The Law of One Search Results for ‘logos archetype’

30 results found.

Sorted by relevance.       Sort by session.

Hide ads

L/L Research

Plenum Healer: offering metaphysical healing

More info

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.

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.

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.

76.8 Questioner: Were Ra’s teachings focusing on the archetypes for this Logos and the methods of achieving a very close approach to the archetypical configuration? Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct without being true. We of Ra are humble messengers of the Law of One. We seek to teach/learn this single law. During the space/time of the Egyptian teach/learning we worked to bring the mind complex, the body complex, and the spirit complex into an initiated state in which the entity could contact intelligent energy and so become teach/learner itself that healing and the fruits of study could be offered to all. The study of the roots of mind is a portion of the vivification of the mind complex and, as we have noted, the thorough study of the portion of the roots of mind called archetypical is an interesting and necessary portion of the process as a whole.

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.

77.22 Questioner: In that case, you would have as a Logos, you would have the advantage of selecting the form of acceleration, I might say, of spiritual evolution by planning for what we call the major archetypical philosophical foundation and planning these as a function of the polarity that would be gained in third density. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. This is exquisitely correct.

78.20 Questioner: Then our particular Logos, when it created Its own particular creation, was at some point far down the evolutionary spiral of the experiment with the significator becoming what it was not or in effect, creating the polarity that we strive for in third density, and, therefore was, I am assuming, primarily concerned in the design of the archetypes, in designing them in such a way so as they would create the acceleration of this polarization. Is this in any way correct?

Ra: I am Ra. We would only comment briefly. It is generally correct. You may fruitfully view each Logos and its design as the Creator experiencing Itself. The seed concept of the significator being a complex introduces two things: firstly, the Creator against Creator in one sub-Logos in what you may call dynamic tension; secondly, the concept of free will, once having been made fuller by its extension into the sub-Logoi known as mind/body/spirit complexes, creates and re-creates and continues to create as a function of its very nature.

78.26 Questioner: The choice of polarity being the unique circumstance, shall I say, for the archetypical basis for the evolution of consciousness in our particular experience indicates to me that we have arrived, through a long process of the Creator knowing Itself, we’ve arrived at a position of present or maximum efficiency for the design of a process of experience. That design for maximum efficiency is in the roots of consciousness and is the archetypical mind and is a product of everything that has gone before. There are, unquestionably, relatively pure archetypical concepts for the seven concepts for mind, body, and spirit. I feel that the language that we have for these is somewhat inadequate.

However, we will continue to attempt to understand, and that is a poor word also, the foundation for this and I am hoping that I have laid the foundation with some degree of accuracy in attempting to set a background for the development of the archetypes of our Logos. Have I left out anything or made any errors, or could you make any comments on my attempt to lay a background for the construction that our Logos used for the archetypes?

Ra: I am Ra. Your queries are thoughtful.

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.

78.34 Questioner: Would the archetype then that has been called the High Priestess, which represents the intuition, be properly the second of the archetypes?

Ra: I am Ra. This is correct. You see here the recapitulation of the beginning knowledge of this Logos; that is, matrix and potentiator. The unconscious is indeed what may be poetically described as High Priestess, for it is the Potentiator of the Mind and as potentiator for the mind is that principle which potentiates all experience.

79.13 Questioner: The archetypical mind of the Logos prior to this experiment in extension of the first distortion then was what I would consider to be less complex than it is now, possibly containing fewer archetypes. Is this correct?

Ra: I am Ra. We must ask your patience. We perceive a sudden flare of the distortion known as pain in this instrument’s left arm and manual appendage. Please do not touch this instrument. We shall examine the mind complex and attempt to reposition the limb so that the working may continue. Then please repeat the query.

[Two-minute pause.]

I am Ra. You may proceed.

79.14 Questioner: Thank you. Prior to the experiment to extend the first distortion how many archetypes were there for the creation of the Logos of that time?

Ra: I am Ra. There were nine.

79.20 Questioner: I would like to try and understand the archetypes of the mind of this Logos prior to the extension of the first distortion. In order to better understand that which we experience now I believe that this is a logical approach.

We have, as you have stated, the matrix, potentiator, and the significator. I understand the matrix as being that which is the conscious, what we call the conscious mind, but since it is also that from which the mind is made, I am at a loss to fully understand these three terms, especially with respect to the time before there was a division between conscious and unconscious. I think it is important to get a good understanding of these three things. Could you expand even more upon the Matrix of the Mind, the Potentiator, and the Significator, how they differ, and what their relationships are, please?

Ra: I am Ra. The Matrix of Mind is that from which all comes. It is unmoving yet is the activator in potentiation of all mind activity. The Potentiator of the Mind is that great resource which may be seen as the sea into which the consciousness dips ever deeper and more thoroughly in order to create, ideate, and become more self-conscious.

The Significator of each mind, body, and spirit may be seen as a simple and unified concept.

The Matrix of the Body may be seen to be a reflection in opposites of the mind; that is, unrestricted motion. The Potentiator of the Body then is that which, being informed, regulates activity.

The Matrix of the Spirit is difficult to characterize since the nature of spirit is less motile. The energies and movements of the spirit are, by far, the most profound, yet, having more close association with time/space, do not have the characteristics of dynamic motion. Thusly one may see the Matrix as the deepest darkness and the Potentiator of Spirit as the most sudden awakening, illuminating, and generative influence.

This is the description of Archetypes One through Nine before the onset of influence of the co-Creator or sub-Logos realization of free will.

79.28 Questioner: Well, I was aware of that. I probably didn’t state the question correctly. It’s a very difficult question to state. I don’t know if it’s worth attempting to continue with but what I meant was when this very first experiment with the veiling process occurred, did it result in service-to-self polarization with the first experiment?

Ra: I am Ra. The early, if we may use this term, Logoi produced service-to-self and service-to-others mind/body/spirit complexes immediately. The harvestability of these entities was not so immediate and thus refinements of the archetypes began apace.

90.11 Questioner: Now my line of questioning I am trying to link to the creation of various Logos and their original use of a system of archetypes in their creation and I apologize for possibly a lack of efficiency in doing this, but I find this somewhat difficult. Now, for this particular Logos in the beginning, prior to its creation of first density, did the archetypical system which it had chosen for its creations include the forms that would evolve, and in particular third density human form, or was this related to the archetypical concept at all?

Ra: I am Ra. The choice of form is prior to the formation of the archetypical mind. As the Logos creates Its plan for evolution, then the chosen form is invested.

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.

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.

90.16 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.

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.

90.18 Questioner: There seems to have been created by this Logos, to me anyway, a large percentage of entities whose distortion was toward warfare, in that we had the Maldek and the Mars experience and now Earth. It seems that Venus was the exception to what we could almost call the rule of warfare. Is this correct and was this envisioned and planned into the construction of the archetypical mind, possibly not with respect particularly to warfare as we have experienced it but to the extreme action to polarization in consciousness?

Ra: I am Ra. It is correct that the Logos designed Its experiment to attempt to achieve the greatest possible opportunities for polarization in third density. It is incorrect that warfare of the types specific to your experiences was planned by the Logos. This form of expression of hostility is an interesting result which is apparently concomitant with the tool-making ability. The choice of the Logos to use the life-form with the grasping thumb is the decision to which this type of warfare may be traced.

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.

91.3 Questioner: The sub-Logos such as our sun, then, in creating Its own particular evolution of experience, refines the cosmic mind or, shall we say, articulates it by Its own additional bias or biases. Is this a correct observation?

Ra: I am Ra. It is a correct observation with the one exception that concerns the use of the term “addition,” which suggests the concept of that which is more than the all-mind. Instead, the archetypical mind is a refinement of the all-mind in a pattern peculiar to the sub-Logos choosing.

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.

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.

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.

92.11 Questioner: Then, this occurs because the Potentiator of the Mind is directly connected, through the roots of the tree of mind, to the archetypical mind and to the Logos which created it and because the veil between the Matrix and Potentiator of the Mind allows for the development of the will. Would Ra comment?

Ra: I am Ra. Some untangling may be needed. As the mind/body/spirit complex which has not yet reached the point of the conscious awareness of the process of evolution prepares for incarnation it has programmed for it a less than complete, that is to say a partially randomized, system of learnings. The amount of randomness of potential catalyst is proportional to the newness of the mind/body/spirit complex to third density. This, then, becomes a portion of that which you may call a potential for incarnational experience. This is indeed carried within that portion of the mind which is of the deep mind, the architecture of which may be envisioned as being represented by that concept complex known as the Potentiator.

It is not in the archetypical mind of an entity that the potential for incarnational experience resides but in the mind/body/spirit complex’s insertion, shall we say, into the energy web of the physical vehicle and the chosen planetary environment. However, to more deeply articulate this portion of the mind/body/spirit complex’s beingness, this archetype, the Potentiator of the Mind, may be evoked with profit to the student of its own evolution.

92.18 Questioner: Turning, then, to my analogy or shall we say, example of the newborn infant with the undistorted Matrix, this newborn infant has its subconscious veiled from the Matrix. The second archetype, the Potentiator of Mind, is going to act at some time through— I won’t say through the veil, I don’t think that is a very good way of stating it, but the Potentiator of Mind will act to create a condition, and I will use an example of the infant touching a hot object. The hot object we could take as random catalyst. The infant can either leave its hand on the hot object or rapidly remove it. My question is, is the Potentiator of Mind involved at all in this experience and, if so, how?

Ra: I am Ra. The Potentiator of Mind and of Body are both involved in the questing of the infant for new experience. The mind/body/spirit complex which is an infant has one highly developed portion which may be best studied by viewing the Significators of Mind and Body. You notice we do not include the spirit. That portion of a mind/body/spirit complex is not reliably developed in each and every mind/body/spirit complex. Thusly the infant’s significant self, which is the harvest of biases of all previous incarnational experiences, offers to this infant biases with which to meet new experience.

However, the portion of the infant which may be articulated by the Matrix of the Mind is indeed unfed by experience and has the bias of reaching for this experience through free will just as intelligent energy in the kinetic phase, through free will, creates the Logos. This sub-sub-Logos, then, or that portion of the mind/body/spirit complex which may be articulated by consideration of the Potentiators of Mind and Body, through free will, chooses to make alterations in its experiential continuum. The results of these experiments in novelty are then recorded in the portion of the mind and body articulated by the Matrices thereof.

93.7 Questioner: With the third tarot card we come to the first addition of archetypes after the veiling process, as I understand it. And I am assuming that this third archetype is, shall I say, loaded in a way so as to create, if possible, polarization since that seems to be one of the primary objectives of this particular Logos in the evolutionary process. Am I in any way correct on this?

Ra: I am Ra. Before we reply to your query we ask your patience as we must needs examine the mind complex of this instrument in order that we might attempt to move the left manual appendage of the instrument. If we are not able to effect some relief from pain we shall take our leave. Please have patience while we do that which is appropriate.

[Thirty-second pause.]

I am Ra. There will continue to be pain flares. However, the critical portion of the intense pain has been alleviated by repositioning.

Your supposition is correct.

93.13 Questioner: Would I be correct in saying that the archetype for the Catalyst of the Mind is the Logos’s model for its most efficient plan for the activity or use or action of the catalyst of the mind?

Ra: I am Ra. Yes.

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.

Hide question numbers   Show categories   Show notes   Show 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 ©2003–2018 Tobey Wheelock.

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