Love and/or Wisdom

[Don C.]

In my humble opinon:

There is nothing inherently wrong with attempting to love wisely,
just as there is nothing wrong with a child pretending to care for a
doll. The intent is pure, even if it is naive.

If Jesus martyred himself to teach us unconditional love, and did so
without the full restraint of wisdom, I can only conclude that it is
not yet time for us to temper our love with wisdom.

In other words: we should love freely, without regard for wisdom -
wisdom (or what we think is wisdom) at our present stage can only
interfere with our fullest realization of love.

We must learn HOW to fly before we can decide WHERE to fly.

[waterflame5]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=pNAQqAjmkZu6IQbqxTsP3nLf4pbevvY7iuXSkH z47N9WvOgSIuqrJuWfbCYcMjXCbFCK6pLFhbrKLq9b), "Don C." <liveoncetv@y...> wrote:

> In other words: we should love freely, without regard for wisdom -
> wisdom (or what we think is wisdom) at our present stage can only
> interfere with our fullest realization of love.

This relates to the ideal of unconditional love
conflicting with violation of safety. Not harming
yourself or others in the act of loving. Maybe the
truth is, that no matter what happens, you will be
harmed regardless, so you might as well try and
make the best of it, by striving for the aim of
loving unconditionally and going against common
sense. Out of this, the definition of Love comes
into question. Like setting limits to keep you
safe so that you can love another day. But there
must be a different definition of love for every
person on the planet.
So, what is the LAW OF ONE definition of love?

[adeonekonade]

There is no need to step backwards thought. I think loveing
uncondionaly can be better done with wisdom. For example.. You
wouldnot give someone you love a razor, who you knowis intending to
slash their wrists with it. You wouldnt invite a known murderer into
your home etc. Show compassion, show mercy, show love yes. Christs
love was guided by the highest wisdom, and it ws uncondtional. He
didnt refrain from rebuking the ignorant or slanderers or money
makers who defiled the holy places. he loved them, but despised and
hated their deeds. Hate is still a natural emotion. Although it
must be controlled, just like the ego must be controlled. You cannot
let your emotions control you, the higher self. The same applies to
love. Controlled love, given to all uncondtionaly. Never hate
another being, always love other living beings. You can hate the
evil they do and the deat they cause, and it can make you angry, but
use that anger to spurr you into action, through love and compassion
let all that is good manifesta nd the evil works be undone..

Love and Peace..

Adeon


--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=oy-Kwl5WLRuo7d8mcwlyfIkc0EgP_nNDuJoKmniXrJDIR4m0NcHBW TwaRY4dQI_D4uKAh2plX0SBiUh6), "Don C." <liveoncetv@y...> wrote:
> In my humble opinon:
>
> There is nothing inherently wrong with attempting to love wisely,
> just as there is nothing wrong with a child pretending to care for
a
> doll. The intent is pure, even if it is naive.
>
> If Jesus martyred himself to teach us unconditional love, and did
so
> without the full restraint of wisdom, I can only conclude that it
is
> not yet time for us to temper our love with wisdom.
>
> In other words: we should love freely, without regard for wisdom -
> wisdom (or what we think is wisdom) at our present stage can only
> interfere with our fullest realization of love.
>
> We must learn HOW to fly before we can decide WHERE to fly.

[Don C.]

I believe we need to distinguish between feeling love and acting with
love. The restraint of wisdom lies not in deciding who or what to
love but in how best to act on that love.

My point in this discussion is that it may be premature and naive to
assume that we are wise enough to know how best to administer our
love. To do so would imply that we have felt and experienced (and
continue to do so)unconditional love and are ready to begin the
process of tempering it with wisdom.

I don't believe this to be the case. How many of us have the love
and the courage to do what Jesus did in his life?

We must strive to remain humble in our quest, and not lose sight of
the fact that we are here to learn. The more we think we know, the
wiser we think we are, the less growth we will experience.

[Jeremy Weiland]

> Maybe the truth is, that no matter what happens, you

> will be harmed regardless, so you might as well try
> and make the best of it, by striving for the aim of
> loving unconditionally and going against common
> sense.

This is a version of the martyr's philosophy, I
suppose. Just realize that it's a view you have
*chosen* - it's not intrinsic in the objective nature
of the world. Also, it might help to realize that the
circumstances of life we all experience are those we
have chosen for their learning potential - as David
said, we are not victims. The circumstances have
little purpose otherwise, and no meaning outside the
context of your experience and, more specifically,
your opportunity for polarization.

> Out of this, the definition of Love comes
> into question. Like setting limits to keep you
> safe so that you can love another day. But there
> must be a different definition of love for every
> person on the planet.

IMHO: Your intent is a matter of love. Your
manifestation of that intent into action is a matter
of wisdom. The blending of the two is not a matter of
right or wrong but of efficiency.

> So, what is the LAW OF ONE definition of love?

You always have the choice to be of service or to
withdraw. You're not obligated to do or not do
anything - it's completely up to you.

Jeremy

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com

[Jeremy Weiland]

> I believe we need to distinguish between feeling
> love and acting with love. The restraint of wisdom
> lies not in deciding who or what to love but in how
> best to act on that love.

Precisely.

> My point in this discussion is that it may be
> premature and naive to assume that we are wise
> enough to know how best to administer our love.

A good point, but there is only one way to learn...
:-)

Keep in mind that trial and error, while it may not
seem like an efficient learning tool, is usually the
way behavioral change is effected - much more
efficiently than higher densities, I believe.
Consider also that 3D provides the most intense
opportunities for the catalyst of failure to take root
in the psyche and personality and effect those changes
that bring about wisdom. That is ok.

> To do so would imply that we have felt and
> experienced (and continue to do so)unconditional
> love and are ready to begin the process of tempering

> it with wisdom.

With wanderers, though, this may not be presumptuous
thinking. It's better evaluated by the individual him
or herself - the lack of proper understanding will
balance out with appropriate catalyst anyway, so
there's nothing to be lost. :-)

> I don't believe this to be the case. How many of us
> have the love and the courage to do what Jesus did
> in his life?

Perhaps not many, but neither do many others have the
prophetic or preincarnative mandate to lead such a
life either. I would argue that our "mundane" lives
provide more opportunities for learning, and Jesus's
provided more opportunities for teaching, at least
from a 3d perspective.

> We must strive to remain humble in our quest, and
> not lose sight of the fact that we are here to
> learn.

Such an understanding makes things much easier, I
agree.

> The more we think we know, the wiser we think we
> are, the less growth we will experience.

The efficiency might be hampered (12:12) but the
correctional force of catalyst always gives us the
opportunity to balance. That which is not needed will
fall away. Essentially, there is no danger.

I appreciate your thoughts, Don. :-)

Jeremy

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com

[Don C.]

I am interpreting/summarizing your response(s) to mean that there is
no risk to the individual in attempting to love wisely, due to the
correctional force of catalyst and the balancing opportunity it
brings. I definitely agree, and I am very grateful for your response.

It is not my role (that I know of) to advise others how to approach
this or any subject; I can only speak of my own experience, limited
as it may be.

I find that my understanding of what is "wise" or "correct"
or "common sense" is subject to change, sometimes dramatically. My
Path has been a process of realizing that what I thought I knew, the
facts that my assumptions were based on, are temporary and naive.
Even as I gain a preliminary understanging of the spiritual realm and
my own higher consciousness, I strive to maintain the awareness that
the Path I am on is still only just beginning.

Perhaps it is my naive desire to help others on their path that
inspires me to point out what I see as an overabundance of
assumptions on the part of many individuals as to how wise they are,
how spiritually aware they are, who is or isn't a Wanderer, who is or
isn't ready for Ascension, etc. This brings us back to your point:
such assumptions, if incorrect, can only lead to catalyst in some
form or other. Thus it is not in vain, but instead is eternally
valuable.

I am new to the group, and look forward to such constructive and
rewarding discussion.

Thanks,
Don




--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=ivVgK2-IYXJOPoHy2478QLlzM8hM7dj8GDyOUAfKrM2oNTybXCcSKw7a_ kHLKh98wsYbBISzj2eDPSslxfxAQA), Jeremy Weiland <greenlantern113@y...>
wrote:
> > I believe we need to distinguish between feeling
> > love and acting with love. The restraint of wisdom
> > lies not in deciding who or what to love but in how
> > best to act on that love.
>
> Precisely.
>
> > My point in this discussion is that it may be
> > premature and naive to assume that we are wise
> > enough to know how best to administer our love.
>
> A good point, but there is only one way to learn...
> :-)
>
> Keep in mind that trial and error, while it may not
> seem like an efficient learning tool, is usually the
> way behavioral change is effected - much more
> efficiently than higher densities, I believe.
> Consider also that 3D provides the most intense
> opportunities for the catalyst of failure to take root
> in the psyche and personality and effect those changes
> that bring about wisdom. That is ok.
>
> > To do so would imply that we have felt and
> > experienced (and continue to do so)unconditional
> > love and are ready to begin the process of tempering
>
> > it with wisdom.
>
> With wanderers, though, this may not be presumptuous
> thinking. It's better evaluated by the individual him
> or herself - the lack of proper understanding will
> balance out with appropriate catalyst anyway, so
> there's nothing to be lost. :-)
>
> > I don't believe this to be the case. How many of us
> > have the love and the courage to do what Jesus did
> > in his life?
>
> Perhaps not many, but neither do many others have the
> prophetic or preincarnative mandate to lead such a
> life either. I would argue that our "mundane" lives
> provide more opportunities for learning, and Jesus's
> provided more opportunities for teaching, at least
> from a 3d perspective.
>
> > We must strive to remain humble in our quest, and
> > not lose sight of the fact that we are here to
> > learn.
>
> Such an understanding makes things much easier, I
> agree.
>
> > The more we think we know, the wiser we think we
> > are, the less growth we will experience.
>
> The efficiency might be hampered (12:12) but the
> correctional force of catalyst always gives us the
> opportunity to balance. That which is not needed will
> fall away. Essentially, there is no danger.
>
> I appreciate your thoughts, Don. :-)
>
> Jeremy
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
> http://search.yahoo.com

[Erik Strasser]

So, what is the LAW OF ONE definition of love?

Erik: By popular demand:


THE 2ND DISTORTION = LOVE
A. THE FOCUSING OF FREE WILL YIELDS LOVE

RA: The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which is known to you as
logos, the Creative Principle or love. This focus may be called the 2nd
distortion. (B1, 148)

RA: The second distortion is the distortion of love. (B2, 7-8)

B. LOVE SEEKS TO KNOW ITSELF

RA: The distortion love is the great activator and primal co-Creator of
various creations using intelligent infinity. (B2, 8)... Love uses Its
intelligent energy to create a certain pattern of illusions or densities in
order to satisfy Its own intelligent estimate of a method of knowing itself.
(B2, 9)



RA: The origin of all energy is the action of free will upon love. The nature
of all energy is light, including the inner light which is the guiding star of
the self. This is the true nature of all entities.











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Don Boulet]

Here, here!!!
From another 'new' Don.
(to be henceforth signed as db)
db

"Don C." wrote:
>
> I am interpreting/summarizing your response(s) to mean that there is
> no risk to the individual in attempting to love wisely, due to the
> correctional force of catalyst and the balancing opportunity it
> brings. I definitely agree, and I am very grateful for your response.
>
> It is not my role (that I know of) to advise others how to approach
> this or any subject; I can only speak of my own experience, limited
> as it may be.
>
> I find that my understanding of what is "wise" or "correct"
> or "common sense" is subject to change, sometimes dramatically. My
> Path has been a process of realizing that what I thought I knew, the
> facts that my assumptions were based on, are temporary and naive.
> Even as I gain a preliminary understanging of the spiritual realm and
> my own higher consciousness, I strive to maintain the awareness that
> the Path I am on is still only just beginning.
>
> Perhaps it is my naive desire to help others on their path that
> inspires me to point out what I see as an overabundance of
> assumptions on the part of many individuals as to how wise they are,
> how spiritually aware they are, who is or isn't a Wanderer, who is or
> isn't ready for Ascension, etc. This brings us back to your point:
> such assumptions, if incorrect, can only lead to catalyst in some
> form or other. Thus it is not in vain, but instead is eternally
> valuable.
>
> I am new to the group, and look forward to such constructive and
> rewarding discussion.
>
> Thanks,
> Don

[Erik Strasser]

THE 2ND DISTORTION = LOVE
A. THE FOCUSING OF FREE WILL YIELDS LOVE

RA: The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which is known to you as
logos, the Creative Principle or love. This focus may be called the 2nd
distortion. (B1, 148)

RA: The second distortion is the distortion of love. (B2, 7-8)

B. LOVE SEEKS TO KNOW ITSELF

RA: The distortion love is the great activator and primal co-Creator of
various creations using intelligent infinity. (B2, 8)... Love uses Its
intelligent energy to create a certain pattern of illusions or densities in
order to satisfy Its own intelligent estimate of a method of knowing itself.
(B2, 9)



RA: The origin of all energy is the action of free will upon love. The nature
of all energy is light, including the inner light which is the guiding star of
the self. This is the true nature of all entities.

Erik: I would like to respond to this myself as well,

I always wondered how one could see the love in every moment. Specialy when one
is watching horror. ( and i dont mean movies)
But i think i understand now how we could see it.
Everything we see is LOVE that seeks to find itself. Sometimes love needs
hardsmanship or even horror to find ITself.
So... even when we see ( or even commit) horrible acts, we see love/light in
action to find out what/who it really is.
There is love in every moment in any place, everywhere.

L/L, Erik.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[adeonekonade]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=_bikja73FRI_-u7SkaPj1_pZub_6FyjNI2yDfkJwKYKKFInmQnMl53O2_dxuyH-uqn31rj1Y7mzpPuXd), "Don C." <liveoncetv@y...> wrote:
> I am interpreting/summarizing your response(s) to mean that there
is
> no risk to the individual in attempting to love wisely, due to the
> correctional force of catalyst and the balancing opportunity it
> brings. I definitely agree, and I am very grateful for your
response.

Yes I would agree with that. If we just igrnore what knowledge we
have then we an never "test" it and build upon it, refine it and grow
further in that knowledge. For example. In Australia back in the
Pioneer days it was common for "Missionaries" to take Aboriginal
children away from their "pagan" families. Thinking they were doing
the right thing by "saving" their eternal souls. By doing this, it
was made clear in later generations that this is wrong. HELP and
TEACH people who ask for it. You can preach your ideas as much as
you want, but to FORCE someone into complying with your beliefs is
wrong. That is an example of a catalyst for learning.

I think we are luck that things take shape slowly in 3D, to give us a
chance to learn, and "time" to think and consider our actions and the
results.

> It is not my role (that I know of) to advise others how to approach
> this or any subject; I can only speak of my own experience, limited
> as it may be.

We are all living with limited experiences. And your experences and
ideas are always welcome.

> I find that my understanding of what is "wise" or "correct"
> or "common sense" is subject to change, sometimes dramatically. My
> Path has been a process of realizing that what I thought I knew,
the
> facts that my assumptions were based on, are temporary and naive.
> Even as I gain a preliminary understanging of the spiritual realm
and
> my own higher consciousness, I strive to maintain the awareness
that
> the Path I am on is still only just beginning.

Absoloutely. If you look at this in the big picture. We have only
just emerged from the colective personality into the personal. We
are only JUST begeinning to realise our OWN identities and our
purpose. To Live, Create and Learn for the benefit of all living
things. This serves "Gods" purpose. Regression is "un-learning"
destructive things. We can learn from suffering imposed upon us by
individual going through a "regression". This is just the beginning,
this cycle is a never ending one. Always building ever upward from
the source ONE true God.. "Alpha" to the destination ONE God Omega.
BUT their is No end, there is no begining to all this. There is only
the NOW. We are the sum of all we have been, that is who we are now.
=)

> Perhaps it is my naive desire to help others on their path that
> inspires me to point out what I see as an overabundance of
> assumptions on the part of many individuals as to how wise they
are,
> how spiritually aware they are, who is or isn't a Wanderer, who is
or
> isn't ready for Ascension, etc. This brings us back to your point:
> such assumptions, if incorrect, can only lead to catalyst in some
> form or other. Thus it is not in vain, but instead is eternally
> valuable.

If your heart is to help others, and your actions are for the benefit
of others then thats great. If you are "helping" someone and they
want you to stop or go away then stop and go away. Who is right, who
is wrong? That is the individuals own path, their "Now" moment. Walk
in Love, Compassion and Peace and you cant go wrong.

When you recognise the Cosmic "I AM" (Extrernal God) and the Inner
Devine "I AM" God as one and the same, this bring unity with God,
aligning the two they become one. This is the Christ Consciousness,
and can only be attained through unconditional Love. The "self IAM"
needs to fall into Harmony with the God "IAM" then the spirit of God
can flow between them and through them, including insight,
realisation of all things, perfection in thought and action, true
sight, true speech etc. Of course one can always falter, ego can
jump up with feeling of grandeur, or doubts and fears can creep in,
especialy from External forces of those who Are NOT in unity with
God, always telling you that "You cant be perfect, or your born a
sinner you die a sinner and God will decide if he wants you or not.."
these are all poor teachings, and stumble the Children of God. Jesus
was a great teacher, he aught us what we can DO, Buddhism is also
great it teaches us also what we can DO and the mechanics behind the
process. The AS2K group, goes even further into the mechanics in a
great way further supporting the Christ teachings and the Buddha
spirit teachings. Having a ofundation in either one of
these "wisdom" schools I think is a great benefit for applying Love
and Compassion through wisdom.

Love and Peace.. Peace through Love..

Adeon
http://www.lightworkers.org

[johnnypi]

"Erik Strasser" <e.strasser@w...> wrote:
> So, what is the LAW OF ONE definition of love?
>
> Erik: By popular demand:
>
> THE 2ND DISTORTION = LOVE
> A. THE FOCUSING OF FREE WILL YIELDS LOVE
>
> RA: The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which is known
to you as logos, the Creative Principle or love. This focus may be
called the 2nd distortion. (B1, 148)
>
> RA: The second distortion is the distortion of love. (B2, 7-8)
>
> B. LOVE SEEKS TO KNOW ITSELF
>
> RA: The distortion love is the great activator and primal co-
Creator of various creations using intelligent infinity. (B2, 8)...
Love uses Its intelligent energy to create a certain pattern of
illusions or densities in order to satisfy Its own intelligent
estimate of a method of knowing itself. (B2, 9)
>
> RA: The origin of all energy is the action of free will upon love.
The nature of all energy is light, including the inner light which is
the guiding star of the self. This is the true nature of all
entities.

JOHN: While these are Law of One definitions of Love that Ra gave,
they seem inconsistent with Ra's account of creation of the Universe.
In essence, we find that Ra outlines two forms of Love. One is most
primal to the essence of creation -- i.e., the focusing of infinity,
which we also refer to as "The Creator", into infinite energy, which
we also refer to as "love". This 'type' of love is a primal energy, a
mystery without finitenes and without polarity. It precedes the first
distortion of creation, which is free will. The basis for this is in:

*****--- begin quotations*****
RA: The first known thing in creation is infinity. (B1, 129)
QUESTION: What is the next step?
RA: Infinity became aware. (B1, 129)
RA: Awareness led to the focus of infinity into infinite energy. You
have called this by various names, the most common being `logos'
or `love'. (B1, 129)
RA: The Creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware conscious
principle called intelligent infinity. (B1, 129)
RA: Love may be seen as the type of energy of an extremely high order
which causes intelligent energy to be formed from the potential of
intelligent infinity in a particular way. All love emanates from the
Oneness. (B2, 8)
RA: ... The basic rhythms of intelligent infinity are totally without
distortion of any kind. The rhythms are clothed in mystery, for they
are being itself. Its unity is undistorted. However, there is a vast
potential to be tapped into by focuses of energy, which we call
intelligent energy, (B2, 7)
RA: Intelligent infinity has a rhythm or flow as of a giant heart
beginning with the central sun as you would conceive of this, the
presence of the flow inevitable as a tide of beingness without
polarity, without finiteness, the vast and silent all beating
outward, outward and inward until all the focuses are complete. Then
their spiritual nature or mass calls them inward, inward until all is
coalesced. This is the rhythm of reality. (B2, 6)
*****--- end of quotations*****

JOHN: Ra advises that in 3-D, a veil surrounds our consciousness of
the Love that is fundamental to our Being our-selves. Ra refers to
the veil as a :primal paradox" called "free will". It's a paradox
because it not only offers us diversions from the perception that IAM
One but also is the 'vehicle' that empowers us to re-discover that we
are One. To 'express' our One-ness, we seek and accept Love. We do
not express Love per se, because LOVE IS.

*****--- begin quotations*****
RA: That which is infinite cannot be many, far many-ness is a finite
concept. In an infinite Creator there is only unity, (B1, 66-67)
RA: Intelligent infinity discerned a concept, namely, freedom of will
of awareness. This concept was finiteness. This is the first and
primal paradox or distortion of the Law of One. Thus the one
intelligent infinity invested itself in an exploration of many-ness.
Due to the infinite possibilities of intelligent infinity (or the
Oneness), there is no ending to many-ness. The exploration thus is
free to continue infinitely into an eternal present. (B1, 130-131)
QUESTION: The 1st distortion of intelligent infinity is free will.
Can you give a definition of this distortion?
RA: In this distortion of the Law of One it is recognized that the
Creator will know Itself (or experience Itself). (B2, 7) The primal
distortion is free will. (B2, 8)
QUESTION: The Creator then grants total freedom of choice in the
ways of knowing. Is this correct? (B2, 7)
RA: This is quite correct. (B2, 7)
QUESTION: Then all other distortions spring from this first
distortion, is this correct?
RA: It is both correct and incorrect. In your illusion of physical
existence all experience springs from the Law of Free will or the Way
of Confusion. In another sense, which we are learning, the
experiences are this distortion. (B2, 7)
*****--- end of quotations*****

JOHN: To me, hate exists only as a distortion, not as experience. As
the first distortion of 3-D, free will perceives that hate exists. If
a Co-Creator "feels" hate, that perception actually is a reaction to
the distortion a Co-Creator perceives as a result of separation from
the One. Separation from Our Creator creates fear, which to me is the
source of feeling that we mistakenly perceive to negative emotions.
By separation, One perceives fear; and fear distorts our perceptions.
Such distortions are mirages that lead us away from The Creator. In
reality, because The Creator is perfect, Love is All that exists. All
else that we perceive to exist is merely an exploration of awareness
of the infinite possibilities of intelligent infinity...

Peace & Love. john

[johnnypi]

The point of my prior note might be unclear, so let's try again:

IF (as quoted:-) "The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which
is known to you as logos, the Creative Principle or love"

THEN: The focus must already exist, in order for free will to find it!

My point is Love IS. All else in Creation follows...

To call love the second distortion may mislead some, because love pre-
exists free will.

Peace & Love, john

"Erik Strasser" <e.strasser@w...> wrote:
>
> THE 2ND DISTORTION = LOVE
> A. THE FOCUSING OF FREE WILL YIELDS LOVE
>
> RA: The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which is known
to you as logos, the Creative Principle or love. This focus may be
called the 2nd distortion. (B1, 148)
>
> RA: The second distortion is the distortion of love. (B2, 7-8)
>
> B. LOVE SEEKS TO KNOW ITSELF
>
> RA: The distortion love is the great activator and primal co-
Creator of various creations using intelligent infinity. (B2, 8)...
Love uses Its intelligent energy to create a certain pattern of
illusions or densities in order to satisfy Its own intelligent
estimate of a method of knowing itself. (B2, 9)
>
>
>
> RA: The origin of all energy is the action of free will upon love.
The nature of all energy is light, including the inner light which is
the guiding star of the self. This is the true nature of all
entities.
>
> Erik: I would like to respond to this myself as well,
>
> I always wondered how one could see the love in every moment.
Specialy when one is watching horror. ( and i dont mean movies)
> But i think i understand now how we could see it.
> Everything we see is LOVE that seeks to find itself. Sometimes love
needs hardsmanship or even horror to find ITself.
> So... even when we see ( or even commit) horrible acts, we see
love/light in action to find out what/who it really is.
> There is love in every moment in any place, everywhere.
>
> L/L, Erik.

[Chris Hamilton]

Hi John,

I think that your explanation was just perfect :) And for Erik, I am sure he
has noticed that small sentence there at the beginning that is so easy to
miss. My point is here that RA is very complex with the answers and answers
are scattered thruout the books, so for people just learning the Ra
material, some points may be missed or misinterpreted. I am going thru my
3rd read now, and I have found new insights each time. I think DW said that
once on the sight :) That to understand we must be patient...and just love.
Then the answers may become easier to assimilate and thus teach/learn to
others. Geez, when I first read Ra in '99, I had not the slightest clue what
was being said :) On that preface, I will answer some of your questions
below. Btw, I think your answers show love, compassion, and wisdom, and I
appreciate your will for service to others :) Chris

> The point of my prior note might be unclear, so let's try again:>
> IF (as quoted:-) "The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which
> is known to you as logos, the Creative Principle or love">
> THEN: The focus must already exist, in order for free will to find it!

This is indeed along a "Jeremy reply" :) good work.
>
> My point is Love IS. All else in Creation follows...

I said this to someone last week:) Thought I might be a little
eccentric...hmm..guess I'm not the only one so maybe I'm not that eccentric
:)
>
> To call love the second distortion may mislead some, because love pre-
> exists free will.>
> Peace & Love, john

Well, they were great posts John. We can always use people here who can
utilize Ra's words in our physical world for our benefit. Yes, Love just
IS...perfect end and beginning. Which came first? Chuckle...I have to lead
that into my duck all you asc2k members! We have seen one cracked egg, so
birth is imminent :) Maybe tomorrow there will be pics :) Love you all,
Chris

[Paul Kandrah]

> QUESTION: Then all other distortions spring from this first
> distortion, is this correct?
> RA: It is both correct and incorrect. In your illusion of physical
> existence all experience springs from the Law of Free will or the
> Way of Confusion. In another sense, which we are learning, the
> experiences are this distortion. (B2, 7)

Other reflections...

"Work is love made visible."
Kahlil Gibran

Here love is the applied energy of free will (work) leading to
creation (the visible). This is opposed to "working" with
destructive forces that do not create, but rather form dissonant
relationships with true nature (spirit/cosmos/logos). The quote
continues with the following:

"And if you cannot work with love but only with distaste, it is
better that you should leave your work and sit at the gate of the
temple and take alms of those who work with joy."
Kahlil Gibran

We don't have all the answers. We only supply some energy that may
be applied.

Paul

[waterflame5]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=kIbV-okGulDb6YtIvHpAfP53N0pBgPB_-ewiYEaT6E6H2F_jNx0jgo2jFqArZJ0b-vErEvn1fDsrfe9rRTk), "Paul Kandrah" <essent321@y...> wrote:

> "Work is love made visible."
> Kahlil Gibran

Thanks Paul, for a potent post there,
with chaos and order, creation and
destruction!

Meditated on those topic words,
Love and/or Wisdom. And what came
to mind is the nature of circumstance.
That the emotional energy of Love
doesn't do so well by itself in our
human condition, it has a hard time
sustaining because of entropy.

It takes constant work to sustain
some order, or structure within which
we can ressonate love. Wisdom comes
in to guide us in managing that, our
inputs/environments/circumstances.
With that are trade offs related to
creation and destruction.

Gratefully,
Pat

[Paul Kandrah]

> > "Work is love made visible."
> > Kahlil Gibran
>
> It takes constant work to sustain
> some order, or structure within which
> we can ressonate love. Wisdom comes
> in to guide us in managing that, our
> inputs/environments/circumstances.
> pat

RA: I am Ra. It is absolutely necessary that an entity consciously
realize it does NOT understand in order for it to be harvestable.
Understanding is not of this density. (b1, p156) [emphasis added]

...

Thus it seems there is a need to 'realize that we do not realize.'
Ra rarely uses such "absolute" language. It seems that thinking we
understand may be a barrier to our growth.

...

This does not mean, however, that we should not use any facility
that we have. We are not inherently stupid creatures. Ra's
statement only indicates that we should not bring the Mind to the
forefront. Universal Love, it seems, belongs in that place of
honor. And it can find its true home... if we remain humble.

"Sow a thought, and you reap an act;
Sow an act, and you reap a habit;
Sow a habit, and you reap a character;
Sow a character, and you reap a destiny."
--Anonymous, 19th century

Thinking with brotherly love, tuning vibrations,
Paul

[waterflame5]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=IKwc_wvs_WzmA1aCrA7FHw2kBQeIaa3pBeqrAR U-CdRPTA_ikL9PqQT301EuyZ7nKGJan6HdsooijVj2), "Don C." <liveoncetv@y...> wrote:

> There is nothing inherently wrong with attempting to love wisely,
> just as there is nothing wrong with a child pretending to care
> for a doll. The intent is pure, even if it is naive.
>
> If Jesus martyred himself to teach us unconditional love,
> and did so without the full restraint of wisdom, I can only
> conclude that it is not yet time for us to temper our love
> with wisdom.
>
> In other words: we should love freely, without regard for wisdom -
> wisdom (or what we think is wisdom) at our present stage can only
> interfere with our fullest realization of love.
>
> We must learn HOW to fly before we can decide WHERE to fly.

The Jesus martyre issue may be an example where wisdom was
breached, (i.e. he lied by witholding his truth,) for a
higher good? Would Christianity have grown to such an extent
without that story? (Some people feel so strongly against
martyrdom that they become anti-martyrdom martyrs,
paradoxically.) This also relates to the subordination
of an egoic will to a Divine will.

But back to the subject.
This also relates to the Yogic Yama of Ahimsa,
that is, "compassion for all living things."

Deeply understood, this contains acceptance of our
desire to be loved, along with acceptance of our
strong negative feelings (anger, jealousy, hatred),
and through that acceptance work to understand their
root cause, that we may better contain those negative
energies. Working toward understanding through
introspective wisdom can help us contain, and by doing
so, may allow us to have a deeper experience of love.

This is where the Church came in with Christianity,
to help people structure their lives with wisdom.
Maybe that path is limited, but maybe that path is
appropriate on a mass scale for the level of
humanity's consciousness and the powers that be.

Unwisely, Pat

[Erik Strasser]

The point of my prior note might be unclear, so let's try again:

IF (as quoted:-) "The 1st distortion, free will, finds a focus which
is known to you as logos, the Creative Principle or love"

THEN: The focus must already exist, in order for free will to find it!

My point is Love IS. All else in Creation follows...

To call love the second distortion may mislead some, because love pre-
exists free will.

Peace & Love, john

ES: Great set of posts John :-)
Thank you, Erik.





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Jeremy Weiland]

Sorry my answer to this post is so tardy, but I've
been busy lately and have been saving posts that merit
attention and response.

I've got an awful lot of your posts saved, Paul :-)

> Thus it seems there is a need to 'realize that we do
> not realize.' Ra rarely uses such "absolute"
> language. It seems that thinking we understand may
> be a barrier to our growth.

I'm not sure "thinking we understand" is such a bad -
or avoidable - thing. The fact is is that, in this
world, we have to have a intellectual model to work
with in order to lead our lives. The point being, we
make a decision about how we approach reality,
implicit or explicit. It's like the Rush song - "and
if you choose not to choose, you still have made a
choice". We will act in the world, we will make
judgements - because that is what one does in this
world. And we will feel things in response to these
actions and judgements. The question is how attached
are we to those decisions. Do they define us, or are
we more than them? This is part and parcel with your
idea that the mind does not define us.

> This does not mean, however, that we should not use
> any facility that we have. We are not inherently
> stupid creatures. Ra's statement only indicates
> that we should not bring the Mind to the forefront.


I would slightly alter the approach that last sentence
implies to say, "Ra's statement only indicates that
Mind is not the foundation". Ra would never dictate
what we "should" or "should not" do, and furthermore
it is just such a distortion as overidentification
with Mind that allows for meaningful experience (such
as the one we are having now :-).

If I may offer my opinion, what I see Ra as saying is,
"Look. You are a limited being by all measures of the
material world, yet obviously you feel like you are
more than that. But you have no ability within the
material world to percieve what's outside of it, at
least by your definition and model of your experience.
That's ok and expected - you are not going to be able
to evaluate the true scope of your existence and
identity while you are in 3D."

Historically speaking, it has always been our lack of
openness to that which was not expected that has
impeded progress on our world; not the lack of proof
for change, but the inability to change the inner
model to correspond. As if we can change reality by
ignoring it. Yet such is the true nature of the first
distortion, is it not?

Jeremy

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo
http://search.yahoo.com