Ra Session 1 Study

Truth from distortion

Discerning and removing distortion was a theme in this first session and throughout the material. In his opening statement, Ra equates what Don, Carla, and Jim call seeking the truth with studying the patterns of the illusions of your body, your mind, and your spirit. 1.0 Then Ra tells us that he remains involved on Earth because he felt the great responsibility of staying in the capacity of removing the distortions. 1.1 Near the end of the session, Ra says to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make. 1.10 Ra’s emphasis suggests that the study of illusion can reveal truth.

One important statement

The Confederation’s only one important statement, Ra says, is All things, all of life, all of the creation is part of the One Original Thought. 1.0 Why is this the key statement? What does it mean and what are its implications? An easy explanation is that Ra’s intention is to teach the Law of One, and this is the Law of One. 1.10 Can we go deeper?

I believe Ra’s statement is key because it directly contradicts the foundational beliefs of third density humanity, including those of the channeling group. Concepts of evil, wrong, and bad cannot be true when all of life is God and all experience is welcomed by God. The channeling group (especially Carla) were hung up on martyrdom, victimization, and service to self — their ‘new age’ or ‘spiritual’ stand-in for the Christian concept of sin. Ra was well aware of both the necessity and the near-hopelessness of attempting to teach, 1.10 which applied just as much to the channeling group and the Ra material’s readership as it did to Ra’s previous involvement in Egypt.

Regardless of how appalling an act may appear, regardless of man’s judgments of ‘evil,’ it’s all the Creator. The Creator never curses part of itself, never cuts off its arm to forever live a separate existence. (Yahweh pretended to be the Creator, claimed there is no God beside me, commanded Thou shalt have no other gods before me, and wiped out swaths of the Creation of which he did not approve — but this, too, was temporary.)

Through the time of one lifetime and the space of one perspective, the unity of all things is convincingly veiled. Circumstances and actions can seem unjust, even ‘evil.’ This catalyst is foundational to our third density. Do we point the finger at others and ourselves, or can we remember that the Creator welcomes all experience? 18.5 31.3 Can we see through this illusion and know that all is complete and whole and perfect? 4.20

Take thought

What is it, my friends, to take thought? 1.0 How do we answer this? What is Ra asking?

Is there a clue in the wording to take thought, rather than simply ‘to think’? When I consider the difference, to take thought sounds like I may be choosing from or accepting thoughts that are already ‘out there’ (in the universal mind?), whereas ‘to think’ seems more autonomous, independent.

Further into the material, Ra describes Don’s experience in a passive sense: You are able to receive thought-forms, word-forms, and visions. However, you seem able to discriminate. 44.5 In a 1972 channeling, Hatonn spoke similarly of incoming thoughts, advising that It is necessary to reject thoughts that continually infringe upon your mind from your present environment and to carefully select each thought that you generate in order to reach a state of true mental maturity. 3.1.1972

My experience is consistent with Ra and Hatonn’s statements: I am aware of thoughts arising in consciousness. I do not experience myself as actively or directly thinking thoughts: the thoughts come and go seemingly on their own. I don’t know that it is possible to blank the mind for any significant length of time. I do know that it is possible to evolve our relationship to the thoughts that arise.

Without awareness of this stream of consciousness, we attach our beingness to every continually infring[ing] thought. We experience ourselves as the passenger on a chariot driven by wild horses, a victim of circumstances. We believe that we have no choice but to react to the conditions facing us.

Through intention and observation we can become aware of the thoughts. With this awareness, we can observe the thoughts. We can realize that we our not our thoughts. We can consciously choose the thoughts we take and the thoughts that we reject or allow to fall away, as effortlessly as it appeared.

The Judgment Beneath Ra’s Balancing Exercises investigates the awareness of underlying thoughts.

Omitted from Session 1

The original publication of the first 26 sessions, The Law of One: Book I, omitted most of 1.0, including the only one important statement and Ra’s comments and questions about thought. (The 2020 40th Anniversary Boxed Set uses the same edited transcript.) In his introduction to the (mostly, but still not completely) restored text in the set’s Book V: Personal Material, Jim explained Don’s choice:

Don felt that, compared with the other twenty-five sessions of Book One, it was anomalistic — and perhaps too confusing as such — for first-time readers. P.2

With this and other aspects of the Ra material, I think it can be helpful to imagine ourselves in Don’s shoes for a better understanding of why he might have edited Ra’s statement.

A little bit of seeking in the material itself and in L/L Research documentation revealed what I believe to be the answer: from the very first session, Don was shaping the material according to what he wanted to present to readers: validation of alien existence. It was always a hope of Don’s that we would be able to communicate to a large number of people, according to Carla. P.65 This mindset drove the questions he asked Ra and the choices he made in publishing the material.

Don knew immediately that the new contact would become a book. Carla recalled that as soon she awoke after the first session, He was so excited and he says, We’re gonna have to write a book, Alrac. This is it! P.76

Already a twice published author, a professor, a lecturer, an interviewee, a filmmaker, P.44-45 a script consultant, P.96 and a channeling group leader, P.587 Don had put some thought into how to attract and maintain an audience’s interest. He immediately applied this experience to the Ra material. From Session 2 alone:

I’m guessing that there are enough people who would understand what you are saying, interested enough, for us to make a book of communications with it and I wondered if you would agree to this, us making a book, and if so, I was thinking that possibly a bit of historical background on yourself would be in order. 2.1

Could you tell us something of your historical background…. Then we would have something to start with in writing this book. 2.2

There will be several questions that I’ll ask as we go along that may or may not be related directly to understanding the Law of One. However, I believe that the proper way of presenting this as a teach/learning vehicle to the population of the planet that will read it at this time… 2.3

Don was serious about his book intention: L/L Research published Book I in 1981, the same year that its 26 sessions were channeled. Book I offered readers a significantly pared version of Ra’s opening comment — 151 of the 565 words that Carla channeled.* Don cut the only one important statement, 13 sentences about thought, and nearly everything about establishing and maintaining the channel.

Would Ra’s opening statement confuse first-time readers, as Don may have feared? Is it any stranger than the rest of the Ra material? It was anomalous in that it was not prompted by a question: This is the only session in which Ra delivered anything close to what Brad Steiger has called a cosmic sermonette before beginning with the question and answer format that was used exclusively throughout the remainder of the Ra contact, Jim wrote in Book V: Personal Material. P.2

Jim restored P.245+255 most of 1.0 in Book V, which was published in 1998 — 15 years after the first four books. Book V’s version of 1.0 still omitted six sentences, including the memorable You are part of a thought. You are dancing in a ballroom in which there is no material. You are dancing thoughts. 1.0 Why those lines — were they just too unusual? Did they not fit the scientific view of a physical universe?

*This word count compares Book I (published in 1981 and 2020) with Tobey Wheelock’s Lightly Edited Relistened Version. The latter is the default text at lawofone.info and the version that L/L Research’s 2018 two-book set, The Ra Contact, is based on.

Content of our thoughts

As he continues his cosmic sermonette, Ra focuses on the content of our thoughts: What thoughts were part of the original thought today? In how many of your thoughts did the creation abide? Was love contained? 1.0 These are challenging questions that require some investigation to even determine what Ra is asking.

What would it mean for a thought to be part of the original thought? 1.0 First we must have a decent idea of what Ra means by the original thought, a concept that cannot be simply or briefly defined. References in the Ra material and L/L Research conscious channelings can help.

From one perspective, every thought is part of the original thought, since the One Original Thought is the harvest of all previous, if you would use this term, experience of the Creator by the Creator. 82.10 I do not believe, though, that this is a trick question — I think Ra is asking sincere questions here and throughout his cosmic sermonette.

One way to evaluate alignment with the original thought, I suggest, is to consider whether a thought contains what is, or whether it regards what is not. We have the free will to experience both what is and what is not, and all experience is harvested. But what exactly is a harvest of what is not? Can there exist such a thing as experiential knowledge of what never did nor could exist?

Epistemology explores this question and correctly, in my interpretation, concludes that knowledge is inherently in accord with fact or reality. Our thoughts can include anything we imagine. I believe Ra is suggesting that we discern whether our focus concerns reality or illusion.

I believe that truly partaking in the original thought means expressing (in thought and in action) from the blue ray chakra, the first ray of radiation of self. The penetration of this center, Ra says, requires that which your people have in great paucity; that is, honesty. 48.7 Truth. Reality. What is. I Am, in the parlance of the new age and the old. This authentic expression, Ra says, involves self knowledge and the ability to open the self to the other-self without hesitation. This involves, shall we say, radiating that which is the essence or the heart. 17.30 Ultimately, partaking in the original thought means being the Creator: As the adept becomes a more and more consciously crystallized entity it gradually manifests more and more of that which it always has been since before time; that is, the One Infinite Creator. 75.23

This hypothesis helps me grasp Ra’s next question, In how many of your thoughts did the creation abide? 1.0 I think that here too Ra is asking whether we’re thinking about the real. If this seems like an abstract concept, consider that the polarity between that which is and that which is not is the crux of third density: Those which have chosen the service-to-[self] path have simply used the veiling process in order to potentiate that which is not. 85.9 Ra says also that the clearer recognition of that which is not is an armor of light of the Wanderer. 16.59

Was love contained? 1.0 continues this theme, I believe. Rather than attempting the somewhat nebulous evaluation of love, I find it instructive to look to the opposite of love. Are our thoughts of fear? Of repulsion? Of what we don’t want, no matter how slight the degree? Of what we prefer to ignore, avoid, reject? Or are we thinking about what we find pleasant, desirable, attractive? I imagine a magnet, with its decisive poles of attraction and repulsion.

Thought is creative — that is, thought creates. Are our thoughts potentiating what is, or manifesting what is not? There are no neutral thoughts. A Course in Miracles elaborates on this concept. For example, from Lesson 16 of the Workbook:

The idea for today is a beginning step in dispelling the belief that your thoughts have no effect. Everything you see is the result of your thoughts. There is no exception to this fact. Thoughts are not big or little; powerful or weak. They are merely true or false. Those that are true create their own likeness. Those that are false make theirs.

There is no more self-contradictory concept than that of idle thoughts. What gives rise to the perception of a whole world can hardly be called idle. W-pI.16.1–2

Hatonn said the same in the 1972 channeling referenced above: Each thought you have is important. It is important either in a negative or a positive sense. 3.1.1972

I believe Ra is emphasizing the importance of observing the stream of consciousness, being aware of our thoughts, and evaluating the reality of each thought.

Not of the Love or of the Light

Also omitted from the original and 2020 books: We are not those of the Love or of the Light. 1.1 This sentence was not restored in Book V and remained unprinted until the 2018 set ran it as We are not those of the Love [density] or of the Light [density]. P.25

I am not aware of any L/L Research comment on the decision to omit the line from the 5-book sets or to edit and footnote it in the 2018 publication P.25 and on the L/L Research website. As challenging as the statement may have been, Carla chose to proceed as channel for Ra. Why, then, remove or edit Ra’s statement? I think either route assumes the polar thinking that not being of the love or of the light must then mean ‘of the hate and of the darkness.’ But Ra’s vibration is higher, not lower.

Clearly We are not those of the Love or of the Light was challenging to Carla. I believe that was exactly Ra’s intention — see Why does Ra say ‘We are not those of the Love or of the Light’? for context and discussion of the editing decision.

Ra’s statement is an opportunity (à la the Way of Confusion) for Carla and anyone who is upset by it to turn away. Ra is offering a choice. Omitting or editing the line removes the free will of readers to be offended — the very reaction that Ra may be intentionally provoking.

As Q’uo is always reminding us, we are to consider the words and concepts that we offer to you today with your own personal discrimination. If there are any words or concepts that do not ring of truth to you at this time, please do not consider them necessary to keep. Set them aside. 04.22.23

The omission and edit reveals an underestimation of readers and a lack of trust that the material would resonate with the appropriate audience — and that those who wished to ignore would do so, perhaps aided by the catalyst of this statement. Would an editor who believes in readers’ intelligence and discernment feel the need for a disclaimer? Perhaps if he allows fear to override that trust, or if he values non-offensiveness more than the integrity of the material.

While I question the wisdom of editing Ra’s message, I believe it is the right of L/L Research to present the material as resonates with them. I think it is important to recognize the motivating beliefs, the choices that were made (and continue to be made), and the effects of those choices.

Because of Tobey Wheelock's extraordinary efforts to accurately record the channeled words and to transparently present the material (including by offering multiple versions of the text with meticulous documentation of the differences), we have the opportunity to discern for ourselves.

Necessary and nearly hopeless

Ra states that his very being is hopefully a poignant example of both the necessity and the near-hopelessness of attempting to teach. 1.10 What is Ra hoping that we’ll see in or learn from his example? How is Ra an example of the necessity of attempting to teach? Have you found your personal experience with learn/teaching to be necessary? To be nearly hopeless?

Distortion is optional

That’s worth repeating: Distortion is optional. Twice in Session 1, Ra suggests that we can see through distortions to comprehend truth here and now:

You move your body, your mind, and your spirit in somewhat eccentric patterns for you have not completely grasped the concept that you are part of the original thought. 1.0

all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time. This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. 1.7

Frequently expressed on Law of One forums are beliefs that we are bound to third-density distortions, that we are in a prison, that we must trudge through thousands of incarnations to achieve the slightest peace and contentment.

I don’t believe in that dark present, nor future. I don’t believe Ra is speaking of the hope that awaits us in a future density. Rather, I interpret Ra’s words as assuring us that we may continue experiencing our illusion of separation for as long as we wish, or we can recognize the true reality, right now.

Free will is absolute. We always have a choice. There is never only one version: Ra speaks of the hallmark of an Infinite Creator, variety. 54.7 Even when there are established paths, such as (debatably) service to self or other, they are merely options.

The Eracidni Murev Te dialogue offers this message all the more clearly, stating that even ultimate reunion with the Creator 081 is available now for the choosing. Ra is subtler, but the information is there:

Meanwhile the Creator lies within. In the north pole the crown is already upon the head and the entity is potentially a god. This energy is brought into being by the humble and trusting acceptance of this energy through meditation and contemplation of the self and of the Creator. 49.6

Because we identify solely or most strongly with our current expression, it feels like the only reality. In truth, though, You are existing at all levels simultaneously. 70.9 We are the Creator, and the choice is always ours. It is simply a matter of choosing our experience.

Only activity worth doing

Existential questions run in the blood of many a student of metaphysics. Since my teenage years, my thoughts have been captivated — and, at times, plagued — by life’s big questions. Near the close of the first session, Ra addresses one of those key ponderings:

indeed it is the only activity worth doing: to learn/teach or teach/learn. There is nothing else which is of aid in demonstrating the Original Thought except your very being… 1.10

This strikes me as an unusually definitive statement for Ra to make. Far more common, I think, is for Ra to warn against judgment, to affirm the worth of all experience, and to refrain from specific guidance on how to live our lives. And yet, here we have the only activity worth doing. 1.10 This deserves our careful attention! In this section I explore the concepts of teach/learning and the original thought to better understand Ra’s statement.

I am teacher, I am learner. We normally think of teaching and learning as two activities involving two (or more) people, but even from what Ra says in 1.10 alone, we can know that teach/learning need not require others:

Firstly, you must understand that the distinction between yourself and others is not visible to us. We do not consider that a separation exists between the consciousness-raising efforts of the distortion which you project as a personality and the distortion which you project as an other-personality. Thus, to learn is the same as to teach… 1.10

To serve one is to serve all. 1.10

Our greatest teacher is our own unmanifested self, 33.15 that is, the aspects of our being that we are not yet expressing. We are each our own teacher and our own student. The thoughts of an entity, its feelings or emotions, and least of all its behavior are the signposts for the teaching/learning of self by self. 42.11 We each have all the resources we need to teach/learn ourself. And in the ultimate sense, since we are all one being, what we each learn and teach is simultaneously learned and taught by the all. A Course in Miracles offers many related ideas, as shared in the Reddit group study of this session.

A famous idea attributable to many sources (apparently not the Tao Te Ching) promises that When the student is ready the teacher will appear. I once imagined this meant that a wise person, or at least a wise book or some other external source, would appear in my life. Others have expressed to me their yearnings to share what they know (and often also their frustration at not having any family or friends with whom they can talk about the ideas closest to the heart). While the quickest way to learn is to deal with other selves, 19.13 Ra clearly states that nothing external is required. I am the teacher and I am the learner.

What is it that we are teaching and learning? For one, teach/learning means sorting out distortions. At multiple points in this session alone, Ra emphasizes the importance of discerning and removing distortions:

you have a need for the diversity of experiences in channeling which go with a more intensive, or as you might call it, advanced approach to the system of studying the patterns of the illusions of your body, your mind, and your spirit, which you call seeking the truth. 1.0

we then felt the great responsibility of staying in the capacity of removing the distortions. 1.1

This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. 1.7

to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make. We can speak no more valiantly of your desire to serve. 1.10

We’re also learning that all is One, an idea that can be briefly stated yet contains lifetimes of learning and ever more refined application:

All things, all of life, all of the creation is part of one original thought. 1.0

We are those who are of the Law of One. In our vibration the polarities are harmonized, the complexities are simplified, and the paradoxes have their solution. We are one. That is our nature and our purpose. 1.1

In truth there is no right or wrong. There is no polarity for all will be, as you would say, reconciled at some point in your dance through the mind/body/spirit complex which you amuse yourself by distorting in various ways at this time…. You are every thing, every being, every emotion, every event, every situation. You are unity. You are infinity. You are love/light, light/love. You are. This is the Law of One. 1.7

We are learning the original thought, especially our unique vibration of the original thought. We expand our experience of that unique vibration by removing the distortions that veil it. It is for this reason that Ra says, There is nothing else which is of aid in demonstrating the Original Thought except your very being. 1.10 It is our true being, our blue ray expression, that demonstrates this essence:

You are dancing thoughts. You move your body, your mind, and your spirit in somewhat eccentric patterns for you have not completely grasped the concept that you are part of the original thought. 1.0

We are learning to live these truths. We are learning to sing our chord in the cosmic harmony, to dance our steps in the cosmic ballroom. In doing so, we teach. And in teaching, we learn. We are learning to teach what we are learning:

to learn is the same as to teach unless you are not teaching what you are learning, in which case you have done you/they little or no good. This understanding should be pondered by your mind/body/spirit complex, as it is a distortion which plays a part in your experiences at this nexus. 1.10

What does it mean to teach what we are learning, and why is this critical? We are learning what is. We have the free will to play with what is not, and this has a (temporary) purpose too. 85.9–11 Its value is in helping us see what we are not, since from this we can learn what we are. Knowledge of falsity is a contradiction in terms. An illusion can only be recognized as such:

The moonlight, then, offers either a true picture seen in shadow or chimera and falsity. The power of falsity is deep as is the power to discern truth from shadow. The shadow of hidden things is an infinite depth in which is stored the power of the One Infinite Creator. The adept, then, is working with the power of hidden things illuminated by that which can be false or true. To embrace falsity, to know it, and to seek it, and to use it gives a power that is most great. 80.8

Teaching what we are learning is a matter of authenticity, honesty, integrity. Additionally, there is a responsibility, an honor/duty, a karmic effect that accompanies learning:

Without demonstrating the fruits of such learn/teaching the life span became greatly reduced, for the ways of honor/duty were not being accepted. 22.5

those whose life does not equal their work may find some difficulty in absorbing the energy of intelligent infinity and thus become quite distorted in such a way as to cause disharmony in themselves and others… 4.14

One item which may be of interest is that a healer asking to learn must take the distortion understood as responsibility for that ask/receiving. This is an honor/duty which must be carefully considered in free will before the asking. 4.20

Each responsibility is an honor; each honor, a responsibility. 16.42

[Hatonn:] Further, it is likely that you as your great Self, hope that in this incarnational experience you not only find transparency in the illusion and begin to read the daily experience, but also you begin to act in accordance with your understanding. Please understand, the fruits of the work of the seeker are secondary to the original intention of grasping the truth, however, one who seeks and begins to find the truth then finds that unless that which is learned is now manifested, further learning will be slow, and the lessons will seem to repeat themselves. 4.24.1984

Teaching what is means demonstrating truth. The more we see, the more we are responsible for. If we ignore our lessons we will experience an increase in negative catalyst. The goal is to teach what we have learned, to demonstrate what is true:

The catalyst of experience works in order for the learn/teachings of this density to occur. However, if there is seen in the being a response, even if it is simply observed, the entity is still using the catalyst for learn/teaching. The end result is that the catalyst is no longer needed. Thus this density is no longer needed. This is not indifference or objectivity but a finely tuned compassion and love which sees all things as love. This seeing elicits no response due to catalytic reactions. Thus the entity is now able to become co-Creator of experiential occurrences. This is the truer balance. 42.2

And so we return to Ra’s statement of the only activity worth doing: to learn/teach or teach/learn, 1.10 the definitiveness of which no longer seems surprising. Every moment, every thought and action, is an opportunity to learn and an opportunity to teach. Are we teach/learning what is, or are we moving in somewhat eccentric patterns? 1.0 There are no mistakes, but there is another option: This distortion is not in any case necessary. It is chosen by each of you as an alternative to understanding the complete unity of thought which binds all things. 1.7