The Law of One Category Archetypical Mind

Results 31 to 37 of 37.

<< Previous 30

Hide ads

Support lo1.info by shopping at Amazon *

Other options
Get the books

Plenum Healer: offering metaphysical healing

L/L Research

* (Works if order is placed within 24 hours for items not already in cart.)

93.4 Questioner: Now, if I understand correctly, prior to the veiling process the electrical polarities, the polarities of radiation and absorption, all existed in some part of the creation, but the service-to-others/service-to-self polarity that we’re familiar with had not evolved and only showed up after the veiling process as an addition to the list of possible polarities, you might say, that could be made in the creation. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. No.

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.

93.6 Questioner: I might make the analogy, then, in that when a polarization in the atmosphere occurs to create thunderstorms, lightning, and much activity, this more vivid experience could be likened to the polarization in consciousness which creates the more vivid experience. Would this be appropriate?

Ra: I am Ra. There is a shallowness to this analogy in that one entity’s attention might be focused upon a storm for the duration of the storm. However, the storm producing conditions are not constant whereas the polarizing conditions are constant. Given this disclaimer, we may agree with your analogy.

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.

97.8 Questioner: Are there any items in the first four cards not of Ra’s intention that we could remove to present a less confusing card as we make our new drawings?

Ra: I am Ra. We find much material in this query which would constitute repetition. May we suggest rephrasing the query?

97.9 Questioner: Possibly I didn’t phrase that the way I meant to, which was: we already have determined the items that should be removed from the first four cards. The question was: have I missed anything that should be removed which were not of Ra’s original intention in the last few sessions of determining what should be removed?

Ra: I am Ra. We shall repeat our opinion that there are several concepts which, in each image, are astrologically based. However, these concepts are not without merit within the concept complex intended by Ra, given the perception by the student of these concepts in an appropriate manner.

We wish not to form that which may be considered by any mind/body/spirit complex to be a complete and infallible series of images. There is a substantial point to be made in this regard. We have been, with the questioner’s aid, investigating the concept complexes of the great architecture of the archetypical mind. To more clearly grasp the nature, the process, and the purpose of archetypes, Ra provided a series of concept complexes. In no way whatsoever should we, as humble messengers of the One Infinite Creator, wish to place before the consideration of any mind/body/spirit complex which seeks its evolution the palest tint of the idea that these images are anything but a resource for working in the area of the development of the faith and the will.

To put this into perspective we must gaze then at the stunning mystery of the One Infinite Creator. The archetypical mind does not resolve any paradox or bring all into unity. This is not the property of any resource which is of the third density. Therefore, may we ask the student to look up from inward working and behold the glory, the might, the majesty, the mystery, and the peace of oneness. Let no consideration of bird or beast, darkness or light, shape or shadow keep any which seeks from the central consideration of unity.

We are not messengers of the complex. We bring the message of unity. In this perspective only may we affirm the value to the seeker of adepthood of the grasping, articulating, and use of this resource of the deep mind exemplified by the concept complexes of the archetypes.

105.19 Questioner: At the end of an incarnation, before veiling, did the entity appear physically to have aged, say like entities at the normal end of incarnation in our present illusion— did they, were they wrinkled and old, did they… Did the Significator look like that?

Ra: I am Ra. The Significator of Mind, Body, or Spirit is a portion of the archetypical mind and looks as each envisions such to appear. The body of a mind/body/spirit before veiling showed all the signs of aging which acquaint you now with the process leading to the removal from third-density incarnation of the mind/body/spirit complex. It is well to recall that the difference betwixt mind/body/spirits and mind/body/spirit complexes is a forgetting within the deeper mind. Physical appearances and surface and instinctual activities are much the same.

Back to top

<< Previous 30

Hide question numbers   Show categories   Show notes   Hide audio   

Version (?): Lightly Edited, Relistened, Original

Back to top

The Law of One books are copyright ©1982, 1984, 1998 L/L Research. This site copyright ©2003–2019 Tobey Wheelock.

Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.