Hello everybody and welcome. This is Austin Bridges welcoming you to the L/L Research Podcast, In the Now, Episode Number 66. L/L Research is a nonprofit organization 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 episode of this podcast, we respond to questions sent to L/L Research from spiritual seekers like you. Our panel consists of Gary Bean, Jim McCarty, and myself. Each of us is a devoted student of the Law of One. 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.

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

Again, I’m Austin and we are embarking on a brand new episode of L/L Research’s Podcast, In the Now, which we intended to be a biweekly podcast, but has been a bit irregular lately. Hopefully, we’ll get things back on schedule after the new year. We’ve been really busy, lots of traveling around and some sicknesses and colds and stuff, but we’re going to do our best to get back on a regular schedule soon.

Gary and Jim, are you with us and ready to go?

Yes, indeed.

That is true.

All right, so our primary question today comes from a Bring4th user named Barium who asks:

“In Voices of the Confederation, page 49, it is transmitted that the infringement of free will was never designed by our Creator. So, who designed it?”

For context, the passage that Barium refers to is as follows:

“Unfortunately, in some places, certain actions of one entity with respect to another cause an infringement that was never designed by our Creator. This results in a discrepancy in the plan of the creation and creates unfortunate situations as it has upon your planet. It is necessary for man on planet Earth to realize this and to individually correct his understanding of himself in order to bring himself back into alignment with the plan and design of our Creator.”

Barium continues:

“I do not mean any disrespect to the entities that communicated this. My point is, how come that something that was not designed may exist?”

And then he asks a couple of follow ups that I’m going to go ahead and read out too, because they’re so similar that I think we can just approach them all at the same time. Or if either of you wants to answer one at a time, feel free to do that. His follow ups are:

“If infringement was not supposed to be designed, and if a law is basically a body of rules/principles, why is there a Law of the Creation, i.e. the Law of One?”


“If we imagine an octave where there are no distortions, then there would be no infringement. But it seems that the opportunity for infringement derived more significantly due to other laws that are a result of distortions of this law. For example, the Laws of Love, the Laws of Light, and especially in our illusion, the Law of Free Will or the way of confusion. If distortions were designed to happen, wouldn’t infringement naturally occur?”

It’s a difficult question to ask and a difficult question to answer, I think. But Jim, how about you get the ball rolling? What do you think?

Well, I think that the One Creator had in mind to fashion a means by which it could know itself. What resulted was what we see as the One Infinite Creation with a lot of help from various Logoi that designed experiments that would utilize the basic architecture or blueprint that was in the Creator’s mind, and fashioned a series of densities through which various life forms would be able to move back into unity with the One Creator by making free-will choices.

I think that the free will aspect is what we can really look to for the reason why there might be things occurring that weren’t originally planned by the Creator. Just because these facets or features were not planned, doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t be here or there’s something wrong with them. One of those is people infringing upon other people’s free will. And that, I think, in part—he mentioned something about the Law of Love and Law of Light—has to do with how we interact with each other as we’re moving through this octave of being or octave of densities that will eventually take us back into union with the Creator.

But if you look throughout the Ra Contact, there were so many things that weren’t planned. Social memory complexes weren’t planned, but free will freely allows them. The heating effect of planet Earth and absorbing disharmonious energies was not planned. I think the most important feature is that Ra mentioned that our Logos, the major Logos of the Milky Way Galaxy, is what they called a protean entity that learns and grows upon a macro cosmic scale. So we have entities at that octave level of being that are learning and growing and exercising their own free will, and then we have kind of a fluid environment in which all of us are existing.

I think we need to make room in our own thinking for there to be surprises. As Ra said, there are no mistakes. However, there are surprises. So, we’re going to run into surprises a lot. I think that’s a good thing. If everything was exactly predestined, then it would be kind of boring for me. I was raised in the Presbyterian Church where that was the doctrine, predestination. I’m not disturbed when I see something that hasn’t been planned. I think, well, this is a very vital, fertile, growing universe and Creator. Even I’m doing the same thing in general. I think that this is something we should be glad about and not be too unhappy about.

Thank you. Gary, what are your thoughts?

When Austin and I touched base on this question just prior to launching the show, I mentioned that I was treating it all as one question. But then I forgot about the first part. So, I’m just offering a correction, I guess, to Austin about the two-part nature of my reply.

I wasn’t sure where to go with this notion that “an infringement that was never designed by our Creator” that appears in Voices of the Confederation. It seems like an inaccurate idea to say that something wasn’t designed because when reading that, I get the sense as if the speaker or the channeled source is saying that there was some aberration—like something has gone wrong, something has gone fundamentally against the design of the Creator. This thing wasn’t planned and it’s happened. And so, I was having trouble with that.

But I love where Jim went with it regarding what is planned and what is discovered spontaneously through the experiment itself. I don’t think Jim used the word experiment. I would just add a little nuance to what he already said, which was great. I want to say that the emergence of Infinity—It becoming aware and the first distortion of free will whereby It decides that it will, can and will know itself—was all a movement into the unknown. It might be said that Infinite Intelligence didn’t know what precisely would happen or how. I mean, it began its experiment and set its parameters, but even within those knowns of parameters, like Jim was saying, there’s endless infinite room for novelty, newness, and surprise.

Moving on to the question of infringement and distortion, it seems there is a conflation of distortion and infringement in his question. Or, rather, an equating of those two notions. I would call that equating or conflating and try to untangle them by saying that I will analyze infringement a little bit.

To me, infringement happens when entity A seeks to infringe upon the free will of entity B. It is a sort of violation that is limiting, undermining, or encroaching upon the free will of another self. What is infringement versus what is not infringement is the question and the stuff of third density. It’s very complex and it’s nuanced with all sorts of shades of conditional meaning. But I’ll just focus on a really simple example of what might be an instance of infringement.

Using his free will, entity B continues to be in an incarnate, living state. His free-will desire is to live and to be alive. Through its own free will, entity A wishes entity B to not be alive. Entity B decides to violate the free will of entity A and intentionally kills entity A. Entity A is dead. Their free will has been infringed upon and abridged by entity B. This can only happen in an environment where disharmony between entities is possible. Disharmony can only happen when the veil of forgetting is implemented and the self sees other selves as truly other or fundamentally different or separate.

Thus, an illusion is created. And in such an illusion, one actor possessed of free will—or as Ra would say, confusion—can use their free will to subvert the free will of another actor also possessed of free will. In that regard, infringement is a very serious distortion—perhaps one of the greatest because it rests upon the assumption that the other-self is not the Creator and is separate from the self. Thus, the self-committing infringement has taken distortion to its extreme, perhaps even its maximum extent—traveling as far away in perception from the unity of the Creator as is possible.

Distortion, on the other hand, is not infringement. Distortion is any act or moment or movement that modifies or conceals the original, undifferentiated unity of the Creator. Free will itself, then, as this questioner notes, is a distortion. Every conceivable thing in the infinite universe, indeed the universe itself, is a distortion. Infringement is just one type of very significant distortion, you might say, that happens in a polarized universe of service-to-others and service-to-self, where there is a possibility of Creator going against Creator. Without the veil and without polarity, all is perceived as one naturally unfolds in harmony. There is no desire to infringe upon the free will of the other because the other is yourself. There may not even be the possibility, I don’t know, to infringe upon the free will. But, those are my thoughts.

Interesting. I kind of had the same assumption about the quote that Barium uses, which is that it seems to be inaccurate. So, my answer is kind of predicated on that opinion that this passage that was communicated wasn’t necessarily completely accurate. That’s not to say that I think it’s completely invalid. But I basically agree with the argument that is implied by Barium’s question, as well as with what you said about it, Gary, that implies something is fundamentally wrong with what’s happening. I don’t necessarily think that’s possible because if we see the Creator as this ever present eternal and infinite source beyond the confines of time and space, then there’s really nothing that can fall outside of that to the fundamental place of wrongness.

So based on my view of channeling—especially conscious channeling, which is what is contained within the Voices of the Confederation—is that it is not necessarily a perfect art. A person’s mind is translating a concept or theme sent from the source of channeling, but that theme might sometimes be presented in a distorted way or a way that is colored by that particular channel’s own beliefs. So my approach would then be to figure out the intention of that passage, at least according to my personal beliefs, based on the assumption that the passage has been distorted from its original intention.

When that channel says that some infringement was not designed by the Creator, I feel that this is coming from a perspective of the Creator that we know as a perfect representation of unity and love. It is from that Creator that we have journeyed outward, and it is towards that Creator that we journey home. In the midst of this journey, we see things that seem foreign to what we recognize as the fundamental love and unity that we believe is indicative of the Creator. But what seems to be foreign nature is, I think, one of the biggest reasons for even taking this journey to begin with—to allow the Creator to experience Itself.

And in order to have vivid experiences, I think it was necessary for us to be put into a situation where something seems other than us or other than what we recognize as divine. What makes the third-density choice so powerful is that we are striving to recognize that things that seem separate from us are not really separate, and then acting upon that recognition by accepting that they are actually part of the ultimate unity of the universe.

So that statement, “that it is not planned by the Creator,” seems to be seated in the mentality that infringement was so foreign in the mind of the person who was channeling. I double checked in the archives and the channeler was an unknown channel. So, it wasn’t Carla or Don, from whom most of the channeling for the Voices of the Confederation comes from. It was maybe somebody they were teaching to channel.

But in their channeling, perhaps their projection of what the Creator is and what the Creator is not influenced the message that was intended by the source. This isn’t to criticize the channel, and it’s not to say that that’s invalid because I think that it is a valid view. We seek to become the Creator through love and unity. So, to recognize things that don’t speak to that love and unity as part of a wrong choice, can be a path to recognizing what we do want, and what we do feel is our path back to the Creator.

Ra says that the Creator blinks at neither the light or the dark. So, I think that that statement is far more telling than the statement that Barium shared from Voices of the Confederation. The light and the dark parts of this creation are a part of the Creator, and all of it is contained within that unity of the Creator.

So that’s my initial response. Do either of you have a follow up or some more thoughts?

Yeah, I’d like to follow up on what both of you have mentioned about the potential distortion or inaccuracy of the channeling at that time. In 74’, it took a long time, for Carla especially, to determine what it really took to have a good group—realizing that the group that you have gathered in meditation helps very much to bring in whatever kind of information is received. And back in 74’ and earlier, in many cases, it was kind of a hodgepodge of people that were maybe tangentially interested, or they were there for a few meditations and didn’t come back. They weren’t that dedicated to being tuned, shall we say, because it really wasn’t discovered then that it was necessary for the group itself to be well tuned.

Carla had begun making some progress. That was when she first learned to channel, in tuning herself, and had gotten some indications and information from Don in that regard. But it was quite a long process for her to discover that not only did the instrument of the channel have to be tuned, but that the entire group needed to be tuned. So that’s really where the round robin that we still use now came from. She wanted to try to include everybody in the group in a more meaningful way so that the vibrations of the entire group can be raised and held at a stable point, and support information coming through from the Confederation, which was usually Hatton at that time.

So, I would suggest that a lot of information in Voices of the Confederation is less well tuned, and that, not surprisingly, the later information was more well tuned because you get better at whatever you do. You learn a lot by trial and error. I also would suggest to people that they look at Voices of the Confederation as a kind of training wheels for L/L Research. This is just a little past when they started. They started as an L/L group back in 62’ so they came a certain distance over ten years, but there was still a goodly distance to go before it was discovered how to really support the channel and to help positively-oriented information to come through in a more balanced fashion.

And as time went on, we attracted entities of the fifth density, La Tui and La Lima, who gave us more information because we had been able to become more harmonized as a group. And then eventually, of course, the Ra Contact occurred.

So that’s just what I wanted to add there. This is training wheels here.

Yeah. I think it’s worth mentioning, too, that Voices of the Confederation was published recently, but it was compiled back then as well. They actually created the manuscript for this before Secrets of the UFO, which was really L/L Research’s first publication. We dug it up and it had been worked on over the decades a little bit, but the actual content in the book was compiled, I think beginning in 75’ when they started taking snippets of those channelings and putting them into categories. And that’s not to say that they aren’t very beautiful and useful messages, but they might not be as precise as the later messages.

Is there a disclaimer at the front of that book regarding the potentially untuned nature of some of the channeling?

I can’t remember if Carla talks about it being potentially untuned, but I think she wrote a pretty long introduction when she picked it up around 2008 or sometime around then. That explains the nature of what the transcripts are, but it might be worth thinking about adding a disclaimer about that specifically.

Yeah, if Carla is not explicit about it in the introduction, just to let readers know this was in its earlier phases.

Yeah. So, is there anything about our initial responses regarding the question that you had, Gary?

Yeah, I had a thought. Out of that consideration, there’s a very rich discussion that could be had that I’m not going to get too deep into it now, but rather just allude to the existence of the discussion regarding whose will it is that is being exercised in any given moment by any given entity. Because ultimately, in the first and the final truth and the only truth, there is only one will and one energy and one life that’s being lived.

However, from our standpoint, the Creator seems to have created portions of Itself that are also possessed of free will and are also connected to Intelligent Infinity. Those portions seem to be able to use their free will in order to explore themselves and chart their own journey through the various densities and octaves. And there are wills that are in conflict or in harmony with other wills and so forth. In any case, each of those portions are responsible for their own journey.

While these portions seem separate and individual, all wills arise out of the One will. So, it’s as if one could truthfully say that nothing happens that is outside of the will of the Creator. Nothing—no destruction, no infringement, anything that we would qualify with the worst possible adjectives or with the greatest bewilderment—is outside of the Creator’s will.

That was my thought.

That’s somewhat related to the first follow up question I had. But I don’t think this follow-up question will get us very far because, just like you’re saying, it’s a complicated thing. Regarding the concept of the Creator having a plan: Does the Creator have a plan? Is that even a valid way to look at things?

What do you think, Jim?

I think the Creator has a plan that is based upon the harvest of the previous octave. I think the plan is always that the Creator would like to know Itself more intensely and with more variety. Ra said that the harvest of the previous octave was the mind and the body and the spirit seen as means by which entities could more fruitfully move through the illusion. And what I’m wondering is what did they look like before they had mind, body and spirit?

But yeah, I do think that there is a plan, and it is the result of what has come before. Although we get into some wonderful paradoxes here because Ra said that they are aware of both entities that have come from the creation before this one, the octave before, and the creation or the octave to come. So, if it’s the octave to come, it’s already there. When is it coming? The eternal now blows my mind. I cannot begin to fathom. Ra said we have past, present, and future here in third density. But in the densities beyond ours, this is an eternal now.

And actually, I’m kind of glad my mind is split because if I could understand that, it would be too simple and it wouldn’t be so valuable. But still, I struggle with it. So, yeah, I think there is a plan and it comes from previous experience and it will take us forward into what we think is the future. But, I don’t know where to go from there.

It’s like trying to twist your brain to even consider these things. It’s like exercising. So, if we could figure it out, then it just wouldn’t be satisfying at all to even think about it.

All begins and ends in mystery. That part, I think I got.

Gary, do you have a follow up?

Yeah. Regarding this idea of plan, I would rewind the cosmological clock, as it were, back beyond Jim’s starting point of the sequence of octaves, back to what comes from the previous octave to this octave, what moves into the next octave, and so forth. Even before that, there were the first three distortions that arise out of Intelligent Infinity. By the time the second distortion comes around, free will has found its focus, which is called the Logos or love, the second distortion.

And that focus is definitely very plan-oriented. It uses intelligent energy and creates a system of densities and octaves and the pathways of intelligent energy, including what science knows as the natural or physical laws of a physical universe and the illusions of space and time and so forth. It uses its own intelligent estimation to invent and create a world that is built upon a blueprint of a plan, and invests itself, that intelligent energy into light, and light then becomes the manifestation of this plan. We are that plan. We are intelligent energy moving through that plan.

But, if you rewind back even further to the point of Infinity becoming aware, which gets ridiculous to try to think or talk about when you get to a certain point. But Infinity becoming aware and determining that it would know Itself was the plan. At that point, I can’t even speak intelligently to that question. But I would assert that free will lays out a plan of spiritual evolution.

Do you think it could be good to think about that plan more as parameters rather than a plan? I mean, plan could mean different things. You could definitely call it a plan, but maybe it’s more like parameters because this is how life will unfold within this creation, but there is no set plan at that point. It is then up to that creation to figure it out on its own.

I think both words are good synonyms. I think plan has some valid insight to bring to this question because the parameters are laid out in intelligent and hierarchical fashion.

And the archetypical mind is actually a very significant part of that plan. Ra describes the nature of the evolutionary process of mind, body and spirit, and that each seeker will glean from the archetypical mind a unique set of, shall we call them, understandings or inklings as to how it all works—that there is no dogma to offer. So even though it’s a plan, it’s really plastic and fluid and flexible.

Yeah. It’s not a plan in the sense that it precludes novelty or discovery. And not in the sense that it prescribes a sequence of steps that will be followed in a predestination sort of sequence, like instructions that step one is complete, then step two, step three, step four. That wouldn’t be the Creator knowing Itself, and that wouldn’t be free will able to explore the manyness in an infinitely infinite present moment. So, parameters then does become a very good word, too.

Yeah. Part of the reason I ask that is because I sometimes struggle considering events or things that happen to me or other people and saying, “oh, that’s just all part of the Creator’s plan.” It’s like on some level I agree with that but, on another level, I can’t agree with that. It’s hard to reconcile.

Yeah. You see that in religious thoughts a lot, too. I think the exercise and experience of faith definitely does connect into that idea that there are no mistakes and that all is well. The experience or knowingness of there are no mistakes, and all is well, arises out of or is predicated upon the sense that everything is unfolding according to the Creator’s will or plan or parameters. But that doesn’t mean that the particular thing that just happened to you or to other people was, say, selected by the Creator who said, “I want this specific event to happen.” Rather, what transpired was a function of seeming parts of the Creator choosing their own journey, which happens against the backdrop of the ultimate plan in which there are no mistakes.

Right. I think it’s called deism—the concept that God created the universe and then enacted a hands-off approach, which might be somewhat valid in this discussion. But ever since the events of the Bible, I think it is a Christian view that God has just decided to not interfere with his creation, and instead is just allowing things to play out.

What you just brought up has a very direct quote that speaks to this. Ra says something like, “The Creator doesn’t so much create as it does experience itself.” So, it might be accurate to say that there’s this basic parameter or blueprint that laid this foundational thing that invests all subsequent portions of the Creator with their own free will.

So, from the perspective of the Creator, it sets the stage, it sets the parameters, and then watches the witnesses as the parts or the actors on the stage undertake their own journey. The Creator, from the perspective of Intelligent Infinity, doesn’t have puppet strings pulling the strings of the actors and coordinating and dictating their movements per se, but is rather watching them of their own volition choose their form of dance and their form of experience.

And then you must remember that the Creator is contained in full and in even the tiniest iota of any part of the creation. So, He or She or It has a ringside seat.

Right. The Creator is not just watching us from an objective perspective. We are the nerve endings of the Creator in a sense that we experience, and through us, the Creator experiences. We are sort of a channel for the Creator to have experience. Carl Sagan said that we are a way for the Cosmos to know Itself.

Carl said that?

Yeah, he was very anti-spirituality, but he was surprisingly spiritual in his science. I think there’s a million different ways we could go with this discussion, but it looks like we are sort of out of time. So, did either of you have some final thoughts you wish to share?

You were talking about otherness, and it occurred to me that a flip side way to say all is one is to say that there is no other. I guess it’s kind of a nondual way to describe unity, but I had never heard it that way before, so I kind of like that. Otherwise, no, that was my great contribution.

Yeah. Trademark that. Copyright that.

All right. Jim, any final words for our listeners?

Yeah. We just want you to know that there may be some confusion and paradox about a lot of things in the universe, and we’re all working as seekers of truth to try to figure that out. But one thing you can know for sure, we love you all. Have a great two weeks.

I used to watch Mr. Rogers when I was a kid, and he would always end his program with statements like you make Jim. Really appreciate it.

I’m Mr. Rogers of the Law of One.

Yeah. He’s a hero of mine, so it’s a good thing.

You’ve been listening to L/L Research’s podcast, In the Now. If you have enjoyed the show, please visit our websites: llresearch.org and Bring4th.org. Thank you so much for listening and for supporting this podcast with your questions. A special thank you to Barium for sending us the question that we discussed in this episode.

If you would like to hear us ramble on about a particular topic, please read the instructions on our page at www.llresearch.org/podcast. New episodes are intended to be published to the archive website every other Wednesday afternoon. They don’t always make it there with that frequency, but hopefully we’ll get back to the regular schedule soon.

Have a wonderful few weeks and we will talk with you next time.