Search type: any / all / phrase.
Sort by: relevance / session.
12.25 Questioner: What I’m saying is would I be polarizing more toward self-service or toward service for others when I did this act of locking up the thought-form or construct?
Ra: I am Ra. You may consider that question for yourself. We interpret the Law of One, but not to the extent of advice.
29.18 Questioner: I sometimes have difficulty in getting, you might say, a foothold into what I am looking for in trying to seek out the metaphysical principles, you might say, behind our physical illusion.
Could you give me an example of the amount of gravity in the third density conditions at the surface of the planet Venus? Would it be greater or less than Earth?
Ra: I am Ra. The gravity, shall we say, the attractive force which we also describe as the pressing outward force towards the Creator is greater spiritually upon the entity you call Venus due to the greater degree of success, shall we say, at seeking the Creator.
This point only becomes important when you consider that when all of creation in its infinity has reached a spiritual gravitational mass of sufficient nature, the entire creation infinitely coalesces; the light seeking and finding its source and thusly ending the creation and beginning a new creation much as you consider the black hole, as you call it, with its conditions of infinitely great mass at the zero point from which no light may be seen as it has been absorbed.
90.28 Questioner: What I am really asking is what percentage part, roughly, are these responsible for?
Ra: I am Ra. We ask once again that you consider that the archetypical mind is a part of the deep mind. There are several portions to this mind. The mind may serve as a resource. To call the archetypical mind the foundation of experience is to oversimplify the activities of the mind/body/spirit complex. To work with your query as to percentages is, therefore, enough misleading in any form of direct answer that we would ask that you re-question.
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.
67.3 Questioner: I will ask if I am correct in this analysis. We would consider that the entity making this so-called attack is offering its service with respect to its distortion in our polarized condition now so that we may more fully appreciate its polarity, and we are appreciative and thank this entity for its attempt to serve our One Creator in bringing to us knowledge in, shall I say, a more complete sense. Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. There is no correctness or incorrectness to your statement. It is an expression of a positively polarized and balanced view of negatively polarized actions which has the effect of debilitating the strength of the negatively polarized actions.
52.2 Questioner: Thank you. I think that possibly I am on an important point here because it seems to me that the great work in evolution is the discipline of personality, and it seems that we have two types of moving around the universe, one stemming from disciplines of personality, and the other stemming from what you call the slingshot effect. I won’t even get into the sub-light speeds because I don’t consider that too important. And I only consider this material important with respect to the fact that we are investigating discipline of the personality.
Does the use of the slingshot effect for travel, is that a what you might call an intellectual or a left brain type of involvement of understanding rather than a right brain type?
Ra: I am Ra. Your perception on this point is extensive. You penetrate the outer teaching. We prefer not to utilize the terminology of right and left brain due to the inaccuracies of this terminology. Some functions are repetitive or redundant in both lobes, and further, to some entities the functions of the right and left are reversed. However, the heart of the query is worth some consideration.
The technology of which you, as a social complex, are so enamored at this time is but the birthing of the manipulation of the intelligent energy of the sub-Logos which, when carried much further, may evolve into technology capable of using the gravitic effects of which we spoke. We note that this term is not accurate but there is no closer term.
Therefore, the use of technology to manipulate that outside the self is far, far less of an aid to personal evolution than the disciplines of the mind/body/spirit complex resulting in the whole knowledge of the self in the microcosm and macrocosm.
To the disciplined entity, all things are open and free. The discipline which opens the universes opens also the gateways to evolution. The difference is that of choosing either to hitchhike to a place where beauty may be seen or to walk, step by step, independent and free in this independence to praise the strength to walk and the opportunity for the awareness of beauty.
The hitchhiker, instead, is distracted by conversation and the vagaries of the road and, dependent upon the whims of others, is concerned to make the appointment in time. The hitchhiker sees the same beauty but has not prepared itself for the establishment, in the roots of mind, of the experience.
30.5 Questioner: I would like to know how the mind/body/spirit complexes originate. How, going back as far as necessary, does the— Do they originate by spirit forming mind and mind forming body? Can you tell me this?
Ra: I am Ra. We ask you to consider that you are attempting to trace evolution. This evolution is as we have previously described, the consciousness being first, in first density, without movement, a random thing. Whether you may call this mind or body complex is a semantic problem. We call it mind/body complex recognizing always that in the simplest iota of this complex exists in its entirety the One Infinite Creator; this mind/body complex then in second density discovering the growing and turning towards the light, thus awakening what you may call the spirit complex, that which intensifies the upward spiraling towards the love and light of the Infinite Creator.
The addition of this spirit complex, though apparent rather than real, it having existed potentially from the beginning of space/time, perfects itself by graduation into third density. When the mind/body/spirit complex becomes aware of the possibility of service to self or other-self, then the mind/body/spirit complex is activated.
88.17 Questioner: I will make this statement as to my understanding of some of the archetypes and let you correct this statement. It seems to me that the Significator of Mind, Body, and Spirit are acted upon in each of these by the catalyst. This produces Experience which then leads to the Transformation and produces the Great Way. This is the same process for mind, the body, and spirit. The archetypes are just repeated but act in a different way as catalyst because of the differences of mind, body, and spirit. They produce a different type of experience for each because of the differences in the three. The Transformation is slightly different. The Great Way is somewhat different but the archetypes are all basically doing the same thing. They are just acting on three different portions of the mind/body/spirit complex so that we can condense the entire archetypical mind into a way of saying that in making the Significator a complex basically we have provided a way for Catalyst to create Transformation more efficiently. Would you correct my statement, please?
Ra: I am Ra. In your statement correctness is so plaited up with tendrils of the most fundamental misunderstanding that correction of your statement is difficult. We shall make comments and from these comments request that you allow a possible realignment of conceptualization to occur.
The archetypical mind is a great and fundamental portion of the mind complex, one of its most basic elements and one of the richest sources of information for the seeker of the One Infinite Creator. To attempt to condense the archetypes is to make an erroneous attempt. Each archetype is a significant ding an sich*, or thing in itself, with its own complex of concepts. While it is informative to survey the relationships of one archetype to another it can be said that this line of inquiry is secondary to the discovery of the purest gestalt or vision or melody which each archetype signifies to both the intellectual and intuitive mind.
The Significators of Mind, Body, and Spirit complexes are complex in and of themselves, and the archetypes of Catalyst, Experience, Transformation, and the Great Way are most fruitfully viewed as independent complexes which have their own melodies with which they may inform the mind of its nature.
We ask that you consider that the archetypical mind informs those thoughts which then may have bearing upon the mind, the body, or the spirit. The archetypes do not have a direct linkage to body or spirit. All must be drawn up through the higher levels of the subconscious mind to the conscious mind and thence they may flee whither they have been bidden to go. When used in a controlled way they are most helpful. Rather than continue beyond the boundaries of your prior statement we would appreciate the opportunity for your re-questioning at this time so that we may answer you more precisely.
1.10 Questioner: Another question. Is it possible to create any acceleration of understanding [in] other entities [or are] all efforts… efforts by the individual on himself accelerating his understanding? In other words, if an individual tries to act as a catalyst* in general to increase the awareness of planetary consciousness, is he doing nothing but acting upon himself or is it possible [inaudible]?
Ra: I am Ra. We shall answer your question in two parts, both of which are important equally.
Firstly, you must understand that the distinction between yourself and others is not visible to us. We do not consider that a separation exists between the consciousness-raising efforts of the distortion which you project as a personality and the distortion which you project as an other-personality. Thus, to learn is the same as to teach unless you are not teaching what you are learning, in which case you have done you/they little or no good. This understanding should be pondered by your mind/body/spirit complex, as it is a distortion which plays a part in your experiences at this nexus*.
To turn to the second part of our response may we state our understanding, limited though it is.
[The remainder of the original audio recording of Session 1 was not available for the Relistening Project. (The audiotape was reused for another purpose after transcription.) Therefore, the following is a lightly edited version of the rest of Session 1 as published in the original volume of The Law of One, Book I.]
Group-individuated consciousness is that state of sharing understanding with the other distortions of mind/body/spirit complexes which are within the evident reach of the mind/body/spirit complex individual or group. Thus, we are speaking to you and accepting both our distortions and your own in order to enunciate the laws of creation, more especially the Law of One. We are not available to many of your peoples, for this is not an easily understood way of communication or type of philosophy. However, our very being is hopefully a poignant* example of both the necessity and the near-hopelessness of attempting to teach.
Each of those in this group is striving to use, digest, and diversify the information which we are sending this instrument, into the channels of the mind/body/spirit complex, without distortion. The few whom you will illuminate by sharing your light are far more than enough reason for the greatest possible effort. To serve one is to serve all. Therefore, we offer the question back to you to state that indeed it is the only activity worth doing: to learn/teach or teach/learn. There is nothing else which is of aid in demonstrating the Original Thought except your very being, and the distortions that come from the unexplained, inarticulate, or mystery-clad being are many. Thus, to attempt to discern and weave your way through as many group mind/body/spirit distortions as possible among your peoples in the course of your teaching is a very good effort to make. We can speak no more valiantly of your desire to serve.
May we speak in any other capacity upon this subject?
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.