The Ra material and the Cassiopaeans

[goyacobol]

there is nothing else

Wandering Star,

My favorite lessons quote is "All there is is lessons". For some reason the 2 "is is" must subconsciously remind me of "Isis"(who is a vanguard) or something.

Session 24 November 24 1994:

Q: (L) So we just have to stay on our toes at all times?

A: Absolutely don't let others distract you. You have suffered many attempts at distraction away from truth. Now follow some proclamations: Pause. All there is is lessons. This is one infinite school. There is no other reason for anything to exist. Even inanimate matter learns it is all an "Illusion." Each individual possesses all of creation within their minds. Now, contemplate for a moment. Each soul is all powerful and can create or destroy all existence if know how. You and us and all others are interconnected by our mutual possession of all there is. You may create alternative universes if you wish and dwell within. You are all a duplicate of the universe within which you dwell. Your mind represents all that exists. It is "fun" to see how much you can access.

Q: (L) It's fun for who to see how much we can access?

A: All. Challenges are fun. Where do you think the limit of your mind is?

Q: (L) Where?

A: We asked you.

Q: (L) Well, I guess there is no limit.

Just had to look for your reference on "there is nothing else" and found more to think about. Even though the Cs also have said "you are an experiment" they seem to want to say that the Cosmos is not a laboratory but is "one infinite school" and all there is is lessons.

Session 23 December 1994:

Q: (D) I also started telling S__ about spirituality and God and things like that, and I told her that what you first have to understand is there is no such thing as sin... (L) It's all lessons... (D) There is no such thing as sin and then I named all the negative emotions and said that what we need to do is have a lot less of that and more of love, caring, sharing and that kind of thing... and she really listened! So, I have started teaching her. And, I want her to have something to... Oh!, here's a good question: Could you help me out and guide me into what book would be good for S__ to read?

A: No, this is up to S__. It is all just lessons for each individual. That is all there is, nothing else.

Q: (L) I guess it is like dancing, you follow the signals and the music to know what step to do next. Take your cues from S__.

A: There is nothing, repeat nothing, but lessons.

Q: (L) I guess it is a big laboratory and we are the guinea pigs...

A: No, everything that exists in all of creation is a lesson, there is no laboratory.

The "experiment" part is being done by STS forces for their own learning agenda to better control us I think.

Session 21 January 1995:

Q: (L) Let me ask this one before the tape runs out and we take a break. What is the "ultimate secret" being protected by the Consortium?

A: You are not in control of yourselves, you are an experiment.
BREAK


Q: Do you have anything else to say on that subject?

A: Up to you.

Q: (T) When you say this is the ultimate secret, that we're being "protected" from by the government, are we talking about the ultimate secret of humans only here?

A: Basically.

Q: (T) The ultimate secret of the human race is that we are an experiment that other humans are conducting on the rest of us?

A: Part.

Q: (T) Okay, does the other part have to do with the Lizards?

A: Yes.

Q: (L) Other aliens also?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) Okay, so, are the humans who are running the experiment, do they know that they are part of the experiment also?

A: Yes.

Q: (T) And they're doing this willingly?

A: They have no choice.

Q: (L) Why do they have no choice?

A: Already in progress.

Q: (T) What is the experiment about?

A: Too complicated for you to understand.

Q: (J) I hate it when that happens! (T) Okay, is this part of, is this about the experiment the Lizzies are doing of dominating us and sucking us dry?

A: Yes, but there's much more than that, you will understand at level 4.

 

[Wandering Star]

We learn by teaching and we teach by learning. You can not teach without learning!

Thanks Goyacobol.

 

[goyacobol]

We learn by teaching and we teach by learning. You can not teach without learning!

Thanks Goyacobol.

You are welcome. What you say has been true for me over and over. Every time I look for a reference I learn something new which I do think is the fun part.

 

[Voyageur]

I tried reading the Ra material back in 2006, and found it pretty clunky and frustrating to read. I concur with others here that the more natural style of communicating used by the C's is preferable. Kinda interesting that it touches on a certain idea on knowledge, that it's not particularly what you know, but how you convey what you know that is more important.

I may have missed out on info because of this, but the rather pretentious lingo just put me off sadly.

Regarding Ra, can agree with that, too.

Now the C's on the other hand are like spending time with good open friends; there is humor/wit, seriousness, sarcasm, compassion et cetera - and they are great at making you think, making one think about almost everything.

Amazing!

 

[SlipNet]

Now the C's on the other hand are like spending time with good open friends; there is humor/wit, seriousness, sarcasm, compassion et cetera - and they are great at making you think, making one think about almost everything.

That's it in a nutshell, it's a free flowing conversation without airs and graces. Imagine if in conversation with me for example, I responded like "I am SlipNet, these are my thoughts". You'd slowly back away saying "okaaa-aaay....". Maybe it was an idea in the channel's mind and the need was to establish a sense of authority, but it was just the start for me, I simply couldn't immerse myself in the info, it was so off-putting.

 

[lilies]

The way ra communicates is off putting and mostly nonsense. This style usually deters me from spending any substantial amount of time on it. That said, I do dip in and find some of ra’s messages to be accurate or intriguing. I guess I’m just keen on to the point communication, not a convoluted word salad menagerie.

Originally I liked Ra as well, because the entity was so confident speaking in his bedazzling 'High New Age'-language blinding with disco-ball glare, so the listener feels finally stumbling on treasured secrets, becoming privy to sensitive rumors spreading in the Higher Dim-ensional Spheres [sic!]

I was researching Vril-Thule and UFOs and came on this excerpt. It made the hairs on my back stand on end: (If this is anything close to the truth)

Horus-Ra as the Archontic Alien Parasite: A follow-up interview with Maarit a Scandinavian MILAB-abductee

I corresponded with Dorica Manu, colleague of Dr. Corrado Malanga regarding the Horus-Ra entity. She said, “In Italy we used this notation because the Ra entity operates in a transdimensional body that looks like a very tall birdlike body, similar to the Egyptian god Horus. This bird-like body is not a cyborg, but it seems to be the body of a decayed humanoid race from Orion.

So, the transdimensional form is Horus, the dark entity within is Ra. It is in actuality nothing more than a black shadow or dot.” According to Dr. Malanga, Ra is a dark entity coming from another Universe, a universe archetypally situated behind our universe. There is dark out there, no physical bodies, no light, no love, no souls. This Ra entity places implants on the tailbone, below the sacrum, from where he hangs on to the abductee’s body, parasiting the persona and performing a perverse type of mind control. Ra may come and go to his liking.
...
Could this dark universe that is archetipally behind ours be what the ancient Gnostics described as the “Outer Darkness”?

The mention of the “shadow beings” beneath the various forms reminded me of a statement made by one of my former Milab female interviewees named Lilu. (http://evelorgen.com/wp/articles/mil...-pandoras-box/)

She stated that it is the Shadows who are behind the reptilians and other colluding–parasite aliens and that these beings are the ones we need to be concerned with. Maarit told me that this black dot shadow is a different kind of energy within the energy body. A presence. She also said that most reptilians and draconians are in line and united with that “shadow energy”. Maarit explains,

“I am able to recognize the Ra energy everywhere and maintain my inner coherence. So in my opinion, the Ra level of universal existence is the level of the so-called Archons, not the minor reptilians, greys or draconians. Ra is the level, which eats the conscious awareness, and we have to bypass it in order to merge into higher realms of existence. The more important thing to focus on is not the origin of Ra in its different forms, but to see the patterns of behavior this Ra has. It truly enslaves. Like seen in cult activity. Ra enjoys the essence of the egotistical uplift.“ Maarit emphatically stated,

 

[Laura]

Differences in opinion are funny aren’t they?

Personally I considered Ra’s syntax and word usage to be an example of impeccability.

I find no impeccability in obfuscation, so it is interesting that you like it.

 

[Laura]

I tried reading the Ra material back in 2006, and found it pretty clunky and frustrating to read. I concur with others here that the more natural style of communicating used by the C's is preferable. Kinda interesting that it touches on a certain idea on knowledge, that it's not particularly what you know, but how you convey what you know that is more important.

I may have missed out on info because of this, but the rather pretentious lingo just put me off sadly.

"Pretentious" is pretty much it. The way language is used in any exchange between two parties, singular or plural, can very often indicate the "status" of each side. Imagine a snooty academic showing off to a blue-collar guy, talking down to him or her, making things difficult to understand as a way to establish superiority and higher status.

I find that sort of thing offensive, rude even. It definitely says to me that the "sender" is not really desirous of being understood, of truly communicating. That was one of the issues I had with direct channeling with "Frank". He tended to go off that way to some extent.

To me, there is an almost sneering quality to the Ra communications; something like, "Well, since you have disturbed me and have acted obsequious enough, I'll deign to reply, but I'm not going to make it easy for you or come down to your level so that you can really understand."

 

[Matthew]

"Pretentious" is pretty much it. The way language is used in any exchange between two parties, singular or plural, can very often indicate the "status" of each side. Imagine a snooty academic showing off to a blue-collar guy, talking down to him or her, making things difficult to understand as a way to establish superiority and higher status.

I find that sort of thing offensive, rude even. It definitely says to me that the "sender" is not really desirous of being understood, of truly communicating. That was one of the issues I had with direct channeling with "Frank". He tended to go off that way to some extent.

To me, there is an almost sneering quality to the Ra communications; something like, "Well, since you have disturbed me and have acted obsequious enough, I'll deign to reply, but I'm not going to make it easy for you or come down to your level so that you can really understand."

Quite so, Laura, the primary role of language is effective communication. Doing so in a way that the recipient(s) understand is a manifestation of external considering.

I am not very familiar with the Ra material as I found the language used and also the phrasing a turn off. From my attempts to read it, however, I always got the impression that this was influenced by the group channelling Ra because that was what they thought pearls of wisdom from such an entity should sound like.

 

[munaychasumaq]

Quite so, Laura, the primary role of language is effective communication. Doing so in a way that the recipient(s) understand is a manifestation of external considering.

I am not very familiar with the Ra material as I found the language used and also the phrasing a turn off. From my attempts to read it, however, I always got the impression that this was influenced by the group channeling Ra because that was what they thought pearls of wisdom from such an entity should sound like.

Maybe this is one of the risk to deal when it is use direct channeling.The result of the material is affected when preconceived beliefs, prejudices, assumptions from part of the channeling group even when the source does not have this in mind.Just an idea.

 

[gnosisxsophia]

I find no impeccability in obfuscation, so it is interesting that you like it.

Hi Laura,

‘Like’ is probably not the term I would have used myself...seemingly afflicted by more than one ‘team’ in the dream state and increasingly when ‘awake’, research into ‘The Nine’ some years ago provided a healthy respect for ‘strangeness’.

Lilies post above is also a very interesting synchronicity.

Best Regards

J

 

[Courageous Inmate Sort]

I am not very familiar with the Ra material as I found the language used and also the phrasing a turn off. From my attempts to read it, however, I always got the impression that this was influenced by the group channelling Ra because that was what they thought pearls of wisdom from such an entity should sound like.

I also thought the wording of Ra had been more influenced by the channeling group. From what I recall from reading lawofone.info, it can be quite cumbersome to make sense of some answers because you need to have a variety of their peculiar definitions in mind, which overall seem to be consistent along their transcripts.

I learned of Ra through this work, so when I read it I had the framework built up by Laura and the Cs to help me make sense of what they say. I've found it useful especially when trying to understand concepts shared by both communications, such as STO and STS.

The Cs are much more straight forward and, let's say, "human" in the way they communicate. They are much easier to read but that doesn't mean it's simple to understand, they can pack a lot of meaning in a few words. The more you read it the more comes out of it, there is always a different angle I had not yet considered.

I read the 4 volumes of “Life After Veil” and can count on my fingers the passages which seemed to make sense and were helpful. Rest was garbage.

I read first 6 Kindle books “Life After Veil”. Kindle comes with a dictionary that helps to immediately check the meaning of the words. Without that it could be lot of guessing. This book were published almost 100 years back.

I suppose you are referring to Life Beyond the Veil by G. Vale Owen. I read the printed book by Red Pill Press and quite liked it. Just as other such accounts there is a lot that seems superfluous or tinted by the expectations of those involved, but I think sifting through the chaff is part of the game. Perhaps if I had already read Stafford Betty it would not have had the same impact, but at the time I saw a lot of fascinating things in it, beginning by the author being a clergyman when he first received the communications. At the time I also wished there were more universal truths laid bare, but now I think of it as an individual experience, if someone recounts their life as a way of explaining what it's like to be human, there will be a lot of superfluous and individual-specific stuff, but the story itself might be beautiful and if you hear a hundred of them you can grasp some commonalities. And, even though I'm very fond of summaries, reading a hundred different accounts that all point in the same direction will have a different impact than reading a summary made by someone else... just my 2 cents.

 

[Wandering Star]

"Pretentious" is pretty much it. The way language is used in any exchange between two parties, singular or plural, can very often indicate the "status" of each side. Imagine a snooty academic showing off to a blue-collar guy, talking down to him or her, making things difficult to understand as a way to establish superiority and higher status.

I find that sort of thing offensive, rude even. It definitely says to me that the "sender" is not really desirous of being understood, of truly communicating. That was one of the issues I had with direct channeling with "Frank". He tended to go off that way to some extent.

To me, there is an almost sneering quality to the Ra communications; something like, "Well, since you have disturbed me and have acted obsequious enough, I'll deign to reply, but I'm not going to make it easy for you or come down to your level so that you can really understand."

True. The point is that for the "truth seeker" the material of Ra (Law of One) is so "powerful" that it can not be ignored.

Now, although the in-depth study of this material leads to a "knowledge" of the "truth" (although only a part), I understand that it inevitably leads to being a "servant".

Laura, if it were not for your sacrifice and that of your wonderful "crew", I would be "still" always putting the other "cheek". My energy changed from victim to "finding myself", thanks to the C's.

If you did not exist, the material of Ra in the vast majority of cases would be a huge STS tool.

Now, as he decides a lot here, "do not throw the baby with the bath water", Carla's work has a huge content of wisdom that helps to understand the "game".

Laura, I do not get tired of expressing my admiration, since in a world where the "lie" reigns, the children of the future have been able to look forward and say "no", "that is not true".

 

[loreta]

The C's express themselves with clarity even people like me that are not English can understand them. And if something is not clear, Laura is the first to ask for clarification. The C's are not superior to us, I don't feel they feel superior. They can be guides, like Laura is. Giving information, but also open curiosity. I really like them.

 

[gdpetti]

Remember the 'constrictions' they mentioned, similarly to those in any group... such as the whole Jesus thing and the affect on data received... with Ra/Quo, The C's et al... what we find is a reflection of the group.. which is why L found that the data received from the C's seemed conflicting at times when different people were in the group. Over at LLresearch, that group dynamic had it's own issues with the three and later with the breakdown to Quo, with any of their extended 'family' that would come and ask questions... the same ones, over and over and over and over... as they said themselves... as the C's have said... it gets boring to repeat yourself, which is probably a good reason for them to take turns.