View another random question/answer
73.14 Questioner: An observation of the working itself by another entity would seem to me to partially abridge free will in that a seemingly magical occurrence had taken place as a result of the working of an adept. This could be extended to any phenomenon which is other than normally acceptable. Could you speak on this paradox that is immediately the problem of anyone doing healing?
Ra: I am Ra. We are humble messengers of the Law of One. To us there are no paradoxes. The workings which seem magical and, therefore, seem to infringe upon free will do not, in themselves, do so, for the distortions of perception are as many as the witnesses, and each witness sees what it desires to see.
Infringement upon free will occurs in this circumstance only if the entity doing the working ascribes the authorship of this event to its self or its own skills. Those who state that no working comes from it but only through it is [not] infringing upon free will.*
94.14 Questioner: I can understand, to use a poor term again, the necessity for an archetype for Catalyst, or a model for Catalyst of the Mind, but what is the reason for having a blueprint or model for Experience of the Mind other than this simple model of the dual repository for the negative and positive catalyst? It would seem to me that the First Distortion of Free Will would be better served if no model for experience were made. I’m somewhat confused on this. Could you clear it up?
Ra: I am Ra. Your question is certainly interesting and your confusion hopefully productive. We cannot learn/teach for the student. We shall simply note, as we have previously,* the attraction of various archetypes to male and to female. We suggest that this line of consideration may prove productive.
The original Law of One books are copyright ©1982, 1984, 1998 L/L Research. The Ra Contact books are copyright ©2018 L/L Research and Tobey Wheelock.
This site copyright ©2003–2024 Tobey Wheelock.
Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.