divinecosmos hacked again

[yossarian]

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.

I was talking about Q'uo.

Criticizing the utility David's channellings on the basis of their content is sensible to me.

Comparing those channellings with the quality of the Ra Material is also sensible.

I don't think you can conclude that 100% of his channellings are useless or negative though just because they aren't as perfect as the Ra Material.

Also, David himself would agree with your criticisms of his channelled work, but he would still say there is value in them. I think this is a moderated and reasonable approach.

Perhaps you are only interested in 100% perfect sources but I don't think The Ra Material is 100% perfect either.

As far the thing about polarity, you might have a point, however I still think it would be a big mistake to lump everything David channels, writes, produces, into a lump of bad stuff.

Everything is a combination of good and bad. If the Ra Material is like 97% good, maybe David is 91% good, but 91% good is still a lot of good and value can be derived from it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

I'm sympathetic to your most recent post because it focuses on the material itself and I've had criticisms of David's channelled material also. David's channelling often focuses on info that the LOO-Ra would consider transient, it clearly involves a lot of David's self, and it suffers from detuning on several occasions - David usually being the first one to point it out when it happens.

Still, despite the downsides David's work still had a ton of good stuff and discernment is necessary to pick out the good from the bad. This applies to the Ra Material as well.

[Derek]

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.

Alright listen, This is what I hear you saying: "David mentions some things about his personal life [in channelings that are FOR HIMSELF about HIS OWN PERSONAL LIFE] therefore all of his research, all of the science, everything he has ever uncovered, everything he has ever written , everything he has ever said is completely wrong"

Here are some things you may find interesting

I am Latwii, and am aware of your query, my sister. Our brothers and sisters of Hatonn took the opportunity this evening to suggest to the instrument known as Carla that it would be more helpful in her service as an instrument for her to face in the northward direction due to her increasing sensitivity or ability to receive the signal, shall we say, that those of Hatonn are privileged to send. The fine adjustment to the twenty degrees east of north direction may at a future date be appropriate. At this time, however, it would suffice to face in the direction of magnetic north.

May we answer further, my sister?

Questioner: I thank you. We are very concerned for the continued and improving wellness of the instrument. Is there any other information which you could offer that would be assistance in our helping her?

I am Latwii, and am aware of your query, my sister. We find that this instrument, the one known as Carla, is the beneficiary of great love, light and healing opportunities of which she is aware upon one level or another, and indeed has called upon these offerings on many occasions, and is most grateful for the giving. We find that the one known as Carla is improving in her state of what you would call health to the degree that we join each in rejoicing that her heart again sings a happy song, and we thank each who gives love, light and concern to this entity.

There are many many more.

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.

This is also how Carla sees it, as shes mentioned it many times. They both believe that his higher self is in Ra and that he was channeling that. They both believe him moving out was the best thing for him.

No. The Ra that David channels—and we’ve talked this out—is not the same source as the Ra Group, it’s his private guidance. He feels that he is a sixth-density wanderer and that he came from Ra, so naturally his higher self, his guidance, would be Ra, so he’s picking up his own guidance for him.

We just got back from the Huntsville Time Of Global Shift gathering, and thoroughly enjoyed working with Scott Mandelker and David Wilcock, and others.

(notice she is also talking about herself here)

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.

[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.

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.

Personally I think our back-and-forth has mixed up different approaches to spirituality which just causes confusion.

Let me explain it using Hindu terms. The Hindus believe there are few paths to the One Infinite Creator:

1. Bhakti yoga - the yoga of love and devotion, very mystical, illogical, emotional, heart-centered love and bliss based worship

2. Jnana yoga - the yoga of discernment. Logical, dispassionate, dry, endlessly cutting through the illusion with a scalpel.

(I won't talk about the other forms of yoga)

Anyway I think we are mixing the Jnana and Bhakti perspectives in our conversation.

Personally I consider myself both a Jnani and a Bhakti. But you can't use devotional principles to reason about the creation.

You have to separate the two approaches. Everytime you try to infer something as a discriminating jnani, the bhakti might jump in and say "but that's wrong because ALL IS ONE!"

But this just sabotages any advances in wisdom. It is thought-stopping.

Likewise, if you interrupt a devotional meditation with some discerning thought about the precise nature of the difference between, say, 3D and 4D, you are going to sabotage your devotion because your devotion is necessarily irrational and seeks only to see the creator in everything.

I look at these things as two muscles and you use both to seek the creator, but you are careful to use them to enhance each other, not to step on each other's toes.

You do this by recognizing the paradox and accepting the paradox. The wisdom side says, "The paradox exists, and it is wise to accept the paradox without losing equanimity."

The love side, which is far less verbal, just vibrates deeply with love and bliss at the sight of the infinite beloved creator in all creation, acting spontaneously from pure inspiration without any thought of separateness or finity and no logical deliberation or deduction and no speech that makes logical sense except as an artistic expression.

Both sides are true and using both is best (IMO) but you gotta be careful not to use them against each other. Use them to enhance each other, not to cut each other down. This is the paradox that needs to be balanced.

[unity100]

I don't think you can conclude that 100% of his channellings are useless or negative though just because they aren't as perfect as the Ra Material.

Also, David himself would agree with your criticisms of his channelled work, but he would still say there is value in them. I think this is a moderated and reasonable approach.

Perhaps you are only interested in 100% perfect sources but I don't think The Ra Material is 100% perfect either.

im interested in purest source possible of course.

however, i see it as pretty dangerous to see value in a confirmed impure source, after seeing the presence of negative material in that source.

first of all, the reason negatives mix negative concepts with positive concepts to give to positive entities is to make those entities receptive to them. because, if the entity starts trusting, it will inevitably swallow this or that negative information/conditioning with the positive eventually, according to its biases.

moreover just check this article :

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

'THE RULES', is not only capitalized, but also bolded, as if being stressed. no, its not as if - its being stressed.

scroll down from the start to some measure below, what you will be noticing with your eye will be 'THE RULES', 'THE RULES', 'THE RULES' ....

quite suggestive and disturbing. totally leaving out the multitude of military organization badges that the article diverts attention, hence power to ...

As far the thing about polarity, you might have a point, however I still think it would be a big mistake to lump everything David channels, writes, produces, into a lump of bad stuff.

Everything is a combination of good and bad. If the Ra Material is like 97% good, maybe David is 91% good, but 91% good is still a lot of good and value can be derived from it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

in spiritual path, you unfortunately have to throw the 'baby' out with the bathwater too, as much as possible. because, the entire point of the veil business is confusion. and the negative part, seeks to amplify that confusion to derail. if one doesnt go for the purest source possible, the chances of getting derailed, increases.

I'm sympathetic to your most recent post because it focuses on the material itself and I've had criticisms of David's channelled material also. It focuses on info that the LOO-Ra would consider transient, it clearly involves a lot of David's self, and it suffers from detuning on several occasions - David usually being the first one to point it out when it happens.

Still, despite the downsides David's work still had a ton of good stuff and discernment is necessary to pick out the good from the bad. This applies to the Ra Material as well.

just read www.zetatalk.com , and then recheck david's site. you will be surprised just how much of the material he produces coincides with what's there on that site.

[Derek]

I don't think you can conclude that 100% of his channellings are useless or negative though just because they aren't as perfect as the Ra Material.

Also, David himself would agree with your criticisms of his channelled work, but he would still say there is value in them. I think this is a moderated and reasonable approach.

Perhaps you are only interested in 100% perfect sources but I don't think The Ra Material is 100% perfect either.

im interested in purest source possible of course.

however, i see it as pretty dangerous to see value in a confirmed impure source, after seeing the presence of negative material in that source.

first of all, the reason negatives mix negative concepts with positive concepts to give to positive entities is to make those entities receptive to them. because, if the entity starts trusting, it will inevitably swallow this or that negative information/conditioning with the positive eventually, according to its biases.

moreover just check this article :

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

'THE RULES', is not only capitalized, but also bolded, as if being stressed. no, its not as if - its being stressed.

scroll down from the start to some measure below, what you will be noticing with your eye will be 'THE RULES', 'THE RULES', 'THE RULES' ....

quite suggestive and disturbing. totally leaving out the multitude of military organization badges that the article diverts attention, hence power to ...

As far the thing about polarity, you might have a point, however I still think it would be a big mistake to lump everything David channels, writes, produces, into a lump of bad stuff.

Everything is a combination of good and bad. If the Ra Material is like 97% good, maybe David is 91% good, but 91% good is still a lot of good and value can be derived from it.

Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

in spiritual path, you unfortunately have to throw the 'baby' out with the bathwater too, as much as possible. because, the entire point of the veil business is confusion. and the negative part, seeks to amplify that confusion to derail. if one doesnt go for the purest source possible, the chances of getting derailed, increases.

I'm sympathetic to your most recent post because it focuses on the material itself and I've had criticisms of David's channelled material also. It focuses on info that the LOO-Ra would consider transient, it clearly involves a lot of David's self, and it suffers from detuning on several occasions - David usually being the first one to point it out when it happens.

Still, despite the downsides David's work still had a ton of good stuff and discernment is necessary to pick out the good from the bad. This applies to the Ra Material as well.

just read www.zetatalk.com , and then recheck david's site. you will be surprised just how much of the material he produces coincides with what's there on that site.

Listen, it's hard to believe that your actually posting this. "He posted the rules in ALL CAPS and BOLD so he must be corrupt!!!!!!!!"

The reason he posted that was to emphasize a point

Your coming up with all kinds of philosophy based on little things you can nitpick about his work. Yet ignoring everything else.

[unity100]

Alright listen, This is what I hear you saying: "David mentions some things about his personal life [in channelings that are FOR HIMSELF about HIS OWN PERSONAL LIFE] therefore all of his research, all of the science, everything he has ever uncovered, everything he has ever written , everything he has ever said is completely wrong"

Here are some things you may find interesting

This is also how Carla sees it, as shes mentioned it many times. They both believe that his higher self is in Ra and that he was channeling that. They both believe him moving out was the best thing for him.

what incarnated entities think about a particular person, is of little interest to me. i think i had had emphasized that, i am using the purest reliable information at hand, to conclude the nature of other channeled material. not the opinions of incarnated entities about each other.

No. The Ra that David channels—and we’ve talked this out—is not the same source as the Ra Group, it’s his private guidance. He feels that he is a sixth-density wanderer and that he came from Ra, so naturally his higher self, his guidance, would be Ra, so he’s picking up his own guidance for him.

there is one Ra society complex. they call themselves, 'i am Ra'. not, 'we are Ra'. some 'subset' of Ra society complex, totally acting in lieu of the collective will so emphasized and expressed in the Ra material we work on, can only be justified by david wilcock himself through the rationalizations he provides himself.

there is no 'private guidance subset' of a society complex - we are told that there is a higher self for entities in 3d, and for entities 3d and above, entity's totality, or society complex, or totality of society complex acts as higher self. there has been no 'subsetifications' of either of these communicated in these matters in Ra material. actually, neither in quo channelings.

.........

derek. i see you getting quite personalized and aggravated in this. its your choice to believe and rely on whatever you wish. you had ignored and dodged any clear pointers to the nature of the information you are accepting. i see it as a personal choice. however, let me tell you one personal thing too :

i have spent/lost ~ 11 years of my life while feeding on compromised material, and it isnt something that anyone would desire. the materials i lost that time on, manifest themselves A LOT in what david wilcock produces, either as himself, or as channeling.

[Namaste]

An enjoyable analogy (a student of yoga myself), akin to thinking with balanced hemispheres, and on that side note, have you practised TM meditation by any chance?

Watch this from about 1h 4m, all about activating/balancing the frontal lobes. Very much worth a few minutes, especially the following talk from John Hagelin. Marvellous :¬)

i have spent/lost ~ 11 years of my life while feeding on compromised material, and it isnt something that anyone would desire. the materials i lost that time on, manifest themselves A LOT in what david wilcock produces, either as himself, or as channeling.

If it's not too personal, would you care to share which materials brother, and how they knocked you off track? Purely as aid to anyone who may follow the same path.

[Derek]

what incarnated entities think about a particular person, is of little interest to me. i think i had had emphasized that, i am using the purest reliable information at hand, to conclude the nature of other channeled material. not the opinions of incarnated entities about each other.

Your posting your personal opinion about one Law of One quote and focusing entirely on that.

there is one Ra society complex. they call themselves, 'i am Ra'. not, 'we are Ra'. some 'subset' of Ra society complex, totally acting in lieu of the collective will so emphasized and expressed in the Ra material we work on, can only be justified by david wilcock himself through the rationalizations he provides himself.

there is no 'private guidance subset' of a society complex - we are told that there is a higher self for entities in 3d, and for entities 3d and above, entity's totality, or society complex, or totality of society complex acts as higher self. there has been no 'subsetifications' of either of these communicated in these matters in Ra material. actually, neither in quo channelings.

It's simple, his higher self originally comes from Ra, therefore when he channels his higher self he says "I am Ra". It's that simple.

i have spent/lost ~ 11 years of my life while feeding on compromised material, and it isnt something that anyone would desire. the materials i lost that time on, manifest themselves A LOT in what david wilcock produces, either as himself, or as channeling.

'

Unity100 there you go! Thats it! I'm very sorry to hear about that. Something like that can effect you tremendously. I really do understand, and wish you all the best.

I'd say this though. He is highlighting that wound for you. You are seeing parts of your former self and belief system in him, causing you to attack him and project on him. This is classic psychology 101. It is totally natural to do so. Consider forgiving any resentment you may have for yourself, the situation and anyone involved

[zenmaster]

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

and i cant even begin to interpret stuff like this.

I think someone mentioned something about intellectual honesty somewhere...

[unity100]

Your posting your personal opinion about one Law of One quote and focusing entirely on that.

It's simple, his higher self originally comes from Ra, therefore when he channels his higher self he says "I am Ra". It's that simple.

i have given you the exact quote in the material. there is no 'opinion' in that. excessive concentration on specific information, is dubbed as a channel being depolarized, by Ra. its still there in the material, you can go check it.

Unity100 there you go! Thats it! I'm very sorry to hear about that. Something like that can effect you tremendously. I really do understand, and wish you all the best.

I'd say this though. He is highlighting that wound for you. You are seeing parts of your former self and belief system in him, causing you to attack him and project on him. This is classic psychology 101. It is totally natural to do so. Consider forgiving any resentment you may have for yourself, the situation and anyone involved

i didnt say i was 'wounded'. i didnt say there was a 'belief system' either. i spoke about information.

im not 'projecting' anything onto anything. however, if you go back and read your above quote, you will see that you are projecting a lot of stuff onto me. this is why i dont ever divulge personal information - it allows the person who is discussing with me to resort into escapism by facilitating more concentration/attack on my persona.

i have given you direct pointers to Ra quote about specific material. if not for anything, that should be enough for you to make out some conclusion. however, you still ignored it. maybe it will interest you to see how much of his material is meshed up from other sources.

a good example of the kind of conspiracy material is below. go, read, and see how much of it is found in wilcock's meshed up produce.

http://www.zetatalk.com

..........

he seems to be meshing EVERYthing that made to popularity in spiritual literature :

cayce
ra
alien/et intervention
council of nine
illuminati
government conspiracy
ascension
harvest
higher self
disclosure
elites
synchronicity
ufo phenomenon
god
earth changes
finance
2012
quantum shift
wanderer phenomenon
............

everything that was seen in other material before, meshed up together in one place.

foremost of which, the most reliable and trusted sources of channeling, despite he contradicts the methods and manners those were conveyed

basically, he is giving everything to everyone, anything that is popular.

[yossarian]

@unity, I don't see why the zetatalk should be obviously negative, or primarily negative. It may not resonate with me but that doesn't mean it's STS. It just means it's not for me. (I haven't read it all just a smidgen, I'll read more for the sake of education)

I don't actually put faith in DW's channelled material, because it's so hard to trust channelled info in general. I only trust the bits of channelled info that really make my inner intuition light up. This applies to Ra as well.

I do put faith in David the man, to an extent, because my intuition lights up when I see him, and my intuition says he is full of love and light, positivity, service, and useful knowledge and feeling.

I once actually started a thread on his forum to discuss the quality of the channelled info but the mods decided it was not an appropriate discussion topic.

Anyway I do personally look to other humans for knowledge and inspiration, but always with the awareness that I have to trust my inner guidance and always with the reminder that humans are human and fallible.

Note that discussing anything on this forum is giving the opinions and views of humans credence; I read what you write despite the fact that you are human. Because I believe humans have a lot to offer.

The Ra Material may be the purest publicly released channelled material ever, but it doesn't cover everything. It's not comprehensive. And for those issues which it doesn't cover or doesn't completely cover it's useful to check other resources like Eastern traditions, new age traditions, Carla, David, unity100, Anhk, Bashar, George W. Bush, Socrates, Jesus, Genghis Khan, and the schizophrenic homeless guy who hangs out by the 7-11.

All of these sources have something to offer. None can be trusted blindly. Everything's gotta be considered and checked against inner discernment and intuitive resonance.

[Derek]

Your posting your personal opinion about one Law of One quote and focusing entirely on that.

It's simple, his higher self originally comes from Ra, therefore when he channels his higher self he says "I am Ra". It's that simple.

i have given you the exact quote in the material. there is no 'opinion' in that. excessive concentration on specific information, is dubbed as a channel being depolarized, by Ra. its still there in the material, you can go check it.

Unity100 there you go! Thats it! I'm very sorry to hear about that. Something like that can effect you tremendously. I really do understand, and wish you all the best.

I'd say this though. He is highlighting that wound for you. You are seeing parts of your former self and belief system in him, causing you to attack him and project on him. This is classic psychology 101. It is totally natural to do so. Consider forgiving any resentment you may have for yourself, the situation and anyone involved

i didnt say i was 'wounded'. i didnt say there was a 'belief system' either. i spoke about information.

im not 'projecting' anything onto anything. however, if you go back and read your above quote, you will see that you are projecting a lot of stuff onto me. this is why i dont ever divulge personal information - it allows the person who is discussing with me to resort into escapism by facilitating more concentration/attack on my persona.

i have given you direct pointers to Ra quote about specific material. if not for anything, that should be enough for you to make out some conclusion. however, you still ignored it. maybe it will interest you to see how much of his material is meshed up from other sources.

a good example of the kind of conspiracy material is below. go, read, and see how much of it is found in wilcock's meshed up produce.

http://www.zetatalk.com

..........

he seems to be meshing EVERYthing that made to popularity in spiritual literature :

cayce
ra
alien/et intervention
council of nine
illuminati
government conspiracy
ascension
harvest
higher self
disclosure
elites
synchronicity
ufo phenomenon
god
earth changes
finance
2012
quantum shift
wanderer phenomenon
............

everything that was seen in other material before, meshed up together in one place.

foremost of which, the most reliable and trusted sources of channeling, despite he contradicts the methods and manners those were conveyed

basically, he is giving everything to everyone, anything that is popular.

Zeta talk totally ripped David off. If you go back and read what happened with them this is apparent. Laura knight was doing something similar.

Regardless of how much of it effected you it is obviously clouding your view.

Where was I projecting?

I ignored it? Really?

I aknowleged it, and posted my view about it at least 3 times if not much more. What is frustrating is that you ignore my response and keep pushing that ONE QUOTE from the Law of One and your PERSONAL OPINION on it.

[unity100]

@unity, I don't see why the zetatalk should be obviously negative, or primarily negative. It may not resonate with me but that doesn't mean it's STS. It just means it's not for me. (I haven't read it all just a smidgen, I'll read more for the sake of education)

you will find that there are repeating patterns. at first, it starts to not only speak about a world elite and bilderberg or this that, but then it turns to a puppet master which controls all of them, even without them knowing that, then portrays that puppet master as evil, but then after a while it turns to portraying that puppet master as unaligned, then, as positive through various produced acts.

not to mention a constant message of separating from society and secluding in reinforced positions or bunkers or secluded communities in preparation of disasters, repeats continually.

these are just a few of the elements. when one reads, s/he can spot more.

All of these sources have something to offer. None can be trusted blindly. Everything's gotta be considered and checked against inner discernment and intuitive resonance.

seeking must reach new levels of purity as the seeking intensifies and work becomes more delicate.

[Derek]

Again what about this (note you didn't really aknowledge alot of it before)


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

How much he has helped people

All of the science and other data that he has uncovered

All of the people he has brought to the Law of One

The positive things Carla and Scott Mandelker have said about him

Gives away 80% of his material for free

etc

Also the fact that those channelings your referring to were his own personal channelings he was using for guidance like dreamwork (you still haven't acknowledged this although I keep posting it)

Comparing all that vs one quote interpreted in your own personal way. That stuff wins out.

[unity100]

Zeta talk totally ripped David off. If you go back and read what happened with them this is apparent. Laura knight was doing something similar.

Regardless of how much of it effected you it is obviously clouding your view.

zetatalk website was there with good measure of its material up circa 1997.

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/1996120...atalk.com/

david wilcock speaks of internet being new at 1999.

I aknowleged it, and posted my view about it at least 3 times if not much more. What is frustrating is that you ignore my response and keep pushing that ONE QUOTE from the Law of One and your PERSONAL OPINION on it.

ra says excessive concentration on specific material, is a sign of depolarization of a channel.

what part of that is 'my' opinion ?

[yossarian]

I aknowleged it, and posted my view about it at least 3 times if not much more. What is frustrating is that you ignore my response and keep pushing that ONE QUOTE from the Law of One and your PERSONAL OPINION on it.

To get equanimity with unity you have to recognize that he doesn't acknowledge conventional social graces.

Basically "manners" and "tact" are not really his interest. If you expect him to respond like a normal person you'll be disappointed everytime.

Also, if you expect him to put a lot of effort into seeing things from your perspective, again, you're barking up the wrong tree.

It's frustrating to talk to him because he so easily misunderstands what you're saying. I used to think it was intellectual dishonesty, now I just think he's exceptionally quirky.

[unity100]

It's frustrating to talk to him because he so easily misunderstands what you're saying. I used to think it was intellectual dishonesty, now I just think he's exceptionally quirky.

after some time, you will notice that i always concentrate on one particular important thing that underlies the basis of what's being discussed.

[Derek]

Zeta talk totally ripped David off. If you go back and read what happened with them this is apparent. Laura knight was doing something similar.

Regardless of how much of it effected you it is obviously clouding your view.

zetatalk website was there with good measure of its material up circa 1997.

http://replay.waybackmachine.org/1996120...atalk.com/

david wilcock speaks of internet being new at 1999.

I aknowleged it, and posted my view about it at least 3 times if not much more. What is frustrating is that you ignore my response and keep pushing that ONE QUOTE from the Law of One and your PERSONAL OPINION on it.

ra says excessive concentration on specific material, is a sign of depolarization of a channel.

what part of that is 'my' opinion ?

Zeta and the cassiopeians use alot of terminology from the Ra material (and since david is online, probably his material) and distorts it. If you read their material closely you can see that alot of what they write is STS.


Ra says that focusing only on earth changes, doom and gloom etc is a sign of depolarization. David talks about Law of One based spirituality, Ascension, Science, Et phenomenon, Politics/ conspiracy, and many many more. One thing he always does is bring in hope, and keep people's vibration high.

---

I aknowleged it, and posted my view about it at least 3 times if not much more. What is frustrating is that you ignore my response and keep pushing that ONE QUOTE from the Law of One and your PERSONAL OPINION on it.

To get equanimity with unity you have to recognize that he doesn't acknowledge conventional social graces.

Basically "manners" and "tact" are not really his interest. If you expect him to respond like a normal person you'll be disappointed everytime.

Also, if you expect him to put a lot of effort into seeing things from your perspective, again, you're barking up the wrong tree.

It's frustrating to talk to him because he so easily misunderstands what you're saying. I used to think it was intellectual dishonesty, now I just think he's exceptionally quirky.

Thank you Yossarian. I needed that grounding. I don't want to hurt my own polarity by engaging in this.

[unity100]

Zeta and the cassiopeians use alot of terminology from the Ra material (and since david is online, probably his material) and distorts it. If you read their material closely you can see that alot of what they write is STS.

quite, zetatalk.com uses a lot of stuff from Ra material.

however, wilcock uses a lot of stuff from zetatalk.com, that is not found, not even approximated in Ra material. this goes from elite to bilderberg to various conspiracies to 'galactic races'. the amount of material from zetatalk conspiracies that recurs in david wilcock's produce, dwarfs whatever zetatalk.com takes off Ra material. if you read, you will notice.

both have an excessive concentration on specific information that goes way beyond transient. and ALWAYS in accordance with the popular interest of the crowd at that point.

zetatalk.com was there before wilcock disseminated any of his produce. he thinks internet was new in 1999, whereas zetatalk.com was one of the high traffic sites of the internet circa 1997.

since david wilcock not even published even a book before 2004, there was no way in which zetatalk.com should be able to field that amount of material at 1996 december on a website, by plagiarizing david wilcock.

Ra says that focusing only on earth changes, doom and gloom etc is a sign of depolarization. David talks about Law of One based spirituality, Ascension, Science, Et phenomenon, Politics/ conspiracy, and many many more. One thing he always does is bring in hope, and keep people's vibration high.

indeed he meshes up everything that is popular and approved, this includes cayce and Ra. however, just go and read the headlines of his blog, and you will see the mind boggling amount of conspiracy material he produces. if you check the items, you may see gems like the 'THE RULES' article in which he had had somehow ended quarantine of earth through china in his blog.

---

excuse me - i exaggerated him a bit :

David's "graduate studies" with Higher Intelligence had already begun at age 20, by fully reading and absorbing an average of three metaphysical books per week; he integrated over 300 metaphysical titles between 1993 and 1995. David's Internet research began in 1996, and soon replaced books as the predominant medium of study. Though Internet writing is often lower in quality than published books, it also contains much that cannot be found in libraries and bookstores, and the search functions are irreplaceable.

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option...view&id=12

he was doing 'graduate studies with higher intelligence' in between 1993 and 1995, by reading over '300 metaphysical titles'.

his 'internet research' had began in 1996, and soon replaced books as the predominant medium of study.

which means, he had had not produced ANYthing that anyone can plagiarize in 1996, and, there was no way in which zetatalk.com and similar sites could plagiarize from him at that point in time.

basically, he saw a lot of the conspiracy stuff he doubles from zetatalk.com, in zetatalk.com, 1996 december and on.

[Derek]

Zeta started talking about those things when David did.

Btw, Zeta predicted the death of 90% of the worlds population on May 15, 2003. They changed their site name when it didn't happen. David totally denied that it would happen at the time.

[Ocean]

well i think the convo about Ra and the higher self etc was really interesting you guys, if you still wanna discuss it could we split this thread into two? or i could start a new thread. i'm really not into this David Wilcock is a good guy vs David Wilcock is a bad guy, it's hard to skim half of the thread to follow the other conversation.

[Derek]

well i think the convo about Ra and the higher self etc was really interesting you guys, if you still wanna discuss it could we split this thread into two? or i could start a new thread. i'm really not into this David Wilcock is a good guy vs David Wilcock is a bad guy, it's hard to skim half of the thread to follow the other conversation.

Sorry, I didn't want to derail your thread. I got way too caught up in all that than I should have. I'm done with all the bickering

Peace and blessings

[unity100]

Zeta started talking about those things when David did.

:

excuse me - i exaggerated him a bit :

David's "graduate studies" with Higher Intelligence had already begun at age 20, by fully reading and absorbing an average of three metaphysical books per week; he integrated over 300 metaphysical titles between 1993 and 1995. David's Internet research began in 1996, and soon replaced books as the predominant medium of study. Though Internet writing is often lower in quality than published books, it also contains much that cannot be found in libraries and bookstores, and the search functions are irreplaceable.

http://divinecosmos.com/index.php?option...view&id=12

he was doing 'graduate studies with higher intelligence' in between 1993 and 1995, by reading over '300 metaphysical titles'.

his 'internet research' had began in 1996, and soon replaced books as the predominant medium of study.

which means, he had had not produced ANYthing that anyone can plagiarize in 1996, and, there was no way in which zetatalk.com and similar sites could plagiarize from him at that point in time.

basically, he saw a lot of the conspiracy stuff he doubles from zetatalk.com, in zetatalk.com, 1996 december and on.

zetatalk.com was there while david wilcock was still doing his 'graduate studies with higher intelligence' in 1996.

............

in any case, thank you for your participation in this thread derek. i think we have discussed enough.

[Ocean]

i didn't mean to derail your convo either. i just think both topics deserve their own thread.

[native]

Being perfectly honest, I've actually just always assumed that almost everyone who posts here is a wanderer from Ra.

To me this would explain why people vibrate so well with Ra.

Maybe I'm deluding myself. But for a long time now it has seemed obvious to me that most if not everyone on this forum is from the social memory complex known as Ra. This forum has a very unique energy and I get very strong intuitive impressions from a lot of the people here... basically... that it's not the first time we've spoken by any means.

I agree, not so much that we're all from Ra, but in general there are probably quite a few on here.

Do you know what's really trippy to think about? For those that were born after the early 80's, they would have been on the other end of the channel responsible for Ra's responses! It would explain why some feel it to be impossibly familiar. Although I wouldn't recommend getting too full of one's self with that idea

---

And hello Derek, the one responsible for me having to add ~ to my name! Although I think it's unique because it looks like a sine wave, symbolizing balance and light!

[3DMonkey]

Oh my! I've been thinking you were one and the same. LOL!!!
I have some backtracking to do ....

[native]

No worries..that was my first post in this thread!

[Ocean]

lol i thought you were the same! of course you are.

[native]

how profound and deep. pass the cheese please

[Ocean]

lol, blue cheese! i tell the truth.