Random Ra Material Questions

[andreazzi]

I think I will ask isis to change the name of this thread to "Andreazzi's general questions"...

Here we go again:

Is there a reason why Ra calls the third density physical world "space/time" and the third density metaphysical world "time/space"? Does time have any different influence over the metaphysical planes?

[isis]

Ra's referring to Just Space, and then Just Time, respectively, in the manner at which we perceive. The Slash denotes that they aren't, in truth, different, and Physics supports this, but we still view them as separate concepts, so he defines which concept he's referring to by putting it before the Slash. Time/Space is Time, Space/Time is Space, Love/Light is Love, and Light/Love is Light. It's just in his eyes, each Combination is a single idea.

[andreazzi]

Ra's referring to Just Space, and then Just Time, respectively, in the manner at which we perceive. The Slash denotes that they aren't, in truth, different, and Physics supports this, but we still view them as separate concepts, so he defines which concept he's referring to by putting it before the Slash. Time/Space is Time, Space/Time is Space, Love/Light is Love, and Light/Love is Light. It's just in his eyes, each Combination is a single idea.

then why is the third density physical world named SPACE/time and the third density metaphysical world named TIME/space?

the concept of unity in each of these double concepts is clear to me, my question is why space prevails in the physical and time prevails in the metaphysical? or there is no predominance at all and this is all just a matter of distinction?

going further, how does time and space transcend from the physical to the metaphysical and how different these concepts are in the metaphysical planes of third density?

---

Ra's referring to Just Space, and then Just Time, respectively, in the manner at which we perceive. The Slash denotes that they aren't, in truth, different, and Physics supports this, but we still view them as separate concepts, so he defines which concept he's referring to by putting it before the Slash. Time/Space is Time, Space/Time is Space, Love/Light is Love, and Light/Love is Light. It's just in his eyes, each Combination is a single idea.

LOLOLOLOL

I was just kidding about changing the thread name!

[isis]

The matter of distinction comes from Us - the ones he is talking to. We recognize Space and Time as different and he understands this. When referring to Metaphysical concepts, he understands that these are concepts that he has a much greater grasp of understanding on than us, so he uses the closest translation he can find in his source (Carla). To better understand the concepts of Space/Time, or Time/Space, might enlighten us more, but for now we can assume that he means each word as literally as possible.

Going further, to know how Time and Space transcends to the Metaphysical would require an in-depth understanding of the Metaphysical. As I don't have a full grasp on the concept of Metaphysical plane, I can't begin to extrapolate how these concepts would be distorted in such a place.

That's also not basic questions. Delving into metaphysics is FAR from General.

[anagogy]

then why is the third density physical world named SPACE/time and the third density metaphysical world named TIME/space?

the concept of unity in each of these double concepts is clear to me, my question is why space prevails in the physical and time prevails in the metaphysical? or there is no predominance at all and this is all just a matter of distinction?

going further, how does time and space transcend from the physical to the metaphysical and how different these concepts are in the metaphysical planes of third density?

Good questions andreazzi!

I will offer you my interpretation, limited though it may be.

The reason why space prevails in the physical is because space is the structure necessary for *tangible* manifestation. That is what puts the "physical" in physicality. Three dimensional space provides the conceptual framework for objects to exist in a seemingly independent and objective way (the illusion of externality).

Now, the reason why time is the realm of the metaphysical, is because time is actually an *inner* dimension. People assume that it is also physical, but this is the conceptual trap that makes it all seem so mysterious. Also, curiously enough, 3 dimensional space is contained *within* the space we call "time". Afterall, its "outer-ness" is only a distortion of perception. But "normal space" is contained within "inner space".

So again, 3D space is contained within 4D space (not to be confused with fourth density, though fourth density does involve awareness of time). You can stack an infinite amount of 3D slices inside of the 4D "slice". Also, notice how you can't, no matter how hard you try, actually physically imagine another axis of space at a 90 degree angle from the 3 axis you are familiar with in the physical realm? That is *not* just a limitation of your physical brain. It's not physical! It doesn't have to follow "tangible" logical constructs. That's the beauty of it. Conceptually, an infinite amount of dimensions may exist with logic gestalts that completely transcend our notions of tangible space.

So, as you may have guessed, time/space is not as limited as space/time is. space/time is a reflection in opposites of time/space. However most people don't understand that time/space is infinite, so the exploration of space/time is one of limitation as the inversion of time/space. But limitations are what give flavor and shape to creation, so limitation is not intended as a negative.

Time/space is the realm of mind, space/time is the realm of matter.

Anyway, I don't know if any of this explanation makes any sense to you, but these are the answers I've come to.

[Ashim]

Also, notice how you can't, no matter how hard you try, actually physically imagine another axis of space at a 90 degree angle from the 3 axis you are familiar with in the physical realm?

Actually you can.
Sure, our conditionining almost ensures that we default to a certain mode of perception but given focused attention one is able to 'view' and interact with this axis.

[anagogy]

Actually you can.
Sure, our conditionining almost ensures that we default to a certain mode of perception but given focused attention one is able to 'view' and interact with this axis.

The point was that there is no more room in a 3-dimensional axis for another dimensional axis, thus, the dimensional axis has to move inner rather than outer. I wasn't implying that it could not be imagined. Just not imagined as "outer".

[Ashim]

Actually you can.
Sure, our conditionining almost ensures that we default to a certain mode of perception but given focused attention one is able to 'view' and interact with this axis.

The point was that there is no more room in a 3-dimensional axis for another dimensional axis, thus, the dimensional axis has to move inner rather than outer. I wasn't implying that it could not be imagined. Just not imagined as "outer".

The potential teleporter would do well to remember the 33rd degree.

This came to mind:

Ra: I am Ra. You are quite correct as far as your language may take you and, due to your training, more able than we to express the concept. Our only correction, if you will, would be to suggest that the 90° of which you speak are an angle which may best be understood as a portion of a tesseract.

[anagogy]

Nothing I've said disagrees with Ra.

[Ashim]

Nothing I've said disagrees with Ra.

Never questioned that, but Ra is also evolving, as are our Guardians.
Your posts are lucid, provoking and well composed.

[ricdaw]

then why is the third density physical world named SPACE/time and the third density metaphysical world named TIME/space?

I believe it is because time pivots around space here in the physical, whereas it is the reverse in the metaphysical. Here, you occupy only one space and time flows around that always present location. There, you occupy one time (the NOW), and space floats around that always present moment.

Some observational artifacts of time/space. You look at a person, but in addition to the “present” person, there is an awareness of the person as a baby, toddler, child, adolescent, adult, and aged all at the same time. In time/space, there is a background awareness of these additional “times” also being present in the person in front of you, in the same sense that when talking to a person here in space/time you are aware of the ground, buildings, cars, sky, and other “spaces” while being focused on the person.

There, a summer’s day will be full of summer-ness; a perception that the day is a summation or amalgam of all summer days happening at the same time. You could tease out a particular day in that continuum of summer days, it would be part of the available and accessible “now” should you want to focus on it. I imagine the sensory impressions are relatively more intense in time/space because of the condensed many-days-in-one (the NOW) of the time/space experience.

going further, how does time and space transcend from the physical to the metaphysical and how different these concepts are in the metaphysical planes of third density?

Here, time is fluid and elastic. Nothing slows down time like boredom or speeds it up like going to a good party!

There, space is fluid and elastic. While I expect an Earth-like environment in the Earth metaphysical planes, it’s not another Earth per se. There is instead unlimited potential real estate. Want to go visit a perfect replica of your favorite summer cabin by the lake? With the right attention and training, poof! that environment “appears” around you. Space is elastic and fluid in time/space in the way that time is elastic and fluid down here. In the time/space environment your position is relative. You are where your thoughts take you. The environment can change and you can be in a completely different space in “no time” at all. (Or many places all at once.)

Today’s space/time, the warm August summer day, is one actuality/layer in the totality of summer-ness that exists in the NOW of time/space. We come down here to explore summer-ness one moment at a time, over a lifetime.

Time/space and the NOW holds the totality, in the same way that you can hold the whole story of a book in a single hand even though the story may be about a thousand years and the rise and fall of empires.

So the metaphysical time/space planes of Earth hold all the “time” or now-ness and all the stories of the Earth Life School like it was in one Great Big Book. We in Space/Time occupy one “space” have to turn each page sequentially in time.

For what it’s worth.

[andreazzi]

So again, 3D space is contained within 4D space (not to be confused with fourth density, though fourth density does involve awareness of time). You can stack an infinite amount of 3D slices inside of the 4D "slice". Also, notice how you can't, no matter how hard you try, actually physically imagine another axis of space at a 90 degree angle from the 3 axis you are familiar with in the physical realm? That is *not* just a limitation of your physical brain. It's not physical! It doesn't have to follow "tangible" logical constructs. That's the beauty of it. Conceptually, an infinite amount of dimensions may exist with logic gestalts that completely transcend our notions of tangible space.

So, as you may have guessed, time/space is not as limited as space/time is. space/time is a reflection in opposites of time/space. However most people don't understand that time/space is infinite, so the exploration of space/time is one of limitation as the inversion of time/space. But limitations are what give flavor and shape to creation, so limitation is not intended as a negative.

Time/space is the realm of mind, space/time is the realm of matter.

Very, very interesting point of view. So, basically what you're saying is that in the metaphysical third density the fourth dimension, or time, prevails in the sense that one may sense all 3D frames of fourth dimensional time/space continuum at once, and in the physical third density we are stuck in one single frame-continuum. :idea:

Thanks for your insight it was exactly what I was looking for on this subject and I really think it makes full sense.

PS: Sorry for the delay, I had some big issues to handle in the past month!

---

then why is the third density physical world named SPACE/time and the third density metaphysical world named TIME/space?

I believe it is because time pivots around space here in the physical, whereas it is the reverse in the metaphysical. Here, you occupy only one space and time flows around that always present location. There, you occupy one time (the NOW), and space floats around that always present moment.

Some observational artifacts of time/space. You look at a person, but in addition to the “present” person, there is an awareness of the person as a baby, toddler, child, adolescent, adult, and aged all at the same time. In time/space, there is a background awareness of these additional “times” also being present in the person in front of you, in the same sense that when talking to a person here in space/time you are aware of the ground, buildings, cars, sky, and other “spaces” while being focused on the person.

There, a summer’s day will be full of summer-ness; a perception that the day is a summation or amalgam of all summer days happening at the same time. You could tease out a particular day in that continuum of summer days, it would be part of the available and accessible “now” should you want to focus on it. I imagine the sensory impressions are relatively more intense in time/space because of the condensed many-days-in-one (the NOW) of the time/space experience.

going further, how does time and space transcend from the physical to the metaphysical and how different these concepts are in the metaphysical planes of third density?

Here, time is fluid and elastic. Nothing slows down time like boredom or speeds it up like going to a good party!

There, space is fluid and elastic. While I expect an Earth-like environment in the Earth metaphysical planes, it’s not another Earth per se. There is instead unlimited potential real estate. Want to go visit a perfect replica of your favorite summer cabin by the lake? With the right attention and training, poof! that environment “appears” around you. Space is elastic and fluid in time/space in the way that time is elastic and fluid down here. In the time/space environment your position is relative. You are where your thoughts take you. The environment can change and you can be in a completely different space in “no time” at all. (Or many places all at once.)

Today’s space/time, the warm August summer day, is one actuality/layer in the totality of summer-ness that exists in the NOW of time/space. We come down here to explore summer-ness one moment at a time, over a lifetime.

Time/space and the NOW holds the totality, in the same way that you can hold the whole story of a book in a single hand even though the story may be about a thousand years and the rise and fall of empires.

So the metaphysical time/space planes of Earth hold all the “time” or now-ness and all the stories of the Earth Life School like it was in one Great Big Book. We in Space/Time occupy one “space” have to turn each page sequentially in time.

For what it’s worth.

Perfect examples, ricdaw! Simply perfect. Exactly the insight I was hoping for on this subject!

As usual, another question arises: Would time in the metaphysical be constant just as space is for us around here? I mean, time in time/space is more rigid with a constant progression towards some kind of ascension into higher planes until the reincarnation process is again established?

Anyway, thanks a lot for your sharing and sorry for the delay!

[anagogy]

As usual, another question arises: Would time in the metaphysical be constant just as space is for us around here? I mean, time in time/space is more rigid with a constant progression towards some kind of ascension into higher planes until the reincarnation process is again established?

Anyway, thanks a lot for your sharing and sorry for the delay!

It may surprise you to learn that the transition from space/time to time/space is not like a light switch. It is not a binary situation where you are either in space/time or you are in time/space. There is a gradual continuum of expression which slowly fades from space into time. Every subtle plane has a slightly different ratio of space to time.

What does this actually mean?

It means that there *is* a flow of time in the subtle planes, however, it is "looser" than the current of time you find yourself in the physical realm. The higher the subtle plane, the closer you are to pure time/space. The lower the plane, the closer you are to pure space/time. So just as there are "time periods" in the physical, there are also time periods in the lower astral. From the lower astral you can travel to different time periods in the physical, from the middle astral, you can travel to different time periods in the lower astral. The higher the plane, the more unhinged it is from the current of time of the lower plane.

From the seventh density, or pure violet ray (which is pure time/space), all time may be seen to be occurring simultaneously.

The more you lean in the direction of time, the less grasp or control you have on a specific point in space. The more you lean towards space, the less control you have over the flow of time.

Pure time/space is violet ray. And pure space/time is red ray. All the colors in between are possessed of varying ratios of space to time. The lower vibrational "outer planes" lean more toward space/time, whereas the higher vibrational "inner planes" lean more in the direction time/space.

Attachment to form necessitates the perception of relative change (and time is simply a measure of change).

[Learner]

then why is the third density physical world named SPACE/time and the third density metaphysical world named TIME/space?

the concept of unity in each of these double concepts is clear to me, my question is why space prevails in the physical and time prevails in the metaphysical? or there is no predominance at all and this is all just a matter of distinction?

going further, how does time and space transcend from the physical to the metaphysical and how different these concepts are in the metaphysical planes of third density?

I like anagogy's response best, but I'd like to offer my understanding. The notion of space/time indeed indicate the sameness of space and time, but they are the same because our current understanding of time, in term of the quantity used in physical laws, in not truely time, but the 4th dimension of space that we mistaken as time. There are indeed 4 spacial dimensions, but we can only perceive 3. I disagree with anagogy here, it is a physical limitation of us. It is this way because we are still 3rd density beings, not yet evolved into 4th density. Yes, the 4th dimension will appear as inner and outer to us. Inner is when we look into the atomic level, outer is when we look out into the cosmos. Currently, the accepted physical theories cannot reconcile the laws of the large (general theory of relativity) and small (quantum mechanics), so physicists know that the current understandings of the physical laws are not complete. What's missing is the recognition and complete understanding of the dynamics of the other (4th) dimension. Relativity laws made a great leap by conceptually defining a 4D spacetime, but it has not reach the complete picture of a 4D space and Time, the 5D space-time. (an interesting note here – as you probably have heard, the next stage of evolution is also called 5-dimension instead of 4th density by some other teachings).

It is hard to believe/image that we can exist in something that we cannot physically perceive. We are capable perceive the effect of 4D space now, but only when we look into the very large and very small. That's why many things we observe there confuses us, such as many quantum phenomena and dark matter etc. in cosmology. Even though we have 3 degrees of freedom in movement in the 3D space we occupy, our perception of 3D mainly comes from stereo vision. Therefore it is very interesting for me to find out that the pineal gland, the supposed gateway to higher dimensions/spirituality, is called the 3rd eye. Ah ha: 2 eyes allow us to see 3D, so logically we can deduct that 3 eyes must allow us to see 4D. :-)

Is it possible for us to live in 3D but not truly experience it? Yes. Here's a moving account of someone who was born cross-eyed and how it felt for her to experience 3D for the first time after operations that corrected her eyesight (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story...=128977924). It reminds me of how people describe how they felt when they had some type of spiritual experience where they are no longer their 3D self. She lived in a 3D world but never truly experienced it; it's similar to most of us now who lives in truly 4D world but never really experience it physically. To me, metaphysical is but the physical world we could not freely access currently, which is the 4th dimension of space which we currently thought as time in mainstream science -- thus it is referred as Time/space.

Let me further explain with another example. Think back in the early stages of human development, when we just came from 2D, we had 3-degree of freedom in movement, but our world was largely confined to 2D – that is, we mostly moved along the surface of the earth. Thus we logically believed that the earth is flat (2D). Only though careful observations and expanding our horizons we started to question that concept. We observed the sun, stars, and the moon and noticed the cyclical/circular nature of celestial bodies. Gradually, with aviation and traveling further in distances, we came to know that the earth is round (a 3D object), without actually observing it. As we got into space, we finally see physically that the earth is round. Going into space and the Moon, human have actually moved to a different spot in the 4th dimension as well, though we are not aware of it (it is currently understood as we moved to a spot where the time passes at a different speed). Slowly but surly, as we move more and further into 4D space, we will recognize this dimension and its properties.

I deduce that once we ascend into 4D human form, we will be able to perceive 4D naturally. But evolution doesn't stop there, as we move around in 4D, we will observe 5D phenomena and learn about it and eventually graduate into the next density, and so on.

Ra: I am Ra. You are quite correct as far as your language may take you and, due to your training, more able than we to express the concept. Our only correction, if you will, would be to suggest that the 90° of which you speak are an angle which may best be understood as a portion of a tesseract.

This is one of the favorite Ra statements of mine. To me it indicated that space is 4D without breaking the law of confusion, for a tesseract is a 4D cube (interesting note: have you seen how tesseract is referenced in the Avenger movies?) I came to understand the 4D nature of space before encountering Ra Material, so Ra's statement here is one of confirmations of its authenticity to me.

[isis]

probably should've noted that my 2 previous posts in this thread were written by this person

[andreazzi]

Anyone able to explain this contradiction on the Orion group densities?

7.15: "...There are a very few third density, a larger number of fourth density, a similarly large number of fifth density, and very few sixth-density entities comprising this organization..."

48.6: "...There are very, very few fifth-density Orion members for they do not any longer perceive any virtue in other-selves."

[anagogy]

Anyone able to explain this contradiction on the Orion group densities?

7.15: "...There are a very few third density, a larger number of fourth density, a similarly large number of fifth density, and very few sixth-density entities comprising this organization..."

48.6: "...There are very, very few fifth-density Orion members for they do not any longer perceive any virtue in other-selves."

Two possibilities as I see it.

The first one is that Ra was actually talking about negative polarity in general in the first quote you shared, and the second one was talking about the Orion Empire specifically.

The other possibility is that they actually meant to say "sixth density" in the last quote you shared.

In other words, transmission error.

[andreazzi]

Anyone able to explain this contradiction on the Orion group densities?

7.15: "...There are a very few third density, a larger number of fourth density, a similarly large number of fifth density, and very few sixth-density entities comprising this organization..."

48.6: "...There are very, very few fifth-density Orion members for they do not any longer perceive any virtue in other-selves."

Two possibilities as I see it.

The first one is that Ra was actually talking about negative polarity in general in the first quote you shared, and the second one was talking about the Orion Empire specifically.

The other possibility is that they actually meant to say "sixth density" in the last quote you shared.

In other words, transmission error.

Oh! NOW, I see it! Look at the full 7.15 answer again:

"Like the Confederation, the densities of the mass consciousnesses which comprise that group are varied. There are a very few third density, a larger number of fourth density, a similarly large number of fifth density, and very few sixth-density entities comprising this organization."

Ra was refering to the negative mass consciousnesses which opposes the Confederation, in this part of the Galaxy, and which comprises the Orion Group. In other words, my mistake!

[andreazzi]

Hello!

what does Ra mean with "working with crayons" in this answer:

55.14 Questioner: The book, Life Force in the Great Pyramid, they have related the ankh shape with a resonance in the pyramid. Is this a correct analysis?
Ra: I am Ra. We have scanned your mind and find the phrase “working with crayons.” This would be applicable. There is only one significance to these shapes such as the crux ansata; that is the placing in coded form of mathematical relationships.

Thanks!!

[Jade]

I'm going to jump out and guess on this one.

The question seems to imply that the book, Life Force in the Great pyramid, draws a direct comparison with the ankh and the pyramid. Ra says the relationship is mathematical. So, I'm *assuming* this means that the average crux ansata is as if drawn "with crayons", as if a child were attempting to create this symbol which at its fullest expression requires specific mathematic ratios.

Here is another question about the ankh that Ra didn't answer:

96.19 ↥ Questioner: Would Ra please give me any information possible on the ratios of the dimensions, and the dimensions and shape of the crux ansata as it should be made or drawn?

Ra: I am Ra. No.

[caycegal]

I'm a little confused about how to approach a negative entity. If someone could correct me, send a negative entity love and acceptance? But not enough acceptance where the entity can enslave you? This happens in our daily lives, negativity approaches us al the time, just not sure how to handle it.

Someone said we should wish and visualize for the negative entity those things we most desire for ourselves, such as love, peace, joy, fun, happiness, etc.

For me this simplistic explanation takes the dilemma out of the question.

[AnthroHeart]

I've never been approached by a truly negative being, though I've seen one who was fairly negative which turned my stomach. He told horror stories of what he's been through.

[βαθμιαίος]

Hello!

what does Ra mean with "working with crayons" in this answer:

55.14 Questioner: The book, Life Force in the Great Pyramid, they have related the ankh shape with a resonance in the pyramid. Is this a correct analysis?
Ra: I am Ra. We have scanned your mind and find the phrase “working with crayons.” This would be applicable. There is only one significance to these shapes such as the crux ansata; that is the placing in coded form of mathematical relationships.

Thanks!!

In addition to what Jade wrote, I think Ra is saying that the relationship drawn by the book is simplistic and inexact. It reminds me of when Ra contrasted the scalpel and the blunt instrument.

[anagogy]

Hello!

what does Ra mean with "working with crayons" in this answer:

55.14 Questioner: The book, Life Force in the Great Pyramid, they have related the ankh shape with a resonance in the pyramid. Is this a correct analysis?
Ra: I am Ra. We have scanned your mind and find the phrase “working with crayons.” This would be applicable. There is only one significance to these shapes such as the crux ansata; that is the placing in coded form of mathematical relationships.

Thanks!!

Hi andreazzi,

In my opinion Ra is essentially saying that the Ankh was simply them expressing themselves, as in the symbols of their culture, much as a child would express themselves by "working with crayons". It was purely cultural expression, and had no particular import with regard to the metaphysical resonances of the pyramid shape.

[andreazzi]

Hello!

what does Ra mean with "working with crayons" in this answer:

55.14 Questioner: The book, Life Force in the Great Pyramid, they have related the ankh shape with a resonance in the pyramid. Is this a correct analysis?
Ra: I am Ra. We have scanned your mind and find the phrase “working with crayons.” This would be applicable. There is only one significance to these shapes such as the crux ansata; that is the placing in coded form of mathematical relationships.

Thanks!!

Hi andreazzi,

In my opinion Ra is essentially saying that the Ankh was simply them expressing themselves, as in the symbols of their culture, much as a child would express themselves by "working with crayons". It was purely cultural expression, and had no particular import with regard to the metaphysical resonances of the pyramid shape.

Thanks, Anagogy. I think you're right, in other words, Ra says that the attempt to relate the crux ansata with some kind of resonance in the pyramid is like "working with crayons", since its true and only value is symbology.

[βαθμιαίος]

Here are some quotes from Carla's letters where she uses the phrases "working with crayons" or "playing with crayons."

http://www.llresearch.org/letters/letter_1988_0724.aspx

It is impossible to understand anything here. That is not of this density and people who think that understanding is of this density in any absolute way, I have a lot of trouble with. I have a lot of trouble with scientists.

They are playing with crayons. Don always said that. All of the basics of science, the things that they count on to make everything work, all that they know about electricity, all that they know about quantum theory, the speed of light. Why is Pi Pi? You can go to all of the different qualities. They can measure them, they can use them and they figured out ways to make gadgets. We have wonderful technology, but nobody to explain the basics. Nobody to explain action at a distance. Nobody is unified things. Nobody has gotten to the bottom of this illusion. And I don’t think we will from within the illusion. It wouldn’t really make sense that we would.

http://www.llresearch.org/letters/letter_1991_0626.aspx

As a matter of fact, I know this doesn’t make any sense, but it’s much more my position that the entire universe is subjective and there’s nothing that exists outside of my senses, than to suggest that the objective world is the real one and what I think about it is incorrect and only objective things are real. I think it’s completely the other way around—very subjective universe and the best we can do is pretty well work with crayons when it comes to vocabulary and just try to live the kind of life that we feel we should.

http://www.llresearch.org/letters/letter_1991_0524.aspx

But I certainly would not want to take time away from the creative use of it by you in working with other scientists because that is probably a relatively chaotic task since scientists are, by definition, working with crayons.

However, there are real scientists in this world; people who truly do want to know why and aren’t going to sit on the scientific method as if it were the fulcrum of our creation. That particular atlas done shrugged.

[native]

So it came from Don's mind. Thanks βαθμιαίος, man of the hour as always!

[andreazzi]

greetings, earthlings!

anyone care to explain Ra's definition of "inner planes" in this answer:

63.26 ▶ Questioner: Could you describe the difference that you are speaking of with respect to time/space and space/time?
Ra: I am Ra. For the sake of your understanding we will use the working definition of inner planes. There is a great deal of subtlety invested in this sound vibration complex, but it, by itself, will perhaps fulfill your present need.

I am really dedicated to the understandig of this critical concept of space/time and time/space. This is the most direct question Don asks about this concept that I could find in the material, but Ra clearly uses Don's concept of Inner planes to explain it, but it doesn't mean much to me...

[native]

Ra actually explains the difference between time/space and space/time here in 71.6.

*Edit I should say the idea of planes in general are drawn from Hindu philosophy itself, and then blended with and popularized in the recent esoteric tradition. Plane

[ricdaw]

greetings, earthlings!

anyone care to explain Ra's definition of "inner planes" in this answer:

63.26 ▶ Questioner: Could you describe the difference that you are speaking of with respect to time/space and space/time?
Ra: I am Ra. For the sake of your understanding we will use the working definition of inner planes. There is a great deal of subtlety invested in this sound vibration complex, but it, by itself, will perhaps fulfill your present need.

I am really dedicated to the understandig of this critical concept of space/time and time/space. This is the most direct question Don asks about this concept that I could find in the material, but Ra clearly uses Don's concept of Inner planes to explain it, but it doesn't mean much to me...

Inner planes = astra planes. In the vernacular, heaven. A good understanding comes form reading the books by astral explorers (people who project out-of-body). Robert Bruce describes the Astral Realms in "Astral Dynamics." Robert Monroe's Jopurney's Out of Body trilogy does too.

The inner planes are like the rings in an onion. They are Earth-centric places. People go to the plane where they belong (after death) by their vibrational attributes. Like attracts like.

I speculate that the "outer" planes are not Earth-centric, but perhaps Solar-system or galactic focused. Robert Bruce sees them as complex patterns.