Search type: any / all / phrase.
Sort by: relevance / session.
74.4 Questioner: In a previous session there was a question on the archetypical mind that was not fully answered. I would like to continue with the answer to that question. Could you please continue with that, or would it be necessary for me to read the entire question over again?
Ra: I am Ra. As a general practice it is well to vibrate the query at the same space/time as the answer is desired. However, in this case it is acceptable to us that a note be inserted at this point in your recording of these sound vibratory complexes referring to the location of the query in previous workings.*
The query, though thoughtful, is in some degree falling short of the realization of the nature of the archetypical mind. We may not teach/learn for any other to the extent that we become learn/teachers. Therefore, we shall make some general notations upon this interesting subject and allow the questioner to consider and further refine any queries.
The archetypical mind may be defined as that mind which is peculiar to the Logos of this planetary sphere. Thusly unlike the great cosmic all-mind, it contains the material which it pleased the Logos to offer as refinements to the great cosmic beingness. The archetypical mind, then, is that which contains all facets which may affect mind or experience.
The Magician was named as a significant archetype. However, it was not recognized that this portion of the archetypical mind represents not a portion of the deep subconscious but the conscious mind and more especially the will. The archetype called by some the High Priestess, then, is the corresponding intuitive or subconscious faculty.
Let us observe the entity as it is in relationship to the archetypical mind. You may consider the possibilities of utilizing the correspondences between the mind/body/spirit in microcosm and the archetypical mind/body/spirit closely approaching the Creator. For instance, in your ritual performed to purify this place you use the term “Ve Geburah*.” It is a correct assumption that this is a portion or aspect of the One Infinite Creator. However, there are various correspondences with the archetypical mind which may be more and more refined by the adept. “Ve Geburah” is the correspondence of Michael, of Mars, of the positive, of maleness. “Ve Gedulah*” has correspondences to Jupiter, to femaleness, to the negative, to that portion of the Tree of Life concerned with Auriel*.
We could go forward with more and more refinements of these two entries into the archetypical mind. We could discuss color correspondences, relationships with other archetypes, and so forth. This is the work of the adept, not the teach/learner. We may only suggest that there are systems of study which may address themselves to the aspects of the archetypical mind and it is well to choose one and study carefully. It is more nearly well if the adept go beyond whatever has been written and make such correspondences that the archetype can be called upon at will.
* See 67.28.
91.19 Questioner: Secondly, we have the wand which has been seen as the power of will. Would Ra comment?
Ra: I am Ra. The concept of will is indeed pouring forth from each facet of the image of the Matrix of the Mind. The wand as the will, however, is, shall we say, an astrological derivative of the out-reaching hand forming the, shall we say, magical gesture. The excellent portion of the image which may be seen distinctly as separate from the concept of the wand is that sphere which indicates the spiritual nature of the object of the will of one wishing to do magical acts within the manifestation of your density.
93.18 Questioner: The third card also shows the wand, I am assuming it is, in the right hand; the ball at the top being the round magical shape. Am I in any way correct in guessing that Catalyst of the Mind suggests possible eventual use of the magic depicted by this wand?
Ra: I am Ra. The wand is astrological in its origin and as an image may be released from its stricture. The sphere of spiritual power is an indication indeed that each opportunity is pregnant with the most extravagant magical possibilities for the far-seeing adept.
96.15 Questioner: I planned to re-draw the tarot cards eliminating extraneous additions by those who came after Ra’s initial giving and I would like quickly to go through those things that I intend to eliminate from each card we’ve gone over and ask Ra if there is anything else that should be eliminated to make the cards as they were when they were originally drawn, before the astrological and other appendages were added.
I would eliminate all of the letters around the edge of the card with the possible exception of the number of the card— one, two, three, etc. That would be the case for all of the cards, I think— the exterior lettering and numbering.
In Card Number One I would eliminate the star at the upper right hand corner; eliminate the wand in the Magician’s hand. I understand that the sphere remains but I am not really sure where it should be. Would Ra comment on that please?
Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, the elimination of letters is acceptable. Secondly, the elimination of stars is acceptable in all cases. Thirdly, the elimination of the wand is appropriate. Fourthly, the sphere may be seen to be held by the thumb and index and second finger.
Fifthly, we would note that it is not possible to offer what you may call a pure deck, if you would use this term, of tarot due to the fact that when these images were first drawn there was already distortion in various and sundry ways, mostly cultural.
Sixthly, although it is good to view the images without the astrological additions, it is to be noted that the more general positions, phases, and characteristics of each concept complex are those which are significant. The removal of all distortion is unlikely and, to a great extent, unimportant.
103.13 Questioner: I’ll have to think about that one. Unless… I’ll come back to that.
We were thinking of replacing the sword in the right hand with the magical sphere and a downward scepter in the left hand, similar to Card Five, the Significator, as more appropriate for this card. Would Ra comment on that, please?
Ra: I am Ra. This is quite acceptable, especially if the sphere may be imaged as spherical and effulgent*.
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.