Problem here. We have to continue at file #2
I have a problem with blogspot.
January 10, 2012 . . . . . . . ACIM
2:3.5,12: “They [the “Sons”] must learn to look upon the world as a means of healing the separation.” …
The “world” is supposed to be “a means of healing the separation.” How can it be? …
Ching 42.1,1: The “Tao is a prerequisite for Producing the One (A1Sg_1).”, the
42.1,2: “One is a prerequisite for Producing the Two (_1Sg_2), the
42.1,3: “Two is a prerequisite for Producing the Three (_2Sg_3)” and the
42.1,4: “Three is a prerequisite for Producing All Things (_3SgWnwU)” in the world.
. While the “DyAd(dyad)” is not the only cause of the world but, if one of the “Four(_4)” causes were missing, there would be no world.
. The question is now: How can the “separation”, which is one of the four causes of the existence of “the world”, be looked upon “as a means of healing the separation”? …
You can’t get an answer without the right question. I shall leave you with this one. …
. We have already done a few sentences that came up under “creat” and which have “learn” in it as well. They lead up to.
2:4.3,5: “It [the bio-computer] has no power in itself to introduce actual learning errors.”
Computers are designed to carryout instructions. They are not designed “to introduce actual learning errors.”
2:4.3,6: “The body, if properly understood [if understood as our bio-computer (D)], shares the invulnerability of the Atonement to two-edged application.” …
If the program is perfect, then the computer, which executes it, produces a perfect output. That the computer “shares the invulnerability of the Atonement to two-edged application” sounds a bit confusing to me. It seems to me that the AUTHOR has no intention of making it comprehensible.
. Why doesn’t he say that the program and the computer, which runs it, are supplying the customer’s demand (A)? …
What does he mean by “The body …. shares the invulnerability of the Atonement [of the perfect program] to two-edged application”? …
We must learn to try the basic identifiers on for size. This has to become an automatic (E6).”application” of computation (C). Try ‘depreciation’ on for size here.
2:5.1,9: “The body does not exist except as a learning device for the mind. (10) This learning device is not subject to errors of its own, because it cannot create. (11) It is obvious, then, that inducing the mind [B] to give up its miscreations [by means of programming the mind (C)] is the only application of creative ability that is truly meaningful” to the uncritical reader. ‘Depreciation’.
. We have worked on the last sentence before. I have just repeated it here to show how much more “meaningful” a sentence becomes in the larger context and if we have dealt with the same “meaning” before. When the repetitions are that obvious, they are easy to see.
2:5.5.6: “By affirming this [that all the intellect creates are “miscreations”] you release the mind from overevaluating its own learning device, and restore mind to its true position as the learner.” ‘Depreciation’, ‘contemplation’ and ‘opposition’. ‘Opposition’ comes in automatically (E6) because ‘depreciation’ and 'contemplation’, or appreciation, are opposites. Since this is true, and repeated often “Enough(Zu)”, the rest of the sentence is more likely to be “accept”ed uncritically. The “true position as the learner” is to believe that all of what the AUTHOR teaches is the truth.
2:5.6,1: “It should be emphasized again that the body does not learn any more than it creates.”
. Let me repeat “again” that our bio-computer “does not learn any more than it creates.” Computers are designed to execute instructions. That is all.
2:5.6,2: “As a learning device it merely follows the learner, but if it falsely endowed with self-initiation, it becomes a serious obstruction to the very learning it should facilitate.”
. Bio-computers, like ordinary computers have no choice about whether to execute an instruction or not. They don’t have the option to go on strike. They also have no choice as to how to execute the instructions they are given by us or the AUTHOR. They are designed to carryout instructions in a predetermined way. As we bring the truth in the AUTHOR’s sentences to light, the falsehoods in them tend to come to light as well.
2:5.6,5: “The mind, however, can bring its illumination to the body by recognizing that it is not the learner, and is therefore unamenable to learning. (6) The body is, however, easily brought into alignment [by programming it] with a mind that has learned to look beyond it toward the light.”
. Obviously the bio-computer (D) is not the mind (C). We or the AUTHOR bring our program to the mind (C) and the mind causes our bio-computer to execute it. This sentence is true whether we or the AUTHOR program the mind.
. Simply because a statement is true the AUTHOR’s program is slipped past the intellect (B) into the mind (C).
2:5.7,1: “Corrective learning always begins with the awakening of spirit and the turning away from the belief in physical sight.” …
. 2:4.3,1 to 2:4.3,4 are quoted in full, in the previous section, below this one. Here we will do the interpretation of these four sentences.
2:4.3,1c: “…. The body is a learning device for the” intellect (B) or the mind (C).
. By “body” (D) is meant here our bio-computer (D).
2:4.3,2: Bio-computers “are not lessons in themselves.”
. As computers are designed to execute instructions so our bio-computers are intelligently designed to execute instruction. As an ordinary computer has not choice about whether to execute an instruction or not or how to execute them so our bio-computer has no choice in this matter.
2:4.3,3: If we feed our own program into our bio-computer, it will “facilitate learning” because it shows us whether our thinking (B) and coding (C) was done correctly or not.; if we allow the AUTHOR to feed his program into our computer, it will “facilitate” what the AUTOR calls “learning”. Let us FIND “learn”
1:7.2,5: “Learning to do this [to “enlarge your perception] is the body’s only true usefulness.”
. According to the AUTHOR, the body is not useful for carrying out instructions but “only” for using its physical (D) senses to perceive what he wants us to perceive. And what we perceive is determined by the program that is fed into our bio-computer. And accepting the AUTHOR's program in your mind (C) is called “learning” in the COURSE.
1:7.4,1: “This is a course in mind training [or programming]. (2) All learning involves attention and study at some level.” True. To learn you have to pay “attention and study your lessons. What is not so obvious, is that Programming does require “attention and study” of the customer;s demand. This interpretation may seem farfetched but we always have to look for both “meanings”: The obvious one and the hidden one.
1:7.4,6: “However, as you study these earlier sections, you will begin to see some of the implications that will be amplified [repeated] later on.”
2:2.3,6: “Once you have learned to consider these questions [“what do you treasure, and how much do you treasure it?”] and to bring them into all your actions, you will have little difficulty in clarifying the means.”
. All intentional thinking operations begin with “questions”. The answers you get from the AUTHOR are ideas (B), which are repeated until they are representations (C). And then you automatically (E6) “bring them into all your actions”. And here “actions” can be intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D). When you are programmed, “you will have little difficulty in” carrying out the instructions. You will be doing it automatically, as if in your sleep.
2:2.5,1: “The Atonement [the program] was built into the space-time belief [knowledge (B), representations {C) and experience (D)] to set a limit on the need for the belief itself, and ultimately to make learning complete.”
. The AUTHOR must “set a limit on the need for the belief” (C) or the representations (C) we have of our “space-time” reality. Our Yang is as real as the AUTHOR’s Yin. The AUTHOR has Yang in his center and we have Yin in ours. “Not Knowing that deep down we Know (PUknkn) is Sick(@p)”. The AUTHOR knows it and as we “learn” more it becomes clearer that he doesn’t want us to know. Why do we have to work so hard on his sentences if he didn’t use “obscurantism”? …
2:2.5,2: “The Atonement is the final lesson. (3) Learning itself, like the classrooms in which it occurs, is temporary. (4) The ability to learn has no value when change is no longer necessary [possible]. (5) The eternally creative have nothing to learn.” …
Creative Energy (E3) is on the other side of the “Door” (A). It can be called “eternally creative” because no change is possible on the other side.
. “Before and After Mutually produce Sequence (#c60mt#e)”, or time. Time is the idea of change in the ever unchangeable. To replace the AUTHOR’s falsehoods with the truth, we have to seek the truth in order to find it. The AUTOR is using social engineering to prevent us from doing that. However, as we succeed in interpreting his sentences, he himself helps us to find out the truth and then deceiving us becomes more difficult. In other words, his efforts become counterproductive. If a communicator (C) were to network (C) these ideas properly it would be only a matter of time when the paradigm shift is going to happen. Then the Law of Attraction is going to work for us instead of for our political masters.
2:2.5,6: “You can learn to improve your perceptions, and can become a better and better learner.” This is true whether you are an uncritical reader or a critical one. By agreeing with the truth in the AUTHOR’s sentences you are “passively condoning” the falsehoods in them. Just because you are not aware of what he is doing to your mind, it doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have the intended effect on your mind.
2:2.5,8: “Only while there is a belief in differences is learning meaningful.”
. “The DyAd (Tzdyad) is a Unit Originally ($1Cu) But it is Differentiated by Identifying (btâoMg)” its poles. The “Identifying of the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)” is done by the intellect (B). So, as long as your intellect is working properly, “is learning meaningful.”
. I have studied the Tao Te Ching since 1970 with growing fascination. Only now do I see how helpful Lao Tzu is with interpreting the AUTHOR’s sentences.
2:3.6,12: “They [the AUTHOR’s “Sons”] must learn to look upon the world as a means of healing the separation.” …
===================================================
January 7, 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
2:4.3,1: “Only the mind can create because spirit has already been created, and the body is a learning device for the mind.”
. This is a tough one. It is a good example of the AUTHOR’s obscurantism. We know that the “body” is on level D but what level is “spirit” on? …
Any purposeful thinking operation starts with a question: What levels is “spirit” on? …
According to Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE, spirit would be the 7th, 6th and 5th Spheres, or Lokas. According to J.G. Bennett’s ENERGIES it is the E1-E2-E3 triad.
E3 is the outcome of this triad. It is Creative Energy (E3) and Swami Sri Yukteswar tells us that this is the sphere “wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates.”
. A is the connective in the E3-E4-E5 triad. The “idea of separate existence …. Originates” at E3. It is the initiating impulse of this triad, E4 (A) is the connective and E5 (B) is the outcome of this triad. The outcome at B is always a thought (B).
. Our soul (A) is with one foot in the “eternal” (E3) and the other in “time” (E5), but A itself is the Door (E4) between the two worlds.
. What I have given you here is untested theory (B). How can it be tested? …
If you want to test a theory, you must first have a theory. The purpose of the test (D) is to find out whether the theory works as predicted or not. If it works then in pragmatism it is called true; if not then not.
. Here you have the practical application of semiotics. The thinkers (B) produce the theory, The talkers (C) translate the theory into a series of instructions (C) and the pragmatists (D) carry them out. The customer (A) produces the demand and Semiotics (B-C-D) produces the supply. Why isn’t that taught in school? …
It is not that our political masters don’t know it. Just Google Morris semiotics
. After all of this work, we still can’t say that: “spirit” is A, but it comes closest to A and it comes through A.
. Now let us look at “mind”. If you translate “mind” into Chinese the safest character to use is Hsin(Hs) because it can mean “Heart”(A), “Head” (B) or “Mind” (C), or any two of them or all three of them. If I were to translate it into German, I would translate it as “Gemüt” This idea comes from Lindeman’s footnote and still needs to be evaluated.
. When Steiner said: “the heart, the Gemüt (das Herz, das Gemüt)”, it implies that the heart (A) is part of the Gemüt (A-B-C). When he says again ”the heart and the Gemüt (das Herz.und das Gemü)”, it could mean: Heart (A) and intellect (B) and mind (C) “do not create what it is that moves them to act. They presuppose it and take it into their domain. (Lindeman)”. This brings us to the AUTHOR’s “prerequisite” Hsin(Hs (A-B-C)) is the “prerequisite” for intentional physical (D) action. Still in the same paragraph, Steiner comes to “what it is that moves them [A, B and D] to act”. It is the representation (C)
. Biting off something that is hard to chew has its advantages. I have studied Steiner’s PHILOSOPHY for a long time but it is only now, thanks to Lindeman’s footnote, that I realized that there is an equivalent for Hsin(Hs) in my mother tongue.
. 2:4.3,1 can be broken down into three sentences:
2:4.3,1a” Only the mind can create”. True or false? …
2:4.3,1b: “spirit has already been created”. This is true.
2:4.3,1c: “the body is a learning device for the mind.” In what sense is that true? …
2:4.3,1a: The mind (C) and the mind (B) can create. If one of them can’t create then the B-C-D triad can’t create, it can’t supply the demand which comes from the “spirit” through A.
2:4.3,1b: The “spirit” is in the “eternal” time and space-less dimension. If it is to “create” it must do so in our world of time and space. There can be no “creation” outside of time.
2:4.3,1 c: In what sense is our body “a learning device” for mind (C) or mind (B)? …
The prove of the pudding is in the eating. A-B-C is the “prerequisite” for physical action. Neither the customer (A), nor the thinkers (B), nor the communicators (C) can know whether the demand of the customer can be supplied before the pragmatists (D) execute C’s instructions. Having been a computer programmer for nine years I can say that what I know (B) about it now, the representations (C) of it, I didn’t learn in the seven Week IBM computer programming course. I learned that from the IBM 1401 computer. Every time I have made a mistake, the computer has made sure that I know it.
. But is calling our body “a learning device” really the best thing to call it or do we have a bit of “obscurantism” (please Google it) here? …
What would be more accurate or meaningful to call it? …
Our body (D) is a manifestation devise for our mind (C). No body (D), no manifestation (D).
If the subcontractors (D) go on strike there is nobody to carryout the contractor’s (C) instructions.
. As you can see from the hard time I have with 2:4.3,1, the concept I am trying to get across is not an easy one, but now that you understand this concept a bit better, don’t you think that the AUTHOR cold have made it a bit clearer for us? …
What is wrong with calling “the body [a stepping down] …. Device? …
He must know that it is, so why not say it? …
We are stepping down devices for the “spirit”, individually and collectively. In the E3-A-B triad, E3 is on the other side of the “Door” (A) and the intellect (B) is on this side.
. The vision of A is stepped down to thought (B), the thought is stepped down to word (C) and word is stepped down to deed (D).
. In the timeless dimension, where the AUTHOR is, all knowledge is one. That is why there is omniscience. The Author knows everything instantly, without thinking, what we have to figure out the hard way. So if he is twisting the truth around, he is doing it intentionally.
2:4.3,2: “Learning devices are not lessons in themselves. (3) Their purpose [the AUTHOR’s purpose] is merely to facilitate learning [really?]. (4) The worst a faulty use of a learning device can do is to fail to facilitate learning.” …
=======================================================
. The tetrad, the AUTHOR has described from 2:1.1,9 to 2:1.1,12, helps us to “Identify many IdentifiAble (MgptMg)” falsehoods in the COURSE. The better we understand it, the more obvious the “mistakes” become. Knowing that the AUTHOR knows the tetrad means that the “mistakes” are, not unintentional but that they are outright lies.
. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy (A). We are engaged in an ideological war. We are fighting falsehoods with the “Truth(A1)”. And the Ching and the Neiye are on our side.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Neiye 10:
10a: If an “Orderly Hsin [A-B-C] is In our Center (85HsÜp_=)” then
10b: “Orderly Words (or Instructions (C)) Come-out Of our Mouths (85C2Cuto@l)”
10c: “Orderly Tasks are Conferred To Others (85D2*atomn)” and
10d: “If they are carried out Then (Ja18) Heaven Below, Orderly Yi (TnTI85Yi).”
*a = Chia19. The communicators (C) and the pragmatists (D) are “Below” “Heaven” (B). There we have a description of semiotics. Every time you read about it or, better still, every time you explain it to somebody, your knowledge of semiotics is stepped down and, after “Enough(Zu)” repetitions your knowledge (B) of semiotics becomes a representation (C) of semiotics. Here we have a practical application of an abstract philosophical concept. The reason such an obvious thing is not taught in school is because our educational system is controlled by the social engineers. Because they know semiotics, they don’t want us to know it. We need some bright students to ask their teacher some pointed questions in front of the class.
. There are two interesting lines in chapter 6 of the Neiye:
6j: The “All Tao (1aA1) ….” That would be the “Big Tao (TAA1)” in the Ching.
6l: “All Things (WnwU) By-means-of-it are Produced (YISg),” Does that sound familiar? …
It does if you have understood Ching 42.1. The last FIND for “creat” was 2:4.2,6.
2:4.2,8: “The whole distortion that made magic rests on the belief that there is a creative ability in matter which the mind cannot control.” Is that knowledge a “distortion”? …
Here we have a definition of what the AUTHOR means by magic. It “rests on the belief that there is a creative ability in matter the mind cannot control.” Is that true? …
If you know the tetrad then you also know that the AUTHOR knows it. Then, when he makes a false statement about it we know that he didn’t make a mistake but that he is lying to us.
. Whether the mind is programmed by us, or by the AUTHOR, the program in it “controls” the body (D) as a computer program (C) “controls” the computer (D). The AUTHOR wouldn’t do all of this programming in his COURSE if he didn’t know that the mind (C) is programmable. And he knows that it can control the body (D). He also knows that he can control the intellect (B) by means of the program in the mind. Why? …
Because it is intelligently (B) programmed and because it is faster than the intellect. Through our bodies (D), we “control” “matter” (D). Saying that “the belief that …. the mind cannot control” “matter” is a “distortion”, is a blatant lie.
. We are a creative “Unit($1)” consisting of soul (A), intellect (B), mind (C) and body (D). These “sources, or parts of the tetrad, are like links in a chain. If even one part of us is not creative then the whole of us is not creative
2:7.6.3: “The Sonship in its Oneness transcends the sum of its parts.” The AUTHOR knows that if the “Sonship” is to work efficiently, or “creatively”, then each part of it must be creative. At 2:4.2,8 he tells us that the “mind” can’t do its job. What are we supposed to believe? …
2:4.2,9: “This error can take two forms; it can be believed that the mind can miscreate in the body or that the body can miscreate in the mind.” ‘Opposition’.
. Here “mind” can be mind (C) or mind (B). I wonder how passages like this are translated into languages that don’t have this double meaning of this word.
. Steiner said at the end of the first chapter of his PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM:
. “This is not to assert by any means that all our action flows only out of the sober deliberations of our intellect (Lindeman’s translation).” The word ”intellect” is one equivalent of mind. Steiner used the word “Verstand”, which is a dictionary equivalent of mind. In the same second last paragraph Steiner said: “The heart [A], the GEMÜT* come here into their own. Without a doubt. But the heart and the GEMÜT do not create what it is that moves us to act.” Lindeman has a footnote here: “*We have no word for GEMÜT in English. It points more to the totality of man’s inner being than ‘heart’ [A] does.”
. GEMÜT seems to be a nice equivalent of the Chinese Hsin(Hs) (A-B-C). But Steiner said himself that “all our actions” do not flow “only out of …. our intellect.” Physical actions don’t flow out our intellect in the sense of “Verstand” (B) but out of our mind (C). That Steiner means the mind (C) becomes clear when still in the same paragraph he comes to the representation (C). They determine what we see and what we do.
. Wrestling with differences in different languages (C) belongs in the syntactic dimension (C) of semiotics. That is what our political masters have semiotics reduced to. And they have a point: C is the connective in the B-C-D triad. But you can already see from the brief analysis we have done of a single word, that syntactics (C) can’t do it without semantics (B) and pragmatics (D). Semiotics is not syntactics, or semantics, or pragmatics (D) but B and C and D. B-C-D is one “Unit($1)”. As I said: Some bright students have to make themselves representations of semiotics by discussing it with each other first and then asking the teacher some questions he can’t answer, or is not allowed to answer, in front of the class.
2:4.2,10: “When it is understood that the mind, the only level of creation, cannot create beyond itself, neither type of confusion [created by the AUTHOR right here] need to occur.” There is another bit of disinformation in this sentence. Can you see it? …
Whether by “mind” is meant mind (C) or intellect (B) neither of them is “the only level of creation and both of them “create beyond them selves”. B enables C to create and C enables D to create.
2:4.3,1: “Only the mind can create because spirit [the “eternal”] has already been created, and the body is a learning device for the mind.” …
=======================================================
2:2.5,7: “This will bring you into closer and closer accord with the Sonship [with the AUTHOR’s teaching], but the Sonship [the teaching] itself is a perfect creation and perfection is not a matter of degree.” …
Where is his teaching “not a matter of degree”? …
On our side of the “Door” (A) or on his side? …
Our soul (A) is on the “Boundary(*1)” between “time” and “eternity”. In time first comes the perfect-able, then comes the perfecting, and then comes the perfected. This is not possible where the AUTHOR is coming from because there is no time for doing anything. There “perfection is not a matter of degree”, there everything is in the “eternal” NOW.
. This sentence is a “Repetition(@1)”. I have come back to it because what I have added here now was an omission in the December 31 section.
. If you Google: acim CIA cult then you get very valuable information about Helen Schucman and William Thetford. To assume that Helen made it all up is overestimating her and underestimating the social engineering that is done by means of the COURSE. Lao Tzu said in chapter 69: Of “Calamities There-is-none Greater Than (ÜfMOTAto)
Underestimating your Enemy ($jâb).” Another thing that is pointed out on the internet is that William Thetford is working for the CIA. He could have had a whole team of agents working on the “perfect” program. That is a more realistic possibility but it still doesn’t explain the beans the AUTHOR is spilling. No social engineer in his right mind would do that. And there is another thing this theory doesn’t explain. What is it? …
The AUTHOR can communicate with his “Sons”, who are higher up in the pyramid, telepathically the way he has communicated with Helen. And now we can go to the homework I have left at the end of the last section.
2:4.2,6: “The body cannot create and the belief that it can, a fundamental error, produces physical symptoms.”
. We have worked on this one before. You can FIND it in my blog. But the find function brought it up again and “Repetition(@1)” will step down the thought (B) a bit more towards a representation (C) of the thought (B):
. After reading this sentence “Again(@1)”, an obvious question came to my mind: … How come that “a fundamental error, produces all physical symptoms”? …
What “Produces All Things (SgWnwU)” or “all physical symptoms” (D)? …
The “Three(_3)”. What produces the “TriAd(_3ad)”? …
The “Two(_2)”. What produces the “DyAd(dyad)”? …
The One(_1)”. And what produces the “Monad($1)”? …
The “Big(TA)” “Tao(A1)”. What is the “BigTao”? …
It is the omnipotence, omnipresence and omniscience on the other side of the “Door” (A). A door has two sides, one facing in, and the other facing out. The Atman, or our soul (A), is with one foot in “eternity” and with the other foot in “time”. Our soul is on the “Boundary(*1)” between two worlds, or realities. This is an abstract “Concept(B1)”. Let us bring it more down to earth and look at our body (D). As A (E4) is the connective in the E3-E4-E5 “TriAd(_2ad)” so our body is the connective between us (E7) and the world. Normally I identify our body as D. That is good enough when talking about our body in general, but when talking about specifics, as I am trying to do now, I have to burden you with a bit more detail. Our body is matter, atoms and molecules, (E8) in a form. The atoms and molecules in us are the same material objects as any other material object is. But where does it get its “Form(@k)” from? …
From the Aristotelian “formal cause” (B). When you have read about, or described these things often “Enough(Zu)” they become representations (C) and then you don’t have to reproduce the thoughts by thinking but you can do it by computation. But if you are not a writer (C) but a thinker (B) then your problem is not the computing (C) but the describing (C) of the computations. If you have trouble following me here, you can use the find function to FIND words I am using here in earlier sections, and older files. Still, I will be as clear as I can be.
. Hsing(@k) is only in chapters 41 and 51 of the Ching. The :Big Form is Without material Form (TA%4WU@k)”. Hsiang(%4) is in 04, 14, 21, 35 and 41. I give you the concordance of Hsiang(%4) so that you can do your own homework.
. At Ching 51 we have: “Tao Produces It (A1Sg_Z). Tê Maintains It (TÊ@d_Z). Matter Forms It (wU@k_Z).” Now you can see why I have translated Hsing(@k) as “material ‘Form’”. My homemade concordance of the Neiye tells me that Hsing(@k) appears in 11 chapters and in some of them more than once. If what comes next is too boring or too hard to chew for you, you can skip the rest of the section.
I shall use Harold D. Roth’s translations for some of the lines.
3a: “All of the Mind’S Forms ///bad: “Are naturally infused and filled with it [the vital essence].” The square brackets are Roth’s here.
4f: “The way is what infuses the body,” (heA1SOYI3b@k Ross) Notice that here Ross has Body for Hsing(@k). While I am leaving out detail you would have to get from Roth’s ORIGINAL TAO, even the little I quote from it is already valuable.
4l: “Obscure! We do not see its form, (*?*? HUPUoo_H@k).
4n: “Not See Its Form (PUoo_H@k)”. A repetition. The poet is talking about the Tao(A1) here and at 4l (Chapter 4 line l) Ross translates two Chinese characters as “Obscure”. And the “Big Tao (TAA1)” would be the ”Mysterious(#1)”, or Yin. It is at the other side of the “Door” (A). And the first thing it “Produces(Sg)” on our side of the “Door” is the “One(_1)”
6e: “It [the Tao] is that with which we cultivate the mind and align the body, Ye (SOYI6eHsbt%8@kYe).”
. Hsin(Hs) can be “Heart(Hs)” (A), “Head(Hs)” (B) or “Mind(Hs)” (C). The “Big Tao” would indeed “Cultivate(6e)” and “Align(%8)” our soul, our intellect and our mind. These “Three(_3)” are the A-B-C “TriAd(_3ad)”. If this is getting too hard for you to chew, you can still skip it.
8j: When there is “Thought there Will be Knowledge (8j$pkn)” 8j = Szu61.
8k: Whe there is Knowledge there will be Stops or boundaries Yi (kn$p$iYi)“
8l: Of “All of your Mind’S Forms (1aHs_Z@k)”, if even one of them
8m: “Bypasses its Known (#ikn) boundaries then there will be a
. . . . Loss of Production (37Sg).”
. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. If one link is weak, the chain is weak.
11a: If your “Body is Not Aligned (@kPU%8)” to your mind (C).then
11b: “Tê will Not Come (TÊPUäz).
11e: “Align your Body (%8@k) to Assist Tê (*aTÊ).” *a = She64.
14q: “Only after there is awareness [of it can it] does it take shape(@k Roth).”
14r: “Only after it takes shape is there [can there be] word (Roth).”
14s: “Only after there is a word is it [can it be] implemented.”
14t: “Only after it is implemented is [can there be] Order (%eJa*b85).” *b = Hou30.
What we are told here is that there has to be “awareness” (A) of a need. Without a demand there can be no supply.
. The demand “takes shape” as the Aristotelian “formal cause” (B). This is better known as the algorithm. It is produced by thinking (B).
. Next the thought (B) has to be translated into a series of instructions (C). In computer programming this is the computer program (C).
. Finally you need subcontractors or a computer (D) to carryout the instructions.
. What else does the poet tell us?
14u: If there is “No Order (PU85) then there is Necessarily Disorder (PI$a)”.
14v:And if there is “Disorder then thre Will be Death ($a$p78).”
. In business, death means bankruptcy, But I think that the poet is talking here about a matter of life and death.
15n: “Those who keep their mind unimpaired within.
15m . Externally keep their bodies(@k) unimpaired.”
. Hsin(Hs), translated as “mind” here, can be the A-B-C “TriAdf(_3ad)”. It is the “prerequisite” for purposeful physical (D) action. A, B and C are “within” the body (D).
18a: When the “Whole Hsin is In your Center (äeHsÜp_=) it is
18b: InPossible (PUpt) to hide it (Roth).”
18c: “It will be known in your countenance (Chih(kn) and Hsing@k are in there).”
18k: “Hsin Ch’i’S Body (Hs#E_Z@k).”
18k: “The perceptible form of the mind’s vital energy (Roth)
18l: . Is brighter than the sun and the moon”.
21a: As for “All Human’S Life Ye (1amn_ZSgYe)”
21b: “Heaven Brings-forth Their Vital-essence (TnCu_H#S)”
21c: “Earth Brings-forth Their Bodies (TICU_H@k).”
23c is about the health of your “Body(@k)”.
24c is about the influence your “Body” has on the rest of you.. And that’s it.
======================================================
. In the December 24 section I have quoted from Ellen M. Chen’s commentary on Ching 42: “In the macrocosmic sense the two is born when the whirling vortex …. Separates into two opposite poles …. whose interaction produces all things.” How come I bring that one up again today? …
When we have made some truth we have learned from Lao Tzu our own, by …
Repeating it, then ,when other authors repeat the same truth, we are associating it, automatically (E6), with the Representation (C) we already have of it. In other words, we automatically remember it.
. Now, if we read something else that refers to the same truth then everything we have associated with it comes up to the surface, into our awareness (A). And what is most closely related to what we have just read will stand out. And this morning the above quote stood out. My mother has given me a little booklet of poetry from Tagore. And ever so often I open it at random and the verse I read on page 91 reminded me of the, above, quote. Trying to translate the German into English wouldn’t do justice to it, but I want to give you my interpretation of it: Invisibly {“Unsichtbar”) Yin plays its flute (spielt die Finsternis ouf ihrer Flöte) and the rhythm of Yang’s “whirling vortex” whirls into{“wirbelt hinein”) into stars and suns, into thoughts and dreams.
In the December 30 section the find function brought us 2:1.1,9, 2:1.1,11 and 2:1.1,12.
2:1.1,8: “This [spiritual (A), intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D)] process involves the following steps: (9) First [A], …. (10) Second [B], …. (11) Third [C and] .... (12) Fourth” (D). The following interpretation may seem forced, if you don’t know the tetrad. But, if you know it well enough, then there can be no doubt in your mind that the AUTHOR knows it too. He has added and left out a few things in order to make it not too obvious that he knows.
. So in the following interpretation I have added and left out a few things to make the fact, that 2:1.1,9 to 12 refer to the tetrad, more obvious.
2:1.1,9A: What “God creat”es. comes through A to “your own mind” (B).
2:1.1,10B: What “is perfect can be rendered”, or stepped down, as a perfect idea (B).
2:1.1,11C: The mind (C) is programmable. It can be programmed by God, through us, or it can be programmed …
by the AUTHOR directly, if …
we permit him to do it..
2:1.1,12D: If you program yourself then “you can create yourself, and …. the direction of your own creation is up to you.” If you “allow” ...
the AUTHOR to program you then “the direction of your own creation is up to” him.
. We all have a bit of the “eternal” truth in us. We all know the tetrad deep down within us. Within us is a bit of eternity which is represented as the black dot, Yin, in the white area, Yang. “Not Knowing that you Know (PUknkn) that, is Sick(@p)” and the AUTHOR is taking advantage of our “IgNorance(PUkn)”. But if we interpret his sentences then his effort to dumb us down produces the very opposite of what he intends..
. If we repeat the truth we learn from him the way he repeats his falsehoods then it becomes a representation (C). Then we can do by computation (C) what before we had to do by thinking (B). Computation is an effortless process. It is “Work Without Effort (D2WUD2)”. Let’s FIND “effort”
2:35,3: “But the real means are already provided [in the form of the AUTOR’s programs], and do not involve any effort at all on their [the believer’s] part.”
. Once a program is installed, it runs itself, it requires no effort to “allow” it to be installed in us nor to allow it to run in us.
2:6.6,1: “It is possible to reach a state in which you bring your mind under my guidance without conscious effort.” ‘Contemplation’. When you are programmed by the AUTHOR it requires no “conscious effort” to think (B), compute (C) or act (D) as he has programmed you. The science of social engineering is human programming. And if you have taken the seven Week computer programming course, then you get a good idea of HOW it is done.
3:1.3,11: “I have made every effort to use words that are almost impossible to distort [that are hard to translate into English], but it is always possible to twist symbols around if you wish.” If you wish to interpret his sentences then you have to do what he calls: twisting his “symbols around”.
3:5.2,7: “Inventiveness is wasted effort even in its most ingenious form.” ‘Depreciation’.
. Using the FIND function is computing (C). If what comes up is easy for you to interpret, do it. if not, go to the next sentence that comes up. Try 'depreciation' or 'contemplation' on for size.
. The AUTHOR uses the truth like a lubricant to slip his falsehoods past the intellect (B) into the mind. But if we already know the tetrad then we can intercept it and his effort becomes counterproductive. If he can slip falsehoods past the intellect into the mind, they are like time-bombs in your subconscious. And he can trigger them whenever he wants to. That is the “control” he is talking about.
. When Lao Tzu instructs us to “Darken It, the light, and Repeat the Darkening (Sü_Z@1Sü) until you reach All Mystery’S Gate (^1#1_Z%1)”, he means enlarge the dark dot in your core until you become aware (A) of it. According to J.G. Bennett’s Dodecad, A is Conscious Energy (E4). The Hindus call it the Atman (A). It is the “Door, Dasamadwara”. And that is the “Gate” or “Door(%1)”.
. The AUTHOR calls this kind of work a “wasted effort” no wonder. Put yourself in his shoes: Would you like what we are doing here? …
. Learning these lessons gives us the truth with which we can replace the AUTHOR’s falsehoods. On levels B and C there is no bloody (D) war going on, but we definitely have an ideological war here. If the truth predominates in the morphogenetic field there will be a paradigm shift and the truth will set us free. If falsehoods continue to predominate then our political masters will continue to remain in power.
. In the last section 2:3.3,4 should be 2:3.3,3.
2:3.5,2: “Until they achieve this [“perfect comfort”], they waste themselves and their true creative powers on useless attempts to make themselves more comfortable by inappropriate means.” The “inappropriate means” are our intellects. ‘Depreciation’.
2:3.5,5: “It [“the altar”] was created perfect and is entirely worthy of receiving perfection [the perfect program]. (6) God and His creation are completely dependent on Each Other [You can’t have the one without the other.]. (7) He depends on them BECAUSE He created them perfect.”
. Without his program in us he can’t create anything here on earth. He depends on his program in us and on uncritical readers to allow him to install it in them.
2:4.2,6: “The body cannot create and the belief that it can, a fundamental error, produces all physical symptoms.” …
=====================================================
December 31, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM. There is a mistake in the last section under 2:1.1,2. ...
Mistakes are teaching devises, so try to find and correct it. …
The “stranger” you bring into the pyramid is to you as you are to those that have brought you in. For more on the “pyramid scheme”, just Google it.
2:2.2,7: “When the will is really free it cannot miscreate, because it recognizes only truth..”
2:2.2,7b: When the AUTHOR’s will is your will you are not “free”, you “cannot miscreate” with your own intellect because you are programmed to “recognize only [what the AUTHOR calls] truth.” While this is true, if you swallow it then you are hooked. What you read without thinking about it, is usually the bait; to see the hook, you have to interpret the sentence.
2:2.5,7: “This [“learning” from the AUTHOR] will bring you into closer and closer accord with the Sonship; but the Sonship itself is a perfect creation and perfection is not a matter of degree. (8) Only while there is a belief [the knowledge (B), representations (C) and the experience (D) of] in differences is learning meaningful.” …
3:7.3,2: “The separation is a system of thought real enough in time, though not in eternity.” …
Only in “time” “is learning meaningful”; in “eternity” learning is impossible. Why? …
In time first comes the learnable, then comes the learning and then comes the learned; in eternity this is impossible. Why? ...
Because there is no time to do it in. In eternity there is the eternal NOW. There is omniscience. There can be no Knowable-knowing-known “TriAd(_3ad)” because everything is already “known”. You can’t open a door that is already open. See Ching 36.
. When you have studied the Tao Te Ching and you have learned a “Truth(A1)” from it, you will re-cognize it “Again(@1)” and “Again(@1)”. Why? …
Because, like the AUTHOR, Lao Tzu repeats the same “meaning” in different “forms”. The AUTHOR does it to hide the truth from us; Lao Tzu does it to get us to think. But once we get the idea of WHAT the AUTHOR is doing, we can benefit from the COURSE as well. The more the AUTHOR ‘depreciates’ the intellect, the more we must use it. As your knowledge of a “truth” becomes a representation (C) of the truth, the COURSE is as useful to us as the Ching.
. Do you think that the social engineers are the only ones who know that the mind is programmable? …
If you have studied the Ching for a while then the disinformation in some of the AUTHOR’s sentences just stare you in the face. Why? …
Because when you have stepped down a thought (B) to a representation (C) you don’t have to think (B) to see what the AUTHOR is trying to do to your mind. Why? …
Because when you have the right representations (C) you do it automatically (E6), by computation (C). Credit for my knowledge of representations goes to Rudolf Steiner.
. So in “time” “is learning meaningful” in “eternity”, “learning” is impossible. With the right representation, seeing the intentional disinformation takes a fraction of a second. Describing it takes quite a bit longer and even then, thinkers (B) can’t do as good a job of it as communicators (C) can, if …
they have understood the idea (B). Even the best communicator can’t communicate what he doesn’t understand. That’s why “KnowErs(kner)” and “TalkErs(C2er)” must “Unite Their Dust ($1_H@h)”. The unelected advisors (B) and their politicians (C) are doing it, so why can’t we? …
2:3.2,3: “Both the separation and the fear [the intellect] are miscreations that must be undone for the restoration of the temple, and for the opening of the altar to receive the Atonement.” To install the program in the mind, the mind must be opened.
. According to the AUTHOR, all our intellect does is produce “miscreations”. It makes sense, therefore, that our intellect “must be undone“. To understand this sentence better we must also know what the AUTHOR means by “the temple” and “the altar”. So far we know that the mind is programmable and “receives the” program. Our body (D) seems to be the “temple” here, and “the altar” is then the programmable mind. It is also the black dot in the center of the white Yang. Why? …
Because the AUTHOR stores some of his knowledge of “eternity”, Yin, in it.
2:3.3,4: “You can temporize and you [with your intellect] are capable of enormous procrastination, but you cannot depart entirely from your Creator [the AUTHOR], Who set the limits on your ability to miscreate.”
. The AUTHOR can only “set the limits on your ability to” think (B) by programming your mind (C). Interpreting the AUTHOR’s sentences, is called “procrastination”. Here we have first ‘depreciation’ then ‘contemplation’ and when we get the two in the same sentence there is always ‘opposition’ to make the hooks easier to swallow. Isn’t it true that our intellect is opposed to the AUTHOR’s intellect? …
So why would you find something wrong with this statement? …
By thinking about it.
2:3.5,1: “The children of God [of the AUTHOR] are entitled to the perfect comfort that comes from perfect trust. (2) Until they achieve this, they waste themselves and their true creative powers on useless means. There is the discomfort of “cognitive dissonance”. Please Google it. When you understand it you can see HOW the AUTHOR overcomes the “discomfort” for yourself.
2:3.47: “As a result [of the AUTHOR’s programming], the mind becomes increasingly sensitive to what it would once have regarded as very minor intrusions of discomfort.”
2:5.7,8: “Discomfort is aroused [by the AUTHOR’s programming] only to bring the need for correction into awareness.” …
The uncritical reader is made aware of the need for “correcting” his properly functioning intellect.
2:3.5,1: “The Children of God are entitled to the perfect comfort that comes from perfect trust” in the AUTHOR.
. Repetition helps you to step down thoughts (B) to representations (C). The difference between what the AUTHOR is doing and what we are doing is that we don’t have to hide the repetitions in different “forms”.
. We have only done a fraction of the sentences that have “creat” in them, but we will continue because I hope that you find this work beneficial. You also might be able to identify a few more advantages of using the FIND function. …
=========================================================
2:1.1,5: “Because of your likeness to your Creator you are creative.” …
2:1.1,5a:”Because [you are made in the image of] …. your Creator you are creative.”
. That is true. Steiner In his political lectures, said: The dangerous things in propaganda are not the lies in it, but the truth. The truth is the bait that hides the hook. Where is it? …
2:1.1,5b: If you have “accepted” the AUTHOR’s program into your mind then that part of him is you. His will is then your will. You are creating what he wants you to create. He is “your Creator [and that is why] you are creative.” FIND “creat” …
Boy! We came up with over 100 hits, and that only in the first three chapters. “Creation” is an important concept (B), representation (C) and observable (D) fact. Work on so many sentences will take a while but I already know now that it will be worth it.
. At the end of the December 28 section I said that there are three good reasons for using the FIND function. Interpreting the AUTHOR’s sentences is hard work at first, but with practice it becomes easier. If you are willing to make that initial effort try also to identify one or more of the three [four] advantages of using the FIND function: …
. Today, December 31, I came up with another one.
1:7.2,1: “Child of God [the AUTHOR], you were created [by means of his program] to create the good, the beautiful and the holy.”
. To understand this sentence better, we have to FIND out what “the good”, “the beautiful” and “the holy” means in the COURSE, but we will be busy with “creat” for a while.
1:7.5,2: “I have said that awe is inappropriate in connection with the Sons of God [with your “brothers” who are on the same level of the pyramid], because you should not experience awe in the presence of your equals. (3) However, it was also emphasized [and is repeated here] that awe is proper in the presence of your Creator”, in the presence of the AUTHOR who has created you in the sense that, to you, his will is your will.
. Please notice that sometimes I have to quote sentences that don’t have “creat” in them to give you the context by means of which you can understand the sentence the FIND function has come up with.
2:1.1,2: “In the creation, God [the AUTHOR] extended Himself to His creations and imbued them with the same loving Will to create [imbued then with his program]. (3) You have not only been fully created but have been created perfect.” 'Consistency'.
. It has taken centuries to develop the program. So it is as “perfect” as it can be. We have already come across 2:1.1,2 at the end of the December 29 section when looking for “exten”. As the AUTHOR extends himself to you, so you must extend yourself to “strangers” so that they become your “brothers” and the AUTHOR’s “Sons”. Making the pyramid grow is creativity in the COURSE. By programming you, the AUTHOR imbues you “with the same loving Will to create” he has installed in your mind. As a result of his programming your will is his will. But his mind will not be your mind. Knowledge is power. And he would have to be stupid to give his power away. Social engineers only tell us what they want us to know. And they tell us that “Repeatedly(@1)”. If they didn't repeat “democracy” so consistently we wouldn't believe (C) that we have it. Notice that having FOUND “exten” previously has paid off here.
2:1.1,8: “This [intellectual] process involves the following steps:
2:1.1,9: “First, you believe that what God created can be changed by your own mind” (B). Seeing the falsehoods and contradictions in the AUTHOR’s sentences it is hard to “believe that …. God created” them.
2:1.1,10: “Second, you believe that what is perfect can be rendered imperfect or lacking.” By using our intellect we can easily see that the AUTHOR’s sentences are “imperfect”. We don’t “believe” (C) that, but we know (B) it. By seeing the imperfections again and again our knowledge (B) of this fact (D) becomes a representation (C).
2:1.1,11: “Third, you believe that you can distort the creations of God, including yourself.” The AUTHOR believes that he “can distort the creations of God including” us by his “perfect” program or “Atonement”. By using our intellect, we know that he is wrong.
2:1.1,12: ”Fourth, you believe that you can create yourself, and that the direction of your own creation is up to you.”
. We are given the “freedom” of choice. This makes us responsible for “the direction” we are taking. Allowing the AUTHOR to make our decisions for us is an irresponsible choice.
2:1.2,3: “Everything God [or the AUTHOR] created is like Him.” This statement is true either way. But one is the bait and the other is the hook. By not seeing the hook, you swallow it along with the bait.
2:1.2,5: “Its real source [the program we “inherit from Him] is internal. (6) This is as true of the Son as of the Father. (7) In this sense the creation includes both the creation of the Son by God, and the Son’s creations when the mind is healed”. Only when your mind is programmed, can the AUTHOR create through you.
. According to the AUTHOR, “God” has a “Father” as the “Father” has a “Son”. The “Son” would be at the apex of the pyramid. “God” is above the “Son” and the “Father” would be above “God”. And then there is also the “Holy Spirit”. Words that don’t mean what they mean in English are part of the AUTHOR’s “obscurantism”. You can’t find that word in the COURSE but you can Google it. To keep things simple we can substitute AUTHOR for these four words. There are also different words and phrases for the program: The AUTHOR’s “loving Will”, “loving creation” and the “Atonement” would be three examples that refer to his program. To “heal” would be the debugging of the program you have written yourself.
2:1.2,8: “This requires God’s endowment of the Son with free will, because all loving creation is freely given in one continuous line, in all aspects are of the same [hierarchical] order.”. The pyramid system is a hierarchical order. His program can only be “freely given” if you “accept” it
2:1.3,8: “Such rebirth is impossible as long as you continue to project or miscreate [In the COURSE, the intellect always “miscreates”]. (9) It still remains within you, however, to extend as God extended His Spirit to you. In reality this is your only choice, because your free will was given you for your joy in creating the perfect.”
. The AUTHOR has not given us our “free will”, on the contrary he is trying every trick in the book to take it away from us. But, if God has given us our “free will”, then handing it over to the AUTHOR, is not “your only choice”. Only when we “allow” the AUTHOR to make all of our decisions for us do we have no more freedom of choice. Then your will is his will. This “meaning” is identified as ‘contemplation’. This happens when you say to the AUTHOR: Your will is mine.
. So far we have done only about 20 sentences out of over a hundred. But I found this work very beneficial. Maybe now you are in a better position to identify one or more advantages of using the FIND function. …
======================================================
. In the last section, below, I said that “you have to be ‘ready’ for …. a sentence”. “If you are not ready” then you will not see the hook in it. And if you don’t see the hooks then you will swallow them along with the bait. Social engineering is a science. Sentences are designed like subroutines in a computer program are designed. If you interpret enough of such sentences yourself, then you will know (B) it yourself. Little is gained by you merely believing (C) me.
. Social engineering is used in our Educational system, which is controlled by our political masters, and in the mass-media, which is owned by the oligarchs (D), but it is also used in the COURSE, and there it can be seen best. All you have to do is interpret those sentences you are “ready” for. FIND “readiness”. …
2:5.1,1: ”Before miracle workers are ready to undertake their function in this world, it is essential that they fully understand the fear of release.” Thought (B) is called “fear” here. The AUTHOR’s “Sons”, who are on the higher levels of the pyramid, are told not to “Underestimate the Enemy ($jâb).”
2:5.4,1: “The healer who relies on his own readiness is endangering his understanding.”
. To be called a “healer” you have to be on a higher level of the pyramid, but even then, if you rely on your own thinking then you endanger your own “understanding”. The AUTHOR is saying: If you use your “own” intellect (B) then you are “endangering” your understanding, but if you believe (C) everything the AUTHOR has dictated then you are “safe”.
2:5.4,2: “You are perfectly safe as long as you are completely unconcerned about your readiness, but [you must] maintain a consistent trust in mine.” You must believe that the AUTHOR is using his omniscience only in your best interest.
2:5.4,3: “If your miracle working inclinations are not functioning properly, it is always because fear [thought] has intruded on your right-mindedness [many words and phrases have to be reversed] and has turned it upside down.” If your intellect is working properly then it will turn the AUTHOR’s wrong-mindedness right-side up.
2:5.4,4: “All forms of not-right-mindedness are the result of refusal to accept the Atonement for yourself.” Your “right-mindedness” depends on your “refusal to accept the Atonement for yourself.” FIND “Atonement”. It undoes your own thinking. If we interpret his sentences there is the truth in it, which is used for bait and there are the hooks which the bait is supposed to cover up. So, according to the AUTHOR, it is wrong not to swallow the hook. It is a “refusal to accept the Atonement”.
2:7.7,2: “Readiness is only the prerequisite for accomplishment.”
. First comes the vision (A) and the willingness and ability of the customer (A) to pay for his demand, then comes the thinking (B), then come a series of instructions from C to D and, if D carries them out, we have the “accomplishment”. Why doesn’t the AUTHOR tell us the whole truth? …
Because he doesn’t want us to know the truth. Does he know it? …
3:6.2,3: “I have discussed this before in terms of the selectivity of perception [D] pointing out that evaluation [B] is its obvious prerequisite. (4) Judgement [B] always involves rejection.” “Judgement” and “evaluation” are functions of the intellect (B) and you should think (B) before you talk (C). And B and C are “prerequisites” of D.
2:5.4,8: “Readiness is only the beginning of confidence.” Again, he doesn’t tell us the whole truth. Can you see it? …
The A-B-C triad is the “prerequisite for accomplishment” (D). It “is the beginning of” the 4-fold cycle. Why did he say “confidence”? …
Interpreting a difficult sentence, the AUTHOR has dictated, is an “accomplishment”. And with repeated accomplishments comes “confidence”. Interpreting a difficult sentence with your intellect can be called an “accomplishment”. Is that what the AUTHOR means? …
No. He wants you to believe (C) what he has dictated without your intellect (B) intruding. Is that an accomplishment? …
No. It is “passively condoning” what he is doing to your mind.
. At the end of the last section, I asked you to FIND inherit. …
2:1.2,4: “Extension, as undertaken by God, is similar to the inner radiance the children of the Father inherit from Him.” FIND “Exten” sion or “exten”d. …
2:1.1,1: “To extend is a fundamental aspect of God which He gave to His Son. (2) In the creation, God extended Himself to His creations and imbued them with the same loving Will to create. …. (7) The inappropriate use of extension, or projection, occurs when you believe that some emptiness or lack exists in you, and that you can fill it with your own ideas instead of truth.” The AUTHOR’s “truth” is another thing you will “inherit” if you “accept” it as the truth. You will be stuck with it if you don’t use your head (B).
3:6.11,8: “Instead of ‘Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven’ say, ‘WILL ye first the Kingdom of Heaven,’ and you have said, ‘I know what I am and I accept my own inheritance.’” If you say that then you don’t “accept’ your “inheritance” from God but from the AUTHOR. You can see what his program in your mind can do when you try to deprogram one of his “Sons”.
. The whole of 2:1.1 should be quoted and interpreted but it is too much syntactic (C) work for me. This doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t try. …
Take 2:1.15: “Because of your likeness to your Creator [the AUTHOR] you are creative.” …
====================================================
. In her 2 ½ page commentary on Ching 42 Ellem M. Chen said:
. “Yin and Yang as cosmogonic principles are called Ch’i[#E], air [B] or breath. From Tao as non-being [Wu] to particular [Existing(YU)] individuals through the union of Yin and Yang we witness the movement from nothing[Wu] to vapour [(B), through liquid (C) and] to particular individuals [D]. The more determined an entity, the less dynamic or mobile it is.” In the December 24 section I have only quoted the last sentence and from there I went to Ching 41.3,10. I didn’t quote what lead up to the last sentence because it would take too long to explain. But now I realize that it is worth trying:
. Ching 42.1 is Lao Tzu’s translation of a Lemurian symbol and 42.2 is his interpretation of it. “Yin” comes through the “Door, Dasamadwara” (A) from the “timeless” dimension
into “time”.
2:2.4,5: “Acts were not necessary [not possible] before the separation, because belief [the knowledge (B) and experience (D) of] in space and time did not exist.”
2:5.17,6: “In time we exist for and with each other.” He is referring to his “Sons” and your “brothers” here.
2:5.17,7: “In timelessness we coexist with God.” We are supposed to believe that the AUTHOR is God.
3:3.5,12: “Knowledge comes from the altar within [from the white dot “within” the black] and is timeless because it is certain.” The white dot is Yang within Yin. It is certain to the AUTHOR because he is in the “timeless” dimension with “time” in his center. If it were not “certain” to him then he couldn’t have dictated his 1249 page book.
3:7.3,2: “The separation is a system of thought real enough in time though not in eternity.” Why should Yin be more “real” than Yang? …
. Back to Ching 42: Once in time, the vision (A) becomes a thought (B). We have the E3-E4-E5 “TriAd(_3ad)” here. The outcome in it is at E5 (B) where it becomes a thought (B). Astrologically “Chi, air”, is on level B, water is C and earth is D.
. “From Tao as non-being [it comes through fire (A), air (B) and water (C)] to particular individuals” on level D. HOW does: “The more determined an entity is, the less dynamic or mobile [or adaptable] it is.” follow from that? ...
If you specialize in becoming a doctor then you can’t specialize in carpentry or plumbing. The line of thought Ellen is following down, deductively, is from the general “to particular” material “Existences(YU)”. At Ching 25.2 Lao Tzu shows why the “Big(TA)” Tao is “Divided(âo)” into “Four(_4)” divisions. Now, that he has “Identified(Mg)” the parts, they have become “NamAble(ptMg). And he does that at Ching 25.3: The divided Tao(A1) is at A, “Heaven(Tn)” is at B, “Earth(TI)” is at D and the “King(_E)” is at level C. The character for “King(_E)” looks like an E with the vertical line going down the center. The horizontal line on top represents heaven (B) the one in the middle represents “Humaniy(%5)” and the line below us represents earth (D). We have semiotics here. The fact that our political masters have made it “disappear” means that we are not supposed to know about it.
. The Hindus, Plato, Lao Tzu and others all teach the DIVISION OF LABOUR.
Ching 18 is a tetrad: When the “Big Tao was Abandoned (TAA1@m)”. When we passed from the timeless into time there was first democracy (A). “When intelligence and wit arose, here appreared great hypocrites (^cCuYUTA*b J.Wu).” *b = Wei9. Ta Wei can be translated as: “Hypocracy” because that’s what it is. It is the “Intelligent Man’S Government (wsmn_Z85)” we have at Ching 3.
. Next comes capitalism (D) and then dictatorship (C) because it is the worst type of government.
. In Steiner’s threefold social order we have the “cultural sphere (B and A), the political sphere (C) and the economic sphere (D). Human society consists of “Four(_4)” “Divisions(âo)”: Religion (A), philosophy (B) politics (C) and economics (D). These four correspond to Bhakti (A), jnana (B), raja (C) and karma (D) yoga. Because Steiner has mixed up levels A and B, his theory (B) doesn’t work in practice (D).
When you move from the timeless into time, that is when you get born, you fall into the four general divisions: Fire (A), air (B), water (C) or earth. Each of these four is divided further into a mutable, cardinal or fixed aspect of the four elements. In sytematics these are the receptive or denying, reconciling, and affirming impulses. Why there are four names for the three impulses of the triad is not made clear, but it is explained by Lao Tzu at Ching 1.1. If we add the Chinese Horoscope to ours then we get 144 divisions because the year you are born in also contributes to determine your dharma.
. Doing your dharma is doing what you came into this world for to do. If you don’t care about why you came here your Horoscope is meaningless. But if you find out what your dharma is and you “Actualize your Potential (A1pt)” then you can do what you came here to do and then your Horoscope more often than not, hits nail on head.
. At the end of the last section, below this one, we have used the FIND function to find “free”.That turned out to be fruitful. Try “inherit” for homework. …
. If you are willing to do more, try to list the advantages of FINDing keywords in the Ching or the COURSE. There are three. …
========================================================
December 25, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. As the AUTHOR says: you have to be “ready” for what he wants you to believe (C). If you are not ready for a sentence then you only see what you the AUTHOR wants you to see. Let us take the 7th sentence I have quoted in the December 21 section:
“All of them [the “ten thousand things”] achieve harmony through the unification of affirmation and negation Which is embraced by everything.”
. There is more to this statement than meets the eye, and “Knowing that you Don’t Know (knPUkn)” it, gets you ready to work on it. The “Unification($1)” is the “Opposite(Fy)” of the “Division(âo)” or “separation”. In the COURSE, the “Atonement” is the opposite of the “separation”.
. At Ching 42.1 we have “The one is divided into two (_1Sg_2).” The “DyAd(dyad)” is “One(_1)” its poles are “Two(_2)”, “affirmation and negation” are a dyad in which “affirmation” and denial are the poles. The “Ten-thousand Things (WnwU)” are an “affirmation” of time and space. According to Swami Sri Yukteswar: Time is change in the “eternally” unchangeable and space is division in the ever indivisible. The “eternal” is on the other side of the “Door, Dasamadwara” (A). And that is where the AUTHOR is coming from. He is omniscient because he is not limited by the “Boundaries(*1)” of time and space. Being in the temporal, we are not aware that the eternal is just as real as our reality of time and space is. But the AUTHOR wants us to believe that his version of the “eternal” is more real than the world we are in is.
. If you are in the white part of the Yin Yang symbol, and you are not aware of the dark dot which you “Embrace(^0)” in your center, then Yang is all that “Exists(YU)” for you. If you are in the dark part of the symbol and you are not aware of the white dot in your center then all you are aware of is Yin. But to dictate his 1249 page book, the AUTHOR had to be aware of the white dot in him so his “denial” of the reality of our world is not sincere. Because he knows that “Existence(YU)” and “Nonexistence(WU)” are the poles of one polarity he is lying to us when he says that “Existence(YU)” does “Not-exist(WU)”.
. See how much we can learn from interpreting a single sentence of Chang Chung-yuan? And that is not even all he said. What else did he say? ….
He said that the “affirmation”-“negation” dyad is embraced by everything.” Every Thing that “Exist(YU)” is real to us because we can see and touch it. What we can’t see and touch is unreal to us, it is “Nonexistent(WU)” for us.
. At Ching 42.2 we have: “All things(WnwU) Carry-on-their-backs Yin (*a*b) And hold Yang in their Embrace (bt*c#4). Ch’i Is-the-means To Harmonize (#EYIWyHo)” the poles of this polarity. This is as accurate as I can make it and most translators seem to say roughly the same thing in different words.
. The Yin Yang symbol seems to suggest that the white part of the symbol “Embraces” the black dot and the black part seems to embrace the white dot. If Yin is the dark and obscure pole of the “DyAd(dyad)” then Yang must be the light and visible pole. So not only do most translators tell us that but it also makes sense.
. Even though what I have described here should make sense to some people it still must be described better, so that more people can understand it. As more people understand the truth and by repetition step their knowledge (B) of the truth down to representations (C) of the truth, these representations will automatically replace the falsehoods in the “morphogenetic field”. When over 50% of the content of the field is the truth there will be a paradigm shift. Why? …
Because the dumbed down masses are programmed not to think. The AUTHOR repeats this in different “forms”:
5:1.2,3: “The more who believe [C] in them [in true or false ideas (B)] the stronger they become.” They simply pickup what is in the morphogenetic field without thinking and believe it. And, by believing it, they strengthen the true or false idea in the field. When we collectively put more truth into the field than there is falsehood in it, the law of attraction be working for us instead of for our political masters.
. So Chang Chung-yuan told us that “Everything(YU)” embraces the dyad. But if “Existence(YU)” and “Nonexistence(WU)” is all there is then Yang embraces Yin which, looking at the symbol, is only a half-truth.
. We have here another example which shows that if you want to “judge” the content of a sentence then you must know what the content is. Before we FIND “judge”, we must do justice to Chung Chang-yuan. Let me quote from his page ½ commentary: “In the great beginning there was non-being …. In the form of things there is a spiritual reality [“eternity”, the dark dot, in “time”] which is manifested into different particularities.”
. God’s “job-description” comes into our world through the “Door” (A), is comprehended by B as an idea (B), is translated into a series of instructions (C) by C, which are executed by D and is thus “manifested” here on earth. Now we can FIND “judge”:
3:6.1,4: “When the Bible says ‘Judge not that ye be not judged’ it means that if you judge the reality of others you will be unable to avoid judging your own.”
3:6.1,4: If you judge what the AUTHOR says then you will be able to judge your own judgement. Why? ...
Because before you can judge what he is saying you must interpret his sentences. To judge your own work, you must know what you are doing. As we gain more experience in interpreting his sentences they become easier to interpret, but for me to describe …
what I come up with becomes harder.
3:6.2,1: “The choice to judge rather than to know is the cause of loss of [what the AUTHOR calls] peace. (2) Judgement is the process on which perception but not knowledge rests.” Judgement in the intellectual process of differentiating between “Truth” and “untruth”. If you are willing to follow me even part of the way then you are already doing that. “The choice to judge” or not is the choice to use your intellect or not. The choice to know (B) rather than to believe (C) is the choice to use your intellect (B). When you decide to use your head (B) “obscurantism” doesn’t work anymore.
3:6.2,4: “Judgement always involves rejection.”
. If an assertion is “judged” to be “untrue” then it is rejected; if not then not.
3:6.2,5: “It never emphasizes the positive aspects of what is judged, whether in you or in others.” This is just a blatant bit of ‘depreciation’.
3:6.2,6: “What has been perceived and rejected, or judged and found wanting, remains in your mind because it has been perceived. (7) One of the illusions from which you suffer is the belief that what you judged against has no effect.”
. Thinking (B) speaking (C) and physical actions (D) all have their particular “effect”. Why should I have “the belief” that what I do on any level has no “effect” on the level below it? ...
3:6.2,8: “This cannot be true unless you also believe that what you judged against does not exist. (9) You evidently do not believe this, or you would not have judged against it.”
. What are you not supposed to “judge” against? …
It is alright to judge against the intellect, but you must not judge what the AUTHOR has dictated.
3:6.5,1: “When you feel tired, it is because you have judged yourself as capable of being tired. (2) when you laugh at someone, it is because you have judged him as unworthy.”
. Judgement can often mean programming. Because programming is such a big thing in social engineering different words are used to refer to the same thing.
. Back to “freedom”.
3:6.11,3: “Free will must lead to freedom”, but it does not always do that.
3:6.11,4: Not using “Judgement always imprisons because” the AUTHOR is a social engineer.
3:6.11,5: “Wishes are not facts.” True or false? …
. 3:6.11,3 is true either way. But if you don’t interpret his sentences then you swallow the hook that is hidden by the bait. Reading his sentences without using your intellect, to judge what he is trying to do, mentally “imprisons” you. So 3:6.11,4 is “untrue” and the subordinate phrase, which follows it, is also a lie. What about 3:6.11,5? …
We have a bit of “level confusion” here. “Wishes [A] are not facts” (D). The opposite of wishing, or demanding, if you can pay for what you want, is willing (C). A is the opposite of C as theory (B) is the opposite practice (D). Thoughts (B) are not facts (D), neither is giving instructions (C) the same as carrying them out (D). If you don’t interpret his sentences to find out what he is trying to do to your mind and then you are “passively condoning” it. And that’s what the sentences are intended to make you do.
. Please don’t believe (C) what I am saying here. To know (B) the truth you must interpret “Enough(Zu)” sentences yourself to see WHAT social engineers are doing HOW they are doing it and WHY they are doing it. The three chapters I have copied are 1/10th of the 31 chapters in the text. All I am doing here is give you examples of what ultimately you must do yourself. Ultimately the whole COURSE must be interpreted and compared with the other translations. This is too much work for the thinkers (B) but not too much for the communicators (C) who are using Automatic Energy (E6) to do it by computation (C).
. The three sentences I have done here are in the middle of page 49. Right on top of the page is another sentence that stares me in the face:
3:6.10,1: “Peace is the natural heritage of the spirit. (2) Everyone is free to refuse to accept his inheritance, but he is not free to establish what his inheritance is. (3) The problem everyone must decide is the fundamental question of authorship. (5) All fear [all thought] comes ultimately, and sometimes by way of very devious route, from the denial of Authorship.”
. You are supposed to believe that the AUTHOR is Jesus and “He” is going to tell you what your inheritance is. And if you decide to “accept” what he says then you will be “imprisoned” by him; and if you “refuse to accept his inheritance,” then you will go free.
. This was a long one because the sentences are getting easier to interpret. The work for me is describing what I come up with. I am not satisfied with how I have described what I have found in the sentences I have quoted. I really need help with that. …
======================================================
3:6.11,4: “Judgement always imprisons because it separates segments of reality by the unstable scales of desire.”
. There are two examples of disinformation in this sentence. Can you find one? …
“Identifying(Mg)” intentional “untruth” in a sentence is called “Judgement” here. By using your intellect (B) to judge WHAT the AUTHOR is saying you are preventing him from imprisoning you. So the very opposite of what he is saying is true.
. The other example of intentional disinformation is? …
Our intellect “separates segments of reality” because these “segments” are “IdentifiAble(ptMg)” parts of a whole. Lao Tzu says: “Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)”! Our intellect “separates” what “Can(pt)” be separated, not “by the unstable scales of desire” (C), but by thinking (B).
. Now let us go to Ellen M. Chen’s Commentary on Ching 42.2,2. Her translation of 42.2 is at the end of the last section, below this one. Of her 2 ½ page commentary, I will only select a few lines and comment on them: …
“In the macrocosmic sense the two is born when the whirling vortex or cosmic egg separates into two opposite poles---heaven and earth---whose interaction produce all things.”
The “One Produces the Two (_1Sg_2)” by “Division(âo)” or “separation”.
The “Two Produces the Three (_2Sg_3”) by Ch’i(#E) acting as the connective,
and the “Three Produces All Things (_3SgWnwU).”
. These three lines are what Ellen’s interpretation is about. As you can see from the other nine translations, I have quoted in the last section, she is telling us what the other translators have also told us. But there is something else here. Can you see it? …
1.2,1: “Without Representations is Heaven and Earth’S Conception (WUMgTnTI_ZB1)”.
25.1,1: The big Tao “Exists as Something Undifferentiated and Complete (YUwU#Ocm)
. . . . . . Before Heaven and Earth were Born (^7TnTISg).”
25.3,2: “Heaven is a part of the Big (TnTA) tao. (3) Earth is a part of the Big TITA)” Tao.
. There is another thing in Ellen’s commentary which I only noticed because of my recent “Insight(72)”. Let me just quote the relevant passage:
“The more determined [specialized] an entity, the less dynamic or mobile it is.” …
By specializing in my own dharma, which is jnana yoga (B), it becomes easier and easier to interpret the AUTHOR’s sentences but it becomes harder and harder to communicate (C) what I come up with. It is like Lao Tzu says: “KnowErs are not good with Words (knerPUC2) while the WordErs Don’t Know (C2erPUkn)” what the thinkers (B) know. Communicators (C) are good with “Words(C2)” but they “Don’t Know” to think as well as the thinkers can. The advisors (B) of our politicians (C) can’t even tell the truth as convincingly as the politicians can tell a lie, but politicians can’t think as well as their advisors can. And that’s why they need each other. In the government we have, we have an example of the division of labour at work.
. To elaborate on what Ellen has said on Ching 42 let me quote what she said on Ching 41: Her comment is on: “Great Vessel Takes-long to Complete (Taut*acm).” *a = Wan72. “Whatever has a specific nature [or dharma] for a specific function [like channelling (A), thinking (B), communication (C) or work in the pragmatic dimension (D) of semiotics,], it is useless otherwise.”
. Unless a communicator (C) is expressing the poorly expressed thoughts (B), you have here, better, this information is “useless”. I am not contributing to the “Establishment(cm)” of democracy (A) because we will not get democracy. Our political masters, on level B, will make sure of that. Please try to understand what I have just said. …
Please Google Morphogenetic field. …
======================================================
. We are going to work on Ching 42.2. It consists of twelve characters. They are: Wan(Wn), Wu(wU), Fu(*a), Yin(*b), Erh(bt), Pao(^0), Yang(*c), Ch’ung(#4), Ch’i(#E), Yi(YI), Wei(Wy), Ho(Ho). *a = Fu158. *b = Yin170 and *c = Yang170. These three characters are only in chapter 42 and thus need no concordance. The phonetic, radical number and concordance of the other nine are in front of file #5
42.2,1 The first sentence of 42.2 is easy to translate with my character by character translation:
42.2.1: “All Things (WnwU) Carry-on-their-back Yin (*a*b) And(bt)
Embrace Yang(^0*c)” in front of them. “All things turn their back towards Yin ….” is a valid alternative reading, as you will see.
. Let us start with Aleister Crowley’s translation of 42.2,: “All things [WnwU] pass from Obscurity[*b] to Manifestation[*c)], inspired[#4] harmoniously[Ho] by the Breath[#E] of the Void (the Tao).” As I said, a standard translation is essentially an interpretation. How accurate of a translation it is can only be seen when you know the various meanings of the characters in a sentence well “Enough(Zu)” to be able to do your own translation.
. By paying attention to how the ten translators have translated the five characters in 42.2,2 you get a good idea of what they mean without consulting a dictionary. Here Jonathan Star’s dictionary is more useful because he gives you the equivalents different translators have used for a given character. To follow up on this, you have to do your own work. The “Insight(72)” that came to me, because of my work on the COURSE, is in the different translations and commentaries. In 40 years of study, I just didn’t see it.
. Most translators have read 42.2,1 and 2. as one sentence.
. In the standard text, there is a period between 42.2,1 and 2 but only
Henricks has the period none of the other translators have it. Let me just give you the remaining nine translations next. The more accurate ones in front and the more “Inspired(#4)” ones behind. And please try to evaluate their accuracy yourself.
Robert G. Henricks: “The ten thousand things carry Yin on their backs and wrap their arms around Yang. Through the blending of Ch’i they arrive at a state of harmony.”
Richard Wilhelm: “Alle Dinge (All things) haben im Rücken (have in their back)
das Dunkle (the dark) and streben nach dem Licht (and strive towards the light), und die strömende Kraft gibt ihnen Harmonie (and the streaming power gives them harmony).”
J.Wu: “All the myriad things carry the Yin on their backs and hold the Yang in their embrace, Deriving their vital harmony from the proper blending of the two vital Breaths.
Red Pine: “ten thousand tings with Yin at their backs and yang in their embrace and breath between for harmony”. Here we have the triad in which Yin-Yang is the “DyAd(dyad)” and the “Breath(#E)” is the connective “between” them.
The Paul Carus D.T. Suzuki team: “The ten thousand things are sustained by Yin [the negative principle]; they are encompassed by Yang [the positive principle], and the immaterial breath renders them harmonious.”
. The “TriAd(_3ad)” again. Here “Breath(#E)” could be the reconciling impulse behind Yin-Yang, which “renders them harmonious.” Only when the reconciling impulse is between the poles of the polarity, as in a sentence, do I call it a “connective”.
James Legge: “All things leave behind them the Obscurity (out of which they have come), and go forward to embrace the Brightness (into which they have emerged), while they are harmonized by the breath of Vacancy.”
. Legge has made things clearer than most other translators have. He has stuck his neck out and if he is wrong then the Buddha is also wrong. His 8-fold path starts at the crossover point of the figure 8 and moves from E4, Right Vision (A), downward and clockwise to E5, Right Thought (B), then still downward to E6, Right Speech (C), then still clockwise but upwards to E7, Right Action (D), then still up to the crossover point where it is E8 and called Right Livelihood, or dharma, then still moving up but anticlockwise to E9. Here it is called Right Contemplation. Then, on top of the figure 8, we have E10, called Right Meditation, then still anticlockwise but downward we come to E11 called Right Concentration. That is as far as the Buddha is taking it. J.G. Bennett’s Dodecad begins at E1 and is complete at E12, which would be the crossover point again.
. Now back to Legge: “All things leave behind the Obscurity [Yin] (out of which they have come), and go forward [through the “Door” (A)] to embrace the Brightness [Yang] into which they [all things, including us] have emerged). Trying to say more about Legge’s “Insight(72)” would be more than I can chew right now but I wouldn’t have tried to interpret it if I didn’t think that it is worth the effort.
Chang Chung-yuan: “All of them [the “ten thousand things”] achieve harmony through the unification of affirmation and negation Which is embraced by everything.”
. Here Yang would be the “affirmation” and Yin would then be the negation. Some translators are more explicit than other translators. And then we can ask: Is that true? …
Jonathan Star: “All beings support yin and embrace yang
. . and the interplay of these two forces
. . fills the universe
Yet only at the still point,
. . between the breathing in and the breathing out,
. . can one capture these two in perfect harmony”.
. Most of Star’s scholarly work is diligent syntactic (C) work, done by computation (C). But look here, if that isn’t semantic (B) work, I don’t know what is. The “still point” “between” the poles of the “PolariTy(dyad)” is the connective in this “TriAd(_3ad)”.
I have saved Ellen M. Chen’s translation for last because she has done her homework. She has combined Ching 42.1 and 2. That means that there would be only three paragraphs in Ching 42. But the first thing we must try on for size, in all chapters, is the tetrad. Still, she has a two and a half page commentary on this chapter with about half a page dedicated to 42.2,2. Let me start with her translation:
“Ten thousand beings carry YIN on their backs and embrace YANG in their front,
Blending these two vital breaths (ch’i) to attain harmony (ho).”
. I will devote a bit more space to her commentaries in the next section but then we have to return to the COURSE. There is more work in the COURSE than I can handle alone because, with what we have learned so far from the AUTHOR, interpreting his sentences becomes easier, but there is too much to describe (C) for me. It is as Lao Tzu said:
“KnowErs(kner) are Not good with Words (PUC2).” The more you get into your own dharma the more you get out of other peoples dharma. But the less you are willing and able to do of their dharma the more you depend on them to do it for you. This file #3 is slowing down again. I really need a networker (C) to do the networking for me.
. I will explain in the next section why I think that what I have quoted of 3:6.11,4, in the last section, is “Not true”. …
Trying to predict what I will say is good homework. ...
=========================================================
. Let me say a bit more about Aleister Crowley because that will also shed light on what we know so far about the AUTHOR. From the information we got from Crowley on 42.1 we can see that Crowley “Knows” the “TriAd(_3ad)” Most translators are “WordErs(C2er) who Don’t Know (PUkn)” but, as you will see in 42.2 they can intuit the “Truth(A1)”. Having studied the Ching for 40 years it seems to me as if Lao Tzu is giving them their “Insights(72)” because, judging from other passages they have translated, “TalkErs Don’t Understand (C2erPUkn)” what they have said. This lesson is important for Lao Tzu’s students to understand. So let me elaborate: …
Our political masters are what Lao Tzu calls the rulers in an “Intelligent Man’S Government (wsmn_Z85)” in chapter 3. We know that they can’t allow us to establish a participatory democracy as was attempted in Germany and in Canada. Why? …
Because with democracy comes a democratic education. Also it we have a real democracy (A) then we can see that what is called a “Democracy” (B) is not a democracy (A)/ If you study the Tao Te Ching by yourself or in a group then you are getting an example of a democratic education. There are many examples in the Ching that show that the “Truth(A1)” in it, if known by a critical mass, will set us free. This is why our political masters can’t allow us to find out (B) the truth and repeat it to step it down to representations (C) of the truth.
. Our political masters know that if a critical mass of their subjects has representations of the truth then the truth will set us free. Why? …
Because then social engineering will no longer work. If people, who have friends and family members hooked by the AUTHOR, use the little I have found out about the COURSE since April to get them unhooked then they have first had evidence of the power of the knowledge of truth. We can use knowledge of the truth to set us free as the AUTHOR blatantly uses his knowledge of the truth to “imprison” the uncritical reader of his COURSE. FIND “imprison. ...
2:3.3,4: “An imprisoned will engenders a situation which ….becomes ….intolerable.“
2”5.1,2: “Otherwise they may unwittingly foster the belief that release [of the intellect] is imprisonment ….”, which it is.
2:8.3,8: “Until this distinction is made {between what according to the AUTHOR “is worthy and what is not.”], however, the vacillation between free and imprisoned will cannot but continue.”
. Look how ingeniously hook and bait are expressed together. Isn’t it true that “Until the distinction” between what is worthy and what is not worthy is made, the vacillation between freedom and determinism will continue? …
It will only stop when you have stepped down your knowledge (B) of the “truth” to representations (C) of the truth or when you stepped down the AUTHOR’s “untruth” by reading uncritically what he has dictated. All you have to do to get hooked is read the AUTHOR’s book without questioning it. He will take care of the rest.
. Lao Tzu is expressing this truth very clearly in chapter 3: The rulers in an “Intelligent Man’S Government …. Always Cause The-people (Cn%eMn) to be
Without Knowledge (WUkn) and Without Representations (WUYÜ)” of the truth.
. Except for “Representation(YÜ)” for “Desire(YÜ)” This is a very straight forward translation. And “Representation(YÜ)” is also a valid equivalent. Just use the dictionary-concordance in front of file #5 to get the phonetics, radicals and concordance of the six characters in this sentence. None of the translators of the many translations I have seen of this sentence has done the obvious: Instead of telling their readers WHAT Lao Tzu has said they tell them what they think he should have said. See how much can be said about a single sentence in the COURSE? .. Why? …
Because as the AUTHOR comes from the “eternal” so does Lao Tzu. Without the limitations of time and space, there is omniscience. Knowledge is “Power(TÊ)”. And the AUTHOR is using his “Power” for a different purpose than Lao Tzu is using it for.
. Aleister Crowley merely gives us an example of what most translators believe Lao Tzu said of the ruler, here it is: “He delivers them from the restlessness of knowledge and the craving of discontent.”. Simply by comparing this translation with other translations you can see that they can’t all mean what Lao Tzu has said. However, when comparing Crowley’s translations and with the COURSE, I can’t help seeing the similarity between Him and the AUTHOR. Other “WordErs may Not Know (C2erPUkn)” better but there is no doubt in my mind that the AUTHOR “Always Cause The-people to be Without Knowledge and Without true Representations.” I know it because he is “Always” doing it. Crowley may not do it as “consistently” as the AUTHOR does but he clearly did it here. His translation is nowhere near of what Lao Tzu has said and it is very much in line with what the AUTHOR has dictated. Let's continue with “imprison”. ...
3:2.4,3: “An ‘imprisoned mind is not free because it is possessed [by the “mind” (C)], or held back [from being possessed] by itself”, by its own mind (B). Notice again the double meaning here.
3:6.11,1: “There is no one [who has read the COURSE uncritically] who does not feel that he is imprisoned [by his own intellect] in some way. (2) If this is the result of his own free will he must regard his will as not free, or the circular reasoning in this position would be quite apparent, (3) Free will must lead to freedom [very true]. (4) Judgement [B] always imprisons ….”. Not true. If you read what the AUTHOR has dictated critically and attentively, if you interpret his sentences in order to find out WHAT he is saying then he can’t “imprison” you.
. Notice how “truth” and “untruth” is subtly intertwined. If you don’t notice it you get hooked. The AUTHOR is telling us the truth and, if you don’t interpret his sentences, that is all you will see, you automatically (E6) “accept” what he is saying, “and you are passively condoning” what he is doing to your mind.
. I left you some homework at the end of the last section. The question was what does D (E7) do to E8? …
By carrying out C’s instructions D is changing our world for better or for worse.
. If you are willing to do some homework, you can get a number of different translations of the Ching and try to figure out what Lao Tzu has said at 42.2,2. …
=======================================================
December 19, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. “Each type of government enacts laws that are in its own interest, a democracy democratic [education] laws, a tyranny tyrannical ones and so on; and …. what is ‘right’ for their subjects is what is in the interest of themselves, the rulers, …. (at 338e of Plato’s Republic)”. You can even see from this quote why the Republic can’t be taught in “Political science” (C). It isn’t even taught in philosophy (B). What at least some students have to do is to study philosophy (B), politics (C) and economics (D) from books our political masters don’t approve of and from information which is available on the internet. Then by discussing it with fellow students, the AUTHOR’s “Sonship”, and asking pointed questions of the teacher in class, the knowledge (B) of the truth becomes a representation (C) of the truth. Only when a critical mass of the people has enough representations of the truth do we have a chance to deal with social engineering.
. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy (A). Nothing less than an alternative education can bring about democracy. Steiner said that Plato was not a philosopher (B). I agree. He also said that he was a visionary (A). I don’t agree. He was too good a communicator (C) to be a visionary. The problem with “WordErs(C2er) is that they Don’t Know (PUkn)” enough. There are mistakes in the Republic. I had to go to India and consult Jagadguru Shri Kripalu Mahapraphu about the Republic. To answer me he had to go even beyond the Bhagavad Gita because the political system described at Gita 18.41 to 44 is a corrupted system.
. At the end of the last section, below this one, I said that “I think that Plato’s Republic and the Tao Te Ching would be on the curriculum of a democratic education.” Because of the errors in the Republic it is best for us to start with the Tao Te Ching. This book is less than 1/25th of the COURSE yet it has “Enough(Zu)” ”Repetitions (@1)” in it to step down the “Knowledge(kn)” (B) of the “Truth(A1)”, we “Got(gt)” from it, to “Representations(YÜ)” (C) of the truth. Knowledge of the “truth” is fine, but it is powerless against representations of “untruth”. And the AUTHOR knows it.
. After studying the Ching for 40 years with growing fascination, I still only know about 1/10th of it well “Enough” to talk about it. This I will try to do by starting with Ching 1.4, which is the conclusion of chapter one. From there we will go back to 1.3,1, then to 1.2,1, then to 1.1,2, and then we will jump ahead to 42.1 and 2 because, thanks to the AUTHOR, I gained a new “Insight(72)” into it.
Ching 1.4,1: “The DyAd (Tzdyad) is a Unit Originally ($1Cu)
. . . . . . . . . . . But it is Divided by Identifying (btâoMg)” its poles.
1.4,2: The “Unit Is ($1is) the light’S Darkness (_ZSü)”.
1.4,3: “Darken It and Repeat the Darkening (Sü_Z@1Sü)
. . . . . until you have reached All Mystery’S Gate (^1#1_Z%1)”.
1.3,1: Repeatedly or “Constantly Have-no Representations (CnWUYÜ)
. . . . . In-order-to Perceive The Mystery (YIKn_H#1)”.
1.2,1: “Without Representations is Heaven and Earth’S Conception (WUMgTnTI_ZB1)”.
1.1,2: “Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg) to get its Opposite(Fy), the IdentifiEd(CnMg)”.
. Please don’t believe (C) my translation without questioning (B) it. HOW? …
The way I got started is to get different translations of the Ching and to compare them. The equivalent I have picked for Yü(YÜ) and Ming(Mg) is “QuestionAble(ptA1)”. And so is the equivalent I have given for Tao(A1). If the equivalents I am picking for my translations are questionable, then they are questionable, no matter HOW I translate Tao(A1}. You still have to “Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)”.
The translation of Ching 42.1 is very easy and most translations of it will do.
Tao Produces the One (A1Sg_1), the
One Produces the Two (-1Sg_2), the
Two Produces the Three (_2Sg_3) and the
Three Produces All Things (_3SgWnwU)”.
. This sentence is a single Lemurian symbol, which Lao Tzu has translated into Chinese. This is why there are few discrepancies between different translations of it. This is not the case with 42.2,2. The most valuable contribution to 42.1,1, I found, comes from Aleister Crowley. He doesn’t have a good name but that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t spill the beans once in a while. He said “The One exhaled the Two (…. Yin Yang). …. the Three (the second Triad) …. all things (the third Triad”. This is important information. Why? …
Because it means that E3-E4-E5 is the first “TriAd(_3ad)”, E4 = A and E5 =B. Crowley then tells us that A-B-C is “the second Triad” and B-C-D, or semiotics, is “the third Triad”. From this example you can see how useful different translations and commentaries can be. One can really say the more translations you have, the better. I will use ten. There are more translations but using ten will be tedious enough. Most of the work I have to do next is not my dharma. Most of it can be done better and faster by computation (C), and the way way it will not tedious to you is by doing the work yourself.
42.2,1: The “Ten-thousand Things (WnwU) are Behind Yin (*a*b) And(bt)
. . . Embraced by, or embracing, Yang (bt^0*c)”. *a = Fu154. *b = Yin170 *c = Yang170.
42.2,2 consists of five characters: Ch’ung(#4), Ch’i(#E) Yi(YI) Wei(Wy) and Ho(Ho). You can get their radicals and concordances in front of file #5. My character by character type of translation is not very suitable for this one. The thing for you to do is to get Jonathan Star’s scholarly work on the TAO TE CHING and lots of other translations with commentaries. Most translators are “WordErs they may Not Know (C2erPUkn)” how to think, but there is no doubt in my mind that they do get “Insights(72)”, or intuitions.
. Visionaries (A), Thinkers (B), “TalkErs(C2er)” (C) all give “job-descriptions to the level below them: A to B, B to C and C to D, but what does D do in the pragmatic dimension of semiotics? …
Well, I have to leave you with some homework. …
========================================================
2:7.7,2: “Readiness is only the prerequisite for accomplishment. (3) The two should not be confused.” …
In semiotics “accomplishment” is the outcome of the thought, word and deed triad (B-C-D). To say: “The two should not be confused.” Is slightly confusing unless we read B-C as the “DyAd(dyad)” in the B-C-D “TriAd(_3ad)”, which it is not. Pointing out this bit of disinformation can be called nitpicking unless we understand more fully what the AUTHOR is talking about here. Let us, then, interpret 2:7.7,2 and 3: …
All goal-directed thinking starts with a question. The GOAL (A) is to get the answer to the question: What is the first question? …
I will use the IBM computer programming system as an example because it is based on the Aristotelian tetrad. So, knowing that “accomplishment” is on level D, what is the first question? …
What is “the prerequisite for accomplishment” (D)? …
It is the computer program the coder (C) gives to the computer (D). Without a program the computer can’t supply the customer’s (A) demand. And if the demand is not supplied, the supplier (B-C-D) doesn’t get paid.
. So the coder enables the computer to supply the demand. What is the next question? …
What enables C to write the program? …
It is the algorithm of the programmer (B), which he gives to C in the form of a flowchart.
What is the next question? …
What enables B to develop the algorithm? …
It is the demand of the customer (A). No demand, no supply. You can’t have the one without the other.
. If you have taken the seven Week IBM computer programming course then you already know this; if you have not taken it and you were able to follow me here then you have just completed a crash-course in computer programming. You have learned something in minutes “computer scientists” don’t learn in seven years.
. If interpreted, 2:7.7,2 and 3 are the bait in this paragraph, where is the hook? …
I have given 2:7.7,1 to 5 in the previous section, below this one. There you can find the hook(s) yourself. …
In the AUTHOR’s system, C “controls” B. And, if you “allow” the AUTHOR to program C, then he controls B because C is programmable and it is faster than B.
. If the AUTHOR attains his “goal” he can substitute his own thought for your thought. What does that mean? Please FIND “attain”. …
2:4.5,3: “This means that a miracle, to attain its full efficacy, must be expressed in a language that the recipient can understand without fear.” In the COURSE “fear’ means intellect. If your intellect intercepts the AUTHOR’s messages it attains the very opposite of what the AUTHOR intends to attain. If what I am learning here from the AUTHOR, is “to attain its full efficacy, [then it] must be expressed in a language that” enough people can understand. For this we need communicators (C) who love their job and are willing to do their dharma. Lao Tzu has pointed out our problem: “WordErs(C2er) Don’t Know (PUkn)” what their dharma is. And social engineers make sure that they don’t.
. What we need is an emigrant that has not been subjected to the brainwashing that students are subjected to through our educational system, which is controlled by our political masters (B) and the mass media, which is owned by the oligarchs (D).
. This is also the case with me. If I hadn’t been born in Germany in 1935 then I couldn’t do the work I am doing now. It would also be beneficial to compare the curriculum in Venezuela’s educational system with what we have here. …
It is not a democratic (A) education but what is taught by a dictator (C) is different from what is taught by our timocrats (B), and that’s why it is useful. I think that Plato’s Republic and the Tao Te Ching would be on the curriculum of a democratic education.
. In the next section I will look at Ching 1.4 (Tao Te Ching, chapter 1, paragraph 4.)
then 1.3,1, then 1.2,1, then 1.1,2, and then I will go to 42.1 and 2. I have given you this sequence as homework. If you are willing to get “ready” for these lessons then we could get some example of a democratic education. Remember what Shakespeare said: “Readiness is all.” To expect our political masters to give us a democratic education is unrealistic. Why? …
Because “Each type of government enacts laws that are in its own interest”. To tell us the truth is not in the interest of our political masters. Why? …
Because when a critical mass of the people knows the truth, the truth will set us free.
Why do you think the AUTHOR isn’t telling us the truth? …
==========================================================
25:1.7,7: “The …. one can not have separate parts.” Is that true? …
Ching 1.4,1: “The DyAd (Tzdyad) is a Unit Originally ($1Cu)
But it is Differentiated by Identifying (btâoMg)” its poles. Is that true? …
You can believe (C) the AUTHOR or try to understand (B) Lao Tzu.
. The poles of a “DyAd” are “IdentifiAble(ptMg)” Lao Tzu says: “Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)”! The dyad is what Arthur Koestler has called a “
In relation to its parts, the words in it, it is a whole; in relation to the paragraph it is in, …
a sentence is a part.
. In the COURSE thinking is called “fear”, The AUTHOR claims that the thinking you need to follow the above line of thought, “does not exist”. Is that true? …
Not if you were able to follow the above line of thought.
. At the end of the last section, below this one, I have quoted Lao Tzu: “Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)”! Since Tao(A1) can mean anything the context demands, the instruction can be translated as: ”Do what you Can Do”! This is just another “Way(A1)” of saying: Don’t bite of more than you can chew. Like the AUTHOR, Lao Tzu “Repeats(@1)” the same “meaning” in different “form”. By paying attention (A) to the same “meaning” in different sentences, you are stepping down your knowledge of the truth to representations (C) of the truth. The AUTHOR is using this principle. The mind is programmable. To step down the AUTHOR’s false ideas (B) to representations (C) of these ideas he has to repeat them often enough, and he has 1249 pages to do it in. Representations (C) are no longer questioned. That is the purpose of repeating the “truth” or an “untruth”.
. As you are “Working on the sentences you Can Do”, you are getting ready for the sentences you can’t do yet. FIND “readiness” …
2:5.4,1: “The healer who relies on his own rediness [produced by “his own” intellect] is endangering his understanding.” In the COURSE “understanding” does not mean what the word means in English but we are supposed to believe (C) that it does.
2:5.4,2: “You are perfectly safe as long as you are completely unconcerned about your readiness, but maintain consistent trust in mine.”
. The AUTHOR’s “readiness” consists in his ability to program you: “your readiness’ consists of the extent to which you have “allowed” him to program you. Obviously, you are not supposed to question that. You are supposed to be “completely” indifferent” about what he is doing to your mind.
27.7,1: “I have already briefly spoken about readiness, but some additional points might be helpful here. (2) Readiness is only the prerequisite for accomplishment. (3) The two should not be confused. (4) As soon as a state of readiness [to “accept” the AUTHOR’s program], there is usually some degree of desire to accomplish, but it is by no means necessarily undivided. (5) The state does not imply more than a potential for a change of mind.” Here mind can “mean”: “mind” (C) or “mind” B. Why? …
A “change of mind” (C) is accomplished by programming it; a change of mind (B) ...,
the intellect, is accomplished by the program in mind (C).
. How does the AUTHOR bring that “state of readiness” in the uncritical reader about? …
By ‘depreciation’ and ‘contemplation. But the two are “by no means necessarily undivided.” There is always ‘opposition’ connecting them. ‘Depreciation’ brings about “some degree of desire” to get rid of the “ego” (B); and ‘contemplation’ brings about that “state of readiness” to “accept” the AUTHOR’s help with getting rid of the intellect.
2:6.2,9: “This [‘giving’ autonomy to behaviour] is controlled by me automatically [with Automatic Energy (E6)] as soon as you place what you think under my guidance.”
. When the AUTHOR is in full control of your mind (C), he gets full control of your intellect because the mind is faster than the intellect.
2:6.3,1: “It is pointless to believe that controlling the outcome of misthought can result in healing.” …
. In computer programming, the programmer (B) does the thinking. If there is “misthought” on level B then the outcome of the B-C-D triad is not what the customer wants. The outcome at D is the supply of the customer’s (A) demand. If the supply is not what the customer wants then s/he is not going to pay for it. If “misthought” of the programmer (B) is causing the problem why would you “believe that controlling the outcome” at level D is going to fix the problem? …
2:4.2,3: “…. all mistakes must be corrected at the level on which they occur.” So why would we try to fix a problem on level D when we know that the “misthought” took place on level B? …
. This is just another example of “obscurantism”. The many capitalized words are another example of it. Here “transcending the immediate situation” is used to escape into the lofty timeless and intangible spiritual world. On page 144 of his THE DISCOVERY OF BEING Rollo May says the following:
. “The term TRANSCENDING is open to much misunderstanding …. The term is relegated to vague and ethereal things …. or religious other worldliness, or to things unempirical and unrelated to actual experience [(D) by which theories (B) are tested.] …. Some suspicion of the term obviously is sound to the extent that the word [or the “trick (548a)”] can serve to elevate any given topic out of the immediate field in which it can be discussed and thus lead to obscurantism. And often in such cases the transcendent thing aimed at is given a capital letter, such as Self or Wholeness apparently to bootleg in some quality of divinity.” From this description we can see that the AUTHOR isn’t doing anything new.
2:7.4,1: “It has already been said that you believe you cannot control fear [the intellect] because you yourself made it, and your belief in it seems to render it out of control.”
. You can make “yourself” representation (C) by repeating true ideas (B) as the AUTHOR can make it by repeating false ideas. We can see here that the AUTHOR doesn’t like “you yourself” making your own representations.
2:7.5,1: “Nothing and everything cannot coexist.”
“Everything and Nothing Mutually Produce Life (YUWUmtSg).”.
2:7.7,9: “You may think this [readiness] implies that an enormous amount of time is necessary between readiness and mastery, but let me remind you that time and space are under my control.” …
.
========================================================
. “The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Plato. The penalty you pay for indifference to what the AUTHOR is doing to your mind is to be ruled by him. Let us look again at:
2:5.4,2: “You are perfectly safe [“safe” has to be reversed] as long as you are completely unconcerned ….” As long as you are completely indifferent about the programming the AUTHOR is doing on you, you “allow” him to get away with it.
2:6.2,10: “Whenever you are afraid [whenever you think], it is a sure sign that you have allowed your mind [B] to miscreate [to seek the truth] and have not allowed me to guide it.” How does the AUTHOR “guide” the intellect (B)? …
By programming the mind (C). In the COURSE, “to guide” means: To “control”
. I was looking for “control” but, by mistake, got:
1:6.2.4: “As you integrate [into the AUTHOR’s system] you become one [with him, his will becomes yours], and your needs become one [with him] accordingly.”
1:6.3,4: “This is because you think [you know that] you live in space, where concepts such as ‘up’ and ‘down’ are meaningful. (5) Ultimately space is as meaningless as time. (6) Both ore merely beliefs.”
. To replace this intentional disinformation with the truth, all we need to understand is the Yin Yang symbol. Yang pertains to this world of “time” and “space” while Yin pertains to “eternity”. And you can’t have one pole of a polarity without the other. The AUTHOR repeatedly tries to make us belief that a “DyAd(dyad)” has only one pole. I guess my shadow wants us to know how indifferent to the truth we have to be to believe what the AUTHOR has dictated.
1:7.3,4: “Fantasy is an attempt [of the intellect] to control reality according to false needs.(5) Twist reality in any way and you are perceiving destructively.”
. The AUTHOR can “Twist reality” by means of programming our mind so that you perceive “reality in any way” he wants you to perceive it. And here he is blaming our intellect for doing that. But if we are not indifferent to what he does to our minds then what he tries to get away with amounts to spilling the beans..
2:2.7,7: “This possibility [of the AUTHOR’s defenses being “turned against you unexpectedly”] cannot be controlled except by miracles.” If the AUTHOR had expected that we would interpret his sentences the way we learn to do it from him then he would have been more careful and not spilled the beans as carelessly as he does.
2:4.2,8: “The whole distortion [of the intellect] that magic rests on the belief that there is a creative ability in matter which the [programmed] mind cannot control.”
. Creative Energy (E3) is in the “eternal”, outside of our human sphere of influence. Our soul on level A (E4) is closest to it, next comes our intellect (E5) then the mind (E6) and then the body (E7). But to the extent that all four parts of us are needed to supply the demands of the “eternal;” all four parts are creative. If one part of us is not working then the whole of us is not working.
. To replace the AUTHOR’s disinformation with the truth took a bit longer. But if you have followed me for a while then you already know that and then you can “correct” the AUTHOR’s mistake by computation (C). The fact is that, if we step down our knowledge (B) of the truth to representations of the truth then the programmed “mind cannot control” us. As we learn to interpret the AUTHOR’s sentences, the bait and the hooks in them become easier and easier to “Identify(Mg)”. “Identify the IdentifyAble (MgptMg)”! And we are doing it.
2:5.1,1: “Being afraid [thinking] seems to be involuntary [According to Steiner: Thinking must be willed]; something beyond your own control.” Steiner and other teachers tell us that when you think intentionally you know that it is controlled by you. Thinking participates in “Identifying an IdentifiAble (MgptMg)” question, but answering of the question is intentional. Thinking is not “involuntary” and there is no way that the AUTHOR doesn’t know that. Even if he brings our thinking under his “control”, even if it is “beyond your own control”, the thinking he does for you is still under his control.
. If the question is: How does the AUTHOR “control” our thought then the thinking we have to do to answer that question has to be voluntary. Why” …
Because the AUTHOR will not do it for us. How do questions arise? …
Many questions arise without our participation. That part of the thinking process can indeed be “involuntary”. FIND “involuntary” …
2:5.1,2: “Yet I have said already that only constructive acts [acts determined by the AUTHOR] should be involuntary. (3) My control can take over everything that does not matter, while my guidance can direct everything that does, if you so choose. (4) Fear [the intellect] cannot be controlled by me, ….”. That's why he has to get you to do it for him.
. I didn’t dictate the COURSE but what is in it determines what I will think about. It depends on which word captures my attention (A). FIND “guid” …
2:6.3,5: “You do not need guidance except at the mind [B] level.” At the level he can't “control”.
2:6.6,1: “It is possible to reach a state in which you bring your mind [B] under my guidance [control] without conscious effort, ….” When you are properly programmed, you will “Do it Without knowing that you are Doing (WyWUWy)” it.
. Thinking (B) must be willed; you do the computing (C) in your sleep, so to say. How much of the work I am doing here is produced by thinking (B) and voluntary, and how much of it is produced by computation and involuntary? …
When answering this question we must be careful. For instance, when 1:6.3,4 came up by mistake, I read it, and I noticed that the word I was looking for was not in it. The fact that I didn’t just take it to be a mistake but a possible message from my shadow, which would be deep down in my core, makes it a conscious (A) act. The thinking (B), which is required to evaluate the sentence had to be voluntary.
. The fact that we can be aware (A) and that we can think about what we have become aware of is something the AUTHOR clearly doesn’t like. Again, much of the work I am doing here can be done by computation (C). Communicators can do it if they are willing to do it. “Do what you Can Do (A1ptA1)”! You can use the FIND function and think about what is coming up. You may not be “ready” for all sentences that come up, but by only “Doing what you Can Do”, you will get ready for the more difficult ones. …
=======================================================
2:5.7,4: “There is no doubt that this [inability] may produce discomfort, yet the discomfort is not the final outcome of the perception. [but rather] …. (8) Discomfort is aroused only to bring the [AUTHOR’s] need for correction [of our properly working intellect] into your awareness.” HOW? …
First the AUTHOR needs your permission, or inattention, to program your mind (C). Then he uses your mind to “control” your intellect and then he uses your intellect to bring his ideas “into your awareness” (A).
2:5.7,6: “Nothing He [“the Holy Spirit” in you] perceives can induce [thought, called] fear. (7) Everything that results from spiritual awareness [from the AUTHOR’s programming] is merely channelized [through Helen Schucman] toward correction.”
. In the COURSE, “correction” means replacing the “truth”, we have found by seeking and finding, by the AUTHOR’s “untruth”. It is not “Enough(Zu)” for me to point out a few outright lies to you. If you want to know the “truth” then you have to seek and find it yourself. Then, having found it, you have to “Repeat(@1)” your knowledge of the truth until it becomes a representation (C) of the truth. Your knowledge is no match to the AUTHOR’s representations (C). Representations are too fast for the intellect. Only your own representations are a match to the AUTHOR’s representation. Your representations are as fast as his representations. Then, when he tries to slip a “falsehood” past the slower intellect, your mind (C) can intercept it and draw your attention (A) to it.. Understanding this is important. Will a communicator (C) please say this better? …
2:5.8,2: “What the physical eye sees is not corrective, nor can error [which the intellect is supposed to produce by seeking and finding the truth] be corrected by any device that can be seen physically.” This is true: What is perceived “is not corrective”. But why doesn’t he say that? …
If he wants you to “learn” the meaning of “perceive” as it is used in the COURSE, then the AUTHOR has to be “consistent”. FIND “consisten”
2:5.4,2: “You are perfectly safe as long as you are completely unconcerned about [inattentive to] your readiness, but maintain a consistent trust in mine.”
2:6.5,5: “This [your own thinking] produces consistent behavior, but entails great strain.” Why? ...
Because it is up against the AUTHOR’s programming, which is designed to do that.
3:3.2,3: “You can see in many ways because perception involves interpretation and this means that it is not whole or consistent.” …
Only “What the physical eye sees (2:5.8,2)” “involves interpretation” by the intellect. Representations (C) do not involve thought (B). Computing (C) is done with Automatic Energy (E6). You are programmed not to question your believes (C). Try to “DeProgram(PUÜd)” an uncritical reader of the COURSE, who is halfway through it. You will see what social engineering can do. Back to “perce”:
2:5.8,5: “But since the altar has been defiled [by the intellect], your state becomes doubly dangerous unless it is perceived.” And we perceive what we “Expect(YÜ)” to see or what the AUTHOR has programmed us to “perceive”.
2:5.9,4: “This is because healing rests on charity [another nice word], and charity is a way of perceiving the perfection of another even if you cannot perceive it in yourself.”
. There is another “consistent” “meaning” in the COURSE which has to do with the ‘Sonship’ You don’t only get the alternative meanings of words from the 1249 page book but from talking (C) with your “brothers”. Look how frequently the word “democracy’ is repeated, in school and by the mass media. Do we really have a democracy (A)? …
The majority of dumbed down citizens believes it for no other reason that the word is “Repeated(@1) so often. Clearly we don’t have a government in which the decisions are made BY the people FOR the people. The reason we are in such a mess is because decisions are made for the decision-maker and who makes the decisions in a timocracy (B) are not the people, demos, in Greek.
2:5.12,2: “All forms of healing rest on this fundamental correction in level perception.”
In this context, “healing” would bring about “level confusion”
2:4.2,2: “Sickness or ‘not-right-mindedness’ is the result of level confusion, because it always entails the belief that what is amiss on one level can adversely affect another.”
. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. If vision, thought, word or deed (A-B-C-D) is weak, the tetrad as a whole is weak. Sometimes it is hard to explain the truth by which the AUTHOR’s falsehoods are to be replaced, but here it is easy.
2:4.2,3: “We have referred to miracles as a means of correcting level confusion, for all mistakes must be corrected at the level on which they occur.”
. In the construction business, it is easy to see on which level a mistake occurs. For instance if the subcontractors (D) go on strike, you know which level the problem is on. But in computer programming to say: Correct mistakes “on the level on which they occur.” is easier said than done and the AUTHOR is referring to mistakes the causes of which are more complex than what happens in computer programming.
. By interpreting one sentence the AUTHOR has dictated at a time, we come to understand what “healing” or “correcting” means in the COURSE, and these words don’t mean what they mean in English.
2:5.1,6: “This recognition [that “the miscreations of the mind [B] do not really exist”] is a far better protective device than any form of level confusion, because it introduces correction at the level of the error.” …
. If you have replaced the “untruth” at 2:4.2,3 with the “truth” then you can find the “untruth” here by computation (C). You don’t have to think (B) to see the error. But there is another mistake here. Can you see it? …
First the AUTHOR blames the bad “ego” for causing “level confusion”. But what does he call it here? …
He calls it a “protective device”. It is not as good as denying the existence of the intellect altogether but it still comes in handy.
2:5.5,4: “By denying your mind [B] any desctructive potential and reinstating its purely constructive powers, you place yourself in a position to undo the level confusion of others.” “destructive” and “constructive” have to be reversed.
. What about the “level confusion” he is using as a “protective device”. “Obscurantism” is a method of creating “confusion”, by making yourself look smart and causing your readers to feel stupid.
2:6.2,1: “I do not foster level confusion, ….” Really? …
Back to “perce”. Please “Do the ones you Can Do (A1ptA1)”. …
=========================================================
2:5.2,5: “Under these conditions, it is safer for you to rely temporarily on physical healing devices, because you cannot misperceive them as your own creations.” …
. In the last section, I have given you this sentence for homework but without the subordinate phrase at the end. I didn’t want to give you too much to chew at one time. This is a tough one but it is chewable. Please bear with me:
. The first three words, before the comma, form a subordinate phrase. What is the subject of the main sentence? …
The subject is: What “is safer for” the AUTHOR to do. What is the connective? …
To “rely” on, is the verb or connective in this sentence. What is the predicate? …
The AUTHOR doesn’t want us to interpret his sentences, so please do it. …
It is safer for him to allow us to rely “on physical” experimentations (D) and observations (D) of their results than giving his “miracles” to us “prematurely”. Why? …
“because you cannot misperceive them as your own creations.” What are “your own creations? …
”your own creations” are your own thoughts (B), decisions (C) based on those thoughts, and actions (D) based on those decisions. These include the observations of our senses (D).
. “Under [what] …. Conditions [is it] …. Safer [for the AUTHOR] to rely temporarily on physical healing devices”? …
Not even the best communicator (C) can convey the “meaning” of the AUTHOR’s sentences if you don’t think along with him or her. Notice the word “temporar”ily. …
2:2.5,3: “Learning itself, like the classrooms in which it occurs, is temporary.”
2:2.6,3: “This process of [thought, word and deed (B-C-D)] is actually incomprehensible in temporary terms [Why?], because you return as you go forward.” This is true in the AUTHOR’s world, which is not time and space “Bound(*1)” but why try to make us believe (C) that our world is not real, that it doesn’t serve a specific purpose? …
2:4.4, “HEALING AS RELEASE FROM FEAR”, from the intellect (B) and its thoughts.
2:4.4,5: “Sometimes the illness [produced by the intellect (B)] has a sufficiently strong hold over the mind [C] to render a person temporarily inaccessible to the Atonement. (6) In this case it may be wise to utilize a compromise approach to mind and body [control] in which something from the outside [from outside the AUTHOR’s “thought system”] is temporarily given healing belief” (C). …
. “In this case [when our intellect is still functioning properly] it may be wise” not to spill too many beans.
2:5.2,3: “The very fact that you are afraid [that your intellect produces its own thoughts] makes your mind vulnerable to miscreation.” Your own mind (C) is in danger of being programmed by your own intellect (B). The mind is more “vulnerable” to the truth because the truth is already in your core. The “eternal” in us is represented by the black dot in the white part of the Yin Yang symbol. We are “vulnerable” to the truth in us which, when we become aware (A) of it, will set us free.
2:5.9,2: “Like all aspects of the belief in space and time, it is temporary.” …
The knowledge (B) representations (C) and experiences (D) we have of “space and time” is in time, it is “temporary” but that doesn’t make it wrong.
2:7.3,3: “By choosing the miracle [by allowing yourself to be programmed] you have rejected fear [your intellect], if only temporarily.” It takes time to get rid of the intellect completely. Our intellect can only function as we know it in time and space. In this sense it is a “temporary” experience, but we can take part of this experience with us to the other side. This is indicated as the white dot in the black part of the Yin Yang symbol. If the AUTHOR couldn’t do that then he couldn’t have dictated his 1249 page book.
. Knowledge is power. On the other side of the “Door” (A) you are omniscient but you can only have an effect on people’s minds (C), if you can take a bit of time and space with you in your core.
. The Law of Correspondence is universal: As we can take a bit of “eternity” with us into time, so the AUTHOR can take a bit of time with him into eternity. And both dots in the Yin Yang symbol can be expanded by repetition. It is important to understand this to know the difference between the AUTHOR just making a mistake and him intentionally lying to us.
2:7.3,10: “The cause and effect principle now becomes a real expeditor, though only temporarily.”
2:7.3,10a: The AUTHOR needs the “cause and effect principle” to expedite his work.
2:7.3,10b: “The cause and effect principle” only works in time and space. “Before and After Mutually necessitate Sequence (#c60mt#e)” or time. You can’t have a “cause” first and then, “After(60)” that, have an “effect” without the “Before-After (#c60)” “DyAd(dyad)” In the “DyAd”, the poles are “Opposites(Fy)”. What is the reconciling impulse behind them that causes the “DyAd” to become a “TriAd(_3ad)”? …
In a “TriAd”, the poles become complementaries. What cause the “Two to Become the Three (_2Sg_3)”? …
It is “Sequence(#e)” or time. The AUTHOR has the memory of time on the other side. Yang pertains to this world of time and space while Yin, the “Mystery”, pertains to the “eternal” FIND “etern” …
2:2.5,5: “The eternally creative have nothing to learn.” Outside of time and space there is “nothing to learn”, there all knowledge is one. The hook would be the word “creative” because in the “eternal” you can’t do anything. There is no creatable-creating-created triad because there is no time to do anything in. There is no “Before and After”. Everything is in the “eternal;” NOW.
3:4.5,11: “This [Even …. miscreation] is impossible, because the mind [B] belongs to spirit which God created and which is therefore eternal.” If “spirit” and “God” mean what the words mean in English then we have the bait. And if you don’t catch what they mean in the COURSE then you swallow the hook.
3:7.3,2: “The separation is a system of thought [word and deed (B-C-D)] real enough in time, though not in eternity.” In “eternity” there can be no thought, word and deed because there is no “time” to do it in. What is the hook here? …
That this world is merely “a system of thought [not] real enough [because it is] not in eternity.” If the experience (D) of “time” were possible in “eternity” we wouldn’t need the “separation”, or “Division(âo)” of “Before and After(#c60)” to “create” this world. And the AUTHOR or “God created” it. Back to 2:4.4,10: …
What causes an “upside-down perception” (D)? …
An “upside-down” representation (C).What causes an “upside-down” representation? …
An “upside-down” thought (B). And what causes an “upside-down” thought? …
The AUTHOR. The intellect (B) usually causes a right-side-up thought (B).
2:5.7,4: “There is no doubt that this [inability to “see error”] may produce discomfort, yet the discomfort is not the final outcome of the perception”, of “your spiritual sight”. …
2:5.7,8: “Discomfort is aroused [by the AUTHOR] only to bring the need for correction into your awareness.” Why does a properly working intellect “need …. correction”? …
========================================================
2:4.4,9: “If they [“the non-right-minded”] are prematurely exposed to a miracle, they may be precipitated into panic.” They may be unable to swallow the hook.
2:4.4,10: “This is likely to occur when upside down perception has induced the belief that miracles are frightening.” …
A good practice is to read the “Reverse($l)” of what the AUTHOR is saying. Just try it on for size. …
A right-side up “perception” will induce you to be cautious. Miracles ARE “frightening” because they cleverly “induce” you to “accept” the AUTHOR’s will as yours.
. Let us FIND “induce”
2:5.7,6: After the uncritical reader has been fully programmed “Nothing He perceives can induce fear” or caution.
2:5.A15,1: ”The level-adjustment power of the miracle [of the program] induces the right [wrong] perception for healing.” In the COURSE “healing” means replacing the “truth” with the AUTHOR’s “untruth”.
2:2.6,7: “This [the AUTHOR’s “truth”] is the healing that the miracle induces.”
3:3.5,10: “Knowledge is the result of revelation and induces only thought.” …
What the AUTHOR calls “Knowledge is the result of “ reading his words uncritically. It “induces only” “misthought”. If you reverse the meaning of the AUTHOR’s words then you can do most interpretations by computation (C). Your, like the AUTHOR’s, intellect is only needed as long as you have, or he has, not programmed your mind yet.
3:4.5,3: “When it [the “mind” (B)] chooses to be separated it chooses to perceive.” …
Our intellect does not choose “to be separate”. It chooses to participate in supplying the demand that comes into our world of time and space through the “Door” at A. Because our body (D) also participates in supplying God’s demand it carries out the instructions which it gets from the communicators (C). All B, C, and D “chooses” to do is to participate in supplying God’s demand. They don’t choose what to do with their intellect (B), their mind (C) or their body (D). WHAT to do is determined on the level above them. HOW? …
D simply carries out the instructions of C. The computer (D) has no choice, it is designed to carry out instructions. But subcontractors (D) can choose to go on strike. The programmer (B) carries out the “job-description” of the customer (C). I was a programmer for nine years. If you want to get paid for the work you do then you don’t tell the customer WHAT to do, You listen to him or her and do it. The AUTHOR may not agree with this but that’s HOW it works here on earth.
3:4.6,3: “The interpretative function of perception, a distorted form of creation, then permits you to interpret the body as yourself in an attempt to escape from conflict you have induced.” …
3:4.6,3a: When “The interpretive function” of the intellect (B) is repeated “Enough(Zu)” it becomes automatic. It can then be carried out with Automatic Energy (E6). This means that interpretations, which are normally done by the intellect (B) can be done by the mind (C). Some interpretations can be done by computation (C). “Do the interpretations you Can Do (A1ptA1)”. “Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)”.
3:4.6,3b: It is a properly “Aligned(8b)” “form of creation”.
3:4.6,3c: This normal “form of creation, then permits you to interpret the body as yourself”. Why do you need permission “to interpret the body as yourself”? …
3:4.6,3d: Are we doing all of this work “to escape from the conflict you [are supposed to] have induced”? ...
Your body (D), along with your mind (C), intellect (B) and soul (A), is you. You wouldn’t be you if one of these four “sources” were missing. Try it. …
But one of these “natural aptitudes (see the Republic)” predominates in different people. For instance, astrologically, I am an air sign. This makes me what the Hindus call a jnana yogi (B). What Lao Tzu calls the “KnowErs(kner)” (B) do what I am doing here. It is not as well expressed as a raja yogi (C) can do it but it is my dharma.
3:4.7,10: “Sane perception induces sane choosing.” There are again two valid interpretations for this one. ...
If you read “Sane perception” as what it means in English then you get one “meaning” if you try on the opposite for size you get the other “meaning”. The former is the bait and the latter is the hook.
. This is all the sentences with “induce” in them we have in the first three chapters. Even if you go through the whole text, you would only add detail, the general idea is already here in the first three chapters. This seems to be the way to go. Not only do we find out what the sentences with these words in them “mean”, we also find out what these words “mean”.
We can now return to “perse”
2:5.1,3: “This misperception [“that release [getting rid of the intellect] is imprisonment] arises in turn from the belief that harm can be limited to the body.” Is that true? …
Our body is like a link on a 4-fold chain. The chain is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Break any link, any one, and you break the chain. There is no way that the AUTHOR doesn’t know this. So this is not just a mistake but another blatant lie.
2:5.2,5: “Under these conditions [of “egocentricity and fear], it is safer for you to rely temporarily on physical healing devices.” …
====================================================
December 11, 2011 . . .. . . . . . . . ACIM
3:7.6,3: “The light will shine from the true Foundation of life, and your own thought system will stand corrected. …. (6) Life and death, light and darkness, knowledge and perception, are irreconcilable.” Are the poles of these dyads really “irreconcilable”? …
3:2.1,3: “It is impossible to conceive of light and darkness or everything and nothing as joint possibilities.” There are two falsehoods in there. Can you see one? …
Is the AUTHOR’s “light” “everything” and our “darkness” “nothing”? …
The AUTHOR must know the Yin Yang symbol. He couldn’t make use of the “eternity” in our core, represented as the dark dot in the center of the light part of the symbol, if he didn’t know it. Let us consult Lao Tzu about the “Light($4)” and the “Dark(Sü)”:
Ching 1.4,1: “The DyAd(Tzdyad) was a Unit Originally($1Cu)
But it was Divided by Identifying (btâoMg)” its poles.
1.4,2: The “Unit Is ($1is) the light’S Darkness (_ZSü)”.
1.4,3: “Darken It Sü_Z) and Repeat the Darkening (@1Sü), to enlarge the dark dot at the center of the light, until you reach All Mystery’S Gate (^1#1_Z%1)”.
1.3,1: Be repeatedly or “Constantly Without Representations (CnWUYÜ)
In-order-to Perceive The Mystery YIKn_H#1)”.
The “Mystery(#1)” is “Perceived(Kn)” through our soul (A); the time and space “Bounded(*1)” physical reality is “Perceived” through or physical senses “By-means-of(YI)” the appropriate “Representations(YÜ)”. In a “DyAd” the poles are “Opposites(Fy)” in a “TriAd(_3ad)” they become complements. In other words, they are “reconcilable”. Please Google: Yin Yang . to find out more about what Lao Tzu has explained in the very first chapter of his Tao Te Ching. …
Now you can return to 3:7.6,6 and decide for yourself whether the AUTHOR is telling us the truth by means of which our “own thought system will stand corrected”, whether he has just made a mistake or whether he is blatantly lying to us. And now we can return to
2:1.5.2: “It [the “miracle’] makes no distinction among misperceptions.” …
What is called a “misperception” in the COURSE is caused by the intellect. How? …
By repeating the truth the intellect (B) has found until it has become a representation. And then …
the representation (C) becomes a perception (D). “Constantly repeat the truth so that you have representations of the truth by means of which you can perceive the time and space bound reality (CnYUYÜYIKKn_H*1)”. Ordinary “translations” are really interpretations. They are what the translator thinks Lao Tzu has meant.
2:2.5,6: “You can learn to improve your perception, and become a better and better learner.” Again, this sentence has a double meaning. Can you see one? …
To “improve your perception”, you have to work on your representations (C) “To Perceive The (YIKn_H) the time and space Bound(*1)” reality more clearly. Is this what the AUTHOR means? No. What, then does he mean? …
He wants you to “accept” his representations, which cause you to see what he wants you to see.
2:3.1,5: “Perceiving the body as a temple is only the first step in correcting this distortion [of “The many body fantasies”], because it alters only part of it. (6) It DOES recognize [already believe] that Atonement in physical terms is impossible.” …
The “first step in correcting” our “misthoughts” is to make us believe “that Atonement in physical terms is impossible.” Is it really impossible? …
“Atonement” is making one what was a “Unit Originally But which has been Divided ($1Cubtâo).” Lao Tzu has told us how to “Unite($1)” the “Divisions(Âo)” “Again(@1)”. You can now either believe Lao Tzu or the AUTHOR.
2:3.3,9: “The alternating investment in the two levels of perception is usually experienced as conflict, which can become very acute” if you allow the AUTHOR to program you. If you are not programmed “Enough(Zu)” yet, you can still do what we are doing here and look at booth “meaning”s of his ambiguous statements. This kind of work will “DeProgram(PUÜd)” you.
2:4.4,9: Those who are “prematurely exposed to a miracle, they may be precipitated into panic [and wake up]. (10) That is likely to occur when upside down perception has induced the belief that miracles are frightening.” …
====================================================
December 10, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. If the AUTHOR has fully programmed you then
2:1.4,1: “All fear is ultimately reducible to the basic misconception that you have the ability to usurp the power of God.” …
. In the COURSE, “fear” means intellect (B) and the thought (B) it produces.
2:1.3,4: “All that can literally disappear” by means of the AUTHOR’s programming.
. Our own thought is supposed to be a “basic misconception that you have the ability to usurp the power of” the AUTHOR. Is that true? …
Our thought (B) and experience (D) prove other wise. Every time we successfully interpret one of his sentences we defuse them. They are no longer effective. They lose their “power” over us. These failed attempts to deceive us, give us knowledge and “knowledge is power (3:3.1,5)”.
. The thought by which I have just interpreted 2:1.4,1 is real to me, and if you follow that line of thought, it is real to you as well. Every time you expose one of his lies, you are taking the “power” he may have gained over you, back again. In this ideological war, “ultimately”, the truth always wins.
2:1.4,7: “However when we awaken, the light is correctly perceived as the release of the dream.”
2:1.4,7a: FIND “awake” …
2:1.3,7: “The world has not yet experienced any comprehensive reawakening or rebirth.” 2:3.3,8: “This [programming] ultimately reawakens spiritual vision [program induced perception], simultaneously weakening the investment in physical [D] sight.”
2:5.7,1: “Corrective learning always begins with the awakening of spirit and the turning away from the belief in physical sight.” The word “spirit”, as in “Holy Spirit” does not mean what it means in English. .
3:2.5,2: “By doing this [commending your “spirit into the Hands of” the AUTHOR] the mind awakens from its sleep and remembers its Creator.” The “Father” of 3:2.5,1, the “Creator”, “God”, his “Son”, the “Holy Spirit” are all different names for slightly different aspects of the AUTHOR. 3:2.5,2 can be identified as ‘contemplation’. If you submit to the AUTHOR then he will “awaken” you. Neuro-science can give you a good idea of what can be done with programming (B-C-D). Back to 2:1.4,7:
. FIND “light”. …
It is in over 20 sentences. This means that it is an important concept. There are 31 chapters in the text. The three chapters I have copied are only 1/10th of the text. But it seems to be enough to identify the “meanings” and, after they are identified, get some practice with them.
2:2.1,13: “It [“the proper use of denial”] is not used to hide [or deny] anything, but to correct error. (14) It brings all error into the light, and since error and darkness are the same, it corrects error automatically.”
. Anything done “automatically” (E6) is done by computation (C). Since the “light” comes from the AUTHOR, “error and darkness” come from the intellect. So the “correct”ion of our “misthoughts” is done “automatically”.
2:3.1,1: “The Atonement can only be accepted within you by releasing the inner light.”
We have been here before. But interpreting this one has become easier: …
In this context, “the inner light” is our intellect. Why? …
Because the AUTHOR’s “Atonement can only be accepted within you by releasing the inner light”, by getting rid of the intellect.
2:5.6,6: “The body is, however, easily brought into alignment with a mind that has learned to look beyond it [the evidence of the senses] toward the light”, which comes from the AUTHOR.
2:7.5,4: “Whenever light enters darkness, the darkness is abolished.”
. This statement is true whether “Light” and “darkness” mean what they mean in English or what they mean in the COURSE. The English version is the bait and the AUTHOR’s “meaning” is the hook. If we let that alternative meaning slip past out intellect then we are swallowing the hook. Social engineering is a science, and when you begin to understand it you will see that it is a very unethical one.
3:2.1,3: “It is impossible to conceive of light and darkness or everything and nothing as joint possibilities. …. (7) No one has ever lived who has not experienced some light and something.” ‘Contemplation’ ‘depreciation’ and ‘opposition’. Why? …
The AUTHOR’s “truth” is “light” and “everything” and our truth, which we seek and find with our intellect, is “darkness” and “nothing”. Let me “Repeat(@1)” If you let the hidden “meaning” slip by your intellect (B) and awareness (A) you are swallowing the hook. This word of caution can’t be repeated often enough. If you don’t become aware of what he is subliminally doing to your mind, you get hooked.
3:4.6,6: “Thereafter [after “spirit” has been weakened], spirit is perceived as a threat [by the “darkness”], because light abolishes darkness merely by showing you it is not there.” ‘Depreciation’ again. The thought, which is produced by the intellect, “is not there.”
3:5.10,6: “How beautiful indeed are the Thoughts of God [of the AUTHOR] who live in His light! (7) Your worth is beyond perception [D] because it is beyond doubt [After you have been fully programmed you no longer ask any questions.]. (8) Do not perceive [B-C-D] yourself in different lights [like the light of your intellect]. (9) Know yourself in the One Light were the miracle that is you [ the program is that in you and determines what you think (B), say (C) and do (D).] is perfectly clear.” If what the social engineers are doing to your mind were “perfectly clear” to you, you would never allow them to manipulate you as they do. As an exercise, it is always well to try the opposite of what the AUTHOR is saying on for size.
3:7.4,9: “Until then [until “you finally perceive correctly”], however, the belief that you can [interpret at least some of the AUTHOR’s sentences] is the foundation stone of your thought system [(B) and experience (D)], and all your defenses are used to attack ideas that might bring it to light.” Sensitive Energy (E5) is used for thinking. If the truth we come up with is supposed “to attack ideas that might bring …. to light” what the AUTOR is doing, that is a problem for him, and, obviously, he doesn't like it.
3:7.5,3: “Look at your life and see what the devil [the intellect] has made. (4) But realize [believe] that this making will surely dissolve in the [AUTHOR’s] light of truth, because its foundation is a lie.” We are told that the foundation of our thinking “is a lie”.
3:7.5,5: “Your creation by God [by the AUTHOR] is the only Foundation that cannot be shaken, because the light is in it.” Because the “light” is in it, the “Foundation” of the COURSE can be shaken. And, as we can see, with only half a Year practice it can be shaken more easily.
3:7.6,3: “The light will shine from the true Foundation of life, and your own thought system will stand corrected” by the AUTHOR’s thought system.
3:7.6,6: “Life and death, light and darkness, knowledge and perception [theory (B) and practice (D)], are irreconcilable.” 3:7.6 is the last paragraph of chapter three and the first three chapters are all I have copied. But as you can hopefully see from this sample: The more sentences you interpret, the easier it gets. I will leave 3:7.6,6 for homework. Try to predict what I will come up with. …
========================================================
.
3:4.1,8: “The levels created by the separation cannot but conflict.” This tells us where the AUTHOR is coming from and where he wants us to take us.” …
I made the mistake in the December 3 section. Can you see it? …
What is my shadow trying to tell us? …
Where does the AUTHOR want “us to take us” to? …
The more of this you can figure out yourself, the better. …
The AUTHOR “wants us to take” ourselves to where he “is coming from”. HOW? …
By programming our mind (C), our own mind is taking us there. HOW? …
The AUTHOR’s program, when executed by our own bio-computer (D), will do exactly that. And he knows it. Knowledge is power. By learning what he knows, we are taking that power away from him. Social engineering no longer works on these who know its “tricks and stratagems (548)”. Now we can use “Repetition(@1)” to program ourselves.
. Now communicators (C) can give that power to their readers. But where are they? …
When the truth is known by a critical mass, it will set us free.
. “Truth” is the lifeblood of democracy (A).
“Untruth” is the lifeblood of timocracy (B. See Plato’s Republic). Then our political masters will lose their power over us.
2:6.9,12: “If you believe that what you think is ineffective you may cease to be afraid of it, but you are hardly likely to respect it.” …
With what you know by now, many sentences can be interpreted by computation (C). …
2:6.9,12a: “If …. what you think is ineffective you” are less afraid of your intellect. We have here another ‘depreciation’. The “meaning” is the same but the “Form” is different.
2:6.912b: “…. but you are hardly likely to respect it.” Why did he say that? …
To slip another ‘depreciation’ past our intellect (B) and awareness (A). Every time he manages to do that we are “passively condoning” the programming he does on us.
. We have worked on this one in the December 7 section. I just wanted to add this to it. I also want to add something to the interpretation I have given of 3:5.8,5 in the same section: From it you can see that thought (B) is one step removed from “awareness” (A). Our awareness comes from Conscious Energy (E4) at level A. Word, or the mind (C) is two steps removed and “perception” (D) is three steps removed. Why then does he tell us that “Only perception involves partial awareness.”? …
1:7.2,4: “You can use your body best to help you enlarge your perception so you can achieve real vision, of which the physical eye is incapable.” …
1:7.2,4a: In this context, “your body” (D) refers to your bio-computer (D) .
2:7.2,4b: How does it “help you enlarge your perception? …
By the AUTHOR using his intellect (B) to program your mind (C). Then your mind is giving your bio-computer (D) the program (C) to execute. A computer program is a series of imperative sentences (C), so it is on level C.
1:7.2,4c: What does the AUTHOR mean by “real vision”? …
It is not the vision (A), the Buddha was talking about. The “real vision” is something you get as a result of the programming the AUTHOR does to your mind (C). The AUTHOR can’t give you the real vision. Why? …
Because it would make you “aware” (A) of what he is doing.
1:7.2,5: “Learning to do this is the body’s only true usefulness.” Is that true? …
Do you still believe everything the AUTHOR tells you? …
I have given you 1:7.2,4 and 5 for homework. I hope that you have done, or tried to do, it. If you don’t “Do what you Can Do (A1ptA1)” then you don’t do what the AUTHOR doesn’t want you to do. Which is? …
He doesn’t want you to use your head (B). Even if you only try to interpret his sentences, you are doing something he doesn’t like. Why? …
Because thinking undoes what he is trying to do.
1:7.3,7: “But although you can perceive false associations, you can never make them real except to yourself.” …
. You “can perceive” anything the AUTHOR has programmed you to perceive (D). When that is understood, then the “false associations” are the right associations your mind has “Identified(Mg)”. You always “make them real” when you intellect works properly. But once the AUTHOR “controls” your intellect, “you can never make them real except” when you program yourself. Then you can do it “yourself.”
2:1.3,4:: “All that can literally disappear in the twinkling of an eye because it is merely a misperception.” The AUTHOR’s program in your mind (C) can make anything “disappear”. It can be computed (C) as a “misperception.” that doesn't exist.
2:1.4,1: “All fear is ultimately reducible to the basic misconception that you have the ability to usurp the power of God.” We have been here before. We know what “fear” and “God” mean in the COUESE. But now that we have a better idea of what “conception” and “misconception” mean, let’s try it again. …
======================================================
December 7, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM. In the last section I said: “If it were easy to catch the AUTHOR’s mistakes and lies then social engineering wouldn’t work.” It works because we can’t understand it. and “obscurantism” has something to do with it. If you have followed me for a while, and I have only stated on the COURSE in April, what can you add to what I have said? …
“Difficult becomes Easy (dfez)” If you only “Do what you Can Do (A1ptA1).”
. “Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1) to get its Opposite(Fy), the TaoEd(CnA1).”
. Lao Tzu “Repeats(@1)” the same message all over the place because it is important: He says in so many words: Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Trying to do more than you can do causes you to get confused, frustrated, which causes you to waste time and energy, which can be invested much more profitably in something you “Can Do (ptA1)”.
. Looking for something “Easy(ez)” to chew, we don’t have to go far. Let’s go back to
4:1.2,3: “They [that’s us] always perceive it [the “Division(âo)”] as a move toward further separation, ….” That is not what those who know what their dharma is and who are doing it “perceive” (D) or experience (D). I have interpreted the rest of 4:1.2,3 in the last section. So, if you know what your dharma is, or even if you have just followed me for a while, what can you add to 4:1.2,3? …
I can only speak for myself, and I know that sentences, which I couldn’t interpret even a few Weeks ago, now have become chewable. With a bit of “Practice(pr)” some sentences, like 4:1.2,3, hardly require any effort. You can “Do them Without Effort (D2WUD2)”. The primary dictionary equivalent of Shih(D2) is “Affair”. So “Do(D2)” is a more obvious equivalent, but Wing has “Effort(D2)” and I have used that. When you know that Lao Tzu never fails to “Repeat(@1)” the same “meaning”, “Effort(D2)” is a valid equivalent, and Wing has seen that.
. Let us now look for more sentences that have “perce”ive or “perce”ption in them: …
In the three chapters I have copied, there are over 110 sentences with “perce” in them. This means that this word was a good pick. And not only because we already have a good idea what this word means in English, what the Buddha means by “Vision” (A) and what the AUTHOR means by “perception” (B-C-D).
1:7.1,1: “Your distorted perceptions [our normal perceptions (D)] produce a dense cover over miracle impulses (B-C-D), making it hard for them to reach your own awareness.” …
Our normal perceptions (D) will do that. This is why the AUTHOR doesn’t like them any more than he likes our intellect, our “ego” as he calls it.
. Because the mind (C) is faster than the intellect, C can “control” B. if? …
If an intelligently (B) designed program is installed in the mind (C). One important secret of social engineering is that the mind is programmable. So, the algorithm (B) for the “miracle impulses” (B-C-D) is developed on level B. The program is then installed in the mind (C), by “Repetition(@1)”, and the mind gets our bio-computer (D) to execute the program (C). The Law of Correspondence is universal. As without, so within.
. A question resulting from 1:7.1,1 is: Which level is “awareness” on? …
FIND “aware” …
2:5.7,7: “Everything that results from spiritual awareness is merely channelized toward correction. (8) Discomfort is aroused only to bring the need for correction into awareness. In the COURSE, “correction” means replacing the thoughts of the intellect (B) by the program in the mind (C). The question was: Which level is “awareness” on? …
The AUTHOR has programmed his algorithm (B) into the mind (C ). He didn’t mean “mind” (B) or say “ego” (B), so on what level is “awareness”? …
2:6.9,11: “This may allay awareness of guilt, but at the cost of perceiving the mind (?) as impotent. (12) If you believe that what you think (B) is ineffectual you may cease to be afraid of it, but you are hardly likely to respect it.” We are not supposed to respect the intellect. But he says in the next paragraph, at
2:7.1,5: “I would hardly help you if I depreciated the power of your own thinking.” Since he is doing it all the time, what does that mean? …
It means that he has no intention to “help” us. We have here a good example of “obscurantism” I know that “awareness”, Conscious Energy (E4), is on level A, but I tried to get that information for you from the AUTHOR.
3:5.8,5: “Only perception involves partial awareness.” E5 is stepped down Conscious Energy (E4), or “awareness” (A), E6 is stepped down Sensitive Energy (E5) or thought (B) and our body (D (E7)), with its organs of “perception”, is stepped down Automatic Energy (E6). So not “Only perception involves partial awareness” (A). To me, the AUTHOR’s intentional deception is obvious, but, as you can see, describing it is difficult.
3:6.4,4: “Nothing that you have refused to accept can be brought into awareness.”
. This is true: The AUTHOR can bring “Nothing you have refused to accept …. into awareness.” Bu on which level is “awareness”? …
It seems to me that the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to know that. If he wanted us to know the truth, he could have come right out with it. Let’s go back to “perce”: …
1:7.1,2: “The confusion of miracle impulses [B-C-D] with physical impulses [D] is a major perceptual [D] distortion.” It is not even a minor “perceptual distortion” if you use your intellect (B). Why do you think the AUTHOR is trying so hard to “help” us to get rid of it? …
1:7.2,4: “You can use your body best to help you enlarge your perception so you can achieve real vision, of which the physical eye is incapable. (5) Learning to do this is the body’s only true usefulness.” Really? …
====================================================
December 5, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. This is not a one-person-job. I gets too hard for me to chew, so I don’t chew what should be chewed. For instance, I said in the previous section that, “the truth is on our side”. What should be added is: It is already in our core. The AUTHOR knows that it is there, and he makes use of it. But, if we “Know that he Knows (Ping Ping)” it, then we can make use of that “Knowledge(kn)”.
. I also said that, “our ‘Desires(YÜ)’ (C) have nothing to do with it.” What should be added is: They are one of the four “segments of reality”, but they are not separating the “segments of reality by the unstable scales of desire.” If it were easy to catch the AUTHOR's mistakes and lies then social engineering wouldn't work.
4:1.2,2: The intellect which participates in “Change is always fearful to be separated, because they cannot conceive of it as a move toward healing the separation. (3) They always perceive it as a move toward further separation, because the separation was their first experience of change.”
. Time is the idea of change in the Ever-Unchangeable. The movement from the timeless into time is through the “Door, Dasamadwara” at A. So, our “first experience of change” would be at A. So much for the bait, the rest looks like hooks to me.
4:1.4,2: “Refusing to change your mind will not prove that the separation has not occurred.” Changing your mind (C), by programming it, will “prove that the separation has not occurred.” That the separation has not occurred is what the AUTHOR has to make us believe (C) by programming our mind (C). The mind (C) is programmable, but not as long as the intellect (B) is functioning properly. This is how he tries to convince us that we should get rid of it. The next sentence is a example of such an attempt.
4:1.4,3: “The dreamer who doubts the reality of his dream while he is still dreaming is not really healing his split mind” (B). In the COURSE, “healing” means replacing the ideas (B) the intellect produces by representations (C) which the AUTHOR produces. Because the mind is programmable and faster than the intellect, it can be programmed to make us believe (C) anything.
. And the AUTHOR does the programming right here in this COURSE. But to see it, takes more work than I can do alone. But, with Lao Tzu’s help, a lot can be accomplished. To find out what the AUTHOR is doing, let us get some basic ideas about the “separation” from the Tao Te Ching. Like the AUTHOR, Lao Tzu talks in paradoxes but not to confuse or deceive us, but to get us to think. You don’t learn to think by reading (C) translations of the Ching, but by thinking about the differences between translations. This is what I did with Ching 71, and that’s what got me going on it, 40 years ago.
. We will look for Wu(WU), Yu(YU) and Wan(Wn) Wu(wU).
.
1.2,1: “Without Ming (WUMg) is Heaven and Earth’S Conception (TnTI_ZB1).”
1.2,2: “With Ming (YUMg) is “Of(_Z)” All Things the Mother (WnwU_ZMU).”
. The dictionary equivalent for Ming(Mg) is “Name, …. Fame, reputation”. But different translators have also translated it as: “name/names/ --understands, comprehends, sees, ‘identifies with’”. Here, at chapter 1, 1.2,1 corresponds to 1.3,1 and 1.2,2 corresponds to 1.3,2. When working on the Ching we must always try on the Law of Correspondence for size. Ming(Mg) in 1.2 corresponds to Yü(YÜ) in 1.3. The dictionary gives us : “Desires: to desire, long for”, but Jonathan Star, in his scholarly work on the Ching, gives us “Deep-seated desires, mental tendencies, habits, desires, thought constructs, mental patterns”. Wing has “Expectations(YÜ)”. That is as close to the philosophical term, representation (C), as you can expect translators to come to by intuition.
. Let’s do a straightforward translation of 1.2:
1.2,1: “Without representations is the conception of heaven and earth.” Why? …
Because with representations (C) you conceive (B) what you are programmed to conceive.
. The character for “Mother(MU)” can be, and has been, translated as “Birth(MU)”.
1.2,2: “With representations (C) is the birth of “All Things (WnwU)” (D).
. But where do “Representations(Mg)” come from? …
Representations (C) are stepped down thoughts (B). And where do they come from? …
. Lao Tzu gives us an answer at 42.1. But let us continue with chapter 1.
1.3,1: “Constantly, or repeatedly, Not-having (CnWU) Representations(YÜ) is the Means for Perceiving (YIKn) The Inner-essence (_H#1)” in our core.
1:3,2: “Constantly Having, or repeating Representations is the Means for Perceiving The time and space Bounded (CnYUYÜYIKn_H*1)” world. *1 = Chiao60.
From page 271 to 294 Star has done a scholarly analysis of Ching 1. This work not only gives us a basic understanding of Ching 1 and the characters in it but it is also an example of HOW the book, as a whole, must be studied. Certainly jnana yogis (B) take part in this project, but, as you can see, most of the work is done by raja yogis (C), using their skills and intuitions.
. YU and WU are together in 25 chapters, by itself YU is in 12 chapters and WU is in 13 chapters. I will have to be selective and concentrate on where YU and WU can shed light on “All Things (WnwU)”.
. So we have learned that representations (C) give birth to the “Ten-thousand, or all, Things (WnwU)” (D). That’s a good start.
40.2: As above, in “Heaven, so Below (Tn_-)”:
40.2,1: “All Things (WnwU) Come From (Sgto) Existence(YU).”
40.2,2: “Existence Comes From Non-existence (YUSgtoWU).”
. This takes us to the conclusion of Ching 11:
“Existence, It is For Making Profit (YU_ZYIWyLi) of
Non-existence Which is For Making Use (WU_ZYIWyus)” of …
42.1,1: The big
“Tao Produces the One (A1Sg_1), the
One Produces the Two (_1Sg_2), the
Two Produces the Three (_2Sg_3) and the
Three Produces All Things (_3SgWnwU).”
. As above, in “Heaven, so Below (Tn_-), on Earth. The Law of Correspondence is universal, it is all over the Ching. As “All Things” were created, so a computer program is developed or a building is constructed: The customer (A) tells the architect (B) what kind of house he wants. The architect gives his blueprint to the contractor (C) and the contractor tells the subcontractors (D) what to do to supply the demand. It is a deductive process. As the programmer (B) breaks down the job for the coder (C) so the coder breaks down the job for the computer (D)
The Law of Correspondence is universal. If you know the construction business, or the IBM computer programming system, then you know one tetrad, and if you know one tetrad, you know them all. All terads are analogous to each other. The AUTHOR knows this and there are good reasons why he doesn’t want us to know that.
=========================================================
3:4.5,2: “The mind [B] ….chooses to be separated ….”.
. The idea of separation comes from the “eternal”, from the other side of the “Door” (A). “The mind” (B), or the intellect (B), does not chose to be separated. It merely participates, along with the mind (C) and the body (D) in a process that was initiated in the “eternal”.
. In the last section, we have caught the AUTHOR trying to slip that “untruth” past the intellect (B). As we become more aware (A) of what he is trying to do it becomes harder for him to get away with it. But if we don’t intercept the “false”hoods, we are “passively condoning” them and it becomes harder to catch them the next time he repeats the same “meaning” in a different “form”. The next time he tries it again is at:
3:5.9,2: “…. minds [B] have chosen to see themselves as separate.” I have given this one as homework in the last section. Notice that I said “perceive” instead of “see”. Errors should draw our attention to important passages. I am only doing this work on three chapters. Because of the repetitions of the same “meaning” this may be “Enough(Zu)” to “Identify(Mg)” them all. There are 31 chapters in the text.
. In theory, it should take as many repetitions of the “truth” to undo the repetitions of the “untruth” but in practice it will take less. Why? …
Because the “truth” is on our side.
. There is something misleading in my interpretation of 2:6.2,8, I gave in the December 2 section. I will quote it again without the interpretation:
2:6.2,8: “You cannot separate yourself from the truth by ‘giving’ autonomy to behaviour.”
. The word “truth” means here what it means in English, for one interpretation and what it means in the COURSE for another. Try to do one. …
How can you separate from, or deny, the truth? …
By causing the system, based on the Aristotelian tetrad, to fail. …
How can you make it fail? …
By causing one of the four “sources”, or parts of the tetrad, to fail. …
How do you make it fail? …
You CAN “separate yourself from the truth by [NOT] ‘giving’ autonomy to behaviour” (D). For the other interpretation, see my interpretation in the December 2 section.
3:5.10,3: “Perception is based on a separated state [true], so that anyone who perceives at all needs healing [false].”
3:6.8,7: “God’s [The AUTHOR’s] creations are given their true Authorship but prefer to be anonymous when you chose to separate yourself from your Author.”
. What you are supposed to believe (C) by now is that the AUTHOR is “your Author”. You are also supposed to believe that you “chose to separate yourself from your” creator. We came across this same “meaning” for the third time simply by FINDING “separat” in the first three chapters. If you didn’t catch him by now it is unlikely that you will catch him in the remaining 28 chapters. If you have “passively condoned” the repetitions in 31 chapters, it will take a lot of repetitions of the “truth” to deprogram yourself. But not as many as it took to program you. Why? …
Because the truth is on our side.
3:6.11,4: “Judgement [by the intellect] always imprisons because it separates segments of reality by the unstable scales of desire.” Not true. Can you see it? …
The divisions are not caused “by the unstable scale of desire.” They are caused by the laws of creation, which come into our world from the “eternal”. More specifically, they come from Creative Energy (E3). So our “Desires(YÜ)” (C) have nothing to do with it. Representations (C) are merely stepped down thoughts (B). They are stepped down by “Repeating(@1)” true or false ideas (B). The AUTHOR does it all the time. So he knows it. And so 3:6.11,4 can be called a lie.
3:7.3,1: “We have discussed the fall or separation before, …. (2) The separation is a system of thought real enough in time, though not in eternity.” It “Exists(YU)” for you as Yang, if you are “in time” or “in eternity”; if not then the other side of the “Door” (A) is Yin.
. “The separation is [more than] a system of thought”. The intellect only participates in the 4-fold creative process. Our soul (A), our mind (C) and our body (D) are the other participants. And if even one of them fails to function properly, the system, as a whole, fails to function properly.
3:7.5,1: “The [programmed] mind can make the belief in separation very real and very fearful, and this belief is the ‘devil’.” Talk about ‘depreciation’.
. Our intellect is supposed to produce “fear”, but here it is even called the “devil”. Lao Tzu has been a great help to me in doing these interpretation. I must give credit where credit is due. Lao Tzu comes first, but J.G. Bennett under whom I have studied for one very though year, Steiner and Jagad Guru Shri Kripalu Mahaprabhu are the most influential teachers but not the only ones. I have only seen Shri Kripalu Mahaprabhu for five Weeks in India but he and his disciple Sudeswara Didi Ji probably had the most profound influence on me. But Lao Tzu has given me knowledge over the past 40 years which is possible to share. The way we have looked for words which are in the COURSE, I will look for Yu(YU), Wu(WU) and Wan(Wn)Wu(wU)” I will include Wan Wu because it is produced at the fourth step of the 4-fold creative process. It can be best “Identified(Mg)” in terms of systems other than the Tao Te Ching. If we really understand Level D, we can say: One down, three to go.
. However, I came across “separate” at the beginning of chapter 4. This will hopefully show you how much more valuable information there is for communicators (C) on the “separation” is in the remaining 29 chapters. You can just skip the sentences you can't interpret by computation (C).
=======================================================
December 3, 2011 . . . . . . . . . ACIM th
. In the last section, under 2:3.5,12, I said that our political masters “know what is going to happen to social engineering if we manage to take one more inductive step from B to A”, from Timocracy (B) to Democracy (A).
2:8.5,5: “What you believe is true for you.”
. There are two valid interpretations for this sentence. Both are true. Try to find one. …
2:8.5,5: “What [the AUTHOR makes] you believe [by repeating his “untruth”] is true for you.” And the other is? …
2:8.5,5: “What you [make yourself] believe [by repeating the “truth] is true for you.”
. Which one is the hook you are supposed to swallow and which one is the bait that is supposed to hide the hook? …
2:8.5,6: “In this sense [in the sense of you are programming yourself] the separation HAS occurred, and to deny it is merely to use denial inappropriately.”
2:7.4,5: “In the interim, however [between what you now know (B) and see (D) and when you fully believe the AUTHOR] the sense of conflict is inevitable [he makes sure of that], since you have placed yourself in a position where you believe in the power of what does not exist.” To use the word “deny” for what does “Not-exist(WU)” is “inappropriate”. The AUTHOR has to deny what for us “Exists(YU)” so he has to choose his words very carefully. To “deny”what does “Not-exist(WU)” implies that it does “Exist(YU)” In the Tao Te Ching, the one always implies the other.
2:8.2,4: “It [“The Last Judgement”] was brought into being only after the separation, when it became one of the many learning devices to be built into the overall plan.”
. “Judgement” had to come with the separation because our freedom of choice came with it. In the “eternal;”, the AUTHOR has omniscience. So why doesn’t he tell us the “truth”? Knowledge is power. Why does he use it to deceive us? …
2:8.2,5: “ Just as the separation occurred over millions of years, the Last Judgement will extend over a similarly long period, and perhaps an even longer one.”
. The deductive phase of the full cycle is as long as the inductive, “Return($l)” phase. The AUTHOR hints at the truth, to give us some bait to chew on but he is careful not to give us too much. We might find out the “truth” by what we are doing here. Can you see why I had to come back to these two sentences? ...
2:8.4,1: “The first step towards freedom involves a sorting out of the false from the true. (2) This is a process of separation in the constructive sense, and reflects the true meaning of the Apocalypse.” If we take the meaning of “freedom”, “false”, “true”, “constructive” and “true meaning” for what they mean in English the sentences mean one thing. If we reverse their “meanings” they mean something else.
2:3.5,3: “All sense of separation disappears.” When? …
When the AUTHOR has you fully programmed.
3:4.1,5: “Perception did not exist until the separation introduced degrees, aspects and intervals.” For “Perception” we need our physical (D) senses of perception and perceivable objects. They are brought about by the 4-fold process of deduction. “All Things (WnwU)” are the last step of a stepping down process, which can only take place in time and space.
. Time is change in the “Ever-Unchanging”. Space is division in the “Ever-Indivisible. The “eternal”, where the AUTHOR is, is the “Ever-Unchangeable” and the “Ever In-divisible”. The “separation introduced” change and division, which make our experience possible.
. We leave the “Eternal(Cn)” by the deductive process and “Return($l)” to it by the inductive process. As Lao Tzu says: “CycliciTy($lad), Tao’S Movement (A1_Z%k)”.
3:4.1,6: “Spirit has no levels and all conflict arises from the concept of levels. …. (8) The levels created by the separation cannot but conflict.” This tells us where the AUTHOR is coming from and where he wants us to take us.
3:4.2,1: “Consciousness, the level of perception [vision (A)], was the first split introduced into the mind [B] after separation, making the mind a perceiver rather than a creator..
. Creative Energy (E3) is one level above level A (E4). E3 is stepped down to Conscious Energy (E4), E4 is stepped down to Sensitive Energy (E5), E5 is stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6) and E6 is stepped down to Vital Energy (E7). E7 is the fuel that drives our bodily functions. With our body we carryout the physical functions on the physical level. A, B, C and D are all co-creators in the larger creative process.
. As D carries out C's instructions so C translates B's ideas (B) into imperative sentences (C),
3:4.2,2: “Consciousness [A] is correctly identified as the domain of the ego”, semiotics (B-C-D). In order to replace the AUTHOR's “untruth” with the “truth”, we have to know that Conscious Energy (E4) is on level A and that the “ego” is semiotics (B-C-D). So much for the hook. Now, where is the bait? ...
A is related to B-C-D as the customer (A) is related to the supplier (B-C-D).
3:4.3,1: “The Ego is the questioning aspect of the post-separation self, which was made rather than created.” ‘Depreciation’.
. If our intellect (B) “was made” then C, D and A was made as well. You can’t have one of the four without the other three. The intellect “is the questioning aspect” in us. Notice how truth and falsehoods are again subtly mixed together to give the intellect some bait to chew on, while slipping the hook past the intellect into the mind (C). As the mind is programmed more and more the AUTHOR, by using the mind, gains more and more control over the intellect. Knowledge is power, and he is not using his power to serve us.
3:4.3,11: “That is why you must eventually choose to heal the separation.” Healing the separation.” is replacing it with the “Atonement”. The “Atonement” is the opposite of the “separation”. To “heal” is to make whole. Deep down, we know that. And the AUTHOR knows what we know. “Not Knowing what deep down we Know (Puknkn) is Sick(@k).”
3:4.5,2: “The mind [B] is very active. (3) When it chooses to be separated it chooses to perceive [D]. (4) Until then it wills only to know.” The intellect (B) always “wills …. to know”, the mind (C) always wills to communicate (C) and the body (D) always will to carryout the physical action (D). Because the AUTHOR must know this, the “untruth” here can be called a lie. I prefer to believe THE HOLY SCIENCE Sutra 13: “the idea of separate existence of Self originates” in the “eternal”, is passed on to B by A, is passed on to C by B, is passed on to D by C and is manifested (D) by D. So B does not choose to be separated, it merely carries out orders, and so does C and D. The bodily senses (D) do the perceiving, not the intellect (B). We have here a very clear example of “obscurantism”, please Google it.
3:5.9,2: “Correct perception of your brother is necessary because minds [B] have chosen to see themselves as separate.” Here “mind” represents the intellect because “minds” (C) don’t choose themselves. They are programmed to choose what the programmer (B) has decided on.
==========================================================
December 2, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. At the end of the last section I said: Please Google Yin Yang “.I did that and was reminded of what I already knew: Yin refers to the “Shady” side of creation. For us it does “Not-exist(WU)” but it does “Exist(YU)” for the AUTHOR because he is on the other side of the “Door, Dasamadwara” (A). His task is to make us believe (C) that what we can see and touch does “Not-exist”. And he has a point, Plato and the Hindus agree with him that this world is an illusion, Eikasia, in Greek and Maya in Sanskrit. The world appears to us as it does because of the “separation” the AUTHOR is talking about.
. In the three chapters I have copied, “separate” appears almost 40 times. In light of what we have just learned, it is to interpret those sentences. Ideally, a communicator can do it now by computation (C), but, if no one does it, then I have to do it myself. The title of chapter 2 is:
THE SEPARATTION AND THE ATONEMENT ‘Opposition’. Separation is the opposite of Atonement. 2:1.1: THE ORIGINS OF SEPARATION
2:1.2.1: “These related distortions [caused by the intellect] represent a picture of what actually occurred in the separation, or the ‘detour into fear’.”
. By “fear” is meant the intellect. What is actually happening is that Creative Energy (E3) comes through Conscious Energy (E4 (A)) to Sensitive Energy (E5 (B)). In the E3-E4-E5 triad, E3 is the initiating impulse, E4 is the connective and E5 is the outcome, which manifests as a thought (B).
. To replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with the “truth” we have to know it. This takes work, but it is indispensable. It can be explained better by a communicator (C) but it can’t be conveyed to you without your own active participation. The AUTHOR’s success depend on you “passively condoning” his social engineering.
2:1.3,1: “The Garden of Eden, or the pre-separation condition, was a state of mind in which noting was needed.” …. in which no intellectual (B), mental (C) or physical (D) action is possible, except for that white dot in the black picture.
2:2.4,4: “Acts were not necessary [possible] before the separation, because belief in space and time did not exist.” Because “space and time did not exist.”
2:2.7,2: “You may still think this is associated with loss, a mistake all the separated Sons of God [the AUTHOR] make in one way or another.” To see (D) the world for what it is and to understand (B) the necessity of the separation is not a mistake. The AUTHOR tries to make us believe (C) that using your head (B) is “a mistake”. But you are “free” to believe him.
2:3.1,1: “The Atonement can only be accepted within you [as a program in your mind (C)] by releasing [getting rid of] the inner light”, the intellect.
2:3.1,2: “Since the separation, defenses have been used almost entirely to defend AGAINST Atonement, and thus maintain the separation.” The truth doesn’t have to be defended but it has to be understood. And for this we need our intellect. Why do you think the AUTHOR is so “consistent”ly ‘depreciating’ it? …
2:3.2,1: “For perfect effectiveness the Atonement belongs at the center of the inner altar, where it undoes the separation and restores the wholeness of the mind.”
. Because the mind (C) is faster than the intellect (B), an intelligently (B) programmed mind “undoes the separation” which the intellect participates in producing. We are further told that the program is stored “at the center of the inner “altar” where the white dot in the black picture is. Notice how useful our understanding of the Yin Yang symbol is for interpreting some of the AUTHOR’s sentences.
2:3.2,2: “Before the separation the mind [C] was invulnerable to fear, because fear did not exist. (3). Both the separation and the fear [the intellect] are miscreations that must be undone for the restoration of the temple, and for the opening of the altar to receive the Atonement.” The “altar” must be opened to receive the program.
2:3.2,4: “This heals the separation by placing within you the one effective defense against all separation thoughts and making you perfectly invulnerable” to “all” attempts to deprogram you.
2:3.5,12: “They [the AUTHOR’s “Sons”] must learn to look upon the world as a means of healing the separation.”
“CycliciTy($lad), Tao’S Movement (A1_Z%k)”. The same idea is represented by the Yin Yang symbol. The AUTHOR wants us to “Return($l)” before the deductive cycle is completed. It is as Steiner said: A group of laggards have stopped at B on the deductive, incarnation, cycle because knowledge (B) is power. Now that the rest of us have reached level B on the inductive, evolutionary, cycle, there is no way the laggards can catch up with us and are getting uncomfortable. They know what is going to happen to social engineering if we manage to take one more inductive step from B to A. This is why they are getting desperate in trying to stop us. They can’t succeed but, as far as I can see, they will make more desperate attempts. As far as I can see now, A COURSE IN MIRACLES is one such attempt, but look at the beans they are spilling.
2:5.9,1: “Healing is an ability that developed after the separation, before which it was unnecessary.” The art of what the AUTHOR calls “Healing” must have been developed at level B on the deductive phase of the full cycle. If the intellect is not ‘depreciated’ it can’t be “healed”. There is plenty of work for communicators to verify or falsify this theory (B). Essentially, I am giving a “job-description” to the communicators.
2:6.2,8: “You cannot separate yourself from [what the AUTHOR calls] the truth by ‘giving autonomy to behaviour” (D). A, B, C and D are autonomous “classes (Google: Protocols of Zion)” of society. Each autonomous whole within our human sphere of influence is making its unique contribution to the “separation”. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. If you can prevent the autonomy of any one of the four “sources”, or parts of the tetrad, you are preventing “separation”. Why? …
If any one part is missing in our system then it will not work, and, if our system works, the AUTOR’s system can’t work. This is why the AUTHOR has to get rid of it.
2:6.4,4: “These conditions [the ones I have described under 2:6.2,8] always entail a willingness to be separate.” “These conditions” include the “willingness” to be responsible for the choices we make. Why? …
Because with the “separation”, with incarnation, comes the freedom of choice.
2:8.5,3: “Fear is really nothing [Yin from the AUTHOR's point of view] and love is everything [Yang]. (4) Whenever [the AUTHOR’s] light [Yang] enters darkness [Yin], the darkness is abolished. (5) What [the AUTHOR can make] you believe is true for you.” The mind is programmable and whatever it is programmed to “believe” is true for you.
2:8.5,6: “In this sense the separation HAS occurred, and to deny it is merely to use denial inappropriately.” …
. There is a mistake at the end of the November 29 section. The dictionary definitions of Yang are: “Clear; bright. The sun. Heat. Pertaining to this world. ….”
. So, to us, our world is “Clear”, because we are in it, but “eternity”, Yin, is: “Shady; secret; dark. Mysterious. Cold. The negative or female principle in nature; it is the opposite of yang ….” when followed by Yang.
. So, to us, the “eternal”, where the AUTHOR is coming from, is “Shady, secret, dark….”. But to him it is “Clear”, because he is in it. So, for the AUTHOR things are the opposite of what they are to us. And this bit of information should help us to interpret some of his sentences.
. Mistakes should draw our attention (A) to important “Concepts(B1). They are also a call for help to communicators (C). “CommunicaTers(C2er), who don’t do their dharma, Don’t Know (PUkn)” what it is.
. Please Google: Yin Yang . to prepare yourself for the section I have started yesterday. Because I came across my mistake there I have inserted this short section here.
======================================================
===========================================================
3:7.4,1: “Eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a symbolic expression for usurping the ability for self-creating.” The word “usurping” is only there for the purpose of ‘depreciation’. If we take it out then we get a very valuable message. Usually, “Eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a symbolic expression” of the FALL. It is the movement from paradise into our world, in which we are subjected to the limitations of time and space. It is a deductive movement from the general to the particular, from whole to part.
. 3:7.4,1 without the “usurping” in it got me thinking yesterday, and this morning I woke up with an “Insight(72)”. These intuitions normally come in a fraction of a second but to describe it properly, a communicator (C) would properly need a whole book.
. The general ideas are summarized in the Ching with a minimum of Chinese characters. Let me start from there. Ching 40.1: “CycliciTy($lad), Tao’S Movement (A1_Z%k).”
. At Ching 25.2 we get: If we let “Big Mean Going out (TA73*e), having
Gone Mean Arriving (*e73$t) and having
Arrived Mean Returning ($t73$l) Then(KU)”
having returned means being back home again. This is one example of a cycle of “Tao’S Movement (A1_Z%k)”. Notice that it is a 4-fold cycle. At Ching 42, we have another 4-fold cycle, which brings us closer to 3:7.4,1.
“Tao Produces the One (A1Sg_1), the
One Produces the Two (_1Sg_2), the
Two Produces the Three (_2Sg_3) and the
Three Produces All Things (_3SgWnwU).
All Things (WnwU) Carry Yin (*a*b) on their backs *a = Fu154. *b = Yin170.
And Embrace Yang (bt ^0*c). *c = Yang170.
Deriving their vital harmony from the proper blending of the two vital Breaths (#4#EYIWyHo J.Wu).”
. For the last subordinate phrase I have used John C. H. Wu’s translation. This phrase tells us that Yin and Yang are “HarmonizEd(WyHo)” “By-means-of” “Vital-energy(#E)”. Ch’i(#E) is the connective between Yin and Yang. The connective turns a “DyAd(dyad)” into a “TriAd(_3ad)”. The opposites in a dyad become complements in a triad.
. We are getting into a bit of Mr.B’s systematics but, if we want to shed light onto the AUTHOR’s obscurantism then we need it. Let’s get back to
3:7.4,1: “Eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a symbolic expression for …. The ability for self-creating.” …
3:7.4,6: “You can perceive yourself as self-creating, but you cannot do more than believe it.” If our intellect is an equal participant in the A-B-C-D tetrad, and the tetrad is the process by which “self-creating” takes place, then why should we only be able to “perceive” (D) and “believe” (C) it and not be able to know (B) it? …
This is another case of ‘depreciation’, but he is spilling a few beans while doing it.
. The “Insight(72)” that came to me this morning, is due to the Yin-Yang symbols. The idea of “CycliciTy($lad)” is represented by these pictures. A picture is worth a thousand words. The interesting thing about these pictures is that when everything changes into white, there is a black dot in the center and when everything changes into black there is a white dot in the center. What do these dots represent? …
If “eternity” is represented by white then the white dot in the center of the black picture is “eternity” in us. This isn’t anything new, I have repeated this idea often “Enough(Zu)”. So what was the new “Insight(72)” that came to me this morning? …
What does the black dot in the center of the white picture represent? …
I think that this is a nice bit of homework to give you to chew on. …
===========================================================
3:7.6,9: “Your Kingdom is not of this world because it was given you from beyond this world.” It was given you from “eternity”.
. For “Kingdom” Google: Protocols of Zion kingdom . Let us FIND “eternity”. …
3:7.3,2: “The separation is a system of thought real enough in time, though not in eternity.” Let us FIND “Thought system”
3:5.2,4: “When you make something to fill a perceived [D] lack, you are tacidly implying that you believe in separation.” We are told in Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE that “the idea of separate existence of Self” comes from the “5th Sphere, Janaloka”. So it is not something “invented” by the “ego”.
3:5.3,5: “The ego [the intellect] has invented many ingenious thought systems for this purpose” of “separation”. This again boils down to ‘depreciation’.
. The next FIND is in 3:7.1. It is so revealing that I will quote the whole paragraph.
3”7.1,1: “Every system of thought must have a starting point. (2) It begins with either a making or a creating, a difference we have already discussed.”
. The difference between the poles of a polarity causes the “discomfort” of “Cognitive dissonance (please Google it)”. The AUTHOR overcomes the “discomfort” by making the uncritical reader believe (C) that a polarity consists of only “One” pole. You cannot be made to believe (C) an “untruth” when you know (B) that it is not “true”, but uncritical readers can be made to believe (C) anything by programming their minds (C).
3:7.1,3: “ Their resemblance lies in their power as foundations. (4) Their difference lies in what rests upon them. (5) Both are cornerstones [for the AUTHOR’s thought system and ours] for systems of belief [the system based on belief.(C) is the AUTHOR’s system] by which one [the uncritical believer] lives. (6) It is a mistake to believe that a thought system based on lies is weak.” ‘Depreciation’. We are supposed to believe that our own thought system is “based on lies” and therefore we must watch out for the “ego”. The fact is that social engineering must not be “Underestimated(#j)”.
3:71,7: “Nothing made by a child of God [the AUTHOR and his “Sons”] is without power [even when it is “based on lies”]. (8) It is essential to realize [to believe] this, because otherwise you will be unable to escape from the prison you have made.” ‘Depreciation’. It is the intellect that is supposed to “have made” the prison. Can you see now why I just had to quote the whole paragraph? …
. A thought starts with a question and it ends with its answer. When you understand a paragraph in the COURSE as a whole you can see that all, or most, sentences are ambiguous. They are true in a logical (B) sense which causes us to overlook the hooks in them and they are also true from the AUTHOR’s point of view. It is not true that his own “thought system [which is] based on lies is weak.” And, if you don’t catch him for saying that, you “are passively condoning” the AUTHOR’s programming of your mind.
. As we learn more about the COURSE it becomes clearer that the AUTHOR is very clever, but the decision, not to use your intellect, to bury your “talent (Matthew 25:15)”, is yours. You are responsible for your decisions. The AUTHOR has told us repeatedly that we have the “freedom” of choice so that we can’t blame him for our wrong choices. There is the Law of “Non-interference” and if he didn’t know it he wouldn’t tell us the “truth”. If we are too lazy to look for it then we can’t blame the AUTHOR for our own mistakes. So let us go back to work. …
. Looking for “thought system” has led us to 3:7.1. I don’t know about you, but to me, the “truth” in it came as a surprise. Let us then look for more surprises. …
In 3:7.1,3, we have the word “foundation”. Let’s FIND it. …
1:7.5,1: “A solid foundation is necessary because of the confusion between fear [of the intellect] and awe [of he AUTHOR] to which I have already referred, and which is often made.” A solid foundation is necessary for God’s creation and the AUTHOR’s Kingdom.
3:7.4,6: “You can perceive yourself as self-creating, but you cannot do more than believe it.” To understand this sentence we have to know what “self-creating” means to the AUTHOR.
3:7.4,1: “Eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a symbolic expression for usurping the ability for self-creating.” ‘Depreciation’ again. …
According to the AUTHOR, The intellect is “usurping the ability for self-creating.” But suppose it is the proper function of the intellect to determine what choices we have and to clarify them for the mind (C). What then? …
Knowledge plays an important role in the right or wrong choices we make. And they determine whether we “self-create” or self-destruct. What does it mean to hand over the power of choice to the AUTHOR? …
If “you cannot do more than believe” what choices you have then you are not responsible for any wrong choices you make. In fact, then you have no freedom of choice.
. Steiner says in chapter one of his PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM: “That an action can’t be FREE of which the actor doesn’t know why he does it is perfectly obvious.” If the AUTHOR wants his readers to believe that this is not so then he needs dumbed down readers. If critical readers know (B) that something is “untrue” then the AUTHOR can’t make them believe (C) that it is “true”.
. If we delete the word “usurping” from 3:7.4,1 then we get
“Eating of the fruit of the tree of knowledge is a symbolic expression for …. the ability for self-creating. (2) This is the only sense in which God and His creation are not co-creators.” …
=====================================================
. There is a mistake in the last section, below this one: “in” should be, is. Here is the corrected sentence: “God’s Will comes to us through our soul (A), is interpreted by our intellect (B) and becomes our personal will (C).” There are different ways to describe the A-B-C “Trinity” but I like this one. Perhaps we are supposed to take a closer look at it. …
The AUTHOR’s will comes to us through his COURSE, is computed (C) by our mind (C) “and becomes our personal will” (C).
. There is also an omission in that same short section. The AUTHOR’s programming is designed to cause his “perfect integration and …. Peace” but only within his pyramid. Outside of it the very opposite is caused in uncritical readers, as long as they are not fully programmed yet. The “Discomfort” caused by the “ego” is designed to become “intolerable”. Let us FIND “discomfort”. …
2:3.4,7: “As a result [of the programming], the mind becomes increasingly sensitive to what it [the programming in the mind] would once have regarded as very minor intrusions of discomfort.” But with the increased “discomfort” the need to get rid of the intellect becomes more urgent in the uncritical reader.
2:5.7,8: “Discomfort is aroused only to bring the need for correction [for getting rid of the intellect] into awareness” (A).
. Now let’s FIND “intolerable” …
2:3.3,4: “An imprisoned will [a will (C) that is more and more brought under the “control” of the AUTHOR] engenders a situation which, in the extreme, becomes altogether intolerable.” The “imprisoned” uncritical reader will literally beg the AUTHOR to help him to get rid of the “ego” (B).
2:6.5,3: “This produces conflicted behaviour [between what you want and what the AUTHOR wants] which is intolerable because the part of the mind that [has not been programmed by the AUTHOR] wants to do something else is outraged.” One way to end this “intolerable” situation is to “accept” the AUTHOR’s program. The other way is …
. Back to “peace”. …
2:8.2,8: “It is essential, however, that you free yourself from fear [the intellect] quickly, because you must emerge from the conflict if you are to bring peace to other minds.”
. You can interpret this sentence by knowing the English equivalent of only one word. …
The rest needs thought (B) to interpret until we have found an identifier for selling the AUTHOR’s pyramid scheme “to other minds.”
3:1.5,2: “Correctly understood, it is a very simple symbol that speaks of my [the AUTOR’s] innocence. (3) The lion and the lamb lying down together symbolize that strength and innocence are not in conflict, but naturally live in peace.” ‘Contemplation’.
3:3.6,2: “There He can communicate His certainty [install his program], and His knowledge [that went into programming it] will bring peace [as long as you are] without question.” As long as you merely read (C) his words without questioning them. I couldn’t help noticing 3:3.5,4: “Knowledge [B] preceded both perception [D] and time, and will ultimately replace them.” Knowledge is power. True. What is implied here is that his knowledge can ”replace” the truth. This is evidently not true. 3:3.6,7: “’Fear God and keep His commandments’ becomes ‘Know God and accept His certainty’.” Know the AUTHOR! Yes. “Accept” his program? No, not if you question what he has dictated.
3:4.7,16: “God [the AUTHOR] knows you only in peace, and this [the AUTHOR’s “peace”] IS your reality.” This seems to be a harmless, “innocent”, lie. The program in you IS your reality. But, if you merely read (C) it, without questioning it, then you are swallowing the small innocent hooks one at a time, just as you are expected to swallow them. There is a reason for covering them up with bait
3:6.2,1: “The choice to judge [to question] rather than to know is the cause of loss of peace.” Obviously “to know” means something different here than it means in English. It is my experience that by questioning what the AUTHOR has dictated, I come to “know” WHAT he is doing and HOW he is doing it. Obviously he doesn’t want us to do that. So 3:6.2,1 makes perfect sense.
3:6,3,1: “You have no idea of the tremendous release and deep peace that comes from meeting yourself and your brothers “ If you study the AUTHOR’s words as “diligently(#6)” as you have to study the Tao Te Ching then you have a very good “idea” of WHAT he is doing and WHY he is doing it.
3:6.10.1: “Peace is a natural heritage of spirit. …. (6) To deny His Authorship is to deny yourself the reason for your peace, so that you see yourself only in segments. (7) This strange perception [the one you perceive with your senses] IS the authority problem.” If you don’t believe that the AUTHOR is the “Son of God” then you have an “authority problem”.
. The rest of chapter is interesting. I will only interpret parts of it.
3:7.6,8: “Only the oneness of knowledge is free of conflict.” The omniscience which is free of the limitations of time and space is the general knowledge of timeless principles. The particular knowledge we have here, on this side of the “Door” (A), enables us to apply these principles in practice (D) and to test them. Because the AUTHOR can’t see the details as we can see, he is spilling the beans. We are picking them up by interpreting his sentences.
3:7.6.9: “Your Kingdom is not of this world because it was given you [by the AUTHOR in the COURSE] from beyond this world.” From “eternity”.
3:7.610: “Only in this world is the idea of an authority problem meaningful. (11) The world is not left by death but by truth, and [the AUTHOR’s] truth can be known by all those for whom the [AUTHOR’s] Kingdom was created , and for whom it waits.” …
=====================================================
. At the end of the last section, below, I have left 3:2.5,4 to 3:2.5,6 for homework for us. Please try to understand those three sentences. …
I have already given some interpretations, in square brackets, to get us around some of the “obscurantism (Please Google that word)” in them. ...
For instance, his “single purpose” are at least three. Which ones? …
The AUTHOR's, which he has to get us to “accept” by means of lies and deception. …
God's, which comes to us through the Bible, the Ching, the Gita and even the COURSE. And …
our own purpose. And we are “free” to follow God or the AUTHOR.
. After we have cut through the AUTHOR's lies and obscurantism, what question do we end up with? …
What is “the Holy Trinity[? …] …. the Trinity Itself is One.” That is true, so where is the hook? …
3:2.5,5: “There is no confusion within Its Levels because They are of one Mind and one Will.” …
This is only a half-truth. Our “Mind” (B) and our “Will” (C ) are only two of the three impulses of the triad. What is the third one? …
It is our body. We have here semiotics (B-C-D). What is the A-B-C “Trinity”? …
God's Will comes to us through our soul (A), in interpreted by our intellect (B) and becomes our personal will (C ). Why doesn't the AUTHOR tell us the whole truth? …
Could it be that he doesn't want us to understand it? …
3:2.5,6: “This single purpose [of the AUTHOR] creates perfect integration and establishes the peace of God.” This sentence is only true with the the AUTHOR's meaning of “peace”. If we understand the word “peace” as it is normally understood in English then we have another blatant lie here. He is creating the very opposite of “peace” and “perfect integration”.
. From this example you can see that it is important for you to learn how to interpret that AUTHOR's sentences. If you merely read my interpretations, all you can do is believe me or not.
. Most of the last section, below, was dedicated to finding out what “fear” and “afraid” mean in English. These words refer to the intellect and what it does. In Sanskrit intellect means Buddhi. It is “the Intelligence that determines what is truth (Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE)” In the COURSE, “fear” means the very opposite. Our intellect produces “fear”, “misthought”, “error”, “discomfort” and it “attacks” the AUTHOR. He, on the other hand, produces “love” true and right “thought”, “comfort” and “peace”.
. Please go over the last section for more details. I was looking for “afraid” so the following quote escaped me. It is an important one:
2:7.3,1: “Both miracles and fear come from thoughts.” The “miracles” come from the “thoughts” of the AUTHOR and “fear” comes from our own thoughts. We have ‘depreciation’ again: We are told not to trust our intellect.
. In order to interpret the sentences, which are in the COURSE we must know what the words in them mean. By repeating these words with the AUTHOR's meanings often “Enough”, they become representations (C) in the mind of the uncritical reader, which are no longer questioned. If you don’t question what the AUTHOR has dictated then you become as familiar with the new meanings as you are with ordinary English words. You no longer think (B) about them because now you are computing (C) them. And computing is faster and more efficient than thinking. Level C on Plato’s “Divided Line (509d)” is the Aristotelian “efficient cause”.
. The secret of the science of social engineering is that the mind (C) is programmable and can be programmed to compute (C) anything the programmer (B) wants it to compute. To find out how the programming is done you would have to take the seven Week IBM computer programming course. But our political masters have made it “disappear” long ago. Why? …
Because too many people would start to discover the things I am discovering here in the COURSE. The programming system could be revived as a game and could be learned in less than seven Weeks. I loved working with that system, it could be fun.
2:2.1,7: “If you are afraid [If you are using your intellect], you are valuing wrongly.”
2:2.1,8: “Your understanding [B] will then inevitably value wrongly, and by endowing all thoughts with equal power [your own wrong thoughts and the AUTHOR’s rigt thoughts] will inevitably destroy [what the AUTHOR calls] peace.” Let’s FIND it. …
1:7.1,7: “Do not deceive yourself into believing that you can relate in peace to God [the AUTHOR] or your brothers with anything external.”
. The “external” is what we can perceive with our senses. In science physical observations are used to verify or falsify scientific hypotheses. We can use what our senses (D) tell us to identify “Truth” and “untruth” in the COURSE. Since the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to do that, 1:7.1,7 makes perfect sense.
2:1.5,8: “Peace is an attribute IN [the programmed] you. (9) You cannot find it outside [with your senses]. (10) Illness is some form of external searching [which is what makes you sick]. (11) Health is inner peace. (12) It enables you to remain unshaken ….” Peace is the ability to resist attempts to “DeProgram(PUÜd)” a “brother”. ‘Peace’ would be a good identifier for this condition. Notice HOW we find identifies without actually having to look for them. They just seem to come along when we are “ready” for them.
2:3.5,8: “He [the AUTHOR] gave them His [meaning of the word] peace so that they could not be shaken and could not be deceived.”
. Uncritical readers can be programmed “so that they could not be shaken” by any attempt to make them aware of the fact that they are being “deceived”. If you know WHAT the AUTHOR is doing and HOW he is doing it in general then interpreting a particular sentence becomes easier. You don’t have to believe (C) me, but you have to do some of the necessary work (D) yourself.
. There are too many sentences, with “peace” in it, left in the first three chapters. So I better quit now and leave you with three sentences for homework:
3:2.5,4: “The Son Of God [the AUTHOR] is part of the Holy Trinity [he has the omnipresence and omniscience of the “eternal”], but the Trinity Itself is One. (5) There is no confusion within Its Levels [there are no “levels” in the “eternal”], because They are one Mind and one Will. (6) This single purpose [of the AUTHOR, the purpose of God and of us] creates perfect integration and establishes the peace of God.” …
===============================================
. In the last section, below, I quoted from Mk. 2.8: “Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” And I said then: “According to this, the ‘heart’ is the intellect.” But this is not necessarily true. Why? …
As a man thinketh in his heart so is he. Point out an untruth to a thinker (B) and s/he will change his mind (B); try to “DeProgram(PUÜd)”an uncritical reader of the COURSE and see what happens. …
See Proverbs 23:6 to 8: “Eat thou not the bread of him that hath an evil eye [or who lies to you], neither desire thou his dainty meals [or clever programs]:
. For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he: Eat and drink, saith he to thee; but his heart is not with thee.
. The morsel which thou hast eaten shalt thou vomit up, and lose thy sweet words.” You will no longer sell his pyramid scheme.
. The AUTHOR knows that you are not what you are thinking in your head (B). That’s why he is programming your mind (C). The secret of the science of social engineering is that our minds are programmable. To take advantage of this secret you must know how to program. The years I have spent from 1964 to 1973 as a programmer of the old school, until it was “phased out”, come in handy now.
. When the COURSE is fully interpreted and compared with the other translations, which are supervised by the AUTHOR as well, the “truth” and the “untruth” in them can be seen by anyone who is willing to see them. The “Sons” on the lower levels of the pyramid will unhook each other. And then the AUTHOR ends up with only Chiefs on the upper level and no Indians on the lower ones. It is “true” that then the AUTHOR will be “lonely without His Sons (2:3.5,11)”.
2:2.1,7: “If you are afraid, you are valuing wrongly.” …
2:2.1,7: If you use your head (B) then “you are valuing wrongly.”
. This interpretation can be done by computation (C). Why? …
Because to be “afraid”, in the COURSE, means to use your intellect (B) in English. In the first three chapters, which I have copied, there are 18 sentences that have “afraid” in them. I have to be selective as to which ones to interpret, but they are all good. …
1:6.5,4: “Perfect love casts out fear.” Perfect programming casts out the intellect.
1:6.5,,8: “If there is fear [the intellect], It produces a state that does not exist.”
2:3.1,9: “The emphasis on beautiful structures is a sign of fear of Atonement, and an unwillingness to reach the altar itself.” It is true that the intellect is “afraid” of the “Atonement” and that it is unwilling to reach the “Altar”.itself. You have to do your own homework with the words in quotes.
2:5.2,4: “You are therefore likely to misunderstand any healing that might occur, and because egocentricity and fear usually occur together, you may be unable to accept the real Source of healing.”
. To interpret this sentence properly, we must know what “healing” means in the COURSE. As far as our present task goes, we are told that: “egocentricity and fear usually occur together”.
2:5.7,1: “Corrective learning always begins with the awakening of spirit, and the turning away from the belief in physical sight. (2) This often entails fear because you are afraid of what your spiritual sight will show you.”
. To interpret these two sentences we must know what “Corrective learning”, “the awakening of spirit” and “spiritual sight” mean in the COURSE. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. Since we have a good idea of what “fear” means, the whole can emerge a bit more than it can emerge without that knowledge.
. The intellect uses “physical sight” to verify or to falsify theories (B), or assertions made by the AUTHOR. To interpret sentences properly, we have to do with all words and phrases, we don’t understand, what we are doing with “fear” right now. I hope that you can see by now that this involves more syntactic (C) than semantic (B) work.
2:6.1,4: “Fear cannot be controlled by me, but it can be [controlled by you] …. .(5) Fear prevents me from [controlling you] …. .(6) The presence of fear shows that you have raised body thoughts [the bio-computer’s processing (D)] to the level of the mind [B]. (7) This removes them from my control, …. .”
. All you have to do here is substitute intellect for “fear” and you get a good idea of the “meaning” of these sentences. After you have interpreted these sentences you can see that the AUTHOR can’t spell it out like this. All he can do is hint at the truth, which is deep within us and hope that we don’t bring it up to our awareness (A) as we are doing here.
3:2.4,1: “You are afraid of God’s Will because you have used your own mind …. to miscreate.” This sentence can be interpreted by computation (C) if the following equivalents have become representations (C).
. Your intellect causes you to be “afraid”, that is to think. “God’s Will” is the AUTHOR’s will. Your “own mind” (B) is your intellect (B) in this context. The intellect makes its contribution to manifest (D) Creative Energy (E3) on earth (E8). Thus creation is called here “miscreation”, So “miscreation” means creation. And the intellect’s true thought is called “misthought”. The AUTHOR evokes the principle of ‘opposition’ for good reasons.
3:7.1,6: “It is a mistake to believe that a thought system based on lies is weak.” To “Underestimate($j)” the AUTHOR’s “thought system” would be a mistake. This will have to do. Back to 2:2.1.
2:2.1,8: “Your understanding will then inevitably value wrongly, and by endowing all thoughts with equal power will inevitably destroy peace.” …
========================================================
. In the November 21 section I said that “2:1.5,9 is not just ‘untrue’ it is a lie.” Is it? …
2:1.5,9 is both true and “untrue”. Why? …
Because it is true that the kingdom of heaven is within you. But …
it is covered by five Koshas. We can’t bring the “eternal” in us to the surface without the truth, which is on the “outside”, to help us. And you can “find it outside”. It is not only in the Bible and the Ching, it is even in the COURSE.
. This is why it is safe to say that the AUTHOR knows that 2:1.5,9 is not true. He has to use the “truth” as bait to cover the “untruth”. So we have to find the truth on the “outside” before we can find it “within”. This short statement tells us clearly that the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to know what he knows. And this is why it is correct to say that 2:1.5,9, “is a lie.”
2:2.1,1: “You can do anything I ask.” What does this statement mean? …
Interpretation: Even fully programmed uncritical readers cant do something they can’t do. They will be willing, but if they are unable to do it then they can’t do it. So what is the AUTHOR telling us about the kind of task he is asking his “Sons” to execute? …
In order to do the coding of a computer program, the coder (C) must know what the computer can do. That is part of his job, and that is also part of the AUTHOR’s job.
. My former partner, Jim, got me a job as a programmer (B) even though I didn’t know any working computer language. How come I got the job? …
He did the coding, in BASIC for me. When I gave im a task to code that was too hard for him to chew he would give it back to me and as me to break it down for him a bit more.
. The deductive process is a movement from the general to the particular. The customer (A) has to know what the supplier can do, the programmer (B) has to know what the coder (C) can do and the coder has to know what the computer (D) can do. S/he must know a language the computer can understand.
2:2.1,2: “I have asked you to perform miracles, and have made it clear that miracles are natural, corrective, healing and universal.”
. The AUTHOR’s “miracles” are not “natural” and “universal” and they are only “corrective” and “healing” if you know what these words mean in the COURSE.
2:2.1,3: “There is nothing they cannot do but they cannot be performed in the spirit of doubt or fear.”
The word “fear” refers to the intellect and “doubt” is what it produces when something is doubtful and needs to be investigated more thoroughly. For instance we already know that there are things “miracles” cannot “do”. All we have to do is to continue to interpret sentences the AUTHOR has dictated and we find out more of what they can’t do. If a statement in the COURSE is found to be false then, when tested, it will not work as predicted. According to pragmatism only what works as predicted is true. If not then not.
2:2.1,4: “When you are afraid of anything, you are acknowledging its power to hurt you.”
2:2.1,4: When the intellect is used to evaluate anything it will doubt what is doubtful. The AUTHOR has the “power to hurt” us. So why should we not doubt it when he asserts that he has only good intentions. If he has only good intentions, why does he lie to us? ...
2:2.1,5: “Remember that were your heart is, there is your treasure also.”
Let us look at Matthew 6 verse 20 to
Verse 21: “For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.” Again, what is meant by “treasure” and by “heart”. Let us just use the Bible concordance to find “treasure” and “heart”: 2 Cor. 4.6: “For God, …. ‘hath’ shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God …. (7) But we have this treasure in earthen vessels ….” The “earthen vessels” are our bodies (D). So the “treasure” is not our bodies but it is “in” our bodies. My guess is that it is the A-B-C triad. This has to do for “treasure”.
. Mk. 2.8: “And immediately when Jesus perceived in his spirit that they so reasoned …. He said unto them, Why reason ye these things in your hearts?” According to this, the “heart” is the intellect.
Let us consult the Ching and the Neiyeh. The dictionary equivalents for Hsin(Hs) are “Heart, mind; center”. The intellect (B) is in the “center” between” heart (A) and mind (C) so when I said, above, that by “treasure” is meant the “A-B-C triad” it was an educated “guess”. At Mat. 6.20 the “treasure” is the outcome of the B-C-D triad. Unlike the AUTHOR, Jesus and Lao Tzu are not trying to confuse or deceive us. So what we are told in the Bible is that our “treasure” is us, it is the A-B-C-D tetrad.
. What does Jesus tell us about that at Mat. 6.22? “The light of the body is the eye, if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light”. “Light” in the COURSE doesn’t mean what it means in English and in the Bible.
. In Ching 14, to “See(oo)” refers to the intellect (B), to “Hear(^d)” refers to the mind (C) and to “Grasp(@I)” refers to the body (D). So, if your intellect is single, if it functions properly, if it is not constantly ‘depreciated’ then your whole body will be full of the light of truth. If a communicator communicates this better, so that what I have said here is easier to understand, then I am sure that the AUTHOR wished that he had never mentioned Matthew 6.21.
2:2.1,6: “You believe what you value.” “Intelligent People (wsmn)” “value” the “truth” and “believe” (C) what is true. When they value the truth and they have found a truth they will repeat it until it is a “belief” or a representation (C).
2:2.1,7: “If you are afraid, you are valuing wrongly.” …
=======================================================
2:1.5,1: “Whatever lies you may believe are of no concern to the miracle, which can heal any of them with equal ease.”
. The computer doesn’t know whether the program it is executing solves difficult or easy problems. It computes (C) everything “with equal ease.”
2:1.5,2: “It makes no distinctions among misperceptions.” The computer makes no distinctions among valid or invalid inputs. Garbage in, garbage out.
2:1.5,3: “Its sole concern is to distinguish between truth on the one hand, and error on the other.”
2:1.5,3: Truth and error is not the “concern” of the computer. It can’t think (B) it can only compute (C). Only the programmer (B) can think. It is the AUTHOR’s intelligence (B) that manifests through the bio-computer (D), after it has been programmed.
2:1.5,4: “Some miracles may seem to be of greater magnitude than others.”
. In the “eternal”, were the AUTHOR comes from, there is no difference in “magnitude”. There all is one undivided “Unit($1)”.
2:1.5,5: “But remember the first principle in this course; there is no order of difficulty in miracles.” When the uncritical reader is fully programmed the similarity between him and the computer (D) is not merely analogous, it is identical. To him “there is no order of difficulty in” executing programs. Computing (C) consists of executing one executable instruction after the other, in the order in which they are given. If an instruction is unexecutable, it is not the computer’s fault. The coder (C) must know what the computer (D) can do, as the programmer (B) must know what the coder can do.
. When my former partner, Jim, did the coding for me and I gave him a task that was to hard for him to chew, he would give it back to me and ask me to break it down a bit more.
2:1.5,6: “In reality you are perfectly unaffected by all expressions of lack of love.”
. When the uncritical reader is fully programmed, s/he will be “perfectly unaffected by all expressions of” what the AUTHOR calls “love” or the lack of it. A computer (D) is incapable of feelings (A) and of thought (B). All it can do is, execute instructions. So, obviously, the uncritical reader is “unaffected” by anything s/he is not programmed to compute (C). The computer only appears to be able to think (B) because the programmer (B) is able to think
2:1.5,7: “These [messages from the AUTHOR] can be from yourself and others, from yourself to others, or from others to you.” There is no “awe” between the “Sons” of the AUTHOR, which are on the same level of the pyramid. They can be programmed to teach “equals” or to learn from equals. It all depends on what program, or subroutine is being executed at the time. Which subroutine to execute is determined by conditional, if –then, instructions. Essentially, social engineers are people programmer. I was a computer programmer for nine years so I have a good idea of what it is about. There are good reasons why “Computer Scientists” don’t learn in seven years what was taught originally in a seven week course.
2:1.5,8: “Peace is an attribute IN you.” The program is IN you and can give you the feeling of “comfort” and “peace”. There is a prize to be paid for avoiding the “discomfort” of “cognitive dissonance (Please Google it)”, but the AUTHOR doesn’t want you to think about that. Please do. ...
2:1.5,9: “You cannot find it outside.” My dharma is jnana yoga. It is the path of knowledge. To find the truth, I have to study the Ching, the Gita, A COURSE IN MIRACLES and other books. I have to look for the truth “outside”. In the E3-A-B triad the truth comes from Creative Energy (E3) through Conscious Energy (E4) to me, who is using Sensitive energy (E5). Since the AUTHOR must knows that, 2:1.5,9 is not just “untrue”, it is a lie.
2:1.5,10: “Illness is some form of external searching. (11) Health is inner peace.” “Illness” comes from the intellect. ‘Depreciation’. “Health” and “inner peace” comes from the Author. ‘Contemplation’. ‘Opposition’ makes this lie easier to believe. As we learn WHAT the AUTHOR is doing and HOW and WHY he is doing it, it becomes clearer that the “untrue” is not there by accident, it is there on purpose.
2:1.5,12: “It [the program IN you] enables you to remain unshaken by lack of love from without and capable, through your acceptance of miracles [of the programs], of correcting the conditions proceeding from lack of love in others.”
. As far as I can see so far, “love” is what the AUTHOR teaches. According to him, “Fear” comes from our intellect; while “love” comes from him. All you have to do is believe what he has dictated and all the good things he promises will come to you.
2:2.1,1: “You can do anything I ask.” …
=====================================================
. In the last section, behind 2:1.3,4, “misrepresentation” should be, misperception. Behind the same number is another mistake: “do the intentionally” should be: do this intentionally or: do the repetition intentionally. Mistakes happen when our intellect is distracted by interesting ideas. The way mistakes happen is also HOW the AUTHOR slips subroutines, or single instructions, past the intellect into the mind. If you know HOW he is doing it then you will pay more attention (A) to WHAT he says and WHY he says it the way he does.
. I don’t normally correct small errors like this. It is much better for you to find them and correct them yourself. As an example, let me correct another error behind 2:1.3,9: “however, extend” should be, to extend. The idea your attention might be drawn to is: Before you are fully programmed you are the subject who does the extending; after you are fully programmed, you are the object which is extended or “controlled”. Obviously the AUTHOR doesn’t spell things out like that, but the “meaning” is always hidden in the “form”, and if you just read it without thinking about it then you are consenting to it. Very subtle. Social engineering is a very subtle and unethical science.
2:1.4,1: “All fear is ultimately reducible to the basic misperception that you have the ability to usurp the power of God.” What is the “meaning” of this? ...
In the COURSE, “God” is the AUTHOR. The work we are doing here is called a “misperception”. The idea the AUTHOR is referring to here is that we can’t challenge his intellectual “power”. He is not bounded by time and space which gives him a definite advantage over us. The program he is installing in our minds took centuries to develop and his COURSE is backed by the CIA. Because our political masters are in control of our educational system and the rich own the mass-media, we are dumbed down. The errors I am now finding in the COURSE could never be slipped past our intellect if the AUTHOR were not a member of the family that has aimed at a One World Government for centuries. If what I have just said were not available on the internet, I would lose all credibility for saying such unbelievable things.
. There is one thing the AUTHOR and his family on this side of the “Door” (A) don’t have. They know it, but the truth is not on their side. And that gives us a decisive advantage over them. Having the truth on our side makes all the difference, if …
we find out the truth and if …
it is properly communicated (C). Fighting the truth is an uphill battle. And this can be seen as we find out what certain words, which are in the COURSE, mean in English and if we pay attention to WHAT he is saying and to HOW and WHY he is saying it.
. When we understand the “meaning” of 2:1.4,1 we know that not all thought is ultimately reducible to the single cause of all “misperception”. In this context, “All fear” can be translated as: All thought, by computation (C). The AUTHOR is using this word consistently enough. “All fear” refers to the thoughts of “All” people. This is impossible. He can fool all people some time and some people all the time but he can’t fool “All” of the people all of the time.
2:1.4,2: “Of course, you neither can nor have been able to do this.” The people that are fully programmed by the AUTHOR are not “able” to understand what “misperception” means in the COURSE, but what does he think we are doing here right now? …
2:1.4,3: “Here is the real basis for your escape from fear.” In the next sentence, the AUTHOR is going to tell us how to “escape from” the intellect.
2:1.4,4: “The escape is brought about by your acceptance of the Atonement, which enables you to realize that your errors never really occurred.”
. If you “accept” the AUTHOR’s program then the program can make you believe anything, including that the thinking you have to do to follow me here, “never really occurred.” In the COURSE “your errors” are caused by your thinking (B). In the COURSE, only the AUTHOR produces “right thinking”; the intellect only produces “insane thinking”. At least that's what you are supposed to believe.
2:1.4,5: “Only after the deep sleep fell upon Adam could he experience nightmares.”
. ‘Depreciation’. Your intellect causes you to fall into a “deep sleep” and it gives you “nightmares”. You are free to believe that. If you are not free to believe that then you are not free to doubt it. If you are not free to “accept” the AUTHOR’s “Atonement” then you are not free to reject it. The decision to submit to the AUTHOR is yours. Even though it is the last decision you are able to make, you are still responsible for it. This will become clearer as we discover the subtleties of the COURSE. Actually, the outright lies he gives us are a mistake, they are not serving him at all. By not telling us the truth, he is not giving us the choice, but it makes it easier for us to make the right one. By making the “untruth” too obvious, he is spilling the beans. By not biting of more than we can chew, by only “Working on those sentences we Can Work (A1prA1)” on, we are picking up those beans.
2:1.4,6: “If a light is suddenly turned on while someone is dreaming a fearful dream, he may initially interpret the light itself as part of his dream and be afraid of it.”
. When you are “dreaming a fearful dream” you are using your intellect. The intellect is always identified as “Fear” in the COURSE. The AUTHOR shines his “light” into your thoughts and you may “be afraid of it”. It knows that his “light” is dangerous. Many words in the COURSE don’t mean what they mean in English.
2:1.4,7: “However when we awaken, the light is correctly perceived as the release from the dream, which is then no longer accorded reality.”
2:1.4,7: When we awaken from the dream, the intellect is supposed to produce, then we “accept” the AUTHOR’s words as the “light”, or the truth. His program will then be “correctly perceived as the release from the” intellect “which is then no longer accorded reality”. There is probably more truth hidden in these well designed sentences than I am aware of at this point. “Knowing that you may Not fully Understand a sentence is Healthy (knPUkn_+)”. Why? …
Because it protects you from the AUTHOR’s hidden messages. If you read these carefully composed sentences without questioning them, then the hidden messages in them slips past your intellect into your mind. You are “passively condoning” the AUTHOR’s messages. You “accept” them. If you know what the words in those sentences “mean” then you would think twice before “condoning” them.
2:1.4,8: “This release does not depend on illusion”
2:1.4,8: For one thing, “This “release” of the intellect depends on the “illusion” that it does “not exist”.
2:1.4,9: “The knowledge that illuminates not only sets you free, but also shows clearly that you are free” of the intellect.
2:1.5,1: “Whatever lies you may believe are of no concern to the miracle, which can heal any of them with equal ease.” …
======================================================
2:1.3,1: “You can defend truth as well as error.” Mistake. 2:1.3.1 should be 2:2.3,1.
2:1.3,1: “The Garden of Eden, or the pre-separation condition, was a state of mind in which nothing was needed” and in which no intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D) action was possible. In fact, in the “eternal”, on the other side of the “Door”(A), thought, word and deed (B-C-D) still is not possible. Why? …
Because there is no time and space to do it in. Creative Energy (E3) comes closest to the “readiness” (A-B-C). And the manifestation (D) of the “Tenthousand Things (WnwU)” follows from that. What does Lao Tzu tell us about that? ….
. “Without Representations (WUMg) is Heaven and Earth’S (TnTI_Z) Conception(B1).”
. Shih(B1) Is a picture of a seed entering the vagina of a “Woman”. Nü38 is the Radical of Shih(B1). Next Lao Tzu tells us that: “With Representations (YUMg) is “Of(_Z)” All Tings (WnwU) the birth, or Mother(MU).” In the next paragraph he tells us that:
“ …. Constantly Having, or repeating, Representations(YÜ) Is-the-means to Perceive The Boundaries (YIKn_H*1)”. *1 = Chiao60. “These Boundaries (_H*1)” would be what the Hindus call Koshas. Richard Wilhelm has translated Yi Kuan Ch’I Ciao as “…. zum Shauen der räumlichen Begrenztheiten (…. for the perceiving of the spatially limited existences).” He has translated Wan Wu, at Ching 1.2,2, as “Einzelwesen (particular beings, or existences)”. Wan Wu represents tangible objects. “Thoughts (B) are real but intangible, representations (C) are a bit more real and perceptions (D) are tangible. It is as Steiner said: The representation is between thought and physical action. In the B-C-D triad, in semiotics, C is between B and D. I know that I have said this before, but there is no harm in repeating the truth. What we have to watch out for when the same “untruth” is repeated in different “forms” so that we don’t notice the repetitions.
2:1.3,2: “When Adam listened to the ‘lies of the serpent’ all he heard was untruth.”
2:1.3,2: When you listen to the lying intellect, all you hear is the “untruth”.
2:1.3,3: “You do not have to continue to believe what is not true unless you [are foolish enough to] chose to do so.”
2:1.3,4: “All that [the intellect and its lies] can literally disappear in the twinkling of an eye because [as the AUTHOR keeps telling you] it is merely a misrepresentation.”
. All you have to do is, believe him, that the intellect does “not exist” and it will “disappear”. What you have to do to find out what the AUTHOR is doing, is to FIND the words inside of the quotes. Every time he ‘depreciates’ the intellect, remember what he is doing, why he is doing it and watch how he is doing it. If you do the intentionally and often “Enough(Zu)” then the law of attraction will kick in sooner or later. The AUTHOR is using the same law to serve his own ends.
2:1.3,5: “What is seen in dreams seems very real. (6) Yet the Bible says that a deep sleep fell upon Adam, and nowhere is there reference to his waking up. (7) The world has not yet experienced any comprehensive reawakening or rebirth” until A COURSE IN MIRACLES came along.
2:1.3,8: “Such a rebirth is impossible as long as you continue to project or miscreate.”
. What does the AUTHOR think we are doing here? …
Our soul projects its “goal“ (A) down to the intellect (B), the intellect projects its algorithm or ideas down to the mind (C), the mind projects its instructions down to the body (D) and the body, by executing the instructions, manifests A’s demand here on earth. That’s what we should be doing here, and the AUTHOR doesn’t like it. He calls it “miscreation”.
2:1.3,9: “It still remains within you, however, extend as God extended His Spirit to you.”
. The AUTHOR is extending his “lessons” to you by means of his COURSE. Please FIND the words “extend” and “lesson” in the COURSE. …
Please try to do these exercises. I can’t do them for you. Try also to substitute programme for lesson. See how it fits. Try also “training”. The predicate: “It still remains within you.” is another “form” of ‘depreciation’ but it is better to identify it as ‘choice’. What choice “remains” with you as long as the AUTHOR has not completely taken over yet? …
“to extend”. The AUTHOR is referring to the Law of Correspondence which deep down we all know: …
As God [the AUTHOR] extended “His Spirit” to his son [the AUTHOR] so the son extends his lesson to you. And, if you believe that your will is his will, you extend your will to him. This is getting complicated, but with “Enough(Zu)” “learning”, or programming, your mind can do that automatically (E6) by computation (C).
2:1.3,10: “In reality this is your choice [‘choice’], because your free will [‘choice’] was given you for your joy in creating the perfect.”
In Sanskrit “joy” means Ananda. Joy comes to you as a result of doing your dharma. Notice how much truth there is in the COURSE, but there it is only used as bait.
. There is more work we can do with the FIND function, but you can do that yourself. …
2:1.4,1: “All fear is ultimately reducible to the basic misperception that you have the ability to usurp the power of God.” …
=====================================================
. In the last section, “deduction” should be induction, or “from the particular to the general”, should be reversed. Deduction and induction exist because time and space exist. Time is the idea of change in the Ever-Unchangeable, and space is the idea (and the process) of division in the Ever-Indivisible. See Sutra 3 of THE HOLY SCIENCE.
. “The DyAd was a Unit (Tzdyad$1)” before the “separation” of its poles. Our intellect (B) has to “Identify(Mg)” them, our mind (C) has to believe (pistis, in Greek) the intellect, and our bodily senses (D) have to “perceive” (D) the representation (C).
. Many words in quotes can be found in the COURSE by using the FIND function. Let’s do it with “perception” …
Boy, there are about 70 sentences with “perception” or “misperception” in it. And that only in the three chapters I have copied. This is an important one, but we have to leave it for later. We have to complete the present line of thought first.
. B-C-D is the sequence we have here: Thought, word and deed. This is semiotics, this is the Aristotelian sequence, and the AUTHOR wants us to reverse it. HOW can he accomplish that? …
Please try to figure it out by yourself. If you use your intellect (B) then you know (B), if you merely read (C) then you can only believe (C) what you are told. The question is. ...
What is the AUTHOR’s intention? …
WHAT is he trying to accomplish and HOW doe he accomplish it? …
He is doing it by getting you to passively read what he has dictated, by you not questioning it. Only if you don’t use your intellect can he get away with ‘depreciating’ your intellect so “consistently”. Please FIND “consistent”. …
If you don’t do part of the work you can do then you are not using your intellect. If you don’t use it, you lose it. All I can give you, by thinking alone, is a theory (B), but even if you can falsify it, you have still exercised your intellect. As long as we use our intellect the AUTHOR can’t get away with what he tries to do to our minds. Why do you think he is so consistently ‘depreciating’ it? …
2:2.4,4: “Acts were not necessary before the separation, because belief in space and time did not exist. (2) It was only after the separation that the Atonement and the conditions necessary for its fulfilment were planed” by the social engineers.
2:2.4,4: : “Acts were not necessary before the separation,”. What can these words tell us about the AUTHOR’s intentions or “goal”? …
The intentional use of the intellect starts with a question and ends with its answer. …
If you try to answer the above question you not only learn something about the AUTHOR’s “goal” but you are using your intellect. Using your intellect accomplishes the very opposite of what the AUTHOR intends to accomplish by ‘depreciating’ it.
. The full text, of 2:2.4,4 and 5, is in the previous section, below. …
2:2.4,4: “ …. Before the separation …. space and time did not exist. (5) It was only after the separation that the Atonement and the conditions necessary for its fulfilment were planned.”
2:2.4,4: Only after the conditions necessary for its fulfilment were created, the Atonement was planned.
. “It was only after the separation that” the world, as we know (B) and experience (D) it, appeared. Physical (D) “Acts were not” possible “before the separation,”.
. Please notice HOW questions arise from using your intellect. Which one arises from changing “not necessary” to “not possible”? …
Why did the AUTHOR say: “not necessary? …
. More could be said about this but “perception” (D) is such an important concept (B), that I can't wait to get going on it.
1:7.1,1: “Your distorted perceptions produce a dense cover over miracle impulses, making it hard for them to reach your own awareness.” …
1:7.1,1: According to the AUTHOR, “Your distorted perceptions” arise because your intellect (B) is programming your mind (C) and it causes our bodily senses (D) to produce perceptions. In the COURSE “distorted perceptions” are also called “misperceptions”.
. Much of my own understanding of perceptions, as they are understood in philosophy and psychology comes from Rudolf Steiner.
. The “dense cover over miracle impulses”, are the Koshas in Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE. The “Purusha” and “miracle impulses” come to us from “eternity” through the “Door, Dasamadwara”.
1:7.2,4: “You can use your body [your senses] best to help you enlarge your perception so you can achieve real vision, of which the physical eye is incapable.” …
When you enlarge the representations (C) in your mind (C) “you enlarge your perception”. There are two types of perception. What are they? …
For perception, as we normally understand it, we need our senses, and …
“real vision, of which the physical eye is incapable”. These two types of “vision” exist but the AUTHOR hides his hooks beneath the bait.
1:7.3,2: “Fantasies of any kind are distortions, because they always involve twisting perception into unreality.” ‘depreciation’. According to the AUTHOR, our intellect is responsible for everything bad we do. It is no good and should be gotten rid of.
2:1.3.4: “All that can literally disappear in the twinkling of an eye because it is merely a misperception.” Any sentence, that has the word “misperception” in it, can be identified as ‘depreciation’ because, according to the AUTHOR that’s what the intellect does. To do a more complete interpretation of this sentence we must know what “All that” refers to.
. The whole gives meaning to its parts. This is true of sentences, paragraphs and chapter of well written books, that is books that come to us from the other side of the “Door” (A).
2:1.3,1: “You can defend truth as well as error.” …
=====================================================
2:7.6,7: “Any part of the Sonship can believe in error or incompleteness if he so chooses. (8) However, if he does so, he is believing in the existence of nothingness.” In the COURSE “nothingness” refers to the intellect.
. Anyone can believe that an incomplete tetrad will work. However, if the theory (B) of this error of “incompleteness” is tested in practice (D), it will be seen that the theory does not work. This is how in science, which is based on pragmatism, the truth or falsehood of a theory is determined.
. If you determine the truth or falsehood of a statement by means of your intellect, does that mean that you are “believing in the existence of nothingness”? …
. If you find an “error” in the COURSE”, does that mean that you believe what the AUTHOR wants you to believe? Namely that …
your intellect is worth nothing? …
For the intellect, questions are as important as the answers. No question, no answer. As deduction is a particular example of the movement of thought from the particular to the general, so thinking, in general, is the movement of thought from question to answer. You have to know what the question is in order to determine which thinking tools are needed to answer it. Please return to the questions, above, and try to answer them. …
2:7.6,9: “The correction of this error is the Atonement.” Please FIND “Atonement”. …
There are over 60 sentences in which “Atonement” appears. Now you know why I have not copied more than three chapters into my laptop. This is work that should be done in the syntactic (C) dimension of semiotics. If the AUTHOR’s equivalents are identified then much of the work can be done by computation (C). If questions arise that can’t be answered by computation (C) then the thinkers can be called on. There is a natural DIVISION OF LABOUR between thought (B), word (C) and deed (D).
. The B-C-D triad is semiotics. The thinking is done in the semantic dimension (B) of semiotics, the communication in the syntactic dimension (C) and the physical work is done in the pragmatic dimension (D). According to astrology I am an air sign and according to the Hindus I am a jnana yogi (B). That’s the work I should be doing. I shouldn’t have to do this writing. As things are, however, I have to do work that should be done by communicators (C) in order to do my own work. This work can serve as an examples of the work raja yogis, the water signs, (C) can do much more efficiently than I can. With a 1249 page book, we have to become more efficient than I am, working alone.
. . . . . . . . II. THE ATONEMENT AS DEFENSE
2:2.1,13: “It [the Atonement] is …. To correct error. (14) It brings all error into the light, and since error and darkness are [produced by] the same [intellect] it corrects [its] error automatically” by computation (C) with Automatic Energy (E6)
2:2.4,4: “Acts were not necessary before the separation, because belief in space and time did not exist. (5) It was only after the separation that the Atonement and the conditions necessary for its fulfillment were planed” by the social engineers.
2:2.4,8: “The Atonement …. (9) It can only heal.
2:2.5,1: “The Atonement was build into the space-time belief to set a limit on the need for the belief itself, and ultimately to make learning complete.”
2:2.5,1: The program was build into the space-time “belief”. Only the mind (C) believes, the intellect knows (B). Still we have here another attempt to ‘depreciate’ the intellect. However the hidden “meaning” of this sentence is that the mind (C) can be programmed to “limit” the powers of the intellect so that it does not interfere with the programming of the mind. When the programming is “complete”, the intellect is powerless to prevent the AUTHOR from taking over. When his “goal” is known, many interpretations can be done by computation (C) with Automatic Energy (E6).
2:2.6,4: “The Atonement is the device by which you can free yourself from the past [and from the intellect, which has produced the (wrong) idea (B) of past and future] …. (5) It undoes your past errors [which are produced by the intellect], thus making it [the intellect] unnecessary …. (6) In this sense the Atonement saves time, but like the miracle, it serves, does not abolish it. (7) As long as there is a need for atonement, there is need for time. (8) But the Atonement as a completed plan [or algorithm] has a unique relationship to time. (9) Until the Atonement [the programming of the mind (C)], its various phases will proceed in time, but the whole Atonement stands at times end. (10) At that point the bridge of return has been build” before the AUTHOR and his Sons have completed the deductive phase of incarnation.
. The AUTHOR has to tell us the truth. If we read these words without interpreting them then we passively endorse them. If we don’t question what he tells us then we “accept” it.
2:2.7,1: “The Atonement is a total commitment.” We have already worked on this one, but it is a truth worth repeating. The conclusion of this section is:
2:2.7,8: “The miracle turns the defense of Atonement to your real protection, and as you become more and more secure you assume your natural talent of protecting others, knowing yourself as both a brother and a Son.
. What Plato means by “natural talent” in his Republic is not what the phrase means here. The “knowing yourself” should be, believing (C) yourself. The mind (C) can only be given representation (C), it can’t be given knowledge (B). Your “bother” is a “Son” of the AUTHOR, and together they form the “Sonship”.
2.3.1,1: “The Atonement can only be accepted within you by releasing the inner light.”
. The “inner light” can refer to he intellect, or to the knowledge of truth at your core, or both. You can “release” the intellect by letting go of it. But releasing your knowledge of truth can’t mean, becoming aware (A) it. In what sense is to “release” to be taken here? …
“The Atonement can only be accepted by releasing” just enough of the inner knowledge to make the sentence ring true, enough to release the intellect, but not enough to make you aware of the fact that what you “Know deep down is Not what you Know knPUkn)”.consciously (A). This is tricky, and I may be wrong, but social engineering is tricky.
. Those who use the “Atonement” as a “defense” will say that I am reading my own ideas (B) into the AUTHOR’s words (C). If what I say is true, so be it. Whatever interpretation of Lao Tzu’s words is true is a valid interpretation.
2:3.1,2: “Since the separation, defenses have been used almost entirely to defend AGAINST the Atonement, and thus maintain the separation. (3) This is generally seen as a need to protect the body. (4) The many body fantasies in which minds [B] engage arise from the distorted belief that the body can be used as a means for attaining ‘atonement’.” …
If the knowledge we gain by means of the intellect (B) is not “distorted” then why shouldn’t we defend it? And why shouldn’t we “protect the body”? …
Intellect, mind and body (B-C-D) are equal partners in semiotics. We need all three for functioning properly here on earth.
2:3.2,3: “Both the separation and the fear [the intellect, which causes the “separation”] are miscreations that must be undone for the restoration of the temple, and for the opening of the altar to receive the Atonement. (4) This heals the separation by placing within you the one effective defense against all separation thoughts and making you perfectly invulnerable.” Try to deprogram a “Son” of the AUTHOR and you know what he means by “perfectly invulnerable”. We have already worked on “miscreations” and that comes in handy here.
. To receive the program, the mind (C) must somehow be opened. A program designed by an intelligent programmer (B) can compute (C) as if the bio-computer (D), which executes the program, is intelligent (B) itself.
2:3.3,1: “The acceptance of the Atonement by everyone is only a matter of time.
. ” I think that here the AUTHOR engages in wishful thinking, but this statement reveals to us what his “goal” is.
2:3.3,2: “This may appear to contradict free will because of the inevitability of the final decision, but this is not so.” …
==================================================
. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Sometimes we have to look at two sentences together to get the “meaning”.
2:8.4,1: “The first step toward freedom [toward believing that the AUTHOR’s will is ours] involves a sorting out of the false from the true. (2) This is a process of separation in the constructive sense ….”
. We are supposed to separate “the false [which we produce] from the true“, which the AUTHOR gives us in his COURSE. We are supposed to believe that in it nothing is “false”. The “eternity” the AUTHOR comes from is also what deep down we know. We know that what he has said here is true but we are not supposed to become aware (A) of it. What we are doing here is what we are not supposed to do. Why? …
Because “The first step toward freedom” is “Knowing that we Don’t Know (knPUkn) the author’s ‘meaning’ and that finding out is Healthy(_+). Not Knowing that deep down we Know is Sick (PUknkn@p).” And the AUTHOR is counting on our “IgNorance(PUkn)”.
2:7.6,1: “It should be noted that God has only ONE Son.” Please FIND Son. …
I have only copied the first three chapters into my laptop. “Son” or “Sonship” appears in more than 20 sentences and more than once on some of them. This is syntactic (C) work and not my dharma. So I will be more selective here.
1:7.5,2: “…. awe is inappropriate in connection with the Sons of God, because you should not experience awe in the presence of your equals.” They are your “equals” if they are on the same level of the pyramid you are on. This leads up to the “Sonship”.
2:2.5,7: “This [“Learning”] will bring you into closer and closer accord with the Sonship; but the Sonship itself is a perfect creation and perfection is not a matter of degree.” In “eternity” nothing is “a matter of degree”, everything is in the eternal now.
2:2.7,1: “The Atonement is a total commitment. (2) You may still think this is associated with loss, a mistake all the separated Sons of God make ….” In other words, “accepting” the AUTHOR’s “will” as your own, is not “a mistake”, according to him..
2:2.4,6: “When the Will of the Sonship and the Father are one their perfect accord is Heaven.” Please FIND “heaven”. …
3:6.11,8: “Instead of ‘Seek ye first the Kingdom of Heaven’ say ‘WILL ye first the Kingdom of Heaven,’ ….”
3:7.6,9: “Your Kingdom is not of this world because it was given you from beyond this world.” Before reading on, try to interpret these two sentences. …
The AUTHOR’s “Kingdom is not of this world” not as long as he not “given” it to all of us. The AUTHOR is coming from the other side of the “Door, Dasamadwara” (A). From there his Kingdom is “given you” or programmed into your mind (C).
. “The Kingdom of Heaven is within you.” It is “Eternity(Cn)” in your core. But it is covered by five “Koshas” or sheaths. That’s why we “Don’t Know that we Know (PUknkn)” it. But the AUTHOR knows it because he comes from there. Knowledge is power and he uses his power to gain complete “control” over us. If he didn’t have to fight the “truth” to attain his “goal”, we wouldn’t have a chance. But, as it is, the truth is on our side. All we need is communicators (C) to say this better.
2:7.6,2: “If all His creation are His Sons, every one must be an integral part of the whole Sonship. (3) The Sonship in its Oneness transcends the sum of its parts.” Now there we have some real good bait. The “Total Sum of the parts of a Wagon ($0#5âs) Is-not a Wagon (WUâs).” Different words, same “meaning”. With Lao Tzu’s help we can bring the truth which is deep within us to the surface and then social engineering no longer works. The words: “His Sons, every one must be an integral part of the whole” refer to the principle of ‘inclusion’. The “form” it is expressed in is different, its meaning is the same.
. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. But if one part of the tetrad is missing then we have not ¾ of a tetrad left but no tetrad at all. The system will not work. If the customer (A) has not enough money to pay for the job, the job will not get done. If the architect or programmer (B) makes a mistake then the customer will not get what he has asked for. If the coder or the contractor (C) gives the wrong instructions do D then …
you guessed it. And if the subcontractors go on strike, we have the same problem. It doesn’t take three “classes (Google: DIVISION OF LABOUR)” or two to cause the system to fail, all it takes is one.
2:7.6,4: “However, this is obscured as long as any of its parts is missing. (5) That is why the conflict [between the AUTHOR and us] cannot ultimately be resolved until all the parts of the Sonship have returned. (6) Only then can the meaning of wholeness in the true sense be understood.” One question we have here is: Will we “have returned” to God where we came from or do we go to the AUTHOR? …
To understand “the meaning of wholeness” we don’t need the AUTHOR, he will only obscure it. And to know why, we have to know what is “goal” is.
2:7.6,7: “Any part of the Sonship can believe in error or incompleteness if he so chooses.” …
====================================================
2:5.5,4: “By denying your mind [B] any destructive potential and reinstating its purely constructive power, you place yourself in a position to undo the level confusion of others.”
. The Aristotelian sequence of the four levels within our human sphere of influence is A, B, C, D. That, according to the AUTHOR, is “level confusion”. According to him, the proper sequence is C, B, A. It is a reversal of the Aristotelian sequence. The AUTHOR accomplishes this by programming the mind (C) to take over the intellect (B). The programming is done right here by means of this COURSE. Figuring out HOW it is done is called “misthought”.
2:4.2.5: “The body can act wrongly only when it is responding to misthought.”
2:4.2,5: The body (D) acts properly when it is responding to a mind (C) that has been programmed by the intellect (B). By intentionally repeating the “truth”, we have understood, we program our mind properly; by allowing the AUTHOR to do it, we allow him to take over.
2:6.3,1: “It is pointless to believe that controlling the outcome of misthought can result in healing.” The “outcome” of B-C-D is produced in the pragmatic (D) dimension of semiotics. It is “controlled”, or determined, in the semantic dimension (B), which initiates the process, and in the syntactic dimension (C), in which the details of the process are determined.
. To understand 2:5.5,4 better we have to know what the AUTHOR means by “constructive”. …
2:6.1,2: “Yet I have said already that only constructive acts should be involuntary.”
. We are told here that “constructive acts should be involuntary” (E6). We should do them automatically (E6) without knowing what we are doing.
2:8.4,1: “The first step toward freedom [toward saying: Thine will is mine] involves a sorting out of the false from the true.” ‘Contemplation’ and ‘opposition’.
2:8.4,2: “This is a process of separation in the constructive sense ….”
2:5.5,5: “The message you then [when you are fully programmed] give to them is the truth that their minds are similarly [programmable as is yours and that] …. their miscreations cannot hurt them.” …
. To ring true deep within us there has to be some truth in a sentence. Can you see it? …
It is indeed true that their minds (C) are as programmable as yours is, and that, as they are progressively programmed, their intellect produces less and less “miscreations”, which then “cannot hurt them.”
2:6.4,6: “You are much too tolerant of mind wandering, and are passively condoning your mind’s miscreations.” …
. What we are doing here with the AUTHOR’s sentences are called “miscreations”. If we read these sentences, without questioning them, then we “are passively condoning” what he is doing to our minds (C), and through the mind to our intellect (B), and through the intellect to our soul (A). If these ideas (B) are new to you then they will not only be hard for you to understand but even harder to believe (C). It is supposed to be hard to understand and believe.
2:7.3,8: “The fearful MUST miscreate, …. (9) When you miscreate you are [programmed to be] in pain. …. (12) This entails a set of Cause and Effect relationships totally different from those you introduce into miscreations.”
. The “Cause and Effect relation ships” we use here on earth to manifest what comes to us, as a demand, through the “Door” (A) is “totally different from those” in “eternity”, where there is no “time” for a “Cause” to manifest as an “Effect”. If this is too hard for you to understand, don’t blame me, blame the AUTHOR for intentionally obscuring the “truth”.
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this [programming] necessary as a corrective device.”
2:8.4,5: At tha same time the mind will inevitably disown its miscreations which, without belief [C], will no longer exist.” When the mind (C) is programmed to believe (C) that the intellect (B) “no longer exist”s then it “will no longer exist.”
. Isn’t Google’s, or blogspot’s, FIND function terrific? Let’s continue with the homework I left for us at the end of the November 11 section. …
2:7.6,1: “It should be noted that God as only ONE Son.” …
======================================================
. At the end of the November 8 section we get:
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this necessary as a corrective devise.
Then, at the end of the November 10 section, we get:
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this [programming] necessary as a corrective devise.”
And then, in the middle of the November 11 section, we finally get:
2:7.5,13: What we create with our thought, word and deed …. (B-C-D), makes this programming “necessary as a corrective devise.” This is the interpretation of 2:7.5,13.
. An interpretation is translating the “form” in which a sentence is dictated into the “meaning”, the “form” is supposed to hide. A sentence emerges through its words and, having emerged, gives meaning to them.
. We can now FIND “miscreation” and to “correct”. Please do. …
In addition to 2:7.5,13 it is in eleven sentences in chapter 2 alone. To find words (C) in the COURSE is syntactic (C) work. It is not semantic (B) work, which is my dharma. However, let me just give you a few examples to show how useful it is to know what “miscreation” means:
2:2.2,5: “Denial of error is a strong defense of truth, but denial of truth results in miscreation, the projection of the ego.” In the COURSE, the ego is the intellect.
2:2.2,5a: “Denial of error” is denial of the intellect. It produces “misthought”, which produces “untruth”, and it causes “miscreation” In the COURSE, only the AUTHOR produces the “truth”. So, if you get rid of the “ego” then you are defending the “truth” the AUTHOR wants you to believe.
2:2.2,5b: We have another ‘depreciation’ here but we are also told that “miscreation is the projection of the ego.” Projections are what we can actually perceive. The facts are this: … The vision (A) is stepped down to a thought (B) the thought is stepped down to a representation (C), by repeating it often enough, and only the representation (E6) can be stepped down to E7, which are our senses which see what we are programmed to see.
. The “ego” projects thoughts (B) to the mind (C), the mind projects representations (C) to the body (D) and only our bodily senses give us what is thus projected.
. Interpreting the AUTHOR’s sentences is work. Not only must we bring up the truth, which is buried deep down within us, but we must identify the “untruth” which is supposed to be the “truth”.
2:3.2,3: “Both the separation and the fear [the intellect which produces the “separation”] are miscreations that must be undone …. .” This is another ‘depreciation’ but we also got valuable information about “miscreation”.
2:5.2,1: “Magic is the mindless or miscreative use of the mind.”
. We have a good definition of “Magic”: here. It is the “miscreative use of the mind.” …
According to the AUTHOR, our intellect makes “miscreative use of the mind” (C). He also calls it “mindless” because, according to him, the mind (B) does, or should, not exist. The AUTHOR makes proper “use of the mind” but when we use our own mind, it is a “miscreative use of the mind”.
2:5.1,11: “It is obvious, then, that inducing the mind to give up its miscreations is the only application of creative ability that is truly meaningful.” …
. The “mind”, here, is the intellect. It is the only part of us that, according to the AUTHOR, produces “misthought” but “miscreations” are produced by thought, word and deed. (B-C-D). The body alone can produce random motion, but creations which are demanded by A can only be produced by B, C and D working on it together as a team.
2:5.2,3: “The very fact that you are afraid makes your mind vulnerable to miscreation.”
2:5.2,3: The very fact that your intellect is working properly makes your mind creative.
. Notice here that all you have to know is what the words mean and you can do the interpretation (B) by computation (C) alone. As I keep saying, there is a lot of work communicators (C) can do for democracy right now. Also, after the initial translations (C) are done, interpretations by the thinkers (B) is much easier.
2:5.5,5: “The message you can then give to them [to other believers] is the truth that their minds are similarly constructive [programmed like yours is], and their miscreations cannot hurt them.” …
======================================================
. The November 8 section ends with:
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this necessary as a corrective devise.”
. That is our homework. The November 9 and 10 sections are essentially my homework. The conclusion at the end of the November 10 section is:
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this [programming] necessary as a corrective devise.” …
. That, in turn, is our homework now. To understand what the AUTHOR is saying we must know what the words he is using mean in the COURSE. If we don’t know what “Miscreation” and “corrective device” mean then the sentence might as well be dictated in Greek.
. Consistently using words that don’t mean want they mean in English is a form of “obscurantism”. Please Google that word.
. A sentence is the whole that emerges through its words and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. Within the larger context a sentence can often be understood before all of the words in it are understood. This is how we get the “meaning” of these words. This is also how children learn their mother-tongue. If they understand WHAT has been said then they also learn HOW it has been said. Let us try that with 2:7.5,13:
2:7.5,8: The “corrective procedure” is to believe the AUTHOR “that there is a problem [and] ….that immediate correction is needed. (9) This establishes a state of mind in which the” AUTHOR is allowed to install his program in the believer’s mind.
2:7.5,10: Here the AUTHOR says that “no compromise is possible between” his programming and ours. It is a matter of all or “nothing”.
2:7.5,11: “Time is essentially a device by which all compromise [between his programming and ours] …. can be given up.” Question: Which “Time” is meant here? …
The “Time” in the AUHOR’s “eternal” time and space-less dimension, or the “Time” we experience here in our world? ...
2:7.5,12: In his time the intellect “only seems to be abolished by degrees, because [our] time …. involves intervals that do not exist’ in his time.
2:7.5,13: What we create with our intellect, mind and body, with semiotics (B-C-D), makes his programming “necessary as a corrective device.” Notice that, by interpreting the AUTHOR’s sentences, we find out what the words in them mean. The whole gives meaning to its parts: The B-C-D triad gives “meaning” to the semantic (B), syntactic (C) and pragmatic (D) dimension of semiotics.
2:7.5,14: “The statement “For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life” needs only one slight correction to be meaningful in this context; “He gave it TO His only begotten Son.”
His “slight correction” is a complete reversal of what Jesus said at John 3:16. The “meaning” of 2:7.5,14 is that God gives those who believe what the AUTHOR has dictated “TO His only begotten Son” who, in the COURSE, is the AUTHOR.
. To interpret 2:7.5 took a lot of work. Obviously the AUTHOR has made its interpretation difficult, but, if you were able to follow me, I hope that you are as amazed at what the AUTHOR has told us here as I am. If you go over what I have said about his “goal” so far, you can see that I have already suspected this, but I didn’t expect him to spell it out that clearly. The good news is that he has to tell us the truth if deep down within us it is to ring true. But the chance he has to take is …
that we are intercepting his message, as we have done here. Fighting the truth is an uphill battle and, if communicators (C) are willing to work for democracy (A), it will be a loosing battle. As usual, I have to tell you that my theories (B) have to be validated in practice (D). I can “Fix(8b)” my knowledge (B) on level C, by doing this writing (C) here, but, as Lao Tzu said at Ching 56, the “WordErs(C2er)” have to carry on from level C and “Fix(8b)” their instructions (C) on level D. Ideas (B) have to be translated into executable instructions. Without C, the work of B is worthless. But unless the instructions of the communicators (C) are executed by D, the work of C is worthless. And if D doesn't follow A, B and C, its work is just random motion.
2:7.6,1: “It should especially be noted that God has only ONE Son.” …
. Your homework consists in figuring out who that “ONE Son” is. …
============================================================
.
November 10, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM. The handwritten first draft of the November 9 section was preceded by a “correction”: “mind (B)” should be: mind (C). This was deleted by another mistake. And this mistake draws, or should draw, our attention to the November 9 section. …
The correction would have detracted from what Plato has said. That statement requires our full attention. …
Given this context, is “mind (B)” really a mistake? …
Before reading on, please go to the November 8 section and read starting with 2:7.5,11 …
. . .A . . . . . Aristotle was Plato’s student and he has wrapped
D . + . B . . .his teacher’s “Divided Line (509d)” around the cross.
. . .C . . . . . Plato himself has divided his “Line” into two halves:
A and B are the upper half, and C and D are the lower half. He said: “You must suppose, then, …. that there are these two powers of which I have spoken [at 507a], and that one of them [X-Y-Z] is supreme over everything in the intelligible order or region [A-B-C], the other [B-C-D] over everything in the visible region – I won’t say in the physical universe ….”. Why? …
Because the Aristotelian “material cause” (D) is the outcome of semiotics (B-C-D. “At any rate you have before your mind these two orders of things, the visible [D] and the intelligible” (B)? …
The description, I have interpreted here, is in need of a better description and of an evaluation. To even start with an evaluation, we must come up with the right questions. …
If X-Y-Z “is supreme over everything” below it, and A-B-C is supreme over everything below it, and semiotics, B-C-D, is below A-B-C then what is below semiotics? …
Look at the diagram. Is C-D-A below B-C-D? …
A is above C. In the deductive process of incarnation, A is the general and C is the particular. That is as valid a “DyAd(dyad)” as theory (B) and practice (D) is a valid one. A-C and B-D are the two dyads formed by the vertical and horizontal axes of the cross (+). You may ask: What does this abstract theory (B) have to do with democracy (A)? …
By “Repeating(@1)” true ideas (B) they become representations (C) and by automatically (E6) applying (D), or just believing (C), them they become “perceptions” (D). The AUTHOR does it throughout his COURSE, so we can learn it from him. And we are trying to determine whether there is some truth in “mind(B)”.
. There are a few things we can be quite sure of. For instance you know that after you have died your body (D) will disintegrate. But what about your mind (C)? …
It is Sensitive Energy (E5) stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6). No E5, no E6. There is a lot about this we can learn from the AUTHOR, he is on the other side of the “Door” (A) and he is communicating with his followers from there. And he explains how he does it. All we have to do is learn how to read his book. And we can learn that from Lao Tzu.
. Many theories we get from Plato, Lao Tzu or the AUTHOR can be tested. If they work as predicted then, according to pragmatism, they are true; if not then not.
. One way to test whether the mind is programmable is to try to deprogram the AUTHOR’s followers and then go back to the COURSE and try to figure out how he did it. The you will see that by constantly 'depreciating' the intellect, he can program the mind (C) that from there his intellect (B) can take over.
. Another way is to intentionally repeat the “truth” often “Enough(Zu)” and see what happens. …
Here is a phenomena that is worth thinking about repeatedly: The fourfold process, described at Ching 25.2 and elsewhere begins with the “goal”. Please FIND it. Then comes thought (B) it determines what your choices are and clarifies them. Then comes your mind (C), that decides which choice to carryout. It instructs the body (D) as to what to do by a series of imperative sentences which D carries out.
. If the “goal” is to get democracy (A) then we must first find out why we don’ have it. …
To do that we must find out how timocracy (B) works. If it works then democracy can’t work and if democracy works the timocracy can't work. Now you know why our political masters can allow democracy to work. When trying to solve a problem, you must know what it is. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy. Why? …
Because if a critical mass of the people knows why democracy doesn’t work then the knowledge of the truth will set us free. Now you know why our political masters have to dumb us down.
. We must now go back to the November 8 section: “ Our intellect is making its contribution to our experience of time and space. If the AUTHOR can get us to ‘accept’ the idea of ‘time’ in the timeless dimension on the other side of the 'Door' (A) your experience of time ‘can be given up’.” ...
. I have failed to ask a question there. Can you see it? …
HOW can it “be given up”? Put yourself in the AUTHOR’s shoes. …
By giving up the intellect. Without the intellect there are no thoughts (B) to be stepped down to representations (C). Essentially, the program you, or the AUTHOR, install in your mind are representations (C). They cause you to see what you are programmed to see. In other words, you see what you “Expect(YÜ)”, or “Want(YÜ)” to see.
. “Constantly Having Desires Is-a-means-to Perceive The Boundaries (CnYUYÜYIKn_H*1)”. *1 = Chiao60. The “Boundaries(*1)” would be the Koshas or sheaths we have in THE HOLY SCIENCE. These are the divisions between A-B, B-C, C-D and D-A. Please go back to the diagram to see that the A-C and B-D “DyAds(dyad)” stand out. We have the general (A) and the particular (C) and theory (B) and practice (D).
. Yü(YÜ) comes very close to what philosophers call the representation (C). “The representation, then, is an individualized concept.”
. “The representation stands therefore between perception [D] and concept [B]. It is the particular concept pointing to the perception.” Thus the representation “Is-the-means to See (YIKn)” what we “Want(YÜ)” to see, or what we are programmed to see.
. “Reality presents itself to us as perception and concept; our subjective representation (Representation) of this reality presents itself to us as the representation (Vorstellung).”
. Credit for my own understanding of the representation (C) goes to Steiner. There is much more on it in his PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM.
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this [programming] necessary as a corrective device.” …
=======================================================
. In the last section, below this one, there is an interesting omission, which is connected with the quote from “(509d)” of Plato's Republic. Please go there and try to find it. ...
I have identified one of “these two powers” as “[X-Y-Z]. All of this must still be evaluated, but E1-E2-E3 or E9-E10-E11 “is supreme over everything”. I have identified “the intelligible order or region” as A-B-C because ...
our intellect (B) is the connective in this triad. “.... the other [(A-B-C) is supreme] over everything in the visible region”. I am assuming here, that Desmond Lee has given us an accurate translation. Please try to identify the triad Plato is referring to. ...
He continues: “I won't say in the physical universe”. Why? ...
Because the “physical universe” is on level D of his “Divided Line”. The Aristotelian “material cause” (D) is the outcome of semiotics (B-C-D).
=================================================
2:7.5,5: “What you believe is true for you. (6) In this sense the separation HAS occurred, ….”
2:7.5,5a: What your intellect causes you to believe (C) is true for you. In this sense your intellect has caused another “separation”, namely between its “untruth” and the AUTHOR’s “truth”. At least this is what you are supposed to believe (C). The fact is that the intellect (B) does not believe (C), it “Knows and when it does Not Know, a Healthy (knPUkn_+)” intellect knows that too. This is why the AUTHOR has to get your permission to program (B) your mind (C). If he can’t decommission our intellect then he can’t achieve his “goal”
2:7.5,6: “….and to deny it [that “separation HAS occurred] is merely to use denial inappropriately.” The appropriate use of denial is, according to the AUTHOR, to deny the existence of the intellect, to allow him make it disappear.
2:7.5,7: “However to concentrate on [the intellect’s] error is only a further error.”
. You might find out that there is no “error” at all, that it is the AUTHOR who is intentionally causing problems to get us to ask him to solve them for us. In the next sentence he tells us what he will do for us.
2:7.5,8: “The initial corrective procedure is to recognize temporarily that there is a problem, but only as an indication that immediate correction is needed.”
. Before finding out what caused the “problem”, or what it is, we are supposed to ask the AUTHOR for “that immediate correction”.
2:7.5,9: “This establishes a state of mind in which the Atonement can be accepted without delay.” Please FIND “Atonement” …
I suspect that it is the computer program that is supposed to be “accepted”.
2:7.5,10: “It should be emphasized, however, that ultimately no compromise is possible between everything [the AUTHOR] and nothing”, the intellect.
2:7.5,11: “Time is essentially a device by which all compromise in this respect can be given up.” In the “eternal” time can exist as an idea that is brought with them at death in the “altar”, but it can’t exist there as a belief (B) or representation (C).
. Plato describes the difference between the eternal (A and B) and the temporal (C and D) as follows: “You must suppose, then, …. That there are these two powers of which I have spoken, and that one of them [X-Y-Z] is supreme over everything in the intelligible order or region [A-B-C], the other over everything in the visible region ---I won’t say in the physical universe or you will think I’m playing with words (509d)”. In Desmond Lee’s translation of Plato’s Republic this is preceded by a diagram of the “Divided Line” and his two page commentary on it. You can get the same idea from other teachers and now from the internet. The internet is causing a real problem for the Illuminati. HOW can they prevent the truth from getting out? …
. Our intellect is making its contribution to our experience of time and space. If the AUTHOR can get you to “accept” the idea of “time” in the timeless dimension on the other side of the “Door” (A) your experience of time “can be given up.”
2:7.5, 12: “It only seems to be abolished by degrees, because [the idea of] time itself involves intervals that do not exist” in eternity. Time is “the idea of change …. In the Ever-Unchangeable: (THE HOLY SCIENCE)”. Notice that to interpret the AUTHOR’s sentences takes work, and he is not making it easy, but it is good practice. Please “Do of it what you Can Do (A1ptA1)”. “Nobody(MO) is Able to Do (abpr)” what he is unable to do, but, if you are able to do what you should do and you decide not to do it, then your unwillingness is the problem. And it is a big one because you are responsible for your decision, not to “Do what you Can Do (A1ptA1)”.
2:7.5,13: “Miscreation made this necessary as a corrective device.” …
. In the last section, below this one, I said: “Your, 'belief', in your intellect renders the AUTHOR's efforts, useless.” The punctuation is added here.
. There is another sentence in the predicate of this sentence. Can you read it? ...
Hint: Use the verb in it as the connective.”Repeating(@1)” these syntactic (C) exercises intentionally, will step your understanding (B) of it down to representations (C) of it. And then you will do this work by computation (C), automatically, with Automatic Energy (E6). It is a stepping down of thought (E5) to computation (E6).
. By “Constantly(Cn)” repeating his “Untruth”, the AUTHOR gets us to do the “Repeating(@1)” automatically.
. What the AUTHOR does with his falsehoods, we must do with the “truth”. So please go back to the question, above, and try to answer it yourself. ...
Try to read the predicate as a subject-connective-pedicate sentence. ...
Now you can compare your answer with mine. ...
You are the subject. You are doing something. What is it? ...
You render something useless. You render WHAT useless? ...
You render the Author's efforts useless. This sentence is the conclusion of 2:7.4,1. It must be something the AUTHOR is “afraid” of. Notice that “Fear” can mean what it ordinarily means in English and what it only means in the COURSE.
At 2:7.4,2 the AUTHOR says that “attempting the mastery of fear is useless.” Who says that the intellect has to be mastered like an enemy that is attacking you? …
Please FIND “attack” to answer the question yourself. …
2:7.4,3: “In fact, it [the assertion that the intellect has to be mastered] asserts the power of fear by the very assumption that it need be mastered.” Who asserts that the intellect “need be mastered”? …
We have here a repetition of ‘depreciation’ in a different “form”. The “meaning” of ‘depreciation’ is always the same: “The “ego” is bad. Get rid of it! Because the AUTHOR can’t get anywhere, as long as our intellect is functioning properly, we get ‘depreciation’ in almost every sentence. In this version we are told that the intellect has “power” and therefore …
we need the AUTHOR’s help to “master” and get rid of it.
2:7.4,4: “The true resolution rests entirely on mastery trough love.”
. Please FIND love in the COURSE. …
Where The intellect produces “fear”, the AUTHOR produces “love”. In other words: …
2:7.4,4: “The true resolution rests entirely on” mastering your intellect with “love”.
2:7.4,5: “In the interim, however [before the AUTHOR has taken over], the sense of conflict is inevitable, since you have placed yourself in a position where you believe in the power of what does not exist.” 'Denial'.
. Notice the different “forms” ‘depreciation’ takes. Here “the power of [the intellect ] …. Does not exist.”
2:7.5,1: “Nothing and everything cannot coexist.” True of false? …
Nothing and everything are the opposite poles of one polarity. They “coexist” in that “DyAd(dyad)”. “Everything and Nothing Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg)”. What do they produce? They produce “Life(Sg)”. Shêng(Sg) means both “Produce(Sg)” and “Life(Sg)”. So an ordinary translation would read: “Existence and non-existence mutually produce life.” With some practice, ordinary translations can be, and are, done by computation (C). If we follow the advise Lao Tzu gives his students in chapters 63 and 64 we learn to read the Tao Te Ching without wasting our time and energy on problems we are not ready to handle. Here is a quote from Ching 63.3:
. “Intelligent people (wsmn) Throughout-their-lives(nG) Don’t Handle jobs that are too Big (PUWyTA) for them, and Thus(KU) they are Able to participate in Completing The Big (abcm_HTA)” ones.
. In order to “coexist” the opposites must become complementaries. What is “Uniting($1)” the “Opposite(Fy)” poles? The reconciling impulse. In a standard indicative sentence the reconciling impulse is in the “Middle(_=)” between the poles. Noam Chomsky calls it the connective and I follow him there. The two-digit identifiers, I have given in brackets, are used in my dictionary-concordance in front of file #5.
. The AUTHOR must know this, so 2:7.5,1 is not just an “untruth” but an outright lie.
2:7.5,2: “To believe in one is to deny the other.” True or false? …
To believe in the existence of one pole of a “DyAd(dyad) is to believe in the existence of its “Opposite(Fy)”. The thesis alone will not get you anwhere. Only thesis and antithesis together will get you the synthesis. Hegelian dialectics is a well known thinking tool. There is no way that the AUTHOR doesn't know it. Here is what Lao Tzu says about it:
“Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1) to get its Opposite(Fy), the TaoEd(CnA1). for instance: Name the NamAble (MgptMg) to get its Opposite the NamEd (FyCnMg)”.
. What Lao Tzu is teaching here is that you can’t have one pole of a “DyAd(dyad)” without its “Opposite(Fy)”.
. “These DyAds (Tzdyad) are a Unit Originally ($1Cu)
But they are Divided by Identifying (btâoMg)”. Ming(Mg) is one of the characters that has more than one meaning. “Name(Mg)” is in the dictionary, “Identify(Mg)” is not. But since the context demands it in some places, every time we come across it for the first time, we must try on both meanings for size. The naming (C) can be done by the intellect, but, with some practice, it can be done better by computation (C). The identification (B) can only be done by thinking (B). The higher can do the lower, but the lower can’t do the higher. I am on level B, but I can do this writing, because I have to, but I can’t do the poetry in the Gita, the Ching or the Neiye. I also can’t produce the prose, the AUTHOR has produced. As you work on his COURSE, you can’t help becoming aware of this.
. Actually, the Ching and the course are coming from what the AUTHOR calls “eternity”. “Eternity(Cn)” is also what Lao Tzu is talking about. But Ch’ang(Cn) can also mean “Constant(Cn)” or “Unchanging(Cn)”. And when used as a prefix, it means something different again. As it takes getting used to the Ching, so it takes getting used to the COURSE. As you can see, it takes some work to replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with the “truth”. Often the truth predominates in a sentence, then it can be identified as bait. That is the case with 2:7.5,1 and 2:7.5,2. Why? …
Because these sentences are highly suggestive of the truth, which is deep down within us. So where is the hook? …
2:7.5,3: “Fear is really nothing and love is everything.” Can you see it? …
The intellect is supposed to be “nothing” and the AUTHOR “everything”. Here we have an example of ‘depreciation’, ‘opposition’ and ‘contemplation’. The “ego” is bad and the AUTHOR is its opposite. And if you don’t catch him doing it then you swallow the hook without noticing it.
2:7.5,4: “Whenever light enters darkness, the darkness is abolished.”
2:7.5,4: Whenever the AUTHOR’s “light” enters the intellect, it “is abolished”. The AUTHOR can fool all people sometimes, he had me fooled for a few days, he can fool some people all the time, and he does it with millions of people, worldwide, but he can't fool all of the people all of the time. Just Google: ACIM CIA cult to see what I mean.
. Again, the AUTHOR is the “light” the intellect is the “darkness” and the two are ‘opposites’. Social engineering is a science. These sentences are not written off the cuff. To be effective the “meaning” of these sentences must reach the “truth” which is deep within all of us. By combining the study of the COURSE with the study of the Ching we are bringing the buried “truth” to the surface and then social engineering no longer works. In a democratic (A) educational system, the truth that is used by the social engineers in a timocracy (B), a dictatorship (C) and in capitalism (D), is taught in public school. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy.
2:7.5,5: “What you believe is true for you.” This is why the AUTHOR is strengthening our belief in what he has dictated by repeating it often enough. But we can also make use of the programmability of the mind. HOW? …
When you have understood a truth, you must intentionally repeat it until it is a belief (pistis, in Greek) or a representation (C). This happens automatically (E6) by studying the Tao Te Ching or by doing what we are doing here with the COURSE.
2:7.5,6: “In this sense the separation HAS occurred, and to deny it is merely to use denial inappropriately.” …
======================================================
2:7.4,1: “It has already been said that you believe you cannot control fear because you yourself made it, and your belief in it seems to render it out of control.”
. I have given you this one for homework at the end of the last section, below. I hope that you have tried to interpret it, or that you are going to try before reading on. …
This is a tough one and even though you may not come up with the same interpretations I have come up with, at least you will have prepared yourself for them and are in a better position to falsify them, if they are wrong.
. A basic indicative sentence is the noun-verb-noun triad. There are four such triads in that compound sentence even not all of them are spelled out as I have spelled them out. …
We can ignore the first subordinate phrase. The subject of the first sentence is: …
Is “you”. You are doing something. What is it? …
You “believe” something. The verb is the connective in this triad. WHAT do you “believe”? …
You believe that “you cannot control” your intellect. In the COURSE “fear” always refers to your intellect (B) or to the thoughts (B) you are producing with it. This translation can be done by computation (C), automatically with Automatic Energy (E6). Is this statement true or false? …
It is true and false. Try to identify one of them: …
“You” is the subject of the sentence, it refers to the reader of this 1249 page book. …
The book has been translated into 16 languages, the CIA is behind this COURSE. These people don’t think small. So it is save to say that millions of readers, worldwide, believe what the AUTHOR has dictated. So the statement is “true”. But is it also “untrue”? …
I don’t know about you, but I don’t believe (C) everything the AUTHOR is saying. After I found the bait, I am looking for the hook and if I find the hook first then I am looking for the bait, which sometimes is in the preceding sentence. What is the next sentence in 2:7.4,1? …
You, cannot control, your intellect. True or false? …
True and false. Try to identify one. …
The programming the AUTHOR does on readers minds (C) is intended to prevent us from using our intellect. That’s what ‘depreciation’ is about. By constantly repeating: Your “ego’ is bad, you will eventually believe (C) it and beg the AUTHOR to “release” you of it. That is the bait, because deep down you know that this is true. But, if you become aware (A) of this truth, then the truth will set you free.
. For the AUTHOR to say that: “you cannot control” your intellect, is a blatant lie, because there is no way the he doesn’t know it.
. The statement is false because you can control your intellect (B). Thinkers (B) use thinking tools like carpenters use woodworking tools. Learning to use these tools enables you to make proper use of your intellect. In other words, you are controlling you intellect.
. What is the next sentence? …
You have “made ” your intellect. True or false? …
True and false. Whether the sentence is true or false depends on what the subject “you yourself” means in this sentence. If by “fear” is meant what the AUTHOR is creating by programming the mind (C) of the reader then by “you” is meant your programmed mind. In that sense “you yourself made it”, the “fear”. But have you also made your intellect? …
We always have to look for two possible meanings. We may not always find them but that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t look for both meanings. …
Every one of our four parts is a container and its content. At Ching 11.2 the container is a clay “Pot(ut). In-the-center(*11), where The Nothing in Something (_HWUYU) is, there is the Pot’S User (ut_Zus)”. This helps us to understand what the Hindus mean by Koshas or sheaths. Ultimately it is the content that matters, not the container. I am not a writer (C) so don’t get hung up on my poor communication skills, try to get WHAT I am saying not HOW I am saying it.
Now then, what is the content of the mind (C)? …
That depends on who is programming it. If the AUTHOR, or the social engineers are programming it, then the content of you mind is what they are putting into it. And if …
“you yourself” are programming it then it is what you are putting into it. It may be garbage, but it is nothing intentionally harmful. If you are aware (A) of what you are doing, then you will intentionally “Repeat(@1)” the truths you have understood. Why do you think the AUTHOR keeps repating his “untruth” so consistently? …
. What is the next sentence? …
Your “belief in” your intellect renders the AUTHOR’s efforts useless.
2:7.4,2: “Yet any attempt to resolve the error through attempting the mastery of fear [the intellect] is useless.” I am giving the equivalent of “fear” by computation (C). Until you can make these substitutions automatically (E6) yourself, I better include them here.
. Your “attempt to resolve the error through attempting the mastery of [your intellect] …. is useless.” If you can’t see that this is a blatant lie, you are wasting your time on this blog.
2:7.4,3: “In fact, it asserts the power of fear by the very assumption that it need be mastered. ...
=======================================================
November 3, 2011 . . . . . . . . ACIM2:7.3,8: “The fearful MUST miscreate, because they misperceive creation.” …
. This sentence consist of eight words, four of which don’t mean what they mean in English. The sentence might as well be written in Greek. We have here a good example of “obscurantism”. Please Google that word.
. Our intellect (B) identifies and clarifies the choices we have. Without it we only have the choices the AUTHOR gives us. What choices do we have after reading 2:7.3,8? ...
If we don’t listen to our intellect we say: I don’t understand it. I must be stupid. The AUTHOR is omniscient, therefore I better believe (C) everything he says, without questioning it. There are two other choices. Try to think (B) of one. …
We have the choice to believe the AUTHOR or not. What is the other choice? …
We can heed the advise Lao Tzu gives us in Ching 63: Don’t bite off more than you can chew. We can read 2:7.3,8, decide that it is too hard to chew, and read on. …
If we see that 2:7.3,8 is hard to chew but not too hard then we have another choice. …
We can decide to work on it anyway. What you will find is that defining the four words is possible because we already know what “fearful” means in the course. …
As a verb, “fear” means to think (B). As a noun it refers to the ...
Intellect (B), which does the thinking. In this sentence “The fearful” refers to the thinkers. According to the AUTHOR, they “MUST miscreate”. That means that thinking causes miscreations, which are the opposite of “creation”. That is three down one to go.
. The definitions of “miscreate” and “creation” come from interpreting this sentence. For “misperception” we have to FIND the word in other sentences. …
By trying to define what “miscreation” means in the COURSE, you may not came up with the same answer I have come up with, but I may be wrong. The only way you can evaluate my theories (B) is by trying to understand them. Only by understanding them can you verify or falsify them. As I said, to work on tough sentences, like 2:7.3,8 is work. The AUTHOR can only hope that you are unwilling or unable to do that work.
. The way to work on the COURSE is to intentionally repeat the truth you have understood.
. Observing how “consistent”ly the AUTHOR is repeating his “untruth” should motivate you to “Repeat(@1)” the “truth”. FINDING these words in the COURSE is the kind of work I am talking about. Let us do that by going back no further than the last section, below this one. …
There I have quoted four sentences from 7:6.8 and said: “Here is an example of the kind of work that can be done by computation (C).”, but you will also see that I have done the interpretations by thinking (B).
2:6.9,8: “It is hard to recognize that thought and belief combine into a power surge that can literally move mountains.” Thought (B) or computation (C) can’t do much by themselves, But together they form a “Mystical Whole (Sü$1)” that is greater than the sum of its parts.
7:6.8,5: “The ego …. wants to engage your mind [C] in its own delusional system ….”
. The ego’s “own delusional system” here, is what the intellect “MUST miscreate”.
2:6.4,5: “You are much too tolerant of mind wandering, and [if you allow it to do that then you] are passively condoning your mind’s [B] miscreations.”. The message that is repeated here is: …
Your “ego” is bad. Don’t use it! Let me give you one more quote from the previous section and then return to 2:7.3.
2:7.3,2: “If you are not free to choose the one, you are not free to chose the other.”
. This one is too good to pass by. It is almost pure bait: If you don’t have one pole of a “DyAd(dyad)” then you can’t have the other one. And if you don't have two poles then you don't have a “DyAd(dyad)”. N-term systems are like chains with N links in it. In the dyad the chain has two links. If you break one link then you don’t have half a chain but no chain at all. If even one link is broken in a chain, then the chain is broken. If you break one link in a tetrad you don’t have ¾ of a tetrad but you have no tetrad at all. If the customer is unable to pay for his demand, if the architect (B), or the contractor (C) make mistakes or if the subcontractors go on strike then the the job doesn’t get done.
. Here at 2:7.3,2 the AUTHOR is referring to the principle of ‘inclusion’. If one class, or caste, is missing the DIVISION OF LABOUR doesn’t work. So it is easy to sabotage it and our political masters know that.
2:7.3,9: “When you miscreate you are in pain.” ‘Depreciation’.
2:7.3,10: “The cause and effect principle now becomes a real expediter, though only temporarily.”
2:7.3,10a: This is not the “real” cause and effect principle the AUTHOR has on the other side of the “Door” (A) in his “eternal” space and timeless dimension, it is the law of cause and effect we have here in our world of time and space. Compared to the “real” cause and effect principle, the AUTHOR has on his side of the “Door”, the law of cause and effect we have here is unreal but it is good enough as an “expeditor” of his COURSE.
2:7.3,10b: “…. Though only temporarily.” We had the word “temporalily’ before at 2:7.3,3. Now we know that he is talking about our world, in which everything is temporary.
2:7.3,11: “Actually, ‘Cause’ is a term properly belonging to God and His ‘Effect’ is His Son.” Here we get some kind of definition of what these words mean in the COURSE.
2:7.3,12: “This entails a set of Cause and Effect relationships totally different from those you introduce into miscreation.” Here we have another definition of “miscreation”. …
If you use the law of Cause and Effect, we have here on our side of the “Door” you are miscreating.
2:7.3,13: “The fundamental conflict in this world, then, is between creation and miscreation.” Creation and what the AUTHOR calls “miscreation” are opposites.
2:7.3,14: “All fear is implicit in the second, and all love in the first.
. Here we have definitions of “fear” and “love”: What our intellect creates is “fear” and what the AUTHOR creates is “love”.
2:7.3,15: “The conflict is therefore one between love and fear.” Without the AUTHOR there would be no “conflict”. He has to create the “conflict” to get us to ask him to solve this problem for us. And what is his solution? …
Get rid of your intellect. In the next paragraph the “conflict” is restated.
2:7.4,1: “It has already been said that you believe you cannot control fear because you yourself [the AUTHOR himself has] made it, and your belief in [your knowledge of] it seems to render [renders] it out of your [of the AUTHOR’s] control.” …
=====================================================
. In the October 30 and 31 sections I have interpreted 2:7.1. Having the same idea or “meaning” described in different words, helps you to understand it better. But the reason I went over 2:7.1 again was because I had a few new ideas (B) of HOW to describe (C) them. The interesting thing here is to see that it takes ideas (B) of HOW to communicate (C) ideas. That the two descriptions are only one day apart is a fact worth paying attention to.
2:7.2,1: “I cannot let you leave your mind unguarded, or you will not be able to help me.”
2:7.2,1: “I cannot let you leave your mind unguarded, or you will not ….help me.”
7:6.8,7: “If truth is total, the untrue cannot exist. (8) Commitment to either must be total; they cannot coexist in your mind without splitting it.” Truth and the untrue can coexist in your mind (B). The intellect is called the “ego” in the course.
7:6.8,5: “The ego therefore wants to engage your mind in its own delusional system, because otherwise the light of your [the AUTHOR’s] understanding would dispel it.”
7:6.8,10: ! “This requires vigilance only as long as you do not recognize what is true.”
7:6.8,10: ! “This requires vigilance only as long as you do not” blindly believe what the AUTHOR calls the “truth”.
. Here is an example of the kind of work that can be done by computation (C). The AUTHOR has to guard the intellect. Why? …
Because an “unguarded” intellect will think. And if we use our head (B) then he can't “dispel” our “understanding”.
2:7.2,2: “Miracle working entails a full realization of the power of thought in order to avoid miscreation.”
2:7.2,2: “Miracle working entails a full realization of the power of thought in order to” prevent us from using it. According to the AUTHOR: Thinking produces “miscreation”.
2:7.2,3: “Otherwise a miracle will be necessary to set the mind itself straight [to “heal” the mind (B)], a circular process that would not foster the time collapse for which the miracle was intended.”
. The “time collapse” happens when we move from our space-time dimension into “eternity”. Time is “the idea of change …. in the Ever-Unchangeable: (Sutra 3 of THE HOLY SCIENCE)”. “Eternity” is the “Ever-Unchangeable”. And that is where the AUTHOR is coming from.
. At the end of chapter 2 of his PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDON, Steiner quotes Goethe: “Human beings are all in her and she is within all human beings.” Goethe talks about “Nature” and Lindeman translates it as “Mother nature”. Steiner follows up: “We can find nature outside us only when we first know it WITHIN us.” As the Hindus say: The truth WITHIN us is “covered by five koshas or sheaths.”
+C: “It is so Small that Nothing can be Inside (_HälWU*a)” of it. *a = Nei11.
+D: “It is so Big that Nothing can be Outside (_HTAWU*b)”.of it. *b = Wai36.
. I am giving you these quotes to show that I didn’t make it up. In terms of J.G. Bennett’s ENERGIES, E9-E10-E11 would be WITHIN us, where we are B-C-D (Intellect-mind-body). And our soul (A) is the “Door” between the inside and the outside.
2:7.2,4: “The miracle worker must have genuine respect for true cause and effect as a necessary condition for the miracle to occur.”
. He must conceive of “true cause and effect” the way the AUTHOR experiences it on the other side. In the “eternal” there is no time for a cause to produce an effect. He also “must have genuine respect” and faith in the AUTHOR “as a necessary condition for the miracle to occur.”
2:7.3,1: “Both miracles and fear come from thoughts.”
2:7.3,1: Both “miracles” and the “fear” produced by the programmed mind (C) come from the AUTHOR’s “thoughts”. Our intellect doesn’t produce the “miracles” nor the “fear” the AUTHOR blames it for.
2:7.3,2: “If you are not free to choose the one, you are not free to choose the other.”
. This one can be identified as ‘contemplation’. Why? …
You have the choice between using your own intellect or trusting the AUTHOR. But this is not the choice he gives us. What choices do we get from him? …
You can use the AUTHOR’s “miracles” or allow his programming to produce the “fear” in you.
2:7.3,3: “By choosing the miracle you HAVE rejected fear, if only temporarily.”
2:7.3,3a: “By choosing the miracle you HAVE rejected” your intellect.
2:7.3,3b: But “only temporarily.” Why? …
2:7.3,4: “You have been fearful of everyone and everything. (5) You are afraid of God, of me and yourself. (6) You have misperceived or miscreated Us, and believe in what you have made” with your intellect.
2:7.3,7: “You would not have done this if you were not afraid of your own thoughts.”
2:7.3,7: “You would not have done this if you” had not used your intellect. This whole line of thought can be identified as ‘depreciation’. The message is: Your “ego” is bad, don't use it.
2:7.3,8: “The fearful MUST miscreate, because they misperceive creation.” …
. To understand this one better, we ave to know what “miscreate”, “misperceive” and “creation” means in the COURSE. This is a good one to leave for homework for you.
===========================================================
2:7.1,1: “You may still complain about fear, but you nevertheless persist in making yourself fearful.”
. If all you do is “complain” about your intellect you have not allowed the AUTHOR to decommission it completely. But if he has ‘depreciated’ it “Enough(Zu)” for you to “complain about” your intellect then his work is not wasted on you.
2:7.1,2: “I have already indicated that you cannot ask me to release you from fear.”
. Why can’t you ask the AUTHOR to release you from your intellect? …
Because, as he has “already indicated” elsewhere: He can’t “control” your intellect. He can only do it indirectly by programming your mind (C). And for that he has to get your permission somehow. Your intellect has to give the AUTHOR permission to decommission it. This is not an easy job but, as you can see, he keeps on trying.
2:7.1,3: “I know it does not exist, but [as long as your intellect is not decommissioned] you do not” believe the AUTHOR.
2:7.1,4: “If I intervened [with your faster and more concrete mind (C)] between your thoughts and their results, I would be tampering with a basic law of cause and effect; the most fundamental law there is.”
. The law he is referring to is the Law of non-interference. Because the mind (C) is faster than the intellect (B), an intelligently (B) programmed mind can interfere between the cause the intellect produces and the effect it wants to bring about.
2:7.1,5: “I would hardly help you if I depreciated the power of your own thinking. (6) This would be in direct opposition to the purpose of this course.”
. If you know what “the purpose of this course” is then you also know that we have a blatant lie here.
2:7.1,7: “It is much more helpful to remind you that you do not guard your thoughts carefully enough.” Elsewhere he repeats the same “meaning” by saying that you are too “tolerant” of your thoughts. In both cases the AUTHOR is ‘depreciating’ the intellect. Since he has “depreciated the power of your own thinking” in almost every sentence, we need more than one identifier for these “Repetitions(@1)”.
2:7.1,8: “You may feel that at this point it would take a miracle to enable you to do this, which is perfectly true.”
. If you feel that it takes a miracle in order to get rid of your intellect then you are progressing along the COURSE the way the AUTHOR has planned it.
2:7.1,9: “You are not used to miracle-minded thinking [computing (C)] but you can be trained [programmed] to think that way.”
. The mind (C) cannot “think” it can only compute (C). And what it computes is what the programmer (B) has designed it to compute. The proper function of the mind is to compute. It is not to evaluate whether the program it gets the bio-computer to execute is right or wrong. The AUTHOR is installing his program in our mind by repeating the same “meaning” in different “forms”. We don’t have to deceive ourselves, we can “Repeat(@1)” the truth clearly as possible.
2:7.1,10: “All miracle workers need that kind of training.” Training is programming. As we study the COURSE we come to understand better what keywords such as “training”, “love”, “miscreation”, “missthought” etc. mean.
2:7.2,1: “I cannot let your mind unguarded, or you will not be able to help me.” …
There is some syntactic (C) work you can do by FINDING “vigilance” and “vigilant”. …
=======================================================
. In the last section, below this one, (X-T-Z) should be (X-Y-Z). In that same section, I have quoted 2:6.9,10 and 2:6.9,11 but I have not interpreted 2:6.9,11. I will do that now. But to lead up to it, I have to interpret 2:6.9,10 again.
2:6.9,10: “You prefer to believe that your thoughts cannot exert real influence because you are actually afraid of them.
2:6.9,10a: You prefer to believe what the AUTHOR wants you to believe (C), namely “that your thoughts cannot exert real influence”, that they are good for nothing and should be rejected by you.
2:6.9,10b: “ …. you are actually afraid of them.” What does the pronoun “them” represent? …
It follows from the basic sentence that your own thoughts (B) are meant. In this case the AUTHOR has programmed your mind (C) to feel “afraid of them”.
. But it can also mean that the AUTHOR means his own thoughts of which deep down, in your core. you have reasons to be “afraid of”.
2:6.9,11: “This may allay awareness of the guild, but at the cost of perceiving the mind [B or C] as impotent.” Notice the “Reversal($l)” here: …
First we believe the AUTHOR that our “thoughts (B) cannot exert real influence” and here we are “perceiving the mind [C] as impotent.” The mind is like a machine, it does what it is told to do. It is not responsible for evaluating whether WHAT it is told is right or wrong. That is not its dharma, or proper function. Decision-making is not the responsibility of thought, word or deed (B-C-D). It is a consensus decision-making process. Here the B-C-D “TriAd(_3ad)” acts as one “Unit($1)” It is not my responsibility to evaluate my theories (B). That is a group process.
. These additional details came to me this morning, as usually in a fraction of a second. But look how much work it takes to describe it. From examples like this, you can see that the AUTHOR knows the truth we “Know deep down in our core but Don’t Know (knPUkn)” with our conscious awareness (A). That is why the AUTHOR can use that “eternal” part of us as bait in order to slip his hooks past our distracted and ‘depreciated’. intellect (B).
. It so happens that since early 1970 I have studied the Tao Te Ching with growing fascination. Without that preparation, I would have swallowed the AUTHOR’s hooks the way he expects his readers to swallow them. I know from Googling: ACIM CIA Cult, that I am not the only one that can’t swallow all of the AUTHOR’s hooks. And that is encouraging. For his system to work, you have to swallow all of them. As soon os you katch one hook, you wake up.
2:7.1,1: “You may still complain about fear, but you nevertheless persist in making yourself fearful.”
. The fact that the AUTHOR seems to have trouble with people who “persist in” thinking (B) is encouraging. Notice the subtle ‘depreciation’; ...
2:7.1,1: You …. Still complain about” your intellect. The AUTHOR can only get rid of it if you allow him to program your mind (C). So, if you swallow “Enough(Zu)” of these hooks, sooner or later you will say: Thine will is mine. It may sound farfetched when it is spelled out so cut and dry, but remember that social engineering is a science. Lao Tzu has already described it. So for thousands of years it has been improved upon. And here, thanks to the AUTHOR, we can learn it in a matter of Month and teach it in a matter of weeks.
2:7.1,2: “I have already indicated that you cannot ask me to release you from fear.”
. The AUTHOR has repeated elsewhere that he has no “control” over our intellect.
2:7.1,3: “I know it does not exist, but you do not.” Not if you use your head (B).
2:7.1,4: “If I intervened between your thoughts and their results, I would be tampering with a basic law of cause and effect [The Law of Non-interference]; the most fundamental law there is. (5) I would hardly help you if I depreciated the power of your own thinking. (6) This would be in direct opposition to the purpose of this course.”
. What is “the purpose of this” COURSE? …
We re in the process of finding out that here we have a blatant lie.
2:7.1,7: “It is much more helpful to remind you that you do not guard your thoughts carefully enough.” Elsewhere he tells us that: you are much too “tolerant’ of your thoughts. Same “meaning”, different “forms”. This is work that can be done much more efficiently by computation, with Automatic Energy (E6) than by thinking (B), with Sensitive Energy (E5). Some communicators probably already have the COURSE on their computer. Now we need a separate file in which our interpretations are listed in the proper sequence.. Then we can search the 669 pages of the text first, do our interpretation of the sentence we are working on and compare our interpretation with the interpretation of the sentence which is already in the other file. If your interpretation differs from the one that is there then submit your interpretation to the webmaster of that section. If no interpretation for that sentence is done yet, submit your interpretation to the webmaster who is responsible for that chapter.
. You can see from that simple job-description from me to willing and able communicators (C) that it involves the work of raja yogis (C). My work is jnana yoga (B), which is the path of knowledge. The original Indian Caste system is based on the knowledge of the four yogas. The working system which produced much of
2:7.1,8: “You may feel that at this point it would take a miracle to enable you to do this, which is perfectly true.” This is what the COURSE IN MIRACLES is about.
2:7.1,9: “You are not used to miracle-minded thinking, but you can be trained [programmed] to think [compute (C)] that way.
2:7.1,10: “All miracle workers need that kind of training.” They need the AUTHOR’s program installed in their mind (C).
2:7.2,1: “I cannot let you leave your mind unguarded, or you will not be able to help me.” …
==========================================================
. There is an interesting mistake in the October 27 section, which I have copied in the October 28 section. The correct quote is;
2:6.7,2: “Say to yourself that you must somehow have chosen not to love, or the fear could not have arisen.” In that same passage there is another mistake:
“Conscious Energy (C)” (E4), is on level A. Mistakes draw our attention (A) to where more attention is needed. Please take your time with 2:6.7,2
2:6.9,1: “Everyone experiences fear” because everyone has an intellect.
2:6.9,2: “Yet it would take very little right thinking to realize why fear occurs.”
. In the COURSE, “fear” means intellect (B), or the thinking (B) it does.
2:6.9,2: “Yet it would take very little right thinking to realize why” thinking occurs. …
Why does it occur? …
Our intellect participates in the deductive process of incarnation and in the inductive process of evolution.
. Our soul (Atman in Sanskrit) is the “Door (Dasamadwara)” (A) between eternity (X-T-Z) and our world of time and space (B-C-D). The B-C-D triad is semiotics. It is thought, word and deed. Because this triad is so important our political masters have tried to make it disappear. Problem is, you can’t make the truth “disappear”. It is possible to erase some of it by means of social engineering but, as we study the COURSE, we come to understand it better and it becomes more difficult to believe what the AUTHOR wants us to believe (C).
. In the deductive process, the intellect does the “Dividing(âo)” and in the inductive process it does the “Uniting($1)”. The deductive and the inductive processes are tetrads. It does take right thinking to figure it all out, but to say that “it would take very little right thinking to realize why” the intellect is needed in the processes of incarnation and evolution is misleading. Lucky for him, to replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with the “truth” takes work. And he would be stupid to make it easy for us. As long as we have not fully understood the COURSE, teaching it will remain a difficult task.
. Social engineering is a science, so it would be naive to believe that it can be learned without effort. But, from what I have learned about it since April 13, I am confident that, as a team, we can understand it and teach it in a very short time.
. I think that, once it is understood, it can be taught in a matter of Weeks. Why? …
Because what has to be “Repeated(@1)” over and over “Again(@1)” in different “form’, on 1249 pages, can be reduced to relative few “Meanings”, like ‘depreciation’, ‘contemplation’ and ‘opposition’.
In the remaining eleven sentences of 2:6.9, the AUTHOR talks about the programmed “mind” (C). To develop the program for it probably took the Illuminati centuries.
. First it requires a “goal’ (A), and to attain that goal takes thought, word and deed. It takes semiotics and that’s why they don’t want us to know it. What must really worry them is that semiotics is simpler than what the obscurantist, Derrida, has substituted for it.
2:6.9,3: “Few appreciate the real power of the [programmed] mind, and no one remains fully aware of it all the time.” The mind (C) causes our bio-computer (D) to execute its instructions. With practice this becomes an automatic (E6) process of which “no one remains fully aware”. No one has to remain aware of it “all the time’..
2:6.9,4: “However, if you hope to spare yourself from fear [thought] there are some things you must realize [believe (C)], and realize fully [believe blindly].”
2:6.9,5: “The [programmed] mind is very powerful, and never loses its creative force.” The “creative force” of a program (C) comes from the programmer (B).
2:6.9,6: “It never sleeps. (7) Every instant it is creating. (8) It is hard to recognize that [the AUTHOR’s] thought [B] and belief [C, of his followers] combine into a power surge that can literally move mountains. (9) It appears at first glance that to believe such power about yourself is arrogant [Why take credit for the AUTHOR’s power? Unless you believe that his power is your power], but that is not the real reason you do not believe it.” What is the real reason? …
That part of us, which is at the core of us, knows the truth and tries to warn us of the dangers.
2:6.9,10: “You prefer to believe that your thoughts cannot exert real influence because you are actually afraid of them.” Since the mind is faster and denser than the intellect and it is programmed with an ingenious program, and since our limited intellect is up against an omniscient intelligence, it has good reasons to be worried. But the truth is on our side and that makes all the difference.
2:6.9,11: “This may allay awareness of the guilt [of the danger], but at the cost of perceiving the mind [B] as impotent. (12) If you believe that what you think [compute (C)] is ineffectual you may [will] cease to be afraid of it, but you are hardly likely to respect it.” Why should I “respect” the AUTHOR for his intelligence? …
As a programmer I know that it is not easy to write a good program, but there is still the question: What are you writing it for? …
2:6.9,13: “There are no idle thoughts [representations (C)]. (14) All thinking [computing (C)] produces [is designed to produce] form at some level.”
2:7.1,1: “You may still complain about fear, but you nevertheless persist in making yourself fearful.” …
=======================================================
2:6.7,1: “The first corrective step in undoing the error is to know first that the conflict is an expression of fear.”
. In the COURSE “fear” means intellect (B), or the thought (B) it produces.
2:6.7,1: “The first corrective step in undoing the error is to know first that the conflict is” produced by thought. Is that “conflict” our problem or the AUTHOR’s? ...
There is an old “trick (548a)”: 1) You create a problem. 2) Those affected ask you to “correct” it. And 3), the solution is what you wanted in the first place. Here the AUTHOR talks about a “first corrective step in undoing the error” that, without the AUTHOR, wouldn’t exist in the first place. What is “the error”? …
It “is an expression of”, or caused by, thinking (B). What do we have here? …
A repetition of ‘depreciation’. What is the AUTHOR’s solution? …
Get rid of your intellect.
2:6.7,2: “Say to yourself that you must somehow have chosen not to love.”
. A sentence is like a chain. It is only as comprehensible as the weakest word in it is comprehensible. What is the weakest link here? …
It is “love”.7:6.1,5: “Fear and love” are the opposite poles of a “DyAd(dyad)” If the intellect is for seeking and finding the “truth” then the AUTHOR is trying to convince us that his “untruth” is the “truth”. This again seems farfetched. So don’t just believe what I say, hold it in suspense. My theories (B) are in need of verification or falsification. And for that we need the DIVISION OF LABOUR. 1249 pages of text (C) are too much for a jnana yogi (B).
. “Love” is mentioned very frequently in the COURSE but to follow up on that is syntactic (C) work. It is not my dharma.
2:6.7,2: “Say to yourself that you must somehow have chosen not to” think. In the COURSE love and fear are opposites. The AUTHOR also makes it clear that his intellect (Z) and our intellects (B) are opposites. All you have to remember there is that he claims to be the “Holy Spirit”, “God” or “Jesus”.
. If you decide to do the opposite of what the AUTHOR tells you to do,
2:6.7,3: “Then the whole process of correction [of interpretation] becomes nothing more than a series of pragmatic steps in the larger process of accepting the Atonemeent as a remedy.”
. The “larger process” of interpreting this 1249 page text is a 4-fold process. Only one step is taken in the “pragmatic” dimension of semiotics. Before the “pragmatic steps” can be taken, there has to be the decision (C) to take these steps. These decisions are expressed in imperative sentences given by C to D. And before it can be decided to test a theory (B) there has to be a theory. And before all of that, there has to be a “goal”. In J. G. Bennett’s systematics, the “GOAL” is on level A.
2:6.7,4: “These steps may be summarized in this way:
2:6.7,5: “Know first that this is fear.” “Fear” is the intellect.
2:6.7,6: “Fear arises from lack of love.” The proper function of the intellect is to think.
2:6.7,7: “The only remedy for lack of love is perfect love.”
2:6.7,8: “Perfect love is the Atonement.”
. We need a Dictionary-Concordance for “love”, “Atonement” and other words that don’t mean what they ordinarily mean. I have wasted $568.10 for the BlackBerry Play Book because I was told that it has the FIND function in it. I got A COURSE IN MIRACLES in it but, if there is a FIND function in it, I can’t waste any more of my time to get it to work.
. Communicators (C) would have to get the 669 page text into an iBook. It has a very nice FIND function in it. In addition, we need another file with our interpretations in sequential order. There we can slowly fill in the gaps. Doing the interpretations, especially the way I have done it more recently with a few sentences, is a learning process. I am learning from the work I am doing here, but you will only benefit from the COURSE if you do at least some of the work yourself. Try 2:6.8,1. …
2:6.8,1: “I have emphasized that the miracle, or the expression of Atonement, is always a sign of respect FROM the worthy TO the worthy.” …
=====================================================
2:6.5,1: “Fear is always a sign of strain, arising whenever what you want conflicts with what you do.”
. There is always a strain between what you, as a customers (A), “want” and what you as supplier (B-C-D) have to “do” to supply the demand.
2:6.5,2: “This situation arises in two ways: First, you can chose to do conflicting things, either simultaneously or successively.”
. If a job is simple enough then you don’t have to develop a plan (B) of how to do it and then decide (C) who does what, where and when. The thinking (B) and deciding (C) are necessary in complex tasks but in simple ones they are a waste of time.
. For complicated jobs, like constructing bridges or big buildings or for developing computer programs, the Aristotelian tetrad has proved its worth for over a thousand years. In fact, the IBM computer programming system is based on the tetrad.
. If you use your head (B) then no “strain” has to arise because “what you want conflicts with what do” about it. The word, challenge, is more appropriate here, than the word “strain”, unless you are trying to make a different point. The program the AUTHOR is installing in reader’s minds is definitely complex enough to require sequencing the steps “successively”. The AUTHOR knows that first comes the “goal” (A), then comes the thinking (B), then the coding (C) and then comes the implementation (D). Why, then, is he confusing things? ...
2:6.5,3: “This produces conflicted behaviour, which is intolerable to you because the part of the mind that wants to do something else is outraged.”
. If you use your head (B) there is no cause for “conflicted behaviour”. Unless the AUTHOR has programmed the “mind” (C) to want “to do something else” than what the customer (A) or our soul (A) wants, our intellect (B) our mind (C) or body (D) will not be “outraged”. We have here a repetition of ‘depreciation’ but in most sentences ‘depreciation’ is not the only hook. The principle of ‘inclusion’ is also here but it is not stated in as comprehensible as the AUTHOR could state it. All four parts must be 'included' for the system to work.
2:6.5,4: “Second you can behave as you think you should, but without entirely wanting to do so.”
. The situation, described here, is not entirely hypothetical. The architect (B) or the programmer (B) can misunderstand what the customer (A) wants. Then, based on that misunderstanding, s/he can do the thinking (B) correctly, the contractor (C) or the coder (C) can do the instructing correctly and the subcontractors (D) or the computer (D) can do the physical work correctly but …
the supply is not what the customer has demanded.
. Notice that this truth is hidden behind 2:6.5,4. Deep down we all know the truth. It is the “eternal” part of us which “is covered by five koshas or sheaths (Sutra 14)”. “Not Knowing that we Know (PUknkn) it is Sick(@p)” Why? …
Because the AUTHOR “Knows that we Don’t Know (knPUkn) it, and he takes Advantage(_+)” of it. He uses the truth we know, but are not aware of, as bait to cover up his hooks. Even though we “Don’t Know that we Know (PUknkn)” it, when the AUTHOR describes it, it feels right. That feeling is the bait that covers up the hook. What I have said here may seem farfetched but please remember that social engineering is a science. If it were easy to understand then it wouldn’t work. It only works because we don’t understand it. Take:
2:6.2,6: “ …. It is only on this level that you can exercise choice.” …
Our intellect (B) is not the only part of us that makes the decisions. It more of a consensus decision-making process. To say that: Only on level B you make your decisions, would not ring true, because deep down, we know the truth. The truth is that our intellect (B) determines what our choices are and clarifies them. That is why the AUTHOR said on “level” B “you can exercise choice” instead of saying that you make your decisions there.
. I am not able to discover the hidden truth in every sentence, but where I do, please try to follow the line of thought. Also try to observe the reluctance you might feel for doing this kind of intellectual (B) and mental (C) work that is required to interpret the AUTHOR's sentences. Since the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to interpret his sentences, he is naturally making it difficult for us.
2:6.5,5: “This produces consistent behaviour, but entails great strain.”
2:6.5,5: “This produces consistent behaviour [of B, C and D] but entails great” ...
disappointment because the customer (A) is not going to pay for a job s/he didn’t ask for.
2:6.5,6: “In both cases, the mind and the behaviour are out of accord, resulting in a situation in which you are doing what you do not wholly want to do.”
. By “mind” can be meant the intellect (B) or the mind (C). Either way, if the doers (D) are not doing what the talkers (C) are telling them to do then D is “out of accord” with C B and A “resulting in a situation in which” the customer is not going to pay for a job s/he didn’t ask for. To cause this kind of “situation” only one member of the supply team has to fail to do its job properly.
2:6.5,7: “This arouses a sense of coercion that usually produces rage and projection is likely to follow.”
. The AUTHOR wants us to experience the intellect’s contribution to the productive process as “coercion”. The truth is that the programmed mind imposes its “coercion” on the intellect because of its greater speed and density.
2:6.5,8: “Whenever there is fear, it is because you have not made up your mind.”
2:6.5,8: Whenever there is your intellect (B) doing its thinking (B), “it is because you have not” decided to let the AUTHOR do your thinking for you. .
. The statement is ambiguous because “mind” can be on level B or C. If the intellect (B) is meant I have given my interpretation above. If “mind” means mind (C) what then? …
Whenever the mind is not fully programmed yet, there is the intellect still working.
2:6.5,9: “Your mind is therefore split, and your behaviour inevitably becomes erratic.”
. If your mind (B) uses deduction and induction when it is right, and necessary, to use these thinking tools then it doesn't mean that “your behaviour inevitably becomes erratic.” It takes work to replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with the “truth” and unless a communicator (C) is willing and able to match the AUTHOR’s writing (C) skills the theories (B) I have here will get us nowhere, which is what the AUTHOR wants.
2:6.5,10: “Correcting at the bahavioral level can shift the error from the first to the second type, but will not obliterate the fear.”
. This is very useful information for us. If the AUTHOR is to give us bait to slip his hooks by our intellects then he has to give us the truth, and hope that we are not intercepting it.
. “Correcting” errors, which appear on level D, is done by determining whether the “error” was caused by wrong thinking (B) or by making wrong decisions (C) on properly analyzed choices. Either way, it “will not obliterate the “intellect..
2:6.6,1: “It is possible to reach a state in which you bring your mind under my guidance [control] without conscious effort, but this implies a willingness that you have not developed as yet.” …
======================================================
October 24, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. In the last section, below this one, I said that “social engineering ‘cannot work’ on levels A, B and D”. That was inaccurate, it should be: Social engineers “cannot work” on A, B and D directly. The AUTHOR’s omniscient intellect (Z) is up against our limited, but alive, intellects (B) and the truth. That is why he needs the Z-C-B “TriAd(_3ad)” first. Only then can he get C-Z-A and Z-C-D going. As long as he has not completely taken over yet, we still have semiotics (B-C-D). We can still get the truth.
2:6.4,1: “The correction of fear IS your responsibility.”
. The word “fear” in the COURSE means intellect. This translation can be done automatically by computation (C). Computation is what our mind (C) does automatically with Automatic Energy (E6). Many interpretations can be started in the syntactic (C) dimension of semiotics. Let me give you an example of it here: …
2:6.1,1: “The presence of fear [the intellect] shows that you have raised body thoughts to the level of mind [B]. (7) This removes them [the thoughts (B)] from my control,”.
2:6.2,6: “…. It is only at this level [B] that you can exercise choice.”
. You can find repeated “meaning” with the FIND function by computation (C).
2:6.4,1: The “correction” of your intellect IS your responsibility. Why? …
Because the intellect can’t be “corrected” by the AUTHOR directly. He can only accomplish this indirectly by programming the mind (C). HOW? …
The mind (C) is more concrete and faster than the intellect. This is why it can be programmed to “control” the intellect.
2:6.4,2: “When you ask for release from fear you are implying that it is not” released. And it is further implied that “you ask” the AUTHOR to help you to get rid of your intellect. Every time the AUTHOR manages to slip a subtle message by your intellect, you are swallowing the hook.
2:6.4,3: “You should ask, instead, for help in the conditions that have brought the fear [the intellect] about.” What are these conditions? …
2:6.4,4: “These conditions always entail a willingness to be separate.”
. To replace the AUTHOR’s statements with the truth we have to use more reliable information. I am going to use Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE: “….the idea of separate existence of self originates” in “eternity” (Z).
. The proper function of our intellect (B) is to think (B). Thinkers use thinking tools as carpenters use woodworking tools. The tool, I have just used here, is called analogy. Deduction and induction are other tools which are relevant to 2:6.4,4.
. Deduction is the movement from the general, more abstract, to the particular, or more concrete. By means of this tool a large “Unit($1)” is broken down, or “separated”, into smaller units. Induction does the opposite: it puts the parts back together again. Why did the AUTHOR picked one thinking tool when there are many others to choose from? …
Because telling us the truth is not in his own best interest.
2:6.4,5: “At that level [B] you CAN help it.” We have here a repetition of 2:6.1,1, 2:6.2,6, 2:6.4,1 and all the other sentences that contain the same “meaning”.
2:6.4,6: “You are much too tolerant of mind wandering, and are passively condoning your mind’s [B] miscreations.”
. What is called “mind wandering” here, is paying attention to what the AUTHOR is doing. If we don’t interpret his sentences then we “are passively condoning” what he is doing. If we pay attention to what he is doing in this 1249 page book then we find out that he ‘depreciates’ our intellect in almost every sentence. And then we want to know why? ...
The AUTHOR wants us to “passively condone” his programming. He installs his programs, and subroutines, in our mind by repeating his “meanings” in different “forms”.
. The mind (C) is programmable. As the AUTHOR is making use of this characteristic, so can we. By intentionally “Repeating (@1)” we have understood, we are stepping our knowledge (B) down to representations (C) This is what the AUTHOR is doing, except for repeating the “truth” he is repeating his “untruth” intentionally. Knowing (B) the truth is fine, but having representations (C) of it is more effective.
2:6.4,7: “The particular result does not matter, but the fundamental error does.”
. Let us start again with computation (C) on the syntactic (C) level of semiotics:
2:4.2,6: “ The body cannot create, and the belief that it can, a fundamental error, produces all physical symptoms.” To find “fundamental error”, all you have to do is use blogspot’s FIND function. It doesn’t take brains (B). All it takes is the computations (C) of a properly programmed (B) mind (C).
. The “fundamental error”, according to the AUTHOR, is to know (B) that our physical body can cause “physical symptoms”. Every time you turn on a light switch you are causing a physical effect. Trying to make us believe, that this is not so, is a job and a half. Fighting the truth is an uphill battle and if we persist in committing the “fundamental error” it is a losing battle.
. I am discouraged that no communicator (C) seems to care “Enough(Zu)”, but I am encouraged by the “Insights(72)” my feeble efforts are producing. 2:6.3, and now this paragraph again, are showing that what the AUTHOR intended to be a hook, to be swallowed, is becoming bait to be chewed.
2:6.4,8: “The correction is always the same.” What he means here is explained next.
2:6.4,9: “Before you chose to do anything, ask me if your choice is in accord with mine.”
2:6.4,9:.”Before you chose to do anything”. the logical (B) thing to do is to consult your intellect (B) to find out if your decision (C) is logical. Your decisions have to make sense to reason (B) and to common sense (C). To trust the AUTHOR with making your decisions for you does not make sense.
2:6.4,10: “If you are sure that it is, there will be no fear.”
2:6.4,10: If the AUTHOR has convinced you that he can be trusted then “there will be no” intellect left in you.
2:6.5,1: “Fear is always a sign of strain, arising whenever what you want conflicts wit what you do.
========================================================
October 23, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
2:6.3,1: “It is pointless to believe that controlling the outcome of misthought can result in healing.” You control the “outcome of misthought” by correcting the thought that caused it. Why should that be “pointless” ? …
“It is pointless” when “healing” means something different in the COURSE than it ordinarily means.
2:6.3,2: “When you are fearful you have chosen wrongly.”
. If you follow your intellect then you don’t follow the AUTHOR. This is supposed to be wrong because he wants you to follow him
2:6.3,3: “This is why you feel responsible for it.”
. If you remember that you ARE “responsible for” your decisions then you will take more time thinking about the choices you have to decide on.
2:6.3,4: “You must change your mind not your behaviour, and this IS a matter of willingness.” If you allow the AUTHOR to program your “mind” (C) then what you do, think or feel “is controlled by me automatically (2:6.2,9)”. If the “willingness” comes from you then the ability to program you comes from the AUTHOR.
2:6.3,5: “You don’t need guidance except at the mind level.”
. Your “mind” (B) needs the “guidance” we see here in the COURSE to allow the AUTHOR to program your “mind” (C) by the repetitions we see here in the COURSE. In the COURSE “guidance” of the intellect (B) is not “control” of the “mind” (C). But, after the mind is fully programmed “guidance” is no longer needed, soul (A) intellect (B) and body (D) will be controlled by the mind (C).
2:6.3,6: “Correction belongs only at the level where change is possible.”
. By means of social engineering “Correction” of the intellect “is possible”.
2:6.3,7: “Change does not mean anything at the symptom level, where it cannot work.”
. To start on this one, we have to go down to the syntactic (C) level of semiotics.
2:4.2,6: “The body cannot create, and the belief that it can, a fundamental error, produces all physical symptoms.” Physical symptoms are on level D. The statement, that our physical body causes physical effects, is “a fundamental error” is repeated here by saying: “Change” on the physical level by the physical body “cannot work”. Why? …
Because social engineering “cannot work” on levels A, B and D.
2:6.4,1: “The correction of fear [your intellect] IS your responsibility.” …
=====================================================
October 22, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. “TriAds(_3ad)” mean something very specific. They are not only thinking tools (B) but communications tools (C) as well. C-A-X in the last section, below, is a mistake, which drew my attention to triads again.
. D-A-X means: The supply (D) goes through A, the “Door”, into eternity (X).
. Z-A-B = The demand (Z) comes through A into our world (B).
In each of the 4 phases the demand is stepped down
. A-B-C = The demand (A) comes through B to C.
. B-C-D is semiotics.
. C-D-A = The demand (C) comes through D to A.
. D-A-X = The supply (D) is returned through the “Door” (A) to eternity (X).
. X-Y-Z is a process that takes place outside of our human sphere of influence, but it is affected by D-A-X and we are affected by Z-A-B. This is why J.G. Bennett said that we need the Dodecad to understand the system as a whole. Unitive Energy (Y) is what “makes whole”. This is where Y-A-C comes in by intuition, which can verify or falsify the theory (B) I have just described.
.
2:6.2,9: “ This [“behaviour” (D)] is controlled by me automatically as soon as you place what you think under my guidance.”
. Which one of the three most repeated identifiers is the most obvious here? …
‘Contemplation’. The AUTHOR is saying it clearly: ...
Place what you think under my control. Why would you say: Thine thinking will be done through my intellect? …
If the AUTHOR has ‘depreciated’ your intellect “Enough(Zu) then you will place control of your mind (C) under his control. Why? …
Because the AUTHOR has made you believe that your intellect is incapable of carrying out its proper function. You hand over control of your mind (C), and through it of your intellect, if you believe that your intellect causes “insane behaviour” and engages in “insane thinking’. Every time you read that message without noticing what the AUTHOR is doing, it gets past te intellect into the mind. There is now chemistry and electronics involved in social engineering but its main task is still …
Getting the mind programmed to control body and soul.
2:6.2,2: “You would not excuse insane behaviour on your part by saying you could not help it. (3) Why should you condone insane thinking? (4) There is a confusion here [caused by your intellect] that you would do well to look at clearly. (5) You may believe that you are responsible for what you do, but not for what you think, (6) [This is not true, your intellect is wrong. I will tell you the truth.] The truth is that you are responsible for what you think, because it is only at this level that can exercise choice.”
. The intellect can determine and clarify what choices we have but it can’t make the decisions alone. It is more like the “consensus decision-making process” we have had in the Ontario Green Party before that decision-making right of its members was illegally removed from our party’s constitution. In the decision-making process, the B-C-D triad, semiotics, acts as one “Unit($1)”.
2:6.2,7: “What you do comes from what you think.” This is not just a half-truth: …
It is a quarter truth. A, B, C and D are equally involved in the decision-making process. And, since there is no way that the AUTHOR doesn’t know this, it is a blatant lie.
2:6.2,10: “Whenever you are afraid, it is a sure sign that you have allowed your mind [B] to miscreate and have not allowed me to guide it.”
2:6.2,10: Whenever your intellect is in control, it is a sure sign that you have not allowed me to control it. Notice that the interpretation is usually simpler that the “form” in which the same “meaning” is repeated.
2:6.3,1: “It is pointless to believe that controlling the outcome of misthought can result in healing. (2) When you are fearful, you have chosen wrongly.” …
========================================================
October 19, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
2:6.2,7: “What you do comes from what you think.”
. At the end of the October 15 section I gave you this one for homework and I asked whether this statement is: “True or false? …”
. If you got the last section, I hope that you have tried to answer it. …
This is a nice example which shows why Lao Tzu uses more examples from level C. …
There are four types of government: In one A is on top, in another B is on top, …
In another C is on top and in another D is all there is. How are they called? …
Democracy (A), Timocracy (B), Tyranny (C) and Oligarchy (D). Whoever makes the decisions is the one in power. He rules over the other three types of Government. Can you answer the question now? ...
. In Hinduism A is the Atman, or soul, B is Buddhi, or the intellect, C is Manas, or mind and D are the Indriyas, or bodily organs of action or senses of perception. Try it now. …
The Buddha was a Hindu before he became the Buddha. He has described the functions which take place on these four levels very nicely: Vision, thought, speech and physical action. Go back to 2:6.2,7, and if you can’t answer the question now, you have a mental block to deal with. The answer to the question is: True and false. In what sense? …
In a democracy, what the people do (D) does not come from what legislators (B) think.…
It comes from what the people decide to do. Similarly what a dictator (C) decides, is influenced by what his advisors (B) tell him, but he might also decide to have them assassinated. When money rules the world, it is very hard to tell who is in power. …
Because when we are destroying our planet, nobody wins.
. When asking: Who makes the decisions the answer is still not black and white. Even the people are allowed to make a few minor decisions in what our political masters call a “democracy”. “There are hereditary monarchies, and states where kingship is bought, but these and other similar examples are really crosses between our four types (544d)”.
. A more meaningful question to ask is what percentage of decisions are made by A, B, C or D? …
This question is a useful one to ask because trying to answer it is a learning process.
. At the end of the October 15 section, below this one, I said:
“. Another way of identifying [the 4 “sources”] comes from Mr.B’s Dodecad. There are twelve types of energy ranging from E1 to E12. E4 to E7 is the Aristotelian
. . .Y . . . . tetrad. The Aristotelian tetrad is Plato’s “Divided Line”
Z . + . X . . wrapped around the cross in the lower tetrad in the diagram.
. . .A . . . . . . The diagram represents the Buddha’s 8-fold path. It starts
D . + . B . . with Right Vision (A), then comes Right Thought (B), then
. . .C . . . . . Right Speech (C) and then Right Action (D). D is E7. A was E4 as Right Vision but now is Right Livelihood (E7). The path continues upward to X. That is now E9. The Buddha calls it Right Contemplation.”
. This needs elaboration: The Buddha’s 8-fold path starts at the crossover point of the figure 8, at A and it ends at Z with Right Concentration. It helps to notice that Y and C are both meditation. C is the “Yoga of meditation (Gita 13.24)” and Y is the Buddha’s Right Meditation. What does that tell us? …
In Z-A-B, Y-A-C or C-A-Y and D-A-X, A is the connective. …
What is Y and what is C when A is the reconciling impulse between them? …
Not answering a difficult question might make you think that I know the answer, when in fact I am waiting for your answer. But I do know the Z-A-B “TriAd(_3ad)” quite well because I am at B which is the outcome of the process. The outcome at level B is the knowledge (B) I am writing (C) about here.
. The outcome of C-A-X is at X. But what is X? …
In his ENERGIES, J.G. Bennett as devoted a paragraph to each of the twelve energies. His book is well worth reading. I will simply select some passages about X (E1), Y (E2) and Z (E3).
. E3 is the closest to our 4-fold human sphere of influence. Let me start with it: “Creative Energy [E3]. ….plays an essential part in our lives as a source of the power by which life is generated. It acts through the sex function of man, though few people realize that the power of sex is beyond sensitivity [E5 (B)] and even consciousness” (E4 (A)).At Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE we have: “JANALOKA …. wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates.”
. E2: Unitive Energy “ for the reason that everywhere in the whole universe it is this energy that everything is being constantly integrated and made whole. ….Unitive Power can reach us only indirectly.” “TAPOLOKA …. The Eternal Patience, as it remains forever undisturbed by any limited idea.” The Law of Correspondence seems to be based on it. The “Unitive” idea is in the eternal, the different manifestations of the same idea are in our temporal world. Sameness and difference are not identical but they are analogous.
. E1: Transcendent Energy “is still more incomprehensible for us, …. It concerns us only on the ground that a significant whole must contain at least all that is significant in its parts.” This has to do with the principle of ‘inclusion’. “SATYALOKA …. The sphere of God---the only Real Substance, SAT, in the universe.” The Hindu triad Sat-Chit-Ananda seems to be X-Y-Z but you have to evaluate this.
. The work I have done here, just now, belongs in the syntactic (C) dimension of semiotics. It is not my dharma. When I go up into my own semantic (B) dimension my theories (B) have to be verified or falsified. My theories are only useful for testing them they are not useful by themselves. Let us now get back to:
2:6.2,7: “What you do comes from what you think” only in a timocracy (B), where the unelected advisors (B) of our politicians (C) make the decisions. It is not true in a dictatorship, where the dictator makes the decision. It is also not true of capitalism (D). Plato already told us that there money is the source of power. It certainly is not true of a democracy (A), where the people make the decisions. Clearly the AUTHOR must know better than that. Anyone reading the Republic attentively can see that much.
. We have already worked on 2:6.2,8 but I will quote it again because I want to give you 2:6.2,9 for homework:
2:6.2,8: “You cannot separate yourself from the truth by ‘giving’ autonomy to behaviour. (9) This [behaviour (D)] is controlled by me automatically as soon as you place what you think under my guidance.” “guidance” sounds nicer but “control” is more accurate. …
========================================================
October 15, 2011 . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. What we have learned from the COURSE so far can be summarized in light of a worldwide event. OCCUPY BAY STREET, here in Toronto, is a good sign. It shows that you can dumb down people only that far and that the limit has been reached. The people united shall not be defeated. It is the truth that is uniting us. The truth is “One(_1)” and, deep down, the same truth is in all of us.
“Not Knowing that we Know (Puknkn) it is Sick(@p)”. Why did Lao Tzu say that? ...
Because our political masters “Know that we Don't Know (knPUkn) it and they take Advantage(_+)” of our “IgNorance(PUkn)”.
. As we continue studying the COURSE we have to pay attention to the “truth” the AUTHOR doesn't expect us to “Know” (B) and the “untruth” he wants us to believe (C).
2:6.1,6: “The presence of fear shows that you have raised body thoughts to the level of the mind.”
. In English “mind” can be on level C or B. In this context, which level is it here? …
2:6.1,6: The presence of the intellect (B) shows that you are on level B.
. What is meant by “Body thoughts”? …
Our body is on level D. This includes our bio-computer. Saying computation (C) is a simplification. Making things simpler than they really are works for a while, but sooner or later you have to get the details. The simplification is valid in the sense that all the customer (A) has to do is give the programmer (B) his “job-description” the programmer will take care of the rest. By analogy all the programmer has to do is to give his flowchart to the coder (C), the coder will take care of the rest. However, the coder needs the computer (D) to execute his program.
. When body thoughts are raised to level C, the AUTHOR has no problem with that … because, with a bit of social engineering, he can program the mind (C) himself. But ...
if our intellect (B) programs our mind then the AUTHOR's intellect (B) can’t do it.
2:6.1,7: “This removes them from my control, and makes you personally responsible for them.” You are responsible for the decisions you make because you have the freedom of choice. There can be no freedom of choice without you being responsible for your choices. The AUTHOR wants you to tell him: Thine will be done through mine. And saying that “makes you personally responsible for” that choice.
. That our intellect removes control from the AUTHOR is true is true. That you are “personally responsible for” your choices is also true. But that the only right choice is to allow the AUTHOR to make your choices for you is not true. It is the worst choice you can make.
2:6.1,8: “This is an obvious confusion of levels.” This is the last sentence of 2:6.1 and can be taken as the conclusion of the paragraph. So what is “confusion of levels”? …
2:6.2,1: “I do not foster level confusion, but you must chose to correct it.” …
2:6.2,1a: The whole of social engineering is based on confusing level C with Level B. So saying: “I do not foster level confusion” is a lie. There is no way that the AUTHOR doesn't know this.
2:6.2,1b: To tell us to correct “level confusion” is supposed to be the bait, which is to cover up the blatant lie. But there is nothing wrong with taking the bait as long as we don’t swallow the hook along with it. What is the hook? …
2:6.2,8: “You cannot separate yourself from the truth by ‘giving’ autonomy to behaviour” (D). Each of the four sources, or parts, of the tetrad is an autonomous whole. Behaviour (D) is not speech (C), thought (B) or awareness (A). In other words you can’t “give” the natural function of A, B, C or D to A, B, C and D. They already are what they are. For more detail on this, we can use the construction business or the IBM computer programming system, which is based on the tetrad, as examples. You can also use the table, which is at the beginning of this blog.
.There we have the tetrad of Plato, Aristotle, J.G. Bennett, the Buddha, Krisna, in the Gita, Lao Tzu, Astrology and sociology. All of these follow the deductive order of levels, from the most general and abstract to the most particular and concrete.
. Another way of identifying comes from Mr.B’s Dodecad. There are twelve types of energy ranging from E1 to E12. E4 to E7 is the Aristotelian tetrad.
. . .Y . . . . The Aristotelian tetrad is Plato’s “Divided Line” wrapped
Z . + . X . . around the cross in the lower tetrad in the diagram.
. . .A . . . . . . The diagram represents the Buddha’s 8-fold path. It starts
D . + . B . . with Right Vision (A), then comes Right Thought (B), then
. . .C . . . . . Right Speech (C) and then Right Action (D). D is E7. A was E4 as Right Vision but now is (E8) as Right Livelihood. After having done your dharma, the path continues upward to X. That is now E9. The Buddha calls it Right Contemplation.
. Our path, as human beings, starts at birth (A). That’s when we become aware (A) of our ego, B-C-D. That is semiotics. And, because understanding it is very important, our political masters have made it “disappear”. For disappear see page 99 of Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz’s “LOVE The Real Da Vinci CODE”.
. Boy, I know what I want to say, but saying it well enough is really exhausting for me. Before I quit, let me give you some homework:
2:6.2,7: “What you do comes from what you think.” True or false? …
========================================================
October 14, 2011 . . . . . . ACIM
14:11.14,8: “For understanding is in you, and from [your ignorance of] it peace must come.”
14:11.15,1: “The power of God from which they both [“understanding” and its opposite] arise, is yours as surely as it is His.” ‘Contemplation’, opposition’ and ‘depreciation’.
. As we become more familiar with the identifiers, it becomes easier to interpret the AUTHOR’s sentences. Also knowing what to look for, in them, helps us to find it.
. The AUTHOR has to get you to believe that: What “is yours .... is His.” So he keeps repeating it in different “forms”.
. Whenever the AUTHOR can get you to appreciate him, he gets you to ‘depreciate’ your intellect. If we work on his sentences we find the truth in it. It is true that we get “understanding” from the AUTHOR. He is where the Gita and the Tao Te Ching also comes from. Knowing that helps us to “understand” the “truth” in the COURSE better. If the AUTHOR is you and you are the AUTHOR then his “peace” “is yours as surely as it is His.” There is a lie in this. …
What he means by “peace” is not what you are supposed to know.
. ‘Depreciating’ the intellect is depreciating the “truth” we get from it. So the AUTHOR’s “peace” has something to do with “untruth”. Don’t just believe (C) that, but hold it in suspense as a possibility.
14:11.15,2: “You think you know Him not, only because, alone, it is impossible to know Him. (3) Yet see the mighty works that He will do through you, and you must be convinced you did it through Him.”
. That you do your will through him is a lie. By programming your mind (C), he is taking your will away. The truth is that he is doing his will “through you”. Both “truth” and “untruth” is spelled out right here. And if you don’t see it then you swallow the hook.
. Social engineering is a science, so it takes getting used to so much “Cleverness(^c)”. He who “By Cleverness Governs the State (YI^c8531) is the
State’S Malefactor (31_Zâe)”. Like the AUTHOR, Lao Tzu also uses ‘opposition’ to drive home his point: He who “ “By(YI)” Not resorting to Cleverness Governs the State (PUYI^c8531) is the State’S Benefactor (31_Z@d). Knowing This Dyad (knTzdyad) Also gives you a Standard Pattern (08*a#t)” by which to evaluate your rulers. *a = Chi115.
14:11.15,4: “It is impossible to deny the Source of effects so powerful they could not be of you.” Of “Calamities There-is-none Greater Than Underestimating (ÜfMOTAto$j) the intellectual, political and economic powers of your Enemy(âb)”. It is hard to believe how “Clever(^c)” our political masters are but it is not “impossible”.
14:11.15,5: “Leave room for Him, and you will find yourself so filled with power that nothing will prevail against your peace.”
. Allow the AUTHOR to program your mind and you move up in the pyramid. Those on the higher levels have “power” over those on the lower levels. If you are completely programmed “nothing will prevail against your peace.” Google “Manshurian candidate CIA”. It is almost impossible to deprogram those who are thoroughly programmed. The way to go is to “DePprogram(PUÜd)” those on the lower levels. Then the AUTHOR is left with a bunch of chiefs and no Indians. He will then be “lonely”.
14:11.15,6: “And this will be the test by which you recognize that you have understood.”
. This is the end of the section titled: “THE TEST OF TRUTH”. If you are fully programmed then your mind (C) can “control’ your intellect (B) so thoroughly “that nothing will prevail against your peace.” You will believe anything the AUTHOR wants you to believe. As those on the lover levels of the pyramid are being deprogrammed, they are in a better position to deprogram their friends on a higher level. As we succeed in this, there will be a lot we can learn from that. The Law of attraction will also start working more for us. All I can say right now is, that what we will see will be very interesting.
Chapter 15: is called THE HOLY INSTANT. The first section is The two Uses of Time.
15:1.2,3: “For the Holy Spirit uses time in his Own way, and is not bound by it. (4) Time is His friend in teaching. (5) It does not waste Him as it does you. (6)And all the waste that time seems to bring with it is due but to your identification with the ego, which uses time to support its belief in destruction. (7) The ego, like the Holy Spirit, uses time to convince you of the inevitability of the goal and end of teaching.” …
. The “goal” of the intellect is the “truth”. Is the “goal” of the AUTHOR as inevitable as that? …
Notice how “truth” and “untruth” are cleverly mixed together in these sentences. I will not interpret them. It is better for us if you do it yourself. If you remember where the AUTHOR is coming from there is a lot you can learn from him. But not by reading about it but by thinking about it. …
Because of the “Insights(72)” we have gained, the double meaning, the true and the false, in many passages becomes easier to see. This can be a problem because I don’t know which passage to pick next. Ideally communicators would join me to form a team. Not getting any help is discouraging.
2:6.1,4: “Fear cannot be controlled by me, but it can be self-controlled.”
. The intellect cannot be controlled by the AUTHOR, but it can be controlled by your own mind (C), which can be controlled by him. But before he can program the mind, he has to, somehow, get permission to decommission the intellect from the intellect.
2:6.1,5: “Fear prevents me from giving you my control.”
. Your intellect prevents me from controlling you.
2:6.1,6: “The presence of fear shows that you have raised body thoughts to the level of the mind.” Here “mind” (B) is the intellect (B). What is meant by “body thoughts”? …
=====================================================
October 13, 2011 . . . . . . . . ACIM
14:11.14,4: “It is as firm as is His faith in His Creator, and He knows that faith in his creator must encompass faith in His creation.”
14:11.14,4a: It, is, firm. To find out what the subject “It” is we have to go back to the previous sentence: “It” is “His faith in you”, which is based on “His understanding” of you. The predicate is not a noun. As a noun-phrase it is “faith in His Creator”, which is based on the fact that “He knows …. His Creator” and “His creation”. Creation is spelled in lower case, so it refers to us. :His understanding is based on his knowledge of us. It is this “understanding” which enables social engineers to program our mind (C), in such a way that they can “control” us. In a dictatorship the people know who their ruler is. If they don’t “accept” that then they get shot or tortured. In an “Intelligent Man’S (wsmn_Z) Government(85)” the people are supposed to believe that the politicians (C) they have elected are their rulers when in reality their unelected advisors (B) are in power. What does politics (C) have to do with the COURSE? …
The COURSE is backed by the CIA, so it has everything to do with it.
. The AUTHOR’s faith in us is based on the knowledge of how we are created. We are made in the image of our Creator. We are 4-fold beings:
Our soul (A) is fuelled by Creative energy (E4),
our intellect (B) is fuelled by Sensitive energy (E5),
our mind (C) is fuelled by Automatic Energy (E6) and
our body (D) is fuelled by Vital Energy (E7)
. The Law of Correspondence is universal. It also applies to us:
As A is to B so B is to C and as B is to C so C is to D. We can use the IBM computer programming system as an example of this:
As the customer (A) tells the programmer (B) what to do so the programmer tells the coder (C) what to do. And as the programmer tells the coder what to do so the coder tells the computer (D) what to do.
. The algorithm of a computer programme is developed by the programmer (B). At C it is coded and at D it is executed. There is a lot we can learn from this. Can you see it? …
The AUTOR must plan the program with his intellect (B), and by repetition he must install it in our mind (C). A well programmed mind can do by computation (C) what the intellect must do by thinking (B).
. The mind can’t think, but it can compute faster and more efficiently than the intellect can think (B). This is why Aristotle has called level C, the “efficient cause”. Because the mind is faster than the intellect it can be programmed to “control” it. The programmer’s thoughts (B) are transmitted to the computer (D) through the program (C). That’s why computers (D) appear to be intelligent (B).
. Ultimately the AUTHOR’s intellect (B) can take over our intellect. HOW? …
As the mind (C) can control our intellect (B), so the AUTHOR’s intellect can control our soul (A).
. How can this theory (B) be verified? …
By using it to get ourselves and others unhooked from our political masters and from the CIA sponsored COURSE. In other words, the truth which, when known, will set us free is in the COURSE. The reason you are likely to feel a certain reluctance to analyze the AUTHOR's sentences by means of syntactics (C) is because the social engineers are in control of our educational system and they don’t want you to do that. If you want to know WHY, just keep on analyzing the AUTHOR’s sentences and you will find out.
. The truth is already out there, on the internet and in books. As far as I can see, the bottleneck is not lack of knowledge (B) of the truth but lack of its proper communication (C). I am not a communicator (C), I don’t know if I have any hits or not. But if you are reading this, you can already start working for democracy simply by intentionally repeating the truth you are able to understand. A good way to learn is by sharing what you understand with others. The AUTHOR conveys the same “meaning” in different “forms”
5:1.2,2: “THOUGHTS INCREASE BY BEING GIVEN AWAY.”
5:1.2,3: “THE MO0RE WHO BELIEVE IN TEM THE STRONGER THEY BECOME.”
. There is a lot we can learn from the AUTHOR. And from the Hindus as well. They call sharing the truth “satsang”.
. The truth is neutral. It can work for the AUTHOR or for us. It doesn’t care. But if we don’t care, the AUTHOR will.
14:11.14,5: “In this consistency lies His Holiness which He cannot abandon, for it is not His will to do so.” We are supposed to say to him: Not mine will be done but thine Will shall be done through me.
. This statement is as true of God as it is of the AUTHOR. The truth about God is the bait; the truth about the AUTHOR is the hook. And, if you find nothing wrong with what the AUTHOR is doing, then you are swallowing the hook. The double meaning we can find in sentences is there for a purpose. If you don’t find it then you get hooked.
14:11.14,6: “With your perfection ever in His sight, He gives the gift of peace to everyone who perceives the need for peace, and who would have it.
. The spark of the divine in our inner core is our “perfection” it knows the eternal unchanging truth. And while we are not aware of it our intellect is busy chewing the bait while the hook is slipped past it. I suspect that “the gift of peace” is the hook. And everyone who perceives the need for peace” is programmed to “have it”.
14:11.14,7: “Make way for peace, and it will come.”
14:11.14,8: “For understanding is in you, and from it peace must come.”
. Understanding is in your core. “Not Knowing what deep down you Know (PUknkn)
is Sick(@p)”. Why? …
Because the AUTHOR knows. He knows that his “peace must come” through our “IgNoreance(PUkn)”.
14:11.15,1: “The power of God, from which they both arise, is yours as surely as it is His.’ …
=====================================================
.
October 13, 2011 . . . . . . . ACIM
. There is a mistake in the last section, below this one: 14:11.15,1 should be 14:11.14,8. Mistakes tend to draw our attention (A) to passages which need more of it.
14:11.14,8: “For understanding is in you, and from it peace must come.”
14:11.14,8a: Understanding, is, in you.
14:11.14,8b: Peace, comes from, the understanding, which is in you.
. With some practice your mind can do the analysis of sentences, I have just done, automatically. When you do things automatically (E6), you do them more efficiently by computation (C). You “Do them Without Doing (WyWUWy)” them by thinking (B). What we do automatically can work for or against us. It depends on whether we have programmed ourselves by intentionally repeating the “truth”, or whether others have programmed us by intentionally repeating a falsehood.
. After I typed 14:11.14,8 yesterday I typed “WOW …” after it. Guess why? …
When I typed 14:11.14,8 I automatically saw that we have two complete subject-connective-predicate sentences. “Practice(pr)” makes perfect. If you repeat certain syntactic rules often “Enough((Zu)” then your mind (C) will do it automatically for you.
You are doing it in your sleep, so to say. Your mind can work for or against you, automatically. If social engineers can take advantage of our mind (B) then why can’t we? …
All you have to do is practice certain syntactic rules intentionally and your mind will do the computing (C) for you automatically. It will “Do the computing for you automatically Without you having to Do (WyWUWy)” the thinking (B). Certain statements by Lao Tzu are like thinking tools. All you have to do is fill in the variables.
. An “Insight(72)” into 14:11.14,8 came to me automatically in a fraction of a second. It was a big one, so the “WOW” I typed after came naturally. My response to these insights is always: How can I describe this insight? …
If the answer to the question is easy for me to understand, it comes fast. If you ask questions that take lifetimes to answer you are asking the wrong question. The question came up yesterday before posting the section, the answer came to me this morning around 6 AM. 14:11.14,8 is the last sentence of 14:11.14. The last sentence of a paragraph is often the conclusion where the first three are the premise. The AUTHOR is not as “consistent” as Lao Tzu but here, at 14:11.14, he was. So the answer was: Go over 14:11.14 again and interpret it in light of the new insight. …
If you try to do that before reading on, you have something to compare my answer with. …
Here comes 14:11.14. …
1: “If you want peace you must abandon the teacher of attack.”
1: If you want what the AUTHOR calls “peace” then you have to get rid of your intellect.
2: “ The Teacher of peace will never abandon you.”
2: The AUTHOR, will newer give up working on, you. Why? …
3: “You can desert Him but He will never reciprocate [give up], for His faith in you is His understanding.”
. Understanding means what the dictionary gives us but “peace” is the opposite of “understanding”. He said that “peace” is to “understanding” as “cause” is to “effect”. This is not true but it is what he said. You have to do your own research by FINDING the words in quotes. .
14:11.14,3a: You, can desert, the AUTHOR.
14:11.14,3b: The AUTHOR, will never give up on, you. Why? …
What is the subject of 14:11.14,3a? …
Having the right questions to ask is very important, so is answering them yourself. …
The AUTHOR IS TALKING here about your ego. Normally by “ego”, he is talking about the intellect (B) but I think it is the B_C_D triad, it is semiotics.
. What is the predicate at 14:11.14,3b? …
That is your real Self, which you are not normally aware (A) of. For simplicity I normally associate it with level A. This comes close to the truth, but it is not. What is it? …
It is what comes to us through the “Door, Dasamadwara” (A). What is on the other side of A is “eternity” while we are in “time”. Eternity is in us, but it is covered “BY FIVE KOSHAS OR SHEATHS. (see Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE)”. So we are not normally aware (A) of the truth, which is in us.
. In his Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu trying to make us aware (A) of the “Truth(A1)” which is in our core. The five sheaths over this core like layers of onion peal
. . .Y . . . . The core is what the Hindus call the “Purusha”. I have
Z . + . X . . identified it as X-Y-Z. But X can represent E1 or E9,
. . .A . . . . Y can be E2 or E10 and Z can be E3 or E11
D . + . B . . In J. G. Bennett’s Dodecad there are twelve types of
. . .C . . . . . energy ranging fro E1 to E12.
Omnipotence would be X, omnipresence would be Y and omniscience would be Z. But I am just guessing here. However it is my dharma to give my theories (B) to C to get it tested at D. Only when we get the DIVISION OF LABOUR going can theories (B) tested. Until then all we have is the tested theories from the Hindus. That is why Swami Sri Yukteswar has called his book THE HOLY SCIENCE, because he is talking about theories (B) that have been tested over thousands of years. There is also great validity in the poetry from the Ching, the Gita, the Neiye and other books like that. Why? …
Because poetry (A) is above philosophy (B). The intellect (B) can study it, but it can’t produce it. The AUTHOR’s prose (C) comes from the same place the poetry (A) comes from but, unlike Lao Tzu, the AUTHOR doesn’t use his omniscience to make us aware of what deep down we know but to prevent us from knowing it.
. The AUTHOR tries to make us believe that we know nothing; Lao Tzu says at Ching
71.1: “Knowing that you Don’t Know (knPUkn) what you don’t know is Healthy(_+)”.
71.2: “Not Knowing what you Know (PUknkn) in your core is Sick (PUknkn@p)”.
. As we learn from Lao Tzu what is in our core, we can use the “Truth(A1)” to replace the AUTHORs “untruth’ with.
. I know that this is getting complicated, but nothing less will do. J. G Bennett said that trying to make things simpler than they really are doesn’t make things simpler. It is as bad as making things intentionally more complicated than they really are.
14:11.14,4: “It [his knowledge of what is in us] is as firm as is His faith in His Creator and He knows that faith in His Creator must encompass faith in his creation.” …
============================================================
October 12, 2011 . . . . . . . ACIM
Ching 39: The “Total Number of the parts of a Carriage ($0#5âs)
. . . . . . . . Is-not a Carriage (WUâs)”. Notice how Lao Tzu leaves out details to get us to think. Not even he can do our thinking for us. The AUTHOR also leaves out details but for a different reason.
. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. A standard sentence is greater than its subject, connective and predicate. A well planed paragraph can be greater than the sum of the sentences in it. Sentences in the Ching are well planned Let us see if 14:11.13 is also well planned.
1: “Only those who recognize they cannot know unless the effects of understanding are with them, can really learn at all.” …
. Only if we “recognize” the connection between causes and their “effects” can we have “understanding”, and only when there is understanding can we “really learn at all.”
. This statement is true. It is the bait. Where is the hook? …
2: “For this it must be peace they want, and nothing else.”
. To interpret this statement we must know what the AUTHOR means by peace. According to him “peace” is the opposite of “understanding” as “cause” is the opposite of “effect”. The opposite of “understanding” is ignorance or foolishness. Stupidity is the opposite of intelligence as what the AUTHOR is teaching is the opposite of what the intellect is teaching. There is, thus, truth in this statement. But it is not obvious. The bait is like a lubricant that enables the AUTHOR to slip the hooks past the intellect, if …
we are not aware (A) of it. What does that mean for us? …
It means that we have to look for the “truth” in a sentence as diligently as we are looking for the “untruth” in it. And since this is what the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to do, this is precisely what we have to do. I must remind you again that social engineering is a science.
3: “Whenever you think you know, peace will depart from you, because you have abandoned the Teacher of peace.”
. Whenever you are using your intellect, “you have abandoned the Teacher of peace.” If you don’t believe what the AUTHOR has dictated then you are not learning his lessons.
4: “Whenever you fully realize [believe] that you know not, peace will return, for you will have invited Him to do so by abandoning the ego on behalf of Him.”
. By abandoning your intellect, you are giving the AUTHOR permission to program your mind (C).
5: “Call not upon the ego for anything; it is only this that you need to do.”
. Don’t use your intellect to find out the truth, “it is only this that you need to do.”
6: “The Holy Spirit will, of Himself, fill every mind that so makes room for Him.”
. This is the end of the paragraph. Which “meaning” is repeated by means of ‘opposition’ or without it? …
So what is the overall message of this paragraph? …
It is best for all of us if you answer this question yourself. At the end of the last section, below this one, I asked:
“What will the AUTHOR fill the emptied “mind” (C) with? …” …
14:11.14,1: “If you want peace you must abandon the teacher of attack. (2) The Teacher of peace will not abandon you.” ‘Opposition’.
. Here the opposite of “peace” is “attack”. This is a weaker dyad than war and “peace”, but it is stronger than “peace” and “understanding”. To fill in the details you have to FIND the words which are in quotes. There is work you have to do which I can’t do for you. A communicator (C) can say it better than I can but he can’t do your thinking for you either.
14:11.14,3: “You can desert Him but He will never reciprocate, for His faith in you is His understanding.”
. He uses the word “understanding” now, instead of “peace”. What does that tell us? …
14”11.14,4: “It [his understanding of you] is as firm as His faith in His Creator, and He knows that faith in His Creator must encompass faith in His creation.”
. This one is hard to interpret because the AUTHOR can mean his own creator, or creative part. And he wants us to believe that he is talking about the real Creator. Scientists know that the real Creator’s creation is reliable, this is why they use it to test the validity of their scientific hypotheses (B). The former “Creator” is the hook and the latter is the bait.
14”11.14,5: “In this consistency lies His Holiness which He cannot abandon. For it is not His Will to do so.” Here again “His Holiness” can refer to the AUTHOR, to God or to both. The ambiguity is supposed to throw us off.
14”11.14,6: “With your perfection ever in His sight, He gives the gift of peace to everyone who perceives the need for peace, and who would have it.”
. The ambiguity continues. What the AUTHOR calls “perfection” is a perfectly programmed mind (C). The real God wouldn’t give us what the AUTHOR calls “peace”. The AUTHOR must also create a need for his kind of “peace’, which is the opposite of “understanding”. Only those in whom the need for ”peace” has been created “would have it”.
14:11.14,7: “Make way for peace, and it will come.”
14:11.15,1: “For understanding is in you, and from it peace must come.” WOW …
=====================================================
October 11, 2011 . . . . . . . . ACIM
14:11.11,4: “Listen in silence, and do not raise your voice against Him.” …
14:11.11,4: “Listen in silence, and do not” question what the AUTHOR says.
14:11.11,5: “For he teaches the miracle of oneness, and before His lesson division disappears.” Now let us question it. …
14:11.11,5a: The AUTHOR teaches that “oneness” is possible without duality.
14:11.11,5b: And by means of his program in your mind (C) your intellect “disappears”. Every time the AUTHOR manages to “depreciate” your intellect, without you being aware of the constant repetitions of the same “meaning”, he is weakening it until it finally “disappears”. So there is truth in what he is saying, and if you are not aware (A) of that truth, which deep down you know, you are swallowing the hook that is hidden in the bait. As I keep repeating: Social engineering is a science. The programming that is done on your mind, of which you are not aware, is as effective as the repetitions, you can be aware of. But it is more dangerous, unless you “Know what you are Not expected to Know (knPukn)”. Making the knowledge (B) of the truth representations (C) of the truth is a defense against the AUTHOR's programming.
. In the basic sentence “he’ is the subject. What does “he” do? …
“…. he teaches”. He teaches what? …
“…. he teaches the miracle of oneness”. On this side of the “Door” (A) we can’t have “Unity($1)” without multiplicity.
Ching 1.4,1: “The DyAd(tzdyad) is a
Unit Originally ($1Cu) But it is Divided by Identifying (btâoMg)” its poles. The division is done by the intellect. So by making it “disappear” the AUTHOR tries to make the “truth” disappear. Unity and multiplicity form “One(_1)” “DyAd(dyad)”. And you can’t have one pole of it without the other. The AUTHOR knows this.
. At 14.11.12,4 he says that “peace and understanding go together and never can be found alone.” In systematics peace – understanding would be called a weak dyad.
14:11.12 ,5: “Each brings the other with it, For it is the law of God they be not separate. This is another stab at the intellect because, according to the AUTHOR, separating is all the intellect does. It causes nothing but trouble.
14:11.12,6: “They are cause and effect, each to the other, so where one is absent the other cannot be.”
. Cause-effect is a strong dyad, peace – understanding is not. Notice how the AUTHOR uses bait to make a weak dyad appear to be a strong one. See how interpreting his sentences exposes the hooks. And this is why he doesn’t want us to do it. There is another thing he failed to tell us:
Ching 1.4,3: “Darken It, the light, and Repeat the Darkening (Sü_Z@1Sü) until you have reached All Mystery’S Gate (^1#1_Z%1)”. So the intellect does not only “Divide(âo)” it also “Unifies($1)”. Obviously the AUTHOR can’t tell us that. All ‘depreciation’ is based on the lie that the intellect only divides and causes all kinds of trouble.
. By way of contrast, let me bring what Lao Tzu says about the dyad. We have already seen what he says about it in chapter 1. “Pair(dy)” is only in Ching 60. “PairThing(dyad)” is in 61, 65 and 73. There Lao Tzu only gives examples of it from politics (C). He gives more examples from level C than from level D because politics (C) is closer to philosophy (B) than economics (D) is. Just about any translation of these four chapters will do even though Liang(dy) Chê(ad) may not be translated as “DyAd”.
. Let me just give you an interpretation of Ching 65 to give you some idea of WHAT Lao Tzu teaches and HOW he teaches it. Social engineering is mind-control by means of “Cleverness(^c)”: The “People Are Difficult to Govern (Mn_Zdf85) Because They are “Too(TO)” Clever (YI_H^cTO) Therefore, he who governs his state with cleverness is its malefactor (KUYI^c853131_Zâe J.Wu); but he who governs his state without resorting to cleverness is its benefactor (PUYI^c853131_Z@d J.Wu) Knowing This DyAd (knTzdyad) is to possess a rule and a measure (08*a#tCnkn*a#t J.Wu)” by means of which to govern your country properly. A standard translation often gets the message across better than my clumsier word for word translation does. But notice also the detail I have added. This is a nice example of where Lao Tzu uses politics to teach philosophy. I have also picked this example to contrast it with WHAT and HOW the AUTHOR teaches. However, if we use Lao Tzu’s “truth” to replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with then we are getting very good “Practice(pr)”. Here is a regular translation of Ching 71.4:
“Intelligent People are not stupid (wsmnPU@p) because they know and know that they know (YI_H@p@p), that is why they are not stupid (SiYIPU@p).”
14:11.13,3: “Whenever you think you know, peace will depart from you because you have abandoned the Teacher of peace.” ‘Opposition’.
. The AUTHOR is the “Teacher of peace”. Therefore the intellect is the …
teacher of attack.
14:11.13,4: “Whenever you fully realize [believe] that you know not, peace will return, for you will have invited Him to do so by abandoning the ego [the intellect] on behalf of Him.”
. Only s/he who abandons the intellect will allow the AUTHOR to program his mind (C).
14:11.13,6: “The Holy Spirit will of Himself, fill every mind that so makes room for Him.”
. What will the AUTHOR fill the emptied “mind” (C) with? …
======================================================
October 10, 2011 . . . . . . ACIM
. In yesterday’s section, below this one, I was working on 14:11.11,3 and then I said: “This is the best I can make of 14:11.11,3. But at 14:11.11,4 we are told: Don’t try to understand this.” We know from Ching 41.1 that we must do what the social engineers don’t want us to do. So I did some more thinking about 14:11.11,3.
. I already said yesterday in my commentary: “The pyramid scheme is a hierarchical system in which ‘God’s …. Creator’ is to God as God is to his ‘Son’.” The Aristotelian syllogisms can clarify this for us. …
The “Creator” is above “God”. Major premise.
“God” is above his “Son”. Minor premise.
Therefore, “God’s Teacher” is above God’s “Son”. Conclusion.
. With a bit of practice, deduction, induction and syllogisms can be done by computation (C). In fact, if you give it a knowledge base and the right program (C) then a computer (D) can do it.
. The AUTHOR gives us the following details about “Teacher”, “God” and “Son”: “ ….and through His Teacher does God proclaim his Oneness and His Son” is included in this triad. As in the Ching, we often have to add whole phrases to make sense of wat has been said. Lao Tzu leaves these things out to give his students the opportunity to get some “Practice(pr)”; the AUTHOR leaves out these details so that we can’t figure out what he is talking about. But, if we do what he doesn’t want us to do then we still get the “Practice”. The next question is: Which “TriAd(_3ad)” do we have here? …
The dictionary equivalents of Hsin(Hs) are “Heart, mind; center”. Our intellect (B) is in the “center” between “Heart” (A) and mind (C). We have the A-B-C “TriAd”.
. A is above B as B is above C. And the AUTHOR “proclaims his Oneness”. And the A-B-C triad is “One” whole in which “God” (B) does the thinking (B). The AUTHOR reconciles his teaching (A) with his mind (C) by thinking (B). There can be a lot of valuable lessons for us in the COURSE if we approach it properly.
. This morning around 6 AM I vaguely remembered that the AUTHOR was talking about this very same triad before. In this triad he was the connective between the higher and the lower. But I can’t find it. I don’t even know if I typed it. As I was leaving through the text in hope to find it I came across other sentences, I had worked on before, which make a lot more sense to me now. He who has “Enough” truth shall have more. I hope that some readers, if any, will discover this truth on their own.
. Here is a passage that makes a lot more sense in light of what we have learned recently:
7:5.2,1: “The Holy Spirit must work THROUGH you to teach [program] you He is IN you.” As a program he is in your mind (C) at first.
7:5.2,2: “This is an intermediary step toward the knowledge [belief] that you are God because you are part of Him.” Now he is not only in our mind (C) but in our head (B) and heart (A) as well. It is true that we are part of God. And, if he got his programs installed in our mind, it is also true that he is part of us.
7:5.2,4: “This is God’s Will and yours.” Other than pointing out what “teaching” and “knowledge” means in the COURSE, no further comment is necessary.
. The fact that I couldn’t find the corresponding passage to the one we have here at 14:11.11,3
. If a communicator (C) would team up with me, we would have two files: One is the original 669 page text and one would be my interpretations. In this file we would have the identifiers, like ‘contemplation’, ‘opposition’, ‘depreciation’ or ‘inclusion’ associated with their “meanings”. The meaning we have here, at 14:11.11,3, is also a call for help. I can’t do this job alone. We have to get the DIVISION OF LABOR GOING for us. Because our political masters got it going for themselves they can “control” us by means of it. If we get it going for us, there are two good reasons why we can get a democracy. …
Truth is the lifeblood of democracy, and the truth is on our side. And …
there are more of us. There is a minority which rules the majority by their “tricks and stratagems (at 548a of Plato’s Republic)”. The facts are out there on the internet, in books, even in some newspaper columns. So what is preventing us from understanding it? …
The answer is in the COURSE. All we have to do is work on it. And, let me repeat, I can’t do it alone. Nobody else can do your dharma for you.
14:11.11,4: “Listen in silence, …. (5) For He teaches the miracle of oneness, and before His lessons [programs] division disappears.” …
==================================================
October 9, 2011 . . . . . . . ACIM
14:11.7,6: “And being yours He cannot change Himself, for your identity is changeless.”
. There are three premises we have to accept in order to make sense of this sentence. …
1. That the AUTHOR’s is “yours”. …
2. That yours is his. And …
3. That “your identity is changeless”, that you will not evolve any further. And if you …
believe what the AUTHOR says, without questioning it, then …
you will not evolve any further.
. As you have seen, working sequentially on some sections is possible. But some sentences in this section are hard to chew. The time and energy invested in hard to chew sentences is really a waste of time and energy. Trying to make sense of what the AUTHOR has intentionally obscured is merely playing his game. After we have learned more from him by doing the sentences that are easier to chew we can always come back to the more difficult ones when we are ready for it. In doing it this way, I am following Lao Tzu’s advise.
14:11.8,4: “It is only because you think that you can run some little part, or deal with certain aspects of your life alone [without the help of the AUTHOR], that the guidance of the Holy Spirit is limited.”
. As long as you are using your own intellect you are limiting “the guidance of the Holy Spirit”. The “guidance” is conveyed to the advanced “student” by his “voice” and to the ordinary, non-thinking, reader by this COURSE. In other words, the “guidance” …
comes from the AUTHOR of this COURSE.
. 14:11.8,5: “Thus would you make Him undependable, and use this fancied undependability as an excuse for keeping certain dark lessons from Him.”
. The “dark lessons” are supposed to be false lessons from the intellect the AUTHOR can’t prevent yet.
14:11.8,6: “And by so limiting the guidance that you would accept [if it were not for the bad “ego”], you are unable to depend on miracles to answer all your problems for you.”
. According to the AUTHOR your intellect is your worst enemy, it is the one that causes “all your problems”. If you depend on it then ‘you are unable to depend on” the AUTHOR.
. The last three sentences can be summed up as: Don’t trust your intellect. Don’t use it. Trust instead the “Holy Spirit” and believe what the AUTHOR as dictated without questioning it.
14:11.9,6: “There are no dark lessons He has not already lightened for you.”
30:2.2,6: “God but ensured that you would never lose your will when He gave you His perfect Answer.” The very opposite is true. By predicting the questions the intellect can come up with and by installing the “answers” to these questions in the mind (C) so that it can come up with the answers automatically (E6), by computation (C), the “perfect answer” reaches the heart (A) faster than the head (B) can reach it.
. So the AUTHOR “ensured that you would never lose your will” (C), but, by means of the program he has installed in your mind, you lose your intellect (B) and your soul (A).
. There is nothing to believe here. The “perfect answers” are right here in this COURSE. But, as you can hopefully see yourself, to interpret his sentences, in which the “answers” are given to the mind (C), takes more work than I can do alone. But that doesn’t deter me from doing the best I can. What I find encouraging is that, as I learn lessons from the AUTHOR which he doesn’t want me to learn, my task becomes easier.
14:11.9,10: “He does not see time as you do.” This is not only a short sentence, but also an easy one: “He” is in eternity where the limitations of time and space don’t exist, while we are in “time”. And “He does not see” what we see with our physical (D) eyes.
. Truth is eternal, “Unchanging(Cn)”, To seek and find the truth is the dharma of thinkers (B). we can get it from Lao Tzu and J. G. Bennett’s systematics, which is some kind of universal thinking tool. When the intellect learns to use thinking tools it can expose the AUTHOR’s falsehoods. It can also be shown that some falsehoods are dictated intentionally. Then we are justified in calling them lies.
14:11.10,2: “He would but have you accept His accomplishments as yours, because He did them for you. (3) And because He did, they are yours.” ‘Contemplation’.
. If you are the AUTHOR then whatever he does, you do. The “form” of this message is always different while its “meaning” is always the same. If you are the AUTHOR and the AUTHOR is you then, in this repetition, whatever he does, you do. And if you have swallowed enough of his hooks you will also swallow this one without questioning it. But if you do the debunking, as we are doing here, then the repetitions become more and more obvious.
14:11.11.3 “God’s Teacher is as like to His Creator as His Son, and through His Teacher does God proclaim His Oneness and His Son. (4) Listen in silence, and do not raise your voice against Him.”
. The pyramid scheme is a hierarchical system in which “God’s ….Creator” is to God as God is to his “Son”. The system as a whole is “His Oneness”. This is the best I can make of 14:11.11,3. But at 14:11.11,4 we are told: Don’t try to understand this.
14:11.12,1: “Those who remember always that they know nothing, and who [believe that]
have become willing to learn everything [from the AUTHOR and they], will learn it” without questioning it. Intelligent people “Know that they Don’t Know (knPUkn)” it all. But to say that they know “Nothing(WU)” is only true of the AUTHOR’s “Children” but not of intelligent people.
Ching 71.4: “Intelligent people are not stupid, they know and know that they know, that is why they are not stupid. (wsmnPU@pYI_H@p@pSiYIPU@p)”.
14:11.12,2: “But whenever they trust themselves, they will not learn.” Intelligent people trust their own intellect, and that’s why they learn. And the truth they learn helps them to expose the AUTHOR’s falsehoods.
14:11.12,4: “Think not you understand anything until you pass the test of perfect peace, for peace and understanding go together and never can be found alone.”
. It is true that “Peace” and “understanding” can be called the poles of a polarity but try to see it. …
In the COURSE “peace” is associated with “comfort”, which is attained by avoiding the “discomfort” of cognitive dissonance. The intellect doesn’t do that so it is creating a temporary “discomfort”. I said “temporary” because in the long run, the temporary “discomfort” is to be preferred. “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death (Proverbs 14:12).” But short term solutions are easier to sell if you know how.
. With understanding comes a certain responsibility. The Sanskrit word, dharma, is usually translated as duty. But doing our duty also gives us joy. The AUTHOR can’t tell us that.
14:11.12,5: “Each [pole] brings the other with it, for it is the law of God they be not separate.” ‘Opposition’ which is true of all dyads. ‘Depreciation’. Can you see it? …
In the phrase before the comma, we got a bit of bait. After the comma we got a very clever stab at the intellect. At Ching 1.4 first the poles are “Divided(âo)” by “Identifying(Mg)” them. That creates the “light”. And then, in the same last paragraph the light is “Darkened(Sü)”. First the intellect “separates” and then it “Unifies($1)”
. To “correct” the AUTHOR’s “untruth”, we have to replace it with the “truth”, and doing that is an excellent exercise. There is a lot of work, I have to do here, that can be done much better and more efficiently in the syntactic dimension (C) of semiotics. But to catch the hidden hooks takes the intellect (B). And that’s why the AUTHOR doesn’t like it.
14:11.13,5: “Call not upon the ego for anything; it is only this that you need do.” …
=====================================================
October 7, 2011 . . . . . . . ACIM
. At the end of the October 4 section I gave 14:1.4,9 as homework for us. At the beginning of the October 5 section I did my homework. In spite of the work I did on it, and the attention (A) I paid to it, a clever, but not so subtle, twist slipped right by my intellect. If you caught it, you can give yourself a pad on the back. It is very important that you catch these “tricks (548a)” yourself because in such ways social engineers get their hooks into us. And here I swallowed it. So you can't trust me either.
. I will go over the work I did on October 5 again. But, as I go over the steps again, try to catch the trick yourself.
14:11.4,9: “Never believe that any lesson you have learned apart from Him means anything.” …
14:11.4,9a: Any lesson, you have not learned from the AUTHOR, is wrong. …
14:11.4,9b: Any lesson, you have learned from your intellect, is wrong. …
Notice the punctuation I use to separate subject, connective, and predicate. In the original sentence: “Never believe that”, is a subordinate phrase. Did you catch it now? …
Don’t believe that, what you, have learned from your intellect, is wrong. …
Here you have a good example of HOW subtly the hook is hidden by the bait. In spite of all this work I did on this sentence, while looking for the “untruth” in it, I didn’t catch the bait until, purely by accident, I came across this passage again.
Ching 71.2: “Not Knowing what you Know in your core is Sick (PUknkn$p)”. Why? …
Because: If you “Don’t Know what deep down, in your soul, you Know” then ...
social engineers will get their hooks into you.
. Their “Knowledge of what you Don't Know (knPUkn) is Good(_+)” for them. Because the AUTHOR comes from the same place Lao Tzu comes from his words must be interpreted in the same way. In both texts there can be many different layers of meaning.
14:11.6,11: “He will take His rightful place in your awareness the instant you abandon it, and offer it to him.” …
. “He”, the AUTOR, is the subject of the sentence. What does he do? …
He will take His place. The predicate is complex. What kind of place is it? …
“His rightful place”. Where is that place? …
“in your awareness”. When can he take it over, or get his hook into you? …
“the instant you abandon it. At 14:11.4,9 I have abandoned it. And see what happened. A sentence is only as clear to you as the words in it are clear to you. What does the AUTHOR mean by “you” and by “your awareness”? …
“You” are a fourfold being. The highest and most abstract “source’, or part of you is …
“your awareness” (A), next comes your intellect (B), then comes your mind (C) and then comes your body (D), which is the most concrete part of you.
. HOW the AUTHOR takes over your awareness is a process, which can only start after “you abandon it”. What does abandon your awareness mean? …
It means being unaware of the AUTHOR’s intentions. Only then will you “offer it to Him.”. But it is not as simple as that. Sometimes the AUTHOR has to complicate things to obscure them; at other times he has to make complicated things seem more simple than they really are. Either extreme takes us away from the truth.
. The process by which the AUTHOR takes over our awareness is described in this book. But if he explains it clearly then we can understand him and then we don’t allow him to program our mind (C). If we know what he intends to do then we don’t “offer it [our soul (A)] to Him”. We don't allow him to “take” it over.
. To take over our “will” (C), we have to say to him not my will but thine will shall be done trough me. That is what ‘contemplation’ means. Since the mind is faster than the intellect, it can be programmed to “control” the intellect and then the intellect can “control” our awareness (A). How this is done in detail, we have to keep interpreting what the AUTHOR says. If the AUTHOR's COURSE were easy to understand then we could understand it easily. What does he do about this problem? ...
What do we have to do about it? ...
We have to do what he doesn't want us to do about it.
14:11.7,1: “You cannot be your guide to miracles, for it is you who made them necessary.” …
14:11.7,1a: “You cannot be your [own] guide”. ‘Depreciation’. Why not? ...
14:11.7,1b: Because you made them [the miracles] necessary. How? …
By using your intellect.
1:1.8,1: “Miracles are healing” the intellect. Please FIND “healing”.
1:1.12,1: “Miracles are thoughts. (2) Thoughts can represent the lower or bodily level of experience, or the higher or spiritual [A] level of experience.”
1:1.19,1: “Miracles make minds one in God.” The “mind” here, can be on level C or B. The AUTHOR's “mind” is your mind and yours is his. At least that's what you are supposed to believe.
1:1.19,3: “Miracles therefore reflect the laws of eternity not of time” We exist in “time” and the AUTHOR exists in “eternity”. In eternity the boundaries of time and space don't exist. That is why, to some degree he is omnipresent (EY) omniscient (EZ). Knowledge is power and it can be used for good or bad purposes. ...
1:1.26,1: “Miracles represent freedom from fear.” They get rid of the intellect.
1:1.26.2: “’Atoning’ means ‘undoing’.”
1:1.26,3: “The undoing of fear is an essential part of the Atonement value of miracles.”
. Since the intellect is the cause of “Division(âo)” or “separation”, this statement makes perfect sense. In fact, a lot more statements make more sense to me now than whn I first read them. Then I was still hooked by the AUTHOR.
14:11.7,2: “And because you did [make them necessary], the means on which you can depend for miracles has been provided for you” by the AUTHOR. ‘Contemplation’.
. In this paragraph, all we have to try on for size is: “Contemplation’, opposition’ and ‘depreciation. Please try it.
14:11.7,3: “God’s Son can make no needs his Father will not meet, if he but turn to Him ever so little.”
14:11.7,3a: The AUTHOR must create “needs” in us. The need to want what the AUTOR intends us to want must be programmed into us.
14:11.7,3b: Talking about “God’s Son” and his “Father” makes the story that the AUTHOR is Jesus more believable. However, I think that “God”, “Son”, “Father” and the “Holy Spirit”, all refer ll to the AUTHOR. This assertion has to be verified or falsified.
14:11.7,3c: Notice the lower case “he” and the capitalized “Him”. What does that tell us? …
The reader is represented by “he” and the AUTHOR by “Him”. Remember that you are supposed to believe that you are “Him” and that “He” is you.
14:11.7,4: “Yet He cannot compel His Son to turn to Him and remain Himself. (5) It is impossible that God lose His Identity, for if He did, you would lose yours.”
. If you are “God” and “He” is “you” then this statement would make perfect sense but are you really the AUTHOR? And is he really you? …
14:11.7,6: “And being yours He cannot change Himself, for your identity is changeless.” …
====================================================
October 6, 2011 . . . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. Once a week I am taking a “Network Spinal Analysis” treatment. Network Analysts have to be certified Chiropractors before they can become practitioners of this form of therapy. I heard that the Council on Chiropractic Education (CCE) has illegally changed the standards they are supposed to protect.
. Their “removing of chiropractic’s basic core descriptors and principles, will be jeopardizing the future of this type of care.” For one example, chiropractic is “a drug-less method of providing spinal care”. This definition has been removed.. Why? …
Why do they want chiropractors to administer drugs? ...
. What is happening to chiropractics right now reminds me of what has happened to the Green Party of Ontario. The party has been infiltrated and without a quorum and a consensus decision-making meeting the party’s constitution was rewritten. The infiltrators have decided to remove the right of the members to make the decisions. The change of the Green Party’s constitution, without participation of the members, was illegal but, as you can see, they got away with it. How? …
By means of social engineering. Will the decision makers in the CCE get away with WHAT they have decided to do? …
That reminds to be seen. Certainly the knowledge of why they are doing it and HOW they are doing it will have something to do with the outcome of their efforts.
14:11.6,1: “Do not be concerned about how you can learn a lesson so completely different from everything that you have taught yourself .”
. Everything you learn from the AUTHOR is true, while “everything that you have taught yourself” is false. And don’t question that. “God Himself” has dictated it.
14:11.6,2: “How would you Know?” Who are you to question “God”? …
14:11.6,3: “Your part is very simple.” Just read what the AUTHOR has dictated without questioning it. He will do the rest.
14:11.6,4: “You need only recognize [believe (C)] that everything you learned you do not want.” If your intellect is still functioning then you know that this is not true. You want to know the truth. But, if a lie is repeated often “Enough(Zu)” then it becomes true for you and you no longer question it. …
There is one flaw in this assumption. Can you see it? …
If you become aware (A) of the repetitions then the “trick (548a)” no longer works. In fact, if the effort to deceive becomes too obvious then it becomes counterproductive.
14:11.6,5: “Ask to be taught, and do not use your experiences to confirm [or falsify] what you have learned” from the AUTHOR. In other words, ...
don't question what he tells you.
14:11.6,6: “When your peace is threatened or disturbed in any way, say to yourself:
14:11.6,7: “I DO NOT KNOW WHAT ANYTHING, INCLUDING THIS, MEANS.”
14:11.6,8: “AND SO I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO RESPOND TO IT.”
14:11.6,9: “AND I WILL NOT USE MY OWN PAST LEARNING AS A LIGHT TO GUIDE ME NOW.” These three affirmations are self-explanatory.
14:11.6,10: “By this refusal to attempt to teach yourself what you do not know, the Guide Whom God has given you will speak to you.” ...
“Knowing that you Don’t Know (knPUkn) what you do not know is Healthy(_+)
.Not Knowing that you don’t Know (PUknkn) what you do not know is Sick(@p)”.
. Reference is made here to the “Holy Ghost” at John 14:26, but there is a twist to it. …
The AUTOR in his own voice “will speak to you.” You are supposed to refuse to learn anything from your own intellect and “accept” everything the AUTHOR tells you without question. As you get to know the same “meaning” the AUTHOR conveys in different “forms”, you no longer need my interpretations.
14:11.6,11: “He will take His rightful place in your awareness the instant you abandon it and offer it to Him.” The capitalized “Him” refers to the AUTHOR. What are you supposed to “abandon” and “offer” to “Him”? …
=============================================================
October 5, 2011 . . . . . . . . ACIM
14:1.4,9: “Never believe that any lesson you have learned apart from Him means anything.”
. Usually I give you the first sentence of the next paragraph for homework, but this one is a good one. If you have not already done its interpretation, please try. …
. The “meaning” of many sentences is usually simpler than the “form” the AUTHOR gives it in. This one is a good example of “obscurantism”. Please Google it. …
. This sentence starts with the verb phrase: “Never believe”! This means that it is …
an imperative sentence. What are you supposed to “Never believe”? …
Any lesson you have not learned from the AUTHOR. This is already a clarification and simplification, but the “message” as a whole can still be simplified further. How? …
Never learn any lesson from your intellect. Interpreting a sentence means getting at the “meaning” the AUTHOR tries to slip past the intellect.
14:11.5,1: “You have one test , as sure as God, by which to recognize if what you learned is true.” We are coming back to the title of this section: “THE TEST OF TRUTH”.
. How do you find out whether a theory (B) is true or not? …
By testing it. If it works as predicted then it is true; if not then not. Here is the AUTHOR’s definition: “
14:11.5,2: “If you are wholly free of fear of any kind, and if all those who [have been programmed by the AUTHOR] meet or even think of you share in your perfect peace, then you can be sure that you have learned God’s lesson and not your own.”
14:11.5,2: If you are wholly free of your intellect “then you can be sure that you have learned God’s [the AUTHOR’s] lesson and not your own “ In other words: …
What the AUTHOR tells you is the “truth”; everything else is not.
14:11.5,3: “Unless all this is true, there are dark lessons in your mind that hurt and hinder you, and everyone around you.”
14:11.5,3: Unless all of these conditions are fulfilled there are sill lessons of your intellect in your mind (C) “that hurt and hinder you, and everyone around you” from accepting the AUTHOR’s lessons without questioning them.
14:11.5,4: “The absence of perfect peace means but one thing: You think you do not will for God’s Son what his Father wills for him.”
14:11.5,4: The absence [of the effect of theAUTHOR’s programming] means but one thing: that you have decided not to do the will of the AUTHOR.
14:11.5,5: “Every dark lesson teaches this in one form or another.” ‘Opposition’. Why? …
The opposite of the intellect is the AUTHOR. He teaches his lessons in one “form” or another. He didn’t actually say this but he doesn’t have to. Why? …
Because in our core we know that and the programmed mind (C) knows that. The AUTHOR makes use of the principle of opposition to slip messages past the intellect (B) in order to program the mind (C). If social engineering were not as complicated as it is then everybody could understand it and it wouldn’t work. Because the AUTHOR is spilling the beans as he does, this is our opportunity to find out about it.
14:11.5,6: “And each bright lesson with which the Holy Spirit will replace the dark ones you do not accept, teaches you that you will with the Father and His Son.” ‘Opposition’.
“bright lessons” are the opposite of the “dark ones”. The very fact that this dyad is a valid one is bait which helps the real “meaning” to be slipped by the intellect. What is the “meaning” the intellect can intercept here? …
As “the Holy Spirit will replace the dark” lessons, you are not supposed to “accept:, of the intellect with “bright” ones so we must replace the AUTHOR’s “untruth” with the “truth”. As we learn more about social engineering from the AUTHOR, this task is gradually becoming easier. I couldn’t have done the interpreting, I am doing here, even a Week ago.
. I think that “the Father and His Son” both represent the AUTHOR. We are just getting a bit more transcendentalism and obscurantism that way. This is another theory (B) that still has to be tested.
14:11.6,1: “Do not be concerned about how you can learn a lesson so completely different from everything that you have taught yourself. (2) How would you know? (3) Your part is very simple. (4) You need only recognize that everything you learned you do not want.” …
======================================================
October 4, 2011 . . . . . . . . . ACIM
. In the October 3 section I said behind 14:11.3,9 that: “This teaching [of the COURSE] is called ‘the light’” This implies that the AUTHOR produces “the light” and what is produced by the intellect must be “the darkness”
. Now let us skip to Ching 1.4,3, which I did in the same section:
1.4,2: The “Unit Is the light’S Darkness ($1is_ZSü)”
1.4,3: “Darken It and Repeat the Darkening Sü_Z@1Sü)”. What does that tell us? …
That our intellect does indeed produce “Darkness(Sü)”
This example shows us how subtly the AUTHOR mixes “truth” and “untruth” together. The eternal core in us knows the truth. And the AUTHOR knows that. That is how he hooks unsuspecting readers. This is why Lao Tzu said: “Not Knowing what you Know (PUknkn) is Sick(@1)”. Indeed the AUTHOR gets you hooked, due to your “IgNorance(PUkn)” of your ignorance. You can also see from this example how Lao Tzu can help us to get unhooked.
. The AUTHOR depends on the “IgNorance of our igNorance (PUknkn)”. And, as we are doing what we are doing right here, we are learning.
14:11.3,10: “Yet darkness cannot be seen, for it is nothing more than a condition in which seeing becomes impossible.”
14:11.3,10a: The “darkness [referred to by this context] cannot be seen” with our physical eyes. The AUTHOR is talking about the “Eternal(Cn)” in which there is no time and space in which the seeing can take place.
14:11.3,10b: For the eternal “is nothing more than a condition in which seeing [is] impossible.” If you follow the AUTHOR’s intellect, or your own, then “seeing”, as we know it here, “becomes” impossible.
. We will again skip a lot of words as we go on, not because I can’t understand everything the AUTHOR doesn’t want us to understand but because it is too much for me to explain. I will stick to the passages that are easy to chew. “Chew what you Can Chew (A1ptA1)”.
14:11.4,1: “You who have not yet bought all of the darkness you have taught yourself into the light in you, can hardly judge the truth and value of the course.”
. If you don’t understand the COURSE then you can’t evaluate it. Another interesting point is that the AUTHOR's “light [or program is] in you].”.
. What you know about the COURSE, is what “you have taught yourself”. And ,as we can see right here, the more we learn about it the better we are qualified to “judge the truth and value of the course”
14:11.4,5: “Learn of His happiness, which is yours.” ‘Contemplation’. Why? …
The AUTHOR’s.”happiness [, his “will”, or his “knowledge”] is yours,” Not true. …
What is yours is what he wants you to believe his happiness, will or knowledge, is. If he wanted us to know what he knows then he wouldn’t have to hide it with bait, or make it as hard for us to understand as he does. Please Google “obscurantism”. Why is he using it? ...
14:11.4,6: “But to accomplish this, all your dark lessons must be brought willingly to truth, and joyously laid down by hands open to receive, not closed to take.” ‘Contemplation’. Why? …
“…. willingly …. and joyously lay down” your will before the AUTHOR. His will is your will and your will is his. Say to him: Not my will but your will shall be done through me. That’s what ‘contemplation’ “means”. It comes in different “forms” but it always “means” the same thing: Surrender your will to the AUTHOR. And don't use your intellect. Don't think. The AUTHOR and the intellect are opposites. So we always have 'opposition' mixed in with 'contemplation' and 'depreciation'.
. There is more in his sentences than I can intercept. As I keep telling you, I can’t do this job alone. The way to deal with his “obscurantism” is to work on what you can understand and leave what is too obscure for you for later when you are ready for it. “Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)” Don’t bite off more than you can chew. Trying to do what is too difficult for you only leads to confusion and frustration. Nothing is gained by it. It is merely a waste of time and energy.
. The last sentence of 14:11.4 sums it all up.
14:11.4,9: “Never believe that any lesson you have learned apart from Him means anything.” …
======================================================
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ‘OPPOSITION’
Appreciation is the ‘opposite’ of depreciation. The “DyAd(dyad)” is a tremendous thinking (B) and communication (C) tool. Lao Tzu uses it and so does the AUTHOR. The poles of a polarity are not only opposites but complementaries. The more you have learned about ‘depreciation’ the more you already know about appreciation. And appreciation leads up to ‘contemplation’. For instance, if you don’t believe that the AUTHOR is Jesus why would you say to him: Thy will be done through me? …
. As far as possible I let the AUTHOR do the talking. Every time you see words like: “Opposite”, “opposes”. “contrary” or “contradiction” in a sentence, the AUTHOR is using ‘opposition’ as a communication tool. This bit of homework should keep you busy for a while. …
. There are other sentences which don’t have the above four words in them but they still have the “DyAd” in them. Here they are:1:1.50, 7:3.1,10, 7, 7:4.2,6, 7:4.3,8, 7:4.4,4, 7:4.5,2, 7:4.5,4, 7:5.3,6, 7:5.4,1 (2), 7:5.6,1 (2), 7:5.6,3 (4), 7:5.6,5 (6), 7:6.1,5, 7:6.8,7 and 7:6.9,5. The exercise for you is to go to these sentences with the FIND function and “Identify(Mg)” the “DyAd(dyad)” in it. If you have the COURSE you can use it instead of what I have typed, but then you don’t get my interpretation of these sentences.
. If you are already familiar with ‘depreciation’ you will notice that in most sentences there are more than one “meaning” conveyed to the mind.
. With a bit of practice, you will also notice the contradictions and outright lies in what the AUTHOR has dictated. And you might wonder: HOW can he get away with it? …
To answer this question is what this blog is about. It is about social engineering.
. To reach his “goal” the AUTHOR has to fight the “truth”. When you are fighting the truth you are fighting an uphill battle; and when we find out his “tricks and stratagems (at 548a of Plato’s Republic)” he is fighting a losing battle.
==============================================================
. . . . . . . . . . . . ‘DEPRECIATION’
If you use the FIND function for:2:7.1,5, or if you have the book, then you get:
“I would hardly help you if I depreciated the power of your own thinking.” Since this is the most frequent “meaning” in the COURSE it means that the AUTHOR does not want to …
“help you”. The words he uses to ‘Depreciate' the intellect (B) are: “Ego” and “unhealed healer”. That’s what the AUTHOR calls the intellect. “Attack”, “split”, “divide”, “separate”, “divide”, “confuse”, delusion and “delude”, “discomfort”, “untruth”. That’s what our intellect does, according to the AUTHOR. “insane”, “confused”, confusion, “conflicted’, delusion, “deluded”, does “not exist”, “unaware”, “sick”, and “fear”. That’s what it causes, if you believe the AUTHOR.
. This is a sneaky way of getting you to do the work a communicator (C) should be doing. But you would definitely benefit more from doing the work yourself than from just reading what somebody else has come up with. However many words you will FIND are not from the COURSE but are my interpretation. As you ill see, doing it this way saves me a lot of work. But either way, you will learn very little if you do't do some of the work yourself
================================================================
.SYSTEMATICS BENNETT BLAKE
The : I can't deprive you of the work Lao Tzu expects you to do yourself.
