Hidden Messages

Kheb is a monastery, remote but not secluded, where people can have an alternative to the mercantile system that is imposed upon society by our political and educational institutions. It is a physical PLACE, and this topic is to discuss the facilities, structures, accommodations, and other physical constructs needed to successfully implement the ideas behind the Sanctuary Project, as well as the "political" structures of a new type of monastic system.
User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:43 am

I've read a lot on religion over the years, and could not help but notice that there are many common features to the various doctrines, including similarities in names, behaviors, motifs and parables. I've always thought that this indicated that religions were all different views of the same thing. Couple days ago, I thought again... each religion also seems to have a unique aspect to itself--something that distinguishes it from the other theologies. Started to think, "what if these unique pieces were like pieces of a puzzle, and the common factors where where they fit together?"

Been thinking further on it, and there are not many people who study MANY religions anymore--they tend to pick one and that's IT, because of the blue vMeme influence. You wouldn't notice it under those conditions.

Doing a "what if" again, "what if some higher intelligence wanted to leave a message that could only be read when people reached a certain level of spiritual development?" First thing I'd do in that situation is to break the message into pieces and spread them across the people of the globe, so that the only way they could put the pieces together would be to focus on their commonality, not their differences. Once people started working together towards a common, spiritual goal, the message would be noticed and assembled. And I'd make it a bit holographic, in the sense that there would be sufficient redundancy so that if a few pieces were lost, they could be recreated from the surrounding pieces (like knowing the shape of a missing puzzle piece by the hole).

In Science Fiction, the signs that indicate a higher civilization are based on mutual cooperation, like the Federation in Star Trek or the Galactic Trig of The Tomorrow People. The general motif is one of rapport, not one of rivalry (yet they use rivalry in the shows because it is more "exciting" to the muggles).

Stargate Universe had a similar theme, where clues to an intelligence that existed prior to the formation of the Universe were found by the Ancients in the cosmic, background radiation and the ship Destiny was created and set out on the 9th chevron to locate it. There is an interesting subtext to the show, which I doubt the authors did consciously--was that this universal mystery was enough to bring opposing factions (Rush and Young) together in cooperation. (That's actually when the series got interesting, and they cancelled it!)

My goals for the Sanctuary project was to make a non-denominational monastery, where people of all theologies could get together and teach and learn their ideas about spirituality in a community that was based on rapport, not rivalry. I just now realized that the "why" is to discover this hidden message. I don't know what it says yet, but I've seen enough of the pieces to know that there is something more here, than meets the eye. And I'd like to know what it says!

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Arcelius » Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:30 am

LoneBear wrote:I've read a lot on religion over the years, and could not help but notice that there are many common features to the various doctrines, including similarities in names, behaviors, motifs and parables. I've always thought that this indicated that religions were all different views of the same thing. Couple days ago, I thought again... each religion also seems to have a unique aspect to itself--something that distinguishes it from the other theologies. Started to think, "what if these unique pieces were like pieces of a puzzle, and the common factors where where they fit together?"
What if different people have different unique aspects themselves and are attracted to theologies that fit well with those unique aspects? I don't think that the various religions fit that well together on their own. It's people who do that within themselves. It seems to me that the focus should be less on the various religions and more on practically implementing a religion within oneself. People are pieces of the puzzle too. The final product isn't a unified religion but a unified person (the medium is the message).
LoneBear wrote:Been thinking further on it, and there are not many people who study MANY religions anymore--they tend to pick one and that's IT, because of the blue vMeme influence. You wouldn't notice it under those conditions.
There aren't that many people who study any more (as opposed to memorizing responses to questions).
LoneBear wrote:Doing a "what if" again, "what if some higher intelligence wanted to leave a message that could only be read when people reached a certain level of spiritual development?" First thing I'd do in that situation is to break the message into pieces and spread them across the people of the globe, so that the only way they could put the pieces together would be to focus on their commonality, not their differences. Once people started working together towards a common, spiritual goal, the message would be noticed and assembled. And I'd make it a bit holographic, in the sense that there would be sufficient redundancy so that if a few pieces were lost, they could be recreated from the surrounding pieces (like knowing the shape of a missing puzzle piece by the hole).
This goes well beyond religion or theology. I would drop the pieces everywhere so they couldn't be avoided no matter what anyone did. No matter what they focused on or found interesting, they would be looking at pieces of the puzzle that could be combined with other ones.

I observe a trend in the world towards more specialization at the expense of generalization. Specialists get paid more depending on their specialty. Generalists just get asked to specialize. So people know more and more about less and less until they "know everything about nothing." This is no way to put any pieces together. It is just a way to put people with the same pieces together and prevent them from finding any more pieces.
LoneBear wrote:In Science Fiction, the signs that indicate a higher civilization are based on mutual cooperation, like the Federation in Star Trek or the Galactic Trig of The Tomorrow People. The general motif is one of rapport, not one of rivalry (yet they use rivalry in the shows because it is more "exciting" to the muggles).
How many nature shows focus on the rapport of nature? Most shows seem more focused on things like "The top 10 deadliest creatures" or showing African cats chase down prey. Yet without the deep rapport that exists in nature, most things would have died out long ago (or never come to be).
LoneBear wrote:My goals for the Sanctuary project was to make a non-denominational monastery, where people of all theologies could get together and teach and learn their ideas about spirituality in a community that was based on rapport, not rivalry. I just now realized that the "why" is to discover this hidden message. I don't know what it says yet, but I've seen enough of the pieces to know that there is something more here, than meets the eye. And I'd like to know what it says!
Perhaps some pointers to the next message(s) :wink: .

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:51 am

Arcelius wrote:What if different people have different unique aspects themselves and are attracted to theologies that fit well with those unique aspects? I don't think that the various religions fit that well together on their own. It's people who do that within themselves. It seems to me that the focus should be less on the various religions and more on practically implementing a religion within oneself. People are pieces of the puzzle too. The final product isn't a unified religion but a unified person (the medium is the message).
My interpretation is that there are unseen motivations (forces) that act as strange attractors (Chaos theory) towards particular sets of beliefs and people migrate towards those centers, making a discrete set of valuing systems--the vMemes. Analogous to stars forming a globular cluster, in RS astronomy (conventional astronomy has it backwards). In psychology, they call it "constellating." People are transient; we're not even around for a century and because of the veil of forgetting, it is very hard to continue on after being rebooted into a new body. People will contain a manifestation of these unseen motivations, but won't be the source of them. Even if the human race wipes itself out, the next sentient species will also be influenced by these strange attractors--the archetypes.
Arcelius wrote:There aren't that many people who study any more (as opposed to memorizing responses to questions).
That also applies to spirituality--there are a lot of people that "memorize" the spirit, can speak the buzzwords, can emulate morality and perform the rituals "by the book." But it is nothing more than a persona--it is not part of themselves. That "Hanuman festival" is a classic example.

But if you STUDY spirituality, it becomes part of you and you don't emulate the behavior, you live it.

And you can tell the difference in someone. A person that memorizes will regurgitate, usually quoting, referring or plagiarizing other sources and not actually have any opinion of their own. A person that studies will be opinionated--and almost always produce NEW KNOWLEDGE, because when something becomes part of you, it rearranges your insides and makes new connections--creativity. Dust on the surface doesn't do that.
Arcelius wrote:This goes well beyond religion or theology. I would drop the pieces everywhere so they couldn't be avoided no matter what anyone did. No matter what they focused on or found interesting, they would be looking at pieces of the puzzle that could be combined with other ones.
That IS probably the case. But our current, societal "norms" for belief are so screwed up that you cannot see the patterns to make the connections. Science won't see it because they have their theories inside-out, upside-down and backwards. Religion doesn't see it because "faith" is used to keep people apart and confined to a specific theology, rather than to find the spiritual aspect mankind has in common. New Age doesn't see it because it's all externalized through channels.

What triggered it off for me was a "correlative update" on my RS2 research from Miles Mathis' papers on how conventional physics has undergone "Death by Mathematics." Not only did he point out the errors and coverups in the system, but proposed some interesting solutions. When I applied those solutions to my knowledge base on how the Universe works--in other words, I STUDIED his work--my internal knowledge base got rearranged (what I call a "correlative update", like the DHDs on Stargate do to correct star positions) and new knowledge was produced. That rearrangement, in this case separating the natural from "diagrammatic" worlds, gave me a sufficiently clear picture of both science and spirituality to see that there was not just a pattern, but a DESIGN to the information--the hidden message.
Arcelius wrote:I observe a trend in the world towards more specialization at the expense of generalization. Specialists get paid more depending on their specialty. Generalists just get asked to specialize. So people know more and more about less and less until they "know everything about nothing." This is no way to put any pieces together. It is just a way to put people with the same pieces together and prevent them from finding any more pieces.
I think that comes from a general trend to be lazy. By specializing, you only have to do the absolute minimum for the maximum benefit. It is analogous to zero-infinity in mathematics.

Personally, I find enjoyment in physical labor, study and research. And it is not about "money" for me--it is about personal growth. (This is perhaps where your first comment comes in.) I live 80% below poverty level and work my tail off helping others. Of course, I still live by Renaissance principles; the Renaissance man was known for his versatility, and held an ethical code of duty, honor and responsibility. Don't see much of that these days.
Arcelius wrote:How many nature shows focus on the rapport of nature? Most shows seem more focused on things like "The top 10 deadliest creatures" or showing African cats chase down prey. Yet without the deep rapport that exists in nature, most things would have died out long ago (or never come to be).
About the only one I've seen is the Shark-Remora symbiotic relationship. And I agree--nature is strongly based on rapport. Rivalry typically occurs only when you have an invader, like when they introduced the Kudzu plant in the southeast, which ran wild and started killing everything else. And that's the thing about rivalry--once you've killed everything else off, the only thing left to a slow death is the victor.
Arcelius wrote:Perhaps some pointers to the next message(s) :wink: .
Asatru - Vedas
Vanir - Vanara
AEsir - Asura

Asatru - Christianity
Thor's Hammer signing - sign of the cross
Hel - Hell
Asgard (astral garden) - Heaven

Vedas - Taoism - Maya
Hanuman - Sun Wukong - Chuen

Asatru - Vedas - Shaver
Svartalfir - Nagas - Dero

Asatru - Shaver - Maya
Ljlosalfir - Tero - kukulcan

Maya - Aztec
Kukulcan - Quetzalcoatl

Mayan - Greek
Chicchan - Poseidon

Greek - Christianity - Egyptology
Apollo - Jesus - Horus

Egyptian - Christianity
Isis-Ra-El = IsRaEl

And that's just a fraction of the basic "god" archetypes. I feel a bit like Jodie Foster in "Contact."

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Wed Mar 28, 2012 8:26 am

I think the message says, "What do you get, if you multiply six by nine?" :-)

This is turning out to be a rather interesting study. It seems this message was designed to be found--once certain assumptions are put in place, "natural consequences" occur. Larson was big on natural consequences, which he developed from his Fundamental Postulates about the Universe. Granted, the consequences are a result of the assumptions made--but this is coming out differently, almost like "tuning in" as a self-reinforcing system. Larson's Reciprocal System postulates never did that--they did the opposite, because he did not include the "yin" aspect in them. Yin was included in RS2, courtesy of KVK Nehru, and that kept a straighter course for the Reciprocal motion concept. It wasn't until I started incorporating Miles Mathis' ideas about differentials that the system started to loop into a self-reinforcing structure. And the interesting bit is that this "loop" affected a lot of my conceptual fundamentals, my "world view" or Weltenschauung. Certain assumptions about life, the Universe and everything got updated along with the RS2 concepts--things I did not anticipate. I find that very interesting.

The archetypal relationships between "gods and men" are forming distinct patterns, almost like contours when you plot out the relationships. But plotting is "diagrammatic" (to use Mathis' terms), so you know you're looking at a dimensionally-reduced projection of archetypal information. When you start to integrate the inter-religion mythos back to find the "natural" pattern, the one that is not projected, a clear distinction between the concepts of "predestination" and "free will" shows up, even at the archetype level--meaning that the archetypes must possess "free will" in order for these patterns to show up, and that free will makes a "uniqueness" to the archetypes.

I'm starting to think this message is some kind of map--though no idea what kind of map, since it does not exist within coordinate space nor clock time.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Arcelius » Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:56 am

LoneBear wrote:I think the message says, "What do you get, if you multiply six by nine?" :-)
:)
LoneBear wrote:I'm starting to think this message is some kind of map--though no idea what kind of map, since it does not exist within coordinate space nor clock time.
A pointer to the next message (or part of the map). A bit like an orienteering course where once you find each point on the course, there are directions to get to the next one. Can you make it to the end? What is there at the end? Is the end just another beginning? Is the orienteering course a form of testing or initiation (i.e. only certain people will make it to the end and be considered worthy)? Is it worth doing in the first place? Who set it up or planned it?

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:57 pm

Arcelius wrote:Is the orienteering course a form of testing or initiation (i.e. only certain people will make it to the end and be considered worthy)? Is it worth doing in the first place? Who set it up or planned it?
It does not appear to be a test nor reward for "passing" or anything like that. When you plot out the cross-cultural archetypes (gods, et al), a lot of them cancel each other out. It is interesting because, by themselves, they tend to dominate the various mythologies. Once you cancel out the loud, blusterous voices of the warrior gods, it does NOT cancel out the system--but it quiets it down, so a more subtle pattern stands out, a pattern based on rapport.

I was doing some "what ifs" last night after a conversation with Gopi concerning the youth of India and how they differ from the youth in western society. Kids seem to operate the same all over the globe, with only one differing characteristic: the tool the ego uses to gain control of the psyche. It is still a projection in all cases. In the west, the projection is more "identification" with material things. In the east, it is the more classic projection onto other people and living things. When I started normalizing the projections to see what was "casting the light," I started to recognize this hidden, message pattern--I've seen it before, and it is on this forum already:

A Path that Doesn't Play the Game
The research in the Archive is basically a set of instructions for another type of "service path", one that completely short-circuits the polarized service path we were told about. One cannot even claim that it is "neither STS nor STO" or "both STS and STO"... it is totally outside this conceptual realm of service, altogether.
It actually doesn't "short circuit" the service system (did not see a large enough picture back then), but makes it "unnecessary." You don't see corporate CEOs riding to work on a tricycle... this system is a different kind of service path.
I also noticed that the "instruction manual" is written as a neural network, so when you study the manual, it actually re-programs your psyche -- gives you a bit of an "upgrade", so you can understand what it is talking about, and make a conscious choice on whether or not to proceed.
Each archetype contains a type of "seed pattern" that is used to upgrade psychological content. The problem is, is that people only have one of the seeds, so the garden only produces the single fruit--that of the STS/STO service path. Once you start cross-referencing the archetypes and begin collecting seeds from all over the world, you can create quite the garden.

It is obviously a Tier 2 function, as Tier 1 will only remain within the defined set of values and not consider others outside the system. And it is more than just "seeing the system" (yellow) or doing the holistic thing... it requires a conscious interaction to comprehend the human system--then this neural network is found, and it WANTS to be found. It is not a test or competition, unless you are competing to see who can remove their competitive nature first... but that seems to be a bit self-cancelling.

It appears to be a type of interactive instruction manual, regarding the evolution of consciousness.

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Arcelius » Fri Mar 30, 2012 3:14 pm

LoneBear wrote:It appears to be a type of interactive instruction manual, regarding the evolution of consciousness.
I believe you are correct. The interactive part only kicks in when you start interacting with "it".

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Sat Mar 31, 2012 9:40 am

Arcelius wrote:I believe you are correct. The interactive part only kicks in when you start interacting with "it".
Yep... seems to be designed to advance consciousness, regardless:

Non-interactive: predestination.
Interactive: free will.

The free will route seems to be significantly faster and generates better results.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Fri Apr 06, 2012 5:15 pm

It just occurred to me that the Cross, the crucifix, Thor's hammer, and various other cross-like symbols, are analogous to the mathematical concept of an Argand diagram--the complex plane, showing the relationship between space and time, or the physical (horizontal, spatial) and metaphysical (vertical, temporal).

User avatar
daniel
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: P3X-774

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by daniel » Thu Apr 12, 2012 1:39 pm

I would think a good place to hide such a message would be in coordinate time, most likely as a living system. It could not be directly observed or measured, having dimensions in time, but would provide for both structure (pattern of the message) and conjugate bioenergy to interact with.

And by a "living system," I'm not talking anything complicated. It could be something as simple as a cosmic flower garden. I just refer to an organized, cosmic system of life that intersects with the material life units during specific conditions.

When you interact with this intelligent pattern, you become aware of the pattern and grow from it; your bioenergy interaction with it also helps it grow; seeds sprout, plants flower. A sympathetic relationship, as Arcelius had mentioned.
Don't ever trust the people that claim the right to rule you. --Larken Rose

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:05 pm

daniel wrote:And by a "living system," I'm not talking anything complicated. It could be something as simple as a cosmic flower garden.
One of the things I have often pondered is if there is a distinction between material and cosmic life. In the life unit, the material aspect is the physical body and the cosmic aspect is the soul--localized in coordinate time. Therefore, our "soul body" should have a physical presence in the Other Realm, as part of our biological existence. This would indicate that everything that is here, is also "cosmic", though the organizational relationships may be different. (One may have cosmic friends that are different than material friends, analogous to the concept of soul mates).

Of course, it could also be a matter of consciousness; the spirit binds the body and soul together. Entities that are not sufficiently complex to have a distinct, spiritual presence may exist in both the material and cosmic, but there would be little communication between the two, so they would appear to act independently.

Of course, the converse could be true... our cosmic aspect of life is just a distributed shadow in the other realm, and cosmic life would be a shadow in this realm, acting much like an unseen force of nature.

I would be interested in other perspectives, if anyone has any.

User avatar
Belthazor
Indagator
Indagator
Posts: 39
Joined: Fri Apr 28, 2006 11:08 pm
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Belthazor » Tue May 08, 2012 11:53 am

LoneBear wrote:I would be interested in other perspectives, if anyone has any.
Does that mean that living people appear as ghosts to those now in the afterlife?

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Wed May 09, 2012 1:07 pm

Belthazor wrote:Does that mean that living people appear as ghosts to those now in the afterlife?
Yes. We are "living ghosts" in the societies of the dead.

It is interesting to note that from the ghost perspective, living people are visible at all times, yet the living cannot see the ghosts. That is probably due to limits on spatial perception of the living, and once that spatial body is cast off, so is the limit.

It seems that when one is at the extremes, either "totally living" or "totally dead," the other side is not visible. But when in the transition zone, you can initially see the land of the living but as you transition, the living fades out and the land of the dead becomes visible. It seems to be more of a slide, than flicking a switch. Incarnation, on either side, seems to be the quantum jump between the transition zone and the "extreme."

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:13 pm

I believe I have a rough translation of part of this hidden message that I found, concerning this "meaning of life" stuff...

Delenn was very close with, "we are the Universe, trying to understand itself."

Life provides a method in which to reify (make real) the abstract--the projective geometry aspect, with wider application. Once real, communication occurs between the real parts, which are then abstracted into theories. It appears that this process is what builds "consciousness."

It appears to be more of a spiral than a repeating cycle. And by that I mean it isn't a repetition--something new is added with each iteration and we call that "evolution."

The message concerns this process of reifying the abstract, communicating the "reality", then theorizing a new abstract from the observations. And it is operating everywhere...

Larson's physics starts with "abstract change" to particles and atoms, which communicate via chemistry, to create new structures that were never abstracted to begin with. The new structures form archetypal abstractions, which are then reified into complexes, which communicate via persona to create complex ego patterns that generate abstract collectives. It's the same system, with increasing levels of complexification.

You don't see the pattern in conventional physics, because it starts with "reality" and tries to build theory--the original abstraction is missing, which Larson provides. Mathis did the same thing for mathematics with his natural and diagrammatic systems.

It is even visible in law and government. The abstract is "common law," which is an observation of how things naturally interact. A sovereign comes along and takes that abstraction and reifies it into civil law, they way he thinks it works. Civil law is a commandment on the way man IS to behave socially, not naturally. The world is now in the process of outgrowing the sovereign commandments to go back to a new interpretation of common law, where everyone is a sovereign.

I find that a lot of the mystery in the world, regardless of discipline--could be science, religion, spirit, anything--occurs because the original abstraction (the Source) is not recognized.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Modulus 9 in Symbolism

Post by LoneBear » Sat Jun 16, 2012 8:01 pm

I've been spending a lot of time digging through ancient legends and have found some interesting stuff. However, one of the problems is that people only remember legends when something bad happens. You don't really find the "Legend of shopping at the marketplace for shoes" or "Spent the day swimming in the Nile." So most mythology appears to surround times of substantial transition.

There is, however, a very interesting numerical sequence that constantly shows up, which most people here would know as the "octave" or doubling, as in the Ra Material reference. In dealing with the various epochs, which most civilizations call "suns", calendars tend to reset. Most things reset at regular cycles, like the 7 days of the week. We could 1-7, then back to 1 again, not 11-17, 21-27, etc. to include the week numbers. We actually use the weekdays as a "modulus" number, "mod 7", so we ignore the week number and just look at days. A number of systems use this process, including numerology and harmonics.

I found two, different number systems present in the old records, one that is zero-based and another unit-based, similar to what Larson does for the coordinate and natural reference systems. I also noticed a correlation to the modulus functions.

The natural system is based on 8, but since there is no zero, it is numbered 1-10. It is done as a modulus 8 function, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10. The "10" became symbolic of the completion of a cycle, all eight are filled. "11" became the start of a new cycle and completed at 20. 21 the start of the third and last cycle (since there are only 3 dimensions in nature), running from 21-30. The number "30" is symbolic of the finish, not just the cycle. Even today, editors will write "30" on a work to indicate it is finished.

Researchers have mistaken this for a decimal system. But we HAVE a decimal system, so where did that come from? The answer--it is the projection of the natural system that includes minimum and maximum boundaries.

0 = minimum boundary
1-8 = finite amounts of the natural system (base 10)
9 = maximum boundary.

Zero can be considered a finite number, since you can get it by taking away 1 from 1. So you could have "nothing", but the maximum limit must refer to "everything", not just 1 more than 8, what we normally term "infinity." Well, we can now count 0 through 8, but in order to keep "9" forever out of reach, the numerical system uses modulus 9, so 8+1 = 10, and 9 got relegated to the infinity concept, and therefore shows up a lot in reference to the gods.

Almost all of the number symbolism in the western world is based on modulo 9, not base 10. The normal, base 10 counting system was for the peasants and merchants, to count quantity. The modulo 9 relationships were those reserved for the nobility and religious leaders.

It first showed up in the Grecian Tetractys, but the was we tend to number it is wrong. 9, being the supreme infinite, needs to be at the top of the pyramid, then number clockwise around the perimeter, 1-8. Now what is interesting, is that if you start at 1, and move up by octaves--modulo 9... 1 doubles to 2, 2 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16 mod 9 = 7, 32 mod 9 = 5, 64 mod 9 = 1. Make a Tetractys, and "connect the dots"... 1, 2, 4, 8, 7, 5, 1... you end up with a double-diamond, a "quantized" infinity symbol, which happens to be a 2D projection of a 3D cube.

I was playing around with the numerical patterns. Most people know how weird "9" is to begin with, 2x9 = 18 and 1+8=9, etc. I found that works for all the various modulo bases--same patterns. It appears to be some kind of a harmonic resonance between numbers, indicating that numbers are more than just "quantity"--providing you start at 1 and use a modulus, not a regular count. I found a pattern, if you lay out the numbers 1-9 sequentially (as yang), then take the same sequence and reverse it, out-of-phase (like time is out of phase with space, as yin). Has some interesting properties, such as if you pick any number and add up it with the 8 surrounding numbers, using mod 9 math, you get the start number again.

(I just noticed in the icon from the image I made of the matrix, that it's got stripes when small... sort of a forward, neutral, reverse pattern reminiscent of Keely's work).

So, attached is a GIF of the ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything, for your perusal!
Attachments
Matrix.gif
Mystery of Universe
(22.84 KiB) Not downloaded yet

MrTwig
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2013 7:10 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Re: Modulus 9 in Symbolism

Post by MrTwig » Tue Nov 26, 2013 9:37 pm

LoneBear wrote:I've been spending a lot of time digging through ancient legends and have found some interesting stuff. However, one of the problems is that people only remember legends when something bad happens. You don't really find the "Legend of shopping at the marketplace for shoes" or "Spent the day swimming in the Nile." So most mythology appears to surround times of substantial transition.

There is, however, a very interesting numerical sequence that constantly shows up, which most people here would know as the "octave" or doubling, as in the Ra Material reference. In dealing with the various epochs, which most civilizations call "suns", calendars tend to reset. Most things reset at regular cycles, like the 7 days of the week. We could 1-7, then back to 1 again, not 11-17, 21-27, etc. to include the week numbers. We actually use the weekdays as a "modulus" number, "mod 7", so we ignore the week number and just look at days. A number of systems use this process, including numerology and harmonics.

I found two, different number systems present in the old records, one that is zero-based and another unit-based, similar to what Larson does for the coordinate and natural reference systems. I also noticed a correlation to the modulus functions.

The natural system is based on 8, but since there is no zero, it is numbered 1-10. It is done as a modulus 8 function, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10. The "10" became symbolic of the completion of a cycle, all eight are filled. "11" became the start of a new cycle and completed at 20. 21 the start of the third and last cycle (since there are only 3 dimensions in nature), running from 21-30. The number "30" is symbolic of the finish, not just the cycle. Even today, editors will write "30" on a work to indicate it is finished.

Researchers have mistaken this for a decimal system. But we HAVE a decimal system, so where did that come from? The answer--it is the projection of the natural system that includes minimum and maximum boundaries.

0 = minimum boundary
1-8 = finite amounts of the natural system (base 10)
9 = maximum boundary.

Zero can be considered a finite number, since you can get it by taking away 1 from 1. So you could have "nothing", but the maximum limit must refer to "everything", not just 1 more than 8, what we normally term "infinity." Well, we can now count 0 through 8, but in order to keep "9" forever out of reach, the numerical system uses modulus 9, so 8+1 = 10, and 9 got relegated to the infinity concept, and therefore shows up a lot in reference to the gods.

Almost all of the number symbolism in the western world is based on modulo 9, not base 10. The normal, base 10 counting system was for the peasants and merchants, to count quantity. The modulo 9 relationships were those reserved for the nobility and religious leaders.

It first showed up in the Grecian Tetractys, but the was we tend to number it is wrong. 9, being the supreme infinite, needs to be at the top of the pyramid, then number clockwise around the perimeter, 1-8. Now what is interesting, is that if you start at 1, and move up by octaves--modulo 9... 1 doubles to 2, 2 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 16 mod 9 = 7, 32 mod 9 = 5, 64 mod 9 = 1. Make a Tetractys, and "connect the dots"... 1, 2, 4, 8, 7, 5, 1... you end up with a double-diamond, a "quantized" infinity symbol, which happens to be a 2D projection of a 3D cube.

I was playing around with the numerical patterns. Most people know how weird "9" is to begin with, 2x9 = 18 and 1+8=9, etc. I found that works for all the various modulo bases--same patterns. It appears to be some kind of a harmonic resonance between numbers, indicating that numbers are more than just "quantity"--providing you start at 1 and use a modulus, not a regular count. I found a pattern, if you lay out the numbers 1-9 sequentially (as yang), then take the same sequence and reverse it, out-of-phase (like time is out of phase with space, as yin). Has some interesting properties, such as if you pick any number and add up it with the 8 surrounding numbers, using mod 9 math, you get the start number again.

(I just noticed in the icon from the image I made of the matrix, that it's got stripes when small... sort of a forward, neutral, reverse pattern reminiscent of Keely's work).

So, attached is a GIF of the ultimate answer to life, the universe and everything, for your perusal!
Don't you mean fractals?
Attachments
colorful-fractals_00384262.jpg

User avatar
daniel
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 200
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2011 2:59 pm
Location: P3X-774

Re: Modulus 9 in Symbolism

Post by daniel » Thu Nov 28, 2013 3:32 pm

MrTwig wrote:Don't you mean fractals?
It looks more like a "magic square" pattern, if you rotate it 45 degrees. Pick any number, than sum and take the modules of the 8 numbers surrounding it, and you always come back, to the number you picked. It looks like a standing wave of spirals.

Fractals are a dimensional recursion; a hall of mirrors. The unrepresented dimension(s) in the calculations act as a scale factor, so no matter how you zoom in or out, you get the same pattern. In the RS, you find fractal patterns when you observe time region structures, since we see temporal speeds as recursive (layered).
Don't ever trust the people that claim the right to rule you. --Larken Rose

User avatar
Obzistian
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:04 am
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Obzistian » Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:10 am

LoneBear wrote:
Of course, it could also be a matter of consciousness; the spirit binds the body and soul together. Entities that are not sufficiently complex to have a distinct, spiritual presence may exist in both the material and cosmic, but there would be little communication between the two, so they would appear to act independently.

Of course, the converse could be true... our cosmic aspect of life is just a distributed shadow in the other realm, and cosmic life would be a shadow in this realm, acting much like an unseen force of nature.

I would be interested in other perspectives, if anyone has any.

This reminded me of the quote: "..left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing."
(not exactly the correct quote, but the general idea)
If it is indeed" binding the body and soul together", then would not the spirit be that which communication between
the two "flows"?
I would say this communication gets 'lost in translation' because it appears as the inverse to the "other realm".
Interactive Intelligence coordinates movement in harmony with its nature.

User avatar
LoneBear
Legatus Legionis
Legatus Legionis
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2004 12:38 am
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by LoneBear » Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:09 pm

Obzistian wrote:This reminded me of the quote: "..left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing."
(not exactly the correct quote, but the general idea)
Personally, I like Ambassador Kosh's statement, "Understanding is a three-edged sword." (Your side, my side, and the truth.)
Obzistian wrote:If it is indeed" binding the body and soul together", then would not the spirit be that which communication between
the two "flows"?
I would say this communication gets 'lost in translation' because it appears as the inverse to the "other realm".
The mortal realm (body) and the other realm (soul) would BOTH appear inverse to the spiritual realm, analogous to adding a 3rd dimension to a sheet of graph paper, where X is the physical, Y is the metaphysical, and Z would be the spiritual.

There is always an exchange/communication between the material and cosmic aspects of life, because each influences the other. Let's call that the "unconscious" aspect of communication, because it is "there" due to the structure of the living cell.

In the Reciprocal System, there are minimum quantities required before an internal system can influence an external one. So if we take the "ethical control unit" as the spiritual version of a "cell," when below that minimum it can only effect the internal environment--which would be the aggregates of cells that it subsumes. The net result would be that the spiritual aspect could have some degree of control over the physical and energetic aspects of those cells, which could result in health or dis-ease, depending on the motivation of the spirit. We could label that influence "subconscious," because it is influencing the unconscious communication in a subtle, indirect manner.

When the minimum quantity of "ethics" is exceeded, that is where I would label "consciousness," as the influence would extend between these "ethical cells" as well as across the entire entity and it's environment--the spirit complex can then directly influence the organism ("taking control of your life," free will) and can orient itself to alter the external environment.

However, every time I see the television, I am reminded that the focus of society is to keep this ethical consciousness to a minimum, to keep everyone dependent and in the victim status, so you can "buy" those conscious influences on your life, rather than create them. After all, there is a drug for every internal problem, and a government program for every external one. (I guess slaves aren't supposed to have free well, anyway...)
Keeper of the Troth of Ásgarðr, Moriar prius quam dedecorer.
Forever Standing Guard over the Bridge Between the Realms
"You have to believe in yourself." --Sun Tzu, The Art of War

User avatar
Obzistian
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 112
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 7:04 am
Location: Jacksonville, NC
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Obzistian » Wed Jul 02, 2014 10:24 am

LoneBear wrote:
Obzistian wrote:This reminded me of the quote: "..left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing."
(not exactly the correct quote, but the general idea)
Personally, I like Ambassador Kosh's statement, "Understanding is a three-edged sword." (Your side, my side, and the truth.)
Obzistian wrote:If it is indeed" binding the body and soul together", then would not the spirit be that which communication between
the two "flows"?
I would say this communication gets 'lost in translation' because it appears as the inverse to the "other realm".
The mortal realm (body) and the other realm (soul) would BOTH appear inverse to the spiritual realm, analogous to adding a 3rd dimension to a sheet of graph paper, where X is the physical, Y is the metaphysical, and Z would be the spiritual.

There is always an exchange/communication between the material and cosmic aspects of life, because each influences the other. Let's call that the "unconscious" aspect of communication, because it is "there" due to the structure of the living cell.

In the Reciprocal System, there are minimum quantities required before an internal system can influence an external one. So if we take the "ethical control unit" as the spiritual version of a "cell," when below that minimum it can only effect the internal environment--which would be the aggregates of cells that it subsumes. The net result would be that the spiritual aspect could have some degree of control over the physical and energetic aspects of those cells, which could result in health or dis-ease, depending on the motivation of the spirit. We could label that influence "subconscious," because it is influencing the unconscious communication in a subtle, indirect manner.

When the minimum quantity of "ethics" is exceeded, that is where I would label "consciousness," as the influence would extend between these "ethical cells" as well as across the entire entity and it's environment--the spirit complex can then directly influence the organism ("taking control of your life," free will) and can orient itself to alter the external environment.

However, every time I see the television, I am reminded that the focus of society is to keep this ethical consciousness to a minimum, to keep everyone dependent and in the victim status, so you can "buy" those conscious influences on your life, rather than create them. After all, there is a drug for every internal problem, and a government program for every external one. (I guess slaves aren't supposed to have free well, anyway...)
For some reason, these "ethical cells" remind me of midi-chlorian cells in Star Wars, but indeed, this is a good analogy.
Where one has the basis to learn how to influence the external from the internal and interact to directly influence
your life as well as others. I see this is where the responsibility comes in. Ethical consciousness, yes.

The "motivation of the spirit" I find very interesting.
Interactive Intelligence coordinates movement in harmony with its nature.

trippingthelight
Discens
Discens
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2016 3:26 am

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by trippingthelight » Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:52 am

In reference to Isis-Ra-El = Israel

the following text is from https://ia600301.us.archive.org/0/items ... anWatt.pdf which seems to debunk the Isis-Ra-El stance and various other theosophy mis-information. It is a great read on ancient history appears to be from a completely independent researcher who was hacked off at deliberate mis-information. He sources a lot of info from Velikovsky.
why would the ancient Israelites use ‘Isis’ (a Greek word) or ‘Ra’ (an Egyptian one)?

First of all, where does the word 'Israel' come from? It comes
from the Hebrew word 'Yisra'el', meaning 'he that fights with God' (which derives from the two
Hebrew words, 'Sara', which means 'he fights', and 'El', 'God'- where also the word 'Elohim'
comes from). So the origin of the word 'Yisra'el' has nothing at all to do with 'Isis' or 'Ra'. But
how old is the Hebrew word 'Yisra'el'? The Egyptian 'Merneptah Stele' actually mentions the
term, which was dated to have been done around 1208 B.C.- but 'Isis' is not ancient Egyptian,
rather a Coptic Greek translation of the Egyptian 'Uesat' (the word the Egyptians used for
their Goddess & the wife of Osiris). The Hebrew word 'Yisra'el' no doubt predates the
Greek term 'Isis', used for the Egyptian Trinitarian Goddess 'Uesat'.
and on similar notion of Sol-Om-On
But Solomon was never called 'Solomon' in the
Old T., that is a Latin or Greek translation of the Hebrew word 'Shlomoh' (which meant
'peaceful').

From the 'Strong Hebrew Dictionary': H8010 - שלמה- ׁshe
l h (shel-o-mo): from H7965; peaceful; Shelomoh, David’s successor: - Solomon. H7965 - שלום ׁשלם-ׁsh l
sh l (shaw-lome', shaw-lome'), from H7999; safe, that is, (figuratively) well, happy, friendly; also
(abstractly) welfare, that is, health, prosperity, peace: - X do, familiar, X fare, favour, + friend, X greet,
(good) health, (X perfect, such as be at) peace (-able, -ably), prosper (-ity, -ous), rest, safe (-ly), salute,
welfare, (X all is, be) well, X wholly)".

So how does the Latin/Greek 'Solomon', which sounds like something from the Mystery
Religion, but which is only a translation of the Hebrew word 'Shlomoh'(and which possesses a
totally different meaning and sound) somehow prove that Solomon didn't exist and Judaism is
connected to the Mystery Religion/Freemasonry? It doesn't, Alan is making a bunk connection.
He has also tried to do the same with the words 'Amen' and 'Amon-Ra' (Jordan Maxwell too),
and Keith Truth did a nice job of explaining why that doesn't fly. (Remember that Jordan is an
admitted Theosophist/disciple of Blavatsky's writings, and in one of her books, the name of the
New Age saviour is 'Jordanus Maximus'; he also admits that he was good friends with Manley
Palmer Hall, the famous 20th Century philosopher-Mason/Luciferian, supports the NWO, and
says he's in telepathic contact with aliens from the Pleiades. Jordan is a great example of
of a theosophist, & him & Alan share many of the same views on ancient history & religion)
This is the kind of thing that is pushed by the 'Zeitgeist' movie and it's astrotheology, again which is gone into detail in the paper.

User avatar
joeyv23
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 680
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 3:51 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by joeyv23 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm

LoneBear wrote:
Fri Mar 23, 2012 9:43 am
My goals for the Sanctuary project was to make a non-denominational monastery, where people of all theologies could get together and teach and learn their ideas about spirituality in a community that was based on rapport, not rivalry. I just now realized that the "why" is to discover this hidden message. I don't know what it says yet, but I've seen enough of the pieces to know that there is something more here, than meets the eye. And I'd like to know what it says!
It's been a while since I've visited this topic, and, going back over it, I wanted to quote the above because the spirit that drives the desire to do something like this is something worth checking and re-checking ourselves for occasionally to see if we still align with it. There seems to be the potential to initiate a process of divorce from the animus complex and a fall from grace so to speak that must be kept in check if one is to remain on the Path.
Arcelius wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:30 am
LoneBear wrote:I've read a lot on religion over the years, and could not help but notice that there are many common features to the various doctrines, including similarities in names, behaviors, motifs and parables. I've always thought that this indicated that religions were all different views of the same thing. Couple days ago, I thought again... each religion also seems to have a unique aspect to itself--something that distinguishes it from the other theologies. Started to think, "what if these unique pieces were like pieces of a puzzle, and the common factors where where they fit together
What if different people have different unique aspects themselves and are attracted to theologies that fit well with those unique aspects? I don't think that the various religions fit that well together on their own. It's people who do that within themselves. It seems to me that the focus should be less on the various religions and more on practically implementing a religion within oneself. People are pieces of the puzzle too. The final product isn't a unified religion but a unified person (the medium is the message).
I think the there is a mutually agreeable solution to this... that each of the unique characteristics of the different religions do fit together to present a coherent, underlying structure. Also, we have to take the things that they have in common into consideration as well. These commonalities are, to me, the core of our collective's (sub)conscious understanding of spirituality. I suspect that the final product is neither a unified religion only or a unified person only, but rather a spiritual relationship among various participants.
LoneBear wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:51 am
Arcelius wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 7:30 am
How many nature shows focus on the rapport of nature?
About the only one I've seen is the Shark-Remora symbiotic relationship. And I agree--nature is strongly based on rapport. Rivalry typically occurs only when you have an invader, like when they introduced the Kudzu plant in the southeast, which ran wild and started killing everything else. And that's the thing about rivalry--once you've killed everything else off, the only thing left to a slow death is the victor.
It's not a nature show par excellence, and I'm only mentioning this again because Spaceman and I re-watched this recently and it is, by far, one of the most (if not only) shows that has at its backbone, a strong ethical foundation. If you haven't seen it, it's definitely worth checking out: Mushi-Shi.

Also, to tie together these two streams, it is important to recognize the existence of both in nature. Predator and prey relationships are rapport based within the contexts of the ecosystem at large. Rivalry based relationships exists within a species and we can see this anywhere you have members of a species competing for mating rights in adults and in some species where we see large numbers of progeny, in the feeding rights between infants. Rivalry and Rapport could not exist without their counterpart. Two sides - one coin. This should indicate the potential for a different orientation to these two with respect to Kheb, being a path that doesn't play the pick and/or choose game. Both exist in nature and are both valid. Imbalance in the extreme in one direction or another makes for difficult existence, but they are both here and we had best figure out a way to navigate our way effectively without trying to substitute one for the other.
LoneBear wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:51 am
Arcelius wrote:There aren't that many people who study any more (as opposed to memorizing responses to questions).
That also applies to spirituality--there are a lot of people that "memorize" the spirit, can speak the buzzwords, can emulate morality and perform the rituals "by the book." But it is nothing more than a persona--it is not part of themselves. That "Hanuman festival" is a classic example.

But if you STUDY spirituality, it becomes part of you and you don't emulate the behavior, you live it.
I take a slightly different stance on this... study of spirituality doesn't make spirituality a part of a person. The will function, living it is necessary in order to be what we here might consider a "spiritual person" to be. Studying spirituality does water the seeds of spirituality in our Store Consciousnesses though, and is absolutely a necessary requisite to becoming the spiritual person that we are attempting to describe here.
LoneBear wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:51 am
People are transient; we're not even around for a century and because of the veil of forgetting, it is very hard to continue on after being rebooted into a new body. People will contain a manifestation of these unseen motivations, but won't be the source of them. Even if the human race wipes itself out, the next sentient species will also be influenced by these strange attractors--the archetypes.
Hopefully we can navigate around this perceived inevitability!
LoneBear wrote:
Thu Apr 12, 2012 5:05 pm
One of the things I have often pondered is if there is a distinction between material and cosmic life. In the life unit, the material aspect is the physical body and the cosmic aspect is the soul--localized in coordinate time. Therefore, our "soul body" should have a physical presence in the Other Realm, as part of our biological existence. This would indicate that everything that is here, is also "cosmic", though the organizational relationships may be different. (One may have cosmic friends that are different than material friends, analogous to the concept of soul mates).

Of course, it could also be a matter of consciousness; the spirit binds the body and soul together. Entities that are not sufficiently complex to have a distinct, spiritual presence may exist in both the material and cosmic, but there would be little communication between the two, so they would appear to act independently.

Of course, the converse could be true... our cosmic aspect of life is just a distributed shadow in the other realm, and cosmic life would be a shadow in this realm, acting much like an unseen force of nature.

I would be interested in other perspectives, if anyone has any.
One of the things that has been discussed here among us outside of the forum is the distinction between the Cosmic Sector and Other Realm. A great deal of misunderstanding occurs when these concepts begin to bleed over and into each other in our minds.
LoneBear wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:13 pm
I believe I have a rough translation of part of this hidden message that I found, concerning this "meaning of life" stuff...

Delenn was very close with, "we are the Universe, trying to understand itself."

Life provides a method in which to reify (make real) the abstract--the projective geometry aspect, with wider application. Once real, communication occurs between the real parts, which are then abstracted into theories. It appears that this process is what builds "consciousness."
I look at this as being one of the issues that the collective aspect of our species is and some of the individuals within it are trying to come to terms with. The idea that "we are the Universe" is a reaction to having most previously (or current) central gravitational focus being at a highly logical/materialistic i.e. Orange orientation which is why we find it where we do, at the Green vMeme of Spiral Dynamics. There is definitely something to this, and is indicated in this thread as the archetypal level of existence. The seeds for our existence exist independently from our existence, itself. This is the top-down approach taken by religions and TV shows that are predisposed to maintain a certain status quo level of consciousness within the collective (because comfort is good but engenders complacency.) One must also recall the bottom-up approach as given in the RS, where the Universe, itself, is not a containment vessel or field of consciousness exploring itself. Both viewpoints are valid when viewed from their proper contexts.
LoneBear wrote:
Mon Mar 17, 2014 12:09 pm
The mortal realm (body) and the other realm (soul) would BOTH appear inverse to the spiritual realm, analogous to adding a 3rd dimension to a sheet of graph paper, where X is the physical, Y is the metaphysical, and Z would be the spiritual.

There is always an exchange/communication between the material and cosmic aspects of life, because each influences the other. Let's call that the "unconscious" aspect of communication, because it is "there" due to the structure of the living cell.

In the Reciprocal System, there are minimum quantities required before an internal system can influence an external one. So if we take the "ethical control unit" as the spiritual version of a "cell," when below that minimum it can only effect the internal environment--which would be the aggregates of cells that it subsumes. The net result would be that the spiritual aspect could have some degree of control over the physical and energetic aspects of those cells, which could result in health or dis-ease, depending on the motivation of the spirit. We could label that influence "subconscious," because it is influencing the unconscious communication in a subtle, indirect manner.

When the minimum quantity of "ethics" is exceeded, that is where I would label "consciousness," as the influence would extend between these "ethical cells" as well as across the entire entity and it's environment--the spirit complex can then directly influence the organism ("taking control of your life," free will) and can orient itself to alter the external environment.

However, every time I see the television, I am reminded that the focus of society is to keep this ethical consciousness to a minimum, to keep everyone dependent and in the victim status, so you can "buy" those conscious influences on your life, rather than create them. After all, there is a drug for every internal problem, and a government program for every external one. (I guess slaves aren't supposed to have free well, anyway...)
The issue I see with the explanation given here, is the what has been left out between the nature of our selves and our species as an indivisible unit consisting of a dichotomy between individual and collective. (See remarks above about this.) Individuals within the collective can have a spiritual component due to the development of the corpus and anima aspects of the collective as its own discreet unit. This does not require that the individual have the exact perfect balance in order for consciousness to "descend" down into the picture. We already have consciousness involved at this stage of our collective development. Sure, there are some who are less oriented towards that, and some individual units within the whole are "newer" than others and may require some work in order to be able to live and express themselves in a spiritual manner.

As for the status quo of our collective that is marked by maintenance at a certain level of comfort and complacency. I refer back to my previous comments about this.
trippingthelight wrote:
Mon Sep 11, 2017 10:52 am
In reference to Isis-Ra-El = Israel

the following text is from https://ia600301.us.archive.org/0/items ... anWatt.pdf which seems to debunk the Isis-Ra-El stance and various other theosophy mis-information. It is a great read on ancient history appears to be from a completely independent researcher who was hacked off at deliberate mis-information. He sources a lot of info from Velikovsky.
[...]
This is the kind of thing that is pushed by the 'Zeitgeist' movie and it's astrotheology, again which is gone into detail in the paper.
Nice detective work! Keep at it! :D


An aside if anyone was wondering... given my post in Bruce's Hex Ed thread today...yes, I'm drawing from the information in the Archive, processing it, and what you just read is my processing of the data. Cool, right? :)
Last edited by joeyv23 on Wed Sep 13, 2017 7:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"Living is not necessary, but navigation is." --Pompey
"Navigation is necessary in order to live." --Me

User avatar
Arcelius
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 517
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 12:35 pm
Location: Atlantic Canada

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by Arcelius » Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:33 pm

joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
LoneBear wrote:
Sat Mar 24, 2012 10:51 am
Arcelius wrote:There aren't that many people who study any more (as opposed to memorizing responses to questions).
That also applies to spirituality--there are a lot of people that "memorize" the spirit, can speak the buzzwords, can emulate morality and perform the rituals "by the book." But it is nothing more than a persona--it is not part of themselves. That "Hanuman festival" is a classic example.

But if you STUDY spirituality, it becomes part of you and you don't emulate the behavior, you live it.
I take a slightly different stance on this... study of spirituality doesn't make spirituality a part of a person. The will function, living it is necessary in order to be what we here might consider a "spiritual person" to be.
I think you have just described what study is in a more occult sense of the word. A true student of the occult (one who studies) does so in a very practical way, or s/he is just wasting their time. The student becomes the study.
joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
Studying spirituality does water the seeds of spirituality in our Store Consciousnesses though, and is absolutely a necessary requisite to becoming the spiritual person that we are attempting to describe here.
This is only part of the full study. The word study has a number of definitions which may include something "executed for practice or in preparation for another work" or "intended to develop one aspect of performing technique". A more common definition may be "the acquisition of knowledge or skill in a particular branch of learning, science, or art" (with a personal emphasis on both knowledge and skill, being the practical side).

I don't think you are disagreeing with LoneBear and I on this as much as you might think.
joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
LoneBear wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:13 pm
I believe I have a rough translation of part of this hidden message that I found, concerning this "meaning of life" stuff...

Delenn was very close with, "we are the Universe, trying to understand itself."

Life provides a method in which to reify (make real) the abstract--the projective geometry aspect, with wider application. Once real, communication occurs between the real parts, which are then abstracted into theories. It appears that this process is what builds "consciousness."
I look at this as being one of the issues that the collective aspect of our species is and some of the individuals within it are trying to come to terms with. The idea that "we are the Universe" is a reaction to having most previously (or current) central gravitational focus being at a highly logical/materialistic i.e. Orange orientation which is why we find it where we do, at the Green vMeme of Spiral Dynamics. There is definitely something to this, and is indicated in this thread as the archetypal level of existence. The seeds for our existence exist independently from our existence, itself. This is the top-down approach taken by religions and TV shows that are predisposed to maintain a certain status quo level of consciousness within the collective (because comfort is good but engenders complacency.) One must also recall the bottom-up approach as given in the RS, where the Universe, itself, is not containment field of consciousness exploring itself. Both viewpoints are valid when viewed from their proper contexts.
The RS approach is given by a human to help fellow humans; as you say, a certain perspective. Larson made observations and drew conclusions from them. The "we are the universe" idea is generally delivered as a result. Delenn, as an alien, is delivering her societies' observations/conclusions but without the full foundation they are based upon. Similarly, the Law of One delivers Ra's observation/conclusions in response to questions. Although many things have since been scientifically demonstrated, at the time, they were not. Certainly, the All is One part hasn't been scientifically demonstrated.

I remember an episode of Stargate where Jack and Teal'c test fly a hybrid Goa’uld death glider modified with some Earth technology. However, there is a homing device implanted on it which causes the death glider to return to base overriding all other controls and they end up needing to be rescued. There is a danger to accepting things that aren't understood. The result of this episode is a decision to only use things that were 100% built and understood on Earth. Thus, they would spend time trying to understand the alien technology but only rely upon what they understood.

I would suggest that relying on one's own understanding is best, even when it seems like a good shortcut to use someone else's. This is not to say that you can't learn from someone else. Only that there is a different between learning (an intellectual activity) and relying (a practical activity).
Robert Browning, Andrea del Sarto, line 98. wrote:Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what's a heaven for?
There is also the expression that "one's reach has exceeded their grasp" or "one should not aspire to rise above one's station in life". The reach may be likened to knowledge acquired; the grasp, to practically leveraging that knowledge. Without the reach exceeding the grasp, how would we evolve or otherwise move forwards. On the other hand, if the focus is strictly on the reach with nothing being done on the grasp, then at the end, you still have nothing.

User avatar
joeyv23
Atriensis
Atriensis
Posts: 680
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2013 3:51 pm
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Contact:

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by joeyv23 » Wed Sep 13, 2017 4:33 pm

Arcelius wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:33 pm
joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
I take a slightly different stance on this... study of spirituality doesn't make spirituality a part of a person. The will function, living it is necessary in order to be what we here might consider a "spiritual person" to be.
I think you have just described what study is in a more occult sense of the word. A true student of the occult (one who studies) does so in a very practical way, or s/he is just wasting their time. The student becomes the study.
joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
Studying spirituality does water the seeds of spirituality in our Store Consciousnesses though, and is absolutely a necessary requisite to becoming the spiritual person that we are attempting to describe here.
This is only part of the full study. The word study has a number of definitions which may include something "executed for practice or in preparation for another work" or "intended to develop one aspect of performing technique". A more common definition may be "the acquisition of knowledge or skill in a particular branch of learning, science, or art" (with a personal emphasis on both knowledge and skill, being the practical side).

I don't think you are disagreeing with LoneBear and I on this as much as you might think.
Thanks for this, I hadn't looked more deeply into the concept of study and was coming from acquaintance with the second definition that you gave above. If I came across as attempting to disagree outright, that wasn't the intention. When looking at this I saw a place that I felt could be filled out. I know quite some time has passed since these conversations started and we won't get every minute detail out in every post, which was why I was saying in response to quoted text that I take a different stance than the text quoted. I agree with you, our lines of thought are in no way mutually exclusive.
Arcelius wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:33 pm
LoneBear wrote:
Wed Jun 06, 2012 2:13 pm
I believe I have a rough translation of part of this hidden message that I found, concerning this "meaning of life" stuff...

Delenn was very close with, "we are the Universe, trying to understand itself."

Life provides a method in which to reify (make real) the abstract--the projective geometry aspect, with wider application. Once real, communication occurs between the real parts, which are then abstracted into theories. It appears that this process is what builds "consciousness."
The RS approach is given by a human to help fellow humans; as you say, a certain perspective. Larson made observations and drew conclusions from them. The "we are the universe" idea is generally delivered as a result. Delenn, as an alien, is delivering her societies' observations/conclusions but without the full foundation they are based upon. Similarly, the Law of One delivers Ra's observation/conclusions in response to questions. Although many things have since been scientifically demonstrated, at the time, they were not. Certainly, the All is One part hasn't been scientifically demonstrated.
Here again, I didn't mean to sound as if I disagreed. Part of my internal make-up is to see polarities and then see if I can wed them into a cohesive unit. I'm curious, however, and want to clarify... Are you saying that Larson's observations lead to the "we are the universe" idea? I haven't read all of Beyond Space and Time yet so if he came to that conclusion and I haven't made it there yet, that's fine - I just haven't seen yet that this was where his lines of reasoning were headed. The thing about Delenn, and any other species coming from any sci-fi or fantasy show... These are products filtered through human mind. I see what's presented from that character less as something actually alien so much as something of a human construct being presented as foreign, because by and large the concepts were - at the time of the shows airing - quite foreign to society at large.
I would suggest that relying on one's own understanding is best, even when it seems like a good shortcut to use someone else's. This is not to say that you can't learn from someone else. Only that there is a different between learning (an intellectual activity) and relying (a practical activity).
I couldn't agree more. This is a tough one, especially when you find someone who you are able to hold in high regard. It should always come back to the individual where personal understanding is concerned. Otherwise we end up regurgitating the thoughts of others ad infinitum, and as LB has so aptly indicated, nothing new comes from this situation.
Arcelius wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 3:33 pm
Robert Browning, Andrea del Sarto, line 98. wrote:Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp,
Or what's a heaven for?
There is also the expression that "one's reach has exceeded their grasp" or "one should not aspire to rise above one's station in life". The reach may be likened to knowledge acquired; the grasp, to practically leveraging that knowledge. Without the reach exceeding the grasp, how would we evolve or otherwise move forwards. On the other hand, if the focus is strictly on the reach with nothing being done on the grasp, then at the end, you still have nothing.
Fair assessment. This is the type of thing I mentioned before that my mind finds great interest in, finding the edge of the coin.
"Living is not necessary, but navigation is." --Pompey
"Navigation is necessary in order to live." --Me

animus
Centurio
Centurio
Posts: 158
Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2015 11:18 am

Re: Hidden Messages

Post by animus » Thu Sep 14, 2017 10:59 am

joeyv23 wrote:
Wed Sep 13, 2017 2:00 pm
One of the things that has been discussed here among us outside of the forum is the distinction between the Cosmic Sector and Other Realm. A great deal of misunderstanding occurs when these concepts begin to bleed over and into each other in our minds.
Cosmic Sector = Agartha + Tartarus
Other Realm = Agartha
?

Locked