This post discusses and compiles a variety of interpretations on the Logos/ Logoi. Logoi could be taken as the plural form of Logos, or a sub-system of the Logos. Metaphorically, if the Logos was a tree the Logoi would be the branches. Logos and Logoi are concepts that should be contemplated on and are important terms for anyone studying the esoteric, occult, philosophy, or religion (especially Christianity). Logos/ Logoi have a vast array of descriptions and there is plenty written on the subject. To begin I will use what I have in my About Page describing why I used the term Logoi for this website:
'The term Logoi Library comes from the Greek word Logoi. The Logos is the centre of all the Logoi, i.e. the divine acts of will that are eternally conceived but expressed at the moment of creation. Through the Logoi a well-ordered cosmos is instituted. The Logoi are the principles behind procession creation and transmutation, and behind the metaphysical structure. Logoi and Logos have many different interpretations such as meaning Logical or λογικόσ as intelligent which is closely tied to the Logos, reason or logic of existence. To simply translate the word as logical is however inadequate. This is due to the term having a closer meaning to the aptitude or intellect and qualifies the possessor of spiritual knowledge or Gnosis. When used in conjunction with the soul or psyche the word then translates as endowed with intelligence. Intelligence itself as the ruling principle of the soul.' "The Logos would be living information, capable of replicating.Replicating not through information/in information, but as information....As living information the plasmate travels up the optic nerve of a human to the pineal body."-VALIS
I am someone just trying to figure everything out, be the best version of myself and manifest the Logos into this realm….
"The order of the Logos, the true Rosicross, does not have a visible or tangible organization in the physical world, it does not have a physical temple; this only exists in the superior worlds.... The true Rosicrucian Order that the Logos has established upon the face of the Earth does not have any visible organization, it does not dictate courses by correspondence, nor does it collect fees, nor does it have juridical personality, nor does it have internal or external statutes. Their members are not even acquainted with each other in this physical world. They might be acquainted with each other in the superior worlds, yet in this physical world they very seldom, very seldom encounter each other." S.A Weor
One of my favorite writings about Logos comes from Philip K Dick’s VALIS book. The following are all excerpts from it:
"Oh, the Gnostic library." Dr. Stone nodded. "Found and read in 1945 but never published. 'Living information'?" His eyes fixed themselves in intent scrutiny of Fat. "'Living information,'" he echoed. And then he said, "The Logos."
Fat trembled. "Yes," Dr. Stone said. "The Logos would be living information, capable of replicating." "Replicating not through information," Fat said, "in information, but as information. This is what Jesus meant when he spoke elliptically of the 'mustard seed' which, he said, 'would grow into a tree large enough for birds to roost in.'"
"The Logos would be living information, capable of replicating. Replicating not through information/in information, but as information....As living information the plasmate travels up the optic nerve of a human to the pineal body."
"Jesus foresaw not only his own death but that of all - - " Fat hesitated. "Homoplasmates. That's a human being to which the plasmate has crossbonded. Interspecies symbiosis. As living information the plasmate travels up the optic nerve of a human to the pineal body. It uses the human brain as a female host -- "
Dr. Stone grunted and squeezed himself violently. " -- in which to replicate itself into its active form," Fat said. "The Hermetic alchemists knew of it in theory from ancient texts but could not duplicate it, since they could not locate the dormant buried plasmate."
"But you're saying the plasmate -- the Logos -- was dug up at Nag Hammadi!"
"Yes, when the codices were read."
"You're sure it wasn't in dormant seed form at Qumran? In Cave Five?"
"Well," Fat said, uncertainly.
"Where did the plasmate originally come from?"
After a pause Fat said, "From another star system."
"You wish to identify that star system?"
"Sirius," Fat said.
"Then you believe that the Dogon People of the western Sudan are the source of Christianity."
"They use the fish sign," Fat said. "For Nommo, the benign twin."
"Who would be Form I or Yang."
"Right," Fat said.
"And Yuragu is Form II. But you believe that Form II doesn't exist."
"Nommo had to slay her," Fat said.
"That's what the Japanese myth stipulates, in a sense," Dr. Stone said. "Their cosmogonical myth.
The female twin dies giving birth to fire; then she descends under the ground. The male twin goes after her to restore her but finds her decomposing and giving birth to monsters. She pursues him and he seals her up under the ground."
Amazed, Fat said, "She's decomposing and yet she's still giving birth?"
"Only to monsters," Dr. Stone said.
"Dr. Stone," he said, "there's something I want to ask you. I want your professional opinion."
"Could the universe possibly be irrational?"
"You mean not guided by a mind. I suggest you turn to Xenophanes."
"Sure," Fat said. "Xenophanes of Colophon. 'One god there is, in no way like mortal creatures either in bodily form or in the thought of his mind. The whole of him sees, the whole of him thinks, the whole of him hears. He stays always motionless in the same place; it is not right -- '"
"'Fitting,'" Dr. Stone corrected. "'It is not fitting that he should move about now this way, now that.' And the important part, Fragment 25. 'But, effortlessly, he wields all things by the thought of his mind.'"
"But he could be irrational," Fat said.
"How would we know?"
"The whole universe would be irrational. "
Dr. Stone said, "Compared with what?"
That, Fat hadn't thought of. But as soon as he thought of it he realized that it did not tear down his fear; it increased it. If the whole universe were irrational, because it was directed by an irrational -- that is to say, insane -- mind, whole species could come into existence, live and perish and never guess, precisely for the reason that Stone had just given.
"The Logos isn't irrational, " Fat decided out loud. "What I call the plasmate. Buried as information in the codices at Nag Hammadi. Which is back with us now, creating new homoplasmates. The Romans, the Empire, killed all the original ones."
Yet by regarding benign people as micro-forms of God, Fat at least remained in touch with a good god, not a blind, cruel or evil one. That point should be considered. Fat had a high regard for God. If the Logos was rational, and the Logos equaled God, then God had to be rational. This is why the Fourth Gospel's statement about the identity of the Logos is so important: "Kai theos en ho logos" which is to say "and the word was God." In the New Testament, Jesus says that no one has seen God but him; that is, Jesus Christ, the Logos of the Fourth Gospel. If that be correct, what Fat experienced was the Logos. But the Logos is God; so to experience Christ is to experience God. Perhaps a more important statement shows up in a book of the New Testament which most people don't read; they read the gospels and the letters of Paul, but who reads One John? "My dear people, we are already the children of God but what we are to be in the future has not yet been revealed; all we know is, that we shall be like him because we shall see him as he really is." (1 John 3:1/2.)
It can be argued that this is the most important statement in the New Testament; certainly it is the most important not-generally-known statement. We shall be like him. That means that man is isomorphic with God. We shall see him as he really is. There will occur a theophany, at least to some. Fat could base the credentials for his whole encounter on this passage. He could claim that his encounter with God consisted of a fulfillment of the promise of 1John 3:1/2 -- as Bible scholars indicate it, a sort of code which they can read off in an instant, as cryptic as it looks. Oddly, to a certain extent this passage dovetails with the Nag Hammadi typescript that Dr. Stone handed to Fat the day Fat got discharged from North Ward. Man and the true God are identical -- as the Logos and the true God are -- but a lunatic blind creator and his screwed-up world separate man from God. That the blind creator sincerely imagines that he is the true God only reveals the extent of his occlusion. This is Gnosticism. In Gnosticism, man belongs with God against the world and the creator of the world (both of which are crazy, whether they realize it or not). The answer to Fat's question, "Is the universe irrational, and is it irrational because an irrational mind governs it?" receives this answer, via Dr. Stone: "Yes it is, the universe is irrational; the mind governing it is irrational; but above them lies another God, the true God, and he is not irrational; in addition that true God has outwitted the powers of this world, ventured here to help us, and we know him as the Logos," which, according to Fat, is living information
The universe might be irrational, but something rational had broken into it, like a thief in the night breaks into a sleeping household, unexpectedly in terms of place, in terms of time. Fat had seen it -- not because there was anything special about him -- but because it had wanted him to see it.
Normally it remained camouflaged. Normally when it appeared no one could distinguish it from ground -- set to ground, as Fat correctly expressed it. He had a name for it. Zebra. Because it blended. The name for this is mimesis. Another name is mimicry. Certain insects do this; they mimic other things: sometimes other insects -- poisonous ones -- or twigs and the like. Certain biologists and naturalists have speculated that higher forms of mimicry might exist, since lower forms -- which is to say, forms which fool those intended to be fooled but not us -- have been found all over the world.
What if a high form of sentient mimicry existed -- such a high form that no human (or few humans) had detected it? What if it could only be detected if it wanted to be detected? Which is to say, not truly detected at all, since under these circumstances it had advanced out of its camouflaged state to disclose itself. "Disclose" might in this case equal "theophany." The astonished human being would say, I saw God; whereas in fact he saw only a highly evolved ultra-terrestrial life form, a UTI, or an extra-terrestrial life form (an ETI) which had come here at some time in the past... and perhaps, as Fat conjectured, had slumbered for nearly two thousand years in dormant seed form as living information in the codices at Nag Hammadi, which explained why reports of its existence had broken off abruptly around 70 a.d.
After a year of analyzing his encounter with Zebra, or God, or the Logos, whatever, Fat came first to the conclusion that it had invaded our universe; and a year later he realized that it was consuming -- that is, devouring -- our universe. Zebra accomplished this by a process much like transubstantiation.
This is the miracle of communion in which the two species, the wine and bread, invisibly become the blood and body of Christ. Men and the world are mutually toxic to each other. But God -- the true God -- has penetrated both, penetrated man and penetrated the world, and sobers the landscape. But that God, the God from outside, encounters fierce opposition. Frauds -- the deceptions of madness -- abound and mask themselves as their mirror opposite: pose as sanity. The masks, however, wear thin and the madness reveals itself. It is an ugly thing.
The remedy is here but so is the malady. As Fat repeats obsessively, "The Empire never ended." In a startling response to the crisis, the true God mimics the universe, the very region he has invaded: he takes on the likeness of sticks and trees and beer cans in gutters -- he presumes to be trash discarded, debris no longer noticed. Lurking, the true God literally ambushes reality and us as well….
The Logos in relation to various philosophies.
"According to David Fideler, a specialist in ancient religions, philosophies, and cosmologies "the Logos represents the heart of the cosmic pattern and the source of existence, its emblem is the sun, the source of life and light." [David Fideler, JESUS CHRIST SUN OF God: ANCIENT COSMOLOGY AND EARLY CHRISTIAN SYMBOLISM, Quest Books, 1993, p. 39.]
In both the Pythagorean and Platonic Schools (of Hellenistic Alexandria) "the sun came to be regarded as the doorway linking together the sensible and intelligible spheres, the material and spiritual orders of existence." [Ibid, p. 39]
The Logos Teachings in the Pythogorean and Platonic Schools was as follows:
*The Logos is not the First Cause...[rather] the Logos represents the first level of real manifestation or Being, for it encompasses within itself all the laws and relations which are later articulated in the phenomenal universe.
*Underlying the source of all reality, the Logos is related to the principle of *Nous* or Universal Intellect, the "repository" of all the cosmic Forms and principles on which creation is based. [Ibid, p. 42]
Fideler notes that the Prologue to John's Gospel reflects the ideas of this Hellenistic Logos teaching,
The "Logos is in the *arche,* the Beginning, Source, or Fount of experience. As the underlying harmonic pattern of creation, all things were made through the Logos, which contains the principles of Life and Light. The light of the Logos shines out, illuminating the darkness of matter..." [Ibid, p. 45]
Whereas the early Christians personified the Logos in the figure of Jesus, the Greeks represented the Logos in Apollo, the god of geometry and music. Another representation was Hermes. [Ibid, p. 46]
Fideler also refers to Egypt: "In ancient Egypt, where the Logos theology appears at an early date, the Greek god Hermes was identified with the Egyptian divinity Thoth. Thoth was the personification of the universal order, the 'heart and tongue' of the sun god Ra who 'spoke the words' which resulted in the creation of the heavens and the earth." [Ibid, pp. 46-47]
As "the reason and mental powers" of the sun god Ra, Thoth was the revealer and speaker of celestial knowledge. These attributes of Thoth were later reflected in the figure of Hermes Trismegistos...the fabled author of the Egyptian Hermetic writings. [Ibid, p. 47]
In summation to these exerpts of Fideler's Solar Logos, some short comparative quotes from his book.
* In the beginning was the Logos...in him was Life, and the Life was the Light of men. --Prologue to the Fourth Gospel
* That Light, He said, am I...the Light-Word (Logos) that appeared from Mind is Son of God --Corpus Hermeticum
* All Father Mind, being Life and Light, did bring forth the Archetypal Man co-equal to Himself...and Man from Life and Light changed into soul and mind...Life to soul, from Light to mind. --Corpus Hermeticum [Ibid. p. 37]"
From: Stoicism, The Logos, etc. : http://www.bizint.com/stoa_del_sol/
Rudolf Steiner interpretation of the Logoi:
The Logos Walks the Earth
“The greatest untold story is the evolution of God.”
― G.I. Gurdjieff
"I have here a text by Rudolf Steiner where he describe the three Logoi. I have added other quotes by Steiner and my own comments and diagrams.
The Three Logoi
There are three godly creative powers in the universe, the three Logoi: In Kabbalah they are called the Father, Mother and Son and in Christianity they are called Father, Son and Holy Spirit. It’s different terminology, but the underlying reality is the same. The Father, Mother and Son symbology describes the creative type in relation to the creation and higher Logoi. The Mother is of course the Creator of humankind. The Father gives the idea, the Mother gives life and the Son gives form. The Trinity defines their role in the creation. See more on this aspect in Sophia – Creator of Humankind.
The First Logos creates out of nothing, creates Consciousness. The Second Logos creates new Life out of the existing and guides the living. The Third Logos combines the created, the building blocks, the clockwork of the microcosmos. Rudolf Steiner has written this text on the three Logoi, but I must admit I didn’t understand the text before I had worked it out for myself. Its very short and he doesn’t give any details or examples, but I think it’s one of the deepest secrets he has hidden here for us to find. I think it’s about time it becomes known.
From Steiner’s Foundations of Esotericism, lecture 27: Here we have three definitions of Beings who bring about, who underlie a planetary chain. They are called the three Logoi.
- The Third Logos produces by means of combining.
• When out of one substance something else having new life comes into being, this is brought forth by the Second Logos.
• Everywhere, however, where we have to do with a coming forth out of nothing, we have the First Logos.
This is why the First Logos is also often called the One who is imminent in things, the Second Logos the One who in the quiescent substance in things creates life out of the living, the Third Logos the One who combines everything existing, who puts the world together out of things.
These three Logoi always manifest in the world in and through one another.
In contemplating the world one continually sees the interaction of the three Logoi.
When a new creation starts, a new Æon, the First Logos sacrifices himself by falling down to a lower level. An archangel becomes an angel by adding an etheric body as a lower body.
The first logos is related to the second, as when, standing in front of the mirror image, we undertake to give our own life to the mirror image. The surrender of life is the original sacrifice in free action. That is the act of the first logo.
The second logos is exactly the same as the first logos, except that it was given its existence by a sacrifice. If one now studies the effect of the second logos, one finds that the essence of the second logos is that it radiates the essence of the first logos back to the first logos.
Thus, the second logos is a reflection of the first logos from which he received his own life, the life that emanated from the first logos.
The lecture series Foundations of Esotericism contains gold nuggets not found elsewhere. Not all versions of this text are good or contain all the pictures. This I think contains everything.
When Christ as First Logos sacrificed himself in the Saturn Æon when he took an astral body as the lowest body he became an archangel. On the old Sun he created Lucifer as a mirror image of himself, the Second Logos, and Lucifer became the first true being of the archangelic hierarchy.
The First Logos encircles the creation, the Second Logos enters the reality. It splits in two, a female part like Sophia or Eve and a masculine part like Anthropos or Adam, and like a potter the one hand forms the pot from outside and the other from within.
Now we have a binary in the Second Logos. The life and content of the Second Logos are twofold. The content is the same as the First Logos, but life is different than the First Logos.
The dash in the middle of the second circle means that in the Second Logos life and content are twofold, that they are divided. When it comes to content, image and mirror image are the same for both, but life is twofold. ~Steiner.
The Third Logos is even more complex to understand. The Third Logos is the physical reality we live in, it’s the physical Earth we see and the reality behind it, the Grail or the Holy Spirit.
First, the First Logos is reflected once again, secondly, the reflection is reflected. This then gives the Third Logos as the reflection of the other two logoi. So it contains the Third logos:
- the mirror image of the First Logos
• the mirror image of what the First Logos in the Second Logos did, namely his life
• The mirror image of what the Second Logos reflects back to the First Logos.
Let us now imagine: The First Logos is mirrored in a. If the First Logos is the creative activity that strives outward, then its reflection in the Third Logos is just the reverse activity of the First Logos. In the First Logos, a is the highest spiritual world light: in the Third Logos, a is the ultimate spiritual darkness.
ln the Second Logos, b is the life that the Second Logos received from the First Logos. It is not the life that sacrifices itself, but the one that has been accepted. The life that sacrifices itself in the First Logos is love. The opposite of this in the Third Logos is the absolute desire, longing, striving for logos, b is therefore the absolute desire in the Third Logos.
In the Second Logos c is the mirror image of the First Logos, which reflects the Second Logos.
All Pictures From: https://kimgraaemunch.wordpress.com/2018/04/13/the-three-logoi/
The Third Logos in spiral form, Sam Tageuk or Gankyil.
Theosophy Perspective on Logos
But I see that HPB quite often refers to the First Logos, Second Logos, and Third Logos. What is meant by these terms? I thought that the Logos was only one – the One All-Ensouling Light and Life of the Universe.
It is true that there is really only one Logos. This is the Universal Logos, that Life Principle and Evolutionary Energy which radiates forth from the Absolute (whether you call the Absolute Brahman, Parabrahm, Adi-Buddhi, Ein-Soph, or whatever) at the beginning of every Great Cycle (Maha-Manvantara) and proceeds to become the Living Universe itself….Genuine Theosophy deals with the Universal Logos, which is the “First Cause” whilst the Absolute is the “Causeless Cause” and the “Rootless Root” of all. This Universal Logos is what is also known as the Central Spiritual Sun or Great Central Sun.
In “The Secret Doctrine” Helena Blavatsky speaks of the three Logoi as being “the personified symbols of the three spiritual stages of Evolution.”
So really they are but symbols, intended to present key concepts to our minds and understanding. Let us note a few things that are said about these three Logoi:
THE FIRST LOGOS is always referred to as the Unmanifested Logos. It is symbolised as the point in the centre of the circle, the circle representing the boundless infinite Absoluteness of Parabrahm and the point marking the very beginning – or rather the re-beginning – of differentiated existence after the Great Night of the Universe (Maha-Pralaya) in which there was nothing – “neither sound nor silence” – but the undifferentiated, unconditioned, infinite, absolute Parabrahm Itself.
The First, Unmanifested, Logos is also called the highest Logos. It is said that it is out of space and time and is “latent potentiality” only. The First Logos is the “potentiality” of the Universe, whilst the Second Logos is the “potency” of the Universe. The Second emanates from the First. Being only latent, potential, and unmanifested, the First Logos is very close to the Absolute and indeed is Its direct radiation. It is not really possible to say any more about it than this. But in the teachings of Theosophy we notice that Atman, the highest Principle of the human constitution, is sometimes spoken of as corresponding to the Unmanifested Logos, whilst most of the time it is equated with the Absolute. This is not a contradiction, as may appear on the surface, but is actually a clear indication of something.
THE SECOND LOGOS is the Manifested Logos. In and of itself it is actually only “the semi-manifested” for it manifests through and as the Third Logos. In “Transactions,” HPB speaks of it as “the Universal and Intelligent Soul, Divine Ideation, combining the ideal plans and prototypes of all things in the manifested objective as well as subjective world.”
Whilst the First Logos is described as “latent potentiality,” the Second is described as “differentiated consciousness.” We are told that space and time commences with the emanation of the Second Logos from the First Logos. The Unmanifested is the potentiality; the Manifested is the potency.
It is this Logos which is the Universal Mind, spoken of in Hinduism as Mahat, which literally means “The Great.” And as the Hindu allegories show, the Divine Mind produces “seven mind-born sons” which go on to play major and important roles throughout the Universe. The synthesis of these seven – which are actually seven rays, seven powers, or seven forces – is what Theosophy calls the Third Logos.
THE THIRD LOGOS is referred to variously as the Seven Rays, the Seven Creative Powers, or the Seven Logoi. The Second Logos contains in itself the Third Logos and manifests through and as this Third Logos, as was mentioned a moment ago. If we call the First Logos latent potentiality and the Second differentiated consciousness, we can refer to the Third as the ultimate differentiation of the Second, in the form of individualized cosmic forces. From them “will proceed the innumerable series of Hierarchies.”
These “Seven” are really the seven occult forces of the Universe and which result, amongst other things, in the actualization and objective manifestation of that which lies latent, subjective, and archetypal within the Universal Mind. In other words, they see to the fulfillment of the Plan for the construction and building of the Universe.
- You mentioned what HPB said about the three Logoi actually being “the personified symbols of the three spiritual stages of Evolution.” In light of everything you’ve been saying, would it therefore be correct to say that there are not actually three distinct Logoi but rather the One Logos bringing about the evolution of the Universe through three distinct stages?
- I believe this is correct, providing we always remember that “the One Logos bringing about the evolution of the Universe” is not any type of Being, Entity, or Divine Person but rather the Energy of Universal Life itself, responding and acting under the inherent impulse of immutable Law. Also, those “three distinct stages” are perhaps not as distinct, separate, and clear cut as our finite minds and intellects would like them to be. We often tend to like to be able to fit things into neat boxes and definite compartments but it doesn’t take much thought or consideration to realize that many things in Nature are not like this.
- What are the names of the three Logoi? I’m sure the Logos can have no name in reality but what are the best names to use for purposes of illustration?
- You’re right, the Logos can have no name, just as the Absolute is necessarily nameless too. It is not actually essential to use any specific names at all. The terms “First Logos,” “Second Logos,” and “Third Logos” will suffice. But if we want to use names then we should use some of the various names given to the Logos in the different religions and philosophies of the world. As was said in the other article that you read –
“Many different names used in many different spiritual traditions may end up becoming confusing unless we keep in mind that they are almost always merely illustrative names applied to this same Logos. Just as it is Brahmā which comes forth as the Logos from the Absolute Brahman in the philosophy of the Upanishads, so it is Adam Kadmon (“Heavenly Man”) which comes forth as the Logos from Ein-Soph in the Kabbalah, and Avalokiteshvara which comes forth from Adi-Buddhi in the esotericism of Tibetan Buddhism. Some Hindus will speak of the Absolute and its Logos as Shiva and Shakti, while others will prefer to use the term Vishnu, Narayana, or Ishvara for the Logos. Others may speak of it as the Universal Kundalini or Mother of the Universe, while a true Christian Gnostic may be inclined to call it the Divine Sophia.
“What is important to remember is that these are not a collection of different beings or entities and are in fact not a being or entity at all but simply names and descriptive terms for the one Logoic Principle which ensouls and animates this entire Universe. “In Esoteric philosophy, the Logos is simply an abstract term,” writes H. P. Blavatsky.”
In Theosophy, the Unmanifested Logos is often referred to as Narayana. Narayana is another name for Vishnu in Hinduism and it can be translated as “the Spirit of Divine Ideation moving on the waters.” Do you remember in the opening of the Book of Genesis in the Bible where it talks about the “Spirit of God” moving over “the waters of the deep” before the world came into being? In the far older Hindu scriptures, we read that Narayana began to move over the infinite waters of abstract Space and that this was “the first flutter of manifestation” which resulted in the cyclic reappearance of the Universe after the Maha-Pralaya.
HPB sometimes spoke of the First Logos as Brahmā, however, and often applied the name Brahmā to the Second Logos also. So we would do well to follow her example in not attaching too much importance to names but focusing instead on the idea and concept which lies behind those names and terms.
The Seven Rays which are referred to as the Third Logos are the Seven Kumaras in Hinduism – which are the seven “mind-born Sons of Brahmā” or Sons of the Universal Mind – whilst in Buddhism they are the Seven Dhyani Buddhas, in Christianity the Seven Archangels, in Judaism the Seven Elohim, and the seven lower Sephiroth of the Kabbalah. All different names for one and the same “thing.” As the most ancient scripture known to man (the Rig Veda of Hinduism) says, “Truth is ONE, though the sages call it by many names.”
To briefly sum everything up, the three Logoi – “the personified symbols of the three spiritual stages of Evolution” – have quite a clear analogy in the three physical stages of the evolution of every human being. First of all there is the conception and the mysterious unseen process which eventually results in the first stages of formation (Unmanifested), then the gestation period where the foetus begins to take form and grow within the womb but always remaining unseen and within that womb (Semi-Manifested) and finally, thanks to the two prior stages of the process, the human being – the microcosm of the macrocosm – is born into objective manifestation (Manifested).
The concept of the Universal Logos is very ancient and certainly does not originate with the teachings of H. P. Blavatsky. But a study and comparison of ancient philosophies will show that HPB’s teachings about the Logos are a clear and accurate re-presentation of that timeless Truth. To comprehend and explore it more fully and deeply, however, it is necessary to read and study “The Secret Doctrine” and especially those chapters and pages which deal with the Logos in the sections on the universal language of mystical symbolism.
A interesting perspective on the different Logos from http://www.4pt.su/en/content/three-logoi-introduction-triadic-methodology-noomakhia that is very in-depth so I only took the opening paragraph. But the writing is a advanced philospihcal treatise on the subject of Logoi/ Logos:
In the book In Search of the Dark Logos , we approached the existence of the Logoi as three views of the world or three fundamental paradigms of philosophy. We defined them as such:
The Light Logos = the Logos of Apollo
The Dark Logos = the Logos of Dionysus
The Black Logos = the Logos of Cybele
These three paradigms can be provisionally placed along a vertical axis between the “here” (ενταύθα) and the “there” (εκείνα), between Earth and Heaven, between cause and effect, between the yield and the source, and so on. Each Logos builds its own universe and presents itself as the master and “demiurge.” Therefore, from a noological (means war of/ within the mind) point of view, we are dealing not with one world but three whose paradigms conflict with one another and each encompass an infinite number of cosmic layers, hierarchies, and life cycles. It might be said that the Noomachy unfolds between these three Logoi in their vying for domination, and the reverberations of this primordial struggle are projected within these three noological universes, thus giving rise to internal battles, conflicts, splits, and oppositions. By virtue of implosion, this paradigmatic “three-way war” collapses each of the Logoi, immersing their content, structures, and “populations” into a funnel of fundamental catastrophes. Studying Noomakhia therefore demands a more careful dissection of these three Logoi. Each of them can be presented as a philosophical country, organized in accordance with certain rules with their own extended geography and topology of central and peripheral zones, and with a number of internal levels and both common and local hierarchies. These three noological countries are the country of Apollo, the country of Dionysus, and the country of Cybele (the Great Mother).
Logoi perspective from the Law of One Ra Channeling. Note I do not fully agree with this channeling and believe it has parts that are truth mixed with non-truth. However they have a lot about Logos/ Logoi from different perspective. Here is a brief excerpt:
Questioner: So the original, the first evolution then was planned by the Logos but the first distortion was not extended to the product. At some point this first distortion was extended and the first service-to-self polarity emerged. Is this correct and if so, could you tell me the history of this process and emergence?
Ra: I am Ra. As proem 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. 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 in depth of the concepts or possibilities of conceptualizations of what we have called the significators. 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, 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.
They have quite a bit written about it here if you want to read the full explanations: https://www.lawofone.info/results.php?q=sub+logoi
I tend to synthesize everything that is written here along with my personal, internalized thoughts/ experiences that I use to shape my understanding and relationship with the Logos/ Logoi. In short from my perspective I see the Logos as the playful energy, which is eternal; If God is Love then the Logos would be the playful energy that is intrinsic in all humanity and a product of this Love. This playful nature is what brings about creativity and creation itself, the playful act of ‘hide and seek’ God is playing with itself through all of us, nature, and everything; which are all aspects of Logos. The ultimate game, being Life, and experience thereof, brought from the primal playful act that is the Logos itself, which began before the beginning, bringing form to the formless, and thoughts to the thinker. Let us manifest this playful energy of Love, the Logos, into this realm through ourselves by always remaining playful with open heart and open mind. As this playfulness brings with it curiosity, and this curiosity can only be quenched by the Knowledge, Wisdom, Gnosis, and Love this experience has to offer.
"In the beginning was the Logos, and the Logos was with God, and the Logos was God." John 1:1