01-18-2009, 01:06 PM
(01-08-2009, 11:19 PM)Lavazza Wrote: .... quote shortened ...
But regardless, when Don asked about the pyramids Ra did explain. Perhaps Ra knew that en-mass, society would reject this notion? But still, how can Ra explain the pyramids and at the same time Q'uo will not explain to L/L Research about the status of a book with a publisher? (A session somewhere in Jan '06 this is talked about). This part of free will is still a mystery to me. But it's fun trying to figure it out, no?
My understanding of this distinction (e.g. specific information from Ra but not from Q'uo) is that the information about pyramids has been in our mass mind for a while and from other sources besides Ra. Answering this question then does not infringe upon free will because it cannot be be verified. Reader's ability to choose what to believe is preserved.
However, if Q'uo were to be specific about the book status, that information could be proven to be true, and thus force the reader to accept that Q'uo exist and that they "know". That would be an infringement on that reader's freedom to choose what to believe.