More Positive but Less Harvestable

[Monica]

It had nothing to do with being vegan.

Do you know for a fact that is true? So the newspapers, courts, doctors, etc. are all lying? Misinformed, maybe?

The media notoriously twists facts. They grab ahold of 1 little detail and blow it out of proportion, for sensationalism. I just quoted some examples of this in another thread, but don't have time right now to find it. Stories originally appearing in Associated Press, for example, get their headlines revamped and made more sensationalistic before being presented on FAUX News or other US media. Happens all the time.

veganism + zealotry = harm

NOT

veganism = harm

Veganism is still part of the equation. YES... you could of course substitute any number of other things in there because the zealotry part of the equation carries much more weight.

guns + zealotry = harm

religion + zealotry = harm

But this is not true for all things. potatoes + zealotry DO NOT = harm because potatoes do not carry the same potential for harm within them.

Zealotry = An ethical dogma based on an absolutist interpretation of a philosophical principle on conduct.

Thank you for clarifying that you don't think:

VEGANISM = ZEALOTRY

Which is what I wondered.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying. Some things, taken too far, can be dangerous. Yes, I agree with that. Fanatics with guns are dangerous. Fanatics citing Bibles are dangerous.

So yes, I see your point. A fanatic can take a perfectly healthy diet and twist it and it becomes something dangerous, especially for a baby.

But, the point you seem to be missing is:

Those people weren't feeding the child a vegan diet!

First of all, they included cod liver oil, which means they weren't even vegans at all. The key definition of vegan is that animal foods are avoided. That's the definition of vegan. So they weren't even vegan. This proves that the media either didn't understand what vegan means, or they intentionally latched on to the term vegan, even though it didn't apply here, just because it was potentially inflammatory. They were capitalizing on the inherent controversy of the vegan diet to sensationalize a news story that had nothing to do with veganism! (Because, the parents weren't even vegan!)

What they fed that baby wasn't a vegan diet! Aside from the obvious fact that cod liver oil isn't vegetarian, much less vegan, not giving a baby what is necessary for babies - human milk or some suitable alternative to milk - doesn't appear anywhere in any vegan diet I've ever heard of. They gave that baby some components that are found in a vegan diet, but it wasn't a vegan diet.

Look at it this way: What if the parents had been meat-eaters, and were feeding the baby beef broth instead of ground nuts, and the rest was the same. The baby would have been just as malnourished! Babies need milk. The baby wasn't starving because it was given some foods commonly found in the vegan diet; the baby was starving because it was denied the one food absolutely necessary for babies: milk! The parents were obviously insane, to think that human milk was somehow 'not vegan.' And if the mother couldn't breastfeed for some reason (which I question anyway, but that's a whole 'nother topic) then there are non-dairy infant formulas available. But the point is that the baby wasn't starving because the parents were vegan and feeding it a vegan diet. A vegan diet for a baby includes mother's milk. So the diet they gave the baby wasn't even remotely close to what any vegan diet would recommend for babies. That baby would have been just as bad off, if it had been given an extreme form of the typical omnivore's diet. But would the media have reported: "Typical meat-eating family starves child" ?

I don't think so. If the parents had a SAD diet, diet wouldn't even have been mentioned.

YES! YES! YES! So what can we do to help prevent against an otherwise reasonable idea, like veganism, from being twisted in the mind of an insane person, or zealot? Any ideas?

Well we can start by differentiating between zealotry and objects of zealotry.

The term connotes use of violence:

zeal·ot   
–noun
1.
a person who shows zeal.
2.
an excessively zealous person; fanatic.
3.
( initial capital letter ) a member of a radical, warlike, ardently patriotic group of Jews in Judea, particularly prominent from a.d. 69 to 81, advocating the violent overthrow of Roman rule and vigorously resisting the efforts of the Romans and their supporters to heathenize the Jews.


A person isn't a zealot for feeling strongly about a particular issue or cause. A person is a zealot if they try to force that view on others thru violence, intense pressure, or some other unwanted measure.

[3DMonkey]

everything is One.

This does not apply to this reality. Many of the concepts that will be brought up in channeling will be almost alien because they simply do not apply in this reality. Once you get past this reality you then have other options.

I don't think that it ever does not apply. As you have stated below, remove the particles of "you" and "you" cease. In the idea that everything is One, you and I are tiny specks of minerals, let's say, in the wholeness of One. It is the idea that what I am doing now is connected to what you are doing and there is no other way existence can exist. I have never viewed the Law of One as a density-specific phenomena.

What other flavors of unity do others enjoy?

How about the unity of you?
Remove all minerals you cease.
Remove all enzymes you cease.
Remove all bacteria you cease.
Remove all water you cease.
Isn't DNA partially virus?
How may separate "beings" make up you?
Do they think they are one?
Does the bacteria think it is made in the image of god?

Every atom (adam) of my body is made in my image.

---

We can't change Others.

I know. Isn't this self-evident by now?

I hope so. Although, it appears that we forget about it when our mind's gears get to moving, so I reiterate.

[BrownEye]

I have never viewed the Law of One as a density-specific phenomena.

Your current reality is density specific.
Meaning, if your conscious awareness never changes, you stay exactly where you are.
The mantra of "all is one, it does not matter" is rationalizing the path of least resistance.

[3DMonkey]

I have never viewed the Law of One as a density-specific phenomena.

Your current reality is density specific.
Meaning, if your conscious awareness never changes, you stay exactly where you are.
The mantra of "all is one, it does not matter" is rationalizing the path of least resistance.

I don't think you see it the way I see it. I'm trying to show you how I see it. All is One is not a path, nor is it the flow of energy ("resistance"). IMO. It is, however, a rationalization of sorts.

[unity100]

So between 9500BC and, say 2500BC, what happened, according to your understanding?

somehow, technology regressed.

Wait. Are you saying that Ra was the burning bush? And that Moses walked the Earth in 9500BC? If not, what are you saying?

im saying your considerations about Ra not being accurate in regard to time, are unfounded.

you either dont remember these, or havent paid attention to these, but you are making rather far flung conclusions.

Hence the ?? I am not giving an authoritative discourse, I am thinking out loud. Writing helps me to better view my thoughts. Sharing it with others helps me to see where there might be blind spots or gaps. So, thanks. I think?

the problem here is that, because you are formulating your strays into analysis by skipping over the information you can easily obtain, your analysis is falling short and off-base of what it could have accomplished.

you are starting your analysis gimped. if you just engage in a few researches into lawofone.info site, you wont. and the results will be much better.

Any ideas how to break this pattern? Or turn it to the positive?

the logos of this solar system needs to change its attitude towards heavy veiling.

Any ideas how one person may be of service in this regard?

complain to logos about it.

I propose that one person, or a whole planet of them, may arrive at the conclusion of not destroying themselves with nuclear devices, without invoking any such should-ness, if it exists.

societies regressing into orange get devoid of proper reasoning. hence, they go to extremes about whatever they are pursuing. this brings about another conclusion - populations regressing back to 2d shouldnt have access to technology or advanced physical brain capabilities, even in 3d. just like how 2d entities dont have.

otherwise, is like giving 5 year old kids shotguns.

See, my mind goes from oneness, to connectedness. Not from oneness, to unifiedness. So, if there is a unified message to be found, it is from the connectedness that naturally follows.

Any ideas how to counteract all these problems?

it is not something you can single handedly counteract. it is possibly a lesson of this solar system, or even galaxy. best you could do would be to learn the lesson individually, and move forward. everyone else will learn theirs whenever they will.

Redux should-ness. But given our differences, how may we harmonize without sacrificing individuality?

that seems to be a different angle. there is a certain amount of individuality needing to be sacrificed for harmonizing, if you are talking about the process that goes on from end 3d towards 8d.

"I believe in the One Lord My God, and His Son Jesus Christ, my Savior. I believe God hates homosexuals, and that the Bible commands me to put them to death. I believe that Allah commands me to sacrifice my life, and the lives of others, for the jihad. I believe that veganism is the one true way to eat, even if it kills my baby. I believe there is no higher anything, and I can treat people however I please."

there are two arguments in the above meshed in one pot, whereas they do not have the same properties.

everything you spoke about the semitic belief system, is the bias of this societal experience. even more, it is the conditioned bias of a certain segment of this planetary population. even if propelled and propagated by various negative concepts behind, they are particularly societal biases of the mind. even though they are portrayed to be positive, they are inherently negative acts. so, while seeming for the positive path, it is actually for the negative path. so even if you interpret the negativity behind those propositions to be a universal phenomenon or path, the propositions themselves are self-betraying - anyone accepting those with positive intents will suffer the hypocrisy.

what you say about vegan/veganism, is something that does not originate from this societal experience, but from the choice of two paths as positive and negative. and actually even further, non-polarized path, if you consider that the purpose of existence is manifesting, and since there is an infinite amount of manifestation to be done, the wisest route is to make sure noone destroys another's manifestation, so that manifestations can be maximized, leading to more varied and numerous experiences while discovering infinity. vegetarianism/veganism, if applied properly, are in alignment with these principles. therefore they end up an application of a path like the above, BUT, there is no contradiction, fallacy, or lying in it. it is what it is. anyone choosing the path to positive, or, path of unifiedness, would benefit from incorporating these practices into their path, because they are a part of that path.

[Tenet Nosce]

Your current reality is density specific.

Densities are nested within one another, and interpenetrate. The only difference is whether or not they are active, or perceived. We have the potential to move through the gateway to Intelligent Infinity, and retrieve information that informs our actions here in 3D.

Your Higher Self in 6D exists simultaneously with your ego self in 3D. They are connected.

Meaning, if your conscious awareness never changes, you stay exactly where you are.

OK but I don't see how that is connected to the first sentence. Conscious awareness changes due to higher density influences. If there were no 4D penetrating into 3D, then there would be no way to get from "here" to "there".

The mantra of "all is one, it does not matter" is rationalizing the path of least resistance.

Repeating a quip line when faced with a paradox is the path of least resistance. Actually, no, I wouldn't purport to be able to discern which path, in fact, is actually the one of least resistance. How do you discern that, Pickle? How do you know about how difficult another's path may be? And where did you get the idea that life was meant to be difficult, anyway?

If what you say is true, then how do YOU rationalize people who believe "all is one, it does not matter" AND don't take the path of least resistance AND who do serve others?

---

A bit like ecosystems we take over. When we kill off the native predators certain animals will overpopulate and things get out of hand. Not much different from the internal environment.

---

The young lady has an immune problem, as a result of long term health issues. When you destroy your body that much even dirt is as dangerous as fruit sugar. Eliminate the immune system and almost anything will kill you, including your own bacteria.

Yeah, that could be true. What would you suggest as a reasonable approach to diet to improve her immune system?

I haven't had to deal with it, so I would not know. Most common form of cleansing internal ailments are grasses and leaf greens. You will see this when dogs eat grass, it is simply to get damaging substances out of their insides. I have not heard of anything that high fiber green intake would not deal with.

OK. I will offer that and see if she accepts.

---

The media notoriously twists facts. They grab ahold of 1 little detail and blow it out of proportion, for sensationalism. I just quoted some examples of this in another thread, but don't have time right now to find it. Stories originally appearing in Associated Press, for example, get their headlines revamped and made more sensationalistic before being presented on FAUX News or other US media. Happens all the time.

Of course. I am just saying that we don't really know, do we? Just like it would be unwise to take every news story at face value, so would it be unwise to dismiss every report of harm from veganism out of hand, based upon your belief it its' inherent righteousness. I will go with the Buddha here and take the Middle Path.

Thank you for clarifying that you don't think:

VEGANISM = ZEALOTRY

Which is what I wondered.

Oh no! lol. Well I'm glad that finally got cleared up! Veganism is a lifestyle behavior; zealotry is a mental framework for lifestyle behavior. Veganism is the program; zealotry is the operating system. The dominant vibration is the operating system. It doesn't matter how GREAT the program is, if the operating system is incapable of running the program as intended.

I see a lot of "lightworkers" desperately trying to get people to accept a new program, and feeling frustrated when it doesn't take, or when it becomes highly distorted. I mean... if that is their supposed "life mission" then why would the Universe set them up to fail? :-/ No, the problem is that the new program won't run correctly on the old operating system.

I would invite my well-intentioned brothers and sisters consider setting aside their causes for a short while, and join together in seeing what we can do to get the new operating system up and running before "time" runs out on 3D. Just a suggestion, of course.

[Remember that scene in Matrix:Revolutions where the machines stop attacking, and are floating around Zion waiting for Neo to negotiate a deal with the Mainframe? I think that there will be a point in the transition from 3D to 4D that is kind of like that. A point where everybody stops fighting each other, even the activists, and focuses on things we can all agree on. And what can we all agree on? Well how about that everything is connected? Certainly we can get the vast majority of people on board with that. Let's see what happens if we start there. I, of course, could be mistaken.]

The only reason I keep using vegetarianism/veganism as an example is because it is generally (not always) tied to a philosophical principle of harmlessness. So I think it is especially poignant when somebody who THINKS they are being harmless, is actually causing great harm. This occurs because they have elevated a philosophical principle to an absolutist doctrine.

It isn't a personal attack on you. That just sometimes happens to be the fallout when somebody identifies so strongly with a cause.

I agree with the gist of what you're saying. Some things, taken too far, can be dangerous. Yes, I agree with that. Fanatics with guns are dangerous. Fanatics citing Bibles are dangerous.

So yes, I see your point. A fanatic can take a perfectly healthy diet and twist it and it becomes something dangerous, especially for a baby.

I see. So if you go back and substitute "fanatic" for "zealot" in my posts, you might get a different read from them.

ZEALOT = FANATIC

But, the point you seem to be missing is:

The point you seem to be missing is that it is the zealotry/fanaticism that caused them to implement some WILDLY distorted view of veganism, as you mentioned. Somewhere along the way, the insane person encountered a vegan, who themselves may have been so overzealous in their mission to convert others to their cause, that they OVERLOOKED the possibility that their new convert did not UNDERSTAND how to implement veganism in a healthy way. Ergo, unintended consequences, and the Law of Responsibility.

When said insane people wander the earth looking for something to believe in, they don't generally run into people like you or me who would offer a balanced view. (Or God forbid somebody who encourages them to trust in their own innate wisdom to discern truth :idea: )They run into other insane people, who believe it is their "God-given mission" in life to preach from the pulpits, whether it be veganism or anything else.

When news journalists need to get an angle on their story, they too, will go for the extremist view, and then try to pass that off as the norm.

Doesn't that ruffle your feathers? What if you learned of a new Kangen water dealer in your area who was spreading all manner of distortion about what it is and how it works? What if they put up a website making claims that, not only can people live off of Kangen water alone, but that it will cure EVERY disease, and REVERSE the aging process? And then next thing you know, there is a news story featuring the Kangen zealot, loudly proselytizing as if their view was representative of ALL Kangen water dealers? And now somebody comes in and tries to BAN Kangen water, or imprison the dealers for "fraud". Would you just leave it be? Or..?

I don't think so. If the parents had a SAD diet, diet wouldn't even have been mentioned.

Probably not. But this doesn't mean that we don't already KNOW about the health effects of the SAD diet. Only thing is: telling people that it is "bad" for them is a demonstrably ineffective strategy for changing their behavior.

These people need a new operating system. THEN we can talk about which programs to load.

A person isn't a zealot for feeling strongly about a particular issue or cause. A person is a zealot if they try to force that view on others thru violence, intense pressure, or some other unwanted measure.

Right! You can pretty much pick any cause out of a hat, and find somebody who is willing to uphold the cause through violent means. Even some "pacifist" animal rights activists, as I'm sure you know.

Now in every group of people supporting a cause there is an interface, or interaction, between the rational people and the fanatics of the group. Yes?

What concerns me is when the rational people sort of look the other way and ignore the extremist minority of their own cause. (I am not saying this is you.) What I am suggesting is that, in the grand scheme of things, that small minority of fanatics is actually doing more to depolarize the cause than all of the big multinational conglomerates put together. OK so there is really only one big multinational conglomerate.

So the "enemy" is within. It may appear to an activist that they are fighting the system, but what they are actually fighting is the system's reaction to fanatics/zealots within their own group. If there wasn't anybody taking it to the extreme, then there would be no foothold for somebody else to come in and try to make an example out of them.

[As long as Neo believed he was The One, and that his purpose was to destroy the Matrix Control System, there was no real hope, only false promises of salvation. Only when Neo turned his attention to what was going on in the REAL world, among his OWN PEOPLE, did he find the TRUE obstacle to peace in the world.]

Put another way, I think that if a vegetarian activist took the "should" and the "wrong" out of their message, i.e. scrap that "eating animals is wrong, therefore you shouldn't eat them" they would actually be MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE at promoting their cause, and thus contributing to the possibility of "one fine moment of inspiration".

I am also saying that, when one finds themselves in the incredibly fortunate position of having access to a mid-6th density entity, to ALSO leave "should" and "wrong" out of the query if they are interested in receiving the best possible response. If 6th density entities refrain from using those words, maybe we can take that as a clue to how they operate mentally, and use that as a pointer to a more enlightened view on life. Ra does not appear to see a contradiction between "there is no right and wrong" and "serving others". Perhaps there is some wisdom in there for us to discern.

Zealots and fanatics are drawn to "should" and "wrong" like flies to feces. Because that's how they propagate their flawed belief system. "Should" and "wrong" lead to UNFORESEEN CONSEQUENCES in others, when invoked by an otherwise well-meaning individual.

And, as I am sure any student of the Law of One would know, failure to foresee the consequences does not absolve one from taking responsibility for their actions. Neither does well-meaning-ness protect one against said consequences.

If you leave some manure out in your yard, intending for it to eventually nourish your garden, but instead a fly comes by and lays their eggs in it, eventually the fly's offspring will come and invade your home, and you will be responsible for that. Not the manure. Not the fly. Not the Planetary Logos.

[Monica]

I will go with the Buddha here and take the Middle Path.

That reminds me of what I hear a lot: "Everything is ok in moderation." But one person's idea of the 'middle path' or 'moderation' might be considered extreme to another. I've been told I was 'extremist' just for not eating meat or junk food. The 'middle' fluctuates depending on what the polar opposites are, in any given situation.

Oh no! lol. Well I'm glad that finally got cleared up!

Yeah me too!

Veganism is a lifestyle behavior; zealotry is a mental framework for lifestyle behavior. Veganism is the program; zealotry is the operating system. The dominant vibration is the operating system. It doesn't matter how GREAT the program is, if the operating system is incapable of running the program as intended.

OK, interesting analogy.

I see a lot of "lightworkers" desperately trying to get people to accept a new program, and feeling frustrated when it doesn't take, or when it becomes highly distorted. I mean... if that is their supposed "life mission" then why would the Universe set them up to fail? :-/ No, the problem is that the new program won't run correctly on the old operating system.

I would invite my well-intentioned brothers and sisters consider setting aside their causes for a short while, and join together in seeing what we can do to get the new operating system up and running before "time" runs out on 3D. Just a suggestion, of course.

We're already doing that, with Kangen Water. I've witnessed many people just naturally start making changes on their own, after drinking the water for awhile. It's uncanny. Of course, they do have to be willing to drink the water. If they aren't willing to do that, then we move on. But there are plenty of people out there who won't change their diets or open their minds, but they are willing to just drink a different water, being that they drink water anyway. So it's not a major change for them. Yet it facilitates major change, almost effortlessly. It's wondrous to behold! It's like there's a quiet revolution going on, one person at a time, who in turn is affecting many others.

[Remember that scene in Matrix:Revolutions where the machines stop attacking, and are floating around Zion waiting for Neo to negotiate a deal with the Mainframe? I think that there will be a point in the transition from 3D to 4D that is kind of like that. A point where everybody stops fighting each other, even the activists, and focuses on http://things we can all agree on. I, of course, could be wrong.]

That would be nice. But we can't just wait for that to happen. We have to start someplace, within our own sphere if influence.

The only reason I keep using vegetarianism/veganism as an example is because it is generally (not always) tied to a philosophical principle of harmlessness. So I think it is especially poignant when somebody who THINKS they are being harmless, is actually causing great harm. This occurs because they have elevated a philosophical principle to an absolutist doctrine.

I disagree with this premise. Firstly, people become vegetarians for many reasons. Animal rights is just one of them, and if anything, I'd say most people are vegetarians for health reasons, not because of the animals. More of the vegans do it because of the animals, but middle-of-the-road lacto-ovo vegetarians generally do it for health reasons.

Secondly, a vegan diet doesn't case 'great harm.' Zealotry causes great harm.

Yes, I see your point...But I can think of better examples for the simple reason that violence and veganism are rarely tied together. Obviously, we all know about the extremist animals rights groups who use violence to rescue lab rats. Those are what I'd call extremists. And there are a few cases in which parents don't feed their children properly, like the example you gave. But those are very rare and, as I explained in my previous post, they weren't even vegans in that particular case, and were obviously crazy.

There is a great deal more positive happening as a result of vegetarianism and even veganism. People are getting healed of chronic diseases in droves. Not to mention reducing animal cruelty and environmental impact. There is astronomically more positive than negative, overall. Thus, I think it's misleading and even a disservice to use something that is so overwhelmingly positive (vegetarianism) as an example of zealotry, when zealotry is so comparatively rare in this area, and there are so many better examples of zealotry.

There are far more examples of zealotry found in the Abrahamic religions, such as terrorists, people supporting wars on a grand scale, 'pro-lifers' who blow up abortion clinics in the name of 'life' etc. In those cases, the ratio of negative to positive is far greater than it is with a veg. diet. Pointing out the incongruencies of people proclaiming to be followers of the Prince of Peace, yet who support war, is far more effective than pointing out the handful of vegan fanatics, for the simple reason that the former involves many, many millions of people who have the political clout to influence new wars. A handful of vegan fanatics is a miniscule problem, by comparison.

It isn't a personal attack on you. That just sometimes happens to be the fallout when somebody identifies so strongly with a cause.

Thank you. I still contend that it's not the identification with a cause that is at fault; it's the approach to working for that cause. I identify very strongly with the causes of ending wars and ending the meat industry, as well as several other causes. My identification with those causes might be every bit as strong as the peace activist or vegan fanatic, but I am choosing to work for those causes in completely different ways.

I see. So if you go back and substitute "fanatic" for "zealot" in my posts, you might get a different read from them.

ZEALOT = FANATIC

fa·nat·ic   
–noun
1.
a person with an extreme and uncritical enthusiasm or zeal, as in religion or politics.

The terms are pretty much synonymous, with zealot being the stronger. Key word in the above definition is uncritical. It is the being uncritical that is dangerous. However, meat-eaters often accuse vegetarians of being fanatics, not because they're being uncritical, but simply because they feel strongly about the issue.

Speaking for myself, I have been conscientiously critical and have spent many years investigating diet, so I cannot be said to be a fanatic. Yet meat-eaters have called me that before.

The point you seem to be missing is that it is the zealotry/fanaticism that caused them to implement some WILDLY distorted view of veganism, as you mentioned. Somewhere along the way, the insane person encountered a vegan, who themselves may have been so overzealous in their mission to convert others to their cause, that they OVERLOOKED the possibility that their new convert did not UNDERSTAND how to implement veganism in a healthy way. Ergo, unintended consequences, and the Law of Responsibility.

Sure. But that can happen with anything.

When said insane people wander the earth looking for something to believe in, they don't generally run into people like you or me who would offer a balanced view. (Or God forbid somebody who encourages them to trust in their own innate wisdom to discern truth :idea: )They run into other insane people, who believe it is their "God-given mission" in life to preach from the pulpits, whether it be veganism or anything else.

Yup

When news journalists need to get an angle on their story, they too, will go for the extremist view, and then try to pass that off as the norm.

Yup. Which is why I don't like to validate them by using those inflated stories as examples. They're often exaggerated or even inaccurate.

Doesn't that ruffle your feathers?

Sure. But I don't read or watch the news much, so it isn't really an issue for me.

What if you learned of a new Kangen water dealer in your area who was spreading all manner of distortion about what it is and how it works? What if they put up a website making claims that, not only can people live off of Kangen water alone, but that it will cure EVERY disease, and REVERSE the aging process? Would you just leave it be? Or..?

Ha, that has already happened! And the opposite too: Some 'chemistry professor' who was obviously paid by quackwatch.com or the FDA set up a website and paid a lot to get in the #1 slot on google search. He claimed to be an 'expert' and that our water was 'snake oil.' His site would have been hilarious, if it weren't for the fact that gullible people who don't know the difference between acid and alkaline, readily believed him, even though he mixed up acid and alkaline and made all sorts of other mistakes as well. No chemistry professor could be that stupid, so it was obviously disinfo.

So of course I do what I can to correct the false info. I wrote a scathing rebuttal to his website. I do my part to educate people.

As for inflated claims of the water 'curing' anything and everything, we haven't had too much trouble with that sort of thing. Maybe because the genuine stories are so powerful, that it isn't necessary to inflate them.

telling people that it is "bad" for them is a demonstrably ineffective strategy for changing their behavior.

Absolutely agree! It's totally useless. Most people aren't willing to change their diet/lifestyle until they're very sick and desperate.

These people need a new operating system. THEN we can talk about which programs to load.

Agreed! Which is what we're working on.

Right! You can pretty much pick any cause out of a hat, and find somebody who is willing to uphold the cause through violent means. Even some animal rights activists, as I'm sure you know.

Yes. And I agree, they do more damage than good. No doubt about it.

Now in every group of people supporting a cause there is an interface, or interaction, between the rational people and the fanatics of the group. Yes?

I suppose, in most cases. But not necessarily. There are always rebels who are out there doing their own thing, and it would be a mistake to associate them with the mainstream group.

What concerns me is when the rational people sort of look the other way and ignore the extremist minority of their own cause. (I am not saying this is you.)

Oh I don't think they look the other way. Reputable groups often issue statements, dissociating themselves from the radical fringe.

What I am suggesting is that, in the grand scheme of things, that small minority of fanatics is actually doing more to depolarize the cause than all of the big multinational conglomerates put together. OK so there is really only one big multinational conglomerate.

Well I don't know what the exact ratio is, but they are definitely destructive.

So the "enemy" is within. It may appear to an activist that they are fighting the system, but what they are actually fighting is the system's reaction to fanatics/zealots within their own group. If there wasn't anybody taking it to the extreme, then there would be no foothold for somebody else to come in and try to make an example out of them.

True. But what do you suggest be done about the zealots? They are loose cannons.

Put another way, I think that if a vegetarian activist took the "should" and the "wrong" out of their message, i.e. scrap that "eating animals is wrong, therefore you shouldn't eat them" they would actually be MUCH MORE EFFECTIVE at promoting their cause, and thus contributing to the possibility of "one fine moment of inspiration".

In practical, everyday life, that is exactly what this vegetarian does. I focus on getting people to just drink Kangen Water, and then they tend to be more receptive to other lifestyle changes. And even if they aren't, just drinking the water alone is such a huge, positive thing, that ripples out so much, that I'm not concerned what else they do after that.

But in an online discussion forum, we are discussing philosophical angle to any given action. Philosophically, I would never "scrap the eating animals is wrong." And when asked directly, or when an opportunity presents itself, I am very upfront that eating animals is wrong, because I believe it is, and it would be a disservice and a lie to say otherwise, just as you wouldn't say "war isn't wrong", would you?

[BrownEye]

and then they tend to be more receptive to other lifestyle changes.

This is how a person goes through the extreme changes like we do. When you feel such a huge difference by eliminating one single item of your diet, many of us will continue to remove things one by one to find out which makes us feel worst. In the end you have quite a list of things that just make a person feel like crap. But without the first step, why would anyone believe this?

[Tenet Nosce]

That reminds me of what I hear a lot: "Everything is ok in moderation." But one person's idea of the 'middle path' or 'moderation' might be considered extreme to another. I've been told I was 'extremist' just for not eating meat or junk food. The 'middle' fluctuates depending on what the polar opposites are, in any given situation.

I say, "Everything in moderation, including moderation."

OK, interesting analogy.

Thanks! I have found that analogy to be quite useful myself.

We're already doing that, with Kangen Water. I've witnessed many people just naturally start making changes on their own, after drinking the water for awhile. It's uncanny.

Awesome!

That would be nice. But we can't just wait for that to happen. We have to start someplace, within our own sphere if influence.

You can do whatever you prefer. There is no judgment. I am just offering an angle here.

I disagree with this premise. Firstly, people become vegetarians for many reasons. Animal rights is just one of them, and if anything, I'd say most people are vegetarians for health reasons, not because of the animals. More of the vegans do it because of the animals, but middle-of-the-road lacto-ovo vegetarians generally do it for health reasons.

Well... hmm. I guess there would be no way to discern what percentages those might be. I do see things like this going on... here come take this yoga class it is good for your health... well now that you are here, did you know that yogis follow a vegetarian lifestyle? [INCORRECT, Bikram for example, eats meat]... what's that you say? you don't want to give up meat? well then we can't teach you the "secrets" of yoga because your body is not "pure" enough. End result: no yoga, no vegetarianism, no spiritual growth, only an umami aftertaste in one's mouth.

Do you see what I am getting at? Why does meat eating disqualify one from spiritual growth? It gets back to the whole thing about cleansing the body so that more of the soul's light can shine through. Well, OK, but that seems like the hard way to me. Why not attend first to the soul, and allow the body to harmonize itself to the higher vibration in its own way and time?

I just see so many people struggling with this question of what to eat. And overlaid upon various natural barriers of communication or education, you then have all these conflicting layers of religious and philosophical thought to contend with about what is "right and wrong", i.e. religious dietary laws, diet gurus, bonehead physicians, etc. Not to mention economic barriers, whether real or perceived.

So the diet thing often gets in the way when somebody tries to start there. Because they are attempting to change their body in order to effect a change in their mind. Which can work... kind of. But it doesn't usually last. And so, then the person (because of their faulty belief system) concludes that there must be something WRONG with them for not being able to uphold the strict ideal of food choices, whatever they perceive them to be.

Secondly, a vegan diet doesn't case 'great harm.' Zealotry causes great harm.

Got it.

There are far more examples of zealotry found in the Abrahamic religions, such as terrorists, people supporting wars on a grand scale, 'pro-lifers' who blow up abortion clinics in the name of 'life' etc. In those cases, the ratio of negative to positive is far greater than it is with a veg. diet. Pointing out the incongruencies of people proclaiming to be followers of the Prince of Peace, yet who support war, is far more effective than pointing out the handful of vegan fanatics, for the simple reason that the former involves many, many millions of people who have the political clout to influence new wars. A handful of vegan fanatics is a miniscule problem, by comparison.

Yes, and no. The problem with the Abrahamic mindset it that it attaches itself to everything in sight, like a parasite. So to all the vegetarians, and the vegans, and the health freedom fighters, and the animal rights activists, and the gay rights activists, and the dolphin activists, and the rainforest activists, and the anonymous computer hacking groups, et al. it may APPEAR that they are fighting against different things, and so there is an opportunity there for a negatively-minded group to use distortion tactics (misinformation, disinformation) to turn all these groups upon each other, thus having an overall depolarizing effect on their (seemingly respective) mission(s).

A possible solution, I would offer, is for the activist to look first in their own mind to see where program might be lurking, and to exercise wisdom in taking action based upon emotional zeal. I am sure that some already do this.

Secondly, the activist would turn to their own group and ask others to join them in the HIGHER purpose of promoting their cause with a mind to minimizing the potential for distortion. Again, there are those already doing this.

Thirdly, the activist group when reaching out would selectively target those "fringe dwellers" of society to help empower them to be more effective leaders in their respective social groups.

Anyway, just a thought. :-/

Ha, that has already happened! And the opposite too: Some 'chemistry professor' who was obviously paid by quackwatch.com or the FDA set up a website and paid a lot to get in the #1 slot on google search. He claimed to be an 'expert' and that our water was 'snake oil.' His site would have been hilarious, if it weren't for the fact that gullible people who don't know the difference between acid and alkaline, readily believed him, even though he mixed up acid and alkaline and made all sorts of other mistakes as well. No chemistry professor could be that stupid, so it was obviously disinfo.

Yes. But to the minds of many, it is not obviously disinfo. Ugh! The only way I have found to deal with quackwatch in my own mind is just to laugh. You know, I actually wrote Barrett and commended him for his commitment to end fraud in medicine. I also asked him how it was that I didn't see ANYTHING on his website about the frauds perpetuated every day by mainstream medicine. I mean... if he felt so STRONGLY on the matter why not, oh I dunno, turn to his own colleagues and try to do something about them first? Based on his reply, I don't think he found much value in my logic.

True. But what do you suggest be done about the zealots? They are loose cannons.

Are we not all things?

And when asked directly, or when an opportunity presents itself, I am very upfront that eating animals is wrong, because I believe it is, and it would be a disservice and a lie to say otherwise, just as you wouldn't say "war isn't wrong", would you?

I would say that what I have observed about war is that it does not lead to peace. Then I would ask what they have observed in their own experience.

War can't be "wrong" because it is birthed out of the very idea of wrongness. We are right. You are wrong. Boom, boom, you're dead! "Wrong" is the problem, and war is the offered solution.

The problem is the illusion of separateness which some choose to employ to demiurgically "create" an artificial boundary between the "right things" and the "wrong things" in Creation. The Abrahamic program confounds this more primal distortion through the identifying unity with sameness, or conformity of belief, i.e. we know the "one true way" and so are justified in making war (physical or otherwise) upon those who refuse to acknowledge the reality of our arbitrary artificial boundary [i.e. false creation].

This "Supreme Ultimate" ninja move comprises a catachresis, metonymy, AND synecdoche, applied through the hypocorism of the name changing of Yahweh and Brahma by agency of the Covenant.

No, we are free to choose war. I certainly don't see anybody stepping in to stop us, with the possible exception of nuclear weapons. Rather, let us be clear about what we also know, based upon history, archaeology and scientific fact, with regard to where it leads.

We've gone down that road before. We know where it leads. And I don't think that is where we want to be.

[Tenet Nosce]

somehow, technology regressed.

Maybe along the lines of what you outlined here in your second post Ra on Atlantis, Mu and others? It would have been helpful for you to offer that, as I did specifically ask if you had an alternative timeline in mind.

Again, where are you coming up with your timeframe? I am not asking in an argumentative fashion, but rather because I am eager to know if there is something important I overlooked.

I mean, were you assuming that I had already read your post and was trying to pull a ninja move? Or were you just choosing not to mention it? Or...? Cause it seems, you know, a little relevant to the conversation.

As you can see, I joined the forum nearly a week after you, as evidenced here in my first post on Post-harvest continuity of consciousness. I will freely admit, I hadn't read through all of the threads before I started posting, but instead jumped right in.

Post-harvest continuity of consciousness
05-28-2010, 12:34 PM
Post: #1
Tenet Nosce Online
Another You
****

I'm new to this forum but not new to Law of One. After many years of research, I find myself coming back to the same fundamental question: How does it actually work?

At least, maybe now there is a little more clarity on why I posted this in 1984.04.15 First Hatonn Contact After Ra:

I would be interested to see where this thread might lead without framing it into a light-saber war based on a false dichotomy of "Tenet's View" vs. "Unity's View". After all, you and I are both on the same "side". At least according to my read of the Law of One.

I'll invoke the wisdom of Zygra:

As for Unity100. I love him, god loves him. We have a loving conflict.

So, you know, what can I say? Peace be with you. We appeared to have been on the same page there in that first thread, at least.

---

And for my new friend Bring4th_Monica, perhaps this quote, also from Post-harvest continuity of consciousness will also help to shed even more light on where I am coming from.

I can't speak for others, but as for myself this inquiry is not motivated by a fear of death.

30-some years ago when this dialogue began, it was much easier to suspend disbelief about the end of 3D because it was so far off. Now that we are well within 3 years, I believe there are some questions which need to be addressed if this theory is going to continue to have any credibility.

We have 3 years to move through these core experiences:

1. An end to all wars, acts of terrorism, murder, and abuse.
2. Basic food and shelter for all inhabitants of earth.
3. Disclosure of the existence of other forms of intelligent life.
4. Removal of all STS and unpolarized individuals from 3D.

It just seems like a pretty tall order from this vantage point.

Trace the distortion back to its roots, folks! There is great wisdom to be found there. :idea:

[Monica]

Moderator Note: Off-topic posts about water have been moved to the appropriate thread:

Olio > Not drinking water

[unity100]

somehow, technology regressed.

Maybe along the lines of what you outlined here in your second post Ra on Atlantis, Mu and others? It would have been helpful for you to offer that, as I did specifically ask if you had an alternative timeline in mind.

in those lines. the technology seems to have regressed fundamentally and speedily. have all the atlanteans fleeing atlantis lost their memories ? or, did they swear not to use technology again. still, it seems there have been numerous structures or installations built with considerable technology. (derinkuyu underground city is a good example).

or, had the technology they were using lost its power source, its means, when the earth got destabilized with the sinking of atlantis. (since tesla technology also uses earth's vibrations, it is possible that they had a similar technology).

Again, where are you coming up with your timeframe? I am not asking in an argumentative fashion, but rather because I am eager to know if there is something important I overlooked.

I mean, were you assuming that I had already read your post and was trying to pull a ninja move? Or were you just choosing not to mention it? Or...? Cause it seems, you know, a little relevant to the conversation.

As you can see, I joined the forum nearly a week after you, as evidenced here in my first post on Post-harvest continuity of consciousness. I will freely admit, I hadn't read through all of the threads before I started posting, but instead jumped right in.

its not about my timeframe. its about how you have missed the date for orion entry. (1600 BC).

[Tenet Nosce]

its not about my timeframe. its about how you have missed the date for orion entry. (1600 BC).

Would it be safe to say that you believe that every word attributed to Ra in the Law of One material is literally true... as in when a Christian fundamentalist says that the Bible is the literal Word of God?

Honestly, I am struggling to see how you are so quick to dismiss the actual statements of the Law of One itself, but instead choose to focus on trivial details that came later in the contact.

[Monica]

quick to dismiss the actual statements of the Law of One itself

Which statements? Which 'trivial' details?

[Tenet Nosce]

in those lines. the technology seems to have regressed fundamentally and speedily. have all the atlanteans fleeing atlantis lost their memories ? or, did they swear not to use technology again. still, it seems there have been numerous structures or installations built with considerable technology. (derinkuyu underground city is a good example).

Yes. When I watched the story about Derinkuyu on Ancient Aliens, I started researching more deeply into other subterranean cities, and the idea that the gods may have retreated underground, and are still there now, pulling strings from behind the scenes, and sometimes reemerging. There is this whole side-story about "ETs" supposedly coming "back" to save humanity. Much of it is communicated by Hatonn through Matthew and Suzy Ward. I suspect that the "ETs" are just an attempt at rebranding by the gods of early antiquity. Honestly, I think Hatonn may have been hoodwinked, through loving folly, into promoting a false flag savior routine by these false gods, now disguised as extraterrestrials.

or, had the technology they were using lost its power source, its means, when the earth got destabilized with the sinking of atlantis. (since tesla technology also uses earth's vibrations, it is possible that they had a similar technology).

Yes! There is a new book out called Atlantis and the Cycles of Time by Joscelyn Godwin. I dunno if you are familiar with his work, but he also recently resurrected The Kingdom of Agarttha: A Journey into the Hollow Earth. The book was originally written by Joseph Alexandre Saint-Yves d'Alveydre and published as The Mission of India in Europe (French translation of title) in 1886, in the time of Sir Edward Bulwer-Lytton, author of The Coming Race. This was not long after the publishing of Donnelly’s Atlantis: The Antediluvian World in 1882. This time frame also overlaps with the life of Nikola Tesla, and the emergence of Coca-Cola into pop culture and its dissemination through North and South America through the demiurgic creation of Santa Claus as a marketing gimmick.

Many of Saint-Yves writings were influenced by another enigmatic character known as Hadji Sharif, who was possibly a brahmin, and who taught the Sanskrit language to Saint-Yves. According to his journals, there was some type of fallling out between the two, possibly over the use of plant entheogens to astral travel to the fabled realm of Agarttha. Saint-Yves also appeared to have a keen interest in the medicinal use of algae, although that line of thinking largely fell to the wastebin of history.

Also notable events from this time period are the re-discovery of Machu Picchu by Augusto Bernsin in 1867 and the opening of the Suez Canal in 1869, eventually leading to the discovery of King Tut's Tomb. Tut being the last pharaoh of the 18th dynasty, best known for Ahkenaton, who proclaimed a cosmology eerily similar to the Law of One. The progenitor of the Inca culture, Viracocha, was also eerily similar to Ahkenaton, even down to certain unusual physical features.

Of course, the opening line to A Wrinkle in Time is a throwback to Lytton, and the story, I believe, a poignant example of how misguided thinking in 4D neophytes can lead them to a negative world where unity is identified with sameness. There are many flavors of unity (100 perhaps ), sameness being the one that the Abrahamic "salvation" mindset insists on identifying it with. Unity can also refer to connectedness, for example. This will lead one in an entirely different direction with respect to ethical considerations, and the supposed duty to proselytize and "convert" others to the "One True Path".

Saint-Yves is known to have made some sideways comments about Atlantis that later emerged in the Cayce Material, and again in the Ra material.

Godwin and I had a few email exchanges a few months back, and I said I would get the book. I suppose now might be a good time to do so. :idea:

Saint-Yves was also the architect of the Archeometre. He is a somewhat enigmatic figure in history. Writers about him have passed him off as a megalomaniac "fringe dweller", even among other alchemists, hermeticists, mystics, esotericists, spiritualists, and occultists of the time. However there are some interesting links I have found as to how some of his ideas got distorted, and passed through time by the Synarchists and Theosophists. He also tried to retract his book, although one apparently slipped through and was re-published by his "friends" post-mortem. Actually, it was an attempt to track down where "his" ideas came from that led me to do some deep historical research, and eventually was what brought me back to this forum after a year hiatus!

As history teaches us (or fails to teach us as the case may be) the views picked up by the Synarchists and the Theosophists reconvene later to form the occult philosophical basis of the Nazi Party and the Third Reich.

Unforeseen consequences, indeed!

[Tenet Nosce]

Just now watching A&E's Ancient Mysteries: Astrology on Netflix.

It is uncanny how some of these distortions I have been jammering on about in various threads: the "Three Wise Men", the Mayan 2012 prediction as an apocalypse, astrology as having been birthed by the Babylonians, not the Aryans... keep emerging in the voiceovers.

See... this is what I am trying to get at... why is it so important to try and reconcile all of these seemingly inexplicable events from the past in terms of the Judaeo-Christian-Muslim (Abrahamic) system of belief?

AND why is there so much resistance in mainstream history and archaeology to the simple offering of an alternative view? Why won't otherwise intelligent people let go of their preconceived notions of human history as programmed onto them by their religious belief systems? What -exactly- is so threatening about it, anyway? :-/

Folks, y'all don't need to give up Jesus to get along with the rest of the world. Only let go of the lies that others (notably authority figures and "loved" ones) have told you about his life and mission. Trust me, there will be no hellfire and damnation for looking into "heretical" views like the [url=http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/thomas.htm]Gospel of Thomas</url>. Maybe, just maybe, you might find at long last some peace...

Personally, I have not observed those who accept the "Jesus as personal Savior" program to be in possession of peace. (Love, Joy, yes) But as for peace, it is only a superficial peace, weakly held in place by a distorted view of what it means to "have faith". It is a lie propagated by a false promise of a "land of milk and honey" where pain no longer exists.

ROFL! Hate to break it to y'all but 4D is a looooonnng way off from anything like that. :exclamation: No, we would do better to seek wisdom on how to bring peace forth/fourth <b>in <a href="http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=2980&amp;pid=46931#pid46931"><i>this</i></a> moment</b>. Leave the milk and honey, ambrosia, soma, <a href="http://montalk.net/gnosis/174/the-philosopher-s-stone" mybb_href="http://montalk.net/gnosis/174/the-philosopher-s-stone">philosopher's stone</a>, <a href="http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=2719&amp;pid=41078#pid41078" mybb_href="http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=2719&amp;pid=41078#pid41078">manna</a>, <a href="http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=2719&amp;pid=47282#pid47282" mybb_href="http://www.bring4th.org/forums/showthread.php?tid=2719&amp;pid=47282#pid47282">dehydrated potato flakes</a>, and all of that mumbo-jumbo to the alchemists. Trust me, we are working on it. <img src="images/smilies/wink.gif" alt="">

For the "Chosen Ones" and the "Saved Ones" there is always lurking in the background is that nagging question... why hasn't the Savior returned? I have observed this to cause deep emotional and psychological angst in people, which in turn results in certain warlike behaviors, or to make excuses for warlike behavior in others. In addition, I am of the opinion that this can lead to certain distortions in the physical body, and contribute to the manifestations of disease in the body complex.

I will just throw myself out on a limb and hypothesize that this sort of deep psychological rift is more damaging to the body than, say, eating meat.

I mean, it doesn't make sense, right? What would Jesus have to say about making war on your brothers and sisters here on earth? I would have thought this much would be obvious by now.

[BrownEye]

It is uncanny how some of these distortions I have been jammering on about in various threads: the "Three Wise Men", the Mayan 2012 prediction as an apocalypse, astrology as having been birthed by the Babylonians, not the Aryans...

The brain finds it relatively easy to grasp threes -- elements, colours and fonts. Push that marginally up to four and the brain gets confused about where to look and what to do, and sends the eye scampering like a frisky puppy on a sunny day.

So why does this happen? For that we might have to go back a little to diaper country. As a child, everything you did and learned seemed to be centered around three -- A,B,C; 1,2,3; Three blind mice, Three musketeers, Trinity, Three Stooges and Huey, Louie and Dewey. (Quack! Quack! Quack!)

Then again, maybe these writers, animators and wise men understood the ease with which we understand 'threes' and reconstructed their work to fit this paradigm.
http://www.hodu.com/marketing-communication.2.shtml

Hmm, they removed the three wise men since the last time I had read this.

[Tenet Nosce]

The brain finds it relatively easy to grasp threes -- elements, colours and fonts. Push that marginally up to four and the brain gets confused about where to look and what to do, and sends the eye scampering like a frisky puppy on a sunny day.

How do you suppose this plays out in a group mind making the transition from 3D to 4D thinking?

So why does this happen? For that we might have to go back a little to diaper country. As a child, everything you did and learned seemed to be centered around three -- A,B,C; 1,2,3; Three blind mice, Three musketeers, Trinity, Three Stooges and Huey, Louie and Dewey. (Quack! Quack! Quack!)

Then again, maybe these writers, animators and wise men understood the ease with which we understand 'threes' and reconstructed their work to fit this paradigm.
http://www.hodu.com/marketing-communication.2.shtml

Yea, we can thank Stan Freberg, Fritz Freling, and Coca-Cola for that!

Hmm, they removed the three wise men since the last time I had read this.

Funny how that happens.

[BrownEye]

How do you suppose this plays out in a group mind making the transition from 3D to 4D thinking?

I think this is just another trap designed for programming the masses. There are so many angles to creating the O/S for everyone to function by that really a person has to look inside and find themself before they can then help others learn their way out of the program.

---

I guess you could call it catalyst. Something that forces you to overcome in order to advance. Why would you need to be programmed? Well, in order to best serve the needs of the programmers. What do the programmers want? So far the most obvious signs to me are consumption and false ownership. Keeping you in their program stops you from creating your own. This is where the adversary concept comes in, creating a false sense of empowerment through the idea that we "need" to own things, or at the very least, nicer things than all the neighbors. The average person competes for this false ownership and falls for consumption. Consumption programming is best seen when a person just HAS to buy something, until getting it home, then setting it to the side never having interest in it again. This is what is taught to children right now, creating the scene for a future of hardcore consumption.

[Tenet Nosce]

When there is contradiction in the heart and mind, you become less harvestable.

Thank you, neutral333. I'd like to hear what you would consider an example of this, hypothetically. By heart, do you mean spirit? Would you think this is your way of explaining the "Way of Responsibility"?

Agreed.

[GrandKitaro777]

It's really quite simple.

Key word "Compassion"

General Patton had a dilemma, which involves defending what he loved and murdering in the name of it. He was the General of the United States Army and vowed to protect the citizens from all enemies foreign and domestic. He's apart of the Army and commanded troops and like most commanders they develop bonds with their soldiers and held the utmost important mission to protect and preserve America's freedom even if it mean killing in the name of it. Patton chose the mundane act of commanding troops to kill, whilst still questioning in mind whether he should be commanding troops to kill off enemies, after all they are human beings capable of the same emotions you're capable of bringing about, the only difference is they aren't humans of the geographical region you protect. If he truly lived with compassion or universal love he wouldn't kill in the name of his country. He'd see them in the same light of his fellow human beings residing in his home country.

[3DMonkey]

It's really quite simple.

Key word "Compassion"

General Patton had a dilemma, which involves defending what he loved and murdering in the name of it. He was the General of the United States Army and vowed to protect the citizens from all enemies foreign and domestic. He's apart of the Army and commanded troops and like most commanders they develop bonds with their soldiers and held the utmost important mission to protect and preserve America's freedom even if it mean killing in the name of it. Patton chose the mundane act of commanding troops to kill, whilst still questioning in mind whether he should be commanding troops to kill off enemies, after all they are human beings capable of the same emotions you're capable of bringing about, the only difference is they aren't humans of the geographical region you protect. If he truly lived with compassion or universal love he wouldn't kill in the name of his country. He'd see them in the same light of his fellow human beings residing in his home country.

Thank you.

I got the impression that he did begin to see them in the same light and with the same love. This is what polarized him more positive, I guess. At the same time, it seems his glimpse of this light/love, accompanied by him turning away from it, is what made him "less harvestable." The being an example of the Way of Responsibility- his glimpse gave him understanding and a responsibility to choose what to do with it.

[unity100]

its not about my timeframe. its about how you have missed the date for orion entry. (1600 BC).

Would it be safe to say that you believe that every word attributed to Ra in the Law of One material is literally true... as in when a Christian fundamentalist says that the Bible is the literal Word of God?

the most reliable piece of information we have in regard to spiritual literature, is Ra material. moreover, the dates hold perfectly. the entry of orion entity circa 1600 bc, and the historical developments coincide. especially the start of 'empire' concept. cultures become increasingly aggressive en masse. kadesh war comes to mind. also the concept of religion and effect of religion on the behavior of entities become significantly visible. religion no longer involved in only spiritual life or behavior patterns of entities in their social circle. it becomes politics itself.

more detailed analysis is possible, however that would require the same level of affinity and enthusiasm on behalf of participants in regard to history.

Honestly, I am struggling to see how you are so quick to dismiss the actual statements of the Law of One itself, but instead choose to focus on trivial details that came later in the contact.

at a loss to see the contradiction or the emphasis there.

Yes. When I watched the story about Derinkuyu on Ancient Aliens, I started researching more deeply into other subterranean cities, and the idea that the gods may have retreated underground, and are still there now, pulling strings from behind the scenes, and sometimes reemerging. There is this whole side-story about "ETs" supposedly coming "back" to save humanity. Much of it is communicated by Hatonn through Matthew and Suzy Ward. I suspect that the "ETs" are just an attempt at rebranding by the gods of early antiquity. Honestly, I think Hatonn may have been hoodwinked, through loving folly, into promoting a false flag savior routine by these false gods, now disguised as extraterrestrials.

or more likely a compromised channel.

[Tenet Nosce]

No, we get it Ra. ....Moving on to more important things....

'retrospective oops'

Bingo! Through no fault of their own, of course.

Here it is again! I "accidentally" found it looking for something else on choosing breakfast. Ra is actually explaining about their previous contact with Akhenaton in the 18th Dynasty.




[unity100 we KNOW that Akhenaton died around 1333 BC. [Barring any stargate-type escapes to South America's future] So are you saying the Orion contact was before the Ra contact, or missing time, or...?]

Ra: This distortion, called “Aten,” was a close distortion to our reality as we understand our own nature of mind/body/spirit complex distortion. However, it does not come totally into alignment with the intended teach/learning which was sent. This entity, Ikhnaton, became convinced that the vibration of One was the true spiritual vibration and thus decreed the Law of One.

However, this entity’s beliefs were accepted by very few. His priests gave lip service only, without the spiritual distortion towards seeking. The peoples continued in their beliefs. When this entity was no longer in this density, again the polarized beliefs in the many gods came into their own and continued so until the one known as Muhammed delivered the peoples into a more intelligible distortion of mind/body/spirit relationships.

Do you have a more detailed interest at this time?

Questioner: We would seem to have dual catalysts operating, and the question is which one is going to act first. The prophecies, I will call them, made by Edgar Cayce indicated many Earth changes and I am wondering about the mechanics describing the future. Ra, it has been stated, is not a part of time and yet we concern ourselves with possibility/probability vortices. It is very difficult for me to understand how the mechanism of prophecy operates. What is the value of such a prophecy such as Cayce made with respect to Earth changes and all of these scenarios?

Naaaaah... we don't want to hear about the boring old past. Tell us about the "earth changes" and the "prophecies"!

---

Would it be safe to say that you believe that every word attributed to Ra in the Law of One material is literally true... as in when a Christian fundamentalist says that the Bible is the literal Word of God?

unity100, you failed to answer the question with a simple yes or no response. Yes, you do believe that everything in the Law of One material is literally true, or no, you don't. Simple question, really. You are, of course, free to not answer it. I would only ask as a courtesy that you let me know that you do not intend to answer the question before moving on.

the most reliable piece of information we have in regard to spiritual literature, is Ra material. moreover, the dates hold perfectly. the entry of orion entity circa 1600 bc, and the historical developments coincide. especially the start of 'empire' concept. cultures become increasingly aggressive en masse. kadesh war comes to mind. also the concept of religion and effect of religion on the behavior of entities become significantly visible. religion no longer involved in only spiritual life or behavior patterns of entities in their social circle. it becomes politics itself.

See the above post. So you are saying that the Orion contact came before the Ra contact?

at a loss to see the contradiction or the emphasis there.

Clearly. I will ruminate on a possibly a different angle to offer my opinion. I doubt, however, that it will make a difference in your outlook. I think it has something to do with your insistence that there is absolute "right" and "wrong" yet you seemingly refuse to answer a question with a simple "yes" or "no". You can't have your philosophical cake and eat it too.

or more likely a compromised channel.

It takes two to tango. And Hatonn's comments about the coming ET salvation are pretty consistent. Why is Hatonn beyond reproach, anyway?

[BrownEye]

Naaaaah... we don't want to hear about the boring old past. Tell us about the "earth changes" and the "prophecies"!

---

The value of prophecy must be realized to be only that of expressing possibilities.

[Tenet Nosce]

More on confused queries:

Ra: I am Ra. It will take a certain amount of untangling of conceptualization of your mental complex to reform your query into an appropriate response. Please bear with us.

Ra: I am Ra. We comment as follows: It is quite precisely correct that the level and purity of this contact is dependent upon the level and purity of information sought. Thusly, the continued request for specific information from this particular source is deleterious to the substance of your purpose. Moreover, as we scanned your mind to grasp your situation as regards the typescript of some of our words, we found that you had been criticized for the type of language construction used to convey data. Due to our orientation with regard to data, even the most specifically answered question would be worded by our group in such a way as to maximize the accuracy of the nuances of the answer. This, however, mitigates against what your critic desires in the way of simple, lucid prose. More than this we cannot say. These are our observations of your situation. What you wish to do is completely your decision and we remain at your service in whatever way we may be without breaking the Way of Confusion.

[unity100]

Bingo! Through no fault of their own, of course.

Here it is again! I "accidentally" found it looking for something else on choosing breakfast. Ra is actually explaining about their previous contact with Akhenaton in the 18th Dynasty.

[unity100 we KNOW that Akhenaton died around 1333 BC. [Barring any stargate-type escapes to South America's future] So are you saying the Orion contact was before the Ra contact, or missing time, or...?]

See the above post. So you are saying that the Orion contact came before the Ra contact?
[/quote]

1600 BC comes before 1333 BC. in BC, it counts backwards, as you know. this makes :

2600~BC, ra pops out the pyramid.
1600 BC orion entry
1333 akehnaten

ra contact doesnt start with akehnaten. the contacts are not serial - they happen simultaneously. yahweh is also working on the planet at the same time orion is.

unity100, you failed to answer the question with a simple yes or no response. Yes, you do believe that everything in the Law of One material is literally true, or no, you don't. Simple question, really. You are, of course, free to not answer it. I would only ask as a courtesy that you let me know that you do not intend to answer the question before moving on.

you cant typecast responses to your questions according to your wish. whatever answer you got, is the answer the other person was able to give you.

again - ra material is the most reliable and accurate material in our hands as of this moment.

Clearly. I will ruminate on a possibly a different angle to offer my opinion. I doubt, however, that it will make a difference in your outlook. I think it has something to do with your insistence that there is absolute "right" and "wrong" yet you seemingly refuse to answer a question with a simple "yes" or "no". You can't have your philosophical cake and eat it too.

you are standing on a planet while standing erect as of this moment. there is something called 'gravity' that is purported to be holding you able to stand on it without veering off into space.

you, as a civilization, dont even know what 'gravity' even may begin to mean, leave aside discovering its nature.

yet, you are able to measure its effect, and make calculations over that and build engineering feats.

this is the current state of knowledge about gravity. it is as much as it has been discovered. until more is discovered, this most reliable amount of information discovered about gravity will be the most reliable information about gravity.

same goes for Ra material.

More on confused queries:
Ra: I am Ra. It will take a certain amount of untangling of conceptualization of your mental complex to reform your query into an appropriate response. Please bear with us.
Ra: I am Ra. We comment as follows: It is quite precisely correct that the level and purity of this contact is dependent upon the level and purity of information sought. Thusly, the continued request for specific information from this particular source is deleterious to the substance of your purpose.

that is not something pertaining to 'confusion'. it is a problem of societal mind, its leanings, its polarity, the dynamics set into motion before thousands of years ago (in regard to these doomsday and stuff) and so on.

in short, it pertains to magic. in layman's terms; engaging in information which the societal mind associates with various biases of negative nature, causes negative interference to increase spiritually.

[seejay21]

@3DMonkey

I have a lot of passion about this discussion of what it is we are suppose to be doing in the here and now. In regards to Patton, or anyone else, What Ra says is, "Exercise Two. The universe is one being. When a mind/body/spirit complex views another mind/body/spirit complex, see the Creator. This is an helpful exercise."

My interjection into this thread is to discourage from seeking answers about specific people, and thier orientation. It is the opposite of what it is that will help seeing the other-self as yourself, as the Creator.

Defining ourselves as STO, is not an STO act. It is the exact opposite. To the true STO mind/body/spirit complex, there is no reason to seperate yourself as more STO than anyone else. Doing so is pure STS. For example, if you volunteer in an animal shelter, and take care of poor orphaned puppies and kitties, you might have a extreme negative view of someone that clubs baby seals to death. You might defame them as being selfish STS jerks, and probably more negative views. Guess what? you just seperated yourself from yourself in that thought. Who would you be serving with this belief other than yourself?

At points in this thread, and many other threads we find ourselves as a group defining others as STS, i.e. George Bush, Dick Cheney, and others. At the same time also defining ourselves as STO, and defining STO heros, like Ron Paul, with the purpose to create contrast between "us" and "them". I assure you, not seeing yourself, the Creator, in EVERY OTHER other-self will not help tip any of us over to the 51% side.

To further understand what Ra says about Patton, you should consider this q/a:
----
35.1 Questioner: I would like to say that we consider it a great privilege to be doing this work, and we hope that we will be questioning in the direction that will be of value to the readers of this material. I thought that in this session it might be helpful to inspect the effect of the rays of different well-known figures in history to aid in understanding how the catalyst of the illusion creates spiritual growth. I was making a list that I thought we might use to hit the high points on the workings of the catalysts on these individuals starting with the one we know as Franklin D. Roosevelt. Could you say something about that entity?

Ra: I am Ra.
It is to be noted that in discussing those who are well-known among your peoples there is the possibility that information may be seen to be specific to one entity whereas in actuality the great design of experience is much the same for each entity. It is with this in mind that we would discuss the experiential forces which offered catalyst to an individual.

It is further to be noted that in the case of those entities lately incarnate much distortion may have taken place in regard to misinformation and misinterpretation of an entity’s thoughts or behaviors.

We shall now proceed to, shall we say, speak of the basic parameters of the one known as Franklin...
----

I wish that Don would have had Ra expand on the concept of "the great design of experience" as the opportunity presented itself. I think what happened here instead was that Don had some scripted questions for this session as a matter of house cleaning. The idea being to round out his book as thorough, to include historical figures. The question didn't really come from what he really wanted to know, it was for a percieved interest of his eventual readers, and maybe publishers. In my opionion, the answers given by Ra about specific entities are wholey shallow. Ra even states in a few answers that the information he is giving is shallow.

----

8.4 Questioner: Where do the people who operate these craft come from? Are they affiliated with any nation on Earth? What is their source?

Ra: These people come from the same place as you or I. They come from the Creator.

As you intend the question, in its shallower aspect, these people are those in your and other selves’ governments responsible for what you would term national security.
----

I think this quote illustrates point I'm making totally. Don askes a question wanting to know about this conspiracy to keep UFOs a secrect, and who is responsible? (and how dare they if it's true?) Ra comes right back with a reality check. "They come from the Creator" (that's you), and the question is shallow, then he answers it anyway. Ra answers the question so directly, he doesn't even bother to say "I am Ra."

Here's another question in this session of absolutely no consequence.
----
8.26 Questioner: I am totally aware that this line of questioning is of totally no consequence at all, but this particular information is so startling to me that it makes me question your validity on this. Up until this point I was in agreement with everything you had said. This is very startling to me. It just does not seem possible to me that this secret could have been kept for twenty-seven years, and that we are operating these craft. I apologize for my attitude, but I thought that I would be very honest. It is unbelievable to me that we would operate a plant in Mexico, outside of the United States, to build these craft. Maybe I’m mistaken. These craft are physical craft built by physical people? Could I go get in one and ride in one? Is that correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. You could not ride one. The United States, as you call your society divisional complex, creates these as a type of weapon.
----

The futility of asking about individual famous and infamous mind/body/spirit complexes from history can not be better illustrated than what is said about Himmler.

----
36.12 Questioner: Let me take as an example the one that you said was called Himmler. We are assuming from this that his Higher Self was of the sixth-density and it was stated that Himmler had selected the negative path. Would his Higher Self then dwell in a sixth-density negative type of situation? Can you expand on this concept?

Ra: I am Ra. There are no negative beings which have attained the Oversoul manifestation, which is the honor/duty of the mind/body/spirit complex totality, of late sixth-density as you would term it in your time measurements. These negatively oriented mind/body/spirit complexes have a difficulty which to our knowledge has never been overcome, for after fifth-density graduation wisdom is available but must be matched with an equal amount of love. This love/light is very, very difficult to achieve in unity when following the negative path and during the earlier part of the sixth-density, society complexes of the negative orientation will choose to release the potential and leap into the sixth-density positive.

Therefore, the Oversoul which makes its understanding available to all who are ready for such aid is towards the positive. However, the free will of the individual is paramount, and any guidance given by the Higher Self may be seen in either the positive or negative polarity depending upon the choice of a mind/body/spirit complex.
----

Is that an answer? Ra made a preztel in my head. What?
----
36.13 Questioner: Then using Himmler as an example, was his Higher Self at the time he was incarnate in the 1940s a sixth-density positively oriented Higher Self?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
----

Wow. Himmler, a most Senior Nazi, and most directly responsible for the Holocaust, had a 6th density POSITIVE higher self? Seems like he is "going all the way" to know himself in every way. Maybe he is hoping to be harvested as 4D negative so he can know that path too. I think. I still have a preztel in my head over that one.

@bring4th_Monica
you seem to have strong views. I have only one question. Do you like fishsticks? If you don't want to answer, I understand. Unity never answered me either. I'm okay with that. It's all good.

@tenet
Everything that Ra says is literally true. However, We have a way of putting it into our own context to suit our viewpoint. In other words, to distort it.

[3DMonkey]

I like the post, seejay21.

About seeing the Creator, I have the very same perspective. Although, it brings about an apparent paradox of sorts, I must see those that choose to label service as Me as well.

About pretzels, lol

About Himmler "going all the way", well, this is what gets the ball rolling. Explore all avenues that Self creates, unfettered, in full faith (not knowing what will result), go for it.

[kycahi]

36.12 Questioner: Let me take as an example the one that you said was called Himmler. We are assuming from this that his Higher Self was of the sixth-density and it was stated that Himmler had selected the negative path. Would his Higher Self then dwell in a sixth-density negative type of situation? Can you expand on this concept?

Ra: I am Ra. There are no negative beings which have attained the Oversoul manifestation, which is the honor/duty of the mind/body/spirit complex totality, of late sixth-density as you would term it in your time measurements. These negatively oriented mind/body/spirit complexes have a difficulty which to our knowledge has never been overcome, for after fifth-density graduation wisdom is available but must be matched with an equal amount of love. This love/light is very, very difficult to achieve in unity when following the negative path and during the earlier part of the sixth-density, society complexes of the negative orientation will choose to release the potential and leap into the sixth-density positive.

Therefore, the Oversoul which makes its understanding available to all who are ready for such aid is towards the positive. However, the free will of the individual is paramount, and any guidance given by the Higher Self may be seen in either the positive or negative polarity depending upon the choice of a mind/body/spirit complex.
----

Is that an answer? Ra made a preztel in my head. What?
----
36.13 Questioner: Then using Himmler as an example, was his Higher Self at the time he was incarnate in the 1940s a sixth-density positively oriented Higher Self?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.
----

Wow. Himmler, a most Senior Nazi, and most directly responsible for the Holocaust, had a 6th density POSITIVE higher self? Seems like he is "going all the way" to know himself in every way. Maybe he is hoping to be harvested as 4D negative so he can know that path too. I think. I still have a preztel in my head over that one.

Ah, yes, Ra did have a way with words.

They said that although Himmler chose the STS path, he still had a late 6D higher self, as we all do, and any/every late 6D HS is of the STO path. His HS is honor-bound to be a responsible oversoul, including respecting the freedom of Choice and, therefore, gave the 3D negative Nazi leader all of the helpful guidance that such role does. This is an example of how STS and STO are both, in the overall scheme of things, the one loving the one.

They explained why newbie 6D STSers soon leave that path for STO: 5D grows in wisdom until achieving enough to become 6D. That density gets a ton of real love, as opposed to the 4D compassion, to merge with all of the wisdom and, as soon is the 6D STSer puts two and two together, abandons the neg path. Cool, I remember not getting that before.