Search type: any / all / phrase.
Sort by: relevance / session.
88.16 Questioner: I will also assume, which may not be correct, that the present list that I have of the twenty-two names of the tarot cards are not in exact agreement with Ra’s original generation of the tarot. Could you describe the original tarot, first telling me if there were twenty-two archetypes? That must have been the same. And if they were the same as the list that I have read you in a previous session or if there were differences?
Ra: I am Ra. As we have stated previously, each archetype is a concept complex and may be viewed not only by individuals but by those of the same racial and planetary influences in unique ways. Therefore, it is not informative to reconstruct the rather minor differences in descriptive terms between the tarot used by us and that used by those of Egypt and the spiritual descendants of those first students of this system of study.
The one great breakthrough which was made after our work in third density was done was the proper emphasis given to the Arcanum* Number Twenty-Two which we have called The Choice. In our own experience we were aware that such an unifying archetype existed but did not give that archetype the proper complex of concepts in order to most efficaciously use that archetype in order to promote our evolution.
89.20 Questioner: You stated that each archetype is a concept complex. Would you please define what you mean by that statement?
Ra: I am Ra. Upon the face of it such a definition is without merit, being circular. A concept complex is a complex of concepts just as a molecule is a complex structure made up of more than one type of energy nexus or atom. Each atom within a molecule is its unique identity and, by some means, can be removed from the molecule. The molecule of water can, by chemical means, be caused to separate into hydrogen and oxygen. Separately they cannot be construed to equal water. When formed in the molecular structure which exemplifies water the two are irrefragably* water.
Just in this way each archetype has within it several root atoms of organizational being. Separately the overall structure of the complex cannot be seen. Together the concept complex is irrefragably one thing. However, just as it is most useful in grasping the potentials in your physical systems of the constituting nature of water, so in grasping the nature of an archetype it is useful to have a sense of its component concepts.
89.23 Questioner: Then could you tell me what information you gave to the Egyptian priest, or Egyptian, who first was contacted or taught with respect to the first archetype? Is that possible for you to do within the limits of the first distortion?
Ra: I am Ra. It is possible. Our first step, as we have said, was to present the descriptions in verbal form of three images: one, eight, fifteen; then the questions were asked: “What do you feel that a bird might represent?” “What do you feel that a wand might represent?” “What do you feel that the male represents?” and so forth until those studying were working upon a system whereby the images used became evocative of a system of concepts. This is slow work when done for the first time.
We may note, with sympathy, that you undoubtedly feel choked by the opposite difficulty, that of a great mass of observation upon this system, all of which has some merit as each student will experience the archetypical mind and its structure in an unique way useful to that student. We suggest that one or more of this group do that which we have suggested in order that we may, without infringement, offer observations on this interesting subject which may be of further aid to those inquiring in this area.
We would note at this time that the instrument is having almost continuous pain flares. Therefore, we ask that each of the support group be especially aware of any misinformation in order that we may correct any distortions of information the soonest possible.
93.23 Questioner: Is there any other aspect of this third card that Ra could comment on at this time?
Ra: I am Ra. There may be said to be many aspects which another student might note and ponder in this image. However, it is the nature of teach/learning to avoid trespass into the realms of learn/teaching for the student. We are quite agreed to comment upon all observations that the student may make. We cannot speak further than this for any student.
We would add that it is expected that each student shall naturally have an unique experience of perception dealing with each image. Therefore, it is not expected that the questioner ask comprehensively for all students. It is, rather, expected and accepted that the questioner will ask a moiety of questions which build up a series of concepts concerning each archetype which then offer to each succeeding student the opportunity for more informed study of the archetypical mind.
May we ask for one more query at this time. We are pleased to report that this instrument has remembered to request the reserving of some transferred energy to make more comfortable the transition back to the waking state. Therefore, we find that there is sufficient energy for one more query.
91.15 Questioner: Is it common for Logo[i] to have twenty-two archetypes or is this relatively unique with respect to our Logos?
Ra: I am Ra. The system of sevens is the most articulated system yet discovered by any experiment by any Logos in our octave.
76.9 Questioner: Is there, in Ra’s opinion, any present-day value for the reuse of the tarot as an aid in the evolutionary process?
Ra: I am Ra. We shall repeat information. It is appropriate to study one form of constructed and organized distortion of the archetypical mind in depth in order to arrive at the position of being able to become and to experience archetypes at will. You have three basic choices. You may choose astrology, the twelve signs, as you call these portions of your planet’s energy web, and what has been called the ten planets. You may choose the tarot with its twenty-two so-called Major Arcana*. You may choose the study of the so-called Tree of Life with its ten Sephiroth* and the twenty-two relationships between the stations.
It is well to investigate each discipline, not as a dilettante, but as one who seeks the touchstone, one who wishes to feel the pull of the magnet. One of these studies will be more attractive to the seeker. Let the seeker then investigate the archetypical mind using, basically, one of these three disciplines. After a period of study, the discipline mastered sufficiently, the seeker may then complete the more important step: that is, the moving beyond the written in order to express in an unique fashion its understanding, if you may again pardon the noun, of the archetypical mind.
76.10 Questioner: Would I be correct in saying that our local Logos, in acting as co-Creator, distorted to some extent, for the purposes of experience, that which we experience here? And that the archetypes of this particular Logos are somewhat unique with respect to the rest of the creation, but are of course related to the all in that they are part of it, but are, I can only say, a unique part, and that the systems of study that we have just talked about would not translate quickly or easily in other parts of the creation. This is a very difficult question to state. Could you clear that up for me?
Ra: I am Ra. We may draw from the welter* of statement which you offer the question we believe you ask. Please re-question if we have mistaken your query. The archetypical mind is that mind which is peculiar to the Logos under which influence you are at this space/time distorting your experiences. There is no other Logos the archetypical mind of which would be the same any more than the stars would appear the same from another planet in another galaxy. You may correctly infer that the closer Logoi are indeed closer in archetypes.
78.26 Questioner: The choice of polarity being the unique circumstance, shall I say, for the archetypical basis for the evolution of consciousness in our particular experience indicates to me that we have arrived, through a long process of the Creator knowing Itself, we’ve arrived at a position of present or maximum efficiency for the design of a process of experience. That design for maximum efficiency is in the roots of consciousness and is the archetypical mind and is a product of everything that has gone before. There are, unquestionably, relatively pure archetypical concepts for the seven concepts for mind, body, and spirit. I feel that the language that we have for these is somewhat inadequate.
However, we will continue to attempt to understand, and that is a poor word also, the foundation for this and I am hoping that I have laid the foundation with some degree of accuracy in attempting to set a background for the development of the archetypes of our Logos. Have I left out anything or made any errors, or could you make any comments on my attempt to lay a background for the construction that our Logos used for the archetypes?
Ra: I am Ra. Your queries are thoughtful.
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.