The Detuning of Session 17 and Ra's True Intentions Regarding 2011 - Part II

[Tenet Nosce]

it is a phrase in english that informs of imminency. same with 'it is upon us'.

Yes. Right. NOW means is immanent and "upon us". This does not imply in 30 years. NOW means "at the present moment". This is what it means to an English speaker.

Why am I still harping on this quote? Well mostly because you totally misstated it in your reply to Bring4th_Monica. According to you, Ra said 2011. Otherwise, I likely wouldn't have brought it up again.

it is a two phased question which can be answered by answering either. it is a common occurrence in our daily life in all languages, and i rarely seen anyone getting so confused by it up till this point.

The query is more than two phased. It is actually a horrible query, and it is unfortunate that, not only is it asking for exact information (against Ra's specific advice), but the syntax and logic of the query is extremely convoluted. Moreover, Ra's answer is not as clear as it it could be. Do you not think there is an explanation for this?

If Don asked me that question in daily life, I would have just as much trouble answering it. First of all, I would inform Don that he is, or is not, to understand whatever is in his capacity to understand. You are overlooking that the entire question was phrased AS IF Ra had a clear agenda toward disclosing that harvest was in 2011. Ra has no agenda, other than being a humble messenger of the Law of One. Therefore, it is perilous for Ra to even answer ANYTHING to such a query.

Don is not only directly asking for specific data after being discouraged, and borderline reprimanded by Ra. And THEN he frames the query in terms that not only make it UNANSWERABLE but belies an either total misunderstanding, or a temporary brain fart, on Don's behalf, by implying that there was some specific information that Ra intended to convey previously, but did not do in a clear manner.

If Ra's communication was so crystal clear on the matter... then why would Don have gone back to this topic at all. Am I to understand....? This seems to imply a high degree of incredulity or skepticism on Don's behalf. And with good reason.

Why all the confusion on this quote, unity100? Even you yourself just stated a complete untruth, putting "2011" into Ra's words when actually it came out of Don's mouth. Even after all this time of meticulously studying the material, you have recurring brain farts on this quote. This is also significant.

And others appear to have recurring brain farts on this quote. Is this mere coincidence that it is the quote that "just so happens" to link harvest to a specific year? Why did Ra not make this more clear?

Moreover, why is this all coming together now in this moment? After 30 years, and some of the world's best scholars of the Law of One still can't come to a consensus on one of the most far reaching concepts contained therein?

I see two pills two swallow here. The first pill has to do with accepting harvest and mass death as basically synonymous. There are obvious reasons for this difficulty. You have done well in pointing out where people are in denial here, and actually you have begun to offer reasons and explanations why there is no need to fear this. This is extremely useful.

The second pill has to do with accepting that the Ra material- despite being the best we have- fell considerably short of what it could have been. This is across the board, and extends into the direct effect the process had on L/L Research, and extends into our ability as seekers to correctly perceive what it says.

"Something" or "somebody" within L/L (sorry I do not know the backstory of this or who is personally responsible) made the decision to publish Book V (in 1998 I believe)? Then came the relistening project. Do you see? How the very quotes which were redacted prevented the seeker from groking the fullness of Ra's message? Do you see? How even the changes that have come out of the relistening project have forced us to reevaluate some things?

Why is this? This is because the material stands as a whole, as one. I understand exactly why L/L decided to make redactions and leave things out. I understand that this decision was motivated by love. And yet it seems to me that the decision was born out of a denial of the message at hand: All Is One. The Law of One also applies to the Ra material itself, taken as a whole.

There was a reason for this. We are now in the process of uncovering that reason. And if we can grasp this "meta" information that was given to us, then we will be able to turn what was previously a negative result into a positive. We can do better than this.

The negative result is confusion. And is the "foundation rock" of the evidence for why anybody would "dare" to suggest that the material is not 100% pristine, and free from error.

If it were 100% pristine and free from error, then we would all clearly agree upon what it says.

But we don't. It appears impossible at this exact nexus. So far... Ra's efforts in communicating the harvest have been largely unsuccessful.

It appears that Ra has only managed to make things crystal clear to one person. That is you, unity100. Luckily, if they reached one, they reached all. So I guess there is nothing to be concerned about here.

i have explicitly told a FEW times that, the phrase above evaluated to a harvest happening WITHIN a year, within the estimate range of 2011 vicinity, with the approximation being in the measure of years, but not taking a year.

excuse me, but, you not only have read these, but also responded to me when i told these, at length.

and here you are, telling me that i cant 'deny' something i myself has openly declared approx 2 threads before and repetitively after.

You specifically said that the phrase could be evaluated either way? Sorry, I missed it.

IF harvest began in 1900 and proceeded through 2100, THEN it would STILL BE TRUE that harvest was in 2011.

I don't think that is what it means. I am pointing out that the statement could be correctly evaluated either way, from a syntax standpoint. I am not arguing with your assessment, which I largely agree with and was concurring on through the last however many threads.

I am pointing out that the statement can, in fact, be correctly evaluated to mean something it does not. Why is this possible? Because Ra did not give a clear answer.

Why did Ra do this? I can think of a few possible explanations. And would be interested in investigating them. Perhaps this will be useful to me when I make contact with intelligent infinity, whether 2 months from now, or 2 billion years from now.

Your view appears to require that Ra gave exactly the best possible reply to every query. Yet Ra actually went back and corrected mistakes. And you know this. So now your view is paradoxical.

IF a "mistake" was made, on any level, at any time, on the part of any person related with the creation or distribution of the material, or in the mind of any seeker reading the material causing them to not only draw false conclusions, but also to make "GRAND" false conclusions which could be easily propagated [b]and[/b] leading others to go astray, THEN there must be a teach/learning opportunity here.

This is because there are no mistakes. You see somebody calling 90% of the material into question; I see somebody saying Ra is so much more clever than we previously imagined.

---

i had had thought that you have directly experienced this attack. i was mistaken.

No, you were not mistaken. I continued to have direct attacks simultaneously with indirect attacks, as if in a coordinated manner. And also with specificity and timing elements which further suggested a high degree of planning and coordination. I just did not share all the details.

This is what it feels like: Something wants so desperately for me to feel fear and doubt that it appears to be willing to go to great ends to achieve this. Including taking a meticulous study of my psychology and character flaws, and to the point of stalking me for a number of years, using others to attempt to manipulate me, and in a few cases apparently physically attempting to take over another person's body to do so. This happened with more than one person.

In one specific case, another person was caused to grab the wheel as I was speeding down a highway, and attempt to ram the vehicle straight into a wall at 70mph. This happened directly AFTER I made a comment referring to the "world that will come" meaning fourth density. This individual's response: "Let's go now!"

So this sucks, because firstly it causes me to feel like I am a paranoid nutjob for even thinking this in the first place. Secondly, because I still do not understand why I am being targeted. I am a nobody. I have little power over others outside of my immediate influence, which is small. Thirdly, because despite my sincere attempts to use this as a catalyst and "learn the lesson" I apparently continue to fail to do so.