Why I am not a vegan

[Monica]

Outs = exceptions.

Yeah, I got that. What I meant was, exceptions to what? What are you trying to do here?

What about people that don't agree with the science that says that humans don't need meat?  After all, on bring4th there are people who don't agree with mainstream science on vaccinations, the moon landings, 9/11, etc.  Surely there are some who don't agree that it's settled science that humans don't need meat.

What about them?

[βαθμιαίος]

Exceptions to your signature, which I'm trying to understand. You said that it's STS to eat meat knowing that it's unnecessary. I'm wondering how that applies to those who don't know it's unnecessary.

[Monica]

Exceptions to your signature, which I'm trying to understand.  You said that it's STS to eat meat knowing that it's unnecessary.  I'm wondering how that applies to those who don't know it's unnecessary.

That's why I included the word knowingly.

[βαθμιαίος]

So people who disagree that humans don't need meat aren't STS when they eat meat?

[Monica]

So people who disagree that humans don't need meat aren't STS when they eat meat?

That isn't for me to decide. As Ra explained, polarizing depends a lot on intentions and circumstances. I cannot possibly assess a particular person in a given situation.

I will say only that, someone whose heart is open in compassion, would be more likely to investigate the issue of whether meat is truly necessary, rather than being quick to try to justify their meat consumption.

Compassion drives investigation, and investigation will reveal that it's not necessary.

[Monica]

Here's a clue: Many children naturally don't want to eat meat when they make the connection that it's a dead animal, but their parents insist that they do, and teach them that they need it. So the child's natural compassion is suppressed. It makes sense to me that this natural compassion is significant.

Not all children...some delight in squashing bugs for fun. But many.

[βαθμιαίος]

So if someone openheartedly investigates but comes to the conclusion that eating meat is necessary for them, then they're not STS when they eat meat?

[Monica]

So if someone openheartedly investigates but comes to the conclusion that eating meat is necessary for them, then they're not STS when they eat meat?

I speak of general principles.

[βαθμιαίος]

The general principle seems to be "eating meat when you know it's unnecessary is STS." I'm wondering how many people that actually applies to.

[Monica]

The general principle seems to be "eating meat when you know it's unnecessary is STS."  I'm wondering how many people that actually applies to.

Well it certainly doesn't apply to Joe Blow who has a BBQ every Sunday, has never seen a slaughterhouse video and even if he did, wouldn't be moved by it because his heart is so closed that he can barely even muster up any compassion for humans of a different color, much less an animal who doesn't look like him, so he has never even given it a second thought.

[βαθμιαίος]

Yeah, and those are probably the majority in every country on earth. Between them, indigenous people, and those who honestly believe humans need meat, it just doesn't seem like your signature applies to many people -- just those who have looked into the question and decided that even though they agree about humans not needing meat, they're going to eat it anyways.

[Monica]

Yeah, and those are probably the majority in every country on earth.  Between them, indigenous people, and those who honestly believe humans need meat, it just doesn't seem like your signature applies to many people -- just those who have looked into the question and decided that even though they agree about humans not needing meat, they're going to eat it anyways.

Yeah, pretty much. (Although, that is rapidly changing, with so much info about this readily available on the internet. It's becoming increasingly difficult to remain ignorant.)

Or, those who don't even care enough to face their own denial about it...who dig in their heels and attempt to justify it, rather than taking an honest look at the information that is readily available.

It was never my intention to make a blanket statement about all humans who eat meat. Hence, the carefully-chosen qualifiers. In a community that professes to foster open dialog, among people who profess to be Wanderers from higher densities, with their hearts open and, presumably, their blue rays (honest communication and self-reflection) also open, I think it's a reasonable topic to address.

Ra answered our call. Some of us are, in turn, now being called by our younger other-selves. If we can't even alert our fellow Wanderers to this call, then it is a heavy veil indeed.

[Doctor Makuta]

18.4 Questioner: Are there any foods that are helpful or harmful that the instrument might eat?
Ra: I am Ra. This instrument has body complex distortion towards ill health in the distortion direction corrected best by ingestion of the foodstuffs of your grains and your vegetables, as you call them. However, this is extremely unimportant when regarded as an aid with equality to other aids such as attitude which this instrument has in abundance. It, however, aids the vital energies of this instrument, with less distortion towards ill health, to ingest foodstuffs in the above manner with occasional ingestion of what you call your meats, due to the instrument’s need to lessen the distortion towards low vital energy.

Ra seemed to advocate injestion of meats.

[Monica]

18.4 Questioner: Are there any foods that are helpful or harmful that the instrument might eat?
Ra: I am Ra. This instrument has body complex distortion towards ill health in the distortion direction corrected best by ingestion of the foodstuffs of your grains and your vegetables, as you call them. However, this is extremely unimportant when regarded as an aid with equality to other aids such as attitude which this instrument has in abundance. It, however, aids the vital energies of this instrument, with less distortion towards ill health, to ingest foodstuffs in the above manner with occasional ingestion of what you call your meats, due to the instrument’s need to lessen the distortion towards low vital energy.

Ra seemed to advocate injestion of meats.

But...but...Ra told Carla to eat meat!!! That means Ra favors the eating of meat, right?
Post #740
Post #1442
Post #2915

[Diana]

18.4 Questioner: Are there any foods that are helpful or harmful that the instrument might eat?
Ra: I am Ra. This instrument has body complex distortion towards ill health in the distortion direction corrected best by ingestion of the foodstuffs of your grains and your vegetables, as you call them. However, this is extremely unimportant when regarded as an aid with equality to other aids such as attitude which this instrument has in abundance. It, however, aids the vital energies of this instrument, with less distortion towards ill health, to ingest foodstuffs in the above manner with occasional ingestion of what you call your meats, due to the instrument’s need to lessen the distortion towards low vital energy.

Ra seemed to advocate injestion of meats.

We have been over that point ad nauseum. Please refer to the posts Monica linked above.

What do YOU think?

[Doctor Makuta]

18.4 Questioner: Are there any foods that are helpful or harmful that the instrument might eat?
Ra: I am Ra. This instrument has body complex distortion towards ill health in the distortion direction corrected best by ingestion of the foodstuffs of your grains and your vegetables, as you call them. However, this is extremely unimportant when regarded as an aid with equality to other aids such as attitude which this instrument has in abundance. It, however, aids the vital energies of this instrument, with less distortion towards ill health, to ingest foodstuffs in the above manner with occasional ingestion of what you call your meats, due to the instrument’s need to lessen the distortion towards low vital energy.

Ra seemed to advocate injestion of meats.

We have been over that point ad nauseum. Please refer to the posts Monica linked above.

What do YOU think?

Well I have been feeling disgusted lately at injesting meats... so its just another nail in the coffin of meat eating for me. I already don't consume dairy, I only injest meat because I live with others and it makes it easier if all meals are cooked together, and for the nutrients it contains that arent naturally widespread. However I also do enjoy meat I wont lie for the flavour and texture, however I would prefer to harvest than have to do another 3rd density cycle considering I am a wanderer so perhaps you can commentate.

[Diana]

Well I have been feeling disgusted lately at injesting meats... so its just another nail in the coffin of meat eating for me. I already don't consume dairy, I only injest meat because I live with others and it makes it easier if all meals are cooked together, and for the nutrients it contains that arent naturally widespread. However I also do enjoy meat I wont lie for the flavour and texture, however I would prefer to harvest than have to do another 3rd density cycle considering I am a wanderer so perhaps you can commentate.

As far as eating meat and being harvestable, I don't know anything about that. I do imagine that in 4D, a density of compassion, there will be more compassionate ways to sustain one's self. Anything eaten will most likely not be the result of cruelty. So my idea is to start moving toward that here, now. You have already taken steps by cutting out dairy. Now something (higher self?) is possibly telling you that meat doesn't line up with who you are now. 

As far as taste and texture of meat, if you were inclined to move away from meat there are many good meat substitutes to help in the transition. It can be tough in a family situation, but in my case everyone has accommodated me for many years. The thing is to just make the commitment and go with it. There is always something you can eat when with others—even if it's only the vegetable and bread.

 

[Doctor Makuta]

Well I have been feeling disgusted lately at injesting meats... so its just another nail in the coffin of meat eating for me. I already don't consume dairy, I only injest meat because I live with others and it makes it easier if all meals are cooked together, and for the nutrients it contains that arent naturally widespread. However I also do enjoy meat I wont lie for the flavour and texture, however I would prefer to harvest than have to do another 3rd density cycle considering I am a wanderer so perhaps you can commentate.

As far as eating meat and being harvestable, I don't know anything about that. I do imagine that in 4D, a density of compassion, there will be more compassionate ways to sustain one's self. Anything eaten will most likely not be the result of cruelty. So my idea is to start moving toward that here, now. You have already taken steps by cutting out dairy. Now something (higher self?) is possibly telling you that meat doesn't line up with who you are now. 

As far as taste and texture of meat, if you were inclined to move away from meat there are many good meat substitutes to help in the transition. It can be tough in a family situation, but in my case everyone has accommodated me for many years. The thing is to just make the commitment and go with it. There is always something you can eat when with others—even if it's only the vegetable and bread.

 

Admitedly though, some vegans/vegetarians can adopt a higher than thou attitude and seem to talk down to those who chose to injest animal protein which can be off putting and annoying. It is my theory though that doing minor STS things are put in our society purposely so people unconciously choose the negative path as they see it as normal. However as I said, being a Wanderer and having a vague rememberance as well as an experience with my homerealm in my mind, doing something to attain harvestability from 3rd Density seems to be something to prioratize as the highest, as I would be very unhappy if I knew I had to do another grand 3rd Density cycle.

[anagogy]

But...but...Ra told Carla to eat meat!!! That means Ra favors the eating of meat, right?
Post #740
Post #1442
Post #2915

We have been over that point ad nauseum. Please refer to the posts Monica linked above.

What do YOU think?

So why exactly does the fact that is in specific reference to Carla does that invalidate the quote as advice for other people?  Perhaps I'm missing something?  I'm just trying to understand your logic.

[Diana]

But...but...Ra told Carla to eat meat!!! That means Ra favors the eating of meat, right?
Post #740
Post #1442
Post #2915

We have been over that point ad nauseum. Please refer to the posts Monica linked above.

What do YOU think?

So why exactly does the fact that is in specific reference to Carla does that invalidate the quote as advice for other people?  Perhaps I'm missing something?  I'm just trying to understand your logic.

First, I didn't say it invalidated it.

I was only trying to put the question to a person, who has the ability and freedom to decide for him/herself. Personally, I don't take Carla's changelings of Ra as a bible. I love all the info, but I think for myself.

We have gone over this ground extensively in years past, regarding Ra's comments to Carla. I was also trying to avoid past rabbit holes that never seem to get anywhere. If using Ra's comments to Carla to justify meat eating works for someone, that's their decision. But as I said, I think for myself—that is my logic.

[anagogy]

First, I didn't say it invalidated it.

I was only trying to put the question to a person, who has the ability and freedom to decide for him/herself. Personally, I don't take Carla's changelings of Ra as a bible. I love all the info, but I think for myself.

We have gone over this ground extensively in years past, regarding Ra's comments to Carla. I was also trying to avoid past rabbit holes that never seem to get anywhere. If using Ra's comments to Carla to justify meat eating works for someone, that's their decision. But as I said, I think for myself—that is my logic.

Well, I didn't say that you, Diana, specifically, invalidated either.  But the posts Monica linked basically seemed to argue that it wasn't advice for anybody but Carla, and that fact seemingly invalidated it being supportive of the idea that Ra, the sixth density STO being of light, would advocate the eating of meat for anyone other than Carla.   

The reason I bring it up, is that any time anyone brings it up, they are linked to a bunch of past posts that supposedly clear up why it it isn't good advice for anyone.  And that it has all been "figured out" before somehow, and that it no longer warrants discussion.  And that seems like a cop out to me, and an easy way to avoid discussing it, or thinking about it further.  Sometimes, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, it is good to tread over old ground, to discover the fine nuances of truth in the cracks of the rocks around the issue.  And it is okay to discuss things over again, in a newer thread, that is not just a database of old posts.  If people are tired of discussing it, they don't have to participate.  I have conversations about old topics all the time with friends, and we discover new aspects every time.  I find new and more concise ways of relating old points, without filibustering a page with unneeded length.  

But anyway, the logic seemingly offered doesn't hold up for me, because it is like it assumes that Carla's physiology was sooooooooooo rare that nobody else in the world would benefit from those suggestions that were tailored to Carla.

I hold the Ra channelings dear as well.  And don't take it as bible, but I've also learned so much from Ra's wisdom, that I can't just brush off a topic that they *DID* to some extent offer words on, just because I don't like what they say.  So we have to ask ourselves, again, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, if Ra is a sixth density service to others being of light, and it is allegedly depolarizing for an STO being to eat meat from animals, why would they advise it for Carla, an obviously STO being?  Wouldn't they have offered her an STO vegan alternative instead?  I mean, if it was unnecessary.

Just something worth thinking about, I thought.

[Lighthead]

I hold the Ra channelings dear as well.  And don't take it as bible, but I've also learned so much from Ra's wisdom, that I can't just brush off a topic that they *DID* to some extent offer words on, just because I don't like what they say.  So we have to ask ourselves, again, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, if Ra is a sixth density service to others being of light, and it is allegedly depolarizing for an STO being to eat meat from animals, why would they advise it for Carla, an obviously STO being?  Wouldn't they have offered her an STO vegan alternative instead?  I mean, if it was unnecessary.

Just something worth thinking about, I thought.

It seems that they did at one point. But the people on this board have found that that quote says something else entirely. That's why Monica doesn't really bring it up. The people on this board say that Ra really meant to emphasize the use of preservatives:

84.2 Questioner: In the last session you mentioned least distorted complex protein in that the body complex of the instrument was capable of greatly increased distortion. Would you define the protein of which you spoke and we would like to know, increased distortion in which direction, towards health or ill-health?

Ra: I am Ra. We were, in the cautionary statement about complex protein, referring to the distortions of the animal protein which has been slaughtered and preservatives added in order to maintain the acceptability to your peoples of this non-living, physical material. It is well to attempt to find those items which are fresh and of the best quality possible in order to avoid increasing this particular entity’s distortions which may be loosely termed allergic.



We were speaking of the distortion towards disease which is potential at this space/time.

Category: Miscellanea: Meat

I just want to make clear that I'm not trying to speak for Monica. She mentioned this in one of the first few posts on this thread that I was a part of. I'm just repeating what she said.

I personally think it's worth investigating, but others have so conveniently disregarded it.

Edit #1: Sorry for the formatting of Ra's quote. I tried to fix it, but couldn't.

Edit #2: My bad. Monica mentioned it one of the first posts of the thread, Ra's Statement About 2D Entities; not on this thread.

[anagogy]

I'm sorry Lighthead, but I fail to see how that quote says anything about a vegan alternative.

Ra says to find meats that have the least preservatives, so as not to exacerbate her allergies.

[Lighthead]

I'm sorry Lighthead, but I fail to see how that quote says anything about a vegan alternative.

Ra says to find meats that have the least preservatives, so as not to exacerbate her allergies.

You don't see it here:

84.2 Questioner: In the last session you mentioned least distorted complex protein in that the body complex of the instrument was capable of greatly increased distortion. Would you define the protein of which you spoke and we would like to know, increased distortion in which direction, towards health or ill-health?

Ra: I am Ra. We were, in the cautionary statement about complex protein, referring to the distortions of the animal protein which has been slaughtered and preservatives added in order to maintain the acceptability to your peoples of this non-living, physical material. It is well to attempt to find those items which are fresh and of the best quality possible in order to avoid increasing this particular entity’s distortions which may be loosely termed allergic.

We were speaking of the distortion towards disease which is potential at this space/time.
Category: Miscellanea: Meat

I highlighted the word, slaughtered. I'm not definitively saying that it refers to the killing of animals. I'm just saying that I feel it's worth analyzing.

[Lighthead]

That said, I would be surprised if Ra were so dogmatic about anything. I think that the other things he says about 2D entities are more relevant.

[Monica]

Well, I didn't say that you, Diana, specifically, invalidated either.  But the posts Monica linked basically seemed to argue that it wasn't advice for anybody but Carla and that fact seemingly invalidated it being supportive of the idea that Ra, the sixth density STO being of light, would advocate the eating of meat for anyone other than Carla.

I don't think Ra advocated the eating of meat at all, for anyone, even Carla. I think that quote is simply congruent with the way Ra always avoided telling them exactly what to do, in respect to free will. Ra acknowledged that Carla already ate meat, and gave advice in accordance with her choices.

Notice that in the other quote, that was general (rather than for Carla), Ra was careful to use the term animal products rather than meat. Animal products could be eggs or dairy, which could possibly be acquired with slightly less cruelty than meat (I say slightly because the calves are still stolen from their mothers, and slaughtered, the cows are still kept pregnant, and killed at the end of their productive years).

Still, being that Ra chose their words very carefully, it's no accident that they said meat when referring to Carla, and animal products when referring to the human diet in general.

Furthermore, Ra specifically stated to the extent necessary, thus leaving it open for each person to decide. There is no biological need for animal products at all...for any human. So extrapolating from that, Ra seemed to be very clearly NOT supporting the eating of animal products at all, for anyone.

Not only that, but all of Ra's words should be factored into the equation. Ra never gave us any rules to follow, like religions do. Rather, Ra taught us principles. Quite simply, dominating and killing a sentient mind-body complex against their will doesn't seem to be congruent with the STO path.

The reason I bring it up, is that any time anyone brings it up, they are linked to a bunch of past posts that supposedly clear up why it it isn't good advice for anyone.  And that it has all been "figured out" before somehow, and that it no longer warrants discussion.  And that seems like a cop out to me, and an easy way to avoid discussing it, or thinking about it further.

I'm sorry for the misunderstanding. I am happy to discuss it further! I simply want to add what has been previously said, to the current conversation. I don't want to repeat myself. So I include the links to the old discussions, in the hopes that you will first read them, and integrate those comments into the current discussion. I am happy to continue the discussion with anyone, but do ask that they at least read those other comments first, for the sake of better understanding. Then we can continue.

Sometimes, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, it is good to tread over old ground, to discover the fine nuances of truth in the cracks of the rocks around the issue.  And it is okay to discuss things over again, in a newer thread, that is not just a database of old posts.

Agreed! At the same time, there are valuable nuggets in those old discussions, that can add to the current one.

But anyway, the logic seemingly offered doesn't hold up for me, because it is like it assumes that Carla's physiology was sooooooooooo rare that nobody else in the world would benefit from those suggestions that were tailored to Carla.

I don't think her physiology was any different. There are many people with medical conditions. But, at the same time, I prefer not to discuss Carla's choices, because she is a real person. It's rather delicate though, being that they did choose to ask the questions of Ra, and they did choose to publish Ra's responses. So, I just ask that we keep it respectful of Carla.

I hold the Ra channelings dear as well.  And don't take it as bible, but I've also learned so much from Ra's wisdom, that I can't just brush off a topic that they *DID* to some extent offer words on, just because I don't like what they say.  So we have to ask ourselves, again, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, if Ra is a sixth density service to others being of light, and it is allegedly depolarizing for an STO being to eat meat from animals, why would they advise it for Carla, an obviously STO being?  Wouldn't they have offered her an STO vegan alternative instead?  I mean, if it was unnecessary.

Just something worth thinking about, I thought.

Personally, I resonate almost 100% with virtually everything Ra has said. I have no conflicts with the Material.

I don't think they did advise Carla to eat meat at all. I think they accepted that she already did, and worked with her according to her own choices.

Remember, Don never asked Ra if eating meat was depolarizing. Nor did he ever ask anything about eating meat from the perspective of the victims. The question was only asked in the context of Carla's allergies.

In analyzing Ra's response, I think it's important to remember Ra's M.O.: Ra always answered direct questions and didn't usually volunteer information that wasn't asked for.

[Monica]

I highlighted the word, slaughtered. I'm not definitively saying that it refers to the killing of animals. I'm just saying that I feel it's worth analyzing.

What else could it possibly mean? Seems rather straightforward to me.

...

[anagogy]

84.2 Questioner: In the last session you mentioned least distorted complex protein in that the body complex of the instrument was capable of greatly increased distortion. Would you define the protein of which you spoke and we would like to know, increased distortion in which direction, towards health or ill-health?

Ra: I am Ra. We were, in the cautionary statement about complex protein, referring to the distortions of the animal protein which has been slaughtered and preservatives added in order to maintain the acceptability to your peoples of this non-living, physical material. It is well to attempt to find those items which are fresh and of the best quality possible in order to avoid increasing this particular entity’s distortions which may be loosely termed allergic.

We were speaking of the distortion towards disease which is potential at this space/time.
Category: Miscellanea: Meat

I highlighted the word, slaughtered. I'm not definitively saying that it refers to the killing of animals. I'm just saying that I feel it's worth analyzing.

It is obvious from the context that Ra is referring to the preservatives being the problem, not the killing animals for meat.  Especially considering in an earlier session, Carla was advised to occasionally eat meat.  

Saying otherwise is just wishful thinking, in my opinion.  And I think if anyone is being completely and objectively honest with themselves reading that, they will come to the same conclusion.  The whole response is about meat, and finding the freshest meat (hence the whole talk about preservatives in dead animal flesh being added to it -- to make it last longer).

I mean do you honestly think that quote says otherwise?  I think most people would agree with what I have interpreted.  

[Monica]

I hold the Ra channelings dear as well.  And don't take it as bible, but I've also learned so much from Ra's wisdom, that I can't just brush off a topic that they *DID* to some extent offer words on, just because I don't like what they say.  So we have to ask ourselves, again, in the spirit of thinking for ourselves, if Ra is a sixth density service to others being of light, and it is allegedly depolarizing for an STO being to eat meat from animals, why would they advise it for Carla, an obviously STO being?  Wouldn't they have offered her an STO vegan alternative instead?  I mean, if it was unnecessary.

Just something worth thinking about, I thought.

It seems that they did at one point. But the people on this board have found that that quote says something else entirely. That's why Monica doesn't really bring it up. The people on this board say that Ra really meant to emphasize the use of preservatives:

84.2 Questioner: In the last session you mentioned least distorted complex protein in that the body complex of the instrument was capable of greatly increased distortion. Would you define the protein of which you spoke and we would like to know, increased distortion in which direction, towards health or ill-health?

Ra: I am Ra. We were, in the cautionary statement about complex protein, referring to the distortions of the animal protein which has been slaughtered and preservatives added in order to maintain the acceptability to your peoples of this non-living, physical material. It is well to attempt to find those items which are fresh and of the best quality possible in order to avoid increasing this particular entity’s distortions which may be loosely termed allergic.



We were speaking of the distortion towards disease which is potential at this space/time.

Category: Miscellanea: Meat

I just want to make clear that I'm not trying to speak for Monica. She mentioned this in one of the first few posts on this thread that I was a part of. I'm just repeating what she said.

I personally think it's worth investigating, but others have so conveniently disregarded it.

Edit #1: Sorry for the formatting of Ra's quote. I tried to fix it, but couldn't.

Edit #2: My bad. Monica mentioned it one of the first posts of the thread, Ra's Statement About 2D Entities; not on this thread.

Not sure what you mean by 'my bad.' You did right to bring it up. The Ra Material was channeled in a monotone, without the benefit of punctuation, or even pauses so that they'd know where to put punctuation. So while many people have interpreted that to mean meat that had preservatives added, Ra might have meant food that was slaughtered, and food that had preservatives added.

Actually, I agree with you that Ra intended the latter, for the simple reason that meat doesn't usually have preservatives added. Think about it. Meat is usually bought frozen, right? (It's been 35 years since I've bought meat, so maybe I'm wrong on this.) Even if I'm wrong on that part, let's look at the next part:

in order to maintain the acceptability to your peoples of this non-living, physical material.

That sure sounds to me like Ra is expressing distaste.

Then:

It is well to attempt to find those items which are fresh

Something that is dead can't be fresh.

These are just my own interpretations. I completely agree with you that Ra was subtly expressing their own opinion, but, in typical Ra style, in such a way that respects our free will to figure it out for ourselves.

[Monica]

Especially considering in an earlier session, Carla was advised to occasionally eat meat.

I don't think Ra ever advised Carla to eat meat.

 
I mean do you honestly think that quote says otherwise?

I think Ra intentionally worded it in such a way that either interpretation might seem valid, in accordance with our free will.

I now have a question for you: Do you honestly think Ra would 'approve' of dominating/controlling/killing sentient beings, the very same beings whose call they answer?

I think most people would agree with what I have interpreted.  

Indeed, yes, most people do see it that way. But then, most of them are meat-eaters, so perhaps they are reading it the way they want it to be. (Admittedly, we all do that, meat-eaters and vegans alike. We all interpret Ra's words according to our own values and biases. And Ra knew that.)