Approaching the Void/Oblivion and the TwinStar

[Kain]

NOTE: This is a topic that came up while engaging in a discussion concerning the particlars of Spontaneous Combustion (http://www.forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?t=890).

If this seems a little off the trail to some I will bring it all home. Insofar as some amount of spontaneous combustion phenomena may be akin to what the tantrics call "kriyas" (energy knots, basically), it may be that certain nervous system blockages are actually partly to blame in some of these cases. It is very rare that the Kundalini serpent would ignite all by itself but if it does so and it veers out of control, intense heat (or cold) can be one of its well observed consequences...sufficient to literally incinerate a human being in a worst case scenario...First of all, I should say that this is a quite accurate comment m1thr0s. As I've previously mentioned, I initially started researching and working on Kundalini after having it awaken on me spontaneously and unconsciously, taking a huge bite off my spine/back that was similar to a partial combustion and in fact had strong ramiffications to all the nerves in my body for a very long time. So Kundalini work in general works on the premise of moderated combustion, and if such a combustion becomes unmoderated for whatever reason it can very much be sufficient for literally incinerating a human being physically. The blockages should be cleaned prior to awakening the Serpent itself (or cleaned throguh the application of the Serpent and while maintaining control), for if it becomes awakened and becomes diverted by blockages, such effects certainly arise and their potency depends on the potency of the initial awakening.
Ok...I think I get all of that (thanks). But let me ask you this then because I know you have worked with the Tetractys etc and fields and so on. It has been my experience that these things successfully plug that gap...that is...they provide the intermediary required to span these depths, heights etc... I have actually arrived at the conclusion over time that what you are describing regarding the physical body may also be applied to the Tree of Life itself, ie, there are certain velocities & magnitudes that will crush it like a toothpick if not for the stellar dynamic of the TwinStar...again providing an intermediary...even to the Tree of Life itself.

So I guess one thing I am asking then is have you run into any of this kind of problem since working with the Tetractys and variant forms? Personally I have not had any trouble of this sort and feel remarkably unconcerned regarding Abyss or Void of any kind...but I do not typically work via Kundalini, so I am not versed in all that kind of phenomena...it seems to me that since you apparently are already able to access this kind of energy more than most people I have met...you are in a prime position to verify that premise. Based upon the mathematics itself...this appears to be one of the really critical aspects of the Tetractys in general...that it is one of the very few things we have access to that can stabilize real and whole universal continuum without crapping out halfway in and leaving us standing there with our dic(tionary)'s in our hands...

And to a large extent it achieves this because it is itself a physical body system and not just a thought-construct per se.This is a very interesting question you bring up m1thr0s. Indeed I have worked with the Tetractys and with assorted field work and the results are certainly very interesting. Kundalini makes things slightly different however, and I'm still trying to reconcile all that in really high altitudes.

First of all, Kundalini is a force that opperates deeply through the principle of laya, or Dissolution. The way it allows access to the Void while on an ascending motion is through a thinning of the concept of Form, as we are all the more approaching the Unmanifest in it's own terms. Kundalini itself is originally situated in the other side of the equation, that of the grossest part of Materialization (Earth), and is meant to be awakened through generated heat so that it ignites and then retracts manifestation backwards (while taking the practitioner up with it). So in this method, shortcircuits are avoided by having Form thinning out appropriately for the altitude we are currently situated at. If for whatever reason as one ascends one inhibits the thinning action if Kundalini the result is the bringing close to the Void of a formation/construct that belongs lower, which results in a "lightning" of sorts through the voltage created.

I have actually arrived at the conclusion over time that what you are describing regarding the physical body may also be applied to the Tree of Life itself, ie, there are certain velocities & magnitudes that will crush it like a toothpick if not for the stellar dynamic of the TwinStar...again providing an intermediary...even to the Tree of Life itself.

...

And to a large extent it achieves this because it is itself a physical body system and not just a thought-construct per se.So what is needed is indeed an intermediate in order to approach those depths to their fullest, as you ssaid yourself m1thr0s. However, even though the TwinStar's and Tetractys's ability to handle velocities and heights of this sort is extremely interesting, the main problem that can still be met under certain conditions in this setting (in my view) is that, as you say, the Tetractys is a physical body. Let me expand on this a bit:

The Void (not so sure if this applies to the Abyss, as it works within the realm of Manifestation) functions as the counter-pole of Form itself. So between those two poles the interplay brings about an immense multitude of different densities of Form, and of course different shapes/formations. However, Form itself still remains the opposite of the Void principle, thus approaching it while possessing any form of construct still results in an explosive energy release. Now, this release can certainly be tapped and used for whatever purposes one desires and the Tetractys is great for achieving that, however it still remains a technological construct subject to it's respective Form, so like all forms it attains a certain height between the two poles of Form and Formlessness. By trying to go higher, the explosive release becomes more violent as Form does not ordinarilly venture in such heights. And if one persists to go heigher, it is not the formation's shape that matters any more at all but it's inherent constitution (which is now completely polarized with it's surroundings and suffers electric evacuations).

So here's my own question m1thr0s: since the Tetractys serves as a subtler construct that superimposes that of the Tree in order to mediate the properities of the Void, doesn't the Tetractys itself pertain to Form ultimately? If so, this method's mathematics point to the conclusion that the Void can always be "courted" at our highest crown and even tapped all the more directly, but never outright attained (unless only as our highest conscious co-ordinate), Man being between Heaven and Earth. If so, then the Tetractys is simply used in a different altitude and this resolves my complication. What do you think?

Kain

[m1thr0s]

These are powerful mysteries Kain and to be candid, none of us can very well pretend to have sorted it all out and still be confined within our human forms, yet there are several important points that we can refer to that may help to guide us here.

The first thing that should be considered is the Jen principle itself, whose distinguishing characteristic mathematically is that it always stands opposite to itself as well as between itself. Thus the Jen is both polar and central to itself in all cases. Because of this it is uniquely capable of equilibrating both Nothing and Everything within itself. The TwinStar itself is built from this principle...it is rooted in the Jen. By definition, this tells us that it is uniquely capable of actually inhabiting the Void...indeed...this is its elemental Homeground.

One of the things to consider as to how such a thing might even be possible is that what makes it possible for any thing to inhabit the Void is Indistinguishability. The TwinStar is both a Form and a principle of Form at the same time, very similar to the Golden Ratio. We are none of us the Golden Ratio itself, yet its principle guides and governs our physical beings. It's Form is all over the place in a technical sense...its form is mathematically infinite, the same as the TwinStar. Being mathematically infinite, it is not possible to confine it at just one place and say "this is its form", since as soon as we have asserted this it springs up in infinite other places as well. A thing can inhabit Nothing where it is impossible to distinguish it from Nothing. A thing can be defined as indistinguishable from Nothing where it is impossible to restrict it to any set value of Thing. If you cannot altogether define a thing, you can also not effectively distinguish it. If it resides within all things...even all potential things...there is finally no "it" to be distinguished. Certain principles of Form are able to successfully accomodate this, though there are not many of them.

I am of the opinion that the TwinStar is such a principle and is both rooted in the Jen and perfectly at home in Nothing, which we also refer to as the Void, although I am a bit more partial to the term Oblivion myself.

One of the parallels we find to this dynamic lies within the "eye" form of the Gods as depicted in ancient Egypt. When a God "stands down" it assumes its recognizeable form, yet when it collects itself back up again, it assumes its "eye" form, such as the Eye of Horus etc. When it resides within in its Eye form it is indistinguishable and we cannot say Horus is here or there or anywhere specifically. At that altitude, he/she/it is everywhere. Being "everywhere" is mathematically equivalent to being "nowhere" because we are simply unable to identify any "where" at all corresponding to its presence. This is how the TwinStar functions in my view as well. It is capable of "standing down" where it assumes a recognizeable form and collecting back up where its form is infinite. At the level of Elements, all of this is made possible by the Jen, which we know to be synonymous with *Spirit* and/or *Intelligence* as defined historically.

Having said all of that. I do believe there remains something within the Void that remains forever incomprehensible to intelligence itself. This is perhaps the most lofty paradox I know of because in a technical sense this "Mystery Principle" is the same as Intelligence itself, yet I believe it remains somehow aloof and it is this "aloofness" that allows for an infinite spontanaety in existence itself...even at the very highest levels of Being. It is my belief that without this Mystery Principle, life soon ceases to be of any real interest to the living. The price of all our attainment would be an intolerable boredom and I do not believe that this ever actually occurs owing to this Mystery Principle which insures that Nothingness itself retains both individuality and spontanety of action. Even Nothing cannot second-guess with absolute precision what it will do next in my view. But this is very "out there" stuff and I only mention it in passing for the moment.

m1thr0s

[Kain]

These are powerful mysteries Kain and to be candid, none of us can very well pretend to have sorted it all out and still be confined within our human forms, yet there are several important points that we can refer to that may help to guide us here. Certainly. This could be termed the subtlest universal paradox we can be met with and have been tracking it's particulars with much interest for some time now.
The first thing that should be considered is the Jen principle itself, whose distinguishing characteristic mathematically is that it always stands opposite to itself as well as between itself. Thus the Jen is both polar and central to itself in all cases. Because of this it is uniquely capable of equilibrating both Nothing and Everything within itself. The TwinStar itself is built from this principle...it is rooted in the Jen. By definition, this tells us that it is uniquely capable of actually inhabiting the Void...indeed...this is its elemental Homeground. Very interesting. I feel the principle of Jen is linked with the positive side of the Unmanifest/Oblivion/Void, thus successfully making for a "Boundless Light" co-ordinate which is essentially everywhere and nowhere.
One of the things to consider as to how such a thing might even be possible is that what makes it possible for any thing to inhabit the Void is Indistinguishability. The TwinStar is both a Form and a principle of Form at the same time, very similar to the Golden Ratio. We are none of us the Golden Ratio itself, yet its principle guides and governs out physical beings. It's Form is all over the place in a technical sense...its form is mathematically infinite, the same as the TwinStar. Being mathematically infinite, it is not possible to confine it at just one place and say "this is its form", since as soon as we have asserted this it springs up in infinite other places as well. A thing can inhabit Nothing where it is impossible to distinguish it from Nothing. A thing can be defined as indistinguishable from Nothing where it is impossible to restrict it to any set value of Thing. If you cannot altogether define a thing, you can also not effectively distinguish it. If it resides within all things...even all potential things...there is finally no "it" to be distinguished. Certain principles of Form are able to successfully accomodate this, though there are not many of them. I agree and see it the same way, in fact attaining this Indistinguishability or primordial condition is also the gateway to Omnipresence/Omniscience/Omnipotence I think. It is a trait that I think must be possessed by all maps of the Body of Light that we are about to use in order for us to even have hope of completing the procedure.

I have also found that, as far as practical experimentation goes with this principle, the relationship between the astral and physical plane could be contemplated on and used experimentally to see in action this phenomenon in mini-scale. For instance, from a strictly physical point of view, an astral construct "does not exist" and cannot be said to be "here" nor "there". It can, however, quite directly influence the physical if it so chooses or avoid it completely if that is it's wish. It effortlessly moves and influences any surface we may wish, and this can be demonstrated through practical telekinetics all the way. So "Nothing" is "Everything", and also influences "Something" at will and completely on it's own terms. What's more, on a higher stratum this "Nothing"/"Everything" is in fact "Something" itself, it being quite particularized and "distinguishable" when seen from a "macrocosmic" point of view.
I am of the opinion that the TwinStar is such a principle and is both rooted in the Jen and perfectly at home in Nothing, which we also refer to as the Void, although I am a bit more partial to the term Oblivion myself.

One of the parallels we find to this dynamic lies within the "eye" form of the Gods as depicted in ancient Egypt. When a God "stands down" it assumes its recognizeable form, yet when it collects itself back up again, it assumes its "eye" form, such as the Eye of Horus etc. When it resides within in its Eye form it is indistinguishable and we cannot say Horus is here or there or anywhere specifically. At that altitude, he/she/it is everywhere. Being "everywhere" is mathematically equivalent to being "nowhere" because we are simply unable to identify any "where" at all corresponding to its presence. This is how the TwinStar functions in my view as well. It is capable of "standing down" where it assumes a recognizeable form and collecting back up where its form is infinite. At the level of Elements, all of this is made possible by the Jen, which we know to be synonymous with *Spirit* and/or *Intelligence* as defined historically. I see. This is a very interesting concept you bring up and am well acquainted with it too. Indeed, the particularized form could be said to be corporeal while the "indistinguishable"/celestial aspect would be Everywhere/Nowhere. This is synonymous with Jen/Intelligence/Spirit indeed.

What I find very interesting is the following. The approach of most historical Body of Light structures is to fascilitate a formulated corresponding structure that can mirror the Unmanifest Godhead in Manifest Form. So a Body of Light would be the afforementioned "Eye" in recognizable form, or the Eye's correspondance within Form (which, since it corresponds with it completely, also "expands" in the aloofness of Oblivion and thus of Nowhere/Everywhere). This could be described as the approach towards Jen/Intelligence and the mirroring of it in appropriate physical Form. However, by integrating Jen in our system, is Jen formulated? I guess the "Perfect Form" to house Godhead could be be describes as the closest Jen can formulate itself...perhaps related with Singularity/Bindu, it being Manifest Potential, retaining the creative properties of Oblivion/Void while being suituated on the Formulated part of the equation.

Formulation itself particularizes and situates a concept. However I can very well see the connection you described between the TwinStar and Jen/Spirit/Intelligence so I feel in such a case the universality is not lost due to the form being "Perfect", the correct vehicle of the undefinable "Eye" principle. I think your quote below pretty much reaches the same point:
Having said all of that. I do believe there remains something within the Void that remains forever incomprehensible to intelligence itself. This is perhaps the most lofty paradox I know of because in a technical sense this "Mystery Principle" is the same as Intelligence itself, yet I believe it remains somehow aloof and it is this "aloofness" that allows for an infinite spontanaety in existence itself...even at the very highest levels of Being. It is my belief that without this Mystery Principle, life soon ceases to be of any real interest to the living. The price of all our attainment would be an intollerable boredom and I do not believe that this ever actually occurs owing to this Mystery Principle which insures that Nothingness itself retains both individuality and spontanety of action. Even Nothing cannot second-guess with absolute precision what it will do next in my view. But this is very "out there" stuff and I only mention it in passing for the moment.I think that, in a way, this is exactly what I have been trying to put across, even though I'm not very satisfied with my wording so far. There is an aspect of the Void/Oblivion that somehow cannot be phathomed by formulation of any kind...a "mystery principle" of sorts. This unphathomed quality remains always Above and seems to be unable to be mirrored on the Body itself under any means. I guess this is the necessary price for Manifestation of any kind, no matter how perfect it is.

In Tantric philosophy, the aim of the construction of the Body and the ascent of the consciousness is the Bindu state, where Kundalini itself rests once again in Absolute Beingness. There is still a differentiation between Bindu and Sunyata (Emptiness) however, and for the "Mystery" principle to be understood completely even Bindu itself must be allowed to dissolve in Sunyata, realizing Consciousness/Intelligence in it's own terms.



This is a particularly important subject for me and I feel it is very much tied with the nature of the principle of Jen in general. I think it is important for it to exist here and have it all on the table for us. A very interesting conversation m1thr0s,

Kain

[MythMath]

I sure enjoy reading these thought streams... :yes:

Looking forward to the day when
any of this will make sense to me... :eek: :confused:

[m1thr0s]

I don't fully understand the Mystery Principle either and it's really just a term of convenience. But consciousness itself *projects* by its very nature and I think that this is somehow the key. No matter where you place consciousness, it is still able to project beyond itself, ahead of itself, behind itself and so on. If you were to somehow eliminate this projection capability, you would be left with nothing conscious at all...and I don't think that this is possible to accomplish because it would take consciousness to accomplish it which puts you right back at consciousness I think.

In a sense, I am very skeptical that any of us actually wants to attain *Absolute* anything. Rather, given a very clear choice with all the variables laid out before us, I think that what we really want is an *Optimal* coexistence with Allness/Nothingness. I don't actually believe any of us is really after *Absolute* attainment. We think we are because we have been coerced into thinking that way in my opinion. I have a very difficult time seeing where this would actually be any kind of an improvement of any kind and I also don't feel that it is somehow a mandatory dharma, or destiny per se. I feel that this has been misunderstood and...at the very least...has no real relevance to the human condition, even at the level of godhead itself.

And perhaps this is exactly why this Mystery Principle remains "aloof"...perhaps this really is the *Absolute* in question and what we really want/need is a ready access to it...not to become the thing itself.

m1thr0s

[Kain]

I sure enjoy reading these thought streams... :yes:

Looking forward to the day when
any of this will make sense to me... :eek: :confused:If you feel like it, you can always ask for a more detailed description of certain concepts you may be unfamiliar with MythMath, as this is directed towards everyone, not just me and m1thr0s :) .

Most of this is deeply related with Cosmology and Creation in general, and with the inherent paradoxes connected with it.

Kain

[Ci Celli Ddu]

I don't fully understand the Mystery Principle either and it's really just a term of convenience. But consciousness itself *projects* by its very nature and I think that this is somehow the key. No matter where you place consciousness, it is still able to project beyond itself, ahead of itself, behind itself and so on. If you were to somehow eliminate this projection capability, you would be left with nothing conscious at all...and I don't think that this is possible to accomplish because it would take consciousness to accomplish it which puts you right back at consciousness I think.


Does this tie in with the theory that the mind/brain, ike a TV is a receiver of consciousness rather than its source?

[Ci Celli Ddu]

Most of this is deeply related with Cosmology


Which one? :)

[Kain]

I don't fully understand the Mystery Principle either and it's really just a term of convenience. But consciousness itself *projects* by its very nature and I think that this is somehow the key. No matter where you place consciousness, it is still able to project beyond itself, ahead of itself, behind itself and so on. If you were to somehow eliminate this projection capability, you would be left with nothing conscious at all...and I don't think that this is possible to accomplish because it would take consciousness to accomplish it which puts you right back at consciousness I think. Exactly. I think this is a very important point you just made m1thr0s, and projection is intricately connected with my perception of the phenomenon as well. This is connected with what you said below:In a sense, I am very skeptical that any of us actually wants to attain *Absolute* anything. Rather, given a very clear choice with all the variables laid out before us, I think that what we really want is an *Optimal* coexistence with Allness/Nothingness. I don't actually believe any of us is really after *Absolute* attainment. We think we are because we have been coerced into thinking that way in my opinion. I have a very difficult time seeing where this would actually be any kind of an improvement of any kind and I also don't feel that it is somehow a mandatory dharma, or destiny per se. I feel that this has been misunderstood and...at the very least...has no real relevance to the human condition, even at the level of godhead itself. By attaining the "Absolute" Oblivion or Sunyata, it would be expected that one would slip to unconsciousness, which is of course not the case as one becomes unconscious only of one's "lower projection" but is conscious of *something*. What's more, the aim of the attainance of it is to consciously re-project downwards and fascilitating the previously mentioned connection of "Eye"- Body. So I agree that "Absolute" attainment is perhaps an overexageration, brought upon us by the dauntingness and magnitude of our task compared to our respectful present. And perhaps this is exactly why this Mystery Principle remains "aloof"...perhaps this really is the *Absolute* in question and what we really want/need is a ready access to it...not to become the thing itself.This is an interesting observation worth consideration. In alignment with the "Benevolent Will of Heaven" as the I Ching would perhaps put it...

Kain



EDIT: Which one? :)Pretty much all of it Ci Celli Ddu. The route to and from the Unmanifest and the phenomena pertaining to it. This is standard "Universal Creation" material...

[m1thr0s]

This is an interesting observation worth consideration. The alignment with the "Benevolent Will of Heaven" as the I Ching would perhaps put it...spot-on...Crowley once referred to the idea of attainment as a state of "Frictionlessness", and I can envision this so much better. But here again, we are accustomed to thinking of ourselves as people...not as whole universes for instance. Well...what if the latter is actually more correct of our longrange potential? Wouldn't we want to at least explore that for awhile before deciding on *Absolute* anything? I feel that the truth is that we are so far removed from our actual potentials, we can't even properly envision the possibilities. I feel fairly confident that I could happily coast at the level of being a whole universe for several trillion years at least before cashing in my chips...surely the *Absolute* is in no big hurry...

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

Does this tie in with the theory that the mind/brain, like a TV is a receiver of consciousness rather than its source?certainly...we must realize that the brain is just a vehicle for consciousness...
we know that because there is way more than just one model in circulation...

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kain http://forums.abrahadabra.com/images/styles/abrahadabra/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.abrahadabra.com/showthread.php?p=10254#post10254)
Most of this is deeply related with Cosmology

Which one? :)pretty much all of tantric tradition, most, if not all of mystical traditions, alchemy, shamanism, many esoteric philosophies and so on...nearly anything that addresses "becoming" in a hands-on sort of way.

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

One of the reasons Satanism sparked my interest, initially, was due to its general rejection of certain popular assumptions that typically go without question. Satanism isn't really very interested in attaining anything *absolute* and neither am I. I think it's silly for people to speculate any more than is absolutely necessary on matters of absolute becoming.

To some extent, we sort of need to know what the parameters might be so we can correctly guage our shot, but I really think people are looking for the best deal they can get from life and I happen to think that this is perfectly right and fair that they should do so. I don't see where becoming melded into some indiscriminate bowl of cosmic goo satisfies my own sense of a balanced cosmic attainment on any level. I also don't believe in the necessity of ego-death per se. I feel like these are both *habits* of mind that were never truly necessary or profitable human aspirations. The real and true likelihood is that neither of them can actually be accomplished by any of us anyway...

m1thr0s

[MythMath]

If you feel like it, you can always ask for a more detailed
description of certain concepts you may be unfamiliar with...
I don't even know how to ask yet...

I'm just beginning with this immersion process...

By 'listening in', I can at least see how this new (to me)
terminology fits in context with a discussion I can't follow... ;)

And because it's actually written material,
I can re-read and research it later, pro re nata...

Eventually I'll get acquainted enough with these concepts
and principles to be able to formulate some questions...

So, please, keep chattin'... :yes:

[Ci Celli Ddu]

I also don't believe in the necessity of ego-death per se.

My own investigation of the ego on the one hand gave me greater control over it, but also made clear that it is a superficial ensemble of inherited and aquired habits, almost hardly worth troubling about when it comes to magick.

[m1thr0s]

you know MythMath, if the term transcendentalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism) were not so badly abused by people who really didn't have a clue what they were going on about, it would in many ways be the best possible term for us to apply to these kinds of conversations, since in a more generic sense we are exploring what the long-term evolutionary possibilities might be for our species and also for the world of which we are a part. Even though that potential may be *long-term*, there is no reason to think we cannot do something about it right now, but we need to have some clear idea what the hell we are aiming at and what a practical sorts of approaches might be.

Some of this has already been answered for us in the work of others who have explored these realms in times past and we can definitely learn some things from that work and those people. At the same time, there are questions looming that have seemingly never really been properly answered and current informations available that do not often find their way into these kinds of discussions. Both Kain and myself come from a pretty strong Vedic backgrounding and this may cloud some of our discussion to others who are not as versed in these ideas...but it's all there for the looking.

My own investigation of the ego on the one hand gave me greater control over it, but also made clear that it is a superficial ensemble of inherited and aquired habits, almost hardly worth troubling about when it comes to magick.yes, this is true insofar as *imprinted* ego is concerned. This is the ego we pretty much piece together from birth based on a lot of bogus information about ourselves to begin with. Satanism (and other schools) believe that the ego can be *freed* to operate along a much higher and healthier cruising altitude that incorporates all of its strengths and all of its natural qualities. There is no reason to kill off that sort of ego as it is simply a balanced self-identification at that point.

m1thr0s

[Okazaki Castle]

And perhaps this is exactly why this Mystery Principle remains "aloof"...perhaps this really is the *Absolute* in question and what we really want/need is a ready access to it...not to become the thing itself.


That is absolutely and precisely what I aimed for. It is why I am Mysterious.

On that point, consider: for something to exist, it must form Itself into an ordered whole, unless it is to express Khaotically, which is not a possibility if we are talking descent from that state of being (The Absolute) to ordered form and matter. Hence, if things are so ordered, that order has to be initially decided upon. Then you have to find some way to project it down into becoming a Creation. When one is making Creations entire, is this not very similar to what one does?

So then, is not The Absolute very closely represented in nature to what I will refer to as Source Lords?

Yet who knows all the hands in the game and holds all the cards at the end of the day? Is it not He who would be in every sense of the term unbeatable? From such a position, what would one best aim for? Friends to hang out with and a fun way to pass eternity, perhaps? Maybe that is what maya is for?

Cool definition of higher ego btw. It's what I call character. So often misunderstood by people who like to operate within constrained constructs of being told who to be and what is 'acceptable', or 'virtuous'. By any means necessary? Yes, but what is aimed for and do not the means become a part of the destination? To what extent, and how, and what can be 'edited'... and what would one not want to edit, but rather keep and improve? To the latter question I'd say personal relationships and connections. Also, to deepen them and fetch things closer in the most respected and enjoyed of such relations...

Best Regards,
Oazaki.

[m1thr0s]

there is a kind of principality in this whole relationship I agree. It's a little tough to sort out as...in my experience...if you were to ask the Absolute who ruled the universe and it were to answer you it would almost certainly point to its *children* who would in turn laugh their asses off and tell you *that gramps...he's such a kidder!*...lol...

In point of fact, both things would be perfectly true.

It's a reciprocal kind of affair all in all I think...works out to everybody's best advantage.

m1thr0s

[Ci Celli Ddu]

One of the reasons Satanism sparked my interest, initially, was due to its general rejection of certain popular assumptions that typically go without question. Satanism isn't really very interested in attaining anything *absolute* and neither am I. I think it's silly for people to speculate any more than is absolutely necessary on matters of absolute becoming.


Quite. I doubt very much that absolutes are even possible. There's always something bigger, and always something smaller.

[m1thr0s]

yes...always something just a little further on. I can only conclude that consciousness itself is the reason for that. I have no reason whatsoever to believe it means jack-shit to matter. It matters to mind, primarily...mind will have it no other way...

In this respect I think I am perfectly in accord with so-called *quantum magick*, although, in all fairness, it was Hermetic Alchemy that asserted these things first.

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

What I find very interesting is the following. The approach of most historical Body of Light structures is to fascilitate a formulated corresponding structure that can mirror the Unmanifest Godhead in Manifest Form. So a Body of Light would be the afforementioned "Eye" in recognizable form, or the Eye's correspondance within Form (which, since it corresponds with it completely, also "expands" in the aloofness of Oblivion and thus of Nowhere/Everywhere). This could be described as the approach towards Jen/Intelligence and the mirroring of it in appropriate physical Form. However, by integrating Jen in our system, is Jen formulated? I guess the "Perfect Form" to house Godhead could be be describes as the closest Jen can formulate itself...perhaps related with Singularity/Bindu, it being Manifest Potential, retaining the creative properties of Oblivion/Void while being suituated on the Formulated part of the equation.

Formulation itself particularizes and situates a concept...
Excellent question Kain...

At present, the only way I know of formulating the Jen principle is in the "Changes" (ie Hexagrams et al) and the Changes are plotting Motion moreso than Matter, Time moreso than Space. So in a sense we are plotting its energy "signature" through Time while the "thing" itself remains a Mystery...remember that the Tai Hsuan Ching itself is called the Way of Mystery, or the Great Mystery Principle etc... The Jen never left and it never came insofar as any "thing" is concerned at all. The nearest thing to what we can say we are actually tracking is Mind itself...and what is this? So yes, in a sense we have "formulated" it via the Changes...but what exactly have we formulated? We have absolutely no idea what "it" is! And this is brilliant Kain...consider the ramifications of this...if we cannot exactly "know" what it is...the Void cannot tax us for it! Even the Void is caught entirely off-guard by this my friend. It's the perfect thing-not-thing assertion...a kind of computer override language if you examine it closely. The perfect "hack" to matter...a kind of mobius loop that sends the Void spinning on its own wheels.

Now it might be questioned, why do we even bother in that case? We bother because of the difference it makes including it alongside Yin and Yang...we bother because we are able to exact a codification system suitable to Mind itself and this is a gem beyond all imaginable value in Body of Light mechanics. We do not actually know what the hell we are doing...we do it because it is a Perfect thing in itself whose Grand Total gives us an "Oversoul" property to the Binary system and all that this implies. And for all of this...which we can (amazingly) predict...we have not even begun to answer what "it" is! We may never actually know the answer to that question in total. Astonishingly, we may never have to know in order to be able to make perfect use of its principle. That is Man's great good fortune, to be able to expertly manipulate things he knows absolutely nothing about to his supreme advantage!

I'm a little tipsy on some ale...did that make any sense?

m1thr0s

[Kain]

At present, the only way I know of formulating the Jen principle is in the "Changes" (ie Hexagrams et al) and the Changes are plotting Motion moreso than Matter, Time moreso than Space. So in a sense we are plotting its energy "signature" through Time while the "thing" itself remains a Mystery...remember that the Tai Hsuan Ching itself is called the Way of Mystery, or the Great Mystery Principle etc... The Jen never left and it never came insofar as any "thing" is concerned at all. The nearest thing to what we can say we are actually tracking is Mind itself...and what is this? So yes, in a sense we have "formulated" it via the Changes...but what exactly have we formulated? We have absolutely no idea what "it" is! And this is brilliant Kain...consider the ramifications of this...if we cannot exactly "know" what it is...the Void cannot tax us for it! Even the Void is caught entirely off-guard by this my friend. It's the perfect thing-not-thing assertion...a kind of computer override language if you examine it closely. The perfect "hack" to matter...a kind of mobius loop that sends the Void spinning on its own wheels.
Certainly so...In other words, it can be said that the mirroring Form of the Mystery/Jen principle is Creation itself in it's totality of internal workings and course through Time. Of course, the question of *embodying* this and thus managing to attain the correct mirroring Form to look the Mystery principle straight in the proverbial "Eye" would have us assume the Changes...as the mathematics themselves would indicate. And thus assume the outlook of a universe too, rather than a person.

A computer override if ever I saw one indeed...that's how I view it myself. And I think this is what asamprajnata yoga (and that form of samadhi, often described as "non-mens concentration") also aims at through the conscious attainance off what is otherwise "Oblivion", as the Void/Oblivion can indeed not "tax" such an attainance/alignment as you mentioned yourself m1thr0s.

I think the key here is to realize that we're experiencing a qualitative difference of such mass/macrocosmic proportions that cannot be measured in quantitative terms, thas is unphathomable to it's totality and appears as a "hack" of our system. Absolutely brilliant and equally profound...

Now it might be questioned, why do we even bother in that case? We bother because of the difference it makes including it alongside Yin and Yang...we bother because we are able to exact a codification system suitable to Mind itself and this is a gem beyond all imaginable value in Body of Light mechanics. We do not actually know what the hell we are doing...we do it because it is a Perfect thing in itself whose Grand Total gives us an "Oversoul" property to the Binary system and all that this implies. And for all of this...which we can (amazingly) predict...we have not even begun to answer what "it" is! We may never actually know the answer to that question in total. Astonishingly, we may never have to know in order to be able to make perfect use of its principle. That is Man's great good fortune, to be able to expertly manipulate things he knows absolutely nothing about to his supreme advantage!

I'm a little tipsy on some ale...did that make any sense?Perfect sense. My sentiments exactly in fact. The mathematics are pointing out a potential that cannot even be properly understood although it can be directly approached, even if initially viewed as a paradox of sorts. In fact, I'm not even sure if such a thing can be attained within Time, so it could be indeed "never" answered as you said yourself m1thr0s.


Kain

[Kain]

you know MythMath, if the term transcendentalism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transcendentalism) were not so badly abused by people who really didn't have a clue what they were going on about, it would in many ways be the best possible term for us to apply to these kinds of conversations, since in a more generic sense we are exploring what the long-term evolutionary possibilities might be for our species and also for the world of which we are a part. Even though that potential may be *long-term*, there is no reason to think we cannot do something about it right now, but we need to have some clear idea what the hell we are aiming at and what a practical sorts of approaches might be. Wonderfully said I think, and I agree about Transcendentalism being awefully and erroneously used in the most part. It is a term that would very well encompass this sort of work, although it seems to be badly abused most of the time...
yes, this is true insofar as *imprinted* ego is concerned. This is the ego we pretty much piece together from birth based on a lot of bogus information about ourselves to begin with. Satanism (and other schools) believe that the ego can be *freed* to operate along a much higher and healthier cruising altitude that incorporates all of its strengths and all of its natural qualities. There is no reason to kill off that sort of ego as it is simply a balanced self-identification at that point.I think that the reason the concept of Ego Death has been introduced is to strictly avoid the miserable musings of the "imprinted" ego in relation to the callings of the higher egoic complex. Seeing it that way, Ego Death both does not exist but is also an absolute given as identification with the impronted shell in inhibition of the greater attributes, potential and abilities of one's Being would be pointless and stupid. Tantra resolves this complication early on by stating that the embodied personality (jivatma) is the Supreme personality (paramatma), thus identifying one's self with the healthy and large egoic complex from the beginning, which is not to be "killed" but is in fact the only Ego to be, in fact, "immortal".

Crowley once referred to the idea of attainment as a state of "Frictionlessness", and I can envision this so much better. But here again, we are accustomed to thinking of ourselves as people...not as whole universes for instance. Well...what if the latter is actually more correct of our longrange potential? Wouldn't we want to at least explore that for awhile before deciding on *Absolute* anything? I feel that the truth is that we are so far removed from our actual potentials, we can't even properly envision the possibilities. I feel fairly confident that I could happily coast at the level of being a whole universe for several trillion years at least before cashing in my chips...surely the *Absolute* is in no big hurry...Certainly. That's a great way to put it actually. However, I think that the reason that the language of *Absolute* is used in such matters is quite technical and is there to avoid premature and imagined "attainments" of concepts and phenomena that are innumerably larger than our current size and thus cannot be quantitatively realized from our standpoint. This does not mean that they are not quantified in themselves however (as the previous astral-compared-to-physical experiment shows), just that in order to realize them in a particularized context a substantial qualitative difference is required on our sense instruments and general proportions. So I feel the *Absolute* is a technical guideline that could be read as (until all your reality context becomes redefined by that striving). There's always something higher as we always see (and has been already said), so shooting at absolutes could be seen as a way of approach that allows us to realize their quantitativeness...

Kain

[Logos]

It's interesting to me how closely this discussion relates to the Renaissance acknowledgement that Nature shows us how to approach, provides us with ways of proceeding, yet does so only insofar as we may proceed to understand that which provides us with such ways of proceeding. In terms of the Adamic language, Nature gives us grammar, but gives us no dictionary, no web of meaning: it is the grammar of Nature itself that we must use to derive the meaning of Nature. Kind of like the surface paradox that gives rise to skeptics of scrying: how can I possibly derive meaning from a symbol I've never seen before? And I think this is what we're dealing with in terms of understanding the likes of "mind" or "consciousness": we're staring at symbols we know nothing about, yet know perfectly well how to use, and so know more than meets the staring eye.

This, I think, is what Jakob Bohme's "upper water" between Heaven and Earth, William Blake's "sulphureous fluid of fantasies," Cormac McCarthy's "blood meridian," or Umberto Eco's "island of the day before" is all about: the Void between knowing how and knowing what.

-Logos

[m1thr0s]

I think the key here is to realize that we're experiencing a qualitative difference of such mass/macrocosmic proportions that cannot be measured in quantitative terms, thas is unphathomable to it's totality and appears as a "hack" of our system. Absolutely brilliant and equally profound...this is a very important distinction and one that will save the practitioner a lot of grief I think, though it takes time to really learn it...I am still learning it really. It's always our damn programming in the way. We are *wired* to quantitative attainment on every conceivable level socially, economically etc. This doesn't work very well with any *infinite* quantitative measure. In a case like that you have to switch gears or you'll get chewed up by the whole process of attainment. You can only have it all by being it all really so this necessarily becomes a qualitative focus since the sum is ultimately incomprehensible.

Another curious thing I have encountered many times is the importance of mixing things up...of being able to work within a framework that allows for (ideally) an infinite range of focus areas. The Mind is easily trapped where it becomes too fixated on just one thing, or just one strategy etc. You can actually feel it ganging up on itself at points and that's when you need to pull a whole other card and direct things in a different direction. This is another advantage afforded with hexagrammal fields, since here we have a whole language system as big as the Mind itself and every whit as versatile...

Logos: it always seems to me no matter where I venture I still wind up asserting the Tao te Ching (http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/taote-ex.html)...lol...

m1thr0s

[Kain]

It's interesting to me how closely this discussion relates to the Renaissance acknowledgement that Nature shows us how to approach, provides us with ways of proceeding, yet does so only insofar as we may proceed to understand that which provides us with such ways of proceeding. In terms of the Adamic language, Nature gives us grammar, but gives us no dictionary, no web of meaning: it is the grammar of Nature itself that we must use to derive the meaning of Nature. Kind of like the surface paradox that gives rise to skeptics of scrying: how can I possibly derive meaning from a symbol I've never seen before? And I think this is what we're dealing with in terms of understanding the likes of "mind" or "consciousness": we're staring at symbols we know nothing about, yet know perfectly well how to use, and so know more than meets the staring eye. Very much so Logos...that's a very good co-relation.
this is a very important distinction and one that will save the practitioner a lot of grief I think, though it takes time to really learn it...I am still learning it really. It's always our damn programming in the way. We are *wired* to quantitative attainment on every conceivable level socially, economically etc. This doesn't work very well with any *infinite* quantitative measure. In a case like that you have to switch gears or you'll get chewed up by the whole process of attainment. You can only have it all by being it all really so this necessarily becomes a qualitative focus since the sum is ultimately incomprehensible. Yes, programming has a lot to do with our apparent difficulty to grasp this, although it is fundamental for real attainment/achievemnt really when we're dealing with the *infinite* side of things in general. All this is also quite related with the effect *adding dimensions* has on consciousness itself. The jump from a set of n dimensions to n+1 is qualitative and does not allow the same essential material to look at itself in the same way as before that change. Also, it's not a change that can be achieved by simply following any number of predetermined and quantified steps within the base n system. The change itself is undefinable from the base n system, although there is an optimum asana/posture to be assumed so that the transition can be brought closest to achievement, although even then an undefinable "leap" is required. Another curious thing I have encountered many times is the importance of mixing things up...of being able to work within a framework that allows for (ideally) an infinite range of focus areas. The Mind is easily trapped where it becomes too fixated on just one thing, or just one strategy etc. You can actually feel it ganging up on itself at points and that's when you need to pull a whole other card and direct things in a different direction. This is another advantage afforded with hexagrammal fields, since here we have a whole language system as big as the Mind itself and every whit as versatile...This is a very common problem so it's important to bring it up I think. There's a whole art in managing to extract the most creative abilities of the Mind in relation to certain objects of concentration. The "fractal" nature of one's system seems to help a lot, although I've found that the opposite can prove very beneficial too for blowing up some habitual tendencies of the Mind more directly. Simplicity and one-pointedness becomes *Wholeness* if the tendency for multiformity is successfully deactivated. There are many ways to go however and I agree that hexagrammal fields make a particularly powerful approach to this problem.

Kain

[Logos]

Logos: it always seems to me no matter where I venture I still wind up asserting the Tao te Ching (http://acc6.its.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~phalsall/texts/taote-ex.html)...lol...

m1thr0s
That's hilarious! I was thinking the exact same thing just ten minutes ago when I first read your words on the "trapped Mind" effect:
The Mind is easily trapped where it becomes too fixated on just one thing, or just one strategy etc.
I, myself, prefer to assert a Renaissance alchemical paradigm. :laugh:

You picked up on that from halfway across the country! :p

-Logos

[m1thr0s]

There's something in all of this that I am still not comfortable with. It is possible that it is the term "Void" itself, which, if I am not mistaken, actually comes down to us via Buddhism. Qabbalah makes mention of the Three Veils of Negative Existence which are subsequently classed as Ain, Ain Soph, Ain Soph Aur, or else En, En Soph, En Soph Or and a few like variations.

Kain: you seem to feel fairly strongly that the Void is kind of the antithesis of Form from what I am reading and I can understand this logic but I am not altogether sure it makes perfect sense. If it were truly the antithesis, how is it that form could spring from it perfectly functional and perfectly universal? I am wondering if we have not succumbed to a projection here that may not actually be quite accurate.

Returning to the Tao te Ching:
From Nothing comes One
From One comes Two
From Two comes Three
From Three comes the Myriad (10,000) things...

And this is my quandary. If it is true that Nothing is triangulatable, how can we assert this and also assert that it is in some way antithesis to Form? It would rather seem to be at root to it, yet in some non-codified sort of way.

To my knowledge, the Buddhists never did this...they have never triangulated "Nothing" in this way, hence the Void primarily retains its "Negative" connotations. Qabbalah disputes this conclusion and instead asserts that the Veils of Negative Existence are in fact supremely ordered in some way...though admittedly...it is difficult to fully understand this type of organization.

Anyway...I won't get too carried away with this just yet because I am still researching what few facts there may be. I am curious what your take might be (or anyone's) on this though.

m1thr0s

[Kain]

There's something in all of this that I am still not comfortable with. It is possible that it is the term "Void" itself, which, if I am not mistaken, actually comes down to us via Buddhism. Qabbalah makes mention of the Three Veils of Negative Existence which are subsequently classed as Ain, Ain Soph, Ain Soph Aur, or else En, En Soph, En Soph Or and a few like variations. Good point m1thr0s, and I feel the triangulation of the "Void" is quite an important suggestion, with very intense ramiffications.
Kain: you seem to feel fairly strongly that the Void is kind of the antithesis of Form from what I am reading and I can understand this logic but I am not altogether sure it makes perfect sense. If it were truly the antithesis, how is it that form could spring from it perfectly functional and perfectly universal? I am wondering if we have not succumbed to a projection here that may not actually be quite accurate.

Returning to the Tao te Ching:
From Nothing comes One
From One comes Two
From Two comes Three
From Three comes the Myriad (10,000) things...

And this is my quandary. If it is true that Nothing is triangulatable, how can we assert this and also assert that it is in some way antithesis to Form? It would rather seem to be at root to it, yet in some non-codified sort of way. I follow all that and in fact see things originating the same way. Let me try to explain my point of view better regarding the Void being the antithesis of Form.

I feel the "problem" creating this paradox is one of extreme altitude spans. It is ultimately not important and even non-existant one may say, however I feel it needs to be approached as if it is a fact for those concerned that still are in the Below part of the equation as far as current conscious awareness goes. The Void is as much the antithesis of Form as Male of Female, which we know they are ultimately reconcilable. However, this reconcilation needs to be brought about under certain conditions in order to come to pass as fact, otherwhise it is simply a non-functioning amalgamation of self-contradicting elements that cause the whole construct to eventually crumble back to Earth and strict Form. I feel the so-called Emptiness/Void is certainly possessing Order although that order is too high to be correctly deciphered from our viewpoint, thus from our standpoint it should be taken as empty in order to make sense in our equation. Following the only and true nature of Nothing/Emptiness / Void is perhaps one of the straightest guidelines to direct one upwards as even manifest emptiness is *Something*, and not *Nothing*. Approaching truly Nothing means that we are approaching something so subtle that our sense instruments cannot decipher without being properly redefined, and that redefinition is the "positification" of the Void and the realization of it's inherent Order. The leap to the base n+1 dimension I referred to before. This is also portrayed by the astral/physical relationship I also referred to, as microcosmic experimentation of this sort would show that the "Emptiness" is indeed occupied by Form of a different caliber, thus not being ultimately antithetical to the concept of Form. One could say that they are simply oscillating in extremely different frequencies. However, if brought in direct relation/contact, the lower counterpart would probably burst into flames due to the immense subtlety of oscillation the higher excitor would impose upon it, oscillation that it cannot fascilitate in it's current constitution.

However, since we approach the apparent "Void" through our current concept of Form (and also dimension one may say), it is Void and it does burn Form to cinders if brought in direct relation to it. The problem is in our own conscious perception and programming of the Form we inhabit, since it causes a shortcircuit with the constitution and oscillational rates of Form as defined and existing above that co-ordinate. So it is not an ultimate antithesis as that would have us return to eternal Duality, but as the third factor of Jen would portray there is a way to reintegrate them, although we must approach it correctly to bring it about.

So in my view and experience the realizational problem remains that even our (mental) definition of Form becomes a shortcircuit bringer after a certain height, and that's when we know we need to follow the Negativity of it and allow it to provide us with the redefinition of Form (or "dimensional jump") we need for it all to make sense from a higher stratum, without the apparent contradictions we had been facing before, and thus allowing us to hit this *Indistinguishability* you previously referred to, reconciling the antithesis and having oneself being simultaneously *Everything* and *Nothing*.
To my knowledge, the Buddhists never did this...they have never triangulated "Nothing" in this way, hence the Void primarily retains its "Negative" connotations. Qabbalah disputes this conclusion and instead asserts that the Veils of Negative Existence are in fact supremely ordered in some way...though admittedly...it is difficult to fully understand this type of organization. To my knowledge as well, the Buddhist concept of Sunyata is said to be without formed order as well, although still possessing the essence of all manifest Order. I agree with your point of view however m1thr0s, and I think this difficulty to understand this organization is what makes this apparent polarity take place, when trying to approach this concept with a formulation that adheres to the laws of our current definition of organization and Form.
Anyway...I won't get too carried away with this just yet because I am still researching what few facts there may be. I am curious what your take might be (or anyone's) on this though. I hope my reply makes some sense as to my viewpoint to you and everyone else.

Kain

[m1thr0s]

You know...in part this must surely have something to do with the limitations of maps in general. As a person who has spent his whole life studying these maps I feel qualified to point this out. Consider how ridiculous it really is to point to a specific location on a map and declare...look...there it is...Nothing!!! (huh???)

I will return to this topic in a few minutes...I am just waking up here Kain. This is a very engaging topic for me and I have a couple more things I want to examine. Thank you for your careful response...

m1thr0s

[Ci Celli Ddu]

Personally, I'd say 0=1. As a symbol it indicates what we might assume is unity, it being an unbroken circle. Could it be that what we might consider to be 1 (unity) is in fact 0, and that 1 is seperation from that unity?

A history of zero (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Zero.html)

[Kain]

You know...in part this must surely have something to do with the limitations of maps in general. As a person who has spent his whole life studying these maps I feel qualified to point this out. Consider how ridiculous it really is to point to a specific location on a map and declare...look...there it is...Nothing!!!Exactly my viewpoint as well...hehe...Indeed I think that this is a limitation of maps in general, which is also a limitation of our perception and definition of *structure* (and, consequantly, it's apparent lack thereof, which ends up being *Something* after all).
I will return to this topic in a few minutes...I am just waking up here Kain. This is a very engaging topic for me and I have a couple more things I want to examine. Thank you for your careful response...Certainly. You're welcome m1thr0s. Here, it's a bit past 19:30 so even I am well awake...

This is an immensely engaging topic for me as well, it is in fact one of my constant areas of engagement. I find this discussion very interesting...take your time my friend...

Kain

[Ci Celli Ddu]

The sum of zero and a negative number is negative, the sum of a positive number and zero is positive, the sum of zero and zero is zero

So zero is neither positive nor negative, another indication of what I would call unity

[Kain]

Personally, I'd say 0=1. As a symbol it indicates what we might assume is unity, it being an unbroken circle. Could it be that what we might consider to be 1 (unity) is in fact 0, and that 1 is seperation from that unity?

A history of zero (http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/HistTopics/Zero.html)Very interesting article Ci Celli Ddu. Also, I think that this is a quite good point you bring up. You know, Indians consider Maya (the concept of differentiation from Unity) to take effect below the Singularity point of Manifestation. So there is an inherent connection shared between 0 and 1, a connection setting them quite apart from all other numbers. Even so however, I feel they are not quite the same thing although could be said to be aspects of the same ultimate principle. This is also tied with the "Everything"/"Nothing" simultaneous paradox we have been discussing thus far.

Kain

[m1thr0s]

Personally, I'd say 0=1. As a symbol it indicates what we might assume is unity, it being an unbroken circle. Could it be that what we might consider to be 1 (unity) is in fact 0, and that 1 is seperation from that unity?I applaud this effort but I can't altogether adjust to the conclusion. Crowley, of course, was a big fan of "0=2" which he repeatedly declared as the Supreme Alchemical Equation, the key to the Philosopher's Stone and yadda yadda yadda. In point of fact, I know of no actual alchemists to have asserted this except for himself. Nevertheless, viewing the value of 0 as the culmination of (-1 + +1), the idea has its merits and returns us to the ternary logic of the Tai Hsuan Ching which asserts that between Yin & Yang exists a third Coordinating/Directing principle called the Jen. Thus again, we see Nothing being *triangulated*...

I want to turn our attentions for a moment to the phrase "Nature abhores a Void" and suggest that whereas this may be true of Nature, it is even much more true of Consciousness itself. I have gone over this ground ten thousand times in my own mind by now I am sure and have pretty much reached the same conclusion as a number of other scientists and occultists, philosophers, metaphysicians etc...that for all practical intents and purposes...there is no such "thing" as "nothing". You can never define it...you can never point to it...you cannot display it on any map...even alluding to it in the most ambiguous sort of way defeats itself in assertion as you must assert an "it" even to allude to it! I don't think a true *nothing* is anything that the Mind is finally capable of adjusting. Even as a rumor, it fails every litmus test we can assign to it, making it insubstantial even as an allegory. Nothing...from the standpoint of Mind itself...simply does not exist.

Yet 0 definitely does exist and we would be stuck up a creek with no paddle without it.

It may be that the qabbalists did the right thing afterall by assigning so-called "Nothing* an actual title and placing it squarely on the map. They did this by calling it the "Horizon of Eternity" and placed it in the position of true apex to the Tree of Life itself. When they did this they were officially acknowledging the relationship of "0" but were not necessarily consenting to call it *Nothing*. In Abrahadabra (and other maps by the way) we find this coordinate indispensable as the primal origin of all things. So while it cannot be called "Unity" exactly (lacking a context of any *things* to unify), it is nonetheless viewed as the true "Origin" of Everything. Only in this context of Everything vs Nothing does it attain to the value of *Nothing*. So this is a contextual rhetoric and not an absolute mathematical valuation in itself. It holds a reciprocal value of *Nothing* relative to Everything Else, but in itself is yet a *Something* in their assessment, which they call the Horizon of Eternity and have triangulated its property, further cementing its *Something* character.

m1thr0s

[Kain]

It holds a reciprocal value of *Nothing* relative to Everything Else, but in itself is yet a *Something* in their assessment, which they call the Horizon of Eternity and have triangulated its property, further cementing its *Something* character.Very much so, very good description m1thr0s.

Kain

[Ci Celli Ddu]

I think the emptiness of the void could equally be considered a fullness. I don't know if satori (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori) is relevant here, but when I have on occasions experienced what I can only describe as temporary satori (or a long moment of clarity perhaps), it has been a state of utmost objectivity.

[m1thr0s]

I think the emptiness of the void could equally be considered a fullness. I don't know if satori (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satori) is relevant here, but when I have on occasions experienced what I can only describe as temporary satori (or a long moment of clarity perhaps), it has been a state of utmost objectivity.yes, I can confirm that as well...and I also don't mean to sound like I am ditzing your idea of 0 as a "Unity" dynamic...it certainly is this but we also have to be careful regarding context. Typically, the word "Unity" is applied to whole interactive systems of which one part can be viewed either as the median, or origin, or culmination point of those whole systems. In a natural number system that property typically applies to the number 1 while in the real number system we can include 0. So I think it is fair to regard 0 in this light but it is still a conditional sort of assignment. So long as we are not confusing apples with oranges, it's all good I think...

m1thr0s

[m1thr0s]

Approaching truly Nothing means that we are approaching something so subtle that our sense instruments cannot decipher without being properly redefined, and that redefinition is the "positification" of the Void and the realization of it's inherent Order. The leap to the base n+1 dimension I referred to before. This is also portrayed by the astral/physical relationship I also referred to, as microcosmic experimentation of this sort would show that the "Emptiness" is indeed occupied by Form of a different caliber, thus not being ultimately antithetical to the concept of Form. One could say that they are simply oscillating in extremely different frequencies. However, if brought in direct relation/contact, the lower counterpart would probably burst into flames due to the immense subtlety of oscillation the higher excitor would impose upon it, oscillation that it cannot fascilitate in it's current constitution.

However, since we approach the apparent "Void" through our current concept of Form (and also dimension one may say), it is Void and it does burn Form to cinders if brought in direct relation to it. The problem is in our own conscious perception and programming of the Form we inhabit, since it causes a shortcircuit with the constitution and oscillational rates of Form as defined and existing above that co-ordinate. So it is not an ultimate antithesis as that would have us return to eternal Duality, but as the third factor of Jen would portray there is a way to reintegrate them, although we must approach it correctly to bring it about.

So in my view and experience the realizational problem remains that even our (mental) definition of Form becomes a shortcircuit bringer after a certain height, and that's when we know we need to follow the Negativity of it and allow it to provide us with the redefinition of Form (or "dimensional jump") we need for it all to make sense from a higher stratum, without the apparent contradictions we had been facing before, and thus allowing us to hit this *Indistinguishability* you previously referred to, reconciling the antithesis and having oneself being simultaneously *Everything* and *Nothing*.Ok...this is some heavy stuff going on here and I had to read it several times but I think I am beginning to get the picture....I think you are right so far as the analytical mind itself is concerned...

So let me pose something more from actual experience. I have not been able to repeat this very often so you'll have to endure a certain amount of vagueness but it occurs to me that the "reward" of "right thinking" is that it is able to lean-in seamlessly to what I can only think to call Perfect Memory...a condition of consciousness that is able to recognize itself for what it has always been prior to having been looped into coded bodily coexistence. What I am suggesting is that the answer to this quandary (which I do agree exists) is actually being able to call down this Perfect Memory at the proper time and place. If all our maps have served us well up to this point and all our focus has been true, I think we would find ourselves able to do this as a kind of inward-looking excercise.

But I understand where you are going and I am impressed, frankly, with the accuteness of this observation. I think you are quite right...in a sense...our projections have to go...we have to dump them...just like a doing a restart on a computer essentially. Whether or not the lesser would burst into flames I do not know for sure but I think it is true that reality projections don't work at this altitude, no matter how good they are...they can take us right up to the edge of the well itself but cannot actually take us all the way in...

And yet...if the maps are sound and the focus true, I think it will make no discernable difference. In the twinkling of an eye this transmutation will take place between the Finite and the Infinite Mind itself...were this not the case I think the Tetractys would not carry the Tree as it does. What is implied from this is that we can do this...we can have our cake and eat it too...what's the damn point of having cake if you can't eat it anyway?

But there has to be a pivot of some kind...I think this is perfectly sound reasoning...Where Crowley (and others) have missed the boat I think is in overdramatizing the *sacrifice*...like a bunch of drama-queens they make a huge spectacle of what actually can occur so fast and so effortlessly as to make breathing seem arduous by comparison... But this is dependant upon a right-thinking to begin with...the further we are from this, the more difficult the transition would probably be. The real issue is not even getting there so much as coming back again...that I think is the real test of all our reality projections...The lesser psychic structure can only withstand a barest minimum of internal contradiction or the thing is a melt-down situation in my view...there is no faking this shit at all...but there may yet be some small margin of error at least...

edit: funny, but this whole thing gives me the visual image of a revolving door right at the Crown Chakra area...you can't go straight through it or you'll be sliced to ribbons...you've got to spin around to go through it and spin around again to get back...that's all really...just a quicky little spin...just enough to break up any straight-line garbage...lol...

m1thr0s

[Kuroyagi]

...and once you are in the doors you will be whirled around for a couple of times and spew out glimpses from the other side twards tifereth etc- "thank thee"...

you sound as if you had been trained in the East m1thr0s- for several years. I agree: its more gentle, a gliding over and not as dramatic as in crowleys system. sometimes(?) one will recognize it only afterwards- oh the terror of "time"!- and analyze it: "right thinking" indeed. Whatever, I have only had some glimpses myself.

havent read this but for what its worth I feel this (the septem sermones ad mortuos by Jung) could be somehow connected to this too- has anyone read it (and probabaly can spare me some time?- im endlessly lazy). and cant read stuff right now...must think about other things etc.

http://www.freewebs.com/navanath/seven_sermons.html

[MythMath]

When I first read about Ain, Ain Soph, Ain Soph Aur,
and the basics of tai hsuan, I associated them together...

Could you all elaborate on why this may,
or may not, be an appropriate correlation...?
________________

The way that the Tree overlays the Abra triangle,
for me, 'absolutely' implies the location of this 'zero'
point by placing it so obviously at the apex...

Triangulated, indeed...
_________________________

I also read not long ago {but I can't locate the source},
that pythagoras did not consider 1 to be the first 'odd number'...

Which he claimed to be 3, 2 being the first 'even'...

This does kinda put 0 and 1 together in a 'neutral zone'...

[Kuroyagi]

I also read not long ago {but I can't locate the source},
that pythagoras did not consider 1 to be the first 'odd number'...

Which he claimed to be 3, 2 being the first 'even'...

This does kinda put 0 and 1 together in a 'neutral zone'... sorry as i said im kinda lazy and drunk and a bastard but this is interesting: dunno about Pythagoras but in the East the One does never signify anything else than the Whole (the unity itself), while the two is pointing to the pair. this pair means the change of yin and yang (its change and unity but not (!) its sum= the sum of them). Then, 1 is the hub, the centre-point, the whole that is neither yin nor yang but on that the change of yin and yang depends; the 1 stands for the middle that doesnt count, that is "empty". in old Chinese numerology this unity is circumscribed always as the one (not as the zero!) because there can always only be one centrepoint, yet at the same time it is a 1 that "doesnt count" because it is non-present so maybe also fulfills the place of the zero in other paradigms- or as the wuji etc of the daodejing no.6. this central unit is always designated as the whole. if you want to express the whole in a number then you could encounter it in all odd numbers- in any of them- but first of all in the three (3)- so thereby the row of numbers actually begins with a 3.

(see Daodejing no.42)

edit:
42

The Way gave birth to the One.
The One gave birth to the Two.
The Two gave birth to the Three.
And the Three gave birth to the ten thousand things.
The ten thousand things carry Yin on their backs and wrap their arms around Yang.
Through the blending of the qi they arrive at a state of harmony.

The things that are hated by the whole world
Are to be orphaned, widowed, and have no grain.
Yet kings and dukes take these as their names.
Thus with all things—some are increased by taking away;
While some are diminished by adding on.

Therefore, what other men teach,
[I] will also consider and then teach to others.
Thus, "The strong and violent do not come to a natural end."
I will take this as the father of my studies.

http://home.pages.at/onkellotus/TTK/English_Henricks_TTK.html

[m1thr0s]

quite so Kuroyagi...like the Chinese, the Ancient Greeks viewed the number 1 as the "Monad" and it was neither even nor odd being Unity itself. This is one of the reasons we need to be careful about what we start calling the Number of Unity...it will depend on context how we assess this and it won't be the same in all cases.

The Three Veils of Negative Existence (ain, ain soph, ain soph aur) was a concept popularized under Lurianic Qabbalah but does not originate there. I actually don't know where this concept originates and would very much appreciate it if anybody could point that out to me. I know its basis is in the Zohar with its Adam Kadmon (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Kadmon) doctrine but I don't know who actually started triangulating it. But it is fundamentally an analysis of the so-called Horizon of Eternity and/or the Infinite Origin Point of the Tree of Life itself. Therefor no part of this would typically be considered to involve matter as we know it. These are all layers within Nothing, which we are here asserting must necessarily be Something if it can be thus structurally disected. And yes, in the Abrahadabra Grid as defined on these boards, this would all intersect at Apex.

Yin, Yang and Jen would amount to the first triune reflection of this *0* properties as reflected from *1* down, whose realm on the Tree of Life would logically find their root in the Supernals (first 3 sepheroth) or at outer edges 1-2-3 in the TwinStar, although, in its most accurate sense these elemental "flux" properties all reside within Crown itself. Only the Jen really has the potential for reaching all the way to *0* or the so-called Horizon of Eternity. Yin and Yang can ascend no further than Crown of their own accord but have their own root properties in the Jen.

Now a very observant reader might want to know why, in this case, do we begin our count from *1* in the TwinStar Meditation? Shouldn't we begin from *0*? That would be a good question, but the answer to this is no. In the TwinStar Meditation we are specifically attempting to *bump* the energy of the ToL Sepheroth via the structure of the TwinStar and so, while we could begin our count from 0, it would avail us nothing substantial to do so. Beginning from 1 allows us to synchronize the Tree via the Tetractys.

m1thr0s

[Kain]

So let me pose something more from actual experience. I have not been able to repeat this very often so you'll have to endure a certain amount of vagueness but it occurs to me that the "reward" of "right thinking" is that it is able to lean-in seamlessly to what I can only think to call Perfect Memory...a condition of consciousness that is able to recognize itself for what it has always been prior to having been looped into coded bodily coexistence. What I am suggesting is that the answer to this quandary (which I do agree exists) is actually being able to call down this Perfect Memory at the proper time and place. If all our maps have served us well up to this point and all our focus has been true, I think we would find ourselves able to do this as a kind of inward-looking excercise. I think this is actually a very accurate description m1thr0s and can attest to this experience myself. Perfect Memory and Right Thinking are intricately connected I think, and managing to hit and maintain the second also amounts to a direct tapping of the first. This tapping is experienced as an inwards glance and deep-felt knowledge, and have known it first hand at certain instances so I know what you speak of.
But I understand where you are going and I am impressed, frankly, with the accuteness of this observation. I think you are quite right...in a sense...our projections have to go...we have to dump them...just like a doing a restart on a computer essentially. Whether or not the lesser would burst into flames I do not know for sure but I think it is true that reality projections don't work at this altitude, no matter how good they are...they can take us right up to the edge of the well itself but cannot actually take us all the way in...That's what I experience personally and I think it is how it is all necessarilly conducted in order for a successful operation to come about. Makes perfect sense too, apparently...
And yet...if the maps are sound and the focus true, I think it will make no discernable difference. In the twinkling of an eye this transmutation will take place between the Finite and the Infinite Mind itself...were this not the case I think the Tetractys would not carry the Tree as it does. What is implied from this is that we can do this...we can have our cake and eat it too...what's the damn point of having cake if you can't eat it anyway? We can certainly do this I think, and is also clearly shown by the mathematics...I agree it's important to have this in mind always.
But there has to be a pivot of some kind...I think this is perfectly sound reasoning...Where Crowley (and others) have missed the boat I think is in overdramatizing the *sacrifice*...like a bunch of drama-queens they make a huge spectacle of what actually can occur so fast and so effortlessly as to make breathing seem arduous by comparison... But this is dependant upon a right-thinking to begin with...the further we are from this, the more difficult the transition would probably be. The real issue is not even getting there so much as coming back again...that I think is the real test of all our reality projections...The lesser psychic structure can only withstand a barest minimum of internal contradiction or the thing is a melt-down situation in my view...there is no faking this shit at all...but there may yet be some small margin of error at least...And here, I feel you make an immensely important observation that is not often expressed. My sentiments exactly m1thr0s, and the bottomline point of view I've held in so many conversations on the subject. I think too much has been made of the so-called *sacrifice*, which I think, if seen from the right-thinking point of view it is hardly a "sacrifice" at all really. It is a conscious strive towards the better, in fact the Best/*Optimum*, ans since the Optimum is also all encompassing and pole-reconciling it is also impervious to "loss". Loss is experienced only when one identifies oneself with wrong thinking, and thus experiences the ultimate reactions of his mental actions. For someone embarking from the point of Right Thinking from the very first step of the process, there can perhabs be said that there is almost no "sacrifice" at all, simply a strive for the realization of the already objective and factual *Truth* of things.

Thus, our *sacrifice* could be said to be as substantial as the extent of our erroneous conceptions and the necessary work to overcome them and actualize the conduct of Right Thinking...

There is a kind of "basic" but still very profound quote of Alice Bailey that I think could be said to be relevant here:

Death, if we could but realize it, is one of our most practiced activities. We have died many times and shall die again and again. Death is essentially a matter of consciousness. We are conscious one moment on the physical plane, and a moment later we have withdrawn onto another plane and are actively conscious there. Just as long as our consciousness is identified with the form aspect, death will hold for us its ancient terror. Just as soon as we know ourselves to be souls, and find that we are capable of focusing our consciousness or sense of awareness in any form or on any plane at will, or in any direction within the form of God, we shall no longer know death.
edit: funny, but this whole thing gives me the visual image of a revolving door right at the Crown Chakra area...you can't go straight through it or you'll be sliced to ribbons...you've got to spin around to go through it and spin around again to get back...that's all really...just a quicky little spin...just enough to break up any straight-line garbage...lol...Heh, pretty much...lol...

Kain

[Naomi]

Is nothingness is being asserted as the same thing as void?

"What is called the spirit of the void is where there is nothing. It is not included in man's knowledge. Of course the void is nothingness. By knowing things that exist, you can know that which does not exist. That is the void. "

- Musashi