Interactions between archetypes, Akasic matter, feeling [IF77.1focus]

[…] Here, perhaps, it would be convenient to insert for a moment why I asked you the question about where were the archetypes. I don't want to go into the details of the precise location, because it wouldn't be very interesting and it wouldn't be very important to know either.

But imagine a moment, give a moment a structure to the elements that make up the Akasic plan, perhaps it can help you to understand, even with all the imperfections that this entails, with the schematic rigidity that this can inevitably entail; so try to take what I am going to say as a way to make you understand the mechanics, keeping in mind that they are not as simple, so fixed, as precise and rigid as my words may appear - but it can be (I repeat) a way to make you understand the mechanics, the interactions that exist between permanent archetypes, Akasic matter, feel of the individual e transient archetypes.

Ideally, some sort of placement could be drawn for all of these elements: at the highest point (clearly) the permanent archetypes; at the lowest point, I would even say located in that part of akasic matter which acts as a film in the akasic body (the analogue of the etheric body, however referred to the akasic matter, on the akasic plane) the transitory archetypes.

  • Readings for the interior: every day a short spiritual reading of the Cerchio Ifior and the Cerchio Firenze 77, up Whatsapp and Telegram.
  • Summary of the philosophical teaching of the Ifior Circle: HOW CONSCIOUSNESS CREATES PERSONAL REALITY, you can order here the book. If you're reading this and want support, write.

What do they find between these two extremes? Some elements are found that are not non-influential: an influential element is theEternal Present, and another element are instead the Akasic bodies of all the individuals who are doing evolution and which are gradually forming. How would you situate these two elements? Above the permanent, above the transient, in between, one first, the other first?

It is clear that the Akasic bodies of individuals, those bodies that are being structured, cannot but belong to the lowest part of the Akasic plane, also because they are not structured, therefore they are in motion, they are in the process of formation, they are that part that receives more directly the clashes of vibrations coming from the lower floors; so io I would ideally situate: the permanent archetypes, the Eternal Present, the feeling of individuals and then, in the still following layer, the transitory archetypes.

Now, imagine for a moment - bearing in mind this sort of ladder - what can happen, mechanically? It happens that the permanent archetype sends its vibration very solid, sure (and also a little overbearing, then, in the end, because it must guide the evolution of the race) towards the underlying matter, arriving at what is the Eternal Present. , that is, the development of Reality as the Absolute has already imagined it should be, taking into account everything that will happen. Inevitably the permanent archetype must modulate itself taking into account this Eternal Present; it seems obvious to me, because otherwise it would upset the Design if its vibration were not in harmony with what the Eternal Present is.

Therefore, in some way it modulates and, modulating however, inevitably it transforms itself and reaches the underlying matter, that constituted by the Akasic bodies in the process of formation, of structuring, of the individuals who are incarnating; it passes through them, comes into contact with the transitory archetypes and resonates in them, setting the matter that forms them in motion; but, because it is a very complex vibration, a very strong vibration, it somehow ends up becoming a kind of light bulb and the transitional archetype a moth trying to move towards the light projected by this light bulb.

This is why in previous meetings I had said that the permanent archetype is what drives the evolution of the individual. The transitory archetype thus remains in motion within it, it is not a static, immobile thing, it cannot be because it receives the two contrasting thrusts according to the dichotomy that accompanies all creation, all the individual and all evolution. Also in the graph we had seen there is always this dichotomy of one pulling on one side and one pulling on the other and, from the combination of the two opposing forces, a resultant emerges.

Also for what concerns the transitory archetype the discourse is the same: under the push (even if more than a push is an “attract”) by the permanent archetype, the transitory one receives a movement; under the influences of the vibrations that come from the experiences made by the individuals, who have created this transitory archetype, the counter-responses arrive instead which tend to modify, to put in a different way this matter which is already in motion of its own; and here, therefore, that through this double clash of reality a transformation takes place in the transitory archetype, which dissolves giving life to a new transitory archetype.

[...] D - The transitional archetype is an intrinsic necessity of the Akasic matter or one could have one's own archetype ... that is, if I have my own feeling, this could be directly influenced by the permanent archetype, without modifying myself with the others ...

In theory yes, but in reality it is a bit the same thing that happens when there is the incorporation of a very evolved entity, for example. It may happen that - and we had said it in the past, if you remember - a very evolved entity sometimes presents itself, so evolved that we had said that it does not present itself through these two tools directly but usually uses an entity that acts as a "bridge" , remember we said that? This happens because the vibrations of this entity would be so strong as to upset the vibrations of the instruments.

Now, the same thing can happen with regard to the vibration sent by the famous "bell toll" of the permanent archetypes. The vibration sent by these permanent archetypes is so strong that, if it were immediately assimilated by the individual, when it is embodied for example, the individual would be shocked by the vibrations assumed.

Instead, it is necessary that he approach the individual gradually, in order to get him used in some way to perceive in the best way this vibration which, among other things, in the meantime has arrived towards him within the physical plane, transforming itself underneath. the thrust (as you know) of all the subjects it passes through; therefore it is very difficult for the individual to be able - except in particular, very, very particular cases - to perceive directly, in its purity, what is the vibration emitted by the permanent archetype.

D - It's a kind of filter, then.

Certainly, and remember that the first filter, already from the start, is the Eternal Present, in some way.

D - And then the matters that make up the whole individual.

Certainly.

D - I thought the permanent archetype was perhaps love, in the purest, truest sense, that is, union with everyone, etc .; lately we have been talking about universal brotherhood, so it seems to me to be the same thing; and I can't think of anything else. It seems to me such a great, so definitive goal that I wonder if it is perhaps the only permanent archetype?

The archetype of archetypes, the "superarchetype" can only be the Absolute Reality, it can only be the Absolute. But the degrees to get to understand the Absolute are made up of all these (permanent) archetypes which instead are vibrations that belong to various attributes of the archetype (the Absolute, ed), of which brotherhood is one of the attributes, for example.

D - It is not that brotherhood corresponds to absolute love, right?

It's not for sure. Let's say that in order to have that idea of ​​absolute love, of absolute reality, and so on, with which one can somehow miserably try to describe the Absolute, it is necessary that many elements be composed - infinite elements, then, in the end end - otherwise we would not speak of the Infinite and the Absolute. Scifo

We would like to translate this site into English with a neural translator: you want to make your little contribution?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

3 comments on “Interactions between archetypes, akasic matter, feeling [IF77.1focus]”

  1. I do not agree so much with placing the permanent archetypes above the eternal present, because if the eternal present is God's way of existing, it must logically "contain" all feelings, including permanent archetypes.

    Reply
  2. All clear. More and more I notice a similarity with the description of reality as it is presented in the Platonic dialogues, I am thinking in particular of the Symposium and the Phaedrus. Thank you.

    Reply

Leave a comment