Welcome, listeners. This is Gary Bean welcoming you to the L/L Research Podcast, In the Now, Episode Number 73. L/L Research is a nonprofit organization that is dedicated to freely sharing spiritually oriented information and fostering community. Towards this end, we have two websites: the archive website, llresearch.org, and the community website, Bring4th.org.

During each of our podcasts, we generally try to respond to questions sent from spiritual seekers like you. Our panel consists of the inestimable Jim McCarty, Austin Bridges, and myself. Each of us is a devoted student of the Law of One and worthy of other positive adjectives, I’m sure. Your questions allow us to explore the Law of One and related matters of metaphysical interest. We hope only to offer a resource that enhances your own seeking process.

So, please know that our replies are not the final word on these subjects. We ask each who listens to exercise their own discernment and to be sensitive to their own resonance in determining what is true for them. If you’d like to submit a question for the show, please do so. Our humble podcast runs on your questions. You may either send us an email to [email protected] or go to llresearch.org/podcast for further instructions.

Again, I’m Gary Bean. We are starting a new episode of our bi-weekly-somewhat podcast, In the Now. Jim McCarty, Austin Bridges, are you guys ready for this podcast?

Yes, indeed.

I think I am.

All right. We have a very simple, but very good question. This question is one that in all my years of working with the Law of One, I have run countless keyword searches and combinations thereof, but I don’t think I’ve ever gone hunting for this one. It’s so simple and it’s so fundamental that one would think I would have had to have searched it before, but I haven’t. And so, I’m very grateful to Juan for sending in this question because it sent me down a road I hadn’t been before, which was very enlightening.

And the question is simple. As I mentioned, it goes, “What does it mean to be and not do?” There was a particular quote that inspired Juan to send in this question.

I’m tired of hearing my own voice. Jim, do you have the quote in front of you?

No, I don’t.

How about Austin?

I could in like 5 seconds.

Yeah, I’ve got in front of me. I’d like to hear one of you guys.

Okay, one second. And as I’m pulling it up, to Juan’s credit, I did shorten and simplify his actual question for the sake of discussions. What he sent in was a little bit more specific than this, but I think that in this discussion it will get covered, hopefully.

I actually found some discrepancies in the date of the quote, which was supposedly from March 25, 2001, but might be somewhere else in March 2001. So, you can look for it in there. It goes:

“You are here as awakened beings to be, not to do. This is a terrifically difficult concept to receive within the context of incarnated life because life as you know it, as you experience it, as the culture teaches you to experience it, is about doing. You were taught to value yourself as a worker, as a producer, as an accomplisher of deeds. They may be many different kinds of deeds, but at the next gathering to which you go, you will be asked not, ‘Who are you?’ but, ‘What do you do?’ And you will be valued by many people according to how that answer goes.

And yet we say to you that you are not here primarily as a doer, but as an essence. In the energetic or metaphysical sense, each of you is a field of energy. Now this energy is not simple. Each of you has, as a core vibration, the one great original Thought. Each of you, at the core, is the Creator. Indeed, the basic goal of evolution is to come once again into full vibratory congruency with the one original Thought that is the Logos. This Logos could be described as love, and yet that word has been so sullied by being used for different kinds of passion and emotion and devotion that it is inadequate at heart to express the fullness of that quality that is creative and divine love.”

Thank you very much. So, my first and most important question for you guys is, would you ever go to a party and ask someone who they are?

No, because I think that would probably throw people off.

Yeah, that would be kind of weird for me. I would love to actually do it sometime—meet a random person and ask them, “Who are you?”

Typically, that means asking, “What is your name?” Then, they’d be like, “Hi, I’m John.” And then you can ask, “Okay, who are you?”

“No, I mean, who are you?” I think we put the emphasis on “are.”

Actually, my first question to help us collectively explore Juan’s question is can you guys speak to what being is, in any sense? I guess I should name you entities. How about Jim?

Well, I believe that being is, for each of us, is the closest approximation that we can make towards allowing the Creator to become manifested in our life experience. We’re always seeking in some way to open ourselves to more of an expression of the infinite nature of the Creator’s love and light. I think that would be my way of looking at what being is, and why we might want to focus on it more than we do, doing. Because doing seems to be the way things are—a default setting.

It’s one way to describe America, especially in the Western world.

Austin, what do you think about being?

It’s difficult for me to separate it individually from doing because it’s sort of this contrast that helps me understand the two, especially when they’re opposed to each other like Qu’o does here. You do one, but not the other. So, I don’t really have a concept of just being that I can talk about without the full question of what it means to do one but not the other.

Do you want me to go down that road?

I guess.

All right. I think that framing things in this way can be confusing, but I think there’s a purpose for why Qu’o and many other spiritual teachings talk about being, instead of doing. Even though I don’t think that if you were looking at somebody who was actually being, it would seem like they were just doing nothing. I think from an outside perspective, a person who is being isn’t just sitting around and it doesn’t look like they’re doing nothing. I think that can sometimes be a hurdle to get past in thinking about these things. So, I generally understand the statement more as a relationship to ourselves and how we relate to our essence, as Qu’o had put it.

I understand the concept of being not to imply that there’s this lack of activity or that there is no doing, but rather as the recognition that what we are doing is inseparable from who we are. The more that we come to know ourselves and accept ourselves, the typical motivations and distortions around what we are doing fall away, and what we become is a more genuine expression of ourselves. So, we don’t necessarily stop doing. Our bodies don’t stop moving, and we don’t stop acting in service. But that action in service is more of a reflection of our true selves that we have come to know and have come to relate to in that core vibration that Qu’o is talking about in that quote.

I think that is essentially what being means in this context—that it is not necessarily a state that we are in, but it’s the relationship to ourselves and how that informs how we act.

Relationship to ourselves. Yeah. Both of you hit on a thread that was occurring to me as well. Like Jim was describing, being is the manifestation of the Creator in your life. And Austin described it as a genuine expression of the true self—essentially genuine, true, and the Creator. There’s a certain authenticity one associates with being. One might say that the being is the abode of the true identity of the self.

I did a keyword search on beingness in the Law of One with this in mind and I began to see that beingness—as Ra uses it—is rather synonymous with existence. In philosophy, the study of being would be ontology, which I’m going to award myself some bonus points for using that big word today. So, being as existence seems to make sense in the Law of One. I’ll quote a few choice nuggets regarding that.

Ra says that the social grouping has a social beingness. They say that the next quantum or octave of beingness—the next octave beyond our own—has a tangible–I don’t know if that’s the word–an existence. I’m not going to try to mine that word any further. Ra says—when speaking of the archetypes—that the archetypal mind “contains the material which it pleased the Logos to offer as refinements to the great cosmic beingness.”

They are talking about the Men in Black, which shed some light on this question. They say that “the Men in Black are a thought-form type of entity which have some beingness to their make-up.” So, substance is another word that comes to mind. Men in Black have some existence, some substance, some tangibility or form, and something that can be identified that is real on their particular level, if that makes sense.

Ra talks about mystics in Western literature where you’ll hear a phrase called “the ground of being,” which implies that if you dig down deep enough, you get to the very basement level and the foundation—the I-can’t-go-any-deeper-because-I’ve-reached-the-bottom-or-the-beginning ground of being. I think this is what Ra is speaking of in #27.7 when they say:

“There is no difference, potential or kinetic, in unity. The basic rhythms of intelligent infinity are totally without distortion of any kind. The rhythms are clothed in mystery, for they are being itself. From this undistorted unity, however, appears a potential in relation to intelligent energy.”

“For they are being itself,” is what Ra says of the intelligent Infinity before it becomes potential or kinetic and before it manifests into the many—before there’s any polarity or universes or octaves. That is original, pure, and undistorted being, which is also synonymous with mystery because no amount of conception or insight or experience penetrates deeper than that.

Does being arise out of something? Being ultimately is only one thing, so there’s nothing against which to compare it or contrast it. So how do you know being? It is just being “clothed in mystery.”

I started contemplating this question and thought that being must be stillness, because if doing is some kind of activity, then doing is motion. And being must be being still–nonmovement. Maybe it could even be the void, the witness, or that seeming empty spaciousness out of which the manifest world arises.

However, Ra does link vibration with being, too. They say:

“Spiritual mass is that which begins to attract the out-moving and ongoing vibratory oscillations of beingness into the gravity.”

Furthermore, Ra says the following about working with the energy centers:

“While it is the primary priority to activate or unblock each energy center, it is also a primary priority at that point to begin to refine the balances between the energies so that each tone of the chord of total vibratory beingness resonates in clarity, tune, and harmony with each other energy.”

So, we have existence as beingness, and we also have one’s vibratory state. One learns in the Ra material that all is vibration. The first, second, and third distortion were born somewhere in the cosmic beginning. Then when the One becomes many, vibration begins and the photon is the first being that comes into that manifestation. Everything in the universe is in motion and is in this vibration. This vibration is beingness, too.

But the Confederation draws a distinction between doing and being and between existing and our activities. Austin was heading down this road. Is there any way we can further delineate why doing is this different category from being. Austin, got any ideas?

Yeah, I stopped myself before going fully down that road. Thankfully, I think that my conceptualization will maybe be a little bit different from both of yours because I was talking about this idea of being and doing where being involves a relationship to the self, rather than a state of activity that we are in. You were basically talking about being as this primal thing in the Cosmos or something that is maybe less than primal, but within those first three distortions.

Anyways, Qu’o said in the quote that Juan shared:

“Each of you has as a core vibration, the one original thought. Each of you at the core is the Creator. Indeed, the basic goal of evolution is to come once again into full vibratory congruency with the one original thought that is the Logos. This Logos could be described as love.”

Ra also says:

“The heart of the discipline of the personality is threefold. One, know yourself. Two, accept yourself. Three, become the Creator.”

That is a succinct way of talking about the path of evolution that Qu’o is talking about. The basic goal of evolution, as they say. So, I imagine that becoming the Creator isn’t a lack of activity. So, if we think about doing as activity, then I don’t think that this necessarily holds up. Imagine the greatest service-oriented people that you can think of, and maybe some of them sat around and did basically nothing. But most of them, I think, dedicated themselves to a life of active service.

Further on in that quote, Ra says that the third step, which is “Become the Creator,” is that step—when accomplished—renders one the most humble servant of all, transparent in personality and completely able to know and accept other-selves. And so, doing here, I don’t think it is again, this lack of activity. But, a relationship to what we are doing and where it is coming from.

Doing, I think, is sort of this compensation for this lack of understanding ourselves and understanding the world around us. I think that’s what they’re referring to when doing. And it is this lack of those first two steps that Ra talks about, knowing the self and accepting the self. If we don’t fully know our motivations for what we’re doing, I think we make a lot of unconscious decisions about what we do. And even if there are things that we do in service, we’re motivated by something that is hidden to ourselves, and that we haven’t fully explored yet. I think that relationship to ourselves in this unknown, unaccepted aspect, is what Qu’o and other spiritual teachers talk about when they talk about doing rather than being.

Once we question our motivations and try to know ourselves and what we’re doing, it doesn’t mean that we stop trying to act in service. But when you are acting and it seems like there’s an emotional charge behind it, or if there is something behind it that feels hidden to you, or if you aren’t sure why you’re doing what you’re doing, but you feel a compulsion to do it, I think that going down that path and asking ourselves, “why are we doing this? Where is this coming from?” is the first step of knowing ourselves. And in doing so, we will discover the distortions that are informing what we do. These distortions, through balancing or through simple shedding awareness and love on them, will fall away. And then we will come into congruency with that core basic vibration that Qu’o was talking about. Our activity can then be a product of being, rather than what they would call doing.

So I essentially view doing as a relationship to what we are doing as an activity.

Before I ask Jim, I just want to recap for a second: Doing on the level that the Confederation is describing as distinct from being, is the doing that arises out of lack of self-understanding.

Yeah. Essentially, self-understanding is naturally the path of spiritual evolution.

And deep, self-understanding necessarily yields deeper conscious beingness merging into the being, and then becoming consciously present of beingness. Action that arises out of that understanding doesn’t necessarily move into the category of doing.

Right. Yeah, I think that doing is sort of a stand in for distorted doing, I guess. Yeah.

I love the word “compensation” that you used earlier, too.

Jim, how about you on this topic of doingness?

Well, I think that it’s necessary for us to do things in order to be spiritual seekers because we have energy centers that have various blockages that we programed in order to learn a lesson that is commensurate with the energy center. We go through certain behaviors and thoughts and attempt to remove the blockages so that the intelligent energy, or the beingness of the Creator, can flow through us more easily. Then, we can raise the level of our—well, shall we call it, understanding—or our grasp of our spiritual nature higher and higher in the energy centers. This is the way that we all progress, and we hope that by what we do in an informed way, that we will be able to eventually become one with the Creator once again. Because that is our great goal.

But I think there’s an irony involved here, too. Because if you look at the basic reason for the creation, it’s for the Creator to find or discover more ways of knowing itself—more ways, more intense ways, and more variety.

Let’s look at what Austin said about “know yourself, accept yourself, and become the Creator.” Well, it can be difficult knowing yourself. This knowledge doesn’t come easily and you have got to work at it and do a lot of different things, some of which are successful while some are failures. It’s trial and error. Accepting yourself is probably even more difficult.

So, there’s a lot of things that can cause us to stumble along the way. But if you look at it in the overall sense of giving the Creator more ways of knowing itself, we’re providing the Creator a lot more experience in our failures than in our successes because we usually have more failures in order to get to success. We don’t succeed right away. We live in a veil of forgetting, and it takes a lot of work to try to remove some of that veil by the way we perceive ourselves, the way we perceive the purpose of our lives, and how we pursue that purpose.

If you take this even further and look at negatively-oriented entities, they have a lot of different types of experiences that are quite intense and of great variety. Plus, when they get to mid-sixth density, they have to switch their polarity and become positive. So, they are on both sides. I think they might provide the most experience for the Creator to know itself.

So, in summary, I would suggest to every sincere seeker of truth to not judge yourself on how well or poorly you’re doing because no matter what you do, you’re aiding the Creator in knowing itself, and moving yourself further along the evolutionary path.

That ruined my next question. I was going to ask, should the seeker judge themselves on the evolutionary path? It’s clearly no. Well said.

So, regarding the irony you were speaking to, that was really intriguing. Are you saying that doing is kind of – what’s the word I’m looking for?

Paradoxical?

Yes, thank you. I was contradictory to the word I was coming up with. Paradoxical, in that, to do or to be so outwardly focused on the separate identity that is constantly seeking and searching and yearning and attempting to learn, is seemingly a movement away from being. But at the same time, there’s this underlying design of the universe that created these conditions that would cause this doing that ultimately yields this fruit for the Creator and for the self.

Right. If you look at the entities that existed before the veil, they were imbued with a great deal more being than are we after the veil. They knew right away and with no doubt whatsoever that they were the Creator. Everyone was the Creator. But it took them forever to get through third density, which is our goal as third density beings. However, they provided a lot of experience, I’m sure, by repeating third density time and time again.

So, I think all of creation and everything that happens in it is a paradox. Carla always said when you run into paradox, you know you’re in some real good spiritual meat because that seems to be the nature of the creation. Ra at the sixth-density level says well, we have the paradoxes resolved. We’re not going to tell you the secrets, but eventually you’re going to get there. And they give us hints and clues as to how we can do that here.

So, yeah, I think that is the reason why Ra says there are no mistakes. Everything helps the Creator to know itself. Everything helps us to know ourselves as unique and as the Creator as well.

That’s why I concur with everything you’ve said. But it’s also why I disagree with the opening sentence in the quoted quote from Qu’o that says, “You are here as awakened beings to be, not to do.” I could refine that to say that I think that is reflected a little bit more accurately about the purpose of what we’re here to do and how being, of course, is the goal and the primary service and the, as I said earlier, the abode of identity. But we are here to do, also.

I think that it’s a statement that isn’t necessarily intended to reveal this grand truth about what we’re doing here. But instead, it makes us think about what we’re doing, and makes us think about our actions and how we relate to ourselves. Like I was saying, I think the statement “You are here to be, not to do,” is asking us to question what makes us act and to help us understand ourselves so that we can relate to that core vibration more than the other distortions that are informing our actions.

Indeed, that makes good sense. Regarding being as true identity, I’ve got a few more nuggets to insert here. Ra says that the violet-ray beingness is far more indicative of true self. They also talk about the green-ray transfer that happens in sexual energy transfer and the joy that is a byproduct of that, which Ra calls “the spiritual or metaphysical nature which exists in intelligent energy.” They say that this is “a great aid to comprehension of a truer nature of beingness.” And they talk about the intuition as a function which is “more in contact or in tune with the total beingness complex.” And elsewhere they talk about the violet-ray being this as well.

So, Austin began his previous reply by talking about the level of the cosmic being. Ra even says the phrase “the beingness of the Creator” once. And, of course, that is our true identity and our deepest beingness. But beings occupy a whole hierarchy of levels of beings and orders of beings and magnitudes of beings, and I’m sure that’s very true within the mind/body/spirit complex itself. I think it is the violet-ray itself that is the measure, the meter, and the readout where our beingness all comes together.

Now to shift back over to doing and to service, Ra says that it is the blue ray where we begin first to communicate our beingness. In fact, they said:

“The blue-ray seats the learning/teachings of the spirit in each density within the mind/body complex, animating the whole, communicating to others this entirety of beingness.”

So that’s moving more into the direction of what I think Jim and Austin are describing: deep in contact with the truer-self yields a service that is doing an activity that is not so much doing, but is being manifesting itself. Ra even describes this way that being is manifested—or translated even, I guess you could say—as service. They talk about the relationship between the parent and the child, and they say:

“The appropriate teach/learning device of parent to child is the open-hearted beingness of the parent and the total acceptance of the beingness of the child.”

Ra also describes the study of being and the relationship between being and working, and talks about doing the work of the incarnation. They talk about the magical Banishing Ritual of the Lesser Pentagram that Jim, Carla, and Don used. I’m trying to paraphrase and I’m not going to succeed, so I’m just going to read the quote.

They say:

“The efficacy of this ritual is only beginning to be, shall we say, at the lower limits of the truly magical. In doing the working those aspiring to adept hood have done the equivalent of beginning the schoolwork, many grades ahead. For the intelligent student this is not to be discouraged; rather, to be encouraged is the homework, the reading, the writing, the arithmetic, as you might metaphorically call the elementary steps towards the study of being. It is the being that informs the working, not the working that informs the being.”

So, in those quotes we see more of how being is a truer expression of the self, and manifests and informs whatever one may be doing in the moment.

Do you guys think that there’s anything that precludes contact with one’s own being? Jim, what do you think?

Ignorance, not aware that it’s there, not becoming consciously aware of your spiritual journey, it’s like leaving a whole reservoir of tools and techniques unnoticed. And just going about your daily business thinking that, well, let’s see if I can make the insurance payment and then the house payment, I’m in good shape for the month. And, yeah, all is well.

Austin, how about you?

To address what Jim just said really quickly, I think that most people listening to this, as well as us here, identify as spiritual seekers, and have what I would call, “the flame of spiritual seeking,” that really motivates them. I don’t think that identification is exactly necessary for what Jim was talking about.

That there might be people who don’t call themselves spiritual but are in different terms aware of their spiritual journey and aware of that true essence of being. Their activities and work come from that. But in the sense of what might preclude, how did you phrase it?

What would preclude contact with or awareness of one’s own being?

I think any sort of distortion that you would find in the lower energy centers would preclude that. I think to single something out that is along the lines of what we’re talking about—especially in our society since Qu’o said that our society over emphasizes what we do versus who we are—I would say social identity and attachment to social identity can be a big blockage and hurdle to getting to that source of true beingness versus false doingness.

Let’s take Quo’s example of people asking you what you do for a living. There are probably a lot of people in our society that do something for a living that they have no passion for but that they identify strongly with because it’s maybe a prestigious thing, or it provides a sense of financial security, or it helps them exist in this social world that is mostly illusory. Their passion is not awakened in what they’re doing, but they identify heavily with it and other types of social identities. You could say that having strong tribal identities, or having a strong isolationist or protectionist view of your social circles or your tribes would extend to inform what you do. And it comes from distortions in your lower energy centers, rather than the awakening to that core of being of who you really are. So, those are some big ones that I think.

In replying first to Jim, I concur that, essentially, ignorance is at the root of it. As Ra says, and I’m paraphrasing, the source of all distortion is the limitation of the point of view. How verbatim am I on that one, Jim? Am I close?

Really close.

I thought so. It’s just a couple of words off maybe. Syntax is off a little bit. So, ignorance is essentially at the root of what obscures being from our sight. And Austin, I’m so glad you said lower energy centers because I think that’s key. A really good way to illustrate and frame and understand being versus doing—because I think the doing activity that the Confederation is describing as that which is opaque to being—are those sorts of activities that are centered in the lower three chakras. Not to say that activity out of those chakras is necessarily separating. It’s just that when the identity of the self is located, there it is residing in the first three chakras. Then the self is one who is doing, one who is valuing and measuring and finding the identity within the activities of the lower three chakras, as Austin was describing about the social identity and the tribal identity or the work identity.

So in that frame of mind, when the entity’s locus of awareness is in the orange-ray and the yellow-ray and the red to some extent, then they are person A because they work at this particular job, or they are worthy because they have achieved this particular thing, or they are this person because they’ve done this thing, or they’re not worthy because they’ve failed in this way or so forth. There’s all these metrics of evaluation, and of finding out who I am by saying what I do or what I did not do.

Whereas being itself is existence and is worth in and of itself. It needs to do nothing. It needs to prove nothing. It needs to gain nothing. It needs to go nowhere. It can’t be lost. Contact with it can only be deepened. And in that beingness is a self which is infinitely worthy because that self is the Creator itself. Besides, the measurement of worth are illusory constructs, just as are those energies that we’re describing. The lower three chakras are these constructs that we impose over our beings, or the personality shell, as the Confederation describes it. Much of which just vanishes when we transition through the gateway of death, and we’re left with a pure distillation of who we actually are. But most of us here on Earth are attached to and identified with these constructs that obscure the being from us.

So, in following the model of the chakras, the next ray that begins to transcend those chakras is the heart. And the heart must be, of course, the central portal to being itself. Simple love, acceptance, kindness, surrender, and so forth. But the chakras, as with so much, just present this great framework on which to situate and hinge any sort of metaphysical discussion. I had some further thoughts.

So how about being as a service? I know this has been kind of touched upon in different threads that we’ve been weaving together here. But can you guys speak more directly to what being as service means, or how one serves from the platform at a standpoint or the consciousness of being.

Austin, how about you?

You just do it. I mean, that’s a difficult question to address because it is just another statement on top of what we’ve already said. I really think that the activity of service is just naturally manifested through your beingness. You might find that prior to your awakening to your beingness, you may have been serving or attempting to serve in certain ways that weren’t congruent with the core of who you are. And then after awakening to that, you realize that there is a deeper service that you could perform.

I think it’s unique to every individual, but it is, in my view, something that I think would seem to come naturally, or something that you have found deep within yourself. It’s not something that you necessarily have to feign or pretend to be enthusiastic about. I think, especially for me, some types of service I feel compelled to do. I feel compelled, and I feel guilty when I don’t do them because it doesn’t light the flame inside of me. And then some types of things might not be considered service to everybody.

But I think in the Confederation’s definition of expressing the love of the Creator, it is truly known to the self. It is a service, in a sense, and it does light that passion inside of me. So, I think that might be the best way of understanding service in the context of beingness. It is something that you feel is right. Once you come to know yourself, you can feel that vibration, that core vibration that Qu’o was talking about. And just know the harmonious activities that go along with it; that when you’re doing them, it strikes a harmonious chord rather than a dissonant chord.

I like that you said that it can’t be feigned. I mean, certainly in this illusion, intentions can be cloaked and deception is readily available. But beingness at that level is not something that’s manufactured because it’s deeper than what I’m looking for. Any sort of personal use of the will could manufacture or construct the semblance of being. It arises from within, and, as Ra says, the being informs the working, not the working informing the being.

And Jim, I want to know your thoughts, but I want to insert one more. I think that where one feels most alive, like you said, and when one feels lit with that flame, is a good gauge for where one is moving into their being, I would think. Though at the same time, and I know you’ve spoken to this too, sacrifice is part of the positive path. So just because something is uncomfortable or discomfortable, or you don’t really want to do it, it doesn’t mean that it’s inimical to being or antagonistic to being, or just the self not being the self.

That said, just my thoughts. Jim, what do you think about serving from the level of being?

Well, I think it becomes more organic and more natural. We get into the flow of things if we can clear our energy centers enough so that the being, or the intelligent energy the Creator, can flow through. That we are really giving over our life to love and light. Joe Goldsmith says there’s a concept called, “divine Grace.” That when you have invited the Creator to come into your life enough, the beingness, in other words, that there is this divine Grace that tends to go out before you, and to make the crooked places straight. You just feel in the flow and what needs to be done, gets done because it’s just a part of you. Now, you don’t have to wonder, do the pros and cons. I’ll show you this. You just do what is in front of you because, it’s in front of you.

Beautifully said. I think, as with so many core spiritual concepts, as you ascend the mountain, they all start to converge and become more and more like each other. And I think that’s true with being and faith as well. They become very congruent and interlinked and part of each other, until they merge into one single point service from being.

This is one of the core messages of the Confederation; that our most powerful and profound service is not the service of doing anything in particular in the world, though that is of consequence. And that matters, too. But on a deeper level, on a more fundamental and primary level, our greatest service is of being. And that is an effortless radiation from us. It’s, whether you call it our violet-ray nature or not, it’s a reflection of our own conscious contact with the Creator.

And that energy and beingness radiates outward from us before we lift a finger; before we say a word; before we do anything in particular in this world. It’s constantly emitting from us, in a way we can’t take credit for it. And specifically, Ra says in #17.2:

“it is impossible to help another being directly. It is only possible to make catalyst available in whatever form—the most important being the radiation of realization of oneness with the Creator, from the self, less important being information such as we share with you.”

I love that. And that theme is repeated throughout Ra’s words or the Confederation, and really throughout any good mystical teaching.

So, I have a quote that I’ll wrap it up with, also from Ra. And of course, if you guys have anything you’d like to say after that, by all means. But at this point, did you want to say anything more, knowing that we’re about to wrap up?

I’ve got a story that I’ll share after you read the quote.

Okay. Jim, am I ready to go?

Ready to go.

I got a clearance. All right. Ra talks about how channeling context can become detuned by an emphasis on seeking specific information versus timeless philosophy and spiritual principles.

Ra says in #26.36:

“This is why we iterate quite often, when asked for specific information, that it pales to insignificance, just as the grass withers and dies while the love and the light of the One Infinite Creator redounds to the very infinite realms of creation forever and ever, creating and creating itself in perpetuity.

Why then be concerned with the grass that blooms, withers and dies in its season only to grow once again due to the infinite love and light of the One Creator? This is the message we bring. Each entity is only superficially that which blooms and dies. In the deeper sense there is no end to beingness.”

And the final words I’d like to tack on to beingness include presence, essence, and I am.

How about your story, Austin?

To finish this off, I have an example of what I think is a simple manifestation of beingness, and how it can have a profound effect on the people around you. This story is from a music festival that I recently went to. I was working at the music festival, which required me to go back and forth through a particular entrance many times throughout the day. And as with all entrances at any sort of event music festivals, there were security guards that would check wristbands, and then make sure that you weren’t carrying anything that you weren’t supposed to be carrying. And I was also camping very close to this entrance too.

Throughout the entire four-day music festival, there was the same woman that was there from sun up to sundown, and beyond that before sun up to beyond sundown who never didn’t have a smile on her face. She was so jovial and kind, and no matter who passed by, she had some kind words to say. And despite the fact that I was passing through maybe 25 to 50 times a day, she always had something nice to say to me. And she would always give me a huge smile, and words of encouragement, because by the end it got really difficult.

And we were talking to her about this and just how much we enjoyed her, and somebody asked her why she does it and how she does it. And she said, “I can’t help it. It’s just who I am.” It was this amazing example because she’s doing something that I think 99.99% of the world would consider one of the most boring jobs in the world, which is sitting there and checking wristbands. And for most people who have experienced an event like that, most people who have that job seem to be rather surly. And for me, at least, they give a really sour beginning to whenever I enter an event.

Everybody that passed by, no matter what they were like before they went through the gates, they came through with a huge smile on their face. I feel like it really rippled throughout the entire event where this one woman sort of infected everybody with her beingness, and created this incredibly loving weekend. Like she said, she couldn’t help it. It’s just who she was.

Okay. That was an awesome story. It illustrates drawing connections to the Law of One because the quote I read earlier said, “joy is an experience of a truer nature, of beingness.” And I think the more truly that we connect with being, the more that joy itself is part of our identity and must necessarily radiate outwards, and be part of our life, as it was with this person. And Ra even describes how in contact with the indigo-ray, when the veil is lifted, that service-to-others becomes automatic.

And this is, I think, an example of that. When those lower three energy centers stop impeding the energy and become transparent, and when the personality shell itself becomes transparent, we start to see that what’s inside of each of us is the sun. And instead of “groping in the moonlight,” as Ra describes it, or of grasping an aversion and trying to find identity in this pale lit atmosphere outside, we discover that the sun has been within us all along. And that self-luminous of itself must shine. This also speaks to the nature of the way that self-work is world work.

Because the more that we can open our hearts and love and forgive and allow that personality to become transparent, the more that we shine, the more we smile for people, the more that joy lightens this planetary vibration.

You guys have any thoughts to offer?

Gandhi said that, “We must become the change that we wish to see in the world.”

Just one small addition to the story that I said that I forgot. By day three, we asked her what her name was and it was Angel. That was the name that she was given as a child. We were like, of course it is.

But I liked what you just said, Gary. The sun is inside you. And also point out the radiating nature of service-to-others, which is I think what that is to recognize that sun has been inside you. You then become transparent, and it shines through you.

Right. And it’s not an activity you do per se. It’s self-luminous. It’s shining on its own right now. And then we humans become transparent to it, or empty vessels for it, or instruments for it.

Yeah. Ra and the Confederation used that word a lot, I think. “Transparent.” And “becoming transparent.”

It’s a beautiful thing. It is. And that was a beautiful quote from Gandhi as well.

Well, Jim, do you want to bring us home?

All right. Well, folks, it has been such a pleasure and an honor to be here with you again. We know we’ve been kind of slacking here. We have so much work to do in the office. Has been beautiful work. Been so grateful to do the work.

We want now to turn more attention back to our In the Now Podcast, to you. To sharing a little bit of love and light with you because we can feel your love and light out there. We know you love us. We love you. Keep on keeping on. You’re on the right path.

You’ve been listening to L/L Research’s bi-weekly or a tri-weekly podcast, sometimes monthly, sometimes longer. If you’ve enjoyed the show, please visit our websites: llresearch.org and Bring4th.org. Thank you so much for listening and supporting this podcast with your questions. And a special thank you to Juan for sending us that awesome question today.

If you’d like to hear us ramble about a particular topic, please read the instructions on our website: llresearch.org/podcast. We try to keep up by publishing new episodes on Wednesday afternoons. Have a wonderful indeterminate period of time and we’ll talk with you then.