Law of One and Fundamentalism

[Brandon Gwinn]

Let us not turn the Law of One into another fundamentalist religion. I think it's easy for us "new agers" to be so passionate about the LOO, Love, Light, and the planetary consciousness that sometimes shining our light may turn into a need to "convert" others, to have them drop their beliefs and take on our way of seeing things, use our terms, and be inspired by our sources. We could then slip into judgement- even anger. I know I have struggled with this before. But inspiration can be found anywhere, in any system, in many ways. The labels we use need not agree. The LOO encompasses everything, even that which may not be as consonant with it or recognize it as the LOO. What matters is the love within, no matter the purity of concept or expression. Let us joyfully recognize and embrace this love wherever it is found, offering people our own information/inspiration when we can, but leaving them free to be and express themselves in their own unique way. Be blessed. L/L.

[Ming the Merciful]

Brandon, I agree with you one hundred percent. I have had your argument since I joined Law of One. Within a few days of joining, I sensed an "Evangelical" undertone in the background. If the spirit of the Law of One is, (supposedly), all-encompassing and all-pervasive, then it cannot become the, (typical), "Fundamentalist" attitude, that only our way is the best, and all others are inferior. I have studied Religion from Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikh, Sufi and others, and the weakness of all of them. Only our beliefs are correct, and all others are imposters. There is an underlying sense of superiority within the Law of One, and I have argued against it from the beginning. As for my own beliefs, I accept everything, and deny everything. Or, in other words, the only way to reach Enlightenment, is to find your own Path. Religion and Spirituality is too often a stumbling block, and not a step upwards. 

The "Law of One" is not an absolute. Or, it is only one of many organizations that are teaching the same core beliefs. Since I encountered the Law of One, I have encountered two other organizations with the same goals, and attempting to unite Humanity. I consider them on the same level as the "Law of One", and I will put none on a pedestal and say it is better. They are all equal. The Law of One does have the problem of putting itself onto a pedestal, and that could become its downfall. In accepting and understanding the "Great Knowledge", there must also be humility. We must drop the pretense of superiority and evangelism. Everything has its place, and become part of the "Overall Whole". Unity through Diversity. Good one Brandon, lets have a proper discussion about this?

[Brandon Gwinn]

Well said Ming 

[tadeus]

There is a reason why every channeling begins with:

As always, we shall preface our beginning with the request that you realize that we are not ultimate authorities—we are your brothers and sisters who have moved somewhat further upon the same path that you move at this time. Thusly, we would ask you to the use the words and concepts which we share with you in whatever way has meaning for you at this time, and we would further ask you to leave behind any words and concepts which have no meaning for you at this time.

and it is remarkable that the Q'uo are doing it.
So the benefit for each being is what it can gain from this channelings.


This remember me that i want to ask about other channelings and the differences to the Q'uo ...

I have encountered two other organizations with the same goals, and attempting to unite Humanity. I consider them on the same level as the "Law of One", and I will put none on a pedestal and say it is better.

Can you reveal this two other organisations?

[Patrick]

Imagine if all the chapters of the bible had started with something like: "As always, we shall preface our beginning with the request that you realize that we are not ultimate authorities". It would have prevented many wars...

In my opinion, the undertone of fundamentalism does not come from the Law of One material, but from some of its students. I see no ways of preventing this from happening without trying to control others.

[Ming the Merciful]

Imagine if all the chapters of the bible had started with something like: "As always, we shall preface our beginning with the request that you realize that we are not ultimate authorities". It would have prevented many wars...

In my opinion, the undertone of fundamentalism does not come from the Law of One material, but from some of its students. I see no ways of preventing this from happening without trying to control others.

Basically, Fundamentalism is a stage of evolution of the individual. What happens when an individual becomes a "Fundamentalist", he/she believes that they have reached the pinnacle of Spiritual Evolution, (and believe), that the world, and everybody on it, should convert to their belief. Not realizing that while within that stage of evolution, they have become stagnant and are lacking Spiritual Growth. They say, I believe this and that, and everybody should convert to my belief, (because). Their Spiritual Development is stuck in the one place, and goes no further. This is why, in the world of Religion, everybody is trying to convert everybody else to their belief, not realizing that Religious Philosophy runs parallel with each other. For instance, in Judaism there is "Shabbat". In Sufism there are similar beliefs and practises that are almost identical to Shabbat. 

In essence, if you want to take the Philosophy of the "Law of One" principles and precepts to the ultimate level. It is not "Unity", (but), "Disunity". Or, the Law of One is the middle, (and neutral ground), where opposing beliefs can exist and coexist without prejudice. Acceptance no matter what the foundation beliefs of an individual are. The Law of One, (as an organization), should remain neutral. Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism are the opposites  of the principles of the Law of One. The moment somebody tries to convert someone to the Law of One, they have already failed because they are no longer accepting the beliefs of another individual.

[Brandon Gwinn]

Yes. Trying to convert, evangelize, proselytize, etc. are all forms of trying to control. The only thing we can really control is ourselves. I also agree that as Confederation sources never claim to be an ultimate authority and are merely humble messengers, that the Law of One material itself is only neutral information and can only be turned into any form of fundamentalism by the error of it's students. I believe that Spirit itself directly, along with working through all it's many various devoted messengers, has provided our world with every possible step to every possible platform for spiritual evolution for every person at every level and background in the form of various religions, spiritual paths, philosophies, arts, sciences, ideologies, movements, etc. and all kinds of various catalysts. The diversity can be overwhelming but it's all beautiful. I think you can still hold dear what you believe to be closest to the truth, as I do with the Law of One, while allowing others their own truths as they see them and even appreciating them for it.

This all might sound obvious to some and inherent in the teachings themselves. I just wanted to post on this subject, because I think it's easy sometimes to get lost in a particular light, forgetting all the love, and returning to the same exclusive fundamentalism that a lot of us were saved from.

[Brandon Gwinn]

There's a lot of nuance and semantics with this subject, but I think what it boils down to is control. We all have our own beliefs which all have fundamental points, and we all want to share the joy these beliefs bring us. I think this is inherent in human nature and it's the nature of light to shine and love to give of itself. We should all be advocates of the highest good that we see, but we shouldn't need others to respond to our light in a certain way, be attached to the outcome, try to control or manipulate others towards our "light", judge or criticize others for their light, or get upset because things and people don't go our way. All we can do is offer our information/inspiration when appropriate in as loving a manner as possible, stimulating free-will by presenting a choice of alternatives.

[Ming the Merciful]

There's a lot of nuance and semantics with this subject, but I think what it boils down to is control. We all have our own beliefs which all have fundamental points, and we all want to share the joy these beliefs bring us. I think this is inherent in human nature and it's the nature of light to shine and love to give of itself. We should all be advocates of the highest good that we see, but we shouldn't need others to respond to our light in a certain way, be attached to the outcome, try to control or manipulate others towards our "light", judge or criticize others for their light, or get upset because things and people don't go our way. All we can do is offer our information/inspiration when appropriate in as loving a manner as possible, stimulating free-will by presenting a choice of alternatives.

Brandon, what you are saying in essence, is "Zen". In the absolute state of Zen, it is "Neutrality in All Things". Or, in the basic Buddhist Philosophy, the "Middle Way" or "Middle Path". Accept everything, and deny everything, and do not become attached to it. The moment that we accept a specific precept, we have, (already), become, (unknowingly), attached to it. How do we overcome the attachment? Remaining neutral and without opinion or judgement. It is, (therefore), it is. The natural "State of Being". The "Absolute" State of Spirituality only exists within itself. Any opinion or judgement instantly breaks the neutrality.

Even the "Law of One", although it has a deep philosophical discourse and filled with Spiritual dogma and concepts has to remain as the "Observer" and not the "Participant". I have found from experience, and participating in various Religions, there are levels of hierarchy and protocols, that if they are crossed, then it is an abomination to the foundation, of the aforesaid Religion. The Religion, (or Philosophy), dictates specific protocols that must be accepted by the followers, or to deny them is the unforgiveable sin. I once belonged to an, (unnamed), Religion, and one of their laws was, you cannot drink alcohol. I wrote to the headquarters of the organization, and asked, by whose authority? Whether I drink alcohol is my decision. Not a dictate of a Religion. I choose my own destiny. The Law of One can only advise, not dictate. That applies to any Religion or Philosophy. I also resigned from that Religion. In reality, it was Islam through the backdoor. I was not Islamic enough. Not that I have anything against Islam, (per se).

[Ming the Merciful]

There is a reason why every channeling begins with:

As always, we shall preface our beginning with the request that you realize that we are not ultimate authorities—we are your brothers and sisters who have moved somewhat further upon the same path that you move at this time. Thusly, we would ask you to the use the words and concepts which we share with you in whatever way has meaning for you at this time, and we would further ask you to leave behind any words and concepts which have no meaning for you at this time.

and it is remarkable that the Q'uo are doing it.
So the benefit for each being is what it can gain from this channelings.


This remember me that i want to ask about other channelings and the differences to the Q'uo ...

I have encountered two other organizations with the same goals, and attempting to unite Humanity. I consider them on the same level as the "Law of One", and I will put none on a pedestal and say it is better.

Can you reveal this two other organisations?

The two organizations in question? 

https://allatra.org/

https://www.essentiafoundation.org/

They are not spiritual organizations, (per se), although there are spiritual undertones in their beliefs.

[jafar]

Let us not turn the Law of One into another fundamentalist religion. I think it's easy for us "new agers" to be so passionate about the LOO, Love, Light, and the planetary consciousness that sometimes shining our light may turn into a need to "convert" others, to have them drop their beliefs and take on our way of seeing things, use our terms, and be inspired by our sources. We could then slip into judgement- even anger. I know I have struggled with this before. But inspiration can be found anywhere, in any system, in many ways. The labels we use need not agree.

Everything has it's opposite pair, including "Law of One", which is "Law Of Many" or a better term will be "Unity in one ness" vs "Separation in many ness".

When one truly understand what "L01" is all about, then he/she will not even think about 'converting' as it will be nonsensical to do so.
Does anyone ever think to convert anyone into "Law Of Gravity"? or "Law of Thermodynamics"?

Everything is already included in "Law Of Gravity", whether they believe in it or not doesn't matter.
Believing "Gravity does not exist" or "Law Of Gravity is false" does not makes one able to escape it or unbind him/her/it self from it. 

The same thing applied to "Law of One".

Having said that, since everything is always available in opposite contrast.
There will always be parties who will try to pull into the direction of 'separaton', as otherwise 'unity' cannot be recognized as it's opposite pair. 
They will create a social identity, in order to be 'separated' from others, and they will name it "Law of One" ™.

A religion named "Law of One" ™ will then be exist.
They will probably put Ra, Quo and friends as deities to be worshipped. 
And they declare the book to be divine as well, holy.
While other books / sources does not, in order to separate the 'holy book' with other books/sources.
To elevate the 'status' of the "Law of One" book in comparation to other books/sources.
While a group of 'exclusives' will play the role of priest, the authority who decide what is and is not "Law of One" ™, in order to separate themselves from common "Law of One" followers.

Yes I've seen such tendency even on this forum, thus I will not be surprised that a religion labeled "Law of One" ™ will be born soon enough. An organized effort will then soon followed in order to spread the "Law of One" ™, by force, if necessary.
As it has happened many many times in the past so it will happened again.

[Patrick]

With a bit of luck 4d will actualize before we see the rise of a Law of One religion.

[Brandon Gwinn]

Patrick, I love your custom user title. Lol.

[Ming the Merciful]

I was under the delusion that the concept of "New Age" thinking is the merging of Religion, and to the point where it, (more or less), makes Religion redundant. Or, the combining Philosophical thinking into a unified "Thought System". The concept of the Law of One becoming a Religion, (unto itself), is taking a step backwards. In higher levels of thinking, Religion is the, (proverbial), "Chain Around the Neck", and dragging a person into the Abyss. Liberation only comes with no attachment to any Philosophical concepts. Religion is the "Lower" manifestation of "Philosophy", because it is attributed to useless rituals and beliefs.

[Spiritual Ronin]

This topic seems to revolve heavily around the concept of free will. Ra states this is the first distortion which would allude to the importance of not going out and spreading the word. Like any forum where like minded people get together there is always a temptation to become almost like a hive mind, which feeds partially off dogmaticism. It's on the individual to discern for themselves what is right or wrong to them.

The LOO for me has been a backbone with which I can connect a multitude of concepts, and so it is for me at this point in my life. But at a certain point I may learn that this backbone might only be one vertebrae of a much larger system. To me it's about making the connections, building a higher launching pad and starting the next process of learning

[Dtris]

Philosophy, Philo-Study, and Sophia-Wisdom. Literally the study of wisdom.

The Law of One as stated by Ra- "All things, all of life, all of the creation is part of one original thought."

And Ra further details. "I am Ra. Consider, if you will, that the universe is infinite. This has yet to be proven or disproven, but we can assure you that there is no end to your selves, your understanding, what you would call your journey of seeking, or your perceptions of the creation.

That which is infinite cannot be many, for many-ness is a finite concept. To have infinity you must identify or define that infinity as unity; otherwise, the term does not have any referent or meaning. In an Infinite Creator there is only unity. You have seen simple examples of unity. You have seen the prism which shows all colors stemming from the sunlight. This is a simplistic example of unity.

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. You are not speaking of similar or somewhat like entities or things. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One."

This is the same message that is at the heart of mystical teachings the world over. This is the key that is missing from mass religion.

The Ra Material is not a philosophy. It is a cosmology and a metaphysics. It is just one that we are far from exploring thru our scientific tools, and thus cannot attempt to falsify. Despite this there has been many scientific discoveries that coincide with the Ra Material. Yet a person must choose to believe that this is true information.

Anyone who has seriously studied the Ra Material, IMO would not make the mistake of confusing it for a religion, or any sort of religious belief system.

[jafar]

All things are one, no right or wrong, no disharmonies but only identity.

There is a strong urge to carve separated identity.
Because otherwise unity cannot be recognized.

And that's the purpose or prominent use of a religion.
-To define Christians as separate identity in comparation to Pagans.
-To define Muslims as separate identity in comparation to Kaffirs.
-To define Enlightened as separate identity in comparation to Non-Enlightened.
-To define US as separate identity in comparation to THEM.

Observing this webforum alone, I've detected few of these patterns:
- STOs as separate group identity in comparation to STSes.
- Fully conscious beings as separate group identity in comparation to NPCs

There is nothing wrong with that, as it seems it is a natural things to do.
Some group push towards separation some others will pull towards unity.
It's a continuing game of push and pull.

Observing the pattern shown in other religion, I'm expecting these to appear as well:
- Identification towards book, the book titled "Law of One" will be regarded as "Our Book", thus it can be separated from "Their book".
- Identification towards those who speak in the book, Ra, Quo as "Our Sources" or perhaps "Our Guide", thus it can be separated from "Their sources".
- Identification towards the channeler, the classic term for this were actually "Prophet and Prophetess", Don, Carla as "Our Channeler" as the only trustable channelers thus it can be separated from "Their/Other channelers" deemed un-trustable.

[Brandon Gwinn]

I think paradoxes exist to humble us so that we rely not so much on grasping with the mind, but on the opening of our hearts. One relevant example of this is how most of us come to the deduction that there can only be one objective truth to reality (which, while being embodied by the universe, is transcendent to our subjective understanding), but we each have our own unique beliefs which are "Truth" to us. So Truth is both one and many- a paradox. It's kind of like if I buy a car from the lot, whether it's new or used, it's still "new" to me. I think this is why the Gospel of Phillip says, "Truth is one and many, for our sakes, to teach us about the one, in love, through the many."

[jafar]

I think paradoxes exist to humble us so that we rely not so much on grasping with the mind, but on the opening of our hearts. One relevant example of this is how most of us come to the deduction that there can only be one objective truth to reality (which, while being embodied by the universe, is transcendent to our subjective understanding), but we each have our own unique beliefs which are "Truth" to us. So Truth is both one and many- a paradox. It's kind of like if I buy a car from the lot, whether it's new or used, it's still "new" to me. I think this is why the Gospel of Phillip says, "Truth is one and many, for our sakes, to teach us about the one, in love, through the many."

Well 'paradoxes' exist thus "it" can be recognized, whatever "it" is.

Basically it's a pattern of "Is" and "Not Is".
Without the "Not Is" the "Is" cannot be recognized..
Without "Not Light" (Darkness) then Light cannot be recognized.
Without "Not Unity" (Separation) then Unity cannot be recognized.

While "Truth" is truly dependent on context and perspective.
And the reason why the one infinite creator fractalize itself into many is to experience multitude of context and perspective.

No 'unit of consciousness' contained in a 'soul' will experienced the exact same thing thus having the exact same perspective thus having the exact same opinion. Even "You" and "You 10 or 20 years ago" will not have the exact same perspective and opinion on all things.

In such context, it's understood that all are serving the one infinite creator, regardless they took the "Is" or the "Not Is" path/perspective/context.
No right or wrong, but only identity.
All is one, and that one is love/light, light/love, the Infinite Creator