Search type: any match / exact term. Sort by: relevance / session.
* Affiliate links.
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.
91.14 ▶ Questioner: Thank you. One more question before we start on the specific questions with respect to archetypes. Do all Logo[i] evolving after the veil have twenty-two archetypes?
Ra: I am Ra. No.
90.17 ▶ Questioner: Is Ra familiar with the archetypical mind of some other Logos that is not the same as the one we experience?
Ra: I am Ra. There are entities of Ra which have served as far Wanderers to those of another Logos. The experience has been one which staggers the intellectual and intuitive capacities, for each Logos sets up an experiment enough at variance from all others that the subtleties of the archetypical mind of another Logos are most murky to the resonating mind, body, and spirit complexes of this Logos.
90.16 ▶ Questioner: What was the ultimate objective of this Logos in designing the archetypical mind as It did?
Ra: I am Ra. Each Logos desires to create a more eloquent expression of experience of the Creator by the Creator. The archetypical mind is intended to heighten this ability to express the Creator in patterns more like the fanned peacock’s tail, each facet of the Creator vivid, upright, and shining with articulated beauty.
93.14 ▶ Questioner: Then the adept, in becoming familiar with the Logos’s archetype in each case, would then be able to most efficiently use the Logos’s plan for evolution. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. In the archetypical mind one has the resource of not specifically a plan for evolution but rather a blueprint or architecture of the nature of evolution. This may seem to be a small distinction, but it has significance in perceiving more clearly the use of this resource of the deep 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.
90.14 ▶ Questioner: Now, as I understand it the archetypes are the biases of a very fundamental nature that, under free will, generate the experiences of each entity. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. The archetypical mind is part of that mind which informs all experience. Please recall the definition of the archetypical mind as the repository of those refinements to the cosmic or all-mind made by this particular Logos and peculiar only to this Logos. Thus it may be seen as one of the roots of mind, not the deepest but certainly the most informative in some ways. The other root of mind to be recalled is that racial or planetary mind which also informs the conceptualizations of each entity to some degree.
90.13 ▶ Questioner: I will guess that the system of archetypes then was devised to further extend these particular principles. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. The phrasing is faulty. However, it is correct that the images of the archetypical mind are the children of the third-density physical manifestations of form of the Logos which has created the particular evolutionary opportunity.
91.16 ▶ Questioner: What is the largest number of archetypes, to Ra’s knowledge, used by a Logos?
Ra: I am Ra. The sevens plus The Choice is the greatest number which has been used, by our knowledge, by Logoi. It is the result of many, many previous experiments in articulation of the One Creator.
90.20 ▶ Questioner: Then built into the basis for the archetypes is possibly the mechanism for creating the polarization in consciousness for service to others and service to self. Is this, in fact, true?
Ra: I am Ra. Yes. You will notice the many inborn biases which hint to the possibility of one path’s being more efficient than the other. This was the design of the Logos.
91.35 ▶ Questioner: How is a knowledge of the facets of the archetypical mind used by the individual to accelerate his evolution?
Ra: I am Ra. We shall offer an example based upon this first explored archetype or concept complex. The conscious mind of the adept may be full to bursting of the most abstruse and unmanageable of ideas, so that further ideation becomes impossible and work in blue ray or indigo is blocked through over-activation. It is then that the adept would call upon the new mind, untouched and virgin, and dwell within the archetype of the new and unblemished mind without bias, without polarity, full of the magic of the Logos.
93.5 ▶ Questioner: Would you correct me on that?
Ra: I am Ra. The description of polarity as service to self and service to others, from the beginning of our creation, dwelt within the architecture of the primal Logos. Before the veiling process the impact of actions taken by mind/body/spirits upon their consciousnesses was not palpable to a significant enough degree to allow the expression of this polarity to be significantly useful. Over the period of what you would call time this expression of polarity did indeed work to alter the biases of mind/body/spirits so that they might eventually be harvested. The veiling process made the polarity far more effective.
90.21 ▶ Questioner: Then what you are saying is that once the path is recognized, either the positive or the negative polarized entity can find hints along his path as to the efficiency of that path. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. That which you say is correct upon its own merits, but is not a repetition of our statement. Our suggestion was that within the experiential nexus of each entity within its second-density environment and within the roots of mind there were placed biases indicating to the watchful eye the more efficient of the two paths. Let us say, for want of a more precise adjective, that this Logos has a bias towards kindness.
90.23 ▶ Questioner: Would this be the reason for the greater positive harvests? I suspect that it isn’t, but would there be Logoi that have greater negative percentage harvests because of this type of biasing?
Ra: I am Ra. No. There have been Logoi with greater percentages of negative harvests. However, the biasing mechanisms cannot change the requirements for achieving harvestability either in the positive or in the negative sense. There are Logoi which have offered a neutral background against which to polarize. This Logos chose not to do so but instead to allow more of the love and light of the Infinite Creator to be both inwardly and outwardly visible and available to the sensations and conceptualizations of mind/body/spirits* undergoing Its care in experimenting.
* Should be mind/body/spirit complexes, presumably.
91.17 ▶ Questioner: I assume, then, that twenty-two is the greatest number of archetypes. I’ll also ask what is the minimum number presently in use by any Logos to Ra’s knowledge?
Ra: I am Ra. The fewest are the two systems of five which are completing the cycles or densities of experience.
You must grasp the idea that the archetypes were not developed at once but step by step, and not in order as you know the order at this space/time but in various orders. Therefore, the two systems of fives were using two separate ways of viewing the archetypical nature of all experience. Each, of course, used the Matrix, the Potentiator, and the Significator for this is the harvest with which our creation began.
One way or system of experimentation had added to these the Catalyst and the Experience. Another system if you will, had added Catalyst and Transformation. In one case the methods whereby experience was processed was further aided but the fruits of experience less aided. In the second case the opposite may be seen to be the case.
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.
* This question was asked in session 67.
Hide question numbers Show categories Show notes Hide audio
Version (?): Lightly Edited, Ra Contact, Relistened, Original
Back to top
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 ©2003–2020 Tobey Wheelock.
Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.