For years I used to believe that this sentence justified forgiveness without contrition. These are things I have thought on for a LONG time. I remember asking questions on this area before I even got to the Law of One:
Questioner: If an entity develops what is called a karma in an incarnation, is there then programming that sometimes occurs so that he will experience catalyst that will enable him to get to a point of forgiveness thereby alleviating the karma?
Ra: I am Ra. This is, in general, correct. However, both self and any involved other-self may, at any time through the process of understanding, acceptance, and forgiveness, ameliorate these patterns. This is true at any point in an incarnative pattern. Thus one who has set in motion an action may forgive itself and never again make that error. This also brakes or stops what you call karma.
Now though, I am looking at this in a different way. Firstly, the answer states that understanding and acceptance is necessary. Understanding and acceptance in my understanding often go to very deep roots If we are to understand something it might go right down to patterns started in childhood.
So with an example lets say that a couple had a nasty break up and one or the other is wondering whether to forgive the other. Letâs say that a man and a woman got married but the marriage fell apart due to lack of appreciation of each other and a slow descent into, cheating, passive aggression and arguing.
We could say these people need to âforgiveâ each other then assumedly, the karma would be gotten rid of and they would not have any remaining problems with each other? This, without the understanding and acceptance would state that they would be compelled to âloveâ each other then, because that was the baseline before the forgiveness.
But thatâs not what the line says, the line says understanding and acceptance first, which I think is meant to potentially take years or longer.
Now understanding and acceptance it seems to me, might be that say, rather than wanting the woman for her soul the man wanted her body, and rather than wanting the man for his soul she wanted his resources.
So the line would make more sense to me that say, the guy wanted a young attractive girl and was kind of âhormonedâ into believing a woman he discovers he did not love. Then obviously, since she does not particularly like him either and starts nagging (because appreciating him would lose her control) so when she gets older and he meets another young attractive and willing partner he goes with her as well then cheats.
So the understanding, would be that he did not love his original wife - and this understanding might have gone down to deep childhood things. This understanding then removes the issue, the âkarmaâ per sey, of him getting in relationships with people that he doesnât really love and that donât really love him. It might also, allow him to ask more questions of his partner and determine if the two are truly in love with each other.
We are unclear exactly what the Law of One contact meant by the term âkarmaâ. Karma is that that which is done keeps on being done? So childhood patterns become repetitive if not reflected on and cause bad situatiosn? Not that all outer situations are suddenly sorted out with the alleviation of karma?
Then, for him, forgiveness is implicit after that understanding. It is an end point after a process. It seems to me though that in relation to âkarmaâ they still might have an aggressive divorce and alimony or whatever, so it is unlikely if we were to consider that manifestation of hostility physical karma, that the ex wifes understanding can be forced to stop hostilities. Due to free will?