|The Sandorian Grove: First Split and the Godhead concept|
Category: Articles Tags: nordenholz
12 comments11 Apr 2010 @ 17:01 by Jeffrey Trenton Crace @126.96.36.199 : Yanging of Yin and the Yinning of Yang
Those dots. Those little dots in the symbol of Tao. Everyone ignores those dots. They represent the original lie. The original 'tainting' of Yin and Yang. The INVERSION. Maybe Ed will become a part of this discussion but he patiently helped me see that due to this original inversion, Creator-Beings sit at the Top and created-beings sit at the Bottom--the illusion that yang creates yin. And, this inversion creates impure polarities that necessitate mediators.
Above, you mention how the Godhead forms AS A RESULT of individuation, from the perspective of individuation. That means that a Creator is objectively at a lower status ontologically than an individual. I remember Geoff telling me that. Man is greater than God. That's important. It's important to be properly oriented to the Truth.
Is the problem literal, or does it arise only due to awareness? Because the highest truth of which we can speak is that there is no reason for creation, and there is no one creating it...
11 Apr 2010 @ 17:38 by mx @188.8.131.52 : ...looking back...
yes, the inner dots, one could interpret them as a 'Being that individuated looking back to its source thinking it is itself' on one side, and then 'the Source looking at its split-off recognizing itself in that' on the other.
Both are right and wrong at the same time, creating the first dichotomy, and making the many discussions people have about what they call 'God' pointless. Or, in the end, demonstrating that whoever talks about God MUST tell a lie and at the same time some tautologic truth (or a semantic derivate), something that always is true and therefore invalid as senseful information.
I don't see how to derive 'Man is greater than God' from the above, rather 'God is the multitude of Beings'. For me, Man (as a Human Being at least) is not necessary the final product of Creation. To know this for sure, gotta wait till the fat lady sings...
11 Apr 2010 @ 17:51 by Ed Dawson @184.108.40.206 : Right...
And so the original sin would not be "knowledge of good and evil" but a consciousness SEPARATE from God which the consciousness KNOWS is inherently evil. The christians got Descartes before the horse on that one. ;-)
Hubbard's people emphasize MUST and MUST NOT, which are adjacent tones on the CDEI scale: enforce and inhibit. With both of those, the flow of life has gone "black". What is far more key than MUST and MUST NOT is Desire, the lowest positive tone on that scale and just above enforce and inhibit. Check Desire against the Hindu materials (Buddhism is a hindu sect, by the way) and they call it KAMMA. If KAMMA is Desire, then what is that tantalizing word they use, tan.ha? I suspect that this is what a meditator/processor is cleaning. Tan.ha I suspect is the flow that produces the entire CDEI scale as a decay scale of itself. Is tan.ha the cause of ALL DECAY, and all descending scales? And if so, what IS tan.ha? I suspect it is the urge to reunite that which has been divided and turned against its source, as Max says above. :)
11 Apr 2010 @ 17:55 by Ed Dawson @220.127.116.11 : actually
(small correction, to Jeff) The visible beings are created beings and they are of Yang, and junior to yin. The creator hides in the BOTTOM, and the created beings all lie above that, from the full range of the middle and up into the top.
11 Apr 2010 @ 18:37 by Jeffrey Trenton Crace @18.104.22.168 : Mmm-hmm...
Mx: "Man is greater than God"--The individual, at it heart, is a Being outside the Game. This would make the individual, in its relationship to its own Source, greater than any image of a Creator-being (Ialdaboath?). Perhaps I am speaking out-of-context...
Ed: Correction ack'd--thank you! Great deconstruction of the CDEI scale. Very useful and inspiring for meditation! Oh, and "Descartes before the horse"? You're too much!:)
11 Apr 2010 @ 19:41 by mx @22.214.171.124 : greater than the image.. YES!
Jeff, absolutely! if you put it the way you did!
Ed, I was investigating more the DESIRE TO INDIVIDUALIZE/SEPARATE. The re-union urge I saw as a reflex. Gotamo's ta.nha needs a re-eval to perhaps spot which of the two he meant (if not the compound two as polarity creating continuosly 'goals'). I can perceive the machinery that urges new splits but I have no clue yet where to look for a 'motivation' for that. Gotamo himself advised to not even look as it would be kind of too far out, an advise I shall not accept :)
12 Apr 2010 @ 07:31 by daniela @126.96.36.199 : indipendence
and 'interesting in this context have a look at the desire for independence (rather the way to no dependence of the cell that detaches from the source) and want to consider yourself to be brother rather than son
. The cell that detaches is a daughter or son? or sister or brother? . How strong dependence of arrogance and imposing the first on the second? and how much should surrender his second on the first? They can be for this war with a great desire and identification in this case the second turn against their source, or
peace and brotherhood with a great sense of desire to re unification ....
12 Apr 2010 @ 14:29 by Mark @188.8.131.52 : Yin-Yang-dots
Coincidnece - I was just putting something together about the polarities and thought: these dots are the eyes, that mirror the opposite.
It's Yin saying: Im not Yang, and Yang saying 'Im not Yin' - lol
12 Apr 2010 @ 16:27 by Ed Dawson @184.108.40.206 : urge to split
The urge to split is the DOWNWARD focus of the root of ofun. This is the first manifestation I can find. it causes the first binary split, usually called yin/yang but more accurately prakriti/purushu, and all subsequent splits. It is found in a limited and upward focused form at level 16 as ofun. But the original is not ofun, which as I said is focused upward toward orun. The original urge (call it proto-ofun?) to split causes the binary tree, just as the counter urge (proto-oshe?) forms the tree of tertiary splits.
12 Apr 2010 @ 21:08 by luc @220.127.116.11 : apocryphal gospel
Thanks Max This is simply great. The history of Obara as the holy apocryphal gospels tried to tell us but with the scientific "Western" language of the 21st century.
3 Sep 2016 @ 05:09 by mobogenie for pc @18.104.22.168 : xdr
I www.mobogenieforpcc.com like www.snapchatforpcdownload.com all www.ucbrowserforpcc.com posts in www.xenderforpcapp.com very much
25 Sep 2016 @ 17:32 by xender for pc @22.214.171.124 : xender
Very use full and Interesting Good blog
xender for pc
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