10-06-2010, 09:37 PM
(10-06-2010, 04:40 PM)ricdaw Wrote: How true should we be to the text? Do we give Ra the same leeway that we give each other when we describe something? Where we use different words to describe the same thing at different times? Or do we assume that 6th density Ra knew exactly what he was saying, and that when he used different words, the differences were purposeful?
It kinda matters here.
The Stairways of Light (82.29) metaphor does very much seem to be the same as the Line of Light (6.14) metaphor.
However, the context of the former is in response to a direct question about whether the pre-veil harvest was the same as the current post-veil harvest. Rather than saying “Harvest is the same” Ra actually said, “The query is not answered easily.” This suggests caution about concluding that the two harvests have the same mechanism.
The absolute test is: “The necessity for graduation to fourth density is an ability to use, welcome, and enjoy a certain intensity of the white light of the One Infinite Creator.” (82.29)
But the mechanism to grade souls pre-veil is more than just about “stairs” vs. “a line.” And more than just “quality” of light vs “intensity” of light.
Ra, in the context of pre-veil harvest said this:
Quote:Between the two stairs lies the threshold. To cross that threshold is difficult. There is resistance at the edge, shall we say, of each density. The faculty of faith or will needs to be understood, nourished, and developed in order to have an entity which seeks past the boundary of third density. Those entities which do not do their homework, be they ever so amiable, shall not cross.
There is a act of “faith or will” involved in pre-veil harvest that is not mentioned in any post-veil harvest description. That suggests that an entity on the steps between 3rd and 4th density (pre-veil) could cross the resisting threshold by an act of “faith or will” during the test. There is a requirement to “seek past the boundary of third density.”
The post-veil descriptions describe walking the line until the intensity gets too great. If an entity stops right at the edge of 3rd, there is no suggestion that a post-veil soul could still manage to cross over into 4th by “will or faith.” There is no suggestion (post-veil) that “seeking” is required at all. Souls that have 4th dimensional characteristics go to 4th unless they actively choose to stay in 3rd. In other words, nowadays (post-veil) wanting, seeking, willing or faithing (sorry, had to say that to make it parallel) does not apply, but Ra suggests they were important pre-veil.
You’ll need to use your own discernment here.
Ra might have used different words intending to describe different harvest mechanisms. I’ve described some of the context above that suggests just that concept.
Ra might have used different words to describe the same harvest mechanism, with the new words clarifying and expanding upon the earlier description, but without intending to describe a new and different harvest mechanism.
For those of you who think that the pre and post veil harvest mechanisms are the same, what do you make of the “faith/will” language? What do you do with “in order to have an entity which seeks past the boundary” language? (Post veil the 10%/51% has no seeking requirement in it whatsoever.) Do you think there is a difference between the words “quality” and “intensity”? Why did Ra use different words?
I personally am of two minds about the different descriptions of the harvest mechanisms. It doesn’t seem to make sense that the harvest mechanism would be different pre-veil vs post veil. And yet, Ra did use different words.
Which is more perilous? To paraphrase Ra, or to be strictly literal?
Ricdaw, what an excellent analysis! You have clearly defined the issues being discussed and the crux of the debate.
I had never caught some of these fine nuances of meaning before. I had assumed that such seemingly minor differences in terminology didn't matter. I didn't even think about whether they mattered or not.
With Ra being so meticulous about terminology, to the point of the text itself being so verbose that many people find it difficult to read, I highly doubt that Ra would have used synonyms. Ra chose words so very carefully. We know this. Thus, it seems obvious to me that the words were chosen for very specific reasons. It would have been out of character for Ra to do otherwise.