All right, let's, let's just jump right in then. Um, so yeah,
I thought today it would be fun to have a discussion about the,
the logos and the,
is essentially following up on the discussions we had about the ideas of the,
um, the,
the higher self and the magical personality working through the sort of the,
the higher aspect of the self, the deeper mind,
and integrating more aspects of our, of our deeper self, our, our deeper mind.
And we've talked in the past, I think also about the, the tree of mind.
It's referenced many times in the material, and that the,
the tree of mind basically, you know, extends down into,
from the conscious mind to the unconscious and down into the, the,
the racial mind, the planetary mind.
And then they say it goes down into the archetypical mind,
the ar archetypes of our, of our logos, which is the,
the mind of the galaxy. Um,
and so I figure we should at least start out explaining the logos
before we dive into the nature of how the archetypes have evolved or are
evolving and are affecting us. And I think that gives us more of a sense,
if we can, if we can understand it. I think it gives us more of a sense of the,
of the nature of, of all basically spiritual work as,
as the progress of becoming more and more the archetypal mind and becoming more
and more integrated with the infinite mind, the galactic mind,
which is basically like the, the source of all of manifest creation in the,
in this particular galaxy, which is like an experiment of consciousness.
Yeah.
So, um,
I guess session 13 was maybe when the logo started
to be described, uh,
in the context of the first several distortions.
That was 13.7. Um, so this start,
this one was, um, after this ha happened,
but what they were talking about in session 13 was, um, you know, the earliest,
first known thing in creation. They said that was infinity.
The infinity is creation.
And then from this infinity then must have come what we experienced as creation.
What was the next step or the next evolvement. And Ross says,
infinity became aware, this was the next step. And then Don said, what is,
what happened after that? And then they say,
awareness led to the focus of infinity into
infinite energy.
You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes or names most common
to your ears being logos or love.
And here there's a note, uh, by Toby Wheelock,
where the logos is also defined as the creative principle or love
according to raw. The logos is the second distortion of intelligent infinity,
which is basically what they're saying here,
where the first distortion was the awareness, um,
which led to focus through free will.
The, uh, intelligent infinity infinity into infinite energy,
which is like the potential in the kinetic,
in intelligent infinity is the potential in infinite energy is the kinetic.
You have called this by various vibrational sound complexes. And then,
so basically saying that love is the same thing as logos is actually one of the
most profound things they've said about it. Cuz you, you know, the,
i I love with the capital L here could mean that there's, you know, every,
every aspect of energy,
every aspect of our creation is coming from the same thing,
which is a love, a love that is acting out of free will.
And this is like superseding all other concepts of love,
that this love can be the, the source of all other loves.
The source of all other desires for experience, desires for anything to, to,
to be manifest in this, in this reality. So maybe I could even ask,
ask you guys right there have, have you guys thought about that much? The,
does everything feel like it's coming from love?
I think the way that they talk about it absolutely. Cause it, you know,
when you, when you're the material and they say everything comes from love, uh,
you can be like, nah, man, there's hate in the world.
But when you start really looking at it,
they talk about love of self or love of other selves. So, I mean, you know,
when you look at love that way, it's got a really broad definition.
Yeah.
I tend to explain. Go ahead, Nathan. I was just
Gonna say that the term love is kind of misunderstood at least a lot of times
too for, for what Roger's referring to here,
it's a much more powerful word than just kind of what we think of as like an
attraction too. So, uh, I forgot the session where they explain it more,
but it's something that Rob wasn't even able to explain within our words, um,
what, what love actually even is.
Sure.
So I wanna draw a parallel to the
sort of, um, the energy of bestow and reception here and,
and wondering if this is, um, where,
with respect to the logos,
does the notion of a holographic or other self
emerge? And, and is this, this aspect,
the logos itself, or the, the capability of it? Is this the,
the transcendence from, you know, uh,
a unified self to the idea of an other self, and again,
only coming out of the idea that love energetically? To me,
I still bind at least in some way, to this, um,
this will to bestow. Um, so there's, there's this energy of giving or,
um, desire on another's behalf, I suppose.
And so I'm just wondering if this is where that emerges, um,
the sense of an other self or not.
I, I, you know, this,
this idea of the initial separation,
I think we, we may touch on that later today,
because essentially like there's the two concepts of the initial, um,
sort of separation from the cosmic mind,
which is the logos is essentially creating thoughts of, you know,
having an, an an experience of, of basically separateness from, from,
from the, from the original thought. It,
it seems to be already occurring with this initiation of the logos, but the,
what we think of, I think as the other self is,
is behind the veil,
which didn't come in place until later in the evolution of the galaxy.
So I think that the w we,
we could talk about the veil also is where the idea of the other self, um,
as a potential experience of self as a seemingly separate self that came in
through the extension of the first distortion, which they say, you know,
happened halfway through the,
or I don't know how long ago through the evolution of the, of the logos.
So I'm not sure if that's touching on what you're referring to, even
It does. Um, but then I guess what that would infer is that
love as an energy is claimed and given for and to the
self.
Yeah.
That's interesting.
Yeah. And this is like referring to love logos as, as a,
a creative force, even even more so than like,
something to be given or, or, you know, bestowed upon somebody else. It,
it, it almost to me sounds like they're talking about like,
love is vibration, you know what I mean? That, you know,
uh, and then God said, let the how does it go where?
And then the voice was heard. What, what,
what's the beginning quote from the Bible? Something about the voice
On the beginning was the word. I think that's,
That's it.
That's John though.
Yeah. And you know, all the different religions have touched on it, but it,
it's all vibration, whether it's the, you know, the vibration of the, the Adam,
you know,
the vibration of the words spoken into the air and then they hit your ear,
you know, but th this almost seems like they're referring to logos, uh,
and love as that, the essence of that.
Yeah. Yeah.
It's also called a creative principle. And,
and so I still kind of go back to the, this energy of, of creation,
giving bestow sort of the purpose behind the energy that's
present here. And if you have a will to bestow,
then you may very well create that which is needed to
receive it. Um, even if that's within the self,
the capability of, of giving and receiving,
I suppose doesn't in and of itself require duality.
Yeah. Um, all right.
Yeah, just knowing the self in some way.
Um, so we can move on. I think the other one,
session 15 might sort of re restates,
I guess could finish reading that the, they said the,
the creator is the focusing of infinity as an aware or conscious
principle called by us as closely as we can create understanding,
learning in your language, intelligent infinity.
So it's the focusing of infinity
as an aware or conscious principle they're calling intelligent infinity.
Yeah. I mean,
it's so unbelievably abstract and,
you know, coming from raw, coming from this place of complete knowing,
how do you put it into a concise terminology for people to
get, I feel like,
I feel like I almost intuitively know what these things are more than I actually
know what these things are as I read through the material.
Yeah.
And to, to actually define it. Like how do you define, uh,
taking everything and then focusing it into one thing? It's,
it's just so difficult to define.
And yeah, that's basically, I think they call love the focus,
the focusing at some point too. Um,
maybe I'll search for that quick. So,
uh, we'll, we'll go to this 1521 here. Um,
I'll, I'll read this whole question. Uh, rah had stated,
we offer the law of one the solving of paradoxes.
Rah also mentioned that the first paradox,
or the first distortion was a distortion of free will.
Could you tell me if there's a sequence? Is there a first, second, third,
fourth distortion of law of one? And Ross said,
only up to a very short point after this point,
the many myths of distortions are equal to one another.
The first distortion free will finds focus.
This is the second distortion known to you as logos. The creative principle,
or love this intelligent energy, thus creates a distortion known as light
from these three dis three distortions come, many,
many hierarchies of distortions,
each having its own paradoxes to be synthesized.
No one becoming more important than another.
So the foundation is there with, with love choosing to
create light.
And the, the, the thing I really got hung up on with this, when,
when I went back and read it this time was, um,
they said that the first distortion, free will finds focus.
So, and then as you go later into the material and they talk about, uh,
this, this octave or this, uh, period of being,
this is fed what was learned from the last octave,
although we know nothing of the last octave, we know the lessons learned of it.
Right. And the thing that I just couldn't shake it, it,
I, I read this section and thought about it for like 45 minutes this morning.
And so was, what was the first octave,
uh, regimented, you know,
was the first distortion order and order didn't work
as well as free will did. So then the next octave was, well,
let's try free will, you know, and how many octaves down the road are we?
And I just, I had this just like,
thought experiment about what would a universe
that doesn't have free will look like? You know, like, cuz they're, they,
you say like, there's no 90 degree angles out in nature. There's no like,
perfectly parallel line. Would it be that way if, if it wasn't free will,
you know, would the world look like a circuit board?
Hmm.
I assume there was some kind of, uh, free will in previous octaves,
but it, it's not the same kind of free will that we know of as, um, yeah.
Beings behind a veil. I think that's pretty clear that there, there,
there was an awareness of the infinite mind that was all working together.
It's just that they were able to do things in a, in a,
i I think they're able to experience affinity to a degree.
It's just an experience affinity in a way that does not lose the awareness of
the infin infinite at the same time.
Yeah. They talk about the,
the ratio of sort of the benefit of experience
gained. Um, as they played around with, uh,
archetypes,
they talked about two different versions of systems that use five
archetypes. And, um, if I remember correctly,
they both used the same first three,
which sort of describe as a little bit more universal or
more broad. Yeah,
the matrix potentiator and the signator
actually in that case. And then they mentioned two, um,
different variations. One, the, um,
the transformation and catalyst, I think.
Yep. Or catalyst and experience.
And then the other one was transformation in a great way, maybe or something.
So they talk about how one was better for catalyst, um,
but maybe doesn't get assimilated as well.
And the other one is the opposite. It's easier to assimilate,
but less catalyst available. Yeah. I think you found it.
Yeah. We skip ahead to, to some of these others that I was thinking.
So yeah.
Archetypes one through nine existed before the influence of the co-creator or
sub logos realization of free will archetypes one through nine at at the initial
stages of the logos or of the universe. The, the, the,
the octave that we're in now would've been the matrix of
mind, body, spirit, the potentiator of mind, body, spirit,
and the signator of mind, body, spirit. Um,
and maybe I'll, I'll just read this now so people have an understanding. Um,
so these first nine archetypes that were the product of the awareness
that was harvested from the previous octave,
the matrix of mind is that which from which all comes it is unmoving
yet is the activator and potentiation of all mind activity,
the activator and potentiation. So potentiation means it's not potentiated yet,
it's not not turned into the potential, but it is,
it is unmoving, but it activates the potential of the mind.
And that's called consciousness also. Um, the poten,
the potentiator of the mind is that great resource which may be seen as the sea,
and to which the consciousness dips ever deeper and more thoroughly in order to
create, ideate and become more self-conscious.
And then the signator is maybe confusingly described here.
They say the signator reach, mind, body,
and spirit may be seen as a simple and unified concept.
Right. I wish they had expanded on it right there.
Yeah.
But they also said, uh, and I wanna talk about the signator more.
Um, maybe this is enough of a starting point.
We can go back now to the discussions of these. Um,
yeah.
They said the signator is also called the most efficacious nature in 78 point
10. Um,
so let's skip to this one here. Um,
So, uh, Don asked these early logo,
the different galaxies that formed in the center of the galaxy, or the,
or maybe they're talking about the sub logo. Yeah. The, the, the star systems.
The suns that formed in the center of the galaxy wished I assumed to create a
system of experience for the one creator.
Did they then start with no previous experience or,
or information about how to do this? And Ross said,
at the beginning of this creation, or as you may call it, octave,
there were those things known which were the harvest of the proceeding octave
about the proceeding creation. We know as little as we do of the octave to come.
However we are aware of those pieces of gathered concept,
which were the tools which the creator had in the knowing of the self.
These tools were of two kinds. Firstly,
there was an awareness of the efficiency for experience of mind, body,
and spirit. Um,
so that to me implies there's some will there with, with experience.
Um, secondly, there was an awareness of the most efficacious nature,
or if you will, signator of mind, body, and spirit.
And I should pull that in a dictionary here.
So efficacious is of something in amateur or abstract.
It's successful in producing a desired or intended result. It's effective. So,
um, it's,
so sometimes I like to remember the word significant or by thinking of the
concept of significance. Um,
but I think that effectiveness may be more what they're getting at here with,
with calling it the efficacious nature, is that the, the,
the awareness of the most, um, effective aspects of the mind,
effective nature of body, effective nature of spirit.
These are the significance of mind, body, spirit. Um,
and thirdly, there was an awareness of two aspects of mind, body, enough spirit,
the, the significant could use to balance all catalyst.
And you may call these two, the matrix and the potentiator. Um, and here, um,
based on other discussions, they say, um, matrix is an environment,
this is Toby Wheelock's note.
He says that matrix is an environment in which development occurs,
a surrounding medium or structure. And then the,
the potentiator is that which makes powerful intensifies or increases
effectiveness.
So these principles of matrix and potentiator are used to
balance all catalyst.
So they didn't even have the archetypes of catalyst,
the archetypes of experience, but they knew that the,
or the previous universe knew that the,
the balancing or the growth of the creator could, could occur.
The growth of the awareness of self as creator could occur through the,
the balancing of the potential with the, the medium,
the structure of the, of the, of the nature of mind, the nature of body,
the nature of spirit, and then finding the most efficacious nature,
the most effective aspect. This was like the three foundations for
This, basically this creation, understanding growth.
Yeah. We skipped over, um,
a couple of the beginning ones where they kind of build the layers for you.
Um, yeah. Where like, cuz now we're, we're all,
we're at the point where we're talking about, uh, at least in my eyes,
we're talking about like entities that are living on the spheres that surround
the logos. And what you're describing is like,
maybe there was an octave of just universes,
or there was an octave of a universe of just galaxies. And, you know,
that was the beginning. Like, okay, well now let's add, um, you know,
solar systems in the galaxies and then let's add planets around the, uh,
you know, or, um, um, uh, uh,
beings on the planets around the solar systems. You know, like, it,
it was kind of, it, it almost seems like this, this building up of, uh,
of experience to get to, to like the very minute,
the minutiae of experience.
Right? Yeah. So let's, let's jump back into some of these. The, the, um,
explaining more the process of evolution. Um,
in session 13, Don asked,
was the galaxy that we are in created by the infinite intelligence?
Or was it created by a portion of the individualized infinite intelligence?
And Ross said,
the galaxy and all other things of material of which you are aware are
products of individualized portions of intelligent infinity.
As each exploration began,
it in turn found its focus and became co-creator using intelligent affinity.
Each portion created a,
a universe and allowing the rhythms of free choice to flow,
playing with infinite spectrum of possibilities.
Each individualized portion channeled the love light into what you might call
intelligent energy.
Thus creating the so-called natural laws of any particular universe.
An intelligent energy seems to imply both space and time and dimensions and
everything. Um,
each universe in turn individualized to focus to a focus
becoming in turn co-creator and allowing further diversity,
thus creating further intelligent energies,
regularizing or causing natural laws to appear in the vibrational patterns of
what you would call a solar system. Thus,
each solar system had its own, shall we say,
local coordinate system of elusory natural laws.
It shall be understood that any portion,
no matter how small of any density or elusory pattern contains as an a
holographic picture of the one creator,
which is infinity plus all begins and ends in mystery.
So every single solar system is like an extension of the free
will to play with the natural laws of reality.
And, uh, so we have our own, um,
sun seemingly having an influence on what,
what this feels like for us as evolutionary paths.
Although, you know,
we were just talking earlier about how the sun is now putting out more flares
right now and it's affecting people. And it's like, technically, you know,
every day we're affected by the sun because it gets brighter and we have,
we have a different kind of day based on the temperature,
but I wonder if there's even more like conscious energy being transmitted all
the time.
It's just like we're just basking at it all the time from the sun and we're,
we're just like, connected without even realizing it. And we're like,
and the plugged into the computer, which is the, the sun's, um, consciousness.
That's something I've wondered about.
I feel like it
That we would, if we're an extension of the earth's consciousness,
then it's an extension of the suns.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah. And, and you can, I mean, once,
once you start tracking it and become aware of it,
you can feel a difference in your, um,
your energy, your mind in your day to day when the, when the sun is,
you know, producing more ions, you know, throwing more stuff at it. I mean,
if you want to just get to the pure physicality of it when you know there's a
sun flare and it just pushes stuff in our direction, then,
then we interact with it. If you want it to be more abstract, you know,
then you, you're talking about the metaphysical side of it,
where if the sun is more energetic and it throws energy towards you,
how does that affect your, your mind state?
Yeah.
But if you start tracking it, I, at at least I did,
I could really see a difference.
Cause there would be days where before I knew about the, um, you know,
like the, the, um, the,
the spiral is that and Leo spiral, the,
the little map that they show you where all the planets are in relation to the
sun and where of the, the majority of the ions are spewing off of the sun.
I think it's the end Leo spiral. Before I even know about that,
I would feel difference in days.
And then I would start looking at that when I felt a difference in a day.
And it almost always corresponds.
Mm-hmm.
It's interesting that we would think of the sun as sending energy to us
as though the sun would conceive of us as
being outside or separate from itself.
Yeah,
That's what I was thinking about too.
Cause it kind of gets into the different levels of the logos here,
this hierarchical nature of it,
of the logos and sub logos and down to where we are.
So we're really just an extension of sub sub logos of the sun there.
So to a certain extent we are all connected in there, but I,
it is kind of interesting, Andrew, I was thinking the same thing,
but yet you're given catalyst,
you're given energy from the sun to kind of decide,
I guess decide to choose how you,
how you want to use that or how open your energy centers are to allow that to
flow through and actually make something of it.
Yeah. That sounds sort of double duty in that regard,
probably occupying a hierarchical space and
consciousness.
Well, and the sun is before the veil, if my memory serves me correctly.
Like the sun is still aware that we're all one and feeding back
our experiential, um, data, if you will,
back into the all mind.
And so if we're down here and things are going a little bit too easy and not
enough catalyst and the sun's like, eh, this is a little boring, you know,
let's splice it up a bit. That that could be when the energy comes.
Cause you know, the,
the sun might look at it as it's sending energy to a limb to keep to,
to like class bits fist. But to us it feels like that distant ball of fire,
which is not us, is sending all these other little things,
which is not it that hit us and impact us. But to the sun,
it could just be like, you know, wrapping its fingers or opening its fingers.
Yeah,
Yeah. The, the sun is, is an adapt.
It's the same thing that we are attempting to refine its consciousness
and know itself better.
And it is before the veil, right. I'm not, I'm not,
Well it is aware of the veil I would say,
but it's mind is beyond the veil. It's, it's in all the densities. Yes. It's,
it's beyond every limitation of awareness.
Yeah. Yes. That, that's what I meant by before the veil,
beyond the veil would've been a better way of putting
It. Yeah.
And I certainly speculate that the reason that we have a veil ourselves
as, as,
as bodies with minds attached to them is because of some sort of
limitation of the genetic programming. So that our,
the systems of emotions that are going through our head are sort of quarantine
off from the, you know, between the conscious and the subconscious mind,
but never, nevertheless, we need the unconscious mind to even regulate our,
our whole body system. So it's like,
it's like there's a computer and a computer when we have the conscious mind
separated from the deeper unconscious mind.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah. So, um, we continue on some of these, the, on session 29,
they said the,
the sub logos of your solar entity differentiated some exper.
So basically talking about the sun when they say your solar entity,
the sun differentiated some experiential components within the patterns of
intelligent energy set in motion by the logos,
which created the basic conditions and vibratory rates consistent throughout
your, what we would call major galaxy.
So that's basically just saying that there's more variations within
what we're experiencing, thanks to the influence of the sun. Um,
but I don't know if they wanna too many details around what they mean by that.
The experiential components
Isn't that like the,
so they say the logos is basically the blueprint or the architecture,
and then each logos,
sub logos below that then uses that architecture to add its own refinements to
it.
So the experiential components of our sub logos for the sun would
be, I dunno, maybe more specific to the male female principal.
And then just I guess the way that the rhythms of this creation are formed that
We're basically going through the densities through.
Yeah. Yeah. I, I certainly wonder how many, how many aspects of this were
specifically by the sun versus like male and female? I think,
I'm sure male and female exist throughout the, the, the galaxy.
I think that was, I mean we certainly, that
Was from the octave before, so my guess is that yeah,
they did throughout the whole
Yeah. Cause it's just polarity.
Yeah.
Yeah. It sounds like one big, you know, feedback system, have the experience,
you know, to put it in, you know, in human terms,
have the experience feed the experience back to the sun.
Sun feeds the experience back to the galaxy.
Galaxy feeds it back to the universe. Yeah.
And then we just keep going until we have all the experiences that are available
within this framework and then, you know,
right up the abstract for the experiment and then move on to the next octave.
So when I think about this in terms of a blueprint,
and obviously I go back to the tree of life, always, I get curious as to whether
the logos at a solar system level, for example,
is tacking on new sra,
for example, to the bottom of the tree. Like it gets handed a,
a basic blueprint of say the top,
you know, let's see six or so for example, would
or top seven, um, if you count dot. But, um,
whether it is tacking on like in this case hode and net soc,
which are thinking and feeling, or it gets handed,
here's all the tens that, um, that build the blueprint for this universe.
And you can tweak the behaviors of each of them individually.
I would suspect it has more to do with tweaking each one individually and the
relationships between them.
I agree.
Just because of the fact that they, yeah,
they basically say that the system of archetypes came from the logos.
Um, I think especially at this level of complexity they were at now,
that you would be handed a, a pretty extensive sheet of,
you know, like you would be handed all 10 and the tweaking would happen,
but at the beginning it might not have, you know,
it might have just been one and then one became two, you know, and then, uh,
it built from, from there.
Right. It could be at the galactic level, for example,
that that's where we have six and at the universal level we've got three.
Mm-hmm.
Mm-hmm.
Or first octave, second octave, third octave. And it could, it could be that,
you know, we're aware of 10 at our level, but the,
at the galactic level, they're, they're aware of 20.
And then at the universal level, it's more aware of like 30, you know, and,
and it could all be playing because all possibilities are are, you know,
possible for, for infinity. So it would have to be playing all multiple layers.
That'd be interesting to consider that moving in a,
in a descending order, you know,
having less and less
variables rather than more and more, though not,
not illogical in and of itself, just, um,
interesting to consider that moving upward,
you might have a larger catalog from which to choose as opposed to
you're building on a foundation that's been handed out and proven to work
across other galaxies and universes.
And then you add onto it from there.
I think at one point Don asked something like, um, is,
is 22 the most archetypes used anywhere that you're aware of?
And I think they said yes. Um, but it, but it also begs the question, what,
what would be next? What, what, how much more of,
and this is really what we're exploring right now,
is how much more complex can our reality get? And
That's 91 17, by the way, where Yes. That,
Yeah.
And he didn't, an rod didn't answer by the way,
whether 22 is the greatest number. He only addressed the five.
Oh, I see.
Yeah. This was the 2016. They said, what is the largest number of archetypes?
Ah, yeah,
There we go. And Ross said, the sevens plus the choice is the greatest number,
which has been used by our knowledge, by logo a as a result of many,
many previous experience in articulation of the one creator.
Okay.
And then, and then they, they say the question,
I assume then that 22 is the greatest number of archetypes. I'll also ask,
what is the minimum number presently in use by any logos to Ross's knowledge?
And then Ross said, the fewest are the two systems of five,
which are contemplating the cycles or densities of experience.
Um, and I guess they,
they described that more here.
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 the space time,
but in various orders. Therefore,
the two systems of fives were used were using two separate
ways of viewing the archetypical nature of all experience.
Each of course used the matrix potentiator and the signator where this is the
harvest, which with which our creation began one way,
our system of experimentation had added to these,
the catalyst and the experience. Another system, if you will,
had added catalyst and transformation in one, in one case,
the methods were by experience was processed, was further aided.
But the fruits of experience less aided. Um,
the fruits of experience would be the transformation. And the second case,
the opposite may be seen to be the case. So,
so this is just a different kind of emphasis on what experience can
be and a different kind of emphasis on what transformation can be.
And now that we're using the 22 system,
then we have the full range of both the potentials of experience and the
potentials of transformation, the fruits of the experience.
So this is about as abstract as, as I can imagine, a description of our reality.
It almost sounds like the, the,
the catalyst when entered into one system creates a slow transformation,
whereas the catalyst from the other system creates an immediate transformation,
but you, you lose all the subtleties of the experience.
So the transformation also would lack subtlety, you know, it would be,
it would be more of an if then statement and less of a,
if this then maybe these as
opposed to like, you know, if you put your hand on a burner and it's hot,
you don't put your hand on the burner anymore. Catalyst transformation.
I don't put my hand on a burner anymore. Right. But catalyst experience is like,
well,
I've touched a burner in various phases of heating up and now I know I can touch
it within this window or, and not touch it in this window.
And then after it's cooling down, I have this window.
Whereas catalyst transformation is just like, burner hot, don't touch.
Right.
Maybe you're dwelling on the experience more when you have that experience
archetype,
and maybe it's more intuitive and instinctive when you don't have that. Yeah.
All right. Let's go into more of this general, um,
initial discussion of the archetypes. Um,
so Don had a long, uh,
question here in 7 67 0.28, which we don't have to go into all this.
When he starts talking about archetypes of female and male particle,
sun and fool archetypes, magician adept.
This had to have been his most optimistic question. Yeah. Of all the sessions.
I mean, and this wasn't in two or three, this is 67 that he is like, all right,
I'm gonna, I'm gonna throw this out there.
He throws out like 23 different concepts and yeah.
Is that accurate? Yeah.
And then Ross slams the door on it.
Ross says this entity's be getting pretty tired right now. Yeah, yeah.
Channel channeler is getting tired. We can, we,
this is a rather complex answer, which is interesting,
but we don't expect to finish our answer.
So we ask you to re re-ask us in a future session, which he did in 74.4.
Um, so we'll continue, uh, we'll,
we'll see how Ross started to answer this. Ross said,
perhaps the first item we shall address is the concept of the spirit used as a
shuttle between the roots and the trunk of mind. This is a misapprehension,
and we shall allow the questioner to consider the function of the spirit further
from working with the mind.
We are working within one complex and have not yet attempted to penetrate
intelligent infinity.
So they're just trying to draw a distinction between mind and spirit here for
Don. Um, and the penetration of intelligent infinity is when you're actually,
when the mind is actually using spirit more directly. I guess that's what they,
what what they mean by the, the shuttle of the spirit. Um,
it is well said that the archetypes, uh,
are portions of the one infinite creator are aspects of its face.
It is however far better to realize that the archetypes,
while constant and the complex of generative energies offered,
do not give the same yield of these complexes to any two seekers.
And that, that alone is a profound revelation.
I think that when we look at the major arcane of the tarau,
clearly some cards are female, some cards are male, but other, but,
but there are different, um,
sort of personality attributes that any individual might be more
drawn to, not just the male and female,
but all the other aspects of the archetypes might also be, um,
different amounts of yield of these of concept complexes.
Um, might be, we might be drawn to more, more aspects of these.
And does that sound like a correct interpretation?
Yeah, I mean this is, this is the effect of,
of experience. So I mean, you can't,
you can't experience these energies directly.
You experience them through the lens of your own
complexes and so through your own experience of them.
So that's why they're all gonna be subjective to experience the energies,
uh, without any of that would,
would be to experience your own energies as though you were not the one
experiencing them.
Yeah.
Yeah. And the one thing I was, uh,
questioning when I was reading this is when he says that, uh,
that the spirit is not a shuttle between, cuz they were only dealing with, uh,
one complex when they're talking about the mind.
And I was thinking when,
when they're talking about the mind and all that is this spirit, uh,
not that it's not there or not within the conversation,
but that the mind is more specifically about each
individual, uh, and, and their experience,
uh, with the reality. And that the spirit is something that you can, uh,
tap into that is, um,
and again, it's hard to describe, not different than, but just, it, it's in a,
a different set of parameters when we're talking about the mind.
They were talking about something else. When you talk about the spirit,
you know, different parameters come in. Cause they were,
it essentially sounded to me like they were talking about how it's not this go
between, between the all and,
and each individual being that's not what the spirit is.
It sounded like that's what, um, Don didn't come up with that phrase was who,
who he said somebody prepared it beforehand.
I don't recall what you're referencing there. They
Did bring up the, the concept of a shuttle before. But I,
Jim,
For some reason,
I'm thinking that it's more that the soul is the connective tissue between
the spirit and the mind.
And I know that raw doesn't necessarily draw a distinction between the mind and
the soul in nor do I necessarily know that they should.
I think they just are two different layers of the same mental
framework. Um, so yeah.
But I do remember them talking about the shuttle in another, another session.
Maybe I'll make a note to, we could go maybe into the,
all the references to the soul and spirit in another session too. Okay.
That'd be good to,
Yeah, definitely.
Yeah, I was, I was, uh, when I was reading it, um, I'll reread my notes here.
And the,
the archetypical mind is holographic aspect of the one infinite creator.
So in each complex there already exists
everything in your mind. Therefore, the spirit doesn't have to be a go between,
between you and the information because you,
you imbue you embody all of the information already because of that holographic
nature of, of the, uh, of everything, of creation.
I also think that the spirit is not,
I think they talked about that in another one of the sessions that we're gonna
talk about. So that's the other reason why it's not a shuttle,
because it doesn't actually move.
Yeah. It almost seems like the spirit, uh, exists in the, um,
in the, um, metaphysical in the
Yeah. It's space, I think more specifically than space.
Well, yeah. We'll, we'll, I think we'll touch on that more later, but let's, uh,
yeah. Continue with the archetype aspect of this here and, uh,
move on to the, some of these others that, um,
so, uh, So we,
we we're talking about the,
the archetypal energies are constant in how they're offered,
but they do not give the same yield of these complexes to any two seekers.
Each seeker will experience each archetype and the characteristics within the
complex of the archetype, which are most important to it.
An example of this would be the observation of the questioner that the fool is
described in such and such a way.
One great aspect of this archetype is the aspect of faith,
the walking into space without regard for what is to come next. This of course,
is foolish, but as part of the characteristic of the spiritual neophyte, um,
that this aspect was not seen by don, maybe,
maybe pondered by the questioner.
So Don took the fool archetype to mean something else, but was still, uh,
connected to it. So he was,
he was taking a different perspective on that archetype. Um,
But was he though, you know, I, I went back and reread his question and didn't,
didn't feel that he missed it by as much as Rod did,
because he did say specifically that the fool is setting out to
refine itself or, you know, figure itself out.
Yeah. And, and I was thinking the same thing like Rod's saying, you know, Hey,
you missed this part of the fool. But it almost seems to me like Jim, when he,
when he wrote this down to give to Don, I mean,
he wrote a sentence about a sentence or two sentences about each thing,
you know? Yeah. And then RA goes on to say how complex each thing is and like,
well, yeah,
he's gonna miss some things if he's trying to put it into a sentence.
Yeah. They also read his mind too, so they know.
Yeah. And that's, and that was the other thing that I was tripping out on, like,
okay, so was he responding to the words on the page that Jim wrote to him?
Or was he responding to the,
to the false thought that Jim had when he wrote the thing?
I think sometimes it goes back and forth. What do you think, Nathan?
No, I, I'd agree. I think, cause I mentioned a few other areas too, that, uh,
RA's basically reading Don's mind,
he's questioning some of this and pulls in information that way. So yeah,
I'd agree that kind of makes it a little more intricate, I guess, too,
to have to piece that together, where,
where they might be pulling that information from.
Yeah. Yeah. So Don had said that he, he sees the fool,
the prodigal sonner fool archetype corresponds to every entity who seems to have
strayed from unity and seeks to return to the one infinite creator.
Yeah. I didn't think that that was, you know, like super miss on the mark.
No. Yeah.
Yeah. It's almost like, uh, um,
ROS answering the question that was in his head, like we were saying,
he's not answering the question that he wrote down so much.
Yeah. So, so the aspect Ross suggesting is missing was the aspect of faith,
the walking into space without regard for what is to come next.
So I guess in that sense, the,
without regard for what's coming next, maybe,
Uh, not seeking unity, but just, yeah,
taking the next step, full
Fullheartedly, fullheartedly, whatever comes, let it come. Yeah.
Interesting. Yeah.
I suppose the prodigal son is similarly walking a path
while he's out and about prior to returning,
Right? Yeah. And that's a great parable.
That's Yeah. It's like
Experiencing, oh, it's among the best.
Yeah. Experiencing all the mess of the, of world working, uh,
eating like the pigs and then deciding, I, I've had enough of this,
I'm gonna go home and, um, starting the journey back.
Yeah.
So that intent to walk back would be the regard for what's to come next.
And RA is essentially saying, you know, just, just moment to moment, live it,
moment to moment, stop, stop, uh,
stop thinking that the fool has to have this overarching goal.
I'm not even sure that this sentence that Mike has highlighted isn't
somewhat contradictory in,
in itself without regard for what comes next,
seems to be releasing attachment.
And yet I would say that kind of a core tenant of faith,
while maybe not attachment to specific outcome,
is certainly the knowing that things can and will
come out to my greatest benefit, uh,
when I allow them to.
So it's not entirely without regard,
like my faith is specifically oriented toward a better experience
for me, as opposed to a worse one.
So yeah, I'm probably just overthinking it.
Yeah, it's, uh, th these archetypes are essentially beyond words too.
There's no, um, you know, there's, there's a pure vibration to them.
Maybe I should pull up the images here. People can actually look at this.
Um, so on the, on the Lavo info site, there's a,
there's a Toro study section,
like click course of curriculum.
And these are some of the images that are closest to what, uh,
what they were actually using in the left hand column.
Here is the ones that they actually redrew,
the ll research team redrew these images.
And so we're talking about the one on the bottom here that the choice, and they,
they recommend pairing when you're, when you're doing the study,
they have had a system talked about at the top here, 88.24,
presentation of the images,
one after the other in certain orders that let you study the matrix first,
all three, um, and so on and so on.
And then they study in pairs, matrix and potentiator,
and then catalyst and experience. And, and they say to pair the archetype,
um, um, Of the signator with the archetype, 22 of the fool,
you will note,
the consideration of the signator was left unpaired for the signator shall be
paired with archetype 22. And so this would be a great time to get into,
um, more discussion of the, the signator archetype two,
to understand the, you know, why,
why are they suggesting pairing that one with the choice the
fool? Why, why is the fool called the choice too? But, but I think the, the,
the choice as,
as a purified concept has to be without regard for,
um, attachments to what is chosen. You're,
except that you're just doing the choosing. Um,
not not choosing because you've been told you have to, or you know, you have to,
it's, it's without regard for what's happening, you, the, the,
the purest archetype of choices just stepping out into, you know,
like Indiana Jones on the, on the third movie where he's walking out,
that was, that was literally like the, the test of faith is just,
he had to step out not knowing that there was something there landed on the
platform.
So
doesn't motivation or desire or the will, I mean,
this has to come into the choice. I mean, it's,
there's something driving the choice.
Well, the, the choice itself is driving the choice as the,
as the separate archetype. And then,
then the will comes from the matrix of mind.
And they say everything comes from that too.
The matrix of mind is that from that which all comes, we, we,
we were talking about, and then once you get to the signator,
I feel like the signator is,
is where the transformation has to have some kind of branching point.
You know, is it gonna be the choice of service self or service to others?
So that's why I see it as kind of, um,
an evolution of just the will is that, um,
I see the choice is presented before the,
the desired outcome is even determined.
Yeah.
Okay. So let's talk about pairing the choice with
the signator. Is the, the choice the fool, is this the totality?
Well, what do you mean?
The, the mind, body, spirit totality.
Oh, okay.
Could we,
could we say that the fool encompasses the
totality or the complex?
Not sure if that I, I would assume that the,
the totality and the higher self are like the purified
representations of all the archetypes. So
The totality is the, is
is all the complexes together, isn't it?
Yeah. All,
all aspects of the self at the end of the seventh density is the totality
of all potentials of self. And at that point,
I would imagine the self is basically just like every single kind of expression
of every single archetype.
I'll refine it to the purest sense of this is the being that I've chosen to
be as the archetypal expression of the infinite creator.
Right? So would Jew equate the full to the mind, body, spirit totality,
or the mind body spare complex?
I would say it's the complex cause post the veil,
That, that might make more sense,
but I feel like it's so far beyond time and expression that it's,
it's all of it. It, you know, every aspect of the self is all the archetypes.
And it, it's just a matter of,
you know, there there's different aspects to the experience.
And the choice is not the same thing as the experience archetype.
It's not the same thing as the matrix archetype.
So let's, let's compare or study
the, the full would, would be significant. Then
I could go straight into what they, everything they say about the, this image,
the, the choice. Um, So yeah, the,
the first one was the one we were just talking about. Um,
the next instance was session 77. Um,
Don asked, uh, I'm asking with respect to this particular logos, our son,
and creating the experience of its planetary system, those sub logo, um,
and they said, this query has substance.
We shall begin by turning to an observation of a series of concept,
complex concept complexes, which of which you're familiar as turro.
The philosophy was to create a foundation, first of mind, then of body,
and then of spiritual complex.
Those concept complexes you call the turro lion, three groups of seven,
the mind cycle one through seven, the physical complex, eight through 14,
the spiritual 1521,
the last concept complex may best be turned to choice upon the foundation of
transformation of each complex with free will,
guided by the root concepts offered in these cycles.
The logos offered this density as the basic architecture of a building and
constructing and synthesizing of data, culminating in the choice,
Culminating in every choice.
Yeah.
So would it be culminating in every choice being every choice that
every entity makes or every choice that one entity makes while within
this planetary sphere?
I think it's everywhere. Everywhere
At every level.
It's, uh,
goes back to the recursive feedback loop of
like ai.
Yeah.
And the choice and the fool are one and the same.
Right.
Okay.
So the significant then we know is a sub-component,
obviously of the fool, one aspects of its consciousness.
And why are we, um,
why is it suggested that we look at these two things together?
I don't, I don't know if you would say they would say that they're,
it's a sub component of it because they put a strong emphasis on perceiving each
archetype is a ding on seek, uh,
thing in and of itself to be studied, um, separately.
But I think the reason they, they put 'em together is I think because the, the,
the signator is, um, where choosing is,
is happening in our, our perspective of what is the,
the most efficacious nature of the mind or the body or the spirit.
And so you'd have to pick, uh, polarity, um, to,
to see what is effective about mind, body, or spirit, I think. Um,
but I could, I could, that's something I want to get into though with the, um,
session, uh, 78
Is the significant or choosing action. Choosing meaning,
or both?
I think it would be both. I think you can't have one without the other.
I mean, there's always the meaning there.
Yeah.
And it's that meaning that we've assigned that then drives future choice.
Yeah. And transformation. Yeah. And then the transformation can lead to, um,
great way. And
So transformation, meaning now I've experienced experience,
I've decided what it means,
and now I'm going to choose differently to have a different experience,
and I've thusly transformed the mind.
Yeah. I have a new mind, body,
spirit from which to create a new reality.
Then what, therefore
is the great way.
I love that we're getting into these.
I feel like each of them ha they say so many things about 'em that they have to
touch on a great way in a future session. Um,
but the great way is like the, the, the, the culminating overview, the,
it's like the archetype of coming to the overview. That's the way I've seen it.
Like mastery.
Yeah. Okay. And so they also, they also compare the, the, the final, uh, the,
the world archetype, the great way of the spirit as being the,
that archetype, which is coming in contact with intelligent infinity. And,
and for me,
this is the most profound thing when they're talking about clothing yourself in
an archetype. If you're clothing yourself in the world itself,
like you are becoming one with the world,
that that is totally what that archetype seems to mean as this,
this end product of spiritual transformation is union with the entire
universe,
And which archetype is the world. It's the great way of the spirit.
Yeah. The great way of the spirit.
Yeah. That would make sense.
And, and, and there's a, a female playing an instrument, which is the male.
Hm hmm.
And maybe I,
maybe I should pull up my higher resolution images from the CC Zane,
um, book,
which is available for sale. These images are not apparently, um,
anywhere else on the internet. Um,
so here we have, um, the top part of this is,
Uh,
different animals around in a circle with the bird outstretch wings and the
center of that circle. And the bird was obviously huge in all the other, uh,
many of the other, uh, terro images have, have the,
the wings meaning something about the, I assume it's like the,
the freedom or the taking flight of the, of the self.
Um, and may maybe the, maybe the specific images here mean something.
I'm not totally sure yet that is worth its own study. And then, yeah, the,
the female playing on the instrument, which is the male,
I don't know what this thing is off the top of the head.
Those, um, the, the John Anthony West suggested,
um, that the, uh,
receptacle and the vessel are the different levels of,
and then the, the snake coming out of the head of the headdress,
uh, were like different levels of alertness of the adept,
essentially. Like if you, once you had this, this, uh,
under your belt, you would have the, the, uh,
the vessel and then once you had another aspect of it, the,
the vessel would hold the, the vase. And once you were, um,
more or less fully awakened as a being, living, you know,
with the veil present, but you're, you're fully awakened to it and you,
you can tap into, I guess you would say the Akashic records, then you have that,
the, uh, the serpent, uh,
sticking out of the head representing like the third eye and,
and all that stuff. Mm-hmm.
Is this thing above his head a vessel? You said
The, the vest that's, I'll have to go back and rewatch,
but I'm pretty sure he said that light gray is a base and the vessel that holds
it is the black. I see. So the black is, it looks, it's look like,
it looks like it's a, a cutaway version,
so you can see that the vessel is holding the vase. Mm-hmm. But normally,
you know, with the vase, you know, it would be enclosed and then the v the,
the vessel would be enclosed and the vase would sit inside of it,
if that makes sense.
Yeah. I'll have to think about that more. Yeah.
I'll have to put that, uh, John Anthony West stuff on a,
on a hard drive for you. Yeah. Cause it's, uh,
it's really interesting the stuff that he gets into with it.
And he talks about a lot of this kind of stuff where every
hieroglyph and everyone of these cards,
it's not just saying one thing,
it's saying a concept on three different levels at all times.
You know, the, the physical, uh, the metaphysical and then the spiritual,
uh, he was saying that everything speaks to all three of the levels.
Uhhuh, I have to share with you,
this is just so funny to me that this entire call, I, I have,
I have all these 22 images up on the wall next to me over here,
and there's this big spider that keeps on crawling from image to image and
crawling behind the images. And like, I'm like, what does that mean?
That he is behind? Which
One's he behind now? Man
Behind the matrix was here now he went behind, he went behind the,
the devil just now. So I had to mention him. It's too funny.
You're gonna have to put a,
a camera on that just so we can track that while we're having the conversation.
Like, where's he now? Where's he now
I know how Mike, uh, comes up with the agendas for
Yeah. Spiders
Spider on the wall.
Oh my gosh.
So how else would you interpret that image then with the feminine, using,
I guess that masculine knowledge to create,
to make creation then as a form of music and rhythm, or, it
Does. I haven't really started, I see them in harmony in a way. So I see them,
you know, coming together to make something beautiful.
Like
It was also an aspect of transcending duality is kind of this last
phase is where the feminine and masculine come together
as one. I don't know if that's what this represents. Or not.
It's interesting that, do they ever females playing the instrument though?
If everything comes from the matrix,
and that's the active aspect of consciousness.
It's interesting that it's playing a passive role here.
Well, the female principle is also behind the,
of the matrix of the body, which is also, um,
called balanced working or even functioning. So there is,
there is a kind of like a balance to it that is,
that is the feminine and that's obviously where we're getting babies from. The,
the feminine is, is creating this continuous, yeah, it's,
it's really like the creative principle is, is the feminine one on,
on a physical plane and then the masculine plane maybe more of the,
the musical expressions in, in that archetypal sense.
Mm-hmm.
Do they, do they ever go into,
besides what we just read, uh, where rah touches on, uh,
the spirits not a shuttle,
do they ever fully go over this passage that Jim
wrote and Don asked, because I don't remember them diving into that again.
Diving into what
Di the, the passage that Jim wrote and Don asked where it was, uh, the They
Do in 74, 4 7.
Oh
Yeah. 7.28.
Yeah, we, we'll get into that. Now. We, we can continue now on to that.
Well, only, only because if you go back to that picture,
he says that the father archetype corresponds to the male or positive aspect of
the electromagnetic energy and is active, creative,
and radiant in our local son.
The mother archetype corresponds to the female or negative aspects of the
electromagnetic energy and is receptive or magnetic,
as is our earth as it receives the sun rays and brings forth life via
third density fertility. And that would be, you know, like
the action being played by the femaleness. You know,
that, that, that if those two, uh,
descriptions are said to be correct, I could see how that, um,
the female would play the male.
Yeah. I think we should,
maybe I'll make another note to get into the female and male discussions.
I don't, I didn't wanna dwell too much in what Don says because I hard,
I have a hard enough time remembering what Ross said about these things too.
Yeah, yeah, exactly. To, to, and that's why I asked,
I don't remember if he fully, if they fully go into that full paragraph to the,
to the extent of Ross saying yes to the, yes. To the father concept.
No, to the mother concept. Yes. To the, uh, um, you know,
the magician Satan healer. No, to the fool. Like, I don't think that
They're, we're about to find out.
Cause Mike's gonna take us to 74 4 where they Yep.
Pick back up on it.
Yeah. Right.
So they said, could you just please continue? And then, um,
and Don also asked, should, should we ask the question again next time?
And RAs said, as a general practice, yes,
it's good to vibrate the query at the same space time as the answer is desired.
Um, do, do they just said, just make a notation here.
Um, so 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.
So they're basically saying they won't even answer this completely. They'll,
they want Don to continue to question more on these points. I think, um,
therefore we shall make some general notations upon this interesting subject and
all the questioner to continue in further ref 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.
And so I, I I assume that, um,
that would imply that these images are largely a product
of, um,
the nuances of the archetypes that the logos has decided to say
these, this is the, the nature of these archetypes,
These refinements. Um, so they, they gave some examples here.
The magician was named as, 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.
I guess this was dawn who didn't recognize this. Um,
so the magician represents the will and the conscious mind.
The archetype called by some of the high priestess then is the corresponding
intuitive or subconscious faculty. So it's, um,
it's this one here. On the upper left is the matrix of the mind,
the magician representing the conscious mind, and then this one,
the high priests representing the, the subconscious.
Um,
Yeah. And that's, that's they, they, they explained this whole thing out,
but they never actually confirmed or denied the, the male or feminineness.
Right. But in that it,
it kind of is like saying that the intuition,
which was the female at the high priestess plays, um,
the magician as the male. Yeah.
Like the action is played by the intuition. Yeah,
Definitely. In other sessions, they do confirm the, the maleness,
cuz it's certainly in session in question in cards one through seven here they,
they go into heavy detail Yeah. With raw.
So we do know for sure that the matrix is, um,
seem to be male in the mind and female in the potentiator.
So yeah. But then it's inverted with the body, with the,
this one in the middle here.
That matrix matrix of body being feminine and the potentiator of, of body.
The wisdom of the sage is, is the, um,
principle which, um, sort of provides,
um, I guess the, the,
the path for the body, the,
the potential of the body is more determined with the,
I forget, I forget,
this is why I want to go into these one by one practically to get R's exact
wording. Um, I know that every time I attempt to summarize it,
it's like not quite the same.
Where did you get the images that you have on your wall?
I tho those are taken from the CC Zane.
This would be a great thing to show people. If you go to um,
l l research.org and you go to, I think you go to,
um, channeling the raw contact and then you scroll down,
you get to the, uh,
section somewhere on the tarro, um,
yeah, right here at the top of the supplementary resources,
the archetypes in the tarro.
And you scroll down here and you get to, um,
full explanation CC Zane images.
The original deck that Don Elkins used for questioning was the work of CC Zane,
founder of the Church of Light cc Zane's first deck was released in 1918.
It was subsequently revised in the 1930s and issued as a monochrome deck in the
1960s is the 1960s deck that Don, Jim,
and Carl used for questioning Rob about the archetypal mind.
This deck e listed as the b o l two design on this website.
Um, and I think, um,
I think there was another point where there was a book that had them, um,
that they were selling. But yeah,
these are, um,
these are not the highest quality versions.
These are pretty low quality on this website. Um,
Yeah, cause I'd like to get 'em, uh,
get a copy of 'em so that when we do do the deep dive Yeah. I can have, uh,
the picture just kind of sitting there.
I'll send them to you. Um, okay. I'm not,
I'm not sure if I can send 'em to everybody, but, uh, yeah. This,
this is here number one in the footnotes, the sacred to row.
This is where I got 'em from. Cuz this is a pdf book, which is vector format,
which means you can infinitely zoom in on the images.
Okay. Maybe I'll just go get that. I'll,
I'll get that book and I'll have it myself.
Yep.
Ok. Yeah, because there's so much in these, um, when,
when you start listening to some of the people that are interpreting the
hieroglyphs, uh, you know,
cuz I really do think that people that are interpreting the hieroglyphs,
not necessarily as the, you know, the, the Egypt,
the, the mainstream Egyptologists, uh,
interpret it some of the more, uh, I guess you would call 'em fringe.
I don't know how exactly to say it,
but when you hear some of the descriptions that some of these people have come
out with, they really resonate. And when you read this, the,
the law of one descriptions, you know, they, they build off of each other.
And then when you start looking at these images with this complex, uh,
notion of what they could mean, it just, it seems like the streamings, uh, the,
the end streamings or the downloads happen more readily.
Yeah. Yeah. I wish I could spend my whole life studying this stuff.
Yeah. Cuz there's so much in each card. And, and you know,
like when they start describing what each one means and they talk about like the
bird in the cage and the, and the lines that, that that represent, you know,
like your humanity in a cage within like the, the,
the matrix that we're working within it, there's so much in each
just portion of each picture.
Yeah.
Makes you wonder then looking at the Egyptian hili,
if you look at 'em from that sentence too. So looking at it a little bit deeper,
I think that's what you're kind of saying, Nick,
is they're not just the black and white sort of image meaning to 'em too.
There's a lot more, if you interpret it that way,
the same way you'd analyze this tarau, um, that the Egyptians had,
it'd be a lot more, a lot more we learned from them.
I guess we can move on now to the next part of this.
So they talked about the magician and the high priest us a little bit.
And then they said,
let us observe the entity as it is in relationship to the archetypal mind.
You may consider the possibilities of utilizing the correspondences between the
mind, body, spirit and microcosm and the archetypal mind, body,
spirit closely approaching the creator. For instance,
your ritual performed to purify this place as you use the term Pega burra,
um, which is a part of the, the banishing ritual, the westerner pangram.
Um, it's actually part of the kabbalistic cross.
Yeah, I get that image up again,
Which is normally performed prior to the banishing ritual. Oh,
Oh yeah, go ahead.
Um, and I also wanted to point out that I don't know if rah
made one of their kind of mismatching parallels here
or not, but, um, so anyway, uh,
the ka crosses atta mal le lama.
Yeah. So it's, um, thou art, uh, the kingdom,
the power and the glory forever and ever.
Yep.
So it's the same, more or less as the, um, as the end of the,
the Lord's Prayer.
But what's interesting here is that according to my,
one of my textbooks, more or less that Deborah on the Tree of Life,
um, it's definitely associated with the pillar of form,
which is actually the negative, um, slash divine feminine.
And Gula is another name for Hesed, which is opposite it on the tree.
It's on the right hand side. Um,
now the planetary correspondences here are accurate or they do
line up, but the male and female, uh, do not,
do not, yeah.
That's where you're looking at Deborah and Hesed across it and has said's also
known as Gula. So that's interesting that,
and then I think either in this session right here that we're reading,
either in the next paragraph or in one of the other ones that you sent us,
they may have made one of their sort of cryptic references to how the male and
female, uh, express opposite. So anyway,
I thought that was interesting about this, but you can go ahead and continue,
Mike.
Okay. Yeah, I'll think
About that. Andrew, what is the they in that v Uh,
That's a good question.
Okay. Cause I know, uh, in Sanskrit that, uh,
what is it that turns something to a negative?
There's an A in front
Of Yeah, if you, if you put in a, in front of the word,
it turns it negative in Sanskrit.
So I was just wondering if they w had some kind of tra transformative
property to it, or if it was, if it was just like saying the Deborah.
Yeah, it's a good, it's a good point because you don't say it ahead.
Ofta or Malkuth. Um,
and yeah, there you go.
Rusty chat. G p T.
Yeah. So Atta malkuth thou art the kingdom,
um, and the power and the glory forever.
Oh, okay. If that makes sense. Yeah. Okay. Okay.
All right. Let's keep going here. Yep. So Don was, uh,
raw was bringing up this example, um, mega Bora,
it is 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 adapt.
Vega Bora is the correspondence of Michael of Mars, of the positive of maleness.
Vega doula has correspondences to Jupiter to femaleness to the negative,
that portion of the tree of life concerned with r e l. So yeah,
these principles may be something we can look into more another time.
Um,
we can 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 adapt,
not the teacher learner.
We may only suggest that there are systems of study which may address themselves
to the aspects of the archetypical mind, and it as well to choose one,
study one and study carefully.
It is more nearly well if the adapt go beyond whatever has been written and make
such correspondences that the archetype can be called upon at will.
So at some point, the images are not what is needed by the adapt.
It's the what, the what the,
the archetype is on the deeper level that can be called upon. It will
Embodying it.
Yeah.
Yeah. And like meditating on it to, to sit there with the,
with the concept in your mind, and then, uh, let your mind expand on it.
You know, let the, the, the, the all mind expand on it.
In your mind,
You think they're like promoting here too, some of maybe the ancient, um,
ancient knowledge kind of studying that those types of systems in order to
better understand this or like, it's kind of vague at that point,
but to me it seems like some of the ancient traditions and systems may help you
to also further gain knowledge on, on the archetypal line from that, uh,
second part in the, in that quote.
Yeah.
Yeah. And I think that the, one of the big things they're,
they're hinting at for us is, uh, to, to,
to like study your history to, to, you know,
cuz the whole act of being is to
learn from the last octave to better, uh,
supply the next octave with, you know, more knowledge.
And if we're in, in modern society, I mean, history is just,
it's going by the wayside. It's being changed and manipulated all the time.
And that's what they're saying. Like, the adept should go deep,
go into this to find the, the truth.
Mm-hmm.
Right. But it's something you need to do.
You need to have the will and the desire to do on your own, to discover.
It's not something that can basically shown to you or or hand to you from that
point.
And I think that what this last sentence is really referring to is,
is moving out of the academia and into practice. So saying,
going beyond studying it and reading it in writing,
but to then applying it in life and calling on the archetypes as needed.
Yeah, that makes complete sense.
So you can use the knowledge from the ancient Vedas, learn it all,
but that's just an intellectual exercise at that point until you actually embody
that or start to practice what, what those teachings are.
Exactly. That's an example.
Yeah.
So maybe this would be a good time to read, uh, 76.9,
which was another really great overview of the,
of the systems of study here. Um,
and I don't even know if we referenced this before on these recorded
discussions, but, um, this is worth mentioning over and over to people.
I think, um, uh, raw asked,
is there any present day value for the reuse of the Turo as an aid to the,
in the evolutionary process? And Ross said, we shall repeat information.
It is appropriate to study one form of constructed and organized distortion of
the archetypical mind in depth in order to arrive at the position of being able
to become and to experience archetypes at will.
You have three basic choices. You may choose astrology, the 12 signs,
as you call these portions of your planet's energy web and what has been called
the 10 planets. We're down to eight planets now, I guess, I don't know,
Changed history.
Well, I'd say poor Pluto, but really poor malda. Really? Oh,
yeah,
Yeah, that's true. Yeah. Pluto's least still there, just got relegated by name.
Right.
Um, you may choose the tarot with its 22 so-called man Arkana,
and you may choose the study of the so-called tree of life with its 10 SRO
and 22 relationships between the stations. Um,
which I should again pull up if I can here, um,
just to show people that these lines in between the, the 10
SRO are the, the 22 in number, right?
Yeah.
2, 3, 4, 5, 6.
Yeah. You never actually experienced the energies of the suffer out directly.
You experienced them in relationship to each other.
I see. I suppose it's that way with astrology to some degree.
They were experiencing the blending of the energies from the different planets.
Yeah. Relationships
Between those planets.
It's always a state of motion,
which the Chinese actually have documented
really well in what they call the eing, which is the book of change. And
That might be why they, uh,
raw references studying to the Kara in relation to each other.
Yeah. Seems to be a concept that's, that's, uh, eons old.
I find it interesting that he, that he,
when he talks about studying the 10 planetary systems or,
or 10 planetary bodies in the solar system, um,
and then you look at something like, uh, I don't,
I don't exactly remember the shape,
but if you look at the poles of certain planets,
they have like a Pentagon and a hexagon and, and these things, uh,
it's, you know, there's, there's sacred geometry happening at the polls.
There's radio frequencies coming off of the planets. You know,
like there's so much to get into, even when he is just saying like, go,
go study the 10 planetary bodies.
There's so much more than this one is this far from the sun,
and this one is this dense and this one is gas gaseous,
and this one is solid and it's made of these minerals.
But there's all those subtle things once again. So it's,
it's never just studying the,
the terra card or the,
the tree of life or the 10 planetary systems.
There's all these subtle energies and subtle wisdoms to all three sets.
Yeah.
And I still feel like a beginner in all these, basically.
Yeah.
I feel like,
and I'm biased obviously since I chose one of these three paths,
but I still feel that, um,
both astrology and the tarot are reflections or,
um, resultant.
And I understand that the tree of life is still the result of, you know,
the injection of information or the comprehension of that information
by mankind. So I still get that that's still reflective.
And yet to me it's still seems more like the blueprint,
whereas the planetary bodies are the building
and the tarot is, you know, something somewhere in between,
but still more of a reflection because it's these images that are meant to
reflect the underlying energies.
And I feel like if you knew enough about either the Tara or the planetary
bodies, you could say the same thing about them.
I think that your extensive knowledge of the Tree of life lends that
idea to you. But, you know,
if you knew that Mars puts off a radio signal that is this
frequency and that frequency, when you, you, you know,
play it through cymatics turns into this sacred geometry and that sacred
geometry means love, you know that,
That, right. But it's not, it's not emanating It is the point.
My point is that it's just another in a long string of
fractualized blueprints that are built one on top of, uh,
of the next.
Yeah. I think that all of these different, uh,
ways of studying are,
are this are the stuff this bras talking about.
It's an ancient knowledge that is being put into
something that the people of this planet can understand. And, you know,
the tree of life is, is was for the ancient Hebrews and the,
the planetary bodies are for the, uh, astronomers. And, you know,
these people study,
and then you got the terror for the people that really gotta have a grasp on the
ancient Egyptology and the hieroglyphs that, that, but the concepts that,
that imbue each one of those studies with the meaning that they have
those concepts are universal.
Um, well, again, I wouldn't say that astrology is,
it can be a means of study, but it's a,
it's like reading signs on the side of the road.
You can learn where you are by looking at what's present and telling
you, you know, here's what's going on. But the sign doesn't make the location.
It just tells you where you are.
It's, it's all, it's all an intersection of energies.
Yeah.
It's just, it's just what it, what is the, what is the nature of the,
and, and it's so profound to me that when, when we're born,
that specific moment Yeah.
Is the determining factor of our personality.
Because we've stepping into a choice of a metaphysical vibration,
which is completely, uh, expressed in that, in that,
in that specific location that we're born, specific time we're born, and the,
the orientation of all energies in relation to us and everything gets down to
like this. I mean, assume it's like an infinitely complex, um, decision.
That is the one decision we made to have that one experience of an
incarnation. That's so, so profound to me that the,
the planets have that resonance. But then at the same time,
you could say that there, there is the, the,
the correspondence to the tarot and to the, um,
the sferra and the tree of life all wrapped up in the,
in the archetypal energies of that moment.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah. We've, we've talked about it before where it just seems like that,
that no matter what, which of these disciplines you choose,
that the undercurrent of all of 'em are trying to get you to these
truths about the reality that we live in.
Yeah. So this is what they said about astrology.
They said the root of astrology as you speak,
it is one way of perceiving the primal distortions.
It's one way of perceiving the primal distortions,
which may be predicted along probability, possibility lines given the,
shall we say,
cosmic orientations and configurations at the time of the entrance into the
physical mental complex of the spirit at and at the time of the physical,
mental, spiritual complex and of the illusion. Um, and they're,
they're distinguishing between the moment of conception and the moment of birth
here. I think, um,
this then has the possibility of suggesting basic areas of distortion.
There is no more than this.
The part astrology plays is likened unto that of one root, among many.
Yeah. I guess we could continue on now. Um, so it's,
well to investigate each discipline, each of these three, um,
not as a Dante, I feel like I keep wanting to define that people,
a Dante is a person who cultivates an area of interest,
such as the arts without real commitment or knowledge.
So they're saying to some degree, be,
be focused and have some commitment to investigation. Um,
as one who seeks the touchstone,
one who wishes to feel the pull of the magnet,
One of these studies will be more attractive to the seeker,
but the seeker than That's just a fact. Torah. Yeah.
Yeah.
That's great. Let the seeker then investigate the archetype,
typical mind using basically one of these three disciplines.
After a period of study, the discipline master efficiently,
the seeker may then complete the more important step that is moving beyond the
written in order to express any, any unique fashion. It's understanding,
if you may, again pardon the noun of the archetypical mind.
So that's similar to the last sentence of the last one that we were
Yeah.
They're kind of emphasizing that beyond study, you then need to apply this,
right?
Mm-hmm.
Yeah. And that's what they said here at the top two, um,
in order to arrive at the position of being able to become, to become,
and to experience archetypes at will,
Though they don't necessarily talk about what the inherent value of
that is. I think for us, that seems to be implicit,
but,
Well, they don asked that and a different one. Uh, um,
I think that was, um, I can find that quickly by searching for the,
the exact phrase, new mind, I think. Um, yeah.
So how is the knowledge of the facets of the archetypical mind used by the
individual to accelerate his evolution?
And this was the only example like this that they gave as far as I'm
aware of it. But this was, this is a great foundation for understanding this.
They say,
we shall offer an example based upon the first explored archetype or concept
complex, which was the magician. The consciousness,
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, and Blu-ray or indigo is blocked through overactivation.
So this is one state that a person may find themselves in.
When your mind is so bursting full of thoughts that it's,
it's difficult to go further in evolution,
it is then that the adapt would call upon the new mind untouched and virgin
and dwell within the archetype of the new and un unblemished mind without bias,
without polarity full of the magic of the logos.
So this is becoming the matrix of the mind,
becoming the magician, becoming, coming consciousness itself,
coming back to consciousness that has nothing in it, no biases, no polarity.
And that is the consciousness which is the most
Full of the magic of the logos.
Hmm.
In the archetype of the new and unblemished mind without bias.
But are they referring to, is that the great way?
This is referring to just the magician as far as I can tell.
Uh,
That almost sounds like the one that we were reading earlier where they were
talking about, uh,
he was talking about faith and to go into things without, uh,
we were saying like motivation. But he, he put it in a different way.
But it's like going, going into the, uh,
situation without any of your, you know,
biases from your experiences prior.
Yeah. Even without polarity, they're saying here. Yeah.
Yeah.
Huh.
And they said full of the magic of the logos, you know,
so we're not talking about the sun or the galaxy, you know,
we're talking about the logos, the, the universe at that point, you know,
the universal mind.
One could also suggest that it's extremely difficult to come all the way back to
the magic of the logos and the original thought you could even say,
dropping off all the biases and desires for thoughts that are separate from that
original thought.
Yeah. That's what I like.
When I was saying earlier how I spent 45 minutes on that one passage,
I felt like I was in that place. Cause the,
the statement where they said the first distortion is free will struck me in
such a way that I had to like completely imagine what it would be like
to not have free will. And then I went down this, this like thought experiment,
you know, what would it be like to not have free will? What would it look like?
What would life look like? And all these different things, you know, that,
that seems to be what they're describing right there.
Almost like a thought experiment.
Yeah.
So maybe we could dive into the magician next time. I feel like Yeah.
We're getting closer to the end here. And, and they,
they went over all the meaning of all these symbols. Um,
and the fact that it relates to what we just said is the most profound thing
too. Um, you, you know, there, there's the checkers,
uh, checkerboard pattern representing the,
the polarity sort of as a foundation here of potential,
um, with the caged bird, um, not yet outstretching its wings,
not yet pursuing that, that direction of, of seeking.
Yeah. And I think that we should definitely, um,
maybe we could do it off of one of the chats,
but we should definitely get together at some point and just
kind of get an aggregate of all the different times and ways they talk about the
significant of the potentiator and the matrix, and kind of come up with a,
an aggregate definition of them, because it's,
it's just so shotgunned all over the place within the material to,
to come up with one specifically that we could reference when, when, uh,
talking about each tarot would be nice.
Hey, Mike, have you, uh, have you played with, uh,
chat g p t with these PDFs yet? I imagine you did with the plugins?
I, I have not yet.
I haven't either. I've done it a little bit with, um, Paul Selig's first book.
Um, but I'd be curious to know how chat G p t would
interoperate with the data.
Yeah. Yeah, that's a good point.
Maybe I'll play with that offline and
see if there's anything interesting there.
I, I will say this.
I've asked Chad g b t about the law of one and version 3.5.
When you ask it to quote the law of one, it will give you wrong quotes,
almost exclusively wrong quotes that just like making up things.
And then version four is almost always right, but still not completely right.
But I feel like it's improving at least.
So for people who out there who feel like this is just a very untrustworthy, um,
way to get information, I feel like that's,
that's true for the free version and for the paid version, it's less true.
It's still partially true though. So
Yeah, I wanna see how the pdf, uh, plugin specifically, I,
I've worked with two of them so far, but I'd like to know how those will do,
because I, it's supposed to limit it supposedly to Yeah.
To what you upload.
Yeah. Oh, yeah. And there's different concepts.
I'm barely understanding with the context window,
but this's is a whole other discussion for another time, I guess.
Yep.
Um, so yeah, I definitely wanted to get to this, um,
discussion of the signator here. Um,
so the question was, um,
following up after 78.19. Um,
I'll, I'll read both of these. So the original first evolution, we,
we didn't wanna get into the veil talking, talking about the veil, but, um,
so, So, uh, yeah, I'll just,
I'll just read this.
So the original first evolution then was planned by the logos,
but the first distortion was not extended to the product.
This is Don's way of talking about humans. Basically. Um,
at some point this first distortion was extended into humans and the
first service to self polarity emerged. Is this correct? And if so,
could you tell me the history of the process and emergence as a
ProAm or preamble?
Let me state that the logo always conceived of themselves as offering free will
to the sub logo in their care. The sub logo had freedom.
The sons, the stars had freedom to experience and experiment with consciousness,
the experiences of the body and the illumination of the spirit.
So they already had that, that freedom that having been said,
we shall speak to the point of your query,
the first logos to instill what you now see as free will in the full sense.
And its sub logo came to this creation due to contemplation in depth
of the concepts or possibilities of conceptualizations of what we have called
the signators.
So
These significant archetypes were something that the logos had to consider.
What were the possibilities of the signators?
The logos posited the possibility of the mind, the body,
and the spirit as becoming complex.
In order for the signator to be what it is not,
it must then be granted the free will of the creator,
the set in motion to quite lengthy in your terms,
series of logo improving or distilling this seed thought.
The key was the signator becoming a complex.
So these images here, uh, when you get down to the signator,
these three images are basically the product of
what they originally said is a simple and unified concept.
Signator is a simple and unified concept before the veiling,
the expl exploration of free will extended further into, um,
beings through a veil over our conscious mind,
between our conscious and unconscious minds. That veiling is,
I believe it's encoded into these, these images now,
because this is an expression of the, of the complex potentials. There's a a,
there's a polarity here in the significance of mine, which is the hierophant.
It's like a priest, um,
the two different potentials of, of positive and negative servants.
It seems like. Um, I'm not sure what those those guys represent,
but we can talk about that another time too. Um,
and then the hanged man is the signator of the body, or the martyr,
as they also call it. And then the son, um, has the male and female,
um, as the significant or of the, of the spirit.
Um,
and each of these becoming more complex is a process of people having
more potentials for exploration and service to self.
Polarity didn't exist before the potential of,
of evil as we know. It came into being
through this contemplation.
Look at that last line. The key was the signator becoming a complex.
So did the archetype become a complex when the veil was drawn,
or,
Yeah.
And then it also says in order for the signator to be what it is not.
So that seems like that would be the purpose, right?
Right.
So in this case,
if we were to draw a parallel between our own divine
realization, is that what this is referring to?
In order for the significant to be or become,
or to realize itself, it has to have the free will of the creator,
although they don't really differentiate between what this full free will
and the previous one, or,
Hmm.
Well, in order to, to be what it is not, uh,
sounds to me like in order for the experience to have,
um,
experiences other than love of all things,
then it had to, that the complex had to be brought in,
the veil had to be dropped. And the fact that you are not,
you're not aware of the fact that all things are won,
therefore you don't recognize that loving someone else is actually loving
yourself. You know, that that's what the, uh, to be what it is not means to me.
Whereas, you know, you know that if you know that everything is you,
you're gonna love everything because you know, it's, it's coming back. It's,
it's, it's all, it's, it's, you know,
you're just putting into the pool of love that, that everything shares.
Whereas if you have to become something that you're not like,
so then you would be becoming unaware that when you put love out,
it goes into the pool. So then that's how, you know, the, the,
the catalyst of loving self instead of loving other selves happened.
Because by default, you would always love other selves because, you know,
the other selves are yourselves. So you had to become not that.
Yeah, I can see it moving in either direction,
because you can also see it as moving into separation.
And in order for the signator to know itself through separation,
it had to have complete free will in order to choose an experience reflective of
separation. Mm-hmm.
Right. And so that gives you the opportunity for what's described here in the,
these other two quotes I wanted to bring up at session 83.
The question was what techniques and methods of penetration of the veil were
planned? And are there any others that have occurred other than those planned?
And Ross said there were none planned by the first grade experiment as all
experiments. And the great experiment is the veiling,
the extension of free will to humans as all
experiments. This rested upon the nakedness of hypothesis.
The outcome was unknown.
It was discovered experientially and empirically that there were as many ways to
penetrate the veil as the imagination of mind, body,
spirit complexes could provide the desire of mind, body,
spirit complexes to know that which was unknown drew them to the dreaming
and the gradual opening to the seeker of all of the balancing mechanisms leading
to adept hood and communication with learned teachers,
which could pierce this veil.
The various,
Go ahead. No,
I just thought that last part was interesting when I read that this morning as
well. Um, balancing mechanisms kind of,
I suppose that makes sense, but both of these start to imply, um,
information. So balancing mechanisms are, you know,
just like we learn here in the lot,
one and any other wisdom traditions that we pursue,
but also communication with teach learners. So they're,
they're getting outta the abstract here. And, and to me,
telling me that that desire to know what is unknown
will call not just knowledge, but also teachers
in specifically to help pierce avail.
And that makes me wonder about lineage and, you know,
the energetic handing down of information and that kind of thing.
Mm-hmm.
It sounds like the, the old quote, when you're ready to learn,
the guru will appear
Yeah. The self really,
Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. You're your self in the form of your, you know,
outside guru that, that other person. But
there is a, a great quote by Alan Watts, and he says, uh, um,
he's like,
you go to your guru and he looks into your eyes and you're nervous because you
know that your guru can see everything in you and you know all the terrible
thoughts that you've had, and this scares you.
And he looks at you in that funny way,
not because he sees all the terrible things that you may be thinking,
but he looks at you in that funny way because he's saying, uh,
he's saying Shiva, which is basically he's seeing the Godhead in you. He says,
Shiva old boy, I see you there playing this fool, and I have all these worries.
Uh, but I see you there. Don't try and fool me. I know who you are.
I think that was Ron Das
when he tells the story of meeting his guru and,
and thinking his bad thoughts and, and they said all of my stuff.
Um,
Ramdas touches on it too, uh, in, uh, in, in the, um,
going home. I think it is the, the thing on Netflix,
Ah,
I mean, they all touch on it. Cause it's a, it's a fundamental truth.
He also says, and if you don't think you have a guru, I'll lend you mine. Yeah.
Just love that.
I like, um, uh, what did, um,
the monkey, why am I blanking on this? Haman Haman, who,
who was hanman talking to on the garden? Yeah, I'm,
I'm having a brain fart. But Haman, uh, I think it was Shiva.
Shiva said to Haman
Ramma
One, Brahma, one of the godheads said to Haman Monkey,
who are you? And he said, when I know who I am, I am you.
When I don't know who I am, I serve you essentially. Like, you know,
we're all one. And when I know who I am, I know that you're me and I'm you.
But when I don't know who I am, uh, you know, we,
we all serve in the same thing.
Mm-hmm.
So we're getting closer to the end. Um, so I,
I'll maybe I'll do one more here on the, the veiling.
Um, I did like that last paragraph though.
I thought it was important for what we're doing.
The various unmanifested activities of the self were found to be productive in
some degree of penetration of the veil in general,
we may say that by far the most vivid and even extra extravagant opportunities
for the piercing of the veil are a result of the interaction of polarized
entities.
That's us. It does go,
go on to explain that a little bit more below in the different ways,
the doubling and all that, but still, yeah. Thought that was important. Yeah.
Yeah.
Could you expand on what you mean by the interaction of polarized entities and
piercing the veil? Marissa, we shall state two items of note.
The first is the extreme potential for polarization in the relationship of two
polarized entities, which have embarked upon the service to others' path,
or in some few cases, the service to self path. Secondly,
we would note that effect, which we have learned to call the doubling effect,
those of like mind, which together seek shall far more surely find.
Mm. I like that.
Yeah.
And that speaks to the whole, uh, you know, like when Andrew, uh, you,
we get together,
I bring the Ayurvedic side and you bring the Kabbalah side
to it. But you know, it's just,
we're just bringing two different disciplines in to expand our,
our knowledge. And, and it does have that doubling effect.
To be able to get your insights from one discipline and my insights from another
discipline just makes it that much more clear when you sit and you talk about
it.
Yeah.
I've kind of furthered my notion of the idea of a vortex that gets created to
pull in lighter information,
and that it seems that having two or more perspectives is
what allows it to spin. Um, yeah. So anyway,
probably a topic for another day, but,
And then in 85 here, I picked out number 19,
the spider just went down to the potentiator spirit.
So random. It's like, it's finding so much shade back there or something.
I don't know.
So this is gonna be like when you watch a racing event and they have the track
at the bottom and it shows you where each car is on the track,
you're gonna have to have a spider tracker in the bottom left-hand corner of
your screen there.
So this question was also about the veiling. Uh,
I would like to carry on to find out what specific functions of the mind were
most effectual and the three or four most effective changes brought about to
create polarization. This is after the veiling,
uh,
and Ross said the primary veiling was of such significance that it may be seen
to be analogous to the mantling of the earth over all the jewels within the
earth's crust. Whereas previously,
the facets of the crater were consciously known after the veiling,
almost no facets of the crater were known to the mind.
Almost all was buried beneath the veil.
If one were to attempt to list those functions of the mind most significant,
and that they may be of aid at polarization,
one would need to begin with the faculty of visioning and visioning or far
seeing without the veil,
the mind was not caught in your elusory time with the veil space,
time is the only obvious possibility for experience.
It says that it's the only obvious possibility.
It doesn't say that it's the only possibility. Right.
And that's where the visioning, the envisioning, and the far seeing goes.
That that goes back to the concept of Mike, you and I talked about it where, uh,
like meditating,
clearing the mind or like meditating on something to
attain, you know, greater understanding of it.
Yeah.
Like visioning and visioning and faring.
Yeah.
I mean, Russell Targa books written on the government employing,
um, uh, what,
what is it when you see something in another location? Why am I remote viewing?
Remote viewing? Yeah. I mean, you know, if, if you're,
if you're one of those normies that's coming into this and you're like, ah,
if it's not written down or the government hasn't invested in it,
then it's not real. I'm telling you that they did, man, and,
and he wrote books about it.
Yeah.
Ivanka talks about it too, right? John Vivo? I think it is,
Yeah.
But I mean, it's totally possible if you can focus your mind,
you can see things. They've talked about seeing things on distant planets, but,
you know, even, even less obvious than seeing, you know,
with your eyes pictures, you can see truths. You know, if you sit and you,
if you don't think that the only possibility is for experience and you,
you think that you can get it through meditation, you will.
Mm-hmm.
This next paragraph I have a little bit of bristling about,
because I don't remember any of my dreams.
Also upon the list of significant veiled functions of the mind would be that,
of dreaming the so-called dreaming contains a great deal,
which if made available to the conscious mind and used shall aid it in
polarization to a great extent.
Yeah. Not part of my experience, unfortunately.
Yeah. Just, just one way of, of getting deeper into the mind.
Yeah.
Well,
maybe that your experience is specifically not to remember your dreams so that
you could more deeply dive into the envisioning,
the visioning and the tree of life.
Yeah. I do think that there's specific reasons why we, um,
come in with certain, uh,
limitations or constructs in mind. Yeah.
And the third function of the mind,
which is significant and which has been veiled,
is that of the knowing of the body,
the knowledge of and control over the body having been lost to a great extent in
the veiling process, is thusly lost from the experience of the seeker.
Its knowledge before the VEing is of small use, its knowledge after the veiling,
and in the face of what is now a dense illusion of separation of body complex
from mind complex is quite significant.
And they didn't give an example here, but I,
I think in other points they talk about like cancer,
it's like a person can have cancer, have no idea why they have cancer,
no idea how the thoughts of anger may have manifested that cancer.
But if you could know,
you could resolve that issue immediately by just tracing up that distortion
and then forgiving self and other self and healing that, that original,
um,
deeper mind issue that is now manifesting in the physical dimensions because
we can't perceive the, the distortion in the inner plane dimensions yet.
So
I think that, um, it was, it was,
it was either Royal Raymond Rif or T towns and Brown, um,
who was experimenting with vibrational healing of cancer. Um,
when you read some of their stuff,
if you then apply that everything is vibration and you think of a certain
emotion as a certain frequency,
and one of those guys was taking the cancer and they would hit it with different
frequencies and it would break up the cancer.
So essentially what they were finding was the cancer had a frequency,
and if you hit it with its opposite frequency, it would break it up.
So if you knew what the frequency of the cancer was and you knew the opposite
frequency, you could then apply that to knowing what the op,
what the frequency of the emotion was that made it go there,
and what the opposite frequency or emotion was to help heal it.
Yeah. Yeah.
It feels like there's, there's also, you know, um,
a deeper mind component to the alternative healing methods too, that we, yeah.
When we tap into the, the belief that we,
that we can magically retune our reality,
then I think that liberates us emotionally on some level too,
that's kind of connected to this,
this greater power that we can have over our physical reality.
And that goes back to the, the, um, two paragraphs up.
It's the only obvious possibility for the experience. Yeah. And it's,
it's kinda like, you know, we,
we live in a society that says the only obvious way to heal cancer is
chemotherapy. Yeah. Well, you know, not necessarily the only possibility,
but that seems like the only obvious one.
Yeah.
It's amazing that when you start looking at these things and you start looking
at how uh,
just changing one little concept in your mind can change your whole reality.
And then the next one, they said the fourth one, the,
perhaps the most important and significant function that occurred due to the
veiling of the mind from itself is not in itself a function of mind,
but rather is a product of the potential created by this veiling.
That this is the faculty of will or pure desire.
And that they describe this at other points too. That the, you know,
the desire to know that which is unknown mm-hmm.
Is an automatic enhancer of the faculty of will a pure desire.
Yeah. And that's, that goes back to the whole to play,
to play poker and knowing everybody else's hand. You know,
you have to become a better poker player if you don't see the other people's
cards.
Yeah.
Which, that's a reference to a previous raw session.
I can't remember if it was in these recordings or the other recordings.
I don't want somebody just thinking I'm waxing intellectually about, uh, poker.
I think we did talk about it in the last one a month ago.
Okay. Okay. That
Was such a good one. Maybe we should do that one repeatedly,
cuz that's kind of a central quote, the poker game analogy.
Yeah. Well, and then it,
it also applies to this where they were talking about how, you know,
if you had pain in your arm before the veil between the body and the mind
happened,
you could just shut the receptors off and stop feeling the pain in your arm.
Yeah.
Um, yeah, that's another quote that's,
so maybe Veiling deserves further discussion in the future episode too,
cuz there's so many other quotes on the, these subjects. Um,
I guess that was the end of this. Um, yeah,
they were just talking about Carl Ruckert and this final paragraph here,
we mis we wish not to misuse this instrument. All right. Um,
I guess we're at the end of our two hour mark,
which is arbitrarily decided by me. Apparently.
All right. We don't wanna misuse our instrument, so
Yeah.
Yeah. It sounds like you need some more rest, Mike.
Yeah. Yep.
And more play time with the baby or toddler. Now
That could be a form of rest. Yeah. Maybe not physical rest,
but rest of the mind and the chaotic world around it.
Yeah, it is. Yeah.
Daniel's that perfect representation, like he was saying to,
to have faith to walk into the next situation with no, uh,
predispositions. He literally walks through life that, you know,
experiencing everything for the first time.
Yeah. Yeah. It's,
it's wild how much he can be affected by every little thing too.
Whenever there's a car crash on tv, he, he takes it very much emotionally.
Like this is something deep,
deep and painful that he's seeing and he starts getting very upset.
Even if it's just a kid's cartoon. It's amazing. What can,
what can happen cuz he's just this blank slate of consciousness
And to embody the consciousness of a cartoon that's next level.
So, um, do you guys have any other thoughts,
things you wanna talk about in future sessions? Just let me know anytime. Um,
Will do pleasure as always.
Yeah, absolutely.
You guys have a great rest of your weekend.
You too. You too. You
Guys as well.