Free Will Infringement, what is it?

[Spaced]

The idea of infringement of free will is one that seems to come up often, but what does that mean in the context of the Ra Material?

If we look at every use of the terms "infringe," "infringement" or "infringing" in the books (this can be found here: https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=infringement ) certain trends become apparent.

1) In virtually every case the term infringement is used in reference to higher density beings interacting with people incarnate here on the 3rd density Earth.

2) This exchange seems to suggest that dual activated children displaying mental powers are not infringing on free will as we are already in the period of transition and older wanderers are subject to the veil of forgetting and thus cannot infringe on the free will of others either:

63.16 Questioner: There are many children now who demonstrate the ability to bend metal mentally which is a fourth-density phenomenon. Would most of these children, then, be this type of entity of which we speak?


Ra: I am Ra. This is correct.

63.17 Questioner: Is the reason that they can do this and the fifth- and sixth-density Wanderers who are here cannot do it the fact that they have the fourth-density body in activation?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. Wanderers are third-density activated in mind/body/spirit and are subject to the forgetting which can only be penetrated with disciplined meditation and working.

63.18 Questioner: I am assuming that the reason for this is that, first, since the entities of harvestable third density who have very recently come here, they’re coming here late enough so that they will not affect the, shall I say, polarization through their teachings. They are not infringing on the first distortion because they are children now and they won’t be old enough to really affect any of the polarization until the transition is well into transition. However, the Wanderers who came here and are older and have a greater ability to affect [polarization] must do that affecting as a function of their ability to penetrate the forgetting process in order to be within the first distortion. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is quite correct.

This exchange seems to suggest that the only way for a wanderer to infringe upon the free will of others is to completely pierce the veil and begin living in a god-like manner:

65.19 Questioner: [chuckles] Thank you. The forgetting process was puzzling me because you said that the fourth-density activated people who were here who had been harvestable did not have the same forgetting problem. Could you tell me why the Wanderer loses his memory?


Ra: I am Ra. The reason is twofold. First, the genetic properties of the connection between the mind/body/spirit complex and the cellular structure of the body is different for third density than for third/fourth density.

Secondly, the free will of third-density entities needs be preserved. Thus Wanderers volunteer for third-density genetic or DNA connections to the mind/body/spirit complex. The forgetting process can be penetrated to the extent of the Wanderer remembering what it is and why it is upon the planetary sphere. However, it would be an infringement if Wanderers penetrated the forgetting so far as to activate the more dense bodies and thus be able to live, shall we say, in a god-like manner. This would not be proper for those who have chosen to serve.

The new fourth-density entities which are becoming able to demonstrate various newer abilities are doing so as a result of the present experience, not as a result of memory. There are always a few exceptions, and we ask your forgiveness for constant barrages of over-generalization.

This one says an adept could perform a feat of magic in front of people and it would not be infringement unless they claimed authorship of the act. Even if they state that the magical energy flowed through them but did not originate from them this would not be infringement:

73.14 Questioner: An observation of the working itself by another entity would seem to me to partially abridge free will in that a seemingly magical occurrence had taken place as a result of the working of an adept. This could be extended to any phenomenon which is other than normally acceptable. Could you speak on this paradox that is immediately the problem of anyone doing healing?


Ra: I am Ra. We are humble messengers of the Law of One. To us there are no paradoxes. The workings which seem magical and, therefore, seem to infringe upon free will do not, in themselves, do so, for the distortions of perception are as many as the witnesses and each witness sees what it desires to see. Infringement upon free will occurs in this circumstance only if the entity doing the working ascribes the authorship of this event to its self or its own skills. Those who state that no working comes from it but only through it is infringing upon free will.*

* Ra meant to say “not infringing” on free will. See the next question and answer.

73.15 Questioner: You said that if the entity says that no working comes from it but only through it it is also infringing. Is that correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. We said that in that event there is no infringement.

4) The Confederation has infringed on our free will in the past (the transfer of souls from Mars and teaching people to use crystals for healing for example) and Ra infringed on the groups free will when they warned that Carla's vital energies were greatly depleted and how to support her:

33.1 Questioner: In our last session you cautioned “each to look well to the vital energies necessary for nondepletion of the instrument and the contact level.” Did that mean that we should— that Jim and I should look at the instrument’s— or be careful of the instrument’s vital energies or be careful of our own vital energies?

Ra: I am Ra. Each entity is responsible for itself. The mechanics of this process taking place involve firstly, the use of the physical bodily complex of third density with its accompanying physical material in order to voice these words. Thus this instrument needs to watch its vital energies carefully, for we do not wish to deplete this instrument. Secondly, the function of the supporting group may be seen to be firstly, that of protection for this contact; secondly, that of energizing the instrument and intensifying its vital energies.

This supporting group has always, due to an underlying harmony, been of a very stable nature as regards protection in love and light, thus ensuring the continuation of this narrow-band contact. However, the vital energies of either of the supporting members being depleted, the instrument must then use a larger portion of its vital energies, thus depleting itself more than would be profitable on a long-term basis.

Please understand that we ask your apology for this infringement upon your free will. However, it is our distortion/understanding that you would prefer this information rather than, being left totally to your own dedication distortions, deplete the instrument or deplete the group to the point where the contact cannot be sustained.

and again here:

44.7 Questioner: I think that it might be a good idea if we terminated the contact at this time to allow the instrument to gain more necessary energy before continuing. This is my decision at this time. I would very much like to continue the contact, but it seems to me, although I can’t tell the instrument’s level, that the instrument should not use up any more energy.

Ra: I am Ra. We are responding to an unasked query. However, it is most salient and therefore we beg your forgiveness for this infringement. The energy has been lost to the instrument, dedicated to this purpose only. You may do as you will, but this is the nature of the instrument’s preparation for contact and is the sole reason we may use it

5) Infringement is neither service to self or service to others, but in fact seems to be a depolarizing act:

16.9 Questioner: If the Orion group was able to land, would this increase their polarization? What I am trying to get at is, is it better for them to work behind the scenes and get recruits, shall we say, from our planet, the person on our planet going towards service to self strictly on his own using his free will, or is it just as good for the Orion group to land upon our planet and demonstrate remarkable powers and get people like that?

Ra: I am Ra. The first instance is, in the long run, shall we put it, more salubrious for the Orion group in that it does not infringe upon the Law of One by landing and, thus, does its work through those of this planet. In the second circumstance, a mass landing would create a loss of polarization due to the infringement upon the free will of the planet. However, it would be a gamble. If the planet then were conquered and became part of the Empire, the free will would then be re-established. This is restrained in action due to the desire of the Orion group to progress towards the One Creator. This desire to progress inhibits the group from breaking the Law of Confusion

All of this leads me to the following conclusion: Infringement on the free will of others incarnated here is impossible by any other being incarnated here and subject to the law of confusion and the veil of forgetting unless one has completely pierced the veil and began flying around and etc. As such, I think we should be more careful how we use this term as it seems like people throw it around to describe anything they do not like, which is both disingenuous and divisive.

[Patrick]

If I remember correctly, Ra mentions that killing someone else is the ultimate abrogation of free will in between 3D people?

EDIT: Here is the quote

31.14 Questioner: I was thinking more of the possibility of the Orion group having influenced, say, certain members of the Third Reich who I have read reports of having sexual gratification from the observation of the, in some cases, the gassing and killing of entities in the gas chambers.

Ra: I am Ra. We shall repeat these entities had the potential for sexual energy buildup. The choice of stimulus is certainly the choice of the entity. In the case of which you speak, these entities were strongly polarized orange ray, thus finding the energy blockage of power over others, the putting to death being the ultimate power over others; this then being expressed in a sexual manner, though solitary.

In this case the desire would continue unabated and be virtually unquenchable.

You will find, if you observe the entire spectrum of sexual practices among your peoples, that there are those who experience such gratification from domination over others either from rape or from other means of domination. In each case this is an example of energy blockage which is sexual in its nature.

Anyway, it's how I interpreted it.

[Minyatur]

I always saw free will infringement as conveyed within the material as the violation of the extension of free will from outside of it. Kind of going against the will of the Logos in some way.

I guess at our level the term means something other entirely and is more about the dynamics of how we relate to one another as humans, which is not really about free will in the sense that the material means it.

[Spaced]

If I remember correctly, Ra mentions that killing someone else is the ultimate abrogation of free will in between 3D people?

EDIT: Here is the quote

31.14 Questioner: I was thinking more of the possibility of the Orion group having influenced, say, certain members of the Third Reich who I have read reports of having sexual gratification from the observation of the, in some cases, the gassing and killing of entities in the gas chambers.

Ra: I am Ra. We shall repeat these entities had the potential for sexual energy buildup. The choice of stimulus is certainly the choice of the entity. In the case of which you speak, these entities were strongly polarized orange ray, thus finding the energy blockage of power over others, the putting to death being the ultimate power over others; this then being expressed in a sexual manner, though solitary.

In this case the desire would continue unabated and be virtually unquenchable.

You will find, if you observe the entire spectrum of sexual practices among your peoples, that there are those who experience such gratification from domination over others either from rape or from other means of domination. In each case this is an example of energy blockage which is sexual in its nature.

Anyway, it's how I interpreted it.

I don't see any mention of free will in this passage, it seems to me they are describing an orange ray distortion in negatively polarized people.

[Diana]

Great question.

If one doesn't allow the free will of others, isn't that control then? Isn't that free-will infringement? Control is a hallmark of the left-hand path, isn't it? Is there some middle road I am not seeing?

I understand that between densities there are other concepts at play, such as taking away choice due to giving information that would influence choice. But I could also relate that to us, here—authority figures such as religious leaders, who claim to be the voice of God, telling their parishioners what to think and do. 

[Spaced]

I would be interested in seeing something from the material that supports the idea that control is the same as free will infringement. It seems to me that Ra is, as ever, very precise in their use of the term.

[Diana]

I would be interested in seeing something from the material that supports the idea that control is the same as free will infringement. It seems to me that Ra is, as ever, very precise in their use of the term.

Okay.  I'll take a look.

[flofrog]

Great thread.   In  a way I am with Diana for one reason :  Ra would not even engage on any subject unless Don broached a question on a specific one, so in a way, Ra would not control the discussion....  

[Glow]

Great thread.   In  a way I am with Diana for one reason :  Ra would not even engage on any subject unless Don broached a question on a specific one, so in a way, Ra would not control the discussion....  

I always looked at that as from the higher density changing the individuated consiousness will change that individuations path so that abridges free will.

I personally and neurobiologist have said the same do not feel we have the common understanding of free will.

We have independent will. Individualized creator has a path, no one is “free” though.

Research on this shows the subconscious makes decisions even though the conscious mind thinks it does.

It’s like input in, all collected data leads to choice A or B

Ra adding information not requested changes the subconscious awareness therefore would change the data, and therefore the individuated consciousness’s path. Infringing on that free/independent will by altering their path with info not sought.

This is yet another reason forgiveness or judgment makes no sense.
Until a consiousness is given new data it can only do as it has been programmed via data.

[Patrick]

...I don't see any mention of free will in this passage...

You're right.  I always believed it to be implied.  In the sense that exerting power over others, to me, means to enforce your will over others.  Thus abridging the will of the other.

[Spaced]

If a mother tells their child to go to bed because it's their bedtime are they enforcing their will on the kid? Absolutely. Are they infringing on the child's free will? I don't think so.

[jafar]

From the most absolute perspective, there is only one person in the room.
As such violating other's free will is an impossibility, as there's no 'other' in the first place.
The free will is the free will of only that one person in the room.

Then that one person fractalized into parts, it still that one person but now in many parts / personalities.
Each parts inherit free will because the part and the one person is the same, but there is no way that the free will of the part will infringe the free will of the one person. As it means he's violating his own free will.

Thus the word 'free will' has multiple meaning depending on the 'zooming level' that we put as a context.

Using the metaphor of an orchestra, there is one person in the room who out of his own free will would like to have an orchestra-tic experience. He fractalized into parts, the music composer is a part, the conductor is another part, the violin players, the cello players, the horn, trumpet players and so on, even up to the audience who are enjoying the orchestra.

Zooming in to a violin player's part perspective, his fractalized free will is on which actual violin instrument to use, what angle to struck the string, what emotion he feels as he struck the notes etc.

He will not play different notes as it will violate the free will of the music composer, which is actually himself as well, yet as another part. Although he seems to have free will of many options to play which notes or even to play different instrument and not violin. But he will not do that as that will violate his own free will. He knew given the option of type of instrument he will eventually choose violin, and given the possibility of notes to play he will choose to play 'that' note as composed by the free will of the musical composer, which is actually himself as well.

[zedro]

I would be interested in seeing something from the material that supports the idea that control is the same as free will infringement. It seems to me that Ra is, as ever, very precise in their use of the term.

Ever consider that Ra explicitly conveying that could be an infringement? Although it really feels implied as it's one of the biggest take aways I've had from the LOO, but I was receiving channeled material concurrently as well so maybe it got reinforced differently.

To me (and I believe this to be widely interpreted) that the infringement of ones free will is inherently a polarizing action and creates karma. It is a delicate line to tread (like the parent child relationship) that makes up the experience, and is part of this illusionary school for spiritual learning. But to believe that you can infringe on someone's free will (i.e. the first distortion) without consequence is quite frankly silly, and I think ignores the over-arching message of the material.

[Spaced]

I would be interested in seeing something from the material that supports the idea that control is the same as free will infringement. It seems to me that Ra is, as ever, very precise in their use of the term.

Ever consider that Ra explicitly conveying that could be an infringement? Although it really feels implied as it's one of the biggest take aways I've had from the LOO, but I was receiving channeled material concurrently as well so maybe it got reinforced differently.

Well, no because Ra describes many examples of what infringement is and if that wasn't an infringement then why would this be? It seems to me they are being very clear about what infringement of free will is.

To me (and I believe this to be widely interpreted) that the infringement of ones free will is inherently a polarizing action and creates karma. It is a delicate line to tread (like the parent child relationship) that makes up the experience, and is part of this illusionary school for spiritual learning. But to believe that you can infringe on someone's free will (i.e. the first distortion) without consequence is quite frankly silly, and I think ignores the over-arching message of the material.

I don't really understand what point you are trying to make. Who said anything about infringing in free will being without consequence?

[zedro]

I would be interested in seeing something from the material that supports the idea that control is the same as free will infringement. It seems to me that Ra is, as ever, very precise in their use of the term.

Ever consider that Ra explicitly conveying that could be an infringement? Although it really feels implied as it's one of the biggest take aways I've had from the LOO, but I was receiving channeled material concurrently as well so maybe it got reinforced differently.

Well, no because Ra describes many examples of what infringement is and if that wasn't an infringement then why would this be? It seems to me they are being very clear about what infringement of free will is.

To me (and I believe this to be widely interpreted) that the infringement of ones free will is inherently a polarizing action and creates karma. It is a delicate line to tread (like the parent child relationship) that makes up the experience, and is part of this illusionary school for spiritual learning. But to believe that you can infringe on someone's free will (i.e. the first distortion) without consequence is quite frankly silly, and I think ignores the over-arching message of the material.

I don't really understand what point you are trying to make. Who said anything about infringing in free will being without consequence?

You said :

All of this leads me to the following conclusion: Infringement on the free will of others incarnated here is impossible by any other being incarnated here

So I interpreted as you meaning exactly what I said (it's just that you deny the premise, it's hard to argue a dismissed premise without me validating it in that context).

And there are many instances where they refuse to elaborate on certain concepts in certain contexts. Regardless whether they are circumventing in this case, I believe free will infringement is a clear premise to which affects polarization no matter what the density level you are inhabiting.

And to be honest, I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make, although I think I know why you are trying to make it.

[Spaced]

The point I am trying to make is that every single case of Ra making reference to free will infringement involves the revelation of higher density information to third density incarnate beings who are not ready or have not put in the work to receive it.

Despite this, every day I see people on this forum saying "this is free will infringement" "that is free will infringement" and that is not supported by the material we are drawing from. If someone can find something rooted in the Ra material that shows it is possible for a 3D entity other than a fully activated adept to infringe on the free will of another 3D entity I would be very interested in seeing it, otherwise I believe using the term in this way is twisting Ra's words to suit one's personal bias.

As Jafar mentioned, there is only one person in the room. From the perspective of higher density being like Ra everyone on Earth is part of the same social organism. We all agreed to the rules when we incarnated here and therefore nothing that happens here infringes on our free will on a soul level, that infringement can only come from outside.

[zedro]

... otherwise I believe using the term in this way is twisting Ra's words to suit one's personal bias.

Who says every belief expressed here is explicitly and directly derived from Ra's words? Unless someone makes the direct claim, but most actually use quotes anyways. I don't see the problem. The very fact that free will is coined as the first distortion should hint at something useful, otherwise why bother with bringing up the concept to us mortals?

STS activity essentially infringes on free will, it's one of the defining actions. The key is discerning the implications of the infringement, i.e. the difference between my mother forbidding me from traveling across town when I'm 6 years old and punishing me for doing so, vs a police officer doing the same on fraudulent premises, and subjecting me to arbitrary punitive damages and violence.

Also that statement is very ironic.

[Sacred Fool]

The point I am trying to make is that every single case of Ra making reference to free will infringement involves the revelation of higher density information to third density incarnate beings who are not ready or have not put in the work to receive it.

Well, here's one.

73.14 Questioner: An observation of the working itself by another entity would seem to me to partially abridge free will in that a seemingly magical occurrence had taken place as a result of the working of an adept. This could be extended to any phenomenon which is other than normally acceptable. Could you speak on this paradox that is immediately the problem of anyone doing healing?

Ra: I am Ra. We are humble messengers of the Law of One. To us there are no paradoxes. The workings which seem magical and, therefore, seem to infringe upon free will do not, in themselves, do so, for the distortions of perception are as many as the witnesses and each witness sees what it desires to see. Infringement upon free will occurs in this circumstance only if the entity doing the working ascribes the authorship of this event to its self or its own skills. Those who state that no working comes from it but only through it is infringing upon free will.*

* Ra meant to say “not infringing” on free will. See the next question and answer.

I think that could happen between two mortals.  The event in question is a Jesus story, but there are others who use unseen powers...or who may pretend to do so.

 

Bonus Track: This is from today's Daily Q'uote thingy....if you're interested.

However, it is indeed possible within third density for people to infringe upon each others’ free will in ways that do involve karma. Take for instance the institution that you call marriage. A marriage of equal partners may involve many spirited discussions, but if one of the mates reserves the right to give orders to the other, there has been an infringement upon the free will of that individual whose liberties have been limited without his or her consent.

In a work situation it is entirely acceptable for the leader to give orders to the employee as long as they do not shame him or abase him or disrespect him as a human being. When one entity uses a weapon to coerce or force another to do his bidding, whether it is in criminal acts or acts of war, this, too, goes beyond the bounds of acceptable usage and constitutes an infringement upon the free will of the one who is limited.

There is no question but that in all of those three circumstances and more there is much infringement upon free will among your people. To those who feel that there is a question as to whether they are acting appropriately or whether they are moving beyond the bounds of acceptable influence and infringing upon another’s free will, we might suggest that, in your mind, you turn the tables and see the situation as happening the opposite way, not from you to another but from another to you. If, in that turnaround, you see the goodness of your actions, you are most likely behaving appropriately and maintaining unity between yourself and the other self. If, when you turn the tables, you realize you would resent such a thing were it to happen to you, then you know that you have infringed upon the rights, the peace, and the liberty of another.

 

[Louisabell]

Hey Spaced, this is a really interesting question, and a pattern that I didn't pick up myself before. I would think that the reason why "infringement of freewill" is not used when dealing with interactions between planetary entities (except for all those skilled adepts running around) is potentially twofold:

1. Infringement of freewill is unavoidable and natural between planetary entities. We are always consciously and subconsciously influencing each other. Our fates and responsibilities are intertwined. We can't help be in each other's businesses, as our choices, actions and attitudes have direct and indirect consequences for all those around us. So in that way, whether we infringe on each other's freewill is a moot point.

OR

2. The Law of Freewill has also been named the Law of Confusion. We cannot infringe on each other's experience of confusion because we are confused entities ourselves, therefore we do not have the spiritual status to act from a place of authority in removing confusion for another entity. Therefore we (3D entities) cannot infringe in this way.

Perhaps another interesting point is that when Ra gave advice as to how interactions between planetary entities should be conducted, Ra said that our actions should be assessed as whether they are "consonant with the Law of One". I would interpret this as being the Golden Rule - "In everything, do to others what you would have them do to you" or "treat others how you would like to be treated". The reason for this interpretation is because the Law of One states that all beings are One, therefore what you do to your other-self, you are also doing to yourself. I think this is a fair standard for 3D entities, for we can only act in accordance with what we believe to be good for ourselves (i.e. we are always coming from a place of relative/incomplete information when behind the veil).

6.14 Questioner: I think it would be appropriate to discover how the Law of One acts in this transfer of beings to our planet and the action of harvest?

Ra: I am Ra. The Law of One states simply that all things are one, that all beings are one. There are certain behaviors and thought-forms consonant with the understanding and practice of this law. Those who, finishing a cycle of experience, demonstrate various grades of distortion of that understanding of thought and action will be separated by their own choice into the vibratory distortion most comfortable to their mind/body/spirit complexes. This process is guarded or watched by those nurturing beings who, being very close to the Law of One in their distortions, nevertheless have the distortion towards active service.

Thus, the illusion is created of light, or more properly but less understandably, light/love. This is in varying degrees of intensity. The spirit complex of each harvested entity moves along the line of light until the light grows too glaring, at which time the entity stops. This entity may have barely reached third density or may be very, very close to the ending of the third-density light/love distortion vibratory complex. Nevertheless, those who fall within this octave of intensifying light/love then experience a major cycle during which the opportunities are many for the discovery of the distortions which are inherent in each entity and, therefore, the lessening of these distortions.

18.8 Questioner: Then an entity, say, four years old would be totally responsible for any actions that were against or in… inharmonious with the Law of One. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. It may be noted that it has been arranged by your social complex structures that the newer entities to incarnation are to be provided with guides of a physical mind/body/spirit complex, thus being able to learn quickly what is consonant with the Law of One.

18.5 Questioner: Thank you. I have a question here from Jim that I will read verbatim: “Much of the mystic tradition of seeking on Earth holds that belief that the individual self must be erased or obliterated and the material world ignored for an entity to reach ‘nirvana,’ as it’s called, or enlightenment. What is the proper role of the individual self and its worldly activities in aiding an entity to grow more into the Law of One?”

Ra: I am Ra. The proper role of the entity is in this density to experience all things desired, to then analyze, understand, and accept these experiences, distilling from them the love/light within them. Nothing shall be overcome. That which is not needed falls away.
The orientation develops due to analysis of desire. These desires become more and more distorted towards conscious application of love/light as the entity furnishes itself with distilled experience. We have found it to be inappropriate in the extreme to encourage the overcoming of any desires, except to suggest the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane, as you call it, of those desires not consonant with the Law of One; this preserving the primal distortion of free will.

The reason it is unwise to overcome is that overcoming is an unbalanced action creating difficulties in balancing in the time/space continuum. Overcoming thus creates the further environment for holding onto that which apparently has been overcome.
All things are acceptable in the proper time for each entity, and in experiencing, in understanding, in accepting, in then sharing with other-selves, the appropriate description shall be moving away from distortions of one kind to distortions of another which may be more consonant with the Law of One.

It is, shall we say, a shortcut to simply ignore or overcome any desire. It must instead be understood and accepted. This takes patience and experience which can be analyzed with care, with compassion for self and for other-self.

42.10 Questioner: How can a person know when he is unswayed by an emotionally charged situation if he is repressing the flow of emotions, or if he is in balance and truly unswayed?

Ra: I am Ra. We have spoken to this point. Therefore, we shall briefly iterate that to the balanced entity no situation has an emotional charge but is simply a situation like any other in which the entity may or may not observe an opportunity to be of service. The closer an entity comes to this attitude the closer an entity is to balance. You may note that it is not our recommendation that reactions to catalyst be repressed or suppressed unless such reactions would be a stumbling block not consonant with the Law of One to an other-self. It is far, far better to allow the experience to express itself in order that the entity may then make fuller use of this catalyst.

52.7 Questioner: Am I correct, then, in assuming that discipline of the personality, knowledge of self, and control, shall I say, in strengthening of the will would be what any fifth-density entity would see as those things of importance?

Ra: I am Ra. In actuality these things are of importance in third through early seventh densities. The only correction in nuance that we would make is your use of the word, control. It is paramount that it be understood that it is not desirable or helpful to the growth of the understanding, may we say, of an entity by itself to control thought processes or impulses except where they may result in actions not consonant with the Law of One. Control may seem to be a short-cut to discipline, peace, and illumination. However, this very control potentiates and necessitates the further incarnative experience in order to balance this control or repression of that self which is perfect.

Instead, we appreciate and recommend the use of your second verb in regard to the use of the will. Acceptance of self, forgiveness of self, and the direction of the will; this is the path towards the disciplined personality. Your faculty of will is that which is powerful within you as co-Creator. You cannot ascribe to this faculty too much importance. Thus it must be carefully used and directed in service to others for those upon the positively oriented path.

There is great danger in the use of the will as the personality becomes stronger, for it may be used even subconsciously in ways reducing the polarity of the entity.

Just another freakin beautiful logical consistency found in the LOO. Thanks again for this thread Spaced!

[Spaced]

... otherwise I believe using the term in this way is twisting Ra's words to suit one's personal bias.

Who says every belief expressed here is explicitly and directly derived from Ra's words?

This is the Strictly Law of One Material subforum which is why I picked it, I wanted to talk about the topic of infringement of free will in the context of the Law of One material.

STS activity essentially infringes on free will, it's one of the defining actions. The key is discerning the implications of the infringement, i.e. the difference between my mother forbidding me from traveling across town when I'm 6 years old and punishing me for doing so, vs a police officer doing the same on fraudulent premises, and subjecting me to arbitrary punitive damages and violence.

You may very well be right about STS being more inclined to infringe on people's free will, but I don't think the act itself is polarizing towards the negative, which is why I brought up examples of Ra or other confederation types infringing on the free will of people here.

As for the police example, the clear difference there is intent. As you say he is acting on false pemise.

The point I am trying to make is that every single case of Ra making reference to free will infringement involves the revelation of higher density information to third density incarnate beings who are not ready or have not put in the work to receive it.

Well, here's one.

73.14 Questioner: An observation of the working itself by another entity would seem to me to partially abridge free will in that a seemingly magical occurrence had taken place as a result of the working of an adept. This could be extended to any phenomenon which is other than normally acceptable. Could you speak on this paradox that is immediately the problem of anyone doing healing?

Ra: I am Ra. We are humble messengers of the Law of One. To us there are no paradoxes. The workings which seem magical and, therefore, seem to infringe upon free will do not, in themselves, do so, for the distortions of perception are as many as the witnesses and each witness sees what it desires to see. Infringement upon free will occurs in this circumstance only if the entity doing the working ascribes the authorship of this event to its self or its own skills. Those who state that no working comes from it but only through it is infringing upon free will.*

* Ra meant to say “not infringing” on free will. See the next question and answer.

I think that could happen between two mortals.  The event in question is a Jesus story, but there are others who use unseen powers...or who may pretend to do so.

Yeah this is the one that made me think that adepts were able to infringe on free will, aside from prophets and the like who ascribe their workings to a higher power. Negative adepts could infringe on the free will of others incarnated here but I think there are not as many negative adepts going around doing this stuff as people like to believe.
 

Bonus Track: This is from today's Daily Q'uote thingy....if you're interested.

However, it is indeed possible within third density for people to infringe upon each others’ free will in ways that do involve karma. Take for instance the institution that you call marriage. A marriage of equal partners may involve many spirited discussions, but if one of the mates reserves the right to give orders to the other, there has been an infringement upon the free will of that individual whose liberties have been limited without his or her consent.

In a work situation it is entirely acceptable for the leader to give orders to the employee as long as they do not shame him or abase him or disrespect him as a human being. When one entity uses a weapon to coerce or force another to do his bidding, whether it is in criminal acts or acts of war, this, too, goes beyond the bounds of acceptable usage and constitutes an infringement upon the free will of the one who is limited.

There is no question but that in all of those three circumstances and more there is much infringement upon free will among your people. To those who feel that there is a question as to whether they are acting appropriately or whether they are moving beyond the bounds of acceptable influence and infringing upon another’s free will, we might suggest that, in your mind, you turn the tables and see the situation as happening the opposite way, not from you to another but from another to you. If, in that turnaround, you see the goodness of your actions, you are most likely behaving appropriately and maintaining unity between yourself and the other self. If, when you turn the tables, you realize you would resent such a thing were it to happen to you, then you know that you have infringed upon the rights, the peace, and the liberty of another.

 

Thank you, this is really interesting. The way Ra talks about infringing on free will always made it seem to me that the law of free will was closely related to the quarantine

16.1 Questioner: As I ask questions, there will unfortunately be [inaudible] I think the direction I wish to go investigating the Law of One. However, I have ideas in mind of some questions [inaudible]. They may be stupid questions; I don’t know, but [inaudible]. [Inaudible] trying to construct a complete, unbiased book about the Law of One, one which itself takes into account the Law of One. I hope that you [inaudible] ridiculous.

I would like to ask, considering the free will distortion of the Law of One, how can the Guardians quarantine the Earth? Is this quarantine within the free will distortion?

Ra: I am Ra. The Guardians guard the free will distortion of the mind/body/spirit complexes of third density on this planetary sphere. The events which require activation of quarantine were interfering with the free will distortion of mind/body/spirit complexes.

It almost seems like Q'uo and Ra are talking about different things but I guess it's more a matter of perspective. Thanks for bringing this one up, I haven't read much of the Q'uo stuff.

[Aion]

Very interesting topic and nicely laid out. In general I would agree with you that it is much less common for infringement to happen between different third density individuals, however, based on your own extracted principle we do have this effect occurring between "sub-densities" of third density. There is a quote here which I think touches upon it, and it regards the conscious movement towards magical ability.

68.12 Questioner: It would seem to me that since I can’t imagine anything . . . anything worse, shall I say, than this particular result, other than possibly the total disintegration of the mind/body/spirit complex due to nuclear bomb, that it would be very advisable to seek out the magical training and defense for this situation. Could Ra, and would Ra, instruct in this type of magical defense?

Ra: I am Ra. This request lies beyond the First Distortion. The entity seeking magical ability must do so in a certain manner. We may give instructions of a general nature. This we have already done. The instrument has begun the process of balancing the self. This is a lengthy process.

To take an entity before it is ready and offer it the scepter of magical power is to infringe in an unbalanced manner We may suggest with some asperity that the instrument never call upon Ra in any way while unprotected by the configuration which is at this time present.

This, I believe, is referring to initiation. In short, to initiate someone who is not fully and consciously willing and engaged is to infringe. Said another way, an adept initiating others without their consent would also be infringing. Naturally, these are not 'common' events, but they are, I believe, more common and notable than one would consider. "Forced initiation" is very much a tool used by "black adepts" to gain power over those initiated. I had a friend in the past whos boyfriend was in to demonic worship and would put her, and other women since they were poly, through torturous situations as ways to "prove their resilience and loyalty" or to try and force them to "awaken spiritually", this is a type of forced initiation that can be severely damaging and infringing.

I think this is also, to a lesser degree, echoed in people who use their metaphysical abilities towards others without the consent of those others. One might say, "one who knows not, cares not", but once you know, you can't really unknow can you?

Thus, the great fulcrum of responsibility rests upon the degree to which the entity is aware of its responsibility. The greater responsibility entity is aware of and choosing to be 'accountable' for, the more concern for infringement there will be, not because of the great danger of infringement, but because of the careful and pointed process of refinement of the self towards greater unity.

[Sacred Fool]

Said another way, an adept initiating others without their consent would also be infringing. 

It's not only adepts who mislead the uninitiated.
Maybe 20 years ago there was an article (back when we read newspapers) about a guy who had been up in the Sierras (in Calif.) who had an arrow shot through his eyeball and lodged in his head.  It said the medics restrained his arms because he was trying to pull it out.
The docs cut away part of his rear skull, clipped the arrow short, sanitized the remaining portion and pushed it out the back of his head without doing much damage to what he had for a brain. 
The patient explained that he was joining "friends" who were "initiating" him into some kind of mountain man club.  They made various false promises, but it involved a good bit of drinking and then him putting something on his head for another guy to try to shoot an arrow through (like William Tell).
The article ended with the patient saying, "Yeah, I feel really stupid."
Was his free will abridged?  Hmm, yeah, maybe a little?
  

[Aion]

Said another way, an adept initiating others without their consent would also be infringing. 

 
It's not only adepts who mislead the uninitiated.
Maybe 20 years ago there was an article (back when we read newspapers) about a guy who had been up in the Sierras (in Calif.) who had an arrow shot through his eyeball and lodged in his head.  It said the medics restrained his arms because he was trying to pull it out.
The docs cut away part of his rear skull, clipped the arrow short, sanitized the remaining portion and pushed it out the back of his head without doing much damage to what he had for a brain. 
The patient explained that he was joining "friends" who were "initiating" him into some kind of mountain man club.  They made various false promises, but it involved a good bit of drinking and then him putting something on his head for another guy to try to shoot an arrow through (like William Tell).
The article ended with the patient saying, "Yeah, I feel really stupid."
Was his free will abridged?  Hmm, yeah, maybe a little?
  

True although I would caveat that individuals whom have gone to the lengths to consciously deceive, have created and maintained such an organization, as well as developing such 'rituals' or demands they are well aware could result in the death of another person, are, in my opinion, definitely pushing some degree of adeptness in consciousness of the rather self-serving variety. Adepts aren't usually people in robes performing rituals under the moonlight (or midday sun for those sunny folk), they are people who have developed enough awareness of how to use their choices to the benefit or detriment of others that they are not acting 'unconsciously'.

[Sacred Fool]

It almost seems like Q'uo and Ra are talking about different things but I guess it's more a matter of perspective.

Well, I think it gets down to what you think this abridgement business is about.  At it's root, I take it to be that we're all intended to pursue our own path of spiritual flowering according to what we *really* desire.  If another entity influences us to act according to something other than that, then there's an abridgement.  The influence may be an implication that "I know better, so you should do as I advise" or "I'm so powerful, I must be right," etc.  The basic idea, though, is that one gets another to choose, not based on their own deep sense of what they want, but for--ahem--a more transient reason.

    

[Aion]

It almost seems like Q'uo and Ra are talking about different things but I guess it's more a matter of perspective.

Well, I think it gets down to what you think this abridgement business is about.  At it's root, I take it to be that we're all intended to pursue our own path of spiritual flowering according to what we *really* desire.  If another entity influences us to act according to something other than that, then there's an abridgement.  The influence may be an implication that "I know better, so you should do as I advise" or "I'm so powerful, I must be right," etc.  The basic idea, though, is that one gets another to choose, not based on their own deep sense of what they want, but for--ahem--a more transient reason.

    

How does one know what one *really* desires?

[Louisabell]

Said another way, an adept initiating others without their consent would also be infringing. 

 
It's not only adepts who mislead the uninitiated.
Maybe 20 years ago there was an article (back when we read newspapers) about a guy who had been up in the Sierras (in Calif.) who had an arrow shot through his eyeball and lodged in his head.  It said the medics restrained his arms because he was trying to pull it out.
The docs cut away part of his rear skull, clipped the arrow short, sanitized the remaining portion and pushed it out the back of his head without doing much damage to what he had for a brain. 
The patient explained that he was joining "friends" who were "initiating" him into some kind of mountain man club.  They made various false promises, but it involved a good bit of drinking and then him putting something on his head for another guy to try to shoot an arrow through (like William Tell).
The article ended with the patient saying, "Yeah, I feel really stupid."
Was his free will abridged?  Hmm, yeah, maybe a little?
  

But did he make it in? Did he become a mountain man? Don't leave us hanging...

[Sacred Fool]

True although I would caveat that individuals whom have gone to the lengths to consciously deceive, have created and maintained such an organization, as well as developing such 'rituals' or demands they are well aware could result in the death of another person, are, in my opinion, definitely pushing some degree of adeptness in consciousness of the rather self-serving variety. Adepts aren't usually people in robes performing rituals under the moonlight (or midday sun for those sunny folk), they are people who have developed enough awareness of how to use their choices to the benefit or detriment of others that they are not acting 'unconsciously'.

That is VERY generous of you, I would say.  Someone else might chalk it up to stupid people doing stupid things.  But who's to say.....I suppose?

    

[Sacred Fool]

How does one know what one *really* desires?

That's the sixty-four dollar question, eh?

  

[Sacred Fool]

But did he make it in? Did he become a mountain man? Don't leave us hanging...

Be serious, Louisabell!!!
  

[Aion]

How does one know what one *really* desires?

That's the sixty-four dollar question, eh?

  

One dollar per element of reality.

http://www.iching123.com/64_hexagrams_chart_text.htm