The Confederation

[Quantum]

During a discussion with 3D Sunset with respect to Lavazza's thread on "Sessions in Focus/1981.02.03 - Book 1, Session 17 - Oahspe", it occurred to me that it may be beneficial to begin an entirely new thread on the Confederation as a separate subject. What information may we as a group draw on as regards anything we may find on them?

The first topic I would like to address stems directly from Lazazza's thread as seen below in which I took the liberty of paraphrasing several lines of those quotes for greater clarity.

(1) A member of the Confederation proposes a message to transmit and (2) has the message (or at least skeletal draft of it) preliminarily approved for dissemination by the Council. (3) After that, a search is made for a suitable instrument to deliver the message. (4) Once said instrument is found, a final review of the message and instrument is performed and approval is granted. (5) As soon as the message is transmitted, it is out of the Confederation's hands. They have acted in good faith and good intentions and they let the chips fall where they might, having no attachment to the resultant outcome. (Prepare for the worst, hope for the best, and expect something in between).

Is there anything in the Ra material that might seem to suggest otherwise, such as the first four premises being true, but that the 5th and last might be challenged, by either the inference or fact that any said material(s) as passed is also approved only after the transmission and "transcription" of same as the last and final step. This would indeed be far more in keeping with the term "passed" as a definition, for what indeed is "passed" under the first premises other than the implication of finding of a suitable material and channel only, rather than passed as regards "the material" itself. Otherwise the emphasis of "passed" in this context lies only in the "attempt" as opposed to the "result". In other words, by our previous speculative assumption, a material is passed before the fact rather than after, this by simple virtue of the fact "in an attempt to do so" verses a transcription also passed after a final review of said material. In this manner the Confederation would at least lend an opinion to a said material they initiated as being in keeping with it's principles. Otherwise there would seem to be a contrary understanding to the definition of something being "passed". "Passed" in this context of the Confederation having "passed" a certain material would be in keeping with the word normally understood, this as synonymously meaning that a certain material has been at least nominally "approved". I wonder if on second consideration, that "passed" in the context spoken to on our previous post would lie not only towards an "effort" but also an acceptable and approved "result". In this manner the suitable material in fact channeled and having been transmitted is further in keeping with task and intent of Confederation principles and philosophy were it also to have been transcribed more towards correct, minus the assumed and anticipated distortions, and therefore at least receive a "passing nod" as more correct than incorrect, i.e. lying more towards less distorted than more distorted. Were this not true, logic then dictates through our previous assumption that although a Confederation material were "passed", it might result nonetheless in the "Devils Manuscript" of pure STS principles irrespectively. Given Ra commented that the Ohaspe materials, as an example, were indeed passed by the Confederation, it might not be out of the reach of logic to assume they might also have made a comment to the fact that it "failed to pass" if were not in keeping with Confederation principles. If to the converse a material is passed, and this were to also imply that the material was in keeping with Confederation principles and philosophy, presumably meaning that only a certain amount of distortion were allowed to be "peppered" in the material, but that it would never "pass" were it to be so distorted so much as to create an STS manual instead, this then would be more in keeping with "passed" as a definition. I must believe if Ra commented on the material some two hundred years after the fact, as they did, and by sharing that it "passed" the Confederation, as they also did, then they might have additionally commented by suggesting that it were as severely distorted, if it were.

This principle of "passing" after the fact by a review, by simple logic might indeed apply to a material being understood as having "passed", unless indeed all is in fact sadly left to chance after the fact by letting the chips fall where they may. This would however seem to be entirely counter-productive to the entire process of attempting to teach. Working through the the hypothetical principle of "passed" to mean that the Confederation takes an active process all the way through the act, it then stands to reason to hope that there may also be an approval mechanism after the fact as well to create a passing ( i.e., a review as it were) as well as before the fact (i.e. finding a suitable mission of a suitable material and then a suitable channel which said material is transmitted to).

Note that in the past such activities have often as not resulted in the message being so distorted that it actually became a benefit to STS. But what of that, as they say, and they gird their loins and continue muddling though. This 3D stuff is always messy, but that's no reason to quit trying!

Following the logic that the teaching is paramount and as such that so too is the more correct 'transcription' of it, no teaching so distorted in transcription would be allowed to pass were it so severely distorted so as to "teach falsely. "Utilizing this logic further in this stream of consciousness, the assumption then is that indeed only "less distorted" information 'transcribed' is allowed to pass, verses "more distorted" information being transcribed allowed to pass, such that there is then a final review or opinion as given by Ra and the Confederation that it is a good work.

In response to your above assumption then 3D, perhaps an information in question that has been passed is in fact not so much distorted in transcription as much as it is in interpretation as a result of it in fact being powerful, and thus as useful for either purpose, STO or STS included, i.e case in point most religious works, i.e. the Bible, The Koran, the Upanishads etc. To continue as a case in point, perhaps no STO "passed" "transmission" or "transcription" has ever been so distorted that it ended up as a specific STS teaching, but that indeed a said STO teaching was purposefully bent so as to be so distorted as resulting in a STS teaching. In other words, the material passed and "more correctly transcribed" by said scribe is always more STO oriented, but that the activities and interpretations may be purposefully utilized as bent for STS purposes. In other words, "Good STO teachers don't teach badly,as much as willingly bad sts students learn to utilize good STO teachings excellently for bad STS purposes".

Curious and open to this and any and all other Confederation topics....

Q

[3D Sunset]

Hi Q,

Here's some discussions of other interactions between the Confederation and Earthings. This is in the context of Atlantis:

Questioner: Was all of their information given to them in the same way that we are getting our information now, through an instrument such as this instrument?

Ra: I am Ra. There were visitations from time to time but none of importance in the, shall we say, historical passage of events in your space/time continuum.

Questioner: Was it necessary for them to have an unified social complex for these visitations to occur? What conditions were necessary for these visitations to occur?

Ra: I am Ra. The conditions were two: the calling of a group of people whose square overcame the integrated resistance of those unwilling to search or learn; the second requirement, the relative naiveté of those members of the Confederation who felt that direct transfer of information would necessarily be as helpful for Atlanteans as it had been for the Confederation entity.

Questioner: I see then. What you are saying is that these naive Confederation entities had had the same thing happen to them in the past so they were doing the same thing for the Atlantean entities. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. We remind you that we are one of the naive members of that Confederation and are still attempting to recoup the damage for which we feel responsibility. It is our duty as well as honor to continue with your peoples, therefore, until all traces of the distortions of our teach/learnings have been embraced by their opposite distortions, and balance achieved.

Questioner: I see. Then I will state the picture I have of Atlantis and you tell me if I am correct.

We have a condition where a large enough percentage of the people of Atlantis had started at least going in the direction of the Law of One and living the Law of One for their call to be heard by the Confederation. This call was heard because, using the Law of Squares, it overrode the opposition of the Atlantean entities who were not calling. The Confederation then used channels such as we use now in communication and also made contact directly, but this turned out to be a mistake because it was perverted by the entities of Atlantis. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct with one exception. There is only one law. That is the Law of One. Other so-called laws are distortions of this law, some of them primal and most important for progress to be understood. However, it is well that each so-called law, which we also call “way,” be understood as a distortion rather than a law. There is no multiplicity to the Law of One.

And here is one regarding the South American contact:

Questioner: I understand, if I am correct, that a South American contact was also made. Can you tell me of the nature of your contact with respect to the attitude about the contact, its ramifications, the plan for the contact, and why the people were contacted in South America?

Ra: I am Ra. This will be the final full question of this session. The entities who walked among those in your South American continent were called by a similar desire upon the part of the entities therein to learn of the manifestations of the sun. They worshipped this source of light and life. Thus, these entities were visited by light beings not unlike ourselves. Instructions were given and they were more accepted and less distorted than ours. The entities themselves began to construct a series of underground and hidden cities including pyramid structures.

These pyramids were somewhat at variance from the design that we had promulgated. However, the original ideas were the same with the addition of a desire or intention of creating places of meditation and rest, a feeling of the presence of the one Creator; these pyramids then being for all people, not only initiates and those to be healed.

They left this density when it was discovered that their plans were solidly in motion and, in fact, had been recorded. During the next approximately 3,500 years these plans became, though somewhat distorted, in a state of near-completion in many aspects.

Therefore, as is the case of the breakings of the quarantine, the entity who was helping the South American entities along the South American ways you call in part the Amazon River went before the Council of Saturn to request a second attempt to correct in person the distortions which had occurred in their plans. This having been granted, this entity or social memory complex returned and the entity chosen as messenger came among the peoples once more to correct the errors.

Again, all was recorded and the entity rejoined its social memory complex and left your skies.

As in our experience the teachings were, for the most part, greatly and grossly perverted to the extent in later times of actual human sacrifice rather than healing of humans. Thus, this social memory complex is also given the honor/duty of remaining until those distortions are worked out of the distortion complexes of your peoples.

What's interesting to note is the continuing theme of naiveté among Confederation members. I've always found this intriguing, and I think that it points to a more direct answer to your question. That being that an aspect of 3D existence is the learn/teaching, through interaction with 3D entities, of members of the Confederation about various methods of providing aid to those making a call. I think that your perspective of the Confederation members is more omniscient than is actually the case. First and foremost the law of Free Will is paramount. Thus there are certain rules and regulations defining how and when contact may be made. It would seem to me that within these acceptable guidelines though, the Confederation is interested in providing those who wish to aid with total free will for them to act however they think is best. Thus some may propose partial or hidden messages, contact through conscious channels, contact through tranced channels, or even direct contact. One must not disregard that this experimentation and learning (and acceptance of the resulting honor/duty to see it through) is probably a vital aspect of lessons in later densities.

I am struck with an image of the Council being convened to consider a proposal:

"Must we hear yet another hair-brained idea from our Venusian love-in students.", said Alathor, exasperated.

"When will they figure out that these people are just different in 3D than they were?", pined Taramere.

"Do we really need another pyramid? This one in Egypt now. Ah, and I see that they are requesting direct contact again. Who's on clean-up duty this Eon?", injected Pandora.

"Now now my friends, how will they learn unless we let them try?", cautioned Council Lead, Brewhaha. "Alright now, sit up everyone. Faces blank, but inviting, robes straight? Send them bailiff. "

Like I said, this 3D stuff is always messy, but that is part of the fun. And a big part of the lessons to be learned.

3D Sunset

[Quantum]

Hi Q,
I am struck with an image of the Council being convened to consider a proposal:

"Must we hear yet another hair-brained idea from our Venusian love-in students.", said Alathor, exasperated.

"When will they figure out that these people are just different in 3D than they were?", pined Taramere.

"Do we really need another pyramid? This one in Egypt now. Ah, and I see that they are requesting direct contact again. Who's on clean-up duty this Eon?", injected Pandora.

"Now now my friends, how will they learn unless we let them try?", cautioned Council Lead, Brewhaha. "Alright now, sit up everyone. Faces blank, but inviting, robes straight? Send them bailiff. "

Like I said, this 3D stuff is always messy, but that is part of the fun. And a big part of the lessons to be learned.

I love it when you make me chuckle-out-loud (col) my friend, which bursts into an outright-laugh-out-loud (olol). Great stuff. You might consider expounding further on this tangent utilizing humor to teach as much. Here's a working title:

"Memoirs from ZigZagmentia from late 6th Density...before he could speak no more from 7th"

Zigzagmaentia was soon to be transmuted to eighth density in as much as 7th density was as good as eighth which was understood to be first again. As such he acted much like the Oracle for the Council. They hardly ever understood what the hell he was talking about.

Thus spoke Zigzagmentia, "It is Turtles my friends, and they are all the way down as much as up, only to discover they're also holding hands and interlocked in circular logic no less."

"But what about the ponies you spoke to us of before Zigzag", asked Brewhaha, who grew weary of all the repetitious s***. "Theres gotta be ponies in there somewhere", he said exasperated with yet another pyramid building scheme of the MLM'er messages of calling and squaring and doubling and what not.

"A-h-h-h verily", spake ZigZag. "Did I ever tell you guys the one about the scorpion and the frog as relates to STO'ers giving STS'ers a free ride?"

"Frogs, scorpions, turtles, ponies, whats with all the animals?", asked Alathor.

"All rests on the back of a great turtle", explained Zigzag the Oracle. "And the turtle in turn rests on turtles which infinitely rest on more turtles infinitely", he went on. And the Council understoodeth him to be speaking of infinite octaves and densities and infinite intelligence and infinite infinity as much as infinite confusion. "And betwixt the turtles rests a grand pony here and there", continued ZigZag fluttering his eyes while transfixed in trance. "And lo, the turtles far, far outnumbering the ponies, all which rest one upon the other cover the occasional pony in turtle dung such that the occasional pony is obscured, yet always present." And the council understoodeth him to be speaking of the truth and the light obscured by the s***.

And all said "O-m-m-m" in adjournment and closing, as confused on their level of 6th as man is on 3rd by Zigzags wisdom from 7th as good as eighth being the next first. They hardly ever understood what the hell he was talking about. Thankfully they had a forum aptly named "bring7th" which to retreat to where they might take council each with the other in mass as a means to uncover what Zigzagmentia attempted to convey through their level of the veil and distortion.

Q

[Lorna]

fantastic

[3D Sunset]

And all said "O-m-m-m" in adjournment and closing, as confused on their level of 6th as man is on 3rd by Zigzags wisdom from 7th as good as eighth being the next first. They hardly ever understood what the hell he was talking about. Thankfully they had a forum aptly named "bring7th" which to retreat to where they might take council each with the other in mass as a means to uncover what Zigzagmentia attempted to convey through their level of the veil and distortion.

I see, dear Q, that you do indeed understand. For let us never forget that in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king.

For what it's worth, if you are ever feeling a little irreverent, and in the mood for a bit of a laugh: I did pursue, for a few weeks last fall an attempt at humor that actually made it through the moderators of DivineCosmos. It is posted under my same pseudonym and is located on the Ascension Humor thread of the Divine Cosmos forum. There are a total of four posts (24, 29, 32 and 34), entitled "Rah and the Law of Won", Session 1-4. For any and all that venture there, please take them in the loving spirit in which they are offered, and as always please set aside that which does not resonate. I feel that there are many ways to apply humor in the teach/learn and learn/teach process, but haven't felt an appropriate avenue for submitting these to this forum until now.

Love and Light,

3D Sunset

[Monica]

If to the converse a material is passed, and this were to also imply that the material was in keeping with Confederation principles and philosophy, presumably meaning that only a certain amount of distortion were allowed to be "peppered" in the material, but that it would never "pass" were it to be so distorted so much as to create an STS manual instead, this then would be more in keeping with "passed" as a definition.

Where does that leave the Bible? Did the Bible 'pass?' Portions of it could arguably be considered an STS manual, while other portions do, according to Ra, contain elements of the Law of One. So is it an STS manual peppered with STO, or vice versa? Or simply mixed polarity that didn't pass? We know that there was a huge Yahweh scandal, so it's obvious how so much of it got distorted. Yet, Ra never (to my knowledge) explicitly commented on whether it had 'passed' or not, or just how distorted it actually ended up.

I must believe if Ra commented on the material some two hundred years after the fact, as they did, and by sharing that it "passed" the Confederation, as they also did, then they might have additionally commented by suggesting that it were as severely distorted, if it were.

Why must you believe that? Where is the precedent? Which other works has Ra declared 'severely distorted?'

This principle of "passing" after the fact by a review, by simple logic might indeed apply to a material being understood as having "passed", unless indeed all is in fact sadly left to chance after the fact by letting the chips fall where they may. This would however seem to be entirely counter-productive to the entire process of attempting to teach. Working through the the hypothetical principle of "passed" to mean that the Confederation takes an active process all the way through the act, it then stands to reason to hope that there may also be an approval mechanism after the fact as well to create a passing ( i.e., a review as it were) as well as before the fact (i.e. finding a suitable mission of a suitable material and then a suitable channel which said material is transmitted to).

Respectfully, I think you are making a lot of assumptions here. Firstly, Ra does not attempt to merely 'teach' but to teach/learn. Secondly, if the goal was to have all such attempts have all wrinkles (distortions) ironed out beforehand, then what would be the purpose of the veil? Why not just rend the veil and be done with it? Thirdly, I don't think the Confederation entities have nearly as much to do with the purity of the info as the recipient of said info. In other words, the Law of One ended up being remarkably (relatively) free from distortions not because of any review process, but simply and solely because of the integrity of the channel/questioner/facilitator team (our dear Carla, Don and Jim). Had they been less 'conscientious' (as Ra referred to them), there surely would have been more distortions. This does not negate the purity of the info or the integrity of the Confederation entity providing the info. Conversely, if, for example, the Oahspe channel was perhaps less conscientious, or, for whatever reason, more prone to coloration of the channeled info, would the Confederation source have denied the contact because the channel failed to reach a certain threshold of required clarity? I think not. I think Confederation entities have answered the call of many countless entities over millennia, with varying degrees of clarity/distortion, but were simply delighted to find the L/L team so configured, thus allowing a communication more complete and free from distortion than any other ever previously attempted. But this does not negate the value of previous contacts, which were undoubtedly useful to those people at that particular time in their evolution. They wouldn't have been ready for more advanced knowledge anyway, just as a child isn't ready for calculus. That Ra finally found some calculus students does not in any way minimize or demean the many arithmetic students previously taught.

Following the logic that the teaching is paramount and as such that so too is the more correct 'transcription' of it, no teaching so distorted in transcription would be allowed to pass were it so severely distorted so as to "teach falsely. "Utilizing this logic further in this stream of consciousness, the assumption then is that indeed only "less distorted" information 'transcribed' is allowed to pass, verses "more distorted" information being transcribed allowed to pass, such that there is then a final review or opinion as given by Ra and the Confederation that it is a good work.

Again I disagree with your initial premise. On what basis do you think that the teaching is paramount? My understanding is that service, ie. assistance in utilizing catalyst for the purpose of polarizing, is what's paramount. We already have teaching available to us when we leave 3D, in between lifetimes. I don't think that is the ultimate purpose of Confederation contacts. Even when Ra walked the Earth in Egypt, they didn't write a book with their refined, clarified teachings! And they certainly could have easily done that, no? Rather, they offered clues, a trail of breadcrumbs, tools for initiation, so that we might find our own way, as 3D reality was designed.

In response to your above assumption then 3D, perhaps an information in question that has been passed is in fact not so much distorted in transcription as much as it is in interpretation as a result of it in fact being powerful, and thus as useful for either purpose, STO or STS included, i.e case in point most religious works, i.e. the Bible, The Koran, the Upanishads etc. To continue as a case in point, perhaps no STO "passed" "transmission" or "transcription" has ever been so distorted that it ended up as a specific STS teaching, but that indeed a said STO teaching was purposefully bent so as to be so distorted as resulting in a STS teaching. In other words, the material passed and "more correctly transcribed" by said scribe is always more STO oriented, but that the activities and interpretations may be purposefully utilized as bent for STS purposes. In other words, "Good STO teachers don't teach badly,as much as willingly bad sts students learn to utilize good STO teachings excellently for bad STS purposes".

I understand your point, but that presupposes that knowledge is inherently good (STO) or bad (STS). I contend that knowledge cannot be so easily categorized, but is a dynamic interplay of archetypal forces. For example, the Bible is not an STS or STO teaching, but an oracle, a depiction of the Archetypes, like the Tarot. (Hence, devotees may open it at random and receive the guidance they seek, much as a Priestess might choose significant cards in a Tarot spread.) Is the Devil, whether the literal character depicted in the Bible or the symbol in the Tarot, an indicator that the respective oracle is STS? No, it's only a character in the play. It is the focus on and attunement to that particular energy that becomes STS or STO. The teaching just describes the stage upon which the archetypal characters interact; what determines the polarity is our CHOICE.

[Lavazza]

I am Lavazza. I have been following your thread for some of your days. I communicate now.

[Lavazza]

Sorry for the incongruity here, as I am poaching this quote from the Oahspe thread that I think is relevant in this thread:

Once again, "Angels dancing on the head of a pin." Lazazza and I then were speaking to the term "peppered" as regards an information being transmitted as being 'partially veiled', this in my opinion so as to not infringe upon free will. I then purposefully attempted to split hairs with an intent so as to draw the distinction between "willful misinformation/misrepresentation" vs "partially veiled" (to protect free will) vs the normal amount of distortion assumed on any given transmission being "interpreted".

So are you deducing, Quantum, that the reason we see such a wide discrepancy between the Ra material and Oahspe is due to the intent of said SMC in question's desire to protect some degree of freewill? The concept that I am trying to extract here is the seeming paradox that two social memory complexes from the same confederation would draw different conclusions about what requires protection from free will violation? (I.e. RA takes reincarnation as a given assumption when providing the information for TLOO books. The SMC that gave Oahspe does not(??)) This paradox of course presented with the assumption that this indeed is the cause of discrepancy between the works, and not some other cause (e.g. interfering STS source).

It seems like that would be a stretch considering the purpose of a confederation in the first place is to work together as a group. (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/confederation)

Just more (delicious, healthy, but not yet satisfying) food for thought.

---

Where does that leave the Bible? Did the Bible 'pass?' Portions of it could arguably be considered an STS manual, while other portions do, according to Ra, contain elements of the Law of One. So is it an STS manual peppered with STO, or vice versa? Or simply mixed polarity that didn't pass? We know that there was a huge Yahweh scandal, so it's obvious how so much of it got distorted. Yet, Ra never (to my knowledge) explicitly commented on whether it had 'passed' or not, or just how distorted it actually ended up.

I may be speaking without enough background education on the bible, but wasn't it more of a compilation of works from many sources over some time, not one continuously streamed work in a relatively short time such as we know TLOO to be? If so it may not be a good example of comparison since it may not be possible to think of it in terms of being 'passed' by the confederation, being that it was not one solid body of work.

Why must you believe that? Where is the precedent? Which other works has Ra declared 'severely distorted?'

I believe Quantum was speaking to the rather sizable difference of premise regarding reincarnation. Since the concept of reincarnation is a base concept to be understood before learning more about TLOO (I feel it safe to say), so that we may call the teachings in Oahspe to be 'severely distorted'. Or depending on your opinion, the TLOO being severely distorted!

Secondly, if the goal was to have all such attempts have all wrinkles (distortions) ironed out beforehand, then what would be the purpose of the veil? Why not just rend the veil and be done with it?

Well I think that's a bit of an extreme next step to take. Just because the goal is to promote the least distorted information possible doesn't mean that the purpose of the veil has been or should be compromised. My understanding of the veil is to prevent us from having proof of god, so that we might learn in an environment of unknowing, and thereby accelerate our learning. Works such as TLOO seem to only reach those who call for it consciously or unconsciously. And even then it is in no way proof.

Thirdly, I don't think the Confederation entities have nearly as much to do with the purity of the info as the recipient of said info. In other words, the Law of One ended up being remarkably (relatively) free from distortions not because of any review process, but simply and solely because of the integrity of the channel/questioner/facilitator team (our dear Carla, Don and Jim). Had they been less 'conscientious' (as Ra referred to them), there surely would have been more distortions.

I only want to point out here that it is only our opinions that TLOO does not have many distortions. I know we are of like mind here, so this is perhaps fluff on my part, but it's good to stay objective.

This does not negate the purity of the info or the integrity of the Confederation entity providing the info. Conversely, if, for example, the Oahspe channel was perhaps less conscientious, or, for whatever reason, more prone to coloration of the channeled info, would the Confederation source have denied the contact because the channel failed to reach a certain threshold of required clarity? I think not. I think Confederation entities have answered the call of many countless entities over millennia, with varying degrees of clarity/distortion, but were simply delighted to find the L/L team so configured, thus allowing a communication more complete and free from distortion than any other ever previously attempted. But this does not negate the value of previous contacts, which were undoubtedly useful to those people at that particular time in their evolution. They wouldn't have been ready for more advanced knowledge anyway, just as a child isn't ready for calculus. That Ra finally found some calculus students does not in any way minimize or demean the many arithmetic students previously taught.

I agree with parts of your thought here and disagree with others. Bear in mind that Ra states that they have been looking for the appropriate group to bring their information through to for 'some of your years'. Well, actually several thousand years. My interpretation from this is that indeed there are high standards to be met for contact / channeling / instrumentation.

Yet on the other hand I agree with your larger point / example about the calculus vs. arithmetic students. It is well made.

what determines the polarity is our CHOICE.

I just wanted to quickly comment that this statement has a very high level of resonance with me. I have coincidentally been thinking along these very lines heavily over the last few weeks, and in mini-debates I have with a friend of mine. My friend is obsessed over the nature of evil in society, and lately I have been maintaining that both good and evil are perspective choices for each individual. Certainly aspects of my life and belief system that I deem 'good' are evil for another. And so to use the timeless statement "One man's trash is another man's treasure" holds true. And when applied through TLOO, Ra constantly repeats that all is one, polarity is therfore ultimately an illusion, the creator desires to know all things... etc.

I'm beginning to figure this stuff out. (finally)

[3D Sunset]

The concept that I am trying to extract here is the seeming paradox that two social memory complexes from the same confederation would draw different conclusions about what requires protection from free will violation? (I.e. RA takes reincarnation as a given assumption when providing the information for TLOO books. The Social Memory Complex that gave Oahspe does not(??)) This paradox of course presented with the assumption that this indeed is the cause of discrepancy between the works, and not some other cause (e.g. interfering STS source).

I see no paradox at all, Lavazza. What is infringement to one is common knowledge to another. Recall Ra's teach/learn to Don on the topic of free will (I've included the entire discourse for completeness, but the relavent portion is emphasized):

Questioner: Basically I would say that to infringe upon the free will of another entity would be the basic thing never to do under the Law of One.

Can you state any other breaking of the Law of One than this basic rule?

Ra: I am Ra. As one proceeds from the primal distortion of free will, one proceeds to the understanding of the focal points of intelligent energy which have created the intelligences or the ways of a particular mind/body/spirit complex in its environment, both what you would call natural and what you would call man-made. Thus, the distortions to be avoided are those which do not take into consideration the distortions of the focus of energy of love/light, or shall we say, the Logos of this particular sphere or density. These include the lack of understanding of the needs of the natural environment, the needs of other-selves’ mind/body/spirit complexes. These are many due to the various distortions of man-made complexes in which the intelligence and awareness of entities themselves have chosen a way of using the energies available.

Thus, what would be an improper distortion with one entity is proper with another. We can suggest an attempt to become aware of the other-self as self and thus do that action which is needed by other-self, understanding from the other-self’s intelligence and awareness. In many cases this does not involve the breaking of the distortion of free will into a distortion or fragmentation called infringement. However, it is a delicate matter to be of service, and compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.

The area or arena called the societal complex is an arena in which there are no particular needs for care for it is the prerogative/honor/duty of those in the particular planetary sphere to act according to their free will for the attempted aid of the social complex.

Thus, you have two simple directives: awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in nature, awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in self to be shared when it seems appropriate by the entity with the social complex, and you have one infinitely subtle and various set of distortions of which you may be aware; that is, distortions with respect to self and other-selves not concerning free will but concerning harmonious relationships and service to others as other-selves would most benefit.

So when communicating the Oahspe material, discussion of reincarnation could well have an infringement on the instrument, whereas with the Ra material, it was not.

3D Sunset

[Lavazza]

So when communicating the Oahspe material, discussion of reincarnation could well have an infringement on the instrument, whereas with the Ra material, it was not.

Hmm, but then without falling back on the reason that there was some higher purpose we don't know about, why was the particular instrument for Oahspe selected, vs. someone else whose belief system included reincarnation? In other words why would the Confederation choose a telephone wire that couldn't transmit certain concepts when surely there must have been one available elsewhere? Wouldn't that lead to more distortion and less "truth" coming through to the entities of 3rd density? Perhaps my exclusion of higher purpose cannot be made to explain such things.

Assuming that the Confederation, being a confederation, agrees to what is or is not a violation of free will (reincarnation for example), and that the Confederation is in agreement to promote as much love (or understanding) and light (or wisdom!) as possible... would it not make the most sense to keep the overall message consistent? I suppose this is the crux of what Quantum speculated initially in the Oahspe thread.

My own speculative opinion is still that it was more a matter of intended audience.

[3D Sunset]

Assuming that the Confederation, being a confederation, agrees to what is or is not a violation of free will (reincarnation for example), and that the Confederation is in agreement to promote as much love (or understanding) and light (or wisdom!) as possible... would it not make the most sense to keep the overall message consistent? I suppose this is the crux of what Quantum speculated initially in the Oahspe thread.

My own speculative opinion is still that it was more a matter of intended audience.

I would agree with your distortion of beingness toward what you would call speculation.

I think that the Confederation entity that transmitted the material had to weight the distortions inherent in the proposed instrument with the intended message and the instrument's ability to disseminate the message to the intended audience. Only after considering all aspects was an instrument chosen that, it was felt, would maximize the exposure of the intended message - after being distorted through both the selected instrument and the distribution process - to the target audience.

3D Sunset

[Quantum]

If to the converse a material is passed, and this were to also imply that the material was in keeping with Confederation principles and philosophy, presumably meaning that only a certain amount of distortion were allowed to be "peppered" in the material, but that it would never "pass" were it to be so distorted so much as to create an STS manual instead, this then would be more in keeping with "passed" as a definition.

Where does that leave the Bible? Did the Bible 'pass?' Portions of it could arguably be considered an STS manual, while other portions do, according to Ra, contain elements of the Law of One. So is it an STS manual peppered with STO, or vice versa? Or simply mixed polarity that didn't pass? We know that there was a huge Yahweh scandal, so it's obvious how so much of it got distorted. Yet, Ra never (to my knowledge) explicitly commented on whether it had 'passed' or not, or just how distorted it actually ended up

.
Again, we mix terms. I suggested that an intentional distortion of an STO transmission that were so severely distorted by STS that it would result in "The Devils Manuscript" would certainly have been prevented enough so as to never having occurred. STS is not "Overlord" nor have dominion in 3D verses that it has "Equal Time", as is the case in political debate in democracy. Therefore it would stand to reason by this premise in logic that a hi-jacked STO transmission resulting in a Devils Manuscript would not be possible. My point here lies not only towards the protection of integrity of the information, but also towards the integrity of the transmission. To your second point:"Where does the Bible stand" as you ask. I suggested in my previous post (before your question asked)

"perhaps an information in question that has been passed is in fact not so much distorted in transcription as much as it is in interpretation as a result of it in fact being powerful, and thus as useful for either purpose, STO or STS included, i.e case in point most religious works, i.e. the Bible, The Koran, the Upanishads etc."

The Bible stands no more susceptible to distortion than does "Winnie The Pooh", notwithstanding that one is a more powerful teaching worthy of the more powerful bending by STS. It is curious to note that in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Logos5..._entity%29 that it suggest the Bible is secondarily utilized as being most closely aligned with the LOO: "Elkins aligned the table which held the Bible ("the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions, which are allied most closely with the Law of One"). I have attempted to find same in the LOO. Perhaps 3D Sunset or βαθμιαίος who both exemplify the agility better than any two on this forum might be better able to quicker find this quote (by the way guys, how do you manage the search so efficiently. Bravo. Please do share).

I must believe if Ra commented on the material some two hundred years after the fact, as they did, and by sharing that it "passed" the Confederation, as they also did, then they might have additionally commented by suggesting that it were as severely distorted, if it were.

Why must you believe that? Where is the precedent? Which other works has Ra declared 'severely distorted?'

This is a simple deduction principle as much as a healthy assumption. Extrapolating the assumption to its extreme that indeed a transmission could be so severely distorted as to entirely negate its STO intent, one might easily deduce that Ra would have spoken to it as though something not resonating with STO principle, or instead left it alone entirely vs suggesting it was passed by the Council, or at least suggested it was as distorted to have missed its original intent, just as they did with the the book "Urantia". Assuming the book review on "Urantia" was less than flattering, one might certainly induce that the book Ohaspe might have lent itself to as much of an editorial comment were it so bent vs given it was indeed passed. To answer your question, its a bit of an extreme. It was not suggested that Ra ever declared anything severely distorted.

Respectfully, I think you are making a lot of assumptions here.

I would never be so presumptuous as to make assumptions on esoterica, which by definition is hidden, veiled, cryptic etc, as much as postulating questions for self and group discovery. Lavazza did an excellent job in answering quite nicely the rest of your questions as regards the intent of my post and with respect to formulating questions to same. Excellent responses Lavazza. Quantum's higher self thanks you for channeling his lower self in 3D (lol).

: Following the logic that the teaching is paramount and as such that so too is the more correct 'transcription' of it, no teaching so distorted in transcription would be allowed to pass were it so severely distorted so as to "teach falsely ....

Again I disagree with your initial premise. On what basis do you think that the teaching is paramount? My understanding is that service, ie. assistance in utilizing catalyst for the purpose of polarizing, is what's paramount.

Teaching clearly is paramount for Ra and the Confederation on the whole as regards man in 3D. This is their service. This is their utilization and catalyst for polarity. How can this be disagreed with?

I understand your point, but that presupposes that knowledge is inherently good (STO) or bad (STS). I contend that knowledge cannot be so easily categorized, but is a dynamic interplay of archetypal forces.

I am a pragmatist. I am speaking to knowledge applied. I am not speaking to knowledge in the abstract as though a definition in sterility void of the user applying same as much as the teacher transmitting same. In principle, yes, knowledge is static verses dynamic, as though in potentiation vs kinetic interplay. Ra and the higher STO brothers however do not teach knowledge divested of love. Neither do STS teachers. Love, I submit, is the principle which maketh things to move. Therefore knowledge conveyed has as much polarity intended as knowledge received. It is not a leap of faith for me to assume that the Knowledge Ra attempted to convey was "Good" knowledge vs sterile knowledge, vs "Bad" knowledge, indeed the knowledge with which we might save our souls vs blow up the world or enslave it. By the same token I might induce that the knowledge transmitted by higher STS to lower sts might indeed, to the converse, be meant entirely to assist in the efforts towards the enslavement of humanity. Both are knowledge. I therefore submit that knowledge hardly exists, as though in static potentiation, but in fact comes alive only in dynamic kinetic interplay, i.e. polarity. Love moves it. I further submit this is the whole of the reason for the Creator creating ITself (in division) as we know IT. IT knew Everything, yet not knowing that IT did, did It create ITself divided to know Itself. The knowingness of the Knowledge now in dynamic format in choice and freewill now came to know ITself ever greater through IT's polarity, thus conveying potentiated static knowledge into either Good or Bad in dynamic. Thus knowledge conveyed, discovering and unfolding IT's compartmentalized Selves unto ITself , ever more, is inherently Good or Bad vs The Static Unknowingness of everything IT also is in the non-goodness/non-badness It is = LOVE. In order for the Creator to thus know ITself, IT needed to move ITself through LOVE by creating ITself as other than ITSELF in order that IT might unfold = move, greater in the knowledge It is.

In this context, Love truly makes the world go/move round....love is movement.

Q

[3D Sunset]

...it suggest the Bible is secondarily utilized as being most closely aligned with the LOO: "Elkins aligned the table which held the Bible ("the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions, which are allied most closely with the Law of One"). I have attempted to find same in the LOO. Perhaps 3D Sunset or βαθμιαίος who both exemplify the agility better than any two on this forum might be better able to quicker find this quote (by the way guys, how do you manage the search so efficiently. Bravo. Please do share).

Here it is my friend:

Ra: I am Ra. I request that we be asked this question in our next worktime, as you would term the distortion/sharing that our energies produce.

If you have any questions about the proper use of this mind/body/spirit, we would appreciate your asking them now.

Questioner: Consider them asked. I don’t have anything to go on. What is the proper use of this instrument? What should we do? What should we do to maximize her ability and her comfort?

Ra: I am Ra. We are pleased that you have asked this question for it is not our understanding that we have the right/duty to share our perceptions on any subject but philosophy without direct question. However, this mind/body/spirit is not being correctly used and therefore is experiencing unnecessary distortions of body in the area of fatigue.

The vibrations may well be purified by a simple turning to the circle of One and the verbal vibration while doing so of the following dialogue:

Question: “What is the Law?”
Answer: “The Law is One.”
Question: “Why are we here?”
Answer: “We seek the Law of One.”
Question: “Why do we seek Ra?”
Answer: “Ra is an humble messenger of the Law of One.”
Both Together: “Rejoice then and purify this place in the Law of One. Let no thought-form enter the circle we have walked about this instrument, for the Law is One.”

The instrument at this time should be in trance. The proper alignment is the head pointed twenty degrees north-by-northeast. This is the direction from which the newer or New Age distortions of love/light, which are less distorted, are emanating, and this instrument will find comfort therein.

This is a sensitive instrument, by which we mean the distortions which enter her mind/body/spirit complex come from any of her senses. Thus, it is well to do the following:

Place at the entity’s head a virgin chalice of water.
To the center, the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions which are allied most closely with the Law of One, that being the Bible that she touches most frequently.
To the other side of the Bible, a small amount of cense, or incense, in a
virgin censer.

To the rear of the book symbolizing One, opened to the Gospel of John, Chapter One, a white candle.

The instrument would be strengthened by the wearing of a white robe. The instrument shall be covered and prone, the eyes covered.

We feel that, though this is a complex of activity/circumstance and may
seem very distorted from a purposeful teach/learning experience, these
elaborations on the technique of trance will ease the mind distortions of
those about the instrument as they perceive improvement in the instrument’s distortions with regard to fatigue. We add only that if these teach/learning sessions are held during time/space during which your sunbody does not light your room that it is best to call the instrument before the lighting of the illuminatory mechanism.

I use the pdf version of the books and a combination of intuition and recollection to determine what search to use within them.

Love and Light,

3D Sunset

[Lavazza]

I use the pdf version of the books and a combination of intuition and recollection to determine what search to use within them.

Another tip is to try using Google on specific sites. For example:

"fourth density" site:lawofone.info
"fourth density" site:llresearch.org

text in quotes will be treated as a complete string, removing the quotes will yield results that contain all words anywhere in the document.

Also, the lawofone.info site has it's own search engine that looks somewhat robust: http://www.lawofone.info/search.php?ss=1

[Monica]

To the center, the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions which are allied most closely with the Law of One, that being the Bible that she touches most frequently.

If you break down this statement grammatically, it is saying that Carla's mental distortions that are allied most closely with the Law of One are [in turn] most closely aligned with the Bible. Carla discovered resonance with the Law of One via her chosen path: mystical Christianity. So, for her, the Bible represented the highest of teachings. I don't think Ra was in any way saying that the bible itself was the most closely aligned, as compared to other books. Ra's statement pertained only to Carla's perception of the Bible, not Ra's assessment of it.

---

I suggested that an intentional distortion of an STO transmission that were so severely distorted by STS that it would result in "The Devils Manuscript" would certainly have been prevented enough so as to never having occurred. STS is not "Overlord" nor have dominion in 3D verses that it has "Equal Time", as is the case in political debate in democracy. Therefore it would stand to reason by this premise in logic that a hi-jacked STO transmission resulting in a Devils Manuscript would not be possible.

I understand but disagree. I think that is precisely what happened with the early books of the old testament. We don't know whether any of it was approved by the Confederation at all, specifically, but we do know that Yahweh engaged in a task of service which got hijacked, and the record of it appears to have gotten pretty mutilated, imo.

---

It is curious to note that in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Logos5..._entity%29 that it suggest the Bible is secondarily utilized as being most closely aligned with the LOO: "Elkins aligned the table which held the Bible ("the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions, which are allied most closely with the Law of One").

This is a great example of another layer of distortion, when quotes are paraphrased, misquoted, condensed, or interpreted. After all the trouble the L/L team and Ra went thru to minimize distortion, only to have it get distorted anyway by well-intentioned people's efforts to condense the teachings!

---

Assuming the book review on "Urantia" was less than flattering, one might certainly induce that the book Ohaspe might have lent itself to as much of an editorial comment were it so bent vs given it was indeed passed.

Not necessarily. That would presuppose that the same rules applied in every situation, and we know they don't; there are myriad factors that enter into the equation, not the least of which is a knowledge of the calling (which is, for the most part, hidden to us here in 3D), as well as an assessment as to whether such an editorial might result in an infringement of free will.

I am a pragmatist. I am speaking to knowledge applied. I am not speaking to knowledge in the abstract

Oh, I thought you liked abstractions! (j/k )

...as though a definition in sterility void of the user applying same as much as the teacher transmitting same. In principle, yes, knowledge is static verses dynamic, as though in potentiation vs kinetic interplay. Ra and the higher STO brothers however do not teach knowledge divested of love. Neither do STS teachers. Love, I submit, is the principle which maketh things to move. Therefore knowledge conveyed has as much polarity intended as knowledge received.

I was in disagreement until I read your next statements (below). I don't think knowledge has polarity. Only the application of knowledge has polarity; or, more accurately, the intention behind that application.

It is not a leap of faith for me to assume that the Knowledge Ra attempted to convey was "Good" knowledge vs sterile knowledge, vs "Bad" knowledge, indeed the knowledge with which we might save our souls vs blow up the world or enslave it. By the same token I might induce that the knowledge transmitted by higher STS to lower sts might indeed, to the converse, be meant entirely to assist in the efforts towards the enslavement of humanity. Both are knowledge. I therefore submit that knowledge hardly exists, as though in static potentiation, but in fact comes alive only in dynamic kinetic interplay, i.e. polarity.

Exactly. We are saying the same thing here.

[Lavazza]

By the way, 3D, I really enjoyed your dialog with 'Rah'. I hope this highly evolved sports entity visits our forum sometime!

[Quantum]

[quote='3D Sunset' pid='5066' dateline='1251320740']
To the center, the book most closely aligned with the instrument’s mental distortions which are allied most closely with the Law of One, that being the Bible that she touches most frequently.

Once again, as with Solo before, I feel it necessary to defend 3D here by stating that 3D did not suggest or cite this passage from Wkipedia. I did. 3D merely gave me reference I asked of where it was. See my above post #12 and his #13.

If you break down this statement grammatically, it is saying that Carla's mental distortions that are allied most closely with the Law of One are [in turn] most closely aligned with the Bible. Carla discovered resonance with the Law of One via her chosen path: mystical Christianity. So, for her, the Bible represented the highest of teachings. I don't think Ra was in any way saying that the bible itself was the most closely aligned, as compared to other books.

This is why I stated below:

the Bible is secondarily utilized as being most closely aligned with the LOO:

My point was that it was good enough for Ra that it was good enough for Carla. Maybe it was indeed good enough. If it is not intrusive, might it be asked if there there is an inherent bias on your part as regards the Bible? I feel all the books of all the religions have great wisdom in them if read merely as "calls to higher consciousness". Making them into a religion is an altogether different proposition which has inherently nothing whatsoever to do with these books calling its reader to higher consciousness. There is a vast distinction between the two. Your quote below seems evident of your feelings as regards same:

I think that is precisely what happened with the early books of the old testament.

I would suggest that this had very little to do with the message while having everything to do with it's interpretation. Same point as before. The sword of a message may cut both ways, i.e. in this case for STO or STS. Case in point The New Testament, not just the Old Testament. Much of what Jesus said has clearly been as utilized by the forces of STS as well, yet we know for a fact according to Ra that Jesus was a successful entity presumably having conveyed a successful message. This example as reference to this undeniable fact does not make the Jesus message an STS doctrine simply because STS use his message as such. Like all else, its in the eye of the beholder. Call a rose ugly, and for the caller no doubt it is.

[quote='Quantum' pid='5064' dateline='1251319786']
Assuming the book review on "Urantia" was less than flattering, one might certainly induce that the book Ohaspe might have lent itself to as much of an editorial comment were it so bent vs given it was indeed passed.

Not necessarily. That would presuppose that the same rules applied in every situation....as well as an assessment as to whether such an editorial might result in an infringement of free will.

But Ra already did give an opinion on both. Its doubtful then that giving a thumb up on the Ohaspe but a thumbs down on Urantia would be construed as an infringement given the opinion was already rendered.

I am a pragmatist. I am speaking to knowledge applied. I am not speaking to knowledge in the abstract

Oh, I thought you liked abstractions!

I (and Ra ) both like it very much. But leaving an abstraction devoid of a principle in action leaves it motionless if not sterile. Liking the one does not require dismissing or negating the other

...as though a definition in sterility void of the user applying same as much as the teacher transmitting same. In principle, yes, knowledge is static verses dynamic, as though in potentiation vs kinetic interplay. Ra and the higher STO brothers however do not teach knowledge divested of love. Neither do STS teachers. Love, I submit, is the principle which maketh things to move. Therefore knowledge conveyed has as much polarity intended as knowledge received.

I respectfully disagree. I don't think knowledge has polarity. Only the application of knowledge has polarity; or, more accurately, the intention behind that application.

It seems this is exactly what I said above as much as to the end of my last post #12 where I in fact suggest that knowledge is motionless without love as the mover.

It is not a leap of faith for me to assume that the Knowledge Ra attempted to convey was "Good" knowledge vs it being a (edited in) sterile knowledge, vs "Bad" knowledge, indeed the knowledge with which we might save our souls vs blow up the world or enslave it. By the same token I might induce that the knowledge transmitted by higher STS to lower sts might indeed, to the converse, be meant entirely to assist in the efforts towards the enslavement of humanity. Both are knowledge. I therefore submit that knowledge hardly exists, as though in static potentiation, but in fact comes alive only in dynamic kinetic interplay, i.e. polarity.

Exactly. We are saying the same thing here.

I'm not sure we are. I am indeed suggesting that the "Knowledge" conveyed by Ra is indeed meant as a Good knowledge, vs a sterile knowledge, and certainly not as a STS knowledge, thus meant to be good, and furthermore meant to be received as good, notwithstanding that it may be as perverted or bent as the Bible or any teaching. In other words the knowledge Ra conveyed was conveyed with Positive Polarity intended. Unpolarized knowledge is knowledge fixed in the unpotentiated unconscious which is "all knowing dormancy". Only when it is applied through love for either STO or STS does it move, only then to become conscious, only then being knowledge applied as aware. Love moves it, less it remain unknown. As you cited in my quote just above your last response: " I therefore submit that knowledge hardly exists, as though in static potentiation, but in fact comes alive only in dynamic kinetic interplay, i.e. polarity".

Q

[Monica]

Once again, as with Solo before, I feel it necessary to defend 3D here by stating that 3D did not suggest or cite this passage from Wkipedia. I did.

The post has been corrected.

This is why I stated below:

the Bible is secondarily utilized as being most closely aligned with the LOO:

I think those are 2 separate issues, so I don't think the 'secondarily' applies. The Bible being Carla's chosen way to most closely align with the Law of One does not necessarily make it THE source of info most closely aligned with the Law of One, whether secondarily or not. That's a leap.

If it is not intrusive, might it be asked if there there is an inherent bias on your part as regards the Bible? I feel all the books of all the religions have great wisdom in them if read merely as "calls to higher consciousness". Making them into a religion is an altogether different proposition which has inherently nothing whatsoever to do with these books calling its reader to higher consciousness. There is a vast distinction between the two.

Absolutely. I agree that there's a vast difference between the two. And certainly there is much wisdom in the Bible, as with other religious texts.

As for my personal opinion about the Bible, I'm happy to discuss that elsewhere, but not here. The subject of the Bible is vast and volatile and discussion of it would likely become consuming, not to mention off-topic (it being another channeled source). There are countless other forums dedicated to its study. For now, suffice to say that I consider it to be mixed polarity.

(Note: When I said I considered knowledge to be without polarity, I was referring to impersonal, intransient truths. Whereas, stories and myths may contain such truths, as jewels to be discovered therein, but are not themselves such truths. Hence, while the buried jewels have no polarity, the treasure chests (stories) encasing them may indeed have polarity. imho.)

I would suggest that this had very little to do with the message while having everything to do with it's interpretation. Same point as before. The sword of a message may cut both ways, i.e. in this case for STO or STS. Case in point The New Testament, not just the Old Testament. Much of what Jesus said has clearly been as utilized by the forces of STS as well, yet we know for a fact according to Ra that Jesus was a successful entity presumably having conveyed a successful message. This example as reference to this undeniable fact does not make the Jesus message an STS doctrine simply because STS use his message as such. Like all else, its in the eye of the beholder. Call a rose ugly, and for the caller no doubt it is.

There is a difference between Jesus and words written about him. There is a difference between what he actually said and did, vs what got recorded in books about him.

But Ra already did give an opinion on both. Its doubtful then that giving a thumb up on the Ohaspe but a thumbs down on Urantia would be construed as an infringement given the opinion was already rendered.

We have a different interpretation as to what Ra meant by 'approved by Council.' I don't see Council approval as either a thumbs up or thumbs down. We still must use discernment either way. For example, let's suppose a certain book by, say, Crowley was not approved by Council. But maybe I felt guided to read it for some reason, while not feeling any such guidance to read Oahspe. That wouldn't really mean anything except that their target audiences were different.

It seems this is exactly what I said above as much as to the end of my last post #12 where I in fact suggest that knowledge is motionless without love as the mover.

The above read different to me. I caught the latter and edited my post accordingly.

---

: Following the logic that the teaching is paramount and as such that so too is the more correct 'transcription' of it, no teaching so distorted in transcription would be allowed to pass were it so severely distorted so as to "teach falsely ....

Again I disagree with your initial premise. On what basis do you think that the teaching is paramount? My understanding is that service, ie. assistance in utilizing catalyst for the purpose of polarizing, is what's paramount.

Teaching clearly is paramount for Ra and the Confederation on the whole as regards man in 3D. This is their service. This is their utilization and catalyst for polarity. How can this be disagreed with?

Well, for starters, learning is at least as important as teaching. Ra never referred to teaching. Ever. Only to teaching/learning or learning/teaching. Secondly, as I previously mentioned, I contend that offering service for the purpose of assisting in the Harvest was paramount, with teaching/learning merely a means to accomplish that objective.

[Monica]

I may be speaking without enough background education on the bible, but wasn't it more of a compilation of works from many sources over some time, not one continuously streamed work in a relatively short time such as we know TLOO to be? If so it may not be a good example of comparison since it may not be possible to think of it in terms of being 'passed' by the confederation, being that it was not one solid body of work.

You are correct. However, devotees of the Bible generally consider it a cohesive, channeled book, and we do know that many of the events described therein were initiated by Confederation entities, so I used it as a convenient example. I contend that the missions of the respective Confederation entities are an entirely separate matter than the recording of those events. While we know that some of those tasks were approved by Council, we have no indication that the recording of them (the actual writing of the books) were approved as well; nor do we have an idea as to the degree of distortion present in the finished works, other than that enough truth remained to still glean an idea of the Law of One, which strongly implies heavy distortion (not surprising when you consider the multiple authors, various circumstances, the Yahweh scandal, etc.).

I believe Quantum was speaking to the rather sizable difference of premise regarding reincarnation. Since the concept of reincarnation is a base concept to be understood before learning more about TLOO (I feel it safe to say), so that we may call the teachings in Oahspe to be 'severely distorted'. Or depending on your opinion, the TLOO being severely distorted!

I understood that. My question was regarding Quantum's statement:

I must believe if Ra commented on the material some two hundred years after the fact, as they did, and by sharing that it "passed" the Confederation, as they also did, then they might have additionally commented by suggesting that it were as severely distorted, if it were.

My point was: Why must he assume that Ra would ever label any body of info severely distorted, when they had never done so before?

Secondly, if the goal was to have all such attempts have all wrinkles (distortions) ironed out beforehand, then what would be the purpose of the veil? Why not just rend the veil and be done with it?

Well I think that's a bit of an extreme next step to take. Just because the goal is to promote the least distorted information possible doesn't mean that the purpose of the veil has been or should be compromised. My understanding of the veil is to prevent us from having proof of god, so that we might learn in an environment of unknowing, and thereby accelerate our learning. Works such as TLOO seem to only reach those who call for it consciously or unconsciously. And even then it is in no way proof.

Agreed! My point was that no body of knowledge in 3D is 100% free of distortion.

I only want to point out here that it is only our opinions that TLOO does not have many distortions. I know we are of like mind here, so this is perhaps fluff on my part, but it's good to stay objective.

We also know that minimization of distortion was extremely important to Ra. Had Ra not emphasized the concept of distortion so much, would we ever have assessed the Law of One's degree of distortion at all? Would we even have known to think in those terms?

Bear in mind that Ra states that they have been looking for the appropriate group to bring their information through to for 'some of your years'. Well, actually several thousand years. My interpretation from this is that indeed there are high standards to be met for contact / channeling / instrumentation.

Ah, but why was it so important to them to provide this info in the first place?

Yet on the other hand I agree with your larger point / example about the calculus vs. arithmetic students. It is well made.

Thank you. I contend that Ra knew there would be students desiring to learn calculus, so they began their search well in advance for a transcriber and publisher of their calculus textbook.

what determines the polarity is our CHOICE.

I just wanted to quickly comment that this statement has a very high level of resonance with me. I have coincidentally been thinking along these very lines heavily over the last few weeks, and in mini-debates I have with a friend of mine. My friend is obsessed over the nature of evil in society, and lately I have been maintaining that both good and evil are perspective choices for each individual. Certainly aspects of my life and belief system that I deem 'good' are evil for another. And so to use the timeless statement "One man's trash is another man's treasure" holds true. And when applied through TLOO, Ra constantly repeats that all is one, polarity is therfore ultimately an illusion, the creator desires to know all things... etc.

I'm beginning to figure this stuff out. (finally)

I agree, with the added clarification that just because my trash might be your treasure doesn't make them interchangeable. An action advantageous to an STS entity would be depolarizing to an entity who has chosen the STO path, and vice versa. So, while we STO's do tend to get all warm and fuzzy in our acceptance of our STS brethren, I think it's important to remember that this is the density of Choice, and in order to choose Option A, Option B must be rejected, and that's ok! Q'uo has stated clearly what they are (radiant ones) and what they are not (those of the dark and bloody path).

[airwaves]

So when communicating the Oahspe material, discussion of reincarnation could well have an infringement on the instrument, whereas with the Ra material, it was not.

Don, Carla, and Jim probably already believed in reincarnation, therefor, there was no infringement on free will. I doubt the dude channeling Oahspe 200 odd years ago believed in reincarnation. Discounting the good folks over in asia, it is more of a new age thingy. That is generally the "rule of thumb" when deciding what information to give and what to withhold.

[Monica]

Don, Carla, and Jim probably already believed in reincarnation, therefor, there was no infringement on free will. I doubt the dude channeling Oahspe 200 odd years ago believed in reincarnation. Discounting the good folks over in asia, it is more of a new age thingy. That is generally the "rule of thumb" when deciding what information to give and what to withhold.

Well said! Such a simple explanation.

[irpsit]

Free will was designed to allow entities an increased power of Choice.
As life is about Choice, and making a good choice, free will is a paramount thing!

Allowing others to make their own choices is one expression of true love.
What to transmit, and what to share is influenced by our choice, in a service either STS or STO.

And we have to recognize different entities have different "flavours", so might not have the same positions!

I wonder how the confederation is like!
How spiritual world is organized!
I guess with infinite patience, tolerance and love.

Peace and love,

[Quantum]

Don, Carla, and Jim probably already believed in reincarnation, therefor, there was no infringement on free will. I doubt the dude channeling Oahspe 200 odd years ago believed in reincarnation. Discounting the good folks over in asia, it is more of a new age thingy. That is generally the "rule of thumb" when deciding what information to give and what to withhold.

Well said! Such a simple explanation.

Hello dear Airwaves. Good to see you my friend. Actually this is a difficult argument to follow as much as is the logic. I'm not at all sure that it is at all simple Monica. Would that it were....

"The wheels of the bus go round and round": Don asked many things. Ra spoke of many things.

Firstly:Many of the things Don asked were on many things Don was already aware of or knew for himself with certainty, which however Ra refused to answer, this based entirely to the converse of your argument of it not infringing on Don's free will or prior belief. Answering what Don asked or had prior knowledge of or believed would not have infringed on Don's Free Will.

Secondly: Don moreover (IMHO) was never the point as much as was the intended audience, this in the same manner that the author of the "Ohaspe" was never the intended audience as much as was the audience it was intended for. Two thousand pages of a book called the Ohaspe would have been a monster of an intent for a book designed for one single man, as much as the Law of One would be assumed to be intended for just one man, i.e. Don et al, this notwithstanding the fact that Ra left it open for the L/L group to publish or not. Surely Ra had the inkling the L/L "might" publish, and that the information might be disseminated to the public, which may have been nothing more than an unspoken hope of the Confederation to begin with as much as was the intent for the Ohaspe to be for a wider audience more than one, even if but just one single soul were saved in the process.

To the converse again, it would be natural to assume that there were far many more things Don did not know, or perhaps did not believe, or was not even remotely intuitively aware of, but that Ra did speak to nonetheless, i.e the entire concept of STO vs STS which is an entire antithesis of the Christian concept of "good people go to heaven - bad people go to hell".

So we have: (a) Don was not aware of many things, nor did he possibly believe vs disbelieve in these many things, many he further knew nothing of, yet Ra spoke to these things in any event (b) Don spoke to things which Don certainly knew of, or was intuitively aware of, or even absolutely knew with certainty of, which Ra refused to answer irrespectively.

Ra spoke to things Don knew nothing of, or even at first disbelieved in, yet answers and information were given, verses Ra refused to speak of things Don in fact did know of, or intuitively was aware of.

I believe it safe to suggest that there is no mechanism in the LOO as simple as might seem at first brush. Nothing. I also believe it safe to say in this case that there is certainly another mechanism involved than is the mere "infringement of free will" principle.

The principle of Reincarnation is a principle as old as Methuselah. It was with certainty a principle known of in this time, as was clearly demonstrated by the fact that it was denied as a principle of truth. Why deny a truth better left unspoken if it is a truth, as opposed to misrepresent the truth. Better to have left it open or unspoken if not untouched. Ohaspe was not a question/answer session. To pursue the logic one step further in closing, it can hardly be assumed that reincarnation would be considered as anathema to speak of as an infringement of free will, yet even wildly assume that the rest of the information in Ohaspe was less than an infringement in the same breath (one would have to read it to understand this statement) and yet assume that the principle of STO vs STS, which prior to the LOO was never spoken of before, is altogether quite alright. This simple bit of information radically changes Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles forever, i.e. most of the known world. Clearly there are other mechanisms involved here which alas may remain forever a mystery and for which "infringement of free will" may sometimes certainly apply, but for which at other times simply can not apply.

Its a sticky mess, this 3D in convolution....as opposed to evolution. Be sure to look for my book appearing in a book store soon in a neighborhood near you: "Evolution through Convolution" :idea:

Q

[Lavazza]

I believe it safe to suggest that there is no mechanism in the LOO as simple as might seem at first brush. Nothing. I also believe it safe to say in this case that there is certainly another mechanism involved than is the mere "infringement of free will" principle.

Quantum,

This is a very interesting discussion, no? I am equally confused on other topics that fall within this same general theme of contradiction... (see my 'Why do you believe?' and 'Pyramid' threads for more details on my recent confusions).

In thinking about this and other "problems", I have lately been thinking on the lines that TLOO as a complete work, although of purest intent, has some percentage of distortion that is causing those of us who like to boil down all interesting details to run in to contradiction. For the more casual reader (if they exist) they may breeze over such things as the Oahspe reference, or think further on pyramid construction and time line details, rouge bigfoot(s), etc. I mention this recent train of though of mine because I feel it may make more sense and may be safer in reasoning than to produce reasons why faulty information could be plausible... Opting for a simpler reason instead of creating more elaborate explanations, if I may be so bold and to follow in your foot path as a TLOO heretic. We must question all things, I completely agree. And perhaps especially so in the field of esoterica.

So I submit, perhaps the nod to Oahspe in TLOO was distortion. Perhaps it was unitended bad information. And I only submit it as an easier explanation, not necessarily the true, undeniable or final verdict on the matter. And I don't mean to just create an easy way out of a paradox rather than perhaps employ the use of Occam's Razor.

I would also differentiate my use of the word distortion from de-tuning in this case, because the question about Oahspe to Ra, from Don, does not seem like the type of transient or proof based or fear based / conspiracy based questioning that would cause de-tuning of a contact such as Ra's. Distortion here must simply be an unknown percentage of bad connection between Ra and Don via the telepathic exchange, that is inherent to that exchange.. Unless it could be argued that the contact was 100% accurate at all times? Certainly this can't be so.

Well, I could go on speculating, but what do you think?

[Monica]

Firstly:Many of the things Don asked were on many things Don was already aware of or knew for himself with certainty, which however Ra refused to answer

Many? Such as? Can you provide a few examples?

Secondly: Don moreover (IMHO) was never the point as much as was the intended audience, this in the same manner that the author of the "Ohaspe" was never the intended audience as much as was the audience it was intended for.

Again respectfully, again I disagree with your speculation. Ra stated that numbers were not important; an audience of only a few was sufficient for them to provide their message. But that's not the same as assuming that Don was the lone intended recipient. Are you saying that Ra offered all those teachings for Don only? And now, are Q'uo offering their teachings for Carla, Jim, and perhaps a handful of others only? How is it that you could even know this at all? Ra/Q'uo have both stated that they answer the call. If I remember correctly, Ra even stated a number, and quite a large number it was, denoting those whose call they were answering.

On the contrary, I would venture to guess that the Law of One might even have reached a larger audience than Oahspe. That's only a guess, though. There's no way I could possibly know, short of checking sales figures of the books. Even then, it would be pointless, since Ra made it clear that 1 million vs 1 thousand was of no consequence. Again, though, that is a far cry from Don being the lone recipient of the teachings.

Two thousand pages of a book called the Ohaspe would have been a monster of an intent for a book designed for one single man, as much as the Law of One would be assumed to be intended for just one man, i.e. Don et al, this notwithstanding the fact that Ra left it open for the L/L group to publish or not. Surely Ra had the inkling the L/L "might" publish, and that the information might be disseminated to the public, which may have been nothing more than an unspoken hope of the Confederation to begin with as much as was the intent for the Ohaspe to be for a wider audience more than one, even if but just one single soul were saved in the process.

I think Ra had way more than an inkling. Remember, Ra was answering the call. Carla, Jim, and Don were facilitators and participants in that service. Remember too that they were/are Wanderers.

To the converse again, it would be natural to assume that there were far many more things Don did not know, or perhaps did not believe, or was not even remotely intuitively aware of, but that Ra did speak to nonetheless, i.e the entire concept of STO vs STS which is an entire antithesis of the Christian concept of "good people go to heaven - bad people go to hell".

Not knowing something does not mean that the offering of same would result in a violation of free will. Don's free will was to learn; hence it was in alignment with his free will that new info be offered.

So we have: (a) Don was not aware of many things, nor did he possibly believe vs disbelieve in these many things, many he further knew nothing of, yet Ra spoke to these things in any event (b) Don spoke to things which Don certainly knew of, or was intuitively aware of, or even absolutely knew with certainty of, which Ra refused to answer irrespectively.

a) I see no reason why Ra wouldn't
b) Such as?

Ra spoke to things Don knew nothing of, or even at first disbelieved in, yet answers and information were given, verses Ra refused to speak of things Don in fact did know of, or intuitively was aware of.

If Don already knew of it, then why did he ask the question?

I also believe it safe to say in this case that there is certainly another mechanism involved than is the mere "infringement of free will" principle.

And that would be...what?

The principle of Reincarnation is a principle as old as Methuselah.

In certain cultures, yes. But to others, it was either unknown or was considered evil/satanic and therefore disregarded. I have met people who immediately dismiss an entire body of knowledge upon the mere mention of reincarnation. And that's in the present time!

Why deny a truth better left unspoken if it is a truth, as opposed to misrepresent the truth. Better to have left it open or unspoken if not untouched.

This gets back to the concept of 'right/true' vs 'wrong/false' as perpetuated by the various religions, and is itself a distortion.

Ohaspe was not a question/answer session.

Precisely. All the more easy to distort! Maybe the author got on a roll and engaged some artistic license.

To pursue the logic one step further in closing, it can hardly be assumed that reincarnation would be considered as anathema to speak of as an infringement of free will, yet even wildly assume that the rest of the information in Ohaspe was less than an infringement in the same breath (one would have to read it to understand this statement) and yet assume that the principle of STO vs STS, which prior to the LOO was never spoken of before, is altogether quite alright.

All the more reason I don't think it was all carefully planned out, but simply allowed to happen.

This simple bit of information radically changes Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles forever, i.e. most of the known world.

Only for those adhering to Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles, very few of whom have likely read the Law of One, so that ends up being irrelevant. Buddhism challenges Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles too, but that doesn't stop people from being Jews/Christians/Muslims. They simply see it as a false teaching, and go on their merry way (if they bother with it at all).

---

So I submit, perhaps the nod to Oahspe in TLOO was distortion. Perhaps it was unitended bad information. And I only submit it as an easier explanation, not necessarily the true, undeniable or final verdict on the matter. And I don't mean to just create an easy way out of a paradox rather than perhaps employ the use of Occam's Razor.

I would also differentiate my use of the word distortion from de-tuning in this case, because the question about Oahspe to Ra, from Don, does not seem like the type of transient or proof based or fear based / conspiracy based questioning that would cause de-tuning of a contact such as Ra's. Distortion here must simply be an unknown percentage of bad connection between Ra and Don via the telepathic exchange, that is inherent to that exchange.. Unless it could be argued that the contact was 100% accurate at all times? Certainly this can't be so.

Well, I could go on speculating, but what do you think?

I think that is a brilliant speculation, Lavazza!

Case in point: I see some variations in spelling of the word. Quantum, who has read all 1000+ pages of the book entitled Oahspe, has referred to it as Ohaspe. This is NOT to nitpick, Quantum, ok? But merely to make a point: If one of us 3D entities, with the very best of intentions, can make a simple spelling error even after seeing the word in front of us at the top of the page for the time it takes to read 1000+ pages of ponderous, deep, and controversial info, then is it such a stretch to think that Ra, communicating via a channel, might also make an occasional mistake? And that such mistakes regarding transient data might be considered as trivial to a SMC as a spelling error is considered to us? Could it even be possible that an errant word 'not' got inserted where it didn't belong, or left out where it should have been? How many of us have completely misunderstood something because of that pesky word 'not' being missing or present erroneously, or missed by our impatiently scanning eyes?

[Lavazza]

I think that is a brilliant speculation, Lavazza!

Thanks! But I didn't mean so much that it was a mistake on Ra's part (especially because they were not talking about something with numbers), but rather simple line-noise on the telephone, to make an analogy. I am assuming of course that there was line noise, maybe there wasn't and in that case my theory can be tossed out the window. It was unconscious trance channeling after all which supposedly would completely remove Carla's conscious mind. Maybe the a thread dedicated completely to the Ra contact is needed- I certainly don't have enough information to make a call on it.

But to get back to the point- I highly doubt it that Ra gave this nod to Oahspe by accident. If we are to assume that that was true I should think it would give us pause about a great many other things that we take at face value from Ra.

I'm not sure how to interpret the Oahspe backing by Ra if it is not for noise, short of coming up with increasingly elaborate and less likely explanations.

[Quantum]

Secondly: Don moreover (IMHO) was never the point as much as was the intended audience, this in the same manner that the author of the "Ohaspe" was never the intended audience as much as was the audience it was intended for.

Again respectfully, again I disagree with your speculation. Ra stated that numbers were not important

I stated this. Please read again Monica.

an audience of only a few was sufficient for them to provide their message. But that's not the same as assuming that Don was the lone intended recipient. Are you saying that Ra offered all those teachings for Don only?

????? Absolutely not. Quite the contrary? Please read again. I emphatically stated otherwise that it was not intended for an audience of one. It would seem ludicrous to assume so.

And now, are Q'uo offering their teachings for Carla, Jim, and perhaps a handful of others only? How is it that you could even know this at all?

I couldn't? It was not stated as such. Would you as an exercise avail yourself to re-reading the entire post with a fresher perspective. You might be humored with your responses by what you read the second time round.

On the contrary, I would venture to guess that the Law of One might even have reached a larger audience than Oahspe.

Again...This is exactly what I speculated.

that is a far cry from Don being the lone recipient of the teachings.

I am being tedious to your points of misunderstanding so that I am not misunderstood by the readers who may not have read my post you seemingly have misunderstood in it's entirety.

Two thousand pages of a book called the Ohaspe would have been a monster of an intent for a book designed for one single man, as much as the Law of One would be assumed to be intended for just one man, i.e. Don et al, this notwithstanding the fact that Ra left it open for the L/L group to publish or not. Surely Ra had the inkling the L/L "might" publish, and that the information might be disseminated to the public, which may have been nothing more than an unspoken hope of the Confederation to begin with as much as was the intent for the Ohaspe to be for a wider audience more than one, even if but just one single soul were saved in the process.

I think Ra had way more than an inkling.

This is what I stated as clearly as everything else you seem to have misunderstood?

This simple bit of information radically changes Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles forever, i.e. most of the known world.

Only for those adhering to Judeo-Christain-Islamic principles

This was meant as an example only to the free will infringement principle. To this point, it would have matted little if every Christian, Muslim, or Jew on earth had taken it upon themselves to read the LOO or that only many several thousands read it. The numbers would be sufficient to have made my point. It changed these many many thousands of perspectives radically. Where is the free will infringement principle in this example? My post is meant as a question only, and further meant only to explore and/or evaluate "infringement on the free will principle" more than as one to be debated. I don't have the answers. Goodness, I don't know. I am speculating however that I am quite certain that there is far more at play in their (Ra) outline than what we assume. I offer only that there is far more at work here than meets the eye and that "infringement on free will" is not as cut and dry as a-b-c.

I highly doubt it that Ra gave this nod to Oahspe by accident. If we are to assume that that was true I should think it would give us pause about a great many other things that we take at face value from Ra....I'm not sure how to interpret the Oahspe backing by Ra if it is not for noise, short of coming up with increasingly elaborate and less likely explanations.

Extremely interesting points Lavazza. You have nailed it quite nicely with respect to what I've been attempting to question. It is confounding indeed, and has been for quite some time after having indulged myself in the exercise. I had the LOO all rather nicely in place before my read of the Oahspe. In short, it is difficult to reconcile these diverging philosophies expressed by seemingly the same exact authors, as it were. Brushing it away with a quick response doesn't quite do it for either of us it seems.

In closing Monica, please take a moment to re-read my entire post again. You might be extremely surprised by your responses.

Q

[Monica]

Sorry for misunderstanding you. Sometimes a simple comma, or lack thereof, can alter or even reverse the perceived meaning. Chalk it up to distortion!

I invite you to address the other points I raised.

---

Surely Ra had the inkling the L/L "might" publish

I think Ra had way more than an inkling.

This is what I stated as clearly as everything else you seem to have misunderstood?

Yikes! I was agreeing with you! Apparently, misunderstanding is an equal opportunity employer! And distortion is no respecter of persons.

Quantum, do you see what is happening here? We are illustrating our subject matter with our perceived misunderstandings and subtle nuances of distinction.

[Quantum]

Sorry for misunderstanding you. Sometimes a simple comma, or lack thereof, can alter or even reverse the perceived meaning. Chalk it up to distortion!
Quantum, do you see what is happening here? We are illustrating our subject matter with our perceived misunderstandings and subtle nuances of distinction.

I see very much what is and has happened here...as well as elsewhere. I am humored by it as much as I am marveled by it. Ironically however I see it as a good thing. It would be near impossible for me to explain how. Alas I've tried many times to explain it to more than a few with no success. Suffice it to say that as life goes, this "is" indeed the beauty of life. I am almost positive that it is what we came here for. To what you perceive as disagreement, I in fact agree, albeit admittedly with different perspectives or slightly different colored hues, particularly as regards my penchant of not stricturing or compartmentalizing words or concepts. Much like cloud gazing, it may be agreed that a party of two is indeed gazing upon the same cloud, but where one sees a bunny with ears the other sees a butterfly or puppy dog, notwithstanding that its just a cloud.

Q

[airwaves]

Firstly:Many of the things Don asked were on many things Don was already aware of or knew for himself with certainty, which however Ra refused to answer, this based entirely to the converse of your argument of it not infringing on Don's free will or prior belief. Answering what Don asked or had prior knowledge of or believed would not have infringed on Don's Free Will.

What you seem to be forgetting though my friend, is that most if not all of what Ra refused to answer that Don was "already aware of or knew for himself with certainty" was transient as you know what. Moon bases? Who cares? As for the stuff that they didnt know, assuming that the three knew anything about the LOO before Ra would be qute silly. Ra's mission was to spread the knowledge of the LOO. So at least in that case "infringe" they must, but I am willing to bet that they were in the correct mind state so that the disbursement of the LOO info was not an infringement.

Questioner: There was a portion of the material from yesterday which I will read where you say “there is a certain amount of landing taking place. Some of these landings are of your own people; some are of the group known to you as Orion.” My first question is what did you mean that some of the landings are of your peoples?

Ra: I am Ra. Your peoples have, at this time/space present, the technological achievement, if you would call it that, of being able to create and fly the shape and type of craft known to you as unidentified flying objects. Unfortunately for the social memory complex vibratory rate of your peoples, these devices are not intended for the service of mankind, but for potential destructive use. This further muddles the vibratory nexus of your social memory complex, causing a situation where neither those oriented towards serving others nor those oriented towards serving self can gain the energy/power which opens the gates to intelligent infinity for the social memory complex. This in turn causes the harvest to be small.

Questioner: Are these craft that are from our peoples from what we call planes that are not incarnate at this time? Where are they based?

Ra: I am Ra. These of which we spoke are of third density and are part of the so-called military complex of various of your peoples’ societal divisions or structures.

The bases are varied. There are bases, as you would call them, undersea in your southern waters near the Bahamas as well as in your Pacific seas in various places close to your Chilean borders on the water. There are bases upon your moon, as you call this satellite, which are at this time being reworked. There are bases which move about your lands. There are bases, if you would call them that, in your skies. These are the bases of your peoples, very numerous and, as we have said, potentially destructive.

Questioner: Where do the people who operate these craft come from? Are they affiliated with any nation on Earth? What is their source?

Ra: These people come from the same place as you or I. They come from the Creator.

As you intend the question, in its shallower aspect, these people are those in your and other selves’ governments responsible for what you would term national security.

Questioner: Am I to understand then that the United States has these craft in undersea bases?

Ra: I am Ra. You are correct.

Questioner: How did the United States learn the technology to build these craft?

Ra: I am Ra. There was a mind/body/spirit complex known to your people by the vibratory sound complex, Nikola. This entity departed the illusion and the papers containing the necessary understandings were taken by mind/body/spirit complexes serving your security of national divisional complex. Thus your people became privy to the basic technology. In the case of those mind/body/spirit complexes which you call Russians, the technology was given from one of the Confederation in an attempt, approximately twenty-seven of your years ago, to share information and bring about peace among your peoples. The entities giving this information were in error, but we did many things at the end of this cycle in attempts to aid your harvest from which we learned the folly of certain types of aid. That is a contributing factor to our more cautious approach at this date, even as the need is power upon power greater, and your peoples’ call is greater and greater.

http://www.lawofone.info/results.php?session_id=8 This session is quite silly on the whole. We shall not fault Don for being human. Given the opportunity to talk to an alien from "far far away" I would more than likely ask some pretty retarded questions. "Whats the weather like over there X-star system bro!?!" But this is completely off topic. We want to know why Ra answered said questions. IDK! To comfort you though this is not the density of knowing.

---

Furthermore, is the Council past polarity? Or does it include STS-biased (even if no longer polarized) entities as well? Could Oahspe have passed for the purpose of teaching STS entities? Now there's a thought! Does the Council 'pass' STS missions or only STO missions?

If STS missions are approved by Council, with no show of favoritism, then indeed the channeled work might have passed, full of what would be considered distortion to an STO reader. But to an STS reader...it might be right on! Are we not assuming that the Council passes only STO works? Do we have a reason to make that assumption? We know Ra/Q'uo are biased to STO, but do we know that about the Council? Aren't they past polarity, as are Ra/Q'uo? But not on an STO mission like Ra/Q'uo and therefore obliged to pass STS missions as well?

Just a thought.

I forgot to incude this in my original post, but this is a very good point.
6d ftw