The Law of One Sessions 27: Question 3

2 results found.

27.3 Questioner: Thank you very much. I will now proceed with the process of starting the second book of The Law of One.* This, I will assume, will be a much more difficult task than the first book because we want to focus on things that are not transient, and as questioner I may have difficulty at times.

When I do have this difficulty, I may fall back on some partially transient questions simply because I will not be able to formulate what I really need to formulate, and I apologise for this. But I will try my best to stay on the track and eliminate things of no value from the book if they do occur during my questioning.**

The statement I will make to begin with I have written. It is: Most entities in this density focus their minds on some transient condition or activity with little regard to its value as a tool, or an aid, to their growth and understanding of the true, or undistorted, essence of the creation of which they are an integral part.

We will attempt, by starting at the beginning of creation, to establish an overview of ourselves in the creation, thereby arriving at a more informed point of inspection of what we consider to be reality. It is hoped that this process will allow us to participate more effectively in the process of evolution.

I would like to start with definitions of words that we have been using that possibly we have not—and possibly cannot—totally understand, but since the first words that we use are intelligent infinity, I would like for you to define each of these words and give me the definition of their combination.

Ra: I am Ra. Your vibrations of mind complex indicate a query. However, your vibrational sound complex indicate a preference. Please restate.

68.3 Questioner: Would you recommend a greater rest period between the end of this session and the next session? Would that help the instrument?

Ra: I am Ra. We might suggest, as always, that the support group watch the instrument with care and make the decision based upon observation. It is not within our capacity to specifically recommend a future decision. We would note that our previous recommendation of one working on alternate diurnal periods did not take into account the fragility of the instrument, and thus we would ask your forgiveness for this suggestion.

At this nexus our distortion is towards a flexible scheduling of workings based upon, as we said, the support group’s decisions concerning the instrument. We would again note that there is a fine line between the care of the instrument for continued use, which we find acceptable, and the proper understanding, if you will excuse this misnomer, of the entire group’s need to work in service.

Thus, if the instrument’s condition is truly marginal, by all means let more rest occur between workings. However, if there is desire for the working, and the instrument is at all able, in your careful opinion, it is, shall we say, a well done action for this group to work. We cannot be more precise, for this contact is a function of your free will.