The Law of Responsibility

[loostudent]

"Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?” Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see,’ your sin remains." (John 9,40-41)

"From everyone who has been given much, much will be required; and to whom they entrusted much, of him they will ask all the more." (Lk 12,48)

[Jade]

I actually meant to specifically put in the OP that I was interested in how the Law of Responsibility interacts or is present with the Ra-tarot archetypes, but forgot to after all the cutting and pasting. Thank you Jade.

Ah that's great! I'm sorry Sprout and C_A, but I believe this ties in quite well with the discussion. As far as I understand it, I don't see how one can separate a study of the Law of One with a study of the magical personality. As I noted, I believe we all make an agreement in session 4 to take on the honor/duty of learning how to heal, and thus, must practice what we have learned from the Law of One. There is no pressure, I'm not forcing anyone to do or talk about anything, to the best of my understanding. This is a Law of One forum, this is the "Strictly Law of One Material" subforum, I feel like talking about the archetypes is on topic and not a violation of anyone's free will.

But for the faint of heart, I will add a warning here, that the rest of my post will be talking about the archetypes.

I thought more about peregrine's question to me earlier on my drive to work, and I realized that I have a very simple way of interpreting this philosophy as a whole, and it comes down to the Transformation of the Mind, specifically this quote:

99.8 Questioner: Thank you. Card Number Six I see as the Transformation of the Mind, the male’s crossed arms representing transformation, transformation being possible either toward the left- or the right-hand path, the right-hand path being beckoned or led by the female, the Potentiator. The one on the right having the serpent of wisdom at the brow and being fully clothed, the one on the left having less clothing and indicating that the Matrix or Potentiator would be more concerned and attracted to the physical illusion as the left-hand path is chosen and more concerned and attracted to the mental as the right-hand path is chosen.

The creature above points an arrow at the left-hand path indicating that if this path is chosen the chips, shall we say, will fall where they may, the path being unprotected as far as the random activity of catalyst. And the intellectual abilities of the chooser of that path would be the main guardian rather than a designed or built-in protection by the Logos for the right-hand path. The entity firing the arrow being what seems to be a second density entity would indicate that this catalyst could be produced by a lesser-evolved source, you might say. Would Ra comment on these observations of Card Six, the Transformation of the Mind?

Ra: I am Ra. We shall speak upon several aspects seriatim. Firstly, let us examine the crossed arms of the male who is to be transformed. What, O student, do you make of the crossing? What see you in this tangle? There is a creative point to be found in this element which was not discussed overmuch by the questioner.

Let us now observe the evaluation of the two females. The observation that to the left-hand path moves the roughly physical and to the right-hand path the mental has a shallow correctness. There are deeper observations to be made concerning the relationship of the great sea of the unconscious mind to the conscious mind which may fruitfully be pursued. Remember, O student, that these images are not literal. They haunt rather than explicate.

Many use the trunk and roots of mind as if that portion of mind were a badly used, prostituted entity. Then this entity gains from this great storehouse that which is rough, prostituted, and without great virtue. Those who turn to the deep mind, seeing it in the guise of the maiden, go forth to court it. The courtship has nothing of plunder in its semblance and may be protracted, yet the treasure gained by such careful courtship is great. The right-hand and left-hand transformations of the mind may be seen to differ by the attitude of the conscious mind towards its own resources as well as the resources of other-selves.

We now speak of that genie, or elemental, or mythic figure, culturally determined, which sends the arrow to the left-hand transformation. This arrow is not the arrow which kills but rather that which, in its own way, protects. Those who choose separation, that being the quality most indicative of the left-hand path, are protected from other-selves by a strength and sharpness equivalent to the degree of transformation which the mind has experienced in the negative sense. Those upon the right-hand path have no such protection against other-selves for upon that path the doughty seeker shall find many mirrors for reflection in each other-self it encounters

In our capitalistic, convenience society, somebody is always losing. The way we view the resources of other selves is very much like that of the prostituted entity - there for ourselves, with no thought to the other who is being exploited and used. We have been conditioned to buy things that are cheap and easy to procure, and the cheaper and easier it is to procure, the more likely someone along the way is being exploited for their labor, and somebody at the top is hoarding all of the labor/money that is exchanged. It's ugly and we all know that this is our reality on earth. People slave for years at their jobs to buy a shiny new car or a bigger house, we are cutting down rainforests to grow more luxury food (animals), we are poisoning our oceans and bleaching our coral reefs and estimates say our oceans will be without fish by 2050 - just over 30 years from now.

Of course, we are born being brainwashed and advertised to, we are not born knowing that our iPhone was made in a factory with nets to prevent loss of labor by suicide. It takes awhile for someone to tell us that the minerals in our computers were mined by a slave child. As a child I had Happy Meals with toys, not the awareness that McDonald's exploits a minimum wage workforce, puts enough chemicals/preservatives in their food to literally freeze its status in time, and basically scorches the earth with their demand for cheap food supplies to support a dollar menu brand. I really didn't know how much torture the people who make our clothing go through until I watched the documentary The True Cost, and now I know better than to indulge my very sparing hobby of shopping for cheap clothing. As soon as I learn these things, I am unable to unlearn them. This is what Tolstoy means by being dragged along by truth - once you recognize a truth, you can step up and trot for rightness, or you can let the truth drag you along with it, while you brutalize yourself and others through your unwillingness to stop prostituting resources.

Ra uses the term courting because it has very specific connotations; it is "protracted" - meaning, that it takes time to do the right thing. If you are doing things to save time, or on a whim, or because it is cheap, and the gratification is so simple to achieve, this is prostituting the resources of other selves. This is also prostituting the resources of the self - when we eat at McDonald's, we know it is not healthful or even hardly real food. We know that it gives us a chemical rush, a gratification in the brain. So, in that way we are prostituting our own resources. When you look at it on the grand scale, it seems almost hopeless. But it's a matter of being willing to recognize when you are doing the wrong thing, as Sprout mentioned, even if you aren't willing/able to change your actions right away - recognition that it is wrong allows further catalyst to move you away from the prostitution. To continue to prostitute without remorse moves you further along the other path.

The "tangle" of the crossed arms that Ra refers to is the sacrifice one makes to create a Transformation of the Mind - you have to dedicate yourself, or else you don't achieve the Transformation. 

[100.6]In this image of Transformation of Mind, then, each of the females points the way it would go, but is not able to move, nor are the two female entities striving to do so. They are at rest. The conscious entity holds both and will turn itself one way or the other or, potentially, backwards and forwards, rocking first one way then the other and not achieving the transformation. In order for the Transformation of Mind to occur, one principle governing the use of the deep mind must be abandoned.

Hence the little impy in the corner. If you are courting, you are going to feel bad, as per Ra. If you are prostituting, you are without guilt, without pain, without as sharp of catalyst as one who deliberately courts. It's supposed to hurt, to realize the hurt we have caused and take steps to undo it. To see the pain in others and recognize that we are one.

But before we can be aware that we are prostituting, there has to be catalyst that shows us this, so that we can take action to choose to stop. It sucks really bad but I ultimately always appreciate learning when I am prostituting, because again, this is how I perceive this philosophy. This is why I don't feel it is a problem to share, in a setting such as this, where the discussion is taking place, my thoughts on the subject. If someone starts a vegan discussion, you betcha I'm going to jump right in. Because I feel that it is my honor/duty/responsibility to teach what I have learned, as others remain shrouded in darkness. Maybe that's the ultimate responsibility.

[Parsons]

I noticed this follow-up question after 22.5 was not discussed yet, and I think this is extremely relevant. Basically I think it gives an outline to the mechanics of the Law of Responsibility in the text I bolded.

22.6 Questioner: Would this shortened life span help the entity in any way in that he would have more at times in between incarnations to review his mistakes, or would this shortened life span hinder him?

Ra: I am Ra. Both are correct. The shortening of the life span is a distortion of the Law of One which suggests that an entity not receive more experience in more intensity than it may bear. This is only in effect upon an individual level and does not hold sway over planetary or social complexes.

Thus the shortened life span is due to the necessity for removing an entity from the intensity of experience which ensues when wisdom and love are, having been rejected, reflected back into the consciousness of the Creator without being accepted as part of the self, this then causing the entity to have the need for healing and for much evaluation of the incarnation.

The incorrectness lies in the truth that, given appropriate circumstances, a much longer incarnation in your space/time continuum is very helpful for continuing this intensive work until conclusions have been reached through the catalytic process.

If you read that session carefully in context, IMO it becomes clear that the reduction of lifespan and the Law of Responsibility go hand and hand. I think basically that the greater the difference between one's intellectual knowledge of the Law of One, and the putting into practice of those lessons, the more opportunities you will receive to end the incarnation 'early'. This is something I have been mulling over a great deal lately as I feel that my own declining health (at 32) and 'wanderer syndrome' all go hand and hand with this.

I think that in order to live the full length of an incarnation of 900ish years, the aware entity would need to treat the other self as the self to a degree that virtually none of us are doing. Later in the session, Don and Ra discuss a small group of 150 people in South America that had a 900 year lifespan. They say that there was a group of people peripherally associated with them that had to repeat the cycle, and that some of them were some of the Saints of history. I've never heard of a Saint living 900 years, so it seems that even the best of them did not escape the Law of Responsibility.

For an example of what I think it would take - Imagine that your next door neighbor that you had never spoken with knocked on your door and said that they need $40,000 to pay medical bills. Without reservation or hesitation, you would give all the money that you had and work extra hours until that bill was payed. And imagine you lived your whole life like that - just giving everything you had to everyone as though they were yourself.

I'm not saying I (and others like me) don't do anything at all for other's in what we've gained in knowledge of love and wisdom, but just not enough to fully live within the Law of Responsibility. What I'm not sure of is if it's even possible to live the full 900 years unless you're as isolated as the 150 people from the South American group.

TL;DR

I think what Ra was trying to say in the bolded text is that if you don't handle the catalyst presented by other people in your own intellectual understanding of the ways of love and wisdom (as defined in the LOO), that catalyst will repeat into a feedback loop until it filters from the mind complex into the body complex in the form of disease, eventually leading to the physical death of the entity.

Edit: I think the other layer of this is not so much in the physical doing in reality, but the proper mental processing when the doing is not possible or not appropriate, which I also think is not happening for those suffering from the Law of Responsibility, since we all seem to be vastly overstimulated with catalyst.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

I think I should be free to study the Law of One as I will.  I'm sorry you believe I should endanger myself, as I feel I would be, by partaking further in very powerful catalyst that arise from such intensive areas of advanced study.

As I said, here to learn Love and Unity.  Not archetypes which I held no resonance with to begin with.

As far as studying the Law of One goes, it was always about Love and Unity, not magic or understanding the underlying magic.  Those are advanced lessons, I'm fairly certain I'm not ready.

I might also add, Sprout seemed to be speaking out of concern of you accidentally infringing someone by pushing a study of archetypes on those whom are not ready for such.  No intentional harm meant, but I am in agreement, as I studied the archetypes once and in retrospect, I wasn't ready and the archetypes were not important for me to understand beyond developing divination skills to read tarot cards from an archetypical interpretation.  Taking them into my reality threw this undisciplined mind into turmoil.  Ra even warns of Personality Disintegration from inappropriately handling the archetypes (paraphrasing).  I vouch of this, I felt splintered and shattered, most of 2015 and 2016 were spent picking up the pieces.  So just be wary Jade, your admirable understanding and loving desire to share isn't bad, just please be aware that the archetypes are advanced study and not for everyone.

Aaaaaaand with that said.

Your post reveals some things that I would look into, but as I said, that catalyst is a bit above my discipline to appropriately handle, but thank you for sharing, I'm sure someone will get much out of your post

And finally, I'm not encouraging you to stop posting such, just be wary that not everyone is ready for the archetypes.

[Sacred Fool]

Edit: I think the other layer of this is not so much in the physical doing in reality, but the proper mental processing when the doing is not possible or not appropriate, which I also think is not happening for those suffering from the Law of Responsibility, since we all seem to be vastly overstimulated with catalyst.

I expect you swung closer to the nub of the matter with your edit.  The text speaks of the stress on an entity due to the intense catalyst of 3d.  (I don't know about you, but my catalyst has been intense beyond any doubt.)  It doesn't talk about what actions a person takes, but the not rejecting Love & Wisdom and all that hard stuff from a 3d perspective probably has more to do with learning not to take catalyst personally--that is, not emphasizing 1st, 2nd, 3rd chakra responses--but developing the skill of working it through the lower areas up to the heart and beyond.  In other words, on the whole, responding to catalyst reflexively with your heart and higher levels.

As for a 900 year lifespan, that's probably a lot more likely with the support of a like-committed community than it would be within the maelstrom of latter day culture.  Sorry to read of your health difficulties.  If you can use that to spur your facility with opening your heart to catalyst, that might be some compensation.

[Jade]

I think I should be free to study the Law of One as I will.  I'm sorry you believe I should endanger myself, as I feel I would be, by partaking further in very powerful catalyst that arise from such intensive areas of advanced study.

As I said, here to learn Love and Unity.  Not archetypes which I held no resonance with to begin with.

If you don't come post here to study the Law of One, then why are you posting? I'm not trying to be mean, I'm trying to ask sincerely. I don't come here if I'm not "in the mood" to discuss/study the Law of One, so I project that experience on to everyone. Again, this is the Strictly Law of One subforum. If this was Treehugger's, I'd take the crticism and listen. But I'm just confused. Right now I feel like I'm being made to feel guilty because I made some points that people don't want to listen to. Saying "I'm not ready to hear this" is honest, putting the onus on me and saying that I can't talk about the archetypes because they're "too magical" just really confuses me. I consider the whole of the Ra material magical, and as I've said multiple times, fittingly on topic with the thread, that I believe that we all make an energetic agreement in session 4 with Ra and Don to not shirk the things we have been told by Ra.

[60.16]At this space/time we may best serve you, we believe, by stating that the pyramid for meditation along with other rounded and arched or pointed circular shapes is of help to you. However, it is our observation that due to the complexity of influences upon the unmanifested being at this space/time nexus among your planetary peoples it is best that the progress of the mind/body/spirit complex take place without, as you call them, training aids because when using a training aid an entity then takes upon itself the Law of Responsibility for the quickened or increased rate of learn/teaching. If this greater understanding, if we may use this misnomer, is not put into practice in the moment by moment experience of the entity, then the usefulness of the training aid becomes negative.

This is the Law of Responsibility. The Law of One tomes as a whole would be considered such a training aid, that facilitates a quickened or increased rate of learn/teaching. Either you want to study and PRACTICE the Law of One, or you don't. There are way more instances than what has already been posted of Ra saying that you must teach what you learn or that you suffer consequences. You can't just come here for social interaction, we all have a responsibility to go forward with what we have learned with this philosophy - if it's not for you, that's totally cool, but I believe you have to walk away. There isn't a line drawn where you say, "Oh, what Ra says about the chakras is okay, but the archetypes are too magical to talk about". And you cannot say that I am forcing you to do anything. You have literally clicked on a thread titled The Law of Responsibility. I think there are a lot of lessons to be learned, here.

Let's try to work with this fear of the archetypes. Why is everyone so afraid? Is it because they sense the increased responsibility more keenly? The way Ra gives us the archetypes are as a means of learning how to use the subconscious mind, and therefore develop our intuition. They ask us to individually, each take the pictures and look at them and create some reference points to the symbology. Presumably, everyone who has read book 4 has already begun this work. When I post the images of two tarot cards after a long rant from an old Russian philosopher, I really thought I couldn't be more protective of others' free will. It was a nudge to the subconscious to give a *very very slight* increased understanding of what the energies mean - for anyone brave enough to drudge through some Tolstoy. There are a lot of steps that one must willingly take on their own, without any coercion on my part. Really, I really do just want to teach what I have learned, as my study of the archetypes has given me a much increased understanding of the nature of catalyst and how to process it. I sincerely believed that everyone who was here was seeking the same increasing clarity.

Everyone says they want more channeled Ra material, but there is so much to study and learn yet from what has been given to us. The archetypes aren't scary in and of themselves, the whole of the material is magical and carries with it responsibility. The ironic part of everyone's fear of the archetypes is that Ra says that there is more protection, the more one consciously polarizes. It's the random catalyst of the sinkhole that's actually scary!

92.31 Questioner: Were the grapes depicted upon the cloth covering the shoulder of the Priestess of Ra’s communication?

Ra: I am Ra. Yes.

92.32 Questioner: We have taken those as indicating the fertility of the subconscious mind. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct, O student, but note ye the function of the mantle. There is great protection given by the very character of potentiation. To bear fruit is a protected activity.

92.33 Questioner: The protection here seems to be depicted as being on the right-hand side but not the left. Would this indicate greater protection for the positive path than the negative?

Ra: I am Ra. You perceive correctly an inborn bias offering to the seeing eye and listing ear information concerning the choice of the more efficient polarity. We would at this time, as you may call it, suggest one more full query.

95.24 Questioner: From that statement I interpret the following meaning: That if the Experience of the Mind has sufficiently chosen the right-hand path, as total purity is approached in choosing of the right-hand path, then total imperviousness from the effect of the left-hand catalyst is also approached. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is exquisitely perceptive. The seeker which has purely chosen the service-to-others path shall certainly not have a variant apparent incarnational experience. There is no outward shelter in your illusion from the gusts, flurries, and blizzards of quick and cruel catalyst.

However, to the pure, all that is encountered speaks of the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator. The cruelest blow is seen with an ambiance of challenges offered and opportunities to come. Thusly, the great pitch of light is held high above such an one so that all interpretation may be seen to be protected by light.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Mostly to learn about ideas within the Law of One.  My study of the Law of One took me down a dark path when I got into the archetypes, they're not the important parts of the Law of One to me, the discovery of this mysterious Love and Unity are what's important to me.  As I understood it, the archetypes are advanced study to accelerate polarization by seeing the underlying themes of lessons and working with and through them.  I'm not into that, I see patterns in reality enough as it is, taking up the archetypes deeply was too much for me, hence I take Ra's humble advice, and discarded whatever importance I thought I saw in the archetypes because it was clear I was not ready for them.

I seriously am not trying to guilt trip you, I'm just trying to point out what Sprout was getting at that you seemed to misunderstand his intent, as you do mine.  I only intended to point that out alongside with a personal point to support what he was trying to get at.

By all means, don't stop, continue as you have been, there was nothing wrong with trying to help, just please see that, and know that not everyone is capable of healthfully studying the archetypes so when they say so, maybe listen to their soul declining the offer, instead of questioning it.

Be as you will, Jade, and maybe when we're on the same level as you, we'll seek out your knowledge, for now, some accept it, others are wary of taking up such a study.  Ra gave warnings, I heed to them for they provided such warnings out of care, not to instill fear, but to tell us that these are powerful concepts and misuse of them will come with serious consequences.

In my experience this was true, however, I like to think of myself as a minority in those experiences so I say do not stop, Jade.  Be as you will, just hear when someone declines your offers of such advanced understandings, to reject that declinement may become infringing, that's all Sprout was providing you warning of.  No guilt intended, no ill desire, just a want to point out something to you that was felt or noticed.

No worries though Jade, it's easy to see a misunderstanding here, just know I meant no intent to guilt you.

[Sacred Fool]

[quote pid='237469' dateline='1514049275']

Hi, Jade.

Reading your thoughts, as it were, brings to mind Ra's comment on Martin Luther King, saying, as I recall, that he was more focused on third ray, not fourth ray issues: that is, on social responsibility, not spiritual responsibility.  Granted that these two can be inter-twined, I'm wondering how you view the emphasis of your (and Leo's) commitments.  Do you view them as working more on a social or on a spiritual level?  Do they appear more yellow or more green, so to speak?

I'm not surprised you are reminded of MLK, as he was very heavily influenced by Tolstoy! But, I don't see what you are referring to as far as what you seem to remember. This is the only quote about MLK that I know of that Ra made:

34.9 Questioner: Thank you. Would you give me the same type of information about the self in relation to the societal self?

Ra: I am Ra. The unmanifested self may find its lessons those which develop any of the energy influx centers of the mind/body/spirit complex. The societal and self interactions most often concentrate upon the second and third energy centers. Thus those most active in attempting to remake or alter the society are those working from feelings of being correct personally or of having answers which will put power in a more correct configuration. This may be seen to be of a full travel from negative to positive in orientation. Either will activate these energy ray centers.

There are some few whose desires to aid society are of a green-ray nature or above. These entities, however, are few due to the understanding, may we say, of fourth ray that universal love freely given is more to be desired than principalities or even the rearrangement of peoples or political structures.

34.10 Questioner: If an entity were to be strongly biased toward positive societal effects, what would this do to his yellow ray in the aura as opposed to an entity who wanted to create an empire of society and govern it with an iron fist? What would be the difference in the yellow-ray activity of these two entities?

Ra: I am Ra. Let us take two such positively oriented active souls no longer in your physical time/space. The one known as Albert, who went into a strange and, to it, a barbaric society in order that it might heal. This entity was able to mobilize great amounts of energy and what you call money. This entity spent much green-ray energy both as a healer and as a lover of your instrument known as the organ. This entity’s yellow ray was bright and crystallized by the efforts needed to procure the funds to promulgate its efforts. However, the green and blue rays were of a toweringly brilliant nature as well. The higher levels, as you may call them, being activated, the lower, as you may call them, energy points remain, in a balanced being, quite, quite bright.

The other example is the entity, Martin. This entity dealt in a great degree with rather negative orange-ray and yellow-ray vibratory patterns. However, this entity was able to keep open the green-ray energy and due to the severity of its testing, if anything, this entity may be seen to have polarized more towards the positive due to its fidelity to service to others in the face of great catalyst.

(I added the previous quote for context in the discussion as well)

Being that Tolstoy was an anarchist, I don't think he believed that rearranging social structures was the answer to our problems, quite the contrary. He believed that each individual person taking responsibility for nonviolence and total selflessness towards others (turn the other cheek) was what would transform society.

I think we incarnated to work with the yellow-ray sphere, directly, hence this is part of our honor/responsibility, since the yellow ray sphere of this planet is severely distorted. I do not see the yellow ray as less spiritual. The yellow ray must be functioning properly for the green ray to be activated, work that still is in progress on this planet.

I'm happy to further elaborate if this doesn't clarify your question!

My understanding of the Law of Responsibility is that when we know better, we should do better.


As far as Greta, Ra uses some weird wording, but basically what they are saying is that the closer that one gets the purity, the more care they have to take with being pure. If you stand close to the light, and then get lazy about it, your Higher self will give you catalyst/lessons/"workings" (which seems to refer to a negative greeting) that give you the catalyst to either return to a higher form of loving nature, or continue basically to be mean to others/the self. Ra goes on to say that this is the value of others who reflect negative internal states: So that we can see ourselves in our negativity, and adjust/correct. Otherwise, if you start to slip too much to "the dark side", you will surround yourself with sycophants who never challenge you, and avoid those who do, and then you lose that ability to check yourself.

Sorry I wasn't more clear about this.  What first struck me about the MLK passage was that I had theretofore considered him an exemplar of righteousness and was surprised to see him get a relatively poor "report card," especially next to Schweitzer whom I had regarded in the same way.  Pondering this led me to look more deeply into what I might suppose was their doing and their being.  It may be that, his prodigious doings aside, Schweitzer put more emphasis on the positive functioning of his energy system by giving concerts of J. S. Bach's music (for fundraising), many years of medical missionary work in Gabon and endeavoring to persuade his fellow Europeans to behave better towards those whom they have colonized.  Whereas King championed high ideals, he was also involved in numerous sexual affairs which may have had a negative aspect and was constantly working against difficult social catalyst, both within his ranks as well as that offered by his opposition.

What I'm trying to posit here is that their being had a lot more to do with their spiritual outcomes than their doings.  And so, when I look at Tolstoy's thoughts and your own account of your actions, I see more emphasis on positive doing than on the being aspect.  I see an emphasis on physical outcome rather than the heart or throat centered response--if it's even possible to see such things.

Well, what's the difference if the actions are positive, I'm wondering?  It would seem that developing dependable fluidity and balance in the lower energy centers so that more energy is available to respond to catalyst from the higher centers is more significant than worrying about responsibility in terms of do's and don't's, in terms of what appears true or false.  Or maybe it's not that simple?  But congruency of being seems more important than congruency of action, yes?  No?  At what point does focusing upon this distinction really matter?

[/quote]
Aside:  It's very interesting to see in the MLK passage that a person can polarize both negatively and positively in a single lifetime.
 

[Jade]

I guess this is what Tolstoy talks about when he talks about hypocrisy. Yes, of course, ultimately, "being" is more important than "doing", but if what we "do" is counter to how we want to "be", our "pure being" is undone by what we do.

The whole of our planet is sick and in danger of being annihilated. Of course, Ra tells us this won't happen, which I think puts people into a bit of complacency. The fact is, when you buy something today, you are almost undoubtedly supporting slavery. Say I go and buy a new dress for $10, and the tag says "Made in Indonesia" or some other small country whose labor supplies our goods. I know, from watching a documentary, that those who make our clothing are literal slaves. I don't need the dress, I just want it. How does this effect my being? Are we really free to continue to contribute to slavery, to buy products made from the SLAVE LABOR of others, while we live in relative extravagance? Do you think when we look back on this lifetime, we will say, "Oh yes, look at me, I kept my balance while I consumed all that I desired from those who are oppressed, I was a beacon of light!"

Or, do we want to look at our incarnations, and see the comforts we SACRIFICED (not mentioned by Ra very often but a very important part of the service to others path) for the greater good?

Ra teaches the integration of mind/body/spirit. Ra says that the spirit must be "fructified" and released into conscious manifestation, lest the bird is never free from its cage. I think SO MANY "nonduality" teachers these days teach that one must rise above the body, that "being" is seperate from "doing". But being is not separate from doing, unless you are living in a cave like a monk, not engaging with others in any way. If you are engaging with others, including buying goods that were made with the labor of others, you have a responsibility with your "doing".

So yes, being > doing, but doing can totally mess up your state of being without you even realizing it. I think this is what Ra means when they talk about unconsciously polarizing negative if one is not diligent. Separating the mind and body (being and doing) is the negative path. Integrating the two so that they harmonize is the positive path, to the best of my understanding.

As far as the chakras go, Ra also says that the throat chakra will always have blockage until the heart chakra is completely unblocked. I think that requires a lot of -sacrifice- of one's being, yes even martyrdom - giving up some creature comforts, out of compassion for those who are enslaved because of our demand for an easy existence. I feel like talking about these things, sharing truth in the face of hypocrisy, putting light onto lies - I believe this is the function of the blue-ray, while incarnate in third density. Moving the energies, with understanding, through the chakras and into the blue ray. Now, my heart chakra is certainly not fully unblocked, so my blue ray is faulty for sure, but in my estimation I am articulating shrouded yellow-ray concepts with the blue-ray. If you think that what I am doing here, speaking out, "rearranging peoples" or whatever is hypocritical, then we all need to abstain from communicating with each other!!! But to the best of my understanding, we cannot abstain from "doing", so we still have a responsibility with our "doing", even if our "being" is quite bright and pure.

I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

So, I feel that at this time, with so much advertisement and fake news and brainwashing and all of the constant attempts to mislead people, that to attempt to speak through all the falsities is a necessary service.

The patterns of activation of an entity of high seniority will undoubtedly move with some rapidity to the green-ray level which is the springboard to primary blue. There is always some difficulty in penetrating blue primary energy for it requires that which your people have in great paucity; that is, honesty. Blue ray is the ray of free communication with self and with other-self. Having accepted that an harvestable or nearly harvestable entity will be working from this green-ray springboard one may then posit that the experiences in the remainder of the incarnation will be focused upon activation of the primary blue ray of freely given communication, of indigo ray, that of freely shared intelligent energy, and if possible, moving through this gateway, the penetration of violet-ray intelligent infinity. This may be seen to be manifested by a sense of the consecrate or hallowed nature of everyday creations and activities.

Ra says we must teach what we learn, which I interpret to literally mean, we must act informed with our being. Perfect discussion for the thread peregrine, thank you. I think our responsibility is to act better once we know better. If it became widely known that Herbal Essences shampoo had a toxic element that started making people's pet dogs drop dead, you'd bet that most people would quit using that shampoo, of their own volition - regardless of whether or not Herbal Essences bans the compound as an entity. To say that your being can override the doing of the shampoo MAY BE ACCURATE, for those who are extremely magical and HAVE risen above the confines of the body. But I believe one must learn to work within the confines of the body before they can supersede it, and I'm sorry but I don't think anyone here has those powers on a large scale. Here is where I would post an image of the Experience of the Body, where we have a woman who is stroking the lion with her right hand but choking it with her left. How do we see physical reality - as something to oppress? Or repress? To force ourselves onto? Or something to cooperate with, to grow with. To see all other beings and this planet as an extension of ourselves, and only wish upon them that which we wish for ourselves - and avoiding those things that we do not wish for ourselves, even if it is in our estimation that others have "incarnated for those lessons". We incarnated for the lesson of standing up for love and unity in the face of separation. If you think I am doing that wrong, I would be especially appreciative of any more feedback you have.

[Minyatur]

@Peregrine

I think you said about being vs doing was spot on. Actions are an extension of being, radiance is the consequence of fulness and service is natural to what feels well and whole. The problem with a focus upon doing is that it seems to induce into others a need to achieve much to gain a worth they initially are without, that their effect upon the outer world is the meter of judgment and worth against them. On the other end, a focus upon being focuses upon the inner balance which allows an healthier relationship with both the self and the world, then radiance comes naturally without needing to be necessarily sought and with a greater purity when it comes naturally. e.g. Music made by people who do what they do because music is their passion and drive to manifest, will be better than music made by people whose focus is merely to provide something to many people and picked music to achieve that.  

I think like with catalysts, the Law of Responsibility works merely with what you feel and the balance of it together. Balancing your thoughts and emotions is your responsibility, your honor/duty, and when it comes into balance then you naturally radiate without thought and have something to focus through your thoughts also.

If I had a single thing I could offer everyone in this world, it'd be the sight that they are whole and complete and without anything to achieve to be of worth. I think if everyone came to feel this without resistance, then we'd see a lot of the ills of this world fall away as they are no longer needed and positive transformation would naturally start occuring.

---

@CA

I have to admit I initially thought you were a bit intense at labelling the archetypes as dangerous and in that I am sorry because it was a dismissal of your experience with them.

Thinking further about it, I thought maybe it is not the basic concept of the archetypes that you found dangerous, that is : matrix, potentiator, catalyst, experience, significator, transformation and great ways, and instead the colored take at them offered, because it imposes the color of others' significators which you can not resonate with, instead of finding your own way to color them, which is completely needed to integrate them. I don't doubt there are many here who may be of Ra and may find in this coloration their own, but I don't think this would be the case with just anyone. A focus upon using them for balance might be more helpful than a focus upon polarity, as once balanced polarity will come naturally.

I had my own resistance to reading about the archetypes in the material and that was not because I wasn't interested, just that I felt intuitively it is much more powerful soul-wise to discover them through your own learning. I did come back to it searching a lot but only when I felt limited in my contemplations of what each position symbolizes.

On a more general note, I think not everyone is lead to the material for the same reasons, not everyone who finds it is meant to walk the adept's path and I think no two person here who takes this path can walk the same path. So in any case of resistances, be it someone that doesn't want to learn about the archetypes or a hurt soul that is not ready to hear about the mechanics of healing, in both cases the ego will try to justify itself as right and will attempt to dismantle the resistance in the other, while the heart is merely to acknowledge the resistance. Learning only occurs when one is open to it and attempting to force a learning has merely potential to back fire into providing teaching to the self.

[Sacred Fool]

I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

So, I feel that at this time, with so much advertisement and fake news and brainwashing and all of the constant attempts to mislead people, that to attempt to speak through all the falsities is a necessary service.

When it comes to free expression to self and others, Jade, I think you're doing quite well.  <smiling emoji-thingy>


I don't take issue with any of your stated points, and yet....something feels displaced, not quite on center....if you don't mind my saying so.  (Maybe I should give you a tarot reading to help elucidate this, eh?  JUST KIDDING!  That's not my style.)

I'm just going to take a shot in the dark, if that's okay.  I feel that the subject of your rant--stroking, not strangling the beast--comes from your heart, but that the delivery of the message has a rather strong grip, so to speak.  Put another way, your passion seems derivative of your own sense of your being's response to planetary peril, but your delivery doesn't feel like it's riding on that same inner stream of love.  It seems to have elements of self-protection in it which are most likely unintended.  Just to give an example, when CA objected to your bringing the archetypes into this discussion (a curious objection), your reply felt to me self-defensive rather than open-hearted in such a way as to acknowledge his concern while encompassing that within a larger frame of thought.  I wouldn't say your hand was on his throat, but I doubt he received much warmth from that incident in the over all interaction.

I'm not trying to over-scrutinize your behavior, but I want to compare that to the examples of King and Schweitzer.  I fully expect that King lived in a much more trying social milieu and, consequently, probably had many more unconscious leanings towards self-protection.  And it may well have been this reflexive self-protection which contributed to his having polarized much less positively than he would have liked in a positive manner. 

I can say that is the case for me right now.  It happens frequently that I look at myself not approaching a person or a situation with an open heart and I quickly see that I am trying to protect myself from.....  Well, that's where it gets interesting...and time consuming!  But I just want to be clear that I'm trying to wheedle a thin shaft of light down into this dark space to possibly benefit us both.  Letting go of a sense of safety seems fundamentally foolish on the gut level and so it is a very sensitive thing to speak to.  I hope I wasn't too strong-handed with you in this missive.

 

[Sacred Fool]

On the other end, a focus upon being focuses upon the inner balance which allows an healthier relationship with both the self and the world, then radiance comes naturally without needing to be necessarily sought and with a greater purity when it comes naturally. e.g. Music made by people who do what they do because music is their passion and drive to manifest, will be better than music made by people whose focus is merely to provide something to many people and picked music to achieve that. 

Yes, I think it's like sex: the germ of it comes naturally, but to be driven by passion on a long term basis requires additional creativity and a special degree of personal freedom, that is, freedom which is unafraid to give and to receive.  Nice work, if you can get it.....

 

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Elros I am admittedly an intense person...  I don't intend to put people off of the archetypes, only to reinforce the idea of handling them with a responsible discipline, or holding off on their intensive integrative study.

I still look at them and find inspiration through them, but I don't dare try to manifest them more clearly into my life.

However, maybe one day I will, when I'm ready.

No worries, just be cautious and safe everyone.

[Jade]

I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

So, I feel that at this time, with so much advertisement and fake news and brainwashing and all of the constant attempts to mislead people, that to attempt to speak through all the falsities is a necessary service.

When it comes to free expression to self and others, Jade, I think you're doing quite well.  <smiling emoji-thingy>

I don't take issue with any of your stated points, and yet....something feels displaced, not quite on center....if you don't mind my saying so.  (Maybe I should give you a tarot reading to help elucidate this, eh?  JUST KIDDING!  That's not my style.)

I'm just going to take a shot in the dark, if that's okay.  I feel that the subject of your rant--stroking, not strangling the beast--comes from your heart, but that the delivery of the message has a rather strong grip, so to speak.  Put another way, your passion seems derivative of your own sense of your being's response to planetary peril, but your delivery doesn't feel like it's riding on that same inner stream of love.  It seems to have elements of self-protection in it which are most likely unintended.  Just to give an example, when CA objected to your bringing the archetypes into this discussion (a curious objection), your reply felt to me self-defensive rather than open-hearted in such a way as to acknowledge his concern while encompassing that within a larger frame of thought.  I wouldn't say your hand was on his throat, but I doubt he received much warmth from that incident in the over all interaction.

I'm not trying to over-scrutinize your behavior, but I want to compare that to the examples of King and Schweitzer.  I fully expect that King lived in a much more trying social milieu and, consequently, probably had many more unconscious leanings towards self-protection.  And it may well have been this reflexive self-protection which contributed to his having polarized much less positively than he would have liked in a positive manner. 

I can say that is the case for me right now.  It happens frequently that I look at myself not approaching a person or a situation with an open heart and I quickly see that I am trying to protect myself from.....  Well, that's where it gets interesting...and time consuming!  But I just want to be clear that I'm trying to wheedle a thin shaft of light down into this dark space to possibly benefit us both.  Letting go of a sense of safety seems fundamentally foolish on the gut level and so it is a very sensitive thing to speak to.  I hope I wasn't too strong-handed with you in this missive.

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances. The reason I didn't give much legitimacy to the claims about my discussion of the tarot bothering people, is because I felt like its genesis was a place of misunderstanding (Sprout thought I was giving them a personal tarot reading). I felt that once I clarified that I was using the Law of One tarot archetypes in a discussion, on the Strictly Law of One forum, that there wasn't much else to address. I have spent a lot of time and energy tending to C_A, on the forums and in PMs, so criticizing me for showing a minor lack of patience for what I felt like was a non-issue in the grand scheme of things is quite hurtful, actually.

In fact, while I don't think you are too strong-handed, I think there is something a little "off", as it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME, and HOW I have conveyed the message I have to convey, instead of what I have said. I know what I have said isn't the easiest message to hear, and probably hits people a little personally, so I guess I can understand why I'm experiencing personal attacks as a response to what I have had to say.

I have a feeling that if you approached MLK and told him that he was "ranting" in the wrong way, that you might feel the protective bubble that he puts around himself as well, as we all have it.

As it stands, being a moderator of a forum that is 90% male and has posters who openly call themselves misogynists with very little challenge to that extremely polarized point of view, yes, I do have some walls built up. I have had some pretty terrible things said to me in passing on these forum throughout the years, I'd say more than the average poster or moderator even. Someday, I hope to be so foolish as to not have these walls, but I have never claimed to be anywhere near the end of my journey, just at some point along the path. As you mentioned, it takes a lot of time! What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit. I fully admit that. So, what other personal failings do I have to admit before we can get on with the conversation at hand?

[Diana]

I have had some pretty terrible things said to me in passing on these forum throughout the years, I'd say more than the average poster or moderator even. Someday, I hope to be so foolish as to not have these walls, but I have never claimed to be anywhere near the end of my journey, just at some point along the path. As you mentioned, it takes a lot of time! What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit. I fully admit that. So, what other personal failings do I have to admit before we can get on with the conversation at hand?

Your efforts certainly ARE welcome here (though I know your statement was in response to a particular instance).

We are not responsible for the reactions of others. Your kindness and caring are most evident, Jade, as well as your intelligence and knowledge of the LOO material. I understand the hurt. I always think I'm so detached, and for the most part I am, and then some unexpected barb will make me close up like an injured flower. The good thing is it's temporary, since the bigger picture inserts itself and such drama looses significance.

[CurtisUSA]

I have had some pretty terrible things said to me in passing on these forum throughout the years, I'd say more than the average poster or moderator even. Someday, I hope to be so foolish as to not have these walls, but I have never claimed to be anywhere near the end of my journey, just at some point along the path. As you mentioned, it takes a lot of time! What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit. I fully admit that. So, what other personal failings do I have to admit before we can get on with the conversation at hand?

Your efforts certainly ARE welcome here (though I know your statement was in response to a particular instance).

We are not responsible for the reactions of others. Your kindness and caring are most evident, Jade, as well as your intelligence and knowledge of the LOO material. I understand the hurt. I always think I'm so detached, and for the most part I am, and then some unexpected barb will make me close up like an injured flower. The good thing is it's temporary, since the bigger picture inserts itself and such drama looses significance.

As a long time lurker and someone who rarely posts, I appreciate the time and effort so many you put into takin time to regularily post. Thru the years Ive extracted many good insights from so many of you.

[Minyatur]

What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach.

What would teach/learning be without feedback? I think it's the image constructs themselves that may hold a powerful effect upon highly sensitive people.

Btw I dont think your method was wrong, just that there's an effected reaction to be acknowledged and contemplated. Now, I think, you have 2 people (or perhaps just 1) to not do this with and much more potentials people interested in co-learning the archetypes.

[Coordinate_Apotheosis]

Okay then, maybe I should be more responsible about whom I try to be honest with...

[rva_jeremy]

What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit.

Jade, I want to first say that I find your analysis of the archetypes quite valuable.  Specifically, I think you are a voice crying in the wilderness on important concepts like the feminine archetype that are extremely sensitive to talk to about.  They speak to some of the most fraught patterns of thought in our complex.  Heck, they speak to some of my most abject distortions.  

It's most uncomfortable to hear when it cuts closest to my fears, hangups, and frankly just the nasty side of me--and it can be tough to afford those ideas the appreciation that they are richly due.  You would be wrong to interpret all resistance to your insights as evidence of a misstep.  In these particular matters, I think you should rather interpret the resistance as evidence that you're hitting lots of nails on their head.  That must be frustrating!

It's something that prevents me from doing much public, conversational analysis of archetypes with others.  Because they go to the root of our thinking and the identities and ids we build around that thinking, one should expect any extended analysis of archetypes, especially involving any other person, to get personal, and quickly at that.  I think this is why those of Ra have always stressed a personal, intimate interpretation of the archetypes: it's hard enough to be naked in front of oneself, let alone others.

Yet it's clear to me that we all need a "boost" to get to the point where we are having personal resonances of the archetypes with which we can work.  We need some sort of guidance to decode the parameters with which we can make interpretations.  Indeed, those of Ra invited this sharing of Don's musings with readers and guided Don when his "subjective" interpretations were off.  So it's not entirely personal; it does benefit from some sort of discussion.

I don't know how to thread that needle between what lends itself to discussion and what lends itself to solitude.  But I do know that it's a difficult thing you're attempting to do, and when we're in a discussion like this, all parties ought to be extremely mindful that the subject of archetypes is a hall of freaking mirrors.  There is nothing more "meta", and it surprises me little that the way it is discussed would become the subject.

Anyway, your insight is appreciated, and I think perhaps all that is needed in addition is just an understanding that this is sensitive and personal, so that we can help each other navigate the channel.

[rva_jeremy]

Okay then, maybe I should be more responsible about whom I try to be honest with...

This is wise.  Once you put it out there, what reflects back to you is not always up to you.  But also, don't assume that something painful is necessarily an attack.  Growth hurts.  That doesn't mean you are wrong to slow down the growth; only that the people pointing to the things that are painful are not your enemy.

[Quan]

I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

So, I feel that at this time, with so much advertisement and fake news and brainwashing and all of the constant attempts to mislead people, that to attempt to speak through all the falsities is a necessary service.

When it comes to free expression to self and others, Jade, I think you're doing quite well.  <smiling emoji-thingy>

I don't take issue with any of your stated points, and yet....something feels displaced, not quite on center....if you don't mind my saying so.  (Maybe I should give you a tarot reading to help elucidate this, eh?  JUST KIDDING!  That's not my style.)

I'm just going to take a shot in the dark, if that's okay.  I feel that the subject of your rant--stroking, not strangling the beast--comes from your heart, but that the delivery of the message has a rather strong grip, so to speak.  Put another way, your passion seems derivative of your own sense of your being's response to planetary peril, but your delivery doesn't feel like it's riding on that same inner stream of love.  It seems to have elements of self-protection in it which are most likely unintended.  Just to give an example, when CA objected to your bringing the archetypes into this discussion (a curious objection), your reply felt to me self-defensive rather than open-hearted in such a way as to acknowledge his concern while encompassing that within a larger frame of thought.  I wouldn't say your hand was on his throat, but I doubt he received much warmth from that incident in the over all interaction.

I'm not trying to over-scrutinize your behavior, but I want to compare that to the examples of King and Schweitzer.  I fully expect that King lived in a much more trying social milieu and, consequently, probably had many more unconscious leanings towards self-protection.  And it may well have been this reflexive self-protection which contributed to his having polarized much less positively than he would have liked in a positive manner. 

I can say that is the case for me right now.  It happens frequently that I look at myself not approaching a person or a situation with an open heart and I quickly see that I am trying to protect myself from.....  Well, that's where it gets interesting...and time consuming!  But I just want to be clear that I'm trying to wheedle a thin shaft of light down into this dark space to possibly benefit us both.  Letting go of a sense of safety seems fundamentally foolish on the gut level and so it is a very sensitive thing to speak to.  I hope I wasn't too strong-handed with you in this missive.

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances. The reason I didn't give much legitimacy to the claims about my discussion of the tarot bothering people, is because I felt like its genesis was a place of misunderstanding (Sprout thought I was giving them a personal tarot reading). I felt that once I clarified that I was using the Law of One tarot archetypes in a discussion, on the Strictly Law of One forum, that there wasn't much else to address. I have spent a lot of time and energy tending to C_A, on the forums and in PMs, so criticizing me for showing a minor lack of patience for what I felt like was a non-issue in the grand scheme of things is quite hurtful, actually.

In fact, while I don't think you are too strong-handed, I think there is something a little "off", as it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME, and HOW I have conveyed the message I have to convey, instead of what I have said. I know what I have said isn't the easiest message to hear, and probably hits people a little personally, so I guess I can understand why I'm experiencing personal attacks as a response to what I have had to say.

I have a feeling that if you approached MLK and told him that he was "ranting" in the wrong way, that you might feel the protective bubble that he puts around himself as well, as we all have it.

As it stands, being a moderator of a forum that is 90% male and has posters who openly call themselves misogynists with very little challenge to that extremely polarized point of view, yes, I do have some walls built up. I have had some pretty terrible things said to me in passing on these forum throughout the years, I'd say more than the average poster or moderator even. Someday, I hope to be so foolish as to not have these walls, but I have never claimed to be anywhere near the end of my journey, just at some point along the path. As you mentioned, it takes a lot of time! What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit. I fully admit that. So, what other personal failings do I have to admit before we can get on with the conversation at hand?

 Wow 90% male really? I never realised, Is that overal members or more in people participating in posts?
Well either way diversity is great especially on forums to have a range of viewpoints and opinions, more the better. All females im especially grateful, Bring some balance to bring4th, mind the pun!  The work that you are doing and time is especially challenging being a moderator too, so really appreciate it We are all bozos on the bus as Carla used to say or something like that

[Sacred Fool]

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances.

No, no: I have no grievance with you, Jade.  I was just trying to string together some loosely related ideas in to a clumsy garland of mirrors for you, if you will.

...it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME....

Yes, naturally.  After all, this is a thread about responsibility and of all of us chattering here, by far, you have taken upon yourself the most responsibility for upholding this website.  And as more responsibility is taken on, more catalyst arrives therefrom, no?   It is definitely not an "honor/duty" for the faint of heart, and I echo the gratitude others have expressed for your stepping into the ring and engaging in a round of doing this work.

As far as the chakras go, Ra also says that the throat chakra will always have blockage until the heart chakra is completely unblocked. I think that requires a lot of -sacrifice- of one's being, yes even martyrdom - giving up some creature comforts, out of compassion for those who are enslaved because of our demand for an easy existence. I feel like talking about these things, sharing truth in the face of hypocrisy, putting light onto lies - I believe this is the function of the blue-ray, while incarnate in third density. Moving the energies, with understanding, through the chakras and into the blue ray. Now, my heart chakra is certainly not fully unblocked, so my blue ray is faulty for sure, but in my estimation I am articulating shrouded yellow-ray concepts with the blue-ray. If you think that what I am doing here, speaking out, "rearranging peoples" or whatever is hypocritical, then we all need to abstain from communicating with each other!!!  But to the best of my understanding, we cannot abstain from "doing", so we still have a responsibility with our "doing", even if our "being" is [not] quite bright and pure.


I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

If you won't mind, I would respond to the above emboldened statement to say that what's required is not a giving up of self--in fact, it's a deeper discovery of self--but an unclenching of templates of self as imagined by consciousness in the lower energy centers and tacitly accepted as the limits of self-definition when, to the contrary, templates within the heart are much warmer and expansive and simply wonderful.  It's the version of life from the perspective of energy centers 2 & 3 that stresses separation and the need for self-defensiveness.  One may perform acts of service while arranged in that posture, but the radiance, the beauty, is far less than when performed from a place of the simplest recognition of Divinity.  This may be what gave Schweitzer a more radiant energetic profile, that more of his work was done with a recognition of the Divinity within others.

So, why am I hammering you with this now, you may be wondering?  It's because I witnessed you do this very thing so beautifully 15 months ago at the conclusion of the Homecoming 2016, and I just wanted to remind you of it.   At that time you addressed all individually while clearly being informed and propelled by a very resonant place within the heart of your being.  I've recently been going through stages of my own heart coming into better alignment with my deeper being, and I felt moved to offer you some encouragement and support.  After several drafts, I see that maybe what I was trying to express is that, as you plow through your doings, service offered from that "resonant place within the heart of your being" is maybe more fun than when offering the same from a place of strife and struggle?  Nice work, if you can get it, eh?

 

[unity100]

With all the emotionally charged tangential discussions you are branching to, let us remember:

Law of Responsibility is the most important law for the adept, for without the entity putting into practice what it understood, the next stage will not materialize.

[hounsic]

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances.

No, no: I have no grievance with you, Jade.  I was just trying to string together some loosely related ideas in to a clumsy garland of mirrors for you, if you will.

...it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME....

Yes, naturally.  After all, this is a thread about responsibility and of all of us chattering here, by far, you have taken upon yourself the most responsibility for upholding this website.  And as more responsibility is taken on, more catalyst arrives therefrom, no?   It is definitely not an "honor/duty" for the faint of heart, and I echo the gratitude others have expressed for your stepping into the ring and engaging in a round of doing this work.

As far as the chakras go, Ra also says that the throat chakra will always have blockage until the heart chakra is completely unblocked. I think that requires a lot of -sacrifice- of one's being, yes even martyrdom - giving up some creature comforts, out of compassion for those who are enslaved because of our demand for an easy existence. I feel like talking about these things, sharing truth in the face of hypocrisy, putting light onto lies - I believe this is the function of the blue-ray, while incarnate in third density. Moving the energies, with understanding, through the chakras and into the blue ray. Now, my heart chakra is certainly not fully unblocked, so my blue ray is faulty for sure, but in my estimation I am articulating shrouded yellow-ray concepts with the blue-ray. If you think that what I am doing here, speaking out, "rearranging peoples" or whatever is hypocritical, then we all need to abstain from communicating with each other!!!  But to the best of my understanding, we cannot abstain from "doing", so we still have a responsibility with our "doing", even if our "being" is [not] quite bright and pure.


I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

If you won't mind, I would respond to the above emboldened statement to say that what's required is not a giving up of self--in fact, it's a deeper discovery of self--but an unclenching of templates of self as imagined by consciousness in the lower energy centers and tacitly accepted as the limits of self-definition when, to the contrary, templates within the heart are much warmer and expansive and simply wonderful.  It's the version of life from the perspective of energy centers 2 & 3 that stresses separation and the need for self-defensiveness.  One may perform acts of service while arranged in that posture, but the radiance, the beauty, is far less than when performed from a place of the simplest recognition of Divinity.  This may be what gave Schweitzer a more radiant energetic profile, that more of his work was done with a recognition of the Divinity within others.

So, why am I hammering you with this now, you may be wondering?  It's because I witnessed you do this very thing so beautifully 15 months ago at the conclusion of the Homecoming 2016, and I just wanted to remind you of it.   At that time you addressed all individually while clearly being informed and propelled by a very resonant place within the heart of your being.  I've recently been going through stages of my own heart coming into better alignment with my deeper being, and I felt moved to offer you some encouragement and support.  After several drafts, I see that maybe what I was trying to express is that, as you plow through your doings, service offered from that "resonant place within the heart of your being" is maybe more fun than when offering the same from a place of strife and struggle?  Nice work, if you can get it, eh?

 

Thank you, when I read this I felt a lightening of my being. Jade I also want to thank you for all of your contributions and hope to take a more serious look at the archetypes in 2018. I'm sure I will be PM-ing you in the new year.

[Infinite Unity]

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances.

No, no: I have no grievance with you, Jade.  I was just trying to string together some loosely related ideas in to a clumsy garland of mirrors for you, if you will.

...it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME....

Yes, naturally.  After all, this is a thread about responsibility and of all of us chattering here, by far, you have taken upon yourself the most responsibility for upholding this website.  And as more responsibility is taken on, more catalyst arrives therefrom, no?   It is definitely not an "honor/duty" for the faint of heart, and I echo the gratitude others have expressed for your stepping into the ring and engaging in a round of doing this work.

As far as the chakras go, Ra also says that the throat chakra will always have blockage until the heart chakra is completely unblocked. I think that requires a lot of -sacrifice- of one's being, yes even martyrdom - giving up some creature comforts, out of compassion for those who are enslaved because of our demand for an easy existence. I feel like talking about these things, sharing truth in the face of hypocrisy, putting light onto lies - I believe this is the function of the blue-ray, while incarnate in third density. Moving the energies, with understanding, through the chakras and into the blue ray. Now, my heart chakra is certainly not fully unblocked, so my blue ray is faulty for sure, but in my estimation I am articulating shrouded yellow-ray concepts with the blue-ray. If you think that what I am doing here, speaking out, "rearranging peoples" or whatever is hypocritical, then we all need to abstain from communicating with each other!!!  But to the best of my understanding, we cannot abstain from "doing", so we still have a responsibility with our "doing", even if our "being" is [not] quite bright and pure.


I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

If you won't mind, I would respond to the above emboldened statement to say that what's required is not a giving up of self--in fact, it's a deeper discovery of self--but an unclenching of templates of self as imagined by consciousness in the lower energy centers and tacitly accepted as the limits of self-definition when, to the contrary, templates within the heart are much warmer and expansive and simply wonderful.  It's the version of life from the perspective of energy centers 2 & 3 that stresses separation and the need for self-defensiveness.  One may perform acts of service while arranged in that posture, but the radiance, the beauty, is far less than when performed from a place of the simplest recognition of Divinity.  This may be what gave Schweitzer a more radiant energetic profile, that more of his work was done with a recognition of the Divinity within others.

So, why am I hammering you with this now, you may be wondering?  It's because I witnessed you do this very thing so beautifully 15 months ago at the conclusion of the Homecoming 2016, and I just wanted to remind you of it.   At that time you addressed all individually while clearly being informed and propelled by a very resonant place within the heart of your being.  I've recently been going through stages of my own heart coming into better alignment with my deeper being, and I felt moved to offer you some encouragement and support.  After several drafts, I see that maybe what I was trying to express is that, as you plow through your doings, service offered from that "resonant place within the heart of your being" is maybe more fun than when offering the same from a place of strife and struggle?  Nice work, if you can get it, eh?

 

Thank you, when I read this I felt a lightening of my being. Jade I also want to thank you for all of your contributions and hope to take a more serious look at the archetypes in 2018. I'm sure I will be PM-ing you in the new year.

I would agree, and even had a dream related to the courting last night. It was as if I were a child, and I was at this house by the sea. And Iived next door and a girl lived in the house beside my own. I remember only being able to visit sometimes, and near the end of the dream I just remember talking to the girls mother, as if I came in the dream as the conversation was finishing up, and I was going to be able to now court the girl. In the last scene. It was as if I were leaving for awhile and was talking to the mother again. No words just transfer of being. Before I left I paused and wanted to reach out to the girl. I felt a slight hesitation, but walked up to the girl!, and poked her flirtishly on the shoulder and asked her what was wrong,and that's where the sense of me leaving really came from. As that pertained to her mood/ behavior toward me. I remember not getting mad and letting her know it was alright.

I draw many conclusions such as my age and giddyness to be symbolic of the long or protracted sense that the relationship will take.

Aldo my response to her at the end resonates to me personally of major life lessons. Or what I should be focusing on.

It was a beautiful dream but I got a probationary sense of sterness, and that I think has to do how I would treat the relationship earlier in the life. I also think her mood at the end had something related with this aspect.

Thank you jade.

[Sprout]

I mean, let's look at your two examples. They obviously had done a lot of DOING, as a service to the yellow-ray sphere. Where would we be without them? Where would we be without those who spoke up for truth in the face of hypocrisy? The idea that this is less spiritual is toxic, I'm sorry peregrine, but that's the best thing I can say about that interpretation of the philosophy. Of course, putting an emphasis on doing OVER being is equally as dangerous to the state of one's energetic balance. But if one uses their being to inform their doing - with lots of meditation and processing of catalyst - they are COMPELLED to serve others, as that is what Ra says that a wide-open indigo ray produces.

So, I feel that at this time, with so much advertisement and fake news and brainwashing and all of the constant attempts to mislead people, that to attempt to speak through all the falsities is a necessary service.

When it comes to free expression to self and others, Jade, I think you're doing quite well.  <smiling emoji-thingy>

I don't take issue with any of your stated points, and yet....something feels displaced, not quite on center....if you don't mind my saying so.  (Maybe I should give you a tarot reading to help elucidate this, eh?  JUST KIDDING!  That's not my style.)

I'm just going to take a shot in the dark, if that's okay.  I feel that the subject of your rant--stroking, not strangling the beast--comes from your heart, but that the delivery of the message has a rather strong grip, so to speak.  Put another way, your passion seems derivative of your own sense of your being's response to planetary peril, but your delivery doesn't feel like it's riding on that same inner stream of love.  It seems to have elements of self-protection in it which are most likely unintended.  Just to give an example, when CA objected to your bringing the archetypes into this discussion (a curious objection), your reply felt to me self-defensive rather than open-hearted in such a way as to acknowledge his concern while encompassing that within a larger frame of thought.  I wouldn't say your hand was on his throat, but I doubt he received much warmth from that incident in the over all interaction.

I'm not trying to over-scrutinize your behavior, but I want to compare that to the examples of King and Schweitzer.  I fully expect that King lived in a much more trying social milieu and, consequently, probably had many more unconscious leanings towards self-protection.  And it may well have been this reflexive self-protection which contributed to his having polarized much less positively than he would have liked in a positive manner. 

I can say that is the case for me right now.  It happens frequently that I look at myself not approaching a person or a situation with an open heart and I quickly see that I am trying to protect myself from.....  Well, that's where it gets interesting...and time consuming!  But I just want to be clear that I'm trying to wheedle a thin shaft of light down into this dark space to possibly benefit us both.  Letting go of a sense of safety seems fundamentally foolish on the gut level and so it is a very sensitive thing to speak to.  I hope I wasn't too strong-handed with you in this missive.

Hi peregrine. I understand your grievances. The reason I didn't give much legitimacy to the claims about my discussion of the tarot bothering people, is because I felt like its genesis was a place of misunderstanding (Sprout thought I was giving them a personal tarot reading). I felt that once I clarified that I was using the Law of One tarot archetypes in a discussion, on the Strictly Law of One forum, that there wasn't much else to address. I have spent a lot of time and energy tending to C_A, on the forums and in PMs, so criticizing me for showing a minor lack of patience for what I felt like was a non-issue in the grand scheme of things is quite hurtful, actually.

In fact, while I don't think you are too strong-handed, I think there is something a little "off", as it seems that most of the criticisms in this thread have been lobbed directly at ME, and HOW I have conveyed the message I have to convey, instead of what I have said. I know what I have said isn't the easiest message to hear, and probably hits people a little personally, so I guess I can understand why I'm experiencing personal attacks as a response to what I have had to say.

I have a feeling that if you approached MLK and told him that he was "ranting" in the wrong way, that you might feel the protective bubble that he puts around himself as well, as we all have it.

As it stands, being a moderator of a forum that is 90% male and has posters who openly call themselves misogynists with very little challenge to that extremely polarized point of view, yes, I do have some walls built up. I have had some pretty terrible things said to me in passing on these forum throughout the years, I'd say more than the average poster or moderator even. Someday, I hope to be so foolish as to not have these walls, but I have never claimed to be anywhere near the end of my journey, just at some point along the path. As you mentioned, it takes a lot of time! What I do know is that I have spent a lot of this thing called time contemplating the archetypes, and meditating upon them, because it was my understanding that it was the most difficult to understand piece of the Ra material, so I wanted to learn so that I could teach. I guess it is a little hard to hear that my efforts are not welcome here, and I took that probably a bit more personally and harshly than I should have, which likely closed my heart chakra a bit. I fully admit that. So, what other personal failings do I have to admit before we can get on with the conversation at hand?

Hey Jade, I apologize again. It really was a misunderstanding, but if we never hear each others hearts and feelings we can never truly walk beside one another. So that is why I expressed myself in such a manner, I was not ready to work with tarot at that specific time and area, therefore I saw myself not being able to continue the discussion. Possibly should've just abstained from replying. But I saw that you made a lot of work regarding the archetypes, and I know that if some day I do decide to take an interest into those then I'd always have that part of service that you gave us. So truly, I am sorry, and I thank you for that, thank you for putting all that time, energy, and pure love to study that essential part of the L/L material.

[Sacred Fool]

With all the emotionally charged tangential discussions you are branching to...

Yes, I wonder if the mods will split this part of the discussion off and make it the "Love for Jade" thread?  We'll just have to wait and see.

...let us remember:

Law of Responsibility is the most important law for the adept, for without the entity putting into practice what it understood, the next stage will not materialize.

Do you really feel that the most important thing for an adept is the materialization of the next stage?  You may not intend this, but it makes it sound like a board game or a computer game where the goal is to move up through the levels as quickly as possible.  To me, this slant on spiritual growth feels heavily inflected by orange and yellow ray concepts of competition and achievement.

I would surmise that, if one were not implicating orange and yellow ray concerns in the matter, and this energy was free to rise upwards to the green and blue zones, that a very important aspect of the Law of Responsibility would appear to be the inter-relationships of all entities and other constructs.  At that point, one would desire to be responsible to the fullest extent, not for personal advancement--in an orange/yellow sense--but because extending the fullest measure of Love to all of Creation would be felt by all aspects of self due to those inter-relationships whereby All are Self and Self is All.

What do you suppose?

 

[unity100]

Do you really feel that the most important thing for an adept is the materialization of the next stage?  You may not intend this, but it makes it sound like a board game or a computer game where the goal is to move up through the levels as quickly as possible.  To me, this slant on spiritual growth feels heavily inflected by orange and yellow ray concepts of competition and achievement.

Leaving aside the next stage can never materialize before current stage is reflected to life, meaning that not obliging with Law of Responsibility will mean that leave aside an adept, but any non-seeking person would have troubles in his/her life as it is, for adepts and

Next stage never materializing before current stage is properly fulfilled would mean that any non seeking person would experience difficulties in his/her life as it is now, leave aside an adept. Law of Responsibility is about the next stage, as it is about the current stage. What the entity is aware of now, must be reflected in its actions here and now.

Beyond that adepts and serious seekers the next stage is important. They are here also to accelerate their spiritual progress. Leaving aside that a wanderer of higher densities could never be content with existing in the status quo without seeking its original vibration.

I would surmise that, if one were not implicating orange and yellow ray concerns in the matter, and this energy was free to rise upwards to the green and blue zones, that a very important aspect of the Law of Responsibility would appear to be the inter-relationships of all entities and other constructs.  At that point, one would desire to be responsible to the fullest extent, not for personal advancement--in an orange/yellow sense--but because extending the fullest measure of Love to all of Creation would be felt by all aspects of self due to those inter-relationships whereby All are Self and Self is All.

What do you suppose?

Its not as simple as it sounds.

The phenomenon of energy flowing up from bottom is what creates entire existence including this planet, society, all the issues, joys, behavior patterns and related blockages and hurdles.

Each energy carry a metaphysical meaning. The green energy wont flow upward without its awareness being incorporated into life, blue energy wont flow upward until its equivalent behavior is fulfilled, and so on. Existence is energetic as it is metaphysical.

[Infinite Unity]

Yes, I wonder if the mods will split this part of the discussion off and make it the "Love for Jade" thread?  We'll just have to wait and see.











Me: What's this statement mean? What energy is it charged with?

[Sacred Fool]

Yes, I wonder if the mods will split this part of the discussion off and make it the "Love for Jade" thread?  We'll just have to wait and see.

Me: What's this statement mean? What energy is it charged with?

Sorry, I was just being silly.  Sometimes portions of threads are split off when they derail the original thrust.  In this case, I expect things will recover.

It was charged with the energy of positive sentiment, I would say.  Not a bad thing.