Sorted by relevance. Sort by session.
83.19 ▶ Questioner: What was the mechanism of the very first veiling process? I don’t know if you can answer that. Would you try to, though, answer that?
Ra: I am Ra. The mechanism of the veiling between the conscious and unconscious portions of the mind was a declaration that the mind was complex. This, in turn, caused the body and the spirit to become complex.
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.
30.10 ▶ Questioner: Can you tell me the philosophy behind this mechanism of propagation of the bodily complex?
Ra: I am Ra. The second density is one in which the groundwork is being laid for third-density work. In this way it may be seen that the basic mechanisms of reproduction capitulate into a vast potential in third density for service to other-self and to self; this being not only by the functions of energy transfer but also [by] the various services performed due to the close contact of those who are, shall we say, magnetically attracted, one to the other; these entities thus having the opportunities for many types of service which would be unavailable to the independent entity.
64.13 ▶ Questioner: I have no ability to judge at what point, at what level of abilities the adept would reach this point of being, shall we say, independent of the cyclical action. Can you give me an indication of what level of “adeptness” that would be necessary to be so independent?
Ra: I am Ra. We are fettered from speaking specifically due to this group’s work, for to speak would seem to be to judge. However, we may say that you may consider this cycle in the same light as the so-called astrological balances within your group; that is, they are interesting but not critical.
78.25 ▶ Questioner: Then you are saying as a result of the polarization in consciousness that has occurred later in the galactic evolution, that the experiences are much more, shall I say, profound or deeper along the two paths. Are these experiences independent of the other path or must there be action across the potentiated difference between the positive and negative polarity, or is it possible to have this experience simply because of the single polarity? This is difficult to ask.
Ra: I am Ra. We would agree. We shall attempt to pluck the gist of your query from the surrounding verbiage.
The fourth and fifth densities are quite independent, the positive polarity functioning with no need of negative and vice-versa. It is to be noted that in attempting to sway third-density mind/body/spirit complexes in choosing polarity there evolves a good bit of interaction between the two polarities. In sixth density, the density of unity, the positive and negative paths must needs take in each other for all now must be seen as love/light and light/love. This is not difficult for the positive polarity, which sends love and light to all other-selves. It is difficult enough for service-to-self polarized entities that at some point the negative polarity is abandoned.
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.
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.