16.22 Ra: I am Ra. There is past, present, and future in third density. In an overview such as an entity may have, removed from the space/time continuum, it may be seen that in the cycle of completion there exists only the present. We, ourselves, seek to learn this understanding. At the seventh level or dimension, we shall, if our humble efforts are sufficient, become one with all, thus having no memory, no identity, no past or future, but existing in the all.
1 Like
Ra’s “polarity” is called “dvandva” in the Upanishads:
So Buddha, being raised in Hinduism, had a much easier task with his listeners (who were also raised Hindu) than Jesus did. Jesus essentially had to “start from scratch”! 
Look at “lila” in Hinduism:
This is a culture who would have celebrated Jesus, rather than crucify him (as they celebrated Buddha).
1 Like
51.6 In fact, the process of the physical death is as we have described before: one in which there is aid available and the only need at death is the releasing of that entity from its body by those around it and the praising of the process by those who grieve. By these means may the mind/body/spirit which has experienced physical death be aided, not by the various perceptions of careful and repeated rituals.
…Yeeeaah…he would have had a much more joyous time in India, because he achieved moksha…
They would have said “congratulations”, not “how dare you!”. 
And Jesus saying “deny thyself” (Matthew 16:24), is what Hinduism calls nirvikalpa, where every last identification of the Self with some object or concept has ceased - “without conception”.
My personal story, my life, my name, my achievements, my profession, my possessions, my relations, my reputation, my country, my ancestry, my language, my race, my culture, my likes, my dislikes, my age, my body, my gender, etc…the entire surface level personality known to the world (maya / illusion) falls away.
Nirvikalpa (Sanskrit) - “nir” means “without” or “free from,” and “vikampa” means “agitation” or “disturbance.” So, “nirvikampa” could be interpreted as “without agitation” or “undisturbed.”
And the word maya, which refers to the concept of illusion or the illusory nature of the material world.
The word is derived from the Sanskrit root matr-, “to measure, form, build, or lay out a plan,” the root from which we obtain such Greco-Latin words as meter, matrix, material, and matter.
And Jesus refer to the infinite as “Abwoon d’bashmaya”.
Although literally in Aramaic, maya refer to “water” and Aramaic has no word or conception of “air”. The closest might be “breath” (nefs) which interchangeably in meaning with “spirit” as well.
One thing for me that has always been questionable (and a bit unbelievable), are these words that he allegedly spoke on the cross:
“Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” /
“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?”
It just doesn’t fit with what I understand about him, an awakened person who has achieved union.
It may be that achieving a state of unity
is a transient experience dependent upon
circumstance and not something that say
necessarily sticks through all experiences.
Possibly a state of unity is like an investment
of a magical personality, and when it comes
off, Jesus the Christ became Jesus the man.
There’s mention of Martyrdom as being an
inferior choice - better to live another day
in chance to help another. In this sense,
some degraded decision may have factored
into some forsaken feeling.
1 Like
In the zen literature, when it becomes time for the zen master to die, the students are always in tremendous sorrow and balling their eyes out, and then the zen master uses that last little bit of time he has left, to teach one last time.
Here’s one of those touching stories:
The way I am with things like these nowadays, is I no longer try and fit square pegs into round holes. I go by intuition and feeling.
What doesn’t fit “my picture” (however subjective), is disregarded.
And given that this canonical text was “officially decreed” by the Catholic church (an institution not to be trusted)…that throws a few other spanners in the works… the Nag Hammadi codices are much more trustworthy in my opinion.
It’s “ever so slightly” reminiscent of the so-called “Satanic verses” in the Koran (in a roundabout way).
Instead if just relaxing about it (or disregarding it), the whole Muslim world is up in arms and poor Salman Rushdie has a fatwa issued against him, even though he lifted the words straight out of the Koran…
I’ve read some spiritual literature over the years which view the crucifiction as symbolic, and not literal.
Still mulling that one over…
Docetism was later rejected at the First Council of Nicaea in 325 AD and regarded as heretical by most non-Gnostic churches.
So who knows… given what they’ve done with regard to reincarnation at these Nicaean councils, who knows what to believe anymore. 
I wonder if Jesus has any clue how much trouble he caused… Christian persecution, the Templars, the Holy Crusades, Inquisition and on and on and on. The deeds that have been commited in that guy’s name…
So Quid, tell me, after you shared the words of Jehovah in Exodus, how do these words strike you?
…square pegs and round holes and all that…
I should probably mention as a side note that some biblical scholars consider this (and some other aspects) to have been directly lifted from Mithraism by the early Catholic church.
Ra did say the Old Testament contains more negativity, they didn’t say the New Testament contains no negativity.
1 Like
That passage of Matt:10 does not resonate with me. And so does many others on the gospel. I did what perhaps Jesus did during his seeking journey, only took that resonate well with me and leave the rest. As also recommended by Quo.
Having said that;
It seems Mattiyahu tried to portrait his rabbi as the “true jewish Mossiach”. So no it was not the Catholic church, Catholicismus was not even founded yet when that gospel according to Mattiyahu spread around.
My ‘triggering passage’ after the Exodus part was actually this:
“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."
John 14:6
Right wing Christian’s #1 favorite passage.
To me it implies:
- The Father is outside of everyone and finite (has border), thus to ‘come’ to the father need to go through somebody (or someplace).
- Jesus claimed to be the ultimate broker to “The Father” which is “outside of everyone”, kind of narcissistic isn’t it? And how about those who were born (and died) before Jesus?
1 Like
That’s putting it mildly. I was simply “going there” because this conversation has had a flavour of “that terrible book, the Old Testament”…glossing over the fact that there’s some seriously problematic (and authoritarian / negatively influenced) passages in the New Testament.
Look at this little gem:
That makes him sound like a cult leader. If you encounter someone today who says that, you’re going to look for the nearest exit. 
And that’s simply my point. Both these books have a goodly amount of negatively influenced material.
It’s largely inconsequential to me the exact details of how and why words of this nature made its way to the printed page, only that it did.
And the influences of Mithraism and Egyptian religions on Christianity are also well established and researched, easily accesible online.
That was a prominent one for me too, if not the one. I remember well thinking about this as a child, with my practical and logical reasoning. So everyone unlucky enough to have lived and died before Jesus… is doomed. And even someone living at the same time as him, not lucky enough to live in the vicinity of the sea of Galilee, like China, South America, Australia, etc., …also doomed. It made no logical sense whatsoever. And afterwards, anyone anywhere whom the “good news” hadn’t reached yet…doomed.
What bollocks!
1 Like
Also who lived on another planet like Venus millions years ago.
Touché!
1 Like
Incidently, Mithra’s birthday was…December 25…