Q’uotes Discussions

Confederation Philosophy
322

Dearest Quan
I so laughed at the multiple energy drinks! I felt this once in a while. In fact if I go to an opera, when I come back I cannot go to sleep immediately since there was evidently so much exquisite work to create ephemeral beauty, so no sleep is possible immediately! So I just sit and listen in the dark to the music as I remember it and the singers

Now as to the view this is exactly what I see too!!!

The first foreground is a limitless sea of green grass flowing in the wind , then starting from my left side a little above the grass is a line of trees moving in the wind, like poplars and l beech trees and the line of wood is on an ascending diagonal towards far away pale yellow hills and a blue sky

My goodness so close to identical, this is hilarious nearly !!

:melting_face:

1 Like
323

I would not say that invoking the Law of Confusion is a get out from addressing claims in all cases.

I think that when we commit to a belief system or set of values, we do yield a little of our free will to those concepts. Since we give others the permission, or opportunity, to challenge us on them.

I’ll give you an example. If you meet someone who is a criminal, and they steal something, and you say to them that they shouldn’t steal because it is a sin, and say, the vernacular in this community might be something like that they will experience karma or their life review will have difficult moments when they die. If the person is an atheist, they can simply say they don’t believe in sin and karma. I have had this conversation with people I see as unethical, without the direct theft example.

Once this happens though, their moral framework cannot be challenged, because they have not committed to one. So it becomes more a game of exacting consequences, and probably ostracising a toxic person.

If however, the person has committed to Christianity. You can say to the person that whichever commandment it is states that they should not steal. Because they have yielded to a small extent the free will in that area. They have two choices. They can ignore this completely. But the challenge still exists. Or they can say they are no longer Christian. Or of course they can say ‘yeah, of course you are right’. But they have yielded a significant portion of the free will over their interpretation of morality to these concepts.

In theory, that same process should be at work here. The people here should have yielded most strongly to the Law of One, and perhaps in a secondary way to the Q’uo. Although I think the Law of One is more… ‘required’ and the Q’uo isn’t specifically. Since the Q’uo is acknowledged as conscious and open to flaw. I think there is also a requirement that the perspectives of say, Carla and Jim, should be given a great deal of weight. Not that they are infallible but they are at the least a helpful teaching authority. And that someone that was openly hostile to their perspectives would not be considered as part of the community here.

With a question like this. Jesus and history and such. It probably was not strictly talked about in the Law of One. But we could say, for instance, that a source like Aaron Abke promotes the idea that Jesus promoted a gospel that is more heavily based on works. And that the Apostle of Paul and the ‘faith alone’ doctrine, statements such as from Isaiah: “your works are as filthy rags” opposes statements such as Matthew 25:37 or ‘Be perfect as your heavenly father is perfect’.

The reason these points might be relevant is that they do correlate moreso with the term ‘service to others’. And the Law of One did at no point put forward a perspective similar to Romans 10:9. They never said one has to confess Jesus as Lord. The Law of One spoke more in terms that people get to a good place if they are good people. Like the thief on the cross who never committed to Jesus as lord, but was told by Jesus he would go to heaven because of his general goodness.

From those perspectives, I would think that if people are consistent with their study and commitment to the Law of One, they do not have complete free will of interpretation. They have to wrestle with the objective reality of what the Law of One said.

People could of course reject such challenges. But then the question becomes, are they following the Law of One or just saying that they are? They would also not be in positive connection to those that were actually studying the Law of One. Because there is a natural barrier between those of different interests. It’s like, if people do weed they tend to hang around with other people that do weed. The pro and anti weed people do not hang out together in most cases.

1 Like
324

Opera, I have not been before maybe i should give a try now :wink:
Yes similar indeed, I just remember the color the most the green of the grass was just so striking!

Phoenix, I really love the passion and enthusiasm and I am especially thankful that you are interested in this type of talk with me..but lol im not right one for those discussions. Hence why again especially recommend to create a new post where is may be more visible to others who may be on similar level of passion. These days increasingly my brain has become very simple, its become used to much silence so any overthinking it starts to hurt :laughing:

1 Like
325

so true Quan, such a great paradox

1 Like
Daily Q'uote from L/L Research Channeling
326

Haha yes but then from personal experience easy to forget too :joy:

327

So nice to see others share my experience of diving deep into the work that made Ra possible and finding these gems. They get hardly any attention from those who speak on the philosophy these days, LLR included. There’s a TON of excerpts especially from '74 on the r/lawofone_philosophy subreddit, many with short commentaries from yours truly.

2 Likes
328

Thank you for the comments, over the many years ive always found myself coming back to that period. Ahh the humour though in the first transcript..amazing transcript yet being an essay for university! Each decade of transcripts, has a different flavour to appreciate. Can you believe more than 50 years now!

Much appreciation for that link, what absolute gem to provide.. ive never visited any Law of One discussion on reddit before or anywhere else really, only the cave here or the bring4th forum before this one!

I may add, so a reference to 74 time period, a curious choice if you want to have share why that time specifically..

1 Like
329

I would highlight the word consensus which is the nature of our physical world

2 Likes
330

I like that, itudemo…

2 Likes
331

Looks like it’s really hard to understand

1 Like
332

Yes it looks like, but in reality… lol, even what seems the darkest entity is in fact a soul of limitless light who decided to take another path.

Also, it is nice, I think, to sometimes look more at what seems very dark actions with very dark consequences but knowing they are made by free will from a 'light-filled soul ’ which took, again, another path.

I find it sometim4s very pacifying ( for myself, lol ) to sort of dissociate the actions from the entity 's soul

And funnily it brings us back to Jesus’ words, if they are not apocryphal , ’ Father the know not what they are doing"

In the end , we are all in this together, and thinking that , makes it easier, as separation is what weighs us deeply..

3 Likes
333

Nice comments with all that in mind.. I just will say the three classic words… All is one

itudemo it may help to lean towards the mystery not the knowing

2 Likes
334

Sounds logical :smile:

1 Like
335

As far as I understand, the Schism of 1054 happened because of including filioque, the question of whether the Holy Spirit coming from the Father, or both the Father and the Son.

(just a note)

336

13.21 … third density, the first density of consciousness of spirit.

I wonder, are entities of second density are also mind/body/spirit complexes?

337

Maybe I’ll try to answer that question. Let’s go step by step, starting with the body complex. The body is a second-density physical structure that contains the basic instincts needed for survival, so second-density beings (we call them animals) definitely possess body complexes. Next we have the mind complex, which in Confederation terminology is our thoughts and emotions, something that exists between our body and spirit and shapes our personality.

A dog or a cat looks like it feels emotions and certainly thinks in its own way; dogs and cats have personalities. But does a snake or a crocodile have a personality? This is a difficult question, but they think in their own way and figure out how to hunt and eat. One could therefore to ponder if some creatures are only body complexes or mind and body complexes. While others are body and mind complexes, like household pets, that’s for sure. Ultimately, I think that all animals have body and mind complexes, even snakes, but they are very fragile personalities.

Now let’s move upward to the spirit. Are animals able to recognize their immortal consciousness, their individuality, or participate in something that might be called spiritual development? It appears they are not, because they do not have a spirit complex. Yet sometimes, for example, dogs display very human behaviors because they have been given so much love, and they seem to engage in family life a bit differently; perhaps their spirit complex is forming and is still in an early stage. And what about dolphins? According to the Confederation, dolphins are third-density beings with the ability to open to the Creator’s love and light; they dream and meditate and certainly connect with the Creator, perhaps in their own, more intuitive way than we do. They clearly are not the kind of second-density beings you are asking about, yet we see them as animals, so they belong in this comparison. Thus, dolphins must possess a spirit complex.

I would sum it up like this. Generally the second-density beings are body and mind complexes (not spirit). They lack a spirit complex because they cannot focus their will on magical or spiritual practice. The first-density “beings,” I assume, are solid body complexes (with the mind complexes as a seed that has the potential to develop). All third-density beings, in turn, are body, mind, and spirit complexes.

There is also another, broader way to look at it. Confederation material sometimes states that everything is consciousness, or that everything is spirit, or that everything is love, or that only intelligent infinity exists, or that all that is is one infinite Creator. All these ideas point to a fundamental substance that underlies reality, and everything else arises from it. You can call this substance spirit. From that perspective, reality contains nothing that is not spirit which emerges as an active force from infinity.

Therefore, with this approach, even the second density possesses something in the shape of a spirit complex; everything possesses spirit, even if it is not obvious. And everything else is what comes from spirit, only subject to distortion. You could think of it that way, but I think it somewhat changes the original meaning of the three complexes Ra speaks of. It’s simply a way of equating the One Infinite Creator with the One Infinite Spirit Complex. However, it’s important to remember that the Confederation doesn’t use such terminology. Even if it makes sense, the technical meaning of “spirit complex” appears when talking about mind/body/spirit complex.

I’ve focused on animals, omitting plants, but I think these considerations can be adapted to plants as well. For example, trees, or most trees as I guess, are mind-body complexes (not just body complexes, but lacking a spirit complex).

1 Like
338

Thank you for your explanations,

Mentioning dolphins I got added next evidence that we/people often forgetting that another being should not necessarily be like human.

As for the “dogs display very human behaviors”, let’s say there are forms in school that learn:

2. arithmetic

3. algebra

Now is summer, schoolchildren finished second form, they are third formers now and they are on holidays. We can say arithmetic corresponds to third form as in the second form they don´t know fully. Indeed in the first moments of second form they know almost nothing of arithmetic but in the last moments they know all of it (but still in the second form). So we can also say arithmetic corresponds to second form because in the third form they are learning algebra. Algebra is an extension of arithmetic so it’s also possible to say the in the second form children learn algebra.

I just wanted to say that sometimes our division confuses ourselves. The dogs’ spirit are between two densities.

I’m inclined to think “everything is spirit” that’s why I have contradiction with “third density, the first density of consciousness of spirit.”

99.7 The Significator [of the Mind] owns a covenant with the spirit which it shall in some cases manifest through the thought and action of the adept.

My supposition is that this covenant appears in the third density. I mean by covenanting spirit is graduating itself from second density to the third one. But I’m not sure enough.

P.S. I’ve just “found” this:

30.5 Questioner: I would like to know how the mind/body/spirit complexes originate. How, going back as far as necessary, does the— Do they originate by spirit forming mind and mind forming body? Can you tell me this?

Ra: I am Ra. We ask you to consider that you are attempting to trace evolution. This evolution is as we have previously described, the consciousness being first, in first density, without movement, a random thing. Whether you may call this mind or body complex is a semantic problem. We call it mind/body complex recognizing always that in the simplest iota of this complex exists in its entirety the One Infinite Creator; this mind/body complex then in second density discovering the growing and turning towards the light, thus awakening what you may call the spirit complex, that which intensifies the upward spiraling towards the love and light of the Infinite Creator.

The addition of this spirit complex, though apparent rather than real, it having existed potentially from the beginning of space/time, perfects itself by graduation into third density. When the mind/body/spirit complex becomes aware of the possibility of service to self or other-self, then the mind/body/spirit complex is activated.

Looks like you can say both mind/body complex or mind/body/spirit complex, but the spirit in the complex is not (fully) activated for the second density.

339

I think that when it comes to the evolution of consciousness into higher densities, it unfolds gradually. Beings that begin to show the capacity for graduation in a sense mirror the state of entities one density above their own. Fundamentally everything that exists is rooted in Intelligent Infinity, a form of Consciousness that already contains the fullness of infinite potential and yet becomes ever more intelligent. This evolution of Consciousness can be portrayed as a condensation into Light and Information. Admittedly the passage from one density to the next is a quantum leap, yet the composition of consciousness and its degree of condensation into light and information may not differ greatly between a being completing its graduation in, say, second density and beginning in third density.

Well, I think at the deepest level we are all Infinity beyond Being, beyond all existence, while simultaneously holding the complete potential for existence, everything and nothing at once. When Infinity became Intelligent it shaped that potential into Intelligent Energy and further into three complexes: body, mind, and spirit. Throughout its evolution all Life draws upon the potential of Intelligent Infinity, first becoming a body complex, then as it advances a mind/body complex, next a mind/body/spirit complex, and finally at the end of the entire cycle the mind/body/spirit complex is integrated into One, into Intelligent Infinity.

Well, as Ra points out, certain subtleties and matters of interpretation are important. A fully formed spirit complex can exist only in a third-density being, not in a second-density one. Still, the love and light accumulated by a second-density entity does “settle” somewhere, so the spirit complex is already taking shape, already present to some degree in every second-density being.

I would sum it up this way: the seed of body complex is the energy that builds any form of existence, it is the first manifestation of Intelligent Infinity focused into Intelligent Energy. When that energy further differentiates into fire, water, earth, and air, these four elements possess a complete body complex and mind complex that will only begin to gather light and information as they evolve. Second-density beings are complexes of body, mind, and spirit in which the body and mind complexes are fully formed, while the spirit complex is just a seed that will develop. Third-density beings already have a fully formed body, mind, and spirit complex, and from that point from third to seventh density this mind/body/spirit complex evolves. Eighth density is the realm in which the complex is integrated into One, both uniting and transcending the body, mind, and spirit complex into Infinity.

1 Like
340

One of rare places when Ra replying with question

28.13 … However, there is always, due to free will acting infinitely upon the creation, a great variation in initial responses to intelligent energy’s potential. Thus almost immediately the foundations of the, shall we call it, hierarchical nature of beings begins to manifest as some portions of consciousness or awareness learn through experience in a much more efficient manner.

28.14 Questioner: Is there any reason for some portions being much more efficient in learning?

Ra: I am Ra. Is there any reason for some to learn more quickly than others? Look, if you wish, to the function of the will … the, shall we say, attraction to the upward spiraling line of light.

341

This is from the first session and I was just in love with my little Ra, lol

1 Like
Daily Q'uote from L/L Research Channeling