The Sandorian Grove: The Vanity of the Universe - now copyrited...    
 The Vanity of the Universe - now copyrited...20 comments
picture21 May 2008 @ 01:00, by Max Sandor

It has always a well-guarded secret of the true shamans that the world at its basic core is VAIN, VAIN, VAIN.

Of course, they would rarely talk about it, just observe it. After all, the latest product of the Universe in our area around here, homo sapiens, is equally vain, vain, vain, and would therefore not appreciate any such comments.

This may change now. The truth of the vanity of the Universe has a cute name (UQV) and a claim to copyright. Congrats go to superultramodern KEDAR JOSHI! [link]

Here is the abstract of his discovery:

The UQV (Ultimate Questioner's Vanity) Theory

Affiliation Unknown May 6, 2007

The UQV theory is a metaphysical theory that the universe is the consequence of the ultimate questioner's vanity. This theory builds on the NSTP (Non Spatial Thinking Process) theoretical metaphysical semi-solipsism, the position, which specifically regards the NSTP theoretical superhuman mind as a personal philosophical questioning supermind. The UQV theory further speculates the existence of the ultimate questioner, which, existing logically/conceptually beyond the superhuman mind, initiated the existence of my NSTP in order to ask an apparently unanswerable (philosophical) question about the nature of its own existence. And since the NSTP is extremely orderly and deterministic, the ultimate questioner already knows if the NSTP would or would not answer the question. Therefore, the theory states that the universe, which includes my NSTP, and possibly the superhuman mind, and even the necessary truths, is the product/consequence of the ultimate questioner's vanity, the vanity of its own existence and intelligence. The theory is constituted of one postulate, one law, and three conjectures.

to retrieve the full text go to: [link]

Meanwhile, Anthony discovered that roses not only DON'T talk, as some people falsely claimed, but that they don't like to be touched either. The insight that this noble flower also steals his perfume and pushes herself into the picture inappropriately will have to wait until a later age.

Cartola was singing about nicely 30 yrs ago:
[link] rosas não falam

Bate outra vez
Com esperanças o meu coração
Pois já vai terminando o verão enfim

Volto ao jardim
Com a certeza que devo chorar
Pois bem sei que não queres voltar para mim

Queixo-me às rosas, mas que bobagem
As rosas não falam
Simplesmente as rosas exalam
O perfume que roubam de ti

Devias vir
Para ver os meus olhos tristonhos
E, quem sabe, sonhava meus sonhos
Por fim

[< Back] [The Sandorian Grove]



21 May 2008 @ 16:31 by Ed Dawson @ : vanity?
All is vanity. -Ecclesiastes  

21 May 2008 @ 23:02 by mx @ : krzbsk dont like cclsyasts & his non-seq
couldn't imagine a statement more against the grain & brain of the Count than your quote, Ed.

What always made me wonder, tho: after Eccl.'s entire discourse, and an excellent one, of sober analysis of the Game of Life, he (or someone else) attached a completely illogical, non-sequitur conclusion to it, see below.

What a pity!

It's so unbelievable, that I don't believe it... he MUST have been smarter than winding up with this:

The Holy Bible: King James Version. 2000.

(12th chapter, the end)
The Whole Duty of Man
9 ¶ And moreover, because the Preacher was wise, he still taught the people knowledge; yea, he gave good heed, and sought out, and set in order many proverbs.
10 The Preacher sought to find out acceptable words: and that which was written was upright, even words of truth.
11 ¶ The words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened by the masters of assemblies, which are given from one shepherd.
12 And further, by these, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.
13 ¶ Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man.
14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.  

22 May 2008 @ 02:14 by solomoreno : Hmmm...
Maybe the dude had a deadline?


22 May 2008 @ 15:47 by mx @ : one of these add-ons...
looking another time at the text, it appears to me now that the entire thing quoted above was simply added on by some wise-crack to make it conform to the orthodox.

Originally it may have simply ended just before that paragraph with the tale-telling words about the end of times (cp: Gospel of Mary!!!):
Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it.
8 Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher; all is vanity.  

23 May 2008 @ 03:37 by Ed Dawson @ : vanity
I was being mildly facetious. :)))

What is not facetious:

Morphic fields operate on the ARC triangle (actually arranged as affinity-communication-agreement).

On a Being’s inside ARC equals Understanding. On the outside ACA equals the Apparency. The Apparency is the visible world. It is also known in the Gurdjieff-Ouspensky system as Phenomenon. Phenomenon is contrasted against Nomenon, which is the real reality. Agreement forms both one’s internal reality and one’s external reality.

Agreement can be defined as cocreation at Effect; cocreation as Cause is called Concurance.

Agreement produces the Apparency or Phenomenon.

Concurance produces the real Reality or Nomenon. (Note that when one concurs, the physical universe becomes less solid to one's perception)

Morphic fields operate by dominance/submission. Morphic fields are all about ownership, who owns whom. Morphic fields are arranged in hierarchies, with the largest field owning smaller fields below it, and the smaller owning still smaller, almost to infinity.

To dominate a morphic field one uses certainty, intention and will. Intention is thought without limitation. Certainty is emotion without limitation. Will is effort exerted without limitations.

Like what I've been working on?

23 May 2008 @ 13:06 by mx @ : sounds like Crowley..
(the last paragraph above, from Ed)

well said.. it is still a confusing subject, probably because of the lack of a good definition of the word vanity itself.

Wiktionary sez:
Latin vannus: emptiness or a void - vanitas: vanity through Old French vanité to Middle English.

but then later:
* conceit
* egotism
* narcissism
* pride
* vain
* egocentric

However, the flavor of both shamanic and UQV (if I sense it the way it is intended to be), goes into the direction of 'showing of oneself', and the moral evaluations and deductions are human judgements and therefore 'inverse' hypocritical.

Ecclesiastes seems to more go towards the orginal meaning of vanity as 'voidness', 'meaningless', instead of 'self-pride', making Martin Luther's German translation (as 'Eitelkeit') dead wrong.  

23 May 2008 @ 16:12 by mx @ : Nietzsche in my heart and my chest...
one can get a t-shirt, Baseball Jersey, BBQ Apron, even a bib, and many more silly items with the following Nietzsche quote:
"What if God were not exactly truth, and if this could be proved? And if he were instead the vanity, the desire for power, the ambitions, the fear, and the enraptured and terrified folly of mankind?"


23 May 2008 @ 16:47 by Ed Dawson @ : anatomy of a meme (off subject, & fun!)
Recent cog:

A fixed idea held on a person's inside is a service facsimile. (we already knew this of course)

A fixed idea held on a person's OUTSIDE, i.e. placed into the space outside of the person, is a MEME.

A meme then could be defined as an infectious serfac.

23 May 2008 @ 16:54 by Ed Dawson @ : further MEME-erie
I had often wondered how it is that fixed ideas get spread through cultures and various groups. So I decided to look at it. The area I examined was the spread of moslem and christian ideas. I noticed that both religions were enforcing fixed ideas. Sure, the idiot enforcing the ideas had serfacs, but what is interesting is that by shoving a serfac down other people's throats, it propagated. So a certain amount of resistance is necessary in the recipients to get the meme copied (not duplicated, COPIED) by the recipients.

23 May 2008 @ 17:28 by mortimer : awsome photo
that is a wonderful image, thankyou for sharing,, of all the grandbaby pics you have posted that is my favorite one.

The baby pic parade, you must be a very proud parent Max.

23 May 2008 @ 19:02 by mx @ : baby pic parade...
proud parent??? vanity... all is vanity

PS: it's my step-daughter's kid... and it's an easy choice for pics as we have zillions of those, vanity... all is vanity...  

23 May 2008 @ 19:34 by mortimer : Osun Exú

My finger the Isu database started with the top ranked 700 antonyms, and oddly, vanity was not on that list. Seems you are correct, people do not like to talk about it.

i added 'vanity' to my Exú, classified as Osun male polarity ...

here are my synonyms:
bootlessness, fruitlessness, unavailingness, unprofitableness, uselessness, conceit, egotism, complacency, vainglory, ostentation, pride, emptiness, sham, unreality, folly, triviality, futility, narcissism, vainness

23 May 2008 @ 20:40 by solomoreno : Lovely exchange
MX: Thank you for blogging about this fascinating idea. I am enjoying the ongoing exchange. It does further corroborate the world as some sort of insanely tragic and comedic joke.

You mentioned above that the meaning of vanity presented in the abstract was more in the vein of "showing oneself." This reminds of a hadith where Muhammad quotes God as saying: "I was a hidden treasure and I loved to be known, therefore I created." Sounds like vanity to me.  

24 May 2008 @ 00:38 by mx @ : unfolding of the not viewable..
Solomoreno, the Ifa viewpoint is close to the viewpoint you quoted Muhammad quoting God:
because one can see only what one is not oneself (the observer's paradox, cp Gotamo Siddharto 'Buddho' & also Apocryphon of John), God, in order to view itself, had to 'unfold' or 'mirror' itself. This became what came to be known as the 'universe'. Since an event is only 'real' if there is an observer, the very act of creation had to be observed - there we have Orunmila, the only witness of creation.

My inquiring mind wants to know:
Judging from the eons the game is already going on, how come that God still hasn't seen enough of itself?????  

24 May 2008 @ 01:21 by bushman : Hmm
Some answers lead to more questions, this makes the universe expand with no end in sight. :}  

24 May 2008 @ 16:42 by vaxen : Max
The term Fear, as used inthe KJ translation doesn't mean 'fear' it is Pahad (Aspirated Het) and means 'reverential trust. The word 'God' doesn't appear there either. It is YHVH which refers to something quite other than...the word God (Persian: Choda Chaldean EA, Egyptian HU). So...


24 May 2008 @ 17:31 by mx @ : ha-elohim
Wikipedia claims that not even yhvh appears in the text, only ha-elohim.
in any case, I suspect that the shell-text was added only to make it conform with the 'official' religion.I don't have time nor motivation to dig deeper even though the text is great stuff for meditation :-)
Over here, in the jungle, we are discussing these days "which comes first? vanity or individuation"?  

25 May 2008 @ 04:00 by solomoreno : Synchronicity?
MX: I've been dying to understand who this guy Orunmila I know! Goddamn, it still astounds me how Ifa sort of encompasses so many errant ideas spread throughout a bunch of disciplines.

Interestingly, I was running Aspectika only minutes after I posted my last comment, running out the goal "to feel utterly alone." And, among other things, what was fueling my fear of loneliness was this idea that when no one is around, anything I create is not real, as if it has no meaning or significance. My aspect was manifesting as this enormous dark space and no one was in it but me. I discovered that I need an audience (No wonder I became a musician). Apparently, God needs an audience too! So, it's like I've been experiencing God's dilemma on a microcosmic level.  

25 May 2008 @ 10:43 by daniela @ : God is an artist...
" The artist is the creator of beautiful things.

To reveal art and conceal the artist is art's aim.

The critic is he who can translate into another manner or a new material his impression of beautiful things.

The highest as the lowest form of criticism is a mode of autobiography. Those who find ugly meanings in beautiful things are corrupt without being charming.

This is a fault.

Those who find beautiful meanings in beautiful things are the cultivated. For these there is hope.

They are the elect to whom beautiful things mean only beauty.

There is no such thing as a moral or an immoral book. Books are well written, or badly written.

That is all.

The nineteenth century dislike of realism is the rage of Caliban seeing his own face in a glass.

The nineteenth century dislike of romanticism is the rage of Caliban not seeing his own face in a glass.

The moral life of man forms part of the subject-matter of the artist, but the morality of art consists in the perfect use of an imperfect medium. No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved.

No artist has ethical sympathies.

An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style. No artist is ever morbid. The artist can express everything.

Thought and language are to the artist instruments of an art.

Vice and virtue are to the artist materials for an art.

From the point of view of form, the type of all the arts is the art of the musician.

From the point of view of feeling, the actor's craft is the type.

All art is at once surface and symbol.

Those who go beneath the surface do so at their peril."
Oscar wilde
Perhaps Creator is waiting for a new artist who can create things as beatiful and vain as his own ...
mmmmh ..all is vanity  

16 Nov 2008 @ 18:00 by Kedar Joshi @ : Definition of "Vanity"
In response to one of the comments, in my work "The UQV (Ultimate Questioner’s Vanity) Theory", the word “vanity” is meant to be ‘conceit and desire for admiration of one’s personal attainments or attractions’. The full paper can be found at Thanks.  

Your Name:
Your URL: (or email)
For verification, please type the word you see on the left:

Other articles in
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:18: A summary of the summaries of Max Sandor's projects
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:04: Project Summary 6. Game Theory - why and how do we manifest?
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:02: Project Summary 5: Polar Dynamics - theory and praxis of polarities
23 Sep 2016 @ 17:01: Project Summary 4: Quantum Fá - a practical guide to this Universe
23 Sep 2016 @ 16:45: Project Summary 3: The Book of Numbers
22 Sep 2016 @ 16:12: Project Summary 2: UrTon - the basis of spoken languages
18 Sep 2016 @ 00:32: Project Summary 1: The ConCur Paradigm - the structure of Reality
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Robot Psychologist (by Awaz)
9 Aug 2016 @ 14:35: Project Summary 7: Archetypology of the Human Being
1 Aug 2016 @ 00:40: Victory, submission or what else? Sign and symbol of the Rio 2016 Kickoff

[< Back] [The Sandorian Grove] [PermaLink]?  [TrackBack]?