Sorted by relevance. Sort by session.
22.23 ▶ Questioner: Then were there what we would call priests trained in these temples?
Ra: I am Ra. You would not call them priests in the sense of celibacy, of obedience, and of poverty. They were priests in the sense of those devoted to learning.
The difficulties became apparent as those trained in this learning began to attempt to use crystal powers for those things other than healing, as they were involved not only with learning but became involved with what you would call the governmental structure.
103.8 ▶ Questioner: I didn’t mean to cover previously covered material. I meant to add any of this to specifically focus on at this time, the best possible thing that we or the instrument could do to improve these energies, the salient activity.
Ra: I am Ra. Before responding we ask your vigilance during pain flares as the channel is acceptable but is being distorted periodically by the severe physical distortions of the yellow-ray, chemical body of the instrument.
Those salient items for the support group are praise and thanksgiving in harmony. These the group has accomplished with such a degree of acceptability that we cavil not at the harmony of the group.
As to the instrument, the journey from worth in action to worth in esse is arduous. The entity has denied itself in order to be free from that which it calls addiction*. This sort of martyrdom, and here we speak of the small but symbolically great sacrifice of the clothing, causes the entity to frame a selfhood in poorness which feeds unworthiness unless the poverty is seen to be true richness. In other words, good works for the wrong reasons cause confusion and distortion. We encourage the instrument to value itself and to see that its true requirements are valued by the self. We suggest contemplation of true richness of being.
33.8 ▶ Questioner: Thank you. Then from this I would extrapolate to the conjecture, I will say, that the orientation in mind of the entity is the only thing that is of any consequence at all. The physical catalyst that he experiences, regardless of what is happening about him, will be a function strictly of his orientation in mind. I will use as an example [example deleted] this being a statement of the orientation in mind governing the catalyst. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. We prefer not to use any well-known examples, sayings, or adages in our communications to you due to the tremendous amount of distortion which any well-known saying has undergone. Therefore, we may answer the first part of your query asking that you delete the example. It is completely true to the best of our knowledge that the orientation or polarization of the mind/body/spirit complex is cause of the perceptions generated by each entity. Thus a scene may be observed in your grocery store. The entity ahead of self may be without sufficient funds. One entity may then take this opportunity to steal. Another may take this opportunity to feel itself a failure. Another may unconcernedly remove the least necessary items, pay for what it can, and go about its business. The one behind the self, observing, may feel compassion, may feel an insult because of standing next to a poverty-stricken person, may feel generosity, may feel indifference.
Do you now see the analogies in a more appropriate manner?
Hide question numbers Show categories Show notes Hide audio
Version (?): Lightly Edited, Relistened, Original
Back to top
The Law of One books are copyright ©1982, 1984, 1998 L/L Research. This site copyright ©2003–2018 Tobey Wheelock.
Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.