12-11-2015, 02:27 PM
I can talk to people about everything being connected in terms of the quantum world, or String Theory. I still get eye-rolling, but it is close enough to the common paradigm to be acceptable in conversation. And in this way I can touch on the implications of unity.
The Ra Material, and the LOO, is another story. Firstly, if someone is ready to hear what Ra conveyed, they will find it. "When the student is ready, the teacher appears." Inherent within this idea is that in analyzing the material for mistakes or inconsistencies, one misses the point of coming across it at all. There is either information one resonates with or not. So trying to explain the LOO to others has inherent problems. It borders on trying convince, which does not work because it incites resistance in general.
As Ra did by answering the call, we might simply talk about the Law of One to those who ask us about the subject of the nature of reality. What I would avoid in this endeavor is to cite Ra or any of the books as the only source, similar to Christians thumping a bible. I also don't recommend even feeling this way one's self—that Ra's words are the end-all. We can find our own words individual to each situation to convey the concepts of unity, and reference works as supporting the subject matter or exploring concepts because they are interesting or relevant (densities etc.).
This is not to say I am dismissing The Ra books in any way. I immediately resonated in a big, big way the moment I started reading the first book. I am familiar with other channelings and most pale in comparison. But I also feel that way about Castaneda's books, which most people feel are fiction. I really don't care. This is what I like because the information is either really useful or sets off a resonating note deep inside. So from my point of view, explaining Ra's LOO to strangers doesn't make sense—unless they open the door themselves.
If one is trying to talk about the LOO from Ra's perspective because the door has been opened, I don't think there is a simple elevator speech.
The Ra Material, and the LOO, is another story. Firstly, if someone is ready to hear what Ra conveyed, they will find it. "When the student is ready, the teacher appears." Inherent within this idea is that in analyzing the material for mistakes or inconsistencies, one misses the point of coming across it at all. There is either information one resonates with or not. So trying to explain the LOO to others has inherent problems. It borders on trying convince, which does not work because it incites resistance in general.
As Ra did by answering the call, we might simply talk about the Law of One to those who ask us about the subject of the nature of reality. What I would avoid in this endeavor is to cite Ra or any of the books as the only source, similar to Christians thumping a bible. I also don't recommend even feeling this way one's self—that Ra's words are the end-all. We can find our own words individual to each situation to convey the concepts of unity, and reference works as supporting the subject matter or exploring concepts because they are interesting or relevant (densities etc.).
This is not to say I am dismissing The Ra books in any way. I immediately resonated in a big, big way the moment I started reading the first book. I am familiar with other channelings and most pale in comparison. But I also feel that way about Castaneda's books, which most people feel are fiction. I really don't care. This is what I like because the information is either really useful or sets off a resonating note deep inside. So from my point of view, explaining Ra's LOO to strangers doesn't make sense—unless they open the door themselves.
If one is trying to talk about the LOO from Ra's perspective because the door has been opened, I don't think there is a simple elevator speech.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)