The most mysterious phrase of the Ra contact

[onLIKE_7_was a number]

Do you have the feeling that you have choosen this insight / catalyst preincarnatic?

Can you give us more details of your experience?

to the first question,
i don’t know if i’ve chosen this path prior to incarnation regarding gender, there’s other elements of my experiences that i do feel an inkling that something was ,hmm, expected, not what happened with gender tho. i think there was an expectation that the duality of gender in myself wasn’t going to be revealed to this degree, but i do feel aware of what it’s like to be without a body, and the empathy of conforming myself to the expectations of a person in a body.

to the second question, Yes i can give more details concerning my experience. it would be of benefit, if u asked a question specifically rather than me give a list of details.

when i wrote “a lot of my experiences are atypical to the human experience” the broad categories that i can think of at the moment are gender, perception of language, psi events. art….maybe asking more about gender might be useful considering the thread title.

Also i hope to relate back to the Law of One to some degree in my answer, which i’ve yet to do. but i should write, i’m not even done reading it …i’m on session 74……and already, i feel a tremendous amount of synthesis in my perception of reality…healing some of the most disturbing aspects of my nature. example, an off and on again god complex that i’ve had most of my life.


flofrog, i appreciate the welcome here, thank you.
tadeus, i appreciate the sincere interest in my experience, thank you.

[tadeus]

to 1)
From my point of view it smells like you have the given task to have to think about gender more than other souls.

to 2)
Hmm - specifically questions are difficult, because i feel that this questions seems to be part of my life, but only with a minor priority.
There are positive points of contact with people like you again and again and i interprete this as catalyst to think about gender.
The positive points are mostly the experience of an open heart, that is in contradiction to the ostracism of the society.
So i am glad to read that the Ra material has an healing impact to you.

The generally question is why there is this principle of gender?
What is the function / advantage in the creation of it?

When there is the one creator, will this be a experimental question about the need of sexuality for the propagation?
Rudolf Steiner has written that our bodies did reproduce with budding in the beginning and we know that sexuality is not needed in future densities.
So there is the question if sexuality is only an additional catalyst specially for the "middle range densities"?

Do we have the active choice / control of our gender preincarnatic?

[onLIKE_7_was a number]

to 1)
From my point of view it smells like you have the given task to have to think about gender more than other souls.

to 2)
Hmm - specifically questions are difficult, because i feel that this questions seems to be part of my life, but only with a minor priority.
There are positive points of contact with people like you again and again and i interprete this as catalyst to think about gender.
The positive points are mostly the experience of an open heart, that is in contradiction to the ostracism of the society.
So i am glad to read that the Ra material has an healing impact to you.

The generally question is why there is this principle of gender?
What is the function / advantage in the creation of it?

When there is the one creator, will this be a experimental question about the need of sexuality for the propagation?
Rudolf Steiner has written that our bodies did reproduce with budding in the beginning and we know that sexuality is not needed in future densities.
So there is the question if sexuality is only an additional catalyst specially for the "middle range densities"?

Do we have the active choice / control of our gender preincarnatic?

The general question is why there is this principle of gender?

maybe the echos of the original thought were premature to harmonize maybe there wasn’t enough distortions, and then distortions were encouraged upon an organized parameter, ’same as me’, and ‘other than me’ that could be gender.

What is the function / advantage in the creation of it?

the function was in the formation of consciousness and to speed evolution i guess…i don’t always think gender as


When there is the one creator, will this be a experimental question about the need of sexuality for the propagation?

i don’t think all sentient beings experience them the same way. procreation and propagation are different i think of procreation as better simply because it involves more of an active participation and propagation in our physical plane of a heavy mattered existance, propagation seems like aloof manipulation. outside this plane of matter or the plane with a lighter fermionic resonance,budding does occur for many earthbound spirits..my friend MLD jokes and says that me and her have 250 million 45 thousand children together. 45,000 that look like me and 250 million that look like her....



So there is the question if sexuality is only an additional catalyst specially for the "middle range densities"?




sexuality will exist for 4th density beings more in emulation of other 3rd densities….. in the 5th density we may put interact with the 3rd and 4th density with how we see fit.what we’ve learned about about other this in practice if we want and in the 6th we harmonize all distortions we made as 5th density beings, and we may also pickup the slack for 5th density negative beings…which to some is like stealing their money that’s what they’ll argue as we say goodbye to them…i don’t know how i know that or even if it’s true . it just came out. i should probably read the Law of One completely before i write this more.


Do we have the active choice / control of our gender preincarnatic?

choice of male or female body for the child in a preincarnatic state is easier to come to terms with , than the choice of gender or even sexuality. the closer a being gets to 4th density, free will appears to go into decline as nature and our surroundings make that choice for us...but for 3rd density beings the choice is considered and fulfillled by others to the highest extent possible….there's a series of saftey measures in place when someone as an infant shows signs of becomming something outsdie of their wishes and a walk in is called but this is used in less and less in the past 200 years



thanks for your interest in my opinion on the subject

[tadeus]

the function was in the formation of consciousness and to speed evolution i guess…i don’t always think gender as

...

Thank you for your thoughts.

I will agree that the principle of gender gives much more possibilities for getting experience and to intensify experience with other self.
Additional it has the advantage that there is a manifold interaction needed between beings, that include free will for propagation.
This will potentiate the experience with other self.

Maybe this principle has just less importance in higher densities, because everything is going into an group complex.
In time/space there is no veil and the knowledge, that you have experienced thousand of lives in a different gender.

[Patrick]

The general question is why there is this principle of gender?
...

84.22 Questioner: Before the veil, were there— Let me put it this way: Did… did the Logos, or did most Logoi plan before the veil to create a system of random sexual activity or specific pairing of entities for periods of time, or did they have an objective in this respect?

Ra: I am Ra. This shall be the last full query of this working.

The harvest from the previous creation was that which included the male and female mind/body/spirit. It was the intention of the original Logoi that entities mate with one another in any fashion which caused a greater polarization. It was determined, after observation of the process of many Logoi, that polarization increased many fold if the mating were not indiscriminate. Consequent Logoi thusly preserved a bias towards the mated relationship which is more characteristic of more disciplined personalities and of what you may call higher densities. The free will of each entity, however, was always paramount and a bias only could be offered.

87.28 Questioner: Why is the male and the female nature different?

Ra: I am Ra. When the veiling process was accomplished, to the male polarity was attracted the Matrix of the Mind and to the female, the Potentiator of the Mind; to the male the Potentiator of the Body, to the female the Matrix of the Body. May we ask if there are any brief queries before we close this working?

[cheikspear]

Many thanks to Tadeus and onLIKE_7 for enriching and deepening the debate. The experience of onLIKE_7 (sexual alternation) is particularly fascinating, because we can then see how, when one sexual polarity is dominant in the conscious, the other systematically passes into the unconscious. Having said that, onLIKE_7 poses the question of some form of indecision regarding gender in the incarnation, which will soon lead me (in a new thread?) to a fundamental new question that I have been working on for a while.

We have thus come to ask the question of the raison d'être of gender in space-time, when it seems a priori so easy to be neutral or androgynous in the third density of time-space.

And thanks to Patrick for reminding us about points 84.22 and 87.28 of Contact Ra.

But now I have two problems:

1 - Although we are circling around, we still don't have a serious answer to my basic question regarding Ra's mysterious phrase.
2 - Point 87.28 for its part, although it seems to give us a radical answer concerning the archetypes of the masculine and the feminine, is "much" less clear than it seems a priori when we analyze it in detail.

There are indeed two totally different interpretations of point 87.28 (When the veiling process was accomplished, to the male polarity was attracted the Matrix of the Mind and to the female, the Potentiator of the Mind;..):

Interpretation a) The Matrix of the mind belongs to the male (and only him), it is according to Ra the male consciousness, and the Potentiator of the mind belongs to the female (and she only), it is according to Ra the female unconscious, in relation to the roots of the mind behind the veil.

But then, would this interpretation mean that the woman has no matrix of the mind, and therefore no consciousness?
And when we refer to Jung, with the female unconscious of the man (the anima), and the male unconscious of the woman (the animus), where are the correspondents in this interpretation? What would be the potentiator of the woman's mind this time?

Do you realize the huge effects of such an interpretation?

Interpretation b) The Matrix of mind, consciousness, is male "in nature" (of male principle), and the Mind Potentiator, the unconscious, is female "in nature" (of female principle).

It is not at all the same thing, because it would mean here that all humans (thus of both sexes) have a Matrix "and" a Potentiator of the mind. What the following points seem to confirm absolutely:

79.21 Q The first change made then for this extension of free will was to make the information or make the communication between the Matrix and Potentiator of the Mind relatively unavailable, one to the other, during the incarnation. Is this correct?
Ra. We would perhaps rather term the condition as relatively more mystery-filled than relatively unavailable.
79.22 Q Well, the idea then was to create some type of veil between Matrix and Potentiator. Is this correct?
Ra. This is correct.
79.23 Q This veil then occurs between what we now call the conscious and the unconscious mind. Is this correct?
Ra. This is correct.

And all the more so that all babies (therefore of both sexes) would have a Matrix and a Mind Potentiator, as this quote seems also to confirm to us:

92.9 Q : I would like to attempt an analogy of the first archetype in that when a baby is first born and enters this density of experience, I am assuming, then, that the Matrix is new and undistorted, veiled from the Potentiator and ready for that which is to be experienced: the incarnation. Is this correct?
Ra. Yes.

There is thus between interpretation (a) and interpretation (b) a gap ten wider than the Red Sea!
But where is this divide mentioned in all the comments on Contact Ra?
Where did we put an alert about the very possible confusion?
How can we let the readers (us) of the Law of One wander and get lost between the two shores of this red sea (quite a symbol)?
Will anyone tell us that nobody noticed the difference, or even worse that it does not matter ?!

Can we realize the enormity of the scandal that would be "in the world", with the interpretation a), the day the Law of One was shared more widely?

There are thus, throughout the contact Ra and its interpretations, below what seems very clear a priori, immense ambiguities concerning the two sexes and their archetypes. These archetypes in fact, as they are commented on, seem to "set in stone" (87.28 in particular) realities which are very fluid, such as for example that experienced by onLIKE_7.

I presume for my part that these ambiguities could come from a "maschist" Tarot which comes to us from the period where the Law of One was perverted in Egypt, in particular after the reign of Akhenaten, where the pharaoh was more and more considered as a "dominant male" (STS), and where women have had less and less access to initiation, limiting their function to the sole unconscious of the couple and of society. This just as we know today that the Yi King, too, has been perverted throughout imperial dynasties which have increasingly promoted male dominance and service to Self. It was Cyrille Javary, a French orientalist who discovered, analyzed and reported it in his completely renewed translation of Yi King in 2002 (French title: Yi Jing, Le livre des Changements. I don't know the equivalent English title).

And these continuous ambiguities explain why I wanted the mysterious phrase of Ra to be made explicit to us. Because in my opinion, it sums up the whole problem of this ambiguity, at the same time as it contains in itself a potential of illumination which could completely renew the traditional interpretations on sexual polarization in the Law of One; interpretations that we take from the early 80s, still very covered by a paradigm of male domination that was imposed on everyone, logically including Carla and Don.

[Patrick]

...
Will anyone tell us that nobody noticed the difference, or even worse that it does not matter ?!
And you Patrick, you hadn't seen?
...

It's not that I do not notice the ambiguities in the material. But indeed they do not matter much to me.

For example, I do not care much about (or even believe) the secret space program and the UFOs in underground bases in Mexico or the details of the construction of the pyramids.

I must admit that I am failing to see what is upsetting you in the ambiguities that you have noticed.  

[cheikspear]

Thank you. And besides you may have noticed that since then, I deleted the question concerning you (even before reading your reaction). It would just means that for you, "all of this" is just a mental theory of no consequence.

[Patrick]

Well I would not say the mental exercise is of no consequence, because the point of "all of this" is to distill from the material what you need and then to put it in practice in how you meet the challenges of everyday catalysts.

So for myself, I do exactly as Ra has humbly asked of us. I let go of those things that I do not resonate with and do not let these be a stumbling block on my journey.

[tadeus]

1 - Although we are circling around, we still don't have a serious answer to my basic question regarding Ra's mysterious phrase.
2 - Point 87.28 for its part, although it seems to give us a radical answer concerning the archetypes of the masculine and the feminine, is "much" less clear than it seems a priori when we analyze it in detail.

Hahaha when the mysterious phrase would have an answer it would not be mysterious.
And yes - i enjoyed the discussion too.

The classifications of the archetypes are really tough when you try to catch them.
At this time i am not able to sort all your comments and so i can only confirm the confusion.

[Ohr Ein Sof]

Many thanks to Tadeus and onLIKE_7 for enriching and deepening the debate. The experience of onLIKE_7 (sexual alternation) is particularly fascinating, because we can then see how, when one sexual polarity is dominant in the conscious, the other systematically passes into the unconscious. Having said that, onLIKE_7 poses the question of some form of indecision regarding gender in the incarnation, which will soon lead me (in a new thread?) to a fundamental new question that I have been working on for a while.

We have thus come to ask the question of the raison d'être of gender in space-time, when it seems a priori so easy to be neutral or androgynous in the third density of time-space.

And thanks to Patrick for reminding us about points 84.22 and 87.28 of Contact Ra.

But now I have two problems:

1 - Although we are circling around, we still don't have a serious answer to my basic question regarding Ra's mysterious phrase.
2 - Point 87.28 for its part, although it seems to give us a radical answer concerning the archetypes of the masculine and the feminine, is "much" less clear than it seems a priori when we analyze it in detail.

There are indeed two totally different interpretations of point 87.28 (When the veiling process was accomplished, to the male polarity was attracted the Matrix of the Mind and to the female, the Potentiator of the Mind;..):

Interpretation a) The Matrix of the mind belongs to the male (and only him), it is according to Ra the male consciousness, and the Potentiator of the mind belongs to the female (and she only), it is according to Ra the female unconscious, in relation to the roots of the mind behind the veil.

But then, would this interpretation mean that the woman has no matrix of the mind, and therefore no consciousness?
And when we refer to Jung, with the female unconscious of the man (the anima), and the male unconscious of the woman (the animus), where are the correspondents in this interpretation? What would be the potentiator of the woman's mind this time?

Do you realize the huge effects of such an interpretation?

Interpretation b) The Matrix of mind, consciousness, is male "in nature" (of male principle), and the Mind Potentiator, the unconscious, is female "in nature" (of female principle).

It is not at all the same thing, because it would mean here that all humans (thus of both sexes) have a Matrix "and" a Potentiator of the mind. What the following points seem to confirm absolutely:

79.21 Q The first change made then for this extension of free will was to make the information or make the communication between the Matrix and Potentiator of the Mind relatively unavailable, one to the other, during the incarnation. Is this correct?
Ra. We would perhaps rather term the condition as relatively more mystery-filled than relatively unavailable.
79.22 Q Well, the idea then was to create some type of veil between Matrix and Potentiator. Is this correct?
Ra. This is correct.
79.23 Q This veil then occurs between what we now call the conscious and the unconscious mind. Is this correct?
Ra. This is correct.

And all the more so that all babies (therefore of both sexes) would have a Matrix and a Mind Potentiator, as this quote seems also to confirm to us:

92.9 Q : I would like to attempt an analogy of the first archetype in that when a baby is first born and enters this density of experience, I am assuming, then, that the Matrix is new and undistorted, veiled from the Potentiator and ready for that which is to be experienced: the incarnation. Is this correct?
Ra. Yes.

There is thus between interpretation (a) and interpretation (b) a gap ten wider than the Red Sea!
But where is this divide mentioned in all the comments on Contact Ra?
Where did we put an alert about the very possible confusion?
How can we let the readers (us) of the Law of One wander and get lost between the two shores of this red sea (quite a symbol)?
Will anyone tell us that nobody noticed the difference, or even worse that it does not matter ?!

Can we realize the enormity of the scandal that would be "in the world", with the interpretation a), the day the Law of One was shared more widely?

There are thus, throughout the contact Ra and its interpretations, below what seems very clear a priori, immense ambiguities concerning the two sexes and their archetypes. These archetypes in fact, as they are commented on, seem to "set in stone" (87.28 in particular) realities which are very fluid, such as for example that experienced by onLIKE_7.

I presume for my part that these ambiguities could come from a "maschist" Tarot which comes to us from the period where the Law of One was perverted in Egypt, in particular after the reign of Akhenaten, where the pharaoh was more and more considered as a "dominant male" (STS), and where women have had less and less access to initiation, limiting their function to the sole unconscious of the couple and of society. This just as we know today that the Yi King, too, has been perverted throughout imperial dynasties which have increasingly promoted male dominance and service to Self. It was Cyrille Javary, a French orientalist who discovered, analyzed and reported it in his completely renewed translation of Yi King in 2002 (French title: Yi Jing, Le livre des Changements. I don't know the equivalent English title).

And these continuous ambiguities explain why I wanted the mysterious phrase of Ra to be made explicit to us. Because in my opinion, it sums up the whole problem of this ambiguity, at the same time as it contains in itself a potential of illumination which could completely renew the traditional interpretations on sexual polarization in the Law of One; interpretations that we take from the early 80s, still very covered by a paradigm of male domination that was imposed on everyone, logically including Carla and Don.

Wait! What?
The conscious mind is attracted to the masculine principle bc its what could be considered 'ACTIVE rather than receptive as is the subconscious mind. One is logical and objective and the other intuitive and subjective. What is so hard to accept about this? The moon is receptive, the sun is giving. The archetype for them would be consciousness/subconsciousness or male/active, female/stillness.

[Ohr Ein Sof]

Tarot existed long before Egypt

[cheikspear]

Wait! What?
The conscious mind is attracted to the masculine principle bc its what could be considered 'ACTIVE rather than receptive as is the subconscious mind. One is logical and objective and the other intuitive and subjective. What is so hard to accept about this? The moon is receptive, the sun is giving. The archetype for them would be consciousness/subconsciousness or male/active, female/stillness.

Ah yes ? So that would mean that the woman has no conscious mind then !? (so normally you wouldn't be able to write here!). That said, we know well that everyone has a left and right brain, but that the intuitive brain is more active in women and the rational brain in men.

[cheikspear]

Tarot existed long before Egypt

I did not say that the Tarot dated only from ancient Egypt (it dated perhaps from Atlantis, who knows?), I said that it had been hijacked after Akhenaten, around - 1350, around the same time as the Law of One.

[Ohr Ein Sof]

Wait! What?
The conscious mind is attracted to the masculine principle bc its what could be considered 'ACTIVE rather than receptive as is the subconscious mind. One is logical and objective and the other intuitive and subjective. What is so hard to accept about this? The moon is receptive, the sun is giving. The archetype for them would be consciousness/subconsciousness or male/active, female/stillness.

Ah yes ? So that would mean that the woman has no conscious mind then !? (so normally you wouldn't be able to write here!). That said, we know well that everyone has a left and right brain, but that the intuitive brain is more active in women and the rational brain in men.

ATTRACTED like a magnet. Not that I have one and my male counterpart has the other.
We have both but the MALE PRINCIPLE IS ATTRACTED to the objective mind and the feminine principle is ATRACTED TO THE INTUITIVE MIND. You cannot see that in all of nature?

[Ohr Ein Sof]

Tarot existed long before Egypt

I did not say that the Tarot dated only from ancient Egypt (it dated perhaps from Atlantis, who knows?), I said that it had been hijacked after Akhenaten, around - 1350, around the same time as the Law of One.

Venus. It was no doubt a different system but they used Tarot

[unity100]

Hi everybody,

In 5.2, Ra expessed this sentence: "The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male."

Could someone explain me the deep meaning of this sentence?

Nobody can exist without a defined balance at any given point. You cant be 100% male or 100% female. There must exist a minimal balance in between them.

Someone who appears 80% male and 20% female (totally made up, it wouldnt be this simple) would fit into the social and energetic conditions of a given time period and could live comfortably, but in a later, higher vibration in this density he wouldnt be comfortable.

These are just well adjusted deviations from 50/50 balance, really.

[cheikspear]

ATTRACTED like a magnet. Not that I have one and my male counterpart has the other.
We have both but the MALE PRINCIPLE IS ATTRACTED to the objective mind and the feminine principle is ATRACTED TO THE INTUITIVE MIND. You cannot see that in all of nature?

Many thanks Ohr Ein Sof. I believe we will have taken a small step towards answering the mysterious question that prompted this thread, if I reinterpret your answer as follows:  

Each human have a matrix and a mind potentiator, BUT the MALE principle is attracted to the MATRIX (of the mind) and the FEMALE principle to the POTENTIATOR (of the mind); and so on (but vice versa) for the body.

This would become an essential clarification of point 87.28 of Contact Ra !

If we look indeed at this principle on the concrete plane of the incarnation of a mind / body / spirit (mbs) in a growing yellow ray body (fetus), then this would assume that :

According to its sexual orientation (previous?, just decided before incarnation?, ...), the mbs would be attracted, on the mental level, either towards the matrix, or towards the potentiator of the fetus, both pre-existing in the latter; and so on (but vice versa) on the body level . It would then be the mbs, during its incarnation (around the 4th month) which would give its sexual orientation to the fetus (we know that the sexual differentiation of a fetus (potentially bisexual) takes place from the 4th month of gestation).

In other words, it would be the mind / body / spirit which, from time / space, would bring the male or female principle to a gestating fetus in space / time.

The earthly incarnation would thus have, in perfect agreement with the Law of One, for fundamental objective the learning of the sexual polarization, even before (or upstream of) the polarization of service.

[Nikki]

@cheikspear, thank you for this quote and asking this interesting question. I will copy your quote for reference to formulate an answer. "In 5.2, Ra expessed this sentence: "The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male." If would be helpful to get the whole thought that Ra is referring to. As I read the quote this came to mind.

Ra may have been pointing for us to realize that on the 4th, 5th or 6th density all beings are androgynous or possibility only some are androgynous. Many of the beings not of this density are androgynous meaning they are both male and female within and without, depending on their choices of expression. Here on earth we appear to be one or another for the experiences of separation. We are all that we see and experience. We can see this reflection of androgynous beings on our matrix only on a physical level leading to not being a whole connected being, not knowing their connection to source. Sometimes words do not always express the knowingness within.

an·drog·y·nous
adjective
- partly male and partly female in appearance; of indeterminate sex.
- having the physical characteristics of both sexes; hermaphrodite.

[cheikspear]

Ra may have been pointing for us to realize that on the 4th, 5th or 6th density all beings are androgynous or possibility only some are androgynous.  Many of the beings not of this density are androgynous meaning they are both male and female within and without, depending on their choices of expression. Here on earth we appear to be one or another for the experiences of separation.  We are all that we see and experience.  We can see this reflection of androgynous beings on our matrix only on a physical level leading to not being a whole connected being, not knowing their connection to source.  Sometimes words do not always express the knowingness within.  

Thanks for your comment Nikki.
Read this thread carefully, Ohr Ein Sof has already expressed similar words to yours about the androgyne, and I responded to her. It seems in the Law of One that androgyny (or bisexuality) is an original state common to all human beings, but not an objective. The most fundamental concept of this law, which has the central purpose of preparing us for 4th density, is that of polarization, with two basic modes of polarization: sexual polarization and service polarization. The problem, which partly justified this thread about point 5.2, is that a lot has been said on this site about service polarization, but very little about sexual polarization in view of 4th density. Ra's words contain, in my opinion, a very great mystery as to this sexual polarization which has never yet been either explained or elucidated, in particular because of the "taboos" that still existed at the beginning of the 80s.

And this is also valid for 5th and 6th density. If you reread  carefully the Law of One, you will see that they had a lot of problems in the past with indiscriminate time / space matings, because entities weren't sexually polarized. All of this seems to show us that androgyny, even though it is widely shared in higher densities, is not at all a goal of SMC Ra.

[MonadicSpectrum]

Hi everybody,

In 5.2, Ra expessed this sentence: "The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male."

Could someone explain me the deep meaning of this sentence?

In my opinion, this statement is only mysterious outside of context. Put in context, the point Ra is making is more clear.

We begin with the mental learn/teachings necessary for contact with intelligent infinity. The prerequisite of mental work is the ability to retain silence of self at a steady state when required by the self. The mind must be opened like a door. The key is silence.

Within the door lies an hierarchical construction you may liken unto geography and in some ways geometry, for the hierarchy is quite regular, bearing inner relationships.

To begin to master the concept of mental discipline it is necessary to examine the self. The polarity of your dimension must be internalized. Where you find patience within your mind you must consciously find the corresponding impatience and vice versa. Each thought that a being has, has in its turn an antithesis. The disciplines of the mind involve, first of all, identifying both those things of which you approve and those things of which you disapprove within yourself, and then balancing each and every positive and negative charge with its equal. The mind contains all things. Therefore, you must discover this completeness within yourself.
The second mental discipline is acceptance of the completeness within your consciousness. It is not for a being of polarity in the physical consciousness to pick and choose among attributes, thus building the roles that cause blockages and confusions in the already-distorted mind complex. Each acceptance smoothes part of the many distortions that the faculty you call judgment engenders.

The third discipline of the mind is a repetition of the first but with the gaze outward towards the fellow entities that it meets. In each entity there exists completeness. Thus, the ability to understand each balance is necessary. When you view patience, you are responsible for mirroring in your mental understanding, patience/impatience. When you view impatience, it is necessary for your mental configuration of understanding to be impatience/patience. We use this as a simple example. Most configurations of mind have many facets, and understanding of either self polarities, or what you would call other-self polarities, can and must be understood as subtle work.

The next step is the acceptance of the other-self polarities, which mirrors the second step.

These are the first four steps of learning mental discipline. The fifth step involves observing the geographical and geometrical relationships and ratios of the mind, the other mind, the mass mind, and the infinite mind.

The second area of learn/teaching is the study/understanding of the body complexes. It is necessary to know your body well. This is a matter of using the mind to examine how the feelings, the biases, what you would call the emotions, affect various portions of the body complex. It shall be necessary to both understand the bodily polarities and to accept them, repeating in a chemical/physical manifestation the work you have done upon the mind bethinking the consciousness.

The body is a creature of the mind’s creation. It has its biases. The biological bias must be first completely understood and then the opposite bias allowed to find full expression in understanding. Again, the process of acceptance of the body as a balanced, as well as polarized, individual may then be accomplished.

It is then the task to extend this understanding to the bodies of the other-selves whom you will meet. The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male. This is a simple example. However, in almost every case wherein you are attempting the understanding of the body of self or other-self, you will again find that the most subtle discernment is necessary in order to fully grasp the polarity complexes involved.

Male cannot exist without female and female cannot exist without male. If one seeks to balance their mental geography regarding the complexes of male and female, one will have to look at both and understand the unity of two between them. Hot is cold and cold is hot, but just different temperatures in degree. Male is female and female is male, but just different genders in degree.

Just as when you see patience, you are responsible for mirroring that observation with impatience to be balanced, when you see you male, you are responsible for mirroring that observation with female. Starting with mental discipline with internal concepts such as patience/impatience or love/fear is more trivial than gender of other selves to balance which is why Ra recommends mastering that before moving to balancing perceptions of other-selves whom you will meet. And of course, the very first step is mastering silence. Without the silence to observe the mental geography and geometry, attempting to resolve paradoxes is akin to trying to navigate a forest blindfolded.

If you are interested in exploring and resolving polarity, paradoxes, and gender into unity, I also highly recommend the Kybalion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kybalion

"Everything is dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled."

"Gender is in everything; everything has its masculine and feminine principles; gender manifests on all planes."

[Ohr Ein Sof]

Hi everybody,

In 5.2, Ra expessed this sentence: "The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male."

Could someone explain me the deep meaning of this sentence?

In my opinion, this statement is only mysterious outside of context. Put in context, the point Ra is making is more clear.

We begin with the mental learn/teachings necessary for contact with intelligent infinity. The prerequisite of mental work is the ability to retain silence of self at a steady state when required by the self. The mind must be opened like a door. The key is silence.

Within the door lies an hierarchical construction you may liken unto geography and in some ways geometry, for the hierarchy is quite regular, bearing inner relationships.

To begin to master the concept of mental discipline it is necessary to examine the self. The polarity of your dimension must be internalized. Where you find patience within your mind you must consciously find the corresponding impatience and vice versa. Each thought that a being has, has in its turn an antithesis. The disciplines of the mind involve, first of all, identifying both those things of which you approve and those things of which you disapprove within yourself, and then balancing each and every positive and negative charge with its equal. The mind contains all things. Therefore, you must discover this completeness within yourself.
The second mental discipline is acceptance of the completeness within your consciousness. It is not for a being of polarity in the physical consciousness to pick and choose among attributes, thus building the roles that cause blockages and confusions in the already-distorted mind complex. Each acceptance smoothes part of the many distortions that the faculty you call judgment engenders.

The third discipline of the mind is a repetition of the first but with the gaze outward towards the fellow entities that it meets. In each entity there exists completeness. Thus, the ability to understand each balance is necessary. When you view patience, you are responsible for mirroring in your mental understanding, patience/impatience. When you view impatience, it is necessary for your mental configuration of understanding to be impatience/patience. We use this as a simple example. Most configurations of mind have many facets, and understanding of either self polarities, or what you would call other-self polarities, can and must be understood as subtle work.

The next step is the acceptance of the other-self polarities, which mirrors the second step.

These are the first four steps of learning mental discipline. The fifth step involves observing the geographical and geometrical relationships and ratios of the mind, the other mind, the mass mind, and the infinite mind.

The second area of learn/teaching is the study/understanding of the body complexes. It is necessary to know your body well. This is a matter of using the mind to examine how the feelings, the biases, what you would call the emotions, affect various portions of the body complex. It shall be necessary to both understand the bodily polarities and to accept them, repeating in a chemical/physical manifestation the work you have done upon the mind bethinking the consciousness.

The body is a creature of the mind’s creation. It has its biases. The biological bias must be first completely understood and then the opposite bias allowed to find full expression in understanding. Again, the process of acceptance of the body as a balanced, as well as polarized, individual may then be accomplished.

It is then the task to extend this understanding to the bodies of the other-selves whom you will meet. The simplest example of this is the understanding that each biological male is female; each biological female is male. This is a simple example. However, in almost every case wherein you are attempting the understanding of the body of self or other-self, you will again find that the most subtle discernment is necessary in order to fully grasp the polarity complexes involved.

Male cannot exist without female and female cannot exist without male. If one seeks to balance their mental geography regarding the complexes of male and female, one will have to look at both and understand the unity of two between them. Hot is cold and cold is hot, but just different temperatures in degree. Male is female and female is male, but just different genders in degree.

Just as when you see patience, you are responsible for mirroring that observation with impatience to be balanced, when you see you male, you are responsible for mirroring that observation with female. Starting with mental discipline with internal concepts such as patience/impatience or love/fear is more trivial than gender of other selves to balance which is why Ra recommends mastering that before moving to balancing perceptions of other-selves whom you will meet. And of course, the very first step is mastering silence. Without the silence to observe the mental geography and geometry, attempting to resolve paradoxes is akin to trying to navigate a forest blindfolded.

If you are interested in exploring and resolving polarity, paradoxes, and gender into unity, I also highly recommend the Kybalion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kybalion

"Everything is dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled."

"Gender is in everything; everything has its masculine and feminine principles; gender manifests on all planes."

Excellent book. I own a copy of it and it is a great read for questions just like this one. It does well to read it a couple times however.

[cheikspear]

............
If you are interested in exploring and resolving polarity, paradoxes, and gender into unity, I also highly recommend the Kybalion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Kybalion........"Everything is dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled." ........ "Gender is in everything; everything has its masculine and feminine principles; gender manifests on all planes."

Hello MonadicSpectrum. Thank you for your comment. Someone on this thread has already quoted the Kybalion, and we totally agree that the principle of polarization is certainly the most fundamental of universal manifestation. So the question here, with point 5.2 of Contact Ra, is not to doubt it, but rather to know how far this polarization extends, concerning the male and the female.

Indeed, as it is "semantically formulated" ("each biological male is female; each biological female is male", and not: "each biological male is "also" female; each biological female is "also" male") , point 5.2 really suggests that it contains several levels of reading and comprehension, like many hermetic texts.

And at the most subtle level, it's as if he's referring to a "super" Kybalion! This is what makes him so mysterious to me.

We know with the Ra Contact that the universal principle of polarization induces in 3rd density the polarity time / space & space / time. As I have already said here, would it not therefore be this polarity that point 5.2 refers to, as a super symbol of yin-yang where, the male being male in space / time, he would be female in time / space (and vice versa)?

This would explain in the highest degree many of the confusions and attempts at explanation that have reigned in social thought for centuries, concerning male-female relations: the androgyne, the soul mates, the female soul of males and the male soul of females (Steiner), anima and animus (Jung), etc ...

This would also explain this formidable polar tension which pushes us just as well towards our opposite inner pole (spiritual aspiration?) as our opposite outer pole (biological).

It is also often said in Ra contact that sexual tension (the red ray libido for example) comes from time / space ....

[Ohr Ein Sof]

"It is also often said in Ra contact that sexual tension (the red ray libido for example) comes from time / space ...."

For every space/time manifestation the same exists in time/space, or on the more subtle planes. Not that if you are a male here, you are a female "there".

[MonadicSpectrum]

...
We know with the Ra Contact that the universal principle of polarization induces in 3rd density the polarity time / space & space / time. As I have already said here, would it not therefore be this polarity that point 5.2 refers to, as a super symbol of yin-yang where, the male being male in space / time, he would be female in time / space (and vice versa)?
...

Thank you for your interesting ideas and questions.

I believe your query into the mystery of gender is well-founded, and while being a "simple example" as Ra states, there is much that can be examined in the statement that biological male is female and biological female is male. Although, I also think it is possible to read too much into the words assuming Ra purposefully did not include an "also" in the statement rather than possibly being a humble mishap of imperfect language.

It is interesting to consider the connection between gender and space/time-time/space. I think one can view space/time as the current present moment predominately expanded through space, so the gender of the self who is observing this space is probably most closely aligned with the physical expression of the self which is usually one body unless one has developed a social memory complex where consciousness spans multiple bodies across space where the self is male in some places and female in other places. On the other hand, time/space is the current present moment predominately expanded through time, so the gender of the self who is observing this time is probably most closely aligned with the mental expression of the self as time is viewed mentally rather than physically like space. Again, most people identify with one physical body across time, but as one learns about reincarnation, the self expanded across time can exist mentally in multiple physical bodies that are sometimes male and sometimes female just like space. And of course the deeper we go, the more we begin to see that time and space are really the same thing distorted in different ways just like gender.

[cheikspear]

I believe your query into the mystery of gender is well-founded,......

A big thank also for your contribution, really very interesting.

It represents like a door step from our original question leading outwards. We have made a great tour of the question on itself (in its house) and we now emerge, through this door, on the infinite depths of the tree of mind which establish the relation between space / time and time / space. We have done all we can to shed light on this question, and it seems to me that further, more in-depth answers do not belong to our "space / time".

In other words, except to access time / space directly here, I think it's time to move on!