WEBVTT
All right. Welcome, guys, to another Ra Uru Hu Deep Dives.
It's been almost a year since we did one of these.
It's kind of crazy it's been so long.
But I've certainly speculated. I wonder if this is meaningful that
we've gone through a year of more life experience. We've grown in different ways.
I've certainly had a lot of time to think about the nature of these three
archetypes, the significators that we were on schedule to be talking
about, that we're going to be talking about with the
significator of mind, which is the Hierophant, significator of the body, which is
called the Hanged Man or Martyr,
and the significator of the Sun.
And
there's an interesting quote. I think I might as well start out in giving you a
hint at how challenging this is to properly perceive
what we're talking about when we're talking about becoming the nature of
spirit, becoming the significator of the Sun, and there's many other words that Ra
gives us hints about what the significator represents.
But I'm going to share my screen now, and we can dive in.
I want to start out with a discussion of the
nature of the spirit more as discussed in session 80
when Don asked about the 15th archetype, which is the Matrix of the Spirit, which
has been called the Devil. "Can you tell me why this is so?"
And Ra said, "We do not wish to be facile in such a central query, but we made a
note that the very nature of the spirit is so infinitely subtle that the
fructifying influence of light upon the great darkness of the spirit is very
often not as apparent as the darkness itself." So, in
other words, we're focused more on the shadows than on the source of the
light, which is illuminating the shadows.
"The progress chosen by many adepts becomes a confused path as each adept
attempts to use the catalyst of the spirit," which is also called the
Faith or the Hope
or the Star. "Few there are which are successful in grasping the light of
the Sun." And when they say this part,
they're hinting that there is another step when we appreciate a
spiritual light. To grasp the source of that light, to grasp the
Sun,
is an extra challenge,
and that would be the process of understanding and becoming the significator of the
spirit, I think.
By far, the majority of adepts remain groping in the moonlight, which is the
experience of the spirit, which would, in theory, lead to an
appreciation of the Sun. But the majority of
adepts, even adepts, remain groping in the moonlight,
discerning truth from falsity in the shadows.
And as we said, this light can deceive as well as uncover hidden mystery.
Therefore, the melody, shall we say, of this matrix often seems to be of a
negative and evil, as you would call it, nature.
It is also to be noted that an adept is one which has freed itself more and more
from the constraints of the thoughts, opinions, and bonds of other
selves. Whether this is done for service to others or service to self,
it is a necessary part of the awakening of the adept.
This freedom is seen by those not free as what you would call evil or black.
The magic is recognized. The nature is often not.
And I've had to wonder about this with...
Boy, there's a lot of groups that can take a lot of negative attention, even
Christian groups. Churches like Bethel
and Hillsong, they put out these amazing worship songs, get everyone
feeling like they're full of the Holy Spirit, full of love and
bliss, and then they get a big portion of the Christian community
telling them they're dealing with satanic, demonic energies because
they're seeing these signs and wonders, but they're false signs and wonders because
there's too much
suspicion. When you see somebody operating in freedom and seeing
a degree of spiritual energy or power radiating from them, it doesn't even
matter if they're trying to toe the line with fundamentalist Christian
beliefs, they're still bashed for their
Yeah. That's basically the same thing that happened to Jesus,
right?
Yeah. Exactly.
For the most part. I'm sure he probably ran somewhat afoul
occasionally, as is recorded in the Bible, of what
the Jewish community would've considered to be
laws.
But
yeah.
Right.
They had a similar evaluation to make, and I've kind of wondered that a
long time. I don't really know the entire nature of what
the
prediction set up in Revelation is
about false prophets and the Antichrist and
all of that. But
I think it's adjacent to this. Certainly, they might.
I don't know.
I can't see that they would come across as entirely free, but this says that this
works for both service to self and other selves.
The phrase before that I thought was interesting, to
free yourself, or sorry, the one right before that, from the
constraints of thoughts, opinions, and bonds of other selves.
So, this seems kind of like
detachment, I think, from a Hindu and Buddhist
perspective, just that one clause minus
the other things.
Right. And I've thought about this quote quite a lot.
This is a little bit of a detour from the specific discussion about the
significator, but this freedom, I think, is related to the light of the Sun that
we're talking about. And really,
it's like what is holding us back from being of service to others or service to
self? If a person is wanting to be of service to others and they get somebody
in their lives who they're feeling very attached to, identified
with, and that person is draining their energy, and they can't
actually find balance. It's like if you can't find
balance in your life, then you can't really continue to be of more
service. So I really do feel like there's a degree to which
service to self is the same thing as service to others, and that we're
finding the way to break out of ourour bondage
to feeling like we have to do certain things.
And when we take care of ourself, then we can take care of others better.
We just have to understand with wisdom.
And I think light and wisdom are connected in this.
When we have more light to work with, we can see more clearly what is
actually helping and what is actually not helping.
And usually attachments to things of this earth and the feelings of others,
the opinions of others, it's like freedom from that can definitely be the thing
that we're needing for spiritual growth on any path.
Yeah. It's kind of interesting that the collective gives us
differing and even diametrically opposed
energies. We've got paradigms and systems that exist that are clearly
incongruent or more congruent with a service to self path,
and then we have a narrative culturally that says that we're
service to others. And so I can see why both on either path would need
to disengage,
with one or the other of those in order to free
itself.
Did Nick join us? Nick made it. All right.
Nick.
I can hear you, Nick.
Hey.
Hey.
All right. Great.
Oh, man.
Welcome back, Nick.
I've missed you guys.
Chatted for a little bit to catch up, so I think-
Good
... yeah, pretty much we're on the first passage.
Okay.
This is just one I was throwing in there thinking it's a teaser to say,
"Few there are which are successful in grasping the light of the sun." And what
does this mean?
And
we'll talk about the symbols of the archetypes that this is hinting us.
It's hinting there. It's talking about these archetypes because the experience of
the spirit is the moonlight. By far, the majority of adepts remain groping in the
moonlight, and as we have said, this light could deceive as well as
uncover hidden mystery.
So ideally, we want to find the light that is uncovering the hidden mystery and
bringing us closer and closer to the source of the light.
Which
if you follow Ra's teachings around appreciating the
archetypes, once you understand the light of the sun, the next
step of appreciating this hidden mystery is to become the light of the sun.
And seeing yourself as the sun seems to be the natural progression,
and seeing yourself as the source of all light and becoming that light.
And I've thought a lot in the last year how this is really
the opposite of victimhood identity, where a lot of
people are just afraid the whole universe is against them.
And there's all these things that are external that are the source
of all these negative experiences.
But if we can flip it around and see ourselves as the light which is illuminating,
we are actually that light which is choosing to have the illuminating
ability to see certain aspects of our reality, to see
certain maybe aspects of our life come into being.
That's pure manifestation, when you're becoming the light that is the source of
manifestation.
But this is also, I think, a process of unblocking the chakras and appreciating the
intelligent infinity, and that's what ultimately the great way
archetypes, I think, will be leading us to understand
is the highest potential uses of the light of the
spiritual energies.
And we'll talk about that in two episodes from now.
But this one is focused on appreciating what is the source of the light
that we are.
And so this is also why I've started to consider that maybe the
appreciation of becoming the significators is actually just appreciation of
becoming
the nature, the raw, pure nature of mind, body, and spirit.
And so we could start discussing
some of the original quotes about
the significators.
Because they said before the significators were complex.
The original significators may undifferentiatedly be termed
the mind, the body, and the spirit.
So you'd think knowing the self as the significator means knowing the self
as the mind with the hierophant, knowing the self as
the body, as the hanged man or martyr.
And I'll pull up the images quick here.
And then knowing the self as the sun, as the spirit, knowing what it is to
be fully radiant and loving.
Can we apply this adverb in here, too, real quick, undifferentiatedly?
Yep. Let's figure out what that means in there.
I
feel like I understand the word, but I think in the context, I guess I'm trying to
figure out is it the term or terminology that they're
saying is undifferentiated? So it's the same across each of them?
Is that kind of how you read that? The significator is
the same
function or essence, I guess? It's essentially the same across the three
non-complexes?
I think undifferentiated means not divided or able to be divided into different
elements.
So maybe you can't divide these things.
Oh. So yeah, the mind. And this is before the
complex, as you said, right? So would this be
relatively primordial?
Yeah. Before the veiling, before the great experiment,
and then after the veiling and the great experiment, then the simple significators
became complex, and they said the mind became a complex.
And because of that, the body became complex.
The nature of the spirit became complex.
And so we could speculate that some of these tarot images, and I'll
start pulling them up here, would actually be
different if there were no complex nature to the mind, body, and
spirit after the veiling.
And certainly, card number five. Now it's updating the image
viewer. Okay. Card number five, you could see there's a lot going on.
And we can break down the
images. I think we did once before try to break down some of these symbols in this
particular image.
But we can cover that briefly again.
But the nature of polarity is represented,
the nature of the scepter,
which may be related to protection
What's the mudra? I don't remember looking specifically at that before.
I don't know if we talked about that yet.
I didn't call that a mudra in my mind, but yeah.
Oh.
That would make sense.
I don't know if they had mudras in Egypt or not.
They certainly had them in India. I'm looking for the book.
I know I have a book of mudras.
Hmm.
All right.
Or actually, Alex does. Alex has the book.
Yeah. I was going to say, let's be clear here.
We know who the librarian is over there.
Of the Ayurvedic content anyway.
Let's see if I can get
my
list pull up that says what all the symbols are.
So yeah, this is one of the discussions we could start having, though.
But I think it'd be fair to continue talking about what Ra
said, and since Ra didn't really say that much
about the other archetypes. This would be 14 is the
significator of the body.
Mike, what on love one do you do to get to those pictures of the tarot?
Well, if you go to
loveone.info, and you just search on the page for images
or tarot,
then that'll show up in the
links near the bottom. So number 12 is the
hanged man or martyr.
Number 5 is the hierophant, the significator of the
mind.
And then the last one is
number 19,
which is the significator of the spirit, which is the sun.
I'll get that pulled up here.
And these are the CCs in-
Does this happen to be one of the archetypes that Ra gave any,
or that Don asked about practical
examples of expression? Or do you guys have anything in mind
that you tend to think of
that you could sort of understand its function by applying it
to some sort of scenario?
Well, it was only archetype one that they were very clear about in that
regard with the coming back to the new mind, which maybe is
perfect. A starting point for everything is to come back to the new mind,
unblemished and full of the magic of the logos for the matrix of the mind.
But what I just described with the concept of
victimhood is actually precisely what I have found to be
the teaching that I most needed, that
whenever I feel like
something is happening to me and I'm a victim of it, I can get stuck in that.
I can get stuck in not understanding that this is still happening for
me. It's happening because of the light I'm seeking to appreciate
and understand. And so I can kind of flip my perspective
by seeing myself as the sun
being radiant in a situation, applying my light and love
into a situation that needed it, as opposed to my light and
love being the victim of the situation that wasn't seeking
that situation.
Have you heard of pronoia?
Yeah.
I love that.
The feeling that the universe is out to benefit you.
Yeah.
That could be the matrix of the spirit or the significator
of the spirit, yeah.
Hmm.
But of course, people like to put that in the context of being an unwise balancing,
I think sometimes. There's a balancing-
So would you say that,
going back to the passage when it mentioned the
moonlight's the experience, and therefore
the significator is acting on, I suppose, or
comes in some sort of linear fashion after the experience, which is based on
the catalyst. And so the experience has to be present
first and foremost, which means that kind of contextually,
in your example, the thing that you might be facing
is maybe something challenging,
but until you see it differently,
do you think that maybe that might be experience of the mind, for example?
And maybe it becomes experience of the spirit once you regain the
greater context and start looking at it through a
broader lens. You know what I mean? Does that make any sense?
Yeah. But they did say that when studying the archetypes, that
the significator should be paired with the choice, the fool.
So it's possible that that's what they're saying is in order to fully
appreciate the significator, you must fully appreciate the choice that you're
making.
You have to choose, right? Just like you're saying, if you
stop and say, "Well, I have a choice.
I can either feel this way, or without any sort
of impostering, I can
actually feel this other way."
Right.
That
totally tracks to me.
Right.
And it also, I've considered if the significator
is partly these accumulated biases
because it's becoming the complex, if that means there's a lot of accumulation of
biases over time in how we see our mind, body, and spirit,
then
there's a lot
to work through there. But there's still a purified form
of this energy which we're seeking to refine, and maybe that's the
simpler form, too,
is getting back to the purified appreciation of light.
I was going somewhere else with that, but maybe we should keep reading the
material.
Do you guys have any other
specific thoughts before I start digging into the session 88?
I'll just add, I think what you were kind of going down that path, Mike, of I've
always considered the significator also a more dynamic process of all
those previous to it. So the matrix, potentiator, catalyst,
experience is kind of building
through those dynamically, those biases and kind of recreating
that too. But we almost need to go back then and refresh
those or we're kind of alluding to the look at them with
a new mind to really distill, I think, what the
significator has to offer at that point.
Right.
I think also just adjacent to that also, in
looking at transformation, I know that that's come up when
we've
talked about it in the past and what's being transformed.
So again, I kind of go back to maybe relationships between the archetypes
and so what's acting on what. And so it does seem like
significator is exercising choice to
decide what meaning to associate to experience
or not, and
then for the purposes of transformation.
But that's where I've gotten a little bit
gray sometimes because we talk about the matrix as something
that can be purified, right? It has a nature that can be
altered in some way. And so that tells me that
perhaps that's where those biases kind of
live. So if the potentiator is all potentiality, but the
matrix is sort of limited to what the biases that exist
within the complex will allow it to select,
then once a significator has the experience and decides,
"Yes, I
like that outcome or experience," or, "It means this or doesn't mean," or
whatever, that that's the refinement either through additional
bias or perhaps the release of bias from the
matrix. But I don't know how you guys see that.
Do you guys see the matrix as something that has, if not
dynamic interrelationship-wise, at least its own
nature is the thing that's being refined?
Well, it's hard to talk about it in those terms because it feels
like the archetypes are somehow the pure gestalt
of
the distortions that we're layering on top.
And we're just kind of always layering distortions on
the purified appreciation of ourselves.
And those distortions could be subconscious, which would then imply that it's more
in the potentiator, right?
Well, maybe the potentiator is always a reflection of those, yeah.
So I believe-
Because that's all that it produces, even though it's the matrix that
is dipping in and selecting from.
Yeah.
So was it in, Mike, was it one of those earlier quotes that you have in here, too,
where they kind of refine to or they explain as well that the
matrix is more of the recording mechanism, I guess, to the
experience or what's being learned by the entity there.
But the
significator's the one actually having the experience or going through the
experience at that point.
Right. I'll pull that quote up.
That would kind of make sense because a matrix kind of, to me,
sounds like a framework of a soul effectively.
And it's a framework into which that
field records all kinds of information.
And so while the matrix itself in its
purest archetypal form, like Mike was just saying, is
unchanged, it's always the same for all of us within this blueprint.
The information that accrues within it, the karmic
energy and frequencies and things like that are
obviously unique to everyone. So it's not so much maybe the nature of the
matrix that's being refined, but the contents of it that
we've attached in each case.
Yeah.
So I'll read this one since we brought it up here.
"Turning to my analogy, shall we say, the example of the newborn infinite with
the undistorted matrix. This newborn has its subconscious veiled from the
matrix.
The second archetype, the potentiator of mind, is going to act at some time
through," I won't say through the veil.
I don't think that was a very good way of stating it.
This is Don's fumbling around. "But the potentiator of mind will act to create a
condition, and I will use an example of the infinite touching a hot object.
The hot object we could take as random catalyst.
The infant can either leave its hand on the hot object or rapidly remove it.
My question is, is the potentiator of mind involved at all in this experience, and
if so, how?"
And Ra says,
"The potentiator of mind and
of body are both involved in the questing of the infant for new
experience.
The mind-body-spirit complex, which is an infant, has one highly
developed portion which may be best studied by viewing the significators of
mind and body."
They don't say spirit. You notice we do not include the spirit.
That portion of a mind-body-spirit complex is not reliably developed in each and
every mind-body-spirit complex.
Thusly, the infant's significant self,
which is the harvest of biases of all previous incarnational
experiences,
offers to this infant biases with which to meet new
experience.
And it's interesting they use that phrase, significant self, almost hinting at this
is the nature of the significators
as well.
Ah. Which is the harvest of the biases.
So the biases exist in
microcosmic form, each of them over
lifetimes, and then the significator is the thing that
sort of abstracts that to a singular gestalt almost,
like you were saying,
Mike. But in a unique way for every
individual based on what's in their matrix or what's attached
to it or recorded
within it.
Yeah.
The harvest of all previous and-- Yeah. That kind of makes sense.
The-
Oh, go ahead.
I've always thought of like the matrix
has different levels. Like they're talking about like there's the matrix of the
world that you enter into, and then there's the matrix of your being, which is like
human bipedal. And then once you start getting to that
point where they're talking about the harvest
of all biases from previous incarnations,
that's when you start getting into the individual that is like
the
personality
that's, for lack of a better word, glued onto the matrix.
And then you start having the experiences, and
then
if you keep doing the same thing over and over again through incarnations, you're
going to keep being presented with those catalysts until you can
feed back to the matrix, "Okay,
I learned not to put my hand on the burner again." Like that kind of thing.
But it
is amplified when you get to bigger things besides just putting your hand on the
burner. Like don't be so selfish that you
harm all of the people around you, would be a larger
thing that you would learn, and you might take four or five incarnations, and
all those harvests from those say you still got to work on this.
And then your body matrix gets printed
onto the universal matrix. I almost feel like it's like
there's matrixes on different levels, and then
you get your significance once
the lessons you need to learn get pasted onto that, and then you feed
it back in.
That makes a little, a bit of sense in the context of this, the last sentence here.
So I might as well finish reading this second paragraph.
After they said this, the infant significant self,
working with the mind and body,
offers the biases with which to meet new experience.
However, the portion of the infant which may be articulated by the matrix of the
mind is indeed unfed by experience and has the bias
of reaching for this experience through free will, just as
intelligent energy in the kinetic phase, through free will,
creates the logos.
Ah.
Well, that
switches that then, because this implies then that
we all start with a clean matrix each time.
Is that how you read that?
Yeah, I guess so.
Yeah, that's what I-- I mean that your matrix is like the
blueprint of a humanoid body on this planet.
And then it starts tipping to significator once you start
applying everything else.
So, I guess I'm still trying to figure out where things like karma,
for example, live. That must be maybe matrix of the spirit
then. And because they're saying specifically matrix of the
mind doesn't have--
Or that starts with a clean matrix, but perhaps the spirit.
I don't think it enters into matrix at all. I think it starts with significator.
The soul itself and karmic implications?
Yeah, like karmic implications and past incarnations and lessons to be
learned and fed back to the universal mind.
That does make some sense, that if you think of the matrix of the mind as just
consciousness and that we are-
Yeah
... we try to blank slate our consciousness when we come in.
Yeah.
We try to start out fresh.
But then we still have biases coming at us.
Which might be what Andrew's saying there, too, is the other karma we
haven't alleviated yet, or other previous past lessons that haven't been
learned necessarily, are what could be coming at us then from
the significator standpoint.
Yeah, so you could have the significator of the mind drawing on the matrix of the
spirit to harvest the aggregated
past incarnative picture, and then
deciding what
to do in consciousness in the mind complex.
Yeah.
So this sub-sub logos then,
or that portion of the mind-body-spirit complex which may be articulated by
consideration of the potentiators of mind and body,
through free will, chooses to make alterations in its experiential
continuum.
The results of these experiments and novelty are then recorded in the portion of
the mind and body articulated by the matrices thereof.
So it'll remember in this incarnation that don't touch hot
things.
Yeah.
But it could reincarnate next time and touch a hot thing again.
Yeah.
Which might not be a karma thing. It might just be-
Learning.
Yeah, that could just be regular catalyst because almost all of us burn ourselves
at some point on something. And so clearly none of us have
fully learned that lesson, or at least I didn't.
I've burned myself like most people.
Yeah.
Yeah, and I think that they're just oversimplifying it by talking about burning
your hand because, you
just apply that upwards into anything and everything.
I think that you hit the nail on the head there, Nick, when you said, for example,
if you expand this out,
whether you're that young when you sort of have this realization or start to
notice this, or even when you get older, when you start to think
about the impacts to other people, for example, maybe that's what
starts to unlock some of the interaction with karma and releasing
karma by focusing more on truth,
on everything being one thing, and perhaps even
being more polarized in any one incarnation.
Yeah, and as someone who directly experienced this
firsthand, pun intended I guess,
my mom told me not to do it before I did it.
So maybe the lesson wasn't not to touch hot things, but to listen and trust others
a little bit more.
Yeah.
But I was a baby, and I was like, "Well, let's see." Whoosh.
Yeah. We'll see anyway.
Yeah.
Hmm.
Okay.
All right.
Maybe we should-
That tracks
... we could go back to session 78 to talk a little bit about...
Although,
I guess we could decide if we want to make this a two-part discussion already,
because I think there's going to be so many key symbols we could talk about, that
it's going to be a lot.
I'm down for that.
I'm going to mute myself and my video while I go get a drink, but I'm going to
still be listening, guys.
All right.
So,
the key to the veiling was discussed
later in 78.
So the original, the first evolution, was planned by the Logos, but the first
distortion was not extended to the product, so free will was not
extended. The veiling was not existing in the early days of the galaxy.
At some point, this first distortion was extended, and first surface-to-self
polarity emerged. Is this correct?
And if so, could you tell me the history of this process and emergence?
As a proem or preamble, let me state that the Logoi always
conceived of themselves as offering free will to the sub-Logoi in their care.
The sub-Logoi had freedom to experience and experiment with consciousness,
the experiences of the body, and the illumination of the spirit.
And that's another
summary of what we're talking about with the
experiment that we're in. The consciousness, the experiences of the body, and
illumination of the spirit are the three components.
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 in its sub-Logoi came to this creation due to
contemplation and depth of the concepts or possibilities of conceptualizations
of what we have called the significators.
So understanding what free will could be required contemplating what the
significators could be.
The Logos posited the possibility of the mind, the body, and the spirit as being
complex. In order for the significator to be what it is not,
a distortion of what it is,
it then must be granted the free will of the creator.
This set in motion a quite lengthy, in your terms, series of Logoi
improving or distilling this seed thought.
The key was the significator becoming a
complex.
I know that we're talking maybe somewhat primordially here again,
but do you gather that
reincarnation or some sort of a cyclical nature
was present or is present in the
non-complex state?
I think they did say that there were certain lengths of bodies and that there
was a certain rate of evolution, and so I think that there was still a
reincarnation. It's just like you didn't lose your memory.
Okay. I see.
Does that sound right, Nathan?
Yeah, that's the way I remember it before the veil there, too, that, yeah, you
still had that memory. And that's also why a lot of the entities in third density
were not progressing because they knew they were the creator.
They knew all was one. So there wasn't necessarily that impetus, I guess,
to continue to strive and continue through the densities at that
point. So-
Yeah
... I think you're right, Mike.
And it's
so endlessly convenient for me to think about video games and how
we could see bodies as just being video game characters.
And of course you want to switch out your video game character from time to time.
You don't want to only be the same thing all the time.
You want to switch out to a different body and try different kinds of things
with different abilities and different bodies.
And if you could see all potentials of what a body could be, maybe you'd make
different choices, but maybe
you'd still be trying just to have just as much variety in your experiences.
Do you read that previous part where they said the illumination
of the spirit?
I guess I want to just make sure that I'm
contextualizing that correctly, that if Ra's
telling us that there's a
purpose, I suppose, to the way that all of this machinery works,
that illumination of the spirit would seemingly be it.
That's certainly the purpose of the adept, I think.
But it's helpful to see
that
as the overarching goal, I suppose, as they set these things up.
Right.
And it's very subtle to figure out what that means in our reality.
We don't have a line of sight. We're not looking at the spirit.
We're feeling it. And it makes sense to me to use a concept like
the fruits of the Holy Spirit being love, joy, peace, patience,
kindness. I know when I have more love and joy,
there's more energy there. There's more potential for transformation there.
But I can't
explain it. I can't show it.
It's just something that
I'm working on, on a different level.
And I assume that
faith is strongly connected to that, being the catalyst of the spirit.
The more faith there is and the more I'm applying the will.
That's what they said relating to the transformation of the spirit is
the faith and the will are the
two primary factors involved in the transformation of the spirit.
Would you say that you would go one step further and say that
those are connected in that way, meaning that you
exercise the will
in a way that is in accordance or reflective of the thing that
you have faith in? I almost want to imply that trust
is
implicit there, but I don't know if that's what your view
is.
Yeah. Trust and faith go together very well.
Okay.So you have to exercise the will, meaning you have to
make choices
on faith even, and probably find more and more opportunities to do
it on faith. Some things might get easier and easier because you're like, "Oh,
every time I do this, it always seems to turn out in this
satisfactory way."
Yeah.
But maybe you need to find the edges of your faith, maybe.
Yeah.
And I think that is the work of wind and fire.
And they simplify it, I think, with session six here when they say,
"With the mind single-pointed, balanced, and aware." I think that relates to the
will.
The mind has to be single-pointed, balanced, and aware.
"The body comfortable and whatever biases and distortions make it appropriately
balanced for that instrument. The instrument is then ready to
proceed with the great work. That is the work of wind and fire.
The spiritual body energy field is a pathway or channel.
When the body and mind are receptive and open,
then the spirit can become a functioning shuttle or communicator from the
entity's individual energy of will upwards and from the streamings of
the creative fire and wind downwards."
And I do wonder if faith should be
considered connected to that, the streamings from the creative fire and wind
downwards.
But when faith becomes a process of the mind, that's harder to appreciate.
Would you say that receptive and open, as we've sort of
talked about it in the past, means
sort of recognizing catalyst for what it is, the opportunity
to have an experience and see the process through, as
opposed to the catalyst that may go unaddressed or just seen
as challenge or something like that?
Right. If you're fighting your experiences like, "This is not what I'm wanting,
this is not what I'm having," then that would definitely block you.
I see. Okay. That tracks.
Resistance. Yeah.
Yeah.
Mutual.
That reminds me of in rebirthing.
Without explaining the whole process or
concept, but rebirthing is about healing
past
traumas. But the thing is, they don't say healing, and they don't
say conquering, and they don't say any of that stuff because it
happened. So what they say is integrating.
So you're getting to a point where you integrate that into
who you are because it happened, and you're affected by it, and you have to
integrate it in. You're not conquering it. It's there.
I would-
You just have to respond
... I want to add to that because I agree with everything that you said, but
importantly,
to say integrating could mean one of two
things or something in between. If we are
integrating a thing that we are calling trauma or traumatic
and
pasting that in or stitching it into
our sense of self and how we identify,
then
I think that that might be incurring either more karma or requirements
to learn through that. Whereas to integrate it through the knowing of what
Mike was saying, to see the self as the light, to see the self
as part of the source of all of this, and that that
experience and ones like them are a part of
this chosen path, then that takes it out
of the traumatic territory.
Right.
Still allows the experience to be fully integrated, but more integrated into
your knowing of self as one who experiences and one
who's come to experience, as opposed to one who has
come to be fraught with victimhood, for example.
And that's 100% the theory, whether I said it that way or not.
That's what it is. It is integrating it
and
putting it as, "Okay, this is what happened.
This is the experience I'm having.
How can I respond from here on out? Do I choose to be the victim?" No.
If you integrate it in the terminology of the book and the
practice, you are accepting it
and choosing to move forward, having
accepted it and brought it into who I am, as opposed to like Mike was saying, like,
"No, not this, not this. I don't want to remember that.
I don't want to be that person." Well, you are that person. It happened.
So now how do you move forward?
I think the significator of the mind is key here.
And there's other work, I know you guys are familiar, I've mentioned a lot of
times, Paul Hellig's work, but his guides talk about this
very explicitly in bringing past things into this
moment and seeing them again, seeing them anew in
a new light. And
then that shifts away from the identity that was held during an
experience and recontextualizes it with a
new known true identity and
strips away the
terror or the trauma or the negative
connotations that go with it.
And so the significator, it seems to me, is not just present at the time
of experience, obviously, when it happened, but any time we
pull that up, any time we pull that memory forward, importantly,
not going backward and to re-identify with the
significator and its sort of picture of
our soul or all these complexities at the time, but
bringing the event instead to our significator now,
the one that we are identified with in this moment, and then
recontextualizing the entire event based on
that. And I think that that's how-- and Ra talks so much about
balancing, even at the end of every day, and going back and seeing
how things were. So when you say accept them, it's like accept a
choice that was made, understand perhaps where the opportunity
for learning or growth or something stemmed from it,
to get as much squeeze as you can out of the
juice, I suppose.
Yeah, I think that once the event
happens, and that is significator in the mind and the
body. It's once you,
I don't know, analyze, I guess, is a good word, but that's a little
cold. But once you get to that point where you're able to
integrate it or analyze it and then move forward
in a more healthy way after the event, especially if it was
traumatizing, that's when you start getting into significator of the soul.
That's when you start to grow on the soul level, and it starts to be something that
no longer has to be repeated when you
go into the next incarnation.
Yeah, 100%. I think it's context. When you see one person did
this thing to this other person, then it's
happening at the mind and body level.
When you see that one soul engaged with another,
perhaps even pre-incarnatively, to have an experience,
then that is being seen at
more of a spirit complex level.
Do you want to read this, Mike?
Yep.
So still trying to get closer to what they mean by significators.
Don had given a list of, is the
Hierophant a governor or a sorter?
And Ra said this is thoughtful, but it is incorrect at its heart.
And
Ra said the Hierophant, and they've had an error in transmission, is the
significator of the mind complex, its very nature.
So by being the significator of the mind complex,
its very nature is,
I guess they're saying
the mind complex.
We may note the characteristics of which you speak do have bearing upon the
significator of the mind complex, but are not at the heart.
The heart of the mind complex is that dynamic entity which absorbs,
seeks,
and attempts to learn.
Okay.
So I would think the process of becoming the
significator of mind, the Hierophant,
would be appreciating our ability to seek, appreciating
our ability to absorb information, and appreciating our ability to learn
information.
And it does seem like when we're
searching for the right perspectives,
we can
realign our ability to find higher perspectives with
discipline. And I think discipline of knowing what the mind is is a part of
this.
And so putting these side by side, I wonder if you could-- Since we don't have
quotes from Ra about the
significator of the body, we could try applying that in some
ways as a sort of mirror image of the mind as
the body is the reflection.
The body, to some degree, is seeking things,
is attempting to have physical experiences,
attempting to grow in the physical dimensions.
And so, I've often likened this image of the guy hanging
upside down to somebody
at a gym exercising.
Knowing-
I was going to ask, actually, what your take is, whether
this person is generally having a good time of it or not. And- ...
I was leaning towards not so much, but
because they're bound also.
So to be hanging from one ankle and
having this figure four thing could be seen as dexterous.
But with the hands bound,
it seems that the
nature,
in this case, because that's what they're saying, the significator is the nature,
so the nature of the body is somewhat
bound, certainly in this incarnation,
to the physical senses and to physical
experience and not likely to
extricate itself from that type of
experience.
You could say it's highly inconvenient to have to use a body.
Well, it's
kind of in for a penny, in for a pound.
You're like, "Hey, I want to have this experience of being other and
separate and outside of the one,"
and this is the only way to do it. And
so the thing is inverted, which also, to me, is kind of how I
think of physical reality. It's sort of the inverse
of spiritual truth. If everything is one thing,
physical reality sort of looks the exact opposite of that.
And so that's why I like seeing it upside down for that reason, too.
Mm-hmm.
This one, because in both pictures,
the person is dropping coins.
Hmm.
And to me, this whole card
says
significator of the body
to look beyond the physical, to give up
feeling so bound by the physical.
Like you-
I would say it represents a challenge.
Not an impossibility, but certainly a challenge.
Yeah, and the
person is
more or less, their body is helpless in this thing.
They're hanging by one arm, by one leg.
They're upside down. Their
hands are bound. They're losing their money, which is a very physical thing.
All of this suggests to me to--
It's the significator of the body.
It's got body and physical right in it.
But it's saying to not be bound by it.
I think you also-
I agree it's inviting. Go ahead, Nathan.
I was going to say, so this card, I think is called the martyr, right?
On this one, that we also do tend to bind or
do this to ourselves as well. We kind of create this sort of
attachments maybe, or bindings in that
sense as well, that we almost need to work through it in that sense
to, I guess, realize when you're martyring yourself versus
when it might be more
behoove us, I guess, to maybe not do it at your own cost to
the body in this case.
It does feel to be like
there's a balancing, and maybe that's the great way of the body.
The alchemist is finding the way not to be a martyr
excessively, but maybe the appreciation of the body
as a tool is what this is about. Martyrdom is really using the
body as a tool all the way to the point of death, where you're seeing your body
as being useful for
shining a light on some
thing that you are dying for.
And so it seemed,
I have difficulty knowing whether I should say David Wilcock
seems like a martyr to me because of the massive flood of
information. His information is now being heavily analyzed and
reported on by all the kinds of people who never would've said the name of David
Wilcock, including Congress people.
Wow.
It's kind of wild
to see Anna Polina Luna mentioning David Wilcock, and it's
like,
man,
it almost doesn't matter how he died if his death was leading to
that.
Mm-hmm.
But-
What about the nature of wanderers who come into this
reality taking on a body, meaning and
knowing that it's going to result in veiling
and having a more challenging
experience?
Yeah, that's why I keep coming back to this.
This card is just screaming to me to not get caught up in the
physical, because it's basically saying, even if you're
immobilized and upside down, and you have no money, and you're down in
the dumps,
there is significance to the experience, to the physical.
Where do we see polarity in this image?
I don't see it in the
poles or the columns like we normally would.
Those
seem to be identical.
Yeah. It could be hinting that the body is
inherently unbiased with relating to polarity.
The nature of the body is not favoring.
It would kind of make sense if you think about it, because it's sort of the great
equalizer. We all have very different minds and
spirits based on our both incarnative
and past incarnative experiences.
But give or take, we are all basically born
into the same types of body and with the same capabilities and
limitations. Obviously, notwithstanding those that
might assume
some that are outside of that. But
it is pretty equal, and so I could see it not having a particular bias.
But then with that being said, the
person's right leg
is pointed over to the left. They're also looking over to the left.
Is your image the same, Nick, on the
other card? Are they hanging by one foot?
Yeah.
Okay.
The one in the card is pretty much exactly the same.
Okay.
All right. Let me get my face out of the way. Is that better?
Yeah. No, I see it.
And I got the one from
the works and the books over here. The reason I hesitated when I said the
person is because in the
one in the book, it looks like a female.
Well, the long hair would suggest it anyways.
Interesting. Is that a female?
Yeah, that's more like could go either way.
Oh, that looks way like a female when you turn it upside down.
Yeah.
And the fact that there's a covering on the chest area, but I didn't want
to completely say that's female.
But if you look in the next one, when they're showing basically sacred male
and sacred female, the male is shirtless.
So I've kind of always took the... But then again,
this one could go either way, and there's a covering on the top there.
Yeah.
So-
And it's possible that this is meant to be
not pronounced
gender.
Like andro-
Yeah, androgynous.
Androgynous.
Androgynous. That's what I meant.
Yeah.
I could see that, which would also make sense, again, because it
sort of applies regardless of which gender-
Yeah
... you come in with.
So what about the-
Did you decide is the left
service to
self
and right is service to others?
Yeah. Well,
as we view the left side-
Yeah
... it would be their right side. So that would be service to others on our left
side, their right side.
So the foot is pointed toward service to self?
Service to others.
Oh, that's pointed to service-
But they're upside down. So if they're upside down, what does that mean?
That's what-
Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah
... yeah.
Because this person's
left.
Yeah.
Okay. Well, I was just thinking that
would kind of make
some sense
if there was a... I don't know. I've asked you
guys this before, and I could have sworn that there was a quote, but I was
definitely proven wrong, about predisposition in
polarity.
Do you guys have a sense of whether there is, in
our universe, in ourSort of agreed upon
reality, a predisposition to one polarity or the
other?
I think Ra says that pretty much when a soul is coming into
incarnation, if it has a base home, which is
of a negative polarity, then there will be a desire for programming along the
negative experiences. But I think that's relatively rare.
And it's mostly like a soul is just wanting to get through as much positive
catalyst as possible.
Regardless of polarity.
Yeah, regardless of-
Or positive
... regardless of what they've accumulated in their recent lifetimes, but it's like
their higher self has a trajectory, I think.
And the trajectory is leading them to the harvest
for the next graduation. And to get to that point,
if they've been on the positive path, they have to continue on the positive path.
And I don't think the higher self would anticipate if a soul was
going to choose strongly along the negative path suddenly.
Wouldn't that be weird?
Oh, didn't that happen with
the two-- There were two beings from Venus that-
Yeah
... Ra talks about. They flipped polarity.
Was that negative into positive or the other way around?
That was going from positive to negative initially, and then they had to
retrace their steps.
Huh.
That's fascinating.
Yeah.
If you think about it.
It's also kind of interesting, too.
You'd think it'd almost be harder to flip at a certain point, but Ra mentions,
too, that it seems you almost build more of that spiritual potential or spiritual
energy, where it makes that option, let's say in the lighter
densities, almost easier if you wanted to flip past in that
sense, because of the experience from there that you've kind of built up in that
sense.
Because there's so much polarity available, too, so you can have an
outsized impact on it.
Mm-hmm.
"What was the attitude of these two entities after they graduated into
fourth-density negative, and the veil being removed, they realized they had
switched polarities? They were disconcerted."
And they didn't-
They didn't realize that they had switched polarities when it happened?
Yeah, they didn't realize until they're out of their body and they can see without
the veil. They can see what actually happened, that they were on this path, and
then they just steered to the left.
Oh, these were third moving into fourth.
Yeah.
These are like us.
Yeah.
Okay. So, this is basically, they set out on the right path,
and then probably turned into religious narcissists and-
Right
... ended up believing that if I can be super effective at
putting out the word, then everyone will learn from me, and et
cetera.
Yeah.
I can see that.
And they were murdering people, and it became a holy war, and maybe the echoes-
Wow
... of that holy war are in our culture now.
Yeah, I was going to say, that's been happening here for a long time.
Yeah.
That's usually negative.
Yeah.
You've got to
be playing some mind gymnastics to
be like, "I'm killing this person for good."
Yeah. I
don't want to go off topic, but I'd agree.
I'd throw just war into that and say that that's about as big an
oxymoron as
you're going to find.
Yeah. But even-
Not to disc-- Ra even says on there, what is it?
A seriously distorted view is holy war.
You don't need to look at that, but it was like Ra does mention something about the
holy war and how it's a significantly distorted view on things as well,
too. It was kind of comical to even think about from there.
It's weird. I don't even know how polarizing or what
the opportunity is when you do execute a
holy war, because it's sort of in denial, but it's
also
you're putting a spiritual bent on it, and you may believe it.
Like these people, they believed it, that they were doing the right thing.
That's what this is saying, right?
Yeah.
That's pity.
But does that make you a negative-- I guess so.
This is when you realize that you switched.
So, it is for power to some extent, right?
When a church conducts a holy war, it's because they want to
maintain supremacy.
Yeah.
Right?
Yeah.
It's easy for a culture to get comfortable with what everyone else is
doing and saying.
Yeah.
But they said even though they went down this negative path and accidentally ended
up on the wrong side,
then they worked with the fourth-density negative, which was their tribe now.
They worked with the fourth-density negative in these other lifetimes for some
period, until, within this framework, the previously learned patterns of the
self have been recaptured, and the polarity was, with great effort,
reversed.
There was a great deal of fourth-density positive work then to be retraced.
Oh.
Yeah, because they had to go back effectively to
the beginning of fourth density to
do the positive work.
Yeah.
That's interesting. And that makes a lot of sense because you incur a lot of karma
doing exactly what they did, and then they woke up and went, "Oh, man.
Oh, man. We screwed the pooch."
We got all kinds of karma, and then they kept working that way for
some period, and then, yeah, it takes a lot of work to undo all that.
So, this is the whole story. Might as well cover it.
Or at least a good part of what
happened to them.
"In our peoples of the planet Venus, there was what may be considered, from the
viewpoint of wisdom, an overabundance of love.
From the viewpoint of wisdom, there could be pity on those who have an
overabundance of love.
These entities looked at those still in darkness and saw that those
of a neutral or somewhat negative viewpoint
found such harmony, shall we say, sickening."
They found their harmony sickening.
"The wanderers felt that a more wisdom-oriented way of seeking love could be more
appealing to those in darkness."First, one entity
began its work. Quickly, the second found the first.
These entities had agreed to serve together, and so they did, glorifying
the one creator, but not as they intended.
About them were soon gathered those who found it easy to believe that
a series of specific knowledges and wisdoms would advance
one towards the creator.
The end of this was the graduation into fourth density negative of the
wanderers,
which had much power of personality and some small deepening of the negative
polarized element of those not polarizing positively.
There was no negative harvest as such.
But I think the key word here is actually the word specific.
And Ross said that
one of the key temptations of the fourth density negative thought forms
is towards emphasis on specific information.
Because when a little specific detail becomes a sticking point and somebody
else doesn't like that theology or whatever it is, then all the
feelings of separation, feelings of anger and fear,
and everything comes from that one little specific hang-up.
Oh, yeah. Like maybe channeling to one being at the right time that his
people are the chosen ones and-
Yeah
... and that
they get the light first. I've considered that because of
what comes out of Ra's work.
That definitely feels like a
poison pill, frankly, that was given to, at the
time, would've been Kabbalists, effectively.
And,
I think that there's a reason why their
ascension and enlightenment
has a ceiling, I guess, would be
the best way to put it. And
ultimately, they were not just told this.
This is central and core
to their beliefs. And not just to the Kabbalists, but
to mainstream and at least Orthodox
Judaism.
And for anyone that
seeks to accept all things as equal and part of the whole,
that's a poison pill. If every spiritual pursuit, if
every viewpoint, if every point of significance
or signification you go through is colored through a lens that
believes that, then
I think that the transformation that happens
is
maybe not as fruitful.
If you're on a service to others path.
Yeah.
Well, and at the heart of every religion,
the main
tenets of it before it gets stepped on
by the specificities is love. And then you can
argue over whether you worship on Saturdays or Sundays, or you kneel at this
time, or you wear that hat, or you wear this hat.
It just doesn't matter if you're
forgetting that the core was love.
Because now you hate somebody because they're wearing the wrong hat or they're
kneeling at the wrong time. That
is throw the baby out with the bathwater.
It's antithetical. Yeah, they've literally lost the seed of
truth
has been corrupted so that the fruits
are always covered like that. And, I don't know of
any
of the primary mainstream religions that don't suffer from that
to their core. It's diametric opposition to the
thing that they claim to teach, and then what they preach is
something very different.
I think that this could be
because the leg is pointed over to the service to others.
It could be don't be
a martyr,
as well as, don't get caught up in it so much that it
flips your
beliefs or who you are, or what you physically
exude.
Yeah.
I like the whole structure that he's hanging on is fruit-bearing.
The entire thing represents fruit.
Yeah.
And it's like with the body, we need fruit to
survive. We need the ongoing supply of nourishment.
So that's
what we're doing here is we're nourishing each other.
Yeah, so I think that the emphasis here is just that this is not
a normal
sort of posture, but this is at least a fruit-bearing
one.
And you said that the character's right is service to
others, right?
Yeah.
Or the right side of their body-
Yeah
... from their perspective.
And almost every card they're looking to our right or their
left.
And Ross said not to put too much emphasis on that because this was just the way
things were drawn.
Ah.
But there may have been a subtle reason.
It was definitely a reason, a subtle reason that they wanted to say that,
just like they said, we're more drawn to notice the
darkness than to notice the light which is illuminating the darkness.
The fructifying nature of the light upon the great darkness is not as apparent as
the darkness itself.
I don't know if this
gets too marginal, but
the experience of the body is
nearly exclusively
singular. It's not
a shared experience. Now, you can share an
experience of the body with another body and then
significate or make of that what you
will.But that does kind of tell
me that there's a predisposition to service to self
by simply taking on a body that is physically separate
from
anyone else. What work can you do? You can do work with the body, but I think
through intent, you're actually then activating the mind and
spirit complexes. But the experience of the body and the
transformation of the body, and perhaps even the great way of the
body,
seem to have
a service to self
experience.
Yeah. And this is
what that card is, the experience of the body.
Maybe she's
focused on this one thing that she has to look to the
left for it. She has to look to the left and see
what is the service to self that I need to be
engaging with.
Mm-hmm.
And it's a lion.
And she has it tamed, though.
Yeah. Seems to be.
Enchantress.
Well,
I could go back to
some more discussions because we did have some more clues.
I wanted to go to session 92 next.
Yeah, 14.
So when the catalyst of the mind is processed by the entity,
the experience of the mind results. Is this correct?
There are subtle misdirections in this simple statement having to do with the
overriding qualities of the significator.
It is so that catalyst yields experience.
However, through free will and the faculty of imperfect memory,
catalyst is most often only partially used,
and the experience thus correspondingly skewed.
So why did they say this about the significator, the overriding qualities?
Because it seems that the significator has to first
see that catalyst is present before it can assign an
experience to it. Like, what am I experiencing?
And going back to our previous examples, am
I
experiencing victimhood or something happening to me, which
doesn't assign consciousness really at all,
or is this an opportunity for my
growth? So I've always felt that the significator is the one that
decides what that experience means.
They create experience through meaning.
So they see catalyst, encounter it, assign meaning,
and that meaning becomes the experience.
Yeah, that makes sense to me. And it would make sense that if the
nature of imperfect memory is somehow-
Because we don't remember why a particular thing might be coming up, and it might
be
absolutely salient to an experience that we've had in the past
that it's the exact same one, or it's the dovetail reverse
or whatever. It's there to teach us something perfectly.
But if we don't remember it, even from this incarnation or a past one,
then it may not be entirely available.
Yeah.
And there's
been many discussions where they're hinting at the
sort of the earlier archetypes being
something that we can work on individually to purify the potentials of the later
archetypes. It's like they keep building the purity
of the intent, the purity of the will,
and even in this sense, the purity of
our ability to grasp things with the mind and to
remember things and appreciate things.
All of it is sort of contributing to the purity of the potentials of the
use of the mind and the use of the body and the spirit.
Yeah, I think that's well said, because this is kind of almost a little bit funny
to me, too. It seems that what they're mentioning with the imperfect
memory kind of concept here is you can maybe learn a
lesson or distill some things from catalyst that you received, but say
five years down the line, you might forget what that lesson was necessarily, too,
and you almost need to re-go back and relearn that again at that point to
kind of maybe more so solidify it at that
later date. So, it's not really a one-and-done
situation, I guess, is what I'm taking out of that.
I agree. I think there's tune-ups, too.
I don't know if Rob mentioned that specifically or if I'm getting that from
other teachings. But yeah, you'll get a lesson and maybe
learn it or learn it mostly, or you're pretty sure, and then your higher self will
call maybe a scaled-down version,
just to make sure. Did you really learn that?
Did you
fully get that? Because you're going to have to choose again, probably
because of this right here, to make sure that you get the
full
use of the catalyst, and by choosing in
an even greater sense of knowing. And I certainly have
experiences of that myself, where I've sort of chosen
being pretty sure. Yeah, okay, I think this is now right, and this is why I'm
making this choice, and then come up with
a remarkably similar situation where
suddenly I see it much more clearly, and the choice is way more available to
me, and I feel like I need to act on it specifically
then to show that, yes, indeed, I did learn that lesson, and
now it's fully sunk in
Yep.
Keeps coming from different angles until you get it.
Yeah.
It seems like-- I really like the analogy when it comes to the catalyst and the
unconscious mind is kind of where it's originating from.
It's like that iceberg underneath the water.
You're only seeing the top 10% with the conscious mind.
There's so much more to this. So, I guess there's just different layers to
a lot of these catalytic events that we experience that we can view
from maybe different perspectives once we start distilling it
slowly throughout our experiences.
And probably finding clarity, honestly, in choices.
When we're making choices, I think that being in our knowing
and feeling the clarity of the choice
is highly important, and that when we make choices that
we're unsure of or that we still have some resistance to, I think that might speak
to the
rest of that iceberg under the water that maybe we
still need to discover in order to fully capitalize on the
opportunity.
Yeah.
So, this is another huge quote that explains,
"The dynamic process between the matrix, potentiator, catalyst, experience, and
mind forms the nature of the mind or the significator of the mind." Is this
correct?
And Ra said, they have an exception to that statement, but that
statement is largely correct, with the exception that
understanding the significator of the mind is both actor and acted
upon.
That makes sense, because going back to where it said if we harvest
all of-- We get a big snapshot of here's my karmic
and energetic makeup,
and so then I'm going to act according to those biases.
I'm going to choose,
and then that's the thing that's getting transformed as
well through that choice. Either some karma's released or some new karma's
occurred.
Right.
And it's worth mentioning also that they said the
harvest of the previous universe, the previous octave, was
including the significators of mind, body, and spirit, along with the matrix and
potentiator. But they didn't have the catalyst refined or
the experience or the transformation or the great way.
They had the
matrix, the potentiator, and the significator.
So it seemed if that was enough for evolution to occur, that implies that the
actor and acted upon nature of the significator is able to go through
potentially an entire
cycle of evolution
at just a very lower-- I assume it would be a slower rate of evolution without
that transformation archetype.
Yeah. I thought we said earlier
that the non-complex
systems were--
they're the significator
in their nature. I thought they were exclusively the significator, and I was
going to ask about this
then, actually, because I know that there were three archetypes before.
So was it just saying that
before the veiling and before the grand experiment,
that
the significator was still the primary sort
of nature of
each of the, not complexes, but
mind, body, spirit?
"At the beginning of this creation, or as you may call it, the octave, there were
those things known which were the harvest of the preceding
octave. About the preceding 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 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.
Secondly, there was an awareness of the most efficacious nature, or if you
will, significator
of mind, body, and spirit.
The most efficacious nature of mind.
Thirdly, there was the awareness of two aspects of mind, body, and spirit,
and of spirit the significator could use to balance all catalyst.
You may call these two the matrix and the potentiator."
It's interesting they talk about a catalyst at experience when they don't have the
catalyst and experience archetypes, but there was that
growth along catalyst and experience through.
And we know that that's what came out, but we don't really know
what went in.
That's true.
Huh. In
fact, based on what
we're seeing here, I don't know that they're even saying
that they existed in the previous octave insomuch as they
were developed from the learnings of the previous octave.
I think that's exactly what they're saying.
They're saying that they
were developing because of the-- They understand that this is
the framework that came from the previous.
"There was an awareness of two aspects of mind, body, and spirit."
Yeah, but even mind, body, and spirit
were potential inputs in the previous
octave, but without perhaps
catalysts.
Yeah.
Huh.
All right.
It's too much to think about
what
previous octave means.
"And they know as little as they do of the octave to come." They know very
little.
I guess they don't say how much they know beyond what they've said.
But yeah.
My Law of One presentation I did for the Disclosure Summit, I was getting
intoThe nature of the harvesters and how the
guardians are from the octave beyond our own,
and they assist as the light bringers.
And
so there's an awareness of that, that there are beings from a different octave
coming here and providing the discernment
for other entities that they don't quite have that.
I didn't realize that. The ones who take them up the stairs are from the
next octave, huh?
Some of them.
For some reason, I was thinking they were just a higher density, but...
No, that's not it.
In the time of a harvest, there are always harvesters.
The first level is planetary, now which may be called angelic.
Second class of those who work this process are those of the Confederation, and the
third group watching over this process is that group you call the Guardians.
This group is from the octave above our own and serves in this manner as light
bringers.
These guardians provide the precise emissions of light, love, and exquisitely
fastidious disseminations of discriminations that the precise light-love
vibration of each entity may be ascertained.
Ah.
They have a very clear perspective.
And there's also a reference to these beings as being helpers of the Council of
Saturn,
who are called upon when, I guess, the challenge of figuring it out is too
challenging for the council itself, then there's the guardians
who assist with the
decisions that need to be made around preserving our free will based on this
information that I guess they have
from their vantage point of the next octave.
Well, which is interesting that they have a view of our
octave while we don't have a view of the previous one.
Right.
Or at least Ra doesn't through upper sixth density.
That's not to say perhaps that
seventh density
doesn't have a view of the previous octave, and that those are perhaps the
guardians are coming from the seventh octave or the seventh density
of the next octave.
That's true.
I don't know. It's mysterious even to Ra what the seventh
density is, and if it's even more mysterious what the octave is, then it makes
sense that there's some bridge there.
Yeah.
I've always thought of the octaves as the--
So the universe expands to all the potentials
under the framework that it learned from the last one, and it does the
expansion, and it does the implosion where it comes back in.
It digests everything it learned, and then the next octave is the next explosion,
kind of like an inhale, exhale.
Yeah.
And then I've always thought of when they talk about the people that can see beyond
the octaves
as the people, once they reach into seventh density, and they're
about to experience the next octave where it's
about to coalesce, learn the lessons, and
matrix potentiator
significator. And
they get to seventh density and they're like, "We need to add a flimflam." So then
the octave collapses on itself, and then the lesson is add in a
flimflam.
If the octaves proceed
indefinitely and infinitely,
then octaves might also fall into a class of
seven as well. And it could be that we're in
the third
sub-octave or whatever,
and
it just happens to be a quality of this particular octave in the
series that
beings are less or unable to see what happened in previous
octaves. Whereas, in further octaves, it might be
that everyone can see all the way back.
Could also be a factor of time. I guess we're looking at this from a
more maybe linear progression as well.
If you kind of more enter into the time-space sort of
aspect to this, where everything's kind of happening simultaneously at that point,
you might be able to step, I guess, the consciousness back possibly
to be able to maybe access multiple of these octaves
simultaneously.
I don't know.
Yeah.
If time happened linearly, you would know
what the lessons were because you'd know where the start was.
Maybe not specifically in time, but you'd know that we started this
octave with this framework because you are seeing
everything at once.
Yeah.
Yeah. That's a good point, though.
If you are outside of time,
then you would think that that would be an all or nothing thing.
But you're not exactly, are you? Because time, space, and space-time
have a proportionate relationship,
right? And so neither is all of one.
And we know that there's very little space
in time-space, and that you can see most of time, or at
least all of this octave. But clearly, if Ra can't see it from where
they're at, I wouldn't think that we get to see it
in every life between lives.
Yeah. I think that time is a framework
that happens after the veil because you don't--
With the whole cards, playing poker and knowing all the outcomes.
That is
being in a place where time doesn't exist. You know everything.
But then if you were in a sandbox, if you were in
the desert and you were standing on a dune, you could
see everything around you, and you'd know all that you could
see, but you wouldn't be able to see beyond the next dunes.
And I think that that's where the perception becomes limited.
It's not limited in time. It's limited in their scope.
Yeah. I would say because time-space itself is its
own scope, and there are so many things-
Yeah
... that are outside of it that may not even
beaccessible when viewed through either lens.
Yeah. Once you get to the higher densities, it just seems like
the scope of knowledge that they have
in their toolbox just
becomes
closer and closer to all knowledge.
Yeah.
The universal mind.
Well, we've got 20 minutes left. I was debating if we should just jump into the
spirit discussion, or maybe just hang on the
body discussion more and see how much more we can extract from those symbols.
But I liked that, read this one maybe, that Don's mind,
after hearing about the significator of mind being both actor and acted
upon, and all these processes lead to the nature of the
significator of the mind.
Then Don asked, "As the entity becomes consciously aware of this
process, it programs this activity itself before the incarnation.
Is this correct?" Ra said, "This is correct.
Please keep in mind that we are discussing not the archetypical mind now, which is
a resource available equally to each,
but unevenly used.
But that to which it speaks,
the incarnational experiential process of each mind, body, spirit
complex.
We wish to make this distinction clear, for it is not the archetypes which live the
incarnation, but the conscious mind, body, spirit complex which may
indeed live the incarnation without recourse to the quest for
articulation of the processes of potentiation, experience, and
transformation." And that
line explains why we're spending time on the archetypes, is
attempting to put more emphasis on the articulation
of the processes of potentiation, experience,
and transformation.
And that's interesting they pick those three, potentiation, experience, and
transformation.
It's kind of saying what we were saying earlier, that when we said the
significator as an archetype is always the same,
but it's our unique
configuration, which is the energetic body/soul
that enshrouds it, that gives us
our unique perspective.
Mm-hmm.
Yeah,
I liked that one as kind of just a reminder that, yeah, the archetypes are more of,
I guess, almost like a tool or something that Ra also talks later
about them being like personas or something you embody at that point as well, but
they're not the ones actually having that experience.
We can potentially use these archetypes, I guess,
to further our progression and experience transformation,
as Ra says there, but it's not necessarily something that's having the
experience itself.
Right.
I always kind of blur those lines, I think, in my head at times.
So I
feel like it's a humbling reminder, too.
Yeah, I need it too. And it's so fun to think about
the sun and that we have this huge,
incredible thing shining on everybody every day
that powers our world, and we don't think about it.
It's not moving. People aren't brought to tears by recognizing the
sun.
But we're brought to tears by
spiritual light that's
more targeted in our experiences when we see the light shining through
in particular ways
with moments of love or light shared.
But we still have this symbol in the sky that is so beyond all
these other symbols in our reality that it's the most
light-bringing thing
by far. Nothing comes anywhere close.
And we don't really think about it. We don't think about identifying as that.
We don't think about how
small we are in comparison to the sun, and
that's humbling to some degree. If you think of the sun as a being there who's
consciously aware or on some level intelligently aware
of all the people on Earth, then that's
humbling.
I bet if we could see it more truly, if we could see the
energy of it. Our physical senses are
limited to such a narrow band of visible light.
If we saw the true energetic expression of the sun
and its relationship to Earth and even the other planets, for example.
If we were watching this
celestial light show where everything was literally
connected and you could see things like solar flares
more or less rippling out energetically and then impacting the energetic
fields of planets, then we would know it.
And that is happening. That is clearly what's present.
That's absolutely the case, but our physical senses limit
us to-
Yeah
... something separate.
I think this
is where it becomes you have to go on the journey to have the
appreciation. Because if you really look at it,
it's very easy for you to see. I've
been listening to this Richard Feynman thing over and over again
because it just is blowing my mind every time I hear it.
But it's a speech Richard Feynman gave, and he talks
about does the tree grow from the ground?
And most people are like, "Yeah, it grows from the ground.
It gets its nutrients from the ground, and it starts as a walnut
and then it gathers nutrients and then it
takes it from the soil and it builds itself up." And he talks about
how there's a guy who did an experiment
on something or other,
and he took a tree
and he grew it from a seed in a--
He measured the soilAnd put the soil in a thing,
and then put the seed in it and grew the seed up to five
years. And there was X amount of mass in the
tree at that point. And then he took the tree out of the soil,
dried the soil again, and weighed the soil, and the tree was,
let's say 20 pounds.
And when he measured the soil, the soil had only lost a
gram. So he was like, "Okay, so it doesn't come from the ground.
It comes from the water."
How much of the water?
Ah, yes. So that's the next. And this is how he's speaking, he's like, "Yes, the
water. That's the next logical step.
Ah, must come from the water." Okay, so what is water?
Water is H2O.
The physical mass of a tree is mostly carbon,
so it can't be the water.
Surely it gets some things from the water.
It uses the hydrogen, but it mainly spits the oxygen, the
O2, back out. That's the air you're breathing.
Then he goes on further and he says, "Well, then where's it getting all the carbon?
It's getting the carbon from thin air."
And then he goes on further to say that, so it's getting the
hydrogen from water and the air, and it's
getting the carbon, which is what the most of the tree is made out of, from
thin air. But how does it-
Carbon dioxide
... break apart the carbon dioxide
that it takes in?
It uses microwave energy from the sun
to break the bond of CO2 and build
ATP and cellulose chains. So when you dig into life at
its core, that
sun, the microwave energy coming in, builds a tree,
which builds all vegetation, which builds all animals' food,
and then if you're a meat eater, it builds the food for your food.
So really, the sun's microwave energy
powers everything.
Creative even.
You just don't think about it.
Is part of the creative
process, in order to break down the
carbon to make it available to the tree.
I mean, that's-
Yeah.
I mean, it's-
Because he says it, he says it specifically.
He says, "Carbon dioxide is a perfectly stable molecule.
It takes a lot of energy to break apart a perfectly stable molecule." He says,
"Where does it get that energy?" It uses the microwave energy from the
sun,
through the,
what is it? The chloroplasts. Through the chloroplast cell, takes the microwave
energy of the sun. It charges up an ion to a level that can
break apart the bond, and then it spits again, the oxygen back out
into the universe for you and I to breathe.
And it's like, if you
sit and you really, really think about it and dedicate some
time to it, it's very easy to see
that
life on this planet, when it was just forming, was just a ball of gases and it was
coming together, and the very first thing that really sparked life
on the planet,
as we know it anyway, besides bacteria and
small multicellular things, was algae.
Algae, through the same process,
floating around in the oceans, created enough oxygen in the
atmosphere for all
the life that we know that breathes oxygen to
exist,
including the fish in the water that use oxygen.
I think it's als-
And it all came from the sun.
I think it's also helpful to consider that Ra says that
all of our creation really is built upon light,
and it's just the intelligent energy, and as soon as
there's free will acting on love, then there is light.
And-
Mm-hmm
... all of our food that we're eating could be said to be just light packaged in
a very particular way.
And it's like all this light
has this pure form that
is being expressed in these
more dense forms or
gross forms, I think they used the word.
But it's always the same photons that's just
recombined in different ways.
And Feynman says that. That's why I kept listening to it
over and over again because it's so paralleled the law of one, because
he says this light energy. We label it microwave
energy because that's how we categorize that frequency
at that hertz.
But, if Ra were going to say it, Ra wouldn't say, "The
microwave energy of the sun created all life on your planet." Ra would say, "The
light love of your sun created all."
Is that the, what you just described, Nick, would you say that that is
fundamentally photosynthesis or that this is a process that works
in conjunction with photosynthesis?
It is how he described photosynthesis
at a granular level, and that's what it was.
Okay.
So he was talking about how-
It couldn't be separate. I was wondering if you could introduce an experiment that
had the right kind of light to produce photosynthesis, but not
the microwave energy
to break down the carbon.
But it seems like this is actually fundamentally, it is photosynthesis, which
suddenly makes-
Yeah. It is light that-
... sense. Light and synthesis is creation or the
making of something. So it's using light to make itself.
I
would say, if you're going to use love one terms and we're on a love one chat, it
is the light love energy
from any source.
Because some plants don't need direct sunlight, they get the
ambient light that comes in. I have a whole garden growing in
our living room right now off of
LED lights.It is light as a
principle.
Mm-hmm.
And then therefore it's even more like law of one as opposed
to, it is very scientific, but it's not just, yes,
the sun produces microwaves. It is more law of one than
science when you look at it a certain way, because it's just light.
And if you add on that other word, light love, we've got
six tomato plants growing so large we got to get them outside soon,
simply because of light love out of the outlet beamed down from
LEDs.
Mm-hmm.
I think some of that love's coming from you and Alex, too.
What's that?
I said, some of that love's coming from you and Alex, too.
Yeah.
Yes. That's a perfect transition. Let's talk about the two people in this image.
Yeah, right.
So, this is such a beautiful card that you have the male and the female together
holding hands, and it's inside of a circle, which could
maybe be a form of protection. And
I feel like, to some degree, sexuality is
calling us towards this, what Ra called the open-hearted
green ray activation of sexual energy transfer.
"Firstly, in the green ray activity being, there is the potential for a direct and
simple analog of what you may call joy, the spiritual or metaphysical
nature which exists in intelligent energy."
So it's as though the joy that can come just from the most
innocent, pure appreciation of a being of the opposite sex, that's
bringing us more into contact with the purest nature
of the energy of the sun.
And so that symbol seems very appropriate then.
If joy is something you can understand and appreciate, then I think the light of
the sun is easier to understand and appreciate.
Yeah. And the light of the sun being frequency as well as joy
being a frequency. You can tell people are putting
off the frequency of joy when they're in pure joy.
Right.
"And this is a great aid to a comprehension of a truer nature
of beingness."
This
joy that comes from knowing the opposite sex.
And then they went on in this discussion
about the way of experiencing the self, the creator knowing the self.
"The other potential advantage of bisexual reproductive acts,
in this sense, is the possibility of a sacramental understanding or connection,
shall we say, with the gateway to intelligent infinity.
For with the appropriate preparation, work in what you may call magic may be done,
and experiences of intelligent infinity may be had.
The positively oriented individuals concentrating upon this method of reaching
intelligent infinity then, through the seeking or the act of will, are able
to direct this infinite intelligence to the work these entities desire to
do, whether it be knowledge of service or ability to heal
or whatever service to others is desired."
So it makes sense to me that there's just this
tap inside of us to find
the fruits of the Holy Spirit, the joy, peace.
And in
building that energy of the spirit, then we have the ability to
direct this energy towards
knowledge of service, ability to heal, or whatever service to others is
desired.
And it's another thing that I've been processing is we
understand physical energy pretty well, and to some degree, we're understanding
mental energy. It's stimulating the thoughts.
Of course, that might be partly a physical thing, too.
Having more physical energy can allow you to have more mental energy.
But the mind is fundamentally a different kind of force.
But still interconnected, it's building in its own way.
But the spiritual energy is building in its own way, too.
And I think that the appreciation of joy in our lives
and pursuing our joy. We hear so many people saying, "Follow your bliss,"
and that kind of thing, and I think that gets misunderstood and not appreciated for
just how that's essentially saying,
"Find love and follow the love.
Don't be a block to that love.
And just let the love..." In freedom, the freedom of expression
that they were talking about.
Very few find that full freedom
of expression.
So maybe it would be more apt to say, rather than follow your
bliss, follow bliss.
Yeah.
Even though every person is going to find it through a different path, you're
saying that, and in this case, it's more fundamental in-
Yeah
... in nature.
Follow the fruits of the Holy Spirit because that's leading you to something.
Yeah. The nature of self.
Well, I do want to spend more time in the next call.
This is the catalyst for us to decide to have one of these again very soon to
finish up part two where we break down more of the symbols.
I don't feel like we can do it justice right now.
Unless you guys want to talk about anything right now that stands out to you.
It looks like a power button in the middle of the sun.
Sure does.
I don't know what that is yet.
Okay.
Yeah.
That'd be a good one to look up here.
I don't know if that would-
I think we can take some time next time and dive into that a little bit more, and
all of the images here, too.
And maybe even comparisons also between them, because isn't that the third or
second step to this?
Yeah.
I like how the
spiritual significator does have the feminine and masculine
represented because it
seems that at some level, the reunification of self as
one,
meaning to contain all
polaritiesis a good goal.
And they're standing in the sun. And so that might
be a bit too reductive, but I do like that that's
maybe the ultimate alignment.
And if you think about the sun as being fusion energy, that makes a lot of sense.
Yeah. And then they're in a circle.
Yeah.
This whole thing just screams balance to me.
Yeah.
I mean, X-I-X.
That is
symmetry, balance, all of it.
In Ayurvedic, they tell you what your
constitution is, and then your whole life is spent trying to keep
yourself in balance. And they say that it's
like a top spinning, and if you induce too much spin one way or
the other, the top will fall over. But if you keep it in balance, it'll spin
on its axis perfectly.
Yeah.
All right.
I guess we could be wrapped up soon.
Yeah, there's a lot we could get into more with the
nature of the sun. There are a few quotes relating to the nature of the sun
archetype and joy.
Working with
light equaling the light of the brightest noon.
That was session 80.
Yeah, we'll probably cover session 80 more in detail next time.
And keep contemplating these things and see what guidance we get about what
to share next time.
Anything else, you guys, before we close?
I don't think so. It's great connecting with you guys again.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Happy to be back.
Yeah, absolutely. I think we always have that time where we go off
and get taken over by life, but we got to keep
remembering to come back because it's helpful.
Yep.
And any of you tech people have any insight as to why I can't share a video on
YouTube?
Well, I can talk to you about that later.
Well, I'm trying to send you guys that video about the tree, and the share button
isn't working on my phone for some reason.
Yeah.
Catalysts.
Yep.
Learn it better and be able to teach it better next time.
Stop using the crutch.
All right.
All right.
Well, until next time.
Yep. I love you guys. Take care.
Love you.
See you all, guys.