Page 8 of 14

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:54 pm
by CCoburn
Ziran wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:16 pm The black hole is "ain". It cannot be a funnel, because, nothing escapes from it.

Oh Really? And how do you know that nothing comes out the other end?

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:20 am
by Vesperium
CCoburn wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:54 pm
Ziran wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:16 pm The black hole is "ain". It cannot be a funnel, because, nothing escapes from it.

Oh Really? And how do you know that nothing comes out the other end?
Sorry to intervene! 😀

I think that Ain or the nothingness is a thing that exist at a primordial level and thus it existed for eons.

However, the word AIN, based on my energy work represents a negative side of a very corruptive energy, much where the sea of Chaos originate and are the home of various demonic beings, including the primordial demons and the Goetic demons.

The Kabalistic tree has two sides; one light and the other one dark *nightside*.

It is important to take in consideration that the nightside is where all the evil originates. Demons, the nothingness, more specifically the seas of chaos, it is where the evil originates.

And to further consolidate this, I bring as proof the picture of Satan traversing the seas of Chaos (AIN):

Image

If we look closely, the sea of chaos, besides containing the origin of all evils, AIN, it also contains the kabalistic sense of Chaos and nothingness.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 5:42 pm
by Ziran
CCoburn wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:18 pm The "flow" begins when the universe begins, and the "ebb" begins when it is ending.

This doesn't match what you wrote earlier. One example you brought were the tides. "Renewal" is more than what you have written above.

See how simple and concise things can be when you actually know what you're talking about? It's just one simple line as opposed to your SEVENTEEN PARAGRAPHS which fails horribly at conveying any concise description of anything.

It is complicated subject matter. That's why there are many books devoted to it. The fact that I described the process from beginning to end should be appreciated not discouraged. It shows a command of the subject. Although, I did leave some parts out. That's how complicated it is. The tree-of-life is a model for the creation of reality. It is naturally complicated.

"Fully formed" is just laughable. The eons of time are now in the double digits and everything is continually in a process of 'becoming': star factories within nebulae as a prelude to solar systems within galaxies.

The concept in question is "renewal". Just like any other "thing" in reality, in kabalah it needs to be created. This occurs in a nested chain of "contractions". No "thing" is fully formed in the tree-of-life model until it is presented to assiyah. "Renewal" is a "thing" just like any other "thing" in kabalah. It goes through a process of creation where it is being formed. Below is a good article describing this, although, it is complicated. Even if it's not read or understood, there is a nice illustration of the nested chain concept.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seder_hishtalshelus



Screenshot_20231118_074510.jpg

ALL things that are created are finite.

No. If they are always and forever being created, then, creation does not automatically entail that it is finite. If the creation event is, itself, infinite, then, the creation is not finite. It might be finite in some ways, but, it is not completely finite.

CCoburn wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:28 pmInfinity is not an absolute. It is not something that can be attained, but only approached.

Absolutely-literally-infinite is a concept which is consistent and coherent. Absolutely-literally-infinite means that it is inclusive of any and all qualities, in any and all categories that can be conceived by the human mind and more. Because of this, it is simultaneously including "nothing" and "everything" in all of their forms and lacking all of their forms. This is what distinguishes the "source" from the partnership "ein-soph/ein".

No finite being can attain the infinite, agreed. I'm quite sure I wrote that earlier in the thread. Although it's not difficult to accurately describe different versions of infinite. 1/3 for example is described in decimal notation as 0.33333...

The ellipsis is used for describing types of infinity.



Screenshot_20231118_085844.jpg

Eternity encapsulates EVERYTHING including any virtual infinities.

No.

1) Eternity only encapsulates events.
2) Eternity does not ecapsulate events which weren't, aren't, won't, or could-be.
3) Eternity only encapsultes events which were, are, and will be.

#2 above describes types of infinities which are not encapsulated by eternity.

Defeating your claim of "everything" only requires 1 counter-example.

1) There are no pegasus here-and-now.
2) "Pegasus" is excluded from eternity.

Therefore: Eternity does not encapsulate everythiing.


There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING that transcends or is beyond the scope of eternity, NOT EVEN GOD ITSELF.

No.

God, capital 'G', is a god-concept beyond the scope of eternity, because, eternity is a creation constructed of several concepts. God is the creator of those concepts. In addition, as shown above, "Pegasus" is beyond the scope of eternity.

As a writer, you should be able to easily conceptualize this. The author is beyond the entire contents of the book they are writing. Although, if they choose, they can include themself in their own story.


YOU ARE BUILDING CONSTRUCTS UPON CONSTRUCTS BUT THE BUILDING BLOCKS THEMSELVES ARE FAULTY. THE BASE TERMS AKA BUILDING BLOCKS YOU USE ARE NOT CLEARLY DEFINED; THEY ARE DUBIOUSLY AMBIGUOUS.

They're not ambiguous at all. I've brought you simple definitions in addition to detailed step-by-step examples demonstrating their usage in the tree-of-life model. Malchus was added and clearly defined in the lengthy example of the creation of "renewal", but the others have been clearly defined prior to that.

These are the building blocks so far:

1) a "source" which is absolutley-literally-infinite

2) an "ein-soph-ohr" which is an ever-flowing-vitality formed directly from the source itself

3) a "kesser" which is a choice or a nested chain of choices

4) an "ein-soph/ein" which is a partnership of nearly infinite assertions ( ein-soph ) and nearly infinite negations ( ein ). Together they are a nearly infinite pool of objects, actions, ideas, and symbols. This is the stock, the raw material, for creation.

5) a "malchus" which is the definition, or nested chain of increasing definitions, applied to a general pool of concepts, see #4 above, refining it into the particular intended resultant .




Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:34 pm
by CCoburn
Ziran wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:16 pm Besides, actual cosmology is material science.

I did notice this little gem yesterday but fell just shy of it. That definition of "cosmology" is horrendous.

This type of innacuracy, incompleteness, and incorrectness is littered all throughout your writing, but you write so damn much it would be like a second job taking the time to pull everything out and putting the time in to elaborate on it.

This is pretty straightforward stuff and there are some aspects that are more mystical and abstract and require slightly more effort, but it's all within my ballpark and I'll likely get to it all eventually, or at least more of it.

There are aspects of "cosmology" that DO NOT fall within the scope of "material science".

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:39 pm
by CCoburn
Cerber wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:42 pm While disagreements, even passionate ones, are part of life, the type of language we use to disagree MUST adhere to our rules and guidelines:
viewtopic.php?t=38759
This is formal warning.
If you, fine gentlemen, could please tone down with all those personal insults, that would be fabulous.

Yes Cerber, absolutely. The thought did cross my mind that you might've jumped in during the ad hominem phase(but not from me) which was many eons ago immediately following the Big Bang.

Cheers, and thanks again for the name change.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 10:26 pm
by Ziran
CCoburn wrote: Fri Nov 17, 2023 9:54 pm
Ziran wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:16 pm The black hole is "ain". It cannot be a funnel, because, nothing escapes from it.
Oh Really? And how do you know that nothing comes out the other end?

That was the defintion of a black-hole that I remember. "Nothing escapes from it." However, it looks like the definition I was using is incomplete, and my information on black holes seems to be out of date.

For "Ain", if something could escape from it, then it would not be "Ain". "Ain" means "Negating", or if one prefers, "Nothingness". If something enters "Nothingness" such that it can escape, then, "Ain" ceases to be "Nothingness" and never was "Nothingness". If that occured, "Ain" would not be "Nothingness". It would either be some form of vessel or some form of portal. Neither of those are "Nothingness". Both of those are "Something".

For example: If a "shoe" enters "Nothingness" and is not immediately negated, then, "Nothiness" is no longer "Nothingness", it is a "shoe". If the "shoe" can escape from, be removed from, or travel through "Nothingness", then, "Nothingness" is actually a "Container", or a "Vessel", or a "Portal", but it was never "Nothingness". Even if "Nothingness" can trasmute, transform, or evolve into a "Vessel" or "Portal", this capability prohibits it from being absolute unqualified "Nothingness". "Nothingness" has no capabilities with only 1 exception. It is always and forever negating.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:35 pm
by Ziran
BlackOrbit666 wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:20 amSorry to intervene! 😀

The more the merrier.

I think that Ain or the nothingness is a thing that exist at a primordial level and thus it existed for eons.

However, the word AIN, based on my energy work represents a negative side of a very corruptive energy, much where the sea of Chaos originate and are the home of various demonic beings, including the primordial demons and the Goetic demons.

I prefer not to misrepresent "Ain" as anything other than what it is:  pure "negation" which is extremely useful.  It's age is irelevant to me, other than its necessary partnership with "everything" and that it requires some thing other than itself to sustain it.

Making it an enemy, imo, causes much more harm than good.  For example, chaos serves an important purpose for natural evolution.  Random mutations with survival benefits are a product of chaos.  These random mutations are an important driver in evolution. Without the genetic variance, the human race would never survive. I agree that it is "corruptive", but the remedy is to understand it. Even chaos is predictable in its absolute lack of order.

The Kabalistic tree has two sides; one light and the other one dark *nightside*.

Agreed. 100%. Here is my own diagram I posted earlier which includes the "other-side". It's not perfect, but I think it does a good job of illustrating the "other-side", and it's position on the "map" surrounding the material realm. This is indicated by the dark circle surrounding the white circle in the lower 4th of the chain. The components of the "other-side", the dark tree, is included in this dark circle surrounding the white one labled "מלכות".

(tap or click on the image to enlarge it)


Screenshot_20231118_152200.jpg

It is important to take in consideration that the nightside is where all the evil originates. Demons, the nothingness, more specifically the seas of chaos, it is where the evil originates.

And to further consolidate this, I bring as proof the picture of Satan traversing the seas of Chaos (AIN):

First, I personally have no fear of demons, satan, chaos, nor evil. That fear feeds them. All of them work for me, if I ever choose to use them for a greater good. Actual evil is remarkably rare, ignorance is far more common. Individuals who do harm intentionally are most often not evil, which is why they can be rehabilitated.

Second, chaos is not "ain". Chaos has a diifferent name: It's "Tohu-vah-Vohu", lliterally "chaos-and-void", which is different than "AIN".

{gustave-dore's "satan-s-flight-through-chaos"}[/img]

If we look closely, the sea of chaos, besides containing the origin of all evils, AIN, it also contains the kabalistic sense of Chaos and nothingness.

The problem with this is: Chaos at random catche and at random releases. So, it doesn't make sense to claim that Chaos contains the origin of all evil. Kabalah would label that dark region in the picture the "other-side", the "sitra-achra", nothing more, nothing less.

Really what's needed is a proper definition of evil in order to distinguish it from darkness.

Evil is willful harm for no other purpose other than pleasure. If an individual is inspired by the idea of rape, for the sole purpose of having that experience, and if that inspiration is pleasurable for them, as opposed to discouraging, then, they are having evil thoughts. If they actualize those thoughts, (act on them) and receive pleasure by doing them, then they are an evil person. It could be that they are evil through no fault of their own, but, this does not mean that they should be permitted to act out their evil intentions, nor that their evil intentions have no consequences.

But this is not the same as an individual who is a thief because they do not think they have any other way to feed themself, and, they happen to be good at stealing, and they get a thrill from stealing at the same time. Stealing is still wrong for them, but, it's not evil. The truth is, there probably are other ways of feeding themself, but, they are deluding themself as a result of the pleasure they receive and how easy it is for them to steal.

There's other ways that the thief is able to convince themself, delude themself, that it's OK to steal, and this is the study of criminal psychology, but it is rarely evil. It's delusional and a form of ignorance. Both delusion and ignorance are products of "Ain", but they delusion and ignorance are not evil.



Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:44 pm
by Ziran
CCoburn wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 8:34 pm
Ziran wrote: Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:16 pm Besides, actual cosmology is material science.
There are aspects of "cosmology" that DO NOT fall within the scope of "material science".

The benchmark you have set is "actual cosmological existence", see below:

CCoburn wrote: Wed Nov 15, 2023 10:49 amit would need to have an actual cosmological existence

I doubt very highly that you will be able to hold yourself to this standard: "actual cosmological existence".



Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2023 1:36 pm
by Vesperium
Ziran wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:35 pm
BlackOrbit666 wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 1:20 amSorry to intervene! 😀

The more the merrier.

I think that Ain or the nothingness is a thing that exist at a primordial level and thus it existed for eons.

However, the word AIN, based on my energy work represents a negative side of a very corruptive energy, much where the sea of Chaos originate and are the home of various demonic beings, including the primordial demons and the Goetic demons.

I prefer not to misrepresent "Ain" as anything other than what it is:  pure "negation" which is extremely useful.  It's age is irelevant to me, other than its necessary partnership with "everything" and that it requires some thing other than itself to sustain it.

Making it an enemy, imo, causes much more harm than good.  For example, chaos serves an important purpose for natural evolution.  Random mutations with survival benefits are a product of chaos.  These random mutations are an important driver in evolution. Without the genetic variance, the human race would never survive. I agree that it is "corruptive", but the remedy is to understand it. Even chaos is predictable in its absolute lack of order.

The Kabalistic tree has two sides; one light and the other one dark *nightside*.

Agreed. 100%. Here is my own diagram I posted earlier which includes the "other-side". It's not perfect, but I think it does a good job of illustrating the "other-side", and it's position on the "map" surrounding the material realm. This is indicated by the dark circle surrounding the white circle in the lower 4th of the chain. The components of the "other-side", the dark tree, is included in this dark circle surrounding the white one labled "מלכות".

(tap or click on the image to enlarge it)



Screenshot_20231118_152200.jpg


It is important to take in consideration that the nightside is where all the evil originates. Demons, the nothingness, more specifically the seas of chaos, it is where the evil originates.

And to further consolidate this, I bring as proof the picture of Satan traversing the seas of Chaos (AIN):

First, I personally have no fear of demons, satan, chaos, nor evil. That fear feeds them. All of them work for me, if I ever choose to use them for a greater good. Actual evil is remarkably rare, ignorance is far more common. Individuals who do harm intentionally are most often not evil, which is why they can be rehabilitated.

Second, chaos is not "ain". Chaos has a diifferent name: It's "Tohu-vah-Vohu", lliterally "chaos-and-void", which is different than "AIN".

{gustave-dore's "satan-s-flight-through-chaos"}[/img]

If we look closely, the sea of chaos, besides containing the origin of all evils, AIN, it also contains the kabalistic sense of Chaos and nothingness.

The problem with this is: Chaos at random catche and at random releases. So, it doesn't make sense to claim that Chaos contains the origin of all evil. Kabalah would label that dark region in the picture the "other-side", the "sitra-achra", nothing more, nothing less.

Really what's needed is a proper definition of evil in order to distinguish it from darkness.

Evil is willful harm for no other purpose other than pleasure. If an individual is inspired by the idea of rape, for the sole purpose of having that experience, and if that inspiration is pleasurable for them, as opposed to discouraging, then, they are having evil thoughts. If they actualize those thoughts, (act on them) and receive pleasure by doing them, then they are an evil person. It could be that they are evil through no fault of their own, but, this does not mean that they should be permitted to act out their evil intentions, nor that their evil intentions have no consequences.

But this is not the same as an individual who is a thief because they do not think they have any other way to feed themself, and, they happen to be good at stealing, and they get a thrill from stealing at the same time. Stealing is still wrong for them, but, it's not evil. The truth is, there probably are other ways of feeding themself, but, they are deluding themself as a result of the pleasure they receive and how easy it is for them to steal.

There's other ways that the thief is able to convince themself, delude themself, that it's OK to steal, and this is the study of criminal psychology, but it is rarely evil. It's delusional and a form of ignorance. Both delusion and ignorance are products of "Ain", but they delusion and ignorance are not evil.


Thank you for the information. I personally learned some things about Kabalah, but damn... I must say this is whole new stuff and very useful information.

Thank you.

Delusion and ignorance are products of AIN, that's true.

The thing is that I was trying to refer to the energetic polarities of Satan which are negative but sadly cannot be rehabilitated. Unfortunately it doesn't work like it works with people.

I mean, I have been in Satanism after all and the energies of Satan are dangerous. Especially if you talk about a lot of organisations like the JoS who literally screw it up, not gonna lie.

That is why I renounced on being Satanist and I am rather occultist, mostly Nordic, astrology etc., but not Satanist.

But, on another note, you are right that I should not fear them as fear (negative feeling) feeds the Demons. Thanks for the tips.

I agree that most individuals, like in the stealing example you gave, tend to impose AIN-like self limitations. It is very complicated why, but, still, interesting why it happens.

Thanks again for the info, will come again if I have questions :)

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2023 9:06 pm
by CCoburn
Ziran wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:44 pm The benchmark you have set is "actual cosmological existence", see below:
Just because I've used a form of "cosmology" in a statement does not change the fact that you are confused about it and failed to define it properly; being an "authentic Kabbalist" are ignorant of such things that are external to your "dojo".

Ziran wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:44 pm I doubt very highly that you will be able to hold yourself to this standard: "actual cosmological existence".
If Kabbalah is to have any worth at all then it should be possible to reduce it to common terms. There is no shortage of superfluous occult jargon and mysticism and as you can observe(as of late) I tend to avoid those sorts of things; if not for the fact that you are nearly a sole writer here, then you yourself might also be avoided, although I think 'ignored' would be more appropriate.

I myself write using a modest variety of dialects; translating some aspects of Kabbalah to a dialect that is common to my language. You don't agree with it; I don't care.

Mostly what you appear to be doing here is regurgitating your consumption of the Torah and possibly what others have fed you on the matter.

Speak in plain language using common base terms. Why should the reader be left to decipher your writing? Perhaps because you yourself are incapable of doing so?

Have you ever heard anything along the lines of simplicity is the way of genius?

It's the confused individuals that are unable to "simplify" and leave affairs in a complicated mess.

But you say "It really is complicated.". Of course it is, otherwise it wouldn't require "simplification" now would it?

Otherwise, you're just building gibberish upon gibberish, i.e...

"A house of cards.":

Image

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2023 10:18 pm
by Ziran
CCoburn wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2023 9:06 pm
Ziran wrote: Sat Nov 18, 2023 11:44 pm The benchmark you have set is "actual cosmological existence", see below:
Just because I've used a form of "cosmology" in a statement does not change the fact that you are confused about it

It's not confusing at all. Your criticisms are hypocritical. It's OK for you to employ mystical ideas which are not demonstrable as "actual cosmological existence" ( your word choice ), but, when those ideas you employ are shown to be contradictory or in error you object that what is correct and consistent to kabalah is not "actual cosmological existence". That's hypocritical.

If Kabbalah is to have any worth at all then it should be possible to reduce it to common terms.

1) I doubt anyone would agree with you here.
2) I have reduced it considerably for you.
3) If it needs to be "reduced" that means in its original form, it is complex.
4) I have already addressed its usefulness. The example I brought requires complexity. It's an opporunity. No one is forcing you to learn kabalah.


I myself write using a modest variety of dialects; translating some aspects of Kabbalah to a dialect that is common to my language.

So far, your translations are wrong and self-contradictory.

Speak in plain language using common base terms.

I have. Here's a reminder:

Ziran wrote: Tue Oct 17, 2023 8:40 pm
Spida wrote: Mon Oct 16, 2023 10:42 pm Let's start with the Ain. What is it to you?
The partner of Ain-Soph after the first keser which is the binary choice "to create".

Have you figured out those 4 words yet? "binary choice to create"?

Ain has been defined in plain langauge. It is "nearly infinite negations". Perhaps I should call it a "set" or a "collection".

Ain-Soph has been defined in plain language. It is "nearly infinite assertions". Perhaps I should call it a "set" or a "collection".


Have you ever heard anything along the lines of simplicity is the way of genius?

Of course, but that's not always true. If that were true, there would be no college text books, nor any set theory, nor any modal logic. Here's something which is a simple idea, but highly complex when it is broken out fully:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conditional_probability

None the less, I have made these concepts simple for you.


But you say "It really is complicated.". Of course it is, otherwise it wouldn't require "simplification" now would it?

Agreed. Then there should not be any more objections to complicated explanations and corrections to your misconceptions. Bondage to "simple" will naturally produce a high likelihood for making false conclusions if the subject matter is naturally complicated.



Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Sun Nov 19, 2023 10:32 pm
by Ziran
BlackOrbit666 wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2023 1:36 pm
Thank you for the information. I personally learned some things about Kabalah, but damn... I must say this is whole new stuff and very useful information.

Thank you.
You're very welcome.
Delusion and ignorance are products of AIN, that's true.

The thing is that I was trying to refer to the energetic polarities of Satan which are negative but sadly cannot be rehabilitated. Unfortunately it doesn't work like it works with people.

I mean, I have been in Satanism after all and the energies of Satan are dangerous. Especially if you talk about a lot of organisations like the JoS who literally screw it up, not gonna lie.

That is why I renounced on being Satanist and I am rather occultist, mostly Nordic, astrology etc., but not Satanist.

But, on another note, you are right that I should not fear them as fear (negative feeling) feeds the Demons. Thanks for the tips.

"Satan" is a catch-all term which I think is very often misunderstood. Technically "Satan", "HaSatan" is the "accuser". It is a spirit-of-opposition. There's nothing really wrong with it. It's not inherently evil. It's wonderful when facing any tyrannt. The spirit-of-oppostion is great for doing any sort of critical analysis or penetration testing in a security context. I am employing the spirit-of-oppostion in a small degree while I am error checking what's written in this thread. That's really all that "satan" is. It is pure opposition.

The problem with this particular spirit is that its opposition is one sided and is itself tyrannical. Furtther, because it is oppositional, it will oppose any moderation applied to itself. Working with it requires moderation and careful planning.

When it comes to the JoS, being jewish myself, naturally I have a knee-jerk reaction towards them, but, if I accept and understand their point of view all of their arguments against me evaporate into nothingness. My opposition to them fuels them. Granted I don't agree with them, but, I can understand their point of view. Understanding it does not imply agreement with it. At a very basic level, if I do not want to be like them, if I actually disagree with their point of view, that includes disagreeing with their dogmatic black-and-white view of the world and reality.

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2023 12:45 pm
by CCoburn
Ziran wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2023 10:18 pm It's not confusing at all.

It's not? Well, on behalf of the "authentic Master Ziran" the data presented herewith begs to differ. Where it is revealed seven pages and seven hundred and fifty paragraphs later within a 'universal context', no less, that the "Master" himself appears to be quite "confused" with respect to something 'so simple' as the meaning of the word "cosmology".

And I'm still reveling in that "revelation".

It was a pretty straightforward blunder, and its blatant "simplicity" is the reason for such an obvious "revelation".

This is the very reason I ask for "simplification", because it "reveals" what a knucklehead you are, and I'm not using "knucklehead" here as an ad hominem but for rhetorical purposes.

And I haven't even gotten to the 'deconstruction phase' of superfluous phrases and "base terms" here yet where the aforementioned was nothing more than a fortuitous gift(so to speak).

Re: Funnels and other Vortices

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2023 7:37 pm
by Ziran
CCoburn wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2023 12:45 pm
Ziran wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2023 10:18 pm It's not confusing at all.
It's not?

No. It's not. My comment which you quoted above is in response to what you wrote about "actual cosmological existence." It is not confusing that you are being hypocritical with your criticism.



Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Mon Nov 20, 2023 8:09 pm
by Cerber
This is the very reason I ask for "simplification", because it "reveals" what a knucklehead you are, and I'm not using "knucklehead" here as an ad hominem but for rhetorical purposes.
That's almost like punching somebody in the face and following up with "Don't be mad, I didn't mean to hurt you, I'm just joking bro."
Anyway, that's not what I would consider "adhering to forum guidelines":
...
Degenerative language: Use of language to describe or imply other members, even if not directly named, are inferior or below the speaker, including language that elevates the self-importance of the speaker; example being in a disagreement with someone then not directly responding to the individual but to proceed to discuss plebs, sheep, etc or self-aggrandizing their power, ability, position, or authority in the world.
...
So to avoid having lose anyone, my precious dudes, I'm left with little alternatives, but to temporary lock this thread.
To give us all opportunity to spend few days on self-reflection, to think about what words we chose to express our thoughts and feelings, and to consider how those words may impact us and those around us.
Hopefully we can come back to this, being slightly better people, to each other. I have faith in our limitless capacity for kindness.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 6:42 pm
by Cerber
Unlocked, but posts will be monitored more closely for the time being.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Thu Nov 23, 2023 7:31 pm
by Cerber
p.s.
If any member strongly disagrees with views of some other member on any subject, to a point were they are unable to express their views without resorting to derogatory language, better approach would be to start new separate thread, and present your alternative interpretation on the subject there, in a constructive manner.

Re: The Tree Of Life

Posted: Fri Nov 24, 2023 10:08 am
by CCoburn
Cerber wrote: Thu Nov 23, 2023 7:31 pm p.s.
If any member strongly disagrees with views of some other member on any subject, to a point were they are unable to express their views without resorting to derogatory language, better approach would be to start new separate thread, and present your alternative interpretation on the subject there, in a constructive manner.
I agree with that; it seems reasonable if necessary. Now I'm going to get back to other forms of writing, what there is left of it anyway, time will tell.

Re: A simple question should produce a simple answer

Posted: Sun Jan 07, 2024 9:41 pm
by CCoburn
CCoburn wrote: Thu Nov 02, 2023 11:53 am
It would be more like: all energy + all mass at zero volume = singularity (meaning it is the only thing that exists and there is nothing else).

It could even be simplified more resulting in a continuation of the Ain Soph Aur.

It doesn't seem entirely accurate to say that "mass"(or matter) IS "energy"; to go that route you may as well say everything is energy, but there are distinctions to be made.

I would prefer to say that everything is a 'manifestation' of energy and to continue with the latter of the above quote where the limitless light(the ain soph aur) is a form of energy resulting in the simplification:

All "energy" manifested at "zero volume" = "singularity"; i.e. God i.e. one the first emanation - Keter.

Energy is synonymous with 'forces' so not only is there the energy of the electromagnetic spectrum but also the strong and weak nuclear "forces" and possibly gravity as well not to mention the hypothetical dark energy.

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:25 pm
by CCoburn
The Emanating Sefirot


Mechanically, the propagating aether lays down a medium/context, i.e. an expanding four-dimensional construct in which the sefirot undergo their development. Much in the same way an artist prepares a canvas followed by a work of art. The former is nearly instantaneous while the latter is an anabolic building up process that is measured in eons, more or less.

Each sefira, or period of cosmic evolution has a peculiarity, uniqueness, or quality that distinguishes it from the others so it is given a special name, and in this particular case there are ten unique phases of cosmic evolution plus Da'ath makes it eleven although technically Da'ath isn't actually a sefira and is most often referred as the invisible or hidden sefira; it has no number, and as the Sefer Yetzirah explicitly states: ten, not nine; ten, not eleven. Ten holy sefirot. So if a numerical reference is to be made then zero does seem most fitting as opposed to eleven which begins the enumeration of the Hebrew alphabet beginning with Aleph(א) the eleventh path.

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Sun Jan 14, 2024 12:50 am
by Amor
CCoburn wrote: Sat Jan 13, 2024 4:25 pm The Emanating Sefirot...
Each sefira, or period of cosmic evolution has a peculiarity, uniqueness, or quality that distinguishes it from the others so it is given a special name, and in this particular case there are ten unique phases of cosmic evolution ...
On the other hand the Tree sits on each human and upon this planet's landscape at local, continental and global scales.

The first Tree I was shown on the landscape, covered the island of Iona

The humans were living on/in the lower sephiroth. That is common for Trees that face up into the cosmos.

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:36 pm
by CCoburn
Amor wrote: Sun Jan 14, 2024 12:50 am On the other hand, the tree sits on each human and upon this planet's landscape at local, continental, and global scales. The first tree I was shown on the landscape covered the island of Iona. The humans were living on/in the lower sephiroth; that is common for trees that face up into the cosmos.

I've seen depictions of the tree aligning with chakra points or whatever, but you're the only one that I know of alluding to similarities with land masses et cetera; the latter is likely nothing more than just coincidental.

The true nature regarding the cosmic development of the tree would be that of a central seed that expands concentrically outward, or any central core comprised of outward layers, so any analogy reflected thereafter would be similar in nature.

The expansion wouldn't necessarily be of perfect concentric spheres, but primarily the idea is that of an origin with its initial core and development expressed temporally where there would be more or less a discernment of the process spatially.

The reflections could take any form. From the layers of an onion, the buds and pistils of flowers, to the outward emanations of ripples from a pebble cast to a stream.

Nature is much about fractal geometry and pattern repetition as can be observed in land masses, clouds, mountains, and of course the Mandelbrot set.

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:23 am
by Amor
CCoburn wrote: Tue Jan 16, 2024 3:36 pm... you're the only one that I know of alluding to similarities with land masses et cetera; the latter is likely nothing more than just coincidental...
My apologies for disturbing your beliefs

One continent has two trees crossing at a well known sacred site. One of the trees faced up into the heavens and the other down into the Earth. As you can imagine the cities on that downwards Tree felt that they did not have much in common with the cities on the upward Tree - and often discussed succession

About 20 years ago, the down tree turned over and since then the succession cities have not talked about that much.

Another case was an island pair with the tree facing down. It turned over as the Monarch toured the islands, one city/sephira at a time. I was travelling a day behind the Monarch watching the turning. Since the turning those islands became much more active in global politics

As you can imagine the cities on sephiroth have characteristics predicted by the Tree.

Here's a hint: What sephira is Chicago?

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 4:16 am
by Amor
That should be secession

Re: The Tree of Life

Posted: Wed Jan 17, 2024 9:33 am
by CCoburn
Amor wrote: Wed Jan 17, 2024 3:23 am My apologies for disturbing your beliefs

I wouldn't go that far. Your writing is kind of vague, but with all that aside and based on what I know about Chicago I could guess.