|The Sandorian Grove: Discovering the difference between Soul and Spirit in Oneself|
13 comments31 Jul 2008 @ 16:23 by fill-void @220.127.116.11 : I - O
Not a great idea, but some itsa: For me, the mind / verbal representation in these last days has become "cause after effect" for soul / O and "effect after cause" for spirit / I, without the, how until short time ago, preference of cause. That's what at the moment helps me most sort out the mess mentally to at least get some hypothesis where to look.
Big actual help to this was the recommendated tennis link. Of course not by itself alone, but based on my archives / in my condition it gave an important kick :).
Apropos great idea for the naming: I doubt if there can be a great idea. Known terms pervert "the thing" by patching arbitrary orientations to it. New creations run, the more "graspable" they are, the risk to fixate the bias of the moment one learns them. Under this contemplation, I could imagine that I / O (or other pairs with minimum related prepacked considerations, like perhaps blue / red or cold / hot) would be a good choice - the smaller the "automatic" assignment, the bigger the chance one has to repeatedly look anew as long no own know above words is reached. (To look for possible names was, by the way, an interesting process for me in itself, only that it shouldn't be considered completed on a LFBD F/N pair wording. ;) )
How little orientation in the terms can abet dead ends I saw in this context impressively in what I call today the "CBR variety of the Zousel diagram" - he described (or gave importance to, I don't know if it was his discovery) cause / cause, cause / effect, effect / cause, effect / effect as the four highest goals. So far, so good - but the RANKING into first, second, third and fourth included a significance which finally became, at least for me, more of a dead-end than a helping pointing aid.
Whereby it's obvious that all names etc. have this tendency. But in very basic or omnibus terms we probably should lower as far as possible the risk to further the tendency - openness to own looking and itsa before clear-cut assignment to significance.
The other side is, that, if I look at what happened for me in the last weeks, "I and O" wouldn't have attracted my attention in the first place. "Spirit and soul" did - the "contradicting" quality of my biased significances to them were the "cause after effect" part of the pointing constellation which made me look at all, and this wouldn't have been brought to awareness by "I and O".
Gosh, the matter is not so easy as I thought when starting this comment. I send this anyway, please take it as itsaing report rather than as the criterium contribution for naming which I thought it is and which it isn't.
1 Aug 2008 @ 21:31 by mx @18.104.22.168 : alpha & omega...
I was playing with 'alpha and omega' for spirit & soul... didn't find too much resonance to those who asked about it..
cause&effect form a 'super-polarity' that mirrors down from the level of 2, if taken as a goal it would have to be something like 'to find the balance between the two'...
2 Aug 2008 @ 01:57 by Ed Dawson @22.214.171.124 : name of a name...
I like the names "higher self" and "lower self", except hiher self can be confusing because there is also the unified "individual overself" that is BOTH of the aforementioned that is "higher". And then above that is the great overself which is the female aspect of God.
As for the higher self and lower self, I know exactly what they look and feel like when called.
The higher self is a clear light that is almost a faint blue; it feels disturbingly high frequency, higher than aesthetic waves.
The lower self is golden light and feels warm and pleasant; its energy is quite comfortable for the meat body (unlike the higher self).
I met John McMaster in 1968 (at that time LRH's "personal envoy") and can attest that he had the higher self present in his space, but NOT the lower self, which was completely absent.
When I met Ken Ogger the first time I could faintly feel the higher self, but again, not the lower self.
As Max pointed out recently, and both of us have mentioned before, lacking "knowledge and conversation" of the lower self is dangerous if one is pursuing the higher self. I don't need to mention what happened eventually to Ken Ogger and John McMaster...
When I met Max the first time I noticed the higher self only. But a few years later in a skywork session where we called his higher and lower selves, he received the lower self (higher was already there) and his vulnerability was removed thereby.
Max, I remember how much you loved the experience. You almost GLOWED! :)))
2 Aug 2008 @ 12:31 by mx @126.96.36.199 : false lights
it is shocking and even a bit disheartening to witness how few people even have contact to 'light'. It seems the more they talk about it, the less they got it. Most accept a 'reflection' or a 'filtered light', usurped or faked by what the old ones called Yaltabaoth. In contrast to most everything in this world, there doesn't seem to be a 'gradient'. Either pregnant or not, so to speak.
In any case, it is not wise to talk too much about this in public, Ed. The "subject matter" is too restimulative for most.
2 Aug 2008 @ 13:38 by Rafaele @188.8.131.52 : false lights
Oh for me il was very teaching to read this distinction beetween the higher self and the lower . I read also articles about inner tennis game and I understood I am not in balance (too much in higher )and I'm going to process. Thanks much
2 Aug 2008 @ 16:33 by Ed Dawson @184.108.40.206 : Restimulating?
I am not very worried about restimulating people. I prefer open communication of truth, especially when the data is vital and can save lives.
When I was on lines at ASHO I saw many "clears" who were not all that clear; in fact they perceptibly did not usually achieve the real state until (old bridge) OT6 or 7. And when they did - guess what??? Higher self ONLY. Having the higher self only is a dangerous state if it goes for too long. The meat body ARCx's and gets sick without the lower self to balance the higher self. I believe this is because the higher self is suppressive or oppressive to the body. Frankly the meat body views a thetan as a sort of invisible demon. And if the thetan is powered up with higher self only the body suffers. The higher self empowers the spirit body (thetan's energy field), which is manifested as the olodu oturupon. The lower self empowers the meat body's energy field or aura, which is manifested as the olodu ika. Oturupon's relation to ika is that in ika's (physical survival) terms, oturupon is body death.
We need a rule: "lower self FIRST".
Gee... I do hope the above wasn't TOO restimulating!
2 Aug 2008 @ 19:49 by mx @220.127.116.11 : is higher really higher?
and lower really lower?
for us the moon is high there in the sky and we are down here. For the man on the moon, it's the opposite.
In the Fá model of the Universe, the skies are in the center and we're looking 'up' to what is really 'deep down inside there'.
In short, these expressions 'higher and lower' self already include a judgement. Same as negative/positive. These value judgments are entered by human mind, in nature they don't exist (or I don't see them).
That's why I am still looking for an intuitive nomenclature which is not overloaded by cultural judgments.
3 Aug 2008 @ 18:40 by Ed Dawson @18.104.22.168 : olodu of spirit and soul
You're right that they are not intrinsically higher and lower. In fact they seem to be based on the splits that form the level of 16 olodu. Spirit and soul are unified at the level of 8.
For example, on the #1 wheel, olodus ogbe and ofun n are of spirit, while oyeku and oshe are of soul.
4 Aug 2008 @ 08:04 by vaxen : Knowable and...
In Praise of Shiva
Shiva and Parvati Male and female are the separate manifestations of thy own self, (thus) split up through the desire of creating; and these are declared as the parents of the creation that sprang into existence. Shiva, Ganesh and Parvati
Thyself without a source, thou art the source of the universe; thyself endless, thou art the end of the universe; without beginning, thou art the beginning of the universe; and thyself lordless, thou art the lord of the universe.
Thou art fluid and hard on account of the close contact of the particles (adhesion); gross and subtle; light and yet heavy; perceptible and yet the opposite of that; thy will is absolute in (the manifestation of) the energies (or miraculous powers).
Thou art the source of those speeches (the Vedas), the introduction of which is by (the syllable) Om, the utterance of which is according to the three accents (acute, grave and circumflex), the rite to be performed by which is sacrifice, and the fruit of which is heaven.
They declare thee as the Prakriti operating for the benefit of the soul (Purusha); and they know thee alone to be the Purusha, the indifferent (passive) witness of (the operations of) the Prakriti.
Thou, the eternal one, art the sacrificial offering and again its offerer (the sacrificer); the enjoyed and the enjoyer; the knowable and also the knower; the meditator and again the supreme object of meditation.
4 Aug 2008 @ 08:19 by vaxen : The Guru...
and Religion 'business...' An excursion into disruptive truth:
5 Aug 2008 @ 07:54 by vaxen : Data Deluge...
Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete: http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory
5 Aug 2008 @ 10:43 by daniela @22.214.171.124 : name/vibration
the observation can suggest rhythm and melody ... spirit/soul game is harmony and disharmony in any case. "quality" in all Olodu and felt at every level.are qualities observable, measurable in any universe. it 'd be selfmelody-selfrhythm or an abbreviation (sem-ser).
when you can know, manage your ser and your sem .. do your song, to your taste.
10 Aug 2008 @ 03:47 by Everlight @126.96.36.199 : Soul and Spirit
My humor is strong with me tonight... so... how about Me & Mini-Me ;~) Mind you, this does not mean Mini is less than!
Other articles in Articles
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