Search type: any / all / phrase.
Sort by: relevance / session.
78.32 Questioner: Then is there any relationship between the archetypes and the planets of our solar system?
Ra: I am Ra. This is not a simple query. Properly, the archetypes have some relationship to the planets. However, this relationship is not one which can be expressed in your language. This, however, has not halted those among your people who have become adepts from attempting to name and describe these relationships. To most purely understand, if we may use this misnomer, the archetypes it is well to view the concepts which make up each archetype and reserve the study of planets and other correspondences for meditation.
82.14 Questioner: Did this in fact happen on some of the planets or on a large percentage of the planets near the center of this galaxy in this way?
Ra: I am Ra. Our knowledge is limited. We know of the beginning but cannot asseverate* to the precise experiences of those things occurring before us. You know the nature of historical teaching. At our level of learn/teaching we may expect little distortion. However, we cannot, with surety, say there is no distortion as we speak of specific occurrences of which we were not consciously a part. It is our understanding that your supposition is correct. Thus we so hypothesize.
91.12 Questioner: To get back to what we were talking about, would then possibly the different races that inhabit this planet be from different planets in our local vicinity or the planets of nearby Logoi that have evolved through their second-density experiences to create the large number of different races that we experience on this planet? Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. There are correctnesses to your supposition. However, not all races and sub-races are of various planetary origins. We suggest that in looking at planetary origins one observes not the pigmentation of the integument but the biases concerning interactions with other-selves and definitions regarding the nature of the self.
78.33 Questioner: It just seemed to me that since the planets were an outgrowth of the Logos and since the archetypical mind was the foundation for the experience that the planets of this Logos would be in some way related. We will certainly follow your suggestion.
I have been trying to get a foothold into an undistorted doorway, you might say, into the archetypical mind. It seems to me that everything that I have read having to do with archetypes is, to some degree or another, distorted by those who have written and the fact that our language is not really capable of description.
You have spoken of the Magician as a basic archetype and that this seems to have been carried through from the previous octave. Would this then be, if there is an order, the first archetypical concept of this Logos?
Ra: I am Ra. We would first respond to your confusion as regards the various writings upon the archetypical mind. You may well consider the very informative difference between a thing in itself and its relationships or functions. There is much study of archetype which is actually the study of functions, relationships, and correspondences. The study of planets, for instance, is an example of archetype seen as function. However, the archetypes are, first and most profoundly, things in themselves and the pondering of them and their purest relationships with each other should be the most useful foundation for the study of the archetypical mind.
We now address your query as to the archetype which is the Matrix of the Mind. As to its name, the name of Magician is understandable when you consider that consciousness is the great foundation, mystery, and revelation which makes this particular density possible. The self-conscious entity is full of the magic of that which is to come. It may be considered first, for the mind is the first of the complexes to be developed by the student of spiritual evolution.
82.12 Questioner: I was interested in specifically how this very first division showed up in this octave. I was interested to know if it made the transition through first, second, third, fourth, fifth, etc., densities? I would like to take the first mind/body/spirit complexes and trace their experience from the very start to the present so that I would better understand the condition that we are in now by comparing it with this original growth. Could you please tell me precisely how this came about as to the formation, possibly, of the planets and the growth through the densities, if that is the way it happened, please?
Ra: I am Ra. Your queries seem more confused than your basic mental distortions in this area. Let us speak in general and perhaps you may find a less confused and more simple method of eliciting information in this area.
A very great deal of creation was manifested without the use of the concepts involved in consciousness, as you know it. The creation itself is a form of consciousness which is unified, the Logos being the one great heart of creation. The process of evolution through this period, which may be seen to be timeless, is most valuable to take into consideration, for it is against the background of this essential unity of the fabric of creation that we find the ultimate development of the Logoi which chose to use that portion of the harvested consciousness of the Creator to move forward with the process of knowledge of self. As it had been found to be efficient to use the various densities, which are fixed in each octave, in order to create conditions in which self-conscious sub-Logoi could exist, this was carried out throughout the growing flower-strewn field, as your simile suggests, of the one infinite creation.
The first beings of mind, body, and spirit were not complex. The experience of mind/body/spirits at the beginning of this octave of experience was singular. There was no third-density forgetting. There was no veil. The lessons of third density are predestined by the very nature of the vibratory rates experienced during this particular density and by the nature of the quantum jump to the vibratory experiences of fourth density.
The original Law of One books are copyright ©1982, 1984, 1998 L/L Research. The Ra Contact books are copyright ©2018 L/L Research and Tobey Wheelock.
This site copyright ©2003–2024 Tobey Wheelock.
Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.