8. Bonus No. 2

Bonus information number 2

7. Bonus Info no. 1

Bonus info #1

6. Extended information

Extra page #7 Can't get anything out. I need help.

0. Communication

Hi Peter, I added 3 more posts. In future I would like to haul over this whole site, as they have added more interesting possibilities. But then we should get together some time. Happy Valentine! :-) E.

Plato . . . . . . . . . . A . . . . . . . . . B . . . . . . . . . . . C . . . . . . . . . . D
Aristotle . . . Final cause . Formal cause . Efficient cause . Material cause
J.G. Bennett . . . Goal . . . . . Direction . . . . Instrument . . . . Ground
The Buddha .Right vision . Right thought . Right speech . . Right action
Krishna . . . . . Atman . . . . . Buddhi . . . . . . . Manas . . . . . . Indriyas
Lao Tzu . . . . "Tao(A1)" . "Heaven(Tn)" . . "King( E)" . . . "Earth(TI)"
Astrology . . . . . Fire . . . . . . . Air . . . . . . . . Water . . . . . . . Earth
Sociology . . Democracy . . Timocracy . . . Tyranny . . . . . Oligarchy.
. .A . . . For letters A, B, C and D, see Desmond Lee's translation
D + B . of Plato's Republic at 509d. Aristotle was Plato's student.
. .C . . The Aristotelian tetrad is essentially his teacher's "Divided Line (509d)" wrapped around the cross. J.G. Bennett's sources are not in the same sequence I have put them in here. His tetrad is not aligned with the Aristotelian tetrad. For more details see pages 29 to 37 of Volume III of his Dramatic Universe.
. Not every thought (B) is leading us into the right "Direction”. This is why the Buddha has said: “Right vision”, “Right thought”, “Right speech” and “Right action”.
In the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna has taught raja yoga (C) to Arjuna. Raja yoga is essentially what J.G. Bennett's teacher, Gurdjieff, has called the Fourth Way. Raja yoga could only be taught to Arjuna after he had mastered karma, bhakti and jnana yoga in previous lives. In Vedanta philosophy, there are two types of “Indriyas”: Jnanendriyas and karmendriyas. The karmendrias are our organs of action, hands, feet etc. A simple definition of karma yoga (D) is: Whatever "Right action" you do with your body (D) is karma yoga. In the scientific process, it is the doers (D) that translate scientific theories (B) into "Practice(pr)" (D). If a theory works as predicted, then it is true.
. The jnana yogis (B), or Brahmins, get their information from below through the jnanendriyas and from above through A which the Hindus call the "Door (Dasamadvara)". Whenever a person can use his or her intellect (B) to produce "Right thought" sh/e is doing jnana yoga.
. Atman in the Gita or Tao in the Ching can mean two different things. The Tao can be the "Big undivided Tao (TAA1)" or the "Divided(@m)" Tao. Obviously translators have trouble with that. For Lao Tzu's students, difficult passages mean: Here is work for you to do! Also Working on Wayne Dyer's excellent interpretation of the Tao Te Ching is well worth the effort.
. The most satisfying part of the work I have done here is the term in column D of the last two lines. But if everything were as easy as that, who needs us jnana yogis, philosophers (B) or "KnowErs(kner)" (B) to interpret the classics (Ching) for you?

A fellow-member of the discussion-group I am attending slipped me a note: Change Your Tought -- Change Your Live by Dr. Wayne W. Dyer. The note said: It's about Lao Tzu.
. It turned out to be an interpretation of the Tao Te Ching. In the "Acknowledgements", Wayne gives credit to ten translators. Among them is: "Tao Te Ching: The Definitive Edition, by Lao Tzu; translation and commentary by Jonathan Star". Also "John C. H. Wu" is there.
. By means of Star's work, dictionaries, and other concordances, it is possible to be more accurate than some of the translations Wayne has chosen. To me this is most obvious with chapters three and 71. The knowledge (B) I have gained due to a more intensive study of some chapters can cause resistance to "accepting" the truth contained in Wayne's book.
. He said in his "Foreword" to "Ask and It Is Given": You "can either summon that higher vibrational energy to yourself and allow it to flow unimpeded in every aspect of your life, or you can resist it, and by doing so stay disconnected from that which is all-providing and all-loving."
. In order to benefit from Wayne's book, you have to forget what you have learned about the Tao Te Ching in this blog. Lao Tzu puts it this way: "Learn to UnLearn(ÜdPUÜd)". or "Know to UnKnow(knPUkn)". I guess I was supposed to tell you that, in order not to spoil your enjoyment of Wayne's book.
. Let me repeat again: I need a Communicator (C) to help me more urgently now than ever. Not only because we are running out of time but because now, that this message should get out more professionally, I am bogged down by an information overload.

I have reached chapter 11 of Wayne's book. There was an "Insight(72)" coming from Wayne's interpretation of the first chapter, but I decided not to bother. Now, again, there is an "Insight" should I skip it again? Maybe somebody can use it. So here it is.
. I have spent a lot of time on Ching 11 because for a while I thought it is the simplest chapter in the book. When Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew!, this must have been what he has meant: Look for what you can understand! Don't waste your time and energy on what is too tough for you!
. What can be easier to understand than that: "Clay is For Making Pots (*gYIdout)"?
*g = Ch'ih32 "Clay". The next thing he says is a bit tougher but it is still understandable, if you think about it: "In-the-center, where The Nothing in Something (*d HWUYU) is, there is the Pot'S Usefulness (ut Zus)." *d = Tang102.
. If you go over my commentaries on this chapter, you can see how Lao Tzu can say so "Much with so Few (TO$s)" words.
. This is why Wayne begins his commentaries on this chapter with: "In this thought provoking 11th verse of the Tao Te Ching .... if it were possible to disassemble you and lay all of your still-functioning physical components on a blanket, there would be no you. Although all of the parts would be there, their usefulness [us] depends on a nonbeingness [WU],or in Lao Tzu's words, 'what is not.'". "What-is-not" is Wu in Chinese.
. This corresponds to: The "Total Sum of the parts of a Carriage is a Nothing Carriage ($0#5âsWUâs)." I hate to admit it, but it is only after reading Wayne's interpretation that I saw this obvious connection.
. Now that we have a little better understanding of the premise of this chapter, let me go over the conclusion again:
. ."Existence, It is For Making Profit(YU ZYIdoLI);
Nonexistence, It is For Making Use (WU ZYIdous)" of it. This demands another translation of: *d HWUYUut Zus: "In-the-center, The Nothing in Something, is the Pot'S User."
. While I am at it, let me point out one more interesting things I found in Wayne's commentary on this chapter: "Your imperceptible center is your vital essence." "Vital-essence(#S)” is in both the Ching and the Nei Yeh but it is too much for me to follow up. That kind of work is the dharma of communicators (C) or raja yogis. "Better death in one's own dyty; The duty of another invites danger. (Gita 3.35. Sargeant)" When we are doing the "duty (dharma)" of another, we are not doing our own. And we are told in this verse that not doing what we came down here to do is "dangerous (bhaya)". Jesus gives us the same message in the parable of the talents. WHAT these teachers are telling us is the same, but HOW they are saying it is different. To do what you are not cut out to do is not only a waste of energy, but it is dangerous. There is an internal and external DIVISION OF LABOR. To make the external division of labor work, each of us has to do his or her dharma. The fact that one of the four talents predominates in each of us should be evidence "Enough(Zu)" that we are supposed to use it. Look at what happened to the guy that buried his "talent (Matthew 25:15)".

On the one-page flyer, I didn't have enough space to say more about the table, but here, thanks to our marvelous internet, we have all the space we want. I don't know how these geniuses handle all of this information but I don't have to. By them doing their job, I can do mine. Without my internet guru setting me up on blogspot, however, nothing of this can happen.
. Being a jnana yogi (B) it is most logical for me to work on column B.
. In connection with chapter ten, Wayne quotes a poem by Hafiz. I will only quote the first five lines of it: "Only
. . . . .That Illumined . . . . One
Who keeps . . . . Seducing the formless into form".
"Formal cause". Get it? ...
. Now, how does "Direction" fit in here? ...
Let us use the computer analogy: The customer (A) doesn't have to tell the supplier (B-C-D) HOW to supply his demand. All s/he has to know is WHAT s/he wants. But the customer must also have enough money to pay the supplier.
. When you order a meal in a restaurant you don't have to know HOW to cook it. You don't have to give "Directions" to the kitchen staff on HOW to do their job.
. But once the cooks know WHAT you want, what your "Goal" is, they can start working on your meal. In computer programming, the "Final cause" or the "Goal" is called the "Job-description"
. Not just any thought is leading you into the right "Direction", it takes "Right thought". Gurdjieff has called the faculty in us that produces thoughts the "Intellectual center".."Buddhi" is translated as intellect. "Buddhi, the intelligence that determines what is truth. (Sutra 14. of The Holy Science)".
. T'ien(Tn) is translated as heaven and also as sky. You can then think of the atmosphere around our planet as "Air". If these teachers knew the tetrad, then WHAT thy are saying about it must be the same but HOW they are saying it is necessarily different because the language they use and the people they teach are different.
. What "Air" means in astrology, you can read yourself.
. If the above sounds like Greek to you, don't feel bad. You are not the only one. I only hope that a Communicator will understand it well "Enough(Zu)" to consider it worth his while to translate this stuff into English.
. If you are willing and able to do this work, I will gladly answer questions you might have, if I am able to answer them. I am certainly willing to do it.
. Please get in touch with Peter Franke, 390 Jones Ave. Toronto M4J 3G3. (416) 466 1029. In addition to the problem of finding a Communicator for this stuff, I have another problem: I don't know how much longer I can stay at this address.
. I have sold my house to a tenant of mine so that I don't have to worry about bad tenants and a roof over my head. Land-lording is not my dharma. But now my landlord is trying to evict me because he is trying to sell the house I sold him for $80,000 for $350,000.
. The late Ben Kerr, a Toronto celebrity, was another tenant of mine. He has insisted on a proper legal contract. He, my present landlord and I have all signed it. But now my landlord said: "There is no evidence" of a contract. No evidence? When he signed it? But perhaps there isn't anymore. The lawyer that did the contract was disbared, the sale took place in 1994 and the contract was not attached to it.
. Is there perhaps somebody out there that knows what to do in a case like this? The message I am getting from the books I am discussing here is: "And do your dharma (Gita 3.35)" no matter what problems may be coming your Way. I get the message, it makes perfect sense, but, boy, it is a tough one.

Ching 1: When there is the “Naming, there is first the NamAble (MgptMg) and then comes its Opposite, the NamEd (FyCnMg).”
. Wayne tells us that the “Tao is both named and nameless.” The nameless is “Without Name (WUMg)”. The “NamAble(ptMg)” in paragraph one is the "nameless", "Without Name (WUMg)" in paragraph two. What is a suffix in English is a prefix in Chinese. The “Potential Name(ptMg)” is what “Can be Named(ptMg)”. The “Tao Can be Taoed (A1ptA1) but Not in the Usual Way (FyCnA1).” Translators have trouble with that because they know too much about Chinese and are unwilling to “UnLearn (PUÜd)" it.
. There is more to chapter one. The reason the Tao Te Ching is so paradoxical is to provoke us to thought. So try to figure out as much of this chapter as you can before you read what I have said about it. If you read what I have said about it before you have done your own thinking then, you deprive yourself of the opportunity of doing your own unbiased thinking. The fact is that nobody else can do your thinking for you.

Sept.14, 2007. Ching 3.
. After saying my thing about Wayne's commentary on Ching 31, I have decided to say a bit about chapter three. But ideally you will use the two digit identifiers to allow Lao Tzu to speak for himself:
"Not Honoring those Worthy-of-honour (PU#3#f)
Causes People Not to Struggle (%eMnPUCê) to emulate them.
Not Valuing (valuable, or) Hard to Get a hold Of, Goods (PUKudfgt Z%f)
Causes People Not To even Steal (%eMnPUdo$) them.
Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ) to see
Causes People's Heart Not to Stir (%eMnHsPU$a)."
. Here is the 3-fold premise we have in most chapters. What is Lao Tzu saying here? ...
Social engineering is based on the knowledge of how people respond to "Repeatedly(@1)", or "Constantly(Cn)", administered stimuli. We have here the stimulus - response of the behaviorists. This knowledge has now been supplemented by Neurolinguistc programming. Remember that social engineering is a science.
. The conclusion of this chapter is a "DyAd(dyad)": "ThereFore (SiYI) the rulers in an
Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85) will ....
Always Cause the People (Cn%eMn) to be
Without Knowledge and Without the Desire (%eMnWUknWUYÜ) to know. they will
Cause The Knowing Ones Not to Dare To (%eheknerPU66do) do what is not 'in the interest of themselves, the rulers (338e)' Yeh(Ye)"
. In the last paragraph, Lao Tzu suggests HOW to do it right: This is advise president Chavez of Venezuela might fid useful today:
"Do the governing Without Doing (doWUdo) it yorself. if you teach the people how to do it
Then Nothing will Not be Governed 18WUPU85)."
. I was a co-founder of the Green Party of Ontario. It came closest to WHAT Lao Tzu is suggesting here. But no longer. Participatory Democracy is not "in the interest of themselves, the rulers (The Republic at 338e)".
. "Not Seeing (PUoo)", WHAT Lao Tzu has clearly spelled out here, is burying your head in the sand. I am not saying that Wayne is wrong but he doesn't have the whole truth, it needs to be complemented.

Ching 14.
. Wayne starts his commentary with: "Try to imagine the idea of forever: that which has never changed, ...." In the rest of this first paragraph, he gets right into the paradox this chapter is about.
. If you go over my blog, you can see that I have devoted much space to this chapter. But unlike any other chapter I have invested as much, or less, time and energy in, for this one I didn't get a return for my investment.
. Wayne said: "Some scholars have singled out this 14th verse of the Tao Te Ching as the most significant of all its 81 offerings ...." And maybe that is why this chapter gives me so much trouble. Let me, then, go over the first two paragraphs again, carefully, word for word.
Ching 14.1.
"Look at It and you Can't See (#M ZPUoo) all of it. it can only be
Identified As Formless (Mg73#N).
Listen to It and you Can't Hear (@H ZPU^d) all of it. it can only be
Identified As Soundless (Mg73^e).
Grasp It and you Can't Get (@I ZPUgt) all of it. it, what you can't get, can only be
Identified As Incorporeal (Mg73$h)."
. I have already said a lot about "This TriAd (Tz 3ad)" in this blog. Most of it is still valid. So I can leave well enough alone.
. Credit for the "all of it" in my translation goes to Wayne. We can only see hear and touch objects on level D, the material level. Its three higher levels, A, B and C, are invisible, inaudible and intangible. If I haven't said such obvious things before, it is because I haven't come across Wayne's book before. The problem is still, that what can't be comprehended by the intellect (B) must be on the other side of the "Door (Dasamadwara)" (A). On that other side, there must be the omnipotent, omnipresent and omnicient impulses of God.
Ching 14.2.
"This TriAd (Tz 3ad) is ImPossible (PUpt) To-fully Examine ($0*a) Because its components are Fused together And Act as One (KU#Obtdo 1)". *a = Chih149 "Investigate .... (6062)".

. "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAds( 3ad)" etc. are "Units($1)". In other words, the "TriAd( 3ad)" has "Three( 3)" impulses but it is "One( 1)" "Unit". This is WHAT Lao Tzu is telling us here in this second paragraph and elsewhere. How much sense you can make of this paragraph depends on how much you know about the "TriAd( 3ad)".
. For the third paragraph, I will only pick a few passages from Wayne's translation and comment on them: It, "the unseen, unheard and untouched are present as one. .... It goes on and on, unnamable, returning to nothingness."
. The "unnamable" is literally the "UnNamAble (PUptMg)". Do you remember the "NamAble (ptMg)" in chapter one? To make these connections, a Concordance is a valuable tool. Ming(Mg) is also at Ching 14.1, three times.
. In Sutra 13 of The Holy Science, the "Satyaloka" is "called Anama, the Nameless." You don't need me to point these correspondences out to you. Communicators can do a much better job with words than I can. But "Insights(72)" that can come to "KnowErs(kner)" (B) may not come to "WordErs" (C). Lao Tzu said: "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" some things. The problem is that they "Don't Know that they don't Know (Puknkn) and that is Sick (@p)."
. "Again Returning To No - Thing (FU77toWUwU)"ness, means just what it means. Gita 2.28 came to mind: "Invisible before birth .... and after death invisible again (Mascaró)".
. There is more to Ching 14, but, as Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew.

Ching 16.
This chapter consists of 67 characters. Wayne Dyer and other translators have assembled them into five paragraphs. I follow them.
Ching 16.1,1.
Chih($0) "To cause; reach, transmit, aim; extreme". It is in Ching 10, 14, 16 and 39. At 14 we have: "This TriAd is ImPossible to Completely Examine (Tz 3adPUpt$0*a)." *a = Chieh149. "To examine". Chih($0) followed by Ming(äG) means To "devote one's life to ....(5266)".
Hsü(%g) "Empty, unreal, untrue ...." This character is at: 03, 05, 16, 22 and 53. In 03, 05 and 53 the context demands "Empty" but at 22 it can also mean "Untrue Words (%gC2)" bcause words can be empty as well as "Untrue".
Chi(%l) "Extreme limit; very". It is in 16, 28, 58, 59 and 68. At 28 we have : " .... Again Return To the InFinite (FU77toWU%l)." That one was worth quoting because Fu(FU) is three times in 16. This doesn't mean that 58, 59 and 68 are not worth quoting, but I have to leave some work for you to do. In fact, now you are ready to do your own translation. ...
After you are done, you can compare your sentence with the sentences of other translators. ...
"Aim at Emptying your mind of falsehoods to the utmost Limit ($0%g%l)" of your ability.
Ching 16.1,2.
"Hold-on to Tranquility Sincerely (40^a*a)."
Shou(40) is in more that six chapters. Ching(^a) is in six chapters and *a = Tu118 "Sincere, serious, pure; stable". Ching(^a) is the keyword here. We are told to seriously hang onto something and, if we don't know what it is, then the sentence is meaningless.
. By means of the two-digit identifiers, you can get the radical number of the character and its concordance. So you can do the kind of work, of which I have given an example in the first sentence. You may not have the Nei Yeh. I have Harold D. Roth's translation of it. I wish he had given us a concordance along with it. The first Ching(^a) I came across is in chapter 7 line 3 (7c). I will also quote the two lines which lead up to it:
"Heaven's Ruling-principle is Alignment (Tn%n%8).
Earth's Ruling-principle is Equality (TI%n7b) and
Man's Ruling-principle is Tranquility (mn%n^a)."
P'ing(7b), Rad. 51, is only in Ching 35, so it has no identifier. I have used its chapter number and line letter to "Identify(Mg)" it. And "Equality" is not a dictionary equivalent for it.
. Here is another Ching(^a) from the next chapter ((8a): If you are
"Able to Align (yourself to the source above you, then you) Can become Tranquil (ab%8ab^a)."
Ching 16.1,3.
"All things Together, at once, Come (WnwU*b%c)" and go.
Ching 16.1,4.
"I sit and watch the cycles (meYIKnFU)." More accurately:
"I, By-means-of watching, Observe the Cycles."
*b = Ping1 "Two together, and, moreover; at once ...."
. And that's the first paragraph. One down, four to go. While the clerical work (C), the work with "Words(C2)", is hard on me. The translations are much easier than the ones of Ching 17.1 and 17.3. Ching 17 is a problem to translators because it is ambiguous. Here, at 16, a sentence means one thing. There are different ways of saying the same thing, as you can see from the different translations, but WHAT is said is roughly the same. If you got the wrong message in one translation, you can correct it by reading other translations of the same characters and thinking about them. But 17 is different. There are two different yet valid interpretations of the first and the last paragraphs. That is the challenge . This is why I believe that Ching 17 is the connective between this one and 18.
. "Watching the Cycles (KnFU)" calms us down because we are becoming more aware of the big picture. The constant bombardment of negative information, no longer has the intended effect on you. What is "Constant(Cn)" in all of this change are the natural laws according to which the changes take place. Take the law of karma: Cause and effect. Because of this law, we have to reap what we sow. This one is fundamental. "CycliciTy, Tao'S Movement ($ladA1 Z%k)." What goes around comes around.
. The "Cycles(FU)" follow definite comprehensible laws. These laws are the "Constant(Cn)" in our changing world. Know these Constants! If you don't, Lao Tzu warns us, you are in trouble.
. Wayne Dyer said in his commentary on Ching 16: "When you see change as the only constant there really is, you start to recognize it as an expression of ongoing life that's a welcome clue to your own purpose and meaning." Notice that he takes Ming(äG) to mean "life". Better read that one again.
. This whole process, Lao Tzu describes next, starts with becoming aware of the unchanging laws of "Nature(A1)". How? ...
By watching and thinking about what you see. This is essentially what Ahmadinejad told the students at Columbia University: Watch the videos of 9/11 and think about what you see.
. Here comes:
Ching 16.2.1.
"Now, Things Flourish (hewU*c)." *c = Yün140 "Fragrant herb, rue, to weed". Flourish.
Ching 16.2,2. Having
"Flourished Each one Again Returns to Its Roots (*c@eFU77 H$6)."
Ching 16.2.3. Having
"Returned to your Roots You-can be Tranquil (77$673^a)" if you did it right.
Ching 16,2,4.
"This is Called Repetition of Lives (SiisFUäG)." äG = Ming30 ".... life ....".
Ching 16.2,5.
"Repeated Lives Give-you-the-experience of the Constant (FUäG73Cn)."

Ching 16.3,1.
"Knowledge of the Constant Can-lead to Insights (knCn7372)."
Ching 16.3,2.
"IgNorance of the Constant will Recklessly Lead you into Disasters (PUknVn*d%cÜc)."
Ching 16.3,3. *d = Wang38 "Reckless".
"Knowledge of the Constant is All-embracing (knCn$m)."

Ching 16.4.
Who is "All-embracing Will be Just ($m$pÜg)."
Who is "Just Will be Kingly (Üg$p E)."
Who is "Kingly Will be Heavenly ( E$pTn)."
Who is "Heavenly Will be Truthful (Tn$pA1)."

Ching 16.5,1 Who knows the
"Tao Will Last (A1$p04)" long. His "Body(Sê)" may
"Die but his Self will Not Perish (äHSêPU%x)." The End.

Jesus seems to agree with Lao Tzu: What does it profit a man to gain the whole world and lose his only soul? Those who don't believe in reincarnation will not like this interpretation. They can find many other translations that are less challenging to their particular belief-system.
. To turn this chapter into a book, we would have to turn every paragraph, and perhaps a few sentences, into a chapter. For instance, let's go over 16.1,1 again.
. You can't "Empty" something unless you have filled it first. Lifetimes of experience do that automatically for us.
. So, the "Emptying" is a clearing out of the "Unreal" and "Untrue" beliefs (C) we have accumulated over many lifetimes.
. This is the “UnLearning (PUÜd)" Lao Tzu told us about. And it isn't easy, otherwise he wouldn't have said that we have to "Learn this UnLearning (ÜdPUÜd)."
. In order to unlearn something we must have first learned it.
"LearnIng is Daily Increasing (doÜd%q$s)" your knowledge.
"TaoIng is Daily Decreasing (doA1%q%w)" the "Unreal" and "Untrue" beliefs (C) you have ignorantly accepted as true.
. Jesus makes it very clear in the "Parable of the tares (Matthew 13:24)" that we have to take the good with the bad. Lao Tzu says it too, but he is more subtle. At 36.1 he gives four examples of why you can't empty something without filling it first: "If you Want to Shrink It (41YÜäk Z), then Necessarily, you Have-to Stretch It (PI$o@N Z)" first. If you want to open a door, then it must be closed. Try to close a door that is already closed. We run up against things that are simply "ImPossible(PUpt)". In situations like that, we come face to face with an "Eternal(Cn)" law of nature. There we have the experience of a law. It is now our task to understand it.
. Lao Tzu points these laws out to us, but what good is just reading, or even translating, them?
. If you are the writer I am looking for, you can see that even the very first three characters of Ching 16 can be turned into a chapter. However, unless we know what Jung($m) and Kung(Üg) mean in the context they are in at Ching 16.4, it is no use starting on this book because we wouldn't know how to finish it. Before I return to Ching 17, I will work a bit more on the riddle Lao Tzu has given us here.
. The first thing I do when trying to find out in what sense Lao Tzu has used a particular character in a particular context is to look for it in the ACC (Analysis of Chinese Characters): Jung($m) is in there: "Appearance; to allow; to endure. (Picture of radical 40) .... a roof. (Picture of Ku(kU)), Phonetic, a deep gorge, a valley. .... at the bottom a mouth, a place where water flowed. .... in (picture of Jung($m)) there is a cover over the valley. Here the valley is said to refer to the depth of the heart, the emotions which are concealed from others. Thus the idea of to contain and to allow is given the character."
. Bernhard Karlgren, in his Analytic Dictionary, gives us 18 equivalents for Jung($m). I will only pick five: ".... contain, have room for, admit; spacious; large-minded, ....". When you have more than one choice, you are no longer translating. You are interpreting. Usually, you will pick an equivalent that supports your belief-system, one that doesn't clash with your preconceived ideas. We have here another example of the law of attraction at work.
. Now we do the same thing with Kung(Üg): "Public; fair, just; male. (Picture of radical No. 12 which means) eight. Because the two parts of this radical, in the old writing, are similar in construction and are not united, it was early adopted as a symbol for separation. (Picture of Rad. 28) .... it was used for private, selfish. .... The character (Picture of Kung(Üg)) implies the right division (Picture of Rad. 12) of private (Picture of Rad 28) property for the benefit of the public".Karlgren has 11 equivalents. I will pick four: ".... common to all, just, impartial; duke ....".
. Now I have some work for you to do: The concordance for Jung($m) is 15, 16, 21 and 50. And for Kung(Üg) it is 16, 42 and 62.
. Many of the equivalents we get from dictionaries have not even been around when the Tao Te Ching was written 2500 years ago, but the pictures were. From the context Lao Tzu has put a character in, you can also tell what he might have meant. Evaluating other translations is also a good thing, because many "WorErs" were intuitive. They hear something, write it down and don't know WHAT they have said. "WordErs Don't always Know (C2erPUkn)" what they are talking about. Still, it might be true.
. Commentaries of interpreters are also often very useful. Arthur Waley didn't look for what we are looking for, but listen to his commentary on Ching 16: "To have room in one for everything (jung) is cognate both in writing and etymology with 'to be without prejudice' (kung). But kung happens also to mean a royal Duke, the person next to the king. There is here a play on these two senses of kung. .... Kung then is a sort of king. And kings are, as has been thought all over the world, delegates of Heaven. Heaven in our author's thought is synonymous with the Tao.". There we have our answer from somebody who wasn't even looking for an answer. He just noticed something unusual about our two characters.
. But Heaven is on level B while Tao is on level A, They are not "synanymous". They are ...
analogous or "Aligned(%8)" to each other.
. As you know more about the characters Lao Tzu has been using, you are in a better position to evaluate different translations. If you have more than one translation of chapter 16, you may wonder if the translators have translated the same text.
. Robert G. Henricks, the translator of the Ma-wang-tui Texts, has pointed out differences between the different texts. But they are minor. The keywords, that are translated so differently, are the same. He gives us an exellent footnote at the end of Ching 16: "Note that the word kung ('impartial') in line 14 -- chosen to rhyme with the 'all-embracing' (jung) from the previous line -- also means 'duke'. This allows the author to shift emphasis and move up through a hierarchy of power -- from duke to king to Heaven to the Tao."
. Now, thanks to the good work some commentators have done, we could start writing on this one. But I have to return to 17. I believe that there is a truth in it whose time has come, but a lot depends on how well it is described. As people read it and understand it, they are actually changing the morphogenetic field from being filled with lies to filling it with the truth.
. The social engineers are in control of the educational system and their partners, the capitalists, own the mass media. This is a formidable power. But as more people can see the truth of 9/11 and more people get a philosophical understanding of the big picture, then, in these last days, there is nothing hid that shall not be revealed.
A slight mistake came to my attention. Making unintentional mistakes is still bad karma, but making them knowingly is worse. Having a mistake pointed out to you, means: ...
Fix it! The mistake is in my "More" accurate translation of Ching 16.1,4. Before I ask you to find it, let me give you a hint by quoting Matthew 13:13: "Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing hear not, neither do the understand."
. Jesus has associated seeing and hearing with understanding. What enables us to see, is similar, or analogous, to what enables us to understand things.
. "Intuition .... is for thought what observation is for perception (Rudolf Steiner, chapter five of his Philosophy of Freedom)." As we need concepts by means of which we understand, so we need "Representations By means-of which we can Perceive (YÜYIKn)".
. Steiner says later in the same chapter: "I can have no relationship of any thing or process (outside of myself) if I don't have its representation (Vorstellung)" within myself.
. One way to think of the representation is as a telescope or microscope which help us to see what we can't see with the naked eye. We can also think of it as computer software. Our brain (D) without representations (C) is like a computer (D) without software (C).
. Many "Don't See what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ)" to see. "Many pass by, unawares, these desirable things (Vorzüge) without noticing them" Why? ...
Because they "have not made themselves a representation" of these things. Steiner, chapter one. Are you now ready to correct my mistake? ...
"I, By-means-of representations for them, Observe the Cycles." I think that I have said "Enough(Zu)" for you to see that there is "Enough" content for one chapter here. Steiner has devoted much space to this important subject. I now have to return to Ching 17.

Ching 17.1
. The first paragraph of chapter 17 is a tetrad. The Aristotelian "causes" and J. G. Bennett's "sources" are different names for the same components of the tetrad. Within the system, A is cause only, B and C are effects first and then they become causes and D is effect only. This is why the Aristotelian term can be misleading. But giving you a few more details is bound to confuse some of you. So please don't shoot the messenger. I didn't invent these ingenious systems.
. The cause of which A is the effect and the effect for which D is the cause are outside the system. This is why the Hindus call A the "Door, Dasamadwara" but the same thing can be said of D as well. A and D are with one foot inside the system while the other foot is outside of it.
. B is the reconciling impulse, or connective, between A and C and C is the connective between B and D. Similarly A is the connective between E3 and B, while D is the connective between C and E8. If B-C-D is the unit, then A is the reconciling impulse and E1-E2-E3 is the third impulse of the triad. If a "WordEr(C2er)" is to make this more comprehensible for the general reader, s/he must first understand it. This is why I said: Please get in touch with me.
. The computer analogy can help us make sense of this: The customer (A) is part of the tetrad, but he may be working for a larger company where the money is coming from and to which the final product is delivered. So the demand doesn't have to come from the customer himself, it can come through the Atman (A). A makes the task comprehensible for B by developing the "job description". Similarly B makes the task comprehensible for C by developing the algorithm. And again, C makes the job executable for D by developing the computer program from the algorithm, or the flowchart.
. The above should make perfect sense to computer programmers of the old school. Without that seven Week IBM computer programming course, this wouldn't make sense to me either. And so we are back again at my old problem: Of not having a communicator who can make this stuff more comprehensible to the average reader.
. E3 and E8 are components of J.G. Bennett's dodecad. The pentad, heptad and dodecad enable us to go beyond the tetrad. As you learn more about J. G. Bennett's systematics, you learn to think of the four sources of the tetrad as the parts of one "Whole($1)". But these same components can also be the parts of other larger or smaller number systems. In other words, sources can be impulses, poles or the components of larger systems. I hope that there are people around that know more about systematics than I do because I am still only scratching the surface of it.
. At Ching 17.1, Lao Tzu has put the four sources in the following order: A-D-C-B. My justification for that can be found in this blog, but doing your own thinking (B) is preferable to reading (C) about it.

Ching 17 "The highest type of ruler (*a +) is one of
whose existence the people are barely aware ( -knYU Z. Translation, J.Wu). of
The Next, they Love And Praise His ( H$e%mbt*b Z) products (See them advertised on TV.),
The Next they Fear Him ( H$eâl Z) (See his "Loyal Officers" in action in Burma.) and
The Next, they Despise Them ( H$e*c Z) (See these con-artists in action right here.).

"(is your knowledge of the above)
Truth InSufficient (09PUZu)? Why(86) do you
Have No knowledge of a Truth (YUPU09) (that should be taught in political science and sociology)?
Why(86) is it not taught?

"The intelligent leader will be careful not to speak as if he doubted or distrusted his
follower's ability to do the job suitably (*dXi HKuC2. Bahm).
When the work is done, and as he wanted it done, he will be happy if the followers say:
'This is just the way we wanted it' (KgcmD2@v%i#s%2is^ITuJa. Bahm)."
*a = T'ai37. *b = Yü149. *c = Wu9. *d = Yu61. "Grieved; distant, far-reaching". This character is important. It is not in the ACC, but its phonetic is: Yu "to ford, is a man (picture) crossing water ...., and tapping with a stick (picture) to sound the depth." This information might help you to appreciate some of the more intuitive interpretations.

Insert: Oct. 7 2007. The following text is a one page flyer I have distributed around Toronto.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tao Te Ching
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Chapters 17
the Superior ruling principle is Above (*a +) and the people
Below it Know that "It( Z)" Exists ( -knYU Z). of
The Next ruler they Love And Praise His ( H$e%mbt*b Z) goods and services.
(Just see them advertised on TV.)
The Next they Fear Him ( H$eâl Z). (See his "Loyal Officers (äc@S)" in action in Burma.)
and The Next ( H$e)? they
Despise Them (*e Z). (Just see these con-artists in action right here.)

(is your knowledge of the above)
Truth Not Enough (09PUZu)? Why(86) do you
Have No knowledge of a Truth (YUPU09) (that should be taught in Political Science)?
Why(86) is it not taught?

The intelligent leader will be careful not to speak as if he doubted or distrusted his follower's ability to do the job suitably (*dXi HKuC2) When the work is done, and as he wanted it done, he will be happy if the followers say (KgcmD2@v%i#s%2is):
'This is just the way we wanted it' (^ITuJa. Archie J. Bahm's translation).

*a = T'ai37. *b = Yü149. *c = Wu9. *d = Yu61. This character is important. One equivalent is "Grieved" probably because Radical 61 is the "Heart" or mind. The character is not in the Analysis of Chinese Characters, but its phonetic is: Yu: "to ford, is a man (picture) crossing water .... and tapping with a stick (picture) to sound the depth."
T'ai(*a), Yü(*b) etc are only in this chapter. Shang( +) means "Above". Hsia( -) means "Below”. Chih(kn) means "Know" or to be aware of. Yu(YU) means "Existence". For the rest of the equivalents see my Dictionary - Concordance in the last file of DaoTeChing.blogspot.com
Archie Bahm has written a book called "Philosophy of the Buddha" His interpretation of the last paragraph is excellent. It is a valid one. Where what the Buddha teaches is "What(SO)" Lao Tzu "Also Teaches(08#l)" Bahm's interpretations are very helpful; where they are not, they are right from the Buddhist point of view, but misleading to students of the Tao Te Ching.
For instance 17.1,1 (Chapter 17. Paragraph 1, Sentence 1) and 17.3 are ambiguous. They can mean two things: 17.1,1 can mean that when the people have a democracy, they "Know that they Have It (knYU Z)" because their education is by the people and therefore for the people. In the timocracy we have, the people are "Constantly(Cn)" told that they have a democracy when they don't have one. This alternative possibility has been expressed vaguely by some translators because Lao Tzu has implied that also.
The real challenge is the last paragraph. It is ambiguous, and so there are two valid interpretations of it. But space on this flyer doesn’t permit me to say more. If interested, go to PetersTao.blogspot.com and space down eight clicks with the “Page down” key.

The title line has been printed Big, 72 point, to get the attention of people who are already sold on this amazing book. These people would be able to see that there are two valid interpretations of this chapter, if they could understand what later philosophers have interpreted Plato's ideal society to be, and if they can see what our so called "democracies" really are.
. Democracy, as described by later philosophers, would be one valid interpretation of Ching 17, the other would be a description of the "Timocracy" Plato has described in his Republic. It is also a valid interpretation, because timocracies are very real.
. Until now, no translators of the Tao Te Ching were able to see both poles of this "DyAd(dyad)" because the official version of the truth has been around for a long time. If it were not, Plato and Lao Tzu couldn't have described it. This is even more obvious in chapter 3: The rulers in an "Intelligent Man's Government (wsmn Z85) .... Constantly Cause the People to be Without Knowledge and Without the Desire (Cn%eMnWUknWUYÜ)" to know.
. Readers who don't understand Ching 17 find it harder to accept my translation (and interpretation) of the 11 characters than the "official version" of the truth. Now that we have the internet we have a choice: We can continue to believe the "official version" of the truth or we can decide to find out the truth. There is one thing you can do right now: Go to the Internet page and type: Video.Google.com hit Enter. Type 9/11 hit enter and watch the first or any of the choices that come up there.
. If you are unwilling to do that, if you prefer to stick to the "official version" of the truth,, then you will not be able to understand this chapter. "Why(86)"? ...
Lao Tzu said: "True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)." What does that mean here? ...
It means that you can't have it both Ways: When you believe (C) the "official version" of the truth, then you can't understand (B) the truth (it is designed that way). And when you understand the truth, then you can no longer believe the "official version" of the truth. And the social engineers can't change that: The truth, Lao Tzu wrote down 2500 years ago, is still the same truth today. There are three characters that are translated as "Truth": Tao(A1), Chêng(%8) and Yi(08). It looks like Lao Tzu wants to tell us something about it.
. Even after seeing only one of those documentaries about 9/11, it becomes clear to you that the social engineers have bitten off more than they can chew. There is no way that they can continue to make us believe their lies when the facts are is starring us in the face.
. I have distributed some of these flyers at York University and the U of T. My hope is that by luck or synchronicity a student of philosophy, sociology or political science will find the flyer interesting "Enough(Zu)" to follow up on it.
. At 7j (Chapter 7 line j) of the Nei Yeh we have: When there is "Thought, there Will be Knowledge (*a$pkn)." *a = Szu61. The context Chih(kn) is in often demands "Undertanding" as an equivalent. These three characters can mean to you, that: If you think "Enough" about Ching 17, you will either know that you are not jet ready for it, or you will understand it.
. Now, If a student of philosophy, sociology or political science understands Ching 17 She can ask her professor a question he is unwilling or unable to answer. Then s/he can ask: "Why do you Have No knowledge of a Truth (86YUPU09)" that should be taught in your class?
This will cause him to fail you, so that you don't get your degree. It is safer to quietly discuss it with fellow students. To bring about changes, in our present society, you have to know the truth, but you also have to understand the "official version" of the truth to get your degree.
. If students are interested "Enough" in the Tao Te Ching, they might want to start a weekly study group. I would like to join such a group.
. Another hope of mine is that the flyer, by luck or synchronicity, gets in to the hands of a writer who can see that the world is ready for the truth and that a book on Ching 17 could satisfy a demand for the truth.
. I will now give details that are necessary to do a proper study of any chapter. There are 44 characters in Ching 17. Ch'i( H) "He, she, it, his; this, that". The equivalents are from Fenn's The Five Thousand Dictionary. Chih( Z) "he, she, it" A pronoun, a sign of the possessive. These two characters appear four times each.
. Tz'u($e). Means "Next" in this chapter. You can use the phonetic, the radical number or other translations to verify this. The same goes for the rest. This one appears three times.
. The next four appear twice each: Pu(PU) "Not". Yen(86) "Why"? YuYU: to "Have" or "Existence"
. The rest of the 25 characters appear once each. *a = T'ai37. For this one, the dictionary may not be the best source to consult. The equivalents other translators have come up with may come closer to the original intent. Better still, is using the concordance. *b = .Yü149. "Fame, praise". *c = Wu9 "To insult, be rude to, ridicule .... to despise.". *d. That one got exposure on my flyer.
. For the remaining 21 characters you can get the information from the Dictionary - Concordance which is the last file of DaoTeChing.blogspot.com If you are interested in studying the Ching more seriously, in spite of its shortcomings, it is a good idea to get a printout of it.
. When you understand a chapter very well, which you can this one, you also understand the words on it better. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. The parts can be words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs, even chapters. So the time and energy you invest in this one is also invested to a lesser degree in all the other chapters in which these same characters appear.
. Instead of only hoping that this flyer falls into the hands of the right student, it is even more important that, by chance or synchronicity, it falls into the hands of the right writer (C). Such a person can see that the world is ready for the truth and that chapter 17 can help people to understand the big picture. Such a person would love writing the way I love seeking the truth. We love it because it is our dharma.
. I will go over a rough outline of that book, but if you are the right person, you will do your own thinking about this book. You must be able to do some thinking as I have to be able to do some writing here. If you can't think at all, then you can't understand Ching 17 and if you don't understand it, then you can't explain it to your readers.
. after you have done your thinking, we can discuss it to see if we have a deal.

We are now coming to the outline of our book: I think the Dictionary should be part of the introduction instead of an Addenda at the back of the book but what is best for your readers is for you to decide. Your job is to determine WHAT your readers can comprehend while mine is to figure out WHAT Lao Tzu has said. You look after the container and I look after the content. Here we have the division of labor, Plato, Lao Tzu and others have talked about.
. I will now deal with the 28 characters in order of their appearance:
*a = T'ai37. "Too, very; term of respect". The equivalents that follow the phonetic and radical number are from C. H. Fenn's The Five Thousand Dictionary. This character is important, so I will use other dictionaries as well: I always look for it in the Analysis of Chinese Characters (ACC) first. It is not there. Then I use Bernhard Kalgren's Analytic Dictionary. T'ai(*a) is in it. It is ".... distinguished by a dot from (Picture of Ta(TA))". The dot is between the legs of a (Big-shot). If the character is very important, I also use my big Hong Kong dictionary. I indicate that by giving you the four-digit number under which it is listed. "Very much, too, excessive. (1208)" When a character is followed by other characters, its meaning changes. T'ai is followed by over 70 such examples. I will only use three: If followed by "Harmony(Ho)" we get "universal harmony of the dual powers, yin and yang; the essence of all things." When followed by "Much(TO)" we get "too much." When followed by "Few($q)" we get "too few." And that could refer to the "Not Enough (PUZu)" at 17.2 Because Hsia( -) also means Less-than.
. What follows T'ai at 17.1,1 is Shang( +) or the "Above - Below ( + -)" "DyAd(dyad)". Chih(kn) = "Know", Understand. When I capitalize an equivalent but don't put it in quotes, it is not in the dictionary but because the context here or elsewhere demands it, other translators have used it as well. There are a few conventions we have agree on. When we use them consistently they will benefit your readers. Yu(YU) = Existence or "Have". Chih( Z) = "Sign of genetive; he, she, it, possessive; to go; this, that". This is what your readers must know about the first six characters to evaluate other translations and what we are going to say about them in our introduction and the first two chapters of our book.
. Ch'i12 = "This", The. To keep it simple, we should only list the equivalents which are demanded by the context of Ching 17. If students are interested "Enough(Zu)", they now have the means to find the character elsewhere in the Ching by means of the Concordance or in dictionaries by means of the phonetic and the Radical number. $e = Tz'u76. "Next". "The Next ( H$e)" ruler or principle appears in the nect three sentences.
Ch'in(%m) "To love". Erh(bt) "And". *b = Yü149. "praise". They, those "Below( -)" the "Highest( +)", "Love And Praise It (%mbt*b Z)." That takes care of 17.1,2.
Wei(âl) "Fear". "The Next one, they Fear Him ( H$eâl Z)."
*c = Wu9. "despise". "The Next they Despise Them ( H$e*c Z)." And that takes care of the first paragraph.
Ching 17.2.
Hsin(09) "Faith, sincerity, to believe" Truth. Literally: A "Man(mn)" standing by his "Word(C2)". Pu(PU) "Not". Tzu(Zu) "Enough". Yu(YU) "Have". Because Hsin(09) has three equivalents, there are three valid translations of these three characters: ...
Is your ...
"Faith Not Enough? Why(09PUZu86)" not? ...
Why can't you "Believe" the truth? What "Causes(%e)" you to doubt it? ...
Is your knowledge of the ...
"Truth Not Enough? Why(09PUZu86)" not? ...
. If a student of philosophy, sociology or political science understands Ching 17.1, then the questions raised by Lao Tzu 2500 years ago will "Naturally(Tu)" arise in an intelligent person today. The "official version" of philosophy, sociology or political science is not the truth about these subjects. When the president of Columbia University insulted his guest, Ahmadinejad, what was he really doing? ...
He was defending what Ahmadinejad has called the "official version of ....". He was trying to discredit him so that the dumbed down mob will not believe him. He was trying to "Ridicule Him(*a41 Z)". His blatant remarks show very nicely where he and his professors are coming from. Do you think that the professors of philosophy, sociology or political science are teaching the "Truth" about their subjects? ...
If they did, they would be fired. After you know the truth and they teach it, there would be no reason for you to ask: "Why(86)" don't they teach the truth?
. Ching 17.2 consists of eight characters. It is the connective here. After 17.1 is understood, the content of this chapter is obvious. It is so easy, I could almost write it myself.
Ching 17.3.
. Ideally, you study the premise, 17.1, come up with the right questions to ask and think about them. Whether you come up with the right answers is not so important. The important thing is that you try. That effort will prepare you for the answer. You need the words Lao Tzu has used, so that you have something to chew on.
. *d = Yu6. I have already dealt with this one. We also have "Anxious thought (1932)" for it.
Hsi(Xi) "Interjection of inquiry, doubt, admiration". It is hard to translate. See how translators handle or ignore it. I will leave it untranslated. The first two characters of this paragraph are as enigmatic as the first two characters of 17.1. "Why(86)"? ...
So that we have something to think about.
. The next three characters are the very opposite of the first two: "He Values Words ( HKuC2)". Kuei(Ku) "valuable". Yen(C2) "Words". He doesn't waste valuable words.
. Kung(Kg) ones Task, or perhaps ones dharma? When a word is not in quotes and not capitalized, it is just my guess. Ch'eng(cm) to "Complete" or "Accomplish". Shih(D2) Work, Task. Followed by Ch'eng(cm) it means "an affair completed". Sui(@v) "Comply". Comply is its primary equivalent. At Ching 9 it could mean: When your "Dharma Complies with your Self (Kg@vSê) ....". In other words: When your work is your dharma, you got it made. That is "Heaven'S Tao(Tn ZA1)." Pai(%i) "Hundred .... many, all". Hsing(#s) followed by Pai(%i), it means "'hundred names', the people". Chieh(%2) "All. every, the whole". Followed by Jan(Ja) it means "all the same". Wei(is) "Say". Wo(^I) We. Yzu(Tu) "Spontaneous, naturally ....". Jan after Tzu means OurSelves. There you have all the characters in this last paragraph, but what is Lao Tzu trying to tell us? This last paragraph is the conclusion of the chapter. And it is a tough one.
. Archie Bahm has done a tremendous job giving us the Buddha's take on this paragraph, but to say that much, Lao Tzu doesn't normally use that many words. As he just told us: "He( H)" who "Sounds-the-depth(*d)" "Values Words". In other words: Pay attention to what I am saying!
. Many commentators say that Ching 17, 18 and 19 be long together. Yes, I can see that 17 and 18 belong together. Both have the tetrad in it and the four sources represnt the same level on Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". But to my thinking, Ching 19 is about a different subject, it is part of a different "TriAd( 3ad)".
. R. L. Wing has accompanied his chapters by a numbering system that is similar to the system we have in the I Ching, exept it is not binary but trinary. It is in base three. We have there three to the power of four. Just a coincidence? 3 X 1 = 3, 3 X 3 = 9, 3 X 9 = 27 and 3 X 27 = 81.
. The top three lines of the tetragrammes are the same for each triad. For our triad, the monad is on top, the dyad is below it and the triad is below the dyad. Then, the bottom line for 16 is the monad, for 17 is the dyad and for 18 is the triad. Insert.
October 12, 2007.
. Our teacher, J. G. Bennett, has told us students that: Nothing is gained by trying to make things simpler than they really are. If the reader is told that s/he is reading a simplification, at least no harm is done but if s/he doesn't know, it can do more harm than good. My, above, description of the trinary system is a slight simplification. Hence, this insert. Here comes the nitty gritty:
. The Tao Te Ching consists of roughly 5000 characters which have been assembled into 81 chapters. These 81 chapters have then been assembled into 27 "TriAds( 3ad)" of three chapters each. 3 X 27 = 81. These 27 triads have then been assembled into nine enneads. An ennead is a nine-term system. 9 X 9 = 81. Finally these nine enneads have been assembled into three 27-term systems. 3 X 9 = 27 and 3 X 27 = 81. This can tell us that the Tao Te Ching is a "TriAd( 3ad)".
. What I have described here is arrived at by the inductive thinking process. It is defined as reasoning from the particular to the general. It is also known as the bottom up process of problem solving. It is also described in Ching 63 and 64.
. The same idea can also be arrived at by the deductive thinking process. It is the opposite of the inductive process. As convoluted this may sound to you, these two thinking processes are basic.
. R. L. Wing has given an excellent description of the trinary system on pages 16 to 19 of his translation. But he too has simplified it, probably in order not to confuse his readers. There is a "Tetragram Arrangement" table on page 17 of his book. in it are all of the 81 tetragrams by means of which all of the 81 chapters are "Identified(Mg)". Lao Tzu said: "Identify the IdentifyAble (MgptMg)"! That's what Wing has done and that's what we have to do.
. We will use his table to work our way up from chapter 1 to 18. If you didn't get it by then: Give up! A tetragram is one way of writing a four digit trinary number. The tetragram representing chapter 1 consists of four solid, or unbroken, horizontal lines.
. Line one is in the units position. It is on the bottom. When it is solid it represents 1, when it is broken into two halves, it represents 2 and when it is broken into three thirds it represents 3.
. When lines two, three and four are unbroken they represent 0, zero. When line two is broken once, it represents 3, when broken twice, it represents 6. 2 X 3 = 6.
. When line three is broken once, it represents 9, when broken twice it represents 18. 2 X 9 = 18. When line four, the top line, is broken once, it represents 27. When it is broken twice it represents 54. 2 X 27 = 54. This may seem like a lot of information to remember, but once you understand it, it makes perfect sense.
. Now, look at the four unbroken lines, representing chapter one, again. ...
What do they add up to? ...
0 + 0 + 0 + 1 = 1. How is chapter 2 "Identified(Mg)"? ...
To look it up on Wing's table or to scroll down past the three dots is cheating. ...
You are just cheating yourself out of the opportunity of learning something. ...
It is 0002. As I said before, the two is represented by the bottom line broken into two halves.
How is chapter 3 "Identified"? ...
Not going to tell you. How is chapter 4 Identified? ...
This one is tougher unless you already know binary, trinary, octal or decimal number systems.
In the base three number system we don't have a unique symbol for the numeral 4 as we have in the decimal system. So we have to make room for the 1 in the units position and save the 3 on line two. How? ...
Don't feel bad if you couldn't figure it out from scratch, I didn't either. It took mathematical geniusses to come up with the place-value system. The 3 in line two, 9 in line three and the 27 in line four are all "place-values". And the "Wise Men(wsmn)" of ancient China already knew that.
. The value of line one can never be more than 3 or less than 1. So what is 4 in trinary? ...
0011. The 1 in the units position is a solid line just as lines three and four are but instead of zero, here it means 1. What is 5 in trinary? ...
0012. The 2 is represented by the bottom line broken into two halves. The same type of line broken once into two halves represents a 3 in line two. 3 + 2 = 5. And what is 6? ...
To identify chapter 7 takes a bit more thought, but please try. ...
0021. 2 X 3 = 6 and 6 + 1 = 7. To make room for the 1 in line one, we had to store the content of line one in line two. 3 was already there, so now we have 6 in line two. And what is decimal 8 in trinary? ...
0022. 6 + 2 = 8. And 9? ...
0023. 6 + 3 = 9. And 10? This one is a bit more challenging, but please try. ...
0101. 9 + 1 = 10. Now we have the top two lines from chapter 10 to 18. 9 + 9 = 18. In fact, Ching 16 to 18 have the same three top lines. To show you again how to count from 1 to 9 in trinary would be counterproductive. Instead of coming up with your own questions and answers, you would just be reading mine.
. John C. H. Wu has an excellent interpretation of the last 11 characters of Ching 64: The wise man "only helps all creatures to find their own nature, But does not venture to lead them by the nose." Some answers I have given above might have been an insult to your intelligence but, remember, not everybody is as smart as you are.

. Ching 16 is much better "Aligned(^a)" to 17 and 18 than 19 is because at Ching 16.4 we have another tetrad. I will now do some work on 16. My excuse is, to give the right writer a chance to do his thinking about what we have so far on Ching 17.
. And if no "WordEr(C2Er)" gives a damn? Doing this outline of the book, is the next best thing to the real thing I can do.

I'm back from Ching 16. Please read translations of Ching 16 and 18 and try to figure out which one of them is the “Positive( +)" pole and which one is the "Negative( -)" one in the "DyAd(dyad)" of this "Triad( 3ad)".
. For this to make sense to you, you have to know the triad. I have already described it in this blog, so I can leave well "Enough(Zu)" alone. But I can say a bit more about the connective, which is Ching 17 in this triad,
. 16 is to 17, as 17 is to 18. In systematics, the connective is the reconciling impulse when it is the middle one of the three impulses.
. Arthur Koestler has called it a holon, a whole part. He has devoted a whole chapter in his "The Ghost in the Machine" to explaining it. Again, I have to leave well enough alone. but we can use a nice example that will help us understand it better. It is the letter-word-sentence triad. Letters are the parts of words and words are the parts of sentences. As letters are to words, so words are to sentences.
. In relation to its letters, the word is a whole; in relation to the sentence it is in, it is a part. And now, if you have understood this, you can see why Ching 17 is so ambiguous. Like a word in a sentence, 17 is both a "Positive( +)" and a "Negative( -)" pole in a "Dyad(dyad)". Ching 17 has to refer to both the positive and the negative sides of sociology. In sociology, the positive and the negative sides of society have to be investigated impartially. You do not have an objective science when the interests of one side are served only.
Plato's Republic is philosophy, sociology and political science. There were a few errors in it, but thanks to Aristotle and later philosophers they have been corrected. How can professors of philosophy, sociology and political science "Not Know(PUkn)" this?
. "Why do you Have No knowledge of this Truth? Why (86YUPU0986)" don't the professors teach it? This question is as valid, or more valid, today as it was 2500 years ago when Lao Tzu raised that question.
. I believe that with Lao Tzu's help we can get around the mental blocks social engineers have implanted in the minds of unsuspecting students. By his blatant insults of Ahmadinejad, and his clear restatement of the "official version" of the truth, Columbia president Lee Bollinger, has revealed to us where he is coming from. By extension, he has also given away where his professors are coming from. And from this, we can see the need for our alternative education which is alive and well on the internet.
. To find out more about holons, I consulted Arthur Koestler's "The Ghost in the Machine". I started reading it and it turned out that it was full of valuable ideas I don't remember being in that book. So I continued reading it as if I just bought it.
. The book is 384 pages long and I am on page 71. I started wondering when I had read it last. "This Picador edition published 1975". So I couldn't have read it before that. By then I had taken my seven Week computer programming course in 1964, I had lectured on the tetrad from 64 to 73, I had studied under J.G. Bennett for one year and one year at Emerson College in England and none of that has helped me to understand what I am understanding now. The prize on it was $4.50 Canadian. That was a long time ago. What did I learn since I got back from England? I think credit for most of it goes to Lao Tzu.
. If you pick up an old book, you have read before, and you find new ideas in it, it means you have acquired the concepts necessary to comprehend them in the mean time. And this is something I just tried to explain above: If you have no "Representations By-means-of which to Perceive (YÜYIKn)" things, you can't see them. And if you don't have the "Concepts(D1)" by means of which to conceive things, you can't conceive them.
. There are "Insights(72)" I got from the book that are too detailed to invest space and your time on it but I hope that you find the choices I have made worth reading. I don't know about you, but I feel that we have a bit of synchronicity here.
. There are ideas in that book that are relevant to the 16-17-18 "TriAd( 3ad)", we have just dealt with, and they might affect the strategy we might use to make this book accessible to the wider public, instead of just to the converted which is all I can hope for now.
. In the first 28 pages Arthur talks about "The De-Humanization" of humanity by means of "Behaviorism". There is a lot about social engineering we can learn from that. We can't protect ourselves from it, If we don't know what it is.
. Speaking about behaviorism, Arthur quotes: "The simplicity of this scheme is attractive but illusory." This forces me to correct something I said earlier. ...
I said that making things simpler than they really are doesn't pay. ...
It is the objective of social engineers to dumb down the mob, and thus, it would pay off for them. In that case the scheme is artificially contrived, for a purpose. In other words, we have their motive for it. In the rest of his book, Arthur tears their scheme to shreds by exposing the artificiality of it.
. As I see it, Behaviorism and NLP are used as more sophisticated forms of "Pawlovian conditioning".
. I started to mark up the book on page 16. I will just quote some of it and then explain …
why I have quoted it. Here is the first quote: As "we move upwards to the higher levels of the hierarchy we again meet the same phenomenon: the 'response' to a syllable (its interpretation) depends on the word in which it occurs; and individual words occupy the same subordinate position relative to the sentence as phonemes relative to words. Their interpretation depends on the context, and must be referred to the next higher level in the hierarchy. (pg. 27)." In other words, and he quotes: "Words stand in relation to the sentence as letters do to the word".
. The reason I have quoted this, is because I was just talking about these ...
"next higher levels" which on the tetrad are called sources. I didn't remember that Arthur went into so much detail. From this you can see that I was telling you nothing new. What "Constant(Cn)" universal law are we talking about here? ...
The law of correspondence.
"The postman kicked the dog. (Pg. 30)" The postman and the dog are Noun Phrases (NP) and kicked is the Verb Phrase (VP). On the next page, in a footnote Arthur says: "The NP-VP division is more expressive and easier to handle than the related categories of subject and predicate."
. The postman is the cause here, the kicker, and the dog is the effect, the kicked. The kicking is the connective, it connects cause and effect, or subject and predicate.
. Try this with "Cows eat grass." We have here the ...
eater-eating-eaten "TriAd( 3ad)".
. "When we speak of fixed rules and flexible strategies, it is important to make a further distinction between these two factors. The rules on every level function more or less automatically .... whereas the strategic choices are mostly aided by the bright beam of focal consciousness. The machinery which canalizes inarticulate thoughts into grammatically correct channels operates hidden from sight; so does the machinery which causes the correct innervation of the vocal tracts, and also the machinery which controls the logic of 'commonsense' reasoning, and our habits of thought. (Pages 42-43)" ...
The word "automatically" refers to Automatic Energy (E6). The "bright beam of focal consciousness" is Conscious Energy (E4) focusing Sensitive Energy (E5) on the darkness.
. Ching 1.4 came to mind: ".... the Unit Is the light'S ($1is Z) Darkness. Darken It and Repeat the Darkening (SüSü Z@1Sü)"! ...
The bright beam of thought is focused on the darkness to darken it. ...
How do you like Lao Tzu's paradoxes? You can learn to like them.
. The hint Lao Tzu gives us here is: "Constancy(Cn)" and ...
"Repetition(@1)". The social engineers know this one: ...
By constantly repeating a lie long "Enough(Zu)" the dumbed down mob will sooner or later believe it. The same technique can also work for us: ...
Repeat a truth often enough and it will move down from conscious thought (B) to where, as Arthur Koestler put it, "the machinery which controls the logic of 'commonsense' reasoning, and our habits of thought" takes over. This machinry is in the mind (Manas (C), in Sanskrit).
This little "Insight(72)" helps us in two "Ways(A1)": ...
Individually: We are now doing automatically which before has required a conscious effort. We are now doing our "Work Without Effort (D2WUD2)". And socially? ...
As we repeat the truth, we are putting it into the morpho-genetic field. In a way, we are broadcasting it. We are doing that automatically as we see, hear, read and repeat the "official version" of the truth.
. This seems to be social engineering 101. These professionals wouldn't have tried so hard to discredit, or "Ridicule(*a41)", Rupert Sheldrake if what he had to say were not "True(A1)",
. Thus, repeating the truth, serves two ends: One private; the other public. The same doable activity serves both us and others.
. If something is doable and it is worth doing, "Why(86)" not do it?

Now, what is the "machinery which canalizes inarticulate thought" (B) into articulate speech (C)? ...
It is the A-B-C "TriAd( 3ad)" of which we have good examples of in architecture (customer-architect-contractor) and in computer programming (customer-programmer-coder).
. At the end of the quote, Arthur brings it down to level D ...
Our "vocal tracts" are parts of our body (D) by means of which we can set off vibrations in the air. Can you elaborate on that, or complete the thought? ...
If you have learned to complete Lao Tzu's thoughts (B), or his incomplete sentences (C), then completing Arthur's thoughts becomes easy. ...
Our hands, feet etc. are called karmendriyas in Sanskrit. These are our instruments by means of which we, the subject, effect changes in the outer world, the object.
. Arthur has spoken of higher and lower levels in his book: What does he mean here by "every level"? ...
How many levels are there in us? ...
Soul (A), intellectual center (B), emotional center (C) and moving center (D). These are Gurdjieff's terms. For the A-B-C triad we also have Eric Berne's Child-Adult-Parent. The important thing is not to get hung up on words. Words are containers, what matters is their content.
. There is another interesting point or question: What level is "the machinery which controls the logic of 'commonsense' reasoning, and our habits of thought" on? ...
Arthur continues: "We hardly ever bother to have a look at these silent machines". But if you work with them in computer programming on a regular basis, you can not not see them.
. If "language and thought .... contain hidden axioms and build-in prejudices -- so much the worse for us. But at least we know that these rules which both discipline and distort thinking are only binding for the individual who acquired them, and (Pg.43)" for those who can't "Empty(%g)" themselves of them.
. "All" intentional and "instinctive activities consist of hierarchies of sub skills .... controlled by fixed rules and guided by adaptable strategies. It is this dual characteristic which justifies us in calling a sub-skill a 'functional holon'. (Pg. 76)"
. For instance from the standpoint of a contractor, a subcontractor, plumber, electrician, roofer etc. is a functional holon. From the standpoint of the programmer (B), coder and computer (C-D) is a functional holon. I have a personal experience of that: Building inspectors have arbitrarily closed down my small rooming house. I still had to pay mortgage. My former partner in the computer business got me a job as a programmer (B). I couldn't do the coding because I didn't know a working computer language. My partner did the coding for me in BASIC. I could now fully concentrate on the algorithm (B) and he could fully concentrate on the coding (C). The computer (D) is designed to do the computing only, so it was concentrating on its own job already. What was the result of this DIVISION OF LABOR? ...
We were four times as fast as my partner was when he was working alone. That meant that we couldn't hand in our finished work because it would have been too embarrassing to the other programmers at Atlas Electronics here in Toronto.
. After one year of harassing me, the building inspectors gave me a severe stomach cramp which forced me to pray (I wasn't going to turn myself in (to the hospital)). Within a Week, my house was cleared. There was no valid work-order, so when I said "arbitrarily" above, it was justified. But had they not done that, I wouldn't be doing this. Isn't live interesting?

. "We learn laboriously to recognize and name the printed letters of the alphabet, to ride a bicycle, to hit the right key on the typewriter or on the piano. Then learning begins to condense into habits: with increasing mastery we read, write, type 'automatically', which means that the rules which control the performance are now applied unconsciously. Like the invisible machinery which transforms inarticulate thoughts into grammatically correct sentences, so the canons of our manipulative and reasoning skills operate below the level of awareness, or in the twilight zones of awareness. (Pg. 108)"
. The "laborious" learning is a conscious effort in which Conscious Energy (A) is directing Sensitive Energy (B) towards problems to be solved and intellectual work to be carried out.
. With "Enough(Zu)" "Repetitions(@1)", the work is done "automatically" (C). We now transform "inarticulate thoughts into grammatically correct sentences" with our Automatic Energy (C).
. Because this energy operates "below the level of awareness, or in the twilight of awareness", there are certain dangers associated with that.
. We couldn't function in the world without our subconscious machinery but to use it without using our conscious machinery, to observe and control it, will "Recklessly Lead us into Disasters (*d16%cÜc)".
. Arthur Koestler's "fixed rules" are Lao Tzu's "Eternal(Cn)" laws of nature. Before I wrote this, I thought that it is "Enough" to study these laws in the Republic, the Tao Te Ching and other books in order to understand them and thus to become aware of them. Now I know that this is not "Enough". These laws are omnipresent. They are not only objective to us in the external world, but they operate inside of us as well.
. As a man thinketh in his heart so is he. "The faith of a man follows his nature, Arjuna. Man is made of faith: as his faith so he is, (Gita 17.3. Mascaró)". Through repeated thinking we make these laws our own, they become part of us, the subject.
. The same laws that operate in the outer world, objective to us, also operate within us. The same space that is outside of the "Pot(ut)" is also within it. But within it is the "Pot'S User (ut Zus)".
. . . . "Existence, It is For Making Profit (YU ZYIdoLI) of
Nonexistence Which is For Making Use (WU ZYIdous)" of it.
. Lao Tzu says it so much better than I can.

"We know that nature, like man, accomplishes complex tasks by breaking them up into many simple sub-tasks. (Pg. 126)"
. If Arthur is not just talking about biology, as it was known in 1970, but about "Eternal(Cn)" natural laws, then we should be able to find relevant passages in the Tao Te Ching and we should be able to find analogies in our own experience which verify these theories for us.
. I have just given myself a "job-description", here:
"Difficult Tasks Necessarily Arise From Easy (dfD2PI%ctoez) ones;
. . . . Big Tasks Necessarily Arise From Small (TAD2PI%ctoäl)" ones. Tso(%c) ".... bring to pass" can mean many things: Like: ".... Consit Of Smaller (%ctoäl)" sub-tasks.
. When interpreting Lao Tzu's words, we must pay attention to some details. These are the hints he gives to his students.
. When Ta(TA) and Hsi(äl) are given in the same context, as above, then, when one appears next, the other one is implied. Another, more "Subtle(Jo)", hint is the word Hsi(äl) for "Small". The more obvious word for "Small" is Hsiao(sm) which he has just used in the previous paragraph in which it is the opposite of "Big(TA)". The attentive student is expected to ask "Why(86)"? The question might cause a student to look at the picture: It is a big "Field(*a53)" broken up into four smaller fields. ...
To get the message, just go over Arthur's quote again. And now you are ready to translate (and interpret) the next passage from Ching 63.3: "Intelligent People Right-to-the-end do Not Handle (tasks that are too) Big (wsmnnGPUdoTA) for them and Thus they are Able (to contribute their sub-task in) Accomplishing The Big (KUabcm HTA)" task.
. And this brings us right back to my computer programming experience, I have just described: When my partner and I, due to the particular situation we were in, were forced to concentrate on a smaller part of the total job, we were both more efficient. We made less mistakes. There was less debugging required. Most jobs came out as intended the very first time around. I have never, in my nine years of programming, experienced such success so consistently. And I couldn't say that my programming skills had improved, because I hadn't programmed for at least seven years. To me, the advantages of specialization, are undeniable. There is further the added satisfaction of doing ones own dharma.
. So, I think that, it is safe to say that we are dealing with one or more "Eternal(Cn)" principles. here. One is what J. G. Bennett has called the law of four (the tetrad).
. In computer programming, the programmer (B) doesn't have to worry why the customer (A) wants a certain job done. In fact, s/he is likely to go to the competition, because your questions tell him that you don't know your job. Only if the job is too big for you, or the computer, to handle, can you ask the customer whether s/he can break it down a bit more. The customer has to know what you can and what you can't do; but why s/he wants the job s/he has described in the "job-description" is none of your business.
. What the customer wants to know from you, is: Can you do the job as described (Do you understand it?)? How much will it cost? And how long will it take you to do it? Your answer to these three questions will determine whether you or your competition gets the job.
. To get you going you are entitled to a down-payment. The balance is to be paid when the computer output is what was defined in the "job-description (Aristotle's "final cause" (A))".
. The programmer (B) breaks down the job for the coder (C) into a number of subroutines, none of which can be bigger than the coder can handle.
. The coder breaks down the job for the computer (D) into a series of instructions, none of which can be what the computer is not designed to handle.
. And that's it. What seems to be complicated as long as you don't understand it becomes simple once you do. To co-create, to participate in the "Big Task (TAD2)", you must know what your own duty (dharma) is, but you don't have to know the job of your partners, it suffices to know them as "functional holons". In fact, you must not interfere in their business. Plato has called this "the worst of evils".
. "The self-transcending emotions show a wide range of variety. They may be joyous or sad, tragic or lyrical; their common denominator, to repeat this once more, is a feeling of integrative participation in an experience which transcends the boundaries of the self. (Pg. 190)"
. Whether you are an artist (A), a thinker (B), a communicator (C) or a doer (D) if you participate in a task in which a common Goal (A) is aspired to, then you are a part of something larger than your self is. You are transcending your smaller specialized self. But by specializing, by "Actualizing your Potential (A1pt)", you are becoming a member of the team; by burying your talents you become an outcast, a Sudra, you are cast out (See Mathew 25:14).
. This transcendence comes most naturally to raja yogis (C). It is Gurdjieff's Fourth Way School system: Develop karma, bhakti and jnana yoga and you become a raja yogi. These are the three yogas Krishna taught Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita.
"Science .... aims at truth .... the criterion of truth .... verification by experiment (Pg. 196)". That's the definition of truth in pragmatism.
. The scientific process begins with an idea (B) called a hypothesis and ends with this idea being tested (D). Between theory (B) and practice (D) there has to be the connective (C). Plato has called it "belief (pistis)". On his "Divided Line (509d)" it is on level C.
. Unless somebody believes that the idea is worth testing, time and money will not be invested to test it. Take my boat idea: Unless somebody is going to test it, I can't get rich.
. The scientific process is a "TriAd( 3ad)", Engineering, production and marketing comes after. In computer programming, the computer tests the program and, if it works, supplies the demand. The demand is defined in the "job-description". The job-description is like your order in a restaurant. There is the demand followed by its supply. And that's it. It is as simple as that, once ...
you understand it.

. "The postulated polarity of integrative versus self-assertive potentials in biological and social systems is fundamental to the present theory. .... The integrative potential of holons makes it tend to behave as a part of a larger, more complex unit; its self-assertive potential makes it tend to behave as if it were itself a self-contained, autonomous whole. (Pg. 225)"
. A long time ago at NewAgeTao.org I have done a long essay on Gita 18.18. Let me do a short one on Gita 18.19-22 here, because it is relevant.
"jnanam karma ca karta ca tridhaiva guna ....". "ca" = and, but it is behind the words it connects. I will use Sargeant's translations: "knowledge and action and the agent" who knows (jnan) and acts (karm) make up "Three (tri)" kinds of gunas (dhaiva guna). Sargeant has done for the Gita, what Star has done for the Ching. I am grateful to them.
. In any number-system, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Thus analyzing each part, one after another, is not only difficult, it is not "Enough(Zu)". Still, we have to start somewhere.
. The easiest tendency to understand is the tamo guna. People in whom this guna predominates tend to be self-assertive. They are "attached to one object .... As if it were all". Please go over the quote from Pg. 225 again to see where this guna fits in: ...
People with this self-assertive attitude tend to assert that they know it all. You may be able to point out some very blatant flaws in their arguments, but they are never wrong, because they don't listen to what you are saying. Because such people exist, we don't just have an abstract theory (B) here, but observable (D) facts. You can't observe extreme dogmatism in the other two types because that is not a characteristic of them. But that also makes it harder to identify them.
. The tamo guna is one pole of the "DyAd" in the "TriAd". The question is now: ...
Which guna is its opposite? ...
If you have one or more translations of the Gita, try to answer the question on our own. ...
I will give you Sargeant's translation of Gita 18.20-21because it is very accurate:

"That knowledge by which one sees . . . . . " But that knowledge which knows as separate
One imperishable being in all beings, . . . . . Different beings of various kinds
Undivided in the divided; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Among all beings;
Know that knowledge to be sattvic. . . . . . . .Know that knowledge to be rajasic."

I have said "Enough" about the "TriAd" in this blog so that we can know exactly what we are looking for. However, for the reasons I have already given above, interpretation is still required. It is, thus, safest for me to quote from Sutra 9 of The Holy Science: The "three attributes, Gunas -- Sattva (positive), Rajas (neutralizing [connecting]), and Tamas (negative) -- produce Jnanendriyas (organs of sense), Karmendriyas (organs of actions), and Tanmatras (objects of sense)." In the same 9th Sutra "Sattva (is associated with) Buddhi, the Intelligence."
. I have quoted from The Holy Science because I am getting into deep water myself. When reading, in addition to believing (C) or not believing, we have a third choice: ...
You can hold it in suspense. You can "Know that you Don't Know (knPUkn)" it all. That is how the unknowable becomes knowable. "Not Knowing that you don't Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)."
Tamas is causing people to mistake the part for the whole and not knowing that it is not. That is the difference between Tamas and the other two gunas.
. Those in whom the Sattwa guna predominates are adwaita vedantins, non-dualists. They "see One imperishable being in all beings," but the more open-minded among them also know that the "Undivided [is] in the divided". We have here one of the paradoxes Lao Tzu likes so much.
. Those in whom the rajo guna predominates “know as separate Different beings of various kinds”. And they "know (vetti)" it to be "in all (sarvesu)" bhutesu. Bhutesu = "in beings, in creatures, in existences (Sargeant)".
. What is emphasized here is that they know "as separate Different beings" in all beings and existences; while those in whom sattwas predominates see the "One" imperishable, undivided (and omnipresent) being "in the divided (vibhaktesu)". There is a big difference in seeing the divided in the undivided, and seeing the undivided in the divided. "True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)."
. What raja yogis (C) see is no longer the "One", it is already broken down into "separate Different beings" or existences. And for those in whom tamas predominates it is broken down still further.
. If it were not, then they couldn't carry out (D) the instructions (C) that have been "Conceived (B1)" by the thinkers (B) by "Aligning(%8)" themselves to level A. We have our 4-fold hierarchy again. If the vision, which comes through A, is to manifest through D, then D must align itself to C as C must align itself to B, and as C is aligned to B so B must align itself to A. As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)." This is HOW Lao Tzu refers to the law of correspondence. That is why he used "Below( -)" instead of "Earth(TI)". Shang( +) and Hsia( -) always imply each other. They represent the [poles of one polarity. In our tetrad, A is the "Door, Dasamadwara". What it must be aligned to is the business of the poets (kavayas (A)). See Gita 4.16.
. Our business is right vision, right thought, right speech and right action. These are the four spheres of influence we have and are responsible for. And to do our duty (dharma) collectively we need THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Not the one described at Gita 18.41-44 and which we have here, but as it was before it was corrupted by the "Brahmins", or our unelected advisors (B).
. Now, back to the quote from Pg. 225: "The postulated polarity" is a holon. Its parts are its two poles and it, the "DyAd(dyad)", is a part of the "TriAd( 3ad)". Lao Tzu gives six examples of it at Ching 2.2, but let us go back to Ching 1. At Ching 1.1-3 we have a number of "DyAds": The changeable object and its "Opposite(Fy)" the "Unchangeable(Cn)" subject, "Potential(pt)" and actual, "Conception(B1)" and birth, and "Existence" - "Nonexistence".
. And then, at Ching 1.4, he says: "These DyAds (Tzdyad) are a Unit Originally ($1Cu) But they are Divided (bt^o) by Identifying(Mg) their poles. the Unit Is the light'S Darkness ($1is ZSü). Darken It and Repeat the Darkening (Sü Z@1Sü) until you reach All Mystery'S Gate (^1#1 Z%1)."
. Notice, that once you have the question, Krishna or Lao Tzu will answer you, if you pay attention to WHAT they are saying. Getting the question is often harder than getting the answer. For instance, in the very first of the six examples of the "TriAd", at 2.2, Lao Tzu uses the "DyAd" we have in Ching 1.2 and 1.3: "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg) Life(Sg)." Shêng(Sg) means both "Produce" and "Life". But now he is no longer talking about the "DyAd", but about the "TriAd( 3ad)". And that should give us something to think about.
. To take this one more step up the hierarchy we have to look at some of Lao Tzu's sentences, paragraphs and chapters. First comes the "TriAd" as the subject or premise and then comes the "Monad($1)" as the predicate or conclusion. Now that you know what to look for you can find plenty of examples yourself but a good one is at 41.1. There we have the "Above( +)" average, - "Average(=)" - "Below( -)" average triad as the premise and a very interesting "Monad($1)" as the conclusion.
. The point of this detour is, that the triad is a part of the tetrad and that Lao Tzu knows it. Arthur knows the triad, he has described it very well in the chapter about the "THE HOLON" but he has simplified it for his readers by sticking to the "DyAd".
. Now, each of the four sources of the tetrad is a holon: B and C are completely within the system while A and D are with one foot inside and with the other foot outside of our system.
. As far as I can see, the Tao Te Ching contains the most accurate description of the "Way(A1)" things work. And if they work as described, then the description is "True(A1)". But there are different versions of the Chinese text, so we can't just blindly believe (C) what one translator says. However, if it makes sense, it is most likely WHAT Lao Tzu has meant. Let me do that section from Ching 63.3 again:
"Intelligent People Thoughout-their-life (ws mn nG) do Not Handle (those parts of the) Big (PU do TA) job (that is not their business, or dharma. And precisely) Because-of-that they are Able (KUab) to participate in Accomplishing The Big (cm HTA)" job. If you understand this, then you know that it is true. And then, it no longer matters who said it. And if a teacher is as consistently "Right(%8)", as Lao Tzu is, he is gaining "Credibility(09)". Which means? …
You are willing to invest more time and energy to find out WHAT he means.
Which means that …
the law of attraction is taking effect. Which means that …
the more of Lao Tzu’s lessons you learn, the more of WHAT he is saying you understand. And much of that undertanding can be used as thinking tools by means of which we can gain more understanding. In other words. …
He who has shall have more. We are talking about the law of attraction here, and Jesus with his parables and Lao Tzu with his paradoxes, must have used it intentionally to help us understand.
. To understand what Krishna, Lao Tzu, Plato or the learned elders of Zion have said about THE DIVISION OF LABOR, all we have to do is: Look at "Big" jobs and observe HOW our 4-fold system, or their 3-fold system, works. For instance, because I didn't know a working computer language I had to concentrate on a smaller part of the "Big" job while my partner was better at coding (C) which is why he liked it more than programming (B). So, thanks to the building inspectors who have arbitrarily put me out of business, I have learned an important lesson. Isn't life interesting? I believe, that this information is worth sharing. If only a "WordEr" could see it too. Problem is: "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)." But I wouldn't mind if Lao Tzu were wrong just this once.
. "To recapitulate: the single individual, considered as a whole, represents the apex of the organismic hierarchy; considered as a part, he is the lowest unit of the social hierarchy. (Pg. 320)"
. As you understand this "DyAd" better you can see that Arthur has something very important to say. He was a successful writer, so how can I, not being writer nor being successful, get people to pay more attention to WHAT he has said? ...
The best I can do is to describe my own experience of this system at Atlas Electronics as clearly as I can. Management (A) knew how to do a "job-description". I don't remember one single instance where I had to ask for clarification. When you know exactly WHAT you want, it is quite easy to do a job-description. Also during the time I worked there, there was not a single complaint that we didn't supply their demand as described.
. The company we worked for, was the "whole" and we were a "part" in it. The reason we submitted to the whole was because we wanted to be paid. The reason my partner submitted to my demand, as stated in my flowchart, was because he wants to be paid. The reason a computer executes the instructions in a program in the sequence they are given is because it is designed that way.
. I have already described why my partner and I were more efficient working as a team ...
We did what the computer always does: ...
Concentrate on its own job. Because I felt bad not handing in our job after it was done, I learned the BASIC computer language so that my partner and I could again be a Jack of all trades. What I have told you here means that ...
management could leave it up to us HOW we did the job, they didn't even know that we did it in half the time they expected it to take. As long we do WHAT they demand, in the time allowed for it, all is fine and we get paid. Our task is now to put what Arthur has described and what we can actually experience together. …
. Once we have a concrete example of WHAT Arthur is talking about, it becomes easier to understand. The reason management was willing to pay us was that it didn't want to worry about the details we took care of and took responsibility for. Similarly I prefer to concentrate on the programming than having to worry about the coding as well. The advantage of this DIVISION OF LABOR could be seen in our increased productivity. By using analogy and computer programming as an example we can learn the tetrad most efficiently.
. Another example forces itself onto our attention: Pakistan. ...
There is a lot of international politics underneath, I can only guess at and that doesn't help us to understand the tetrad. What is happening there is a transition from a timocracy (B) to a dictatorship (C). What we have learned about the tetrad from computer programming can help us
. . . A . . . . . to shed light on the tetrad Lao Tzu is talking about in Ching 16,
D . + . B . . . 17 and 18 and Plato is talking about in his Republic: As I (B) was
. . . C . . . . . mediating between management (A) and my partner (C), so timocracy (B) is mediating between a"Jjust(Uw)" society (A) and a dictatorship (C). As "Truth(A1)" is the lifeblood of democracy so the unelected advisors (B) depend on their "Great Hypocrites (TA*b18)" and as B depends on C, so a dictator (C) depends on his "Loyal Officers (ac@S)", GESTAPO (GEheime STAats POlizei) or goon squads. The ultimate aim of all timocracies (B), that is governments that pretend to be democracies, is to be able to exert totalitarian power. The return of Benazir Bhutto has forced Pervez Musharraf to reveal his true intention. Let us hope that he had to move too soon. The people behind disarming law-abiding citizens have the same intention but they are moving more slowly and more surely. The Germans didn't believe that it could happen there. The lawyers in Pakistan didn't believe that it could happen there. People believe what they want to belief and Musharraf has made sure that they believe the wrong thing. Politicians can be expected to do that. I only hope that Bhutto forced his had and that it is not too late yet.
. The tetrad can help us to understand what can be seen on the surface but it can't tell us what happens outside its boundaries. I didn't always know why management (A) wanted a certain program. It may not make sense to me, but it wouldn't be wise for me to question them about it because that was none of my business. Once I give my flowchart to my partner WHAT he has to do is still determined by me, but HOW he does it is up to him. Analogy is a thinking tool it works because of the law of correspondence. The law of correspondence is "Eternal(Cn)" it works whether we like it or not. It also works whether we know it or not. I am trying to show that it is better to know it than not.
. The Sanskrit word: Guna, is often translated as "tendency”. The:
"tendency to build 'closed systems' centered on some part-truth, and to assert its absolute validity in the teeth of evidence to the contrary (Pg. 232)" is due to the tamo guna or self-assertive tendency.
. This self-assertion, on the part of Musharraf, takes the form of might versus right. At Ching 16, Musharraf is the ruler the people "Fear(âl)". They "Don't Dare To do (what is not "in the interest of themselves, the rulers, and if anyone deviates from this he is punished as a lawbreaker and 'wrongdoer' (338e of Plato's Republic))". This should be known by professors of philosophy, sociology and political science but if they do understand the Republic, then they are not teaching it. And that's why Lao Tzu is asking "Why(86)" not? We have to connect what is happening in the world with the "Eternal(Cn)" laws Lao Tzu, Plato and others are talking about, and ask "Why?" more often.
. "In social hierarchies, the psychological controls which operate inside of organisms are of course replaced by institutional controls which restrain the self-assertive tendencies of these groups on all levels, from whole social classes down to the individual. (Pg. 232)"
. This means that the law of correspondence is omnipresent in time and space.
. "Unfortunately, neither of these remedies, though often tried, has ever worked. For the last three or four thousand years, Hebrew prophets, Greek philosophers, Indian mystics, Chinese sages, .... (Pg. 233)".
. "Laotse" is mentioned on page 320 but I didn't read that far. Thirty years ago, somebody suggesting that Lao Tzu could be wrong has turned me off. When I read that passage, I stopped reading. Now I know that what matters is not who said something or HOW it is said, but WHAT is said. So I read on to the end of the book. What is in this third and last section is about what I have said already about over-population. But there are more scary details in here. And they can be updated today, forty years after the book was first published.
. It is one thing to say that Arthur was ahead of his time and it is a slightly different thing to say that he was talking about "Eternal(Cn)" laws. Why does so much in the Tao Te Ching sound like tomorrows news? ...
Because Lao Tzu is talking about "Eternal" laws. These laws are omnipresent in time and space. That’s why history repeats itself.
. The title of the chapter the above quote comes from is: "The Pathology of Devotion".
"The first of these misconceptions is putting the blame for man's predicament on his selfishness, greed, etc. ; in a word, on the aggressive, self assertive tendencies of the individual. (Pg. 233)" Certainly dictators have an overdose of this tendency. And Arthur is telling us that this is not the worst? He has some explaining to do. ...
We are getting into international politics, The Protocols of Zion and David Icke's pyramid scheme which takes me out of my sphere of influence. And I am not responsible for what is not in my Feldraum. Let me stick to my own area of competence, which is primarily the tetrad.
. The rightness or wrongness of a tendency depends on its application, and it is determined by the whole or holon we are attached to. When D submits to C, C to B and B to A, then our 4-fold system is in "Alignment(%8)"; if not, then it is out of alignment.
. For instance, if a politician (C) takes bribes from a businessman (D), especially if it is in cash, then he is not properly aligned. If he takes orders from B, then he is properly aligned. But if B is not aligned to A but to his own kind, then we have a timocracy (B) which is good for the advisors (B) and their politicians (C), but bad for the people (A). But what is worse is when a politician (C) is aligned to himself then we have a dictatorship (C). This is the totalitarian system in which might is right as we can see so well right now in Pakistan.
. Huxley's "'Final Revolution', brought about by the combined effect of drugs and the mass media, could create 'within a generation or so for entire societies a sort of painless concentration camp of the mind, in which people will have lost their liberties in the enjoyment of a dictatorship without tears'. (Pg. 335)"
. When Musharraf throws his political opponents and lawyers into jail by the thousands, we know that it is happening; when people are put into the "concentration camp of the mind" by the millions, there are no protest rallies "Why(86)"? ... In addition to the "mass media" there is the educational system. In addition to "drugs" there is fluoride in our drinking water, chemicals from the chem-trails in the air we breathe and in the ground where the food we eat is grown. As a further update there are microwaves that are "Aligned(%8)" to the frequency on which the neurons in our brains transmit and receive their signals. I am no expert in this field, but is it naive to ask if this is the only frequency on which cell-phones can operate? If not, is the choice of this frequency just accidental or intentional? I was informed that there are boxes on utility poles and public buildings that look like transformers or something important like that, but I was told that the only purpose for these boxes is to subject passers by to microwaves of a particular frequency. "Why(86)"? ...
I don't know everything the social engineers are doing to dumb us down but I have a good idea about WHAT they are doing. And I also know a bit about HOW they are doing it: …
Slowly and surely. If they go too fast, we might wake up. When the building inspectors gave me my stomach cramp, I didn't know HOW they did it, but I was painfully aware of WHAT they did.
. I paid for access to the internet from my home computer. After a few Month I got sick. I stopped using it and after a reasonable time I got better. I got onto my computer again and after Weeks (in less than a month) I got sick again. This time the sickness was worse and the time it took to get better was longer. I am the curious type, I got back on the computer again. And I got sick again within days, that is in less than a Week. This was the worst. It was very bad and the time it took to get better was much longer. There were times when I was afraid that I wouldn't get better at all. I have god reasons for not going to the hospital with my problem and for not getting back on the computer again. I have told this to people and they assume that I am just making this up. The reason I am saying it here is because the hardware and software to make people sick, perhaps even kill them, does exist. This would mean that I am not the only person that is subjected to these microwaves that are adjusted to my particular frequencies that control bodily functions. If people other than myself have had similar experiences, than more people are going to ask "Why" do these things happen to certain people? They can't kill us as openly as a dictator can get away with. There are assassinations but they can't overdo it in a timocracy. If they want to pretend that we have a democracy, then they can’t act like dictators. People must not get suspicious, they must not start asking the questions too soon. And if the Cuban counterparts of the RCMP had shipped me back in a body-bag, no questions would have been asked.
. After the Arar case it becomes safer to say these outrageous things without being "Ridiculed(*a41)" anymore, especially if others reading this can report similar cases.

. I was following the Finland Campus Shooter news, looking for parallels between him and the Virginia Shooter: Both did the shooting first and then shoot themselves. Both shootings were premeditated. Both shooters had the same motive: ...
To wake up the dumbed down people, but I was looking for more.
. On page 10 of the Toronto Sun, Friday November 9, 2007, we get the following: "A bullied teenager outcast with radical views .... bent on causing maximum bloodshed .... .His opinions were extreme .... In a posting on YouTube Auvinen called for a popular uprising against ' the enslaving, corrupted and totalitarian regimes.'" Instead, the social engineers use these shootings to: call "for a popular uprising against" law-abiding gun-owners.
. Even though the Virginia Shooter has killed more, he still had many more rounds of ammunition than he intended to use. This can be interpreted to mean that he was more interested in getting his message out than in "creating maximum bloodshed"
. Considering how well he has planned his "sacrifice" he could have kept shooting, then hiding himself, waiting for the police to break down the door and start shooting again. That would have been "maximum bloodshed". A guy who has outwitted his tormentors to get his message out on their own mass media could have easily done that. If you can put yourself into the shoes of a desperate but highly intelligent person like that, taking those extra rounds of ammunition along could have been intended to reinforce his more explicit message.
. Investigative reporters (C) might find more explicit messages of the Finland Shooter on YouTube. The message both shooters knowingly sacrificed their lives and the lives of others for was to get their message out, to wake up the dumbed down people. In both cases it was a call "for a popular uprising". HOW the social engineers consistently manage to divert our attention away from the facts, and get away with it time and again, is something that requires much more attention than I can, or should, give it. If you are willing to make the world a better place than it is now, find out what your calling or dharma is, develop your talents and use them. This is HOW you can make the greatest contribution to our seemingly unsourmountable task. If, on the other had, due to indifference, we let the perpetrators of 9/11 get away with their blatant lies then we must accept the consequences of our indifference. "The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men. (Plato)". As I said before: Look at the videaos: Video.Google.com (ENTER) 9/11 (ENTER). If you are unwilling to do that much, then you are imprisoned in their mental concentration camp and you are conditioned in such a way that you don't want to hear the truth. Hard to believe? You are not supposed to be able to believe it.
. In the section called CAMPUS CARNAGE, I quoted: "' Cho was evaluated by a local health facility, and he was placed in for treatment after a temporary detention order was obtained. It's unclear whether he volunteered or was forced.' What did he learn in that 'mental health facility'? ... My job is merely to point out to investigative reporters (C) what work has to be done". And so, again, all I can do here is "point out to investigative reporters (C)" in Finland, "what work has to be done" by them. If Auvinen was not in "a local health facility" the next question must be: …
Was he in the care of a psychologist? And if yes: Find out more about him!
. Please notice the parallel between what I was doing in the 4-fold programming system and what I am trying to do, right here, in our 4-fold social system. Listen to Lao Tzu:
"KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2) WordErs(C2er) are good with words but they Don't Know (PUkn). .... Unite Your Dust($1 H@h)!" The globalists are doing that without "Aligning%8)", or subordinating themselves, to the people (A); we must do it by "Aligning" ourselves to the "Truth(A1)".
. I, as a mutable air sign (B), must reach up to level A and bring down what I find there to my own level B. The Communicators (C) must reach up to level B and bring down what they find there to their own level C. And the Doers must reach up to level C and carry out the instructions they find there on their own level D. In other words,: If the Doers don't execute C's instructions then ...
The work done by the Poets (A), the philosophers (B) and the leaders (C) is in vain.
. As far as the Poets (Kavayas) go, the Bhagavad Gita and the Nei Yeh are a hundred percent poetry, the Tao Te Ching is estimated to be 75% poetry (A). For the remaining 25% Lao Tzu has brought his message down to level B. In other words, they don't have to be interpreted by the "KnowErs(kner)" (B) anymore, they are already interpretations (B).
. Yesterday, Saturday November 10, 2007. the ONE-DIMENSIONAL MAN by Herbert Marcuse was dropped into my lap. To find out what it was about, I went to the Index: Under P alone, there is Plato, Poetic language and, most interestingly, "Packard, Vance, XVII". I went to page XVII and there we have "Vance Packard's The Hidden Persuaders, ...." It so happened that just a few days (less than a week) ago, I went over that book again to make some comparisons with Arthur's book. Then I went to page XIII to quote: "The fact that the vast majority of the population accepts, and is made to accept, this society [which Arthur has described as well] does not render it less irrational and less reprehensible." Compare this with the last quote I gave from page 335 of Arthur's book.
. Let me give you one more quote to illustrate what we are going to get ourselves into:
"Perhaps an accident may alter the situation, but unless the recognition of what is being done and what is being prevented [from being thought, said and done, and unless enough members of the population become aware of what] subverts the consciousness and the behavior of man, not even a catastrophe will bring about the change. (XV)"
. The facts presented in this book are pretty depressing, but unless we face them, there is indeed no chance for us to "bring about the change". The title of the third and last section of the book, Pages 203 to 259 is "The Chance of the Alternatives". Let's hope it is a better than 50/50 chance.
. As I see it: Social change to the better, is still possible if "Enough(Zu)" of us are willing to do WHAT we are able, or know HOW, to do.
. By dumbing us down the social engineers are trying to prevent us from "Actualizing our Potential (A1pt)". But by making these, often blatant, efforts they are also letting us know that if we don't bury our "talents (Matthew 25:15)" then we are a real threat to them. Why else would they try so hard to "Constantly Cause the People to be Without Knowledge (Cn%eMnWUkn)"?
. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy. If a critical mass of us finds out the truth, the truth will set us free. The facts given in Arthur's and Herbert's books are depressing, but we must not let this deter us from finding out the truth. If we let the social engineers continue to dumb us down then the negative news we are fed by the mass media will continue to dissuade us from doing what is not "in the interest of themselves, the rulers. (338e)". But once we know that this is what they have to do to stay in power, then we can begin to interpret their words a bit differently.
. Let me come to a conclusion with Arthur's book. He has done a tremendous amount of work in the first APPENDIX. There is a lot of work to be done on it. With the help of the Gita, Systematics and the Ching, some of it can be simplified, other "PROPERTIES" can probably be deleted but that is not my kind of work. I will give one more quote:
"There has been some positive advances such as the European Common market". I must definitely disagree with that: The European Union was already envisioned (A) and planning (B) had begun before 1905 by The Wise Elders of Zion.
. Arthur uses the army to describe HOW a vision, a Goal, the final cause or a "job-description" (A) is manifested (D). The process starts on top. Let's say the president of the United States says: "Let's invade Iraq!" That's the Goal (A). Now his Generals and advisors have to develop the "algorithm". An algorithm (B) is a plan of action that must be detailed enough so that the officers can take over from there. The president's advisors (B) will say: "Before we get the generals involved in this, we have to find an excuse for invading Iraq. Only after that problem is solved can they get the generals involved. Their job is to break down the big task into smaller subroutines the officers (C) can handle. As the coder (C) gives his instructions to the computer (D), so the officers (C) give their orders to their soldiers (D). Then, when the bullets, grenades, bombs and rockets start flying the execution of the plan has begun.
. Establishing the envisioned (A) European Union takes a lot more planning than to invade a country. Its been done before, so it becomes more of a routine. But to establish the European Union is something new, that takes a lot of planning on level B and a lot of more detailed work on level C. What further complicates the task is that most of it has to be done in secret, but what happened next is history. However, the fact that the plan was leaked in the Protocols of Zion makes it more difficult for the social engineers to make us believe that it was just a "hoax". Once their web of lies starts cracking, at any point, the law of attraction can be expected to take effect.

. And now we are ready for Herbert's book. The very first sentence of the Introduction poses a very challenging question: "Does not the threat of an atomic catastrophe which could wipe out the human race also serve to protect the very forces which perpetuate this danger?" ...
. The form of this question can also be applied to the phenomena of the two Campus Shooters we have just compared. ...
Does not the wiping out of lives in those universities also serve the psychologists, or social engineers, to promote their own agenda of gun-control? ...
. The first paragraph consists of five sentences. Each could be elaborated on but nobody else can do your thinking for you. The best one can do is pose questions that might direct your attention to aspects of the problem you may not have thought about. In other words, certain questions can help you to break down the problem into more manageable pieces.
. When Lao Tzu advises us: Don't bite off more than you can chew! He means that if a problem can be broken down into more chewable bites: Do it! I will try to illustrate this, by using the last sentence of this first paragraph:

"We submit to the peaceful production of the means of destruction, to the perfection of waste, to being educated for a defense which deforms the defenders and that which they defend."

Here come some questions: What does to "submit" mean in terms of Arthur's "DyAd"? ...
"We submit to" what? ... there are four phrases following the subject: ...
"We". and the connective ...
"submit". The four phrases form the ...
predicate. Each of these requires our attention and thought but why should I deprive you of the opportunity of doing the first three easy ones? Who are "they"? ...
the students or their teachers? .... What is it "they defend"? ...
How is it produced? ... HOW is it "deformed"? ... From what to what? ...
. If you have not come up with a satisfactory answer to all of them, don't worry, I haven't either. I am quite sure that they will be answered as we read on. However, how can we understand the second paragraph when we don't understand the first one? This question arose from my study of Ching 63. This is why I invested a disproportionate amount of time and energy in Ching 1 and in the first chapter of Rudolf Steiner's Philosophy of Freedom.
. Even if you couldn't get answers to the above questions, they still have served a purpose. ...
They have familiarized you with IX.1,5. To analyze it you can turn the first three words into a question, an interrogative sentence. ...
. Instead of me doing the exercise for you, let's try to determine what kind of book was dropped into my lap. Herbert Marcuse was highly recommended to me a long time ago. Now, I think, I know why I never got around to reading his books: ... I wasn't ready for them.
. After I got the book Saturday morning, I spent the rest of the day reading it. I got as far as page 25 when I was convinced that it is a book that can't be read, it has to be studied like the Tao Te Ching. That doesn't mean that translations of the Ching can't be read but in them, WHAT Lao Tzu has said is brought down to WHAT the translator can understand. It is as Lao Tzu has said: "WordErs Don't Understand (C2erPUkn)" it all. We can only understand what we are "able(ab)" to understand. The Tao Te Ching is a textbook that is designed to help, those that are willing to study it, to understand it better. Just reading the instructions, or even translating them accurately, doesn't do you any good if you don't "Carry-them-out(pr)".
. Ching 1 is not the easiest chapter, but it serves as a good example of HOW Lao Tzu teaches and HOW his book must be studied: At Ching 1.4,1 Lao Tzu says
"These DyAds (Tzdyad) ...." What does that mean? ...
That there are "DyAds" in Ching 1.1 to 1.3. If you have a translation that is accompanied by the original text, try to "Identify(Mg)" the first one. ...
The first character in the Tao Te Ching is Tao(A1). The second character is K'o(pt) "sign of potential mood (0675)". "ImPossible (PUpt)", "TaoAble(ptA1)", Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)!" The "Tao Can be Tao-ed. (A1ptA1)" "be" and "-ed" are fillers, they are needed in translation but they don't add to or subtract from WHAT is said. Notice however that the same three characters have been translated as an imperative sentence and as an indicative sentence.
. At Ching 1.1,2, Lao Tzu says: "Identify the IdentifyAble (MgptMg)"! and that is precisely WHAT we are doing here. However dictionary equivalents of Tao(A1) and different translations of it don't help us to "Identify(Mg)" the first "DyAd" in the Ching. Let us, then, use Richard Wilhelm's definition: Tao is like "an algebraic variable (ein algebraisches Zeichen) for something inexpressible (Unaussprechliches)" in words.
. And now you have the information neccessary to identify the first "DyAd". Please do. ...
. The whole (the DyAd in our case) emerges through its parts (the two words in our case) and, having emerged, gives meaning to them.
. If you have done the exercise you can see that the whole can't emerge through parts you don't understand well "Enough(Zu)". The process of getting the parts ready for the emergence is called induction, It is defined as the movement from the particular to the general. It is also known as the bottom up approach to problem solving. On the bottom are the words. Then you put the right ones together and the sentence can emerge through them. The opposite, or complement, of induction is deduction. Induction can be done by us, as you have just seen. Deduction can't be done by us at will. It happens to us when we are ready. That's why computers can't be programmed to do association or dialectics because the laws of correspondence and attraction don't work through computers.
Actually, computers can be programmed to do dialectics but you have to give it a knowledge base that includes the synthesis. In other words ...
the synthesis isn't original, it doesn't come from the other side of the Door, Dasamadwara (A).

November 13, 2007. I just came through a crisis this morning. Had the “Insight(72)” that solved the problem not come in time, this would have been the end of my attempt to participate in a collective effort to change our desperate social situation to the better. It also would have dealt a heavy blow to my faith (A) in divine guidance. Starting on Nov. 3, I got progressively more disillusioned with that book. Dropping it into my lap seemed more and more like a mistake to me.
. Herbert’s book put me into a deeper victim state of consciousness than even The Protocols of Zion did. If Herbert Marcuse was an “Agent” he was a very good one. He convinced me of what the Protocols were unable to do: That the attempt to change the present situation is futile. As I got more and more discouraged, I skipped ahead to "The Chance of the Alternatives” at page 203 to look for some encouragement. I got none. According to Herbert, the chances of attaining our Goal (A) are just about zero. Trying to participate in attaining a Goal that is unattainable is not only a waste of time and energy but it is stupid. There are situations in which we have to tolerate the stupidity of others but I don’t have to put up with my own. Please bear with me until I have figured out HOW I can get the new “Insight(72)” across to you. Let's just continue with IX.1,5 and see what happens: The question is: ...
What do "We submit to"? ...
This question breaks down the one big sentence into four smaller, more comprehensible ones. At Ching 63.1,4 Lao Tzu uses Hsiao(sm) for "Small". There it is the opposite of "Big(TA)". At 63.1,8, he uses Hsi(äl) "Fine, carefully, delicate" for what is usually translated as "Small" because the context demands it. The right component of that character is a big "Field(*a53)” and the left component is a rope (Rad. 120) by means of which the big field is broken down into four smaller fields. In chapter 63, Lao Tzu teaches the inductive, or bottom up, approach to problem solving. And that is the approach we are using here on IX.1,5. Please go over the four sentences one by one: ...
"We submit to the peaceful production of the means of destruction". Once it is "understood" that we need weapons of mass-destruction for self-defense it is alright to work in factories that produce these weapons. Besides: ...
Jobs are hard to come by these days.
. "We submit .... to the perfection of waste". What Herbert means here is not as obvious, so we have to look for clues in the text I have read so far: ...
You can't look for clues in the book, if you don't have it. A change in attitude happened to me between Saturday night and Sunday morning. On Saturday I was ready to throw the book into the garbage and to delete everything I have said about it. I didn't want you to get into the same despondent state I got into by Saturday. Not only would Herbert have created bad karma for himself by writing such an ingenious book but I would also create bad karma for myself by recommending it.
. An excuse, for discontinuing my work on this blog, could be to say: I am fed up with doing the work writers (C) should be doing. And that is the truth, I am fed up doing the work I don't like and I am not good at, and sooner or later, enough will be enough. The fact, as I saw it by Saturday, is that Herbert has deprived me of the opportunity to work for truth and justice right up to the bitter end.
. In the Gita we are told that whatever we think (B), believe (C) and do (D) at the time of our death, determines what will happen to us next. Herbert has convinced me that the Goal (A) is unattainable. I can continue my study of philosophy, which I love (philos, in Greek), but I can't put my heart into something which for one thing is not my dharma and which is unattainable for another. The Learned elders of Zion couldn't convince me that we, the people, have no chance to succeed, but Herbert did because the facts, he uses in such a brilliant Way, are much more convincing than what I saw in the Protocols of Zion. I had no problem seeing the flaws in them but Herbert's book seemed flawless to me. I assumed that the statements I couldn't accept were due to my own ignorance. All I had to do is study this book like the Ching and then, as in the Ching, the paradoxes start to make sense. But here they didn't. So how come I am now suggesting that you get the book? What happened? After I had looked for help in the last section of Herbert's book, I knew that something had to be wrong. I knew that things are bad but I also knew that they couldn't possibly be as bad as Herbert has made me believe. With that thought I went to sleep on Saturday and with the "Insight(72)", of what was wrong with Herbert's ONE DIMENSIONAL MAN, I woke up on Sunday morning. ...
Before I can tell you WHAT is wrong with his book you have to know a few things to help you understand it. Without understanding the parts the whole (the solution of my problem, in this case) can't emerge through them. So let’s find out what Herbert says about "the perfection of waste". If you have the book you can find many more relevant passages than I will pick. Here is one:
".... the productive apparatus tends to become totalitarian. (XV)" All of Lao Tzu's and Plato's four governments are totalitarian because the decision-making powers are OF those who are in power: A democracy (A) is a government OF the people in which the decisions are made BY the people. ...
Please complete the thought. ... You can't understand something without doing the necessary intellectual (B) work. ...
Let me give you a hint: In Pakistan, right now, the decision-making powers are in the hands of one man. In a dictatorship there doesn't even have to be the pretense of justice. There are no rights other than those of the dictator. We can see right now what that means in Pakistan. If we pay attention we can also see what that means in our so called "democracies" (C). But the most important question is: what does that mean in an Oligarcy (D), or a capitalist system? ...
And what does all of this have to do with "waste"? ...
We can use the form of the first sentence of this paragraph as a formulae into which we can insert other variables. _Please try. ... Does not the production of ...
waste also serve the producers and consumer of these (waste producing) products? ...
If the producers want to produce more (waste) then they have to create a market for their products. And have they not achieved a level of perfection in their marketing skills?
. When the "productive apparatus" is perfected, the marketing skills to sell its products must be perfected as well.
. "Vince Packard's .... The Waste Makers, (Pg. XVII)".
. "Perhaps the most telling evidence can be obtained by simply looking at television or listening to the AM radio for one consecutive hour for a couple of days, not shutting off the commercials, and now and then switching the station. (XVII)" If you produce and consume any product that can't be recycled or composted, you are participating in the production of waste. The true necessities of life, like food, shelter, closing and transportation don't have to be advertised, a need for then does not have to be created.
. "We may distinguish both true and false needs. 'False needs are those which are superimposed upon the individual by particular social interests in his repression: the needs which perpetuate toil, aggressiveness, misery, and injustice. (4 to 5)" The list can be continued with fear, pride, greed, lust, gluttony etc. Notice thet it is "particular social interests" that get us into these states.
. "Most of the prevailing needs to relax, to have fun, to behave and consume in accordance with the advertisements to love and hate what others love and hate, belong to this category of false needs. (5)" "Must I fear what others fear? What abysmal nonsense this is. (mn ZSOâlPUptPUâl. Wu's translation)"
. "Here, the social controls exact the overwhelming need for the production and consumption of waste (7)". There is much more in this paragraph which should be quoted but then, where do you draw the line? The fact is that I can't quote the whole book. The solution to this problem would be: Getting the text on the internet. Then you can search for key-words. The next best thing is, buying the book.
. "We are again confronted with one of the most vexing aspects of advanced industrial civilization: the rational character of its irrationality. Its productivity and efficiency, its capacity to increase and spread comforts, to turn waste into need, (9)". Again, there is much more in this paragraph I feel tempted to quote, but I have to draw the line.
. There are many more relevant quotes on "the perfection of waste" but this is as much I will do on it. If you have understood, not only WHAT Herbert has said here but if you are also able to appreciate the ingenious Way of HOW he has said it, you can hopefully understand why this book has put me into this desperate emotional state. You can't refute the facts presented in this brilliant and irrefutable Way. At least not before you have found that ...
one flaw Herbert must have overlooked. And even then, most facts remain irrefutable. It is only their interpretation that changes our attitude towards them. To give us his interpretation Herbert must have overlooked a number of details, some of which are right there in his own book. So let us approach the solution to our problem (Capitalism is not just my problem), very slowly and methodically. Let us study Herbert's book like the Tao Te Ching. This doesn't mean that Herbert's book is better than the Tao Te Ching, but it is more comprehensible for us because Herbert is addressing the problem we are facing right now more directly than Lao Tzu was able to do.
And, as I already said before I found the error: We can't solve a problem if we don't know what it is. The customer must tell the programmer WHAT s/he wants by means of the "job-description", the programmer must tell the coder WHAT to code by means of the flowchart and the coder must tell the computer WHAT to execute by means of the program. Without That programmer (B), Coder (C) or computer (D) don't know WHAT to do.
. Herbert's book is bitter medicine but, if we want to get better we must take it. We must know WHAT we are up to in order to deal with it properly. And one thing we are up to is social engineers. These are professionals. Social engineering is a science. Lao Tzu warns us: Of "Calamities There-are-none Greater Than Underestimating the (intellectual, political and economic) powers of your Enemy (ÜfMOTAto$jâb)." I take this to mean that I have to proceed very slowly and cautiously, lest you get turned off before you get the idea.
. Let us, then, continue with the last two sentences of IX.1,5. "We submit to ...
being educated for a defense which deforms the defenders". ...
Desmond Lee has introduced the section of Plato's Republic which starts at 421d as follows: On "education everything else depends, and it is an illusion to imagine that mere legislation without it can effect anything of consequence." And because the social engineers know that, they are in control of our educational system.
. We can again make use of the form of the first sentence of IX.1 as a formulae: ...
Does not dumbing down their students also protect the professors of philosophy, sociology or political science from being found out? ...
If you find out the truth, in spite of them, HOW can they make you believe that they didn't know the truth? ... Herbert's book has been around since 1964. And from his Index we can see that he is telling us nothing new. He has merely concentrated on one of Plato's four types of government and put it together for us in a very ingenious Way. If I am a teacher of philosophy or political science I shouldn't need Herbert's book. I should know my subject as well as my students by studying it independently of me and in spite of me giving them the "official version" of my subject.
. The last sentence of IX.1,5 is: ...
."We submit .... to being educated for a defense which deforms .... that which they defend." ...
I have already mentioned the "Truth(A1)" and the deformed "official version" of it but what happened at Columbia University recently is worth repeating: ...
When Ahmadinejad visited Columbia University, he questioned the "official version" of 9/11 and the holocaust. Columbia president Lee Bollinger defended it by giving us the "official version" we also get from the mass-media. The transcripts of what was said is available on the internet. Which means? ...
There is work for investigative reporters (C). The question is? ...
If the president does that, what can we expect his professors to do? ,,,
. I will now go over the pages of Herbert's book which I have read on that Saturday when I got it. I clearly remember that there was something I disagreed with but I thought that if I study it like the Tao Te Ching, I will understand the troublesome passages and see the error of my ways. This is the approach I now take towards the Ching almost automatically.
. Lao Tzu teaches by means of his paradoxes. So when you have "Identified(Mg)" a paradox it means? ...
There is work for you to do. For instance, if you read: "My Words are Very Easy to Understand (myC2%tezkn). .... And (Tn -) Nobody Can Understand (MOabkn)" them. You know that there is a lesson for you to be learned. What you have to do first is: "Seek(@n)" the question until you "Found(gt)" it. You can't ask a question unless you have a question to ask. Then, when you have the question "Ask(@n)" it until you "Get(gt)" the answer. If you don't get a valid answer to your question, then you still go an answer to your question. Which is that ...
there is no valid answer to your question. And, since the question arose from the text, ...
there must be a flaw in it.
. As I am looking for that clearly objectionable passage, a lot of what I couldn't understand at first reading now makes already more sense after only working these few days on this book. .... I think I found the objectionable text, but it may not be as objectionable to you as it was to me when I first read it. But if I take it out of context you may still see what I mean. Here it is:
"There is only one dimension, and it is everywhere and in all forms.(11)" ...
Can you see what is wrong and what is right with that statement? Hint: B is the Aristotelian formal cause. So, in a sense, matter is in a form (B). It is informed (C). Isn't language interesting? …
There is not “only” the material dimension (D). There is also Manas (C), the world of emotions, Gurdjieff’s emotional center. Above, or within, that is Buddhi (B), the world of thought, Gurdjieff’s ntellectual center and within it is the Atman (A), or our soul. The spiritual world is within A and outside of it. We can use a "Pot(ut)" as an example. Space is omnipresent, it is within and outside of the "Pot". I hope that I didn’t move too fast for you here.
. The problem Herbert has pointed out to us is that capitalism can satisfy physical (D) needs and desires which our politicians (C) can promise, but which their advisors (B) are unwilling to deliver. This is why Lao Tzu said that the people "Love And Praise It (%mbt*b17 Z)."
. The dictator that rules in Pakistan can not only promise better conditions to the disadvantaged masses but also deliver it. We have a similar situation in Venezuela even though Hugo Chavez is not a dictator (yet). He has taken the educational system out of the hands of the social engineers and given it to the people. This is why in spite of all their money and social engineering the "Hypocrites(*b18)" can no longer win an election. The Way Chavez can establish a lasting democracy is by the consensus-decision-making process. This is how he can “Do the governing Without Doing (doWUdo) it himself. By teaching the people how to govern themselves, Nothing is Not Governed (18WUPU85).” Chavez would have to teach the consensus-decision-making process. That is what the members of the Green Party of Ontario were already doing and, because democracy is a threat to timocracy, it was subverted.
. The problem I have now with ONE DIMENSIONAL MAN is not that there is not enough in it to quote and to comment on but that there is too much of it. To do justice to Herbert's book requires "WordErs(C2er)" do do justice to it. I am not cut out for this kind of work. It is not my business, or dharma. I will return to work on the Ching in front of the next file. Just click on it. I will continue here, but at a slower pace.
. In case some “WorErs(C2er) are willing to help the people, let me show them WHAT to do: I will now select a few quotes that are relevant to the economy's powers to offer comforts and to what this power leads to.
. " In the face of the totalitarian features of this society, the traditional notion of the 'neutrality' of of technology can no longer be maintained. Technology .... is a system of domination which operates already in the .... construction of techniques. (XVI)"
. Herbert talks about "False" needs: "Their satisfaction might be most gratifying to the individual, but this happiness .... serves to arrest the development of the ability (his own and others) to recognize the disease of the whole and grasp the chances of curing the disease. (5)"
. Here the word "whole" is correct. When a link of a chain is broken, then the "whole" chain is broken. Khalil Gibran's THE PROPHET is full of love, tolerance and kindness except where he talks about the "lust of comfort". There he could have said: Of lusts there is none worse than the "lust of comfort". And we know why: ...
It is destroying us. But does not the lust for comfort "which could wipe out the ...
human race also serve to protect the very forces which perpetuate this danger? (IX.1,1)"
. Notice that above I have used the form of Lao Tzu’s and of Herbert’s sentences as a formula. I have learned to do that from Lao Tzu.
. "The productivity and growth potential of this system stabilize the society and contain technical process within the framework of domination. Technological rationality has become political rationality. (XVI)" This "rationality" is, so we are told and taught, rational.
. "The efficiency of the system blunts the individuals' recognition that it contains no facts which does not communicate the repressive power of the whole. (11)".
. What Musharraf tells the underprivileged people of Pakistan may contradict the "official version" of the truth. That seems to be why his opponents don’t seem to get the support of the masses. And that is also why we don't get it all of it from the mass-media. Again, I am drawing the attention of writers (C) to valuable work they could be doing for the people. To get a translation of what Musharrat is telling the people and to point out where he could be talking about our government would contain facts the mass-media does not communicate to us.
. There is also an error at the end of the quote. ...
The "power", referred to here, is the economic power of the capitalists which must not be "Underestimated($j)", but here, it is overestimated because ...
the "economic sphere" (D) is not the whole. The 4-fold social system is the whole of which the economy is one part, or source, of. Can you "Identify(Mg)" this kind of mistake? ...
The self-assertive tendency, or tamas, is the cause if it. Capitalism (D) is not the only possible government, just as our body (D) is not the whole of us. However the capitalists can infiltrate our present type of government because our politicians (C) and their advisors (B) can be bribed.
. The capitalists, who own the mass media, and the social engineers, who control the educational system, must work together because neither of them can defeat democracy by itself. "El pueblo unido nunca sere vencido (The people united can never be defeated)." So our "Enemies(âb)" must prevent us from getting our act together if they want to stay in power.
. Well, this has to do for a while. Please follow me to the beginning of the next file, the Introduction.

End of insert.

. I have come back to this chapter [17] in order to shed light on Ching 38. There is more in 38 than I can chew but what I am doing there is the same I have done here. I have only worked on what I know, which is the tetrad. Now I can say a bit more about this chapter, but just reading it, wouldn't benefit you very much. You might not even be able to follow me without doing some thinking on your own. Thinking about this one will be more beneficial for you. Why? ...
Because here Lao Tzu has spelled things out more clearly than at 18 and 38. If you are new to the Ching, this is a good place to start. Without understanding this one, Ching 18 would be more difficult. And without having worked on this one and 18, Ching 38.4 would have been almost impossible dor me to figure out. The Ching is like a hologram, all chapters are connected, but some have to come before other chapters for which we are not ready yet. This is why I have come back to this one. I know that now I am better prepared for it. The Way I am Describing (C) WHAT I am doing may be confusing, but HOW I am working on it can serve you as an example for HOW to work on other chapters.
. The sequence of the sources, here, is anticlockwise around the cross. We start with Democracy (A), then comes oligarchy, or capitalism (D), "The Next" one is tyranny or dictatorship (C) and then the last one is the government we have now (B). Because we are not supposed to know that such a government exist this is the least known source of the tetrad. But we have many names for it. Plato had to coin a name for it because up to then, there was none. He called it a timocracy and it is on level B of his "Divided Line". In English it has been called a ruling bureaucracy. Lao Tzu has given it a different name or description every time he has mentioned it: At Ching 3 it is an "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)". At 17 it is the government the people "Despise(*c)". At 18 it is a "Hypocracy(*b)". But at 38 it is the legislature (B) of a "Just(Üw)" society, which is a democracy. Both, the legislature and a timocracy, are on level B.
. The legislature in a just government is part of a democracy. It exists to serve the people. The legislature in an unjust government exists to serve the "Hypocrites". They pretend to serve the people while serving themselves.
. Once you have "Identified(Mg)" these four types of government, understanding Ching 18 is easy. Only the sequence is different, but the sources , monads or components, are the same. To add these four sources to the Table of Correspondences, all I had to do is "Align(%8)" them to the sequence we have in the Aristotelian tetrad. But at Ching 38 the sources are not the same. This is why the knowledge gained from studying Ching 3, 17, 18 and Plato can get in the way of understanding Ching 38. The legislative (B), judicial (C) and executive (D) branches of government are not separate governments, looking after their own interest, but they are the parts of the same democracy, looking after the interests of the people (demos, in Greek).
. If it hadn't been for Wayne, drawing my attention to Ching 38, I wouldn't even have attempted to solve this problem. To solve it, we have to "UnLearn(PUÜd)" what we have learned about the four governments from Plato and Lao Tzu. But Rudolf Steiner's "Economic Sphere" (D) and his "Political Sphere" (C) of the same government come in handy. If only he had not mixed up level A and B, his "Cultural Sphere", the Anthroposophist might have gone somewhere with it in Germany.
. The "UnLearning" allowed me to remember what I had learned about the three branches of government and Steiner's "Threefold Social Order" and after that, things fell into place very nicely. With an understanding of Ching 38.4 (or 3), Plato's Ideal Society can make a lot more sense.
. There is an error in Plato's Republic. After seven years of trying to solve that problem, I ended up in India and had Jagad Guru Sri Kripalu Mahaprabhu help me to understand the Republic better. But it is only now, after understanding Ching 38.4, that I can see more clearly what Plato's error was. Aristotle saw some errors in his teachers books and later philosophers must have also seen the problem, otherwise they wouldn't have come up with the three branches of government. The three branches of government and Ching 38.4 take us beyond the Republic. It is something Plato has not explained. His democracy was an "Imperfect Society" like the other three. His "Ideal society" comes closer to democracy, but the whole cannot emerge through its parts when the parts are not "Aligned(%8)". Later philosophers have fixed the problem and their insights have found their way into the American Constitution. But our rulers have done some heavy social engineering on us. They have invented an "official version" of the truth so that we literally have to re-invent the whole thing again from scratch. And there is no Way that I could have come this far without Lao Tzu's help. And, unfortunately, we will not get very far with this knowledge (B) without the help of communicators (C) who are willing to take their dharma more seriously.
. If you go back over my web-sites with the knowledge you have gained from Ching 38.4, you can see that I was onto it for a long time, but now, if only a communicator (C) gets the idea, this: Fourfold Social Order would become teachable. Before we get into the systematics of Ching 17, let us take a look at 17.3, the last paragraph.
"Probing-the-depth, the Questioner, He (*dXi H)
Values Words (KuC2 (he doesn't waste them)). when the desired
Task is Accomplished (Kgcm), the
Work is done in Compliance (D2@w) with his plan,
All of the People, All Say (%i#s%2is)
'We OurSelves' (^ITuJa)" have made the decision to disarm the people and to punish Iraq for bringing down three towers with two airplanes and Mr. Bush has kindly "Complied(@w)" with our wishes.
. The first "Why(86)" in the connective at Ching 17.2 refers to 17.1, the first paragraph. If you are a student of Political Science or of Sociology, and, after a reasonable amount of study, you understand Plato's Republic in light of the Tao Te Ching and the three branches of government, then, naturally, you will want to know: "Why(86)" have my teachers not told me the "Truth(09)"? If I can understand it, why can't they? ...
. The second "Why" points to the solution of the problem that came to light due to the first question. There are, thus, two answers at Ching 17.3: One defines the problem, the other refers to its solution. The very first sentence of this chapter already hints at it. The "greatest leader" takes the advise Lao Tzu gives at Ching 3.5. At 3.4, Lao Tzu tells us what the rulers in an "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)" are doing while at 3.5 he is telling us HOW a "Superior Leader (*a +)" would "Govern(85)" instead. This is the answer Archie J. Bahm has formulated very nicely. And it is a valid one. There second answer I have formulated above. It is an answer, because you can't deal with a problem before you know what it is. First we have to find out what the problem is and then we can ask: What can we do about it? Plato said that tyrannies don't last as long as timocracies. Why? ...
Because the people know what their problem is. Bahm has written a book called "Philosophy of the Buddha". Where the Buddha's philosophy corresponds to "What(SO)" Lao Tzu "Also Teaches(08#l)" Bahm's interpretations are excellent; where it doesn't, they are still useful if you want to learn the Buddha's philosophy but they are misleading if you want to understand the Tao Te Ching.
. We have here, at 17.3 the same problem - solution "DyAd" we had at 3.4-5 but, as you can see, it is given in a much "Subtler(Jo)" way. As you discover these "Pearls(#v)" the hard Way, you know that Lao Tzu does not cast his pearls before the swine. Students don't learn by reading answers, they learn by figuring things out for themselves. Once you get used to his Way of teaching, you know that he knows HOW to teach.
. If the presidents of Iran and Venezuela would learn this lesson from Lao Tzu, then they would establish a participatory democracy in their countries while they still can. Democracy is the better mousetrap and Lao Tzu can tech us HOW it works.
. "Truth(A1)" is the lifeblood of democracy. Lao Tzu can help us to comprehend it. It becomes teachable, but the "KnowErs(kner)" can't do it alone, the "WordErs(C2er)" must team up with them as the elected politicians (C) team up with their unelected advisors (B). Neither the advisors nor their politicians can pull it off alone. Neither can we. The difference is that they know it and we don't.
. Here comes a bit of systematics: You don't have to know that the first 20 characters form a tetrad to see that it is the first paragraph. Wayne's translators have seen it. And their connective is also the same one I got. Many translators have divided the chapter into the same three paragraps without knowing systematics. But that there is a "Pattern(#t)" that causes translators to divide the words into paragraphs that then can be analyzed by means of systematics. This is an indication that Lao Tzu knew it.
. Ching 17.2 is the reconciling impulse here. When it is in the middle it is a connective. Credit for this "Insight(72)" goes to Naom Chomsky. Now we can say that: As 17.1 is to 17.2 so 17.2 is to 17.3. Now systematics enables us to come up with some questions: ,,,
If 17.2 is the monad, in what sense is 17.1 - 17.3 a "DyAd"? ...
There is some homework for you. ...
Instead of just telling you, which “DyAds(dyad)” I have come up with, it is better for us to take a closer look at Lao Tzu’s “Words(C2)”. If we invest “Enough(Zu)” time in his words, they are really “Very Easy to Understand (%tezkn)”. But if you try to bite off more than you can chew, then, obviously, you are going to waste your time and energy.
. Ching 17 is much easier than 38. So the time we invest in it wisely will not be wasted. If you look at translations of 17.1,1 and 17.3 you can see that the translators had trouble with it. Some tell us this, others tell us that. And that means to us that there is work for us to do. Let us, then, take another look at 17.1: The
“Superior ruling principle is Above (*a +). the people
Below Know that “It( Z)” Exists ( -knYU Z).”
. The next three rulers or principles are defined very clearly. No problem there.
. Filling in the blanks at 17.2 is no problem either, if you have learned from Lao Tzu HOW to do it.
. The last paragraph is vague again which explains my outrageous interpretations of it. Sentences that can’t be translated, obviously have to be interpreted. And 17.1,1 and 17.3 are written in such a way, that given the larger context, they must be interpreted in two significantly different Ways. For instance if the decisions, instead of being made by the people, are made by the capitalists (D), then we don’t have an “economic sphere” serving the people, but a government of the capitalists in which the decisions are made for the capitalists. Breathable air, drinkable water or natural resources don’t matter. To them, money is all that matters. This is why we tried to establish the Green Party here in Ontario. And, as you can see, our rulers didn’t like it.
. If a dictator makes the decisions, then we will know it, just as the people in Burma do.
. If the “Hypocrites” make the decisions, they will “Repeatedly(@1)” tell us that we have a “democracy”. If you understand the Republic, even with the flaws in it, you know that this is a lie. And if the politicians (C) couldn’t lie more convincingly than their unelected advisors (B) can tell the truth, then they wouldn’t get away with it. However, the social engineers are also controlling our educational system (B) and the mass media (C). If they decide to make us believe that two airplanes neatly brought down three big towers, you can see how good they are at it.
. I hope that you can see now HOW Lao Tzu can help us to find out the "Truth(A1)" which, when known by a critical mass of the people, will set us free.
. We may not be as good at social engineering as our rulers are, but we have the truth on our side. No matter how they manage to twist it, in the end, our truth will always outlast their falsehoods. The Old (Tzu)” “Truth(A1)” Lao Tzu was talking about 2500 years ago is still the same truth we have right here today.

Ching 18.

. . .A . . . . . Ching 18 is a tetrad. The sequence in which Lao Tzu has
D . + . B . . put the sources in this chapter is: A-B-D-C.
. . .C . . . . . This is the same sequence we havw at 25.3. As you can see from the diagram, A is above, it is the best form of government and C is below, it is the worst. D and B are in between, not as bad as the worst, but not as good as the best either.
. Chapter 18 is the last one up to which I have followed a well thought out plan. There are mistakes in the work I have done. After all, I am not a "WordEr(C2er)". "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". You can go to the Text-Commentary file and follow me up to chapter 18 but from then on, things got totally off the track. And that may not be a bad thing. Judge for yourself.
. I said at the beginning of this section: Forget all you might have learned from this blog and concentrate on Wayne's book.
. According to what I have said in this blog and what I have now learned from Wayne's book so far, I can say that this is still valid for some of you, however, I must tell you that others must study Wayne's book and this blog together.
. By knowing what I know and working on Wayne's book with as open a mind as I can manage, I have benefited and I hope that others, by taking the same approach, will benefit as well.
. To benefit from a combined study of Wayne's book and of my blog, you have to be open to both. This is easier when you are not familiar with either of these two different approaches. If you have never read Wayne's books and studied my blog, your chances of succeeding are better than when you are too familiar with either of these two approaches. If you just came across my flyer and started reading at the beginning of this section you might be better of than if you know too much about either one of the two approaches.
. If you study Wayne's book and my blog with an open mind, you may come to an understanding you can't get from either one of them alone. The Way to go is to concentrate on one chapter until you understand it as best as you can. Lao Tzu seems to help those who really try to understand his book.
. I am talking here about the dialectic process. You start with the thesis. It can be either Wayne's book or my blog. Then if you can accept the antithesis, which would be my approach if you are already familiar with Wayne's approach, then the synthesis can happen. There is no gurantee for it, but now the "Possibility(pt)" exists. The "Potential(pt)" must exist before it can be actualized. "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"!
. By "Taoing the TaoAble you are producing its Opposite, the TaoEd (A1ptA1FyCnA1).". First there has to be the "Potential Tao (ptA1)" then comes the Taoing and then comes the Taoed. Potential and actual is a "DyAd(dyad)". The activity that turns the potential into the actual is the reconciling impulse in systematics. We have a "TriAd ( 3ad)" here.
. The "Two Produces the Three ( 2Sg 3)" by the dialectic process. First the big "Tao Produces the One (A1Sg 1)”. We have the "Big Tao (TAA1)" at 18.1. It produces the thesis.
. The "One Produces the Two ( 1Sg 2)." The thesis attracts the antithesis, and the "Three Produces All Things.( 3SgWnwU)."
. What Lao Tzu is telling us here, among other things, is that we need the tetrad to bring about changes in the outer world (E8). The "DyAd" will not do, not even the "TriAd" will do. Nothing less than the tetrad will do. Anything less than the tetrad will not do it. Anything less is not the whole truth. And anything less than the whole truth cannot set us free. We must know the whole truth to set us free.
. I am coming primarily from the intellect (B). In this book Wayne is coming primarily from the "Tao" (A). Now try to put these two approaches together. But, remember, the dyad is not "Enough(Zu)". No matter how much I learn from Wayne's book, I still need a communicator (C) to communicate what I know (B) and they need the doers (D) to implement their instructions. To "Produce(Sg)" any intentional effect in the world we need the tetrad. Study Wayne's: The Power of Intention along with the philosophical (B) approach.
. Let me put this whole thing in a nutshell for those who are ready for it: The six "DyAds" in the tetrad are: A-B, A-C, A-D, B-C, B-D (theory - practice) and C-D. The two triads within the tetrad are: A-B-C and B-C-D (thought, word and deed). The two triads in which A and D are the reconciling impulses, or the connectives, are: E3-A-B and C-D-E8. I only hope that the right people come up with the right questions.

Chapter 22.
. I said before that: In order to benefit from the combined study of the “Tao” path (A) and the intellectual approach (B) you have to be open to both. Wayne talks about the same sort of thing here, but he says it better.
. While I am at it, he also talks about karma yoga (D): If you are “immersed” in your work and you don’t care about the “outcome”, you are a karma yogi. Krishna says the same thing at Gita 2.46 and elsewhere but in the Gita “Doing your own dharma” applies to more than karma yoga only. It applies to all of the four yogas which are taught in the Gita. Doing your work not for the fruit of your labor but for the love of it is what is meant. It applies to spiritual (A), intellectual (B), mental (C) and to physical (D) “work”.
. Like the links of a chain, each “source", or component of the tetrad, is equally important. What can be confusing to students of the Gita is the fact that Krishna says at one time that karma yoga is the best. Then at Gita 4. 33 to 38, he makes it clear that jnana yoga is the best. Then he says more than once that He loves the bhaktis (A) most. But then, since he teaches raja yoga (C) to Arjuna, it must be the best.
. At Gita 12.1, Arjuna demands a clear answer: What is better, bhakti yoga (A) or jnana yoga (B)? A politician couldn’t have given a more ambiguous answer than Krishna gave: Well, the bhaktis “I hold as the best. But ….”.
. The fact is that: Whatever is your yoga, that is the best for you, that is your dharma. “And do your own dharma …. (Gita 3.35)”.

Ching 25
. Wayne starts his commentary on this chapter with: "Many of the scholars who have written about the Tao Te Ching over the centuries consider this 25th verse to be one of the most significant lessons in the entire manuscript."
. The reason Ching 14 and 25 stand out is because 14 is about the "TriAd( 3ad)" and 25 is about the tetrad. The "Monad( 1), the "DyAd(dyad)", the "TriAd( 3ad) and the tetrad are the most important components in systematics because these are the basic building blocks that make up all the other larger number systems. For instance, the dyad consists of two monads called "poles". The triad consists of three monads called "impulses". Two of these always form a dyad. The monad is always the reconciling impulse.
. The tetrad can either be a double dyad (2+2), as in Ching 40 or 71, or a triad and a monad, as in most of the other chapters including this one. The monad is usually the conclusion.
. If you were able to follow me up to here, then you are probably able to follow me the rest of the Way through this chapter. But then, if you want to get beyond level B, where I am coming from, then you have to put in as much, or more, time and effort into Wayne's interpretation of this chapter as you have put into mine. Let us start with
Ching 25.1: The big Tao
"Exists, it has Substance, is Undifferentiated and Complete (YUwUÜecm). Before Heaven and Earth it was Born (^7TnTISg)."
. My two favorite translators, J.WU and Wing, have both considered this to be the first paragraph. Wayne and I have not. Wayne's first paragraph goes on for another six lines. The reason for this is because the first paragraph is about the "Big(TA)" Tao. The remaining three paragraphs are about what the Hindus call: The "idea of separate existence". There are "Four( 4)" separate existences in the "One( 1)" "Undifferentiated, Complete (Üecm)" "Existence(YU)"
. I will only translate the last three sentences of Ching 25.1: Talking about the "Big" Tao, Lao Tzu said: "I Don't Know Its Name (myPUkn HMg). the Character that is used for It Is Tao (Zi Z73A1). if Forced To give It another Name (57do ZMg) then I-would-call-it Big (73TA).. if we let
"Big Mean Going (TA73*e) out, having
Gone Mean Arriving (*e73$t) and having
Arrived Mean Returning ($t73$l) Then (KU)"
having returned means being back home again. Notice how Lao Tzu gets his students to fill in the blanks.
, He is talking here about "Eternal (Cn)" laws. Because these laws are universal, we can find many different examples of it. There are, for instance, the four seasons. Or let us take the pendulum: At first, the bob is at rest. Next comes acceleration, then comes maximum velocity, then deceleration and then we are back at rest again . From rest to rest is one cycle.
. "CycliciTy, Tao'S Movement ($ladA1 Z%k)." A most useful example of this 4-fold cycle is computer programming. The "job description" (A) comes from the customer and the computer (D) output (E8) is Returned to the customer.
. It helps to consult different translations of the same Chinese characters as Wayne has done. Getting different interpretations of the same text helps you to form your own opinion.
Ching 25.1
. Ching 25.1 is about the Big "Undifferentiated and Complete (Üecm)" Tao. Ching 25.2 is about its four-fold division. At 25.3 its four sources are named. Their sequence is: A-B-D-C. It is the same we have at Ching 18.
. Ching 25.4.
Here the sequence is reversed. We now have: C-D-B-A. When Lao Tzu "Reverses($l)" two things it means that they are opposites or complements. For instance "KnowErs Don't Talk; TalkErs Don't Know (knerPUC2C2erPUkn)." means that they are opposites. As I already said: Each of the four sources is the opposite of the other three. Words are containers and ideas are their content. So we have here the content - container dyad. Without words, ideas can't be communicated (C) and without content words are empty. When a politician gives us hot air, we say that his words are empty.
. You can find the details on Ching 25 elsewhere in this blog, so there is no need to repeat it here. What I am giving you here in this blog is theory (B). Unless a theory is properly communicated (C) and made use of (D), it is useless. The same is true of words (C) unless words have content, they are worthless.
. This seems to be contradicted by politicians who are making a good living by giving us empty words. This is so because their profit is compensated for by our losses. Knowledge is power. The unelected advisors (B) and their politicians (C) know HOW to make use of natural laws. And as long as we don't understand these laws they will continue to take advantage of their power over us. The knowledge of the advisors alone will not do it, they need their communicators (C). Similarly, unless a communicator takes over from here, what I have to say, isn't going to go anywhere fast "Enough(Zu)".
. The knowledge, I am giving you here, alone, will not do But I believe that Wayne's interpretations can take us deeper along the Tao path (A) and into a more practical (D) direction as well because he is an excellent communicator (C).
. A theory (B) is hard, or impossible, to apply in practice if communication is laking. For instance, a computer (D) can do nothing without instructions written in computer language (C).
. Still, let me attempt to explain the meaning of the "Reversal" of Ching 25.3 and 25.4: Lao Tzu said: "Other Teachers What they Teach I Also Teach (mn ZSOlme08l) if What-they-teach ( Z)" is true. In other words: If you can't figure out the details, then get them from "Other Teachers".
. Let us, then, consult Sutra 14 of The Holy Science: "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths." Purusha seems to be the upper or inner triad: E1-E2-E3. The first layer around this inner core "is called Anandamaya Kosha." Around that is "Buddhi" (B). It "is called Jnanamaya Kosha." Next comes "Manas" (C). It "is called Manomaya Kosha."
. All of these Koshas are inside of our body (D). It is "called Pranamaya Kosha." "The fifth and last of these sheaths is the gross matter" we know. It is around our body as the body is around our mind. Since we can see our body and the outside world we can, by analogy, infer how the invisible components of us are related to each other. It takes a certain trust in the law of correspondences, but it is possible to do.
. The process we have followed this far can be called involution because it got us more and more involved with, or entrapped in, physical matter (E8). For instance, our body (D) is physical matter. The layers around us became more and more dense or physical.
. And now comes the "Reversal": It can be called evolution. Now, layer by layer, we have to remove these coverings that are, in a sense, imprisoning us. But HOW?
. Now we can return to Lao Tzu for advise. To free ourselves from these "Boundaries(*1)" we must "Constantly Have Representations By-means-of-which we can See Them (CnUYÜYIKu H)." We can't deal with what we can't even see. In other words, the truth, when known individually, will help us to remove those coverings; when known collectively, it will help us to remove our oppressive government. Either Way: The truth, when known, will set us free.
. I have lectured on the tetrad from 1964 to 1973. So it is understandable that this chapter stands out for me. But in spite of all the work I have done on it, after reading Wayne’s interpretation of it and saying what I said about the “Reversal($l)”, above, I had a new “Insight(72)”. WHAT it is, is clear in my head, all in one piece. But HOW to explain it to you is not clear.
. I will put out this information in hope that a “WordEr(C2er)” will understand it well enough to start asking me some relevant questions. To prepare yourself, for what will come next, you can go over this and my earlier blog: DaoTeChing.blogspot.com and read up on what I have said about Ching 25. ...

If you are serious about studying the Tao Te Ching, my Dictionary - Concordance is a good study guide. It is the last file at DaoTeChing.blogspot.com So, the best way to get to it is to scroll right to the end of it. Then you are in it. I got a printout of it and it has served me very well in spite of the few errors and omissions in it. You can also get the two - digit identifyers for Ching 25 from that same blog but I will give them to you here next because I will arrange them in three lines which represent the last three paragraps. My two favourite translators, and I, up to now, have translated these characters as two paragraphs. The insight I had is that: The last 33 characters of 25, make up a "TriAd( 3ad)". If you use the identifyers of Ching 25, other translations and your own intelligence (B) or intuition (A) to come up with a triad, you will have prepared yourself for what comes next. If you wait until I give it to you, you will have deprived yourself of the opportunity of doing it yourself. ...

I was going to wait a few days to get you to do your own thinking. There is a certain urgency in all of this, so I couldn’t wait. To help you figure it out yourself, let me repeat what I have said at the beginning of this Ching 25 section: “The triad consists of three monads called ‘impulses’. Two of these always form a dyad. The monad is always the reconciling impulse. …. If you were able to follow me up to here, then you are probably able to follow me the rest of the Way through this chapter.”
. At the time I said that, I didn’t know yet that the last 33 characters of Ching 25 form a “TriAd( 3ad)” but I did know that in order to understand Lao Tzu you must understand these number systems. Here are the 33 identifiers:
A1TATnTATITA E08TA. E08TA means “King Also (a component of) Big” Tao.
*f =YU 4 (divisions of) TAbt ECü H 186. Now “King( E)” changes to “Man(mn)”.
mnähTITIähTnTnähA1A1ähTuJa. *f = Jü32. "In-the world (*f =) There-are Four (YU 4)...." Remember Sutra 14: D, C, B and A, these four, are in the world (E8), the "Annamaya Kosha".
. The question is now: What is the dyad and what is the monad in this triad?
For TnähA1A1ähTuJa, Wayne has: “To know heaven, understand the Way. To know the Way, understand the great within you.” This isn’t the most accurate translation but, if you think about it, it is the most valuable interpretation.

Ching 28
. The first three paragraphs of this chapter are the most symmetrical ones in the whole book. To convey this symmetry to you, I will put the two diggit identifers of these three paragraphs in front.
kn H*a40 H@xdoTn -*bdoTn -*b Cn TÊPU#DFU77to#F#G
kn H#J40 H*c do Tn -#t doTn -#t Cn TÊPU*d FU77toWU%l
kn Här 40 H $f do Tn -kUdoTn -kUCnTÊ$pZuFU77to^i
Know The Male Hold-to The Female! Become The-World's Stream! by Being
The-World's Stream Constantly, T'ê will Not Leave. Again Returni To InfanCy.
Know The White Hold-to The Black! Become The-World's Pattern! by Being
The-World's Pattern Constantly, T'ê will Not Falter. Again Return To BoundLessness.
Know The Glory Hold-to The Lowly! Become The-World's Valley! by Being
The-World's Valley Constantly, Tê Will-be Sufficient. Again Return To Simplicity.
. *a = Hsiung177. *b = Ch'i150. *c = Hei203. *d = T'ê60 *e = Chih18.
. Even though the last sentences of the three paragraphs sound like imperative sentences, I don't think they are. I think what is meant here is that: If you are "Constant(Cn)" in your efforts, then Tê will-be sufficient. to return you again to simplicity, or to get you out of trouble.
. The last paragraph is pretty straight forward, so most translations are adequate. Here are the identifiers: ^iäQ18doutwsmnus Z18do*elgKUTAâxPUäu. By using different translations and the identifiers, you can see that my word for word method of translation doesn't work too well on this one. But that doesn't really matter. What matters is the exercise you get. A thought just came: The more of us do that, the easier it becomes for others to find the truth. To find out why this is so, you can consult Rupert Sheldrake.
. The idea is to appreciate the symmetry, get an idea, or a feeling, of WHAT Lao Tzu is trying to convey to us and then expand on it by means of Wayne's less accurate translation, but more meaningful interpretation. By "Constantly(Cn)" doing this kind of work, you come to realize that what matters is not so much HOW Lao Tzu has said things, but WHAT he says. I have used the present tense here because intuitions from the other side and Sheldrake's "morpho-genetic field" don't come to us in the past but in the now.

Ching 31
, The problem addressed here includes overpopulation and social engineering. In my opinion, nothing short of a miracle can solve it.
Sept. 13,2007
. A part of Wayne’s commentary on this chapter bothers me. I have already said something about gun-control in this blog. Let me sum it up here:
Before the globalists can make their move from their “Timarcy (The Republic at 545c)” to their global “Tyranny (562a)” they have to collect all the registered guns. Word gets around and some gun owners will refuse. They get shot. Word gets around and agents get shot before gun owners get shot. Collecting guns becomes dangerous business. ….
Times of “Darkness and Disorder (Üe$a)” are also times of opportunity: The “Truth that has been Greatly Ridiculed (A1TA*a(at 41))” is being reexamined. The people starting to think is a greater threat to the social engineers than “the right to own and use weapons” in Wayne’s words. I had to contradict part of Wayne’s commentary here because I know that Lao Tzu is not advising us to burry our heads in the sand.
. The latest news about Bin Laden comes to mind. … How can he imply responsibility for 9/11? … Please use your head: Two planes (without windows) hit two towers. Three towers come down in such a way that any demolition expert can tell you HOW they came down. We also have a motive for this crime.
. The social engineers working in the mass media are good, there can be no doubt about that, but 9/11 is more than they can chew. All you have to do is: See the documentary. After that, social engineering will be seen for what it is: A powerful tool in the wrong hands.

Ching 32
. Ching 31 points to a problem that seems to have no solution other than a miracle. In the Ching, the chapters are related: If one chapter gives rise to a question, then it is worth looking for its answer in the next one.
. If there is an answer in this chapter, then it is a very “Subtle(Jo)” one. I hope that it will make the solution Wayne is suggesting more comprehensible. I will only translate the first two and the last sentence of this chapter: The big
“Tao is Always Without Name (A1CnWUMg). its
Primal-simplicity, Although Small (^i%vsm), in
The-World There-is-nothing Able to Master it Yeh (Yn -MOab@SYe). ….
Compare the Tao Which is In The-World (*fA1 ZÜnTn -)
With a Stream in a Valley Which is To Rivers (^5@qkU Zto@Y) as rivers are to the
Sea (#X).” *f = P’i149 “Compare, like, if, suppose”.
. Does this analogy shed light on the tetrad? …
"Rivers and the Sea (@Y#X)" are the first two characters of Ching 66. Please think (B) about it before I give you something to read (C) about it. ...

Before I say more about Ching 66, let us figure out how "Stream .... River and Sea" can shed light on the tetrad, or how the tetrad can shed light on "Stream ....". "Stream" is to be "Compared" with the "Tao Which is In The-World (A1 ZÜpTn -)".
. The "Sea" seems to correspond to E8, the "Annamya Kosha". What does that assumption tell us about the "Rivers"? ...
. At this point I went into a long explanation about what the three doots ("...") mean. I will move it to the begining of the "Introduction" file because it doesn't belong here.

After having done the above work, I relaxed and read Wayne's commentaries on Ching 32 again. There is now a bit more to criticize but even then, if you do your own thinking, you cannot help but benefit from that as well. So, let my approvals and criticisms merely serve as examples of what you can do yourself:
. "You and I are like the rivers and streams that Lao Tzu mentions in this verse." ... Is this true? ...
Yes it is. And what do the "Rivers(@Y)" and "Streams(@q)" represent? ...
The thinkers (B), communicators (C), doers (D) and poets (A) can be compared to the sources of the tetrad. For "poets" see Sargeant's commentary on Gita 4.16.
. Stop, listen to your passion, ...." ...
If you can't come up with ideas, read the context out of which I have lifted the quote. ...
You can also go over what I have said above again. ...
Your passion, excitement or bliss, all refer to the "Anandamaya Kosha", the "bliss sheath". Whether you are a jnana (B), raja (C) or karma (D) yogi, all of us get our sense of satisfaction, fulfillment or rightness from the "bliss sheath" (A). It comes from doing your dharma. "Follow your bliss" is another Way of saying the same thing.

Ching 33
. For Chapters that are straight forward enough, you will find no great differences between different translations. There you don't need my word for word type of translation unless you want to learn how to read Lao Tzu's own words. By using more than one translation, and by doing your own thinking about it, you can get a good idea of what Lao Tzu has said.
. Now you are ready to read Wayne's interpretation. Speaking only for myself, I am often surprised how much I have missed. Here he is: ".... as you realize that you are responsible for your reactions in any given moment, others will cease to have any power or control over you. .... even just seeing the atrocities reported on the evening news -- you'll become aware that there is no 'they' who have power over you."
Of "Calamities There-is-none Greater Than Underestimating (ÜfMOTAto$1) the intellectual, political and economic powers of your Enemy(âb)."
. ".... when you sincerely desire that others follow their own paths" you can help them by explaining THE DIVISION OF LABOR to them. It is described in the Bhagavad Gita, the Republic and hinted at by Lao Tzu in many places other than this chapter. Take 3.5: There a ruler is advised to "Do his dharma Without Doing (doWUdo)” the governing himself. HOW? ...
By educating the people. Even the Learned Elders of Zion say that they are going to tech that after they have made their move. At least they intend to teach as much of it as the Brahmins (B) have permitted it to be taught at Gita 18.41-44. A partial, or distorted, "truth" can be a dangerous thing.

Ching 34: The
"Big Tao Inundates (TAA1*a) everything. Hsi(Xi)!
It Can be to the Left or Right ( HptÜr^q)." *a = Fan85.
. In other words, it can be everywhere. The Big Tao must be omnipresent.
"It can also be called small (ptMgtosm)." And ....
"It can also be called big. (ptMgdoTA) Because It (YI H),
right to the End, does Not by itSelf Handle the Big (nGPUTudoTA)" task. and
Thus it is Able to Accomplish the Big (KUabcmTA)" task.
. For instance: If a "Wise Man (wsmn),
right to the End, does Not Handle the Big (nGPUdoTA) task by himself,
Then he is Able to Accomplish The Big (KUabcm HTA)" task.
. We have here one of Lao Tzu's ingenious paradoxes, ...
The "..." means: Please don't wait for me to tell you what I think about it. ...

The paradox Lao Tzu has given to his students, to work on, is: ...
How can you accomplish the "Big" "Task(D2)" without doing it? ...
The Concordance tells you that Shih(D2) is in Ching 63 among other chapters. Think about Ching 63.1,1 and 2: ... They are imperative sentences. Try to translate them. ...
"Do it Without Doing (doWUdo)" the whole job on your own. Break it down!
"Work Without Effort (D2WUD2, Wing)"! "Strive for the effortless (J.Wu)"!
. R. L. Wing has been a great help to me. Often I just have to capitalize the words that are there and add the identifiers.
. Different translators translate Lao Tzu's instructions differently. Wayne has: "Work without doing." If you want to carry out an instruction, you must understand it. Obviously, "Nobody who doesn't understand an instruction is Able to Execute (MOabpr)" it.
. In order to "Work Without Effort", you have to do your own dharma. You will then find out for yourself that your work becomes play. It becomes an "EffortLess Effort (D2WUD2)".
. Now let's get back to our paradox. Can you rephrase the question that arises from it? ...
How can you participate in accomplishing the "Big" task? ...
By only doing that part of the work that is your responsibility, duty or dharma. That is the work you are better qualified to do than anybody else. And it is work you love doing. And, if there is a creative part to it, it is "EffortLess (D2WU)" to you. For instance ideas come into my head all by themselves, I don't know when they come but when they do, I am often surprised, because I am not doing it. And, if I may say so myself, some of them are really good. The "Effort(D2)" for me is to Communicate (C) them to you. Some "WordErs(C2er)" actually hear words, as if taking dictation. "KnowErs(kner) are not that lucky: They only get intuitions (A) from above. These are then translated into ideas (B) which then have to be translated into words (C), which, in turn, have to be translated into actions (D). Lao Tzu puts it this Way: "Without Name (or words) is Heaven and Earth'S Conception (WUMgTnTI ZB1)." Heaven and earth are the poles of a polarity or "DyAd(dyad)". First it is a vision (A), then it is "Conceived(B1)" as a thought (B), then it is expressed in "Words(C2)" and then it is manifested (D) in the outer world (E8) where we can see the many examples of it.

The "Right vision" (A) is available to us through the Bible, the Ching, the Gita, the Republic and many other books. We can get "Enough(Zu)" messages from level A in books, to keep thinkers busy for a long time. All we need is "Right thought" (B). The truth can also be found on the internet, but you have to learn HOW to deal with the disinformation. It is put there by professionals, so: Let's not underestimate it.
. What we need next is "Right speech" (C) or Communication. That's where, I believe, the bottleneck is. As long as the communicators fail to do their job, or dharma, the doers (D) have no coherent plan to follow. Another definition of social engineering came to mind: It is the art of communication. Politicians (C) can lie more convincingly than their advisors (B) can tell the truth. Their "Words(C2)" are not "Aligned(%8)" to what they "Know(kn)" to be the truth. Still, if they can make us believe them, then they are very good communicators.
. If thought is not aligned to "Right vision" then it can't be right. If speech is not aligned to "Right thought" then it can't be right. And if actions are not aligned to "Right speech" then they can't be right. Why is that so? …
"Right action" (D) is the effect for which the vision (A) of the customer is the cause. The Buddha's "Right vision" is Aristotle's "final cause" and J. G. Bennett's "Goal". That is the "job description" in computer programming. Wayne's "Intent" also comes close to it. The manifestation, or the supply of the customer's demand, is the "material cause" (D) because it brings about the effect on the material level (E8).
. What the "Knowers(kner)" know must be expressed correctly and comprehensibly by the "WordErs(C2er)". And the doers must be willing and able to carry out the instructions the communicators give them. The reason computer programming works so well is because the computer has no will of its own. It is designed to do as it is told. There is a lot we can learn from that because the willingness of humans to do what is good for human society can only come from charity or love, a knowledge of the truth, or an understanding of THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Plato has devoted so much space to explain it because we can't have a healthy society without it.

Ching 35
"Hold-fast to the Great Smbol (32TA%4)! and all in
The-World will be Attracted (Tn -*a)
Attracted, But take No Harm (*abtPU%a). instead they find
Peace, Security and Happiness (%h*b*c).
"Music And Food (%5Yü*d) can cause a
Passing Traveler to Stop (#iär$i). ...."
*a = Wang60. *b = P'ing51. *c = T'ai(äY), alternative = T'ai37. *d = Erh184.
. Wayne has called this chapter "profound". I believe that you will agree with him, if you dwell on it for a while.
. There are 43 Chinese characters that make up this chapter. It is fairly straight forward to read, so you will find few major discrepancies between different translations. There is an almost line by line correspondence between translators whose primary concern is accuracy. The ones I consult for accuracy are Ellen M. Chen and R. L. Wing. I also appreciate their commentaries.
. Both have divided the 43 characters into three paragraphs. But the lines at which they have made their divisions are different. Whenever a character is “Repeated($l)”, as the *a in this chapter, we have the reconciling impulse of a “TriAd( 3ad)”. Thus the first ten characters of Ching 35 form a triad. Thus, some translators have interpreted it as one paragraph. However, other translators have interpreted the first 13 characters as one tetrad.
. Please don’t let this bit of systematics confuse you. I didn’t learn it over night either.

The way different translators have divided a chapter is worth paying attention to because if a chapter is divided into two halves, Lao Tzu might be talking about the "DyAd(dyad)". If we get three paragraphs, we can expect a "TriAd( 3ad)". If you know "Enough(Zu)" about systematics, you know that Lao Tzu knows it too, even though he doesn't call it "systematics". For instance, I am always looking for the tetrad first but this chapter isn't one, even though some translators have "Identified(Mg)" this one as a tetrad.
. With Wayne's translation, I have now twenty translations. You don't need that many. Over the years, I have just bought the ones I like and some have been given to me. Now, since I have them, we can do some statistics with them: Four translators have not subdivided chapters. They are right because a chapter is "One( 1)" "Unit($1)". But in chapter 25 we can see that the "Unit" has been broken down into four parts. So the question about HOW the "Whole($1)" is "Divided(âo)" still remains. Four translators have divided Ching 35 into two. Five have three paragraphs. Two have six and one has eight.
. Richard Wilhelm is among those that has a "DyAd(dyad)". A "DyAd", "TriAd" or tetrad can be interpreted as a "Unit". So translating a chapter as a "Unit" or a "DyAd" is not a mistake. Plato, Lao Tzu and others have done it as well. For a thorough analysis of a chapter, we must try on all possible number systems for size. While doing that, I found Richard's translation of the last three lines worth translating:
"You look for it (nach ihm) and you see nothing special (Sonderliches).
You listen for it (nach ihm) and you hear nothing special (or unusual).
You act according to it (nach ihm) and you find no end of it."
. These three lines are the last paragraph in most translations in which Ching 35 is a triad. So we have a triad in which the last impulse is a triad as well. But Ellen M. Chen has a tetrad there. It too is well worth quoting:
"Tao, when uttered by the mouth, [A1 ZCu@l]
Is so bland it has no flavor. [âaHU HWU#K]
When looked at, it is not enough to be seen. [#M ZPUZuoo]
When listened to, it is not enough to be heard. [@H ZPUZu^d]
When used (yung), it is inexhaustible." [us ZPUZu$r] We have here a comparison between "Music And Food (%5Yü*d), which can cause a Passing Traveler to Stop, and the Tao (#iär$iA1). ....", which is too "Subtle(Jo)" to be "Seen(oo)" or "Heard(^d)". But the not so "Subtle" message, here, is: ...

You can "Use(us)" it. "SubtleTy, Tao'S Usefulness (JoadA1 Zus)."
. Ellen's commentary is also well worth reading. As you study different translations and you think about them, you will find things to agree with in some and to disagree with in others. But don't reject the whole thing because you find a few flaws in it. Many will find flaws in my work. That is unavoidable because people are different. We all have different "talents (Mathew 25:15)". For instance, "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" what the "KnowErs" know. But "Knowers are Not as good with Words (knerPUC2)" as the "WordErs" are. That's why we all need each other. As Lao Tzu advises us: "Unite Your Dust ($1 H@h)! This is Called a Mystical Unit (SiisSü$1)" because it is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.
. If I had stopped reading Wayne's book at chapter 31, then I wouldn't have learned what I have learned since then. But I had to speak up. The globalists want influential people to say what Wayne has said there because before they can make the "move", The Learned Elders of Zion are talking about, they have to disarm the people.
. I am "Struggling(Cê)" very hard here, trying to do the best I can. Why?... See Ching 3.1,1. ...

Ching 3.1,1 is Chapter 3 paragraph 1,sentence 1. ... I am trying to emulate the exellent work, Wayne has done on level A, on level B. I can't do it with all of the chapters because I don't know the Ching well "Enough(Zu)". But, where ever possible, I try to do the best I can do.
. By doing the reading, comparing and thinking, you are preparing yourself for Wayne's interpretation. In spite of having done all of this homework, I usually find out that there is much more to a chapter than I have noticed. I notice it after reading Wayne's interpretation because, in a way, he is drawing my attention to it. Even though we are not gathred together in a Tao Te Ching study-group, I still benefit from Wayne's contributions.

September 12, 2007
. This morning details about the original Chinese texts came to mind. I think, I better fill you in. Unless you do this detail work yourself, reading about it can be boring. so, if you get bored, just skip it.
. Actually, the translation by Robert G. Henricks is my 21st translation. I have not mentioned it to you to keep it simple. Robert is using the Mawangtui texts and they are different from the standard text. Ching 35 is among those chapters of which it is safe to assume that all translators have used the standard text. The statistics wouldn't be valid if we have to assume that the translators have used different Chinese texts.
. Among the twenty translations is the following: "Lao-tzu's Taoteching translated by Red Pine with selected commentaries of the past 2000 years." In it, Ching 35 is followed by ten such commentaries. The first one reads: "Here 'hold' means to hold without holding, to hold what cannot be held."
. Wayne also tells us that the "Great Image (TA%4)" represents the Tao. And, as we are told at Ching 14 and here: The Tao can't be "Seen(oo)” or "Heard(^d)".
. Here is a translation of a relevant passage from the Mawangtui texts: "Therefore, the Tao Which, when Expressed in Words,: (KUA1 ZCuC2Ye) is .... Without Taste (WU#K)." I have taken the Wu(WU) from the standard text. The Wei(#K) is in Ching 12, 35 and 63.
. Red tells us that "The Mawangtui texts add ku: thus to the beginning of line seven. I have followed the standard edition in leaving it out." He has interpreted Ching 35 as a "Monad($1)" while the Mawangtui text demands a "DyAd(dyad)" because of the "Thus(KU)".
. Before the "Therefore(KU)”, the Mawangtui texts and the standard text are almost identical. After it, there are three Yeh(Ye)s in the Mawangtui texts which have been deleted and "Word(C2)” has been changed to "Mouth(@l)". When you compare the translations of the Mawangtui texts with translations of the standard text, you can see what an effect changing a single character can have on the meaning of the sentence. In most cases, the difference between the translations is not the opinion of a translator, but is demanded by the text.
. This is probably all the details even the more serious students of the Tao Te Ching can take. However, if you do the work yourself, it can be quite fascinating, even for "KnowErs(kner)".

J. G. Bennett has suggested that systematics can be used as a thinking tool. Applying it to the Tao Te Ching is very useful because Lao Tzu has used it himself. Systematics enables us to formulate specific questions: ...
If the first paragraph is read as a tetrad, what is the "TriAd( 3ad)" and what is the "Monad( 1)"? in it? ... Again, if the last paragraph is a tetrad, ...
What is the triad and what is the monad? ...
Are more than one answer permissable? ...
Look at Ching 28 and 41.1: What is the triad there? ...
Questions are very important. They determine the direction our thoughts are going to take. In computer programming, the "job description" (A) is what in science and education is the "problem statement". Lao Tzu is an excellent teacher. His paradoxes are intended to provoke us to think. Please do.

What I have said here so far about this chapter was supposed to be a complement to the A-C-D "TriAd". What does that mean? ...

September 26, 2007. Insert.
. Yesterday I wrote and sent out the addition to Ching 35. Then I slept over it and this morning a few new ideas came to mind. But I couldn't have received these ideas if I didn't already know the triad. For the same reason, I can't explain it to you if you haven't gone over my web-sites to find out what I have said about it over the years.
. You can also read my teacher's "Dramatic Universe (Four volumes)" to find out about it. The triad takes up most of the space in it. It is very important.
. You can also study the Tao Te Ching to find out about the "TriAd( 3ad)". I must give credit to Lao Tzu for helping me to understand it better. But you can also read my summary of it here:
. The triad is a whole consisting of three components. Two of these form a "DyAd(dyad)". The other component is called a "Monad( 1)" In systematics, this is the reconciling impulse. The components in a triad are called impulses.
. The positive pole of the dyad can be represented by the plus (+) sign, the negative pole by the minus (-) sign and the monad by the equal (=) sign. In the Ching, the three impulses are: ...
Shang( +), Hsia( -) and Chang( =).
. The "Systemic attribute" of the "TRIAD" is "DYNAMISM". It is a threefold dynamic process having a beginning a middle and an end. Any one of the three impulses can be in any one of the three positions. This gives rise to six different sequences or triads, Using the +, - and = signs, HOW do you "Identify(Mg)" them? ...
=+-, =-+, +=-, -=+, +-= and -+=. Now that we have "Identified(Mg)" these six triads, they can be "Named(Mg)". J. G Bennett has done that because having a name for the things you are talking about, facilitates communication:
+-= is called The Law of Expansion,
-+= is called The Law of Concentration,
+=- is called The Law of Interaction,
-=+ is called The Law of Identity,
=+- is called The Law of Order and
=-+ is called The Law of Freedom.
. You can find the descriptions of these laws on pages 107 to 128 of Volume two of the Dramatic Universe. Fortunately, copy-right laws prevent me from having to type it all out for you. However, let me just say a bit about The Law of expansion: Plato has used the: Father-Mother-Child analogy for it in his Timaeus. Mr.B, as we have called our teacher, has criticized Hegel and Marks for claiming that it is the only law. Hegelian Dialectics is based on this law: The thesis (+) attracts the antithesis (-) and the two produce the synthesis (=). "One Produces Two ( 1Sg 2), Two Produces Three ( 2Sg 3) and Three Produces All Things ( 3SgWnwU)." But this is not the law we have at Ching 35.1,1.
. Instead of trying to describe what Mr.B has said about these triads, let me use the two laws in which the reconciling impulse (=) is in the middle to shed light on Ching 35.1.
It doesn't always matter whether the affirming (+) or the denying (-) impulse is in front. Why? ...
Because one pole of a polarity will always attract its complement, opposite or antithesis. Whether to call something good or bad, is a judgment that can only be made in a relatively narrow context. What is the initiating impulse at Ching 35.1? ...
"Hold-on to the Great Immage (32TA%4)." Judging only by the syntax, what is its opposite? ...
"But No Harm (btPU%o)." Why do I assume that "The-World Attracted, Attracted (Tn -*a*a)" is the connective in this triad? ...
This is a tough one. I'm not even a hundred percent sure of it myself. But there is a logic to it. ...
Use the B-C-D triad from computer programming as an analogy. ...
B is to C as C is to D. The demand of the customer (A) must be conveyed by B to C, as the same demand must be conveyed by C to D to be executed. If the final product, the "final cause", is WHAT the customer has described in his "job description”, then the job has been done right, the customer is satisfied and pays for a job well done.
. Language (C) is the connective between theory (B) and practice (D) without computer language, the computer can do nothing.
. This has to be "Enough(Zu)". I feel that I am supposed to leave some thinking for you to do. The following quote from the "Analysis of Chinese Characters (ISBN: 0-486-23045-7)" is safe to give you because it might get you going: Wang(*a) "To go towards, towards. (Picture of Ch'ih) Radical No. 60, to step with left foot. (Picture of) wang Phonetic, luxuriant vegetation which springs from the earth in tufts here and there; rambling, (W. 79 D.). With the addition of the radical it means stray or roam about, .... (Picture of) k'ung, a mad dog comes from this phonetic, .... This is a suggestive phonetic in (Picture) as a mad dog wanders about aimlessly. The idea of aimless is suggested as these tufts of vegetation spring up without regard to order."
. Since this character is only in this chapter, Lao Tzu must have chosen it for a reason. ...
The following thought caused me to find out a bit more about Wang(*a): Dr. Dispenza said on page 216 of the Bleep: "The subatomic world responds to our observation, but the average person loses their attention span every 6 - 10 seconds," The question is now: ...
How does "The-World (Tn -)" respond to one who can ...
"Hold-on to the Great Symbol (32TA%4)" of the "Truth(A1)" a bit longer? ...
Hearing the news from Burma and seeing the pictures, I have a question for you: ...

Could those "Loyal Officers (äc@S)" get away with shooting the people if the people were armed? ... End of insert.

At ching 23, Wayne said: "Here's what Lao-tzu says to you, through me, ....". And again, at Ching 32: "Here's what Lao-tzu seems to be saying to you, through me, about implementing the idea of this 32nd verse of the Tao Te Ching." It took courage for Wayne to come out with What he has experienced because he knows that many readers will scoff at it. He actually seems to have "Heard(^d)" some of the words that have found their way into print.
. I can believe him for two reasons: I knew a woman who got messages from the other side as if taking dictation. I Knew that the information that came through her couldn't have come from her because she didn't know "Enough(Zu)" philosophy to understand what she had typed. She couldn't even understand it when I tried to explain it to her..
. The second reason is that Wayne has invested four days for studying one chapter. Times 81 chapters, that is about one year. I have concentrated on Chapter 1, 3, 11, 63, 70, 71 and a bit less on a few others. In other words, I have not even studied them all and I have been at it for over 35 years. And now Wayne comes along and tells me things about the chapters I have specialized in, I have never heard about, nor did any of the many commentators I have read. How do you explain that? ...
Wayne must have had some help. There is a third reason: Most of the ideas I put out here, poorly expressed, are the result of a deliberate intellectual effort. Every step along these lines of thought can be traced back in a logical order. Many of these steps are documented right here on my three web-sites. But some of the ideas that are in here came to me out of the blue, "Without Effort (WUD2)". How do you explain that? ...
I must have had some help. Lao means "Old" and Tzu means "Boy". In the Ching things come in "Pairs(dy)". So we either have "Girl - Boy" or "Old - Young". If we take the latter, we have the old and ever young "Eternal(Cn)" wisdom of the ages. Most commentators go into a spiel about who Lao Tzu was or is. Here is mine.
. Now, this wisdom came through Wayne to us. As Lao Tzu has communicated to Wayne, so Wayne has communicated to us. As A is to C so C is to D. Wayne is the connective here. The "Old Boy" is telling us WHAT we have to do to find "Peace, Security and Happines".
. You can scoff at this all you want, but your scoffing isn't going to get you "Peace, Security and Happiness".
. Notice that B has been bypassed here. Lao Tzu must have gone directly to a suitable communicator because he can't wait for a communicator to wake up and contact a "KnowEr(kner)". Time is running out. We have had 2500 years to figure out WHAT Lao Tzu has said: Now Lao Tzu can't wait any longer. We can call this an emergency measure. There is a lot of Divine intervention happening in these last days. Probably due to the fact that the dark forces are overstepping their "Boundaries(*1)".
. As I already said: I am "Struggling(Cê)" to emulate Wayne's work. Not all translations Wayne has chosen are as accurate as can be, but this one is. To do justice to Wayne's work on this chapter, more work on my part is required.
. To make this cut and dry philosophy (B) more appealing to you, I will use a quote from Wayne's commentary on this chapter: "Most everything defined as pleasurable is temporary, so if you need more and more of it, then it has a grip on you. What you desire so strongly has become your jailer,....." If you are attracted by, and go after, something that is not the "Tao", you are likely to become addicted to it. Because it can never completely satisfy you, you always wan't more of it. And that is addiction. All addictions are "Harmful(%a)" to you.
We are so used to many addictions that we are not even aware that they are addictions. We can't do anything about a problem if we don't even know that it is a problem. "The fool knows not and knows not that he knows not (heho@p@p). That is Why he does Not feel Sick (SiYIPU@p)". To him "IgNorance(PUkn)" is bliss.
. At the early stage, when we are "Attracted(*a)" to something, before we are hooked, we still have a chaice: We can "Go-after(*a)" it, or decide whether to do so is a good idea.
. It is always safe to go after the "Truth(A1)". "No Harm (PU%o)" follows from that. In fact, it may turn out to be beneficial.
. "Music And Food (%5Yü*d)", if it is the kind we like, will "Attract" us and cause us to stop. Wayne tells us that there is no harm in that, as long as we don't expect it to give us the same satisfaction the "Tao" can give us. Worldly things we can "Hear(^d)" and "Taste(#5)" can't do that for us. Still, we can "Taste it Without Tasting (#KWU#K)" it. And that brings us to the last paragraph.. If it is a tetrad, can you "identify the monads" in it? Before you can do that, you must know what that means. In systematics identifying the monads in a tetrad means: On what level of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" is "Taste(#K)", "Sight(oo)", "Sound(^d)" and "Touch(gt)"? ...
Hint: Lao Tzu has associated "Taste" with the Tao (A). ...
At Ching 14, Lao Tzu has called "Sight", "Sound" and "Touch" a "TriAd( 3ad)". That is another hint.
. If Lao Tzu were to spell out things for readers that are unwilling and unable to think, he wouldn't do a favour to the students that are.
. The fact that Wayne is enabled to come out with details that were hidden for 25 centuries means that there is not enough time left to wait for the "WordErs(C2er)" to wake up and look after their dharma. So the Lao Tzu went past the "KnowErs" and went straight to Wayne and told him what to tell us. In these last days, there is nothing hid that shall not be revealed.
. Iran's president Ahmadinejad is in the news right now and he is a good example of what I mean. He was invited to Columbia University and was insulted with information he knew to be false. "When you come to a place like this it makes you simply ridiculous." The president of the university said. He was implying that we know it all and you know nothing. He continued: "The truth is that the Holocaust is the most documented event in human history."
. The truth is that the social engineers can document anything they feel like and have university professors and commentators in the mass media expose unsuspecting students and citizens to it. The "Learned Elders of Zion" even tell us that. What they can't change, however, are the facts. The International Red Cross, according to the Geneva Convention, had access to the concentration camps. They have kept records of the actual number of deaths. Not surprisingly, these records have been suppressed for a long time. Now, in these last days, they have surfaced. Now we can all make up our own minds about whether University president Bollinger or Ahmadinejad is right. WHAT Ahmadinejad is saying is nothing new, just do a Google search on these subjects, but: That he is saying it, must have the social engineers worried. That would explain their treatment of him. If they can get the dumbed down mob to believe that he is another Hitler, then these zombies will not believe him. When you put yourself into the shoes of those who have to maintain the “official version” of the truth, you can see that this is what they have to do, in spite of the fact that Ahmedinejad has not nearly the power in Iran, Hitler has had in Germany. Iran is not the dictatorship Germany was and Burma is.
. As more of us understand the difference between democracy (A), timocracy (B) and tyranny (C), the truth will set us free. And Lao Tzu can help us with that. It is the truth the globalists are afraid of. That's why they aren't teaching it in political science. They have to fight the truth at all cost and, as they have to fight harder, what they are doing becomes more obvious. Trying to paint Ahmadinejad as another Hitler was, in my opinion, an act of desperation. The social engineers are afraid that too many people are going to believe what he has to say. Many experts are already saying now that behaving as president Bollinger did to reinforce the "official version" of the holocaust and 9/11, was a mistake. But if that was the best they could do and it turns out to be a mistake, then there is nothing they can do about it. One of the "tricks and strategems (548a)" of social engineering is: "Repeat(@1)" a lie "Constantly(Cn)" "Enough(Zu)" and the people will eventually believe it. But what if these "tricks" have to be "Repeated" too often? ... Suppose our rulers are forced to overdo it, to bite of more than they can chew: What then? ...

Ching 37: The
"Tao is Always Without Action (A1CnWUdo)
And Nothing is Not Done (btWUPUdo)." ....
. You can find corresponding statements at Ching 3.5, 48 and 63.1,1.
"UnDesire By-mean-of Tranquility (PUYÜYI^a) and
The-World Will by itSelf become Stabilized (Tn -41Tu8b)."
. "UnDesire(PUYÜ)" is more readably translated as: "Curb your Desires (%rYÜ)!" but, for the sake of accuracy, I have said it the clumsy way.
. "Tranquility(^a)" appears in chapters 15,16, 37, 45, 57 and 61. 8b = Ting40. It appears only here and thus has no identifier. When the same character is also in the Nei Yeh, I use a chapter number and line letter in it to identify the character. Let me give you a translation of the first two lines of chapter 8 to show you how useful this convention is: If you
"Can be Aligned, you Can be Tranquil (ab%8ab^a).
Only Then Can you be Stabilized (Ja8Rab8b)." See what I mean? ...
You have here a better definition of Chêng(%8), Chiang(^a) and of Ting(8b), in the sense Lao Tzu is using these characters, than you can get from dictionaries. But that doesn't mean that dictionaries are useless.
. To become stabilized means to become "Fixed(8b)" on a more solid component of the tetrad. A is the most inclusive and abstract source of the tetrad. B is less abstract and less inclusive. C is already more concrete. To get there, you have to translate a vision (A) into a thought (B) and the thought (B) into a belief (C). The vision (A) is more "Stable(8b)", as a thought, on level B than it is on level A. If you can get it down to level C, you have "Stabilized(8b)" it still more while on level D we have Aristotle's "material cause". There it is "Fixed(8b)" in solid matter (D).
. Of course, a communicator (C) can communicate this heady stuff better than I can, but "In-the-end(nG)" we all have to end up with the same content (B) of these words (C).
. The picture of "Fixed(8b)" is "Alignment(%8)" under a "Roof(Rad. 40)" or in a house. If you have brought something into your home, it is more accessible to you. Level C is J. G. Bennett's "Automatc Energy" (E6(C)). Now you do the things, you had to decide on consciously on level B, automatically on level C. You are now doing it, by habit, "Without Effort(WUD2)". There are advantages and disadvantages to this arrangement. What does this mean to us? ...
Before you "Fix(7b) a thought by "Repetition(@1)", you better make sure that it is a "Right thought".

September 21, 2007,
. Yesterday I visited friends. We saw the video: What the Bleep Do we Know!? Actually, we saw less than half of it, because we kept stopping it and discuss what we heard and then continue for a bit and start discussing it again.
. This process worked very well. I learned a bit more about Ching 37. To fill you in, let me start with a new translation of the first two lines of chapter 8 of the Nei Yeh: If you are
"Able to Align yourself to the level above your own, then you Can be Tranquil (ab%8ab^a) and
Only Then will you be Able to Substantiate (Ja8Rab8b)" the higher on the level below yours. As above, in “Heaven, so Below (Tn -)”, on earth, doesn’t mean that the above is identical to the below. It means that the two are analogous to each other. This means that level C must correspond to level A. HOW is this accomplished? …
By C aligning itself to “Right thought” (B) and B aligning itself to “Right vision” (A). We can use the Aristotelian syllogism on this: …
If C is “Aligned(^a)” to B and B is “Aligned” to A, then C is aligned to A. B is the excluded middle, it is the connective.
. While communicators (C) can communicate better than I can, they can’t explain the law of correspondence to you when they don’t understand (B) it.
. Neither Roth's "stable" nor my "Substantiate" are dictionary equivalents of Ting(8b) but the picture of "Alignment(%8)" under a "Roof(Rad. 40)" and the context substantiate our alternative equivalents.
. "Substance" is an equivalent of Wu(wU). The big Tao "Exists, has Substance, is Undifferentiated and Complete (YUwUÜeCm)." It becomes substantiated by giving "birth to heaven and earth (TnTISg)." That is when the "Big(TA)" Tao is split up into "Four( 4)" "Smaller(sm)", more substantial, Taos. You can use the concordance to find out where the quotes came from.
. Level A on Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" is the most abstract level. Compared to the lower levels it is insubstantial. Level D is the most substantial level, it is our physical body (D). Some people deny that we have a soul (A) but nobody can deny that we have a physical body (D). Thus, translating a vision (A) into a thought (B) is a substantiation. It makes the abstract more concrete. Thinkers (B) only add form to the vision but the "formal cause" (B) is more "Substantial(wU)" than the "final cause", the "job description" or "Goal" (A).
. The vision of the customer can be compared to a three dimensional hologram while the idea (B) of it is a two dimensional blueprint or flowchart. Thanks to Wayne, I noticed my ego’s “Demand(YÜ)” to spell it all out for you again. Wayne advises us to become more aware of these demands. Once we do, we can consult our intellect (B) to determine if the ego’s demand is justified. If it were really in the best interest of Lao Tzu’s students to spell everything out for them, he would have done it. If you are serious about understanding the Tao Te Ching, then allowing you to "Complete(Cm)" a thought your"Self(Tu)", is better for you.
. By giving you the two digit identifiers, you can get to the context I have taken the quote out of. While for a "WordEr(C2er)", not spelling things out, could be due to laziness; for "KnowErs(kner)" this is due to understanding Lao Tzu's instruction he has given to his students: "KnowErs, Don't Talk (knerPUC2) any more than you have to, .... Shut Your Mouth (Ül H%1)!" "Know when to Stop (kn$i)" talking!
. Wayne mentions "wars, terrorism, famine, hatred, crime, and disease -- how many are the result of interference .... ?" .... "What would earth be like if .... natural resources, air, plants, and animals where respected and allowed to flourish without any interference?"
. What would our society be like if people didn't interfere in other people's business, if everybody would mind his or her own business? ...
Plato has described THE DIVISION OF LABOR very well. We must learn to appreciate other people's work, to leave well enough alone.
. The only way we can be creative and happy, is by finding and doing our own dharma. People who are not creative make babies. There are different substitutes for creativity, but making too many babies as a substitute has grave consequences: When there are too many people to be fed, clothed and sheltered, mother earth can't supply their needs. Nature is "interfered" with. There are other causes of our ecological problems, but if there are less people using un-renewable energy and buying products made from un-renewable resources then these products can't be sold. If there are less people who are polluting the air and water, then mother nature can keep up with repairing the damage we are doing to her.
. If we give nature enough time to renew the resources we use up, so that nature can supply us with them, then life would be sustainable, but if we take out more than nature can put back in, then the time at which we are going to run out can be, and has been, predicted.
. "Man Follows Earth (mnähTI)". The earth had to be there before we could live on it. Considering the thousands of years man has been on this planet the time when he runs out of life-supporting resources comes surprisingly close to the deadline given to us as 2012. That gives us five more years.
. Is there still enough time left to reverse this trend? ...
Don't ask me, I am not an ecologist. But, as a philosopher, I would say: As long there is life, there is hope. But we must learn to use and to renew our "Inner-powers (TÊ)" properly. Which requires? ...
Right vision, Right thought, Right speech and Right action.
. If we don't use our soul, our head, our mind (Manas) and our body in a creative and responsible Way, Nature has to reduce the human population to protect Itself from us.

Ching 38
. This is a long one. 129 characters. Wayne finds it “confusing”. So do I. Lao Tzu said in chapters 63 and 64: Don't bite off more than you can chew! This is why I don't invest my time and energy in passages that are too hard for me. He also said: "Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)! In other words: Do what you "Can(pt)" do!
. Thanks to the most inaccurate translation in my collection, I can do a commentary on the first 17 characters of this chapter: Let me start with Archie J. Bahm's translationof the first eight:
"Intelligent control appears as uncontrol or freedom [ +TÊPUTÊ]. And for that reason it is genuinely intelligent control" (SiYIYUTÊ). This translation can be interpreted in two Ways: ...
In terms of Ching 17.1 "The highest type of ruler is one of whose existence the people are barely aware (*a + -knYU Z. J.Wu)." But in the end "When the work is done, and as he wanted it done, he will be happy if the followers say: 'This is just the way we wanted it.' (Kgcm@v%i#s%2is^ITuJa. Bahm). In the other interpretation, this can also apply to the ruler the people "Despise(*c)''. *a = T'ai. *c = Wu9. In terms of Ching 3 and 18, the intelligent rulers in an "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)" don't want the people to know that they know what they are doing. This ignorance on the part of the people, gives the rulers their "Power(TÊ)" over us because "Intelligence(TÊ)", or the knowledge resulting from it, is "Power(TÊ)". There you have Bahm's reason for translating Tê(TÊ) as "Intelligence". In Ching 18 the timocrats (B) are called the "Big Hypocrites (TA*b)". *b = Wei9.
. As a democracy is a government of the people in which the decisions are made by the people for the people, so a timcracy is a government: Of the hypocrites, By the hypocrites and thus For the hypocrites. Decisions are made For the decision-maker. Is that so hard to believe when our rulers get caught in wrong doings time and again and time and again, they just wiggle out of it. Social engineering can be called: The art of defrauding the public.
. Using Bahm's equivalents for Shang( +), Hsia( -) and Tê(TÊ) We can translate the next nine characters of Ching 38: "UnIntelligent rulers Don't want to admit that they have Lost Intelligent ( -TÊPU37TÊ) control. ThereFore they are Without Intelligence (SiYIWUTÊ)."
. The next 45 characters are too hard for me but the 64th character is a "Therfore(KU)". This could mean that a summary of all that confusing stuff that came before is coming up now. Looking at the next 20 characters, I knew it wouldn't be an easy task. The monads can't be "Identifies(Mg)" as easily as the ones in Ching 17.1 and 18 but with the help of systematics, I knew it was worth a try. It wasn't easy but today, three days later, I got it. The only problem I have now is explaining (C) it to you. Please bear with me, I promise to do my best. Let us start with the text:"Therefore(KU)
Lose the (big) Tao And Next comes Tê (37A1bt60(Hou40)TÊ)
Lose Tê And Next comes Humanity (37TÊbt60%5)
Lose Humanity And Next comes Justice (37%5bt60Üw)
Lose Justice And Next comes Ceremony (37Üwbt60Üj).
"Now, these Ceremony People (heÜjer)
Loyalty, Honesty'S Husk (äc09 Z*x) And Confusion'S Beginning." In my comment on Ching 18, I said that "Humanity(%5)" represents the government of the people in which the decisions are made by the people which are for the people. So "Humanity" here at 38 must also represent democracy (A). But at 18, "Justice(Üw)" comes along with "Humanity: There "Appeared Humanity and Justice (YU%5Üw)."
*x = Pao140.
. The next thing you have to know is HOW Plato's four "Imperfect societies(543a - 592b)" are "Aligned(^a)" to his "Divided Line(509d)". You can get the long story in the rest of my blog or get the summary here: ...
Sociology . . Democracy (A), Timocracy (B), Tyranny (C) and Oligarchy (D). I will add this line to the Table of Correspondences, above.
. As in Ching 18, we are going beyond the tetrad. The first step in applying systematics to this problem, is to determine which characters in the above quote are sources, or components, of the tetrad? ...
Instead of giving you something to read which you can believe (pistis in Greek) or not believe (C), I think it is better to stop here to give you the opportunity to think about what you got up to now. ...

In my comment on Ching 18, I said that "Humanity(%5)" represents the government of the people in which the decisions are made by the people which are for the people. So "Humanity" here at 38 must also represent democracy (A). But at 18, "Justice(Üw)" comes along with "Humanity: There "Appeared Humanity and Justice (YU%5Üw)."
. The government that followed the "Just" society at 18, is an unjust society. As "Truth(09)" is the lifeblood of democracy, so falsehood is the lifeblood of timocracy. That is a perfect "DyAd(dyad)". We don't have that here at 38. In a democracy, the educational system is in the hands of the people, now it is in the hands of the social engineers. If they can't prevent us from finding out the truth, they loose their power over us. Knowing the truth will set us free.
. This is the knowledge I gained from studying Ching 3, 17.1, 18 and the Republic. But that knowledge got in my way here, that's why I had trouble with this one.
. To solve the problem, I had to bring in the three branches of government. ...
The legislative branch (B), the judicial branch (C) and the executive branch (D). I wonder if they still teach that in political science? Level A is the most abstract and inclusive level on the "Divided Line (509d)". Thus democracy (A) is also the most inclusive one of the four types of government. Democracy includes the B-C-D "TriAd( 3ad)".
. As a Co-founder of the Ontario Green Party my experience in participatory democracy comes in handy. By means of the consensus decision-making process we, the members, hammered out our own constitution (B). But we were already infiltrated then. It was hard to believe these "nice people" could actually be "agents" or "lackies" trying to prevent us from getting our act together. Later it became more obvious. Our computer, with the minutes on the hard drive was stolen and our constitution was rewritten without a quorum and the consensus decision-making proces. It was literally done behind our backs. I was a member of the Greewood Gree's riding association we tried to prevent the hijacking of the party and simply got de-registered..
. Had we become a major party, the decisions made b the people would be taken to the parliament in Ottawa were it has to be passed by the judicial branch (C) and then be implemented by the executive branch (D). Of course our rulers couldn't permit that to happen, because we can't have our democracy (A)and their tomarchyy (C) at the same time.
. What Lao Tzu said clearly at Ching 18 is that things can bo wrong at level B. Instead of the people making the decisions, the "Big Hypocrites (TA*b)" are making them for us. He also implied at 18 and here that things can go wrong on level C. ...
I hope that this makes "Enough(Zu)" sense to the right people who will contact me to ask the right questions and thus give me the opportunity to fill in some missing details and to correct any errors that might have slipped in.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The BOOK of SECRETS
________________________ Chapter 2 ________________________________

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .The path of yoga and the path of tantra

17.1,2 (Chapter 17. Column 1, paragraph 2): Question: "What is the difference between traditional yoga and tantra? Are they the same?
. "Tantra and yoga are basically different. They reach to the same goal; however, their paths are not only different, but they are contrary also. This has to be understood very clearly. The yoga process is also a methodology, yoga is yoga is also technique. Yoga is not a philosophy .... "
. . . . A . . . . . . . When you draw the diagram to the left properly, you can
. ./ . .I . .\ . . . . see that the four letters are each connected to three other
D---+----B . . . letters. Each of the six lines between the letters represent a
. \ . . I . . / . . . . "DyAd(dyad)". So there is not only one "contrary" but there are six.
. . . . C . . . . . . . . . . In Plato's Republic, each letter represents two things:
. . . . . . . . . . . . Individually, A represents our soul or the Atman. B represents our intellect or Buddhi, C represents our mind or manas and D represents our body with its sense organs (Jnan endriyas) and our organs of action (Karm endriyas).
. In terms of society, as a whole, A represents religion, B philosophy, C politics and D economics. The four types of government that correspond to these four components of society are described in the Republic as well. However, since the Republic is the description of a vision, it is in need of interpretation as well.
. Of these six dyads, the theory - practice (B-D) dyad is the easiest to identify. Of the four Aristotelian causes, A is the most abstract and inclusive component and D is the most concrete and specific one. So we can tentatively say that A-B, A-C, B-C, B-D and C-D are all general - particular polarities. To move from A to C, for instance, you use deduction, to move from D back to A, you use induction.
. The designers of the 4-fold IBM programming system must have known the Aristotelian tetrad. The movement from A, the "job - description" or demand, to D, "execution" or the supply, is a deductive process. This is also known as the top - down problem-solving process.
. The demand comes to A like a three-dimensional hologram. In the building trade, this is the dream-house the customer wants manifested in tangible matter (D). This is why Aristotle has called it the "Final cause". The hologram is intangible while the final product is tangible but both have the same 3-dimensional form. B produces a more tangible 2-dimensional blueprint or flowchart of the demand. S/he gives a more tangible form to it. This is why Aristotle has called B the "Formal cause".
. C is the reconciling impulse between B and D. Language (C) mediates between theory (B) and practice (D). That is why Aristotle has called it the "Efficient cause". Aristotle was Plato's student. I am using letters A, B, C and D the way Desmond Lee has used them in his translation of Plato's Republic.
. D clothes the abstract hologram in solid matter. That is why Aristotle has called it the "Material cause". I have described the tetrad as best as I can. A communicator (C) could not only do a more efficient job, but also a better, more comprehensible one. As it is, what I have here will have to do. The content of this and a better description is the same, but a Communicator (C) gets the idea across more efficiently. With less effort s/he does a better job.
. B knows that s/he can't do what A does. The message from the other side doesn't come to thinkers (B). Their intellect is in the way. But without that intellect thinkers can't do their own dharma. So, once the Way things are, is understood, it turns out to be the best Way. If any one can come up with a better Way, let's hear about it. The Theosophists say that the lower cannot comprehend the higher. I heard that statement many times during my Theosophy days, from about 1957 to 1973, but only now do I understand what it means: Jnana yogis know that they can't do the work, or dharma of bhakti yogis. But bhaktis can do the work of jnana yogis. If that were not so, Bhakti yoga Guru Sri Kripalu Mahapraphu couldn't have helped me to understand Plato's Republic. Poets (A) can write prose (C) but "WorErs(C2er)" can't write real poetry. I believe that Rudolf Steiner was a "WordEr"(C), he tried, but real poets don't seem to take his "poetry" serious. "KnowErs" can write, but "KnowErs are Not good enough with Words(knerPUC2)" to make the difference. Without the help of Communicators (C), what I know (B) does not reach a critical mass of the people. Communication is the weakest link in our system. And our rulers like it that way. In their system the unelected advisors do the thinking (B) and the politicians do the talking (C). That is the B-C dyad, and they know it. . . . . . (We don't have it. As you can see, I even have trouble with the Line-feed in this section of the blog.) After I took the seven week IBM computer programming course, I have lectured on it at the Toronto Theosophical society until 1973. At that point I went to England to study under J G Bennett. There I got the nickname: Peter Tetrad. By teaching what I know about the tetrad, I could make a real contribution to our alternative education. As it is, our system is dysfunctional. . . . . There is much to be learned about this from the Bhagavad Gita: Arjuna was a raja yogi. Raja yoga is also called integral yoga. To learn raja yoga (C), Krishna had to teach him karma yoga (D), bhakti yoga (A) and jnana yoga (B). This is an ingenious Way of teaching all four yogas in a small book of 18 chapters.
. The higher components in our 4-fold system can do the work of those who are on the levels below them. Poets (A) can write prose. Thinkers (B) can describe their ideas. I am doing it. Aren't I? But do I get across to a critical mass of the people? ...
The contribution I can make, is the tetrad. Understanding it is necessary in order to understand many other things. The tetrad works in us and in society. Each of the four components of the tetrad is like a link of a chain: If one is weak, the system, as a whole, is weak. If one is broken, the system, as a whole, breaks down.
. I already noticed that there are lots of "Repetitions(@1)" in Osho's book So, if you don't get the concept here, don't worry, we will come back to the tetrad from another angle. Follow Lao Tzu's advise: Don't bite off more than you can chew. You can also go over the rest of my blog to find out more about the tetrad.
. When Lao Tzu says: "KnowErs Dont Talk; TalkErs Don't Know (knerPUC2C2erPUkn)" he is taling about the B-C "DyAd(dyad)".
. In the Gita, Arjuna (C) was the "leader of the Baratas." The Baratas are his followers. So C-D can also be identified as the leader - follower dyad. "Deeds Have a Master (D2YU#u)." Here it is the master - servant polarity. Don't get hung up on words (C). It is the content (B) the "KnowErs(kner)" are after. If you don't just believe (C) what Osho says but think (B) about it, you will find that some of it is misleading. Misleading the people is the job of the social engineers. So why did they find it necessary to kill him? ...
Read the parable of the "Tares (Matthew 1:24)" and think about it. If there is not some very important message coming through Osho, he would still be alive. In order to control us, our rulers must prevent the truth from getting out. And if they didn't try to do that, then we would "Not have Enough Means To find out the Truth (PUZuYIdoA1)." If "Enough(Zu) of us understand Ching 41.1, then having killed Osho would turn out to be a mistake.

17.1,4: "In yoga one has to fight, it is the path of the warrior. On the path of tantra one does not have to fight at all. Rather, on the contrary, ...."
. Read the Gita and notice how often Krishna tells Arjuna to "fight". Accomplished raja yogis become the members of the "warrior" caste. The two major axes of the tetrad are B-D and A-C.
. Osho seems to be talking here about the A-C dyad.

17.1,6: "Tantra says that whatsoever you see, the ultimate is not opposite to it. It is a growth; you can grow to be the ultimate. There is no opposition between you and the reality. You are part of it, ...."
. One of the 112 techniques takes true bhakti yogis (A) to the other side of the Door (A). If they take other yogis there as well, that would be great, but right now let us just assume that they work for the bhaktis. I have personal evidence that some bhakti yogis can get to the other side of the Door at will, leaving jnana yogis behind bewildered. They can come back with information that logically they can't have. On the one hand, they make mistakes that thinkers wouldn't make and then they come back with ideas that took you years to figure out. How do you explain that? Let me tell you WHAT I know about bhaktis:
. I can't explain HOW they do it, but I have seen WHAT they can do. I was accompanying a beautiful bhakti yoga guru on a lecture tour in Trinidad. She would also lecture in schools. In one of these lectures she had a class of very young children. She asked: How many of you are Christians? Hands went up. How many of you are Hindus? Hands went up. How many of you are Moslems? A small group of Moslem kids hardly dared to rise their hands. They were obviously frightened. I have seen my guru in many difficult situations and I never failed to be amazed at how she solved problems. To my embarrassment she can also read thoughts. I found her attractive and it was good exercise for me to control my thoughts. --- A thought came to me just now --- We don't know who can read thoughts and who can't unless they tell you with their glance, as in my case: If you don't clean up your thoughts, I send you home. Now, if we assume that every person we think about, can read our thoughts, would we continue to think the same thoughts about them? ...
. Let us get back to my beautiful guru. What would she do in this situation. She couldn't talk about Christianity, Hinduism and Islam with a bunch of frightened kids huddling in the far corner of the class room. She started to chant the Koran. I love those chants. Her chant was authentic. The change in those kids was astonishing. Moslems know, or believe, that those chants are inspired by Allah and can only come through holy persons.
. On the way back, I asked her where she has learned that chant? She told me that she doesn't even know it. It just came through her. How do you explain that intellectually? ...
. In Theosophy we didn't think much of the bhaktis: What do they know. She and her guru in India changed my mind about them. In the eyes of jnanis (B), bhaktis (A) have their faults. After all, they are not jnanis. This must be remembered as I find faults in Osho's words. Let me tell you another story for good measure. When I was in that bhakti yoga ashram in India. I was coming out of a building. The door opened outwards, and there, right in front of me, stood our guru. He is a big man. As fast as I could, I jumped aside and held the door open for him. Instead of walking through the door, he hugged me. The female devotees who saw that were green with envy. It must have had something to do with the job he had to do for me. It felt like walking on air for the rest of the day. He played a few more tricks on me. Leaving me rather confused to the delight of his devotees. They called me the jnani, the one on the path of knowledge, but look at him now. Our guru had to shake up my ego a bit to get through to me, I guess.
. There is a law of non-interference advanced masters have to obey. So before he could take on the job, he had to ask me: "Do you give me permission to help you?" I heard him say that, otherwise I couldn't put it in quotes. But he doesn't speak English, he didn't even open his mouth. I now know how he did that. Masters and other entities can put a thought into your mind (manas) as if it is your own. And then your mind (C) does with it what it is programmed to do: ...
It translates the thought (B) into English (C). Even with this information, what Osho said at 17.1,6 is still incomprehensible to any one who cannot get to the other side of the Door (A). But if by means of one of those 112 techniques we could get there, then we could experience what to our intellect (B) is incomprehensible. In Hinduism the highest sphere is the "Satyaloka .... the sphere of God .... the only Real Substance Sat, .... called Anama, the Nameless. .... " The "Nameless" is the "UnNamAble(PUptMg)" in the Ching. Sat is one impulse of the Sat-Chit-Ananda triad. It has been translated as Existence-knowledge-bliss. I am no longer sure that this triad corresponds to the E1-E2-E3 triad, because in Sutra 14, "the seat of bliss, Ananda, is called Anandamaya Kosha". That would be E4 because E5 is "Buddhi" and E6 is "Manas". As you can see, much work is still left to be done and there is no Way that I can do it alone. If you think (B) or feel (A) that I am getting close, don't just sit there, do something.
. Another important quote from Sutra 13 of The Holy Science is: "Janaloka .... wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates..... It is called Alakshya, the incomprehensible." So what is made comprehensible at E5 (B) "originates" in the "Incomprehensible" (E3).
. On the other side of the Door (A) there is omnipotence (E1), omnipresence, or love (E2) and omniscience or truth (E3). On this side, for the "KnowErs(kner)", there is first the knowable, then comes the knowing and then comes the known. But when everything is known, how can there be something that is still unknown? On the other side, all is "One( 1)". Everything is connected as our scientist are now finding out. If there is no time and space, then how can there be knowing or any other activity. Yet, because of the law of correspondence, we know that E3 is to E4 as E4 is to E5. E4 (A) mediates between E3 and E5 (B) as language (C) mediates between theory (B) and practice (D). Before reading on, please think about that for a bit. ...
. A quote from page 23 of Mr.B's ENERGIES might shed light on 17.1,6: "The diagram [of the Energies] suggests that there is in man something more than a living being, he has something in him which participates in energies that are beyond life: that is the cosmic energies" E1, E2, E3 and E4. E4 (A) is both a cosmic energy and a cause in the Aristotelian tetrad. That paradox causes confusion in the description of Mr.B's vision (A). He told us that he had a vision in a graveyard in Turkey. He has met Gudjieff in Turkey, so the vision could be due to his influence. The Dramatic Universe is a description of this vision. But it is neither complete, nor perfect. But, as far as I can see, it is the most detailed information on these "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAds( 3ad)" etc. we have. Let me finish this 17.1,6 section with a question: When Osho said: "There is no opposition between you and the reality". What do the words "you" and "reality" mean? ...

17.1.7: "In yoga .... -- you as you are and you as you can be -- are two opposite things."
. The very two first characters of the Tao Te Ching can be translated as "Actualize your Potential!(A1pt)" Question: HOW? By "Taoing the TaoAble(A1ptA1).". By doing what you are "Able(ab)" to, or "Can(pt)", do. To become what "you can be" you have to "do what you can do(A1ptA1)." My job, or dharma as a jnana yogi, is to show what all great teachers have in common. But I can only elaborate on what I know well "Enough(Zu)". Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew! Following that advise also prevents you from saying things you later, when you know more, regret.
. A person who doesn't "Actualize his Potential(A1pt)", who buries his Talents (Mattheew: 25:14)" is "cast …. into outer darkness". In Hinduism these are the outcasts, or Sudras. A person becomes an outcast through stupidity (tamas) or laziness (tamas). Question: ...
How come the same word means those two different things? ...
Tamas is one impulse of the Satwa-Rajas-Tamas triad. To answer the question we have to return to my commentary on 17.1,2: ...
There are four "sources", causes or components of the tetrad. By "Actualizing their Potential" Jnana yogis (B) become more intelligent and karman yogis become more effective workers and more industrious. Jnana yogis don't expect other yogis to be as intelligent as jnana yogis have to be, that is not their dharma but raja yogis (C) must be able to understand WHAT the jnanis explain to them because if they can't they can't do their own dharma, then they have not "Actualized their Potential". And so in relation to the thinkers (B) they are stupid.
. Anyone who knows, or is told, what his dharma is, can “Actualize his Potential”. If he doesn’t, it is due to unwillingness and in relation to karma yogis they are lazy.
. Lao Tzu is a jnana yoga guru: "Other Teachers, What they Teach, I Also Teach (mn Z#lme08#l) if what They( Z)" teach is true. If different a teachers know the tetrad, for instance, then WHAT they say about it is the same even though HOW they say it is different. For instance Chinese is not Sanskrit. And also what their students can understand is different.
. Look how much work it took to get through the first column of the first page of the second chapter. And even there I had to skip a few things to get through that column.
. I hope that you can see that I have to become much more selective, not because the passages I am going to skip are not worth commenting on but because it is simply too much for me.
17.2,2: " .... Do not create any gap between you and the real, between the world and nirvana. Do not create any gap. There is no gap for tantra; ....
19.1,5: ".... Yoga thinks in terms of duality .... Tantra says there is no duality. If there is duality, then you cannot put them [the opposites] together. And however you try they will remain two. Howsoever put together they will remain two, and the fight will continue, the dualism will remain."
. The controversy between Dwaita-Vedanta (Dualism) and A-dwaita-Vedanta (Non-dualism) has been going on for ages. In western philosophy Non-dualism is better known as Monism. Please read up on this important polarity, to prepare yourself for what I will say about it.
We must now take a closer look at the "Monad($1) - "DyAd(dyad)" polarity. Rudolf Steiner taks about the one, two, three, four, five and seven on pages 31 to 46 of his Occult Signs and Symbols. Mr.B talks about numbers one to twelve in over 1600 pages. Steiner’s description of these six number systems can serve us as a nice introduction to Mr.B's more extensive work. "When speaking of occult signs and symbols, it is necessary to mention the symbols that are expressed in numbers, even if only briefly. (31)"
. "In all occultism the One has always designated the indivisible unity of God in the universe. God is indicated by the number one. (32)"
. That seems to correspond to the Hindu "Satyaloka, the sphere of God" and Mr.B's "Transcendent Energy E1", "the supreme Will" as opposed to "Man's 'I', Will" (E4 (A)). This also would be Lao Tzu's "Unit($1)" or the "One( 1)" as opposed to the "DyAd(dyad)".
. "Two is called the number of revelation in occultism. (32)" In Systematics, the "Systemic Attribute" of the "DYAD" is "COMPLEMENTARITY". "Term Designation: POLES Term Characters: POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE Connectivity of terms: FORCE (Vol. III, Pg 20)"
. "Everywhere in nature you find that nothing reveals itself without being related to the number two. Light alone cannot reveal itself. There must also be shadow or darkness -- that is duality .... It would never be possible for good to manifest if it did not have evil as shadow-picture. The duality of good and evil is a necessity in the manifest world. (33)" The whole chapter should be quoted, but I have to draw the line somewhere.
. "Both Know: the Good Ones Doing Good and Their complements, the No Good, Doing-their-thing (%2kngd Zdogd*2PUgd^k). Indeed, Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (KUYUWUmtSg)""Life(Sg)." *2 = SSu69.
. “Everything arises out of thought creations. There you have the number three! In revelation things alternate between involution and evolution. Behind this is a deeply hidden creation, a new creation born out of thought. Everything has arisen out of thought, .... From what, then, do things arise since ideas are new creations? They arise out of nothing. (39)"
. "All Things Come From Something; Something Comes From Nothing (WnwUSgtoYUYUSgtoWU)." Who says that translating the Ching is tough?
. "We come now to the number four. Four is the sign of the cosmos or of creation. As far as we can determine with our present organs, the present planetary condition of the earth is in its fourth embodiment. .... This is but a special case for all creations that appear thus. (40)"
. The best example of this is computer programming, but you must know it first. So let us use the construction business, because it is more accessible:
. The Customer (A) describes his dream-house the Architect (B). The Architect gives his blueprint to the Contractor (C). The contractor knows what his sub-contractors (D) can do and tells them what, where and when to do it.
. A-B, B-C and C-D are all analogous to each other. I am talking here about the law of correspondence. The C-D relationship is the most concrete one and, therefore, the most comprehensible one. Let me use computer-programming to illustrate this: In order to communicate (C) with the computer (D) the Coder (C) must know WHAT his computer can do and HOW to tell it do what has to be done in order to supply the customer's demand. This means that the Coder must know a computer language.
. The original IBM 1401 machine language was so simple that everything: helping the customer to do his "Job-description" (A), how to do the "Job-analysis" (B), how to do the coding (C) and how to get the computer to "Execute" (D) your instructions, could be taught in a seven Week course. Today, "Computer scientists" can't even "Code" after seven years of university. There is a reason for that, but let's not get into that here.
. "Five is the number of evil. This will become clear to us if we again consider human beings. In their development men have become fourfold beings [Soul A, Intellect (B), Mind (C) and body (D)] and thereby beings of the created world. Here on earth, however, the fifth member of their being, the spirit self, will be added. Were they to remain fourfold beings, they would be constantly directed by the gods -- toward the good, of course -- but they would never develop their independence. They have become free through the gift of their germinal fifth member, but it is also from this that they have received the ability to do evil. No being can do evil who has not arrived at 'fivefoldness'.(42)" And we are responsible for our decisions, because along with our freedom of choice, had to come our intelligence.
. Steiner has skipped the number six. The hexad is usually represented as the star of David which is a double triad.
. "Seven is the number of perfection. (4)" Since the Dalai Lama's book was dropped into my lap, I had to go beyond the tetrad. Mr.B and Sutra 13 of Swami Sri Yukteswar's book have helped me with that. It is usually described as a tetrad below and a triad above (4 + 3 = 7). The 4 is the Aristotelian tetrad and the 3 is the E1-E2-E3 triad. In Hinduism, A or E4 is the "Maharloka, the sphere of the Atom, the beginning of the creation of darkness, Maya, upon which the Spirit. is reflected. This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara."
. If you think about these words, they can clear up a lot of confusion that is unintentionally and intentionally disseminated about these things. ...

With A, being the Door it is a monad. Thus the E1-E2-E3 triad is above it and the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad is below it. This is the 3 + 1 + 3 = 7 heptad.
. If you work on this, then you prepare yourself for Lao Tzu's lesson on this.

. In case you are not ready for Ching chapter 1 yet, let us continue with Steiner a bit more. The whole of chapter two of his Philosophy of Freedom is dedicated to the Monism versus Dualism controversy. I am using Lindeman's translation:
. "The whole relationship [of Monism to Dualism] .... confronts us in a world-historical manifestation: in the polarity of the one-world view or monism, to the two-world theory or dualism. Dualism directs its gaze only upon the separation between 'I' and world. .... Monism directs its gaze upon the unity alone and seeks to deny or obliterate the polarities actually present. Neither of the two can satisfy, for they do not do justice to the facts. Dualism sees spirit ("I") and matter (world) as two fundamentally different entities, and therefore cannot grasp how the two can interact with each other. How should the spirit know what is going on in matter, if matter's essential nature is entirely alien to it?"
. Steiner is not a monist, he simply expresses what monists say about the dualists. You can now go back to 19.1,5: and compare it with what Osho has said about the dualists. Steiner continues: "Or how should the spirit under these circumstances work upon matter in such a way that its intentions transform themselves into deeds?" ...
. Steiner is a tough one to translate. Rita Stebbing has here: "Or how should it be able to act on matter when translating its intentions into actions?" Steiner said: "Oder wie soll er unter diesen Umständen auf sie wirken, so dass sich seine Absichten in Taten umsetzen?"
. Put this way and with our knowledge of the tetrad, the answer is obvious. A steps down the intent from the other side for B, B steps it down for C and C tells D, by means of specific instructions, WHAT to do. This is HOW A's "intentions convert themselves into actions" on level D. There is a subtle hint here that still comes through Lindeman’s seemingly clumsy translation. Can you see it? ...
Intentions (A) transform themselves into thoughts (B), thoughts transform themselves into words (C) and words transform themselves into deeds (D) as if on their own. When the system works right, each member of the team "Works Without Effort (D2WUD2)". See Wings translation of 63.1,2 to check that I didn't make this one up.
Actually Lao Tzu doesn’t mention the “heptad” by name. He doesn’t even mention the “tetrad” by name but he describes it very well in chapter 25.
. The only number systems he mentions by name are the “Monad($1)”, the “DyAd(dyad)” and the “TriAd( 3ad)”. At 42.1, he doesn’t even mention the “Four( 4)” but he refers to it as “All Things(WnwU)”. This brings us back to what Steiner has said about it. When Lao Tzu says “Other Teachers, What they Teach I Also Teach”, it is more than a hint. Lao Tzu’s students must take these “hints” as instructions. So what I know about these number systems, doesn’t only come from Lao Tzu or from Mr.B who was my teacher.
. All larger number systems, including the “TriAd” emerge through the “One( 1)” and the “Two( 2)”. The triad always consist of a dyad and a monad. According to Steiner and others, the two is the number of revelation and the one and three are numbers of divinity. So when the three emerges through the one and the two, it becomes the monad in the triad. In any system, each component is equally important. Bringing in Hegelian dialectics here, will either get you more confused or clear up your confusion: The “Tao produces the one, the one attracts its complement, the two, and the three emerges through this dyad (A1Sg 1 1Sg 2 2Sg 3).”
. Even though the three emerges through the two, it becomes an equally important “impulse” or component of the triad. There are six different “Ways(A1)” the 1, the 2 and the 3 can be combined: 123, 132, 213, 231, 312 and 321. For details you can consult Mr.B’s Dramatic Universe.
. A well meaning friend told me that my dyads, triads and tetrads confuse him: Why don’t you write in English? I must repeat again, that I am looking for a “WordEr(C2er)” who can translate, what sounds like Greek to you, into English. To do that, Communicators (C) must understand the content of my words. So, in order to do their dharma, they must be willing to make the effort required to understand what I am saying here, but I can’t do my dharma by trying to do theirs. Again, I am talking about THE DIVISION OF LABOR here. Plato knew that we can't have a healthy society without it. The Brahmins (B) and the Learned Elders of Zion know that a corrupted version of the natural division of labor can be used to control the people.

19.2,3: "Tantra says there is no duality; it is only an appearance. .... "
. This "appearance" is called Maya in Sanskrit and Plato has called it eikasia in Greek. See his Republic at 509d.
. That, what our senses (Indriyas (D)) report to us is an illusion, is known but how it is interpreted can be different. That Osho could see what he has seen, means that he has done his dharma. That I can find some mistakes in his book, means that I am doing my dharma. That "WordErs(C2er)" can see that the truth I have found is not expressed properly, means that they are doing their dharma. But they can only say that if they can say it better. And they can only say it better after they have understood WHAT I am trying to say. In other words, in order to do their dharma they must be willing to figure out what I have said in order to help their readers to understand it. But the time and energy I invest in trying to do their dharma is time and energy I can't invest in my own. When the doers (D) put what we tell them to do to the test and they find out that what we told them is wrong (because it doesn't work), it means that they are doing their dharma.
. One reason for studying the tetrad, or any other natural law, is to appreciate how ingenious it really is. This is also true of the Tao Te Ching. It is like a hologram. One chapter sheds light on other chapters. As you study it the "Way(A1)" or HOW Lao Tzu tells us to study it, we can't help but be amazed at how ingenious it is.
. I have spent more time on the first chapter than on any chapter because for a long time I didn't realize that the Ching is a hologram. When Lao Tzu said in chapters 63 and 64: Don't bite off more than you can chew, he meant don't waste your time and energy on chapters that are too "Difficult(df)" for you, that only leads to frustration. Sine the Ching is a hologram, any chapter you can understand, any chapter that is "Easy(ez) for you, is the first chapter for you. Before I had learned that lesson I thought: How can I go on to the second chapter when I don't even understand the first one. I have done the same with Steiner’s Philosophy of Freedom. The first chapter of his major work is the only one I feel competent "Enough(Zu)" to interpret.
. The time and energy I have invested in the first chapter of the Ching was not wasted, because, once I started to work on chapters that were easier for me, they have then shed light on chapter one.
. Before I get into chapter one here, I want to go over the scholarly work Jonathan Star has done on that chapter: There is first a nice conventional translation of it on page 14. Then comes its "Verbatim Translation" on pages 100 and 101. Then comes a COMMENTARY on it from pages 271 to 294 and then comes the Dictionary Concordance.
. Because half of the roughly 800 characters in the Ching only appear in one chapter, there is no need to clutter up the concordance with them. I also believe that my two digit identifiers are a simplification because there is a lot of duplication in the Verbatim, word for word, translation.
. Thinkers (B) come up with good ideas, but "Knowers are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". That is why Lao Tzu told the "KnowErs" and "WordErs(C2er)" to "Unite Your Dust($1 H@h)!"
Ch'en(@h) is in only two chapters. So, by means of these identifiers, you can find the chapter a quote is from. Some of my ideas are good; the Way I have implemented them is not.
. In his commentary Star says: "Tao is both a noun and a verb." In the "KEY WORD" section, Tao takes up almost a page. But I am missing two definitions. The "Way(A1)" things work is HOW things work. In this sense, the Tao is the big HOW. I red that a long time ago but I don't remember who said it, so I can't give credit for it. Another important meaning of Tao comes from Richard Wilhelm: "Tao" is like an algebraic variable, "ein algebraishes Zeichen". Many key words mean what the context demands, just as variable X means what the equation it is in demands. Many Chinese characters can be read both as a noun and as a verb. What a character means in a certain sentence is determined by the sentence. The sentence emerges through its words and, having emerged, gives meaning to them.
. Now then, are we ready for Ching 1.1,1? ...
What is the very first sentence in the Ching? ... What is the first and most important thing we have to do in this world? ...
The first two characters are Tao(A1) and K'o(pt). Imperative sentences start with a verb. ...
"Actualize your Potential"! HOW? By "Taoing the TaoAble(A1ptA1)." By "Doing what you Can Do(A1ptA1)". Star quotes eleven different translations of 1.1,1. The following ones are as accurate or more accurate than the ones quoted: The "Tao Can be Taoed but Not in the Usual Way (A1ptA1FyCnA1)." Credit for the idea behind this one goes to the founder of Falun Gong.
"Taoed and TaoAble object is the Opposite of the TaoIng" subject. I have taken liberties with Ch'ang(Cn) and Tao(A1). If you are after the content, then the inaccuracies are justifiable. By means of the two-digit identifiers, you can look up the dictionary equivalents of the characters. You can do your own translation in this way, and thus you are less likely to be mislead by any translation.
. Here is one more: There are two "Taos: the TaoAble and its Opposite the TaoEd." Here the context demands the "TaoEd" because it is the "Opposite(Fy)" of the "TaoAble(ptA1)". While we must try to be as accurate as possible, what matters in the end is not HOW something is said, but WHAT is said. If it doesn't make sense, then Lao Tzu couldn't have meant it.
. At Ching 1.4,1, Lao Tzu said: "These DyAds(Tzdyad) ...." Why? ...
Because that's what he has been talking about in the first three paragraphs: "Actual-Potential (A1pt)". Object-subject. "NamAble and its Opposite the NamEd(ptMgFyCnMg)." "Conception(B1)" - birth, and "Nonexistence(WU) - "Existence(YU)", or our inner and outer realities. In the last paragraph, Lao Tzu sums it all up:
. "These DyAds are a Unit Originally But the poles of this dyad are Separated by Naming (Tzdyad$1CubtâoMg) them. the Unit Is the light'S Darkness ($1is ZSü). Darken It and Repeat the Darkening(Sü Z@1Sü) until you reach
All Mystery'S Gate(^1#1 Z%1)." As far as possible, I let Lao Tzu speak for himself. But where he has left a blank, he obviously wants us to fill it in. Most translators actually say it: The Tao Te Ching can't be translated. Many passages have to be interpreted. By only giving us "Enough(Zu)" to complete the incomplete sentence ourselves, he is forcing us to think. Lao Tzu is a good teacher. And if you accept him as your teacher, you might actually learn something.
19.2,4: "So it is difficult to find a yogi who is not an egoist. And yogis may go an talking about egoless-ness, but they cannot be egoless. The very process they go through creates the ego. The fight is the process. If you fight, you are bound to create an ego. And the more you fight, the more strengthened the ego will be. And if you win your fight, then you will achieve the supreme ego."
Jnana Yogis are on the path of Knowledge, they don't "fight". At the beginning of the second chapter Arjuna talks as if he is a jnana yogi. He finishes his lecture on jnana yoga by saying "I will not fight, Krishna (2.9)".
"Krisna smiled and spoke to Arjuna .... and are thy words words of wisdom? .... (2.10-11)." Arjuna is not a jnana yogi, he is a raja yogi. So how can his words be words of wisdom?
. This "very process" that "creates the ego" wouldn't exist if there is no purpose or Divine intent (E3) for it. When Krishna tells Arjuna to fight, there is a very good reason for it. If a raja yogi does not strengthen "the ego" he wouldn't do his dharma. Just because jnana (B), raja (C) and karma (D) yoga are different from bhakti (A) yoga, it doesn't mean that they are all wrong.
Between A and C we have the Divine Will - personal will dyad. The Buddha's Four Noble Truths are relevant to this paragraph. See the section on the Dalai Lama in this blog. However, 19.2,4 sheds a new light on it which we must not "Pass-by(#i)".
. It would have been more correct to say: It "is difficult to find a" raja yogi in whom the personal will or "ego" does not predominate. A and C are direct opposites on the vertical axis of the cross. 20.1,1: ".... And this is the secret of the method -- that if you are aware anger is transformed: it becomes compassion. ...." . If this is one of the 112 methods or techniques, then I have possibly already missed a few of them.
20.1,1: ".... The same anger, the same energy, will become compassion." It can be transformed.
"The whole secret of our existence lies in the fact that energy of one quality can be transformed into energy of a another quality. (Mr.B's ENERGIES pg.23)"
. While it is safe for me to quote from different teachers, it is not my dharma. But, after a “WordEr(C2er)” has used his search engines to come up with promising sentences, I can help him or her to analyze the content of these sentences.
21.2,5: "Remember, it is ultimately your mind that makes anything attractive or unattractive."
. Attractive - unattractive is a dyad, and the number two is the number of revelation. Lao Tzu says at Ching 2.1: There can be no "Beauty(%b)" without "Ugliness((ug)".
23.1,6: "But what is surrender and how does it work? And if surrender works, then what is the need of one hundred and twelve methods?"
. The passages that lead up to those questions are excellent, and the answers that follow from these questions are again excellent, they are self explanatory. Quoting such passages is not my dharma. If I don't have something valuable to add to such quotes, I would even infringe on the copyrights of that book. Just saying that I like those passages isn't good enough.
. Unless I can add something the author has omitted or unless I can expose an untruth, quoting passages is not my dharma.
24.1,5: ".... I am not my body. ...."
24.1,7: ".... I am not my mind."
. The Hindu saying: Neti-neti-neti, means: Not-not-not. I am not my body, I am not my mind (Manas, in Sanskrit) and I am not my intellect (Buddhi). This saying refers to the well known thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad. Gurdjieff has called the three impulses: The intellectual center (B), the emotional center (C) and the moving center (D). He has not named our soul or the atman because it is the observer. When A observes B, C and D, A is the observer and B, C and D are the observed. Before the observation, they are parts of the subject, after the observation they are observed objects. We are no longer identified with them and we say: Neti-neti-neti.
24.1,9: ".... I am not my body, not my mind, so I must be my soul, my atma. ...." ...
Hold it, what is missing here? ...
If there is no intellectual center, Buddhi, in Sanskrit, then all the Hindus are wrong, Plato, Aristotle and Descartes are wrong, the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Mr.B and many others are all wrong. Talk about: "I am right and you are wrong. (5.2,5)" This is the biggest falsehood I have come across so far and it seems to me, that this is why I find myself working on this book.
. There can be no falsehood without the truth; and no truth without falsehood. In a way, Falsehood reveals the truth because only when you know the truth that is challenged by the falsehood can you refute it. This is why, the two is called the number of revelation. So the social engineers, whose job it is to deceive the people, should be thankful to Osho for helping them. Why, then, did they find it necessary to kill him? ...
. The question is still only partially answered, but: "Seek and you will Find(@ngt)'.
25.1,7: "When one surrenders, one becomes like a valley. One becomes depth, not height."
Lao Tzu said: The "Highest Goodness is Like Water ( +gdJO@8)" because water seeks the lowest places. "Compare the Tao Which is In (*fA1 ZÜp) The World(Tn -)With a Stream in the Valley(^5@qkU) Which is To Rivers as rivers are to the Sea ( Zto@Y#X)." *f = Pi149.
What is this analogy an example of? What are we supposed to "Compare" the stream, the rivers and the sea with? ...
The Tao which is in us, is to the intellect which is to the mind as the mind is to the body. That Lao Tzu's analogies are so precise is hard to believe. That is why, by means of the three dots, I ask you to do your own thinking. Then you don't have to believe (C), then you will know (B).
. As our body is in the world, so the mind is in the body, the intellect is in the mind and our soul is in the intellect. Even though, all we know for sure is that our body is in the world, that it is all around us, we can know that the rest of the statement is true because of the law of correspondence. Whenever you are using an example, you are making use of the law of correspondence. And Lao Tzu is a master at it.

24.2,9: " .... You cannot surrender -- you are the hindrance. ...." . "You" as intellect, mind or body cannot surrender. It is not in "your" interest to surrender. For surrender to happen, "you" must cease to be. "Your" very existence prevents surrender from happening.

24.2,9: " .... When you are not, surrender is there. So you and surrender cannot cohabit, there is no coexistence between you and surrender. Either you are or surrender is. ...." . We still have the "All or nothing" principle here, but with a twist to it. Lao Tzu loves paradoxes. I hope you are working on this one. If only surrender is there, only surrender can happen; if only you are there only you can exist. This is not a "DyAd(dyad)" these are only two "separate" "Monads($1)". Logic tells us things we cannot experience. Only if, by means of one of the 112 techniques we can go to the other side at will does the other side become real to us. Then, if we don't sacrifice the truth for this experience, we have the two poles or parts through which the dyad, the whole can emerge and, having emerged, give meaning to them. Until we can actually experience this, this will merely remain a theory (B).


_____________________ Chapter 3 ____________________________

31.2,1: " .... Lao Tzu says, "Seek not; otherwise you will miss. Seek not and find. Don't seek and find." I don't know where he is supposed to have said that.
. Lao Tzu is a jnana yoga guru. So it is very unlikely that he would say such a thing. In chapter 62 he said:
"Why did the ancients prize the Tao?
"Is it not because by virtue of it he who seeks finds (PU73YI@ngt. Wu's translation.)"? A valid equivalent of Yi(YI) is: "by virtue of it". @n = Ch'iu85 "To entreat, seek, aim at". So "By-means-of Seeking you Get (YI@ngt)" the answer. How much clearer could he have said that?
. Since Jesus has said the same thing at Matthew 7:7, He would have to be wrong as well. What else did He say about that? "If ye continue in my word, then are you my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. (John 8:31-32)"
. If knowing the truth will set us free, what is wrong with seeking it? ...
The social engineers don't want us to find out the truth. If you don't seek the truth, then you will not find it. So Osho is actually helping them. But the question: Why did they kill him? keeps coming back. ....
On the other side of the Door (A), there is omniscience (E3), there is the truth. Suppose bhaktis (A) can go there at will to get specific answers to specific questions we ask them. And the reason they can do it, is not because they can think (B) but because they refuse to think.
. Now, again, I ask you to put yourself into the shoes of our rulers. ...
The truth, they know but don't want us to know, is right there on the other side for the taking for those who can get there. The truth, when known, will help us to take the power, our rulers have over us, away from them. Now, then, how would you feel? What would you do? ...
. There is also a possibility that some of the 112 techniques can work for yogis other than the bhaktis. ... Even for those whose dharma it is to seek the truth and to expose the untruth. ...
The 112 techniques come from Shiva and Shiva is not a bhakti yogi. Shiva is the destructive impulse in the Creator-Maintainer-Destroyer triad. Vishnu is said to have incarnated as Krishna. But then he says: "I am all-powerful Time which destroys all things (Gita 11.32 Mascaró)". As which Impulse did Krishna reveal Himself to Arjuna there? ...
. It can be expected that Osho has done an excellent job on the techniques that are suitable for bhaktis but, I suspect, that we have to interpret the ones that are not for the bhaktis ourselves. If I don't get help, or don't get called off, I will have to work on this book for a long time.

31.2,2: "All these techniques of Shiva's are simply turning the mind from the future or the past to the present. That which you are seeking is already there [on the other side], it is the case already. The mind has to be turned from seeking to nonseeking. It is difficult. If you think about it intellectually it is very difficult. How to turn the mind from seeking to nonseeking?"
. For jnana yogis, the question is not " How to turn the mind from seeking to nonseeking .... The mind makes nonseeking itself the object! Then the mind says, 'Don't seek.' Then the mind says, 'I should not seek.' Then the mind says, 'Now nonseekimg is my object. Now I desire the state of desirelessness.' The seeking has entered again, the desire has come again through the backdoor. ...." Osho has put the problem, the Nuddhists are struggling with, very nicely. Lao Tzu puts it this way: "Desire Not to Desire (YÜPUYÜ)". But his students know that the sentence is not complete, that it is their task to complete it. How would you do it? ...
"Desire Not to Desire" what you are unable to attain. That is an avoidable waste of energy. Can you think of another Way to complete the same sentence? ...
If you did, you can also see how Lao Tzu can say so "Much with so Few (TO$q)" words. If you are able to attain it, should you attain it? ...
"Desire Not to Desire" what is not worth having. Why invest time and energy in what turns out to be useless or harmful to you? But what do you do if it is worth getting? ...
You use your intellect (B) to develop a plan, or algorithm on HOW to attain it. What then? ...
You use your mind (C) to break down the plan into a series of instructions the doers (D), or a computer, can execute.
. When the tetrad is understood, many of the problems the Buddhists take so serious don't even exist for the Taoists. They simply become routine operations for the thinkers (B), the Leaders (C) and their followers (D).
. When looking at some of the the questions the Buddhists are wasting their time and energy on and at some of the questions the Buddha has so adamantly refused to answer, it becomes clear to jnana yogis that Buddhism is not jnana yoga.
. Even though Buddhism is not jnana yoga, this doesn't mean that it is wrong. As the links of a chain, each component of a system is equally important. I must, again, remind you of the "all or nothing" principle. Jesus has mentioned it in the parables of the Ten pieces of silver and the One hundred sheep.

A coincidence happened last Saturday June 2, 2007. The last thing I said above, last Friday, was that we have to differentiate between three types of "Desire(YÜ): 1. Desires we are unable to attain. 2. Desires that are undesirable to attain and 3. Desires that are "DesirAble(ptYÜ)" to attain.
. I said then that there is a systematic Way to attain it. You can go back to the Dalai Lama section in this blog for more details. My blog is full of descriptions of envisioning( A), planning (B), organizing (C) and manifesting (D) a "Desire(YÜ)". I made it sound as if this is the only Way to go. It is not. ...
The systematic approach is only one pole of a polarity. The two poles are the parts and the "DyAd(dyad)" is the whole. To make it sound as if one part is the whole is a mistake that is described at Gita 18.22. Saying things that can be misleading, is bad karma. I hope that by confessing my sin, I can avoid some of the potential damage that any mistake can cause.
. HOW was this mistake brought to my attention? ...
I have written about synchronicity before. It is the answer to the question. A book was recommended to me so insistently and convincingly that I just knew that this is no accident, I knew that this was synchronicity. So I went that same Saturday and got the book and started to read it. What I read that very first day was already "Enough(Zu)" proof for me that this was no accident. So I could also see the law of attraction at work. The proof is valuable Enough to tell you about it:
. For instance, the title of the second chapter is: "Synchronicity in Nature". And on page 120 we read: "We must depend on coincidences to show us the will of the universe." It seems to me that the universe doesn't want me to mislead unsuspecting visitors to my blog.
. The last passage I have worked on is at 31.2,2. After I have put my work out on the internet, I read ahead to look for the next suitable passage. I have read ahead quite a bit, but I was at a loss. Even though I could see that this was good stuff, I had nothing worthwhile to add to it. Deepak Chopra's book gave me many relevant details that I will bring up when I return to Osho's book.
. The very title of his book refers to the complement of my: Systematic Fulfillment of Desires. It is : THE SPONTANEOUS FULFILLMENT of DESIRES. Take what I have just said about "Desires(YÜ)" and compare that with what Deepak has said: "We start to desire things that may not be meant for us; we begin to have intentions that do not match up with intentions of the universe. (pg. 151)" "Desire(YÜ)", or intentions in this context would be my will while the intentions of the universe would be God's Will.
. The way Deepak has described the complement to my systematic process of supplying a customer's demand has made it possible for me to see my mistake and to confess it to you here. I hope that having said this here will undo some of the bad karma that can be caused by presenting a half-truth as if it is the whole truth.
. This should also soften the stance I have taken towards The Secret. However, I still believe that the truth is used very skillfully to put unsuspecting readers into the victim state of consciousness or, if they can do it, to get them to misuse their power.

31.2,3: "So .... you cannot desire nondesire. ... "
. The "Wise Man Desires NonDesire (wsmnYÜPUYÜ)". We have a paradox here, unless you assume that either Osho or Lao Tzu is wrong.
. Let us adopt Deepak Chopra's terminology to shed light on that paradox. There is a table on pages 100 to 103 in which "Local Mind" and "Nonlocal Mind" are contrasted. For instance: Local Mind: "algorithmic"; Nonlocal Mind: "nonalgorithmic". For those who are familiar with the 4-fold algorithm, this makes perfect sense. "When the intention of the nonlocal mind is served by the local mind, it is more holistic, and therefore more effective. (112)" When the local and the nonlocal minds cooperate, we have the synthesis of the two parts of the "DyAd(dyad)".
The nonlocal mind would be the E1-E2-E3 triad and then the local mind is the B-C-D triad. The two "TriAds ( 3ad)" form the "DyAd(dyad)" Lao Tzu has described at Ching 1.3. It is well to read different translations of the same Chinese characters. Better still, use the concordance and a dictionary.
. Deepak has verified what Osho has told us: The poles of the polarity are opposites.
"When self-concern departs, nonlocal intelligence enters. (117)" When Deepak and other teachers support a statement Osho has made, it gives credibility to it. This kind of work can be carried out most efficiently by a "WordEr(C2er)" - "KnowEr(kner)" team. As it is, I have to invest more time and energy to produce an inferior job because no "WordEr(C2er)" seems to think that this work is worth doing.
. Let me also repeat, that work that can be verified by, or by means of, Communicators (C) cannot be verified by the thinkers (B). All thinkers can do, is produce a theory (B). But, again, there are people who have had the actual experience, "existentially", and, as far as I can see, their descriptions of it are worse than what I am producing here. They can't understand WHAT they are experiencing and, thus, their description of it is confusing.
. Deepak Chopra's book is an en exception to the rule. In my 63 year long search, it is the most comprehensible description of the "Mystery(#1)" I have come across. However, for Lao Tzu's "KnowErs" it is not as useful as the Tao Te Ching because there is a difference between reading the answers and having to figure out the answers yourself. ...
When "Above average Students Hear the Truth ( +Ün^dA1) they Diligently study And Practice It (#6btpr Z)." Such students "Understand(kn)" the lesson. Average students merely believe (C) what they are told. To understand (B) WHAT is said (C) you have to find out the"Way(A1)" things work, and to do that, you have to learn HOW to think.
. "Those able to understand me are few (knmeer^e)" because not everybody is born to be a philosopher. The astrological air signs (B) have that love (philos) in them, at least as a "Potential(pt)".
. A university degree does not confer that love of truth (Sophia) upon graduates of philosophy. The word means one thing and the reality is something else. In fact, the social engineers, who are in control of the "Educational" system, do anything but "educate".

31.2,3: "So you cannot seek anything nonworldly. The moment you seek, it becomes the world. ...." This can be paraphrased as: You cannot seek anything nonlocal while being in the local world your mind (C) is identified with and your body (D) is in. In the world, first comes the "TaoAble(ptA1)" then comes the Taoing and them comes the Taoed. Now substitute name, knowledge or other words for the Tao: ...
First comes the knowable, then comes the knowing and then comes the known. That is the "Way(A1)" it is on this side of the Door (A); this is not possible on the other side, because there is no time and space. Where there is omniscience, there can be nothing "NamAble(ptMg)" or understandable because everything is already named or known. "If you try to understand intellectually, it will become a puzzle. (31.2,3)" for bhaktis (A) because learning HOW to think is not their dharma. "And do thy duty, even if it be humble, rather than another's even if it be great. To die in one's duty is life; to live in another's is death." Gita 3.35. Mascaró's translation. He has translated dharma as "duty". The bhaktis "do not know(13.25)" this. Still, they are as important as the rest of us. ".... they hear from others and adore." That is good "Enough(Zu)" for them. Trying to learn and do the yoga of another "is death" in the sense that you are not doing WHAT you came down here to do. Our soul (A) is our conscience: It can give us this feeling (A) that we are on the wrong path. So what are we doing here? ... The feeling, that you are not doing what you came here to do, can lead to frustration, depression, addictions and even to suicide.
32.2,4: "The first nine techniques are concerned with breathing. …"
33.2,5: "There are certain points but we are not aware of them. ..." But, intellectually, we can "Identify(Mg)" them: The "Wise Man does Not See (them) But he can Identify (wsmnPUoobtMg)" them.
35.1,4: "! Watch the gap between two breaths." On page 173 of Deepak's book, the in-breath is "so" and the out-breath is "hum". He also talks about the gaps between two thoughts. These are timeless, nonlocal, “points" within our local experience. By means of certain techniques, it seems to be possible to become "aware of them. (33.2,5)"
. . A . . . . Using analogy, the pendulum can help us to "Identify"
D . + . B . . points A, B, C and D:
. . C . . . . At A, the bob is at rest. All energy is "potential". At B potential and kinetic energy is in balance. At C the bob has reached maximum velocity. All energy is kinetic. At D the two energies are in balance again. This is the out-breath, deceleration. At A the bob is at rest again.
. If you understand this, then you are ready for Lao Tzu's description of the tetrad: Ching 25.1 is a long one. He talks about the "Big Tao(TAA1)" there: "I Don't Know Its Name (myPUkn HMg). the Character used for It Is Tao (Zi Z73A1). if Forced To give It another Name(57do ZMg), I-would-call-it Big(73TA). if we let Big Mean Going (TA73*e) out. having Gone Mean Arriving (*e73$t), having Arrived Mean Returning ($t73$l) Then((KU)" having returned must mean? ...
being back home again.

38.1,4: "We are divided into the center and the periphery. The body is the periphery; we know the body, we know the periphery. We know the circumference, but we do not know where the center is. ...."
. Osho now relates this to the breath. We have the third technique here. I can't comment on it because I don't know "Enough" about it. But this "center and the periphery" thing is a philosophical subject.
. Let me first quote what came to mind from the Tao Te Ching and then go into the details we get from Sutras 13 and 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE.
. "Lumps of Clay are For Making Pots (*f*gYIdout). In-the-center (*d), where The Nothing in Something ( HWUYU) is, there is the Pot'S Usefulness (ut Zut)."
*d = Tang102. *f = Yen32. *g = Ch'ih32
. Sutra 1 is a heptad. The "Satyaloka .... the sphere of God. .... " The "Tapoloka" and the Janaloka .... werein the idea of separate existence of Self originates." seems to correspond to Mr.B's E1-E2-E3 triad.
. The "Maharloka .... This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara."
. As far as I can see, this is Mr.B's "Conscious Energy E4". "Man's 'I', Will". In Sanskrit this would be the "Ahamkara", the "I" maker (A). These are hypotheses only. Please use them to refute or to verify them. As I said before, jnana yogis can only give you theories. That is our dharma.
. At this critical point in time, it is important to state the truth as boldly as possible, because we are running out of time. There is no time to beat around the bush. So let me go on: E5-E6-E7 (B-C-D) would be the "Swarloka", the "Bhuvarloka" and the "Bhuloka. The last and lowest sphere ...." There should be no problem with the "Bhuloka, the sphere of gross material creation, which is always visible to everyone." but let's not be too sure or careless. Let us look at Sutra 14 next:
. "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths."
Steiner and Mr.B have a lot to say about the pentad, but I am unable to do justice to all of that. So let's continue with Sutra 14:
. "The first of these five is Heart, Chitta .... which feels or enjoys, and thus being the seat of bliss, ananda, is called Anandamaya Kosha."
. It is safe to say that this is E4 (A) because E5, the "Jnanamaya Kosha" (B) is right below it and below B is E6, the "Manomaya Kosha" (C). Things aren't always that clear, as you will see next:
. "The fourth is .... composed of the organs of action .... called Pranamaya Kosha" (E7 (D)). The karmendriyas are our "organs of action”. For details see Gita 3.42.
. We are talking here about the law of correspondence, about "Alignment(%8)". We need this law to "Align" our material body (E7 (D)) with "Gross matter, the 5th Kosha" (E8).
. We must differentiate between E7 (D) and E8. Let me paraphrase Gita .42: The senses Indriyas) are high(er than ...) Higher than the senses is the mind (Manas), higher than the mind is the intellect (Buddhi) and higher than the intellect is it (the Atman). So A (E4) is above B (E5), B is above C (E6), C is above D (E7) and D is above …
The answer is quite obvious, so I am not doing you any favor by giving the answer away. If you have trouble, go over Sutra 14 again.
. It is safe for me to say, that once you know the "Dyad,(dyad)", the "TriAd( 3ad)", etc. a lot of other things will make more sense as well. Mr.B was right when he implied that these number-systems can be used as thinking tools. When you do, you don't have to believe (C) that: He who has shall have more. You will know (B) it.
. Plato has reduced the tetrad to a triad in his Timaeus. We can do the same thing with the Heptad: E1-E2-E3 is the upper triad. E4 (A) is the reconciling impulse and B-C-D is the lower triad. Any number system is a "Unit($1)" and can thus be a "Unit" or part in other number systems. A contains the upper triad, as the lower, and more concrete, triad contains A. We have the law of correspondence again. We can now return to Osho's 38.1,4:
. Where A, the reconciling impulse, it has the "Nothing(WU)" within it and the "Something(YU)" around it. It is the "circumference" around the "Nothing". It is like the "Pot(ut)" that separates the space within it from the space outside of it. This is also the function of the five Koshas: Separating E3 from E4 (A), A from B, B from C, C from D and D (E7) from E8. Everything within E8 is ordinarily experienced as the subject and everything outside of our body (D) is ordinarily experienced as the object.
. By means of self-observation, or meditation, our body, mind and even our intellect can become objective to us. That is when the meditator says: Neti, neti, neti: I am not my body, mind or intellect. And now, will a Communicator (C) please say it better.
38.2,4: " .... partiality is always ugly. ...." . The Tamoguna causes people to mistake a part for the whole. See Gita 18.22. 39.1,2: ".... You are affraid. You are affraid to be vulnerable, so open to someone, to anyone. .... You are afraid to be so completely given to someone. You cannot breathe .... You cannot relax your breathing so that it goes to the center -- because the moment breathing goes to center your act becomes total." . Your intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D) actions become "Aligned(%8)" to your inner Self, the Tao, Atman or God. . The "You" in this quote refers to your outer, more concrete self. As long as we are identified with it, it will seem more real than our inner Self.

. Right now, for most of us our body mind and intellect is the inner, and the world is the outer. we are the subject and it is the object. We are the local self and within us is the nonlocal Self. When interpreting Osho, we must remember that he can go to the other side of the Door (A) at will. From there the outer is the B-C-D triad The parts of us that produce our thought, words and deeds can be as objective to him as the outer world is to us. Some of his students who have learned to use their techniques can see it that way as well. They have no problem with WHAT Osho says, but the rest of us are bound to be confused. . Now, if we can move "the center" inward, to the other side of the Door (A), then we can see it his way as well. E1-E2-E3 is the subject and B-C-D is the observed object. When you are identified with the upper or inner triad, the lower or outer triad becomes the object.

. Just because jnana yogis can understand this, it doesn't mean that they can do, or see, it. If that experience prevents them from doing their own dharma, then, even if they could, they shouldn't do it. They shouldn't, because that will prevent the synthesis from happening. You can't deny the antithesis and still expect the synthesis to happen. I prefer to follow Lao Tzu in this.

39.1,5: ".... The more you are dead, the more you are secure. The more you are dead, the more everything is in control. .... you can control everything. ...." . If "you" are a capitalist (D), you can control the economy. For instance, bankers can issue money without being taken to court for counterfeiting. They can give you a loam that comes from nothing. In about seven years, you will have collected as much in interest as the original loan you produced from nothing. You have collected that amount of money for money that didn't even exist. Talk about controlling everything. . If you are a dictator (C), you have absolute power over life and death. That is totalitarian control. what you have to do is collect all the guns in the hands of private citizens, because when they find out the truth, which they will, they will shoot back. . If you are a timocrat (B), you don't have to get yourself elected. You have "the power of election" See The Protocols of Zion. Decisions are made for the decision-maker. And now you know why the people (A) get such a bad deal in a timocracy. In a democracy and in a dictatorship the people must know which political system they live under. If they don't know that, neither of these two systems will work. In a timocracy the people must not know which system they live under. If they do know it, then the system will not work.
. Self-observation means that the observing subject observes itself. As a result, the observed subject becomes the object. To understand this intellectually is easy for intellectuals, but to do it is hard, even for non-intellectuals. That's why Socrates, in Plato's Republic, said: Observing human society is easier than observing ourselves because society is outside of, or objective to, us.
. Then, after we have observed society, we will be able to understand the human individual better because society is made up of individuals. Therefore, society must reveal the (four) human characteristics to us.
. The Republic is essentially a description of the four human types by means of human society which is used as an example.
. One premise underlying the Republic is the law of correspondence: If we observe society correctly, then, by analogy, we can draw conclusions about the human individual.
. Now, what does Lao Tzu do at Ching 18? ...
I have already dealt with 18. in this blog, so I don't have to go over the details again:
. When the parts of the "Big Tao are Separated (TAA1@m)" first comes democracy (A), then comes "Hypocracy(*b = Wei9)" (B), then comes capitalism (D) and then dictatorship (C). We don't have the A-B-C-D sequence here. Why? ...
All efficient problem-solving activity begins with the right questions. At Ching 25.3, we have the same A-B-D-C sequence. At 25.4, the conclusion of 25, the sequence is "Reversed($l)". There we have the C-D-B-A sequemce. There we have our answer. But only if you had the question. No question; no answer.

30.2,2: ".... Suddenly you take a deep breath. You may not have observed it."
. The you is breathed. The You breathes the you. Hey, that even happens to me. I have to become more aware of, and grateful for, that.
40.1,2: ".... Civilization, education, morality, they have created shallow breathing It will be good to go deep into the center, because otherwise you cannot take deep breaths."
. It must not be ignored that the social engineers are in control of our “education". By means of psychology, chemistry, electronics and other means, these professionals put us into the victim state of consciousness. They dumb us down. They cause us to feel helpless: They cause people to say "What can you do about it!", when the question should be: WHAT can we do about it? They know HOW to make us feel insecure. They know HOW to create fear in us which causes "shallow breathing".
. 85 % of Canadians didn't want the GST (General Sales Tax) we got it anyway with the results that were predicted. I signed a petition against the Chem-trails that are darkening our skies like clouds. They are still up there, still making us sick. Now "They're coming to take our water ..." If you can help The COUNCIL of Canadians financially, please do so. The fact remains, that in a timocracy decisions are made for the timocrats, not for the people. That makes some people angry which, again, causes "shallow breathing". In a timocracy, your anger will not deter our rulers from selling our water, because what is good for the people may not be good for the timocrats. They are simply doing what is in their own interest. By definition, a timocracy is not a government of the people, by the people and thus, for the people.
. There is no doubt in my mind that our rulers know what they are doing. They have been at it for a very long time. If we want to solve a problem, then we must first of all know WHAT the problem is. The social engineers know HOW to keep us in the dark, but I also know first hand, that, in spite of their efforts, a lot of people are becoming suspicious.
. I am only at the beginning of his book, but so far, Osho has not brought these facts to our attention. This makes the question: Why did they kill him, harder to answer, but it becomes more worth the effort. The search itself is good exercise. If they had not killed Osho, and if I had not studied Ching 41.1, then I wouldn’t be doing the work I am doing now on this book. I don’t know about you, but I think this book is amazing. This seems to verify that there is something in it that has our rulers worried.

40.2,2: ".... The breath passage is in the upper body and the sex passage is in the lower body. When they meet they create life. ...."
. Where "they meet", we have the synthesis of the opposites. "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Create (YUWUmtSg" "Life(Sg)".
40.2,3: "Shiva says, Whenever in-breath and out-breath fuse, at this instant touch the .... center."
41.1,1: Here we have the term: "cosmic energy". E1-E2-E3-E4 is the tetrad of Mr.B's "Cosmic Energies". Osho and Mr.B can probably shed light on each other's "Energies" but for me, to elaborate on it, takes me outside my sphere of influence, or competence.
. One human being can't do it alone. We are not built for that. To put all of the pieces of this gigantic jigsaw-puzzle together, requires "Uniting Our Dust ($1 H@h). This Is-called the Mystic Unit (SiisSü$1)." Mystic, because it is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts.
The "Total Sum of the parts of a Chariot is a Nothing Chariot ($0#5âsWUâs)." This is Lao Tzu's Way of saying: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Our rulers have learned HOW to make use of this principle. That's why they know that we must be "Without this Knowledge (WUkn)". Knowledge is power: If we know WHAT they know, we can do WHAT they can do. And there are more of us than there are of them. So they have good reasons to keep this knowledge away from us. Only after their "kingdom has come" can they introduce "THE DIVISION OF LABOR". See The Protocols of Zion.
. The fact is, that a critical mass of the people must understand THE DIVISION OF LABOR to make it work for us. One human being can't channel (A) it all, understand (B) it all Communicate (C) it all or do (D) it all. We have to become as organized as our rulers are. The task of our rulers is to keep the truth from us; our task is to seek and find the truth. That is why truth is the lifeblood of democracy. If a critical mass of us knows it, then the truth will set us free. This is not something we have to believe (C) because Jesus has said it. It is something we must understand (B) to make it work.
. The Internet makes our alternative education possible but only if the net-workers (C) are pulling their weight. This is why, I believe, that the social engineers have concentrated on them. They know that they don't have to weaken all four components of the tetrad to cause the system to fail. Weaken one link of a chain and you weaken the whole chain.
. I have to do my darnest to get these ideas across to you. They are absolutely vital. Until a "WordErs(C2er)" "Knows that he Doesn't Know (knPUkn)" it all, you have to put up with my poor communication skills. This is the best I can do. Let me tell you one more thing: If I were a social engineer, I would create the bottleneck at level C. When there is nothing to mediate between theory (B) and practice (D) the system can't work. Try to get a computer (D) to do what the programmer wants it to do without a computer language (C). And it doesn't matter whether the programmer (B) understands WHAT the customer (A) wants and knows HOW to develop a perfect algorithm for it. My hope is that not all water signs (C) have been dumbed down "Enough(Zu)" so that at least some of them can still see WHAT is being done to them and still understand what I have just said. When I typed the word "algorithm" just now, its opposite "Nonalgorithmic (from Deepak's pg. 103)" came to mind. Take it for what it is worth to you. To me it is a ray of hope because without divine guidance our situation looks pretty hopeless.

59.2,3:L "5 Focus your attention on the third eye.
"The fifth breathing technique: Attention between eyebrows ...."
. " .... with inner gaze which is not restless, but rests still between the eye-brows; (Gita 6.13)"
Earlier in this blog I said that Krishna teaches raja yoga in the Gita. Arjuna was a raja yogi.
. At 13.24, raja yoga is "the Yoga of meditation". At chapter 6, Krishna talks about meditation. Raja yoga is also known as integral yoga. This is why Krishna also teaches karma (D), bhakti (A) and jnana (B) yoga.
. Because of my bhakti experience I know that it can't be taught in a book. It was also clear to me that what we get of jnana yoga in the Gita, is only an introduction. But until I read up to 59.2,3, I thought that the Gita is a textbook on raja yoga. Now I can no longer say that. Compared to Osho's book, the Gita is only an introduction to raja yoga as well.
. The four yogas are the components of a system called a tetrad. Behind such number-systems is the law of correspondence. This means that when you get deeper into any one of these four yogas you will notice the correspondence or similarity between them. However, to notice it, the other system must be understood and described well. Osho has done that. He gets into details on raja yoga you don't find in the Gita. For instance, he says: "First you will become aware of the passage, and when you have become completely aware of the passage, only then will you begin by and by, to be aware of the breath itself. And when you become aware of the breath, then you will be capable of being aware of the gap, the interval. It is not as easy as it looks. 48.1,3)"
. And just because I can copy that, it doesn't mean that I can do it. To learning any yoga, you, first of all, need the "Potential(pt)" for it. But notice the step by step process. Never bite of more than you can chew at any one time. “It is not as easy as it looks.” Learning one yoga takes lifetimes.
"At the end of many lives the man of vision comes to me. (Gita 7.19)". "man of vision" = jñãnavãn = "wise man, man of wisdom". The context tells us that this is the raja yogi. It takes "many lives" to learn karma, bhakti and jnana yoga before you can integrate them as raja yoga. This might shed some light on the question: Why did the social engineers consider Osho a dangerous person.
. There are many water signs in the world, but not everyone is material for raja yoga. Real raja yogis like Arjuna, and probably Osho, are rare. The only way you can prevent them from waking up too many people is to kill them.
With Osho still around, his organization would be much harder to infiltrate. Not all of his followers can be expected to be as "pure (62.1,3)" as Osho must demand. The power that comes through Focusing “your attention on the third eye” is there but, without purity, it is dangerous.
. This could be the answer to our question, but the book is too god to stop here. So let's keep going.

I haven’t attended to my blog because I was reading the book: Ask and It Is Given. It hit nail on head so well that I couldn’t stop reading. The knowledge we can gain from studying it should help us understand “The Book of Secrets” better. So I will work on it now and return to Osho’s book when we are done.
. Whether we have here a case of synchronicity, or Divine guidance, is for you to decide. I will put this new section in front of file 2 - Text Commentaries.


This morning, May 10, a thought came to me. It seemed so obvious to me that I thought that you must have thought of it already. So at first, I wasn’t going to put it out. However, I also know the law of attraction, which means that if I don’t act on what comes to me in this way, no more thoughts like that will come to me in this way. In short, to use it or lose it. (205)"
. So here it is: Instead of asking whether dogs or cats can bring about changes in “the subatomic world” ask whether sociopaths can do it.
. “ 1 in 25 ordinary Americans secretly has no conscience and can do anything at all without feeling guilty.” From the cover of Martha Stout’s “the sociopath next door”.
. Some of these citizens without a conscience and thus without a soul (A), or “Conscious Energy E4”, are very likely to be found in jail. If cooperating with you can get them out on bail for a while, they probably would be more than willing to help you with your experiments. Once it is established that by means of this test the presence or absence of a soul can be definitely proven, president Bush would be more than happy to demonstrate to the world that he is not the “devil” president Chavez of Venezuela has claimed he is. Don’t you agree?

The guy that gave me The Secret to read, has now lent me What the Bleep do We Know. Since I have to give it back, I better start working on it now. Is changing the direction of my work, just because somebody tells me to read a book, logical? No. Is it syncronistic? That is for you to decide.
In the "Introduction" the authors talk about the film "What the BLEEP Do We Know? .... Our intent always had been to have .... 100 million see it. .... all those minds focused on a new reality would" .... Would cause what? "Would", could, is, is not, are connectives in a sentence. We have here the subject and the connective while the predicate is on the next page.
. Students of Lao Tzu learn to complete sentences because he leaves that work for us to do. That's how we become students, instead of being mere readers, of his words. Before I turned the page, I realized that here is an opportunity to do the same exercise with this sentence. Try! ...
The predicate the authors give us is: .... would "in fact shift something. We didn't know what,".
. Ah ha, I said to myself, that's why I got the book: I am supposed to let them know that when a critical mass of the people knows the truth, it will "shift" the morpho-genetic field of our planet and then the truth can set us free. Isn't that wonderful?
. I have finished reading the book and I can no longer say that that's why I got the book because on page 253, you can read about "Sheldrake's morphic field" yourself. Also what I could comment on has already been commented on by the authors and they have done a much better job than I can do. This is terrible, the authors have left hardly anything for me to contribute.
. I saw the movie, but I wouldn't have bought the book because I am too busy with the stuff I am better able to deal with. A lot of the book is above my head. And Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew. So I wouldn't have bought the book, but it was dropped into my lap, and that's the difference. So what am I supposed to do with it?
. On page 151, there are two diagrams: The first of them is the pentad and the other one is the hexad. Even though I have not specialized in these two systems, the "DyAd(dyad)", the "TriAd( 3ad)" and the tetrad are the parts of the more complex systems, and they can help us to understand them as words can help us to understand a sentence.
. Starting at the top and reading clockwise around the pentad we get: Science, Magic, Paradigm, Miracle and Spirit. Except for Spirit, there is a chapter devoted to each of the other four.
. The pentad I have dealt with most recently is: A (Conscious), B (Knowledge), C (Belief (pistis, in Greek)), D (Reality (or illusion (eikasia, in Greek, Maya, in Sanskrit))) and E8 (Matter or tangible reality). That pentad clearly was the Aristotelian tetrad plus E8 (Constructive energy). What the one on page 151 is, I don't know.
. Around the hexad are nine "Names(Mg)" or lables. Again, reading clockwise from the top, we have: Science, Belief, Magic, Conscious, Paradigm, Miracle, Knowledge, Spirit and Reality. There are only four monads, here, I know well enough to give me a better handle on this one than I have on the pentad, but to get a satisfactory "Insight(72)" on it, one that is good enough to write home about, might take some time.
. Essentially, what I have described here is a "Problem-Statement" (A) I have given to myself. But putting it out on my blog, others who are interested in this sort of thing and who know more about the pentad, hexad and ennead can work on it too. I will then put out what I have picked up, and put together, here. In the mean time, I will go ahead doing the easy stuff.

".... all the film distributors turned us down ....( x)" To students of the Tao Te Ching, this means that it is a good film: When
"Below average Scholars Hear the Truth ( -Ün^dA1) they will
Greatly Ridicule It (TA*a Z). if they do
Not Ridicule it, then we have Not Enough Means To find out the Truth (PU*aPUZudoA1)."
. Hsiao118(*a). The purpose of Hsiao(*a41) is to prevent us from finding out the truth. But when we know what we are not supposed to see or read, it has the opposite effect. They can't play a trick on us which we know. In fact, then it will do the very opposite of what it is intended to do: It tells us what is good for us to see or to read. Rupert Sheldrake's "morphic fields (253)" are a good example of this. They tried so hard to "Ridicule" or to discredit this theory and now, even "Lacerta" is talking about it. So what these "Below average Scholars" are telling us is: This is an important "Truth" and we don't want you to know about it.

"Then this film literally landed in my lap. Talk about the universe sending you a message! (xvi)"
. This statement also validates my own experience: Here I am minding my own business (dharma), working diligently on chapter 18 of the Tao Te Ching, and the Dalai Lama's book landed in my lap. This blog hasn't been the same since.
. There is this law of attraction: If you are aware "Enough(Zu)", of the universe sending you messages, then there will be more of them; if not, then, for you, there are no messages.
. When we get such a job to do, we must have "Enough" to put into it. Then we will get "Enough" out of it to know that this was not just an accident. When such a coincidence is meaningful "Enough" to us, then we know that it was a message from the universe.
. When a book is dropped in my lap, I normally read it first to find out if it is a job I am supposed to do. With all of the books I have commented on in this blog I knew that I had a worthwhile contribution to make to it. The Secret is a good example of this. The real intent of the book is hidden, like the hook is hidden by the worm. If this is not pointed out, the book can do much damage. The BLEEP is the exception to the rule: This darn thing is too perfect or too far above my head. Since Lao Tzu has told us not to bite off more than you can chew, I wouldn't have bought the book. I have seen the movie and I feel that there is more to it than I can chew. But I didn't have to buy it, it was given to me with the message that I have to read it. If I can't make a worthwhile contribution to it, then the universe must have made a mistake. Such a mistake would prevent me from working more efficiently on things I am better qualified to work on. It would also shake my faith in synchronicity. Not nice. Time will tell what comes out of this.

The title of the first chapter is: “The Great Question (1)”.
“What is a Great Question? Why should we bother? What makes it Great? (2)”
. The question (A) is the first phase of the 4-fold problem-solving process. It is the most creative “source” in that system. A source is a component of the tetrad. The other three sources are: thought, word and deed (B-C-D). Plato, his student, Aristotle, the Hindus, the Buddha, Lao Tzu, my teacher, J.G. Bennett and many others have described the tetrad. There is also much detail in the rest of this blog, so I don’t have to do it here.
. In general the dyad, triad, tetrad, pentad or the hexad is a whole that emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them.
. In the case of the dyad, its parts are always two monads called poles. In the case of the triad, its parts are always a dyad and a monad. In the triad, the poles and the monad are called impulses. In the tetrad, the parts can be two dyads or a triad and a monad. That is why, when analyzing a tetrad the first thing we ask is: What kind of tetrad is it? The same goes for the pentad and the hexad. From this you can see that the first step in the problem-solving process is asking the right question.
. What is the right question? The first chapter can speak for itself. What I might add is: If a question is dropped into our lap and it feels like a message from the universe, who are we to question it? But if you have a choice, don’t bite off more than you can chew. A question, the answer of which you are not ready for, can be a great waste of time and energy.
May 4, 2007
. The film distributors "never exclude (1-2)" you if they think that you are no threat to them. "But when things become significant .... that's when .... you want to exclude the other .... the alternative scientists are making a good case of their data .... And that is why the polarization is a very good sign that we are getting somewhere. (2)" Especially when we learn to interpret the efforts of those, who want to hide the truth from us, properly.
. "If you provide experimental data that violates their precepts, they want it to go away, so they sweep it under the rug. They will not let you publish. They will try to block all avenues for communicating (33)" the truth.
. And once a critical mass of the people knows "Enough(Zu)" of the truth, knows how to interpret the efforts of those that don't want us to know the truth, their efforts become counterproductive.
. Students of the Ching know that "Ridicule(*a41)" is a "Means To hide the Truth (YIdoA1)". But, as we understand what the people in power are trying to accomplish, they accomplish the very opposite of that. "Knowledge is power." And, thanks to Lao Tzu, they are giving it away.
. Having read the whole book now, I find one important principle missing. Plato, the Hindus, Lao Tzu and the Learned Elders of Zion have seen the importance of it and if that is the only thing I can make you aware of, it will do. It is THE DIVISION OF LABOR.
. I am on the path of knowledge. Have been for over 60 years. Whether I believe (C) what I know (B) is not that important. It is also unreasonable to expect me to communicate (C) what I know as well as a Communicator, or what Lao Tzu calls a "WordEr(C2er)", is able to do. What does matter, or should matter to Communicators (C) is whether they believe it. Then it can be tested. Communication is not my business, or dharma. "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2).".That's the "Way(A1)", or HOW , it is. That's why Tao(A1) has also been translated as "Nature". Following the Tao means learning to live in harmonyy with nature.
. To my knowledge, the best description of the division of labor is in Plato's Republic, but you can also read about it in this blog. even though it is important, there is no need to go into it here.
. The chapter on paradigms is from page 25 to 35."Paradigm" is one of the five monads around the pentad and one of the nine monads of the ennead on page 151. Let me report to you how far I got with the hexad. After all, that's the one I have the better handle on.
. "From the following list of words, see how many above/below relationships you can construct. (151)" "Conscious" (A) is above "Knowledge" (B). Knowledge, or "Heaven(Tu)" (B) is above "Belief" (C) and the "King( E)" (C) is above tangible "Reality" (D). Students of the Ching know that the three horizontal lines in Wang( E) represent heaven, humanity and earth. So, in Chinese, we even get a diagram of that.
. There are "Above average Scholars ( +Ün) .... Average Scholars ( =Ün) .... and Below average Scholars ( -Ün)".
. The "Average Scholars ( =Ün)" are sitting on the fence, watching the game, without themselves getting involved. That probably was alright in the past, but in these last days this is no longer acceptable. As the man said: "I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelations 3:16)" If you are not on His team, then you are on the opposing team. The choice is yours. You got intelligence: Use it! Do you know what happened to the guy that has buried his talents? See Matthew 25:14. Our freedom of choice is a blessing if we use it wisely; if we don't, it is a curse. Even if you play stupid, you are still responsible for the decisions you make.

. "The ancient symbol for this is the six-point star of two intersecting triangles, (151)".
By doing the exercise the authors asked us to do on page 151, I came up with what is an "Insight(72)" to me, but the Communicators (C) and the Doers (D) should treat it as a hypothesis. They have to test it before they accept it as a truth.
You can think of the "triangles" as the tip of an arrow, one pointing up and the other pointing down. The one pointing up is also in the ennead. There "Conscious" (A) is at point 3, "Knowledge" (B) is at point 6 and "Science" (?) is at point 9. If "Belief" (C) had been on top of the triad, at point 9, I would have had no trouble because Plato said that "Belief (pistis)" is on level C of his "Divided Line (at 509d of his Republic)". Now, when the authors put something into their diagram that does not fit into my paradigm, all kinds of doubts arise in my mind: What the bleep do they know about systematics? etc. Considering what the authors have said about our personal paradigms, we can do something about them. We have some information that helps us to know what to watch out for. Let us not reject ideas that don't fit in right away. Stop and think about the problem: The arrow, which points up, is a triad. We have identified two monads, A and B. The third monad should be C. Do you remember how important the question is? Here it is: Can Science be identified as C? ...
. In computer programming, the customer is at A, the programmer is at B, the coder is at C and the computer is at D. The computer program (C) mediates between Theory, the algorithm (B) and the computer (D). Language mediates between theory and practice. Is "Science" a language? ... C is the connective or the reconciling impulse between the hpothesis (B) and the actual test (D). Can we say that of "Science"? What do you think? ...

The second chapter is: "SCIENCE AND RELIGION: The Great Divorce (11)"
. I like to think of the scientific method as a "TriAd( 3ad)":
1. Come up with a "Hypothesis(17)" 2. Decide whether it is worth the expense of testing it. If not; come up with another hypothesis; if yes: Approve the funding. 3. "test (17)" it.
. In systematics, the triad has four impulses. This has puzzled me, and the instructors at Sherborn House have not given me a satisfactory explanation. If they did, I wasn't ready for the answer then. Lao Tzu has given an answer that I could understand. Now, as I am trying here to find out about "Science", I came up with another explanation:
Step one is the affirming impulse. It is affirmed that the hypothesis is true. Step two is the reconciling impulse, it mediates between theory (B) and practice (D). Step three is the receptive impulse when the hypothesis is true and the denying impulse when it is false.

"Knowledge is Power. (18)" Where did I hear that before?

"The oldest known scriptures, the Vedas, talk about the physical world as illusion, maya. (20)"
. Actually, the Hindus talk about the sub-strata and the superimposition. This superimposition is the world of the "senses (indriyas (Gita 3.42))" In Plato's "Cave (514a)", the cave wall is the substrata, the screen, and the superimposition is the "illusion (eikasia)" that is projected onto it.
. In J.G. Bennett's dodecad the cave wall would be E8, which is his "Constructive Energy". Our senses are E7 (D). The mind (manas (C)) is E6. Our intellect (Buddhi (B)) is E5. And the Atman (A) is E4.
. In the heptad, A is the "Door, Dasamadwara" between the lower triad, B-C-D and E3-E2-E1 which would be the upper, or inner, triad.
. Mr.B has divided the dodecad into three tetrads The lowest one is E9 (+ +), E10 (+ -), E11 (- +) and E12 (- -). I have included here the Cartesian designations to let you know that personally I prefer the + +, +-, -- and -+ sequence. This is heady stuff, let us see if Lao Tzu can help us with that: + +, + -, - -, is the threefold premise we find in most chapters and many paragraphs. + -, is the connective between the affirming (+ +) and the denying (- -) impulses. One of the triads is in 25.2, but the best example is in 41.1. There we have the "Above( +)", "Average( =)" and "Below( -)" triad. In Ching 25, the affirming impulse (+ +) is unusually long while the reconciling and the receptive impulses can be read as one sentence each. It is the reconciling impulse(+ -), in this amazing chapter, that explains why I prefer the + +, + -, - -, - +, sequence. The "Therefore(KU)" in 25.2 separates the premise from the conclusion. This makes it an: If-then, statement. Lao Tzu is not always that explicit. Let's have a look at the chapter.

"It-was Something Undifferentiated, Complete, Before Heaven and Earth were Born (YUwUÜecm^7TnTISq). .... I Don't Know Its Name (myPUkn HMg). the Character Which Is-used-for-it is Tao (Zi Z73A1). if Forced To give It another Name (57do ZMg) then
I-would-call-it Big (73TA). if we let
"Big Mean Going-out, having Gone Mean Arriving and having Arrived Mean Returning Then (TA73*e*e73$t$t73$lKU) having returned must mean being back home again. the separated
"Tao is a part of the Big (A1TA) tao, Heaven is a part of the Big (TnTA) tao, Earth is a part of the Big (TITA) tao and the King is Also a part of the Big ( E08TA) tao.
"In the Universe (*f =) Are Four divisions of the Big (YU 4TA) tao And the King (bt E) is one of them (Cü H 186). ...."
. Shih162(*e).Yü32(*f). "in the world or universe (*f =)"
The Tao Te Ching is a textbook. Lao Tzu's words must be studied. So don't let me spoil it for you by giving you my thoughts on it before you have tried. ...
May 6, 2007
This is the chapter in which Lao Tzu defines the tetrad most clearly and ingeniously. Thanks to it, it is easy to relate his tetrad to the tetrads of the Hindus and Plato. There are not really any different tetrads: It's all the same truth. There are just different ways of describing it. Aristotle clearly understood his teacher's "Divided Line(509d)". The Buddha was a Hindu before his enlightenment. He knew that: Right vision, thought, speech and action corresponds to Atman (A), Buddhi (B), manas (C) and indriyas (D). And this again corresponds to Lao Tzu's: Tao (A), heaven (B), humanity (C) and earth (D). "Earth" in astrology, again, has the same meaning. And this is the paradigm I have "Held-on-to(40)" for a long time.
. So I am in good company, and the authors will have a lot of explaining to do if what they say about the triad or the tetrad doesn't fit into this paradigm. For instance Mr.B's tetrad doesn't quite fit in. and this might be the reason why his Systematics didn't take off the way one would expect it to. I can only speak for myself, but without his help I wouldn't be able to understand the basic number systems, and without them I wouldn't be able to understand Lao Tzu's "DyAd(dyAd)" or his "TriAd( 3ad)" and I might not even have seen the tetrad in Ching 25. So, in spite of being unwilling to fully agree with him and being unable to fully understand him, credit, for being where I am now, still goes to him.
. The sequence of the monads doesn't seem to be a major issue since Lao Tzu is changing it as well. For instance: At 25.2 the sequence is: A, B, D and C, while at 25.4 we have its "ReversAl($lad)": C, D, B and A. " Man Follows Earth (mnähTI), Earth Follows Heaven (TIähTn), Heaven Follows Tao (TnähA1) and the Tao Follows ItSelf (A1ähTuJa)." In other words, the separated Tao follows the "BigTao(TAA1)".
. This is why students of the Ching always have to ask: Which Tao is it? "Can it be Identified As Small (ptMgtosm)" or "Can it "Be(do)" Called Big (ptMgdoTA)"?
. Actually, I can think of three "Possibilities(pt)", but to verify that is not my job, isn't in my "Feldraum", isn't my sphere of influence, my responsibility, my duty, whatever you want to call it, it isn't my dharma. Here is what I got from Mr.B's dodecad: The Tao can be within us (E1-E2-E3), it can be between the inner and the outer triad (E4 (A)) or, and this is tricky: If the A-B-C triad is the inner Tao, then our body (D) is the connective, or reconciling impulse, and E8 to E12 is God, or the "Big Tao".
. Lao Tzu has compared our body to a "Pot(ut)": "In -the-center (*d11), where The Nothing in Something ( HWUYU) is, there is the Pot'S Usefulness (ut Zus)."
. Where the E1-E2-E3 triad is compared to a drop in the ocean, E4 to E7 is the film, Kosha or "Boundary(*1)" around it and E8 to E12 is the ocean around the drop. The water in the drop is the same water that is in the ocean.
. I am not a cardinal (+ -) air (B) sign but there is a lot of work for them in the job I have just described for them and on the pentad, the hexad and the ennead they have on page 151.

. The "coin remains split, with religion on one side and science on the other. (21)"
. If "Science(151)" is the B-C-D triad, then its opposite would be the E1-E2-E3 triad. This would then be the "Sprit(151)" while "religion(21)" would be what of the spirit comes to us through the "Door" (A), is interpreted by the thinkers (B) and communicated by the talkers (C). This is HOW Unintentionally, and intentionally, falsehoods can slip in, and be slipped in.

. "The materialist model of reality moved long ago from the ranks of 'theory' to become set in stone (28)".
. When we try to translate a "theory" (B) into practice (D), it may not work and then it should not be "set in stone"(C), it should be rejected.

. According to Plato, the "prisoner" in the "Cave(514a)" believes that, what is projected onto the cave wall is "reality". This is what Plato calls "eikasia (illusion)". Then the prisoner is turned around. This "turning around of the mind itself might be made a subject of professional skill, which would effect the conversion as easily and effectively as possible. (518d)" Now the prisoner no longer sees the illusion but what causes it. Then he is "forcibly dragged up the steep and rugged ascent and not let go till he had been dragged out into the sunlight". Strange prison, but try to follow what Plato is trying to tell us here. Coming out from the dark into the bright sunlight, he can't see anything. His eyes are "dazzled by the glare of it that he wouldn't be able to see a single one of the things he was now told were real. (516a)" There you have a much abbreviated description of what Plato has meant by reality (A).
. Is the "Reality" on page 151 the illusion (D) we believe (C) to be real (A), or is it the reality (E8), our senses don't report to us but which science (B-C-D) and our unaided intellect (B) assert must be behind the illusion (D)? Can you see how important it is to come up with the right questions? Now we know what answers to look for in the book. For instance, read

"(the next chapter), which deals with what we perceive -- and take to be real (38)". When so much work went into the movie, first and then into this book, it is impossible to do justice to it with a few commentaries. If they give you the impression that now you know all about the book so that you don't have to read it anymore, then I have done a disservice to it.

"Consciousness creates reality. (38)"
. Is what is meant by "Consciousness" here, Mr.B's "Conscious energy E4" (A)? Somehow

"who we are, what life is, what is possible and what is not, is all based on what we think is real. (39)"

"Most people think reality is what our senses report to us. (39)" But the Hindus and Plato have told us all along that, that is not "reality", that is maya, that is eikasia. And now science is telling us the same thing. Maybe we are finally getting somewhere.

"Both Hindu and Buddhist seers taught, and still teach, that the world of appearances, the world we see with our senses, is maya, or illusion, and that something underlies this material realm, (41)".
. Our "senses(indriyas (D))" are projecting the illusion onto the real (E8). The "DyAd(dyad)" tells us that: Without an "Above( +)" there can be no "Below( -)". This also means that: Without the real, the screen, there can be no illusion projected onto it. You simply can't have one pole of a polarity without the other. That's HOW, or the "Way(A1)" things work. And, as the pragmatists (D) say: If it works, then it is "True(A1)".
“Aside from dyed in the wool materialists, the consensus seems to be that we are at the stage of analogy. (70)"
. That means that in addition to the law of attraction, we are now ready for another law: The law of correspondence. That's what the thinking tool called "analogy" is based on, that's why it works.

"Quantum Logic .... Process 1 was the decision by the observer to pose a question to the quantum world. .... This choice already limits the modes of freedom available .... posing any questions limits the response: If one asked what fruit you had for dinner, steak is not a valid response. (79)"
. There are three processes in Quantum Logic but I don't know enough about "Process 2" and "Process 3" to make any useful contribution to them, but what I have to say about "Process 1" might be of interest to you.
. We are not only back at the importance of the "question" but, here, we have to combine it with the law of correspondence. In other words, in order to understand "Process 1" better, we have to use "analogy(70)":
. As the customer (A) poses a question, or describes his demand, to the programmer or architect (B), so B describes his demand to the coder or contractor (C). And as B describes his demand to C, so C describes his demand (in the form of specific instructions) to D.
. There is a relationship between A and B, B and C and between C and D that is, not identical but, analogous. There is a universal law operating here that is worth taking a closer look at.
. The "question" to start with is: In what sense does B limit" the modes of freedom available" to C and in what sense does C limit the modes of freedom available to D? I have described the computer programming example in this blog before. There is no point for repeating it again, here. However, I will give you a hint: Level D is the most concrete level within the tetrad, there you will get the most concrete answer to the question (A) which starts the problem-solving process. No question, no answer. No problem, no solution.
"Every observation can be looked upon as a quantum measurement, because quantum measurement produces brain memory. These brain memories are activated every time we encounter and experience again a repeated stimulus. A repeated stimulus will always illicit, not only the original impression, but also this repetition of memory impressions . . . (84)"
. I have already done a commentary on this one when talking about Edward de Bono's jelly surface analogy. "A repeated stimulus" will move a thought (B) from the intellectual center (B) down into the emotional center where it becomes belief (C). C is more concrete than B and more abstract than D. It is the connective (+ -) between B (+ +) and D (- -).

"Memory (past) ®Perception ®Observation®(affecting) Reality (85)".
. Sense impressions elicit a corresponding content from our "Memory" (C) which produces our "Perception". The world produces a change in us. Then comes the "ReversAl($lad)". "Observation" with intent (A) and thought (B) changes "Reality".
. Thought with intent affects our "Desires(YÜ)" or "Expectations(YÜ)".
"Constantly Have Expectations By-means-of which you can Perceive your Boundaries (cnYUYÜYIKn H*1)." Kuan147(*1).
If these "Boundaries" are what the Hindus mean by Koshas, then we can read up on it in Sutra 14 of Swami Sri Yukteswar's The Holy Science.

"We're interested in the images of the movie, but we forget that without the screen on which the images play, nothing would be there. (90)"
. We need the reality to project the illusion onto. We can't have the one without the other.

" .... pure consciousness, .... creates .... the threefold structure of observer, observed and process of observation. (95)"
. J.G. Bennett has devoted more space to the triad than to any other number system in his Dramatic Universe. He has identified six of them. He uses + for the Affirming, - for the denying and = for the reconciling impulses. To identify the triads, he uses numerals instead. Thus the
1- 2- 3 triad is Plato's Father-Mother-Child triad. but, once you understand it, the thesis-antithesis-synthesis triad is a more useful example of this one. The other five triads are:
2-1-3, 1-3-2, 2-3-1, 3-1-2 and 3-2-1.
. + can also mean transmitting or giving, and - can mean receptive. The first impulse in any of these triads is always the "initial" or "initiating" component, the one in the middle is always the connective and the last one is always the "outcome" of the process. The triad is a process, as compared to the dyad which is a state, or static.
. At Ching 2.2 Lao Tzu gives six examples of triads: "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg)" "Live(Sg)". Shêng(Sg) means both "Produce" and "Live". That was the first example. The last one is: "Before and After Mutually produce Sequence (#c60mt#e)" or time. Try to identify the type of triad we have here. ...
If you can't tell whether the affirming (+) or the denying (-) impulse comes first, don't feel bad, "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)." Probably either way is right. It depends on HOW you look at it.
. Now, that even scientists talk about the triad, maybe the time for this idea has come. Whatever I understand of the "TriAd( 3ad)" comes mainly from Lao Tzu:
. The best description of the Tao(A1) comes from Richard Wilhelm: The Tao is like an algebraic variable. When leaving the "Tao untranslated, we get: the TaoAble is the Opposite of the TaoEd (A1ptA1FyCnA1). substituting Name for it, we get: the NamAble is the Opposite of the NamEd (MgptFyCnMg)."
"Constant Name (CnMg)" doesn't mean "NamEd". Lao Tzu doesn't spell things out like that. If he did, there wouldn't be a challenge for his students. And clearly the "TaoAble is the Opposite of the TaoEd."
. Now let us substitute "observation(95)" for the Tao: The observable is the opposite of the observed. First comes the observable, then comes the observing and then comes the observed. The object changes from potential to actual. Question: Does the subject change as a result of the object changing? ...
. There are two of the 1-3-2 triads in the tetrad, A-B-C and B-C-D. I know them best because I know the tetrad and the whole gives meaning to its parts. I have learned it from IBM and have used it from 1964 to 1973. If you use anything long enough, you can't help but know it.
. Clearly the designers of the original IBM programming system knew the Aristotelian tetrad. The tetrad is a whole like a sentence is. If you understand a sentence well, you necessarily also understand each word in it. You know that each word is like a link in a chain. If one link is weak, the whole chain is weak. If you break one link you break the chain.
. This is an important principle to understand. In systems theory this is the "critical path" component. This same principle is necessary to understand the "Intelligent Design" paradigm. Intelligent design is the synthesis of the creation and evolution theories. Somehow, Sheldrake's Morphic field, intelligent design and your quantum theory are all related.

"The Big Turnaround (131)"
. "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)" or turn around.
"As victimization is the strongest rejection of this chapter's premise, 'I accept responsibility' is the strongest acceptance of it. (131)" A victim is denying that s/he is consciously or subconsciously attracting whatever comes to him or her.
. In Eric Berne's The Games People Play, the payoff is not money but energy. To get the opponent's energy you have to get him into a negative state. That's when people lose energy. Experienced players know HOW to get people to feel bad or inadequate. A good example of this is the book: The Secret. It gets people into the victim state of consciousness so efficiently that it is hard to believe that this happens by accident.

"'Everything in your life is frequency specific to who you are. (130)"
. If you experience more failures than successes and you wonder why, "just look around; the universe is always serving up the answer. (130)"
. You can't have winners without losers. This is why a few people, that know the rules of the game, get good at getting their opponents into the victim state of consciousness. And the victims don't even know that they are in a game, or in a war. And if they don't wake up in time, they are on the losing team.
. If you have read my commentaries on The Secret you can see that it ties in with what I have just said. It so happened that the same guy that gave me The Secret to read also gave me the Bleep to read. Accidental, you can say. Between these two books, I stumbled onto The Handbook of the Navigator. Just another accident? To me it is the connective (- +) between these two books. The first being so negative that I felt compelled to warn people about it, the other one is the very opposite. Both books stand out: One as extremely bad, or dangerous, the other as containing the information we need to get out of this mess. It is amazing.
. Let me explain why the "Navigator" is a connective for me: After I did my commentary on the quote from page 95, I tried to brush up on what I remember about Mr.B's six triads. They are described from page 67 to 211 of Volume two of The Dramatic Universe. The pages are all marked up, so I must have tried very hard to understand it.
. On page 107 of Mr.B's book, we get into "The Law of Expansion
. The symbol 1-2-3, when expressed in verbal form, can be read: 'Affirmation, meeting with Receptivity and blending with it, issues as a Reconciling Impulse'. Furter development". At that point I made a note on that page: "'Further development' gets me nowhere. Following Lao Tzu, I say: to hell with it."
. That note expressed well what I felt then and what I felt again when trying to brush up on those triads. What I said there doesn't mean that what is said in those Volumes is false. What it means is that I can't understand most of it. In order to know that a statement is false, you must first understand it. This is one reason why Lao Tzu said in chapters 63 and 64: Don't bite off more than you can chew.
. Trying to understand something you are not ready for is not only a waste of time and energy, but it puts you into a negative state. This lowers your frequency and, by the law of attraction, the thoughts (B), emotions (C) and events (D) you attract into your life are of that frequency. See? If you don't let The Secret drag you down, if you stop reading as soon as you feel that negative feeling coming on, then there are some very valuable lessons in it for you. The bitter inside of the pill must always be covered by a sugar-coating, otherwise nobody would swallow it. As far as I can see, Mr.B's books have no dangerous poisons hidden in them but if there is somebody in this world that can understand them, then s/he should be able to make systematics work.
. Now, if it hadn't been for the "Navigator", I might not have been ready for the following question:

"What level of 'I-ness' is this [anything, good or bad] coming from? (131)"
. What level you are on determines what you are attracting. This is spelled out more clearly in the Bleep but, once you know what to look for, you can also find it in The Secret. The intent (A) to approach The Secret with this knowledge (B) actually increases your frequency. And with a bit of experience of this, you also know why truth is the lifeblood of Democracy. When a critical mass of the people knows the truth, the truth will set them free. The truth is there on the internet, but you must approach it the way you have to approach The Secret. If the hook is not covered by the worm no fish will swallow it. And there are a lot of hooks hidden in the internet.
. As materialists, or pragmatists, (D) find it hard to believe what they can't see, touch or measure, so philosophers (B) find it hard to believe what their intellect can't comprehend. That The Secret, the Navigator and the Bleep was dropped into my lap in that particular sequence can't be explained intellectually. And so the intellectual explanation of these coincidences is that it was just an accident. Study of the right books, or under the right teachers, can lead to the understanding that there must be a higher "level of 'I-ness'" these meaningful coincidences are coming from. By dwelling on these ideas, or struggling to describe them as I do here, this knowledge (B) will slowly become a belief (C). And then, simply because you start to believe in synchronicity, more of it will happen. And this brings us back to the law of attraction.
. Some of the stuff that is in the Bleep is easier for me to accept if I think of the "Navigator" as some kind of inner guru who gives me my lessons as I am ready for them. Some lessons have been very hard to appreciate. Lying in the Vladimir Lenin Hospital in Holgin, Cuba, and have the goon-squads come in and break my bones to make their ambush on me look as if I was run over by a truck and then putting a tube into my chest to make it look as if they tried to save my life. That was a terrible experience, and I still don't quite see the reason for having to suffer that much. However, I am able to see now that many bad things that have happened to me were important lessons I couldn't have learned in any other way. This appreciation of painful experiences is due to new knowledge.
. To gain more knowledge, requires knowledge. For instance, to understand Mr.B's books, a lot of knowledge is necessary and they must be understood to find any unintentional bottlenecks in them. To understand some of the ideas in the Bleep, the knowledge I got from the Navigator came in handy. He who has, shall have more.
. There is also the opposite side of the coin, the "Reverse($l)": Old knowledge (B), especially after it has become a belief (C), can also be in the way of new knowledge. That "Knowledge(kn)" has to be "UnLearned(PUÜd)".

"A Matrix of Words (151)"
. I'm back at page 151. As I just said, it takes knowledge to get more knowledge. As it turned out, even after taking a closer look at the "Words" around the pentad, the hexad or the ennead, the whole didn't emerge through its parts.
. I can now follow Lao Tzu's advise and not spend any more time on what is too hard for me to understand, or I can give some kind of job-description (+a) from me to those who put the diagrams on page 151. If I am the only one that can't "start tying them together . . . ", fine, don't bother but if I am not, try to make at least one of the three systems more comprehensible:
. There is a hexad that emerges partly through the tetrad. That one is comprehensible to me. Since it is quite different from your hexad, it may not be useful to you, but if you take it as a job-description from a mutable air-sign (-b) to cardinal air-signs (=b), we might be able to produce something more comprehensible:
. A picture is worth a thousand words, let's start with that. You can get a printout of this page and connect point A
. . -a A +a . . . . with points -d and +b. The two lines you have drawn and
+d ------ -b . . . the horizontal line between -d and +b form the triad
D . . .+ . . B . . . on page 151. That one has one monad correspond to
-d -------+b . . . each point.The other triad with points C, +d, -b has
. . +c C -c . . . . two words or monads correspond with each point.
If you connect point C with points +d and -b you get a rough picture of the hexad we have on page 151. The difference between them is that I understand this one and I might be able to help you to understand it as well. The one on page 151, I don't understand, and then, obviously, I can't help you to understand it. If you can, please do.
. The four lines you have drawn and the two horizontal lines I managed to draw represent the inner structure of this system; the outer structure touches clock wise all the 12 points of the dodecad. I have shown in this blog how the tetrad helps us to understand the diads and triads in it. The whole gives meaning to its parts. Now I am trying to use the dodecad to shed light on the triad, the hexad and the ennead we have in the second diagram on page 151.
. The inner structure of the ennead is from point 1 to 4, 4 to 2, 2 to 8, 8 to 5, 5 to 7 and from 7 back to 1. Its outer structure is clockwise from point 1 to 9. The outer movement in both systems touches on all points, the inner connectives in the ennead don't touch point 3, 6 and 9. On page 151, that is "Conscious", "Knowledge" and "Science".
. In the dodecad, the inner connectives don't touch point +a, B, -c, +c, D and -a. Starting now at point +a, I will use my knowledge of the tetrad and of computer programming to run through the job. Since I have been a computer programmer, I know the first quadrant best:
. +a is the job description of the customer (A). It is the Affirming impulse of A or the fixed fire sign. You can also think of it as as A's shipping department. -b is B's receiving department, it is the receptive impulse of B or the mutable air sign. That's me, a Gemini. Most input I use for doing my dharma is Plato's Republic, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao Te Ching and some of it comes to me by intuition and meaningful coincidences (like having this job dropping into my lap). But, as you can see from the example I am using here, I am also using thinking tools like analogy. If it doesn't mean anything to you, well, you can't win them all, but if it does, how much of it was synchronicity and how much of it was just straight-forward thinking (B)?
. Notice that -b is connected to C. This means that I must not accept anything from +a that C can't handle. B develops the algorism. +b translates it into a flowchart and gives it to -c. -c is the Receptive impulse of C, but if it finds that this is more than C can chew, it becomes the denying impulse and gives the flowchart back. Then B or +b must break down the job into smaller tasks C is able to code.
. Look what the diagram tells us: The coder looks back to the job-description as received by -b and forward to the computer output. In other words, the supply (+d) must match the demand (-b). +c is the computer program which -d must be able to read and D, the computer, must be able to execute. If it can't, then that is the coder's fault. And that's it. You don't really need me to tell you that. anyone who has taken the 7 week IBM computer programming course can tell you the same thing. Many of them were assassinated because they still could program. The fact that those programmers that didn't get killed could prevent the Y2K disaster means that those that have planned it are not infallible.
. Within the tetrad, there is the law of correspondence operating. As C must look forward to +d, So B must look forward to +c, B must know WHAT C can do. +a tells -b WHAT it wants B to do and B knows HOW to do it. +b tells -c WHAT to do and C knows HOW to code it. +c tells -d WHAT to do and D is designed to carry out instructions exactly as given. Since D is the most concrete level, we can see the pattern working on that level in the most concrete way. I can't claim to have given you a perfect description of the hexad, but I hope that I have given you some work to do. For a "job-description" (+), this should be good "Enough(Zu)".
. For practical purposes (D), the seven Week computer programming course, that was taught before the system was corrupted, was good "Enough(Zu)" but, for a philosophical (B) challenge, as you have given us, a larger system, in which the tetrad is a component, has to be consulted. It's like adding the five subordinate phrases to the above sentence for greater detail. After the subordinate phrases are removed we are left with a sentence in which each phrase is like a link in a chain: The seven Week computer programming course was good enough but (now) a larger system has to be consulted (Why? Because of the philosophical challenge you have given us).
. The subject and the predicate of the above sentence are complete subject-connective-predicate sentences of their own. The connective, "but", turned them into phrases within the larger whole. As I said before: Language can be used as a thinking tool.

".... intention.... that act .... that chooses the effect that is to be observed in the outside world ... is the key, the (163)" WHAT is to be produced tangibly in the outside world. The "how that key is to be turned is up" to B who has to develop the algorithm, is up to C who has to write the program and is up to D who has to execute it.
. The "act .... that chooses the effect that is to be observed in the outside world" is the job-description in computer programming, it is the Aristotelian final cause (A) and it is +a, the demand, that has to be manifested as the material cause (D) which is the supply (+d) of the demand (+a).
. As we are using analogy with an excellent example such as computer programming we automatically bring clarity into our thoughts. That's what thinking tools are for. The very opposite of this is allowing yourself to be dumbed down. And, as I said before, all kinds of hooks are hidden behind a sugar-coating of truth. Social engineering is a science but if outsiders get to know it as well, they become a treat. If the social engineers can't subtly remove people by getting them into "Mental Health Facilities", then they put their names on flight lists to Cuba and have their Cuban counterparts do the dirty work for them. This is called "Out-sourcing". The fact that I am still here means that the social engineers are not infallible. Their problem is that, like thieves, they have to work in the dark.
. Let's get back to the dodecad. Mr.B told us that nothing is gained by trying to make things simpler than they really are. Maybe that's why his Dramatic Universe is so hard to understand. At least that's why I am afraid to overburden you with details. Let me simply elaborate on something I have already explained in the rest of this blog: Where B is the reconciling (=) impulse in the A-B-C triad, A is the affirming (+) and C is the receptive (-) impulse. Where C is the reconciling, B is the affirming and D is the receptive impulse. Both triads are of the 1-3-2 type but the monads in them are different. What we have just done is called "identifying the monad" in systematics. Take some time to digest that.
. Now we have to move from the tetrad, I am familiar with, to the dodecad, I am not. According to the law of correspondence the relationship of any three consecutive monads in the tetrad must be analogous to any three consecutive monads in the dodecad. Let us see: I am a mutable (-) air (B) sign. In front of me is an affirming or fixed (+) fire (A) sign, behind me is the cardinal (=) air sign. The triad would be 1-2-3. But if I become a reconciling (=) impulse in the middle position, +a would remain the Affirming impulse in the initiating position, but what was the reconciling (=) impulse in the end position, would have to become the receptive (-) impulse. We still have the same 1-3-2 triad we have in A-B-C, but the monads have changed. Remember: Analogy is not identity. I will let you chew on that. And: Don't bite off more than you can chew.

"Our purpose here is to develop our gifts of intentionality (204)".
. I will use this quote to say a bit more about the dodecad. In the tetrad, intent comes from the customer (A), s/he pays the architect (B), the contractor (C) the sub-contractors and for the materials (D) they need to manifest the Aristotelian material cause (D).
. The architect produces a 2-dimensional blueprint of the dream-house the customer might have seen as a 3-dimensional holographic vision. S/he can't give the vision (A) to the contractor (C) because he doesn't know what to do with it. This is why B has to mediate (=) between A(+) and C(-). As I said above, this is the 1-3-2 triad.
. To understand this abstract "Concept(B1)", we have to bring it down to earth (D) by means of analogy. Let us continue to observe what actually happens in the building trade:
. The contractor doesn't do the plumbing roofing or painting etc. himself. He tells his sub-contractors: What to do, when to do it and where to do it. At this point the 2-dimensional flow-char is brought down to a sequential, 1-dimensional string of instruction in computer programming. For instance, in the building trade, the plastering has to be done before the painting, the drywall has to go in before the plastering, the pipes and wiring has to go in before the drywall and the frames have to be there before the drywall can be put up.
. You may know a handyman who can do all these things by himself. Why break things down and complicate things? ...
There is this thing called efficiency. Aristotle has called the third cause (C) the efficient cause probably because he has understood his teacher's DIVISION OF LABOR. Plato has devoted much space in his Republic to the 4-fold division of society because we can't have a healthy society without it. The Hindus talk about dharma. Others talk about Feldraum, sphere of influence, "responsibility (here in this Bleep)" or duty. When asking the question:

"Why ARE We Here? (204)",
these details must be included. "intentionality" (A) is important, but so is thought, word and deed (B-C-D). Each of the four sources of the tetrad is like a link in a chain. Break one and you break the chain. And now apply, what we know, and can verify, about the tetrad, to the dodecad. To do that, you might have to return to what I have said about the second diagram on page 151.

".... we're here to .... make known the unknown. (204)"
. This is true of the jnana yogis, or air (B) signs, but the water (C), earth (D) and fire (A) signs have other duties. The blueprint alone is not the house.
. We must first "Actualize our Potential (A1pt)" and then we must find out what the people on the level below us are able to do and help them do their dharma. By doing this, we are doing our own. Maybe "KnowErs(kner)", philosophers, ynana yogis or air signs (B) can call themselves lucky because the Fire signs have given us such a nice job-description, in the form of the Tao Te Ching. etc. But how many people use their talents? "In short, to use it or lose it. (205)"
. If we don't use the job description that comes to us from the level above us, then we will end up with a global dictatorship. Guess why the truth is intentionally kept away from us? ...
Because knowing the truth will set us free.
. If the difference between the four human types can be detected in brain tissue, then we would be a step closer to the truth. In theory, the joy (ananda) for doing your own dharma should be greater than the satisfaction you get from doing somebody else's dharma even when done more successfully than your own. Worldly (D) and spiritual (A) success are opposites.

"So, in effect then, when one wants to focus intent, you want to be a singleness of mind. (208)"
. I intent to use this quote to elaborate on Gita 3.35 and on the dodecad again. In the dodecad, the intent of A is expressed at +a, of B at +b, of C at +c and at D it is expressed in tangible reality at +d. There are thus, four types of intent which originate at A and culminate at D.
. Speaking only for myself, I find that the more I get into my own dharma, the more I get out of other people's dharma. The law of attraction again. I can't imagine being "a singleness of mind" while doing somebody else's dharma.
. "And do thy duty, even if it be humble, rather than another's, even if it be great. To die in one's duty is life: to live in another's is death. (Juan Mascaró's translation)"
. Some people contradict me by saying that I communicate (C) well. Communicators (C) know better. If I get some ideas across, it is because I know WHAT I want to say. The WHAT and the HOW are the poles of one polarity. For instance, when the building inspectors closed down my small rooming house, I still had to pay my mortgage. That's when my former partner got me a job as a programmer. The original perfect IBM 1401 computer language has been phased out, so I had no language to work with but my friend did the coding for me in BASIC and I did the algorithm for him. This is team-work. There I have seen the division of labor first hand. the two of us were twice as fast as any two programmers at Atlas Electronics. Now I can say it: We couldn't hand in our finished job because we didn't want to get the other programmers into trouble. Now, it just so happened that there I learned another lesson. If one of the blocks in my flowchart was too big for my partner, he would ask me to break it down further for him. Some blocks were so small that they could be translated into a single instruction. This is how I learned the BASIC computer language very quickly. Instead of writing the instructions inside the block in English, I would write it in BASIC, just for fun. I hope that my own personal experience can explain to you how the WHAT is to be coded and the HOW it is done, are related.
. Question: Has my "Navigator" led me to that job so that I can explain this relationship to you now? Whether you call it an accident or synchronicity, this personal experience of the "efficiency" of THE DIVISION OF LABOR and of the relationship of the WHAT and the HOW certainly comes in handy now. Another verse from the Gita comes to mind:
"Ignorant men, but not the wise, say that Sankhya and Yoga are different paths; but he who gives all his soul to one reaches the end of the two. (5.4)"
. In the Gita, "Sankhya" is the path of knowledge (B) while "Yoga" is karma yoga, the path of action (D). Krishna is talking here about the more obvious theory (B) - practice (D) dyad, but any of the six connectives between A, B, C and D are a dyad. So, by giving all of your soul to your own yoga you eventually reach the end of all yogas. Even though I don't like doing this writing (C), I start to suspect that I was set up for this because, as I said myself: Language can be used as a thinking tool. And how do you learn about thinking or language? by using it or by practice. Practice makes perfect.
. I am doing some reading up on the intelligent design theory because I think that it must be integrated with your quantum theory and Sheldrake's morphic field.
. A few pages back I said that creationism, evolutionism and intelligent design form a thesis-antithesis-synthesis triad. First I learned about it from J.G. Bennett's Dramatic Universe Volume four. He used "photo-synthesis" to make the point: "If chlorophyll has always been necessary to support life -- and all evidence goes to confirm this -- where did the first chlorophyll come from? (pg.136)" The "hypothesis of fortuitous arising seems more untenable then ever. We can confidently assert that some organizing influence was at work. (pg. 137)"
. I didn't get the phrases, "intelligent design" and "irreducible complexity" from him. They came from a BBC documentary: THE WAR ON SCIENCE.
. Another interesting reference to the same general idea comes from Lacerta. Interview December 16, 1999: "You must know (some of your scientists have already supposed this) that your species had evolved in a naturally completely impossible speed within just 2-3 million years." The quote is from the first page.
. And then, out of the blue, Darwin's Black Box by Michael J. Behe was lent to me to read. To me that means that I am to brush up on intelligent design.
. The "blood-clotting system fits the definition of irreducible complexity. That is, it is a single system composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system effectively to cease functioning. (86)" Like: Break a link and you break the chain. "It's all or nothing. (111)"
. There is a "distinction between conceptual precursors and physical precursors. .... In Darwinian evolution, only physical precursors count."

“Words Have an Ancestor (C2YU@4) Deeds Have a Master (D2YU#u)." Lao Tzu doesn't give his students answers to read but problems to solve. ...
In this blog, the three dots "..." mean: Please think before reading on. Try analogy with computer programming as an example. ...
The computer (D) can do nothing without the program (C). But Lao Tzu's students are not supposed to stop after coming up with the obvious. ...
Looking up the answer before you have done your homework is cheating. You are cheating yourself out of the opportunity of doing your own thinking. One way to prevent yourself of seeing my answers (and, without doing your own thinking, how do you know they are right?) is by scrolling down only to the line with the three dots at the end. After you have done your thinking, you can scroll down further and compare your answer with mine. That is healthier and can be fun.
. After the obvious answer, Lao Tzu "Wants(YÜ)" you to come up with a question. A creative process begins with the right question. ...
What are the precursors of "Words(C2)"? ...
And what are the precursors of thoughts (B)? ...
Without the customer (A), who envisions the end-product and who pays for it, there can be no purposeful intellectual (B), mental (or verbal (C)) or physical (D) action. For purposeful action, we need a purpose. To get the big picture we must even go beyond the intelligent designer (B).
. In order to make THE DIVISION OF LABOR work for us, we must understand the tetrad. It helps to know that there is something above level A and below level D but these other levels are outside “Humanities (%5)” Feldraum or sphere of influence. As Plato would have put it: They are none of our business.
. "To a person who does not feel obliged to restrict his search to unintelligent causes, the straightforward conclusion is that many biochemical systems were designed. They were designed not by the laws of nature, not by chance and necessity, rather they were planned. The designer knew what the system would look like when they were completed, then took steps to bring the system about. Life on earth at its most fundamental level, in its most critical components, is the product of intelligent activity. (193)"
. The customer(A) must know "what the system would look like when they were completed, then took steps [B-C-D] to bring the system about."
. Even if we had twice the time to "evolve" a la Darwin, it couldn't have happened if left to chance. The way to translate the Aristotelian "final cause" (A) into the "material cause" (D) is by having the "formal cause" (B) and the "efficient cause" (C) mediate between them. The best example of HOW the tetrad works is the original computer programming system, because its designers must have known the Aristotelian tetrad. The point, here, is that the planning (B) alone will not do it. You need all of the four Aristotelian causes or nothing. Each link in a chain is equally important. And to see why this is so, you must see the tetrad in action.
. "When a question is too difficult for science to deal with immediately, it is happily forgotten while other more accessible questions are investigated. (251)"
. There is a lot of wisdom in that book, some of which could have come straight from Lao Tzu: Don't bite off more than you can chew. What is also included in this advise is: Stick to your own dharma! Don't try to do what you are not cut out to do! The fact that I have to do the writing here, which is not my dharma, is a sign that we live in an unhealthy society. Our rulers know that their politicians have to do the talking (C) and the unelected advisors have to do the thinking (B). Why don't they teach that in political science? ...
The rulers in an "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85) .... Always Cause the People
(Cn%eMn) to be Without Knowledge (WUkn) and Without the Desire (WUYÜ)" to know. I believe that books like the Tao Te Ching and your BLEEP can kelp us to find the truth which, when known by a critical mass, will set us free. If that is not so, if knowledge is not power, if truth is not the lifeblood of democracy, then why do our rulers have to try so hard to keep us in the dark? ...
. Let's return to the Bleep:

"And although Descartes is credited with 'inventing' dualism, this dualistic idea of a God 'out there' predates Descartes by thousands of years. (229)"
. The separation originates in what the Hindus call the "Janaloka .... wherein the idea of separate existence originates. As this sphere is above the comprehension of anyone in the creation of Darkness, Maya, it is called Alakshya, the Incomprehensible. (Sutra 13)"
. The Janaloka (E3) is one level above the "Maharloka .... the Door, Dasamadwara." (E4(A)). In other words, the Janaloka is on the other side of the Door (A) and thus, outside the sphere of our influence and responsibility.
. But "the idea of separate existence" must have come through the Door into our playing field (Feld), or into our space (Raum). No matter HOW we got it, it is now in our sphere of influence and we have to deal with it.
. Things are most abstract at level A (E4) and we are told that they become "incomprehensible" on the level above that (E3). Let us then go to the most concrete level (D), where we can actually experience things:
. We know from computer programming that D (the computer) gets its instruction from C (the coder). We also know from business that the boss tells his workers WHAT to do. So we know for sure that C tells D WHAT to do. And If the worker doesn't know HOW to do WHAT s/he is told, then the boss should be fired, instead of the worker, because he doesn't know his job. So on the bottom level of the hierarchy we know what is happening in great detail. As we move up from D to A, things become more abstract.
. In my experience with my partner, I told him WHAT to code. Also, even though we elect and pay for our politicians (C), they work for their advisors (B). If the advisors knew HOW to lie as convincingly as the politicians can, they wouldn't need them. But, as Lao Tzu told us: "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)." We can see, then, that the relationship between B and C is analogous to the relationship between C and D. Does the law of correspondence hold as we move up to level A? ...
In Plato's timocracy and the corrupted Indian caste ststem the Brahmins (B) are on top of the hierarchy. But in a Democracy (demos = the people, archein = rule), the people make the decisions. As Plato already implied, this doesn't work if the Educational system is not also controlled by the people. We also know from business, that the customer (A) is king. If his demand is not supplied, s/he goes to the competition. While the supplier is not supposed to tell the customer WHAT to demand, advertisers seem to get away with it. Some people are telling God what to do, and He may even be liswtening. Still, in theory, B-C-D (the supplier) gets its instructions through A
. As we move beyond the Door (A), things don't just get more abstract, we are told that they become "Incomprehensible". Still, if the law of correspondence holds, then we know that the relationship between E3 and E4 (A) is analogous to the relationship between A and B. This means that many things that can't be explained without analogy, can be explained with it.

" .... Sheldrake's morphic fields are the crucial factor in deciding which emergent acturally emerges in complex systems and that the morphic field is a field of coherence with its source in something non-physical -- which is real. (254)
. " These morphic fields can be thought of as the blueprint .... (255)"
. We have the phrase "complex systems" in this quote: The whole "emerges" through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. And this leads up to the "Concept(B1)" of "irreducible complexity .... where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system effectively to cease functioning. (86 (Behe))"
. The "blueprint" (B) is one of four components which are necessary to get a house build. There is the customer (A) who must know WHAT kind of house s/he wants and who is willing and able to pay for it. Then there is the architect (B) who produces the "blueprint". Then there is the contractor (C) and his sub-contractors (D) who do the actual building. While those who actually produce the house in tangible reality are the most obvious participants of the team, all four members are equally important. If one of these parts is missing, no house.
. I believe that the idea of "intelligent design" is important "Enough(Zu)" to be mentioned in your book. To tell you this could be a reason why DARWIN'S BLACK BOX was dropped into my lap at the time it was dropped.
. The next quote, from the same page, has led me to a most interesting "Insight(72)". As if to verify what I have just said. It came to me yesterday morning May 24, 2007.
"Is there something there I should listen to? Will it guide me where I want or need to go? I've begun to realize it's the subtleties that are so small ( I [BETSY] barely notice them); they are actually the big clues. (255)"
. For me, the "big clues" started to come in more frequently, or I started to notice them more often, after I took the message, that I have to read the Dalai Lama's book, seriously. You can read the story in the Text Commentary file, so I don't have to repeat it here. Since then I have learned more about the law of attraction and I know that it has something to do with it. In theory, I knew about synchronicity for a long time. The problem is, that, even when we notice an unusual coincidence, we are so used to writing it off as accidental that, without a special effort, we tend to ignore it.
. Once we realize that "the subtleties that are so small .... are actually the big clues", we start to pay more attention to them and, as we do, we get, or notice, more of them. He who has shall have more. The law of attraction again.
. "SubtleTy, Tao'S Usefulness (JoadA1 Zus)." Lao Tzu's lesson seems to be: Paying attention to the "Subtle(Jo)" is a "Useful(us)" thing to do.
. There is no way to prove that I got DARWIN'S BLACK BOX, when I got it, for the purpose of telling you that "intelligent design" is missing in your book. However, suspecting (B) or believing (C) that it was a message from the other side of the Door (A) will make a difference to your perception: You will notice more meaningful coincidences.
. However, yesterday an experience came to mind that can be taken as a demonstration of "irreducible complexity". For ten years I was wondering why I had to suffer that much in Cuba. Yesterday an answer came. Was it just accidental? ... You decide.
. The fact is, that I wouldn't be here in Toronto alive (still), without irreducible complexity. I will restrict myself to listing four components, each of which was necessary for my survival. If one of them had failed, I wouldn't be here to tell you about it.
1) First of all, there had to be a fellow tourist who had to see me on the ground, within walking distance of our hotel in Guardalavaka, with blood coming out of my left ear where I had been hit from behind and knocked unconscious. He had to return to the hotel, and phone my next of kin for which I have given my friend's name, Michael Green.
2) My friend got the telephone message and he had to be willing and able to take the right steps to get me back alive.
. Fellow tourist had traveled all the way to Holguin to visit me in the Vladimir Lenin Hospital there. They were not even permitted in. So how do you think my friend was going to get me out of there alive? . . .
Before he left for Cuba, he contacted the Department of Foreign Affairs in Ottawa.
3) Without the pull from the Department of Foreign Affairs, my friend could have done nothing. And if the department had been infiltrated by the "Neo-Cons", they would have ignored his pleas as they ignore warnings about bomb plots etc. You can see from this, that within each component, there have to be other components, each of which is necessary to make the system work. For details see DARWIN'S BLACK BOX.
4) The most memorable member of the rescue-team was the nurse that had to get me into a condition in which I could walk onto the Toronto bound plane. They won't take you if you are on a stretcher or have to be carried.
. Her task was like: Mission impossible: I had been given drugs to take my appetite away. Within days, I was down to 70 pounds, skin and bones. Eating was obnoxious to me. I couldn't feed myself, my collar-bones had been broken in the hospital. The accident report stated that I was run over by a truck in Holguin, so they had to make me look like it. I had lost the will to live. I didn't want any more of this. I have had "Enough(Zu)".
. Strangely enough, it was her pleading that caused me to change my mind: "You are going to die (morrir).". I knew that. Most of the suffering was behind me, I have worked hard in life and nothing I tried seemed to work out, why go on? I was fed up with that whole thing and this was a neat way to get out of it without having to call it suicide. Suicide is a dumb thing to do. But I also knew that in a dictatorship the goon-squads that got me, can do anything to the people. What would they do to her, or to her family, if I died while under her care? I didn't type the three dots, here, because only those who have lived under a dictatorship can answer that question.
. She fed me, patiently, one spoon at a time. But what an amazing instrument this body of ours is: Give it the right conditions and within days I was ready to hang onto my friend's arm and climb up the gangway onto the plane to Toronto.
. As you can hopefully see, all four members of the rescue team had to do their part. If any one had failed the whole rescue mission would have failed. It’s an "all or nothing" situation. If only one link is required, then Darwin's "evolution" is valid. As soon as more than one component is required in sequence or in parallel, then we are getting into irreducible complexity in which the probability of it happening by chance becomes too improbable. That's when we need a plan (B). That's where divine intervention is the more logical explanation.
. So my rescue turned out to be a demonstration of "intelligent design". But would I sign up for this job voluntarily? If I did, I must have been nuts.
. Having finished my report, my gratitude goes out to my four rescuers. I would like to personally thank that fellow tourist who just happened to see me lying there and who did the right thing. Many people couldn't be bothered to do anything like that for others.
. What my friend did for me, I might not be able and willing "Enough" to do for him.
. The minister of foreign affairs took a personal interest in my case. I had the opportunity to talk to her on the phone and to thank her for her efforts. But the one that stands out for me is the nurse. Suppose that, because of the pressure from Ottawa, the goon-squads now had to get me back to Canada alive, suppose they still wanted me dead or perhaps they didn't care one way or the other about whether I am dead or alive? Each of these three possible scenarios would put the actions of the nurse in a different light. Whatever the facts were, I wouldn't have eaten if I didn't believe that she was threatened.
. Can you see now, how complex, and outright ingenious, "complex systems" are? And that the designer of such systems must have His "source in something non-physical -- which is real"?

"Wat's the difference between belief and knowledge? (270)" ...
The difference between belief (C) and knowledge (B) is ... .
. Before I sign off from this Bleep job, I want to return to the first chapter we have started out with: What can computer programming, not "Computer Science", tell us about asking the right "QUESTIONS"? ... The three dots are primarily for those who have taken the seven week computer programming course, not the seven year "Computer Science" program. ...
. HOW to operate the quarter of a million dollar IBM 1401 computer (D) took only a few hors to show us.
. Learning HOW to talk (C) to the computer took less than a week. To show you how easy it was to use the original perfect, English-like, 1401 computer language, let me give you a few examples. I have written a slightly improved emulator of that language in Turbo BASIC. In it, telling the computer to: Add "1" to "3"!, reads: A"1""3" . The space behind the instruction tells the computer that it is complete. Move "abcd" to A!, reads: M"abcd"A . The A would ordinarily be called an indirect address, but in my emulator it works more like the "Notepad" on Word-Processors. There are only three such note-pads, A, B and C, in my prototype.
. In order to understand computer-programming (B) we had to know a bit about "Coding" (C) first. So let me give you just one more example: If "bcde" equals the "abcd" in A, then Subtract "2" from "10"!, reads: ="bcde"A S"2""10" . The ="bcde"A , is a conditional phrase. It makes execution of: S"2""10" conditional. Since "bcde" is not equal to "abcd", S"2""10" is not executed.
. In order to use the Customer's (A) "job-description" and to be able to help him with it, we had to learn to do it ourselves. It boils down to clearly defining the inputs and outputs. It may also include the price of the job and deadlines. So we can think of it as a contract.
. There are preprinted forms to be filled out and quite a bit of other detail, so that the "job-description" (A) took about a Week to learn.
. Most of the time of the seven Week computer-programming course was taken up by computer-programming (B) or the "job-analysis".
. The coder (C) needs a "flowchart" to do his job and the programmer (B) must know "Enough(Zu)" about coding to help the coder write (C) the program. A flowchart consists of four types of boxes with arrows between them.
. For the purpose of this brief description, we only need two of them. One box is a rectangle. It is called an "operation box". In it is stated in English, what operations, Additions (A), Subtractions (S), Incrementation (I (A"1" )), Decrementation (D (S"1" ) or data Movements (M), are required at that point.
. The other box is a diamond shape. It is a "decision box". One arrow leads into it and two arrows come out of it. One of the two arrows means "No match" or "No: Don't execute the following instruction! The other arrow, then, means: "Yes, you have a match: Execute it!"
. We have finally come around to the purpose of this exercise. For our purpose, we can call the "decision box" also a "QUESTION" box. If the answer is "Yes" it means: Execute the next instruction! If the answer is "No", it means: Don't execute it!
. There is a bit more to it, but I think you have "Enough" to chew on for now. And please remember that the course took seven Weeks. So don't get frustrated when you didn't get it in one hour.
Computer Scientists learn HOW to use “black boxes”. Such boxes are special purpose computer programs. Computer Scientists don’t learn HOW to design (B) and Code (C) black boxes. Since there was no black box to prevent the planned Y2K disaster, in theory, it should have happened. It didn’t happen because the computer programmers that didn’t get killed, knew HOW to program.
. To intelligently design and code black boxes, computer programmers are still needed. How was it possible to teach us in seven weeks what Computer Scientists don’t know HOW to do after seven years? …
. It is often better to leave good questions unanswered for a while. We are back at the difference between knowing (B) the answer and reading (C) it.
. Let's get back to my nurse: The three possible scenarios, one of which she must have known, were: Life-death-indifference. Because she was so desperate that I had no intention of going on with a life that just didn't seem to work out, I assumed that she must have been threatened. But that was only one of three possible scenarios. And if I was wrong, then being wrong has saved my life.
. Notice again, that what we know (B) or believe (C) to be true does make a difference. In my case, it was the difference between life and death. And somehow, in addition to this "DyAd(dyad)", there is thought (B) that makes the difference between the poles of this polarity.
. "Invisible before birth are all beings and after death invisible again. They are seen between two unseens. .... (Gita 2.28, Mascaró)".
. We have here a "TriAd( 3ad)" in which birth-death is the "DyAd(dyad)" and the "Invisible" is the monad. There is another triad in this verse. ...
If you don't think, the law of attraction will not work for you. You will not learn to think. Once you think about the triad you will see it all over the place because it is. He who sees will see more. In computer programming, you can not, not see them. Every time you compare a quantity, X, with a quantity, Y, you have three questions to ask: ...
Is X greater than Y, is it smaller than Y or are they equal? There is no other possibility. When comparing two quantities, there are three possible results, no more, no less. There are three specific questions you can ask, three specific conditions you can test for. Computer programmers are doing this kind of work regularly. There are a few other things they do, but this triad is at the heart of it.
. The triad is always the same, but its "impulses", its three components, can be different. Thus triads are not always identical, but they are always analogous. This is so because of the law of correspondence. Now, then, what is the other triad in Gita 2,28? ...
If you look up my answer before you have tried to come up with one yourself, you will hopefully kick yourself because it is so easy. You should kick yourself for having deprived yourself of the opportunity of doing some thinking on your own. Please read the verse again attentively with the question in mind. ...
If you really study great teachers like Jesus, Krishna or Lao Tzu, you will find that they don't cast pearls before the swine. They know that nothing is gained by doing that. The fact is that: Nobody else can do your thinking for you. If you burry your talents, if you don't use it, you loose it. ...
Here is my answer: Between "birth" and "death" is life. That is the monad in the second triad and the "two unseens" form the dyad: One unseen is within us and the other is outside of, or objective to, us.
. Even if you didn't come up with the same answer, if you have tried, you will have prepared yourself for the answer. Not being able to come up with an answer is one thing; not being willing to try, is another.
. Now you can apply what you have just learned to the original question: How could we learn in seven weeks what Computer Scientists are not taught in seven years? ... There are two questions here: One philosophical (B); the other political (C).
May 29, 2007
The political question has already been answered by Lao Tzu over two thousand years ago: The "People, They are Hard to Govern (Mn Zdf85) When They are "Too(TO)" Smart (YI H^cTO)." Chih72(^c) = "Wisdom, knowledge". So I could also have translated the predicate as: "When They Know Too-much (YI H^cTO)." but if Lao Tzu had meant that, he would have used "Know(kn)" instead of "Wisdom(^c)". And I think he has used that word facetiously. He does have a strange sense of humor.
. The philosophical answer is not as easy. I wish a "WordEr(C2er)", who has taken the seven week course, could help me with that.
. In spite of the difficulties I will try: Philosophically, what we have studied in these seven weeks is the Yes-No dyad, the "More-than ( +)" - "Equal-to ( =)" - "Less-than ( -)" triad and the Customer - Programmer - Coder - Computer (A-B-C-D) tetrad. These are universal laws like the laws of attraction and correspondence. These laws are not invented by the developers of the IBM system, but they were utilized by them. Some students are conscious of some of these laws but all of us, deep down, know them. Our instructors didn't have to teach us these things from scratch, all they had to do is remind us of them.
. There is a difference between just talking about a theory and actually trying to make it work and seeing it work or not work. Thinking can help you to know (B) some things but seeing it work is believing (C) it. That is the difference between "Knowing(kn)" and "Understanding(kn)" something. "Understanding" is not a dictionary equivalent of Chih(kn) but in some contexts it is demanded. At Ching 70, "Understanding" is associated with "Practice(pr)" which is associated with "Ability(ab)" which is associated with willingness.
. Deciding HOW to read a character, teaches students HOW, or the "Way(A1)", to "Differentiate (âo)" between its different "Possible(pt)" meanings. Good exercise.
. Lao Tzu has "Named(mg) the "DyAds(dyad)", and the "TriAds( 3ad)". But before you can do that, the monad has to be "Identified(Mg)", it has to be "NamAble (ptMg)" first. First comes the namable, then the naming and then comes the named. The three impulses of the triad are always in sequential temporal order. If three monads are not in sequential order, we don't have a triad. The order of the A-B-C and the B-C-D triads, in the A-B-C-D tetrad is: Affirming-Reconciling-Denying. The whole determines the meaning, or order of its parts. The "threefold structure of observer, observed and the process of observation (95)" is the subject-object-verb triad. See? The sequence is different but we still have a triad. Take anyone of the three impulses away and it is gone.
. In Mr.B's Dramatic Universe, the triad is called a DYNAMISM. The affirming-denying dyad, in the triad, is merely its "Potential(pt)", When "Actualizing the Potential (A1pt)", when bringing in the verb, it becomes a DYNAMISM, the "Potential" becomes the actual.
. It took me a long time to learn this stuff, and I am still just scratching the surface, but some pieces of the puzzle are klicking into place. About time. If you can understand what I have explained so far, then you will not need a seven week course for the rest of it.
. I came to Canada in 1956. After about one year, I joined the Toronto Theosophical Society. That’s where dyads triads and other natural laws are discussed. Then, in 1964, I took the seven week computer programming course. Now I saw the theory, we were discussing for years, actually work in practice. Without that experience, the theory (B) would probably have remained theory (B) for the rest of my life. I then began lecturing on the tetrad till 1973. So if the stuff, I have dished out, above sounds like Greek to you, please don't give up. Learning these things does take time. But intuition can do miracles for you, because you already know these laws, they are within you.
. What you don't know already is the IBM 1401 computer language. However, it is the most English-like computer language we have ever had. That's why the details I have to explain next, are best explained in that language.
. There are a number of problems I have that will make my explanation more difficult. I am putting out the following description in hope to reach a Communicator (C) who can fix the problems. If you take the following description as a "Job-description" you might be less critical of me.
. Above, I have given a few examples of computer language instructions and one conditional phrase. That's a good start, but there are really three possible types of conditional phrases but I can only use the equal sign (=) in this blog because the mathematical symbol for "Greater-than ( +)" and "Smaller-than ( -)" are commands in the http system that is used here. Because they cause trouble, I had to use the plus (+) and minus (-) signs as identifiers instead of the proper symbols.
. Many Chinese characters in the Ching are like algebraic variables and mathematical symbols. At Ching 41.1, ( +) - ( =) - ( -) represent the "Above" average - "Average" - "Below" average "TriAd( 3ad)".
. Another problem is that the spacing between the text you can read on line and the printout you get of it are different. The printout is closest to the blogspot editor, so the text doesn't line up. Ordinarily this is no problem but the 1401 language is based on the direct addressing mode. So the guide-line which I display above the program line gives you only an approximate location. But an approximate guide-line is better than no guide-line.
. Finally, another problem is that I can't do computer graphics which means that I can't show you the flowchart which would have been used by the coder to write the subroutine I will give you below. The flowchart shows the Coder (C) WHAT has to be coded, while I can only describe too you HOW it is coded. That's a pity, but a Communicator (C), seeing my plight, might take pity on us. So, here we go:
Note: The guide-line is much too long. It has worked before. Maybe a virus. There is also an extra blank space in front of this file which I can’t delete. If somebody wants to mess me up, there is nothing I can do about it. I only know, about networking (C), what I have to know. Investing more time in somebody else’s dharma than is absolutely necessary, to do your own, is the wrong thing to do. Read Plato’s Republic about that: He has called: Interfering in other people’s business, the greatest of evils, while minding your own business is the kind of “justice” that is necessary for a just society.

. . . . 5 . . . . 1 . . . . 5 . . . 2 . . . 5 . . . 3 . . . 5 . . . 4 . . . 5 . . . 5 . . . 5 . . . 6 . . . 5 . . . 7
M"1"A =A"1" B19 BD IA =A"2" B36 BD IA =A"3" B53 BD IA =A"4" B70 BD BL

M"1"A reads: Move "1" into A! =A"1" B19 reads: If A contains "1" then Branch, or go to, column 19. If not, then Branch to line D. Letters represent line numbers. If the column you are addressing is on the same line you are already on, you don't have to precede it by the line letter. The instruction I am always branching to is the IA instruction. They are far enough apart so that even when I don't get right on top of the opcode (I) it should be close enough for you to see what I mean.
. IA at column 19 reads: Increment A! =A"2" B36 reads: If A contains "2" then Branch to column 36. If not, BD !
. Things are getting repetitive. Let's jump ahead to column 53: Increment A! If A = "4" B70 ! If you don't jump over BD to column 70 you are going to end up at line D. D is to be suggestive of death while L is to be suggestive of life.
. If you know the BASIC computer language, you can substitute an indirect address for each of the direct addresses which are given here in line letters and column numbers. You can think of these addresses as street names and house numbers.
. Ideally somebody would write an emulator in the Motorola or Intel machine languages. Such a program might have to be loaded like a virus but it would be a virus that ends all viruses. It is a relatively simple program. The above subroutine can be adapted as the main driver for it. The conditional phrases would look for special characters, or Function keys, to Branch to special routines. After you have tested for all of the special keys, you end up at, what in this example is, line L. There you are in the Line editor. The computer is waiting for you to enter a special key or to type a program like the one we have here. When you are done, you move your cursor to the first instruction of the routine you want to be executed and hit Enter. “Enter" is treated like the other special keys. They are called “Commands”.
. Now let us look at some of the philosophical implications of adapting this kind of a program to demonstrate what is required for intelligent design: ...
The operations that are carried out before you come to the conditional phrase, or the decision box, set up the conditions you are testing. If you did it is right, you go forward towards Life; if not, you are Dead. As in life: First come your actions and then comes the judgement.

. If there were only one test, there is a 50/50 chance of making or breaking it. As the number of tests you have to pass through increases, your chances of making it diminish, unless the system is designed in such a way that your chances do not diminish. And that would require an intelligent designer.
. Actually, the Bhagavad Gita puts a slightly different slant on the, above, scenario: "Those who are in Sattva climb the path that leads on high, those who are in Rajas follow the level path, those who are in Tamas sink downwards on the lower path. (14.18, Mascaró)"
. The above subroutine only gives you two choices: up or down, "the level path" is equivalent to sitting on the fence. Certainly there are situations in which there are the three conditions but in my Cuba experience there were only two: Life or Death. If any one of my four rescuers had been sitting on the fence, twiddling his thumbs, I would be dead. If the customer (A), the programmer (B) or the coder (C) are unwilling or unable to do their job or if the computer (D) breaks down, then not only that component will not work but the whole system is dysfunctional.
. Here is some homework for you: In addition to the sequential arrangement, there is also the parallel architecture. Programmers are familiar with both scenarios. Simply alter the above program to simulate the alternative to it. ...
. If you are an electrician, then you know the difference between a parallel and a sequential circuit. Let me describe a sequential circuit to non-electricians: Instead of having one long cord between your electrical outlet at the house and your electrical appliance, at the far end of the backyard, you have three short ones.
. Now you plug in the first cord, cord A, into the outlet and test it with an appliance on the other end. The question is now: Do we have juice? If yes: Plug cord B into cord A. Test it: Do we have juice? If yes: Plug cord C into cord B. .... Do we have juice? If yes: Plug in your appliance. Does it work? If yes, you made it; if no, something went wrong. And it doesn't matter which component of the system is malfunctioning. In a sequential circuit it is either "all or nothing".
. To have a "DyAd(dyad)", you need two poles. To have a triad you need three impulses. To have a tetrad, you need four sources. Nothing less will do. The same goes for the pentad and larger systems. All sequential systems are analogous to each other. The law of correspondence is omnipresent which means that it is working everywhere, even within you.
. The reason I prefer the tetrad is because I know it best. In fact, anyone who has taken the seven week computer programming course can make the tetrad work (D) and that is better than theorizing (B) or talking (C) about it.

What we have here, in the form of a subroutine, is a model, or example of a sequential circuit. All sequential circuits are analogous to each other.
. Desmond Lee has called Plato's "LINE (509d)" an "analogy": "Well, suppose you have a line divided into two unequal parts, and then divide the two parts again in the same ratio to represent the visible [C and D] and the intelligible [A and B] orders."
. In what sense is that an "analogy"? What is that an example of? ...
I have given you the above subroutine as an example of what Plato is talking about. He has used "THE SIMILE OF THE CAVE (514a)" to elaborate on the LINE.
. Plato was a Communicator (C) who has had a vision (A). Instead of me trying to explain it to you,, I am better off leaving well enough alone.
. Lao Tzu puts it this way: The "Tao Produced 1 (A1Sg 1), 1 Produced 2 ( 1Sg 2), 2 Produced 3 ( 2Sg 3) and 3 Produced All Things ( 3SgWnwU)." Again, it is often better to let Lao Tzu speak for himself.
. Let me, then, write a program that is the complement of the above:

M"1"A =A"1" BL IA =A"1" BL IA =A"1" BL IA =A"1" BL IA =A"1" BL BD

. Both programs have to start with: M"1"A ! The "Tao Produces the One." That is the molecular basis of life in DARWIN'S BLACK BOX because it could never have arisen by chance. But now comes the difference: =A"1" BL If all went well, Branch to line L.
. Where in the linear mode you get to line L only after you have passed all the tests, here you get to line L after the very first test. What happens next? ...

IA =A"1" BL If all went well, Branch to line L. Instead of being sent to line D after you failed, as you are in the linear mode, you are allowed to "follow the level path". In other words, you are allowed to try again.
. In the linear mode, your chances of survival are diminished with every additional challenge; here, in the parallel mode, your chances of succeeding are increased with every additional challenge. Only if you failed to pass all of the tests, do you fail at the end: BD ! Branch to line D!

What we have here now, are two examples, in simplified form, that are comparable to Plato’s “Divided Line (509d)”. The “Line” is a simplified example of the four levels of abstraction: A, B, C and D, each of which is complicated enough to keep you busy for the rest of your life.
. The two programs, you have here, are similar to it in the sense that they are a simplification of the linear and the parallel conditions of life.
. Linear conditions are synchronistic. To program such conditions, an intelligent designer is necessary. And to make such a plan work, each component of the system must intelligently and responsibly do his or her work, or dharma. What my friend did, to get me out of Cuba alive, is a good example of that.
. To program the alternative to the above, still requires an intelligent designer, but to pass through most of the tests, under such favorable conditions, can be left to chance. Under these conditions, Darwin’s “evolution” does work.
. A few pages back, I have associated the creationism – evolutionism – intelligent design triad with the dialectic process. Historically, that is correct: First came creationism, then it was challenged by Darwin and now both are challenged by intelligent design. However, if you read up on “Dialectics” on my old website: NewAgeTao.org you will see the flaw in it. Also the question of freedom versus determinism came to mind. What does that have to do with what I have said here? …
. I am not just putting this question out to you, I am challenged by it myself. As we have seen from the very first chapter of the Bleep: Creative processes start with the QUESTION (A). The second step is thinking (B) about the question. Just as a Communicator (C) must know the truth in order to communicate it, so thinkers (B) must have a question in order to answer it. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" to think as well as thinkers (B) can. That's why they should learn HOW to listen. Listening is part of communication but "WordErs Don't seem to Know" that. The third step would be networking (C). That is, comparing possible answers, evaluating the validity of refutations, deternining whether financing is available for testing the hypothesis and if yes, deciding on HOW to translate the theories (B) into practice (D) and thus testing them. If a theory is true, then it will work as predicted; if not, then not.
. Many of the theories I have expressed here are in need of verification or refutation, but, without a net-worker (C) teaming up with me, that is not likely to happen. I am putting out this warning not just for your protection but for my own as well. Putting out false information, even if unintentionally, is bad karma.

In Transactional Analysis, the Adult (B) is also called the “computer”. Let us, then, very computer-like, go about the answer. …
. According to my article on Dialectics, the first question to ask is: …
Is the apparent creationism – evolutionism dyad a real “DyAd(dyad)" that will work, that will “Produce(Sg)” the synthesis? …
Historically, it is true: The thesis came first, next came the antithesis and now it is only a matter of time that the synthesis will be generally accepted. According to Schopenhauer there are three phases in which the truth proceeds: “Ridicule, violent opposition (the stage we are in now) and acceptance as a matter of course: “Everybody knows that!”:
The “One Produced the Two ( 1Sg 2)” But do the “Two Produce the Three ( 2Sg 3)”? …
I can’t see HOW. There has to an Intelligent side opposed by an equally valid non-intelligent side. The light side has to be complemented by the “Darkside (See the “Navigator”)” In time and space, we can’t have the one without the other. If you don’t have both poles, you don’t have a “DyAd(dyad)”. The synthesis of this dyad would be the answer to the question: WHAT “Produced(Sg)” our “reality” and HOW? This is as far as I can safely take it alone. For me to invest more time and energy in Communication (C) is the wrong thing to do. It is like asking my customer why s/he wants me to write this particular program for her. I might as well tell him to ask for something else. If you do that sort of thing, the customer might rightly assume that you don’t know your own business well enough and go to the competition.
. Now, if we had a net-worker (C) to network this theory (B) we might get responses that might enable us to go further. As it is, the best I can do to ask Lao Tzu for help:
“Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg)” “Life(Sg)”. Shêng(Sg) means “Produce” and “Life” among other things. At Ching 40, it means “Comes”:
“All Things Come From Existence. Existence Comes From Nonexistence (WnwUSgtoYUYUSgtoWU).” Doing an Aristotelian syllogism on this, we get: Therefore: “All Things …. Come From Nonexistence.” Where did I hear that before?
. Lao Tzu gives examples from our physical world (D), politics (C), philosophy (B) and religion (A) which, in this context, I would call cosmology.
The “Tao Produced the Monad (the molecular basis of “Life(Sq)”), the Monad Produces the Dyad, the Dyad Produces the Triad and the Triad Produces All Things (A1Sg 1 1Sg 2 2Sg 3 3SgWnwU).”
. If you go over the rest of my blog you might wonder why I didn’t put things together like this before? This is at least the question I asked myself: What took me so long? ...

The answer came to me in a flash. Before I can give it to you I have to tell you a bit about myself: I love Afro-Cuban Jazz. I can’t listen to the radio and think at the same time. That’s too distracting. So I don’t normally liten to the radion while working. The only exception to the rule is the Latin Jazz program on Saturdays from four to six on Toronto’s JazzFM91. There the host announced that Jane Bunnett is at the Distillery that same day, Saturda June 2, 2007. It happened before: I hear Jane Bunnett, I go. Talk about addiction. The show was: "Salsa Meets Jazz. Afro Cuban Dance party. The show went from 8:30 to past midnight and I was enthralled. Music seems to be the only thing that can drive me out of my mind. I don’t know about you but that was my answer. You have to get out of your mind, to get into something else, or to let something else in.

After going over the last three lines again, Nai Yeh chapter eight came to mind. Let me start at line seven (g):
g Vital-essence Ye It-is Vital-energy'S Essence Ye (#SYead#E Z#SYe). when
h Vital-energy is Guided it Will Produce (#E?a$pSg) (the "Vital-essence"). when there is
i Production there Will-be Thought (Sg$p?b). when there is
j Thought there Will-be Knowledge (?b$pkn). when there is (too much)
k Knowledge, it Will-be time to Stop Yi (kn$p$iYi)
l All of the Mind'S Forms (?cHs Z@k), when they
m Gain (too much) Knowledge, will Lose Productivity (#jkn37Sg) or creativity

?a Tao41 "To lead, guide, teach". This character has replaced the Tao(A1) that was used in an earlier version. While the Tao(A1) can mean anything the context demands, the more specific Tao(?a) is definitely an improvement over the more general Tao(A1). We can, thus, see a parallel between the older Ma-Wang-Tui text and the Standard text of the Ching and what we have here. If you are interested "Enough(Zu)" you can get Roth's translation but I will only use the updated characters. __
?b Szu61. "To think, reflect; meaning". If I had a concordance for the Nei Yeh, I could give it to you here. When I have that, of if I find the same character in another chapter, I will replace the "?" with "&" because then we need a concordance, even if I don't have the phonetic or radical number for that character yet. If this character is only in this chapter, I would use the "*" as I do for the Ching. But without a Concordance I can only be sure after I have worked an all of the 26 chapters as I am working on this one now.
. Ye and Yi are both Final particles but to translate them as "Period" does not convey their meaning. They have no English equivalent because in the old Chinese no punctuation was used. The Yi at the end of line k marks the end of paragraph. The last two lines are the conclusion. Roth Has: "Whenever the forms of the mind have excessive knowledge, You lose your vitality. The message may be conveyed by a more conventional and readable translation. The objective of this character by character translation is to get to know these characters so that we can read these thexts ourselves. It does take some effort, but I am becoming more and more convinced that this is the way to go. It will save us time in the long run.
. The Nei Yeh Dictionary-Concordance will be closed for renovation. It has to be simplified. In the mean time you can use the Ching Dictionary for the characters we already have. A concordance for the Nei Yeh will take some time. I will improve it as I go along. If I try too hard, if I try to bite off more than I can chew, I would get messed up as I am with the Ching.

Can you see now, why this chapter came to mind? ...
"Humans(%5)" have a soul (A), an intellect (B), a mind (C) and a body (D). These "Four( 4)" components are like the links of a chain: The whole can not be stronger than the weakest link. When the soul is missing, a person is not human, s/he is "InHuman(PU%5)".
. The opposite condition, where one link becomes too strong is also unhealthy but ...
depending on the date you are born, one link naturally predominates in us. Roughly 1/4 of humanity are fire signs (A), 1/4 are air signs (B), 1/4 are water signs (C) and 1/4 are "Earth(TI)" signs (D). This is our "Potential(pt)". And to "Actualize our Potential (A1pt)" is our duty, or dharma. If we don't do that, if we don't do what we came here to do, we feel unfulfilled and try to make up for it with booze, drugs or other "addictions".
. In the Indian caste system, before it was corrupted by the Brahmins (B), dharma meant your caste duty. It is your social responsibility, your duty to society or your duty to your fellow-humans.
. This morning June 5, I read in the Toronto Sun how a driver noticed a woman huddling on the Keele street bridge above the 401 , through his rear mirror. He was driving home from work. How many people would have just kept on driving, how many people have already "Passed-by(#i)"?...
This man didn't. He became suspicious, he parked his car, he held on to her and said: "I am not going to let you hurt yourself today." He held on to her until another good person came to assist and until the police could take over. What a story. As I leave through the Sun at breakfast, that's the stories I am looking for, the rest is just the usual crap. The problem is, if we go for the crap instead of the right things, then, we must not be surprised that our society is as sick as it is. It's been planned that way. Do some of us perhaps have other plans? ...
. People that help their fellow humans are yogis, whether they know it or not, they are Christians, whether they call themselves that or something else. It is unfortunate that it even has to be mentioned but it has become necessary to say that there are also very good Moslems. It is unfortunate that we allow the extremists to give Christians and Moslems a bad name.
. There is another point I want to make in relation to the last three lines: "Music" or Art (A) carries out a very important social function that must not be ignored: Poetry (A), truth (B), justice (C) manual skills, goodness and kindness in action (D) are the links of the same chain. The Buddha calls them: Right vision, thought, speech and action. Since a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, that is the one we have to work on.
. I think that level C is the weakest link: The mass-media is owned and the educational system is controlled by people that have no intention to informing us of what is really going on and in educating the yung in the true sense of the word.
. I believe that, with the help of the Ching and the Nei Yeh, we can "Fix(*a37)" that problem. The truth is within us, it is merely a matter of educing it. But the thinkers (B) can't do it alone. It is as Lao Tzu said: "KnowErs are Not good enough with Words (knerPUC2) WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" enough. That's why he said that we should team up, "Unite($1)", as the unelected advisors (B) and their politicians (C) are doing. Even though we elect, and pay for, politicians, they don't work for us. If we want to know the sad truth, we have to educate ourselves. And only then, when we know it, can the truth set us free.

. . . . . . . . The Nei Yeh Dictionart - Concordance

. . . . . The Text is in the next file, the "Introduction".


. . . . . . . . . . . . Nei Yeh Dictionary - Concordance
. In the Ching Dictionary, the first identifers are: A1 B1 C2 D2, 1, 2, 3, 4, -. =, +, E, H and Z
. In the next group the first characters of the identifiers are in the following sequence: @ ä â, # Ü, $, % and ^. The & means that the character is not in the Ching.
. In the next group, lower case (l) and Capital (C) letters are combined in the following four groups: ll, Cl, lC (only for wU) and CC.
. In the next group, the character is identified by its radical number.
. There is one more type of identifier which is not used in this dictionary but which should be mentioned: For it the chapter number and line letter is used to identify the character that is in that position in order to refer to it without one of the above identifiers.

D2 Shih6. 10c __ - Chung2 8c 10a __ @l K'ou30 6b 10b __ @W Chia19 10c __
%8 Chêng77 Roth has "Alignment" for it. It is not a dictionary equivalent, but it fits. 7a . 8a . 11a,e . 13m . 16a . 19a . 21j,r . 22b . 25h __
^a Ching174 "Vital-essence" 5c,m 7c 8a 11c 13a 19p 26g __ Üp Tsai32 8c __
&a Fan16 "All ...." 1a 3a 6j 8l 21a 22a 23a 25a __ &b Ting40 (*a37) 8b,c __ &c Hou30 8b __ &f Literally, the character is "Alignment(%8) under a "Roof" __ & g She135 "Shed, Cottage, my" __ &h Hou30 8b __ &e Szu61 "To think, reflect; meaning". 5l . 13c . 14i,i,j,k . 19i,ij . 20f,k . 23m,q . 24d __ (*a37) 8c __ &i Tao41 "Guide"
&m Ts'ang140 (*a44) 14n,n __
ab Neng130 "Able" 3f . 8a,a,b . 9a,b,f . 13c . 14c . 15j . 16a,e . 22k . 24d . 26g .
Üp Tsai32. 2d,e 4a 8c 10a 13o 14b 18a 21k 26a __ to Yü70 This one means "To", "From" etc. It is the kind of character for which we don't need the concordance because "through(YI)" "Repetition(@1)" your "Mind(Hs)" "Does the Learning (doÜd)" for you anyway. __
Cu Ch'u17 2q 10b 21b,c __ Hs Hsn61 Literally this is the "Heart" but the "Mind" is usually intended. 3a,e,g,h 4k 5b,c,m 6f 8c,l 10a 11d 12e 13n,o 14e-p 21k 24a 26a,g . As translators of the Gita have trouble with manas (C), so translators of the Ching and this one have trouble with Hsin(Hs).__ Ja Jan86 8b 10d 11f 14r,s,t 15d 16o __
72 Ming72

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9/11,

The Oklahoma City bombing,
Hitler's burning down the Reichstag etc.
Are all inside jobs. And there will be more of them if we don't wake up.
Now, the "Virginia Tech shooter delivers .... message": "You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today". " But you decided to spill my blood ". "You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision is yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off". "You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience". "You thought it was one pathetic boy's life you were extinguishing . Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people ... "
Is the death of his victims going to be in vain or are these words going to "inspire" enough of us to prevent more murders like that? Once a critical mass of people knows who is to blame for these murders, these crimes will become counterproductive for these criminals and will stop.
No other shooter got his message out before. Cho did. That's the REAL NEWS.
He had to outwit his tormentors. Now they must prevent us from getting the message. If we let them fool us again, then there will be more murders. How can you help to prevent that? By finding out the truth. Knowledge is power. Without knowledge we are “the weak and the defenseless people”. That’s why our rulers must prevent us from thinking.
How did Cho manage to get the truth out to us? He had to beat his torturers at their own game. Where did he learn that? In that "mental health facility" they had him in? Have the previous shooters been in mental health facilities? Have they left any messages? What do we know about social engineering? What can these professionals do to our minds? …
These are some of the questions investigative reporters must ask. I mean, here, real reporters, not the trained seals that try to make us believe that Cho did all of this planning, including his own death, to get attention. The fact is, that the social engineers don't want us to think about his words, and if we don't, then there will be more murders. And I am no prophet.
There is an excellent movie out: LIVES OF OTHERS. If you see it for no other reason than to find out a bit about social engineering, it will be well worth your time and money.
One way to find out what is going on in the world today is real investigative journalism. See the Toronto Street News, The Epoch Times or SaveTheMales.ca
Another way is good old philosophy. See PetersTao.blogspot.com Lao Tzu says in chapter 56 of his Tao Te Ching that thinkers and Communicators must work together. That still hasn't happened at my web-site. So you have to put up with my poor writing to learn some of Lao Tzu's lessons. But I know of no better teacher to help us understand this deliberately contrived "Confusion (Luan5)" which we are not supposed to understand. Why not? Please think!

. Above you have the most important flyer I ever did in my over 60 years of searching. There is much I would like to add to it, but there is only so much you can get on one page. I said in my second important flyer, below, that: Gun control and damage control are contradictories. Just read the papers now and see HOW gun conrol is promoted. Common sense alone should tell us why these killings have to be staged to attain their goal, as stated in the Protocols of Zion.
. The problem with knowing the truth is that it can be a burden. That's why some people don't want to hear it. And with some help from the social engineers, this fear, or reluctace to lisen and to think, is helping the globalists. In this game you have to take sides. In these last days you have to be either cold or hot, you can no longer sit on the fence. All you have to do is find out the truth and know it. That is all you have to do because if a critical mass of the citizens of this world knows the truth, the "Morpho-genetic field (See Rupert Sheldrake)" of our planet will change and then their lies simply become unbelievable to everybody. There is a reason why the globalists tried to discredit Sheldrake. Now if I don't do my best to prevent these murders I am guilty of the sin of omission. Not being a networker (C), I don't know whether I have any hits at all. But putting out these flyers there is a better chance of getting one of them into the right hands. So this is all I will do on this web-site for now, I'll be walking the strees of Toronto putting out the above flyer.

April 27. What happened on my walks, is described in front of the Syncronicity section below.
April 24, 2007. I will do a few commentaries on my own flyer now. I didn’t want to sacrifice the heading: “9/11” at 72 points, the next line at 36 and the third line at 26 points. Also the REAL NEWS, at 18 points, has to stand out in line eleven because: “No other shooter got his message out before” and the perpetrators of these crimes will make sure that this mistake will not happen again in the future. What social engineers can do to the human mind is simply unbelievable. It must be, otherwise social engineering will not work. That Cho has managed to outwit them is the REAL NEWS which the social engineers must delete from our memory as quickly as possible. On the flyer that has inspired this one, I said: “Damage control and gun control are contradictories.” Just look at HOW this carnage is used to promote gun control. There you have the motive for this crime. So HOW can they do damage control at the same time? The two are contraries. Did the globalists bite off more than they can chew this time? They want their pie and eat it too. Are we going to let them get away with that? Did we let them dumb us down that much? If they did do their thing on you: Let Lao Tzu help you to "DeProgram" yourself.
. If the friends and relatives of the victims knew who is responsible for these murders, they would start a class action against the perpetrators of these crimes, But look what some of them are doing instead: They are doing what they are intended, or programmed, to do. People that serve the globalists because they don't know better are called "lackeys" in the Protocols of Zion while those that serve them knowingly are their "agents".
. David Icke explains it best: Agents are to lakeys as the lakeys are to the rest of us. Agents are above the lackeys wile the lackeys are made to feel superior to the rest of us. That is why the lackeys that promote gun control are glorified by the mass-media. If these "Outstanding citizens" knew that they are really working for the instigators of these murders, they wouldn't feel proud about what they are promoting. We have here another example of were knowledge gives our rulers power over our minds, while ignorance turns us into "the weak and the defenseless people" Cho was talking about.

. “Once a critical mass of people knows who is to blame for these murders, these crimes … will stop.” Why? Not because these criminals are bothered by their conscience. How can they? They don’t have a conscience. It is only when their actions compromise their goal, as outlined in the Protocols of Zion, that these murders will stop.
. The following passage really made me think: Once we know who is responsible

"for these murders, these crimes will become counterproductive".
Instead of disarming the people, the people start to arm themselves, because now they know who their "Enemy(âb)" is and WHAT his intentions are. A critical mass of the people will start to deliberately inform themselves because now they know that their "Enemy" must "Always Cause the People (Cn %e Mn) to be Without Knowledge (WUkn) and Without the Desire (WUYÜ)" to know. They will study the Protocols of Zion. They will "Identify(Mg)" the "lackeys" and "agents" of these globalists, illuminati or servants of the "Darkside". For instance, once we know that a reporter or a columnist is an agent, we can use their work for something analogous to reverse engineering. I have done something like that with an article by George Jonas on my old web-site, NewAgeTao.org Unless an insider spills the beans, this is the second best thing we can do to find out about social engineering. We have to find out the truth. The truth can only set us free if we know it. I have not done the best job possible on Jonas' article but it was the best I could do at that time. And if you take my effort as a "job-description" for a more professional job, my analysis of the work of an "agent" can be quite useful.
. In fact, if you take my whole blog as a "job-description" for a more user-friendly web-site it will be more useful than this one is now.
. Again, once we know that our enemy has to put us into the victim-state of consciousness, we will be looking for Ways to get out of it. One Way that works for me is the "Way(A1)" or the "Truth(A1)". The truth is on our side as Krishna was on Arjuna's side in the battle that was described in the Bhagavad Gita.
. Many of those who are born under an air-sign (B) will study the Tao Te Ching and come up, independently, with similar "Insights(72)" I am coming up with here. Before the truth can set us free, we must know it. To my knowledge there is no better textbook, for those who are on the path of knowledge, than the Tao Te Ching. But I must give credit to all those teachers who have helped me to appreciate it. There is first my Sunday School teacher in Hamburg, Germany under whom I have studied from age nine to 16.Then there are my fellow lectures and members of the audience at the Toronto Theosophical Society, from 1958 to 1973, then comes J.G.Bennett under whom I have studied from 1973 to 1974 but with whom I have corresponded longer than that. Then came Jagad Guru Sri Kripalu Mahaprabhu who has helped me to understand Plato's Republic. He has also blessed me with two para-normal experiences. Without such experiences, it is hard for us to believe (B) that the para-normal exists. They called me the "Jnani" at his Ashram. Jnana yogis can know (B) that God exists but the experience (D) of the para-noemal is not part of our path, or dharma. It comes to us, and even to Arjuna, only "by grace (presannena)".
. Now, at age 71, "The Handbook of the Navigator" falls into my hands. Its author, Eric J. Pepin, said on page 43: "I wonder if you question what led you to begin reading it in the first place." Well, it just sort of fell into my hands. I have no problem with going along with Pepin and calling this something that has steadily led we from one lesson to the next, my "Navigator". Once we have "Identified(Mg)" something, once we know it exists, we can "Name(Mg)" it, and "Navigator" is a good name for it.

. “Knowledge is power.” There is a lot of space devoted to this subject, so I can leave well “Enough” alone since it is the best I can do, but I do need a writer to clean up my blog. Or, on second thought, to start a new one in which everything that is transfered from here, is cleaned up. The "Words(C2)" would be the networker's (C) own, only the ideas (B) would come from here. The following article was also turned into a flyer. It too needs editing.

CAMPUS CARNAGE Toronto Sun, April 19, 2007. "Virginia Tech shooter delivers .... message": "You had a hundred billion chances and ways to have avoided today ... But you decided to spill my blood [they re getting desperate to get guns off the street or have the names and addresses of responsible gun owners registered so they know where they are. If there are too many guns in private hands the people will shoot back. The right to bear guns is in the American Constitution for a reason. So they have "decided" not to avoid the rampage. Let's read on:] You forced me into a corner and gave me only one option. The decision is yours. Now you have blood on your hands that will never wash off"
. "You have vandalized my heart, raped my soul and torched my conscience"
"You thought it was one pathetic boy's life you were extinguishing [Obviously they made a mistake: The "boy" wasn't as "pathetic" and dumbed down as they thought he was]. Thanks to you, I die like Jesus Christ, to inspire generations of the weak and the defenseless people ... Your Mercedes wasn't enough you brats. Your golden necklaces weren't enough, you snobs. Your trust funds wasn't enough. Your vodka and cognac wasn't enough. All your debaucheries. Those weren't enough. Those weren't enough to fulfill your hedonistic needs. You had everything."
. Where did he get that information from? David Icke? " Cho was evaluated by a local health health facility, and he was placed in for treatment after a temporary detention order was obtained. It's unclear whether he volunteered or was forced." What did he learn in that "mental health facility"? ...My job is merely to point out to investigative reporters (C) what work has to be done, and fast. As far as I can see, Cho was let out to do a job that was predictable in order to do away with the right to bear arms. When investigating a crime, we must always ask for the motive. That Cho was smarter than they expected him to be can be seen in that he managed to get his "meaasage" out. He second guessed them. Now the social engineers have their hands full with doing their damage control as they had to do with the Protocols of Zion and with 9/11. When will we reach the point at which social engineering simply cannot handle, what it was designed to do, any more? ... That point will be reached when WHAT people are expected to believe simply becomes too incredible. There is only so much that even dumbed down people can be conditioned to believe. My only hope is that Cho's victims will not have died in vain.
. My own close encounter with social engineering was over twenty years ago: Two building inspectors arbitrarily closed down my small rooming house and harassed me for one year three times a week (I am not exaggerating, it is rather more than less than that). It was like the Chinese drop torture. After one year of this treatment, suddenly and unexpectedly, I got a terrible stomach cramp. Fortunately, I already knew "Enough(Zu)" about social engineering to know that my stomach cramp was brought about deliberately. Even though I didn't know exactly HOW they did it, I knew WHAT they did. Knowing the truth prevented me from turning myself into the hospital. Instead I prayed. And, when you are desperate "Enough", prayer even works for ynana yogis. If they had succeeded to commit me to a "mental institution" would I have done the work I have done since then? ... When investigating a crime, it is always well to look for a motive. See my old website NewAgeTao.org

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . THE SECRET by Rhonda Byrne

The book was lent to me. Guess what I am supposed to do with it? ... The book should be quoted in full, but, since I am not a "WordEr", this is not what I am supposed to do with it. I will give a quote from a given page and comment on it. An unanswered question can detract an otherwise attentive reader's attention from the quotes and commentaries. An attentive reader would notice that I am doing here what I have done with the Dalai Lama's book. So: Why not put this article in the Text-Commentary file where it belongs? Because that file is already too long. When a file gets too long, blogspot slows down, and adding this article would cause it to slow down even more. And now, I hope, your attention is free to be directed to the following quotes and commentaries.

"To become aware of your thoughts, you can also set the intention, 'I am the master of my thoughts.' (23)" As far as possible, I let Lao Tzu do the talking: "Words Have an Ancestor (C2YU@4) Deeds Have a Master (D2YU#u)." In the Ma-wang-tui text we have: C2 YU #u, D2 YU @4. "Ancestor(@4)" and "Master(#u)" have been "Reversed($l)". This means: Don't get hung up on words! You can say it either Way or both Ways: ... Deeds have a master or an ancestor, words have a master or an ancestor and thoughts have a master or an ancestor. The question becomes now: Who or what is the master of thought? ... Please go back to the quote from page 23 and figure it out on your own.

"All power is from within and therefore under our control. (165)"
”Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)”: All “Power (Te)” is from without.
. This requires an explanation: God is omnipotent and omnipresent. Thus his power is within us and outside of us. This power comes from within when a customer describes WHAT s/he wants to a supplier who knows HOW to supply the demand.
. To explain HOW we are controlled from the outside, we have to look at the larger picture first: Words (C) are containers by means of which ideas (B) are shipped from one place to another. When the container is shaped by the “Pattern(#t)” which is within, then it is “Aligned(%8)” to the inside; when the container is shaped by the “Form(@k)” which is on the outside, then
the container, or the mold, “Conforms(%8)” to the outside. I hope that you could follow me up to here, because now we come to the conclusion of the above pemise: …
The content takes the shape of the container. Due to the urgency of the situation, I have been prompted to put out ideas (B) that are in need of verification by specialists other than thinkers (B). Some of the ideas I am putting out here can be considered scientific (or philosophical) hypotheses. If they are true, then they should work for experts other than jnana yogis and if they work, then they are true. And only then should they be accepted. I am a jnana yogi and I can't test all of my theories. We have here another example of a "Reversal($l)". When it is true, it will work; when it works, it is true. This subject of verifying the "Truth(A1)" is important. Rudolf Steiner has devoted much space to it in his "Occult Science" He didn't make it clear that only those who are able to carry out his instructions are able to verify, what he has described in his book, in themselves. In this, Occult Science differs from Material Science. From the fact that Steiner has assumed that everybody can do it, I assume that he was a raja yogi.
. Jnana yogis can, and must, make use of all types of observation: spiritual vision (A), physical evidence (D) and the representations of raja yogis (C). More correctly, what comes through A is "Conceived(B1)" by B and verified on level D. But this is only possible when the communicators (C) listen to the thinkers (B). It is working for the elected politicians (C) and for their advisors (B) that "have the power of election". If we want a democracy then we must make use of the same principle that works for our rulers. Knowing the truth will set us free. Knowledge is power. To expect our rulers to give it to us is naive.
. The Theosophists and the Hindus say that the world is created from the inside out: A creates B, B creates C, C creates D and D creates E8 or the "Annamaya Kosha (Sutra 14)"

"If you can see it in your mind you're going to hold it in your hand. (9)"
. Ordinary people must create the algorithm on level B before they can have it manifested on level D. The emphasis on thought alone, leads to an oversimplification that can be misleading. Without language (C) to mediate between theory (B) and practice (D) ordinary people will not hold it in their hands. The idea (B) must be “Fixed(*a37)” in your mind (C) before it can be manifested (D). The algorithm (B) must be translated into a computer program (C) before the computer (D) can execute it. There are many examples of a working tetrad, so you don't have to be a philosopher (B) to know that these 4-fold systems are true. In pragmatism (D) the definition of truth is: If it works, then it is true.

"Every thought of yours is a real thing -- a force. (4)"
. In "Your Center you Have a Core-of-vitality ( H =YU#S) Your Core-of-vitality is Very Real ( H#S%t#m)." To prevent a possible misunderstanding, I have to quote from XIV 15 of the Nei Yeh: "Within the mind there is yet another mind. (Roth's translation)" B is real, C is "Very Real" and D, your body, is even more real to you.

"Your thoughts become things. (25)"
. The emphasis in "The Secret" is on thought (B). But it is not the only component in the tetrad. It is not the innermost, or most abstract(A), nor is it the outermost, or most concrete (D), it is one link in a chain which is no more, nor less important than the other links. A will attract B, B will attract C and C will attract D, if "Enough(Zu)" money, or intent, is there on every level. If one link in the chain is weak, then the system will not work efficiently; if one link is broken, it will not work at all.
. For the purpose of getting a better understanding of The Secret, let me "Identify(Mg)" and "Name(Mg)" the four "sources", links, or components, of the tetrad. ...
Try to figure it out on your own. ...
You would benefit more from your own thoughts (B) than from reading (C) about the thoughts of others. So, please think before reading on. ...
If you just read, all you can do is believe (C) or refuse to believe (pistis, in Greek) but you don't really know (B) it. The words I came up with are: intent, thought, word and deed. I have choosen "intent" because it comes up a number of times in this book. Just go back to the quote from page 23: "' I am the master of my thoughts.' Say it often, meditate on it, and as you hold that intention ...." ...

"Imagination is everything. It is the preview of life's coming attractions. (91)"
. If you are able to imagine that, what does not exist, exists, then it can become the Power of Intent. And if you are unable to do that you are bound to fail. It says at Gita 3.35: Do your dharma, doing the dharma of somebody else is "dangerous(bhaya)".
. "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! The "you (in lower case)" is an interpretation. I have inserted it because you can't actualize a potential you don't have.

"Expectation is a powerful attractive force. (93)"
"Constantly Have Expectations (CnYUYÜ)". "Expectation" is Wing's equivalent of Yü(YÜ). In philosophy it is the representation (C). It is indeed a more powerful activating force than thought (B), even though it is thought that produces it. It is a thought (B) that is "Fixed(*a37)" in the mind (C). And "Repetition(@1)" is a reliable Way to "Fix" it there. It is part of "The Secret" and it is also known by the social engineers. Repeat a lie often "Enough(Zu)" and the dumbed down masses will eventually believe it. That's Social Engineering 101.

"The knowledge of The Secret and the intentional use of the law of attraction can be applied to every single subject in your life. (98)"
. In the computer analogy, intent is backed up by money. If you go into a restaurant and order a meal you can't pay for, you are in trouble. In the building trade the customer (A) pays for the architect (B) who does the thinking, the contractor (C) who does the talking and for the sub-contractors (D) who do the physical work.
. As the customer decides on WHAT kind of house s/he wants, so the architect determines WHAT the contractor has to say and the contractor gives very specific instructions to the subcontractors. So, on each level, there is an intent. I am just filling in details for those who are not raja yogis. Those that provide the convincing examples for this book don't need these details. They know HOW to use The Secret. You must know these missing details in order to prevent becoming a failure because you are prevented from "Actualizing your own Potential (A1pt)". As the Tao Te Ching is a textbook for jnana yogis, so The Secret is a textbook for raja yogis. Do the "WordErs really Not Know (C2erPUkn)" this? Answer: Those who do the planing (B) don't have to do the writing (C).

You "have .... to .... convince yourself of the truth (144)".
To make use of The Secret, you have to convince yourself that, what does not exist on the physical plane, exists on the physical plane. And that is not convincing "yourself of the truth". In this sense the above statement is misleading. There is, however, a truth in it. If you are able to convince yourself that this falsehood is true, then you can cause it to become true. We have an interesting paradox here.
. One Way to convince yourself of the truth (or an untruth) is to "Consistently(Cn)" repeat it, like a mantra. "Repetition(@1) will move the idea from level B down to level C where the thought becomes a belief (pistis, in Greek). Another Way is by explaining it to others. Even though communication (C) is not my dharma, I know that explaining it, even imperfectly, has helped me a lot over the years. Perhaps that is why my higher Self (A) doesn't give me the "WordErs(C2er)" my lower self (C) wants. The higher Self has the whole picture, like a hologram; the lower self is primarily interested in itself, it has a short-term goal in mind: money, cars, houses, power etc. Even global power is a short-term goal because it can not last forever. Hitler's "Thousand Year Reich" didn't even get off the ground. See ddickerson about Hitler. The globalists have developed their plan over centuries. Parts of it, like the European union they have described in the Protocols of Zion in 1905, have been actualized but, even if their "Kingdom comes", how long can it last?

"Energy flows where the attention goes. (145)"
The energy "Fixes (*a37)" the idea (B) in your mind (C). The intellect (B) is two steps removed from physical action (D) The mind (C) is right next to it. Moving the representation from level C to D, is manifesting it on the material level. That is why what is described in The Secret works for the raja yogis. Raja means "King( E)" (C). The energy is first used to create the container on the etheric (D) level. That would be Mr.B's "Vital energy (E7)", or the "Pranamaya Kosha". The container, being empty, "attracts" the content, which would be Mr.B's "Constructive energy (E8)", or the "Annamaya Kosha". We need Lao Tzu to clarify this for us:
“Tao Produces It (A1Sg Z) Te Maintains It (TE@d Z) Matter fills “Its( Z)” Form (wU@k Z)”. The dictionary equivalents of Hsiang(@k) are: “Form, figure, to give form …. Substance, the body”. It is the holographic “Image Without Form (%4WU@k)”. The “Great Image (TA%4)” is above level A(E4). What of it comes through the Door (A) is given form by thought, word and deed. Only after that can the form, or mold, be filled with “Matter(wU)” (E8).

"To think there is not enough is to look at the outside picture and think that everything comes from the outside. When you do that, you will most surely see lack and limitation. You now know that nothing comes into existence from the outside, and that everything first comes from thinking and feeling on the inside. (148)"
. First comes feeling, (A), then thinking (B). But other than that, this statement is in perfect agreement with the Hindus, the Theosophists and Lao Tzu: "All Things Come From Existence (WnwUSgtoYU) Existence Comes From Nonexistence (YUSgtoWU)".
. The Atman (A) is within the intellect (B) and within the Atman there is something else. Let's call it omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience. That omniscience is, or is like, a hologram. This comes to us as poetry or art through the Atman (A). "This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and the material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara. (Sutra 13)". What is on the other side of the Door is within A. It is within us. It is "Small, within Heaven and the two levels Below it, but Nobody is Able to Master it Yeh (smTn -MOab@SYe) .... the Tao Which is Within (A1 ZÜp) The World (Tn -) is As a Stream in the Valleys (^5@qkU)".
. "My Words are Very Easy to Understand (^5C2%tezkn)." That should be reason "Enough(Zu)" to translate them as accurately as possible.

"Most of the leaders .... missed the great part of The Secret, which is to empower and share with others. (152)"
. The part that is "missed", or is not emphasized "Enough(Zu)" in this book, is: When you know HOW to use The Secret you must use your power "to empower .... others." "Do the governing Without Doing it yourself. instead empower the people and Then Nothing is Not Governed (doWUdo18WUPU85)". What is emphasized instead, is fancy cars, big houses the man or woman you are attracted to, or millions of dollars in your pocket. Sure, I would like some of these things myself, but if I had to give up, what I know now, for it, I would say: No, I don't want it, it isn't worth it.
. What good are these material possessions when our home, mother earth, can no longer support us? ... And what will you be allowed to do with all your money under a global dictatorship? ...
How much of it will they allow you to keep? In Germany, Hitler has decided that, and in Cuba Fidel Castro or his brother is deciding on what you can say (C) do (D) or have. Do you think that history is going to change with a global "despotism" that is to be modeled after the Indian caste system, as described at Gita 18.41-44"? ... Look at the corrupted caste system now, as it is disintegrating right in front of our eyes. What is "Not based on the Truth will Sooner or later Cease-to-be (PUA1Üq^k)".
. The globalists know The Secret. They have been working on the realization of their dream for centuries. .... We have some catching up to do but, since the truth is on our side, this shouldn't be too hard to do, if we get our act together in time.

"This is the best time to have ever been alive in history. It's the first time we've ever had the power to gain knowledge at our fingertips.(152)"
But with all the disinformation put out by professional social engineers, some of us have to learn HOW to think in order to weed out the lies that are disseminated through the mass media, the internet and the educational system. But once you know how to differentiate between truth and falsehood, you realize that, in these last days, there is indeed nothing hid, that shall not be revealed. All you have to do is think. But what the "KnowErs(kner)" have come up with must be disseminated by the "WordErs(C2er)". The thinkers can't do it as well because Communication is not their dharma.

There are a lot more passages to comment on, so HOW do I get out of this assignment gracefully and back to the Nei Yeh? ...
You put out the question to the universe, and here is the answer: Give readers the knowledge-base you use to interpret The Secret and thus , you "empower" them to do it themselves. Great idea. I am using J.G. Bennett's Systematics as a thinking tool. Systematics is described in Mr.B's Dramatic Universe. It consists of four volumes the average of which is about 350 pages thick. It doesn't look like such a great idea anymore. What now? ...
Concentrate on those parts of Systematics that are relevant to The Secret! That's better. Still not easy, but this blog is addressed to those that are interested "Enough(Zu)" in the "Truth(A1)". Why water it down for those that don't care anyway? All I have to do for those that care, is to give a brief outline and the right people will know where to go from there.
. "Systematics" is about "Number-systems": "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAds( 3ad)" right up to the "Dodecad, twelve-term system, 72-4 of energies, 122 of human society, 234 of values, 102. (Vol III page 309)".

"Everything is energy (155)"
Let's start with that. Mr.B has identified and named twelve divisions of the big, undifferentiated, unit of energy. He has called the highest energy (Level 1 or (E1)), "Transcendent Energy" while the lowest level (E12) is "Dispersed Energy". On the highest and the lowest level, energy is "Undifferentiated, Complete, that is Before Heaven and Earth were Born (Üecm^7TnTISg)". "Heaven(Tn)" and "Earth(TI)" are two of the "Four( 4)" divisions that appear when the "Big Tao is Split-up (TAA1@m)".
. On the highest and the lowest levels, that "one energy field" is undivided, it is one hundred percent potential or kinetic energy. Things get interesting between the extremes because the 12 units can combine in varied Ways. Mr.B has joined E1-E4, E5-E8 and E9-E12 to form three tetrads. E5-E8 comes closest to the Aristotelian tetrad, but it is not the same.
. . . .E4(A) . . . . Plato's student, Aristotle, has wrapped his teacher's "Divided
E7(D) + E5(B) . Line" around the cross, as shown to the left. This is the
. . . .E6(C) . . . . Atman(A)-Buddhi(B)-manas(C)-Indriyas(D) tetrad the Hindus are using. Lao Tzu is using the same four components but not always in the same sequence. At Ching 25.3, we have: Tao(A), Heaven(B), Earth(D) and the King(C). At 25.4 we have The Tao on top. The "Tao Follows ItSelf (A1ähTuJa)" because it is at the cross-over point in the figure 8. Then comes Heaven (B), then Earth (D) and then "Man(mn)" (C). We are last in the deductive process and first in the inductive, bottom-up, process.
. Over the years, I have become quite familiar with the Aristotelian tetrad. When I had the opportunity to talk to Mr.B, instead of asking him about the triad, I had trouble with, we would discuss the tetrad. I got the nickname "Peter Tetrad" at Sherborn House.
. For a Hindu and even for Lao Tzu's students it is hard to "UnLearn(PUÜd" something you have become very familiar with. That is why, in order to do that, you must first "Learn to UnLearn (ÜdPUÜd)".
. The Aristotelian tetrad was the kind of "Concept(B1)" I found hard to transcend but, when the need for it arose, I found that the "pentad", the five-term system, and the "heptad", the seven-term system, have helped me to do it quite painlessly. The pentad, we get at Sutra 14 of The Holy Science, is E4(A), E5(B), E6(C), E7(D) and E8. E8 is the "outer coating, which, becoming Anna, nourishment, supports this visible world and thus is called the Annamaya Kosha."
. As I understand it, this body of ours is, what the Theosophists call the "etheric body" It is like a mold that contains physical matter. It contains that part of the world we identify with. We call it "I". Philosophically it is part of the subject and the rest of the world is the object. Unless we get this clearly into our head (B) first, and then into our mind (C), the pentad is not going to be of much use to us. When Mr.B would explain these complicated things to us we would have a hard time with it, of course. Then Mr.B would say that: Nothing is gained by trying to make things simpler than they really are. When we try to understand a phenomena that requires a "TriAd( 3ad)" to make sense of, then the "Dyad(dyad)" will not do. If a carpenter wants to cut through a two-by-four, then a hammer will not do. We need the right thinking tool to do a given job.
. And so, when it comes to understand The Secret, not even the tetrad will do it all. By using the pentad, we have taken one step beyond the tetrad. To understand The Secret, we don't really need the dodecad. Mr.B said that there are more complex systems beyond the dodecad, but for us humans, the dodecad is the most inclusive and useful tool we have. For this summary of systematics, it serves us to "identify the monads", as it is called in systematics. For instance by saying that level D is E7, we have identified the monad in terms of the dodecad. And, since I don't have a good terminology for the monads above A and below D, Mr.B's terminology for the dodecad comes in handy.
. We now need the heptad to go above the tetrad. Usually it is symbolized by the square at the bottom and a triangle above it. The square has four points connected by four lines and the triangle has three point and three lines between them. and 4 + 3 = 7. The square represents the Aristotelian tetrad. Just see the diagram above. The upper triad is E1-E2-E3. As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)". God doesn't have to be told HOW to supply our demands. "Just say the word." An example we have of this in our worldly experience is the computer (D). Just give it the right instructions and it will carry out the most complicated tasks faster and more accurately than any human can do it. And we don't have to worry about HOW it does it, the designers of the computer have taken care of that.
. The 3 + 1 + 3 heptad is actually a more useful tool to help us understand what the author of The Secret and her coauthors are talking about. Here thought, word and deed (B-C-D) is the lower triad, E1-E2-E3 is the upper triad and A(E4) is the Door or the reconciling impulse between them. The two triads and the monad between them form one triad. in turn. I hope that this isn't too complicated for you. This is about all I can take myself. Still, Mr.B was right in telling us that: Nothing is gained by trying to make things simpler than they really are.
. Lao Tzu's advise on HOW to "Handle(do)" "Difficult Tasks (dfD2)" is in Ching 63 and 64.

"Everyone has the power to visualize. (86)"
but not everyone has the power to carry out the feats that are described in this book.
. Undeniably, everyone has a body (D), a mind (the instrument that gives us "Speech (C2)") and an intellect (B). Deniably, we have a soul. Without it we couldn't love, have faith or see beauty. Still, there are entities that don't have a soul or conscience. They look (D) like humans, talk (C) like humans and think (B) better than the average person, but they are "Not Human (PU%5)".
. One of these four, or three, components predominates in everyone. For instance thought predominates in "KnowErs but they are Not good with Words (knerPUC2) WorErs, on the other hand, Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that they don't know. And as long as they "Don't Know that they don't Know(PUknkn)" they will not listen (C) to the thinkers (B). Listening is part of communication (C). This is why the elected politicians (C) listen to their advisors (B). The advisors are so smart that they "have the power of election", while the politicians are so good with words that they can lie more convincingly than their advisors can tell the truth.
. The Secret is essentially a textbook for raja yogis, or what in astrology are the water-signs (C). They can believe (pistis in Greek) what others can't. They can "pretend", "make believe" or "act as if" what does not exist on the physical plane, exists on the physical plane. Even if jnana yogis were able to do that, they wouldn't do it because such falsehoods prevent them from finding the "Truth(A1)". Falsehoods are like a monkeywrench in our machinery.
. Now, these communicators (C) tell Everybody that "Everyone has the power to" do what they can do. If they know that this is not true, then this is a lie; if they don't know it, it is a falsehood but the effect is the same.
. People without the ability to "visualize" strongly "Enough(Zu)" will fail in their attempts to materialize what they have visualized. Now they are told: You have not tried hard enough. You have not tried long enough, or you didn't do it right. This turns people that have other talents into failures. Instead of "Actualizing ther own Potential (A1pt)", they are trying to do somebody else's dharma. Their "feeling" (A), that tells them the truth about themseves, tells them: You are a failure. You are not doing what you came down here to do. You are burrying your "talents (Matthew 25:15)". This can lead to depression which in turn can lead to suicide.
. Turning people into failures is not only harmful to these individuals but to society as a whole. Having said this, I can see now why this book was dropped onto my lap. "Nothing happens by accident".
. Let me then sum up what I can say about The Secret after six days of working on it. I got it on Saturday March 17 and this is March 22, 2007.
. Reading this book is like going onto the internet. Unless you know HOW to differentiate between the "Truth(A1)" and falsehood the book can do more harm than good. Trying to do what you can't do is putting you into the mental (C) state the globalists want us to be in.
. The book can turn ordinary water signs (C) into raja yogis. He who has the potential for it shall have more. But I have come accross many passages in that book that will cause these raja yogis to misuse their "Power(TÊ)". The parable of the talents and of the tares (Matthew 13:24)" is relevant here.
. The Secret helps potential raja yogis to become real raja yogis. By their concentrated and sustained "visualization" they create a container on the etheric level (D). The container, being empty, "attracts" it opposite, its content (E8). The law of attraction works on every level "For unto him that hath shall be given .... but from him that hath not [enough] shall be taken away even that which he hath. (Matthew 25:29)".
. In jnana yoga the intellect predominates. Some of the knowledge gained, turns into thinking tools which, in turn, produce more knowledge. In boats we have what is called the breakthrough speed which means that when you have "Enough" speed you shall have more. If you have "Enough" money to start a business, you can get more money simply by providing a good service to your customers. You can also get rich by inventing, developing and marketing a better mousetrap which, again, amounts to giving a good service to others.
. To repeat, there is a lot of truth in that book. I don't want to discourage you from reading it, but I must warn you that among the good seed, there are the tares. and often you must wait for the harvest to tell which is which. You shall always know them by their fruit. We have to take the good with the bad. That's the "Way(A1)", or HOW, it works. We must not stop going to the internet, or reading the newspapers because professional social engineers have sown tares among the good seed. We are bound to get falsehoods along with the truth but there is also a good side to it. ...
because in this way the globalists are forcing us to learn how to think. And, to my knowledge, Lao Tzu is the best teacher to help us with that. "Learning to UnLearn (ÜdPUÜd)" is a Way of removing mental blocks authority figures and social engineers have installed in us. The three characters can also be translated: "Learn to DeProgram" yourself.
"LearnIng is Daily Increasing (doÜd%q$s) your knowledge;
TaoIng is Daily Decreasing ( do A1%q%w)" the falsehoods in it.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . End of The Secret section.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Synchronicity

As I was walking the streets of Toronto I saw a picture of Hugo Chavez on the front page of a program of "The Brunswick Theatre". I went there to check it out, because there was supposed to be a discussion after the film. That seemed like a nice format to me.
. The film on that Thursday happened to be "War on science". It was about three types of belief systems (C): Creationism, Evolutionism and Intelligent-design. Even though the name, intelligent design, was new to me, I was already familiar with the concept and agreed with the ideas as presented in that documentary. This is what my teacher, Mr.B, said about it in his Dramatic Universe, Volume four, page 20: " .... For example, sunlight alone cannot convert water and carbon diaxide into cellulose. It is the highly structured order of the chlorophyll in green leaves that, as it were, 'captures' the available order and turns it to account."
. The problem to be solved here is HOW to “convert water and carbon into cellulose.” Intelligent design is the flowchart, the algorithm or the blueprint. It is a part of a larger whole. The whole emerges though its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. This can be seen very nicely in computer programming: The customer knows WHAT s/he wants. This is described in a “job-description”. It is also known as the problem statement. The programmer knows HOW to develop a theoretical solution to the problem. This is also known as the algorithm. But he doesn’t know HOW to talk to the computer directly. The coder knows HOW to talk to the computer. For routine jobs the coder can be replaced by “black boxes”. Black boxes or a coder give instruction to a computer and it knows HOW to carry them out. These four components are like the links
in a chain. Break one link and the whole process breaks down. This point was very nicely made in the movie.
. The "discussion" after the movie consisted of a two-way conversation between two ladies that didn't give me a chance to get my comment in edgewise. My struggle with that frustration might have been a necessary ingredient that caused me to wake up with a new "Insidgt(72)" the next morning and here it is:
. According to the Bible, God created the world in six Days. On the seventh Day He looked at his creation and saw that it turned out very well. That is the thesis.
. Along comes a man by name of Charles Darwin who said that, all of this could have happened purely by chance. That is the antithesis.
. Mr.B said on page 19 of the same Volume: "The level of order in the Biosphere within its own present is enormously improbable. The odds against its arising by chance are thousands of millions to one." And that's what the position of the advocates of intelligent design is based on. The book was published in 1966. So Mr.B was way ahead of his time.
. As I said before, Mr.B's, or Lao Tzu's "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAda( 3ad" or tetrads can be used as powerful thinking tools. And here I stumbled about a nice example of it.
. You can call the events I have described here, accidental or synchronistic, The facts remain the same. However, your attitude towards these facts, your interpretation of them, can make a difference.

Co-incidents are called Synchronicity when their occurrence is too improbable, or too meaningful.
. He who has shall have more. If you pay "Enough(Zu)" attention to "Co-incidents" you will have more (attention).
. By March 28 I had put out some flyers, titled: The Secret, to promote my blog. In it I said: "Unless the falsehoods in the book are pointed out to you, they can do you harm. When there is a lot of free promotion of a book or a movie, we have to be careful."
. On March 29, I saw the picture of Conrad Black and his wife, Barbara Amiel, on the front page of the Toronto Sun. Why are they in town? ...
To do some "free promotion of a book" by "Bab's ex". The intent of the globalists, as stated in the Protocols of Zion, is to destroy all religions. The book is about Islam. I don't know "Enough" about it to tell you how much, of what is said about it in the book, is true, but I do know what the intent of the book is. And so can you. Islam is the biggest obstacle to the One World Government. For more about its author, George Jonas, see my old web site NewAgeTao.org
. I said in the section about The Secret, above: " 'Repetition(@1)' is a .... part of 'The Secret' and it is also known by the social engineers. Repeat a lie often 'Enough(Zu)' and the dumbed down masses will eventually believe it. That's Social Engineering 101."
. If you go to my old web site, you will know why the picture on the front page of the Toronto Sun has caught my attention. If you pay no attention to synchronicity then, for you, there is no synchronicity; if you pay "Enough" attention to it then, for you, there will be more of it. If you pay no attention to "Reversals($l)" then, for you, there are no "Reversals". If you pay "Enough" attention to them then, for you, there will be more of them.

April 2, 2007. This morning I had an "Insight(72)" that answered a questions I had been asking for over 25 years. Jesus and Lao Tzu have told us that when you ask, you will "Receive(gt)". Just because the getting can take an awful long time it doesn't mean that what they told us isn't true. They didn't say how long it will take. Did they? If we ask for something that takes a long time to get, the fault is ours. When I got my answer this morning, the first thing that came to mind was: What took me so long? The answer to that one came much more quickly: You had mental blocks that prevented you from receiving the answer. The answer was there all the time, I just wasn't ready for it.
. The question arose from the following passage in Ching 10: When "Loving the People and Governing their Country (%0Mn8531) are you Able to do it Without Knowing (abWUkn)? Are-you(HU)"? The reason that this statement was a problem to me was also the reason that it took me so long to solve it. The problem was that I approached this question with certain preconceived "Assumptions(YÜ)" that prevented me from receiving tha answer. You can see that I already knew the answer if you read what I have said earlier in this blog. I was only blind to it here. Since not only I, but you too can learn from my mistake, let me describe to you how I have acquired those mental blocks.
. What has enabled me to appreciate and benefit from the Tao Te Ching was the Bhagavad Gita. Like The Secret it is a textbook for raja yogis. Arjuna was a raja yogi and Krishna was his teacher. Unlike The Secret, it also deals with the other three yogas. Raja yoga is also known as integral yoga or Gurdjieff's Fouth way Schools. Please read the better commentaries on Gita 13.24-25. In other passages Krishna will say that karma yoga is the best. In still other passages he says that jnana yoga is the best. all the while it becomes clear that he loves the bhakits the most.
. This can become confusing. So at 12.1, Arjuna asks his teacher: Who "are the best yogis", the bhaktis or the jnanis? A politician couldn't have done better than Krisna did at 12.2: The bhaktis are "the most devoted to me. But ...." The way to make sense of the seeming confusion is to read Gita 3.35: Do your dharma, the dharma of another is dangerous. The yoga that is best for you is your yoga. Don't waste your time and energy on somebody else's yoga.
. While there is an outline of karma (D), bhakti (A) and jnana yoga in the Gita, to specialize in any one of these yogas you have to find other gurus or books. For me it was only a matter of time (from 1944 to 1970) to get interested "Enough(Zu)" in the Tao Te Ching to keep going on it. But how can a teacher of ynana yoga say that to "Govern a Country" the path of "Knowledge(kn)" is not good enough? If you go over the rest of my blog you can see what my problem was.
. The statement goes counter to what I have said about democracy and still believe to be true: Truth is the lifeblood of democracy. Right now president Chavez of Venezuela is demonstrating it. He weakens some of the power of the mass-media by supporting the private and public media, by himself knowing and communicating the truth and by taking the control of the educational system away from the social engineers. In this way he is enabling the people to think for themselves. In this Way the votes will automatically go to what is best for the people in the long run, instead of voting for those that are very good at controlling the minds of the people. Their "tricks and stratagems (548a)" can only work as long as the people are dumbed down "Enough(Zu)" so that they don't know better.
. Social Engineering is a science that is necessary to make the people believe that they have a democracy when in fact they have a timocracy. All you have to do is read Plato's imperfect description of the four types of government, or read the Ching, and then ask yourself which one of the four predominates. Whoever makes the major decisions is the one in power. That should be simple "Enough(Zu)". For more details you can see the rest of this blog. The point here is that Lao Tzu's statement about the "KnowErs(kner)" is still too hard for me to swallow unless another "Insight(72)" can help me to make sense of it.
. What finally led me to the insight can be called a series of co incidents or synchronicity, the choice is yours, the facts are the same.
. In my flyer on The Secret I said that "The (*a37) means that the character is *a in chapter 37 of the Tao Te Ching". I had to inform newcomers to this blog of these details. Since there are mistakes in this blog, I went to chapter 37 to make sure that the character is really there. See? If it is possible to avoid errors. I try, but I am frustrated of being stuck with this kind work when I have better things to do, like reading chapter 37. Ting(*a37) is only in 37 but it appears more often in the Nei Yeh. As you understand a word better, you understand the sentence it is in better. So the authors of The Secret are right in saying that "Like attracts alike" They could also have spoken of the law correspondence or sympathetic vibrations. They didn't mention complementation but, either Way: He who has "Enough" shall have more.
. So I read the same chapter again, but I brought a bit more knowledge to it, and so it is reasonable to expect to get a bit more out of it. And this time what I got out of it solved my problem.
. The chapter starts with: The "Tao is Always Without Action (A1CnWUdo) But Nothing is Not Done (btWUPUdo) .... Whithout Name'S (WUMg Z)". Ming(Mg) is here followed by the "Sign of the possessive" Chih( Z). This means that Lao Tzu must have meant the mind (C). Whithout the mind interfering, the intellect (B) can help us to be "Without unrealistic or harmful Desires (WUYÜ)".
. Lao Tzu has said the same thing elsewhere in different Ways. So I already knew that, but in this context the lesson was that: Thought (B) can only bring about a change in our belief system if the representations on level C don't counteract it.
. Another "Co-incidence" must be mentioned here: Remember that above I said that the container on level C can either be changed from within or from without. Whithout interference from the mind (C), the intellect (B) can bring about a change in it. B is the higher and C is the lower component within us. The higher is more abstract and more inclusive while the lower is more exclusive and more concrete. Because C is more concrete than B it can prevent B from changing the container (C). This is important stuff and needs to be said better but Communication is not my dharma. "WordErs Don't (C2erPU)" care as much about the truth as they care about "Words(C2)"; "Knowers Don't care as much about Words (knerPUC2)" as they care about their content. If they cared about something other than their own (swa) dharma, they couldn't do it well "Enough(Zu)". If I tried to become a better "WordEr", I mean, if I spend more time and energy on cleaning up this blog, I would produce nothing better for Communicators to Communicate than what they can produce themselves. All I can hope for now is that some Communicator out there can see the logic of what I have just said.

The Way I came across: True Conspiracies, the Illuminati and One World Government,
sounds perfectly reasonable. It just doesn’t feel like that to me, that’s why I put it under this heading. Above, I used the Phrase “One World Government”. So I went to Google to find out more about it. And there was the above web-site. I didn’t have to read much of it to know that it is about the same thing I am talking about. It can shed light on what I am saying here. It is an excellent summary of the Protocols of Zion in which you can get the same information from the horse's mouth. But I wouldn’t add this message to my blog if I didn’t believe that my poorly expressed ideas can tie a lot of loose ends together.

April 5. Since this is important, and since no writer (C) seems to be interested in this, you have to put up with me trying to do the best I can. You have to take the good with the bad. This is not only true of The Secret but also of my blog. English is my second language and that doesn't help either, but I mean more serious errors in the content of my words. The "Insights(72)" I gain today can make insights I have gained yesterday obsolete and misleading. This is even true of the Tao Te Ching: The standard text of Ching 71 is definitely an improvement over the older texts. Concentrating on the content (B) rather than the container (C) can save us a lot of time and energy we might otherwise spent on speculating which "one" is the right text. In fact, different popular versions might be there for the purpose of getting us to think about it. By "popular" I mean not only historical causes of variants but that perhaps more than one copyist might have been inspired to make a change. This is a line of investigation that "WorErs(C2er)". might want to follow up.
. It has become my experience that if you are willing and able to seek, then you will find. One example of this is the fourth interrogative sentence of Ching 10. That one is an exception because over the years I have learned to ask questions the answer of which is easier to find.
. The answer has shed light on many other passages and given rise to new "Insights(72)". The problem that arises from this for me is: Describing it all to you. Communication (C) is not my dharma, that's why I don't like it. That is why before I get to the "important" insight of April 2, I will talk about thinking tools to enable, or "empower" yo to do the thinking (B) yourself.
. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)." But to "Know that they Don't Know (knPUkn)" they have to be able to do at least some thinking.
. You shall know them [falsehoods] by their fruits. This is elaborated on in the parable of the "tares (Matthew13:25)". Once a parable is understood, it becomes a thinking tool which gives us more knowledge. "For unto every one that hath shall be given (Matthew 25:29)". "But he that received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some an hundred fold, some sixty, some thirty. (Matthew 13:23)". Same idea, different words. See what I mean by: Going after the content? ...
. Can you see what Lao Tzu means by: Make "Many Few (TO$q)"? ...
In a sentence there are many words, but the idea that emerges through these words is always one. A complete sentence always consist of a subject, a connective and a predicate; no matter which language is used to convey that one idea, no matter if one "impulse" of the "TriAd( 3ad)) is only implied, it is always there. In order to understand a sentence you must know what a sentence is. When I went to school over 60 years ago, this was still taught. Today this is probably no longer the case because the people have to be dumbed down in order to be controlled.
. From the fact that basic indicative sentences are triads, you can see that triads, and language itself, are thinking tools. With that knowledge alone, you can get more knowledge.
. Around 1970 I gave a lecture at the Toronto Theosophical Society on the parable of the Sower and the Seed. Around that same time Ching 71 happened to come to my attention again. The fact that I became interested "Enough" in the Tao Te Ching, as a result of that, can be called a coincidence or sychronicity. What you call it, doesn't change the facts, but it can change your perception of them.
. Above, I have described a few coincidents, so that you will know WHAT can happen between the lines you are reading here.
. Before I return to that "important" insight from April 2, I will describe a few thinking tools, I am using,, so that you can follow me better.
. "Other Teachers, What they Teach, I Also Teach (mn ZSO#lme08#l) if what They ( Z)" teach is true. If we accept Lao Tzu as our teacher, then he is advising us to not only use the Tao Te Ching, but to compare what he teaches with what other teachers teach.. I have learned that lesson already way back in 1957 from the Theosophists. So what Lao Tzu said here was already known to me. The advantage of knowing WHAT our teacher is talking about is that in this "Way(A1)" we find out about HOW he says things. In the early 1980th I did some work on Ching 63. You can see it in my old web-site NewAgeTao.org I credit that work with leading me up to where I am now. I am still only scratching the surface of this amazing textbook but as all the great teachers say: She, or he, who has shall have more. For instance, if you know one sentence well, that will help you to understand the words in it and the paragraph or chapter, it is a part of, better. In other words, the words, phrases, sentences, paragraphs and chapters, you understand well "Enough(Zu)", become thinking tools that help you to get more thinking tools.
. By studying the Tao Te Ching ,as instructed in chapter 63 and 64, you can personally verify that the law of attraction, as described in The Secret, is real.
. I said, above, that a word can become a thinking tool. A word is a "Name(Mg)" for an idea, a "Thing(wU)" or a principle. It can serve us as a mnemonic, as a reminder to "Make Use" of a tool that is required to solve a particular problem at hand. Not being reminded of using the tool at this particular time means that we missed the opportunity of using it.
. Take the word "Enough(Zu)": Lao Tzu has defined it at better at Ching 46 than you can find in any dictionary, or take the word "Reversal($l)". It is in chapters 25, 40, 65 and 78. "ReversAl ($lad), Tao'S Movement (A1 Z%k)." So you can see that this word refers to a very important "Concept(B1)". I just happened to notice the following sentences at 65: He who "By-means-of Cleverness Governs the State (YI^c8531) is the State'S Malefactor (31 Zâe); he who does Not By-means-of Cleverness Governs the State (PUYIâe8531) is the States Benefactor (31 Z@d). Know This DyAd (knTzdyad)"!", And notice, again, the "Reversal($l)". Chih(^c) is also in 18 which, in turn, sheds light on other chapters. Again, he who has shall have more.
The more you use a tool, the more often it comes to mind when you need it.
. "Work Without Doing (doWUdo)" it yourself. Let your mind (C) with its memory do it for you "Naturally(Tu)" on its own! Wei Wu Wei can be read as an instruction. When you know that the three characters can be read as an instruction, you have the choice of carrying it out. If not, then not. Did you notice the "Reversal($l)" here?
What is true of passages in the Ching is also true of the parables in the Bible:. The more relevant knowledge you can bring to them, the more knowledge you will get out of them. Let me use the Parable of the "tares (Mattheus 13:24)", because it is useful in exposing the lies that are hidden within the truth. "The kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: But while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way." The interesting twist to the story is that "the servants of the householder" noticed the tares and asked their boss: "shall we go and gather them up?
"But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.
"Let both grow together until the harvest. ...." Can you see HOW Jesus, like Lao Tzu, teaches by paradox? If you understand this parable you will also understand the saying : You shall know them by their fruit. ...
The three dots "..." mean please think before reading on. The paradoxes are there for you to think about. Reading (C) answers is not thinking (B). ...
The proof of the pudding is in the eating, the proof of a scientific hypothesis (B) is in its successful and repeatable verification on the physical level (D). Repeatable unsuccessful tests will disprove the hypothesis.
. In his "Occult Science" Rudolf Steiner devotes much space to the proof of spiritual scientific hypotheses or descriptions of what can be seen on the spiritual level (A). Because of the law of correspondence, the same assertions can be made about philosophical hypotheses on the intellectual level (B). On the physical level (D) we need physical tools to prove or disprove a hypothesis, on the intellectual level (B), we need thinking tools to prove or disprove a hypothesis and on the spiritual level (A) we need spiritual tools to prove or disprove them. Very appropriately Steiner devotes much space to teaching the necessary spiritual aptitudes to his readers. Very inappropriately he claims that everybody can learn it. As Krishna and Lao Tzu said: You can't "Actualize a Potential (A1pt)" you don't have but raja yogis, (C) or "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that.
. If a hypothesis works, no matter on which level, then it is true. "True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)." If it is true, then it will work. However, the only level on which we can see the proof with our physical eyes is the physical level (D). That is why material science has the status it has today. But the proof bhakti, jnana and raja yogis can prduce within themselves is much more significant to such individuals. Anyone has eyes to see, but not anyone has "Actualized his or her Potential (A1pt)". With the dumbing down process in full swing, people that have managed to actualize their potential are indeed rare.
. The law of correspondence has come up a number of times, above. Is it a thinking tool? ...
Natural laws are intangible yet real. They are the principles according to which things work. The primary equivalent of Tao(A1) is "Way". Why is "Truth" another dictionary equivalent of the Tao? ...
Because it is the "Way" things work, and if they work, then the Way they work is true. That's HOW the pragmatists (D) have it, and in their own Way they are right. If you understand a natural law well "Enough(Zu)", the question, whether natural laws are thinking tools answers itself. If you understand the Way things work, then you know HOW to use them as thinking tools. The same goes for the law of attraction. You can use it to attract true concepts to you or to attract lots of money to you. In the end the question boils down to: What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and loose his only soul? ... And if you didn't attract the answer to that question, then you are attracting a lot of trouble to yourself. The law of compensation works, whether we understand it or not. We have to reap what we sow, unless somebody found a Way to change the law of cause and effect, or karma. No amount of money or worldly power can change any of the natural laws. Ignoring them isn't going to do much good in the long run.
. We don't know who invented induction and deduction but we owe syllogisms to Aristotle. He has put a minor thesis and a major thesis together in such a Way that the two produce a conclusion.
. We owe Hegelian dialectics to Hegel. Very smart man. It consists of the thesis-antithesis-synthesis "TriAd( 3ad)". Substituting different "impulses" for Hegel's three components gives us different thinking tools. Impulses are the parts of a triad.
. Now we can return to deduction and induction. actually, these are operation, not tools. Deduction is the movement from the general to the particular, and induction is the movement from the particular to the general. You can still find these definitions in older dictionaries, but the social engineers make sure that the truth doesn't find its way into newer dictionaries..
. Deduction is also known as the top-down approach to problem solving. Thank God, some people still have to solve problems. It is a taking apart, an analysis, a movement from whole to part(s). "Right Words Likely Reverse." Induction is the opposite of deduction. It is the bottom-up approach to problem solving. It is an assembly, a movement from part(s) to the whole. Words like deduction, induction, attention etc. are not quite nouns nor quite verbs. They are somewhere in between, some of them leaning a bit more towards verbs, others leaning a bit more towards nouns. Nouns. For instance when we read:: "Energy flows where the attention goes.", or when we take the phrase "paying attention", it seems to be something we can pay with for something else. In this context attention seems to be something concrete like money. But is money concrete, or is it just an idea? ...
. Let's get back to deduction and induction. If these are verbs, they must bring about a change in something. The movement must be from somewhere to somewhere. This is where the whole-part polarity comes in. While, like othe natural laws, polarities are intangible we nevertheless all agree that "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAds( 3ad)" etc. are nouns. The suffix "--ad" tells us that they are. In my mother tongue, German, nouns are capitalized. That seems to "Fix(*a37)" these abstract notions more firmly in people's minds in whose language nouns are capitalized. Just as the whole-part dyad can be used as a thinking tool, so can other dyads be used.
. Edward De Bono has written a number of books on thinking. His flat yellow surface analogy is the one I value most: Since it is an excellent example of HOW the law of attraction works, let me go into it a bit further: Take a pot of hot yellow and pour it into a tray. As it cools, you get a nice model of our mind before any impressions are made on it. Drops of hot water will heat and thus soften the flat yellow surface. If you simply let it cool, it will just harden again without any significant change to the surface, but if you siphon of the yellow while it is soft, you get a lasting crater. This siphoning is analogous to paying attention to a soft spot in our mind. This is what "Fixes" it there. If you pay attention, you bring about a positive or negative change in your mind; if not, then not. Now, by means of this this simple analogy you can see HOW the law ao attraction works: The next drop doesn't have to hit the center of the crater again. Anywhere within the circumference of the crater is good "Enough". In fact, even if the drop hits the circumference, the water will still flow inwards because as the drop melts the yellow beneath it, it already increases the size of the crater. As your attention goes more to the big one, more and more drops fall into it. Other smaller craters are gobbled up. The yellow you have siphoned out of them no longer has to be siphoned out of the big one. Its been a long time since I have read Edward De Bono's book, but he must have done a good job explaining it, otherwise it wouldn't still be so vivid in my memory. What clearly can be seen from this example is that: S/he who has shall have more. Can you see now, from this example, how a flat yellow surface can become a thinking tool? Oh, there is another lesson in this. When reading what De Bono said about dialectics it turned out that he doesn't understand it. If I had allowed that realization to turn me off, I would have missed out on a valuable thinking tool.
. What I am doing here isn't a one-man job. We need a study group of different experts bringing in their expertise. We would have the division of labor in miniature. So please don't let the errors in this blog turn you off.
. A lot more could be said about the question from Ching 10 that has kept me busy for so long, but I will go to Ching 37 because the answer came from there.
. The last sentence of a chapter is usually the conclusion. Ching 37 is no exception. Ting(*a) is the last character in that sentence. Another character I learned more about from the Nei Yeh is Ching(^a). So I brought more knowledge to the sentence and, according to the law of attraction, I got more out of it. S/he who has shall have more. And now I will translate that last sentence as follows: "UnDesire By-means-of Tranquility (PUYÜYI^a) Heaven and the two levels Below it Will then Naturally Fix (Tn -41Tu*a)" themselves.
. Ting40(*a). Tzu(Tu) can also mean itSelf. Heaven (B), mind (C) and body (D) will align themselves to your soul (A) if it gets rid of some unrealistic and harmful "Expectations(YÜ)".
. Normally we assume that our soul is perfect, but we know from Transactional Analysis that the Child (A) in us can suffer from serious trauma. About that is the problem Lao Tzu was addressing over two thousand years ago before we had Transactional Analysis. Let us go to the beginning of the chapter to see how Lao Tzu is leading up to this conclusion.

The "Tao is Always Without intellectual, mental and physical Action (A1CnWUdo)
But Nothing gets Not Done (btWUPUdo). if
"Princes and Kings Were Able to Adopt This as a policy (Üa EJOab40 Z) then
All Things Will Naturally Transform (WnwU41Tuäo). having
"Transformed But Desires still Arise (äobtYÜ%c)
I Would Curb Them By-means-of (my41*b ZYI) the
Without Name'S Natural-state (WUMg Z^i).
"Without Name'S Natural-state (WUMg Z^i)
One Also Can Eliminate unrealistic and harmful Desires (he0841WUYÜ). therefore
"UnDesire By-means-of Tranquility (PUYÜYI^a) and
Heaven humanity and earth Below it (Tn -)
Will Naturally Fix (41Tu*a)" themselves.

. Chên167(*b) "To repress; protection". Followed by Shou(40), we get: "to guard; to keep watch." Followed by Ting(*a). we get: "to soothe; to calm; to settle down. Followed by Hsin(Hs), we get: "to quiet the mind. (6906)". We must pay attention to these words because Lao Tzu doesn't pick them randomly. As you can see, a good dictionary can be a "Gold (Rad. 167) mine for ideas.
The difficult phrase: "Without Name'S Natural-state", seems to be the equivalent of Tranquility(^i)". "Name(Mg)" is on level C. Without the mind (C) interfering with the intellect (B), the intellect can bring about desirable changes in the mind. The intellect, being "Weaker(Jo)" than the mind can only accomplish this if the mind is willing to change. The intellectual center is more inclusive but weaker than our emotional center (C). By means of self-observation we can see that. According to the law of correspondence, B is to C, as A is to B. Thus A has the big holographic picture, but it is not as concrete as B, and so it can only bring a desirable change in B with B's cooperation. The question at 10.4 can thus be rephrased as follows: Are you able to govern without your intellect exercising its "Natural-tendencies(^i)"? Are you willing to allow A to help you? Will you accept A's advise?
. We can only understand a sentence as well as we understand the words and phrases in it. The difficult phrase and its substitute, Ching(^i), make it difficult to understand the sentences they are in, more fully. It will help to look up Ching174 in dictionaries and in different translations.
. Any creative process begins with a problem to be solved (A). Then comes the intellectual analysis of the problem (B). Then comes the mental (C) work which can consist of deciding on how parts of the problem, as analyzed by (B), can be solved by trial and error (D).
. P'u(^i), Ching(^a) and Ting(*) are bottlenecks that prevent me to do as good an interpretation of Ching 37 as I would like to. These characters are in the Nei Yeh, and if I had a Dictionary-Concordance for it, I could do a better job.
. Actually, I have already imagined (A) how it would look like and I have "planed(*a63)" (B) HOW to do it. All I have to do is to take the time to let my "Mind(Hs)" (C) tell my fingers (D) which keys to press on my keyboard (E8).
. "He who finds it Easy to make Promises will Necessarily (he$j*XPI)" find it difficult to keep them. As much as I dislike work that is not my dharma, having "Committed(*X (No149))" myself in writing, I better start working on this darn job.
WELL, I QUIT that darn job, but I tried and I got some very valuable ideas out of that frustrating effort. It will take a bit of time to put it together, but it will be worth waiting for. What I can say already now is that: Without Lao Tzu's help you can't interpret that text. If it were possible, others would have already done it without his help.

Relaxing, and looking up ^a on Table Two, we first come to 5c: "When the mind is tranquil and the vital breath is regular (Hs^a8b5c)". When there is normal capitalization, I am using Roth's translation.
. We can verify the accuracy of the first three characters ourselves but to verify 5c,4 (the character at chapter 5, line 3, column 4) we have to accept Roth's equivalents. If you do the work required to verify the translation, you are progressinf from being a passive reader to being an active student. For me, doing that kind of work, means doing the work that is not my dharma. And as Krishna has told us at Gita 3.35, that kind of thing is "dangerous". Let me do it, just to show you what I mean: The left component of 5c,4 looks like Wang( E) to me. Its not the phonetic and not Rad. 95 Star gave us. But right next to it, Rad. 96, looks promising, and it is. We get Li96 on page 295 of "The Five Thousand Dictionary". We get: "To manage; notice; principles, reason, abstract right." You need this information to do your own interpretation. You also need a concordance to see how other translators have translated the character in the different contexts in which the poet(s) or Lao Tzu have placed it. Li96 is not in the Ching.
. After this work, we can say: If your "Mind is Tranquil and your Breath is Noticed" or observed, what then? ...
5d The "Tao Will Possibly Stop (A1$ppt$i."
The Way and the Truth is always in us but we don't "Stop" long "Enough(Zu)" to "Notice" it.
. Returning to Table Two, we get 5m next:
"Cultivate your Mind! make Tranquil your Thoughts (5mHs^a5m))"!
. On page 112, Roth gives us the Phonetic of 5m,1. It is Hsiu. The first thing I check is whether it is in the Ching. Yes it is. It is only in chapter 54, but there Star tells us that it is Rad 9. Even if a character is not in the Ching, it is still a good idea to look there first because it is much easier to find a character in the relatively small Dictionary-Concordance than in a regular dictionary. I am really grateful to Star for all the time he has saved me.
. Why can't somebody do the same kind of work on the Nei Yeh? Why do I have to invest time and energy in work that is not my dharma. That is time and energy I can't invest in my own dharma. And because it is not my own I have to invest more energy in it than a "WordEr(C2er)" has to for doing a better job.
. Because the poets and Lao Tzu have done such a good job, I can do my dharma. Because "KnowErs(kner) do their dharma Communicators (C) can do theirs, but as Lao Tzu said: The "WordErs Don't Understand (C2erPUkn)" that. Why can't Lao Tzu be wrong, just that one time?
. The bottom component of 5m,4 is Hsin(Hs). It is Rad 61. Maybe that's the radical of 5m,4. Yes it is. 5m,4 is Yi61. It means: "Thought, will, intention". 5m,4 is not in the Ching. Can you see from this example how much time Star is saving me. If I wanted to know whether an interesting character we have in the Ching is also in the Nei Yeh, I would have to go through a lot of work, and even then I can't be sure because I am not a "WordEr(C2er)". There is only so much time I am willing to spend on looking at a page to see whether the character is on it. That is why I am not sure whether my Dictionary-Concordance in the first file of this blog is complete. So Star is saving me a lot of time because he has done an excellent job. We can all save each other's time by doing a good job. And we can only do that by doing our dharma. By doing our dharma, we "enable" others to do theirs. A jack of all trades can never excel at any one of them. The "wicked and slothful servant (Matthew 25:26)" didn't get cast "into outer darkness" because he has buried somebody else's "talent" but because he as buried his own. We can't "Actualize (somebody else's) Potential (A1pt)" because we don't have it. And so we will not bee cast into outer darkness for not doing what we are unable to do. We have here an excellent example of the law of attraction at work.
. The next place we find "Tranquility(^a)" is at 7c. The connective in the first three lines of chapter 7 is %u. Roth has "Ruling-principle" for it and that seems to be the best choice in this context. %u is not only the connective in each of the first three sentences, but it connects the first three sentences. In fact, they make up the first paragraph of 7. The next three lines form the second paragraph. Then comes the "ThereFore the Wise Man (SiKUwsmn)" which is followed by a two-line conclusion.
. The three sentences that make up the first paragraph are each three characters long: We have there: The subject, followed by the connective, followed by the predicate. Here it is:

"Heaven's Ruling-principle is Alignment (Tn%n%8),
Earth's Ruling-principle is Uniformity (TI%n7b) and
Man's Ruling-principle is Tranquility (mn%n^a)."

Until I find 7b,3 in an earlier chapter, it will be 7b. It is only in Ching 35, so we have no other identifier for it. Star tells us that it is P'ing51: "Even, level, tranquil; to weigh; uniform, equitable". Since "Tranquility" is one of the choices translators have, the question arises: What is the difference between the human level (C) and the physical level (D)? ...
By taking the time to think about the question, you are preparing yourself for the answer. This preparation may attract the answer to you or, if that doesn't happen, you are better prepared for the answer I came up with, which may not be the right one. The only Way you can be sure is by doing your own thinking.. Here is my guess: ...
What is "Tranquility" to our emotional center (C) is evenness, ...., uniformity, or equitability, to our moving center (D). The last option brings liberty (B), equality and the brotherhood of man (C) to mind.
. In Ching 25 "Man(mn)" is equated to the "King( E)". If you look at Wang( E), you can see why I have picked E as its identifier: The top line symbolizes heaven, the middle line symbolizes man and the bottom line symbolizes earth. Since the Chinese speaking reader is expected to know this symbolism of their language, we have to familiarize ourselves with it as well, if we want to understand what the poet(s) or Lao Tzu are saying. Applying this bit of knowledge to Nei Yeh 7.1, we can say heaven is associated with %8, earth with 7b and man with ^a.
We went from here to chapter 37 to find out more about Ting(8c). We came back here to find out more about ^a and 8c. Let's go to 8c. Let us start reading at 8a: If you are
"Able to Align and Able to be Tranquil (ab%8ab^a)
Then you are a Prince who is Able to Fix (Ja8bab8b)" Fix what? ...
8c "Fix the Mind In your Center (8bHsÜp =)"! If we read line three as an instruction, then we can only execute if we understand it.
"Nobody who is unable to understand an instruction is Able to Execute (MOabpr)" it.
. 8b,2 is Hai30. It is not in the Ching. “This is [picture of] hou ( a man [picture] who orders [ picture of the mouth, K'ou30], a prince .... ) reversed to indicate the subordinate or servant who receives the orders. (ACC)." The dictionary tells us that. So, obviously, the Chinese speaking reader, student or translator is expected to know that. What does this bit of information from the dictionary tell us? ...

After I got "The Original Tao" by Harold D Roth, the Nei Yeh, I went to the internet to find out more about it. Since I am not a net-worker, I didn't get too far with that. But purely by "acident" I stumbled on something else. What do you expect from novices like me? It was information on "The Handbook of the Navigator" by Eric J. Pepin. It said there that it was available at Chapters. Indigo, The World's Biggest Bookstore, same thing,, same owners. .... The book wasn't even on their computer. Now, that is strange. The way they are putting the smaller bookstores out of business is having more books on their shelves than the smaller ones have space for. How come they don't even have this one on their computer, so you can't even order it through them. Actually, the did have David Icke's books on their computer, but they still will not order it for you. Even one of the smaller bookstores person told me that his books are banned. What does that tell us about books that are banned? ...
We are not supposed to read them. What can we find out about books that get a lot of free promotion and that are all over the shelves of the big bookstore conglomerate? ...
That we are supposed to read them.
. What can Lao Tzu tell us about people that buy up newspapers and bookstores? ...
"Below average People, when they Hear the Truth ( -Üp^dA1) will
Greatly Ridicule It (TA*a Z). if they did Not Ridicule (PU*a) it, then we would have
Not Enough Means To find out the Truth (PUZuYIA1."
. Hsiao118(*a41) means "To lough .... ridicule". To these "Below( -) average people "Ridicule" is used to discredit people that try to tell us the "Truth(A1)". Thei can help us to "Identify(Mg)" the truth because the know it. Just because they know what they don't want us to know doesn't mean that it isn't true. This is why, if they didn't ridicule it we don't have enough means to identify the truth. Lao Tzu said right at the begining of his book: "Identify the Identifiable (MgptMg)"!. Throughout his book, he tells us HOW to carry out his instructions. Readers will just read and perhaps comment on his words. He says: "My Words are Very Easy to Understand, Very Easy if you Carry-out (myC2%tezkn%tezpr)" my instructions. What good is just reading, or translating, instructions, imperative sentences, the purpose of which is to be carried out?
. If we have learned the above two lessons from Lao Tzu,, what can we learn from the fact that David Icke's books are banned? ... He works for the globalists in that he puts us into the victim state of consciousness, but ...
the truth in his books is doing more harm than good to the globalists. Coming back now to "The Handbook of the Navigator" ...
I am now half through Pepin's book. He doesn't like religions. There is some justification in that. Religions have been infiltrated for centuries, just read the Protocols of Zion, but to reject them altogether, is throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Parable of the tares (Matthew 13:24) tells us that falsehoods are bound to creep in there but it also tells us HOW to deal with them. If it were not for the bad guys, we wouldn't learn HOW to think, there would be no challenge to practice it. Today you can't go onto the internet, or read a newspaper, without using your head. I went over an analysis I did of an article by George Jonas in my old web-site NewAgeTao.org I did it because I knew where he was coming from. Reading it now, I find it hard to follow my thought, but I know it is there. It just takes a lot of work, even for me to refresh my memory. and I am not motivated to get back into that when no "WordEr(C2er)" is willing to make it worth my while.
. So we found out from the globalits that we are not supposed to read The Handbook of the Navigator, which means to me that I have to read it. Pepin's dislike of religion has to be compensated but other than that, I found nothing seriously wrong with that book. There are no dangerous lies hidden under a sugarcoating of truth. If there are, the sugarcoating is so thick that I didn't get there yet. If as many people read The Handbook as are reading The Secret, it will not only undo the damage The Secret is doing but it will do more harm to the globalists than good. Why else would they ban this book? ...
. In fact, when I came to chapter six I had no choice but to interrupt my work on the Nei Yeh to share with you what I have learned from this book so far.
. I will put that new section in front of the Text-Commentary file. That will slow it down, but being in front, I can still squeze it into the file in which this kind of work belongs.
. I may not have my first installment in there tomorrow, but just keep tuning into it once in a while.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . End of new Section

My latest insights are in the "Dictionary" file. Just click on it.

Hiya Pete, did you get the book via eBay?... I have to leave feedback.. (set your hearts on the greatest gift)...? or is it a different one? Give us a call plse :-) Friend is not having the car for a bit.. shucks!! GuruE

>>>>Hey Internet Guru: I got a different book. I went to the church you told me to go to but your friend was not there. What now? I want to thank you for twisting my arm to get me on this blog. Without you fulfilling your contract, none of this would happen!!! <<<<<>