Law of One. Reflection on Orange Ray Blockage.

Just got Google Analytics. Damn, it is confusing. I don't quite know what to do with the information yet. 

I've been thinking recently about the Law of One (for a change!) And I've been thinking of what it is to actually apply the information. Re- reading the Law of One and taking notes on almost every question. It leads to self reflection on how much of it I can use. Am I using it precisely. Even if I do not apply the specific passage I am reading, they are not all applicable to real life. Continuing to read through and scrutinise the text means that it is at the forefront of my mind and I think about other bits I have picked up previously.

One of the central themes of the Law of One, which I have taken more seriously over the past year or so, is the idea that what we experience in the world is catalyst. Which is then used as a kind of nudge towards better understanding our inner world. I have been using this thought process far more frequently. Enough to use it in my general everyday life. It is definitely a perspective that softens reactive, angry behaviour. "This thing is here to teach me, I am to process it and gain understanding on it". Is a different thought process than "you are challenging my status." 

Even with that though. Either the Law of One contact is being intentionally obtuse. Or I am not that able to understand it. This is more true of the second of these two answers:

I will add a bit of emphasis because it is a bit dense: 

Questioner: Thank you. I have a question here from Jim that I will read verbatim: “Much of the mystic tradition of seeking on Earth holds that belief that the individual self must be erased or obliterated and the material world ignored for an entity to reach ‘nirvana,’ as it’s called, or enlightenment. What is the proper role of the individual self and its worldly activities in aiding an entity to grow more into the Law of One?”

Ra: I am Ra. The proper role of the entity is in this density to experience all things desired, to then analyze, understand, and accept these experiences, distilling from them the love/light within them. Nothing shall be overcome. That which is not needed falls away.

The orientation develops due to analysis of desire. These desires become more and more distorted towards conscious application of love/light as the entity furnishes itself with distilled experience. We have found it to be inappropriate in the extreme to encourage the overcoming of any desires, except to suggest the imagination rather than the carrying out in the physical plane, as you call it, of those desires not consonant with the Law of One; this preserving the primal distortion of free will.

The reason it is unwise to overcome is that overcoming is an unbalanced action creating difficulties in balancing in the time/space continuum. Overcoming thus creates the further environment for holding onto that which apparently has been overcome.

All things are acceptable in the proper time for each entity, and in experiencing, in understanding, in accepting, in then sharing with other-selves, the appropriate description shall be moving away from distortions of one kind to distortions of another which may be more consonant with the Law of One.

It is, shall we say, a shortcut to simply ignore or overcome any desire. It must instead be understood and accepted. This takes patience and experience which can be analyzed with care, with compassion for self and for other-self.

Questioner: Basically I would say that to infringe on the free will of another self or another entity would be the basic thing never to do under the Law of One. Can you state any other breaking of the Law of One than this basic rule?

Ra: I am Ra. As one proceeds from the primal distortion of free will, one proceeds to the understanding of the focal points of intelligent energy which have created the intelligences or the ways of a particular mind/body/spirit complex in its environment, both what you would call natural and what you would call man-made. Thus, the distortions to be avoided are those which do not take into consideration the distortions of the focus of energy of love/light, or shall we say, the Logos of this particular sphere or density. These include the lack of understanding of the needs of the natural environment, the needs of other-selves’ mind/body/spirit complexes. These are many due to the various distortions of man-made complexes in which the intelligence and awareness of entities themselves have chosen a way of using the energies available.

Thus, what would be an improper distortion with one entity is proper with another. We can suggest an attempt to become aware of the other-self as self and thus do that action which is needed by other-self, understanding from the other-self’s intelligence and awareness. In many cases this does not involve the breaking of the distortion of free will into a distortion or fragmentation called infringement. However, it is a delicate matter to be of service, and compassion, sensitivity, and an ability to empathize are helpful in avoiding the distortions of man-made intelligence and awareness.

The area or arena called the societal complex is an arena in which there are no particular needs for care for it is the prerogative/honor/duty of those in the particular planetary sphere to act according to its free will for the attempted aid of the social complex.

Thus, you have two simple directives: awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in nature, awareness of the intelligent energy expressed in self to be shared, when it seems appropriate, by the entity with the social complex, and you have one infinitely subtle and various set of distortions of which you may be aware; that is, distortions with respect to self and other-selves not concerning free will but concerning harmonious relationships and service to others as other-selves would most benefit.

I get what a lot of this says in principle. That the life is an extremely complex process of receiving a catalyst. Experiencing a life event. Then going through analysing it and understanding it, accepting it. Etc. 

But in reading this quote. There were some powerful, relevant lines. Such as 'nothing shall be overcome. That which is not needed falls away'. This really helps when you have a strong instinct to try and fight for something that you can't actually get. "I have to do xyz or else my life path is off" kind of thinking. Or if someone is offering opposition to how a person thinks a relationship should be.

There are other relevant bits. But overall, the actual guidance is rather vague. And lines like 'What is correct for one entity may be wrong for another'. Is especially vague. When Don says that the thing not to do is to infringe on the Law of Free Will.  The contact does not validate that as correct. Why? This could be because it is not. Even though reading the Law of One would indicate that in my opinion. It could also be the Law of Free Will. Anyone who votes left, or for a right wing party pretending to be left. Is infringing on the Law of Free Will. So the contact might be infringing on free will by agreeing with that. 

It just struck me that the idea that there are no particular need for care for the societal complex might be a statement that is subtly against voting!? Rather easy for me, I live in a left wing safe seat. 

Anyway, having said that, there is far more of the Law of One to explore. I think that some of the most useable stuff comes from the discussion on archetypes in book 4. That's where you get to what you actually do, best practices to live with in real life. Indirectly in a lot of instances. I think of the Matrix of the Mind frequently.

The real world. Real grounded people. 

Some of this then will be more from memory. It would be silly to engage in a discussion that has a lot of Law of One roots and quote every passage.  

But it seems to me, that in terms of judgement. There are passages that are kind of conflicting. One of the passages. Either 94.9 or 95.9 says something like, in dealing with Carla, that she should ponder the non efficacy of judgement. But another, when discussing ways of understanding service to others and service to self polarity. It is specifically said that those words were the best used to judge accurately in others what is service to other sand service to self behaviour. 

In our lives. There are a lot of people of varying shades of service to self walking about. Some of them might be very service to others, but they are drug addicts or have some other issue that makes them service to self to the extent that it is a problem. 

I recently had the thought. And this does go along political lines. I have seen a lot of reports. Social media types of reports. That amongst homosexuals. There is a LOT of sexual activity. One post was from someone that had been talking to a colleague that said that he would go to a club for an orgy with new people every week. So body count would be in the 1000's. I suppose there is no reason not to. No risk of pregnancy and the male sex drive is high. Apparently, when researchers first heard the stories from this community. They simply couldn't believe it.

Imagining this reality then. Obviously they are not all like that, but of the subsection that are that promiscuous. Imagine someone whose world is constantly doing that. The incredibly energy expenditure that involves. Their lifestyle is that. They do not have any energy left over for reading philosophy or exploring political issues deeply.  

So if someone is engaged in conversation with them, and then starts talking in complex political terms. Redistribution of wealth this, meritocracy that... Or whatever. Then the reaction is not going to be based on a considered thought of said opinions. It's going to be knee jerk based on protecting themselves and their identity. I.e. fundamentally. The Christian right is not pro gay and the left is very pro gay. It is going to be based on that.

Now let's extend this to a straight guy that has a lot of hook ups. So we can capture some more of the subtleties of this point. Straight guys that do hook ups are less promiscuous than that. But some of them not by much. The body count will be in three figures rather than four. But, there is a lot that goes into one of these 'interactions'. Dealing with female emotions is heavy. Even if you are meant to be having a one night stand. Women are emotional by their nature, and, despite women not usually perceiving this and seeing their effect often as only positive. Very often that emotion is a burden. It is a burden men are happy to carry, but it is still a burden. Every honour is a responsibility.

This guy would likely have had to pay lip service to their beliefs and way of being. I have seen it said that pick up artists are more like women in their strategies. Cognitive dissonance means that we cannot engage too much in lying without starting to believe said lies. Also, these women will have a lifestyle. Alcohol and drugs might be what a person needs to remain 'interesting' to said women. 

Also, virtue costs energy. And these decisions mount up. It takes a long time for a person to get to casually being interested in philosophy to reading Nietzsche's original works. It takes a long time for a person to be convinced of the value of what is valuable. Another example might be investigating obscure forms of music. Over time, prioritising hook ups and this lifestyle over real relationships, can hollow out a person. 

If a person is hooking up a whole lot. Do they have the time to give their all to their other friendships? To their family? If someone has a long term relationship and wife those things are usually cut off anyway. But a long term relationship and wife will give more than what is purely carnal. You can spend time with friends with a long term relationship. You meet your family with your wife by your side. So it is not the same thing. 

What I am getting that with all these analogies is... Orange ray blockage. I am wondering if these behaviours are orange ray blockages.