View another random question/answer
67.4 Questioner: We would welcome the services of the entity who uses, and I will use the misnomer, you might say, of attack, since I do not consider this an attack but an offering of service, and we welcome this offering of service, but we would be able, I believe, to make more full use of the service if it were not physically disabling the instrument in a minor way. For with a greater physical ability she would be able to more appreciate the service. We would greatly appreciate it if the service was carried on in some manner which we could welcome in even greater love than at present. This, I assume, would be some service that would not include the dizzying effect.
I am trying to understand the mechanism of this service by the entity that seems to be constantly with us, and I am trying to understand the origin of this entity and the mechanism of greeting us. I will make a statement that is probably not only incorrect but is a function of my extreme limitation in understanding the other densities and how they work. I am guessing that this particular entity is a member of the Orion Confederation and is possibly, or possibly not, incarnate in a body of the appropriate density, which I assume is the fifth, and by mental discipline he has been able to project a portion if not all of his consciousness to our coordinates, you might say, here and it is possibly one of the seven bodies that make up his mind/body/spirit complex. Is any of this correct, and can you tell me what is correct or incorrect about that statement?
Ra: I am Ra. The statement is substantially correct.
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.
* See 67.28.
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 ©2003–2025 Tobey Wheelock.
Questions? Comments? Email me: tw at law of one dot info.