I'm sick of all these STS threads. On this section and others.

I think they should have their own section or something.

In keeping with Book 1 of the Ra material.

I prefer talking of the positive polarity!

Sacrifice

Interesting question over at divinecosmos.com:

Quote:I have question under the Law of One. Some times met there mentions of the historical persons of the negative polarity who has opened consciously the gate to intelligent infinity: Genghis Khan, Rasputin and Taras Bulba. First two - it is clear, but the third? He isn't the historical character. He is Nikolay Gogol's literary character of the story. Who there meant?

Quote:11.9 Questioner: Are any of these people known in the history of our planet by name?

Ra: I am Ra. We will mention a few. The one known as Taras Bulba, the one known as Genghis Khan, the one known as Rasputin.

17.25 Questioner: How did Taras Bulba, Genghis Khan, and Rasputin get harvested prior to the harvest?

Ra: I am Ra. It is the right/privilege/duty of those opening consciously the gate to intelligent infinity to choose the manner of their leaving of third density. Those of negative orientation who so achieve this right/duty most often choose to move forward in their learn/teaching of service to self.

Hello everyone,

This is a topic I have been pondering for some time. I do not fully understand the purpose of the STS path... I do not understand why it exists. There are two things that I have often heard as a way of explaining STS. One is, of course, free will. Entities have the free will to be of STS if they so choose. The other is a mystical belief of mine that all things, that is to say, ALL things in the universe must have a balance of some sort. I will expand on these two ideas and discuss some other aspects of my STS confusion below. (session and question numbers added in parentheses where needed). I will also acknowledge that my own bias is STO and as such I have a somewhat biased view of STS (if I may say... ) I am of course writing from my STO perspective and not a balanced perspective and as such my logic may well be flawed or naive when viewed from a larger perspective. Yet I do not find much solace in this possibility, at least at this point in my development. One last notation- when I speak of the STS path, I am mostly speaking to the extreme STS entities that go out of their way to be of STS, so that they might (consciously or not) become more STS polarized and progress in that fashion. Not so much the lesser, shall we say mixed polarity entities that are acting mostly from basic survivalist positions in life. I'm talking about the Himmlers, Kahns, etc.

So...

Free will
So, in a universe governed by free will and with a large enough spread of diversity in the way of sparks of creation from the god source (i.e. entities such as ourselves) we should naturally run in to just about every walk of life imaginable. This makes sense to me. And yet, how is it that as many as 10% of all third density harvestable entities should choose the negative path (65.13) when the second distortion of the Law of One is unconditional love (27.11)? I understand that the first distortion is indeed freewill, second being love which is to say freewill exists first and foremost with love being secondary. Yet it is paradoxical that as many as 10% could interpret the second distortion in (from my view) such a distorted way. I would rather expect 1% if any.

Balance
Every action has an opposite and equal reaction...? The Ying needs a Yang? This is what Ra seems to indicate is required before returning to the creator, and what 6th density is all about (16.19, 47.5). But, why is it that a seemingly loving creator (my naivete again?) would seek to know elements of itself that is harmful to itself (STS actions as perceived by the victim)? I think we could make a case that god is loving because we were split off from god in the beginning, we exist, we are. Or is it that the supposed STS entity would see this as an un-loving act, to have to experience separation?

A dead end path...
As we have learned from the Ra material, STS entities can only travel so far along their chosen path. (can't find session) In mid-sixth density, the negative entity realizes that it cannot progress any further without realizing that it must love others as it loves itself in order to master the lesson of unity. Is it just my perspective that it seems highly awkward for an entity to progress on a spiritual path for millions of years with a misguided premise before finally realizing the "correct" path?

Further speculation...
One might also argue that without STS, STO would be meaningless. But I would challenge that idea.

I think it would be perfectly reasonable if we imagined a completely different paradigm of our reality. Suppose with me for a minute, that there is NO STS path. God is only about love, and we are all creations of love in physical manifest form. However, we do have a thick veil about us. This veil should be more than sufficient catalyst to create any and all opportunities (seemingly STS actions) for STO action. However the key difference is that everyone who participates in STS actions (murder, theft, hatred, etc) are not working from deep subconscious desires to polarize in STS or "evil" ways, but are simply mis-guided, emotionally traumatized or otherwise suffering entities. After their death they are welcomed back in to the spirit world and undergo much healing, learning what they did wrong and why, and then reincarnating later on with the intent of doing better at those life lessons. This is the paradigm that Michael Newton has observed in his books 'Journy of Souls' and 'Destiny of Souls'.

In conclusion (for now), I will state that the STS path is one in which I am more than ready to 'leave behind' as Q'uo might suggest I do. If I cannot find resolve on this I will surely do so. In the meanwhile I welcome any and all comments on my perspectives, and hopefully I can find some understanding.

Love and Light to all,
Lavazza

Hello everyone,

I had an interesting question pop in to my head yesterday as I was scrubbing some dishes, as so often happens. In the most recent "Sons of the Law of One" podcast, host Glen Pendelton mentions that:

Quote:There are many entities, and groups of entities giving us the same information, that we are all one, and that we can connect to this oneness.

Given Ra's explanation in session 16 that each density has 7 sub-densities (and each sub-density, 7 sub-sub densities, etc), how would these sub-densities be expressed, say in 1st density?

Presumably, 1st density pertains primarily to the gross-material and to the bulk of our physical "laws". So, other than something like a narrow band of light radiation, is there an identifiable 7-fold structure, or hierarchy, or ...?

Hello everyone,

I was thinking most recently about thought forms (that is to say, I was forming thoughts on the thought of thought forms...) and was trying to figure out exactly what they are. In Book 1 Ra explains that many supposed UFO sightings were not actually ships but "thought-forms". I take from this they appeared as a mirage or sorts? Ra explains at a different time that they themselves appeared to the Egyptians via thought- so that they themselves were thought-forms (or mirages?) in appearance- not exactly appearing in the flesh. In the introduction to Book 1 Don speculates that the artifacts from psychic surgery, ghosts and other visual phenomena may indeed be thought forms also.

When one considers that the reality in which we exist is an illusion, all things seem possible and the distinction between "real" and "mirage" do not seem so concrete. Perhaps a thought-form is not so much a visual illusion as it is a real thing- the difference being it was produced by thought and not classical means. Or perhaps not?

I'm curious if anyone here has drawn different speculation than I have, and if so, what are your thoughts on the thoughtful topic of thought forms?

Hello once again everyone. I have the urge to put this confusion of mine to rest once and for all (if possible). In my reading (proper) of the Law of One books I am running across many small (and some not so small) bits of transitory material. The construction date of the pyramids in Egypt is something that struck me as interesting when I first heard about TLOO last September.

1981.01.20 - Book 1, Session 2 Wrote:We are those of the Confederation who eleven thousand of your years ago came to two of your planetary cultures which were at that time closely in touch with the creation of the one Creator. It was our naive belief that we could teach/learn by direct contact and that the free will distortions of individual feeling or personality were in no danger. We had no thought of their being disturbed, as these cultures were already closely aligned with an all-embracing belief in the live-ness or consciousness of all. We came and were welcomed by the peoples whom we wished to serve. We attempted to aid them in technical ways having to do with the healing of mind/body/spirit complex distortions through the use of the crystal, appropriate to the distortion, placed within a certain appropriate series of ratios of time/space material. Thus were the pyramids created.

1981.02.11 - Book 1, Session 23 Wrote:The first, the Great Pyramid, was formed approximately 6,000 of your years ago. Then, in sequence, after this performing by thought of the building or architecture of the Great Pyramid using the more, shall we say, local or earthly material rather than thought-form material to build other pyramidal structures. This continued for approximately 1,500 of your years.

Quote:Questioner: Let’s take the point at which an individualized entity of second density is ready for transition to third. Is this second-density being what we would call animal?

Ra: I am Ra. There are three types of second-density entities which become, shall we say, enspirited. The first is the animal. This is the most predominant. The second is the vegetable, most especially that which you call, sound vibration complex, “tree.” These entities are capable of giving and receiving enough love to become individualized. The third is mineral. Occasionally a certain location/place, as you may call it, becomes energized to individuality through the love it receives and gives in relationship to a third-density entity which is in relationship to it. This is the least common transition.

The following exchange, captured from another thread, is offered as source material for this thread which is devoted to sorting out the sometimes confusing relationship between the various co-creators of our Octave as described (often ambiguously and sometimes even inconsistently) in the Law of One.

Particular focus is requested in the relationships between humans / Earth, Earth / Sun, and humans / Sun. Participants are asked to reference applicable quotes from the Law of One when posting.

Love and Light,

3D Sunset

Post #17 of the thread Ra=Sun Post from the Olio Forum Wrote:

(08-20-2009, 11:00 AM)βαθμιαίος Wrote: It's kind of a cryptic quote, isn't it? "Not that entity which experiences the learning/teachings of [yourselves]." So is there a sun-type entity that does experience our learning/teachings? Why wouldn't our sun experience our learning/teachings -- surely it's intimately aware of our every thought and action.

Hello again βαθμιαίος,

It is truly an honor to have you more active around the forum again. I trust that all is well is with you and yours.

What I hear Ra saying is that, in its capacity as sub-Logos, the Sun is responsible for creating the environment in which we, sub-sub-logoi do the experiencing. By extension, I would suppose that our sun does experience vicariously through us, its creations.

I think that there is an even more interesting relationship between ourselves and the Earth. I found it very interesting to note that when Don asked for an example of a sub-sub-Logos, that Ra stated that Don would be such an example. I would expected him to give our planet Earth as the example, and that we would be sub-sub-sub-Logoi. But he didn't. :-/ Interestingly, Ra does not describes anything lower than sub-sub-Logoi. I'm not sure, but I suspect that this is intentional, rather than simply convenient, but I may well be wrong.

I have spent some time investigating this relationship between humans and Earth and although I have a perspective, like so much that is not directly asked by Don and responded to by Ra, the exact nature of the relationship remains only partially manifest to me.

For what it is worth, based upon my humble study of the material, it would seem that our relationship to Earth is as co-sub-sub-logoi, both of whom are at once both dependent upon the other for their conscious existence, and having aspects that transcend the relationship.

I would beg differ with you slightly though, on one of your previous posts, in that I see Earth as distinct from the Logos (i.e., Sun) as evidenced by the following quotes.

Law of One, Book II, Session 29 Wrote:Questioner: Then the planet which we walk upon here would be some form of sub-sub-Logos. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. A planetary entity is so named only as Logos if It is working in harmonic fashion with entities or mind/body complexes upon Its surface or within Its electromagnetic field.

Law of One, Book II, Session 30 Wrote:Questioner: Thank you. Can you give me a brief history of the metaphysical principles of the development of each of our planets that surround our sun, their function with respect to the evolution of beings?

Ra: I am Ra. We shall give you a metaphysical description only of those planets upon which individual mind/body/spirit complexes have been, are, or shall be experienced. You may understand the other spheres to be a part of the Logos.

So it seems that once a planet leaves 1D, it becomes separate from its Logos (Sun) and becomes a sub-sub-Logos. (Note: There is a little more to this logic than I have included here.)

If you are interested in discussing this topic in further depth, I would suggest that we start another thread, preferably in the Strictly Law of One section.

Love and Light,

3D Sunset