The Law of One Search Results for ‘teach/learner learn/teacher’

4 results found.

Search type: any / all / phrase. Sort by: relevance / session.

Donate with PayPal button
More options

Get the books

Plenum Healer: offering metaphysical healing

Try the Brave browser*

L/L Research

* Affiliate links.

89.18 Questioner: I would like to question Ra on each of these cards in order to better understand the archetypes. Is this agreeable?

Ra: I am Ra. As we have previously stated, these archetypical concept complexes are a tool for learn/teaching. Thusly, if we were to offer information that were not a response to observations of the student we would be infringing upon the free will of the learn/teacher by being teach/learner and learn/teacher at once.

15.13 Questioner: [You] previously gave us some information about what we should do in balancing. Is there any information that we can publish now about any particular exercises or methods of balancing [these] centers?

Ra: I am Ra. The exercises given for publication seen in comparison with the material now given are in total a good beginning. It is important to allow each seeker to enlighten itself rather than for any messenger to attempt in language to teach/learn for the entity, thus being teach/learner and learn/teacher. This is not in balance with your third density. We learn from you. We teach to you. Thus, we teach/learn. If we learned for you, this would cause imbalance in the direction of the distortion of free will. There are other items of information allowable. However, you have not yet reached these items in your lines of questioning and it is our belief/feeling complex that the questioner shall shape this material in such a way that your mind/body/spirit complexes shall have entry to it, thus we answer your queries as they arise in your mind complex.

89.22 Questioner: When Ra originally trained or taught the Egyptians about the tarot, did Ra act as teach/learners to a degree that Ra became learn/teachers?

Ra: I am Ra. This distortion we were spared.

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.

Hide question numbersShow categoriesShow notesShow audio

Version (?): Lightly Edited, Ra Contact, Relistened, Original

 

Back to top

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 ©2003–2020 Tobey Wheelock.

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