Protection from natural disasters

[Monica Leal]

In Book 4, at the end of session #95, Ra discusses the protection from
cataclysmic disasters that is afforded to those of the STO path. It
appears that a random element is at work which can affect those of the
STS path but less so those of STO orientation. This is very
reassuring, in light of current concerns.

If anyone would like to reference this passage, it might be useful to
discuss it.

I have always found Book 4 to be the most difficult to comprehend. I
am curious how many others in this group have actually made it all the
way thru Book 4 and might be interested in starting a discussion about
the archetypes. Tarot is my chosen path of study. Heavy stuff!

[E. Drake]

Monica Leal <lealdragon@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=qBozXmRIfPhQ6uT4S2EXYBEzGSlWcLOe6mBCFQ jeu9adF_bj59I4-1hrcVPXFRsQF6Kdixr02DB4sDpunsJT)> wrote:
In Book 4, at the end of session #95, Ra discusses the protection from
cataclysmic disasters that is afforded to those of the STO path. It
appears that a random element is at work which can affect those of the
STS path but less so those of STO orientation. This is very
reassuring, in light of current concerns.

__________________________________________________ ________________

Dear Monica,

Thank you for the reference and the offering. Not only are you totally "on
topic" with respect to "The Loo" specifically, and it's study, but the offering
is so much more reassuring than is it's inverse, so much fear expressed,
although understood to be sure. We must release it. All is truly well.



There seems to be a "mesmerizing affect" that disaster, or the fear of it,
conjures and plays 'effect' in and to the mind. It is expressed in almost every
traffic jam on an interstate all have witnessed...the proverbial rubberneckers
creating the very tangle. Erstwhile the cars in question have already long ago
been pulled off the roadway. Where's the beef? In our minds. Perhaps this is a
throwback from primal origins. But this is to the point. We strive to be more
than primal, and certainly here.



It has been stated so very oft that many have not as of yet taken it upon
themselves to actually study the Loo, as is evident by some of their questions.
Although it may also be that some, in spite of having read the information,
nonetheless may not have understood so much of it. This is an altogether
different puzzle. It needs be encouraged to read the Loo, reference it, read it
again, and re-read it once more, and continue to read it again, as it is perhaps
one of, or even perhaps 'THE' cleanest "narrow band contact" ever established
for mankind. Dare we say it? Dare we believe it? Did not Ra themselves not speak
to this so very often? We must "honor" it's source, it's "narrow band" contact
intent, and as such, not infuse this information with other Non-Loo "fluff and
stuff" , persoanl conjecture, or other 'channeled' readings.



Is it then not incumbent upon us to take up this honor of this offering? Why
would we then not rally to the cause of the study of the Loo in total, and in
specific, attempting to bar ourselves of "any other sources at all" in light of
this study as a true study?



For example: Were I to study Socrates , as a study for self, or in a class
setting, I would think "we / I" would in fact study Socrates, and his works.
See? I would not study Kant or Nietzsche, or Hagel etc. etc., or use them as
argument against Socrates. Nor would I be studying needle point. I would be
studying, contemplating, meditating and attempting to understand Socrates. See?
We would discuss his works. His meaning. His teaching.



We should avail ourselves to this task and put this noble effort upon ourselves,
having this be our reason for being here, the study of RA, the Loo.



Thank you Monica. This should come as a welcome information to all of us that
strive for the STO path. All may truly be well indeed.





Faithfully,



Drake



SPONSORED LINKS
Astronomy gift Astronomy magazine Material science Astronomy telescope Astronomy
star name Astronomy book

---------------------------------
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS


Visit your group "asc2k" on the web.

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
asc2k-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=VK_krNFBBFPmUc9axy7TUl0oPIPndbMqaFHNUn Tr1ECqH79Zke11GQ9Ei0Q4uuetL1tQBCmCUsN_SaoZvW4Ag1JF VLnVxNQ)

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---------------------------------






---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[M.W.]

DRAKE says:

SNIP

> Is it then not incumbent upon us to take up this honor of this offering? Why
would we then not rally to the cause of the study of the Loo in total, and in
specific, attempting to bar ourselves of "any other sources at all" in light of
this study as a true study?
>
>
>
> For example: Were I to study Socrates , as a study for self, or in a class
setting, I would think "we / I" would in fact study Socrates, and his works.
See? I would not study Kant or Nietzsche, or Hagel etc. etc., or use them as
argument against Socrates. Nor would I be studying needle point. I would be
studying, contemplating, meditating and attempting to understand Socrates. See?
We would discuss his works. His meaning. His teaching.

SNIP
> Faithfully, Drake

Observation from billy g

Drake, I'm not sure if your idea of the advisability of an exclusive, pure and
total concentration on the delivered works of Ra is all that sound. It seems to
me to resonates somewhat of a trap in circularity.

A similar concept of exclusivity is found in some Muslim countries where
everything is thrown to the wind except for the concentrated and devotional
study of the Holy Koran. That doesn't work our too well from an objective
observer's viewpoint

The same example of applied blinders can be found in Christian history. That
didn't turn out well at all either.

The Ra philosophy is not a religion of applied dogma but rather a Philosophy of
living. We are advised to examine it and discard what does not fit our immediate
sense of rightness. Its value is not as a thing in itself but rather how it ties
together the multitude of life's experiences. Accordingly, there can be no
wrong, excluded "thing" that we cannot measure against theLoO.

In passing, there seems to be many loose ends in the RA material that cry out to
be at least noted if not explored. I know it is designed for my own good, but I
really don't like the Law of Confusion at all!

Drake, I do appreciate your concern about going out of focus concerning the LoO
but I do think we need to be flexible rather than to make a virtue out of being
merely uptight and righteous in the programming

Somewhere there is a middle ground that will serve us best.

Hmmm.

To put the above in qualitative perspective I must admit it is presumptuous for
me to make any comment much less offer gratuitous advice especially since I'm
relatively new to the program ? with a pile of material yet to work through.
Every time I think that I finally understand what is going on something else
come out of the blue to set me back on my intellectual heels ... back to square
one once again.(hopefully on a higher level?)

billybobbled

P.S. How can one do justice in a study of Socrates without fleshing it out by
dragging in every other philosopher under the sun?

My apologies Drake. I'm just suffering from an unexpected aglugermentation of
the sinus cavities that are presently being siphoned off by the gallon directly
into my brain.

In pain and dis-ease ...with or without the help of some 5th D negative
fiend...whoops! friend, that is.











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[E. Drake]

"M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng" <skykieng@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=AoNiAZzNXMilqmWOQis0LGum7pmEscOVP1t10o zM41qpDeE_UWOamoJ5HSClXBtFbVx9TK39BFJsjswByuRv)> wrote:

DRAKE says:
For example: Were I to study Socrates , as a study for self, or in a class
setting, I would think "we / I" would in fact study Socrates, and his works.I
would not study Kant or Nietzsche, or Hagel etc.,,,Nor would I be studying
needle point. I would be studying, contemplating, meditating and attempting to
understand Socrates. See? We would discuss his works. His meaning. His teaching.

SNIP

Observation from billy g

Drake, I'm not sure if your idea of the advisability of an exclusive, pure and
total concentration on the delivered works of Ra is all that sound. It seems to
me to resonates somewhat of a trap in circularity.

__________________________________________________ __________



Hi Bill,

Thank you for your reply. I do understand your point.Let me try again, and see
too if mine is equally understood. Dialoging on paper is an interesting exercise
to be sure.

1.Is the Ra material a study? Not a religion?

2.If so, should we not take the "Study" as just that first? Mind you, I mean a
"Study" first. Although I understand your meaning, this is to my point. We need
first delve 'into it' so that we may indeed greater 'understand' it, no?

3.Would it not be prudent and "scholarly" first to understand the teachings of a
Socrates, as in my example, or the Koran, or the Bible, as you use in your fine
example before having the ability, or the right for that matter, to use it as
reference, or any other point to your intelligent question?



I am making only a statement that the Loo is a study. It certainly is not a
religion. As such, it is incumbant to delve into it
scholarly/intuitively/academically/scientifically first, so that it be
understood greater first, as an exercise first, then indeed we may use Socrates,
the Bible, the Koran, etc. as other source.



Dogmatism, fundamentalism, closed mindedness, is not to the point. Study first.
The educated fundamentalist well versed in his dogma of Christianity or the
Koran, whether liked or appreciated, has at least made his mark on the material,
and may speak with authority, as opposed to the one who agrees or disagrees
without reference to his subject. I am only advocating the greater effort to the
study of the Loo.



Thank you for the question. It brings clearer the point.



Faithfully,



Drake



---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Monica Leal]

Very true. Case in point: I first read the LoO 21 years ago, and have
reread all the books, except book 4, several times. For some reason, I
had never been able to get thru all of book 4. Until now. And look at
what a gem I just found - something that had been there all along, but
I just now found it!

excerpts from Session #95 (please refer to the text for the full meaning):

"...There is no outward shelter in your illusion from the gusts,
flurries, and blizzards of quick and cruel catalyst. However, to the
pure, all that is encountered speaks of the love and the light of the
One Infinite Creator... Thusly, the great pitch of light is held high
above such a one so that all interpretation may be seen to be
protected by light...

...Firstly, if there has been the preincarnative choice that, for
instance, one shall not take life in the service of the cultural
group, events shall fall in a protective manner. Secondly, if any
entity is able to dwell completely in unity the only harm that may
occur to it is the changing of the outward physical yellow-ray vehicle
into the more light-filled mind/body/spirt complex's vehicle by the
process of death. All other suffering and pain is as nothing to one
such as this...

...You may note some of these of your people which, at this
space/time/nexus, seek places of survival. This is due to the lack of
protection when service to self is invoked..."

And, in session #99:

"...Those who choose separation, that being the quality most
indicative of the left-hand path, are protected from other-selves by a
strength and sharpness equivalent to the degree of transformation
which the mind has experienced in the negative sense. Those upon the
right-hand path have no such protection against other-selves for upon
that path the doughty seeker shall find many mirrors for reflection in
each other-self it encounters..."

This totally blew my mind! I'd always been annoyed by how, in movies
and in our culture in general, the 'good guy finishes last' so to
speak - the villain is alwasy cooler, smarter, sharper...in politics,
the bad guy plays dirtier... Now I understand! It's an equalizing
mechanism.

Temporarily, it APPEARS that the STS entities have the advantage, and
they sort of do, in 3d. But that is just to equalize the fact that
they actually do NOT have the protection given to those of purity on
the STO path.

In cases of widescale disaster, the random factor kicks in, for STS
entities. But STO entities can see all events in light of "God's grand
design" in their lives, so to speak. STS entities can see other-selves
as adversaries, whereas STO entities can choose (for maximum spiritual
growth) to see seemingly adversarial other-selves as mirrors of the
self, and therefore one. Harmony, rather than adversity.

It's also reassuring that, if we listen to our guidance, we really
will 'be in the right place at the right time.'

I love it!

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=Gy96sjNzrK_qPVhaZLRpqU2C1ydF0SnCo3BHXe XB9UxHJb9McDI-dEU0uTn-gzZzYhvMj3bulRPLJUOkbNo), "E. Drake" <truelyndeeply@y...> wrote:

>
> It has been stated so very oft that many have not as of yet taken it
upon themselves to actually study the Loo ... Although it may also be
that some, in spite of having read the information, nonetheless may
not have understood so much of it. ...It needs be encouraged to read
the Loo, reference it, read it again, and re-read it once more, and
continue to read it again, as it is perhaps one of, or even perhaps
'THE' cleanest "narrow band contact" ever established for mankind.
...Did not Ra themselves not speak to this so very often? We must
"honor" it's source, it's "narrow band" contact intent, and as such,
not infuse this information with other Non-Loo "fluff and stuff" ,
persoanl conjecture, or other 'channeled' readings.
>

[Monica Leal]

I understand your point, Bill. I certainly do see the potential risk
of limiting ourselves to ONLY the LoO. However, we are extremely far
from doing that!

On the contrary, it seems to me that there has been more study of
other sources than the LoO. And, it can work both ways: just as it
might become dogmatic to study ONLY the LoO, we can also get too far
in the other direction, where we are studying everything else BUT the
LoO...where we are discussing people's opinions about the LoO but not
the LoO itself!

Perhaps it would be helpful to state whether something is a direct
quote from the LoO or is it our opinion about it, or from some other
source. That way, people won't read someone's opinion and think that
it is from Ra. They will know what's what and can evaluate and decide
for themselves accordingly.


--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=p8uszDnERywA2Eo3XJvTod2L1LNIz050H64qH8 qAWWpDK7eVg7a5v-IYfd1YKBd-e8Fr90p_IWeQTd7FrOhd), "M.W. (Bill )Gieskieng" <skykieng@i...>
wrote:

> Drake, I'm not sure if your idea of the advisability of an
exclusive, pure and total concentration on the delivered works of Ra
is all that sound. It seems to me to resonates somewhat of a trap in
circularity.

[Monica Leal]

Dogma does not result from serious study. Dogma comes from expecting
others to adhere to one's own interpretation of that study. We can
study without dogma.

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=Z7qBpazjWkEAN0L2CjcwP6ucqq08SNeViJZt-PcWPaRRYD6yrs0H8iA5p1TYts2peMa_WYwYUHvWWEs), "E. Drake" <truelyndeeply@y...> wrote:

>
> Dogmatism, fundamentalism, closed mindedness, is not to the point.
Study first. The educated fundamentalist well versed in his dogma of
Christianity or the Koran, whether liked or appreciated, has at least
made his mark on the material, and may speak with authority, as
opposed to the one who agrees or disagrees without reference to his
subject. I am only advocating the greater effort to the study of the Loo.
>

[M.W.]

Hi, guys.

The term "Dogma" is not necessarily distasteful in its
connotation. "Dogma" in its first sense refers merely
to a system of doctrines which is taken as true ... i.e.,
a system of principles or beliefs. Serious study
of the RA material will naturally result in a
systematic construction of Ra dogma. That is good!
I think. Yes.

billy g



--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=NNbj_GX57bG1TB73WgEO5JcaLS2nlNl8U21nAa Dtna6owy1AxTkM2x1d0HcBo06vvgDC2ZPmW8ieB_H51Xl6), "Monica Leal" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
>
> Dogma does not result from serious study. Dogma comes from expecting
> others to adhere to one's own interpretation of that study. We can
> study without dogma.
>
> --- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=NNbj_GX57bG1TB73WgEO5JcaLS2nlNl8U21nAa Dtna6owy1AxTkM2x1d0HcBo06vvgDC2ZPmW8ieB_H51Xl6), "E. Drake" <truelyndeeply@y...> wrote:
>
> >
> > Dogmatism, fundamentalism, closed mindedness, is not to the point.
> Study first. The educated fundamentalist well versed in his dogma of
> Christianity or the Koran, whether liked or appreciated, has at
least
> made his mark on the material, and may speak with authority, as
> opposed to the one who agrees or disagrees without reference to his
> subject. I am only advocating the greater effort to the study of
the Loo.
> >
>

[pschutzy]

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=UD8cjGOkxLSE0ffmo_laJOAgR6Ek23cj4PiQIW p2Qhl5HMFWUG5u8twMxtL3lWEra8ZnpOkCXFd8LhlPMwRRSA), "Monica Leal" <lealdragon@g...> wrote:
> It's also reassuring that, if we listen to our guidance, we really
> will 'be in the right place at the right time.'
>
> I love it!
>
I agree Monica. It's quite beautiful, isn't it? The difficult part,
to me, is using my free will and actually listening and acting upon
the guidance, learning to use the power of our Will in a positive
manner keeping the course directed on a path of service-to-others.

"Ra:?..However, to the pure, all that is encountered speaks of the
love and the light of the one infinite Creator. The cruelest blow is
seen with an ambiance of challenges offered and opportunities to
come. Thusly, the great pitch of light is?.." (Session 95)

The purity of heart, mind-body-and-spirit? well? that is the goal.
The Purity seems to be the key in the ability to transform obsticles
into opportunities. Focused intent upon the Creator.
I also noticed that "the cruelest blow" is not deflected but
experienced and then transformed. Which leads me to believe that
pain and suffering is to be felt? a balancing of the emotions that
leads to fullness. I cannot transform into Love that which I ignore,
disbelieve, or run from.
One other reading that was helpful to me was in Session 94, which I
interpreted to mean? the more I desire to be of STO and follow the
Possitive Path the more possitive "oppertunities" will be presented
to me and I will become strenghtened in that direction. So, we do
evolve and become pure.

"Ra:?..The nature of experience is such that the attention shall be
constantly given varieties of experience. Those that are presumed to
be negative, or interpreted as negative, may seem in abundance. It
is a great challenge to take catalyst and devise the magical,
positive experience?.
Questioner: ??For instance, if he had chosen the right-hand path the
Experience of the Mind would change the permeability of the veil to
accept more and more positive catalyst?... Is this correct?
Ra: I am Ra. This is not only correct but there is a further
ramification. As the entity increases in experience it shall, more
and more, choose positive interpretations of catalyst if it is upon
the service-to-others?... (Session 94)

Blessings and Joy
Patty

[Mary]

Yep, that's why I don't worry about it anymore. If I'm to lose this
existence in a natural disaster, so be it. If not, so be it. I will be
where I'm supposed to be when I am supposed to be there. The more I work to
figure it out the less I understand. The more I follow my heart, the more
things seem to work out.

Mary

-------Original Message-------

From: asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=GV6ArcGZsDjh3Sj-8mFCnJcs-KTctktqCjFJVif1pZfnoisv5B34MwxVh7NI2yHv-X6_zrBjcdJR4X8)
Date: 10/31/05 09:05:45
To: asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=GV6ArcGZsDjh3Sj-8mFCnJcs-KTctktqCjFJVif1pZfnoisv5B34MwxVh7NI2yHv-X6_zrBjcdJR4X8)
Subject: [asc2k] Re: Protection from natural disasters


It's also reassuring that, if we listen to our guidance, we really
will 'be in the right place at the right time.'

I love it!


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[E. Drake]

Monica Leal <lealdragon@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=9W40g6rD_QQzRkw0U8Xaz512yuumdNIqK6f-qOwL2O4GsDrI5MmFQmMvel6GQsupovR2eM5Oe6eydIzmFw)> wrote:
Dogma does not result from serious study. Dogma comes from expecting others to
adhere to one's own interpretation of that study. We can study without dogma.

__________________________________________________ _____________
Very poetically profound. Like the proverbial wisdom pearl worth committing to
quote.






---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Vincent, Fran]

Monica and All:

Monica Leal wrote, 10-29-05. " I have always found Book 4 to be the
most difficult to comprehend. I
am curious how many others in this group have actually made it all the
way thru Book 4 and might be interested in starting a discussion about
the archetypes. Tarot is my chosen path of study. Heavy stuff! "

Fran writes:

I read Book 4, at least three times and came away confused. The info
sent today on Chapter 1 that Don Elkins wrote helped put the Matrix,
Potentiator, and Significator in a better place in my mind, that is,
"the nine archetypes or general blueprints for evolutionary
development".

Don Elkins wrote: ..."it was planned that in total will the mind, the
body and the spirit of a developing individual would evolve as a result
of the potentiator distorting the matrix into the form which we call the
significator". I read Book 4 and never understood this.

I recall that the Ra Group indicated that studying the Tarot was the way
for us to understand the "Nature of the Universe", and because of that
reading, I have recently begun to study the Tarot cards. I have taken 10
classes from a teacher who has studied Tarot for 30 years, and I am
aware I still know nothing. The Ra Group relayed that along with
studying the Tree of Life, and the Chakras that these areas would help
in our gaining understandings. I find the Tarot cards to be extremely
complicated. My intention is to aim at knowing and understanding
myself and the nature of the universe, and not just for giving readings.
All the material of the LOO, the Chakras, the Kabala (and Astrology--but
Ra did not recommend it as highly as the other two) and I find,
science-- all work into the Tarot cards.

For the above reasons, I think a discussion on the archetypes and the
Tarot cards is extremely in keeping with the LOO, and may very well be a
useful tool to study and utilize the LOO information.

In love and light,

The Lucky Unicorn,

Fran


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Monica Leal]

Rather than memorizing the attributes of each archetype, I am seeking
to know them experientially. They are real, living energies and can be
experienced as such.

2 books that have helped me to do that are:

The Inner Guide Meditation by Edwin Steinbrecher

and

The Magical World of the Tarot: Fourfold Mirror of the Universe
by Gareth Knight - (excerpt of review from amazon.com: '...shows you
the best way to reach the spirit of Tarot, that is, by meditation. Not
simply hold the cards and look at the cards to see what information
you can get from the images of the cards, in this book, you will be
taught how to communicate with the characters of the cards of the
Major Arcana and how to visit the Theatres of the suits...')

The authors contend that it is not necessary to memorize details about
the archetypes, because once you begin to experience them, you will be
introduced to their qualities in a very real way. My experience
definitely confirms this for me.

Both of these books introduce the reader to techniques to experiencing
the archetypes. Personally, I have found this approach to be very
powerful. The study of the Tarot, imo, is intended to be an ongoing
experience. Ra's purpose in describing the symbology of the images
serves mainly to get us started in our own study, rather than being an
end in itself, I believe.



--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=S8vDiT9ZTxJLaKSeCdN1zoD6YeNHCiCl_WLkCz UUfgnoQpy1DGyMt8DwnbrEnrdylEFg9xIAPAMNzLu9), "Vincent, Fran" <fran.vincent@p...> wrote:

> I recall that the Ra Group indicated that studying the Tarot was the way
> for us to understand the "Nature of the Universe", and because of that
> reading, I have recently begun to study the Tarot cards. I have taken 10
> classes from a teacher who has studied Tarot for 30 years, and I am
> aware I still know nothing. ... My intention is to aim at knowing
and understanding
> myself and the nature of the universe, and not just for giving readings.

[E. Drake]

Monica Leal <lealdragon@... (/group/asc2k/post?postID=mVE9vsfrDvWY5SjIp7vqsaq5on-chAh75uU9GfQSfgB5gu8z5TB8PsHQx9ae2yMM5cf7Oe_TEG_wl N4)> wrote:
Rather than memorizing the attributes of each archetype, I am seeking
to know them experientially. They are real, living energies and can be
experienced as such.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ ++++++++++++

Several things occur to me with the Tarot topic. Let us remember that it was in
fact the Ra group that introduced the Tarot to Egypt originally, if memory
serves.



Archetypes are universal imagery, or in Jungian terms, an inherited pattern of
thought or symbolic image of past present and future images of the collective
mind of man, including the understanding and experiences of humanity, present in
the individuated and collective unconscious contained within the individual in
template form. Also called imago. These images, universal in nature, resonate
throughout mankind and throughout all of his history of and within 3d, appearing
in dream form, meditation, altered state, thought, or symbolic picture.



They have in them universal representation of meaning. The tarot perhaps thus
communicates on a deep mind level information to which word would fail or pale
in comparison. Indeed these images must certainly transcend words, and may have
inherent in their image resonate frequency information, perhaps holographic in
nature, vibrating and thus magnetizing the deep mind, stirring in it's slumber
and ultimately gravitating toward a facilitated awakening. It may be for this
that the Ra group suggests it may be a tool to gateway.



Faithfully,



Drake








---------------------------------
Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[lottacontinuum]

Mary wrote:
> Yep, that's why I don't worry about it anymore. If I'm to lose this
> existence in a natural disaster, so be it. If not, so be it. I will be
> where I'm supposed to be when I am supposed to be there. The more I work to
> figure it out the less I understand. The more I follow my heart, the more
> things seem to work out.

ThatÃà‚‚Â ´s the conclusion that I came to as well in dealing with natural disasters.
We`ll allways be where we are supposed to be and and if we follow our guidance
everything that happens to us will be conceived as being beautifully perfect.
And I guess someday, maybe in this life, we will have to face our biggest fears
in order to
transform it to our biggest joy, so everything as bad as it may seem has the
potential of
the greatest love.
And in some way we will all sooner or later have to leave this body behind to
enter new
realms. I hope I will then remember the love and not the fear and leave it in a
conscious
and thankful way and be aware of the illusion.

Lotta

[Monica Leal]

Well that's probably the best description/definition of the Tarot
archetypes I have ever heard! Well said!

I would add that the energies already existed, but the committing of
these energies in pictorial form (the images depicted on the cards) so
that humans could more readily access them, is what Ra introduced to
the Egyptians. They were, of course, already accessible thru dreams
and altered states and even in the mirror of everyday life, but the
set of images have allowed us to consciously access them, study them,
and work with them.

They correlate to Astrology, as well as Kabbala. They are the same
energies, depicted in different languages, essentially. Which is why
Ra recommended that the serious student choose one of these to focus upon.

--- In asc2k@yahoogroups.com (/group/asc2k/post?postID=yjtFtgklFcTsYkTGdpXVSDV7z0NvgfQLTlL6sJ sPnhYQTxiHQEM2Qq4izh28JsJhjydbTNSmXfV4B1U), "E. Drake" <truelyndeeply@y...> wrote:

>
> Archetypes are universal imagery, or in Jungian terms, an inherited
pattern of thought or symbolic image of past present and future images
of the collective mind of man, including the understanding and
experiences of humanity, present in the individuated and collective
unconscious contained within the individual in template form...
>
>