I listened to almost 9 hours from Book One of the Law of One last night and today. I don't think I could manage to listen to another 4 volumes on this. Bear in mind, this is a critique of the framework.
"According to the text, Ra claims to be the original extraterrestrial source of many of these ancient Earth philosophies"
This is a conveniently unfalsifiable claim. The ancient philosophies all came first, it's totally absurd to assume priority based on channelled texts from who knows what.
All is One, seven densities of consciousness, a "harvest", STS/STO, "wanderers" that are here to help with the transition, mind-body-spirit complex, reincarnation, true self and false self... I mean there is so much more to name, but every single one of these concepts predates the Law of One by at least a millennium across multiple cultures.
Then comes the great lack of specificity of the claims, like STS/STO. 51% STO or 95% STS is required for "graduation". So, ones level of consciousness measured by percentages. Who is keeping score and by what metric? What does 52% STO vs 48% STO look like? This is the same as the karmic cosmic credit system. No one is keeping score.
Christianity, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism expressed the same concepts. Christianity calls it Judgement instead of a harvest.
Ra's "Council of Saturn" is said to be in the eighth dimension with 9 members of a council and 24 Guardians managing the quarantine. In antiquity, there were 9 gods of Heliopolis in Ancient Egypt, 24 elders from the Book of Revelation and Gnostic Archons which prevent souls escaping. Literally derivative works.
Then come the defining problems in these texts.
The pyramids were constructed by a sixth-density complex through thought, but SOME aspects were actually just cut blocks so the structures didn't seem too supernatural, but the group of Ra doesn't explain that aspect in any detail. No, that's for us to figure out.
And while ratios are mentioned a few times, Phi isn't brought up a single time? Since we have known about Phi for a long, long time, the idea that it would impinge on our free-will as repeated throughout the texts doesn't apply, so why doesn't Ra mention it?
Ra didn't have the foresight to understand that leaders would corrupt it? The texts aren't correcting anything, they are combining multiple ideas from different cultures. Of course the concepts map perfectly, they came first and are being adopted into a new framework.
That same sixth-density complex also uses pseudo-scientific language from the 20th century:
"Q: Are there any people such as you find on Earth on any of the other planets in our solar system?"
Ra: I am Ra. Do you request spacetime present information or spacetime continuum information?"
No "sixth-density complex" would be using this made-up, poorly defined terminology. "Spacetime continuum" is Einsteinian pop physics filtered through Star Trek and 80's American culture.
Instead, it would know that a dynamic medium like the 'aether' has density and elasticity, and these are the fundamental properties which affect what we call space and time.
Even worse, Ra doesn't seem to know what a magnet is. They describe magnetism using the same incorrect conventional framework that every modern physics textbook uses - a north and a south 'pole', moving upwards and downwards. I suspect Don Elkins had the same level of nescience when it comes to magnetism.
A genuinely advanced 'complex' would understand these field dynamics and be able to properly explain them, or at least term them correctly. For example, here is how Ken Wheeler explains magnetism:
Magnetism is the spatial expression of the dielectric field. Two inverse, conjugate vortices with centripetal divergence (magnetism creating space) and centrifugal convergence (dielectricity compressing space). Magnets don't have poles, they have the inverse of counterspace. At the centre of a magnetic field, there is no magnetism or gravity. Magnetism is specifically how the One becomes the many, through it's creation of space.
Simple, clean, logical, testable. Someone in antiquity HAD to understand this because it is essential to constructing functional Pyramids, and it clearly wasn't Ra.
The way Ra talks about densities makes absolutely no sense. If everything is conscious to some level, then nothing is conscious and the word loses all meaning.
Consciousness requires both a signal AND a functioning antenna. The One is beyond consciousness. Consciousness requires differentiation. The One is undifferentiated. This is the classic triad or trinity that is common to basically every ancient culture and religion.
Plotinus called it the One, Nous and Soul.
Citta (mind) maps to Plotinus's One and Nous. The very beginning of the emanation sequence - immutable.
Vinnana maps to Plotinus's Soul, which is where consciousness arises. It is a temporary phenomenon that arises when citta, imbued with nescience (ignorance), contacts the physical world through water. It dies with the body. A new vinnana arises with each new embodiment.
Both frameworks say the same thing using different terms: consciousness is not the highest state. It's what happens when the highest state couples to matter through a specific medium.
The goal isn't more consciousness. The goal is recognition of what's prior to consciousness, and that recognition actually involves transcending consciousness, not perfecting it.
When you don't have a solid framework to test against seemingly new ideas, they are next to impossible to filter. The Law of One is very clearly recycled information and they have left a lot of bad ideas mixed with some genuinely useful ones.
But that's just my opinion.