Search type: any / all / phrase.
Sort by: relevance / session.
Questioner: Thank you. I would like to go back to the plan of this Logos for Its creation and examine the philosophical basis that is the foundation for what was created in this local creation and the philosophy of the plan for experience. I am assuming that I am correct in stating that the foundation for this, as we have stated many times before, is the first distortion. After that, what was the plan in a philosophical sense?
Ra: I am Ra. We cannot reply due to a needed portion of your query which has been omitted; that is, do we speak of this particular Logos?
Questioner: To get back to what we were talking about, would then possibly the different races that inhabit this planet be from different planets in our local vicinity or the planets of nearby Logoi that have evolved through their second-density experiences to create the large number of different races that we experience on this planet? Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. There are correctnesses to your supposition. However, not all races and sub-races are of various planetary origins. We suggest that in looking at planetary origins one observes not the pigmentation of the integument but the biases concerning interactions with other-selves and definitions regarding the nature of the self.
Questioner: So that I can just get a little idea of what I am talking about, what are the limits of Ra’s travel in the sense of directly experiencing or seeing the activities of various places? Is it solely within this galaxy, and if so, how much of this galaxy? Or does it include some other galaxies?
Ra: I am Ra. Although it would be possible for us to move at will throughout the creation within this Logos, that is to say, the Milky Way Galaxy, so-called, we have moved where we were called to service; these locations being, shall we say, local and including Alpha Centauri, planets of your solar system which you call the Sun, Cepheus*, and Zeta Reticuli*. To these sub-Logoi we have come, having been called.
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.
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.