The Law of One Sessions 37: Question 4

2 results found.

27.4 Questioner: Would you define the word intelligent in the concept of intelligent infinity?

Ra: I am Ra. We shall address the entire spectrum of this question before defining as requested. Your language, using vibrational sound complexes, can be at best an approximation of that which is closer to an understanding, if you will, of the nature of conscious thought. Perceptions are not the same as sound vibration complexes, and the attempt to define will therefore be a frustrating one for you, although we are happy to aid you within the limits of your sound vibration complexes.

To define intelligent apart from infinity is difficult, for these two vibration complexes equal one concept. It is much like attempting to divide your sound vibration concept, faith, into two parts. We shall attempt to aid you, however.

37.4 Questioner: I have been very hesitant to ask certain questions for fear that they would be regarded, as I regard them, as questions of unimportance or too great a specificity and, thereby, reduce our contact with you. In order to disseminate some of the information that I consider to be of extreme importance—that is, the non-transient type of information, information having to do with the evolution of mind, body, and spirit—it seems almost necessary, in our society, to include information that is of little value, simply because that’s how our . . . our society works and how the system of distribution appraises that which is offered for distribution.

Could you comm— Will . . . will you comment on this problem that I have?

Ra: I am Ra. We comment as follows: It is quite precisely correct that the level and purity of this contact is dependent upon the level and purity of information sought. Thusly, the continued requests for specific information, from this particular source, is deleterious to the substance of your purpose.

Moreover, as we scanned your mind to grasp your situation as regards the typescript of some of our words, we found that you had been criticised for the type of language construction used to convey data. Due to our orientation with regard to data, even the most specifically answered question would be worded by our group in such a way as to maximise the accuracy of the nuances of the answer. This, however, mitigates against what your critic desires in the way of simple, lucid prose.

More than this we cannot say. These are our observations of your situation. What you wish to do is completely your decision, and we remain at your service in whatever way we may be without breaking the Way of Confusion.