[Drifter]

SACRED GEOMETRY and Symbology

Place a point in the center of a circle and draw a line from the center to the circumference.

The ancients used the symbol of the circle to help us understand that we exist as Spirit, soul, and body. The center represents our spiritual identity, the circumference represents the body, and the radius represents the soul.

Each one of us is a soul. The soul is our character, which has a polar nature. One the one hand, a character appears as a particular body in the story, represented by the circumference. But essentially every character is one with the Primal Imagination, represented by the center. The soul, represented by the radius, is the relationship between our essential identity as Sprit and our apparent identity as a body.

Now, drawing more radial lines connecting the center of the circle with the circumference, the ancients teach that there are an infinite number of souls arising from our shared spiritual identity at the center of the circle, culminating in different bodies in the world on the circumference. We appear to be separate characters in the story, but at the depths of the soul we are one.

"Noumenon[Nothing] to phenomenon[something], manifesting metaphysically in the mind of physical man. Just a thought."

If phenomenal things are replaced with illusions of the mind[no literally changing noumenon], based only on time as the sole factor in determining any sense of reality, then I would agree.

The strict laws that govern the sense of physicality, I propose is based on the rate at which the mind can process potential information that is consistent with this particular shared reality - perhaps what can be referred to as a persistence of existence.

It's my own personal "way of no way" or toe, and is certainly not everybody's empty cup of tea. Meant to be absorbed or ignored as we see fit.

The circle is the cosmic egg, represented as Ra in Egyptian tradition, of which, it is said, is to have been hatched from.
The egg, or circle, is the container or cartouche, that holds the souls spiritual essence, and within it, the entire process of becoming a whole person.
A persons full potential is held in this protective cocoon-like chamber within a personal spiritual heart, until the perfect moment of soul awakening.
This activation opens the flow of Divine Light, from the Source centre, and stirs the soul blueprint of the person into motion, energizing the transformative process of developing ones Higher-consciousness and becoming Self-Realized.
The clear light Source flows out from the centre, creating the rainbow colors of the individual souls[personalities], like the seven cosmic rays.
These rays embody qualities of the Source needed to bring itself into manifested expression.
These qualities include power and will; love and wisdom; harmony and beauty; concrete science and knowledge; devotion; and ceremonial order.
For those who know they don't know_ it is to know, for those who think they do know_ it is not.

[N0B0DY]

Originally Posted by Fluent Piffle

There it is then.

3d Infinite Space IS 'absolute'. Its inherent motion will make it collapse upon itself (it can only move inwardly, - and there is your 'intuition' of an 'infinitesimal'), thereby forcing it to become, once again, an 'absolute' (actually 'Wave') state.

pif.

The whole point to the point of no point is that there is no where "there," pif. The inherent motion is all in your mind, but I think we're coming closer to an agreement due to the eradication of the concept of "outward."



Now all we have to do is eradicate the "inward," and we can agree that the absolute is contextually based upon neither/nor; therefore not.

We don't have to worry about waves and shapes moving in, down and all around infinity for an eternity because the absolute already had it all covered in no time at all.

[Drifter]

Beyond concepts there is a static field of Is-ness, I'll meet you there.

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

The whole point to the point of no point is that there is no where "there," pif. The inherent motion is all in your mind, but I think we're coming closer to an agreement due to the eradication of the concept of "outward."



Now all we have to do is eradicate the "inward," and we can agree that the absolute is contextually based upon neither/nor; therefore not.

We don't have to worry about waves and shapes moving in, down and all around infinity for an eternity because the absolute already had it all covered in no time at all.

[N0B0DY]

You remind me of one Akhenaten, Drifter, with your synthesis of the gods.

"Both defiled and admired during his lifetime and long after, the Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten (c. 1385 B.C. - c. 1350 B.C.) was a revolutionary who transformed Egyptian society by instituting history's first monotheistic religion. Rejecting belief in Egypt's numerous traditional gods, Akhenaten worshipped the sun disk, or Aten, as the only true god. With his attempted eradication of Egypt's primary god, Amun, Akhenaten earned the hatred of Amun's high priests who called him Egypt's "heretic pharaoh." A pioneer who also encouraged a radical art movement and became founder of the city of Amarna, Akhenaten survived the attempt to wipe his name from history. With his androgynous and deformed appearance, Akhenaten is one of the most fascinating pharaoh's of all time, and one who was considered to be well ahead of his time." - http://www.answers.com/akhenaten

In my opinion, though, the chicken is already perfected. The last effect and the first cause are one and the same Nun/none.

[Drifter]

Well, Thank you Nobody for that. [not to be taken as self-assuming]

"God" has many names but there is only one Creator, or Creative Energy, as the case may be. Personally, I see 'god" in everything, everywhere, and at all times.
Namaste` Brother Self, That Art We
ps thanks for the link

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

You remind me of one Akhenaten, Drifter, with your synthesis of the gods.

"Both defiled and admired during his lifetime and long after, the Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten (c. 1385 B.C. - c. 1350 B.C.) was a revolutionary who transformed Egyptian society by instituting history's first monotheistic religion. Rejecting belief in Egypt's numerous traditional gods, Akhenaten worshipped the sun disk, or Aten, as the only true god. With his attempted eradication of Egypt's primary god, Amun, Akhenaten earned the hatred of Amun's high priests who called him Egypt's "heretic pharaoh." A pioneer who also encouraged a radical art movement and became founder of the city of Amarna, Akhenaten survived the attempt to wipe his name from history. With his androgynous and deformed appearance, Akhenaten is one of the most fascinating pharaoh's of all time, and one who was considered to be well ahead of his time." - http://www.answers.com/akhenaten

In my opinion, though, the chicken is already perfected. The last effect and the first cause are one and the same Nun/none.

[Drifter]

Looking deeply into the eye of the Friend, you will see Buddha.

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

You remind me of one Akhenaten, Drifter, with your synthesis of the gods.

"Both defiled and admired during his lifetime and long after, the Egyptian pharaoh Akhenaten (c. 1385 B.C. - c. 1350 B.C.) was a revolutionary who transformed Egyptian society by instituting history's first monotheistic religion. Rejecting belief in Egypt's numerous traditional gods, Akhenaten worshipped the sun disk, or Aten, as the only true god. With his attempted eradication of Egypt's primary god, Amun, Akhenaten earned the hatred of Amun's high priests who called him Egypt's "heretic pharaoh." A pioneer who also encouraged a radical art movement and became founder of the city of Amarna, Akhenaten survived the attempt to wipe his name from history. With his androgynous and deformed appearance, Akhenaten is one of the most fascinating pharaoh's of all time, and one who was considered to be well ahead of his time." - http://www.answers.com/akhenaten

In my opinion, though, the chicken is already perfected. The last effect and the first cause are one and the same Nun/none.

[N0B0DY]

Absolutely, my Friend! And when we look into Buddha we see a Bud dh. Where dh can represent drifting happily.

[Fluent Piffle]

Originally Posted by Drifter

It's about the message not the messenger.
Go for the ball not the player.
You obstinately continue, in spite of moderator warnings, to exibit foul behaviour.
Just pointing out the obvious.
Don't start any shit[drivel], and there won't be any.

"Everyone 'proposes' it, in their own way. Does your 'God' not have an 'infinite aspect'? And this 'void', is it a 'finite' void? Everyone instinctively knows it is the Reality, as Drifter plagiarises...'THOU ART THAT'."

Yeah, drift on, 'friend'.

If it's 'about the message and not the messenger', why are you still trying to goad me into your own personally distinct nastiness by calling me 'obstinate'? I can't affect 'you', because you only post other people's words. Therefore it is all just another ego-reaction from you. This makes for quite a profound realisation of your mind-state. You spout childish names such as 'shorty' and 'arsehole'....why? You seriously think I will react to that in any kind of serious way....why? ...because that is how YOU think, isn't it? The slightest scratch to your veneer, and all this inner violence comes pouring out!!

Don't worry, I know you have 'friends' here. This is the only explanation for why you are still allowed to post, after such aggressiveness and abuse, and that you feel secure enough to post your violence in the first place, safe in the knowledge that you have 'friends' to back you up, eh?

So, please do not take this personally, as it is intended as a message of hope, passed on from one poor, humble messenger, for the purpose of helping a poor stranded soul/brother out of his internally violent predicament.. because, as you yourself have just written, it is about the message, and not the messenger. Go for the ball and not the player, Drifter.

Now all we have to do is eradicate the "inward," and we can agree that the absolute is contextually based upon neither/nor; therefore not.

We don't have to worry about waves and shapes moving in, down and all around infinity for an eternity because the absolute already had it all covered in no time at all.

No, Nob. There is motion. You don't want to 'worry about waves' because it upsets your 'theory'.

The whole point to the point of no point is that there is no where "there," pif.

There are 'subjective' points, which are what we refer to when we posit a 'there', but there is also the objective 'everywhere', which is more Cosmologically correct, when we are attempting to describe the necessarily Infinite Space. You are still confusing yourself by trying to merge two views into one, instead of accepting that they are two aspects of the same thing. There is a subtle difference. One possible route for you might be to try to connect with your inner female side...



pif.

[N0B0DY]

I'm neuter-gender, pif; neither father sun, nor mother moon.

How do you propose one can ascertain the existence of "everywhere" other than through a deductive means? Any other means would inevitably lead to a non sequitur if we adhere to the restrictions of the scientific method you've advocated.

My claim of the impossibility of absolute motion requires no empirical verification, because from the beginning I've proclaimed extending inverse relationships to the absolute level beyond the scope of empirical, theoretical and philosophical science. So it can only be realized through an antithetical - counter-intuitive - means.

I understand where you're at with this, pif, as are most others, but I don't follow anybody or anything but the non-existent way of no way; then relative events take care of themselves in their own ways.

[dipayankar]

To me time can be explained in terms of quanta and hence the concept of zero can be explained better..

Originally Posted by N0B0DY

I don't know if these are Drifter's own words - "Zero represent the Whole. Singularity represents Centre." - but I interpret both as two abstract perspectives of non existence, and the only means I'm aware of to make such an inference is by using the inverse suggested by Drifter. Yet, I concede that if the above implies a singular entity within an absolute void, it can be used as a means to realize its logical fallacy.

The common use of singularity implies an infinite density, so I'm not sure if this is what you mean by absolute singularity, but if you mean absolutely static and solid, then it implies to me that the reference is to the absolute void I repeatedly refer to which is non-existent. To the time-independent universe, there can be no relative states in between the two abstract perspectives; but to time-dependent observers and events, there is apparently a multitude of relative states between zero and one.

The time it takes for observers to process prerequisite information, from a big bang to any and all cyclical or continual creative events, would then be subconsciously eternal and consciously temporal - extended from the timeless absolute center, circumference or any absolute space-time point between. Again, the difference between eternal and timeless, imo, is that eternal implies no beginning and no end to the extension of time; whereas timeless implies that there is no time at all, never was and never can be.