divinecosmos hacked again

[Ankh]

You just blew me off my kitchen chair, yossarian, with that frankly tone of yours. Thank you.

Now that we are honest with each other - have you read DW's channeling? I just get a "don't go there" vibe. Implying being re-incarnated Edgar Cayce (don't know who he was and never read his material rather than what's been said about him, that he was some great person) and also saying that he is an incarnated Ra Wanderer is daring, specially that he is going public with it? Don't you think?

---

What makes you think LL are not from Ra?

Being very candid, my interpretation of the Jim/Carla/Don triad has been that Jim and Carla are 6D from Ra and Don is 5D from someone else, perhaps Latwii.

Would be very interested if there is something I haven't read on this issue.

LOL, and I thought that I'd dodge that bullet. Anyway, someone said on this forum which doesn't mean that it's true, that Ra Wanderers don't have any allergies, and since Carla is allergic to everything upon this Earth I made an assumption that she was not from Ra, and also made the same assumption as you regarding Don. And to be honest - would you handle the emotions coming up if you made the contact with your own memory complex? To handle those vibrations and still be able to live in this present moment as normal human being? I wouldn't.

[Meerie]

Hey Ankh,
maybe you will be interested to read this, but beware it is loooong:
http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option...&Itemid=30
I have read that DW first was reluctant to claim to be EC's reincarnation, but Wynn Free (the guy who wrote his autobiography) was convinced he was... and when DW went to Virginia Beach, where Cayce had lived, some of the people at the A.R.E. were astounded at how similar to Cayce he looked. Dunno if that necessarily has to be like that, but it seems that the astrological correlations are also astounding (it is mentioned in that link also)
I don't get that Ego vibe from him, I find most of his blog entries quite interesting.

[yossarian]

I think each person has unique distortions and a unique veil suited to their particular life mission.

I've read all of DW's public works, including all his channeling. I think his conscious channeling is often spotty quality and suffers from negative interference. David himself admits this and points out when he believes that a negative entity has influenced his channeling.

It's not as clear of a contact as the Ra Material, and David never claimed that it is. David emphatically says over and over that conscious channeling is never as good as unconscious channelling, and the fact that he channels on his own also makes his contact less powerful and less reliable. His mission is just not the same as the Carla/Don/Jim triad. Different missions, different channeling style, different preparation, different contact quality. David would be the first to tell you that he believes the LL Ra Material is higher quality than his own. [Having said that, I think he is less impressed with Q'uo. There is still some unpublicized drama, from when he lived on the Kentucky farm, that everyone always tip-toes around.]

Conscious channelling involves the personality of the channeller, not just the vocabulary. This is why you always see a lot of Carla in Q'uo. Read Carla's blog and books, read Ra, and then read Q'uo. Clearly there is more Carla in Q'uo than Carla in Ra. This is just how conscious channeling works.

Likewise, David's channellings, which are all conscious, have heaps of David in them. You can't expect anything else.

David's channelling isn't on the same level of the LOO, and doesn't deal with the same subject matter, has a different focus and a different style and a different channeller. It's different and appeals to different people. Nothing wrong with that. I don't take it as authoritative, but then again, I take almost nothing as authoritative.

It will definitely resonate with fewer people. A lot of it doesn't resonate with me, but also a lot of it does. Still, not as high quality as the LOO. But nothing is.

[unity100]

Who are you saying is acting against the collective will exactly?

I'm down with that interpretation, but still, I don't think that is conclusive.

Who is going against the collective will?

collective will, and the lesson learned by Ra seems to be conveying pure information without distortion as possible and respecting free will. during this, they are observing every precaution to prevent any distortion from any form of identity/self leaking into the mix.

it may or may not be the lesson of Ra, however, it is definite that it is their practice. this can be not only observed in Ra material's nature, but was also iterated numerous times by them over and over.

basically, that much 'oh i wouldnt have you any other way - ga-lory!' leaking into the channeling of wilcock's self shows that there is a good deal of such no-no being present in the current balance of that entity, and therefore, its not compatible with Ra's collective behavior we saw in l/l work.

basically, ra wouldnt talk through a channel in such a situation.

Wandering doesn't mean leaving the complex. Wanderers reunite with their complex after graduation.

It seems like you're just saying that Ra never wandered to earth. I believe this is incorrect.

The collective will of a complex respects the individual wills of the members. The collective will of the complex is that the individuals serve the creator in the way they are called to do so.

The harmonizing factor in an Social Memory Complex is not the specific way each individual chooses to serve but rather the vibration of the service.

the harmonizing factor in a society memory complex is not only the vibration of service, but, the certain direction the entities choose to serve. singularity of thought. this was what was defined as the phenomenon that brings about society complex.

even if we interpret this as 'direction of service', all entities harmonizing will have a certain character/perspective on that service. this is what harmonizing means in the first place.

it seems that your approach to society complex is to take it as if it was an ordinary 3d group or society. it is not as such - entities share memories, share thoughts, share energies. they increasingly harmonize, to the point of calling themselves 'i am Ra', it seems.

you cannot just go against the collective will of your complex, and still remain a member of that complex. first, it will be very hard for you to go against the union you are a part of, second, you will be incompatible and out of sync with them when you go against the direction the collective thought is towards.

this is no different in any other situation - even the state of being multiple in the 'illusion' of existence in the first place, is the state of being unaligned with the 'first thought' ra speaks of. the same phenomenon exists in all cases that involve harmony - group, society, planetary and so on.

..........

i didnt say Ra didnt incarnate as wanderers here and there. you concluded that yourself. i told that, someone who is going totally contrary to the will of its society complex, cannot be remain a member of that complex and portray them as doing something that is against their collective will.

Ra heavily implied that Akhenaten was a wanderer from the Social Memory Complex of Ra.

although it was stated that this entity was a wanderer and melded its distortions with Ra's, it was not implied that entity was of Ra.

[yossarian]

Implications are necessarily subjective.

Anyway I still don't understand who you think is going against the collective will of their social memory complex.

David Wilcock isn't part of a social memory complex, he's a human.

The social memory complex shares thoughts but they are still a multitude, just like an individual is a multitude. Everyone is made from components. Humans are made from the combination of mind, body, and spirit, and Ra is made from the combination of many minds, many bodies, many spirits.

The components still have uniqueness and individuality. The mind is different from the body, has a different focus, and different goals. The spirit has unique desires that are not shared by the body. But they all live together and work it out. Just like humans are seen as one big organism by Ra.

[Namaste]

Regarding Ra and Wanderers, I'll re-quote as this may have been overlooked before...

14.5 Questioner: Was the Egyptian visit of 11,000 years ago the only one where you actually walked the Earth?

Ra: I am Ra. I understand your question distorted in the direction of selves rather than other-selves. We of the vibratory sound complex, Ra, have walked among you only at that time.

Since Wanderers are 3D incarnations of 6D entities (in this case), one would imagine Ra would have confirmed 'Ra Wanderers', but, the opposite was stated.

That includes Jim, Don and Carla.

Meerie - I very much enjoyed this interview with DW in which he discusses his journey towards Edgar Cayce in much detail (and a plethora of other things, of course).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxQLiy7AHx8

[yossarian]

That was when they landed with UFOs and actually walked around as non-human beings.

Wandering is a different process entirely. Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

The vibratory sound complex Ra walked on earth one time. The egyptians worshipped these aliens as gods and so Ra decided that strategy was ineffective.

Ra may have sent portions of itself to be incarnated as humans, but those portions of itself are not the vibratory sound complex Ra, and so those portions incarnated in the wombs of earth women having earth DNA and earth mind/body/spirit complexes are not vibratory sound complex Ra and when they learn to walk it does not count as vibratory sound complex Ra walking on the earth.

At least that's how I always interpreted that part.

[unity100]

Anyway I still don't understand who you think is going against the collective will of their social memory complex.

David Wilcock isn't part of a social memory complex, he's a human.

The social memory complex shares thoughts but they are still a multitude, just like an individual is a multitude. Everyone is made from components. Humans are made from the combination of mind, body, and spirit, and Ra is made from the combination of many minds, many bodies, many spirits.

a social memory complex which has a certain characteristic, would not act against that characteristic :

some people are saying that willcock is of Ra, and hence he is channeling his higher self or Ra or whatever, and it can be valid because he is part of that society complex.

in that regard, i say what i had been saying ; he cannot go against the collective will/cumulative experience of the society complex and still remain in that complex.

that is totally leaving out the discussion that is 'to what extent a wanderer remains part of its society complex when incarnated to a veiled 3d planet'. its up for discussion.

however, if we take him just as a random wanderer or a random 3d incarnate, then he still couldnt channel Ra, because what he is doing is not in the nature Ra sees proper. even l/l group was the last among many groups Ra checked before settling on Ra - imagine how many groups like l/l were not used, because of their various mishaps, even tho being close to them in nature.

this shows, just someone going out on a limb and saying that s/he's consciously channeling Ra, alone, cannot be trusted.

The components still have uniqueness and individuality. The mind is different from the body, has a different focus, and different goals. The spirit has unique desires that are not shared by the body. But they all live together and work it out. Just like humans are seen as one big organism by Ra.

'creation capitulates in the reverse order it came into being' -> this was what Ra has said when describing the ray work going up towards higher rays. which is also identical to the concept of the creation coming into being like the branches of the tree, then merging back into multiple faceted infinite oneness to one central sun :

mind, is the tool of the spirit which projects what spirit is to the physical reality, body, is the creation of the mind with which mind interfaces with the physical creation outside.

it is not as you portray ; mind and spirit and body being totally separately inclined and in different directions - if so, there would be no concept of mind/body/spirit complex.

by conditioning biases into mind in a veiled planet, it is possible to force entities to act in lieu of their spirit - that doesnt last too long ; either the significator (overall resultant manifestation of the entity) breaks down, gets ill or disarrayed, or, the mind drops its bias despite the demands of the societal mind it lives in, and acts in accordance with its spirit.

[Namaste]

That was when they landed with UFOs and actually walked around as non-human beings.

Wandering is a different process entirely. Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

The vibratory sound complex Ra walked on earth one time. The egyptians worshipped these aliens as gods and so Ra decided that strategy was ineffective.

Ra may have sent portions of itself to be incarnated as humans, but those portions of itself are not the vibratory sound complex Ra, and so those portions incarnated in the wombs of earth women having earth DNA and earth mind/body/spirit complexes are not vibratory sound complex Ra and when they learn to walk it does not count as vibratory sound complex Ra walking on the earth.

At least that's how I always interpreted that part.

I see where you're coming from, interesting.

Would that not mean however, by definition, that the 3D self is not a part of the higher (6D) self?

That's akin to separating myself from my higher self. Something intrinsically impossible, as it's a subset. Or so I understand

[Ankh]

How is Ra going to work out their Earth karma if they avoid the #1 way they can serve the Earth -- by sending wanderers?

What Earth karma are you implying that Ra need to work off?

---

Ikhnaton

Note that Ikhnaton is the alternative spelling for Akhenaten.

What do you mean by that? It's not like it was Ra who was writing? They probably pronounced it in some strange way (probably as it was pronounced in old Egypt) and Jim had to write it as it sounded, or did I missunderstood you?

How much do you want to bet that Akhenaten was a wanderer from the Social Memory Complex of Ra?

Let's do that, my brother! Let's name the price and have some fun when we come home.

[Derek]

Davids Higher Self is part of the Ra social/memory/complex as are millions of other wanderers.

Says who?

EDIT: I am not trying to pick a fight here or mean it in any other negative sense, but is genuinely curious about who said that?

Ive heard himself and Carla say that he and millions of other wanderers are part of Ra on more than one oocasion. Your going to have to dig that material up

[3DMonkey]

Channelings can be from any density right? If it's Higher Self, it is 6D. But a channel could be 4D and lie about being 6D, right?

[Derek]

Listen, this is the last time I'm going to respond to this. I appreciate your opinion, but I don't want to waste vital energy Smile The vast majority of those channelings are his own personal channelings that he was using for personal guidance. They are coming from his higher self and are about his life. Some of them contain inspiring material and prophecy, so he released them online. There are hundreds more he hasn't. The channelings he has released online for public only say things like this

"Again, our goal is not to promote David or his works. David is one aspect of a much greater collective initiative, and it has many, many facets.

Our goal is to reach the shoreline of your awareness, and set sail with a craft of our own design in collaboration with you – such that there is no need to worry about the future, or concern yourself with the frequency of available materials of any kind, whether they be David’s writings or otherwise."

David constantly stresses that he doesn't want to be put on a pedestal.

again, the endless amount of personal-related stuff in any of the things he channels, means that he has an overindulgence in his own self.

providing and producing reasons for it does not change that fact.

i have given you direct link to Ra quote about aggrandizement of self/organization reducing polarity of the channeler.

The way he defined ego in that post is exactly how Carl Jung and many others define it.

If he didn't have products he would not be on the internet. Nobody would know who he is and far fewer people would know about the Law of One. That is a fact.

Davids Higher Self is part of the Ra social/memory/complex as are millions of other wanderers.

david's or carl gustav jung's definition of ego, is not relevant to spiritual definition of ego. a good link to the definition of ego related manifestations was, again, given by a link to Ra material.

Davids Higher Self is part of the Ra social/memory/complex as are millions of other wanderers.

Says who?

EDIT: I am not trying to pick a fight here or mean it in any other negative sense, but is genuinely curious about who said that?

david himself of course. the 60 million crowded Ra social memory complex has shown their approach to channeling with the work they undertaken with ll group. and that, isnt at parallels with what this person is doing, or saying.

He uses channeling as a way to receive guidance from his own higher self, much like dream work or tarot readings. Some of them he posts online, so they have some of his personal material within them. Many of the readings he posts online for only the public do not say anything about him at all.

That link you posted would be relevant if he completely sold out and started putting himself off as "the messiah" and making everything he does into a giant business (instead of giving 80% of it away for free). He refers to that point and quote from the Law of One often.

david's or carl gustav jung's definition of ego, is not relevant to spiritual definition of ego. a good link to the definition of ego related manifestations was, again, given by a link to Ra material.

That is your opinion. Ra defines it similarly, saying that the way ego is defined by many is a misnomer and it actually is related to the body consciousness (which is exactly how David defines it)

---

Channelings can be from any density right? If it's Higher Self, it is 6D. But a channel could be 4D and lie about being 6D, right?

His higher self downgraded into 5d in order to be able to fully work with him in an ongoing basis. I believe their is a quote from the Law of One saying that Ra had to do this as well. His higher self has given him thousands of accurate predictions and guidance that has done nothing but help him and others over the years. Some of those predictions he has posted online before they came true. Like 9/11, the economy, bush/gore election and more.

---

Why the need to attack his channeling? What about all the other amazing work that he has brought to the table?

He has done SO MUCH good for people.

He has awakened SO MANY people.

He is probably the only person in the alternative community providing hope and dispelling fear.

He has discovered so many valuable things that nobody else has.

He has brought so many people to the Law of One.



What is your comment on that?
It feels good to just sit back and attack someone and project your shadow onto them. Studies have shown that people actually get an opiate rush in their brain when they do this.

Frankly from most of the posts Ive seen that attack David you really don't know what your talking about. You post assumptions that can easily be disproven. Why do you feel the need to nitpick everything he does?

He lived with Carla for sometime. Why don't you ask her if he has a big ego? Scott Mandelker (who is good friends with him, and has collaborated with him on many things) doesn't seem to think so.

[3DMonkey]

Higher self downgraded? Or channeled source became his fifth density self? Ra says The Higher Self is six density.

So that anwers my question on possible channel sources. I'm sure some lie as well.
My point in posing the question is that the reader gets to decide. Lying or not, the reader chooses to believe or resonate. Anyone who doesn't believe David's channelings are right in doing so.
Ra could be pulling my chain big time. It doesn't matter because I choose to believe it.... And discuss it till these forums die

[Derek]

Wow!! Look what I found.

Leah: Oh absolutely. You know, I came across something and I can’t even cite the source. Does David Wilcock live with you or near you?

Carla: Not any more. There was a point in his life, when he was leaving Virginia Beach and he didn’t really know what he was going to do next, and I said he could stay with us for awhile, if he liked, and he did that.

Leah: Well, he is very popular in so many of our groups and I enjoy him so much. What a character!

Carla: We enjoyed him too. And we blessed him on his way when he felt that he needed to move on. Of course he could never do the kind of thing in rural Kentucky that he can do on the west coast. And I think he is doing very well out there. We have a very cordial relationship, but we weren’t that compatible as far as our life-styles. I am not that careful, you know. I have been known to drink a coke. I have been known to drink vodka or a glass of wine. David would never do anything like that.

Leah: Oh, is that right! A balance in all things.

Carla: He is so very careful in all things. He is very careful with what he puts into his body. Our lifestyles just didn’t mesh. He wasn’t that happy here.

http://www.llresearch.org/interviews/int..._0207.aspx

Congratulated Wynn F on a particularly positive review of his book on Wilcock and Cayce which he had sent me

http://www.llresearch.org/journals/camel...06_08.aspx

At least half of the group had first learned about our work through the Wilcock/Free book on The Reincarnation of Edgar Cayce

http://www.llresearch.org/journals/camel...05_08.aspx

[3DMonkey]

well look at that. Derek, you love David. I love you.

[unity100]

That link you posted would be relevant if he completely sold out and started putting himself off as "the messiah" and making everything he does into a giant business (instead of giving 80% of it away for free). He refers to that point and quote from the Law of One often.

that is the extreme end. had he done it, he would be switched to the other side of the spectrum completely.

it says aggrandizement of self, specific information, reduces polarity there, and compromises the channel. situation fits what is described there.

That is your opinion. Ra defines it similarly, saying that the way ego is defined by many is a misnomer and it actually is related to the body consciousness (which is exactly how David defines it)

no its not my 'opinion'. i have taken it from Ra's definiton of ego as we know it in our own society. there is nothing in Ra material that links the ego to body consciousness. if so, i would like to see the part that does it.

Why the need to attack his channeling? What about all the other amazing work that he has brought to the table?

because, we are in a forum that is involved in spiritual teachings ?

He has awakened SO MANY people.

He is probably the only person in the alternative community providing hope and dispelling fear.

He has discovered so many valuable things that nobody else has.

He has brought so many people to the Law of One.

not to mention that none of these eliminate the ego problem and the accompanying polarity reduction and heightened possibility of compromise, but also it is questionable that what he is 'awakening' people to. he is talking about as much conspiracy material as flat out conspiracy sites like zetatalk.

What is your comment on that?
It feels good to just sit back and attack someone and project your shadow onto them. Studies have shown that people actually get an opiate rush in their brain when they do this.

Frankly from most of the posts Ive seen that attack David you really don't know what your talking about. You post assumptions that can easily be disproven. Why do you feel the need to nitpick everything he does?

you have disproven none of the post assumptions so far, even if they are easily disproven. and you are rather debasing the people who bring opposing ideas to whatever david wilcock puts out - not disproving their arguments but questioning their motives for raising arguments. and the one doing the defense, is david wilcock - from his mouth. his definition of ego, his good deeds and so on. from his perspective.

we are giving links and quotes to the trusted source material, the very same material which is supposedly channeled by david wilcock. yet, you are dodging to take them into account, by taking them to extreme end and therefore leaving david wilcock in the acceptable threshold.

He lived with Carla for sometime. Why don't you ask her if he has a big ego? Scott Mandelker (who is good friends with him, and has collaborated with him on many things) doesn't seem to think so.

yes. and despite being reincarnation of edgar cayce, a member of society complex Ra, and someone who is able to channel Ra in a conscious basis, he is not with L/L Research group, who had to quit Ra workings because a team member has left.

why, if david wilcock is such and such a person who is not only edgar cayce reincarnation, but someone easily channeling Ra consciously, not working with l/l group at this time ?

[yossarian]

That was when they landed with UFOs and actually walked around as non-human beings.

Wandering is a different process entirely. Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

The vibratory sound complex Ra walked on earth one time. The egyptians worshipped these aliens as gods and so Ra decided that strategy was ineffective.

Ra may have sent portions of itself to be incarnated as humans, but those portions of itself are not the vibratory sound complex Ra, and so those portions incarnated in the wombs of earth women having earth DNA and earth mind/body/spirit complexes are not vibratory sound complex Ra and when they learn to walk it does not count as vibratory sound complex Ra walking on the earth.

At least that's how I always interpreted that part.

I see where you're coming from, interesting.

Would that not mean however, by definition, that the 3D self is not a part of the higher (6D) self?

That's akin to separating myself from my higher self. Something intrinsically impossible, as it's a subset. Or so I understand

Ultimately all separation is an illusion.

And yet here we are, seemingly separate.

Likewise for the relationship between the 3D human and the 6D higher self.

It's just the paradox of unity/separation. There is apparent separation because creation itself is dependent on some level of separation, and yet in truth All is One.

Everything is everything and yet everything is seemingly different. When we have these discussions we are discussing the illusion: we are discussing the seeming differences.

---

How is Ra going to work out their Earth karma if they avoid the #1 way they can serve the Earth -- by sending wanderers?

What Earth karma are you implying that Ra need to work off?

---

In the LOO Ra explains that their mistakes with respect to helping the earth have karmically bound them to humanity and the earth. Don asks Ra if the LOO contact will alleviate their karma, and Ra says the contact alone will not even come close.

Ikhnaton

Note that Ikhnaton is the alternative spelling for Akhenaten.

What do you mean by that? It's not like it was Ra who was writing? They probably pronounced it in some strange way (probably as it was pronounced in old Egypt) and Jim had to write it as it sounded, or did I missunderstood you?

I meant exactly what I said... earlier I had stated that the LOO implied heavily that Akhenaten was a wanderer from Ra. Then I decided I would dig up the quote and post it. When I dug it up I noticed that it said Ikhnaton instead of Akhenaten, and so to avoid confusion I
pointed out that they are the same in case anyone doesn't know that.

How much do you want to bet that Akhenaten was a wanderer from the Social Memory Complex of Ra?

Let's do that, my brother! Let's name the price and have some fun when we come home.

Haha, does this mean you think there will be currency in the other dimensions? :p

[BlatzAdict]

i am so lost, i don't have the patience to intellectually keep up. whaaaaaaa?

[unity100]

I meant exactly what I said... earlier I had stated that the LOO implied heavily that Akhenaten was a wanderer from Ra.

i also read that quote, however i havent still seen anything that implies akhenaten being of Ra, leave aside anything heavily implying it. it is only said that, he was a wanderer.

[Namaste]

Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

Ultimately all separation is an illusion.

And yet here we are, seemingly separate.

Likewise for the relationship between the 3D human and the 6D higher self.

It's just the paradox of unity/separation. There is apparent separation because creation itself is dependent on some level of separation, and yet in truth All is One.

I'm not trying to pick here, but these two statements are a bit of an oxymoron; the first states separation, while the second says otherwise.

Just to be clear, I agree entirely. The point is that Ra, as a 3D Wanderer, is always Ra. A subset of the energy pattern, contained within the whole.

[Derek]

That link you posted would be relevant if he completely sold out and started putting himself off as "the messiah" and making everything he does into a giant business (instead of giving 80% of it away for free). He refers to that point and quote from the Law of One often.

that is the extreme end. had he done it, he would be switched to the other side of the spectrum completely.

it says aggrandizement of self, specific information, reduces polarity there, and compromises the channel. situation fits what is described there.

That is your opinion. Ra defines it similarly, saying that the way ego is defined by many is a misnomer and it actually is related to the body consciousness (which is exactly how David defines it)

no its not my 'opinion'. i have taken it from Ra's definiton of ego as we know it in our own society. there is nothing in Ra material that links the ego to body consciousness. if so, i would like to see the part that does it.

Why the need to attack his channeling? What about all the other amazing work that he has brought to the table?

because, we are in a forum that is involved in spiritual teachings ?

He has awakened SO MANY people.

He is probably the only person in the alternative community providing hope and dispelling fear.

He has discovered so many valuable things that nobody else has.

He has brought so many people to the Law of One.

not to mention that none of these eliminate the ego problem and the accompanying polarity reduction and heightened possibility of compromise, but also it is questionable that what he is 'awakening' people to. he is talking about as much conspiracy material as flat out conspiracy sites like zetatalk.

What is your comment on that?
It feels good to just sit back and attack someone and project your shadow onto them. Studies have shown that people actually get an opiate rush in their brain when they do this.

Frankly from most of the posts Ive seen that attack David you really don't know what your talking about. You post assumptions that can easily be disproven. Why do you feel the need to nitpick everything he does?

you have disproven none of the post assumptions so far, even if they are easily disproven. and you are rather debasing the people who bring opposing ideas to whatever david wilcock puts out - not disproving their arguments but questioning their motives for raising arguments. and the one doing the defense, is david wilcock - from his mouth. his definition of ego, his good deeds and so on. from his perspective.

we are giving links and quotes to the trusted source material, the very same material which is supposedly channeled by david wilcock. yet, you are dodging to take them into account, by taking them to extreme end and therefore leaving david wilcock in the acceptable threshold.

He lived with Carla for sometime. Why don't you ask her if he has a big ego? Scott Mandelker (who is good friends with him, and has collaborated with him on many things) doesn't seem to think so.

yes. and despite being reincarnation of edgar cayce, a member of society complex Ra, and someone who is able to channel Ra in a conscious basis, he is not with L/L Research group, who had to quit Ra workings because a team member has left.

why, if david wilcock is such and such a person who is not only edgar cayce reincarnation, but someone easily channeling Ra consciously, not working with l/l group at this time ?

You seem to think that anytime David talks about himself he is aggrandizing himself. Should David just never talk about himself at all? Carla talks about herself in many text documents, video and audio files. The Law of One talks about Carla tremendously. I know all about Carla's personal life and history because Ive heard her talk about it so much. She even sells products!!!!!! I could easily say that she is "aggrandizing herself" if I wanted to.

David is CONSTANTLY telling people not to put him up on a pedestal, and that he is no better than anyone else. Does that sound like aggrandizement?

Davids channeling is literally 5 to 10 percent of his work.

He just lived with them for awhile until his higher self told him to leave. According to Carla they both felt that he can do his work much better in los angeles than kentucky, and they both enjoyed each other and speak positively of each other.

From his website

David moved to Louisville, Kentucky in February 2003 to join forces with Jim and Carla, the two surviving members of the Law of One contact. He was soon followed by fellow members Vara in March and Gary in late April. David reliably paid 601 dollars monthly rent, shopped for the group's food on Friday night and cooked the group's food for the entire week all day Saturday (with fellow member Vara, who also did all the bookkeeping). David also regularly performed a variety of skilled labor tasks, including a complete remodeling of the basement, creating three new bedrooms and a large laundry room, under the direction and partnership of fellow L/L member Bruce, also known as LoneBear, who moved in as of December. Gary also provided assistance in construction.

This remodeling process proved to be the most grueling physical labor David would ever perform. He literally worked from the time he woke up to the time he went to bed every day, stopping only to take paid clients, cook group food all day Saturday and attend group meetings on Sunday. He began eating regular animal protein again to support his physical body's muscular exertion, and discovered that his particular blood type really benefited from it - thus he allowed limited types of organic meat back in after a seven-year stint of severely disciplined vegan dieting. (Sorry to our dedicated vegetarians out there... some people can do it and some can't.)

[yossarian]

that is the extreme end. had he done it, he would be switched to the other side of the spectrum completely.

it says aggrandizement of self, specific information, reduces polarity there, and compromises the channel. situation fits what is described there.

You seem to think that anything anyone does in 3D is STS regardless of intention.

This is at odds with the definitions of polarity that Ra gives. Polarity is defined by intention and cannot be measured from outside by acts.

Ra: I am Ra. It is unlikely that there is a more pithy or eloquent description of the polarities of third density than service-to-others and service-to-self due to the nature of the mind/body/spirit complexes’ distortions towards perceiving concepts relating to philosophy in terms of ethics or activity.

You can't judge someone's polarity by looking at their actions. Only their intention matters.

It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity

You are trying to figure out if someone is STS or not by looking at the nouns and verbs they are using when they speak. This isn't going to tell you anything because the words they use do not determine polarity, the intention of the words determines polarity.

Have you read Carla's blog? The entire thing is about herself and like 3 other people. Does the focus on her self make it STS? No. The intention determines polarity and her intention in writing the blog is to share herself and her life and her perceptions, for the benefit of everyone.

David's intention with his blog is similar, and so naturally David talks about himself.

It's not STS to talk about yourself.


I completely disagree with

no its not my 'opinion'. i have taken it from Ra's definiton of ego as we know it in our own society. there is nothing in Ra material that links the ego to body consciousness. if so, i would like to see the part that does it.

Ra says the term ego is too confusing and doesn't use it. Why are you using it?

Questioner: Can you tell me how you balance the ego?
Ra: I am Ra. We cannot work with this concept as it is misapplied and understanding cannot come from it.

a member of society complex Ra

A human can't be a part of a social memory complex. David is not part of a social memory complex.

His higher self is part of one.

, and someone who is able to channel Ra in a conscious basis, he is not with L/L Research group, who had to quit Ra workings because a team member has left.

why, if david wilcock is such and such a person who is not only edgar cayce reincarnation, but someone easily channeling Ra consciously, not working with l/l group at this time ?

Your basic assumptions about metaphysics are not in line with standard accepted theory. They aren't in line with Carla's views on the issue that she outlines in Channelling Handbook, and they aren't in line with the ancient wisdom teachings that have been passed down since pre-history.

Channelling is not as simple as one entity speaking to another. The spirit world is like fire and spiritual contacts are highly variable.

No one, not now, not ever, will ever be able to channel the exact same entity that Don/Jim/Carla channeled. That contact and the entity that came through is specifically dependent on those 3 people at that time in their life, at that location, and on the specific nature of the world, and the specific nature of Ra. It's actually inaccurate to look at it like a telephone connection to a person. It's more accurate to see it as a creative work that is generated based on intersecting energy patterns.

Unless those energy patterns are perfectly replicated again, the same entity will never be channeled.

If someone else unconsciously channels Ra, Ra will use different language and a different style and speak about different things. Because the contact is not just Ra and never is and can't be. It's a big amalgamation of energies of the moment that produces the material and it's highly unique.

There has never been a case where two earth entities channeled a higher being in exactly the same way. The higher being always comes through slightly differently because the channelling process is not truly a telephone, it's a collaborative creationary process. The more that the channeller is able to put himself aside, the less of himself will be in the contact, but it is impossible to completely put himself aside and this would not be desirable anyway in achieving the goals of the channelled material.

A conscious channel will have more of himself in the channel by necessity - that is the very definition of a conscious channel.

You define polarity differently than most.

What I get from the LOO is that polarity is defined by intention, and two people can do the same action but one will have an STO intention and the other an STS intention. By looking at the action alone you can't know their inner polarity.

Polarity is not related to material ethics or material behaviour in my way of looking at this. You can't just observe David speaking about himself and conclude that he is compromised. You can't even observe one slipping of the contact and then conclude that he will be forever compromised with no hope of redemption.

People go through cycles between emphasizing different aspects of their being. I just don't see things nearly as black and white as you do.

Also every criticism you make of David Wilcock can easily be applied to the conscious channellings of Carla. All conscious channellers have to deal with the fact that the contact has more of themself in it. I find it interesting how you never apply any of this critical thinking to Carla's Q'uo but are so quick and unhesitant when it comes to attacking other channellers' material.

---

Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

Ultimately all separation is an illusion.

And yet here we are, seemingly separate.

Likewise for the relationship between the 3D human and the 6D higher self.

It's just the paradox of unity/separation. There is apparent separation because creation itself is dependent on some level of separation, and yet in truth All is One.

I'm not trying to pick here, but these two statements are a bit of an oxymoron; the first states separation, while the second says otherwise.

Just to be clear, I agree entirely. The point is that Ra, as a 3D Wanderer, is always Ra. A subset of the energy pattern, contained within the whole.

It's strange to me that you haven't noticed this oxymoron already. Ra calls it an apparent paradox.

This oxymoron between separation/unity is like the main point of the Law of One. Separation exists between entities - different entities with different names. Separation exists between densities - different densities with different names. And yet all is one.

I'm not the one who brought up this paradox. Ra did. And before him, millions of mystics have brought it up again and again. It's not a new idea...

[Derek]

Posted by unity100 - Today 05:48 PM

(Today 03:53 PM)Derek Wrote: That link you posted would be relevant if he completely sold out and started putting himself off as "the messiah" and making everything he does into a giant business (instead of giving 80% of it away for free). He refers to that point and quote from the Law of One often.


that is the extreme end. had he done it, he would be switched to the other side of the spectrum completely.

it says aggrandizement of self, specific information, reduces polarity there, and compromises the channel. situation fits what is described there.

Quote:That is your opinion. Ra defines it similarly, saying that the way ego is defined by many is a misnomer and it actually is related to the body consciousness (which is exactly how David defines it)


no its not my 'opinion'. i have taken it from Ra's definiton of ego as we know it in our own society. there is nothing in Ra material that links the ego to body consciousness. if so, i would like to see the part that does it.

Quote:Why the need to attack his channeling? What about all the other amazing work that he has brought to the table?


because, we are in a forum that is involved in spiritual teachings ?

Quote:He has awakened SO MANY people.

He is probably the only person in the alternative community providing hope and dispelling fear.

He has discovered so many valuable things that nobody else has.

He has brought so many people to the Law of One.


not to mention that none of these eliminate the ego problem and the accompanying polarity reduction and heightened possibility of compromise, but also it is questionable that what he is 'awakening' people to. he is talking about as much conspiracy material as flat out conspiracy sites like zetatalk.

Quote:What is your comment on that?
It feels good to just sit back and attack someone and project your shadow onto them. Studies have shown that people actually get an opiate rush in their brain when they do this.

Frankly from most of the posts Ive seen that attack David you really don't know what your talking about. You post assumptions that can easily be disproven. Why do you feel the need to nitpick everything he does?


you have disproven none of the post assumptions so far, even if they are easily disproven. and you are rather debasing the people who bring opposing ideas to whatever david wilcock puts out - not disproving their arguments but questioning their motives for raising arguments. and the one doing the defense, is david wilcock - from his mouth. his definition of ego, his good deeds and so on. from his perspective.

we are giving links and quotes to the trusted source material, the very same material which is supposedly channeled by david wilcock. yet, you are dodging to take them into account, by taking them to extreme end and therefore leaving david wilcock in the acceptable threshold.

Quote:He lived with Carla for sometime. Why don't you ask her if he has a big ego? Scott Mandelker (who is good friends with him, and has collaborated with him on many things) doesn't seem to think so.


yes. and despite being reincarnation of edgar cayce, a member of society complex Ra, and someone who is able to channel Ra in a conscious basis, he is not with L/L Research group, who had to quit Ra workings because a team member has left.

why, if david wilcock is such and such a person who is not only edgar cayce reincarnation, but someone easily channeling Ra consciously, not working with l/l group at this time ?

Intellectual dishonesty.

dishonesty in performing intellectual activities like thought or communication. Examples are:

* the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or misleading
* the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to ensure the truthfulness of the position
* the conscious omission of aspects of the truth known or believed to be relevant in the particular context.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_dishonesty

Your not focusing on 90% of his material and what he has done for the planet. Your choosing only to focus on the fact that he talks about himself in some of his personal channelings he posted on the internet.

You are using that as total proof that he is an egomaniac

You are denying

That he constantly tells people that he is no better than them. They can have all the abilities he has, and that he shouldn't be put up on a pedestal.

All the good works hes done

The positive things Carla and Scott Mandelker have said about him

Gives away 80% of his material for free

etc

Your focusing on whether he says hes from Ra or not, and that he mentions some personal material in some of his readings.

[Ankh]

In the LOO Ra explains that their mistakes with respect to helping the earth have karmically bound them to humanity and the earth. Don asks Ra if the LOO contact will alleviate their karma, and Ra says the contact alone will not even come close.

Yeh I remember that, but I was confused then and I guess that I am still confused when they stated that. The thing is that Ra and their teachings in Egypt were like what 10000 years ago? I mean noone even believes in that stuff anymore. Unless they did something else that went wrong??? And karma=isn't karma an ability to forgive the self? So that's what all the Wanderers of Ra doing here? Runing around and trying to forgive themselves?

Ikhnaton

Note that Ikhnaton is the alternative spelling for Akhenaten.

What do you mean by that? It's not like it was Ra who was writing? They probably pronounced it in some strange way (probably as it was pronounced in old Egypt) and Jim had to write it as it sounded, or did I missunderstood you?

I meant exactly what I said... earlier I had stated that the LOO implied heavily that Akhenaten was a wanderer from Ra. Then I decided I would dig up the quote and post it. When I dug it up I noticed that it said Ikhnaton instead of Akhenaten, and so to avoid confusion I
pointed out that they are the same in case anyone doesn't know that.

Nah still not get it. A bit slow today then.

How much do you want to bet that Akhenaten was a wanderer from the Social Memory Complex of Ra?

Let's do that, my brother! Let's name the price and have some fun when we come home.

Haha, does this mean you think there will be currency in the other dimensions? :p

LOOOL You and your money! I was thinking something like the "looser" will have to descend in 3D one more time and the "winner" is allowed to mess up with his free will to have some fun or something?

[Namaste]

It's strange to me that you haven't noticed this oxymoron already. Ra calls it an apparent paradox.

This oxymoron between separation/unity is like the main point of the Law of One. Separation exists between entities - different entities with different names. Separation exists between densities - different densities with different names. And yet all is one.

I'm not the one who brought up this paradox. Ra did. And before him, millions of mystics have brought it up again and again. It's not a new idea...

I'm not saying it is brother, and I do appreciate a good paradox or two :¬)

The crux of my input is that my beliefs differs from yours, which is:

Once you wander you are no longer 6D, Ra would no longer be Ra. The wanderer would be fully human.

I'm offering the notion that a 3D Wanderer is never, ever, separated from the 6D self. A 3D incarnation is encompassed by the higher (6D) self.

That's it :¬)

[unity100]

You seem to think that anytime David talks about himself he is aggrandizing himself. Should David just never talk about himself at all? Carla talks about herself in many text documents, video and audio files. The Law of One talks about Carla tremendously. I know all about Carla's personal life and history because Ive heard her talk about it so much. She even sells products!!!!!! I could easily say that she is "aggrandizing herself" if I wanted to.

firstly, there isnt talk about Carla in Ra material, but 'the instrument'. that talk is depersonified to an extent that almost makes Carla appear as if she was not a real person.

secondly, there is talk about her, because of health problems. not because she needs reinforcement in the form of 'oh i wouldnt have you any other way !'.

l/l group, if you arent aware, is no longer channeling Ra, since their member died. and the channeled material they are working on since then, doesnt involve appeasing any particular entity's identity on the face of this planet.

David is CONSTANTLY telling people not to put him up on a pedestal, and that he is no better than anyone else. Does that sound like aggrandizement?

Davids channeling is literally 5 to 10 percent of his work.

the nature of his channeling makes his spiritual information unreliable. this is what we can conclude from the Ra quote i have linked. that is our main question here.

not david himself engaging in guitar work and so on.

He just lived with them for awhile until his higher self told him to leave. According to Carla they both felt that he can do his work much better in los angeles than kentucky, and they both enjoyed each other and speak positively of each other.

this is how he sees it.

regardless, he would have been with l/l, working on Ra channelings, had he been able to channel Ra. however, he is not.

You seem to think that anything anyone does in 3D is STS regardless of intention.

intention does not change consequences. intentions of akhenaton were great, yet it resulted in distortions for him, and in the information he was supposed to convey. intentions of Ra was great, yet, it had resulted in karma.

intentions of the walk-in which entered lincoln's body was great, and not only his attitude is of service to the oppressed during his lifetime, but also he had succeeded in his mission, yet, its polarity was still reduced, even if slightly, due to the effects the thoughts of many people dying due to the ensuing war. this is despite he was detached from the results of what he was doing, and had not gained or lost any karma.

intention doesnt create polarity. intention is just the beginning. it needs to manifest in acceptable purity enough to manifest the polarity.

This is at odds with the definitions of polarity that Ra gives. Polarity is defined by intention and cannot be measured from outside by acts.

Ra: I am Ra. It is unlikely that there is a more pithy or eloquent description of the polarities of third density than service-to-others and service-to-self due to the nature of the mind/body/spirit complexes’ distortions towards perceiving concepts relating to philosophy in terms of ethics or activity.

You can't judge someone's polarity by looking at their actions. Only their intention matters.

with that, if an entity, truly thought that eradicating the evil was the good thing to do for service to other entities, it would make that act a positive act.

no - we can judge someone's polarity by looking at their actions. manifested actions, make up the polarity. even if the entity is polarized in a certain way in its unmanifested being, consistently behaving opposite to that polarity, even if with correct intentions, would reduce the overall polarity of the entity, leave aside the manifested portion.

lets make a case of the maldekians :

http://lawofone.info/results.php?session...c=1&ss=1#1

10.1 Questioner: I think that it would clarify things for us if we went back to the time just before the transfer of souls from Maldek to see how the Law of One operated with respect to this transfer and why this transfer was necessary. What happened to the people of Maldek that caused them to lose their planet? How long ago did this event occur?

Ra: I am Ra. The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self. This was, however, for the most part, couched in a sincere belief/thought structure which seemed to the perception of the mind/body complexes of this sphere to be positive and of service to others. The devastation that wracked their biosphere and caused its disintegration resulted from what you call war. ......

It is to be noted in this context that it is quite impossible to judge the polarity of an act or an entity

You are trying to figure out if someone is STS or not by looking at the nouns and verbs they are using when they speak. This isn't going to tell you anything because the words they use do not determine polarity, the intention of the words determines polarity.

we are not judging the polarity of an entity, we are judging the reliability of david wilcock's channeling.

and, the picture in front of us fits what Ra speaks about channels being depolarized and compromised ; concentration on specific information, aggrandizement of self etc.

it doesnt matter whether wilcock is the most positively polarized entity to ever grace the planet - his channeled material shows the traits Ra spoke of as being depolarized. he may go from one end to other end in regard to being polarized/depolarized, however, this situation in itself makes the channelings unreliable - it would be impossible to determine whether he was compromised or not.

Have you read Carla's blog? The entire thing is about herself and like 3 other people. Does the focus on her self make it STS? No. The intention determines polarity and her intention in writing the blog is to share herself and her life and her perceptions, for the benefit of everyone.

David's intention with his blog is similar, and so naturally David talks about himself.

i think i dont need to reiterate that, i am talking about wilcock's channelings. not his personal life. same goes for others. however i actually already explained this above.

Intellectual dishonesty.

dishonesty in performing intellectual activities like thought or communication. Examples are:

* the advocacy of a position which the advocate knows or believes to be false or misleading
* the advocacy of a position which the advocate does not know to be true, and has not performed rigorous due diligence to ensure the truthfulness of the position
* the conscious omission of aspects of the truth known or believed to be relevant in the particular context.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intellectual_dishonesty

Your not focusing on 90% of his material and what he has done for the planet. Your choosing only to focus on the fact that he talks about himself in some of his personal channelings he posted on the internet.

You are using that as total proof that he is an egomaniac

You are denying

That he constantly tells people that he is no better than him. They can have all the abilities he has, and that he shouldn't be put up on a pedestal.

All the good works hes done

The positive things Carla and Scott Mandelker have said about him

Gives away 80% of his material for free

etc

and you are concentrating on me, debasing me instead of answering to the argument i proposed.

for something to be omitted as truth, it has to be relevant to the discussion at hand. you are arguing the greatness of this entity outside its channeling work, to show it as proof of his channeling's reliability, while his channeling concentrates on, well, david in a flattering sense.

however none of these change the fact that, you cannot exonerate an entity's channeling and make it reliable, judging by acts outside his channeling. that is totally leaving out the fact that he has an extreme amount of interest in conspiracy theories that directly deal with fear patterns in this society, from illuminati to other things.

almost all of the people who he 'awakened' comes with a strong package of conspiracy and fear material in their minds. this, we unfortunately saw in this forum too, during the discussions. that tells of important pointers as to the nature of the result he is producing with his work. basically, conspiracy/fear material, melded with Ra material. a situation of reliable information mixed up with fear information.

Your focusing on whether he says hes from Ra or not, and that he mentions some personal material in some of his readings.

quite.

in case you forgot, this is the forum that people converge to discuss Ra material. and hence, our second common ground and interest, after the interest in spiritualism, is Ra material itself.

therefore, i am indeed interested in, not surprisingly, ra material. and because it was proposed that this entity channels Ra, and reincarnation of another entity which had produced reliable channelings and confirmed by Ra, i have taken interest in this, and analyzed the situation and expressed my conclusion, again, on the basis of quotes from Ra material.

what we have from Ra shows that this entity does not channel Ra.

as for edgar cayce, we dont have a means to conclude decisively, however if we remember the fact that cayce continued to give readings until it killed him, we can also make up an opinion.

[yossarian]

I'm offering the notion that a 3D Wanderer is never, ever, separated from the 6D self. A 3D incarnation is encompassed by the higher (6D) self.

That's it :¬)

I just think this is simultaneously both true and untrue depending entirely on your perspective.

A 3D wanderer is likewise never, ever, ever separated from the one infinite creator.

But from the perspective of logical reasoning about illusory phenomenon, they are separate. Acknowledging the separateness is the only way to reason about them.

[unity100]

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php/start-...quarantine

and i cant even begin to interpret stuff like this.

[Namaste]

I'm offering the notion that a 3D Wanderer is never, ever, separated from the 6D self. A 3D incarnation is encompassed by the higher (6D) self.

That's it :¬)

I just think this is simultaneously both true and untrue depending entirely on your perspective.

A 3D wanderer is likewise never, ever, ever separated from the one infinite creator.

But from the perspective of logical reasoning about illusory phenomenon, they are separate. Acknowledging the separateness is the only way to reason about them.

It does indeed appear we're discussing different perspectives, with the same underlying viewpoint :¬)

When you said 'Ra is not Ra', I used the perspective of unity of consciousness/energy patterns, whereas (if I understand correctly) you were pointing towards the perspective of separation, i.e. the veil between the physical mind of the 3D entity and his/her 6D higher self. Hence the 3D Ra incarnation does not act and think as the 6D complex.