I borrowed nine titles from the library. I've begun reading with Anna Campbell's A Rake's Midnight Kiss. So far it's easy light reading and good story telling.
lawofone.info is a website dedicated to the study of the Law of One material channeled by L/L Research in the 1980s.www.lawofone.info
42.2 Questioner: I will just read it very rapidly the question, then.
I am going to make a statement and ask you to comment on its degree of accuracy. I am assuming that the balanced entity would not be swayed either towards positive or negative emotions by any situation which he might confront. By remaining unemotional in any situation, the balanced entity may clearly discern the appropriate and necessary responses in harmony with the Law of One for each situation.
Most entities on our planet find themselves unconsciously caught up into every emotional situation which they come in contact with according to their own unique biases and because of these biases are unable to see clearly teach/learning opportunities and appropriate response in each emotional situation and must therefore, through a process of much trial and error and enduring of resulting pain repeat such situations many many times until they become consciously aware of the need to balance their energy centers and thusly their responses and behaviors. Once a person becomes consciously aware of the need to balance their energy centers and responses the next step is to allow the appropriately positive or negative responses to emotional situations to flow smoothly through their being without retaining any of the emotional coloration after it has been consciously observed and allowed to flow through the being. And I am assuming that this ability to consciously observe the positively or negatively charged energy flowing through the being may be augmented by practice of the balancing exercises you have given us with the result in balance being achieved for the entity which would allow him to remain unemotional and undistorted in regards to the Law of One in any situation much like the objective viewer of the television movie.
Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is an incorrect application of the balancing which we have discussed. The exercise of first experiencing feelings and then consciously discovering their antitheses within the being has as its objective not the smooth flow of feelings both positive and negative while remaining unswayed but rather the objective of becoming unswayed. This is a simpler result and takes much practice, shall we say.
The catalyst of experience works in order for the learn/teachings of this density to occur. However, if there is seen in the being a response, even if it is simply observed, the entity is still using the catalyst for learn/teaching. The end result is that the catalyst is no longer needed. Thus this density is no longer needed. This is not indifference or objectivity but a finely tuned compassion and love which sees all things as love. This seeing elicits no response due to catalytic reactions. Thus the entity is now able to become co-Creator of experiential occurrences. This is the truer balance.
54.16 Questioner: Let me make an analogy that I have just thought of. A seven-stringed musical instrument may be played by deflecting each string [a] full deflection and releasing it and getting a note. Or, once the strings are capable of being deflected through their full deflection (producing a note), instead of producing the notes this way taking the individual creative personality and deflecting each the proper amount in proper sequence to produce the music. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. In the balanced individual the energies lie waiting for the hand of the Creator to pluck harmony.
I've just finished four books in the Mackenzie series by Jennifer Ashley and I've just started on book no. 5. My reading is a bit slow since I went back to the project a month ago, so I'm managing about one book a week. I understand better why it's a good idea to read the whole series, even with half of the series read you get a better insight into the events, traumas and emotions which influence the behaviour and internal dialogues of the main characters, the MacKenzie brothers. And the remarkable women, also wounded, who helped the brothers to overcome their traumatic childhood at the hands of a tyrant. To this point in reading the series I've been emotionally moved by the special relationship between two of the brothers in particular, Ian and Hart, and the bond between them.
I'll keep reading this series and hopefully start with Mary Balogh before too long.Hart has so much responsibility for his brothers from a young age, but he looked after Ian more than anyone. He struggles to understand Ian's inner mind and his behaviour but following a shocking event which almost costs him his life he has time to understand he no longer needs to be in control of everything and can let go. It's quite a reversal by the end of book 4 that it is the most vulnerable of the Mackenzies, Ian, who saves Hart in several ways. Not just physically but also guiding him to the key action that Hart must take to fully give himself to Eleanor, that is, 'Tell her everything'. I was definitely struck by those three words and how much it took for Hart to come to a state of mind for that level of honesty and vulnerability. Ian is a very intriguing character, the one that supposedly struggles to fit into society is the one who better understands with his logical mind what humans need to do to get along in that same society. A man who only speaks when it is necessary, acts decisively when it's necessary and willing to sacrifice himself out of love for the one brother who did more than most to protect him.
I've also got a better understanding of the physical intimacy in the novels, that is the role sex plays in healing the mind of psychological and physical traumas, this is particularly true of Ian and Cameron, one who couldn't stand physical touch and the other who couldn't share a bed. In the end they were able to let go and trust because of the love of Beth and Ainsley. It's these moments of intimacy which resonate the most with me, the point where a physical act of possession becomes making love beyond the physical.
On 5 May 1821, one of the most iconic figures in world history died while in bitter exile on a remote island in the South Atlantic Ocean. Napoleon Bonaparte, who rose from obscure soldier to new Caesar, remains a uniquely controversial figure to this day. Should we think of him as a flawed but essentially heroic visionary who changed Europe for the better? Or was he simply a military dictator, whose cult of personality and lust for power set a template for the likes of Hitler? ()
The problem is that nothing with Napoleon is simple, and almost every aspect of his personality is a maddening paradox. He was a military genius who led disastrous campaigns. And he was a liberal progressive who reinstated slavery in the French colonies. And take the French Revolution, which came just before Napoleon’s rise to power. As historian Professor Chris Clark ponders, 'His relationship with the French Revolution is deeply ambivalent. Did he stabilize it or shut it down? He seems to have done both.'
A NATION WHICH HAD BOLDLY BROUGHT DOWN THE MONARCHY HAD TO WATCH AS NAPOLEON CROWNED HIMSELF EMPEROR...
On the one hand, Napoleon did bring order to a nation that had been drenched in blood in the years after the Revolution. The French people had endured the crackdown known as the 'Reign of Terror', which saw so many marched to the guillotine, as well as political instability, corruption, riots and general violence. Napoleon’s iron will managed to calm the chaos. But he also rubbished some of the core principles of the Revolution. A nation which had boldly brought down the monarchy had to watch as Napoleon crowned himself Emperor, with more power and pageantry than Louis XVI ever had. He also installed his relatives as royals across Europe, creating a new aristocracy. In the words of French politician and author Lionel Jospin, 'He guaranteed some principles of the Revolution and at the same time, changed its course, finished it and betrayed it.'
He also had a feared henchman in the form of Joseph Fouché, who ran a secret police network which instilled dread in the population. Napoleon’s spies were everywhere, stifling political opposition. Dozens of newspapers were suppressed or shut down. Books had to be submitted for approval to the Commission of Revision, which sounds like something straight out of George Orwell. Some would argue Hitler and Stalin followed this playbook perfectly.
But here come the contradictions. Napoleon also championed education for all, founding a network of schools. He championed the rights of the Jews. In the territories conquered by Napoleon, laws which kept Jews cooped up in ghettos were abolished. 'I will never accept any proposals that will obligate the Jewish people to leave France,' he once said, 'because to me the Jews are the same as any other citizen in our country.'
He also, crucially, developed the Napoleonic Code, a set of laws which replaced the messy, outdated feudal laws that had been used before. The Napoleonic Code clearly laid out civil laws and due processes, establishing a society based on merit and hard work, rather than privilege. It was rolled out far beyond France, and indisputably helped to modernise Europe. While it certainly had its flaws – women were ignored by its reforms, and were essentially regarded as the property of men – the Napoleonic Code is often brandished as the key evidence for Napoleon’s progressive credentials. In the words of historian Andrew Roberts, author of Napoleon the Great, 'the ideas that underpin our modern world… were championed [by] Napoleon'.
What about Napoleon’s battlefield exploits? If anything earns comparisons with Hitler, it’s Bonaparte’s apparent appetite for conquest. His forces tore down republics across Europe, and plundered works of art, much like the Nazis would later do. A rampant imperialist, Napoleon gleefully grabbed some of the greatest masterpieces of the Renaissance, and allegedly boasted, 'the whole of Rome is in Paris.'
Yet, defenders of Napoleon will say his reputation as a war monger is largely due to British propaganda at the time. They’ll point out that the Napoleonic Wars, far from being Napoleon’s fault, were just a continuation of previous conflicts that arose thanks to the French Revolution. Napoleon, according to this analysis, inherited a messy situation, and his only real crime was to be very good at defeating enemies on the battlefield.
[Added: History has it that Napoleon was an expansionist military conqueror who invaded other countries because he wanted to extend his control but this is not entirely accurate. Many of his wars were defensive, with a coalition of European powers attempting to bring down the “upstart” Napoleon.]
He was, by any measure, a genius of war. Even his nemesis the Duke of Wellington, when asked who the greatest general of his time was, replied: 'In this age, in past ages, in any age, Napoleon.'
And, while Napoleon’s Russian campaign has been held up as a fatal folly which killed so many of his men, this blunder – epic as it was – should not be compared to Hitler’s wars of evil aggression. Most historians will agree that comparing the two men is horribly flattering to Hitler – a man fuelled by visceral, genocidal hate – and demeaning to Napoleon, who was a product of Enlightenment thinking and left a legacy that in many ways improved Europe.
The arguments over Napoleon’s status will continue – and that in itself is a testament to the power of one of the most complex figures ever to straddle the world’s stage.
A description by Hyde de Neuville, Royalist conspirator, in his memoirs: "The door opened. Instinctively I looked at the man who came in, short, thin, his hair plastered on his temples, his step hesitating; he was not in the least what I had pictured to myself. I was so wanting in perception that I took him for a servant, a mistake which was confirmed when he walked across the room without taking any notice of me. He leaned his back against the chimney-piece, raised his head and looked at me with such an impressive, such a penetrating glance that I lost all my assurance under the fire of that questioning eye. To me he had suddenly grown taller by a hundred cubits.
The German author Wieland described him in 1808: "I had been [at the ball for] hardly a few minutes when Napoleon came over to me from the other side of the ballroom; the Duchess herself presented me to him, and he made the usual remarks to me, very affably, but gazing intently into my face. Probably there is scarcely a human being who has the gift of fathoming a man almost at first glance, and 'seeing through him', as one says, in a higher degree than Napoleon. He saw that I, for all my pitiful celebrity, was only a simple and unassuming old man, and since he apparently wished to leave me with a good impression of him for ever, he changed himself for the moment into the form in which he could be sure of doing so. Never in my life have I seen a man more simple, quiet, mild and unpretentious. There was not a sign that my companion was conscious of being a great monarch. He conversed with me like one old acquaintance with another, and what is more-a thing none of my equals have yet experienced-continued for an hour and a half without break and quite alone..."
I thought I’d share some realizations as they are fresh in my mind. Others have already commented on similar realizations previously in the thread but at the time I didn’t really grok them.
These characters are behaving as mirrors for us. It’s almost like they’re an extension of our network. Just like when individuals on the forum share in say the swamp section of the forum, we are learning from the characters internal swamp.
For me how I experience this is the internal considering of the characters. The more I read, the more I’m confronted with my own internal considering in ways I was never aware of. I’m aware of my traumas and have always struggled with why I can’t seem to let them go. Now I realize that the programs originating with that trauma morphed into internal considering, like tentacles. Those tentacles became indistinguishable from who I thought I was. So even though I was aware of the source of the issues, the trauma, I could not see the tentacles. But with this project I’m forced to observe these characters internal considering in so many forms that it has made me aware of my own.
In truth I’m quite aghast at my internal landscape and how “swampy” it is. Reading these books, in the quantity and regularly one after another is forcing one to observe the self. An exercise I thought I understood before but had not truly.
I have a question. What is the difference between internal considering and the predators mind? They seem very similar to me.
A very complex figure indeed. Like most individuals, he had good and not-so-good qualities, both which would be magnified owing to the power he wielded. There is supposed to be quite a good video on Napoleon, think it's just called Napoleon. According to the video, his mother was highly influential and a driving force behind his ascent to power. Imho, he was definitely a genius.As a lot of those stories take place during or after the Napoleonic Wars, and on the 5th May 2021, France (despite an attempt by the woke crowd to cancel him and bannish him from History books) will celebrate the bicentenary of Napo's death, here's a brief article about this quite complex historical figure:
Thank you Laura for this reply and answer to my question. It sets me on a whole new line of thinking and really helps me to better understand some concepts used on the forum.Exactly the sort of observations I've been looking to see in the participants; you articulated it beautifully.
As to your final question, I think that Internal Considering and The Predator's Mind are the same thing.
The Doctrine of the Present.
If, by persistent introspection, the subject manages to observe the rise of the negative emotion in himself immediately after its birth, that is, while the limits of the slot in his individual Present have not been crossed in the passing of time, it is possible for him to disassociate the components of this emotion.
Introspective observation brightens our inner being just like a streetlamp, and negative emotions can only be formed and begin to act in the inner darkness which characterizes the state of confluence.
The light projected by constatation within the limits of the Present disassociates the negative emotions, and the passions which gave rise to them then fall back into a latent state.
But constatation has yet another effect that is of primary importance: the immediate disassociation of the components which constitute the negative emotion liberates the energy SI-12 which the passions had drawn into the motor centre; a result of constatation is that this is automatically concentrated in the emotional centre which it then sets in motion.
The more violent the negative emotion, the greater the quantity of energy SI-12 drawn in, which can be transmuted into SOL-12 in case of victory.
By carrying out this work with all the sincerity of which he is capable, the neophyte can reach the "Path of Access" which will lead him towards the Way. In this way he will put off the old man, the slave of his passions, and will put on the new man which is renewed in Knowledge.
The process which leads to fusion must be attentively observed during its development and subjected at every moment to the practice of constatation in a state of lucid presence in oneself.
The whole process may take many years. It includes five successive stages:
FIRST STAGE. - Introspection. Constatation.
This consists of sustained introspective observation having as its object all the little I's forming the Personality.
Once the faithful has become familiar with the spectacle of his Personality during persistent introspection, he must try to discover which little I's or groups of little I's have a tendency to wish to occupy the foreground of the scene. It is important to know them. It is also useful to know that these little I's which always tend to play the main role and which, because of this, serve as guides in the whole of the Personality, are sometimes masked from the observer as a result of lying to oneself and of hypocrisy.
Generally speaking, every Personality is deformed; the sense and the degree of the deformation are individual, but the greater the deformation the more of the little I's are behind the mask. It is important to know this, as they must be unmasked in the first stage of the work. Otherwise the fusion can never take place properly and completely, which is a necessary condition for it to be effective.
SECOND STAGE. - Active inner peace.
Outer or inner circumstances provoke conflicts in us between I's of divergent tendencies - faithfully reflecting the world of W influences. Each conflict produces a disagreeable sensation of inner friction. At this moment it is necessary to be watchful. One must be actively present in oneself and observe the process while, at the same time resolutely detaching oneself from it.
Otherwise, if we take part in the conflict, even momentarily or partially, the friction cannot be turned to our advantage. On the contrary, when we are dissolved in it we lose our energies instead of preserving and accumulating them.
It is necessary to bepresent at the very moment when the friction is born; the result is then positive, and fine energies are produced.
Their quantity depends on the intensity of the friction, that is, on the inward conflict or conflicts, as well as on the degree of one's presence in oneseff. Their quality depends on the centre which is acting.
When properly treated with the aid of constatation whilepresent in oneself, the friction can liberate fine energies
A Practical Pointer.
Thefaithfal who commits himself to esoteric work while continuing to live in the world invariably provokes the animosity of those around him. Several texts in the Gospel refer to this law. It is sufficient to know the verse where it is said that man's greatest foes are those of his own household.
However, an even greater enemy of man is certainly himself, precisely because of his unconditional attachment to those 'of his own household.' This is why Jesus said: if any man come to me and hate not his father and mother and wife and children and brethren and sisters, also, he cannot be my disciple.
This is the meaning of the other words Jesus pronounced: think not that I came not to send peace, but a sword.
One can feel that here it is a question of the disciple's inner attitude towards the people that surround him, that is, inner nonconsideration. On the other hand, we are generally deficient in outer consideration. Thus, when we manage to transform negative emotions into positive, acquiring inner peace and joy in the process, we must not show this victory over ourselves to the person who provoked the wave of anger in us, as it will only increase the offender's rage.
THIRD STAGE. - Warmth.
We must not take this word as merely symbolic. Real heat is born in us when the inward friction becomes sufficiently intense and is used rationally. It happens in exactly the same way as where heat is produced when two bits of dry wood are rubbed together.
When we feel this heat we can be sure that we are on the right track. The sweetness it brings never satiates us.
We have seen that this heat can come from the proper use of circumstances.
FOURTH STAGE. - Fire.
The first three stages of fusion require sustained effort. The last two are of a spontaneous nature. The heart sets itseff aflame when the friction liberates sufficiently strong heat, as is the case with two pieces of dry wood.
This is the mystical Fire. From there, it spreads through the veins. A traditional maxim refers to this subject in the following words: When thefire burns in the blood, the very composition of the nervous system changes in essence. And the blood becomes 'blue'.
At this stage, the wonder-struck seeker will see in his own depths the image of his real 'I' a brilliant ray - a star.
In the Gospel according to St Thomas, which was discovered recently, the following allusion is made to this:
Let him who seeks, not cease seeking until he finds, and when he finds, he will be troubled, and when he has been troubled, he will marvel and he will reign over All.'
To reign over All. The reader will understand that this means identification with one's real 'I', which is a fragment of the Creator's "I" ' which reigns over the Universe.
FIFTH STAGE. - Fusion.
The fusion takes place in different ways but always begins from the emotional centre, under the influence of an intense emotion cultivated through continuous efforts, or of a sudden powerful emotion as in the case of the good thief on the cross, or following a long accumulation of diverse emotions oriented in the same direction.
The nature of thefusion is, therefore, strictly individual.
It can be the result of a sacridice: that of the someone who sacrifices himself for another. Jesus say that there was no greater love than that of someone who sacrifices his life for his friends. It can also happen in the wake of any other intense manifestation of true Love.
Love, therefore, is the common element in all the processes which lead to 'Positive fusion.
In reality it is Love, and Love alone, which sets the heart aflame while it leaves the head cool.
The fusion effected in this way has a definite nature.
Fusion can also take place under the influence of a strong negative emotion, the fear of sin, for example. But in this case it is not and cannot be total. Its quality is hybrid and its effect is insufficient.
If, later on, the man becomes conscious of this insufficiency, and if he persists in his desire to attain a correct and perfect totalfusion, he is first called upon to destroy his partial fusion and then to start all over again from nothing. But this destruction can only be made at the price of considerable suffering. Once he is conscious of the fact that the fusion is defective, the man must force himself to destroy it as soon as possible. This is all the more difficult because the imperfect fusion is the result of a long accumulation of emotions oriented in a wrong direction.
If the defective fusion is destroyed, at the very moment of its destruction the man can appropriate and turn to his profit all the power of the emotions with the effects of which he had managed to create a partial or negative fusion. In this case, as in the struggle against negative emotions, the positive effect remains when the pernicious effects of the negativefusion have been effaced. However, there is one condition for this: the destruction must be accompanied by the practice of constatation while in an active state of presence in oneself.
We should also note that besides all kinds of partial or negative fusion, there also exist crystallizations. These are always incomplete and localized. But one must not confuse them with what is, in the esoteric sense, human nature. The latter could be compared to a viscous mass in a liquid; it can show one or several points of crystallization which have been obtained mechanically. Often, this comes and grows with age, especially in people who are hardly interested in what oversteps the limits of the immediate in space and time. Then the prudent become avaricious and the dictatorial become intractable. Mental sloth augments with age, so that man becomes incapable of having an original thought; from then on he lives with the thoughts of others which, in their turn, become progressively crystallized in him, losing all their healthy versatility. These phenomena are sometimes also to be found in the young. They are signs of premature aging,
These are the different aspects of the process of fusion that we have briefly studied during the five stages of its realization. Once it is attained, the 'I' of the Personality becomes monolithic and is no longer a conglomeration of little I's, but a stable entity.
At that moment, the seeker finds himself on the fourth step of the Staircase, in front of the second Threshold and ready to cross it.
Internal Considering and The Predator's Mind are the same thing.
Yes, I too was observing it to be the same phenomenon. I asked the question because I wasn’t sure. There were certain facets of it I was minimally aware of before, which I put down as programs. Then with this reading project I started to become aware of more facets. I just wasn’t sure what exactly the “thing” is and if I was getting terminology mixed up. When I’m internally observing, I’m not using this terminology, it’s only in reference to how to explain what I’m observing to the forum. Internally I observe it as a tentacly, slippery swamp creature or parasite. It’s also rather silly, well the internal considering is incredibly silly. It’s only when I write it out, do I go “geez that’s ridiculous”. So I’m going to try to journal my observations, I’ve tried this in the past but got side tracked.was thinking that Internal Considering and the Predator's Mind are two different concepts describing the same thing. One thing I do now differently than maybe I did in the past, I don't try to take them as literal as I did, these concepts. If you can see the underlying reality that the concepts point to, you don't need to spend much time on the concept.
I think you did a good job exposing the predator mind's actions and behavior Candice.Thank you Laura for this reply and answer to my question. It sets me on a whole new line of thinking and really helps me to better understand some concepts used on the forum.
So to my understanding we are a machine. Developmental trauma triggers mechanical “programs” within the machine. These programs manifest as the little I’s. The true self or “I” takes a back seat and the little I’s or programs take on a life of their own and drive the machine.
This predators mind is then something that is external to the machine, as in its origin is 4D STS. It’s also internal due to the tinkering with our DNA in the past. It’s essentially a parasite of the mind utilizing the programs of the machine to appear to integrate with the self. This is where the internal considering comes in.
Is this what is meant by we are “food for the moon”? The parasite is feeding off of our negative emotions which arise due to the programs and internal considering.
Is this why we need to observe those negative emotions and keep them below the neck? In doing so, we block the parasite from its food source and if we know what we’re doing we can potentially also transmute those emotions into something that benefits our true self. Or is it that the heat of the transmutation sears that “parasite”? Making the internal landscape unpalatable. Though, I see pitfalls in this line of thinking. One could believe that one has slain the beast and wishful thinking sets in that one is fully cleansed. However those were just some of the tentacles and not the core. Which is why it may take many lifetimes to accomplish this.
I know that probably none of this is new to long term members of the forum and those doing the Work. I’m new to a lot of this and I’m trying to keep up with the different terminology used here. I’m aware I have so many gaps in my knowledge or awareness. So much reading still to do. I thought it best to share where my thinking is at and ask if it’s on the right path.
It was in reading this post by Laura that prompted these realizations of mine. I will share it here for any other newbies such as myself who may also benefit from this post in conjunction with this reading project.
I don’t think it’s silly. I have had times when my involvement in a messy situation (i.e interactions with a particular person) is so strong it feels like it has become a thing and I literally feed it like an addiction that I am attached to. It actually looks like it has form and when I see it it is a slippery creature with lots of tentacles, sucking greedily the energy from me and the person involved. Horror of all horrors when I realise I had a part in creating this thing. Anyway I chop off its tentacles and let the light dissolve it. I rethink how I’m going to behave AND feel/approach in a positive loving way.Internally I observe it as a tentacly, slippery swamp creature or parasite. It’s also rather silly, well the internal considering is incredibly silly. It’s only when I write it out, do I go “geez that’s ridiculous”. So I’m going to try to journal my observations, I’ve tried this in the past but got side tracked.