Oh yes,
Absolutely, we all have our own unique ways of experiencing this great path, and that is the ugly-beauty of it all.
From what I share, and what I offer to other-selves, it is just another way of moving the infinite observer from one angle to another.
Offering possibilities and probabilities of experiences to the "infinite creator" to "see."
Now if this is tiring, boring, or rubs you the wrong way, then just shut the chapel's door, and ignore other creators' perspective of the one.
There's no need to force, or will someone in any way, hidden under the pretense of "niceness," or exercising parental control for the "greater good."
Ironically, the materials and the readers are paradoxically involve in this,
Please try to see this from the perspective of public servants, and/or medical professionals. Imagine if doctors, and social service acts base off of their pure emotions? Aren't we glad that there are laws to prevent this? and holds people responsible for what they've done to another?
In the field of mental health, colleagues and myself absolutely abhor to the saying "for your own good."
"For your own good," we will force you meds, constrain you, "for your own good" we are going to take away your freedom.
Until one can see how contradicting it is, which is the point Kraken has made. Until you step back from the whole thing, and not be mesmerized by the "magic" within. Then one can see the "other-side" of this coin, of this "life-changing" materials being given to this world.
The whole conversation/transcript/teaching constructed and revolves around the protection of freewill..
But then it's own representative slaps their own teammate with the most contradicting move that is possible... hello?
If that first statement is true, then Don should have been given the freedom to choose how he wanted to pass-on, with or without anyone's "loving" concerns.
if you can take a step back for a moment if possible, and just look at this,
leaving the philosophy, and all of the poetic/creative writings behind for a moment,
Suddenly you will go,
"oh, wait a minute, I wouldn't have done that to someone I love, whether if it is for personal reasons, spiritual, or religious."
For example, if a similar incident involves my own Ma or Pa, I wouldn't call the police, and say things like "there were no other options."
It would have been my neighbor, who has no idea what is with the noise and commotion going on next door.
So, let say, even if my Ma or Pa tries to kill me, I would sit with them, until the very end. Because I truly love them.
(But that is just me, and I am not expecting anything, nor am I judging anyone, or Carla, or even Jim)
I am simply explaining how I would apply a certain level of common sense in similar situation.
I will not give into the fear for my own mortality, and pass that responsibility to people that are trained to solve problems with violence, like law enforcement.
Most of the tragedy that I've seen, are due to the "caller" having no idea what they were doing, or what the possible outcome for someone like Don in his state of mental decline, when confronted with law officers. Carla and Jim are not dumbfounded, from their writings and work, they show a level of cognitive reasoning that could understand this.
OR, unless,
if the patient were lunging at the "caller" with a weapon, threatening them with violence.
Don showed no signs of violence at all, from his own account, nor from Carla's or Jim's. He was not combative, and was only self-destructive.
So unless I missed it somewhere in all of the writings. Was there a point where Don threatened Carla or Jim?
I digress,
Going back to the OP from Kraken, and his viewpoint..
You know... maybe it is an American thing, I don't know, I am not originally from the US, but when I heard that the US rejected proven methods to treat drugs addiction through micro-exposure treatment...
I really questioned how they treat their sick, dying, and their homeless.
Like most powerful countries, (1st world) the US has a very disconnected viewpoint with the rest of the world, and it is hard to show US citizens, or their government that they are ironically not very...
"Land of the free, Home of the brave" materials
again, I digress, my apology.
Please try to view this purely from a human level (if that is even possible with some folks)
If that is possible, then I will try to share my observation,
(also, please try not to laminate this with your personal bias or "judgement," I am not judging them like how we judge a commentary, as funny as this may sound when your ego reads it.)
Don, Carla, and especially Jim....are definitely not below average in their intellectual and cognitive function.
The personal accounts that was written down, and events that unfolded, seriously shows foul play at the end.
Yes, we cannot "see" what's going on in their minds, but their words, and actions are evidences for examination in an exhibit manners.
- Sexual desires were evidently present between members of the team,
- Inter, and even intercrossed intimate relationships were manifested,
- Drugs were involved,
- Ethical boundaries and guidelines were crossed, during an attempt to work in a scientific research fashion.
Professionally, and ethically speaking. Keeping the abovementioned out of the work until afterward is not far-fetched, or impossible.
There is a reason why this is a model that applies in our world, whether through professional policy, or just common understanding of human nature.
It exercises maturity, patient, and professionalism, but not for the sake of it.
It is for the sake of the work that this team was trying to accomplish.
How was this missed? especially by entities that were suppose to be from the 5th and 6th? the place of wisdom and all.
So we have these variables in the dynamic.
And without failures, it produced misunderstanding between the three,
Carla mentioned that Don thought she doesn't love him, Don got jealous, and then you have Jim! being in the mix.
But what caught my attention, is that there is a victimization and "blame" being expressed here. (Even though it was not intentionally, or negatively projected.)
I would need to seriously apply a full investigation to be able to get to the bottom of it, but this is not possible, two of them are gone, and one doesn't talk.
Although in their own alibi and written statements. Questions arises,
One of them may be, did Carla have intention or feelings for Jim? while she was sexually active with Don?
In this dynamic, it is not about making assessment of the people involved, but the research itself were being infringed upon, as it is psychological by nature.
But all of these things were "transformed" through the love, and compassionate understanding of the three,
This is something I can feel and understand, I do love them, for their effort, and what they tried to do.
Don's statements with his decisions of continuing the experiment/research, also brought up concerns, he did not follow any "ethical" approach of a scientist/researcher.
As a team leader, if your research shows signs of degeneration, bodily and/or mental harm to yourself and/or participants, you need to immediately stop the experimentation.
Regardless if the participants are "gung-ho" or "motivated" about it.
As the primary researcher of the experiment, there is a responsibility, that must be enacted at all time by them, to ensure safety and not allowing any personal hubris to inflict irreparable damage to people.
An example of this would be the Stanford prison experiment. (You can google about it)
The notion from all the variables and dynamics in the written work, personal accounts, and statements, points to a psychological experiment with the participants and the researcher not respecting professional boundaries, thus causing internal misunderstanding, conflicts, and misjudgment with their actions.
Consequently, mishandling of a team member, indirectly causing a preventable death by self-infliction.
The research does involves an experiment with the human psychology, crossed-boundaries between researcher and participant were evidently observed, and it also lacked the supervision of any qualified professionals in the field of mental health, to ensure the safety and well being of all.
In closing,
My observation indicated that this written work, the "channeled materials." Is a psychological experiment carried out by Dr Elkins and his colleagues. It does have a significant and foreseeable impact on the psychological function with all most who come in contact with the materials.
We can see this in the way the community members carry themselves, their attitudes, and persona after reading the materials. It also affect the current work environment in the organization. The philosophy of the written materials serves as a compass for decision making, company's culture, and management of the organization and it's leaders.
In other words,
The psychological effect of the Ra materials, and other written materials by Carla Ruekert, Donald Elkins, and James Mccarthy do have strong influences on peoples' minds.
The positive effect of the supposed intention in the books does bring a loving outlook, compassion, and understanding for those who reads it, but it also ironically brought negative psychological effect to one of it's researcher, their staffs/volunteers, and readers alike.
The results of the organization's mission statement can be viewed as inconsistent, internally and externally, there are constant struggles with people that are involve with this project, on a very personal level.
If, this research, and experimentation is in turn, proven to be a psychological, and medically based. The responsibility of it's impact to the public, whether positive, or negative, direct, or indirect, must be taken with significant consideration.
If, this research is theological, or fictional based, then it must be stated as so, to allow readers to freely exercise their own interpretation purely as entertainment, and not as a mental-health application for their own personal well being. As observed, the result has indirectly caused significant mental health damage to it's own writer/researcher, and possibly future readers.
I empathize with Donald Elkins, because I have approached this written work with similar demeanor as him, from a scientific approach.
And personally, it has shown to me that it does have a strong effect on the humans mind.
Spiritually speaking, coming full circle to it all, I do feel that this is a product of love, from love. But most importantly, the causality of this, or "karma" would be placed on the original writers and current writers/authors of the written materials.
And in that, I do feel a strong sense of compassion, and respect for those who are willing to take on such a heavy karmic lesson. Whether it is for themselves, or other-selves.
With light,
Absolutely, we all have our own unique ways of experiencing this great path, and that is the ugly-beauty of it all.
From what I share, and what I offer to other-selves, it is just another way of moving the infinite observer from one angle to another.
Offering possibilities and probabilities of experiences to the "infinite creator" to "see."
Now if this is tiring, boring, or rubs you the wrong way, then just shut the chapel's door, and ignore other creators' perspective of the one.
There's no need to force, or will someone in any way, hidden under the pretense of "niceness," or exercising parental control for the "greater good."
Ironically, the materials and the readers are paradoxically involve in this,
Please try to see this from the perspective of public servants, and/or medical professionals. Imagine if doctors, and social service acts base off of their pure emotions? Aren't we glad that there are laws to prevent this? and holds people responsible for what they've done to another?
In the field of mental health, colleagues and myself absolutely abhor to the saying "for your own good."
"For your own good," we will force you meds, constrain you, "for your own good" we are going to take away your freedom.
Until one can see how contradicting it is, which is the point Kraken has made. Until you step back from the whole thing, and not be mesmerized by the "magic" within. Then one can see the "other-side" of this coin, of this "life-changing" materials being given to this world.
The whole conversation/transcript/teaching constructed and revolves around the protection of freewill..
But then it's own representative slaps their own teammate with the most contradicting move that is possible... hello?
If that first statement is true, then Don should have been given the freedom to choose how he wanted to pass-on, with or without anyone's "loving" concerns.
if you can take a step back for a moment if possible, and just look at this,
leaving the philosophy, and all of the poetic/creative writings behind for a moment,
Suddenly you will go,
"oh, wait a minute, I wouldn't have done that to someone I love, whether if it is for personal reasons, spiritual, or religious."
For example, if a similar incident involves my own Ma or Pa, I wouldn't call the police, and say things like "there were no other options."
It would have been my neighbor, who has no idea what is with the noise and commotion going on next door.
So, let say, even if my Ma or Pa tries to kill me, I would sit with them, until the very end. Because I truly love them.
(But that is just me, and I am not expecting anything, nor am I judging anyone, or Carla, or even Jim)
I am simply explaining how I would apply a certain level of common sense in similar situation.
I will not give into the fear for my own mortality, and pass that responsibility to people that are trained to solve problems with violence, like law enforcement.
Most of the tragedy that I've seen, are due to the "caller" having no idea what they were doing, or what the possible outcome for someone like Don in his state of mental decline, when confronted with law officers. Carla and Jim are not dumbfounded, from their writings and work, they show a level of cognitive reasoning that could understand this.
OR, unless,
if the patient were lunging at the "caller" with a weapon, threatening them with violence.
Don showed no signs of violence at all, from his own account, nor from Carla's or Jim's. He was not combative, and was only self-destructive.
So unless I missed it somewhere in all of the writings. Was there a point where Don threatened Carla or Jim?
I digress,
Going back to the OP from Kraken, and his viewpoint..
You know... maybe it is an American thing, I don't know, I am not originally from the US, but when I heard that the US rejected proven methods to treat drugs addiction through micro-exposure treatment...
I really questioned how they treat their sick, dying, and their homeless.
Like most powerful countries, (1st world) the US has a very disconnected viewpoint with the rest of the world, and it is hard to show US citizens, or their government that they are ironically not very...
"Land of the free, Home of the brave" materials
again, I digress, my apology.
Please try to view this purely from a human level (if that is even possible with some folks)
If that is possible, then I will try to share my observation,
(also, please try not to laminate this with your personal bias or "judgement," I am not judging them like how we judge a commentary, as funny as this may sound when your ego reads it.)
Don, Carla, and especially Jim....are definitely not below average in their intellectual and cognitive function.
The personal accounts that was written down, and events that unfolded, seriously shows foul play at the end.
Yes, we cannot "see" what's going on in their minds, but their words, and actions are evidences for examination in an exhibit manners.
- Sexual desires were evidently present between members of the team,
- Inter, and even intercrossed intimate relationships were manifested,
- Drugs were involved,
- Ethical boundaries and guidelines were crossed, during an attempt to work in a scientific research fashion.
Professionally, and ethically speaking. Keeping the abovementioned out of the work until afterward is not far-fetched, or impossible.
There is a reason why this is a model that applies in our world, whether through professional policy, or just common understanding of human nature.
It exercises maturity, patient, and professionalism, but not for the sake of it.
It is for the sake of the work that this team was trying to accomplish.
How was this missed? especially by entities that were suppose to be from the 5th and 6th? the place of wisdom and all.
So we have these variables in the dynamic.
And without failures, it produced misunderstanding between the three,
Carla mentioned that Don thought she doesn't love him, Don got jealous, and then you have Jim! being in the mix.
But what caught my attention, is that there is a victimization and "blame" being expressed here. (Even though it was not intentionally, or negatively projected.)
I would need to seriously apply a full investigation to be able to get to the bottom of it, but this is not possible, two of them are gone, and one doesn't talk.
Although in their own alibi and written statements. Questions arises,
One of them may be, did Carla have intention or feelings for Jim? while she was sexually active with Don?
In this dynamic, it is not about making assessment of the people involved, but the research itself were being infringed upon, as it is psychological by nature.
But all of these things were "transformed" through the love, and compassionate understanding of the three,
This is something I can feel and understand, I do love them, for their effort, and what they tried to do.
Don's statements with his decisions of continuing the experiment/research, also brought up concerns, he did not follow any "ethical" approach of a scientist/researcher.
As a team leader, if your research shows signs of degeneration, bodily and/or mental harm to yourself and/or participants, you need to immediately stop the experimentation.
Regardless if the participants are "gung-ho" or "motivated" about it.
As the primary researcher of the experiment, there is a responsibility, that must be enacted at all time by them, to ensure safety and not allowing any personal hubris to inflict irreparable damage to people.
An example of this would be the Stanford prison experiment. (You can google about it)
The notion from all the variables and dynamics in the written work, personal accounts, and statements, points to a psychological experiment with the participants and the researcher not respecting professional boundaries, thus causing internal misunderstanding, conflicts, and misjudgment with their actions.
Consequently, mishandling of a team member, indirectly causing a preventable death by self-infliction.
The research does involves an experiment with the human psychology, crossed-boundaries between researcher and participant were evidently observed, and it also lacked the supervision of any qualified professionals in the field of mental health, to ensure the safety and well being of all.
In closing,
My observation indicated that this written work, the "channeled materials." Is a psychological experiment carried out by Dr Elkins and his colleagues. It does have a significant and foreseeable impact on the psychological function with all most who come in contact with the materials.
We can see this in the way the community members carry themselves, their attitudes, and persona after reading the materials. It also affect the current work environment in the organization. The philosophy of the written materials serves as a compass for decision making, company's culture, and management of the organization and it's leaders.
In other words,
The psychological effect of the Ra materials, and other written materials by Carla Ruekert, Donald Elkins, and James Mccarthy do have strong influences on peoples' minds.
The positive effect of the supposed intention in the books does bring a loving outlook, compassion, and understanding for those who reads it, but it also ironically brought negative psychological effect to one of it's researcher, their staffs/volunteers, and readers alike.
The results of the organization's mission statement can be viewed as inconsistent, internally and externally, there are constant struggles with people that are involve with this project, on a very personal level.
If, this research, and experimentation is in turn, proven to be a psychological, and medically based. The responsibility of it's impact to the public, whether positive, or negative, direct, or indirect, must be taken with significant consideration.
If, this research is theological, or fictional based, then it must be stated as so, to allow readers to freely exercise their own interpretation purely as entertainment, and not as a mental-health application for their own personal well being. As observed, the result has indirectly caused significant mental health damage to it's own writer/researcher, and possibly future readers.
I empathize with Donald Elkins, because I have approached this written work with similar demeanor as him, from a scientific approach.
And personally, it has shown to me that it does have a strong effect on the humans mind.
Spiritually speaking, coming full circle to it all, I do feel that this is a product of love, from love. But most importantly, the causality of this, or "karma" would be placed on the original writers and current writers/authors of the written materials.
And in that, I do feel a strong sense of compassion, and respect for those who are willing to take on such a heavy karmic lesson. Whether it is for themselves, or other-selves.
With light,
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)