Your mind is a electromagnetic manifestation

[anagogy]

(47.8) The red-ray body is your chemical body. However, it is not the body which you have as clothing in the physical. It is the unconstructed material of the body, the elemental body without form. This basic unformed material body is important to understand for there are healings which may be carried out by the simple understanding of the elements present in the physical vehicle.

(47.8) The yellow-ray body is your physical vehicle which you know of at this time and in which you experience catalyst. This body has the mind/body/spirit characteristics and is equal to the physical illusion, as you have called it.

---

These seem to suggest otherwise.

I used to think so as well, but have since changed my perspective on this issue.

In my earnest opinion, Ra was describing the red ray subdensity of each of those aforementioned ray bodies.

So when they talked about the red ray body, they were talking about red-ray subdensity of red ray. When they talked about the orange ray body, they were talking about the red-ray subdensity of orange ray, and when they described the yellow ray body, they were describing the red ray subdensity of yellow ray, and so on, etc.

But it makes sense that Ra would describe the bodies in that way, especially as they were just laying the foundation for unscrambling the plethora of occult opinion on the subject, and also as they were trying to correlate it with the density concept thus provided. After all, they stated, "Firstly, the basic energy of so-called red ray. This ray may be understood to be the basic strengthening ray for each density. "

Every density expresses in all the rays. I used to think that density and ray were synonymous, but later discovered they were, in fact, different.

So they were describing the physical expressions of all those bodies. All those bodies also have lower astral expressions, middle astral expressions, higher astral expressions, devachanic expressions, etheric expressions, and buddhic expressions.

It's one of my favorite subjects actually, and I appreciate you providing the opportunity for me to bring it up.

When Ra said it was equal to "the physical illusion", they meant, in my opinion, that it was equal to *our* physical illusion. For example, it would *not* be equal to the physical illusion of 2nd density organisms or 1st density organisms, their physical illusion is different.

Another clue that they were only discussing physical bodies in that particular section of the Ra material was when they get to talking about the blue ray body and add:

The light body or blue-ray body may be called the devachanic body. There are many other names for this body especially in your so-called Indian Sutras or writings, for there are those among these peoples which have explored these regions and understand the various types of devachanic bodies. There are many, many types of bodies in each density, much like your own.

Whereas, on the inner planes, it is not much effort to conjure up a different type of body.

Another clue in that section is the fact that first three bodies described we know to be physical. Ra makes no mention of the last few bodies described as being nonphysical, thus, we can assume they are still describing physical bodies. And when I say "physical", I don't necessarily mean "matter", the last 4 bodies definitely begin to lean in the direction of energy, rather than matter, but I still maintain they are physical energies (at least, in this circumstance Ra described).

Anyway, I welcome your thoughts, opinions, and questions on this subject. It is a very interesting topic.

[Unbound]

Well, the main issue I have with your interpretation is that I don't see any reason to assume that the red-ray body is the only "visible" body, because if yellow-ray is a physical form we experience and see, then wouldn't we be perceiving the entire yellow-ray spectrum of sub-densities? If I was to use your interpretation, then I would still say it wouldn't be the red-ray aspect of each body we are seeing, but the yellow-ray, that which is consonant with our own activated body.

All the bodies are made of light, so why assume that when we perceive a yellow-ray body we are only perceiving one of its sub-densities?

From your interpretation it would make more sense (although still not total sense to me) that it would be the yellow-ray sub-density of the red-ray that is physically perceived, but then what is the point of Ra suggesting that the yellow-ray body is that which we perceive as the physical illusion?

I just don't see how you conclude that red-ray accounts for visibility, especially if red-ray is the basic ray of structure and strengthening, how would that translate to what we see, considering all the bodies are light?

---

I guess what I am trying to understand is why would our perception "filter" purely the red-ray?

[anagogy]

Well, the main issue I have with your interpretation is that I don't see any reason to assume that the red-ray body is the only "visible" body, because if yellow-ray is a physical form we experience and see, then wouldn't we be perceiving the entire yellow-ray spectrum of sub-densities? If I was to use your interpretation, then I would still say it wouldn't be the red-ray aspect of each body we are seeing, but the yellow-ray, that which is consonant with our own activated body.

Excellent question. I will try to explain as best I can.

The reason why I say the red ray is the only visible spectrum is a result of my understanding that the the lower the vibration, the more outer and tangible it is, and the higher the vibration the more intangible and inner it is. As I said, every density contains all the rays, but they are focused by the true color ray's perspective.

So, as a 3rd density being, our perception is limited to the yellow ray density perspective. So, everything we see is yellow ray.

However...

We are physically incarnate. The physical is the lowest level of vibration (which is the most outer and lowest vibrational level, which, to my understanding is, as I've said, red ray expression). And that is the level of vibration our physical bodily senses pick up on. Everything we see in the physical world is the red ray subdensity of 3rd density (true color yellow). Even the lower density physical constructs (like animals, dirt, rocks, trees), because we are seeing all of it, every bit of it, through a 3rd density perspective, interpreting in a 3rd density, true color yellow, sort of way. Thus, we only ever see the 3rd density portion of the physical things we see. We see 3rd density physical.

So you are absolutely correct in that regards, we are seeing the true color yellow spectrum, but while physically incarnate, we are only seeing the physical portion of that spectrum, because as I said, that is all our physical bodies are vibrationally able to pick up on.

All the bodies are made of light, so why assume that when we perceive a yellow-ray body we are only perceiving one of its sub-densities?

My personal, and intuitive understanding, is that each of the subdensities is a miniature of its native true color density. My understanding is that the lower the subdensity, the more tangible and outer it is, and the higher it is the more intangible and formless it becomes. I wish I had more Ra quotes to confirm this intuitive notion I have, but I don't, if I find one, I will be sure to share it.

It sort of just became apparent to me as I meditated upon the rays, and chakras, pondering the nature of inner and outer, and how everything is coalesced inwards, and violet ray is the apex of "inwards", and red ray is the apex of "outwards".

From your interpretation it would make more sense (although still not total sense to me) that it would be the yellow-ray sub-density of the red-ray that is physically perceived, but then what is the point of Ra suggesting that the yellow-ray body is that which we perceive as the physical illusion?

As I said, yellow ray is the domain of *our* physical illusion (the physical part of yellow ray). But yellow ray also has parts that are *not* physical. And there are some quotes that support that, for example:

47.9 ↥ Questioner: Which bodies do we have immediately after physical death from this yellow-ray body that I now inhabit?

Ra: I am Ra. You have all bodies in potentiation.

47.10 ↥ Questioner: Then the yellow-ray body in potentiation is used to create the chemical arrangement that I have as a physical body now. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect only in that in your present incarnation the yellow-ray body is not in potentiation but in activation, it being that body which is manifest.

47.13 ↥ Questioner: What stimulus would create what we call an Earth-bound spirit or a lingering ghost?

Ra: I am Ra. The stimulus for this is the faculty of the will. If the will of yellow-ray mind/body/spirit is that which is stronger than the progressive impetus of the physical death towards realization of that which comes, that is, if the will is concentrated enough upon the previous experience, the entity’s shell of yellow ray, though no longer activated, cannot either be completely deactivated and, until the will is released, the mind/body/spirit complex is caught. This often occurs, as we see you are aware, in the case of sudden death as well as in the case of extreme concern for a thing or an other-self.

47.14 ↥ Questioner: Well then, does orange-ray activation after death occur very frequently with this planet?

Ra: I am Ra. Quite infrequently, due to the fact that this particular manifestation is without will. Occasionally an other-self will so demand the form of the one passing through the physical death that some semblance of the being will remain. This is orange ray. This is rare, for normally if one entity desires another enough to call it, the entity will have the corresponding desire to be called. Thus the manifestation would be the shell of yellow ray.

So from these quotes it can be seen that yellow ray also has a nonphysical expression (as well as orange ray) as well, so it is not just a physical body. So this leads me to conclude there are portions of it that our physical and portions that are nonphysical, and perhaps variations in between.

I just don't see how you conclude that red-ray accounts for visibility, especially if red-ray is the basic ray of structure and strengthening, how would that translate to what we see, considering all the bodies are light?

For me it is a matter of vibration. Red ray is the lowest vibration and so it accounts, in my experience, as gross visible tangible matter, and every vibration thereafter becomes less gross and visible and more subtle and immaterial, with the apex of these vibrations culminating in violet ray, which is the most subtle and the most immaterial of all the vibrations.

For example, orange ray is visible too, but only to inhabitants of the lower astral, pure yellow ray (and when I say "pure" i mean "yellow subdensity of yellow ray) is visible material to inhabitants of the middle astral, and pure green ray is material of a sorts only visible to inhabitants of the higher astral.

So each ray has its own substance. Orange ray is *like* physical matter, but it is matter of the lower astral, yellow ray is visible matter to the middle astral, green ray is visible matter to the higher astral. But the red ray subdensities of those planes is physically visible material.

Please let me know if I can clarify any of this further.

[Unbound]

Hmm, well I do get what you are saying although I still don't see/understanding how you are making the division of "inner" and "outer". What are those exactly? Do you mean space/time and time/space in that red-ray is polarized to space/time forming a gradient with violet-ray polarized in time/space? Not sure what you mean by inner and outer so that kind of puts a block on the idea for me.

If I am to translate this musically, I see the individual being as a musical chord, the "key" of the chord corresponds with the yellow-ray or whichever body is currently in activation, and then the other bodies, through potentiation, modify the "tone" or harmony of that key tone. In this way, I would equate physicality with "timbre", in that physicality is actually the perception of energy according to particular qualities.

The quality of physicality is that of tangibility. I do agree that red-ray is responsible for the tangibility of any density. However, I disagree that it is solely responsible for the appearances.

Were I to use the analogy of a painted sculpture I would consider red-ray to be the raw material, orange-ray is the form applied to the raw material, yellow-ray is the paint, the colouring and "fleshing out" of the form through tones, green-ray would be the feeling or mood the colouring and form together form, blue-ray would be the many possible interpretations according to its design, what it communicates, indigo-ray would be the raw idea or concept itself inherent in the sculpture, and violet-ray is the fact that is itself, individuated, yet is also an extension of the sculptor.

So I agree that the red-ray forms the basis for physicality (raw material), but I believe the "appearances" we perceive are a feature of the yellow-ray painting over the orange-ray (individuation of the raw material), or in otherwords, it is through the yellow-ray that things have "characteristics". At least, that is how it appears to me.

[anagogy]

Hmm, well I do get what you are saying although I still don't see/understanding how you are making the division of "inner" and "outer". What are those exactly? Do you mean space/time and time/space in that red-ray is polarized to space/time forming a gradient with violet-ray polarized in time/space? Not sure what you mean by inner and outer so that kind of puts a block on the idea for me.

Yes, you've got it exactly.

Outer is polarized towards space/time (matter). Inner is polarized towards time/space (mind). And what creates the division between "inner" and "outer"? The self. The ego is the demarcation between who you are, and where you are. So as you proceed away from the outer planes and more toward the inner planes, you are turning away from matter, and more towards mind. Mind is inner projection, matter is outer projection. And spirit is the integrator.

When Ra calls time/space "inner planes" they mean that literally. They are within our consciousness.

If I am to translate this musically, I see the individual being as a musical chord, the "key" of the chord corresponds with the yellow-ray or whichever body is currently in activation, and then the other bodies, through potentiation, modify the "tone" or harmony of that key tone. In this way, I would equate physicality with "timbre", in that physicality is actually the perception of energy according to particular qualities.

Yes, the rays could be looked at as tones. Vibrations can be discriminated among in various ways and sound is certainly a valid way to look at it. Red ray is the lowest note, the most outer expression. The lack of consciousness at this level translates to a very pronounced outer expression, and a very muted inner expression. So lots of tangible form going on, but not much mind. As you go up the tones, the reverse becomes true -- mind becomes the more predominant characteristic.

The quality of physicality is that of tangibility. I do agree that red-ray is responsible for the tangibility of any density. However, I disagree that it is solely responsible for the appearances.

Yes, tangible is what puts the "physical" in physicality. The manifestation of form.

It's not solely responsible for the appearances. It is just where the appearances show up, or manifest, in the physical. As I said, in the lower astral, orange ray is the "tangible" expression. Less tangible than what we know as matter, but tangible to the lower astral inhabitants. Yellow ray is the tangible substance of the middle astral -- less tangible than the lower astral matter, but some semblance of form nonetheless.

Were I to use the analogy of a painted sculpture I would consider red-ray to be the raw material, orange-ray is the form applied to the raw material, yellow-ray is the paint, the colouring and "fleshing out" of the form through tones, green-ray would be the feeling or mood the colouring and form together form, blue-ray would be the many possible interpretations according to its design, what it communicates, indigo-ray would be the raw idea or concept itself inherent in the sculpture, and violet-ray is the fact that is itself, individuated, yet is also an extension of the sculptor.

The outer always reflects the inner. So all these forms start out as formless violet ray (the apex of inner mind), and then seep down into more and more tangible levels until, finally, they crystallize into red ray vibrational manifestation. It's very much like steam gradually coalescing into water, and lowering in vibration to the point where it "freezes" into a solid, red ray crystallization of form. The difference between the violet ray and red ray is that violet ray is undifferentiated, and general, and formless. Red ray is like "specific-ness". So as it lowers into vibration is coalesces into specific form from the infinity of probable thoughts. So it goes from pure thought, to thought-form, and then to form. And of course, all the gradations in between.

This is also why red ray is the basic strengthening ray for the densities. As the most "outer" manifestation, it is the "energizer" of form. Violet ray is passive potential, and red ray is active, aggressive, and kinetic.

So I agree that the red-ray forms the basis for physicality (raw material), but I believe the "appearances" we perceive are a feature of the yellow-ray painting over the orange-ray (individuation of the raw material), or in otherwords, it is through the yellow-ray that things have "characteristics". At least, that is how it appears to me.

The way I see it is that density level is a measure of complexity of consciousness. Or we could say, the level of closeness or resonance with the one undifferentiated consciousness. Rays, on the other hand, are more like "environments of expression".

Or, we could say, that rays are like notes to be played, and density level, is a measure of one's degree of mastery over such notes. That sounds good, I like that analogy best, I think.

So as an example, a 3rd density being incarnating in the red ray, or physical level, naturally coalesces a red ray form that can overlap with its true color yellow consciousness. This is why our physical 3rd density body has a brain with sufficient cognitive capacity to entertain self awareness, whereas a 2nd density physical body does not have that support to as a great a degree. The red ray expression that forms around the individual consciousness complex incarnating in that plane expresses that perspective within the limitations of its plane of existence.

So a third density being has a more "complex" red ray manifestation than a 2nd density red ray expression, because of the higher consciousness level. And a fourth density being would have a more complex red ray manifestation than we do. And the same is true for all the other vibrational levels.

[Unbound]

Well, I agree with all of that and I follow your explanation, but at this point, it appears to me that we just see light. White light. We see all of the rays all of the time, they are always there, we just can't perceive the higher ones due to our agreement of invisibility with them.

I get what you mean by inner and outer and how red-ray is most outer and violet-ray most inner, but I still see them as an unbroken rainbow, we see all of the layers even if we do not always understand the form they are in. To say we "see" only red-ray because it is "outer" is a matter of focus is, to me, only true only to the extent that the third eye is un-activated.

It is somewhat difficult to me to describe what I mean, as I guess you could say I believe it is possible to see "in to" the time/space of others. This is a different kind of seeing than most are familiar with, but it is seeing all the same. Seeing "within" is still a form of sight.

However, I believe we see white light, limitless light, and that is the "actual thing" we perceive. The division in to inner and outer and all of the categorical stuff is just classification to attempt to understand the layers of the structure we know as reality. In fact, it is one light and one love.

[Adonai One]

The question is if knowledge exists and if greater knowledge is attainable from any aspect of the creation? Can any part of the creation know itself entirely in any capacity, even in a veiled capacity? I say, yes, yes it can and I consider this process science.

Does science exist, always? Is there a place for the study of knowledge in every part of the creation? I believe the answer is yes: Science is universal.

[Unbound]

What isn't universal if everything is everything?

[Adonai One]

All things being known is universality.