The Law of One Search Results for ‘understanding misunderstanding’

3 results found.

Sorted by relevance.       Sort by session.

Hide ads

L/L Research

Plenum Healer: offering metaphysical healing

More info

53.3 Questioner: Thank you. During my trip to Laramie certain things became apparent to me with respect to disseminating the first book of The Law of One to those who have had experiences with UFOs and other Wanderers, and I will have to ask some questions now that I may have to include in Book One to eliminate a misunderstanding that I am perceiving as a possibility in Book One. Therefore, these questions, although for the most part transient, are aimed at eliminating certain distortions of understanding with respect to the material in Book One. I hope that I am making a correct approach here. You may not be able to answer some, but that’s all right. We’ll just go on to some others then if you can’t answer the ones I ask.

First I will ask if you could tell me the affiliation of the entities that contacted Betty Andreasson.

Ra: I am Ra. This query is marginal. We will make the concession towards information with some loss of polarity due to free will being abridged. We request that questions of this nature be kept to a minimum.

The entities in this and some other vividly remembered cases are those who, feeling the need to plant Confederation imagery in such a way as not to abrogate free will, use the symbols of death, resurrection, love, and peace as a means of creating, upon the thought level, the time/space illusion of a systematic train of events which give the message of love and hope. This type of contact is chosen by careful consideration of Confederation members which are contacting an entity of like home vibration, if you will. This project then goes before the Council of Saturn and, if approved, is completed. The characteristics of this type of contact include the nonpainful nature of thoughts experienced and the message content which speaks not of doom but of the new dawning age.

54.7 Questioner: Now, I have made these statements just to get to the basic question I wish to ask. It is a difficult question to ask.

We have, coming from the sub-Logos we call our sun, intelligent energy, which then forms, and we’ll take as an example a single sub-sub-logos which is a mind/body/spirit complex. This intelligent energy is somehow modulated or distorted, so that it ends up as a mind/body/spirit complex with certain distortions of personality that it is necessary for the mind/body/spirit complex or the mental portion of that complex to undistort in order to conform once more precisely with the original intelligent energy.

First, I want to know if my statement on that is correct, and, secondly, I want to know why this is the way that it is; if there is any answer other than the first distortion of the Law of One for this?

Ra: I am Ra. This statement is substantially correct. If you will penetrate the nature of the first distortion in its application of self knowing self, you may begin to distinguish the hallmark of an Infinite Creator, variety. Were there no potentials for misunderstanding and, therefore, understanding, there would be no experience.

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   

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.