. . . . . . . . . . Tao Te Ching Dictionary-Concordance
A1 Tao162 01 040809 14-16 18 21 23-25 30-32 3435 3738 40-4246-48 51 53 55 59
60 62 65 67 73 77 79 81. "A road; a way; path. From which came the idea of The Way;
the Truth .... A doctrine. A principle. Reason (661 7)" used as an algebraic variable (" ein
algebraisches Zeichen (Richard Wilhelm),,).
B1 Shih38 01 14 32 38 52 64.
C2 Yen149 02 05 08 172223 27 41 43 56 62 66 69 70 73 78 81 "Word .... speak"
D2 Shih6 02 8 1723 30 1 48 52 5 7 9 61 3 4 ... "Affair, thing,; to serve, manage.
1 Yi1. 10 11 142225 39 42 67. 2 Erh7 4267 "Two"
3 San11114 19 42 50 62 67. 4 Ssu3110 1525.
- Hsial. Looks like a T. __ = Chung2 05 21 2541. __
+ Shang1. 08 14 1731 38 41 6675 76. Looks like an inverted T.
E Wang 95 16 25323739 4266.,78 "king"
H Ch'il2 "He, she, it; his; this, that". The H can serve as a mnemonic.
\
Z Chih4. Looks~like a Z ~he, she, it". A pronoun, aign of the possessive
@1 Yu29 01 48 PIcture of the thumb and Index finger formIng ~n 0, as In A-Okay
@3 Fu130 03 12 ____ @4 Tsung40 04 70 ____ @5 Yu61 05 81
@7 Ssul15 07 19 ____ @8 Shui85 08 78 ____ @a Chia08 60 61
@b Mu93 55 61 __ @c Ku188 03 55 __ @d Hsii102 51 61 __ @e Ko30 1661
@f Juil67 04 56 ____ @g Fen120 04 56 ____ @h Ch'en32 04 56
@i Chien169 05 43 ____ @j Ch'iungl16 05 45
@k Hsing59 41 51 (see 65 . for Rule and Measure) ____ @l K'ou30 12 35
@m Fei53 18 36 ____ @n Ch'iu85 62 75
@o Pei1 45 50 70 ____ @p Pingl04 44 71 ____ @q Ch'uan47 15 32
@r Chuang33 30 55 ____ @s Ch'u170 10 53 ____ @t Chiao187 09 3O
@u Chiu30 09 46 ___ @v Sui162 09 17 __ @x Tz'u172 10 28 __ @y Tsai40 10 51
@z Shih24 1 1 50 ~ ___ @AAi303169 __ _ _ @B Hu63 1147 __ @CYu91 11 47
@E Ch' ihl 87 12 43 _ @F Ch'eng1 87 1243 __ @G Fa105 1239
@H T'ing128 1435 __ @IP0641 4 55 __ @J Mei721441 _ _ @KHu61 14 21
@L Huang61 14 21 __ @M Shou1 85 14 38 ____ @N Chang57 36 77
@O Chao10 20 64 ____ @P Chao74 23 53 ____ @S Ch' enl31 18 32
@T Ch'eng4 26 80 __ _ _ @U Chi115 59 81 ____ @V Ch'i156 57 64
@W Chia19 62 69 __ __ @X Chia102 50 80 ____ @Y Chiang85 32 66
@jZ Chieh1 20 27 80
ä = @
äa Chien54 41 54 __ äb ~hien 154 39 56 __ äc Chung61 18 38 __ äd Ch'u73 22 45
ae Ch'iian11 22 55 __ a( Ch'iiehI21 45 58 __ ag "Two( 2)" __ ah Fa85 25 57
ai Fang70 41 58 _ _ aj Hai39 20 49 ___ ak Hsi76 36 49 ___ al Hsi120 63 67
am Hsiao39 18 19 _ _ an Hsin69 15 22 _ _ ao Hua21 37 57 ____ ap Jang64 38 69
aq Jeng64 38 69 __ ar Jung75 2628 ____ as Kan99 32 80 ____ at Kang18 36 78
au Ko 18 28 58 ___ av K'o40 35 69 ____ aw Ku39 39 42 ____ ax Ku115 39 42
ayKuang53 4167 __ az Lai973 80 __ aALil172425 ____ aB Lin16315 80
aC Ma1 86 46 62 aD Men61 2058 aE Mi57 47 57 _ ___ aF Mi162 27 58
~lG i\1ing30 16 51 __ aH Mo85 16 52 __ al Mou149 64 73 ____ aJ Mu75 64 76
aK Nai37 26 74 aL Pai66 29 64 aM Pen 75 26 39 aN Pi130 38 69
aO Pien160 45 81 __ aP Sai32 52 56 __ aQ San66 28 64 ____ aR Sang30 31 69
aS Shang9 60 74 __ aT Shih50 27 30 __ aU Shih149 15 38 __ aV Shu103 56 73
aW Ssu30 74 79 aX Su9 20 80 aY T'ai85 29 35 aZ T'ai133 20 64
â = @
âa Tan85 31 35 âb Ti66 68 69 âc T'0130 36 54 âd Tsao157 26 45 ---- ----
ae Tse154 65 79 __ af Tse154 19 57 __ ag Ts'ui130 64 76 __ ah Tsun41 51 62
âi T'u60 50 76 ____ aj Tui10 52 56 ____ âk Wang8 41 44 __ al Wei38 17 72
am Wen67 19 53 ___ an Yang1 84 34 51 ___ ao Yi102 01 20 ___ ap Ying61 38 73
aq Yu30 31 34 __ ar Yung19 67 73 __ as Yti159 39 80 __ at Ytian6 1 63 79 " . .. hate"
au Ytin7 57 78 av Ch' a40 20 58 ax Chih1 8 28 32. az Tu94 20 25
#1 Mia038 01 1527 ____ #3 Shang42 0323 31 ____ #4 Ch'ung15 04 4245
#5 Shu66 05 27 39 ____ #6 Ch'in19 06 41 52 ____ #7 Ch'ieh1 07 41 67
#8 Ytian85 4 8 36 #9 Hsieh163 07 39 62 #a Yin1 80 02 1241
#b Chan62 31 67 68 -=---=---=-- _ #c Ch'ien18 02 38 66 --- #d Chang59 22 24 57
#e Sui170 02 1429 _ #fRsien154 03 75 7 _ #g Chih61 03 31 3 "the will, purpose"
#h Kao 189 02 39 77 ____ #j Kuo162 35 61 64 ____ #k Ju11 43 50 61
#1 Chia066 02 4243 ____ #m Chen109 21 41 54 ____ #n Ssu9 04 20 67
#0 Ch'i37 51 58 74 ____ #p Ts'064 04 2956 ____ #q Chieh148 042756
#r Ch'i75 19 27 62 ____ #s Hsing38 05 17 49 ____ #t Shih56 22 28 65
#u Chtin30 26 31 70 ___#v Yti95 09 39 70 ___#w Ch'ia048 19 45 57
#x P'in93 06 5561 ____ #y Chien32 43 7678 _____ #z Chihl 09 22 45 58
#A Fu40 09 33 57 ___#B Yi162 09 20 52" ___#C Chin162 41 6269 -
#D Li172 10 2628 ____ #E Ch'i84 104255 ____ #F Ying39 102028
#G Erh10 10 2028 ___#H K'ai169 1027 52 ___#1 T'ui162 09 41 69
#J Pai106 1028 41 ___#K Wei30 1235 63 ___#L Pi60 1238 72
#M Shih147 1435 59 ___#N Yi37 1441 53 ___#0 Run85 14 15 25
#P Sheng120 1427 80 ____ #Q Chin9 1421 67 ____ #R Ching110 22 24 30
#8 Ching119 21 2655 ____ #T Ch' ing85 1539 45 ____ #U Chiu66 275267
#V Chtin159 30 31 50___ #W Fa9 22 24 30 ___#X Hai85 20 32 66
#Y Ha038 30 53 57 ___#Z H030 32 55 64
Ü = #
Üa Hou9 32 37 39 ____ Üb Hsiangl13 31 5578 ____ Üc Hsiung17 163031
Ud Hstieh39 20 48 64 __Ue Hun72 18 2057 __UfHuol13 46 58 69
Dg Kung12 164262 ____ Uh Lao125 30 55 80 ____ Ui Li19 336268
Uj Lil131 9 3138 ____ UkPa040626769 ____ lJlPi169275256
Um Shen85 15 5965 __Un Shih33 15 41 68 __Uo Ssu31 10 1525 ---- ----
lJp Tsai32 24 32 49 ____ Dq Tsa072 30 55 59 ____ Dr Ts048 31 34 79
Us Ts'ung60 21 23 64 ____ Ut Tz'u61 18 1967 ____ Du Wei75 20 55 64
Uv Yen27 53 6672 __Uw Yi123 18 "'1938 __Ux Yti61 2038 65 ---- ----
Oy Chia40 18 54 57 ____ Uz Fu74 53 59 80 ____ UA Sha79 31 7374
UB Sun64 42 48 77
$1 T'ung30 01 042356 __ $3 Tao108 03 195357 ____ $4 Kuang10 04 52 56 58
$6 Ken75 06 1626 59 __$8 Chi52 08 20 64 69 __$9 Pa09 09 15 6267
$0 Chih1 33 10 1416 39 __ $a Luan6 0318 38 64 ____ $b Ts'un39 04 06 07 41
$c Shen113 06 29 39 60 __ $d Ling9 12 19 32 57 ___ $e Tz'u76 12 17 38 72
$f Ju160 13 28 41 44 __$g Chi29 13 21 43 48 __$h Wei60 14 15 36 64
$i Chih77 20 32 35 44- ~ $j Ch'ing159 26 63 69 75 __$k Chung1 66 26 59 66 80
$1 Fan29 25 40 65 78 __ $mJung40 15 162150 ____ $o Ku3136 5558 59
$p Nai4 16 28 5465 __ $q Sha042 192247 63 ____ $r Chi71 323552 81
$s Yi1 08 4243 48 55 ____ $t Ytian1 62 254765 80
%1 Menl6901 06 105256 __ %2 Chieh106 02 17204967
%4 Hsiang152 04 14 21 35 41 %5 Jen9 05 08 18 19 38 __ %8 Chel g77 08 45 5758 78
0/00 Ai6110 1327 4472 __ %b Mei123 023 1 62 80 81 __ %c Tso 09 02 16 37 55 63
%d Shih61 02 10 34 51 77 __%e Shih9 03 53 55 7480 __%f Huo15403 1244 53 64
%g Hsü141 03 05 16 22 53 __ %hAn40 153564 79 80 __ %iPai1060517 1949 66
%j Hu4 05 1023 35 39 __ %k Tung19 05 08 15 4050 __ 0/01 Chi75 16 28 58 59 68
%lll Ch'in147 17 8 44 56 79 __%n Chu3 26 30469 78__ %0 Hai40 35 56 66 73 81
%p Hou27 38 44 50 55 75 _ %q Jih72 23 2648 55 58 __ %r Kua40 19 3942 63 80
%s L075 23 31 35 66 80 __%t Shen99 21 2944 53 70 __ %u Shih184 20 24 53 75 80
%v Sui172 26 2 32 62 80 __ %x Tai78 1625 3244 52 __ %y Wei102 15 20 53 724
^1 Chung109 01 08 2021 31 64 ^4 Ying108 0409 15223945
^5 Yu94 05 15 3263 73 77 ___ ^7-Hsien10 04 0725626667
^0 Pa064 10 19 22425464 ____ ^a Ching174 15 16374557 61
^b Tsai30 20 2122535457 __^c Chih72 03 18 192733 65
^d Wen128 14 35 41 50 80 /\e Hsi50 1423 41 43 70 74
^f Chih133 43 48 55 65 72 80. __ ^g J057 03 36 40557678
^i P'u75 15 19 28 32 37 57 __ ^j Yü184 20 24 53 54 77 79
^k Yi49 02 0929 30 31 55 __^1 Yüan10 01 06 10 15 51 56 65
^m W 062 1 7 20 42 53 57 67
ab Neng130 07-10 14 5 22 3 32447 63 6 7 70 77. "Ability, talent, to be able".
ad Che 125 "Phrase, speech, .... ; sign of end of a paragraph; after other parts
• . of speech, it changes them into nouns, [as we do with - ad or -er]. This
• . character was invented to represent a connection between members of a text:
• . (ACC)". A connective. === al Chung143 01 08 2021 31 64. "All"
bt Erh126 01 0204 0507-10 ... "And yet; still" But.
cm Ch'eng62. 02 07 15 1725 3441 45 47 52 63 64 67 77. To complete, accomplish.
df Nan172. 02 03 12 63 64 65 73 75. "Difficult"; "hard to accomplish (df cm)".
do Wei87 "To do, be; make; cause". "To ... " where the WHAT "To" do is your guess.
dy Liang1 1. 01 60 61 65 73 . "a pair" __ er See ad
ez Yi72. 02 63 64 70 78. ";easy".
f! Yi49. 02 09 29 30 31 55 . "Already, finished, final particle".
gd Shan30. 02 08 1520 273041 49 50 54 58 626.5 66 ... "good, benevolent, skillful".
gt Te60 03 12-142223 29-31 394246 52 56 61 626474 "To get, gain, attain"
he Fu37 3 16 31 32 37 38 50 51 60 61 63 74 When "Fu (he)" is followed by "Wei
• (ho)" the person thus "Identified (Mg)", can be a "Wise Man ('Yimn),' or his
• opposite, because in life and in the Ching, things come in “Pairs (dy)". For
• instance, Who is Sick Sick (he ho @p @p)" does not know and does not
. know that he does not know. He is a Fool. To him, “IgNorance(PU kn) is
• bliss. "That is Why he does Not (feel) Sick (Si YI PU @p)".
ho Wei30. 20 42 53 77 "Yes," he ho 02 08 15 22 41 59 67 70 71 72 75.
is Wei149. 01 06 10 13-17 22 27 30 36 39 52-53 55 5659 65 67 68 69 74 .. "(is) called"
kn Chihl11. 0204 10 14 16 1721 25 28 32 33 ... "To know, perceive". "Wisdom".
At 70.1, the context demands "Understanding" as an equivalent: Some "My
Instructions are Very Easy to Understand and Very Easy to Execute
(myC2%tez%tezpr)." Words that are to be executed are instructions, my equivalent
ofYen(C2). The primary dictionary equivalent of Hsing(pr) is "To walk". other words,
if you "Walk(pr) the "Talk(C2)", you will not only "Know(kn)" what I said, but you will
"Understand(kn)" what I mean.
Lg Ch'angI68. 02 07 09 10 22 24 28 44 51 54 59 67. "Long, excelling".
me Wu30 04 13 16 21 25 29 37 42 43 49 54 57 69 70 74. “I, my, me" ; “we, us".
My Wo62 17 20 42 53 57 67 "I, myself“
mn Jen9. 02 03 05 07 08 122022 25-31 '" "Person, man, men, human"
mt Hsiangl 09. 02 20 32 60 69 "Reciprocal, mutual". connective. (an
"Eye(12*e)") and seen (a "Tree(aJ)") mutually necessitate the "Seeing(oo)".
00 Chienl47. 03 14 19 22 242935 47 52 72 77. "To see, observe".
pt Ko30. "May, can, might, able; sign of potential mood. (0675)"
pr Hsingl44. 02 1224 5 6 729 33 41 47 50 53 62 64 69 70 78. "To walk, act, motion"
sm Hsia042. 32 34 52 60 61 63 80. "small, petty".
to Yli70 08 14 20 23 28 31 32 34 36 40 ... "With, at to," From
ug Wu61. 02 08 20 24 31 42 73. "To hate, dislike". Ugly.
us Yungl 0 1 04 6 11 27 8 31 35 40 5 52 7 .. "To use, employ; expenses; with, by".
ut Ch'i30 28 29 31 36 41 57 67 80. vessel, dish, utensil, tool"
ws Shengl28. 0203050712 192226-29474957.6063646670-73 .. Intelligent.,
kU Ku150. 06 15 28 32 39 41 66. "Valley"
nG Chung120 23 2634 52 55 63 64. "End, all, finis" To the end
wU Wu93 1421 45 72930 1 3 55 57 "Article, thing; matter, substance"
C' Ch'li28 02 12 20 21 29 38 72 "To leave, go; dismiss"
Cê Cheng87 03 08 22 66 68 73 81 "To contest, wrangle"
Ch Ch'u141 02 08 2426 30 31 38 66 76 77 "To dwell (5656)" on
Cn Ch'ang50 01 03 162728 323437 46 49 51 5255 61 6465 7479. Scale in a
. big building (Probably the department of weights and measures).
Cu Ch'ul7 01 05 10 1835 47 50 51 "Out, to from"
Cü Chü44 02 08 25 31 38 72 80 "To dwell;" in
Fy Fei175 01 07 31 39 53 60 65 "uncommon, infrequent (FyCg)"
. "A primitive with two sides opposite to each other, and so the notion of opposition,
negation, wrong, not. (ACC)"
Ho H030 02 04 18 42 55 56 79 "To unite; filling; harmony with"
Hs Hsin61 03 08 1220 49 55 "Heart, mind; center"
Hu Hu062 042429 31 42 61 73 "Perchance, if, may, or, someone"
Ja Jan86 17 21 23 25 26 51 53 54 57 64 ... "Certainly ... however; adverb of suffix"
Jo J057 03 36 40 55 76 78 "Weak, pliable~ yveak of purpose"
Ju Y0u75 10 36 43 52 55 76 78 “Yielding, soft, tender, mild”.
Kg Kung19 02 09 17 22 24 34 77 "Merit, efficacy, service"
Kn Kuan147 01 16 26 54 "Look out, examine, inspect"
Ku Kuei154 03 09 13 1720 27 37 39 51 56 62 64 .. . "Expensive, honorable; valuable"
Mg Ming30 01 14 21 25 32 34 37 41 4447 To "Name"; to identify, to see, to
. recognize, to understand, .. . fame"
Mn Min83 03 10 193253 57 58 64-66 72 74 75 80. "people, citizens"
Se Shen158 07 09 13 16 26 44 52 54 66 "body, trunk; personal; lifetime"
Sg Sheng 100 02 7 10 5 25 30 4 "To beget, produce, birth; raw; strange; life, grow"
Si Shih72 02 6 7 10 12-4 6 21 2 4 26 .. "To be; yes, correct; such, that, this"
Sü Hsüan95 01 06 10 15 51 5665 "dark, mystic, abstruse" __ Te See "gt"
Tn T'ien37 "Heaven . .. " Level B on Plato's "Divided Line (509d)"
Tu Tzu132 07 09 1721-2532-34373951 57647273 "Spontaneous, naturally;
• from; self, personally" "Itself (TuJa)"
Tz Tz'u77 01 14 15 1921 23 3954 576265 73 "This here".
Wn Wan140 26 "all things, nature (WnwU)" 01 245 8 163247 39 40 2 51 62 4 76
Xi Hsi12 "Interjection of inquiry, doubt, admiration" 04 15 1720 21 25 34 58
Ye Yeh5 03 20 24 29 32 53 55 67 76 "Also; final particle"
Yi Yi or Il1 l 31 46 63 65 67 69 74. "A final particle denoting that the sense has been
fully expressed. (4312)"
Yli YU134 08 20 22 35 36 44 65 66 77 79 81 "Particle of query, exclamation"
• "Give; with, by; than; and"
Zi Tzu39 04 25 31 52 54 55 62 "Child, son; seed, sir; noun-ending"
Zu Tsu157. 17 1923 28 33 35 41 444648 64 77 .. see 46 for our teacher's definition
FU Fu60 14 16 1928 52 58 64 80 "To repeat, again"
HO H09 13 20 21 26 50 54 57 62 74 "Who? What? How?"
H1J Hu4 05 10 23 35 39 "Interrogative adverb; exclamation"
JO Jo140 06 08 13 15 20 32 37 41 45 59 60"If, like, as to, as; to follow"
JU Ju38 05 09 20 39 62 64.
KU Ku66 01 02 07 08 11-15 .. 6774 78."Cause; old; to die; therefore" Thus
LI Li 18 08 11 19 36 53 56 57 73 81 "Sharp, clever, gain, interest" Profit
MO Mo140 09 22 32 38 46 51 59 66 69 70 78 "Not, do not, if, perhaps" Nobody
MU Mu80 01 20 25 52 59 "Mother" The one that gives. ~irth.
PI Pi61 30 36 44 63 66 79 "Certainly, must, necessary" V
PU Pu1 "No, not" As a prefix, Un-, Ig-, Im- etc. Not in 11 13 40 53 and 75 .
SO S063 0708 13 192022 30 32 33 425058 61 62 ... " ... relative, pronoun, which"
TA Ta37 "Great, noble, best; very" "highway, true doctrine (TAA1)" Big See 25.
TE Te60 03 12-1422 23 29-31 39 42 44 46 52 56 61 62 64 74. "Virtue, goodness,
• principles in action; energy; conduct"
TI Ti32 01 05-08 23 25 32 39 50 "The earth ... "
TO T036 05 22 44 57 63 .. . "Many, much, ... how much? mostly, too n1uch; more"
WU 'Nu86 "Not, without," Nonexistence. The opposite of "Yu (YU)"
YI Yi or 19 "According to; To use; with, for ... a connective By-means-of'.
YU Yu74 "To have, be; yes" Existence, With. The opposite of "Wu (WU)"
YU Y-U76 01 03 15 192934363739465761 646677 "Desires; to desire, long for"
04 Chiu4 07 15 1623 33 44 58 5967 __08 Yi8 23 25 32 37 42 49 50 60 63
-~--
09 Hsin9 08 1721 23 384963 81 ____ 12 Ping12 30 31 5057 69 7680
18 Tse 18 "And so, then; pattern, rule" Follow
19 Sheng19 31 364561 789 73 68 ____ 29 Ch'u29 12293084857 61 72
30 Ku30 14 5 21 2 62 5 8 __ 31 Ku031 "Country, kingdom, nation" Organization
32 Chih32 1429 35 64 69 74 79 ____ 37 Shih37 "To lose"
39 Shu39 "Who? Which? What?" ____ 40 Shou40 05 09 16 28 32 37 52 67
41 Ch~ang41 "To take in the hand, hold, ... ; to c~nsider; just about to"
42 HSla042 32 34 52 6061 63 80 _ _ _ 57 Ch'lang57 "To force, compel"
60 I-Iou60 02 07 1430 3865 6667__ 66 Kan66 03 306467 69 73 74
70 Yu70 See "to" ___ 72 Ming72 10 16 22 24 27 33 36 41 52 55 65 “Insight”
73 Yueh73 14 16 24 25 52 55 62 67. " ... (a) used as an expletive (2712)"
77 Kuei77 14 16 20 2228 34 52 60 ____ 78 Ssu78 06 33 42 50 67 74 75 76 80
85 Chih85 03 08 10 32 57 59 60 64 65 75
86 Yen86 02 15 1723 25 30 34 60 "How? why? final affirmative".
Dictionary equivalents are the most objective ones we can get, but many clear examples
show us that they are not always what Lao Tzu means. We must get the meaning of a
character from the context our teacher has put them in. For that to happen the whole must
emerge through its parts. In other words, the sentence must emerge through its words
before we can be sure what the words in it may mean. This is a paradox that can only be
solved by doing the "Practice(pr)" our teacher tells us to do.
There are still some gaps to be filled and errors to be corrected, but this dictionary is now
good "Enough(Zu)" for you to use on the chapters of the main Text that have the period
behind the chapter number. .. May 8, 2005. Dec. 26, 2006: Main text is still in shambles.
But my time is more usefully invested in jnana yoga.
September 22, 2010. I had my messy dictionary concordance scanned. Lots of editing, lots of work. Probably more errors. But this is the best I can do. As I just said my time is better invested in jnana yoga. But this concordance has been very useful for me over the years. So I hope tat you can also make use of it. The Ching and the Neiye need a lot of syntactic work done on them. The more I get into my own dharma, the more I get out of other people’s dharma. The awersion I feel for doing other people’s dharma is real. If more people get into their own dharma then THE DIVISION OF LABOUR would be established naturally. A healthier society would naturally arise.
============================================================
July 11, 2009
. We have to go to File#4. This one is getting too full and therefore too slow.
======================================================
July 9, 2009
. On page 9 of The HeartMath Solution we read: "As the brain begins to develop, it grows from the bottom up." This is what science has discovered.
. The Law of Correspondence is universal. Corresponding processes are not identical with each other, but they are analogous. The Hindus say that things develop from the inside out.
. "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths." The HOLY SCIENCE Sutra14.
Purusha (E1-E2-E3) is in the "Center( =)". It produces the Atman (A) around itself. The Atman produces Buddhi (B) around itself. Buddhi produces Manas (C) around itself. And Manas produces the Indriyas (D), the physical senses, around itself. Then, after four phases, there is a break. The world (E8) is still around us but we no longer identify with it. It is no longer part of the subject but it is objective to us. Our body is part of the world, but it is different from it in that we identify with it. When our body is sick, we don't say: "It is sick." but: "I am sick."
. The Hindus "say that the power of the senses is great. But greater than the senses is the mind. Greater than the mind is Buddhi, reason; and greater than reason is He -- the Spirit in man and in all. (Gita 3.42. Mascaró's translation)" Above Buddhi (B) is the Atman (A) but it is not spelled out here because just as "Heart(Hs)" can mean Atman (A), Buddhi (B), Manas (C) or body (D) so can the Atman. In order not to cause confusion the word is not spelled out here, even though some translators fill it in.
. We have to be careful when applying the Law of Correspondence because of these breaks. Lao Tzu tells us the same thing: The "Big(TA)"
"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)."
. Notice the break. After four phases there is always a break. Lao Tzu shows that more clearly in chapter 25. We can also see it in the four season, the four phases of a pendulum cycle and, best of all, in the 4-fold IBM computer programming system, which is based on the Aristotelian tetrad. At Ching 25.3, Lao Tzu is "Naming(Mg)" the four "sources", or parts of the tetrad. They are: Tao (A), Heaven (B), Earth (D) and the "King [C] is Also a part of the Big ( E08TA)" Tao.
. The character for "King" looks like letter E but the vertical line goes down in the center. The horizontal line in the middle is the shortest. It represents "Humanity(%5)". Next comes the line on top. It represents "Heaven(Tn)". The longest line is the one on the bottom. It represents "Earth(TI)".
. Please don't let this bit of systematics intimidate you. But systematics actually helps us to understand the Ching. However it does take a while to get used to.
. I am 74 years old. At age 9, due to a lucid moment, my search for truth became more intentional. In 1964, after taking the 7 Week IBM computer programming course, I began to lecture on the tetrad at the Toronto Theosophical Society. In 1973, I went to England to study systematics, under J.G. Bennett, in a one year course. Now, in 2009, things are slowly coming together like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. This is some kind of resumé. With my experience I can save you time but I can't do your thinking for you. The best Way to develop these ideas, and to get them across to the right people, is a study group. Where two or three are gathered together in the name of truth, it will be in the midst of them. There is still a lot I have to learn. That's why I said: "to the right people".
. Sill page 9:
".... the thinking brain then grows out of the emotional regions." Can you see what trouble the scientists are causing me with this discovery? ...
I just said " Buddhi (B) produces Manas (C) around itself." So? ...
HOW can the intellectual center (B) grow out of the emotional center (C)? ...
We now have to take a closer look at the 4-fold cycle of the pendulum. ...
The four phases are as follows: Rest, Acceleration. Maximum velocity (all potential energy has been converted to kinetic energy), Deceleration and Rest again. The cycle is "Complete(cm).
. What I have described to you so far is our downward "Movement(%k)" from level A above to level D below. "CycliciTy ($lad). Tao'S Movement (A1 Z%k)".
. Just as the bob reaches maximum velocity when it has reached the lowest point in its cycle, so we have reached bottom when we are totally immersed, or enclosed, in a physical body (D). To complete the cycle, we must move back up from D to A again. Just let me quote how the Hindus describe it when we get back up to level B again:
. "MANKIND. When Manomaya Kosha becomes withdrawn, Jnanamaya Kosha (the body of intelligence ....) becomes perceptible. The Atom, acquiring the power of determining right from wrong, becomes man, the rational being in the creation. (Sutra 14)"
. Scientists are now independently discovering what the Hindus, Lao Tzu and others have been telling us for a long time. We just didn't listen because WHAT they told us was not scientific "Enough(Zu)". Now, finally, science is catching up to them. This is why I believe that our two authors have come across an idea whose time has come.
======================================================
July 9, 2009
. After I put out a section on my blog , I get a printout of it to see what mistakes I have made. There are a few words missing but that's not serious. But there is a good one near the end of the last section. There I say: "In the Neiye chapter 14 we have ....". Wouldn't it be nice if it were chapter 14 instead of chapter 4? Why? ...
In the June 16 section I said: In "Neiye chapter 14 .... there are 22 lines. The commentaries on most .... will be short, others will be long. The one on 4A will be very long." You can say that again. But if the four lines from chapter 4 had been in chapter 14 it would look really good. Why? ...
I get the HeartMath Solution, go to page 7, give the quote from Sainy-Exupéry, which leads up to the four lines. I mean, aren't "I (B-C-D)" smart? Of course my ego (B-C-D) would like to take the credit for that. But even before I noticed the mistake, my heart (A) said to my head (B): Let's be honest, the wisdom (E1-E2-E3) didn't come FROM me, it came THROUGH me and it caused us to do what we did. With a bit of humility, we can step back and "see an order in its (the "BigTao's (TAA1)") accomplishments."
. With bhakti yoga this humility comes naturally. Credit for this "Insight(72)" (A) goes to the authors of The HMS. They recommend “appreciation”. Here you have some advise of HOW to learn it. To see an “Order in Its Accomplishments (4p Hcm)” is to see its wisdom at work. And then we can say: Wow, isn’t IT smart? …
July 8, 2009
. On page 8 of The HEARTMATH SOLUTION we have:
. "Similar perspectives are found in the Hebrew and Christian bibles as well as in Chinese, Hindu, and Islamic traditions. The Old Testament saying in Proverbs 23:7, "For as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he," is further developed in the New Testament in Luke 5:22, "What reason ye in your heart?" .... In the Kabbalah the heart is the Central Sphere".
. In the Ching and the Neiye "Center( =)" can represent the heart, while "Heart(Hs)" can represent the heart (A), the intellect (B), the mind (C) or the brain (D). If only the heart (A) is meant, another word may be used. From this we can see that the higher can represent the lower but the lower can't take the place of the higher. This bit of knowledge can cause difficulties in translating passages which we have Hsin(Hs) in it. For instance at 4N (Neiye Chapter 14 line 14) we have:
"Hsin is the Means to Store Hsin (HsYI4NHs)".
. 4N = Ts'ang140: "To hide, conceal, store". These four characters can be translated as:
The "Heart is a Means to Store the Head". Or:
The "Head is a Means to Sore the Heart". Or:
The "Mind is a Means to Hide the Head". Or:
"It is the body in by means of which heart, intellect and mind are concealed."
. Makes you think, doesn't it. It is supposed to. Without the knowledge of what Hsin(Hs) can represent there is no problem. Hsin means heart, that's all there is too it. But as you gain knowledge, you come up with questions and answers you can't get without that knowledge.
. "Appreciation" is one of the keywords in HeartMath. It takes work to learn to "appreciate" the wisdom in the Ching and the Neiye. Artists (A) appreciate beauty. The Neiye is a 100% poetry (A). Philosophers (B) love (philos) or appreciate the truth. Ideally, politicians (C) love justice and honesty, while the pragmatists (D) love goodness in general.
. Still page 8:
. "In tradtional Chinese medicine the heart is seen as the seat of connection between the mind and the body, forming a bridge between the two. It is said that the heart-blood houses the SHEN[$c] which can be translated as both 'mind' and 'spirit'."
2A (Neiye chapter 12 line 1) "Shen, Nobody Knows its Limits ($cMOkn%l)"
3A (Chapter 13 line 1) "There-is Shen Naturally Within (YU$cTuÜp)" us.
. Still page 8:
. "Whereas in the West, thought [B] is seen as exclusively a function of the brain [D] the Chinese language itself expresses a different perspective. The Chinese characters for 'thinking,' 'thought,' 'intent,' 'virtue,' and 'love,' all include the character [the simple] for 'heart [Rad. 61]'".
. Before I got the book, I didn't leave through it to find out if the authors had anything to say about the Chinese language. The title was good "Enough(Zu)" for me. Now that I came across this passage, I want to remind you that I got this book for fifty cents purely by chance, if you want to believe that.
. Sill page 8:
. "All these conceptions have a common view of the heart as harboring an 'intelligence' that operates independent of the brain yet in communication with it. Are all of the cultures that share this view incorrect, perhaps not scientifically sophisticated enough to understand intelligence?"
. What is happening now is, that science has become sophisticated "Enough(Zu)" to help us understand these views of these ancient cultures. And I am thinking of the Tao Te Ching and the Nei Yeh in particular.
========================================================
July 7, 2009
. Yesterday I saw The Queen and I, a "Documentary about Iran's former empress, Farah Pahlavi". I like movies like that because you can learn more about US. strategies in 99 minutes than you get from reading books. First they used the Communists to dethrone the Shah and then they hanged them in public. Then it turned out that the Ayatolla, they have used to replace the Shah with, is not as obedient as he was supposed to be. He accepted their help but now he is no longer willing to go along with them. Which means? ...
That the CIA has to get rid of him.
. Movies like The Queen and I and The Revolution shall not be Televised, shed light on what is happening in Iran right now, and what is going to happen between Venezuela and Honduras. But let me return to The HEARTMATH SOLUTION:
. Page 6: "When I (Doc) founded the Institute of HeartMath in 1991, my colleagues and I wanted to understand how the physical [D] heart communicates with the body [D] and how it influences our whole system."
. The heart, as a physical subsystem within our physical body, is subject to scientific enquiry. But "our whole system" is more than the physical body (D). It includes ...
our mind (C), our intellect (B) and our soul (A).
. We are 4-fold beings and the Law of Correspondence applies to all four levels. They are analogous to each other. As above, in "Heaven so Below (Tn -)" on earth. Which means? ...
That what is discovered on the material level, by means of science, is analogous to the three levels above level D. This bit of philosophy (B) explains why there are such astonishing insights to be found in The HEARTMATH SOLUTION. Science has reached the point where the discoveries made on the material (D) level shed light on the emotional (C), the intellectual (B) and the spiritual (E1-E2-E3) levels. Why didn't I say, spiritual (A)? ...
Because A is the "Door, Dasamadwara", between the E1-E2-E3 and the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) "TriAds( 3ad)". Lao Tzu also talks about systematics. Evidence that systematics is important is that the Illuminati have infiltrated the DuVersity and have deleted a significant part of a file. The fact that they don't want us to understand systematcs means? ...
That we have to understand it. Lao Tzu uses the words "Monad($1)", "Dyad(dyad)" and "TriAd( 3ad)". These are N-Term systems in which N = 1, 2 and 3. He also describes the tetrad in chapter 25.
. I have studied under J.G Bennett in England for one year. He has helped me to get started on the Tao Te Ching, but now I get more out of the Ching than I get out of THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE. "Too-many Words (TOC2)".
. Still page 6: "The word 'heart' has meaning to almost everyone, of course. When we think of 'heart' we think of the physical heart as well as qualities such as wisdom [B], love [A], compassion [A], courage [C], and strength" (D). Associating strength with physical (D) "strength" is valid if the context refers to the physical dimension. So what we are told here is that "heart" can mean anything from level A right down to level D, where it is a pump. And there is no contradiction in this. We are 4-fold beings.
. At Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE we are told that:
. "Purusha [E1-E2-E3] is covered by five KOSHAS or sheaths"
"Heart, the 1st kosha. .... [It], the seat of bliss, ananda, is called Aanadamayakosha" (A).
"Buddhi, the 2nd .... the seat of knowledge, jnana," (B)
"Manas, the 3rd .... the mind," (C)
"Prana, the 4th .... composed of the organs of action as described before" (D)
"Gross matter, the 5th Kosha. This .... outer coating, which, becoming Anna, nourishment, supports this visible world" (E8 -E12).
. The higher creates the lower for the purpose of working more directly and efficiently on the lower and denser levels of creation. It is not designed to work on the level on which the higher can work more efficiently than the lower. This is why the higher can do what the lower can do, but the lower can't do what the higher can do.
. For instance, I have to do this writing, but if I could write as well and efficiently as those, whose dharma it is to write, I wouldn't need them.
"KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2); WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" how to think as well as those whose dharma it is to think.
. "Not Knowing that you don't Know (PUknkn) how to think as well as the thinkers do is Sick (@p)". Lao Tzu has hit the nail on the head. The reason that the "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" this, is lack of humility, inability to appreciate the truth which when known will set us free and the work of the social engineers.
. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The "TalkErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" this and the social engineers make sure that they don't. The Illuminati know what people put out on the Internet. They are using it. And as long as the communicators don't communicate it, they have nothing to worry about.
. As it is, the Illuminati seem to be the only ones who benefit from what I am saying here. In this sense, I am working for them just as David Icke does. The Illuminati have been playing their game for a long time, they are hard to beat but it is not impossible.
. Way back on my first Website: NewAgeTao.org I wrote open letters to George Jonas, at the Toronto Sun. Friends came to me independently and told me that Jonas must be reading my letters because he is using the information which I gave him in his columns. It is important to note that not I, but others noticed independently of me that Jonas was picking my brain and using some of the information in it in his own columns. In this sense I have been working for the Illuminati for a long time.
. The fact that I was critical of him does not prevent him from making use of what I told him. This is how I learned about this social engineering trick.
. Since I knew that he is an agent, I took one of his columns and did some kind of back engineering on it. I worked on it for a long time. I still remember that I was onto something. But as I looked at it recently and I can't even understand it myself anymore. To get back into it alone is a waste of time. But to go in there with a communicator would be worth his while. My analysis of Jonas' column must have touched a sensitive spot. I believe that it is the reason that my name got on the flight list to Cuba. Having said this, might cause them to make a third attempt to stop me from making these unfounded "Ridiculous(*141)" accusations.
. They will probably succeed the next time. If they fail three times in a row, people might start to believe me. But putting out this information here on this blog is a certain safeguard. Trying to do it again might do more harm to them than good.
. Human life means nothing to them. Putting my name on the flight-list to Cuba is just a matter of routine to them. But if it is bad strategy then they might reconsider it.
. Page 7: Saint-Exupéry is quoted: "And now here is my secret, a very simple secret; it is only with the heart that one can see rightly: what is essential is invisible to the eye."
. The Tao "Listen to It (@H Z) and you Can't Hear (PU^d) it but it can be
Identified As Soundless (Mg73^e)" to the physical ear.
"Tao It Coming-out of your Mouth (A1 ZCu@l .... is Not Enough to Hear (PUZu^d)".
In the Neiye chapter 14, we have: We do
"Not See Its Form (PUoo H@k) we do
Not Hear Its Sound (PU^d H4o)
But(bt) "we can see an order in (Roth)" Its Accomplishments (4p Hcm). we
Call It Tao (is ZA1)".
. The authors of the Ching and the Neiye are telling us that there are things that can't be "Seen(oo)", "Heard(^d)" or "Touched (gt)" with our physical(D) eyes, ears or hands. The authors of The HEARTMATH SOLUTION tell us that we can "Accomplish(cm)" it with our "Heart(Hs)" (A). I think that Lao Tzu would agree.
. I tried "Ear" Rad. 128 for Sheng(4o). I was lucky. It means "Sound ....".
. For Hsü(4p) I tried Rad. 110 first. It was the wrong one. Then I tried Rad.53. It had to be because Hsü(4p) consists of only two simples. It means: "Preface, seriatim, series". For the translation I have used Roth's equivalents. This example shows nicely that the poetry demands interpretations and that Roth has done an excellent job here. To be continued.
========================================================
July 3, 2009
. In the June 30 section I complained about authors who tell us all about the problems we have but who don't give us any solutions. This causes us to accept passively what our rulers are doing to us. Why? ...
If there seems to be nothing we can do about it then: What can you do about it. Notice that when this statement is made, there is no question mark behind it. It is like a statement of fact. This is just one example of social engineering. Instead of asking: What can we, collectively, do about the social engineers? They get is to say: What can you do about it. According to certain authors, there is nothing we can do about them. But is it true? ...
To get us to passively accept what they are doing to us is their job. They are professionals. So we must not underestimate them but this doesn’t mean that we can’t do anything about them. What is it we can do? …
Find out WHY and HOW they are doing WHAT they are doing. If we don't ask these questions we would be better of without David Icke's books.
. Because I was preoccupied with SOLUTIONS, The HEARTMATH SOLUTION came to my attention in the Parkdale Public Library: I don't normally borrow or buy books because I am too busy with the Ching and the Neiye but this time I took the book and my library card to the checkout and, after the clerk put the book under the scanner, she told me that I can't borrow this book. "Why?" Because you can only buy it. "How much"? "Fifty cents will do."
. When I came home, workers were in my room doing renovations. They had turned off the power. So I couldn't do that terrible work, you have an example of in the first three lines of the June 30 section. For "WordErs(C2er)" this type of work is no problem but "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)", for me it is an energy draining effort. Also losing over a page of my work is discouraging. How do I know that my unconscious parts, or ego-states are not going to sabotage me again? So not being able to use my computer was a welcome excuse to start reading the book.
. In the Foreword we get: HEARTMATH "recognizes the heart [A] as the central rhythmic force in the body [D] and shows us how to use the coherent power of love [A] to manage our thoughts [B] and emotions [C]." From this quote alone, and there are more I have to skip, you can already see that this book is down my alley. If forced to say which one of the four yogas is being taught here, I would have to say bhakti (A) yoga. But ...
science (B-C-D) ads an intellectual (B), a mental (C) and a practical (D) dimension to it. Thanks to HEARTMATH it has become possible to practice your own yoga along with the other three. Lao Tzu says: The "Tao is Without Action (A1WUdo)". The Hindus say the same thing about the Atman (A). Were these teachers wrong? Did we not understand them? Or are things changing in these last days? The authors of The HEARTMATH SOLUTION bring us scientific evidence which demonstrates that the heart (A) does take "Action(do)".
. Let me just pick the following quote from the Introduction: "....our theory is that the heart links us to a higher intelligence through an intuitive domain were spirit and humanness merge."
. If you have followed me for a while, you know that I associate "spirit" with J.G Bennett's E1-E2-E3 triad and "humanness", our ego, with the B-C-D triad. And "the Door, Dasamadwara" (A) is "were spirit and humanness merge." See THE HOLY SCIENCE Sutra 13 about that. By now the power is back on but I just love reading and commenting on this book. This beats the physical and mental work the "WordErs(C2er)" should be doing. If no "WordEr" is willing to do his dharma I have to do it. But right now, I might as well keep going on this book. Even though the lookup table of the 400 Chinese characters is very important, through this book I might learn to handle unpleasant work more positively and efficiently. So let me continue with a quote from the same page: “With stress increasing in the world, ...." Who is intentionally creating much avoidable stress? ...
I can see right here that the Illuminati and their social engineers must hate this book. And if they are afraid of it then they don't want us to know that. According to Lao Tzu, Hsiao(*a41) is any reaction by our rulers which is supposed to make, WHAT is a problem to them, disappear.
. On the same page we read: "As people wake up to new possibilities, they become motivated to better manage themselves mentally [B] and emotionally [C] in areas they've avoided or not known to address." What needs to be added here is, that much avoidance and ignorance is programmed into us by the social engineers. It’s their job to dumb us down, to "Constantly Cause the People (Cn%eMn) to be Without Knowledge (WUkn) and Without the Desire (WUYÜ)" to know. I visited http://www.heartmathsolution.com They are doing well. HOW are the Illuminati going to stop that? The truth in what it is. Social engineers can make it more difficult for us to find the truth but they can't make a law against seeking the truth. They have a problem: While having to pretend that we have a democracy, they must prevent us from establishing a true democracy. They have done a terrific job with the German and the Canadian Green party but they can't eradicate the principles on which these parties are based. They can't make the truth disappear.
. The Illuminati train and pay social engineers to "Cause(%e)" us to say: "What can you do about it." instead of asking: "What can we, collectively, do about them?" Once we know WHAT they are doing, figuring out WHY and HOW they are doing it, is the next step. David Icke helps us to understand WHAT our problem is but without telling us WHY we have these problems, HOW they are produced and WHAT we can do about them, the information he gives us is dangerous.
. I only got to page 22 so far but I can already see that here is a clear SOLUTION to our problems in that book. The Illuminati hate books that give us SOLUTIONS. The question is now: ...
WHAT are they doing about it? ...
. Voltaire's Bastards and Angels & Demons describe our problem very well but the Illuminati, which these books are about, seem to feel that these books are doing more harm to them than good. HOW have I reached this conclusion? ...
I have read some books John Ralston Saul has written after his Voltaire's Bastards and to me it looks like damage control. We know from his previous book WHAT Ralston knows about the Illuminati but in his later books he seems to have forgotten all of that. What does that tell us? ...
That the Illuminati don't want us to find out about them. What does that tell us? ...
That we have to find out about them. At Ching 41.1 Lao Tzu shows us HOW the very attempt of preventing us from finding out the truth can be a "Means To find out the Truth (YIdoA1)". All it takes is the "Knowledge(kn)" of HOW to look for it. Here, at Ching 41.1, we have an example of the kind of "Truth(A1)" which, when known, can set us free.
. In his LOVE The Real Da Vinci CODE, Dr. Leonard G. Horowitz has shown very clearly that there is no CODE in the Da Vinci CODE. There is more CODE in Dan Brown's previous book, ANGELS & DEMONS, than there is in his later book(s). Horowitz has shown that damage control is applied. He says on page 100 that the Illuminati and their social engineers "Ridicule(*a41)" or "discredit reputable books, films, scientists and research discoveries that might otherwise establish widespread publicity, credibility and thus contribute greatly to educate society." But in order to manifest their global dictatorship called "The New World Order" they must prevent the people from finding out the truth which, when known collectively, will set us free.
. On page 99 he said: "...I have observed numerous times astonishing scientific revelations and major breakthroughs disappeared from public view, almost immediately, lost to obscurity. I do not perceive this as idiosyncratic, or simply chance. There are methods of mass-mediated mind-control being used." Unless we know (B) and believe (C) WHAT the social engineers are doing, we are not motivated to find out HOW they are doing it. And only when we know that can we do something about them. Right now, only they know it and that is “Not Enough(PUZu)”.
. Leonard's approach works for some human types but not for all. Still, his book is highly recommendable because you might be a type his method works for. And then Leonard puts you into the position where you can help others. From this you can see that even books which, only help some people directly, are a threat to our political masters.
. Unlike THE SECRET which, as its authors claim, works for "everybody", The HEARTMATH SOLUTION does seem to work for everybody because everybody has a heart. I will give some quotes and comment on some passages in that book but I have to skip a lot of valuable information if I want to return to the Chinese character lookup table and with that tool return to Neiye 14.
Page 1: "In order for the mind [B], emotions [C] and body [D] to perform at their best, the heart [A] and brain [D] must be in harmony with one another. Learning to align[%8] these two integrated but separate sources of [our] intelligence [B] is" taught in this book.
Usually, when relating an English word, like "Align(%8)", to a Chinese character, I put it in quotes, capitalize it and follow it with its two-digit identifier (in brackets). This I can't do in a quote but you can see that I am using here the same conventions I am using in the rest of this blog. The convention of identifying the level a statement is about with letters A, B, C and D (in brackets) is not only useful in Desmond Lee's translation of the Republic but for any text which is based on the tetrad. Identifying the "Brain" (D) as part of our material (D) body is unusual but accurate. If we are "to align these two integrated but separate" systems, A and D, then we need B-C as the connective (=) between them. Please don't let this bit of systematics intimidate you. I didn't learn it in a day either.
. Page 4: "We now have scientific evidence that the heart sends us emotional [C] and intuitive [A] signals to help govern our lives. Instead of simply pumping blood, it directs and aligns[%8] many systems in the body so that they all can function in harmony[Ho]. And although the heart is in constant[Cn] communication with the brain [D], we now know that it makes many of its own decisions." What science finds out now and information we can now get through the Internet, Lao Tzu has already given us 2500 years ago. Actually Gurdjieff and transactional analysts have told us that there is an intellectual center (B) in the emotional center (C) and an emotional center in the moving center (D). This explains why each of these centers can make "its own decisions". The vexing problem of freedom of choice is connected to this. As our intellect is responsible to the spirit within and above it, so our mind is responsible to the intellect within and above it. The center above the one we are at home at has limitations just as we have but the center within us seems to be "Without(WU)" time and spatial limitations.
. Same page: "....And we'll show how that intelligence [B] can have measurable impact on our decision-making (C), our health problems [D], our [intellectual, mental and physical] productivity at work, our children's learning ability, our families, and the overall quality of our lives."
. If you ask me which one of the four yogas is being taught here, I would have to say bhakti (A) yoga, the path of devotion. But science (B-C-D) ads an intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D) dimension dimension to it. Which means that now we can all become bhakti yogis without having to give up our own yoga or dharma.
. If our soul (A), the Atman (A) or Tao (A) "can have measurable impact on" level B, C and D then it is "Active(do)". The Hindus and Lao Tzu told us that the "Tao is Always Without Action (A1CnWUdo) But(bt) ....". Does that mean that the Hindus and Lao Tzu were wrong? That things are changing in these last days? Or that we didn't understand these teacher well "Enough(Zu)"? ...
. Our intellectual (B), mental (C) and physical (D) productivity is also significantly determined by our understanding and application of THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Just Google:
protocols of zion division of labor
. The wise elders of Zion are not talking about the true Indian caste system but the one which was corrupted by the Brahmins (B). It is described at Gita 18. 41 - 44. By analogy, what we are told about the "Green Party", here in Canada today, is not about the original real Green Party but about the corrupted one. If the Brahmins could pull it off thousands of years ago what do you think the Illuminati can pull off today? ...
. Page 5: "The heart isn't mushy or sentimental. It's intelligent [B] and powerful, and we believe that it holds the promise for the next level of human development and for the survival of our world. .... Technology is rapidly linking the world through satellite TV and the Internet, creating both opportunity and challenge"
. Some challenges are listed next. But one, which is left out, must be mentioned now. The people who put out dis-information and debilitating content in their mass media and on the Internet are well trained professional social engineers. We must not "Underestimate($j)" them. Unless we know HOW and WHY they are doing WHAT they are doing we can't deal with them. As it is, they even get away with a blatant lie like 9/11.
. WHY are they doing it? ...
To answer these questions we must be able to outthink the social engineers. And Lao Tzu can teach us the Way or HOW to do that. Why? ...
Because they love money (D) and political (C) power; real philosophers (B) love (philos) the truth.
. Next, still on the same page, comes a quote from Albert Einstein: "The significant problems we face today cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."
. That statement was made long ago. What we must ask now is: ...
If you try to answer these questions before reading on you will benefit from your efforts. Even if you don't get the same answer I came up with, and especially if you found out that I am wrong. You benefit because your effort enables you to understand and evaluate my statements. You can't know whether I am wrong if you don't understand WHAT I am saying. How do you know that I don't purposely put in mistakes as my unconscious parts. or ego-states, are doing? ...
An important question is: Who is creating these problems? WHY and HOW? ...
. Truth is the lifeblood of democracy. Victory of democracy (A) is defeat of timocracy (B) just as victory of the truth is defeat of falsehood.
. Still on page 5: "Developing the capacity to deal with the challenge of living in a stressful, ever-changing world is now more important than ever."
. Not every system is right for every human type. The Tao Te Ching is primarily addressed to jnana yogis, to those who are on the path of "Knowledge(kn)", or the "KnowErs (kner)". Translations and commentaries which water down what Lao Tzu is trying to teach us were necessary to turn the Tao Te Ching into the bestseller it has become but now those, who have the capacity for it, must "Diligently study And Practice (#6btpr)" the lessons, which are in the "Tao(A1)" Te Ching. "By-means-of(YI)" this study we are "Developing the capacity" to deal with the professionals whose job it is to dumb us down.
. Page 6: "In the realm of the heart, the Magelans have returned with news of strange new lands. They tell us, 'Our old models were based on limited information.'[1] New discoveries now reveal that within each of us there exists an organizing and central intelligence that can lift us beyond our problems" which are largely caused by our political masters.
. My switch from philosophy (B) to politics (C) was caused by two Gestapo-like building inspectors who after a year of relentless harassment gave me a serious stomach cramp. This is one of the ways they get people committed to a "Mental Health Facility". Luckily for me, I was already aware of that and instead of turning myself in, I ...
prayed. Here it was my knowledge of HOW they get people, who are a threat to them, into Mental Health Facilities. "Mental Health Facility" sounds so caring but once you are in there, you are as good as dead. In Cuba I came again close to death, but there it was not my knowledge which saved me. It was really this mysterious power of the individual and universal heart. You cooperate with the universal powers not with your mind (C) or intellect (B) but with your heart (A). I was wondering why I had to suffer so terribly in Cuba. Now I know. ...
It helps me to integrate this terrible experience with WHAT I am reading here in this amazing book. There simply is no other explanation for me getting out of Cuba alive. And there is great hope in experiences like that because nothing short of such experiences can solve our present global problems. Nothing short of the help which comes to us from above through "Door Dasamadwara" can enable us to deal with our present problems. And the Illuminati are not the only problem. They are aware of the problem of overpopulation. It just isn't right that they can decide who has to go and who can stay.
. Who has to go are partly their own soldiers who serve in NATO. Often they are called "Peace keeping forces". They always use nice sounding words and phrases, like: "Education" or "Mental Health Facility" when what the words stand for serves the very opposite purpose. But primarily their victims are Moslem civilians and private citizens in Honduras and, yes, Venezuelian soldiers who are told that the Hodurean army can easily be defeated, especially with the new weapons Chavez got from Russia. The result of all these casualties will be bit of "population control". But, let us also remember that the CIA has tried many of its tricks to get rid of Hugo Chavez, but this is a really good one. The CIA agents know that Chavez is not going to wake up, and if his supporters don't, it’s probably going to work.
. Still page 6: The heart is "a high-speed, intuitive source of wisdom". As I said the "Insight(72)" of HOW to separate the 400 characters we don't want in the lookup table from the 400 we want in it came to me in a fraction of a second. That is the "high-speed", intuitive (A) source of wisdom". Developing its algorithm (B) took me a few minutes. Still fast. But the mental (C) and physical (D) work, I am supposed to do now, takes Weeks. "This form of intelligence is experienced as direct intuitive (A) knowing that manifests in thoughts [B] and emotions [C] that are beneficial for ourselves and others."
. Another benefit is the direct experience of the action of the heart (A) itself. And since the Hindus and Lao Tzu that the Atman (A) or the Tao (A), does not "Act(do)". We have some work to do on this problem as well. ...
. Still same page: "Although the words 'heart' and 'math' are rarely used together, I felt that this thought-provoking combination reflected the two most essential aspects of our work."
. This "combination" and the word "SOLUTION" certainly got my attention.
"The term 'HeartMath' thus represents the importance of both fire [A] and precision in our exploration of the heart" (A). I visited http://www.HeartMathsolution.com They are doing well. It looks to me that they have come across the idea whose time has come. To be continued.
=======================================================
July 2, 2009
. Here is an afterthought: After I said “…. Because Chavez should have established a participatory democracy in Venezuela long ago” in the last June 30 section I should have added: “He can’t tell leaders in Honduras HOW to do it, if he isn’t doing it in Venezuela himself. He is failing to set an example.”
=====================================================
June 30, 2009
01 Chiao60-39, 02 Ssu69-09+18, Tuan111-32, Chiao159-34, Ch'ing9-38, Fu57-79+83, 03 Shih40b-37, 04 Chan85-28, Shui149-36, Ti50-40, 05 Kou94-10+20, T'o75-27, Yo118-28, Ch'ü44-33 , 06 Mien120---18+19, 07 Wai16-33, 08 Shih72b-43, Yu43-50, 09 Ch'uai64-
Above you have the first 9 entries of the roughly 400 entries. Chiao(*1), "Boundary", is a character which is only in chapter 01. Seven characters are only in 02. "Shih40b-37" is in the 37th position of 03. Ching 3 reminds me of something that is going on in the world right now. Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, is challenged by Honduras to declare war on it. Who is arranging these challenges for Chavez? ...
Chavez wants to stay in power, Power corrupts, remember? If he falls for that trick then why would he? ...
And why can't he see that he can't win this war? ...
Because, if he admits that then he can't start the war. This is his opportunity to declare the martial law he needs to stay permanently in power. He rather sacrifices the lives of his soldiers than his presidency. If you were able to answer the last three questions, and to see the psychology of it, then it is safe to assume that the Illuminati know what you know.
. There are Canadian politicians who sacrifice the lives of Canadian soldiers so that multinational oil companies can build their pipeline through Afghanistan. There will be more Canadian soldiers serving in the UN dying in Honduras. For what? ...
For helping to establish the global dictatorship called The New World Order. Is that a good cause to die for? ...
. Well, all we know is that there was a military coup in Honduras. Why should that be interpreted as a challenge to Chavez? After threatening Honduras that if something happens to his ambassador there then .... And if something does happen to him then that is a well planned challenge to him. The CIA does use psychology in its strategies. Am I telling you anything new by saying that the CIA doesn’t like Chavez? Well, let us just assume that Chavez accepts the challenge. Why, in spite of getting new weapons from Russia, can't he win the war? ...
Because he is up against the armed forces of The New World Order, which is called U.N. When investigating a crime it is well to look for the motive. The same goes for 9/11. In case you think that I am exaggerating, read David Icke's books or Voltaire's Bastards. These books tell you HOW things are but they don't give us solutions. This puts us into the victim state of consciousness, which is where the Illuminati want us to be. In this sense these authors are working for the Illuminati. If there is no solution to this global problem, then the authors of these books are excused but if there is a solution, which makes sense to you, then these authors are withholding it, and then we must find out why they are not telling us the whole truth. The partial truth they are giving us is dangerous.
. If there is a solution then what is it? ...
What could Chavez do right now, which has a better chance of success and which is less costly financially and in terms of human lives? ...
We can learn from what the global mass-media has accomplished in Iran. They have caused a mass protest by informing the people that the Ayatollah(s) is a dictator and that he does what dictators do: They kill whoever gets in their way for the purpose of instilling "Fear(âl)" in the people. So the mass-media had a cause for exposing that. But why are they doing it? ...
To help the people to get rid of a dictator? ...
Yes, but what kind of government are the Illuminati going to replace him with? ...
. The same goes for Venezuela. Chavez becomes more and more like a dictator but both of these dictator are a threat to the Illuminati, they know too much. If, in spite of that, Chavez is blinded enough to "Underestimate his Enemies ($jâb)" and he goes to war, who is going to win in the end? ...
These are questions about "Strategy(12)", like in a game of chess and our enemies are strategists. They are using "tricks and stratagems (548a)" to achieve their end.
. Of "Calamities There-is-none Greater Than to Underestimate (ÜfMOTAto$j) the intellectual, political and economic powers of your Enemy (âb)".
. "Do your governing Without Doing (doWUdo) it yourself, because, if the people are doing it, Then Nothing will Not be Governed (18WUPU85)".
This is part of the truth, which when understood by a critical mass of the people, will set us free. This is the kind of information Chavez could beam by radio and TV programs to Honduras. In this Way he can educate (B) the people. He could support candidates in Honduras strategically (C) and financially (D). He knows how the CIA is doing it, so why isn’t he? …
. All it takes is one true participatory democracy in the world to set an example. Our Green Party here in Ontario was modeled after the German Green Party. Because the Illuminati know that, both of these examples have disappeared. I was a member of the Greenwood Green Constituency Association. Our Green Party Constitution was rewritten single-handedly without a meeting, no quorum, no consensus, no vote. One agent simply took pen in hand and rewrote our constitution, which 30 of us hammered out by the consensus-decision-making process in one long weekend. When we, the members of the Greenwood Greens, objected to this illegal takeover, we were simply de-registered. How could they get away with that? ...
In short, the answer is social engineering. Back to Hugo Chavez, why does he not do what has worked so well in Iran? ...
Because Chavez should have established a participatory democracy in Venezuela long ago.
That would have been the example that would be useful to leaders in Honduras. In spite of the fact that he would remain to be an intellectual (B) leader (C) of the people (A) in Venezuela he didn't do it. Why? ...
A true democracy does not serve the interests of a dictator. The two intellectual leaders of the German Green Party committed mutual suicide as the "official version" of the event goes.
. To get more details on WHAT we, collectively, can do about our present problems we have to study the Neiye in conjunction with the Ching.
. I lost the file of which I have quoted the first three lines above. You can call that stupid but I suspect that my unconscious parts are fed up with having to do the work the "WordErs(C2er) should be doing. The "Insight(72)" (A) about HOW to extract the 400 characters, which only appear in one chapter, from the list of 800 characters, which I have now, came to me in a fraction of a second. Its algorithm (B) took minutes. The physical (D) work has to be done in conjunction with the mental (C) work. That is the work I shouldn't have to do. And that work could be done in days by the people whose dharma it is to do that kind of work. It is taking me weeks and it will be flawed. It will be usable for me and as a "job-description" (A) for "WordErs" but, when it finally will be done, in weeks, it will not be good for general use. All the while we are running out of time. And that's the Way the Illuminati like it.
=====================================================
June 26, 2009
. One week ago, on June 19 (I said May) I started the first paragraph with: "Order is a place for everything and everything in its place." That seven-line paragraph can be taken as the "algorithm" for sorting through 5000 Chinese characters. To find Chieh(#q), on line four of the Neiye chapter 14, took me 15 minutes without finding it. After that I gave up. But I also thought: There has to be a better Way of identifying a Chinese character. If I allow one minute to put a character into one of the 17 places that would be 5000 minutes. That would be over 80 hours. The fact that I did it in less than half that time by using the new system is a good sign.
. Actually not all of the time was used for manual (D) work. When trouble shows up on level D, D has to "Align(%8)" itself with level C and ask for help. If C can't help then it has to "Align" itself with level B and ask for help there and if B can't help then B has to align itself with A and ask for help there on the spiritual level. What this boiled down to in practice was that I got overwhelmed by the amount of work required and the problems which came up which seemed to be insurmountable. It came down to being discouraged and ready to give up. How did the Atman (A) or my soul help me? ...
It reminded me of how important this work is, not just for me but for others as well who are up against the same troubles I have been up against over the past 30 years. Most importantly, two days ago, at about 5 AM an idea came to me which solved a problem which otherwise would have been insurmountable. Without that idea, it would have been unreasonable to go on.
. There is much to be learned from taking on a job single-handedly that one would expect only experts of the Chinese language would be qualified to handle. When I was doing my soul -searching, I reminded my Self of Ching 63 where Lao Tzu said: The "Wise man (wsmn) Throughout-his-life does Not Handle tasks which are too Big (nGPUdoTA)" for him. I really felt that I was trying to bite off more than I could chew. What my Self had to remind me of was that I don't have to take the job all in one big bite. Break it down into smaller bites which you can chew. Still, all of that encouragement would have been no good, had it not been for that idea which came to me on that Wednesday morning. This moving up and down on the four levels of abstraction, A, B, C and D, produces new approaches to problems. For instance, unless you run up against a problem, you don't look for a solution. And the only way you come up against problems is to by doing the actual manual (D) work. The manual work we do on a smaller scale is analogous to the testing (D) which is done in the scientific process. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.
. If I had found a printer who was willing to do the job for a price I can afford, he wouldn't have run into the problems I have run into but he also wouldn't have come up with the solutions I had to come up with. Just because a computer can do something doesn't mean that people can also do it as efficiently. Even after having done the sorting, I am still only half done. The most time-consuming problems are mistakes which are almost unavoidable with so many Chinese characters. Some characters look very much like another character. When I first noticed it, I was surprised how small a difference there is between some characters. Before I noticed it I might have mistaken a character and put it on the duplicate tray. I also noticed that the tiny less than 1/2 by 1/2 inch pieces of paper stick together. So instead of throwing one piece of paper on the duplicate tray, I might have thrown away two pieces, one I saw, the other I didn't. There are now over 4000 tiny pieces of paper on the duplicate tray. Finding one that is missing is like finding a needle in a hay stack. So, the second half of this job may take much longer than the first half.
. This is some kind of progress-report. Let me keep it short.
The places for the 15 radicals could be divided into five subdivisions. I have represented this for myself by a rectangle in the center, a space above it, a space to the right of it, a space below it, and a space to the left of it. This can be easily identified because our radical is either on top, to the right, below, or to the left, of other "simples". Simples are the components, or parts, through which the character emerges. Some experience is necessary to identify the simples but too much familiarity with the conventional Way of doing it is bound to cause difficulties. To study the Tao Te Ching, you must "Learn to UnLearn (ÜdPUÜd)" the things which get in the way of the Way. Notice the sequence in which I have listed the four areas around the central rectangle. ...
Top: 12 O'clock, right: 3 O'clock, bottom: 6 O'clock and left: ...
. I have already described this in my June 16 section but it is well to go over it again because this is the sequence in which the characters will end up in my lookup table. In addition to this, there is the point, line, plane solid order. These two rules determine the order in which the characters go into the lookup table.
. So I had these 15 X 5 places, plus the one for the characters which had none of our radicals in them, to put my 5000 tiny squares of paper with Chinese characters on them into. (15 X 5) + 1 = 76. Top and bottom are the endpoints of a vertical line along which characters are going to be listed. The horizontal, right left axis, comes after the vertical axis
. It didn't take long to see that I was going to run out of space on that one sheet of 8 1/2 by 11 paper, on which the characters, which couldn't be identified with our radicals, were collected on.
When I see a problem coming, I try to think (B) of a solution before it actually appears. "Tackle things before they have appeared. (do ZtoÜuYU. J.Wu)".
. Some solutions come to me early in the morning like the one I got two days ago. There is a Way to subdivide the "UnIdentifyAble(PUptMg)" group into five subdivisions as well. Can you see it? You could only see it if you look at Chinese characters with that question in mind. Unless you ask the right questions, you can't expect right answers. Question: How can you "Identify" a simple so that it can take the place of our radicals? ...
By noticing that a character is alone above or below a horizontal line of characters, or alone beside a vertical line of characters. The key to this system is recognizing simples. But as you begin to use this system you automatically learn to recognize them. We have the Law of Attraction working for us here. He who has shall have more.
. There is an obvious difference between simples which are all by themselves, simples which are on top of each other and simples which are ...
beside each other and simples which are ...
both beside and on top of each other. We can think of this as: Point, line (vertical first, then horizontal) plane. Again, we start out with what is "IdentifyAble(ptMg)" and then we spill over into the "UnIdentifyAble(PUptMg)" area. You start noticing these repeating patterns more readily when you become more aware of the Law of Correspondence. He who has shall have more. Once you know "Enough(Zu)" you know that these correspondences are no accident and then you can make good use of analogy.
. While using these five divisions I noticed that there are four more areas. Guess where? ...
What about the four corners? What about 1:30, 4:30, 7:30 and ten: thirty? ...
When our radical has other simples to the left and below it then it is at 1:30. So where is it when other simples are above and to the right of our radical? ...
. When I started the manual (D) sorting operation, I had the 76 places into which I could put all of these 5000 pieces of paper. With a Chinese word-processor this could easily be done but with tiny bits of paper you sooner or later run out of space.
. Ultimately all that would end up in those 76 places are the 400 characters which are to go into the lookup table. Ideally that would average out to five or six characters in each of these 76 places. The number of characters you have to sift through using the stroke method is over sixty for most characters. So using this alternative approach would be a hundred percent improvement. . Even though for some characters most of the five places are left empty, as I kept working on this manual sorting job, more timesaving ideas kept coming along. As you can see, the "UnIdentifyAble(PUptMg)" group could be divided into five subdivisions.. This group is the one in which the characters have none of our own expanded radicals in then. And then, as can be expected, there is a sixth group which doesn't fit into any of the five divisions. But, since we have a closed system of 400 Chinese characters here, this group turns out to be small "Enough" to be manageable.
. Instead of the 76 places, I started out with, I ended up with 86. And these are no longer theoretical places, every one of them has characters in it and many of them have clearly identifiable subdivisions in turn. I had to delete Rad. 120 and Rad 140 and I have added Rad. 66.
. I don't know how it will all end up in the end because I have not taken out the characters which only appear in one chapter. And HOW to do that came to me in that idea two days ago. The original theory (B) was: If I save two characters on the trays then the characters which have no companions only appear in one chapter. But only if it is the only character in that one chapter.
. All these thoughts go on in my head (B) while my mind (C) keeps my hands (D) working with Automatic Energy (E6). When doing this type of repetitive manual (D) work, there is a lot we can learn about our inner workings. But, as Plato already said, it is harder to observe our own inner parts than it is to observe the corresponding "sources" in society around us. What is within us is subjective and harder to see and describe than what is around us. What is outside of us is objective and easier to describe because everybody can see the same things.
. That is essentially what Plato's Republic is about and Aristotle, Plato's student, has used his teacher's "Divided Line (509d)" for his tetrad without giving him credit for it. Of the two, Plato was the communicator (C), who has had a vision (A), and Aristotle was the philosopher (B) who has used that vision.
. Let me use analogy to describe what happened during the last Week:
. A customer could describe the idea I have expressed in the first seven-line paragraph of the June 19 subsection to a printer. If he can see that he can do the job, he tells the customer how much it will cost and how long it will take. If the price is right, the customer goes home and comes back when the job is done. Unless the supplier did a careless job, the supply of the customer's demand is bound to be an improvement over what is available now.
. To do his job, the supplier had to do a certain amount of thinking (B), he has to type out all of the 5000 characters to get them into his Chinese word-processor, unless he can download them from the internet, and then use it to carryout the operations the customer has demanded. Then he has to assemble the lookup table and do the printing.
. But the troubles I have run into by having to do the job manually would not have shown up with the word-processor. There are no small trays on which little pieces of paper are overflowing. Doing things manually reminds me of the way I was developing my boat invention
US 6,834,605 B1. Fellow boaters, at the Toronto Island Marina, would come over and say: Why do you struggle with 16 foot main hulls and 12 foot outriggers? Why don't you use small models instead? My answer was: Because you can't sit on a small model, I can't get the feel of it.
===========================================================
June 16, 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMMENTARIES n
4A represents Neiye chapter 14, line one. There are 22 lines in this chapter. The commentaries on most chapters will be short, others will be long. The one on 4A will be very long.
. 4A: The "Tao Fills everything in Heaven and Below (A14ATn -)" it.
At Ching 25.3 we learn that the "Tao(A1)" is on level A of Plato's "Divided Line" at 509d of his Republic. The "King( E)", "Man(mn)" at 25.4 or "Humanity(%5)" at 5.1, is on level C and the material (D) component of us, our physical body, is on level D. To familiarize yourself with the convention of "Identifying(Mg)" a level on the "Line" with letters A, B, C and D (in brackets) read Desmond Lee's translation of the Republic
. In terms of J.G. Bennett's ENERGIES, our soul (A) is, or uses, Conscious Energy (E4). Our intellect (B) is, or uses, Sensitive Energy (E5). Our mind (C) is, or uses, Automatic Energy (E6). Our body (D) is, or uses, Vital Energy (E7) and the world around us is E8. This is explained in more detail in J.G. Bennett's ENERGIES and in Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE. If any theory (B), or vision (A), about a specific thing is true then it must correspond with other theories about the same thing, which are true. Why? ...
Because there can only be one truth about a specific subject. For example, if one writer says 2+2 = 1, another says 2+2 = 4, another says 2+2 = 5 and another also says that 2+2 = 5 then only the one who said that 2+2 = 4 is right. The other three must be wrong or they are using a different number system within which they may be right but they are not talking about the same number system we are talking about. When we are talking about one of the twelve N-Term systems, we have in systematics, we are talking about a specific systems in which N equals one of the twelve possible numbers.
. When Lao Tzu is talking about the "Monad($1)" N = 1, when he is talking about the "DyAd(dyad) N = 2 and if he is talking about the "TriAd( 3ad)" then N = 3. It doesn't matter whether statements about a specific number system are made in Chinese, Greek or English, if a statement about a specific system is true then WHAT is said about it must be the same as other true statements about the same system. That is what the Theosophists call comparative religion. They don't care HOW something is said, they want to know WHAT is said. The same approach can be applied to philosophy because the poetry we get in the Bhagavad Gita, the Nei Yeh or the Tao Te Chng is as much philosophy (B) as it is religion (A). The parts of any N-Term system are like the links of a chain, they are equally important. Break one and you break the chain.
. To learn these things, we must study them "Diligently(#6)". When Lao Tzu leaves some sentences incomplete, it means to his students: ...
Complete them1. Incomplete sentences in the Ching are examples of a "Job-description" or a problem-statement. All problem solving processes begin with a ...
problem. Because translators fill in missing words or phrases, we don't get these lessons unless we go back to the original Standard text.
. "Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed (dfezmtcm)" or a problem to be solved. An incomplete sentence requires students to "Complete(cm)" it.
. Picking one dictionary equivalent from a number of equivalents is an interpretation. This is even more obvious when the context demands an equivalent which is not in the dictionary.
. When the author of the poem, we are analyzing here, tells us that the Tao is inside and outside of people then it must be everywhere, it must be omnipresent.
. Finding the dictionary equivalent for Man(4A) in that first line, is more work for me than it is for a speaker of Chinese. I was lucky that I picked Rad. 85 first because that was the right one. There are two more possible radicals in that compound character and if I had picked them first we would have had an example of Murphy's Law. I had to go through the same laborious process with 4B, 4J, 4N, 4P and 4Q. With 4E and 4F, I didn't even bother, I just took Roth's word for it. The same goes for line 7 (G). I just let Roth do it for us. I also got "Entangled(@g)" with Chieh(#q). In order to know whether a character is in the Ching, I have to know its phonetic My memory doesn't serve me well "Enough(Zu)" for that purpose. But, unless you speak Chinese, you can't know what the phonetic of a character is, just by looking at it. So I have to identify its radical number. After about fifteen minutes of that, I gave up on Chieh(#q). If by luck, or synchronicity, I had not found it in the Ching, I would have to say in the footnote: "4D Can't find its phonetic but it probably means 'Release'". At Ching 4., I would translate it as: "Untangle The Entangled (#q H@g)".
. So I have a problem here. How would you describe a solution for it? ...
I want an efficient system for identifying the roughly 400 characters in the Ching, which appear in more than one chapter. ...
This would be a very general "Job-description" (A) or problem-statement. You could give it to a Chinese print shop and see if they are willing and able to handle it for a prize. The problem-solver, or thinker, (B) can take off from there. S/he can suggest a number of potential solutions to the paying customer (A). What would you suggest? ...
What I will suggest is a "job-description". If you have "Enough" money, you can take it to a Chinese writer (C) to have it done properly. If you are a Chinese writer with a Chinese word-processor you can use the work I am going to do as a "job description" to do a better job that can be used for the Ching and the Nei Yeh. In return I want a copy of your work. And I am not going to do my work, including the printing, stapling, postage and handling , for nothig, I want $10 for it. Send a postal money-order to Peter Franke 914 - 20 West Lodge Avenue Toronto ON M6K 2T4. A small percentage of your profits will be appreciated. If your work is good, I will promote it. I know that there is a potential demand for it. I would buy it for that prize.
. So here we go: The Five Thousand Dictionary has 5000 characters in it Deleting 4600 entries and leaving only the 400 we need, would be one solution. There will be less entries to sift through before you find the one you are looking for. I had a concordance in which the roughly 800 characters, which are in the Ching, are arranged by the stroke method. If you know how to write Chinese then this is fine; if not, you can still find a character but it takes much longer. Reducing the roughly 8000 characters to half by treating the characters which only appear in one chapter as footnotes behind that chapter will definitely be more efficient. Why put a character which only appears in one chapter into a concordance? ...
Further: Using a smaller radical system will reduce the number of characters you have to sift through to find the one you are looking for.
. Further: Looking for these radicals in a certain predetermined sequence will avoid looking for a character under the wrong radical. Having to sift through 400 characters instead of 800 is already an improvement right there. Using a simplified radical system in a predetermined sequence is another.
. Anyone, who wants to study the Ching seriously, can benefit from that. Once you have a way of identifying a character in the Ching, you can recognize the same characters in the Neiye. Actually, what motivates me to develop such a lookup table for the 400 characters in the Ching is the possibility of efficiently "Identifying(Mg)" characters in the Neiye to see if they are in the Ching. Then, doing the same job for the Neiye is much easier because the Neiye is only 26, or 27, chapters long instead of 81. There is also less work to do because most of the characters, which are in the Neiye, are in the Ching. Putting the equivalents of any character which is in only one chapter as a footnote behind that chapter reduces the number of entries you have to sift through in the dictionary. Even though there are fewer characters like that in the Neiye it is an idea that is sill useful there. Do you have any other ideas? ...
As we have to memorize our alphabet so the Chinese have to memorize 214 "radicals" by which to "Identify(Mg)" the 7796 characters which are in my big dictionary. But we only have 400 characters to identify. So we don't need that many radicals.
. To avoid looking for a character under the wrong radical we have to establish a sequence in which to look for these radicals: We shall look for Rad. 162 first because the "Tao(A1" is identified by that radical. The Tao(A1) should be the first in our lookup table, even if we have to jump the line. Rectangles, or squares, have a shape, which is easy to recognize. So the rectangle with two horizontal lines in it is our second radical. This is the one we look for AFTER we have looked for our first radical. The rectangle, or square, with one horizontal line in it, or a vertical line going through it is our third radical. The empty square is our fourth. There is no need to explain the system in greater detail than this because you can see how these rules are applied in the actual lookup table. And it is going to shock those who are used to the established system. Well, we don't need 214 radicals to identify 400 characters.
. Rad. 30, is our fourth radical and the bigger square, Rad. 31, is our fifth radical.
. Our second and third radical are the most shocking. They have a wider range than are in the standard list. People who are familiar with the standard system will have trouble with that but the rest of us, fortunately, don't know any better. For instance our radical 2 is the official Rad. 109 but Ch'i( H), which officially is Rad. 12 is also our radical 2. And so are Radicals 128, 132, 154, 181 and 185. Why? ...
Because, except for Rad. 128, we have there a clearly recognizable rectangle with two horizontal lines in it. Why Rad. 12and not Rad 109 is not our concern. Our concern is identifying each of the 400 characters as simply and efficiently as possible. There is also an eye in Tao(A1). But officially that eye is a head, Rad. 185, and there are only two entries in that group. There are reasons for selecting one of the 214 radicals to identify only two characters, but these reasons are not our concern. At least not yet.
. For our next radicals we are looking for those who have close to, or more than, 400 entries in the RADICAL INDEX. In most of our radicals, we look for them first
on top (12 O'clock) of the character, next we look for it an the
right side (3 O'clock), next we look for it on the
bottom (6 O'clock), next we look for it on the left side and the rest comes last.
. This is how the groups under one of our radicals are broken down further. And this is the sequence in which they appear in the columns of our lookup table. All that is written beneath each character is its two digit identifier, or an asterisks (*) with a letter behind it. This is to fill in missing entries in my dictionary-concordance. You can get it by Googling: A1 Tao162
You will find it at the end of a file which comes up.
. Our sixth radical is Rad. 9, man.
. Our seventh is Rad. 32, earth.
. Our eights is Rad. 38, woman.
. Our ninth is Rad. 61, heart.
. Our tenth is Rad. 64, hand.
. Our eleventh is Rad 75, tree.
. Our twelfth is Rad. 85, water.
. Our thirteenth is Rad. 86, fire.
. Our fourteenth is Rad 120, silk, and:
. Our fifteenth is Rad. 140, color.
. These 15 radicals are tentative. If a group covered by one of the above radicals is too small it is deleted and if the sixteenth group which can't be identified by these radicals is too big then other radicals have to be selected or another graphic system of identifying characters has to be invented by means of which the unidentified group, is broken down further.
. I can only do this by trial and error. I can only see how many characters are in each main group and in each of the five sub-groups after I have done the physical (D) work of shuffling the 5000 square pieces of paper around.
. At this point I can only guess how this system is going to work and the best way to find out is by trying it out. This system can be different from the standard system because we have 400 instead of thousands of entries in our lookup table. This is why Ch'i( H) can also be our second radical. The experts will be shocked but we need a system that is simple, efficient and that works for us. I am looking for a solution of a problem that has cost me avoidable time and energy for the past thirty years. Finally I am fed up "Enough(Zu)" to do something about it. I am no longer going to wait for a "WordEr(C2er)" who is able to do a better job than I can do but who is unwilling to do it.
. Whether, what I have said so far, can be determined by the customer (A) alone or whether a thinker (B) can help him with it. These details depend on the particular circumstances.
. In the construction business, the customer is not the architect (B), not the contractor (C) nor a subcontractor (D). Here I am all four of them. But in the bigger systems each of the four component is represented by different people specializing in different types of work. But in real life, these “sources” also intersect like the two circles in a Ven diagram. Those on the higher level can do what those on the lower level can do but not as efficiently. If they could, we wouldn't need THE DIVISION OF LABOR. I wouldn’t be so painfully aware of the lack of a communicator. Those on the lower level can do what is in the intersection of the two cycles, but they can't go beyond that. For instance the architect or programmer (B) can't pay for the job the customer has to pay for. “WordErs Don’t Know(C2erPUkn)” how to think as well as the thinkers (B) do.
. Within the intersections, the members of the higher and the lower levels can work as a team, as our politicians (C) and their advisors (B) are doing, but beyond that, each of them is on their own.
. Even In the original computer programming system, which was based on the Aristotelian tetrad, the "Boundaries(*1)" between A, B and C can't be clearly drawn but when we were taught about these four "sources", or components of the tetrad, in that seven Week IBM computer programming course, they were treated as separate units, and, in a way, they are. The only source that is really unique in that system is the computer (D). It does its own thing and nothing else. That's why that system works so well.
. Plato said at 344d: "There are hereditary monarchies, and states where kingship is bought, but these and other similar examples are really crosses between our four types ...." But when he has describes these four types of government he has kept it simple. He has even oversimplified it a bit. Rudolf Steiner said that Plato was not a philosopher but, unlike me, he was an excellent writer (C).
. The question still is: To what extent do we have a government OF the people in which the decisions are made BY the people and, therefore, FOR the people? ...
To what extent do the advisors (B) of our elected politicians (C) make the decisions? ...
To what extent is even a dictator (C) really in power? ...
And to what extent is power bought with money (D)? ...
If these divisions between these four possible types of government were more clearly drawn, and in philosophy (B) and political science (C) they can be, then we couldn't be fooled the way we are.
. If you read Plato's Republic you can summarize his four governments as follows:
. Democracy (A) is the government of, by and for the people. Its power is derived from the knowledge of the truth, which, when known collectively, will set us free.
. Plato's Timocracy (B) is the government we have. What Lao Tzu has called it, can be translated as "Hypocracy(*b18)". Here, as well as in democracy, knowledge is power. At Ching 10, Lao Tzu asked the ruler: "Can you govern without knowledge? (85abWUknHU)" or cunning? Its power is derived from the knowledge of HOW to use mind-control. And this is what the science of social engineering is about.
. A Dictatorship (C) is a Government in which a dictator has absolute power. His power is derived from instilling "Fear(âl)" in the people by means of his goon-squads. This was Hitler's Gestapo. As democracy is the best possible type of government so a dictatorship is the worst. Hitler probably got the knowledge of HOW to do it from THE PROTOCOLS OF ZION. The government we have and the following one are between the extremes, not as bad as the worst but not as good as the best either.
. Capitalism is the government in which money is the source of power. This is also what Plato has seen clearly.
. Let me try to clarify things by telling you about my experience as a computer programmer. When I was working as a programmer (B), my partner was the salesman. He brought in the jobs, normally in the form of a "Job-description". When the job was too complex, or the customer too difficult, he sent me out to get the job-description. You can't do a job if you don't know WHAT it is. I remember one day when I came back to the office: I got the job-description but it was very tough. It took much too long to get it and it was too frustrating to me. I told my partner: "This guy doesn't need a programmer, he needs a psychologist." The customer (A) does not always know WHAT s/he wants and the programmer can help the customer by explaining what the computer can do and what it can't do. Then you have to get into the details about WHAT the input is and WHAT the output is supposed to be. This first step is the "Job-description". For instance what input do I have right now for this lookup table of roughly 400 Chinese characters? …
Well, I got John C.H. Wu's translation for $10 at a used book store. That's a start. If the customer has "Enough(Zu)" money, he can let the thinker (B) worry about the rest. The problem-solver would ask the customer: "What do you want me to do with that book?" Or he could ask: " HOW do you want the output to look like"? "Well, I like the characters which are in this book but they should be a bit bigger so that I can read them better. I only want those characters in my lookup table which appear in more than one chapter. I want them arranged in columns with Tao(A1) on top of the first column. I want you to select radicals by means of which these roughly 400 characters can be subdivided. Within each group I want you to use the stroke method. ....". There you have an example of a "job-description" which could be given to a Chinese print shop.
. The second step is the "Job-analysis". There, the programmer develops the algorithm.
. The third step is called "Coding". There a string of instructions, called a computer program, is written, And in the fourth step the computer carries out the instructions. This last step is called "Execution". Can you see the logic of this? Can you see why it was possible to teach the whole system in a seven Week course? Because it ...
made sense. And it can still make sense, in spite of the mind-control that is done on us. This is why I believe that today it could be done in less time because today we have cheaper personal computers. But time may be running out. I don't know the deadline the Illuminatis have set for their virus.
. Now, let me continue to describe HOW I am producing a lookup table in which the 400 Chinese characters appear in a simpler, more comprehensible and recognizable sequence than is possible to arrange thousands of characters.
. The idea I have described above came to me as I was working away at chapter 14 of the Neiye. I want to continue working on the Neiye but I need this kind of a lookup table for it. The next step is now, HOW to translate the "Job-description" into reality. ...
If you have a Chinese word-processor and know how to use it, simply type out the roughly 5000 characters in the book and organize them according to the rules I have given above.
. But, even if I had a Chinese word-processor, I wouldn't know how to use it. So what is the alternative? ...
Here is WHAT I have done so far and WHAT you can also do to make yourself such a look-up table of 400 characters: which will pay off in time.
. Buy a copy of the Tao Te Ching which is accompanied by the standard text. I got John C. H. Wu's translation.
. Cut out the Chinese text and paste it chapter by chapter onto 11 by 8 1/2 inch sheets of paper, leaving a margin on two sides for enlarging it by twelve percent. A bit bigger might be better, but that would be more cutting and pasting.
. After four hours of cutting and pasting, I ended up with 16 sheets with all of the roughly 5000 characters on it. 16 X 5 = 80. So I got about five chapters on each sheet.
. Then I went to a Photo-copy store and did the enlarging and copying. I now have 16 pages with roughly 16 columns of roughly 20 characters each 16 X 16 X 20 = 5120. That's close "Enough" to the estimated 5000 characters in the Tao Te Ching. Naw what next? ...
Take exactor knife and ruler and cut out the 16 X 16 columns of Chinese characters. It is hard to tell who is doing what within the intersection of level B and C especially when I am the one who is doing both jobs. However, giving the sixteen pages, an exactor knife and a ruler to someone who knows HOW to do the job and telling him to start cutting is analogous to a coder (C) giving instructions to a computer (D) or a contractor (C) giving instruction to his sub-contractors (D). The line between the mental (C) decision-making and the physical (D) action decided on, can be clearly drawn.
. So I, in the role of a contractor (D), tell myself, in the role of a subcontractor: Start cutting! It is 4:45 PM. Let me start. .... All right, it is done. It is 5:45 PM. It took me one hour to cut these 16 X 16 strips. What next? ...
Take scissor in hand and cut out those 5000 little squares from those strips! ...
I just cut one strip to see what I am in for. This will take longer. I continue tomorrow.
. Getting those 5000 characters randomly into one pile may not be the most efficient way to do it, but it will be most educational because I will use our new radicals to test the system. The fun part of this will be to see the pile shrink. All the duplicates will go onto another pile. Finally, the 400 characters which don't have a duplicate will also go into another place.
. So by using the radicals I already have, and the radicals I may decide on, as I go along, I should in theory end up with the 400 characters in the right order in columns on paper. Then I type out the two digit identifiers and stick them under the Chinese character. The physical (D) work is easily differentiated from the intellectual (B) and mental (C) work but B and C is not as easily to keep apart because the job is too small and I have to carry out each step by myself. But in the construction business and in the original IBM programming system the intellectual (B) work and the verbal (C) work can be easily distinguished because ideally the intellectual work is done by the "KnowErs(kner)" and the mental or verbal work is done by the "WordErs(C2er)". The contractor (C) makes his living by talking to his sub-contractors (D); the coder (C) makes his living by talking to the computer (D); I am getting this job done by talking to myself. The instruction I have given myself is: Take scissor in hand and cut these 16 X 16 strips into 50000 little squares with Chinese characters on them. I am going to time myself to see how long it takes. No matter how long it takes, it is better to work with a plan (B) than without one.
. As I am going through these four steps in a practical (D) way, I am actually commenting not just on line one (4A) but on the whole chapter, as you will see in time. It was the content of chapter 14 which has inspired me to finally do what I should have done a long time ago.
May 18, 2009
. This morning I started cutting at 8;50 AM and worked till 11:50 AM. After lunch, I started again at 2:15 PM and finished at 3PM. Let's call it 250 minutes. 250 goes into 5000 20 times. That means that I did an average of 20 cuts per minute.
. There are lessons to be learned from doing repetitive manual (D) work. "Repetition(@1)" causes energy to be stepped down. In this case from Sensitive Energy (E5) to Automatic Energy (E6). First I started out with Conscious Energy (E4) and Sensitive Energy (E5) but slowly Automatic Energy (E6) begins to take over. Even though much attention was required because the characters are so close together. Even with conscious attention mistakes would happen. I would chop of a bit from the top or the bottom of a character I was cutting off. No worry, there are at least two characters of the 400 I am using and mistakes are not the rule but the exception.
. As Automatic Energy took over, I got faster but I made no more mistakes than before. And the most amazing thing was when I noticed that I was so engaged in a thought that I was not even aware of my hands going snip, snip, snip. It was like driving a car on automatic. And I could see no mistake and my speed was faster than it was when I was working with Sensitive Energy. No wonder Aristotle called level C of his teacher's "Divided Line" the "efficient cause".
May 19. What now? ...
Order is a place for everything and everything in its place. I can't start sorting out the 5000 characters before I have a place for each one of them. So first there are the 15 places determined by our 15 radicals. Then there is another place for the ...
characters that can't be identified by our radicals. Then there is another place for ...
the characters which are duplicates of the 400 characters we will use. Then there is an- ...
other place for the 400 characters which are in only one chapter. These can only be identified near the end of the sorting process.
. As I was cutting I could see that the group that can't be identified by our 15 radicals, even in their expanded versions. We have to invent another geometric way of dividing that group. Right now, before I start sorting, it will save time if can put each character in the sequence in which it eventually will end up in our columnized lookup table. I will tell you more about these further divisions later.
============================================================
June 12, 2009
. The "mistake" which came to my attention AFTER I had posted the last, June 10, section surprised me. It isn't really a mistake. Even if you don't notice it, it does no harm and if you do notice it then, if you think about it, you will benefit from it.
. After I realized that it is a "message", it made me think. The message is in the second last paragraph of the first page. Can you see it? ...
It is good to see it in context, which includes the rest of this section. As far as "I", my ego, is concerned it is a "mistake" because it is not what “I” intended to say.
. I wanted to say: ".... we will only analyze these messages properly if we know them for what they are." As you can see, what came out was ".... if we know them for what we are." ...
Did you get the message? ...
As a man thinketh in his heart so is he.
"Man is made of faith. Whatever faith he has, thus is he. (Gita 17.3 Sargeant)".
. The thinking in the heart (A) is not the thinking we do in the head (B). And faith (sraddha) is not thinking (B) nor is it believing (C). It is an "Inner" knowing. Nei Yeh is translated as "Inner Training". Nei11 means "Within, inside, inner, native". Yeh75 means "Patrimony, estate; a profession, trade; to entice, ...." By giving us his paradoxes, the author of this amazing poetry is "enticing" us to think. Can that be translated as "Training"? ...
Let us consult Bernhard Karlgren's “ANALYTIC DICTIONARY OF CHINESE ....” #229: ".... property, patrimony, estate; (what gives property:) industry, business, profession, occupation, instruction; ...." There we have it. The Neiye and the Ching contain instructions on how to think.
8i: If there is "Production then here Will be Thought (Sg$p8i)" and
8j: if there is "Thought then there Will be Knowledge (8i$pkn)."
. Knowledge is an inner, intellectual property. So inner property is produced by inner work and outer property is produced by outer work. The Law of Correspondence again. Thus, Nei Yeh can also be translated as INNER WORK, which is the title of the book by Robert A. Johnson. I have quoted from page eight before but it is worth quoting some of it again, as a reminder.
. "Jung compared the ego---the conscious mind---to a cork bobbing in the enormous ocean of the unconscious. .... When we say 'I' we are referring to only that small sector of ourselves of which we are aware. We assume that 'I' contains only THIS personality, THESE traits, THESE values and viewpoints that are up on the surface within the ego's range of vision, accessible to consciousness. This is my limited, highly inaccurate, version of who 'I' am."
. There are twelve levels of energy in J. G. Bennett's Twelve-Term system, the Dodecad. We can be aware of Thought (Sensitive Energy), word (Automatic Energy) and deed (Vital Energy) but most of the time, when engaged in these activities, we are half asleep.
. I must have been asleep when "I", my ego, made that mistake. When it took me about a minute to figure out what that message meant, then who wrote that message? ...
. We left off with the question at 4H (Chapter 14 line 8). Let us look at the whole chapter.
4A: The "Tao Fills everything in Heaven and what is Below (A14ATn -)" it.
4B: It is the "Omnipresent which is In People and Which (4BÜpMnSO) is all around them.
4C: But the "People are UnAble to Understand (MnPUabkn)" this, unless they grasp the
4D "One Word Which will Release ( 1C2 Z#q)" them.
4E: "Up it Reaches To Heaven ( +4EtoTn)" by aligning itself with it.
4F: "Down it Stretches To those on Earth ( -4FtoTI) who align themselves with it.
4G "You pervade the nine inhabited regions (Roth)"
4H: "What-does-it-mean To-be Released by that One-word (HOdo#q Z)"?
4I "The answer resides in the calmness of the mind. (Roth)"
4I: "Inside, From your Heart comes the Calmness. (ÜptoHs%h)".
4J: If "Your Heart is well Ordered (meHs85) your Senses Will be well Ordered (4J$p85)".
4K:If "Your Heart is Calm (meHs%h) then your Senses Will be Calmed (4J$p%h)".
4L "What makes them well ordered is the mind. (Roth)" 85 .Z to Hs Ye
4M "What makes them calm is the mind. (Roth)"
4M: "Calmness, It comes From the Heart Yeh (%h ZtoHsYe)".
4N: Your "Heart is a Means to Store the Heart (HsYI4NHs)".
4O: In the "Heart'S Center Again There-is a Heart. How (Hs Z =@1YUHs86)" come?
4P: "This Heart'S Heart is Thought By which it Precedes Word (#LHs ZHs4PYI^7C2)".
4Q: When there is "Thought, Only Then can it (A) take Shape (4PJa4Q@k)".
4R: When it has taken "Shape, Only Then can there be Word (@kJa4QC2)".
4S: When there is "Word, Only Then can there be Implementation (C2Ja4QD2)".
4T: When there is "Implementation, Only Then can there be Order (D2Ja4Q85)".
4U: Without Order there Necessarily will be Confusion (PU85PI$a)".
4V: And when there is "Confusion there Will be Death ($a$p78)".
4A Man85 "Full, entire,". This one is not in the Ching.
4B P'u72 "Universal, all, large, general". Not in the Ching.
. For 4E and 4F I take Roth's word.
4J Kuan40. It is *e in Ching 28. The dictionary equivalents are not "Senses". Now, if the "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" why Roth has translated Kuan(4J) that Way then how can they explain it? And, even if the "TalkErs(C2er)" do "Get(gt)” it, it will still be a tough
. job to explain it. So what do you expect me to do? All I can do is do the best I can.
4N Ts'ang140 "To hide, conceal, store". *b at Ching 44.
4P I, Yi61 "Thought, will, intention". Not in the Ching.
4Q Hou30. Not in the Ching. The dictionary doesn't have "Then" but Roth seems to be right.
The poetry in the Bhagavad Gita and the Nei Yeh is absolutely amazing. But, if you don't "Get(gt)" it, it is not amazing to you. If, what comes through A, is properly analyzed by the thinkers (B) then sooner or later they will "Get" it. "Thought Will produce Knowledge (4P$pkn)" and then, if you are a thinker, you can't help but be amazed.
. However, without the roughly 25% of prose in the Tao Te Ching, it would be inaccessible to us. Lao Tzu has explained, in prose (C), how to read the poetry (A).
. In the next section I will start my commentaries on each of the 22 lines. Some will be short, some will be long. Try to predict what I will say. Good exercise. ...
=========================================================
June 10, 2009
. Before we continue from where I have left of in the last, June 7, section, I have to draw your attention to an error in it. There are more, but this one is interesting: "....
1F Yin85 ["]Licentious, lewd; excess; to soak'. .... The primary 'Meaning(Üw)' of Yi(Üw) is 'Licentious', so what do you do with" such a blatant error? ...
According to Jungian psychology there are two ways our unconscious parts can communicate with our conscious part, the ego: Dreams and Active Imagination. There is a third way, which we can call: Synchronicity. Not everything that happens to us is synchronous or meaningful but, if you analyze the above error, you will find that it is. What the more serious errors have in common is that, if you are a student, you can see them. It is as if my unconscious parts want to weed out the "Average ( =)"reader and concentrate on the "Above average Student ( +Ün)". These are really the only ones who can help me. Notice also the fact that "Licentious(1F)" is the opposite of "Righteousness(Üw)". There are lessons in it for you. All you have to do is …
pay attention to them. …
. Still, there are unconscious parts in me who are getting fed up with having to do the work the communicators (C) should be doing. It is clear to me that they want me to quit. But really, why should I keep on going? What's the use? Why bother if nobody else does? ...
Give up! That's what the social engineers want us to say and do.
Let us continue from where I have left off in the last section:
. At 0e (NeiYeh chapter 10 line 5) we have "One Word ( 1C2)" and at 0g, we have the same two characters again. Then at 0i (line 9) we have “One-word( Z)”. The Pronoun( Z) refers to the "One Word ( 1C2)" at 0e and 0g.
. At 4D (chapter 14 line 4) we have the "One Word ( 1C2)" again. And again we have the "One-word( Z)" in line 8 (4H). Just as our dreams can be analyzed so we can analyze the poetry (A) we have here. It is only accessible to our intellect if we approach it with the appropriate respect or with "Reverence", as the author of the NeiYeh suggests at =2h (Chapter 22 line 8). Who is this author? ...
We can call him Lao Tzu, the "Old (Lao)" and ever young "Boy (Tzu)". It is a timeless wisdom. It comes to us from God's omniscience. It comes through dreams, poetry, synchronicity and other "Ways(A1)" but we will only analyze these messages properly if we know them for what we are. This knowledge causes us to appreciate them. "Follow Me Ones (My followers) Value (18meerKu)" my words. "My Words are Very Easy to Understand(myC2%tezkn). Very Easy if you translate them into Practice (%tezpr)". If you approach this poetry with some respect, and you find this "One Word" in different chapters, what does the Lao Tzu tell you? ...
. In the meantime, let me tell you about the addressing system. When working on this type of poetry it helps to have an efficient addressing system. Admittedly, it takes a bit to get used to it but it will pay off. For instance "Reverence(=2h)" is in chapter 22 line 8. If no Chinese speaking communicator (C) comes out of the woodwork then I have to continue working on the Dictionary-Concordance. I have given up on that work because it is not my "dharma", it is not what I came here to do. The same goes for the writing (C) I have to do here. But, since our political masters don't want us to get our act together, this is the best I can do. If the social engineers don’t want us to do something then, according to Ching 41.1, we have to do it.
. Now, if you want to know more about "Reverence(=2h)" you would look up =2h in the dictionary-concordance and if I had one, you would read there: "I have tried to find that character in the dictionary for 15 minutes and I am not going to waste any more of my time on it."
0h: For "Holding-on to the Rites There-is-nothing Better-than Reverence (40ÜjMOJO=2h)". The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. So to find out more about ???(=2h) we have to look at the other four characters in that line. For instance the third equivalent for Li(Üj) is "worship". That takes me to Gita 4.24, where pure "work .... is .... worship". If you can love the work you do, then you are doing your dharma and then, what would otherwise be a boring routine, becomes an act of worship. So to "Maintain a Worshipful attitude, There-is-Nothing Better-than Respect" for what you are working on. The average line-length in the Neiye is four characters. If a character is in only one chapter, we can use the "*" routine we already have for the Ching. There this convention reduces the number of entries in our Dictionary-Concordance from roughly 800 to 400 characters. This convention reduces the number of entries into the Neiye concordance less dramatically because most of the characters in it are already in the Ching. But still we must try to reduce the number of entries into the dictionary to a minimum. That makes it much easier to use. There is no need to put a character, which is in only one chapter into a concordance. Footnotes will be much more efficient for that. The efficiency of your approach to the poetry is an important factor in your success..
. In the meantime: Did you figure out WHAT the author of the NeiYeh has told us? ...
. Right now, all I have is Harold D. Roth's translation of the NeiYeh. If his 26 chapters are increased to 27 chapters the same numbering system would apply. Chapters 21 to 26 are the only ones which need a three digit identifier, unless somebody comes up with a better idea. Chapters 1 to 10 are identified by numerals 1 to 0, where the line numbers are lower case alphameric numbers. And chapters 11 to 20 are identified by numerals 1 to 0, where the line numbers are upper case alphameric numbers.
At 4H, the question is clear: "What-does-it-mean To-be Released by that One-word (HOdo#q Z)?" What follows after that question should, in theory, contain the answer. The Pronoun( Z) refers to that “One Word ( 1C2)".
. The question at 0i is: What or where is the predicate of 0i? ...
It is interesting to see how Roth has translated 0i:
"It is this [word "Wei"] to which the saying refers. . . . . {Üg} [Tz] .Z is Ye ." Roth gives us the Chinese characters. I can only give you the two-digit identifiers of those characters. If you got his book, you can also read what the different brackets mean.
The "Way" is the Tao(A1) and it means whatever the context demands. So Roth got around the answer because the question still is: ...
What does the context demand here? ...
At the end of the last , May 7, section I said that the unnumbered line between 1E and 1F comes closest to the answer. Did that hint help you? ...
The line reads: "Heaven, Humanity, Earth and Righteousness Follows (Tn,%5TIÜw18)". At Ching 18, Yi(Üw) is translated as "Justice". This brings us to the Republic at 433b: ".... justice consists in minding your own business and not interfering with other people." Plato is talking about THE DIVISION OF LABOR. That means that that the thinkers B, the doers (D) and those between them (C) are cases in that system. Google: protocols of zion division of labor
. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. It is interesting to note that a secondary meaning of I(Üw) is "Meaning". What are the parts through which the Tao emerges and gives "Meaning(Üw)" to them? ...
Let us use analogy: The customer (A) produces the demand. In the original computer programming system it was called the "job-description". The designers of that system have used the Aristotelian tetrad. That is what our political masters don't want us to understand. And that is why they had to make it "disappear". If you have learned the lesson in Ching 41.1 then you know what that means. ...
If our rulers don't want us to know something, then that is precisely what we must understand.
. Now then, the customer’s demand is supplied by ...
programmer, coder and computer (B-C-D). In the construction business it is architect (B), Contractor (C) and his sub-contractors, who are doing the actual physical (D) work. HOW are the Illuminati going to make that disappear? HOW can they make the "Truth(A1)" disappear? ...
There is a reason why they are controlling the educational system and why they own the mass media. See Noam Chompsky about that.
. HOW is that "One Word Grasped ( 1C2gt)"? ...
There we have another, not so obvious, question. If you don't do some thinking on your own then you will not "Get(gt)" it. Not even the Lao Tzu can do your thinking for you. What the timeless wisdom can do is ...
tell you WHAT to think about. If we treat such instructions like a "Job-description" (A) then we might get somewhere in time. If we run out of time before we got out act together it is game over for us. And that is what the Illuminati are aiming at. Fighting the "Truth(A1)" is an uphill battle. The only chance they have for winning the battle is by fighting dirty. This battle is primarily on the mental (C) level. They can’t defeat us on the intellectual (B) level. As A, Conscious Energy, is to B, Sensitive Energy, so B is to C, Automatic Energy. On level B there is more awareness (A). That's why the social engineers must somehow get past our intellect (B). This means that ...
we don't have to let them dumb us down. Eckhart Tolle puts a lot of emphasis on awareness. He is absolutely right on that point.
. So you can see that you don't really need me. However, I might be able to save you some time. and that is important because ...
time is running out. As a cardinal air sign, I can interpret (B) some of the poetry (E1, E2 or E3?) which comes to us through the poets (A). You have an example of that right here.
. The cardinal air signs can think a bit more about what the mutable air signs bring into the semantic dimension of semiotics, and the fixed air signs can explain this stuff better than I can. Where two or three are gathered in the name of Truth, it will be in the midst of them. As a team the thinkers (B), talkers (C) and the doers (D) can accomplish more than the three of them can "Accomplish(cm)" by working on their own. This is what I have to do. And why? ...
Because our political masters don't want us to get our act together. Why? ...
Because they have their act together and they know what will happen if we do.
. Try to understand the tetrad. The customer (A) gets his demand supplied through the supplier (B-C-D). As above, so below. As within so without: As A is within B so B is within C. And as B is within C so C is within D. We, A, B and C, are within our body (D). What is within and the body itself we call the subject. What is outside of us we call the object. In Mr.B's ENERGIES A is E4, B is E5, C is E6 and D is E7. Around us is the world (E8). In Hinduism that is the Annamaya Kosha, D is the Pranamaya Kosha, C is the Manomaya Kosha, B is the Jnanamaya Kosha and A is the Anandamays Kosha (A). We are told at Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE that the "Purusha is covered by [these] five koshas or sheaths". The "Purusha" seems to be the E1-E2-E3 triad.
. You can "Ridicule(*a41)" these scriptures or you can take them serious. The choice is yours. You don't have to let the social engineers make that choice for you.
. The Tao (A) emerges through the B-C-D "TriAd( 3ad)" At Ching 14 Lao Tzu calls the three "impulses" or components of the triad the "Formless(#N)", the "Soundless(^e)" and the :Intangible($h)". The "Comments" on these three words by the Paul Carus and D. T. Suzuki team is four pages long. So I can't quote it all. ".... It is strange that Lao-tze's description of the Tao [of this "TriAd( 3ad)"] finds an almost literal parallel in the Phaedrus where Plato speaks of .... an essence, truly existent, without color, without shape and impalpable." The four pages should be read in full. The only question I have is: Why should it be "strange that Lao-tze's description .... finds an almost literal parallel in the Phaedrus"? ...
If Lao Tzu knows the "TriAd( 3ad)" and if Plato knows the triad, why should it be "strange" that WHAT they say about it should be the same? ...
If by means of Mr.B's systematics and the Tao Te Ching, you understand the "TriAd", the question will arise in you "Naturally(Tu)".
. Let me now interpret (in lower case and in brackets) the line between 1E and 1F: If those in "Heaven(B) align themselves with the (Tao at level A) and if Humanity (C) aligns itself to the truth (which B got from A) and if those on Earth align themselves with the level above them then Justice Follows." There is still something, which is not quite clear yet. Can you see it? ...
Why are the three words called "One Word"? ...
. I will give you some time to think about that one. ...
If you are willing to work on the poetry (A) then you will "Get(gt)" it; if not then not. It is as simple as that. You have your opportunity to work on the Tao Te Ching right now. After you have learned a few lessons from it, you can apply that knowledge to the Neiye. You don't need me for that. Lao Tzu has done a great job. All you need is the willingness to "Listen(0h)" to Lao Tzu's instructions and "To-carry-them-out(pr)". If you are willing to do that, then you will "Get(gt)" it; if not then not.
==========================================================
June 7, 2009
. On page 64 of the ORIGINAL TAO, by Harold D. Roth, is the translation of nine lines of poetry and the original Chinese text is on page 65. The translation below is essentially Roth's translation. All I have done is capitalize the words, which are the equivalents of the Chinese characters on page 65 and I have changed some of the fillers and interpretations, which are in lower case. Since you can get Roth's book, this is not only a safe thing to do but also a very useful one. It will hopefully make you think. There is only one different equivalent I have picked from the dictionary. It is for Chia(@W). You will find the concordance and the equivalents for the first four lines in the June 1 section. The ones I don't have there are:
" 1 Yi1. 10 11 14 22 25 39 42 67. __", One. "gt Tê60 12-14 22 23 29-3142 46 52 56 61
62 64 74 'to get, gain, attain'". "bt Erh126 01 02 04 05 07-10 . . . 'And yet; still' But."
8b Ting40 "To fix, stop; determine; tranquil". This one is *a, at Ching 37: All in "Heaven and Below (Tn -) it will Take-in-hand Their-own Alignment (41Tu8b)". What this character seems to mean in the Nei Yeh is, that energy from level A, B or C is stepped down to the next lower level at which it becomes more concrete, "Stabilized" or "Fixed". The picture of it is, "Alignment(%8)" under a "Roof(Rad. 40)". It means that "Alignment" is brought under a "Roof". It means that "Tranquility(%8) is brought into the house. Our "Lower( -)” centers are "Aligned" with the higher, more "Subtle(Jo)", ones. They are coming "Home".
"Üz Fu74 53 59 80". "To yield, assent, serve, dress, ...."
"@H T'ing128 14 35". "To hear. listen, obey: smell". Here is chapter 10: With a well
a. "Ordered Intellect Within your Mind (85HsÜp =) well
b) Ordered Words Come-out Of your Mouth (85C2Cuto@l) and well
c) Ordered Tasks are Conferred Upon Others (85D2@Wtomn)
d) And-if they carry them out, Then all in Heaven and Below (Ja18Tn -) it will be well
. Ordered Indeed (85Ye). if
e) One Word is grasped ( 1C2gt)
f) And all in Heaven and Below it will Submit (btTn -Üz) then the
g) One Word Stabilizes ( 1C28b) on the next lower level
h) And all in Heaven and Below it will be ready To-hear (btTn -@H) the ("Truth(A1")
i) This One-word is Called . (Tz ZisYe)"
The reason I have translated Chung( =), on line a, as "Mind" (C) is because in the B-C-D "TriAd( 3ad)" C is the connective (=). Our mind, Manas in Sanskrit, is our “Center”. As our "Intellect is Within our Mind (HsÜp =)" so our mind (C) is within our body (D). The mind (C) is our center with the intellect "Within" it and the body (D) outside of it. As B is to C so C is to D.
. Yeh(Ye) is a "final particle". It is a period, which normally tells us that the sentence is complete, but here it tells us that the sentence is incomplete. Why? ...
We "Have(YU)" the subject, "The One-word (Tz Z)". Chih( Z) is a pronoun which refers to the "One Word ( 1C2)" in lines e and g. And we also have the connective, "Is-called (is)", but we "Have-no(WU)" predicate. As in the Ching, this means that there is some work for us to do. ...
. If I have come up with an answer, it would be wrong to give it to you now Why? ...
because I would deprive you of doing your homework. Look at the lesson in Ching 36: "If you Want (41YÜ)" to close a door then it has to be open. Why? ...
Because you can't close a closed door. By analogy, you can't answer a question which ...
has already been answered. Learning a lesson from one chapter leads to learning lessons from other chapters. Why? ...
Because they help you to see them. Now, returning to line nine of chapter ten. What is the homework we are given there? ...
As in the Ching, when there is a question, there is an answer. Many words, which are used to formulate the question, are also used to hint at the answer. If I had a concordance for the Nei Yeh, I could use it to find passages which lead us to the answer; without it, I have to rely on luck or synchronicity. If you have the book, try it. ...
Take chapter eleven: If your
A "Body is Not Aligned (@kPU%8) then the inner
B) Power will Not Come (TÊPUäz). if your
C) Mind is Not Tranquil ( =PU^a) then your
D) Intellect Can't be well Ordered (HsPU85).
E) Align your Body (%8@k)! Assist Tê (1ETÊ)!
. . {Heaven Humanity Earth Righteousness Follows (Tn%55TIÜw18).}. in spite of a
F) Licentious Self, do it And of Itself it will Come (1FJabtTuäz)".
1E She64. "To assist; act for; control". In Ching 50 it is *b.
"Üw Yi123 18 19 38". "Righteousness; public; adopted (child); meaning"
1F Yin85 Licentious, lewd; excess; to soak". This one is not in the Ching.
. It is well to see how Roth has solved the problem in Line F. The primary "Meaning(Üw)" of Yi(Üw) is "Licentious", so what do you do with it? Like the Ching, the Nei Yeh is full of paradoxes, but the Ching and the Nei Yeh are also full of hints for the attentive student. Here are the last four lines of chapter 18: If
P) "this flow of vital energy is achieved. (Roth)
Q) And all in Heaven and Below (btTn -) it will Submit(Üz)
R) And once the mind is made stable, (Roth)
S) And once all in Heaven and Below (btTn -) it Listen(@H)" then ...
As in the Ching, the answer is not usually spelled out but, if we are willing "Enough(Zu)", we are given "Enough" to go by. Just compare 8Q with 0f and 8S with 0h. No comment needed here. The Nei Yeh speaks for itself. With a concordance you can easily find these correspondences yourself; without one, you have to rely on luck or synchronicity as I have to.
. Here is another one: At 4D (Chapter 14, line 4) we have:
"One Word, It Releases ( 1C2 Z#q)". And then at 4H we have:
"What-does-it-mean To-be Released by It (HOdo#q Z)?"
"#q Chieh148 04 27 56". "To deliver over". At 4D, Yen(C2) Chih( Z) can be translated as "Word'S", or as I did. At 4H, Chih( Z) refers to the "One Word" at 4D. And that is the same function Chih( Z) has at 0i. It refers to the "One Word" at 0f and 0h.
. As I leave through the Nei Yeh, even without a concordance, more examples or hints come up but I have to draw the line somewhere. You have here an example of the kind of detective work students have to do. What I am doing is less than Jonathan Star has done but HOW I am doing it might be a bit more practical. The most relevant clue to the answer is the unnumbered line in chapter eleven. What is in these brackets are alternative readings. I am glad that Roth has included them. I will now leave you to it. ...
============================================================
June 1, 2009
. On May 30, I went to a lecture by "M15 Whistleblower, Annie Machon. She was talking about ".... state sponsored murder ...." and, even though she was talking about her personal experiences it was still hard to believe. Question: If it were not hard to believe, could these criminals get away with their crimes? Note the accomplicity of the mass media who is helping to hide the truth. This is why Annie concluded her lecture with saying that: If enough of us can believe the truth of 9/11 then not only what our governments are doing but what the mass media is doing, would be revealed at the same time.
. The reason a critical mass of us must know, and believe, the truth is because we are like radio transmitters. What we believe (C) goes into the collective unconscious. Social engineering is the science of mind-control. The people are dumbed down, they are conditioned not to think, and then they pick up what is in the collective unconscious without thinking. The mass media only reinforces what the non-thinking majority already believes. What the mass media says does not go directly into the collective unconscious or morpho-genetic field. It must be picked up by people and then, through them, it is transmitted to others. The Illuminati and their social engineers know that and, unless "Enough(Zu)" of us know it too, we keep transmitting the wrong ideas. By not thinking, we automatically serve our political masters.
. At that meeting, I bought the 9/11 issue of the "Global Outlook" magazine. From reading it, I become more convinced that, with 9/11, our rulers have bitten off more than they can chew. Just take what I read on page 30: ".... Justice Department's John Ashcroft imposed this incredible gag order preventing her from talking about this. In fact, as the NEW YORK TIMES said last week, that even statements made on the major media now are retroactively being considered classified. So to talk about things that have already been in the press now is illegal. That is almost unprecedented in US history and it shows just how afraid" those behind 9/11are that the truth is going to get out. And, if you have learned the lesson from Ching 41.1, it shows us more. ...
By imposing a gag order on material that has been already in the press, our rulers are telling us what they don't want us to know, and Lao Tzu is telling us that this is precisely what we must pay attention to.
. The article from which this quote comes from is of interest to me because Paul Thompson's approach to making sense of 9/11 is analogous to my approach to making sense of contradictory religions (A) and philosophies (B). By reading the following quote, you not only find out HOW to investigate 9/11 but HOW to study comparative philosophy and religion as well.
"CONNECTING THE 9/11 DOTS
. The other thing is that individual facts are reported or individual stories, but there is no connection made between that story and all the other related information. So people have no way of understanding that information., nowhere to put it into context. You might have a story about a particular 'failure of intelligence' but there's no attempt to show a greater pattern involved ....
. Those individual facts are really useless until you understand and can see them in a context. So the chronology idea, putting everything in a logical order, is my way of understanding the context." And that is also the "Way(A1)" we must follow to find the one "Truth(A1" in the many different religions and philosophies.
. That "greater pattern" is like the big picture that comes with jig-saw puzzles It shows us where all the little pieces fit in. Thompson gets his "individual stories" from the mass media; I get them from scriptures like the Bible, the Ching or the Gita. The little pieces we are working on are different, but HOW we are working on them is the same.
. This same-difference condition tells us that the Law of Correspondence applies. Thompson gives credit to Michael Ruppert for getting him going on this project. I have only read the summary of Ruppert's book, "Crossing the Rubicon", but what I can see from it, is that it is possibly the major key, not just for solving but, for helping "Enough" of us to understand the 9/11 crime.
. Lao Tzu literally forces his students to do this kind of detective work. If you don't carry out his instructions, if you don't accept him as your teacher, then you will not learn his lessons.Once you know the "Way(A1)" to do it, Thompson's approach makes a lot more sense.
. The Tao Te Ching is estimated to be 75% poetry. Lao Tzu seems to have used the 25% of prose to teach us HOW to read the poetry. And that knowledge also helps us to read and interpret the Nei Yeh. It is 100% poetry.
. While most of the credit for the translation of Nei Yeh 10, must go to Harold D. Roth, there are a few "Insights(72)" I got from it for which credit has to go to Lao Tzu. Nei Yeh 10 is a concise description of the B-C-D "TriAd( 3ad)", or of semiotics. Since the translation is already in the May 28 section, there is no need to do it again here. The chapter consists of 20 characters. "Ordered(85)" is repeated four times and Yü(to) appears twice. That leaves us with 16 characters we have to know in order to read that chapter. The syntax of the poetry is more like English than Chinese. All of the characters in Nei Yeh 10 are also in the Ching. I will go over them next and, if you are not interested, you can skip it.
. "85 Chih85 03 08 10 32 57 59 60 64 65 75". The information in quotes is from my dictionary concordance. It tells us that Chih(85) is in ten chapters. If you have the "Original Tao" by Harold D. Roth, you can see what the character looks like. Then you can get a translation of the Tao Te Ching which is accompanied by the original standard text and you can find the character in those ten chapters. The dictionary equivalents from "The Five Thousand Dictionary" are: "To govern, keep in order". This will help you to see HOW it is translated.
. "Hs Hsin61 03 08 12 20 49 55 'Heart, mind; center".
. "Üp Tsai32 24 32 49". "At, in, present, at home; living; involved in, consist in". When a character appears in only six chapters or less, there are no dictionary equivalents. You have to use the phonetic and the radical number to look it up yourself.
. " = Chung2 05 21 25 41 _ _". At Ching 41.1 it is the connective (=).
. "C2 Yen149 02 05 08 17 22 23 27 41 43 56 62 66 69 70 73 78 81 'word, ... speak".
. "Cu Chu17 01 05 10 18 35 47 50 51 'Out, to spring from'".
. "to Yü70 08 14 20 23 28 31 32 34 36 40 ... 'With, at to'. From".
. "@l K'ou30 15 32". Mouth.
. "D2 Shih6 02 8 17 23 30 1 48 52 5 7 9 61 3 4... 'Affair, thing; to serve, manage'".
. "@W Chia19 62 69". "To add to, confer on; inflict".
. "mn Jên9 02 03 05 07 08 12 20 22 25-31 ... 'Person, man, men, human", Others.
. "Ja Jan86 17 21 23 25 26 51 53 54 57 64 ... "Certainly ... however; adverb of suffix".
The "And-if" is justified by the next character.
. "18 Tsê18 'And so, then; pattern, rule' Follow".
. "Tn T'ien37 'Heaven... ' Level B on Plato's 'Divided Line (509d)'".
. " - Hsia1 . Looks like a T. __". It represents the "Negative( -)" pole of a polarity.
. "Ye Yeh5 03 20 24 29 32 53 55 67 76 'Also; Final particle'". In Star's Dictionary, the equivalent is "Indeed".
Here you have the parts through which sentences emerge. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The "Total Sum ($0#5) of the parts of a Carriage(âs) is Not a Carriage (WUâs)".
. Right in the first sentence of his book, Lao Tzu said: The "Tao Can be Taoed (A1ptA1) But-not(Fy) in the Usual Way (CnA1)". The equivalents of the Chinese characters we get from translators of the Ching and the Nei Yeh are often more meaningful than the equivalents we get from dictionaries. Why? ...
Because the equivalents Lao Tzu is using are "Not Always the Usual (FyCnA1)" ones. For instance the Tao(A1) can mean anything the context demands. Makes you think, doesn't it? It is supposed to. Richard Wilhelm said that "Tao" is like "ein algebraishes Zeichen", an algebraic Variable. So we must get Lao Tzu's meaning of words from the context he has put them in. Going back to Thompson: "Those individual facts are really useless until you understand and can see them in a context." Also seeing HOW skillfully the social engineers are preventing us from seeing things in their larger context, how they so consistently distract us with their headline NEWS, can tell us that going after the big picture is a mental skill we must acquire.
The words, or characters are the parts through which phrases emerge,
subject, connective and predicate are the parts through which indicative sentences emerge,
sentences are the parts through which paragraphs emerge and
paragraphs are the parts through which chapters emerge. Can you see the Law of correspondence here? Where it applies, we can use analogy to clarify things. There is more:
. The Gita emerges trough 18 (9X2) chapters,
the Ching emerges through 81 (27X3) chapters and 27 (9X3) seems to be the right number of chapters through which the Nei Yeh can emerge. But this is for the experts to decide on. As a mutable air-sign, my job is to make suggestions. Whether "Others(mn)" will "Follow(18)" up on it depends on how willing and able they are.
. There is a lot we can learn from synchronicity. Yesterday I happened to speak to a writer. I asked him to look at my website and if he finds it worth his while I would go 50/50 with him. He laughed out loud about such a preposterous offer. Writers don't need anybody to tell them WHAT to write. Thinkers know nothing about writing. That’s just the point I was trying to make: "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". What he couldn't understand was that writers or "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" how to think well "Enough". They have specialized in writing (C).not in thinking (B). If this writer could think well "Enough(Zu)" he could see that no matter how well he can write, he can't explain something he does not understand. “Knowing that you Don’t Know is Healthy (knPUkn +)”.This guy knows a lot about writing but if he is unwilling to first learn WHAT to say then why should I go 50/50 with him? Politicians (C) are very good with words but they still need their advisors (B) to tell them WHAT to say. The communicator (C) I was talking to couldn't understand that.
===========================================================
This is my birthday May 29, 1935
According to Chinese Astrology, I am a Pig. They go by the year instead of the month but there are also twelve types. When we combine these two systems, we get 144 types instead of only 12. 12 X 12 = 144. This is much more accurate.
WHAT happens to us, and HOW we will most likely respond to it, is predicted accurately for some people and not for others. Why? …
Because some people do their “dharma”, they do what they came here to do, and others don’t.
===============================================
May 28, 2009
139: Langdon chuckled. "Mother Earth."
. "GAEA. The planet is an organism. All of us are cells with different purposes. And yet are intertwined. Serving each other. Serving the whole."
. It is not only the lower who are serving the higher by carrying out the instructions which are conferred upon them; it is also the higher who are serving the lower by enabling them to do their job. The higher and those on the level below them are "Serving each other." And, by doing so, they are "Serving the whole."
. All it takes to make this dream (A) a reality (D) is for some of us to understand (B) THE DIVISION OF LABOR, for some of us to communicate (C) it and for some of us to translate the theory (B) into practice (D).
. The theory is true because it has worked in India before the Brahmins have corrupted the 4-fold system. But even the corrupted system still works well for the Brahmins (B) and for the unelected advisors (B) of our elected politicians (C).
. The system was also known in ancient China. Hear Nei Yeh chapter X: With a well
85 Hs Üp .= . . . . . Ordered Mind Within our Center, well
85 C2 Cu to @l . . Ordered Words Come-out Of our Mouth and well
85 D2@Wtomn . . Ordered Tasks are Conferred Upon Others.
Ja 18Tn - . . . . . . .And-if they are carried out Then all in Heaven and Below it
85 Ye . . . . . . . . . . will be well Ordered Indeed.
==========================================================
May 27, 2009
. I have proofread the previous, May 26, section over three times on the screen and once, carefully, on a printout. Yet the "9/1" and the "(A1-A2-A3)" have slipped by my conscious part every time. But then, after the section was posted, I could see the errors right away. It is as if my subconscious parts want to make sure that "I", my ego, knows that it is not the only part of me. Actually, I notice now that there is still more to it. ...
Notice HOW Lao Tzu is teaching: The errors are obvious "Enough(Zu)" so that you can also find them. In the very next line after the "A1-A2-A3", I said: "INFORMATION is the connective (=) between energy (E1) and matter (-)." I didn't want to say "energy" (+), because I am not sure "Enough(Zu)" of that, and I also wanted to refer to Sat (E1), which I have dealt with already. So it seems to me that my subconscious parts want to separate the thinkers (B) from the readers (C). If you have found these errors yourself then you are in a much better position to "Follow(18)" me.
At the bottom of page 138 "Langdon". the hero, asked "Vittoria", the heroine: "And God? .... Do you believe in God?"
. Vittoria was silent for a long time. "Science tells me that God must exist. My mind tells me I will never understand God. and my heart tells me I am not meant to."
. To understand this profound answer better, we must know what the words "heart", "mind" and "Science" mean in this context. ...
. The easiest monad to identify is "heart". It is the Atman in Sanskrit and it is on level A of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". That is one down two to go. ...
. The English word "mind" comes from the Sanskrit Manas. It is on level C. But "mind" can also refer to our intellect, Buddhi in Sanskrit. Our intellect is on level B. In this context, "mind" seems to refer to both levels.. Two down one to go. ...
. That leaves us with level D for "Science". Science is thought (where the scientific hypotheses come from), word (the decision-making and financing) and deed (the testing). It is the B-C-D triad. It is semiotics. What "Science tells" us, is essentially what the test results tell us. If a theory works as predicted then it is considered true (until another test proves it wrong).
. Now you can go over the quote again. ...
The three dots mean please think (B) before reading (C) on. That's HOW we learn. ...
Our "heart", the soul or the Atman, is the "Door, Dasamadwara". Our soul knows that the "Way(A1)" things are working is the way they are "meant" to work. And, if we can't understand it all, then we are "not meant to."
. B and C are "Bounded(*1)" by A and D. All we can know comes to us through intuition (A) or through our senses, the Indriyas, (D). If we take what comes to us through A as a "job-description" (A), do the "Job-analysis" or develop the algorithm, (B), do the "coding" (C) and do the "execution" (D), as we have been taught in that seven Weeks course, then we get paid for our work. What we ship out, through D, determines what we receive in return. So to say that we "will never understand God" is a bit too pessimistic. We will reap what we sow. The demand comes to us through A. If we supply the demand, through D, then why should we not reap what we sow? ...
As above so below. "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)". As below so above. If a customer pays us for supplying his demand then why should God not reward or punish us for our deeds? ...
. When it comes to "Science", Gods answers don't have to come through A. They come to us through D in such unmistakable ways that statements like: "Science tells me that God must exist." are not something you only find in novels. His answers are the test results (D) scientists come up with and which they have to explain. Things are the "Way(A1)" they are. Tao(A1) also means "Truth".
===========================================================
May 25, 2009
"DAN BROWN
ANGELS & DEMONS"
"AUTHOR'S NOTE
References to all works of art, tunnels, and architecture in Rome are entirely factual (as are their exact locations). They can still be seen today.
. The brotherhood of the Illuminati is also factual."
Page 48: ".... The Illuminati took advantage of the infiltration and helped found banks, universities, and industry to finance their ultimate quest. .... The creation of a single unified world state---a kind of secular New World Order."
. They "found .... universities" in order to infiltrate the educational system. They also own the mass media. Why? ...
Noam Chomsky has described HOW they manage to "Repeat(@1)" their "official version" of the truth through columnists, reporters etc. who don't necessarily know what they are doing. They are programmed to do it. They are the "lackeys" in the "protocols of zion". They can be more effective than the "agents". Lackeys believe that what they have been told, about the Protocols or 9/1 for instance, is the truth. That's why they can come across more sincerely than the agents. Agents know that they are lying.
. Politicians (C) are professional liars, they can lie more convincingly than their unelected advisors (B) can tell the truth. B is above C and, if their system is to work then, the politicians must "Align(%8)" themselves with their advisors. They must say what they are told to say.
. As more of the truth is getting out, it becomes harder for the lackeys to remain ignorant. They already know that if they don't repeat the "official version" of the truth, knowingly or unknowingly, then they will get fired. They got a mortgage to pay, they got family. What are they going to do? ...
Psychoanalysis? Drugs? Suicide? I suggest that, before you take that last step, you tell the truth. Spill the beans. It will make you feel better, it is the better choice.
56: "He was starting to fuse science and religion . . . showing that they complement each other ...." Science (B-C-D) is the complement of religion (A1-A2-A3) with A, the door, between them. INFORMATION is the connective (=) between energy (E1) and matter (-). This is all above my head but, if I don't toss out these ideas, nobody, more qualified than I am, is going to think about that. Matter - energy is the "DyAd(dyad)" in this "TriAd( 3ad)" and information is the "Monad($1)".
91: ".... science claims the same thing as religion, that the Big Bang created everything in the universe with an opposite." All "TriAds" have the "DyAd" in it.
98: "If antimatter and matter make contact, both are destroyed instantly. Physicists call the process 'annihilation' .... It is nature's simplest reaction. A particle of matter and a particle of antimatter combine to release two NEW particles--called photons. A photon is effectively a tiny puff of light."
. This is not my field of specialization, I just feel that it might fit in somewhere.
==========================================================
May 25, 2009
. Near the end of the previous, May 24, section, I said: "To be dominated, the lower must 'Align(%8)' itself to the higher." ...
This is bound to turn some people off. Who wants to be "dominated"? ...
Before we got to this statement I was talking about the "DyAd(dyad)". Maybe the original Greek doesn't have the negative connotations of the English "dominating and dominated" has but evaluating the statement from the semantic dimension (B) of semiotics we know that we have a "DyAd" here and that we can't have the one pole without the other.
. If there is to be a "dominating" subject then there has to be a "dominated" object. You can't have the one without the other. You can't have a dominated object without a dominating subject. And, since on the physical level the lower is more solid and, thus, stronger than the higher, it must ALLOW the higher to dominate it. And what does that mean in practice? ...
To be dominated, the lower must "Align(%8)" itself to the higher. For instance, an employee may be stronger than his employer is but, if he doesn't want to get fired, then he better do what his boss tells him to do.
. I said earlier in this blog that each of us, each one of the twelve astrological signs, is a triad. We all, to a greater or lesser extent, receive (-) orders process them (=) and give (+) orders, or advise. I couldn't say WHAT I am saying here if I didn't spent over half a century reading revelations and thinking about them. My dharma, as a mutable air sign, is bringing information from level A into the semantic dimension (B) of semiotics. The actual thinking (B) is done by the cardinal signs and the dissemination of the ideas, we produce collectively, is done by the fixed air-signs. What happens with us, the three air-signs (B), is not identical to the water (C), earth (D) and fire (A) signs but it is analogous. Individually we can all dream (A), think (B), talk (C) and walk (D). That is why we can fill in where somebody is not doing his job, or dharma. But ...
We are not as efficient at it as is possible. So collectively we must specialize in our particular dharma. As a mutable air sign, I am doing three jobs, two of which are not my dharma. And this is why since 1989, when I came back from India, I tried to reach a communicator (C) and it was all in vain. I don't seem to get through. I know why but that doesn't help me to get through.
. We are all miniature "TriAds( 3ad)" within or on the boundary of our element. The mutable and fixed signs are on the "Boundary(*1)" and the cardinal signs are fully within their element. For the DIVISION OF LABOR to work properly and efficiently "Enough(Zu)", these details have to be understood.
. As we have individual "TriAds" so we have collective triads. The B-C-D triad in the A-B-C-D tetrad can be collective or individual. But it is easier to observe them in society because there it is objective to us. We can see it work as I could see it in the original computer programming system. There I was a programmer (B). There I took orders from A and, after developing the algorithm, I gave orders to the coder (C). In order to produce a computer output for which we get paid, each of us has to take orders and give orders. And somehow, when it comes to making decisions, the idea of freedom and determinism is connected to this.
. Rudolf Steiner, in his PHILOSOPHY of FREEDOM, had the difficult task to explain how it is possible to have freedom in a world which is so obviously determined. As everything that happens, happens because something else causes it to happen so everything we do, we do because of what we have done before. We may feel that we have the freedom of choice but the facts seem to contradict that.
. One of the six Laws around the Hexad is called FREEDOM (=-+). =+- and =-+ differ from the other four laws in that the reconciling impulse (=) is in the initiating position.
. The description of "THE LAW OF FREEDOM" runs from page 123 to 128 of Volume two of THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE. Too much to quote but let me try to give you some idea:
. "The symbol 3-2-1 [=-+] can be expanded to read: 'The Reconciling Impulse is the initiating factor and, meeting the Receptive Impulse, protects it from extraneous influences so that as Pure Receptivity it can support a Pure Affirmation. (123)"
. From this we can go to a clearer definition: " .... freedom for an entity is possible only when it is in a state of pure receptivity. When in a state of emptiness, the self is uncommitted and can choose to submit itself to the action of a 'higher' law. (124 to 125)" This "Pure Receptivity .... can support a Pure Affirmation." What does that mean in practice? ...
Hard to explain when it is not quite clear to me either. In the E3-A-B triad A is the "Pure Receptivity" (-) and B is the "Pure Affirmation" (+). Now, what is the Reconciling Impulse (=) doing in the initiating position? ...
It initiates the 3-fold process. Since E3 is beyond our 4-fold system it is outside of our sphere of influence. Something which, according to the Hindus, is unknowable to us, initiates a process we can know (B). We can study the Gita, the Ching, pages 123 to 128 etc. What we get in THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE is the description of a vision Mr.B has had in a graveyard in Turkey. For me there are "Too-many Words (TOC2)" in Mr.B's books. But because I like the Ching better it doesn't mean that you have to like it too.
For the thinkers (B) to get the visions (A) from the level above them, they must "Align(%8)" themselves with A. Chêng(%8) is in chapters 08, 45, 57, 58 and 78.
In "Speaking It-is-well to be Honest (C2gd09).
in Governing It-is-well to maintain Order (%8gd85)." The dictionary equivalents of Chêng77
are: "Principal, orthodox, upright, exact, straight, right, just then". But most translators have "governing" or "government". Why? ...
A "Good(gd)" ruler will "Align" himself and his people to the higher levels above, and he does that by maintaining "Order(85)", or by "Governing(85)" “Well(gd)”.
"Peace and Serenity Does Heaven Below Align (#T^adoTn -%8)" with what is above heaven.
At 57 "People Self Align (MnTu%8)" can be interpreted as: People follow their dharma. Following your dharma is following your bliss or higher Self.
At 58 Chêng(%8) appears twice. Just compare different translations of it.
"Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)". Lao Tzu gives examples of these "Reversals".
. Where Chêng(%8) is actually translated as "Alignment" is in chapter 8 of the Nei Yeh:
If you are "Able to Align (ab%8) yourself to the level above then you are
Able to be Tranquil (ab^a)". The Nei Yeh is terrific but I don't have a concordance of it and it would take too much of my time and energy to do it myself.
. This "Tranquility(^a)" seems to be the factor which purifies the affirming (+) and the denying (-) impulses. According to Nei Yeh chapter 8 it makes us "Stable(8b)". It seems to give communicators the charisma which causes people to listen to them. At least that is what I get from chapter 10: With well
"Ordered Mind In your Center (85HsÜp =) well
Ordered Words Come Out-of your Mouth (85C2Cuto@l), well
Ordered Task are Given To Others (85D20ctomn) and
If they are carried out Then all in Heaven and Below (Ja18Tn -) it will be well
Ordered Indeed (85Yi)".
===========================================================
May 24, 2009
. The May 14 section needs a Correction: The "what are they going to do about this one?", should be: What are they doing about it. ...
. I went to a talk on ANGELS & DEMONS at YORK University. It was by a professor who was at CERN. I asked him if he had heard about SCIENCE and the AKASHIC FIELD, which is about his area of specialization. Did he? ...
No. Is he to blame? …
Only for not being aware of what is being done to his mind or, if he is aware of it, for valuing his position, his job security or his family, more than the truth. Who can really blame him? ...
Let him, who can make that sacrifice for the truth, cast the first stone. Take author Ralston Saul: In his Voltaire's Bastards he has revealed truth that should be followed up. Did he? ...
Read the books, he wrote next, yourself. I call it damage-control. But could YOU resist the temptation he must have been subjected to? ...
Take THE SECRET. It contains partial truths. Is it credible that none of its authors knew more of it than they put into that book? ...
Simply by reading THE SECRET SOURCE you can know more about the Hermetic Laws, which are used in that system, than what is in THE SECRET. Speaking for myself, I find it hard to believe that none of the authors knows more about these Laws than what they have put in that book. The authors of THE SECRET SOURCE have merely collected information, which is available to just about anyone. Why not to the authors of THE SECRET? Again, if you put yourself into their shoes, could YOU resist the temptation of wealth and fame? ...
. Let me get back to page 74 of: LOVE The Real Da Vinci CODE: "Everything evolves from the whole or Holy unity symbolized by the cycle. The false division, a straight line, represents the shortest distance between two points---Yah and man." ...
The "line" is not a "false division". The "circle", the "Unit($1)", the "One( 1)”, the "whole or Holy" truth can only emerge through its parts. The whole cannot manifest without its parts. Let's go to page 91 of ANGELS & DEMONS: ".... science claims the same thing as religion, that the Big Bang created everything in the universe with an opposite."
. "A fact of nature. Everything has an opposite. Protons have electrons. Up-quarts have down-quarts. There is a cosmic symmetry at the subatomic level. Antimatter is YIN to matter's YANG. It balances the physical equation. (Page 94)”. Not bad for a novel, don't you think?
. . .A . . . . . Plato's student, Aristotle, has wrapped his teacher's
D . + . B . . "Divided Line (509d)" around the cross to form a cycle.
. . C . . . . . What happened? ...
Complementation happened. Plato was a writer (C) who has had visions of the truth. This is why Steiner said that Plato was not a philosopher. Aristotle was the thinker (B). Trouble is that he has not given credit where credit is due. Our ego does the things, which are natural to it, to us. "For the human creature it is the smallest number in which certain multiplications, dominating and dominated, .... (546b)" In our 4-fold human system, the higher must dominate the lower, if what the higher wants is to be manifested by the lowest "source" or component, which is our physical body. In computer programming, the customer (A) tells the programmer (B) what s/he wants. B tells C what needs to be done to supply the customer's demand and the computer (D) produces the output, or supply.
. The A-B-C and the B-C-D "TriAds( 3ad)" are both fully contained within the A-B-C-D tetrad but they are not the only components which complement each other. There is also A and D. All components of a system are like the links of a chain. If one link doesn't work, the whole system doesn't work. B and C are within the system while A and D are like a "Door, Dasamadwara" facing both in and out. B and C are within while A and D are on the "Boundaries(*1)". When a number follows the * it represents a chapter number.
. This will have to do because I have described this stuff in more detail in previous sections.
After seeing The Da Vinci Code, I was not inspired to get the book. Why read the book when the code is not in it? That was before I heard Horowitz. And that is why I was inspired to buy his book. I was not interested to see the much advertised ANGLES & DEMONS but when "Enough(Zu)" people tell me that I have to see it, I take that as a message. The movie inspired me to get the book 713 pages long. Now you know why there is a gap between the May 14 section and this one. Let me quote from it, starting at the bottom of page 54: ".... He felt like he
was witnessing the clash of two philosophical titans . . . an unsettling blur of opposing forces. He scanned the titles on the bookshelf:
THE GOD PARTICLE
THE TAO OF PHYSICS
GOD: THE EVIDENCE
One of the bookends was etched with a quote:
TRUE SCIENCE DISCOVERS GOD
WAITHING BEHIND THE DOOR
. . . . . . . ---POPE PIUS XII"
. The "Door, Dasamadwara", the "Boundary". I have no time for novels. I like non-fiction and this novel turned out to be among the best books I have read. It is on the level of VOLTAIRE'S BASTARDS and thus it is bound to come to the attention of the "ILLUMINATI". They promoted the Da Vinci Code as a part of their damage-control, but, indirectly, they also promoted ANGELS & DEMONS, which exposes much the ILLUMINATI don’t want us to know. Brown did not go as far into the Da Vinci CODE as Horowitz did, but he went further into it than he did in the Da Vinci CODE. Interesting, isn't it? ...
. When you familiarize yourself with the Law of Correspondence you start to notice more correspondences: As LOVE The Real Ds Vinci CODE is to the Da Vinci Code so THE SECRET SOURCE is to THE SECRET. Is it credible that none of its authors knew even some of what is in THE SECRET SOURCE? …
Fame and riches are temptations, which are hard to resist. I don't know if I could. I am saying this now, because I am not tempted or assassinated yet,but they tried in Cuba. Our political masters know HOW to tempt and HOW to threaten.
. Ralston Saul took a junket around the world along with other members of the club. Complements of the taxpayers. That is temptation. To go over VOLTAIRE'S BASTARDS again and then compare that with what he wrote next to see what is missing and what is added is not my job. My job is to get the general picture, which comes through the door (A) into the semantic dimension (B) and to draw attention to it as best as I can.
. And I must draw attention to Dan Brown. "I am not saying Dan Brown is guilty of anything (page 100)", neither do I. All I am saying that the right people have to look into it. What company is Dan Brown in now? How many of the ILLUMINATI secrets has he revealed? Does he know more? Does he already know too much? ...
As with Ralston Saul, how much of the CODE which is in ANGELS & DEMONS is in The Da Vinci CODE? What has he added? ...
Lots of work. Too much for me. My job is to rise these questions, to draw attention to them. I am talking about a DIVISION OF LABOR. At 546b of his Republic, Plato's "Muses" are talking about "dominating and dominated". To be dominated, the lower must "Align(%8)" itself to the higher. In order to produce the output the customer (A) demands, the programmer must listen to and obey the higher. Because of the Law of Correspondence, As A is to B, so B is to C. This "dominating and dominated" relationship can best be seen between coder (C) and computer (D), or contractor (C) and subcontractor (D), because there we have reached the most tangible level. There, on the physical (D) level, the computer or the construction workers, produce what the customer wants and is going to pay for if it is done right.
. Analogy is based on the Law of Correspondence. It is "one of the most important mental instruments by which man was [and is] able to pray aside the obstacles" which the ILLUMINATI put in our way.
==========================================================
May 14, 2009
. In the May 10 section, I have quoted Juan Mascaró's footnote on SATTVA, RAJAS, and TAMAS .... intelligence .... mental [C] energy .... and inertia.". Now let us go to SCIENCE and the AKASHIC FIELD. What is Ervin Laszlo's triad? ...
"INFORMATION", "energy" and "matter". ...
Can you see The Law of Correspondence at work here? ...
. On page 11, Ervin said: "As we have seen, physical TOEs endeavor to relate together all the laws of physics in a single formula .... it is simpler, and more sensible, to look for the basic laws and processes that GIVE RISE TO these entities, and to their interrelations.
. "The computer simulation of complex structures demonstrates that complexity is generated, and can be explained, by basic and relatively simple starting conditions. As John von Neumann's cellular automata theory has shown, it is enough to identify the basic constituents of a system and give the rules --- the algorithms --- that govern their behavior. .... A finite and surprisingly simple set of basic elements governed by a small set of algorithms can generate great and seemingly incomprehensible complexity merely by allowing the process to unfold in time. A set of rules informing a set of elements initiates a process that orders and organizes the elements, so that they create more and more complex structures and interrelations."
. By selectively quoting from a larger text, we focus our attention on what we intend to work on. If we intend to work on something else then we have to highlight it and ignore what will detract us from it. For instance, if we want to work on systematics then we have to highlight what is related to "the basic constituents of a system and ...." But right now we want to work on The Law of Correspondence: Notice, for instance, how ruthlessly I have extracted "intelligence .... energy .... and inertia" and "INFORMATION", energy" and "matter" from the larger texts. The purpose of the above selection is to find correspondences between Vedanta Philosophy and Science. ...
In science, theories (B), or scientific hypotheses, are tested and, according to pragmatism (D), if they work then they are true. Now, if a philosophy is also true then there has to be a correspondence between them.
. Thinkers (B) use thinking tools the way carpenters use woodworking tools. I have just used a thinking (B) tool as a communication (C) tool. Which one? ...
Analogy is based on The Law of Correspondence. It is not the only thinking tool thinkers must learn to use but its power is usually "Underestimated($j)". Could it be that our "Enemies(âb)" have something to do with that? ...
Laszlo's new paradigm is a departure from the ever more complicated attempts to account for the new discoveries scientists keep coming up with. Laszlo's new approach to problem-solving would have Lao Tzu's approval but it cannot be in the interest of our political masters. So what are they going to do about this one? ...
And how can we pray aside the obstacles they put in our way? ....
To keep us in the dark, they must complicate things. Any problem-solving tool, which simplifies things, is a problem to them. If they do "Enough(Zu)" about it (so that enough of us become aware of what they are doing) then Lao Tzu's lesson of Ching 41.1 applies: When
"Below average Rulers ( -Ün) Hear the Truth (^dA1) they will
Greatly Ridicule It (TA*a Z). if they do Not Ridicule (PU*a) it then we have
Not Enough Means To (PUZuYIdo) find out the Truth(A1)". *a = Hsiao118.
. What is a practical application of this lesson? ...
If our rulers don't want us to use analogy then ...
we must learn how to use it. Since analogy is based on The Law of Correspondence, let us go to page 73 of THE SECRET SOURCE.
"II THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE
. . As above so below; as below so above.
. . . . . . . . . . The Kybalion
"This Principle embodies the Truth that there is always a Correspondence between the laws and phenomena of the various planes of Being and Life .... There are planes beyond our knowing [the planes above level A] but when we apply the Principle of Correspondence to them, we are able to understand much that would otherwise be unknowable to us. .... it is a Universal Law. The ancient Hermeticists considered this Principle as one of the most important mental instruments by which man was able to pray aside the obstacles which hid from view the Unknown. .... the Principle of Correspondence enables Man to reason intelligently from the Known to the Unknown. Studying the monad, he understands the archangel."
. If you don't know what the intentions of our political masters are then you would expect them to teach students how to use this powerful thinking tool. Why are they in control of our universities? ...
And how can we pray aside the obstacles they put in our way? ....
By studying the truth independently of their "official version" of the truth, we will become aware of where the truth has been oversimplified and were it is made to appear to be more complex than it really is. When you know the truth individually, it will set you free individually; when we know it collectively, it will set us free collectively.
===========================================================
May 10, 2009
. The previous, May 6, section is short and full of the usual obvious errors. The reason is that I wanted that section out as fast as possible to keep the damage, which the last two paragraphs of the May 4 section are bound to cause, down to a minimum.
. Errors in the syntactic dimension mean that sentences are hard to read because their syntax is wrong. But it doesn't take any brains to detect those errors. As "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" how to think properly so "KnowErs Don't know how to Write (knerPUC2)" properly.
. When evaluating the last May 6 section, from the semantic dimension it is alright because the message I wanted to get out, got out. There is, however, some room for improvement. Let me tell you a bit more about the three Gunas. Here is a quote from Gita 14.5:
. "SATTVA, RAJAS, TAMAS --- light, fire, and darkness --- are the three constituents of nature. They appear to limit in finite bodies the liberty of their infinite Spirit. * ....
. "* SATTVA, RAJAS, and TAMAS are the three 'Gunas', or the three 'strands' which, intertwined, are both the constituents and the changing conditions of nature. They are the light and harmony of pure intelligence ....; the fire and desire of impure mental energy and restless passion; and the darkness of dullness and inertia. Until final freedom is attained, they are clouds of matter darkening the Sun of the Spirit."
. According to the May 6 section, Sattva and Raja are the opposites in the triad. with Tamas, indifference, between them. Here, at 14.5, the opposite poles of the triad seem to be Sattva and Tamas, with Rajas, busy activity, between them. Which one of the two statements is wrong? ...
Both are right. Both are "TriAds ( 3ad)". We must now "Identify(Mg)" the "Above( +)", Below( -)" and the "Average Scholars ( =Ün)" in terms of the Gunas. ...
"If the soul meets death when Sattva prevails, then it goes to the pure regions of those who are seeking Truth. (Gita 14.14)". I am happy to inform my fellow air-signs (B) that "Buddhi", or our intellect, is associated with Sattva. I am aware that Eckhart Tolle is going to disagree with that but the Hindus have studied these things much longer than Tolle has. It also makes a lot more sense to me. When compared with Sattva, people in whom Tamas predominates are called stupid. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)". When compared with Rajas, people in whom Tamas predominates are called lazy. Why? ...
Because stupidity is the opposite of intelligence and laziness is the opposite of "mental energy and restless passion". All triads consist of three "impulses", or components. Two of these are the poles of a polarity. But which two impulses are the opposites, and which pole is the monad can be different, as you have just seen here.
. In no other "TriAd( 3ad)" has Lao Tzu defined the three impulses as clearly as in Ching 41.1. If you "Diligently study the first three sentences of that first paragraph And Practice (#6btpr)" Lao Tzu's lessons, then you don't need other people to do it for you. Nobody can do your thinking for you anyway. Not studying (B), communicating (C) and "Practicing(pr)" the "Truth(A1)" when you "Hear(^d)" it, is laziness. Being lazy is being lukewarm.
. "So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelations 3:16)" For thinkers (B), being stupid and lazy means not looking for contradictions in the information, which comes to us through the Door (A).
"Those who are in Sattva climb the path that leads on high, those who are in Rajas follow the the level path, those who are Tamas sink downwards on the lower path. (14.18)" ...
Which two Gunas are the "DyAd(dyad)" here and which one is the "Monad($1)" ...
If you have done this simple exercise, you have done what is called "Identifying the monad" in systematics. You have become a student instead of just being a reader (C).
. At 14.5 Sattva and Tamas are the "light" and "darkness" dyad while at 14.18 "Sattva .... leads on high" while "those who are in Tamas sink downwards". We have here the same Sattva-Tamas dyad but the monads in them are different.
. At 14.14, those in whom "Sattwa" predominates are "those who are seeking Truth". Those are the "Above average Students ( +Üd)". Those in whom Rajas predominates are their opponents because they try to prevent the seekers from "Finding the Truth (doA1)". Those in whom Tamas predominates "Hear the Truth (^dA1)" and they don't care; those who are for or against the "Truth" do care about it. So, at Gita 14, Tamas is the opposite of Sattva while at Ching 41, Rajas. is its opposite. Now that we have "Identified(Mg)" a contradiction we have something to chew on. ...
"Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed (dfezmtcm)". ...
Without a task to be "Completed(cm)" nothing is difficult or easy. What is our task now? ...
At Gita 14 and Ching 41.1 the "Monad" is between the poles of the polarity; at Ching 2.2 we have six examples of a "TriAd" in which the "Monad" is at the end.
. There are six different triads: +-=, -+=. +=-, ___. =+- and =-+. These are all valid, if ...
they work.
. When we apply systematics to the visions, which come to us through the Door (A), questions arise more readily and answers come to us more "Easily(ez)". What is "Difficult and Easy (dfez)" is largely determined by how well we are able to think. ...
Why are difficult problems often caused by thinking? ...
"Not Knowing that you don't Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)
"He Who (heho) doesn't know that he doesn't know (@p@p)
ThereFore (SiYI) does Not feel Sick (PU@p)".To him, "IgNorance(PUkn)" is bliss. It takes intelligence to detect contradictions. No contradictions, no problems to solve, no tasks to be "Completed(cm)".
. Lao Tzu is first teaching us the inductive, or bottom up, approach to problem-solving. Without it, the Ching remains a closed book. See Ching 63 and 71, for instance.
. The other thing I have referred to in the last two paragraphs of the May 4 section is The Law of Complementation. Whenever Lao Tzu leaves words and phrases out of sentences, he is using that Law. "What-is-not-there(WU)" in a sentence is the complement of "What-is-there(YU)". Six of "THE SEVEN HERMETIC LAWS (page 71 of THE SECRET SOURCE)" are based on The Law of Complementation. ".... all truths are but half truth (page 74)". The truth "Which-is-there(YU)" is but the complement of the other half "Which-is-not-there(WU)".
. Of all the N-Term systems, only the "Monad($1)" is "Complete(cm)". All other systems need the full complement of their components to be "Complete".
. Why is The Law of Complementation not included in the seven Hermetic laws? ...
I guess Hermes has left out a few things for us to figure out. One of his laws is based on the "Monad", the other six are based on the "DyAd". It and all larger N-Term are based on The Law of Complementation. All N-Term systems are complementaries. To go beyond the dyad may have been too much to chew.
. "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg)" the "One( 1)", or the monad, by complementing each other. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that. That's why, when they "Hear the Truth (^dA1)", they don't communicate (C) it. That's why not "Enough" people "Hear the Truth". And that's the way our political masters like it.
=======================================================
May 6, 2009
In one of the previous sections, I used the analogy of looking at a house from one of the four lateral directions: Front, back or from one of the two sides. The Hindus have a triad consisting of three "gunas", or tendencies. These are preconceived ways of interpreting what we see.
. The Tamo Guna causes people to mistake the part for the whole. When they only see the back-view of a house, they claim that the way they see it is the ONLY way to see things.
. The Sattwa Guna is its opposite. Each triad has a dyad in it. What we can say of this opposite view is that people under the influence of this Guna mistake the whole for the part. They can see the whole, but that think that they see it as clearly as if they are looking at a part of the whole. Understanding the three Gunas helps us to see that no extreme view is good "Enough(Zu)".
. The Rajo Guna is the connective between the extremes. It alone is not good enough either. The parts of a whole are like the links of a chain. Only by considering the "TriAd( 3ad)" as a whole, which "Acts as One (do 1)", can we arrive at a better understanding of what we, as humans, can see. "Not Seeing what is DesirAble to see Causes People's Heart Not to Stir (PUooptYÜ%eMnHsPU$a)". Seeing or not seeing things "Causes(%e)" us to Want(YÜ)" or not to "Want" them. The rulers in an "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)" know that. Do we? ...
When we understand the three Gunas,, we appreciate what others can see because ...
we know that it is " DesirAble(ptYÜ)" to see but we also know that ...
we can't see it.
. The insight which caused me to make this disclaimer is that comparing the view, which is described by Horowitz and Tolle must not be compared to only the back-view of a house. Studying these visions (A) causes us to realize they are more than that. If you find passages in their books, which show that they have ignored the fact that the whole is greater than its parts and that it is like a chain, which is only as strong as its weakest link. please don't reject the whole book because of that because that would amount to throwing out the baby with the bath water. At the same time, we must not ignore the work their egos, with their preconceived ideas, are doing. If an author claims that his way is the ONLY way that means that the other three ways, or yogas, must be wrong. If you have followed any one of the other three yogas far "Enough(Zu)" then you know that they are not wrong.
. For jnana yogis (B) the task is to determine what of the description of a vision is true and what is not. To do their dharma, the "KnowErs(Kner)" (B) must study more than one description of a vision, find contradictions in them, and then use their intellect, Buddhi in Sanskrit, to determine which one is true.
The reason the double line, =====, at the end of the previous section is short is because I got caught up with what I said at the end of that section and I forgot to put in the line. I only noticed that it was missing when I was already on line. The file is getting too long. Blogspot is slowing down and staying too long in front of the screen is dangerous for me. Our political masters can do things with microwaves we are not supposed to know about. Even my internet guru told me that they can't do that, and that's the way they like it. The third time I got sick, it was so bad that was afraid that I never get better. If I don't get better then I can no longer say nasty things about our political masters. And thats the way they like it.
. This is another appeal for help. Others can sit in front of the screen for hours without being targeted. They could safely do the corrections which need to be done.
===================================================
May 4, 2009
. Before I put out the previous, April 29, section, I have proofread it, twice on the screen and once on a printout. Each time I have found the obvious errors you can see as well but the following two have slipped by my conscious mind each time. They are: ...
"For the Enneagram to emerge through its 12 parts ...." ...
The Enneagram has 9, not 12 parts. The other mistake comes a few lines later: ...
"1/4 of the Dodecad could emerge through the tetrad.
. J. G. Bennett's Dodecad consists of three tetrads.", not four.
. I have given you here syntactically correct sentences but semantically wrong, or misleading, information.
If you had caught these errors yourself, you would have benefitted from that. So, what my subconscious parts have done, can be beneficial. What are these parts? ...
Let me quote from page 8 of INNER WORK by Robert A. Johnson:
".... Jung compared the ego -- the conscious mind -- to a cork bobbing in the enormous ocean of the unconscious. ....
. Ego, in Latin, simply means 'I.' Freud and Jung referred to the conscious mind as the ego because this is the part of the psyche that calls itself 'I,' that is 'self-conscious'--aware of itself as a being, as a field of energy that is independent and distinct from others. When we say 'I' we are referring to only that small sector of ourselves of which we are aware. We assume that 'I' contains only THIS personality, THESE traits, THESE values and viewpoints that are up on the surface within the ego's range of vision, accessible to consciousness. This is my limited, highly inaccurate version of who 'I' am.
. The ego-mind is not aware that the total 'I' is much larger, more extensive than the ego, that the part of the psyche that is hidden in the unconscious is much greater than the conscious mind and much more powerful."
. When time and again it can slip errors, of which I have only given you two examples here, past my ego then I get some inkling of how "powerful" it is.
. There is another interesting bit of information in this quote which I only noticed now: The ego is "a field of energy that is independent and distinct from others." ...
Can you also see it? ...
Which are the four Energies in Mr.B's Dodecad we call "I"? ...
Conscious Energy (E4), Sensitive Energy (E5), Automatic Energy (E6) and Vital Energy (E7). We say: "I am me" (A), "I think" (B), "I said" (C) this or that, or "I did" (D) this or that but we don't say: "I am that tree over there". What is out there is objective to us, only what is inside of our body (D), and the body itself, is our own subject. This is the first "DyAd(dyad)" Lao Tzu mentions in his book:
"Taoed and TaoAble (A1ptA1) object is the Opposite(Fy) of the TaoIng (CnA1)" subject.
Lao Tzu didn't say "TaoIng(doA1)" here, but object "Is-the-opposite-of(Fy)" subject. Lao Tzu "Always(Cn)" challenges the syntactic dimension with the semantic dimension. This is HOW he tries to get us to think. What is more important, content (B) or container (C)? ...
Both are equally important. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. The A-B-C-D tetrad is greater than the sum of its parts. This is fundamental to systematics, to systems theory and to semiotics.
. Let us now look at page 1 of LOVE the real DA VINCI CODE:
. "Where is the code in The Da Vinci Code? ....
. By definition, a code is, '.... ; a systematic collection of the existing laws ....'"
. Systematics is the study of 12 N-Term systems. The system in which N = 6 is the HEXAD. Its "Term Designation" is "LAW. Laws govern the coalescence of events."
. What are these Laws? ...
As Horowitz says: they are mathematical, they have to do with Sacred Geometry. Plato can help us here. As he has divided the TETRAD in his "Divided Line (509d)" so we can divide the HEXAD: Divide a line into half and then divide the 2 halfs into ...
3 parts. As the 4 parts of the Tetrad are ++, +-, __ and -- so the six parts of the Heptad ...
are +-=, -+=. +=-, -=+. ___ and = -+.
If you have filled in the -+ and the =+- then you know that there can be no more nor less than _ components in the Tetrad and no more nor less than _ components in the Hexad.
. To get the Enneagram: Divide the line into three parts and then divide each part into three parts again. We have a picture of that on page 104.
. Following J.G. Bennett, to get the Dodecad: Divide the line into three parts and then divide each of the three parts into ...
four parts. To divide a circle into 8 parts is easier.
. "The integers 6, 8, 9 and 12 are the smallest whole numbers with which the symmetrical system of interlocking ratios .... can be expressed. (page 18)" Horowitz also points out the difference between addition and multiplication: 4+3=7. That gives us the HEPTAD. 4X3=12. That gives us the Dodecad. As I already said, the real Da Vinci Code is a text-book. Like the Ching, you can't just read it.
Systematics is more inclusive than systems theory but both disciplines must be studied properly. When Lao Tzu said: Don't bite of more than you can chew he didn't mean: Don't study the "DyAd(dyad)”, "TriAd( 3ad)" etc. but don't waste your time and energy on trying to answer questions, the answer of which, you are not ready for.
. The numbers 3, 6, 8, 9 and 12 are most significant in the Da Vinci Code but they also stand out in systematics. Except for the Dodecad, more space is devoted to them than to the other N-Term systems.
. Once you have familiarized yourself with these few systems, you will see that Horowitz is right: They are quite simple. The hard thing is to de-program yourself from the programming the social engineers have done on us. "Learn to UnLearn (ÜdPUÜd)", learn HOW to de-program yourself.
. It is clear from what Horowitz tells us that people who intentionally complicate things don't want us to understand them. They want us to look for the truth where it can't be found.
. Ervin Laszlo, in his SCIENCE and the AKASHIC FIELD is also moving away from ever more complicated formulas to one basic triad. He doesn't spell it out, but let me quote one paragraph from page 13:
. "In order to account for the presence of a significant number of particles in the universe (of 'matter' as opposed to 'anti-matter') and for the ongoing, if by no means smooth and linear, evolution of the existing things, we need to recognize the presence of a factor that is neither matter nor energy. The importance of this factor is now acknowledged not only in the human and the social sciences, but also in the physical and life sciences. It is INFORMATION--information as a real and effective factor setting the parameters of the universe at its birth, and thereafter governing the evolution of its basic elements into complex systems."
. This new "paradigm" is clearly in support of the new "Intelligent Design" theory. We have another triad here. ...
First there is the "Creationist" doctrine. That is the thesis. Then comes ...
Darwin's "Evolutionism". That is its antithesis. And then comes their ...
synthesis. It makes sense that the synthesis should be supported by cutting edge science.
. Is Ervin Laszlo's "scientific revelation and major breakthrough" scheduled to be "disappeared from the public's view"? ...
What does that tell us? ...
Read Ching 41.1 to see that this is precisely the truth which, when known by "Enough(Zu)" of us will set us free. Can you see that this is precisely what our political masters are trying to prevent? ...
. How can our political masters make all of these "scientific revelations and major breakthroughs" disappear "from the public's view? ...
If there is "Enough(Zu)" willingness on our part then it simply can't be done. Too much of the truth got out already. It is only a matter of time when their "Ridicule(*a41)", their desperate attempts to hide the truth, can be seen for what they are.
"Everything evolves from the whole or Holy unity symbolized by the circle. The false division, a straight line, represents the shortest distance between two point--Yah and man. (74)"
. I have followed Plato in dividing a line instead of the circle.
On page 22, Horowitz quotes Da Vinci: "There is no certainty where one cannot apply any of the mathematical sciences."
. The real Do Vinci Code is a textbook of the original mathematical science. In the way the 6 LAWS of the HEXAD are identified, mathematics is applied. If you do the exercise yourself, then ...
there is the "certainty" that there are no more and no less than 6 Laws in the Hexad. and no more and no les than 4 divisions in the tetrad.
. If you use the Cartesian plane to interpret "The Parable of the Sower and the Seed (Matthew 13:3)" and Ching 71then you know that it has been used. Descartes didn't create the Cartesian plane, he just rediscovered it. Mr.B has used it to divide the three Tetrads in the Dodecad into four divisions. If you know the tetrad, you can see it all over the place and each time you see it, you learn a bit more about it. He who has shall have more,
On page 3 Horowitz tells us that he had "a vision of Da Vinci's Vitruvian Man spontaneously ...." And on page 4 we have: "Most importantly, 1n 1998, I wrote HEALING CODES for the BIOLOGICAL APOCALYPSE ...." This is knowledge which was there BEFORE the vision came to him and this knowledge, which is there already determines what new knowledge is allowed to come through. Some new knowledge is not allowed to come through at all while other is only allowed through if it is modified so that it does not contradict the pre-established knowledge. This even happened to Plato.
. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts and it is like a chain, which is only as strong as its weakest link. Look for passages where these facts are ignored. Eckhart Tolle has described his vision in A NEW EARTH but he also has the preconceived idea according to which there is only ONE Way. Therefore the other three ways, or yogas must all be wrong. If you look for the same one-sided viewpoint in the real Da Vinci Code then it can be found. It is better if you find the relevant passages yourself than if I point them out to you. But they are not spelled out as clearly as they are in A NEW EARTH. If you are willing to look for then, then you will see them. Seeking is one pole of a polarity, finding is the other.
=========================
April 29, 2009
. After I put out a section on my blog, I get a printout of it to see what is out there. Once it is out, I can see the errors right away. The obvious errors are no problem, you can see them yourself. Like with dreams or active Imagination, our unconscious parts can also communicate with us by causing trouble. I know from experience that my unconscious parts can slip more serious errors past my conscious part. Jungian psychologists call this conscious part the ego.
. Serious errors are where I put a C (in brackets) where there should be an (A), (B) or a (D). This can cause much confusion and cause people to quit in disgust. I am glad to report that I have seen no serious errors in this section, where accuracy when lining up the types of energy with the numbers in our diagram is very important.
. I know from experience that my unconscious parts can slip serious errors past my ego and I am grateful that they haven't done that for a while. They seem to be satisfied with letting me know that they are unhappy with having to do the work the "WordErs(C2er)" should be doing. It also seems to help that I take note and agree with them. Perhaps they have realized that putting serious errors out on the internet isn't going to do us any good. It is not going to attract a "WordEr" who might be willing to do his dharma.
. There is only one less obvious error in the last section because the sentence with the wrong word in it is perfectly correct syntactically (C), only semantically (B) it is not. It clearly is not what I intended to say. Here it is: "As the incomprehensible moves across A to B, B makes it compressible for C."
At the end of the last section I have left you with a problem to solve. If you have solved it, fine; if not, let me state the problem again in a way, which makes it easier to solve:
. The Buddha was a Hindu before he became the Buddha. Therefore he must have known what I am going to quote for you now from Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE:
"7th Sphere, Satyaloka. .... called Anama, the Nameless. [E1]
"6th Sphere, Tapoloka. .... called Agama, the Inaccessible. [E2]
"5th Sphere, Janaloka,. .... called Alakshya, the Incomprehensible [E3]
"4th Sphere, Maharloka. Then comes Maharloka, the sphere of the Atom, the beginning of the creation of darkness, Maya, upon which the Spirit is reflected. This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and the material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara. [E4, the connective (A)]
"3rd Sphere, Swarloka. .... called Mahasunya, the Great Vacuum. [E5}
"2nd Sphere, Bhuvarloka. .... called Sunya, the Vacuum Ordinary. [E6]
"1st Sphere, Bhuloka. The last and lowest sphere is Bhuloka, the sphere of gross material creation, which is always visible to everyone. " (E7).
. We have here the HEPTAD. The circle is divided into seven equal divisions. This Heptad starts on top of the Dodecad. It starts at E1 and goes down to E7. The Buddha's OCTAD sterts at E4, the Maharloka. As far as I can see, he goes down to E11. It is an OCTAD because he touches on the crossover point, point A, twice. At lest that's how it looks to us because ...
we only have a two-dimensional diagram of it.
. Let me quote, even more briefly, from the next Sutra, Sutra 14:
"Purusha [the upper triad] is covered by five koshas or sheaths. ….
"Heart, the 1st Kosha. .... [E4]
"Buddhi, the 2nd Kosha. .... [E5]
"Manas, the 3rd Kosha. .... [E6]
"Prana, the 4th Kosha. .... composed of the organs of action .... [E7]
"Gross matter, the 5th Kosha. .... [E8]".
. We have here the pentad. Each of these N-Term system is unique and requires a certain investment of time and energy to understand it well "Enough(Zu)". The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. For the Enneagram to emerge through its 12 parts we have to get to know these parts through smaller N-Term system.
. Since I have taken the seven week IBM computer programming course I have learned more about the tetrad than I have learned from reading books in years because ...
there I have learned HOW to make use of the tetrad. Theory (B) is no substitute for practice (D). Of the four "sources", or components, of the Aristotelian tetrad, A corresponds to E4, B to E5, C to E6 and D corresponds to E7. In other words, in theory, 1/4 of the Dodecad could emerge through this tetrad.
. J.G. Bennett's Dodecad consists of three Tetrads. There we have Plato's: " .... basic ratio of four to three, .... " at 546c of his Republic. The first of Mr.B's tetrads consists of: + + (E1), + - (E2), - + (E3) and - - (E4). E4 is the lowest source in this tetrad but A (E4) is the highest source in the Aristotelian tetrad. The second of Mr.B's three tetrads ranges from E5 to E8 and the last one goes from E9 to E12.
. The Aristotelian tetrad is easier for us to understand because ...
our "Feldraum, or sphere of influence, ranges from A, the artists, through B, the thinkers, through C, the talkers, to D, the doers. Each one of us is responsible for one of these four areas of specialization. Here we have the 4-fold DIVISION OF LABOR, which is described in the Republic, the Bhagavad Gita, in The Dramatic Universe, the Tao Te Ching and many other books. The social engineers had to do a tremendous brain washing job to make us blind to the information which is available in books, on the internet and which everyone, who has taken that seven week computer programming course, has had a personal experience of.
. The Aristotelian tetrad ranges from E4 to E7, vision, thought, word and deed. The Pentad, we have in Sutra 14, ranges from E4 to E8. The Heptad, we have at Sutra 13 ranges from E1 to E7. And the Buddha's Octad ranges from E4 to E11.
. One symbol of the Heptad is on page 52 of Volume 3 of the DRAMATIC UNIVERSE. It is called "The Double Square Symbol". It is a clearly drawn symbol of the diagram we have at the end of the April 23 section. It fits perfectly into the Dodecad because each of the seven points, E1 to E7, is only counted once. To represent the Pentad and the Octad by means of the figure 8, we have to count the crossover point twice. Actually a more correct representation of the Pentad is the cycle divided into 5 equal divisions. With 1 on top, label the remaining four points, 2 to 5, clockwise. Now trace the 1, 3, 5, 2, 4 pattern back to the 1. If you have the real DA VINCI CODE you can see it on page 151. Notice the pentad you get at the center of the symbol.
. From page 57 to 63 of Volume III you have a description of the Octad. There you get six different diagrams of it. It will be beneficial for you to draw one of them yourself. If you are willing, you will find that it is easier to divide a circle into even numbered divisions than into odd numbered ones.
. Draw a circle. Draw a horizontal line through the center. Draw a vertical line through the center. Divide each of the four quadrants you get into two. That gives you 8 divisions. Now you can start numbering them, clockwise, with 1 on top. On page 59, Mr.B has a diagram called "The Total Octal Symbol". In it Mr.B has connected each one of the eight points with each of the other seven. That pattern is too complex to see another interesting pattern emerge:
. Trace the 1, 3, 5, 7 and the 2, 4, 6, 8 patterns. That is, draw lines from 1 to 3, 3 to 5, 5 to 7 and from 7 back to 1 for the first square and from 2 to 4, 4 to 6, 6 to 8 and from 8 back to 2 for the second square. What you got now inside the circle is called "The Double Square Symbol" on page 57of Volume III. It is formed like the Star of David, but instead of super imposing two triangles, we have here super imposed two squares. As the two triangles form a Hexad in the middle, so the two squares form an Octad in the middle. Can you see the law of Correspondence at work here? ...
Notice the correspondences between the figure produced by the two superimposed triangles and the two superimposed squares. ...
Obviously the two figures are not identical to each other, but they are analogous. Why? ...
The two triangles form a six-sided equilateral figure at the center with six triangles between it and the circumference of the cycle. The two squares form ...
an eight-sided equilateral figure at the center with eight triangles between it and the circumference.
. Also, if we divide the circle into five equal parts and trace the 1, 3, 5, 2, 4, 1, pattern we get a five-sided equilateral figure at the center and five triangles between it and the circumference. There is a difference between even numbered figures, which divide evenly and odd numbered ones which don't. But they are still analogous to each other.
. On the front cover of his LOVE the real DA VINCI CODE Horowitz has a diagram, which looks as if it has two superimposed Pentads in the circle but there are a few things which don't add up. If you have the book, you can take a closer look at it yourself. If you don't have the book, the very exercise of producing it will demonstrate what is actually there.
. Draw a circle, which is divided into 9 divisions. Write the nine on top and write numbers 1 to 8 clockwise around the circle but not quite equally spaced. The spaces between the 8 and 9 and the 9 and 1 are a bit larger than the rest, except for the space between the 4 and the 5. It is the widest space. To get the right proportions you really have to scale the picture on the front cover. But as long as you get close enough we can go ahead with tracing the 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 2, 4, 6, 8 pattern. Now you can see that what looks like two superimposed Pentads, isn't quite what it seems to be.
. Now I have a few questions for you: What is Da Vinci trying to tell us? ...
. Did Horowitz get the answer? ...
Why did he put that interesting diagram on the front cover? ...
Question and answer are really only different degrees on the same knowledge scale. ...
On the one end you "Don't Know and you Know (PUknkn)" it; on the other end, ...
you "Know and Know (@p@p)" that you know.
==========================================================
April 26, 2009
. The last thing I said in the previous, April 23, section was: "Line up B-C-D with 1-2-4 and E1-E2-E3 with 8-7-5. Where is point A? ..." ...
If you have the book LOVE the real DA VINCI CODE by Len Horowitz then the task is easy: Go to page 111, look at the diagram, take pen in hand, write B beside the 1, C beside the 2, D beside the 4, E1 beside the 8, E2 beside the 7, E3 beside the 5 and the answer to the question stares you in the face. But if you don't have the book then you have the opportunity to draw the diagram yourself. All you need is "Enough(Zu)" willingness to do it.
. If you have that then here is what to do: Draw a circle. Draw an equilateral triangle inside of it with one corner pointing up. Write a 9 above the top corner and going clockwise write a 3 and a 6 beside the other two corners. Now, equally spaced, write 1 and 2 between the 9 and 3, 4 and 5 between the 3 and 6 and write a 7 and an 8 between the 6 and 9. Now trace the 1, 2, 4, 8, 7, 5, pattern, that is, draw lines from 1 to 2, 2 to 4, 4 to 8, 8 to 7, 7 to 5 and from 5 to 1. Now you can go back to the previous paragraph to complete the task. ". ...
I hope you didn't forget to answer to the question: "Where is point A?" ...
I don' want to insult your intelligence, so please answer it first. ...
It is at the crossover point of lines 4--8 and ...
5--1. Now compare this diagram with the one I have drawn at the end of the previous section, which is behind this one. ...
It is a diagram of the OCTAD. There I have traced the steps of the Buddha's 8-fold path through the figure 8. It starts at point A, which the Buddha calls "Right Vision", goes clockwise around the lower loop, B-C-D, then back to A again, which is now called "Right Livelihood”, and then we go anticlockwise around the upper loop, points 8-7-5, and there he stops. Point 5, is called "Right Concentration".
. In terms of J. G. Bennett's ENERGIES, point A is E4, that is Conscious Energy. Then comes thought, word and deed, E5, E6 and E7 and then we are back at point A. This time we have Constructive Energy (E8) there. This is the crossover point. as we cross over into the upper counterclockwise loop the experts can't agree on what the Buddha has called the next three steps. Contemplation for point 8, meditation for point 7 and concentration for point 5 is a choice, and it seems to be a reasonable one. Now comes a question ...
What question arises from following the eight steps around the two loops? ...
The Buddha starts with E4. J. G. Bennett's Dodecad starts with E1. E4 be the fourth step. The highest level of energy is Transcendent Energy (E1). That is at point 8 on our diagram.
. In Hinduism, this highest energy level is called "SATYALOKA. The foremost of these is SATYALOKA, the sphere of God -- the only Real Substance, SAT in the universe. (Sutra 13, THE HOLY SCIENCE)". It is the first impulse in the Sat-Chit-Ananda triad.
. There is no contradiction between this and the Buddha's 8-fold path because ...
The Octad is not the Dodecad. eight is not twelve. The Buddha's eight steps take us from point A, where it is E4 around the lower loop across A, where it is E8, up to point 8, where it would be ...
E9. Then comes Right Meditation (E10) and then comes Right Concentration (E11). That is the last step in the Buddha's 8-fold path. The Buddha knew what he was doing, He was a Hindu before he became the Buddha. What did he do? ...
He started at the highest point within the Aristotelian tetrad. That is our sphere of influence. There he started with vision (A) then come thought, word and deed (B, C and D, or E5, E6 and E7) and then we come around to point A again. This time it E8 and he calls it Right Livelihood. Then he moves up to the upper, or inner, triad where we have E1. Then comes E2 and then comes E3. That's where he stops. And it doesn't matter what the experts call these three levels of energy.
. Four steps are within our "Feldraum", or sphere of influence, and three steps take us beyond it. No wonder the experts have trouble with it. The Hindus call point 8 "Anama, the Nameless", point 7 "Agama, the Inaccessible" and point 5 "Alakshya, the incomprehensible". As the incomprehensible moves across A to B, B makes it compressible for C. C is to communicate it to D. If any one of the four sources doesn't do its duty, or dharma, the whole system doesn't work. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. And don't think that our political masters don't know that. What is now the next thing we have to figure out? ...
We have to apply what we have learned so far, in the last two sections, since I heard the Holowitz talk, and apply it to the Dodecad because it has a special meaning for us humans. There is a reason for Astrology and there is a reason for why it is "Ridiculed". There is a reason for dividing the year into 12 month. There is also a reason why the foot is divided into 12 inches. Here in Canada a former initiated Prime Minister did something about that.
. Like Lao Tzu, the Buddha has left out a few things for us to figure out in these last days. Which levels of energy has he left out? ...
E1, E2, E3 and E12. Using the figure 8, to complete the 12-fold cycle, which points do we have to count twice and which point to count three times? ...
Good exercise. ...
=========================================================
April 23, 2009
. At the end of the last, April 20, section, I have quoted from page 85 of the real Da Vinci Code: ".... everything, and nothing are really the same. How" so? Horowitz explains that in the next paragraph: ".... So everything and nothing are like opposite sides of the same coin. If one side disappears so must the other. Likewise, if one side manifests, so must the other."
. We have here a bit of Hermetism you can also get from THE SECRET SOURCE. You can also get it from the Ching. "Everything(YU)" and "Nothing(WU)" are the poles of a very important polarity in the Ching. You can't have one pole of a polarity without its complement.
. Another bit of Hermetism comes from the quote from Pg. 86: "As above so below." Then I have translated (the capitalized words inside the quotes) and interpreted (the rest of the sentence) HOW Lao Tzu says the same thing. Then comes the double line, ======, which indicates that we have reached the end of the section.
. The previous section, of April 14, is right below that line. In that section, the first thing you get is "Above( +) average ....". Next in 41.1 comes "Average( =)" and then "Below( -)" average. This is a "TriAd( 3ad)" The "Above" - "Below" is the "DyAd(dyad)" in the triad. Horowitz said: that "everything, and nothing are really the same." He is talking about the dyad here. And then, a few lines later, I bring in the "Positive( +)" - "Negative( -)" "DyAd". You can read THE SECRET SOURCE and find the same idea there:
".... the terms 'heat' and 'cold' simply indicate varying degrees of the same thing. (Pg. 75)" As hot and cold are different degrees on a temperature scale, so heavy and light are different degrees on a weight scale etc. I knew that but I didn't put together what here on this blog came close "Enough(Zu)" together so that I noticed it. The question is now: What do "Above" and "Below" average people have in common? ...
"Before and After Mutually necessitate Sequence (#c60mt#e)". If you take any one of the three impulses, Before, After, or Sequence, away then you don't have 2/3 of a triad left but none at all. But if you take Sequence away, you still have the "Before - After (#c60)" "DyAd(dyad)". And so, if you take the "Average( =)" away then you still have the "Positive( +)" - "Negative ( -)" dyad. Average is the "Monad($1)", or connective( =) in this triad and it can help us to see what Above and Below average people, who "Hear the Truth (^dA1)", have in common. ...
What does Lao Tzu tell us about the average students? ...
They don't care much about the truth. They are not motivated to seek and find the truth. Even if the "Hear the Truth" it goes in one ear and out the other. "As easy it Come As easy it Go (JO$bJO^k)". So what does the "Monad" tell us about the "DyAd"? ...
There are good and bad people who are both concerned about the truth. The former love (philos) it and the latter hate, or are afraid of, it.
3 + 3 = 6. 3 X 3 = 9. One thing Horowitz drove home in his lecture was that Pythagorean math is simple. If you double eight (8), you get 16. But in Pythagorean math, no number is greater than 9. So you only see a one (1) and a six (6). And 6+1=7. The problem is that social engineers are professionals. They control the educational system and part of their job it is to make it difficult to "See the Simple (oo*d19)". One Way to get around them is to study Hermetism, the real Da Vinci Code, Semiotics, Systematics or the Tao Te Ching from scratch. Of course, our political masters will "Ridicule(*a41)" that too but once you know "Enough(Zu)" about any one of these subjects, their "Ridicule" comes too late, you will be able to see it for what it is. We can also have Syncronicity or COALESCENCE work for us. What is COALESCENCE? ...
Webster's has ".... to grow together; to unite one body or mass ...." The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. What that word COALESCENCE means more specifically depends on the context it is in, or on the parts through which the whole emerges. This takes us into what systematics is about. Systematics is the study of N-Term systems in which N = 1 to 12. For instance, in the HEXAD, N = 6.
. Let me go to Pg. 48 of Volume III of Mr.B's DRAMATIC UNIVERSE: " .... HEXAD Systemic Attribute: COALESCENCE ....Term Designation: LAW.
Laws governing the coalescence of events."
. The six laws are: +-= "EXPANSION", -+=, "CONCENTRATION". +=- "INTERACTION", -=+ "IDENTITY". =+- "ORDER" and ___ "FREEDOM".
. These are the six parts through which the whole, called a hexad, emerges. If even one of them is missing the hexad cannot emerge. But the whole, after having emerged, is greater than the sum of its parts.
. The symbol which is associated with this 6-term system is the double triad, or the Star of David. The Laws Mr.B has associated with the six corners of the star are: =+- at 12 O'clock, +=- at 2 O'clock, +-= at 4 O'clock, -+= at 6 O'clock, -=+ at 8 O'clock and =-+ at 10 O'clock. Notice here that the opposite corners are "Reversals($l)" of each other.
. If we line up the top corner with point A and the bottom corner with point C, then the other four Laws don't line up with B and D. If we start with E1 at 12 O'clock and move down clockwise we get E2 at 2, E3 at 4, E4 at 6, E5 at 8 and E6 at 10 O'clock. This is just wild and brainless guesswork but it might get some of you thinking. ...
. Now, if we put E4 (A) in the center of the HEXAD then we get a HEPTAD and that might get us somewhere. ...
If the inner triad is E1-E2-E3, with E2 on top then the outer triad has to be B-C-D, with C on the bottom. Thought word and deed are the parts of the outer triad. These are the semantic (B), syntactic (C) and pragmatic (D) dimensions of Semiotics through which it emerges.
. What I have given you here is merely theory and theory alone is not "Enough". Theory (B) alone is not the A-B-C-D tetrad. The whole, which emerges through A, B, C and D, is greater than the sum of its parts.
. There is another symbol on page 48 titled "The Hexad as Progressive Cyclicity. "CycliciTy, Tao'S Movement ($ladA1 Z%k)". The six moves trace the .142857 pattern. That is Gurdjieff's Enneagram. I have seen it at the Horowitz lecture but not in his book.
. On page 111 of the book we have a diagram, which comes close to the Enneagram. In fact, lines 4-2, 5-7 and the triad, are identical. To me, this diagram appeals more than the Ennearam because we have the figure 8 in it. A " diagram of the infinity pattern 1,2,4,8,7,5 is structurally identical to each segment of DNA spiraling in the genetic double helix. (Pg.120)"
. On page 105 Horowitz says: "This dynamic human ability of communion with the Divine Matrix, through and from which the Holy Spirit flows, ....".
. Now, how does Mr.B describe this "communion" of the lower (triad) with the higher? ...
It gets complicated. Sorry. As Mr.B said: Nothing is gained by trying to make things simpler than they really are. If we don't oversimplify, if we invest the time and energy which is required to understand even one of these 12 systems then we can also see when the social engineers have skillfully complicated the system. When you understand something then you can see when it has been made to appear more, or less, complicated than it really is. If you have understood what I have said about Semiotics you can see what I mean. The only way these manipulators can pull it off is by preventing us from "Finding-out the Truth (doA1)". The truth is what it is. It is not more nor less complex than it is. What the social engineers must get us to do is to look for the truth where it can't be found. They know how to make the truth work for themselves and they know that if "Enough" of us know it then the truth will set us free. If we know the triad and the tetrad as well as they do then we can also make use of these systems as well as they do. That’s why the original IBM programming system has disappeared from the public's view. After a seven week course we have learned how to make use of the tetrad. Can you see now why they had to make that 4-fold system disappear? ...
Knowledge is power. To share their knowledge is to share their power. Horowitz said on page 99: "I have observed numerous times astonishing scientific revelations and major breakthroughs disappeared from the public's view, almost immediately, lost to obscurity. I do not perceive this as idiosyncratic, or simply chance. There are methods of mass-mediated mind-control being used. ....". I know this to be true of the original IBM computer programming system. The "improvements" or updates were so inferior to what I have been working with for nine years that I thought that the people who came up with such senseless “improvements” were stupid. That was around 1973. Now I know better.
. The designers of that original IBM system have based it on the Aristotelian tetrad. This is HOW it works: The customer's "job-description" brings the demand (A) to the supplier (B-C-D). More specifically: A is the connective in the E3-A-B triad. It is the "Door, Dasamadwara" between the higher and the lower triads. B is the connective in the A-B-C triad, C is the connective in the B-C-D triad and D is the connective in the C-D-E8 triad. What we must do collectively comes to us through A and it is returned through D. But we are not supposed to understand any of this. The system, which would help us to understand the tetrad, "disappeared from the public's view".
. Horowitz gives the following example: "The book and movie, THE DA VINCI CODE, is a prime example of this subtle art of deception. The title begs the question, 'Where is the code in THE DA VINVI CODE?' The ploy leaves people ignorant and divided. ....". Can you see now why they have to suppress the knowledge of the real DA VINCI CODE? ...
Studying the real DA VINCI CODE causes people to think and to ask questions like: Where is the CODE in the DA VINCI CODE? HOW are those who have hiding the code going to answer questions like that? By using "Ridicule"? If the code is understood well "Enough" by "Enough" people, "Ridicule will no longer work. In fact, it will be counterproductive because we can see it for what it is. Put yourself into the shoes of social engineers whose job it is to dumb us down: Do you want more people like Horowitz asking questions the answers of which expose what you are doing? ...
According to Ching 41.1, the things, which "disappear from public view" are precisely the thinks we must pay attention to. Making the CODE disappear from the DA VINCI CODE means ...
that we are not supposed to know it because if we do then ...
the truth will set us free. Our political masters are not stupid. If you can understand this then we can assume that they cal understand it too.
The eight (8) is featured on page 111: "The Infinity Pattern and Separate 3,6,9 Triangle .... Doubling numbers beginning with 1 yields the pattern 1,2,4,8,7.5 to infinity. Where 1+1=2, 2+2=4". 4+4=8, 8+8=16, 16 = 1+6 = 7. 7+7=14, 14 = 1+4 =5. 5+5 = 10. 10 = 1+0 =_ and we are back at the beginning again. This 1,2,4,8,7,5 pattern within the circle gives us the number 8 on its side.
. On page 44 we get: "Table 5. Column Showing Multiples of Eight (8)". Eight (8) is a very interesting number. What can the Buddha and Mr.B tell us about the OCTAD? ...
. . . E2 . . . . . . The A in the diagram to the right is E4, B is E5, C is E6 and D is E7.
E3 . + . E1 . . . The Buddha's 8-fold path begins with Right Vision at A. Then,
. . .A . . . . . . . moving clockwise down, we come to thought (B), then comes
D . + . .B . . . . speech (C), then physical (D) action, then, if I got it right, comes
. . .C . . . . . . . contemplation (E1), then meditation (E2) and then comes
. . . . . . . . . . . . concentration (E3). This is Mr.B's Creative Energy. It is above Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". The Hindus tell us that this is where "the idea of separate existence" comes from. Point A is the crossover point. When moving from D, across A, to E1, A is called Right Livelihood. Living right is doing your dharma.
. What B, C and D can produce collectively comes from E3, through A, to B and is returned from D, through A, to E1. You have here a few more details, which the computer analogy alone could not give us.
. While this may not be as simple as some would like it to be, I hope that "Enough" of you can see that it is not as hard to understand as our political masters are trying to make us believe.
. Now, put "The Infinity Pattern", 1,2,4,8,7,5, together with the OCTAD. ...
Line up B-C-D with 1-2-4 and E1-E2-E3 with 8-7-5. Where is point A? ...
=====================================================
April 20, 2009
. Yesterday I went to the TOTAL HEALTH show here in Toronto. At 1 PM I heard the talk by Len Horowitz. I bought his book: LOVE the real DA VINCI CODE. What else do you do, after hearing that talk?
. On page 7, I read: "Simply recognizing the sanctity of this knowledge compels a responsible investment" of time and effort in studying this knowledge. Without the recognition of the "Value(Ku)" of a book, the willingness to make that investment is not there. You may be "Able(ab)" to study it but you will not do it. What does it take to recognize the value of a book? ...
It takes "Enough(Zu)" of a certain kind of knowledge. "For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance but from him that has not [enough] shall be taken away even that [one talent] which he has. (Matthew 25:29)"
. If you haven't enough brains to fill in the obvious blanks in the Bible how are you going to fill in the blanks which require more knowledge of the truth? ...
If you don't have enough willingness to use the intelligence you have, HOW to you expect to get more? ...
"He Who (heho) is Sick Sick (@p@p) who does not knows that he does not know ThereFore(SiYI) does Not feel Sick(PU@p)." What will motivate such a person to do something about his "IgNorance(PUkn)"? ...
Such questions arise from studying the Ching a bit more seriously than "Average Students ( =Ün)" do. ...
On page 24 we read"
"10= 1 + 0 = _ . . 11 = 1 + 1 = _ . . . . . . What do you learn from reading: 1 + 1 = 2? ...
12 = _ + 2 = 3 . . 13 = 1 + _ = 4 ...." . . . . All good teachers know that reading (C) "Many Words (TOC2)" is no substitute for thinking (B). Nobody else can fill in the blanks for you.
. In the last section I said that I would work on Ching 41.1. I also said if you don't work on this paragraph on your own then you have no work of your own to compare with the work of any other translator (C) or interpreter (B). If you don't do your own work first, you can't know (B)whether my work is right or wrong. All you can do is believe (C).
. Above the translation are the identifiers of the Chinese characters. The capitalized words are the equivalents I have picked for them. The lower case words are fillers.. The question-marks represent a word which is missing and the Hsiao is the phonetic of a character I have left untranslated.
+ Ün ^d A1 #6 ?? bt pr .Z (When)
Above average Students, Hear the Truth they will Diligently ??? And Practice It.
= Ün ^d A1 JO $b JO^k (When)
Average Students Hear the Truth As Come As Go.
- Ün ^d A1 TA *a .Z (When)
Below average Scholars Hear the Truth they will Greatly Hsiao It.
PU *a PU Zu YI do A1 (If they do)
Not Hsiao it then we do Not have Enough Means To find out the Truth.
*a = Hsiao118 "To laugh, smile, glad .... ridicule" . In this context, it represents anything that is done to prevent the "Truth(A1)" from getting out. These "Scholars" are not stupid, they know the truth, they just don't want us to know it. Because they know, we can use their actions as a "Means To identify the Truth (YIdoA1)".
. Because of the practical advise we get in this paragraph and the syntax used here, 41.1 is worth studying more "Diligently(#6)". This paragraph consists of 30 characters. The whole of Ching 40 consists of 21 characters. Ching 40 is a 2 + 2 tetrad while this one is a 3+1 tetrad. It appears more frequently in the Ching. This is why it is well worth getting to know it better. Lao Tzu has described the "TriAd( 3ad)" in chapter 14 but in no other chapter have I seen a better example of it than here. The first three sentences form one triad, which one? ...
+=-, Affirming - Reconciling - Denying. In this context Shang(+) means "Above" average, Chung(=) means "Average" and Hsia(-) means "Below" average. This "TriAd" is here disguised as part of a political message but the message only comes through at the conclusion. In this 3+1 type of tetrad the conclusion is usually a monad, but not "Always(Cn)" at Ching 3, the conclusion is a dyad.
. I started reading LOVE the real DA VINVI CODE. "Da Vinci's special intelligence and inspiration is available to everyone (Pg.4)". "By understanding the Da Vinci code, you are presented with a Divine invitation for spiritual evolution, universal unification and planetary salvation (pg. 6)". To have this system "work for you, you will need to make a reasonable investment of time and money. (pg. 7)" From my study of the Tao Te Ching, I know that you need a reasonable investment of time and energy to even begin to appreciate this system.
. Obviously you can't do in days what should take weeks but I was already familiar with Theosophical addition, which is here called the "Pythagorean skein". I also know some number symbolism. Still I had some difficulties with the exercise on the bottom of page 80. After I finally got it figured out, I still think that it was a bit too tough. The numbers shown can be misleading unless you know the pattern beforehand. Let me share my experience of that exercise:
. It put me into a negative state. Being put into a negative state is bad because in that state you lose energy. I almost gave up on that book, if I didn't see the following question on the next page: "5. Can you see the absence of the 3s, 6s and 9s in this infinity pattern? Yes or No?" If you can't do the exercise, then, obviously, the answer has to be "No".
. Talking about the Hexad on page 48 of Volume III J. G. Bennett said: "The numbering of the [six] points is taken from the recurrent decimal 1/7 = 0.142857." Then, talking about the Enneagram on page 64 he said: "The key to the problem of hazard consists in the combination of dynamism and coalescence which comes by joining the properties of the triad and the hexad."
. The three and the nine is also strong in the numbering system which comes with Wing's translation. 1 X 3 = 3 X 3 = 9 X 3 = 27 and 27 X 3 = 81. It takes time and effort to study a particular system. I can't know them all, but I know that what I have cognized as true in one system, I can re-cognize in another. I also know that what comes through in books, comes through human beings who have egos and egos will block or change what does not agree with their own preconceived ideas. The most reliable source of truth is poetry (A) because the ego can't touch it.
. In the "References" section (pgs. 193 to 200) are about a hundred authors listed. Horowitz has certainly compared notes.
Pg. 85: "Here is another way of contemplating this universal freeing truth. Polarity exists for everything, and everything and nothing are really the same. How come?"
This statement sheds light on the "Everything(YU)" - "Nothing(WU)" "DyAd(dyad)"
Pg. 86: "'As above so below'.". As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth.
. There is more but why don't you read it yourself? ...
=====================================================
April 14, 2009
. When" Above( +) average Scholars Hear the Truth ( +Ün^dA1), they will
Diligently(#6) ??? And Practice It (btpr Z)".
. Above you have the first sentence of Ching 41. It consists of seven characters. Their phonetics, identifiers (in brackets) and radical numbers are as follows: Shang( +)1, Shih(Ün)33, Wên(^d)128, Tao(A1)162, Ch'in(#6)19, Erh(bt)126, Hsing(pr)144 and Chih( Z)4. These are the characters which "Are-there(YU)". The ??? represents a character which, obviously, is "Not-there(WU)". The lower case words and phrases are not there either but, when it comes to the Ching, words you fill in, or equivalents of the characters you pick can be interpretations. Translators (C) can't get around using their own judgment.
. I have come up with two conventions which should enable translators to mind their "own business (See the Republic at 433b)" better. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" why Lao Tzu has left those blanks in his textbook. One of the two conventions is the one I have used in the translation, above. I represent missing words or phrases by the question-marks, ???. The other convention consists in leaving characters untranslated, so that "Above average Students ( +Ün)" can "Diligently study And Practice (#6??btpr)" Lao Tzu's lessons. Filling in missing words and phrases and picking equivalents for certain characters is the kind of work Lao Tzu can expect from his "Students(Ün)".
. Ching 52 ia a tough one but it serves us well to demonstrate the two new conventions. The Tn, -, YU and B2 represent the Chinese equivalents of the Heaven, Below, Have and Conceived of the first sentence of chapter 52. To get their phonetics and radical numbers: Google "A1 Tao162" My Dictionary-Concordance is at the end of the file which comes up. Chi(*a)85, Yang(*b)78, Hsi(*c)124 and Jou(*d)75 are not in there.
. What to substitute for the question-marks and what equivalents you pick for the Wei at 52.1,2 and the Yüeh at 52.3,1 and 3,2 is up to you. But you will not learn Lao Tzu's lessons if you don't "Carry-them-out(pr)". Please do your homework before you look for the answers the translators have come up with. You can't fill in a blank which has already been filled in. Don't let translators rob you of the opportunity of doing the exercises Lao Tzu has given us. Unless you do the work yourself, you can't know whether the answers others have come up with are right or wrong. Also my translation, below, is still my opinion. The way to check my work is to do it yourself.
Tn - YU B2 . . . . . . . . . all in Heaven and Below it Have been Conceived.
YI do ?? Tn - ?? MU . .In-order-to Wei those in Heaven and Below it, ??? a Mother.
$r gt H MU ?? . . . . . . . Since we Got The Mother ???
YI kn H Zi . . . . . . . . . . Means to Know Her Children.
$r kn H Zi ?? . . . . . . . .When we Know Her Children ???
FU 40 H MU ?? . . . . . .Return To-hold-on-to Their Mother. ???
äH Sê PU %x ?? . . . . . . Death to your Body is No Danger to ???
??äp HâjÜl H%1?? . . . . ??? Block Your Passages, Close Your Doors ???
nG Sê PU #6 . . . . . . . . . To-the-end-of-your-life You will Not Wear-out.
??#H Hâj*a HD2?? . . . . ??? Open Your Passages, Multiply Your Activities ???
nG Sê PU #U . . . . . . . . . To-the-end-of-your-life there is No Hope.
oo 42 73 72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . See the Small Yüeh Insight!
40 *d 73 57 . . . . . . . . . . Hold-on-to Weakness Yüeh Strength!
us H $4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Use Your Light!
FU 77 H 72 . . . . . . . . . . Return Again to Your Insights!
WU #H Sê *b . . . . . . . . . Do-not Burden your Self with Bad-karma!
Si is *c Cn . . . . . . . . . . . This Is Cultivating the Constant.
The first thing R. L. Wing said in his commentary on this chapter is: "The term MOTHER is another expression used in the Tao Te Ching to describe the Tao." From this you can see how valuable some commentaries can be.
. Many of Lao Tzu's statements are obvious. As far as 52.1,1 goes: ...
You can't be born without having been conceived first.
. According to Ching 25.3: "Heaven(Tn)" is on level B of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". The Tao (A) is above it and humanity (C) and "Earth(TI)" (D) are "Below( -)" it.
. The Wei(do) at 52.1,2 represents a verb, any verb. Ideally interpreters pick an equivalent for it which is demanded by the context. This is even more obvious with the Yüeh at 52.3,1 and 52.3,2. My interpretation of it may seem a bit farfetched but, since Yüeh(73) is "used as an expletive", as far as the syntactic dimension of semiotics goes, anything goes. But when evaluated from the semantic dimension, the equivalents better make sense.
. Talking about the "Strength(57)" and "Weakness(*d)", at 52.3,2, is tricky. Lao Tzu has given us a tough one here. One Way to approach a problem is to "Know that you Don't Know (knPUkn) its solution. that is Healthy( +)" because admitting your "IgNorance(PUkn)" is the first step to solving the problem. Before we are looking for a solution, we must clearly understand WHAT the problem is. The next step is to look for the answers in Lao Tzu's book. If he knows what he is doing then the answers will be there.
. In terms of the four levels of abstraction, we have at Ching 25.3 and on Plato's divided Line, The "Lower( -)" levels are "Stronger(57)" than the "Higher( +)" ones. Why? ...
"Earth(TI)" (D) is more solid than water (C) and water is heavier than air (B). The only Way the higher can exert its power over the lower is when the lower "Aligns(%8)" itself with the higher. What does that mean in practice? ...
We must "Know that we Don't Know". We must admit our weakness. This requires humility and nothing less will do. We can't do it alone. We need the help of the higher levels. For the poets or bhakti yogis (A) the proper attitude towards the "Higher( +)" comes naturally. ...
They are on the path of devotion.
. For the jnana yogis (B) the right attitude to the poetry (A) only comes with the right kind of knowledge (B). Only when you have "Enough(Zu)" of that kind of knowledge can you get more of it. Essentially it is the knowledge of HOW to do your duty, or dharma. Since thinkers (B) are on the path of knowledge, with "Enough" willingness and ability, they will get there. "By Seeking you will Find (YI@ngt)". Notice that neither Jesus nor Lao Tzu have told us how long we have to seek. Maybe they didn't want to discourage us.
. Raja yoga (C) is described in the Bhagavad Gita and by Gurdjieff. I have translated the 1918 preface and the first three chapters of Steiner's PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM. Interestingly enough, it was not the Anthrophosophists, but Gurdjieff people who have helped me to edit it and who typed it out for me. These people did their dharma. Unfortunately, they are the exception.
. As we get down to karma yoga (D), things get more concrete and easier to understand. And, since the Law of Correspondence applies to all levels, we can use analogy to understand the higher levels better as well. Let me use the computer analogy: The coder (C) writes a string of instructions, called a computer program, and the computer carries it out. In relation to the computer (D), the coder (C) is in a position of power. Why? ...
Because the computer is designed to give his power to the coder. It is designed to "Carryout(pr)" the coder's instructions. The computer has no will of its own. It may not know it, but it is "Aligning(%8)" itself with the level above its own level. But HOW did our creator design us? ...
Good question. ...
This is where Steiner's PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM can help us. However I got some very good ideas from THE SECRET SOURCE as well. The story of Job comes to mind. How would you like to play a game of chess in which the figures have a mind of their own? ...
. Let us stick to the Tao Te Ching. See Ching 36.1,3. ...
"If you Want to Weaken It (41YüJo Z) then you Necessarily(PI) ...
Must Strengthen It ($o57 Z)".
. If you want to fill in the blank spaces in the Ching then, necessarily, they must be left blank. The character translated as "Weak" at Ching 52.3,2 is not the same character we have at 36.1,3 and which is also translated as "Weak". Why? ...
Is our teacher trying to tell us something? Let us do our homework. ...
At 36 we have Jo(Jo)57 "Weak, pliable; weak of purpose". It is at: 03, 36, 40, 55, 76 and 78.
At 52 we have Jou(*d)75 "Yielding, soft, tender, mild", Followed by Jo(Jo) it means "pliable, soft, flexible". These definitions are from C. H. Fenn's The Five Thousand Dictionary. Jou is at: 10, 36, 43, 52, 55, 76 and 78. Notice that Jo(Jo) and Ch'iang(57) have the same radical. Notice also that both characters are in 36 and 76. There you have enough information to keep you busy for a while. ...
36.2,2: By the "Soft and Weak (Ju(*d) Jo) the Hard and Strong is Overcome (19ät57)".
76.1,1: A "Person, when S/he is Alive Ye (mn ZSgYe) s/he is Soft and Tender (Ju Jo)".
. Please read Ching 76 yourself to get the message. We have another Way of understanding the relationship between the weak and the strong. ...
It is systematics.
. Within the limits of our time and space dimensions, the strong normally "Master(#u)" the weak but if the strong "Hold-on-to the Weakness within them, then it becomes Strong (40*d7357)" enough to guide them. The physically (D) strong must submit to the physically weaker because of "Insights(72)" which have come to them from the dimensions above them. Lao Tzu advises us to alternate between the big and the "Small(42)" so that our "Power(57)" does not go to our heads.
. Our dimensions of time and space are within more inclusive time and space-less dimensions. When Eckhart Tolle talks about the ("Eternal(Cn)") NOW, he is touching on that other dimension. Whatever is in that dimension is "Unchangeable(Cn)". See also 52.3,6.
. The "TaoAble (ptA1) Is-the-opposite-of(Fy) the UnTaoable (CnA1)." Is that enough for you to chew on? It is too much for me but, depending on where you are at, it may get you going.
. My task, here on level B, is to bring the truth, which, when known, will set us free, from level A down into the semantic dimension of semiotics (B). The social function of semiotics is to see to it that each one of its three dimensions is "minding its own business".
. I am a Gemini, a mutable air sign (B). To do my dharma, I must "Align(%8)" myself with the dimension above my own. The poetry (A), or revelations, in the Bible, the Ching, the Gita, the Koran and other holy books come from there. If the poets and prophets had not done their job, then I couldn't do mine. If the jnana yogis, philosophers, or "KnowErs(kner)" (B) don't do their job the "WordErs(C2er)" can't do theirs and if the leaders (C) don't lead then the doers (D) can't do their job ...
efficiently. Aristotle called level C of his teachers "Divided Line (509d)" the "efficient cause". The communicators (C) are not indispensable. As there is a way to get around the "KnowErs" (B) so there is a way to get around the "WordErs" (C). For instance Wayne Dyer has gone directly from level C to the Tao Te Ching, on level A and what he has come back with is quite amazing. Now, HOW do the pragmatists get around the communicators? ...
We need systematics here. I will give you a bit more of it and then we get around to the answer to our question. Let me explain what applies to my own level and, because the Law of Correspondence applies to all levels, you can use analogy to apply what I will tell you next to your own level.
. J. G. Bennett has said more about the triad than about the dodecad, the twelve term system, yet his systematics is essentially based on it. It is no accident that there are twelve astrological sings. There are four elements which each have three aspects: The mutable signs are the receptive impulse (-) of systematics, the cardinal signs are the reconciling impulse (=) and the fixed signs are the affirming impulse (+).
. As I said before, my job, as a mutable air sign is to bring the message I pick up at level A down to my own level B. What I am doing here is not identical to what the mutable signs on level C, D or A are doing, but it is analogous.
. The cardinal air signs must refine the stuff I have put out here a bit more. The cardinal signs of any one of the four elements are doing its own thing. They are staying within their own "Boundaries(*1)", or Koshas. The mutable and fixed signs are on that boundary, with one foot in and the other foot outside of their own dimension.
. The fixed signs must turn out what has been produced in their dimension. The fixed air signs must sell our product to the water signs (C).
. I have just given you the general. picture, so far. My teacher J. G. Bennett, Mr.B as we called him, was absolutely right when he said that: Nothing is gained by making things simpler than they really are. The problem the social engineers have is making things seem more complex than they really are.
. Mr.B has said that the dodecad is the highest N-Term system, which concerns us as human beings. The 12-term system is not the only possible system but it is the highest system which has something to do with us humans. Our own sphere of influence, the sphere we are responsible for, ranges from level A to D of Plato's "Divided Line". Trying to bite off more than you can chew is irresponsible because ...
trying to do what you are unable to do is time and energy wasted which you should invest in your own dharma, in doing what you came here to do. The "unprofitable servant", at Matthew 25:30, thought that he had a good excuse for burying his talents. Part of the lesson of that parable is that if you are wrong then excuses won't work over there.
. The time during which each one of the twelve signs is born is roughly equal. By means of systematics, and also systems theory, we know that each sign is needed.
. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Because there are many members in each group, the chain is never completely broken but it is weakened by the negligent group. Knowledge of the DIVISION OF LABOR is in the Ching and the Gita but it is explained best by Plato in his REPUBLIC. There is no excuse for educators to be ignorant of it. So why is it not taught? ...
. Let me stay out of politics for a while and continue with systematics: Each one of the 12 signs is a "connective". A connective is the reconciling impulse of a triad when it is in the middle position. In semiotics, the middle position is the syntactic dimension. There are six possible types of triad:
+-=, -+=. +=-, -=+. =+- and ... . Notice that only two of them have the reconciling impulse (=) in the middle. That is where I follow Noam Chomsky and call it the "connective". The connective is between the subject and the predicate of a sentence. In English it often suffices to represent it by a comma. In Chinese it doesn't have to be represented by anything but it is always there.
. In the Ching, the "TriAd( 3ad)" is described at chapter 14. Each one of us, each one of the twelve types, is a receptive, a reconciling and an affirming impulse. The opposite of affirming is denying. There is also a denying impulse in systematics. The opposite of receiving is giving. Some expert from the DuVersity still has to explain this paradox. But we can also consult Lao Tzu. ...
. As I just said, we can be in all of the three states of the "TriAd" but as the connective, we are at home. The connectives, or cardinal signs, of fire (A), air (B), water (C) and earth (D) are the impulses by means of which the four elements do their own thing. The function of the receptive impulse, or mutable signs, is to bring the messages from the dimension above them into their own; the function of the four affirming impulses, or fixed signs, is to offer the message from their own dimension to the level(s) below them
. "Heaven Below (Tn -)" means that the "Truth(A1)", B gets from A, can go to C or to D. If C fails to fulfill its social function then D can pick up the message from B and apply it in "Practice(pr)" Then, if it works, it is true, no matter how well or poorly it has been described to them. Communicators, failing to do their duty, can delay the transmission of the truth but they can't prevent it.
. As communicators (C) can bypass the thinkers (B) so the pragmatists (D) can bypass the "WordErs(C2er)" and go directly to the "KnowErs(kner)". By testing what is out there in the mass media and on the internet in practice (D), the pragmatists in the pragmatic dimension of semiotics, are cutting through all that bull, which is put out there by the professional bullshitters.
. Have you done your interpretation of Ching 52? ...
Please don't let me deprive you of the opportunity of doing it yourself. ...
. As far as I am concerned, there is also an information overload in the four volumes of Mr.B's DRAMATIC UNIVERSE. Reading (C) "Many Words (TOC2)" are no substitute for thinking (B). This is why I learned more about systematics from Lao Tzu than From Mr.B but I needed systematics to get started on the Ching. Ching 41.1 is a good example of HOW Lao Tzu teaches systematics. I will work on it in the next section. Please work on it as well because ...
you can't compare your work with mine if you don't do your work. ...
. I have used the telescope-naked eye-microscope analogy to illustrate this. In the center of our own triad, we are most efficient, we can see things with our naked eyes, to look up we need a telescope. It makes us feel "Small(42)". When looking down towards the level below us, we need a microscope. It makes us feel big and "Strong(57)". We are the boss. But be careful. If you misuse your power there are consequences.
. The two new conventions have been a big help to me. A week ago I didn't know half of what I have said here. The chapters of which I felt able to give an interpretation, like the one I will do here, are: 01, 03, 17, 18, 40, 41, 42, 63, 70 and 71. Since I have already commented on them at NewAgeDao.org, DaoTeChing.blogspot.com and PetersTao.blogspot.com, I am in no hurry to do an interpretation (B) based on a translation (C) for you, it is much better for you to do it yourself. Here is my interpretation of Ching 52:
All in heaven and below it have been conceived.
In order to conceive those in heaven and below it, there has to be a Mother.
Since we got the mother we have a means to know her children.
When we know her children we must return to hold on to their mother.
If you do that then death to your body is no danger to you.
If you block your passages, close your doors from then on you will not wear out.
If you open your passages, multiply your activities from then on there is no hope.
See the Small! Return again to your insight!
Hold on to weakness to gain inner strength!
Use your light!
Return again to your insight!
Do-not burden your self with bad karma!
Doing this is cultivating the constant.
=======================================================
April 6, 2009
. At the end of the last, March 31, section I have left you with two questions: HOW is semiotics "helping us in studying the Ching? ..." And: "What is its social function? ..." ...
The answer to the second question was new to me. I called it "the most important question" because it is. I still don't know HOW the social engineers managed to put me into such a negative state that I was ready to give up in despair. Considering how much I already know about them, that takes some doing. But the answer told me WHY they have to do it and that is a good start. Again: What is the social function of semiotics? ...
The question is too important to spell out its answer here but let me give you some hints to help you to figure it out for yourself: What have I said about semiotics so far? ...
"In-order-to Make Use (YIdous)" of semiotics we must understand it. Semiotics is the B-C-D triad. This triad is part of the A-B-C-D tetrad. In it the customer (A) produces the demand and B, C and D, doing the thinking,, talking and physical work, produce the supply. This was taught in a seven Week computer programming course. After seven Weeks, programmers (B), coders (C) and computers (C) could turn out the supply as efficiently as it can be done today. Why was it phased out? ...
It was based on the Aristotelian tetrad. Is it still taught in universities? ...
I don't know, but I can guess. Let us apply semiotics to our study of the Ching. In the same March 31 section, I have given a breakdown of Ching 56. I have broken it down into three paragraphs. When this chapter is read as a triad, 56.1 is the premise, 56.2 is the connective and 56.3 is the conclusion. The connective connects the premise to the conclusion. The connective consists of six imperative sentences followed by an indicative sentence. Here it is: "These Are Dark Units". Its syntax is straight forward: "These" refers to the six imperative sentences. It, or they, are the subject of the sentence. "Are(is)" is the connective and "Dark Units" is the predicate. As we are completing the work in the syntactic dimension, we are coming up with questions which must be dealt with in the semantic dimension. ...
If the connective is to connect the premise to the conclusion, it is not "Enough(Zu)" to read the six instructions, we must successfully carryout at least one of them. Our political masters have carried out 56.1,6: "Unite Your Dust"! Our elected politicians (C) have "United($1) with their unelected advisors (B). Together, they form a "Dark Unit". This unit is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. Because of this they can get away with WHAT they are doing to us. And they will continue to do it as long as we don't know HOW they are doing WHAT they are doing to us. They are using semiotics. So why aren't they teaching it in universities. Why do we have "To find out the Truth (doA1) from the internet? and why is the truth so covered up by information overload? ...
To find out whether the truth is deliberately distorted, we must find out the truth in spite of their "Ridicule(*a41)". I believe that Lao Tzu can help us to get around them. In fact, we can learn HOW to carryout 56.2,6 from our political masters because they are demonstrating it for us. All we have to do is watch HOW they are doing it.
. 56.2,6 seems to be the only instruction which the partners "Mutually(mt)" produce the "Dark Unit" in the other five instructions the poles "Mutually" necessitate the "Dark Unit". If there is no "Dark Unit" You may be able to carryout some of the five instructions but that will not produce the positive results you expect. For instance. "KnowErs are not good with Words (knerPUC2)". 56.2,2 can be translated as "Shut Your Mouth"! If I do that, if I stop doing the networking, if I wait for a net-worker (C) to do it for me, how long do I have to wait?
. If you are willing and able to carryout even one of the six instructions then ...
you will find out that one person alone can't do it successfully. And now comes the "If(KU)" one person can't do it alone, if it is "ImPossible (PUpt)" to do it alone, then ...
it must be done collectively. The net-workers (C) don't have to figure out WHAT to network but hey must know HOW to network. They must be willing and able to carryout their social function. As I can't do my job if the poets (A) had not done theirs so the talkers (C) can't do their job if the thinkers (B) had not done theirs. This is as far as I will take Ching 56.
. But, as I said in the last section, Lao Tzu has commented on Ching 56.2,1 and 56.2,2.
??? Block Your Passages, Close Your Doors ???
To-the-end-of-your-days You will Not Wear-out.
??? Open Your Passages, Multiply Your Activities ???
To-the-end-of-your-days You can Not be Helped.
??äp .H âj Ül .H %1 ?? nG Sê PU #6
??#H H âj *a .H D2 ?? nG Sê PU #U To the left, you have the two-digit identifiers of 56.2,1 written on top of the identifiers of 56.2,2. From this you can see that the two sentences form one paragraph. Ching 56 is a "TriAd( 3ad)". 56.1 is the premise, 56.2 is the connective and 56.3 is the conclusion. Here the premise demands some heavy intellectual work while the conclusion consists of five imperative sentences followed by an indicative sentence. It means that, if you carryout these instructions, if you do "This, you Are Cultivating the Constant".
*a = Chi85 "To help ; cross over" This could mean to help those on the lower levels. To cross over into their sphere of influence. Star has: "meddle/ be busy / crowd / engages / 'multiply' / 'carry out' / 'insist'" From this you can see that Lao Tzu has given us some work to do.
*b = Yang78."Divine judgment; calamity; retribution, mishap".
*c = Hsi124 "To practice, habit". Practicing the instructions is cultivating good habits.
. In the last, March 31, section I have given a breakdown and translation of Ching 52 but I have failed to give you the information on the three characters which are only in that chapter. I have done that here. I have also put the identifiers of each sentence in 56.2 in one line. This helps you to see more easily which characters are "Repeated($l)".
In 56.3,1 and 56.3,2 I have also failed to apply a convention which Star also uses. He describes it as follows on page 98: "(_____) indicates that the character may be left untranslated, such as in the case of a modifier or where two Chinese characters can be translated as one English word". I use that convention to leave the translation to you. For instance, Yüeh73 appears at 52.3,1 and 52.3,2. It is in ".... 14 16 24 25 52 55 62 67. '... (a) used as an expletive (2712)'". This means that Lao Tzu does not only want translators to fill in what the character means to them but primarily he wants his students to work on it. This means that Yüeh(73) should always be given as a phonetic. Ching 52 is a tough one but it serves well to put my two new conventions to the test. For instance, at 52.3,1 and 52.3,2 we get:
"oo 42 73 72! . . . . . . . See the Small Yüeh Insight!
40 Ju 73 57! . .Hold-on-to the Weak Yüeh Strong!" As Lao Tzu said:
"Nobody who doesn't understand an instruction is Able to Carry-it-out (MOabpr)".
. To find out how difficult it is to come up with a good equivalent for Yüeh, ...
try it. If "Weak Is-the opposite-of Strong" then what "Is-the-opposite-of" ...
Small? Lao Tzu's hints are very "Subtle(Jo)". "Knowing that you Don't Know the answer is Healthy (knPUkn +)". It is healthy because now, at least you have the question. No answer without a question. "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)": No question without an answer.Chêng(%8) = Cheng77 "First moon, or month". Star has: "true / correct / straight / straightforward / upright / 'positive' ". Another indication that Lao Tzu has given us something to think about: My big dictionary has: "Upright; true. .... (a) Orthodox, correct, regular, Authorized. .... (b) Exact. Straight. Formal. ....(c) Just; at the time of; during. .... (d) To adjust; to regulate; to correct. .... (e) Principal as opposed to secondary. Chief." In the ACC (Analysis of Chinese Characters) it is number 166: "(Picture of Chêng(%8)) cheng, Upright, correct, exact, proper, orthodox, etc. (Picture of Chih($i) chih, is the radical, No. 77. (See Nos. 10 and 12.) To stop (Picture of Chih($i)) at the appointed limit -- without going astray is correct (Picture of Chêng(%8))." Chêng(%8) appears in "08 45 57 58 78" Harold D. Roth has translated it as "Alignment(8b)" in the Nei Yeh and that is what the context of the Ching seems to demand as well. The original IBM computer programming system was based on the tetrad. For the system to work, A, B, C and D must "Align" themselves with the next higher level above their own. This is most obvious with the computer (D). ...
If it doesn't carry out your instructions, you throw it in the garbage. To write the instructions that go into the black boxes, which nobody but the initiated are supposed to understand, the coders (C) must listen to the programmers (B) they must listen to their masters (A) and A must listen to E3. It is a big scheme but it is described very well by David Icke as the pyramid scheme.
. Eckhart Tolle uses the word in the following context. Please pay attention to it:
"THE THREE MODALITIES OF AWAKENING
. . "There are three modalities in which consciousness can flow into what you do and through you into this world, three modalities in which you can align your life with the creative powers of the universe."
. This quote is from page 295. The three modalities are "ACCEPTANCE .... ENJOYMENT .... ENTHUSIASM". These are the impulses, or components, of a triad and Tolle talks about them up to page 305. Obviously I can't quote the whole thing but I will pick a few passages and apply systematics to them:
. "Through enjoyment you link into that universal creative power itself. .... When the creative power of the universe becomes conscious of itself, it manifests as joy."
. Joy is Ananda in Sanskrit. The Hindu triad is Sat Chit Ananda (Existence-Knowledge-Bliss). J.G. Bennett's triad is E1-E2-E3. E1 is "Transcendent Energy", "The Supreme Will". E2 is "Unitive Energy", "Universal Love". And E3 is "Creative Energy", "Generation and Creation".
. On page 20 of his ENERGIES Bennett tells us that these higher energies are "beyond the range of the powers of man." Which means ...
that we can't fully understand them, nor have the proper words to describe it. If the vision (A) of Tolle, of the Hindus, of Bennett and others is true then WHAT they are talking about must be the same, they are talking about the same "TriAd( 3ad)", but HOW they are describing it is different. It is, however not to farfetched to assume that Tolle's "creative power" is Bennett's "CEATIVE ENERGY" In fact, Tolle says on the same page: "Modality means the underlying energy-frequency that flows into what you do ,,,,". Bennett says on page 23: "The whole secret of our existence lies in the fact energy of one quality can be transformed into energy of another quality" or frequency. I have said a lot about stepping down Sensitive energy (E5) to Automatic energy (E6). HOW? ...
See page 201: ".... But that one decision you have to make again and again and again ---until it becomes natural to live in such a way", until Sensitive Energy has been stepped down to Automatic Energy. If you go back a number of sections where I talk about A NEW EARTH you will see that I don't agree with everything Eckhart says but, just because I don't agree with some things, this doesn't mean that I have to disagree with everything. A person, who sees only the back of a house and who claims that he sees the whole house, still can give an accurate description of the back of the house. No matter what nasty things Tolle says about the intellect (B), mistaking it for the ego (B-C-D), his description of the upper, or inner triad, the knowledge comes to us as a vision (A) through the "Door, Dasamadwara" (A), is still correct. Eckhart Tolle is a man, all men have an ego, therefore, Eckhart Tolle has an ego. The whole of us is greater than the sum of its parts. Without an intellect (B), a mind (C) and a body (D) we can't be humans. Let me concentrate on the good stuff which comes through Tolle:
. The fact that Tolle can see that "the creative power ... manifests as joy", "Identifies(Mg)" E3 as Ananda. The "main purpose in life is to bring the light of consciousness into this world ...." Level A is above Semiotics (B-C-D). The Hindus call A the "Door" because the main purpose, the dharma, of A is to bring the vision, which comes from E3 down to B (E5). E3-E4-E5 is the triad in which A (E4) is the connective. Writers (C), Like Plato, Steiner, Bennett and others can also have visions (A). These are expressed in prose while the visions of the poets (A) are expressed in poetry (A). When a vision is expressed in poetry, the ego (B-C-D) cannot reach it.
. "Enthusiasm means there is deep enjoyment in what you do plus the added element of a goal or a vision that you work toward. (Page 301)" Bennett calls the "job-description) (A) the "Goal", in the Buddha's 8-fold path the vision (A) comes before thought (B), thought comes before speech (C) and speech comes before physical action (D). The best person to verify, or to contradict, what I am saying here would be Tolle himself. We have here two impulses of the triad Joy (E3) and the "goal" (A). That is the "vision that you work toward." Who works towards it? ...
First the thinkers (B) develop the algorithm, then the communicators (C) write the program, or give the instructions and then ...
the workers, or the computers, (D) carry them out.
. In the last, March 31, section I have given a breakdown and translation of Ching 52. It is a tough one but that is why it can serve well to test my two new conventions. The idea is to fill in what, you think, should go where the question-marks "???" are. You will not learn Lao Tzu's lessons by just reading what translators have come up with, especially when they came up with the right answer. In the next section, which will be in front of this one, I will fill in what I think should go in the places of the "???". Please don't let me rob you of the opportunity to do the exercise yourself. ...
===========================================================
March 31, 2009
. In the second-last sentence of the March 24 section I said: "When the mind (C) can get around the intellect (B), or perhaps identifies with it, C feels like 'the very form of God'." Now, if it were not so dangerous, I would add: "...., or if C takes over B, ...." If you are on level C and you "Defeats(äL)" those on level B, because you are such a good "ArguEr(äOer)", then you "Perceive(Kn)" the form on level B as you "Want(YÜ)" to see it. You believe (C) to be "the very form of God". And for you it is true but it is wrong to make the members of the other three classes believe that it must also be true for them. And, if they can't see it, it is wrong to try to convince them that there must be something terribly wrong with them. It is wrong to put people into the victim state of consciousness.
. To establish and maintain a healthy society, each one of the four classes must have authority over, and is responsible for, its own Feldraum, or sphere of influence.
. Plato's ideal society comes closest to democracy (A) but even it must not interfere with the business of the other three classes, as Plato has it. Justice is not established by the Brahmins (B), Plato's philosophers (B) or the Learned elders of Zion but by THE DIVISION OF LABOR. But to make it work as intended it must be understood and accepted by all.
. Only if we understand the truth collectively, only then can the truth set us free. There is a lot of truth in the Tao Te Ching. But it is presented as lessons are in a textbook. You can't learn to think without making the effort to learn it. Nothing comes from nothing. "The Nothing in Something ( HWUYU)" exists but not in our time and space dimensions. It comes to us through the poets (A) and takes form on earth through us (B-C-D).
. The Ching is estimated to be 75% poetry. I think that Lao Tzu has used the 25% of prose to explain the poetry. So the Ching is not just revelation (A) but philosophy (B) as well.
I will now concentrate more on the Ching because learning to think is the duty (dharma) of the "KnowErs (kner)", or jnana yogis (B). Below we get going on Ching 56:
kn er PU C2 . . . The March 23 section concludes: ".... but the problem of a
C2 er PU kn . . . one-sided view is still there." No one class can speak for all four
. . . . . . . . . . . . . "classes". Please Google: Protocols of Zion division of labor
äp .H ^j! . . . . . . . . The injustice, which is done by one class to the other three
Ül .H %1! . . . . . classes can best be seen in the Indian caste system which was
#p .H @f! . . . . . corrupted by the Brahmin (B) caste. We can see the same political
#q .H @g! . . . . . system in power closer to home.
Ho .H $4! . . . . . . . In that same, March 23, section I have given a breakdown of
$1 .H @h! . . . . . Ching 1. I have called it a "translation". That was not correct. ...
Si is Sü $1 . . . . . First comes the "Undifferentiated(#O)" text (A), then comes the
. . . KU . . . . . . . breakdown of the whole into parts, or paragraphs, (B) and then
PU pt gt bt %m . comes the translation (C).
PU pt gt bt äV . . . . To the left I have given a breakdown of Ching 56 into three
PU pt gt bt LI . . paragraphs. This gives it the more concrete FORM (B) of a triad.
PU pt gt bt %o . But, if we translate the Ku(KU) in fron't and the one behind 56.2
PU pt gt bt Ku . as "Therefore" then the chapter becomes a tetrad.
PU pt gt bt äb . . . . It is not the business of translators, working in the syntactic (C)
KUdo Tn .- Ku . dimension of semiotics, to "Identify(Mg)" a chapter as a triad, a
. . . . . . . . . . . . . tetrad or a pentad. The job of translators (C) is to use Lao Tzu's syntax methodically while leaving the thinking to the thinkers (B). As long each class minds its own business, all is fine. Once they start to interfere with each other we get the mess we have right now. The DIVISION OF LABOR is still adhered to in the trade union tradition. Why? ...
Because it works. Specialization makes for greater efficiency. For details you can Google: Protocols of Zion division of labor
"Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! Why? ...
For one thing, you can't actualize a potential you don't have.
. Above you have a breakdown of Ching 56. If you have followed me through the last few sections, you can already "Identify(Mg)" the first paragraph yourself. There we have two "Cycles($l)" in which Chê(er) and Pu(PU) are "Rpeated($l)" and Chih(kn) and Yen(C2) are "Reversed($l)". Ching 56.2 consists of six imperative sentences followed by an indicative sentence. "These(Si)" are, or is, the subject, "are(is)" is the connective and "Dark Units (Sü $1)" is the predicate. Lao Tzu couldn't make it any clearer.
. If the Ku, which comes next, were translated as Therefore" then the second Ku, which comes after the six sentences in 56.3 would have to be a "therefore" as well and then the last four characters would be a separate paragraph. Strictly following syntax, this would be correct and this is what R. L. Wing has done. But most translators have not. However, translating the first Ku as "If" is unusual. If I could find another chapter in which the if .... then .... format is more obvious, my choice of this equivalent would be justified. Ku is in over 40 chapters. The equivalents we get from Star for Ku66 are: "For, therefore, thus, hence // cause, reason, purpose, therefore." but no "If". To get support from the context, we have to look at chapters in which Ku appears two or more times. Very time-consuming. It appears twice in 07, 08, 15, 23, 38, 39, 50, 56, 61, 62, 63, 64 and 66. Three times in 27 and five times in 22 and 67. There was relatively little luck, but even one example would help. Let us look at Ching 64: "Intelligent People Do-not Act (wsmnWUdo) foolishly. If(KU) they Do-not Defeat (WUäL) anybody, Do-not Take-hold-of things, Then (WU32KU) Nothing, no battles, no things, are Lost (WU37)".
. At Ching 62, we have the same five character at the end which we have at 56. The idea is: If the ancients have (collectively?) "Valued The Tao (KuTzA1" then why can't we do it now? And the last five characters can be translated as I have translated the last five characters of Ching 56.
. Looking for parallels of passages from Ching 56, Ching 52 came up: There we have an actual commentary on Ching 56.2,1 and 56.2,2. The idea is: If you mind your own business, then you . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . are fine; if not, then not.
?? Tn .- YU B2 . . . . . . . . ??? Heaven Below Have been Conceived.
YI do ?? Tn .-?? MU . . . . Because To ??? Heaven Below ??? Mother.
$r gt .H MU ?? . . . . . . . . . Since we Got The Mother.
YI ?? kn .H Zi . . . . . . . . . . By-means-of ??? Know Her Children.
$r kn .H Zi ?? . . . . . . . . . . When we Know Her Children ???
FU 40 .H MU ?? . . . . . . . Return To-hold-on-to Their Mother.
äH Sê PU%x ?? . . . . . . . . Death to your Body is No Danger.to ???
?? äp .H âj Ül .H%1 ?? . . ??? Block Your Passages, Close Your Doors ???
nG Sê PU#6. . . . . . . . . . . Throughout-your-life You Don't Wear-out.
?? #H .H âj *a .H D2 ?? . ??? Open Your Passages, Multiply Your Activities ???
nG Sê PU #U. . . . . . . . . . Throughout-your-life there is No Hope.
oo 42 73 72! . . . . . . . . . . See the Small To-get Insight!
40 Ju 7357! . . . . . . . . . . . Hold-on-to Weakness To-get Strength!
us .H $4! . . . . . . . . . . . . . Use Your Light!
FU 77 .H 72! . . . . . . . . . . Return Again to Your Insights!
WU #B Sê *b! . . . . . . . . . Do-not Leave your Body with Calamities!
Si is *c Cn . . . . . . . . . . . . This Is Cultivating the Constant.
To the right you have my translation and to the left you have the two-digit identifiers. To make use of them you need my Dictionary-Concordance. To get it, Google "A1 Tao162"
It is at the end of the file which comes up.
. In it you get the phonetic and the radical number of the characters. This information helps you to find them in a dictionary. Characters which appear in more than six chapters also have dictionary equivalents. There are excellent dictionaries, like G.D Wilder & J.H. Ingram's ANALYSIS OF CHINESE CHARACTERS and Bernhard Kalgren's ANALYTIC DICTIONARY OF CHINESE AND SINO-JAPANESE. They give you the history and etymology of the characters. This is important, because over time the meaning of some characters changes. This is also true of German. I came to Canada in 1956. As I go back there from time to time, I notice the changes, which have taken place even in that relatively short time. So you want to know what a character has meant at the time the Tao Te Ching was written. For instance Tao(A1) has always meant "Road, way, passage; ...." But I don't think that it meant ".... doctrine; ....; to say". Tao followed by another character (which would take me too long to find) means "Doctrine of Taoism". So it couldn't have meant "Doctrine" before there was a doctrine.
But more important is the Ching itself, and here Jonathan Stars work on this book is most valuable. Much work which has been done on the Ching can also be found on the internet.
. You can see from this that today we have much better "Means(YI)" for studying the Ching than were available in the past. These means give you the ability to study the Ching more efficiently. All you need now is the willingness "To Make Use(YIdous)" of the means which are available to you now. A nice practice for you to do, is to go over my breakdown (B) and translation (C) of Ching 52 and fill in what you think should go in where the “???” are. After you have done what a teacher can expect from his students, compare your work with the work translators have done for you. Translators have intuitions, so they may be right, but they are wrong to give the answers away.
. Also try to figure out HOW Semiotics is helping us in studying the Ching. And now comes the most important question: …
What is its social function? …
What is the social function who are working on level A? …
This work on the Tao Te Ching has become more than a hobby to me. I believe that the "Truth(A1)" which is in the Ching, when known, can set us free, not only individually, but collectively as well. As the social engineers are perfecting their "Means(YI) for mind control, so we have to perfect the "Means" for exposing WHAT they are doing to us. At this point, the best example of this, I can think of right now, is Ching 41.1. ...
============================================================
March 24, 2009
A1 pt A1 Fy Cn A1 . . . . . 6 . . The Tao Te Ching was one "Unit Originally ($1Cu)".
Mg ptMg Fy Cn Mg . . . . .6 . . It came to us as one unbroken string of about 5000
. . . . ?? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . characters. Then this string was broken down into
WUMg Tn TI .Z B1 . . . . 6 . . 81 chapters. The numbering system behind it is
YU MgWnwUZ MU . . . . 6 . . shown in R. L. Wing's translation.
. . . . KU . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . After that most important "Division(âo)"
CnWU YÜ YI Kn .H #1 . . 7 . . the chapters were still undivided. Each chapter
Cn YU YÜ YI Kn .H *1 . . 7 . . came to us as one unbroken string of characters.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . This can be seen by the fact that translators can't
Tz dy ad $1 Cu bt âo Mg. . 8 . . agree on HOW to break down the chapters.
$1 is ?? .Z Sü. . . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . To do it right, we have to accept Lao Tzu
Sü .Z! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 . . as our teacher and follow his advise. What does
@1Sü?? ^1 #1 .Z %1! . . . . 6 . ."CycliciTy ($lad), Tao'S Movement (A1 Z%k)"
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . tell us about Lao Tzu's syntax? ...
The inner component of Fan($l) is the Yu(@1) we have at Ching 1.4,4 and at 48.2. In both chapters it means "Repeat". The K'o(pt), Fei(Fy) and Ch'ang(Cn), at Ching 1.1,1 are "Repeated" at 1.1,2. What can that tell us? ...
That we have two "Cycles($l)" here. And what is such a cycle in the Ching? ...
There are "Final particles" in Chinese and Lao Tzu uses them but not when it is not necessary. A sentence is "Complete(cm)" when a cycle is complete. And that's where another cycle or sentence starts. Go over the first three paragraphs of Ching 01, we have here. ...
You get three straightforward examples of two sentences each. But then, what is the Ku(KU) doing between two complete sentences? ...
Lao Tzu "Values Words (KuC2)", he does not waste them. Syntax does not demand it there. So, when there is a seemingly unnecessary word, we must pay attention. Ku can mean "Therefore" and it can also mean "Then". If we decide to translate it as "Therefore" then the first half of the chapter is the premise, the second half is the conclusion and the Ku(KU, between them, is the connective. In a sentence, the "premise" is the subject, the "Then" is the connective and the "conclusion" is the predicate. This is so because the Law of Correspondence can apply to sentences, paragraphs and chapters. In fact, when we consult the numbering system, which comes with Wing's translation, you can see that it applies to the Ching as well.
. In the Gita, the first six chapters are said to be about karma yoga (D), the second six about Bhakti yoga (A) and the third six are said to be about jnana yoga (B). Raja yoga (C), which Krishna taught to Arjuna, is the study of all three of them. Arjuna is a Kshatriya (C). Gurdjieff's 4th Way is Raja yoga.
. If we decide to translate Ku as "Then", then Ching 1.2 and 1.3 form one "DyAd(dyad)", which becomes the connective in the "TriAd( 3ad)", which is now formed. I am using systematics here and, if you are not familiar with it, don't let that discourage you. What is important to remember, however, is that if you change the equivalent of a single character, you can change the structure and meaning of a sentence, which changes the paragraph it is in, which changes the chapter it is in. In fact, a falsely translated character can affect our understanding of the whole book.
. As far as syntax goes, everything is fairly straight forward up to Ching 1.4,2. In this sentence the Wei(is) is a connective. Connectives don't have to be spelled out in Chinese. When Lao Tzu does it, we have to ask why? ...
The "??" at 1.4, of the translation we have at the beginning of this section, represents a missing character: The Unit is Called ???'S Darkness ($lis?? ZSü). Darken It ( Sü Z)"! How can you "Darken It" when you don't know what the pronoun (Chih( Z) represents? Obviously, "Nobody who does not understand an instruction is Able to Carry-it-out (MOabpr)".
. If you have carried out an instruction once, then you can "Repeat" it. But then: ...
How often do I have to "Repeat the Darkening (@1 Sü)"? The answer is ...
Until you have reached "All Mystery'S Gate ( ^1#1 Z%1)". The "??" at 1.4,4 means that a phrase is missing. The breaking down of paragraphs into sentences is work the "WordErs(C2er)" should be doing with Automatic Energy (E6). Since there are no "Repetitions" and there is no punctuation in Ching 1.4 it "Can be Identified(ptMg)" as one sentence without having to think, simply by methodically applying Lao Tzu's rules of syntax. But "Identifying" these rules is the work of the "KnowErs(lner)" because the ...
"WordErs Can't be expected to Know (C2erPUkn)" that. The "WordErs" are not only to do the "Talking(C2)" but they must be willing to listen as well.
. The chapters are "Undifferentiated(#O)" "Originally(Cu)". By breaking down the first chapter into three or four parts the "KnowErs" already give it a more concrete form.
. Thinkers (B) are on level B. This is what Aristotle has called the "formal cause". The "KnowErs(kner)" must give form to the chapters by "Identifying(Mg)" them as N-Term system in which N may equal 3, 4, 5 or perhaps even lower or higher numbers. As I have already said, I am only beginning to scratch the surface of the Ching. I have only analyzed about a dozen chapters so far. In none of them N equals less that 3 and more than five. In computer programming, the "job analysis" (B) is breaking down the "job-description" (A) for the coder, so that s/he can do the "coding" (C). As B breaks down A so C breaks down B so that the computer can do the "exrcution" (D).
. Since 1964, when I took that seven Week computer programming course, I have said the same thing. I started by lecturing on it at the Toronto Theosophical Society. I am getting tired of "Repeating(@1)" the same thing for all these years. If I didn't know that the social engineers want me to give up, I would have done it long ago.
We give form to the single "Unit($1)", which "Originally" comes to us through the poets (A) by "Dividing(âo)" the unbroken line into four parts. "Well, suppose you have a line divided into two unequal parts, and then divide the two parts again". And there, right between the two halves, Lao Tzu has put the Ku(KU). See the REPUBLIC at 509d.
. The first four sentences are six paragraphs long each, the next two are seven characters each and the last paragraph consists of of two indicative sentences and two imperative sentences. It is 20 characters long. That, plus the Ku, gives us a total of 59 characters
. That the last two sentences are imperative sentences is obvious because ...
an imperative sentence always starts with the verb or a verb phrase. This is straightforward syntactics (C), no thought required. Translators who don't see that, are not doing their job. Plato does not take failing to "mind your own business" lightly:
. "Interference .... with each other's jobs .... does the greatest harm to our state, and we are entirely justified in calling it the worst of evils. (434c)" If you don't mind your own business you you are not getting the job-satisfaction you get from doing your own thing and somebody else has to do your job instead of his own. Gita 3.35 comes to mind.
. If I haven't "Enough(Zu)" time and energy for my own dharma, it is because I have to spend so much time and energy on doing somebody else's dharma. But then, I can think of this work as a job-description for "WordErs(C2er)". If a "WordEr really Doesn't Know (C2erPUkn)" that an imperative sentence starts with the verb, or HOW to "Identify(Mg)" the sentences in Ching 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3 then somebody has to tell them. But the “WordErs” (C) should leave the breaking down of chapters into paragraphs to the "KnowErs" (B) because, as we can see, not all of this work can be done without thinking. "KnowErs" have to accept the division of the Ching into 81 chapters as a given. By analogy, "WordErs" should accept the division of chapters into paragraphs, if there is a consensus among thinkers (B), as a given.
. In the Gita, Arjuna, the raja yogi (C), was taught jnana yoga (B). This means that good communicators (C) know how to think. How can they communicate something if they don't understand it themselves? The translators (C) who have broken down Ching 1 into four paragraphs, have done a good job. Essentially that is what the programmer (B) does. He gets the "Job-description" from the customer (A) in one piece. The programmers job is called the "Job-analysis". S/he is breaking down the "Big (TA)" "Task(D2)" into smaller tasks, so that the coder (C) can handle it. Notice the Law of Correspondence again: The coder breaks down the task into still smaller pieces so that ...
the computer (D) can handle it. When you apply the Aristotelian tetrad to computer programming, as the developers of the original IBM system have done, it could be taught in seven weeks. Now it takes seven years to become a "Computer scientist" and guess what? They can't even program. That is excellent social engineering but it is not teaching computer programming.
. To start with Ching 1, is a good idea because Jonathan Star has done such an excellent job on it. He can help you to put some meat on this chapter. By breaking it down you are giving it a more specific form than it had "Originally(Cu)". Aristotle has called level B of the "Divided Line (509d)" the "formal cause". If you have not come across my previous sections, just keep on reading.
. Since you can read the March 10 and 11 sections yourself, I can keep my commentaries on them down to a minimum.
. Starting with the March 10 section we come across my first mistake about 2/3 down the page. What I should have said in two sentences, ended up in one: ".... there is only so much a translator can do". He "can either do the best he can do, or water it down." This is not a serious error, because you can see that it is an error. The "If my thinking (C) ....", in the March 17 section, is a more serious error because it is not as obvious that this is also an error. If you are trying to figure out why I said "(C)" instead of "(B)" you are wasting a lot of time, get frustrated, and quit.
. There is no need for me to point out the errors you can see yourself. So let me concentrate on improvements I would like to make, if it were not as dangerous for me to spend too much time in front of the computer, when it is connected to the internet, as it is.
. I would substitute the word "recognize" for the word "see", which is in the next sentence after the one with the mistake in it. Why? ...
Because you can only re-cognize something again if you have cognized it first.
. You can see from this example that my comments are more about the semantic (B) dimension of semiotics than about the syntactic (C) dimension.
. As a result of reading the two sections again, I came up with good ideas I would simply add to the existing text. Since I can't do that, unless a "WordEr" will do it for me, this is a good alternative. There is also a good opportunity for you to go over the original text and trying to figure out what ideas I might have come up with. What you would have to do is: Skip the rest of this section, skip the March 23, the March 17 and the March 15 sections and start reading the March 10 section. ...
At the bottom of the first page of the March 10 section I have described how we get from Ching 2.2 to Ching 1.4. At the beginning of this section I have given a translation of the whole chapter. And this time including the new "???" and "??" convention, which I have described in the March 23 section. What might at first be confusing will become clear if you compare the two translations of the same characters of Ching 1.4,3 and 1.4,4 you have here. After you have overcome your confusion you can compare this with other translations of the same words, phrases, sentences and the whole chapter.Jonathan Star's scholarly work on this chapter can be a tremendous help with this work
. Chapter one can be considered the "Gate(%1)" to the rest of the book. I think that this is one reason why Star has devoted so much space to it.
. There is really no Way of getting around this work. Nobody, not even Lao Tzu, can do your reading (C) and thinking (B) for you. I have worked on this book foe 40 years by now and I am still only scratching the surface. You simply don't have as much time left for this work as I have had so far. Time is running out. If we could work on this book as a group consisting of all four types of people then we should be able to progress faster: Where two or three are gathered in the name of truth, It will be in the midst of them.
. Thanks to the "Insights(72)", which have come to me at a faster rate recently, I am embolded to say that I can save you time, if you are motivated to learn some of Lao Tzu's lessons. Willingness is is more important than ability here because ...
if you are willing ...
you can gain the "Ability(ab)" but without the willingness, to gain it, you are stuck.
. I can do this writing, I can tell you what to think about but I can't do the thinking for you. While you can decide to do the reading and thinking. you can't decide when the intuitions (A) or "Insights(72)" will come as a result of your efforts.
. Gita 2.47 comes to mind. This time I am using Winthrop Sargeant's translation:
"Thy jurisdiction is in action alone;
Never in its fruits at any time.
Never should the fruits of action be thy motive;
Never let there be attachment in thee to inaction."
. There is an excellent footnote on this "Acting without regard or desire for the fruits ...." The best insights or intuitions came to us as a surprise. We tend to wonder: What took me so long? It is so obvious to me now, why didn't I see it before? We often realize that we knew it all along but we did "Not Know that we Know. and that is Sick (PUknkn@p)" because ...
a mental block has prevented us from becoming aware of what deep down we knew all along.
. The Tao Te Ching can be a great catalyst for new insights. It can help us getting around our mental blocks. How long have I studied Ching one but some of the things I am telling you here are brand new to me. Does the fact that I have to struggle with getting these ideas down on paper have something to do with it? ...
Lao Tzu says: Don't waste your time and energy on questions the answers of which you are not ready for! Don't bite off more than you can chew! ...
The significance of these lessons, from Ching 63, only dawns on us when we manage to carryout these instructions with some success.
. For the first three paragraphs of Ching 1, there is at least some agreement among translators. Since this is lacking for Ching 1.4, it means that ...
our teacher has given us some work to do. Before we can go to the semantic dimension (B) of semiotics, we have to "Complete(cm)" the work that has to be done in the syntactic dimension (C) first: You can now go over the work different translators have done on it but also look at the characters which make up these four sentences as well. ...
. 1.4,1: "These DyAds (Tzdyad) are Units Originally (S1Cu)". The connective "are" has to be inserted for the English reader but it is not necessary here because the Ché(ad) doubles as a connective. The "But(bt)" tells us that what follows is a subordinate phrase.
. 1.4,2: The "Unit Is the ???'S Darkness ($1is?? ZSü". This is a complete sentence. Obviously a word is missing but we even have a connective here.
. 1.4,3: "Darken It (Sü Z)" The syntax of imperative sentences is simple it is a verb or a verb-phrase. Even dogs understand it. Just say "Sit!" to a well trained dog.
. 1.4,4: "Repeat the Darkening (@1Sü)"! If you have done it before then you can "Repeat" it. but sooner or later you want to know how many times you have to "Repeat" it? ...
The answer is: Until you have reached "All Mystery'S Gate (^1#1 Z%1)".
The question we got here is: What does the pronoun, Chih( Z), represent? ...
What does the ??? represent? ...
As far as syntactics (C) goes, all the “WordErs(C2er)” have to tell their reader that a word is missing. But that missing word forces us to think and the thinking (B) is done in the semantic (B) dimension of semiotics. We have a DIVISION OF LABOR here. Can you see how useful semiotics is? If I tell you now that, there are people who don't want us to understand it, is that part of a malicious "conspiracy theory", or is there evidence that some information overload and all disinformation is produced intentionally? ...
One way to get that evidence is to understand (B) and to make use (D) of semiotics and then the "official version" of it will be seen for what it is. Let us get back to our question. For "Dark(Sü)" our Dictionary-Concordance gives us:
"Hsüan95 01 06 10 15 51 56 65 'dark, mystic, abstruse'". The idea is to look for "Dark" and see if its opposite, comes up in the same chapter. No luck there. The closest we get is Ching 56. Chapters which have more words in common can shed more light on each other. The characters Ching 01 and 56 have in common are:
Chê(ad), Ch'i( H), Mên(%1), T'ung($1), Wei(is), Hsüan(Sü), Ku(KU), K'o(pt), Erh(bt) and T'ien(Tn). Of these only T'ung and Hsüan are of primary interest to us. For instance, if "Heaven(Tn)" had been followed by "Earth(Tn)" then there might have been a closer connection but "Heaven Below (Tn -)" in the Ching means everything on level B and levels C and D "Below" it. This is why its official equivalent is "On Earth", which is also a valid equivalent in the Ching but it is not the only one. It is also a reference to the Law of Correspondence: As above so "Below". This little introduction to my translation of Ching 56 will hopefully enable you to evaluate it better. I will only do the last 2/3 of it:
"Harmonize Your Light (Ho H$4)!
Unite Your Dust ($1 H@h)!
This is Called Dark Unit (SiisSü$1)
If(KU), for the individual, it is
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Love (gtbt%m) it,
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Hate (gtbtäV) it, if it is
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Benefit (gtbtLI) it,
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Harm (gtbt%o) it, if it is
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Honor (gtbtKu) it,
ImPossible (PUpt) to Get it And Despise (gtbtäb) it,
Then To (KUdo) honor it, all in
Heaven and Below (Tn -) it must Honor(Ku)" it collectively.
Ching 63.3 came to mind: “Intelligent People (wsmn) Throughout-their-lives(nG)
Don’t Handle Big (PUdoTA) tasks alone and Thus KU they are
Able(ab) to participate in Completing The Big (cm HTA)” one.
We may still not have in black and white WHAT the pronoun, Chih( Z) at Ching 1.4,3 represents, but we got something else to chew on.
On the first page of the March 11 section there is a quote from Swami Muktananda. I will quote the last sentence of it because it expresses that partial view of the whole 4-fold human system best: "Until the mind loses itself in the inner Self, ....
When the mind becomes free from thoughts, ....
You become the very form of God."
. The sentence consists of a subject, a predicate and three subordinate phrases. I have deleted two of them: The first one because I don't agree with it and the second one because it does not add anything to the view expressed but can cause confusion because ...
"the inner Self" is not "the mind .... itself".
. In the Gita the Atman is either translated as "Self" (A) or "self" (C). When the context demands "Self" it is the "inner Self" within our 4-fold human system. But within the Atman there is the Purusha and I think that it is the E1-E2-E3 triad. "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths. (THE HOLY SCIENCE Sutra 14)". They are Atman (A), Buddhi (B), Manas (C), the Indriyas or "Prana" (D) and all of these are "covered", or surrounded, by "GROSS MATTER" (E8), as we can see.
. The word "form" in the predicate refers to the Aristotelian "formal cause" (B). When the mind (C) can get around the intellect (B), or perhaps identify with it, C feels like "the very form of God." This theory (B) still needs to be verified or debunkt but the problem of a one-sided view is still there.
=============================================================
March 23, 2009
. Semiotics is a very useful version of the B-C-D triad. In it, B is the semantic dimension of semiotics, C is the syntactic dimension and D is the pragmatic dimension.
. Lao Tzu says of B and C:
"KnowErs are Not good enough with Words (knerPUC2) while
WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" HOW to think well enough. But if they work as a team, then they form a "Mystical Unit (Sü$1)". "Mystical", because that "Unit" is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts..
. In systematics, the three parts of a triad are called impulses. Its "Systemic Attribute" is "DYNAMISM". If you take any one of the three impulses away, then the "dynamism" is gone. Each one of the three impulses is the opposite of the other two.
. Individually, we all know how to think (B), talk (C) and walk (D). But in each of us one of these three, or the artist (A) in us, predominates. To carryout our "dharma", or social function, we must first "Identify(Mg)" which one of the four elements predominates in us. Astrology is a good guide here. When we have "Identified(Mg)" our "natural aptitude (See the Republic about that)" then we have to "Actualize our Potential (A1pt). When we have done that, we have the ability to do our dharma. But without the willingness to do it, all the work we have done so far is good for nothing. Why? ...
Ability and willingness are the poles of a polarity. They are complements of each other. You can't have the one without the other. No willingness to do what you are able to do and it doesn't get done. No ability to do what you want to do and it doesn't get done. ...
"Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)"! A job is only doable if we have the ability to do it. And we will only do it if we are willing to do it.
. After you have "Actualized your Potential" you must be willing to translate it into "Practice(pr)" This is HOW you participate in the establishment and maintenance of a healthy society.
. Not participating is neglecting your social responsibility. Neglecting your social responsibility is indifference to what happens to society. "The penalty good men pay for indifference to social affairs is to be ruled by evil men." Plato said that over a thousand years ago and we still don't seem to get it. If you have found out why it is so hard to find out the truth, which, when known, will set us free and you try to explain it then your explanation will be called a "conspiracy theory". Try it! In spite of their efforts, your efforts may do some good.
. Plato said in his REPUBLIC that: "justice consists in minding your own business ($33b)". There is a footnote by Desmond Lee, the translator, on the same page: ".... 'mind your own business' is almost exactly translated by the current (1974) catch phrase 'doing your own thing' ...."
. Due to what Lao Tzu has said about "Expectations(YÜ)" and what Steiner has said about representations (Vorstellung) There is a major mistake in the Republic. The social engineers love it but I had to go all the way to India to find out what exactly is wrong with it.
. Representations (C) are preconceived ideas which kick in automatically as soon they encounter an idea they don't agree with. Because our mind (C) works with Automatic Energy (E6) the idea is deleted very efficiently. This is why Aristotle has called level C of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" the efficient cause. This is why good ideas get deleted before we even become aware of them. This is not because Plato, or we, are not intelligent (B) "Enough" but because our intellect (B) is not fast "Enough". It uses Sensitive Energy (E5), it wants to know what is going on before it decides what to do about it. Before our intellect (B) has figured out what a perception (D) means, our mind (C) has already identified it and decided on it automatically without thinking about it. It is using Automatic Energy (E5) and so it does everything fast and efficiently. What a perception (D) is and what to do about it is decided automatically. Our mind is what Aristotle said it is. It is efficient.
. But E5 energy can be stepped down to E6. This is important. How can that be done? ...
By "Repeating(@1)" the truth until it is as automatic and fast as the falsehoods in us are. This effort requires Conscious Energy (E4) because the most dangerous beliefs (C), or representations (C), are implanted in us skillfully and intentionally. This bit of information will, again, be "Ridiculed(*a41)" as a part of a big and malicious "conspiracy theory". And, unless we realize that this "Ridicule" is just another "trick (548a)" of our political masters, it is effective. But once a critical mass of us understands Ching 41.1, this trick will be counterproductive.
. Now, if a big error could slip into Plato's REPUBLIC because his own preconceived ideas didn't agree with parts of his vision (A), what about us, being worked on by social engineers? ....
. According to Jungian psychology, there are unconscious parts of us which communicate with us through dreams, and "Active Imagination". They can also let us know that they are unhappy by causing trouble for us. I have already told you about that unconscious part of mine which consistently slips mistakes by my conscious part in spite of me proofreading each section and looking for these mistakes before I put them out on the internet. But after the section is out and I read what I have just put out and then I see them right away. How come? ...
An unconscious part of mine wants me to know that it is not happy with me having to do the work "WordErs(C2er)" should be doing. What it is doing is very predictable and why it is doing it is understandable. Problem is, I can't do anything about it because I am not a "WordEr". I have already explained why it is risky for me to spend too much time in front of the computer while I am connected to the internet. So even by putting the March 11 section behind the March 10 section I was taking my chances because this file is getting longer and it is slowing down.
. While relaxing and going over the March 10 and 11 sections, again, in addition to noticing the errors, some nice ideas came to me as well. The best way to share them with you. is to go over the sections again and to elaborate on the passages at which the "Insights(72)" came to me. Since I am going over the two sections again anyway, I might as well point out some errors I found in these two sections.. In this way I an catching two birds with one stone.
. The reason I got these new insights into semiotics is because of what I have read about it recently. It has put me into an unusually heavy negative state. When there is this kind of overreaction, Jungian psychologists tell us to pay attention: Our unconscious parts are trying to tell us something. This is why I have decided to take another look at semiotics to find out what is right and what is wrong with it. ...
When doing this kind of work, it is a good idea to see if Lao Tzu has something to say about it. He said: When
"Below average Scholars Hear the Truth ( -Ün^dA1) they will predictably
Greatly Ridicule It (TA*a Z)". if they do
Not Ridicule (PU*a) it then we do
Not have Enough Means To find out the Truth (PU*aPUZuYIdoA1)".*a = Hsiao118.
. Putting people into a negative state is just another form of "Ridicule". Essentially "Hsiao(*a)" represents anything which prevents the truth from getting out, but, it you understand Ching 41.1 then, it also helps you "To find out the Truth (doA1)". Since I gained a new "Insight(72)" into semiotics because of the "Ridicule", because of getting into an unusually severe depressed state, there are definite advantages to it, if ...
we know HOW to "Identify(Mg)" and interpret the "Ridicule".
. Now let us see how my new "Insight" applies to what I have said about the semantic dimension since the March 10 section:
. Lao Tzu has told us that those who are in the syntactic dimension of semiotics (C), the "WordErs, Don't have to Know (C2erPUkn)" HOW to think. The paradox is now that Lao Tzu forces his students to think. The problem which is caused by that is that translators, in order to make Lao Tzu's Chinese readable in English, have to fill in the blanks our teacher has left for us to fill in. If what the "WordErs" fill in is wrong "Enough(Zu)" so that their mistakes are obvious to see, no harm is done. Why? ...
Because we can still fill in the right words. The problem is when they fill in the right words because ...
you can't fill in the right word when it has already been filled in. By analogy, you can't "Complete(cm)" a crossword puzzle when somebody else has already completed it. "Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed (dfezmtcm)". No incomplete sentences; no task to be "Completed(cm)". You can't complete a complete sentence.
. "WordErs Don't necessarily Understand (C2erPUkn)" the intuitions which come through them. So it makes no difference to them whether they fill in the right or the wrong word. But if it is the right word then we are deprived of the opportunity to fill it in ourselves.
. If Lao Tzu had left no work for us to do all would be fine. Translators could apply the rules of syntax to the words and punctuations and do their work with Automatic Energy (E6) efficiently without having to think. But translators of the Tao Te Ching agree that the Ching can't be translated, it has to be interpreted to be readable in English. So we have a problem here. What can we do about it? ...
In theory (B), the conventions I use in my type of translation should take care of the problem but in practice (D) they don't. If things are incomprehensible and contradictory in the Chinese original, why do translators have to MAKE sense of it? ...
What we need is a few more rules added to my type of translation which enables translators to be more accurate, which enables them to better mind their own business. We need a few more rules or conventions which can be applied automatically, or methodically, as we apply the rules of syntax we already have.
. Many problems can be avoided by being more accurate. If what Lao Tzu has said doesn't make sense in Chinese, why does it have to make sense in English?...
But when a word is actually missing, then translators must have a Way of letting their readers know that a word is missing. I only know about ten of the 81 chapters well "Enough(Zu)" to comment on them, yet, even in them I have two clear examples where a word is missing. So I suggest to insert thee question-marks (???) where the word is missing and two question-marks (??) along with the two-digit identifiers to indicate that a character is missing. If grammatically nothing is missing but semantically a sentence doesn't make sense, then we only put the three question-marks in but leave the two out.
. If translators agree on some fillers and interpretations and if the context demands them, go along with them. Why complicate things unnecessarily? But if they can't agree, put in the three "???" so students can make up their own minds. Another thing "WordErs" can do is use the Chinese phonetic instead of an English equivalent if the translators can't agree on the equivalent. of a character, let the student figure it iut for him or herself. After all, that's HOW we learn.. These conventions will not eliminate all of the problems but it will reduce them. I am having a hard time explaining these things. I think the best way to proceed is to use examples from the Ching and try to apply the new rules along with the old ones. Let us start with the first sentence in the March 10 section:
. "Other Chih What they Teach I Also Teach (mn ZSO#lme08#l) ??? It( Z)".
mn = Jen9 "Man, human a person)". It doesn't mean "Other", but the context demands it and most translators have seen that. They know Chinese, and when there is a consensus among them, we might as well go along with them. There is no point in complicates things unnecessarily yust because I have come up with a few new rules.. But the thing to watch out for is oversimplification.
Next comes Chih( Z). The context tells us that the pronoun Chih( Z) represents "Other Teachers" But most translators don't have it. I think, to ignore it is to ignore Chih( Z). But I still put in the "Chih" instead of "Teachers" so that the students can decide for themselves.. The "they" is a filler. In Chinese it is not needed; in English we need it to make the sentence readable. As we try to apply these new rules, it becomes obvious that even in the syntactic dimension we can't do entirely without thinking (B). All we can do is reduce the amount of thinking required. The same goes for the thinkers in the semantic dimension. We can't do entirely without communication (C) we have to get our ideas (B) across somehow. All a communicators could do for me is to reduce the amount of writing (C) I have to do and do a better job than I can do.
. The "???" in front of the "It( Z)" requires thought: ...
We know that Lao Tzu leaves out words and we know why. He can also add an unnecessary word but then there is a reason for it. He does not add unnecessary words for no reason. This can be established as a rule of syntax. Just as a word-processor tells us when a word is repeated, so "WordErs" can automatically put in the three question marks to indicate that there is an extra word here that is not required by syntax. The sentence is complete without it..
. There are no clear-cut divisions between the three dimensions of semiotics. Look at computer programming. Where is the line between customer (A)and programmer (B)? ...
Where is the line between programmer and coder (C)? ...
The only line that is clear-cut is the line between coder and computer (D). The computer will only mind its own business. It cannot do the work of A, B or C and so we don't expect it to. Because it specializes in its own job, it can be as efficient as it is. And because it is as efficient, the whole system is as efficient as it is. Because the computer is the most dependable link in the system, the system will break, or slow, down at one of other three links. In the original IBM computer programming system, or in a working 4-fold social order the weakest "source", or component, is "IdentifiAble(ptMg)" Why? ...
Because a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Here you have a bit of semiotics.
Semiotics (B-C-D) is a science like semantics (B), syntactics (C) and pragmatics (D). Even though it is the whole of which B, C and D are the parts, it is no more important than any one of its parts. Why? ...
Take any one of its parts away and you no longer have a science called semiotics. You can have an "official version" of "semiotics" but you can't have a whole without its parts.
. Isn't the truth beautiful? No amount of social engineering can destroy the truth. Social engineers can dumb down the people, they can cause them to be indifferent to the truth but the choice to be indifferent, and the social responsibility which comes with that choice, is ours. ...
If you didn't get it, please read it again. This section is getting too long. I will start working on the March 10 and 11 sections in the next section. It will be in front of this one. Trying to predict what I will say about them, finding the errors for instance, is good exercise. ...
===========================================================
March 17, 2009
. In the last, March 15, section I have quoted an interpretation of Ching 1.3 (Chapter 1. Paragraph 3). It is on page 289 of Jonathan Star's book. There is much we can learn from it:
. "When a person is established in his own nature, When his mind .... no longer identifies with its own thoughts, .... Then he sees the world as it truly is ....
. "When a person identifies with what he perceives .... When his mind is focused outwardly .... When he remains in the state of separateness and limitation, then .... He sees the world as the world, .... He misses the underlying unity and perfection."
When our soul (A) gets around our ego (B-C-D), she "Perceives The Mystery;
When she does not go around it but uses it, she "Perceives The Boundaries".
The word "limitation" in the quote is implied by the word "Boundary(*1)". *1 = Chiao60. The word "separateness" is implied by nothing in that paragraph. Where does the idea of separation come from? ...
See "Janaloka" in Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE. In philosophy it can also come from using space as an analogy: Draw a point and then draw another point beside it. …
The points are separate from each other. Now, what connects the two pints? ...
The line. This simple exercise requires an intellectual jump from the zero dimension, the point, to the first dimension of space. Did the interpreter of 1.3 arrive at that concept in this way? ...
No. How do I know? ...
"The four orders of men arose from me, in justice to their natures and their works. (Gita 4.13 Mascaró's translation)". Philosophers know Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". Much of his Republic is devoted to the division of labor because we can't have a healthy society without it. There are four orders, or classes of people in the world. Each one of these classes has its own dharma with its own abilities and viewpoints. Each member of a class "sees the world as the world" s/he sees. For a member of one class to claim that "He sees the world as it truly is" is misleading because the members of the other three classes also "see the world as it truly" appears to them.
. Let me try to illustrate this by an example. We can look at a house from the four cardinal directions: From the front, from the left or the right side or from the back. For a person who only sees one side of the house to claim that he sees the whole house is a mistake. This type of mistake is called Tamas in Sanskrit. It is mistaking the part for the whole.
. Each one of the four possible viewpoints is as valid as the other three. For a complete picture of the house we need all four views. To claim that there is only one possible view of a house is unreasonable. For a person to claim that everybody who has a different view "misses the underlying unity and perfection" is presumptuous.
. If the author of the above interpretation did not arrive at the idea of "separateness" by thinking, then HOW did he arrive at it? ...
By intuition. An intuition on level A would be a vision. Steiner said that an idea (B), which comes to us, is an intuition. I have known a channeler, who heard the words (C) she was typing on her word-processor as if taking dictation. Now, what about a karma yogi (D)? ...
"He sees the world as the world" s/he sees. HOW do we see the world? ...
The world we see in here is not the world which is out there. Plato and the Hindus say that it is an illusion. That Plato calls it "eikasia" in Greek and the Hindus call it "maya" in Sanskrit doesn't mean that WHAT they are saying is different. Can our illusion be called an intuition? ...
I think that this is a nice question. Let me just add here what we can learn from the original IBM programming system before it was corrupted: Customer (A), programmer (B), coder (C) and computer (D) are all needed to carryout a job. Any one of them missing, is like one of the four viewpoint of a house missing. As we don't get a complete picture of the house with one view missing so we can't "Complete(cm)" the job with one "source", or component, missing.
. Analogy is a thinking (B) tool, but here I have used it as a communication (C) tool. Back to the translation: The fact that somebody, who is not a "KnowEr(kner)" can intuit the word "separateness" tells me that there are people who have more concrete intuitions than I have. Whatever else he said tells me that "Worders Don't always Understand (C2erPUkn)" what comes through them. But the "KnowErs(kner)" can.make use of it. Speaking to the "KnowErs" and "WordErs", Lao Tzu said: "Unite Your Dust ($1 H@h)". Our political masters are doing it: Our elected politicians (C) are "United" with their unelected advisors (B). They are working as a team, and, unless we understand HOW, and why, they are doing it, they will continue to control us. We have to know the truth collectively to set us free.
. I have no problem with admitting that the person who has interpreted Ching 1.3 has made a valuable contribution to our understanding of that paragraph. When the person, who describes the back-view of the house, claims that his view is the only possible one, his description of it is still a description of the back-view of the house. It is one of four valid views we need to get a fuller picture of the house.
. Analogy is based on the Law of Correspondence. Lao Tzu uses it very skillfully: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. What is true for thinkers (B) is analogous to what is true to communicators (C). If my thinking (C) tells me that the intuition of a communicator is as valuable and necessary as my own ideas then why doesn't his more concrete intuition tell him more concretely that my thoughts are as valuable as the words which come to him from within or from without? ...
This is a tough one. Let me try to explain:
. "WordErs do Not always Understand (C2erPUkn)" WHAT they are saying.
. "Knowing that you Don't Know is Healthy (knPUkn +)
Not Knowing that you don't Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)". Lao Tzu usually gives short explanations, which we can't understand without thinking about them. ...
What prevents people from getting "DesirAblr(ptYÜ)" intuitions or ideas? ...
The short answer is: "Expectations(YÜ)". We see what we "Want(YÜ)" to see. We don't see what conflicts with our preconceived ideas. Preconceived ideas are ready-made ideas that come up automatically because our mind (C) works with Automatic Energy (E6). The intellect (B) can do nothing about our "Expectations", or representations, because the intellect (B) works with Sensitive Energy (E5). Before we have become aware (E4) of what is going on, the mind is already done. Because the mind (C) just does its thing, without asking any questions before it does it, it is more efficient than the intellect. This is why Aristotle has called level C the "efficient cause”. Our intellectual center (B) can only deal with our emotional center (C) if its thoughts become as automatic as our emotions are. And HOW can this be done? ...
Our thoughts become automatic by "Repeating(@1)" them until they have become automatic. Then they are no longer thoughts (B) but representations (C). This is HOW we step down E5 energy to E6. This is why the social engineers use the mass media and the educational system to repeat the things they want us to believe (C).
. The Way to counteract that is to do your own thinking. Then you know (B) the truth instead of having to believe (C) their "official version" of the truth.
. Social engineering is a science. It now uses electronics and chemistry but originally it was primarily psychology. What makes people tick? HOW can we make them tick the way we want them to tick? ...
Knowledge is power and knowing HOW to control our mind gives them power over us. They know that we see WHAT we "Want(YÜ)" to see. If we don't want to see what is "DesirAble(ptYÜ)" to see, then we don't see it. They know it and so must we.
. Our political masters know that our ego "Wants(YÜ)" to be right. And, if our mind (C) can prevent our intellect (B) from being heard, then the "official version" of the truth will be heard instead of the truth..
. If people lack the honesty and humility to consider the possibility of being wrong they will always claim that their view is the ONLY one.
. "Expectations" are preconceived ideas. Whatever conflicts with these ideas, whether they come from the outside or the inside, they can't reach us. We are closed to such ideas. Since this censorship is done with Automatic Energy, our intellect can't intervene. It can only intervene indirectly by stepping down Sensitive energy (E5) to Automatic Energy (E6). In practice this means: By "Repeating(@1)" an idea that can counteract an mental block until it kicks in automatically as the mental block kicks in. We program our own subconscious by "Repeating(@1)" the truth which can counteract the falsehoods in us. For the truth to become effective it must become as automatic as the falsehoods it must deal with. To do that, it must "Identify(Mg)" them first.
. Intuitions are as selective as thoughts are. If we are not open to them, they don't come.
. This is the best I can do right now but I am still not satisfied with my explanation. For me, describing these ideas is a pain in the neck. But sharing these ideas is important. This is why even without the help of communicators (C), I put out these ideas as best as I can. Please help to share this information. Please pass on what of it you understand.
. S/he who has, and shares, shall have more.
=============================================================
March 15, 2009
. Let us continue with Ching 1.3 (Tao Te Ching Chapter 1. Paragraph 3). In his scholarly work, Jonathan Star has described nine out of the ten characters which are in that paragraph. They are: Ku(KU), Ch'ang(Cn), Wu(WU), Yu(YU) Yü(YÜ), WuYü, YuYü, Kuan(Kn), Ch'i( H), Miao(#1) and Chiao(*1). The only character missing is Yi(YI).
. The KU, Cn, WU etc. (in brackets) are two-digit identifiers of the roughly 400 Chinese characters, which appear in more than one chapter in the Ching. If you Google: "A1 Tao162" you should be able to get my Dictionary-Concordance at the end of it. In it you get the phonetic and the radical number "By-means-of-which(YI)" you can find the character in a dictionary.
. In theory, if you know all the characters in a sentence then you should be able to read it. There is no guarantee that you will also be "Able(ab)" to understand it but you should be able to read it.
. From page 281 to 286 Star has described the nine characters. Chang(Cn), Yü(YÜ), Kuan(Kn), Ch'i( H) and Yi(YI) come up twice, thus giving us a total of 15 characters. After star has described his nine characters, he has selected three translations of the paragraph and on page 287 he comments:
. "In the context of Translation 1, MIAO is the Essence of the Universe, .... In Translation 2, MIAO is the mind's essence, it is the place of the self where all thoughts arise. In Translation 3, MIAO is the identification with one's unlimited Self, it is the awareness of ones own essence being the essence of the Universe; it is the realization that 'I am That,' 'I am the Supreme Reality.'
. "CHIAO translates as 'the body' but can also refer to the false identification that limits a person-- mind, personality, individuality, ego, doership, etc."
. After this one come two more translations and the following comment: "Here CH'ANG is interpreted as the term for the Eternal, Unchanging Reality-- the Absolute." Then come three more translations of the same 15 characters and then comes: "This interpretation is problematic for two reasons: .... A person in a state of non-being does not DESIRE to perceive the essence-- he just perceives it; similarly, a person in the state of of being does not desire to see the world's appearance-- he just sees it."
. If Yü(YÜ) is translated as "Expectation" then this makes perfect sense because ...
This word comes closest to what philosophers (B) call representation, which is essentially like a program in us, which tells us what to see, believe, or do. The program is like software in the mind (C), which is written in the hardware of our physical (D) brain. To use D we need C, to get around C we need B and to get around B we need ...
Use the Law of Correspondence. As ...
we need thought (B) to get around our beliefs (C), so …
we need awareness (A) to get around our thoughts (B).
. Essentially, our expectations, or representations (C), are “Repeated(@1)” thoughts (B). Credit for my own knowledge of what a representation (Vorstellung) is, goes to Steiner.
. Back to Star's scholarly work: He now gives us four more translation which are based on the above insight. The last one is the longest but it is also the most explicit description of that particular vision (A):
. "When a person is established in his own nature, When his mind merges into itself, When it no longer identifies with its own thoughts, When it becomes aware of its own awareness, Then he sees the one unchanging Reality that has become everything in this world. He sees the world as it truly is-- as the perfect expression of Tao, as the supreme play of one consciousness.
. "When a person identifies with what he perceives and not with the one who perceives, When his mind is focused outwardly and assumes limitations, When he remains in the state of separateness and limitation, Then he sees the varied forms of this world, He sees the world as the world, as an interplay of objects, He misses the underlying unity and perfection."
When our soul (A) gets around our ego (B-C-D) she "Perceives The Mystery (Kn H#1)".
When she does not go around it but uses it, she "Perceives The Boundary (Kn H*1)".
That systematics is in the Tao Te Ching is obvious but there is also systematics in the Bhagavad Gita. The components of the Three-Term system, the triad, are called Sattwa (B) Raja (C) and Tamo guna. At Gita 18.20 what "one sees" by "Means(YI)" of the Sattwa guna is described, what "one merely sees" "Through(YI)" the Raja guna is described at 18.21 and what "one selfishly sees .... as if it were everything," is described at 18.22.
. There are four yogas, or elements in Astrology. If the members of one of these four castes or "classes" selfishly claim that their vision is the only valid one then that will lead to a one-sided interpretation (B) of a text, which is likely to lead to wrong "Expectations(YÜ)" (C), which can lead to wrong actions (D), which will cause bad karma.
. The original Indian caste system, before it was corrupted by the Bramins (B), was a four-fold system, the tetrad. There were four castes in India and each one was equally important. The harm, and injustice, done by one caste claiming to be special is unbelievable. And unbelievable it is supposed to be. How else can they pull it off? ...
. For the corrupted caste system, Google: Protocols of Zion division of labor
. The three gunas form one triad. Take one of them away and you don't have 2/3 of a triad left. While the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, it is also like a chain which is only as strong as its weakest link. If one component of a system is not functioning properly then it is affecting the system as a whole. If the members of one social class do not have the honesty, or humility, to admit that their view is only one of four equally valid, and necessary, views, then they not only do harm to the members of the other three classes but to themselves as well. Destroying the social system we all depend on is as bad as destroying mother earth we all depend on. In fact, the former is causing the latter.
. Back to Star's scholarly work: The description of Yü(YÜ) starts on page 282 and goes on for over a page. It is excellent. It shows nicely that Lao Tzu must be talking about what in philosophy (B) is known as "Representations" (C). R. L. Wing's "Expectations" comes closest to that. It is not one of the many equivalents in Star's list. Wing's translation is a more accurate one among those I have. For Ching 1.3 he has:
"Thus, without expectation,
. . One will always perceive the subtlety;
And with expectation.
. . One will always perceive the boundary."
Ku(KU) means "Thus" and it can also mean "Then". If we interpret it as "Then", then we must put an "if" in front of the previous paragraph:
"If the conception of heaven and earth is without name (WUMgTnTI ZB2)
and the birth of all things is with name (YUMgWnwU ZMU) Then(KU). being
Without Expectations is For "Always(Cn)" Perceiving The Mystery and being
With Expectations is For "Always(Cn)" Perceiving The Boundary
(CnWUYÜYIKn H#1
CnYUYÜYIKn H*1)". Putting a word in quotes followed by the identifier is a convention I use to get around the fact that Chinese is not English.
. J.Wu has the: As .... So .... format, which refers to The Law of Correspondence. If you read Ching 1.2 and 1.3 as one "DyAd(dyad)" then instead of a tetrad, Ching 1 is a triad. This doesn't necessarily mean that, if one interpretation is right, the other one has to be wrong. When it comes to Lao Tzu, it is more likely that both interpretations are valid. When the chapter is read as a "TriAd( 3ad)", then the "DyAd" in it must be read as a "Monad($1)". If you are not familiar with systematics this is bound to be confusing. Systematics is about "Manads" "DyAds(dyad)", "TriAds( 3ad)" etc. So, if you read a sentence in which there is an N-Term system, you don't know, then you can't fully understand it, unless ...
the context defines the word.
. You have here an example of the kind of work that must be done on the Nei Yeh as well. It is a vision (A) which is in need of interpretation (B). Thanks to Harold D. Roth we have a translation of it but more work on the semantic (B), syntactic (C) and pragmatic (D) dimensions of semiotics is still required. ...
=============================================================
March 10. 2009
. "Other Teachers What they Teach (mn ZSO#l), I Also Teach (meo8#l) if What-they-teach( Z)" is true.
. With these words Our teacher is telling us something. ...
If other teachers know the truth then they can fill in ...
details Lao Tzu has not filled in himself. Why does he not fill them in? ...
For one thing, if you don't participate in the learning process then you are not going to learn Lao Tzu's lessons. For another thing ...
if he had filled in all the details, the book would have become too long and then it may not have become the bestseller it has become. Look at all the different translations you get from the same characters. Not all of them make sense, but if they are true, then Lao Tzu has probably meant it. What does that mean to jnana yogis (B)? ...
That "WordErs can have intuitions they Don't Understand (C2erPUkn)" themselves but which the "KnowErs(kner)" (B) can understand and thus "Appreciate(Ku)". You can't appreciate a teacher you don't understand.
. When you fully understand a sentence, when you "Get(gt)" it, you also understand the words in it. For instance, the second and the last character in the above sentence is Chih( Z). Giving the character in this context twice is better than a dictionary definition of it. Besides, some equivalents Lao Tzu is using are "Not used in the Usual Way (FyCnA1)". So we can't "Always(Cn)" trust the dictionary anyway. Also most of his syntax is not Chinese.
. An imperative sentence starts with the verb but not all of Lao Tzu's instructions start with a verb. Our teacher's instructions are often very "Subtle". "SubtleTy (Joad), Tao'S Usefulness (A1 Zus)". What practical "Use" can we make of the first sentence on this page? ...
We have looked at a part of the first paragraph of chapter six of Rudolf Steiner's PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM. Let me give you the last sentence of the first paragraph and let it speak for itself:
"As a world knower, I can find what both [subject and object] have in common--as two sides of one existence which belong together--only through thinking, which relates both to each other through concepts." Steiner is not easy to read in German either, so there is only so much a translator can either do the best he can do, or water it down. THE SECRET DOCTRINE is written in English. J. G. Bennett told us that the truth is all in there. Problem is, you have to know it in order to see it in there. The same is true of THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM, THE BHAGAVAD GITA, the TAO TE CHING and many other inspired books. But, if you know which ones contain "Enough(Zu)" truth, then they can shed light on each other. Each of the 81 chapters of the Ching contains part of the truth, that's why they can shed light on each other. Knowing the truth is like having money, the more you have, the more you get.
. Not all of Lao Tzu's instructions are obvious. Unless we are willing and able to look for them, we will not see them. And only when we actually benefit from taking a hint, will we be looking for more. For instance, Steiner not only clarifies the "Mutual(mt)" necessitation, at Ching 2.2, for us but what Lao Tzu has said at 1.4 as well:
. "These DyAds (Tzdyad) are one
Unit Originally But they are Divided by Identifying ($1CubtâoMg) its poles. the
Unit is Called the light'S Darkness ($1is ZSÜ).
Darken It and Repeat the Darkening Sü Z@1Sü) until you reach
All Mystery'S Gate (^1#1 Z%1)"!
. For the "Mystery(#1) we have to go to 1.3.
"Constantly being Without Expectations (CnWUYÜ) is the
Means to Perceive The Mystery (YIKn H#1)
Constantly being With Expectations (CnYUYÜ is the
Means to Perceive The Boundaries (YIKn H*1)".
*1 = Chiao60. It is not in my 5000 dictionary. The big one has: "To go around. The frontiers or boundaries. (1842)" Star gives us: "outer form / manifestations / outcome / outer shell / end / limit / external / world appearance / 'outer fringe' / 'outer aspects' (Wu) / 'the apparent' (Cleary) / bounds / borders / --body". From this we can see that Lao Tzu has given his students some homework to do ...
Please don’t just sit there and wait for me to do it for you. It can’t be done. Nobody can do your thinking for you. …
. I am having some problem. A virus has taken out my word-processor. Just another reason why I need some help. March 11. Problem fixed.
===============================================================
March 11, 2009
Being "With Expectations is the Means for Perceiving (YUYÜYIKn)" the world as we usually perceive it; being "Without Expectations (WUYÜ)" is an unusual state to be in. Thus "Perceiving The Mystery (Kn H#1)" is an unusual experience. This experience is harder for jnana yogis, to get because, as Eckhart Tolle rightly sees, the intellect (B) gets in the way. But the "KnowErs(kner)" need the intellect to point out the flaws in Eckhart's vision. We only see what we "Expect(YÜ)", or "Want(YÜ)", to see. Here the mind (C) gets in the way. "Expectations" (C) is the equivalent R. L. Wing has given us for Yü(YÜ).
. To do your homework on Ching 1.3, you need at least two translations, which are accompanied by the standard Chinese text. But if you get Jonathan Stars's scholarly work, it alone will do. His "Verbatim Translation" of Ching 1 is close to two pages long because the equivalents different translators have given for each character are in there. The "WordErs may Not always Understand (C2erPUkn)" what came through them but their intuitions are very useful for the "KnowErs(kner)".
. From page 256 to 270 he gives excellent commentaries on many chapters and then, from page 271 to 294 he elaborates on chapter one. Ching one is of average length, so he can't do that kind of work on all of the 81 chapters. I think that he is merely giving us an example of the kind of work that should, or could, be done on all chapters.
. The work on Ching 1.3 is from Page 280 to 288. Here is his translation, or interpretation, of ching 1.3 from page 14:
"A mind free of thought,
. . . merged within itself,
. . . beholds the essence of Tao
A mind filled with thought,
. . . identified with its own perceptions,
. . . beholds the mere forms of the world". Eckhart Tolle would agree with this interpretation. This interpretation is based on Swami Muktananda's words we get on page 281:
"We perceive the world as world only as long as our mind looks outward.
When the mind turns within and dissolves into the self,
we see the world, not as the world,
But as an expansion of God.
. Until the mind loses itself in the inner Self, you cannot attain anything.
When the mind becomes free from thoughts, when the mind loses itself in itself,
You become the very form of God."
Not all translators are willing or able to see it that Way. In Ching 1. Paragraph 1, 2 and 3 Lao Tzu has given us "DyAds(dyad)". Their poles are complementaries. You can't have one without the other. So which one is good and which one is bad is a matter of interpretation.
. Star has selected ten different translations and given excellent commentaries on them. For instance he identifies HOW the word Miao(#1) is interpreted differently in the first three translations. Let me just give you an example of translation #3:
" . . The state of wu yü reveals, 'I am the Essence'
. . . The state of yu yü reveals, 'I am the body' "
".... In Translation 3, miao is the identification with one's unlimited Self; it is the awareness of one's own essence .... Chiao translates as 'the body' but can also refer to the false identification that limits a person---mind, personality, individuality, ego, doership, etc."
. How do you get to do such excellent work as Star has done here? ...
By working on the best. I wouldn't have worked on the Ching for 40 years, by now, if I didn't believe that it is the best book for jnana yogis (B). Bhakti (A), raja (C) and karma (D) yogis follow a different path. They have different "Expectations By-Means (YÜYI)" of which they interpret Lao Tzu's words. Yogis, whose primary function is not thought (B), do not necessarily realize that we are a whole, which is greater than the sum of our four parts. The fact is that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Our soul (A) does not think (B), talk (C) or walk (D) but bhakti yoga (A) is no less important than jnana (B), raja (C) or karma (D) yoga.
. Jnana yogis will now have to take a closer look at Yü(YÜ) to get a more philosophical (B) interpretation of the original text and of the interpretations we get from the different translators.
. What you get from my Dictionary-Concordance is the following:
"YÜ Yü76 01 03 15 19 29 34 36 37 39 46 57 61 64 66 77 'Desires, to desire, long for'"
If you Google: "A1 Tao162" you should be able to get it yourself. Isn't Google amazing?
. If you fully understand a sentence, then you also understand what each word in it means but only in that particular context. And in Ching 1.3, Yü(YÜ) is a key-word, and, to a large extent, it determines the meaning of the two sentences we have in Ching 1.3. And, as you have seen, translators can't agree on what it means. So let us look for other chapters in which the meaning of Yü(YÜ) is clearer.
. 3: "Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ) to see Causes(%e) ....". Here the first four character are the subject and "Causes", the verb, is the connective. And that is all we need to find out what "DesirAble(ptYÜ)" means. "Not Seeing(PUoo)" something "Causes(%e)" something. If what we see is desirable it causes one thing and if it is undesirable it causes something else. So, from this incomplete sentence, we can learn something about Yü(YÜ).
. 29: "If you Want to Take The World And Do with It (41YÜ29Tn -btdo Z)" what you want, .... The last three words are added to the subject to "Complete(Cm)" it and the comma here is added to represent the connective. And, again, subject and connective is all we need to know to find out more about Yü(YÜ). Whatever the predicate is, it doesn't tell us any more about Yü(YÜ). All it would do is, ...
detract our attention from what we are supposed to be doing. But at Ching 36, it is worth to allow ourselves to be detracted.
. 34: The "Big Tao (TAA1), .... Always Without Desires (CnWUYÜ)”.
. 36: "If you Want (41YÜ) to Shrink It (äk Z) then you Necessarily Have-to (PI$o) Stretch It (@N Z)" first. The syntax and semantics of this sentence are clear. There are six examples of these obvious "Necessities". The idea is that if you want to close a door it has to be open because ...
you can't close a closed door. So "If you Want to Shrink It" then it helps to know HOW, or the Way, to do it.
. 46: Of "Calamities (@u) There-is-none Greater Than (MOTAto) Desiring to Get (YÜgt) more than you need, or are able to get.
. "Therefore(KU) if you Know Enough'S Enough (knZu ZZu) then you have
Always Enough Yi (CnZuYi)". Compare different translations to see if translators have trouble with this one. And, if they do, what does that mean? ...
. 64: The "Wise Man Desires Not to Desire (wsmnYÜPUYÜ), Not to Value “Goods(%f)” which are too Hard to Get a hold Of (PUdfgt Z%f) and to Learn to UnLearn (ÜdPUÜd)" the wrong things he has learned. Notice here, that bad habits and "Expectations", or "Representations(YÜ)", are learned over time by "Repetition(@1)". This may be a hint to shed some light on Ching 1.3, but, other than that, the dictionary equivalents of Yü(YÜ) seem to apply for the rest of the book.
. Let us, now, consult Gurdjieff on this: What he has identified as the "intellectual center" is on level B of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)", his "emotional center" is on level C and his "moving center" is on level D. The purpose of identifying these three centers is to know what you are looking at when doing self-observation. Which part of us does the observing? ...
The Hindus call it the Atman (A).
. Not everything in these centers is open to our consciousness (A). However we can be aware of our immediate thoughts (B) of what we are saying (C) and of what we are doing (D). This is why Jungian psychologists call this triad our conscious self and some, like Robert A. Johnson, call it our ego. The connective in this triad is the "emotional center" (C). That's where our desires are. Now, again, what are these "Desires"? ...
Let us go back to Steiner:
. "The mental picture [representation, Vorstellung in German] is therefore an individualized concept. And now we have the explanation as to why the things of the real world can be represented for us through mental pictures. The full reality of a thing yields itself to us at the moment of observation out of the coming together of concept and perception. (Page 96 of Lindeman's translation)"
. Between concept (B) and percept (D) is the connective (C) which here is the mental picture, which is "Fixed(8b)" in the mind (C) as a representation. Two-digit identifiers, which start with a number, followed by a lower or upper case letter, are from the Nei Yeh.
. On the same page Steiner sums it up:
. "The mental picture stands therefore between perception and concept." We have the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad here. There is much more detail in Steiner's book but I have to draw the line somewhere. How much more detail do the "WordErs(C2er)" need from me to get going on their job? ...
The only way I can justify doing the work of "WordErs(C2er)", instead of my own dharma, is to look at it as a "job-description" for communicators (C). No publisher is going to publish this stuff because I am not a writer (C). But, thanks to the internet, "KnowErs(kner)" can get around them now.
. I couldn't do my own dharma without the Republic, the Bhagavad Gita, the Tao Te Ching and other recorded revelations (A). There are concordances for the Gita and the Ching but, without Jonathan Star's scholarly work, I wouldn't be where I am now. Now we need that same kind of work done on the Nei Yeh. Perhaps it should be divided into 27 chapters; perhaps not.
==========================================================
==========================================================
March 8, 2009
. This morning, at 6:59 AM, I had an "Insight(72)": According to the Law of Correspondence things "Repeat(@1)" and "Reverse($l)". "Aligned Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)". There are plenty examples of this in the Ching.
. In the Aristotelian tetrad the Monad (A) comes first and the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) "TriAd( 3ad)" comes next. A is the zero-dimension, it does not do any intellectual (B), mental (C) or physical (D) work. A can be compared to the receiving department of a factory, B and C would then be manufacturing departments, they would be the cardinal signs of Astrology, and D would be analogous to the shipping department, even though from our point of view, that’s where the actual physical (E8) work is done. The reason there is this potential for confusion is because A and D are not fully inside of our 4-fold system. They are with one foot in it and with the other foot outside of it. That's why the Hindus call the Atman (A) the "Door, Dasamadwara)”. A door faces inwards and outwards. The receiving and the shipping departments of a factory are analogous to the mutable and fixed signs in Astrology. They are what doors are in a house. And wherever there are analogies, we have to pay attention because ...
the Law of Correspondence comes into effect.
. The Aristotelian "final cause" is a description of what the B-C-D triad is to produce. Where? ...
Outside of our 4-fold human system. Our body (D) needs Vital Energy (E7) to produce a change in Constructive Energy (E8). Now comes theory (B), which is in need of verification or refutation, Our three-dimensional body is in the zero dimension of time but the change it produces in the world is outside of our body, as a second point in space would be outside the zero-dimension of space. The synthesis of these two pints would be the first dimension of space.
. According to the Law of Correspondence: As there is a line between two points in space, so there is a connective between our body and the work it does in the world. …
The "Tao Produces One (A1Sg 1)", the zero and its complement moved into the dimension of ...
space or time. What is the zero-dimension in our three dimensional space is the zero--dimension in time. As above, in "Heaven, so Below(Tn -)" on earth. The Law of Correspondence is one of the seven Hermetic Laws; the Law of Compensation is not. Systematics takes us beyond the seven Hermetic Laws.
. In terms of J. G. Bennett's ENERGIES, E1-E2-E3 is the upper triad but his twelve term system, the dodecad, consists of three tetrads. The four "sources", or components of these 4-fold systems are identified as: ++, +--, -+ and --. There are four "Cosmic Energies" (E1 to E4), four "Life Energies" (E5 to E8) and four "Mechanical Energies" (E9 to E12).
. The Negative, Negative (--) condition of the Cosmic Energies is level A (E4) of the Aristotelian tetrad. This is the "final cause" (A). A-B-C-D is our human "Feldraum", or sphere of influence. This is our collective dharma or responsibility. What comes into our system from above is not our responsibility but what we turn out, at D, is.
. Now E1-E2-E3-E4 and A(E4)-B-C-D are two valid tetrads. The Aristotelian tetrad has been validated by the developers of the IBM computer programming system. But A(E4) is part of both tetrads, HOW can both be valid? ...
As A-B-C is to D so B-C-D is to E8. And now watch: As E1-E2-E3 is to E4, so E4-E5-E6 is to E7.
E4-E5-E6-E7 is our Aristotelian tetrad
. . E5-E6-E7-E8 is J. G. Bennett's tetrad, composed of his "Life Energies”. And the instructor at Sherborn House, who told me that systematics does not work, was such a nice guy. Notice that the E5-E6-E7 (B-C-D) triad is the intersection of both tetrads. This monad can be seen as the connective between E4 and E8.
. Well that insight came to me this morning in a fraction of a second. And I am still not satisfied with my description of it. But a "WordEr (who knows that he does) Not Know (C2erPUkn)" it all, can always ask me for clarification.
. But I don't know it all either. There is still a lot of work left for the experts at The DuVersity. As the pieces are falling into place, you will notice that the Law of Attraction is starting to work for us and there is nothing the infiltrators can do about it. When we know the truth, it will set us free. It will help us to identify the infiltrators. They are using the insights, the lovers (philos) of truth (Sophia) come up with, for their own ends. Since they don't have that love themselves, they need the true philosophers to get their original ideas. Its quite a game. By the way, did you find out who has deleted those 21 pages? And Why?
====================================================================
March 6, 2009
-"True Words are Not Beautiful".
. When this sentence is evaluated from the standpoint of the syntactic dimension, all is fine: "True Words (09C2)" are the subject Lao Tzu is going to tell us something about, "Not(PU)" is the connective, and "Beauty(%b)" is the predicate. But when seen from the semantic viewpoint, all we really understand is the connective, because ...
who knows what the "Words(C2)", "Truth(09)" and "Beauty(%b)" really mean? ...
Philosophers have "Argued(êO)" for ages about this. Why is it impossible to fully understand these concepts? ...
Our intellect is not designed to understand things which are outside of our "Feldraum", or sphere of influence. Just Google: Feldraum Lacerta for more details.
. What we can all agree on is that the "Word". "Truth" is "Not" the word "Beauty". But Lao Tzu tells us more by adding: "Beautiful Words are Not True (%bC2PU09)". What does this "Reversal($l)" of the two words mean? ...
. Let me return to the last, March 3, section. The translation I have given at the end of that section is not as accurate as can be, because, to me, WHAT Steiner has said is more important than HOW he has said it. So let me give you Lindeman's translation of the same words: "My perception of the tree exists within the same whole as does my 'I.' This general world happening calls forth just as much there the perception of the tree as here the perception of my 'I.' If I were not a world knower, but rather a world creator, then object and subject (perception and 'I'), would originate in one act. For they determine each other mutually". "Denn sie bedingen einander gegenseitig.", is the original of the last sentence. Michael Wilson has: For they imply each other. I didn't put his words in quotes because I no longer have his translation. But he did use the word "Imply". What does it mean? ...
In order to infer something that is implied, you have to think. But then, …
how can the perceived object and the inferring subject …
"originate in one act"? ...
. Michael Wilson was the greatest authority on Steiner in the English speaking world. When he came to Emerson College, as a guest speaker, I took the opportunity to point this syntactic and semantic error out to him. He admitted neither of them. When I tried to describe to him what Steiner must have meant, he said that I don't speak English well enough to know what "imply" means. I then switched to German to explain to him why ".... bedingen einander gegenseitig" cannot mean: To imply each other. It turned out that he knew German. He didn't actually say it, but he let me know that he is the authority on Steiner and I am just a student here, and he walked away. As you can see, there is a lot of valuable information we can get from Steiner but, if this information turns out people like that, then I prefer to stay away from them. You shall know them by their fruit.
If Lao Tzu, Plato, Steiner and others, who have understood the triad, describe it, why should WHAT one of them says about it be any different from what the others say about the same thing? Obviously Chinese is not Greek but the truth can be expressed in both languages (C). Words are the containers of information. So the container must fit properly around its content. The content (B) is not the container (C), but they must be analogous to each other.
. As beauty (A) is not truth (B), so thinking (B) is not believing (C). The word "truth" is not the word "thinking". So, as far as syntax goes, there is a flaw here but those who know the Aristotelian syllogisms will probably forgive me for that mistake. To be correct on the syntactic dimension as well, I could say: As A is to B so B is to C. But then I would have left a gap thinkers still have to fill in. And ...
that would be good exercise.
Transcendent Energy (E1) seems to be God as the omnipotent creator of this universe.
. Unitive Energy (E2), "Universal Love", seems to be God as omnipresence everywhere and in everyone. J. G. Bennett has said that this is so because God enters into every triad as the reconciling impulse.
. Creative Energy (E3) is God's omniscience manifesting through us.
When identifying E1 to E7 as monads in the heptad, E1-E2-E3 is the upper, or inner, triad, B-C-D, thought, word and deed, is the lower triad and A (E4) is the connective between them. I am no expert of systematics, I just wanted to give you an idea of what is in there.
===============================================================
March 3, 2009
. Ching 2. "As above, im "Heaven, so Below(Tn -)", on earth.
. 2.2,1: "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce" the one. The subject of 2.2,1 (Chapter 2, paragraph 2, sentence 1) is: "Existence and Nonexistence (YUWU)", and "Mutually Produce (mtSg)" is the connective but there is no predicate. Most translators have filled in "Life", because it is another equivalent of Shêng(Sg). Is this also a valid equivalent in this context? ...
At 4.4 we have: "Existence Comes From Nonexistence (YUSgtoWU)". And at 42.1,1 we have: The "Tao Produces the One (A1Sg 1)". These are complete sentences but 2.2,1 is not. Syntax tells us that. When we fully understand a sentence, it gives meaning to its parts. That's HOW children learn to speak and that's HOW we can learn Lao Tzu's Chinese. There are only about 400 characters in the Ching, which appear in more than one chapter.
. 2.2,2: "Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed". "Difficult and Easy (dfez)" is the subject, "Mutually(mt)" necessitate a task to be, is the connective and "Completed(cm)" is the predicate. If there is no task to be completed, for instance, if 2.2,1 doesn't have to be "Completed", then there is nothing that is difficult or easy. But then you also don't learn anything. Translators (C) have no problems with the equivalents of the four characters we have here but interpreters (B) have difficulties with the content of these four words. Some details have to be filled in to make sense of it. In order to emerge through its parts, the whole must attract any missing parts and we must be "sensitive" to that. That is why thinkers (B) need Sensitive Energy (E5) to do their job.
. 2.2,3: "Long and Short Mutually necessitate or produce Distance (lg*amt*b". *a = Tuan111 "Short, ....". No problem there. Even if our teacher had left out the word, we still know that the opposite of "Long" is "Short". *b = Chiao159 "To compare test". Whenever you get different equivalents from different translators our teacher has given us a problem to solve. Problems are difficult for some and the same problem can be easy for others.
. The problem which arises from this statement for philosophers (B) is: ...
In order to conceive of "Long and Short" distances do we need the concept of space first? ...
Or do "Long and Short Mutually produce Distance"? ...
Translators have to say something in English. If they say "Mutually necessitate" it means one thing, and if they say: "Mutually produce" it means another". Does Lao Tzu mean one of these two alternatives or does he mean both? ...
If we reason deductively then we start with the most general concept, which is ...
space, and then we move down to the more specific concept of distance and then we end up with a point in space. Now we do an intellectual jump and draw other points closer and further away from the first point and "Compare(*d) the different distances with each other. This is what Ouspensky has done. He has started with the point, then came the line, then the plane, then the solid and then came another intellectual jump, from space to time. His approach is inductive, from the bottom up.
. What can THE SECRET SOURCE tell us about this? ... Starting on page 74:
"IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY
.... like and unlike are the same; opposites are .... but different in degree; .... To illustrate: heat and cold, although 'opposites,' are really the same thing, the differences consisting merely of degrees." And as hot and cold are different degrees of temperature, so long and short are different degrees of distance. We have longer or shorter distances between points.
. Our task on this one is not quite "Complete(cm)" yet. …
What enabled us to take that intellectual jump from one point to other points? ...
Where does the idea of separation (between points or objects in space) come from? ...
See Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE: "Next is Janaloka, .... wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates." Again, this is work communicators (C) can do better than thinkers (B) can, because they are better with reading words and they seem to be born with a better memory. I only remember the things which make sense to me. Then I can rethink, rather than remember, them.
. 2.2,4: "High and its Negative-opposite (#h -) Mutually produce, or need, Altitude (mt*c)".
*c = Ch'ing9 "To upset, overturn, pour out; melt". To see what the different translators came up with, you need Jonathan Star's scholarly work. Again, if different translators have come up with different equivalents, then our teacher has given us some work to do. ...
"High and Low" are to Altitude as "Long and Short" are to Distance and as hot and cold are to temperature.
. In all of the six "TriAds( 3ad)" we have in Ching 2.2, the "DyAd(dyad)" comes first and the "Monad($1)" or the "One( 1)" is the predicate or the outcome.
. If we call "High(#h)" Positive(+) and its opposite Negative(-) then we have the +-= triad here, at 2.2,4. Do we have this “TriAd” in all of the six examples we have in 2.2? ...
When the reconciling impulse(=) is at the end, we can also have the -+= triad.
. 2.2,5: "Melody and Rhythm Mutually produce Harmony (#a#bmtHo)" or music.
. Ho(Ho) means: "To unite; filling; harmony with,". Here translators have trouble with the poles of the dyad. Music is not just melody and not just rhythm but melody, rhythm and harmony. This makes sense to musicians but it may not be the only possible interpretation of this "TriAd( 3ad)".
. 2.2,6: "Before and After Mutually necessitate Sequence ($c60mt#e)" or time.
mt = "Hsiang109. 02 20 32 60 69 80. 'Reciprocal mutual ...." The right component of this character is an eye, representing the seer, and the left component is a tree, representing the seen. Steiner comes to mind. THE PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM 6.1:
".... The perception of the tree, along with my I, are parts of the same whole. In the world, these ordinary happenings call forth, in equal measure, there the perception of the tree as here the perception of my own I. Where I not world-knower but world-creator object and subject (percept and I) would appear in one act. For they necessitate each other (Denn sie bedingen einander) mutually (gegenseitig)." And there we have the "Mutual(mt)" necessitation, Lao Tzu is talking about.
=============================================================
Feb. 28, 2009
. The "Tao and its complement Produce the One (A1Sg 1)". All Lao Tzu has said is: ...
"Tao Produces One". The subject and the predicate of this sentence are nouns and the connective is a verb. From the syntactic position, this is a perfect sentence, all is fine. But when evaluated from the semantic dimension, something is missing. ...
How does the "Tao Produce the One"? ...
The complement of "Nothing(WU)" is "Something(YU)". "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtSg)" the one. This is the only one of the six sentences at Ching 2.2 in which the predicate is left open to interpretation. All of the six sentences are "TriAds( 3ad)". They all shed light on each other because all 2+1 triads are analogous to each other. I will continue with this in the next section. So, if you have a translation of the Ching, you can prepare yourself for it.
. That Lao Tzu is going to use the Law of correspondence, he has stated right at the beginning of the second chapter: As above, in "Heaven, so Below(Tn -)", on earth.
. The Tao Te Ching is like a hologram. It is the whole which emerges through its parts. As it emerges, even partially, the parts start to shed light on each other. The "Truth(A1)" is a whole which emerges not only through the Ching but through all books in which the words are "Aligned(%8)" with the truth. Maja D'Aoust and Adam Parfrey have given excellent examples of this in their THE SECRET SOURCE. Somehow, by intuition (A), by thinking (B) or by good writing habits (C), they have given us three translations, or interpretations, of an old document. This is like getting three translations of a passage of the Ching. By means of different translations, we can get a better idea of WHAT Lao Tzu must have meant, even if you don’t have the original.
. Two of the three translations are on page 153 and the third one is on 165:
. "Truth! Certainty! That in which there is no doubt!
That which is above is from that which is below, and that which is below is from that which is above, working the miracles of one. .... “
. “1. It is true without any lying, certain and most true, that which is inferior, or below, is as that which is superior or above, there being one Universal matter and form of all things, ….".
. The last phrase, here, might also shed light on SCIENCE and the AKASHIC FIELD.
"1) Here [is] a true explanation, concerning which there can be no doubt.
2) It attests: The above from the below, and the below from the
. . above---the work of the miracle of One."
. What can I add to this? Communicators can, or should be able to, do this kind of work. By focusing on the truth "concerning which there can be no doubt" they are cutting through all of that bull, which is disseminated by professional social engineers. It's not quite as easy as that. Our political masters know what they are doing. So, "Underestimating($j)" them, would be a mistake.
. The globalists have blatantly destroyed the German Green Party and they have done it more subtly in other countries, like Canada, but, try as they may, they can't destroy the truth.
. I shall leave you with that thought. ...
============================================================
Feb. 26, 2009
. At the end of the last, Feb. 24, section I have left you with two question: Why is the Law of Compensation not one of the seven Hermetic laws? ... And: If the complement of thesis is antithesis then what is the complement of cause? ...
If you could answer the second question, then you would come closer to being able to answer the first one. And if you couldn't answer it, then your efforts have prepared you for understanding the ideas which follow:
. Here is a hint from page 76 of THE SECRET SOURCE:
"V. THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM
Everything flows out and in; everything has tides; all things rise and fall; the pendulum-swing manifests in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates."
. Let us continue our enquiry using the Law of Correspondence:
. The "TriAd( 3ad)" is the next higher N-Term system above the "DyAd(dyad)". In the dyad, N = 2 and in the triad, N = 3. Yet all N-Term systems are analogous to each other in that the Law of Correspondence. It, the Law of Attraction, the Law of Compensation and the Law, or THE PRINCIPLE OF MENTALISM, applies to them all. There may be more laws than the four I have mentioned here. "Knowing that we might Not Know (knPUkn) it all is Healthy( +)". What we can know is that if one of these more inclusive Laws is missing, no N-Term system would work. Let us use the graphic mode as an analogy of the progression of numbers from N = 1 to N = 5:
. The point is the zero dimension of space, the dyad is the first dimension, it is the line, the triad is the second dimension, it is the plane and the tetrad is the third dimension of space, it is the solid. Now let us do some very basic geometry:
. Three is the minimum number of lines you need to enclose a plane. Just draw a triangle to see that. …
. Now, if you put a dot in the center of the triangle and connect it with the three corners of the triangle, what do you get? ...
The top-view of a tetrahedron. The "Tao Produces One, One Produces Two, Two Produces Three and Three Produces All Things (A1Sg 1, 1Sg 2, 2Sg 3, 3SgWnwU)". There you have it in a nutshell. What is the Tao? ...
It is not "One" because it is "Producing" it, just as the "One" is not "Two", because it is "Producing" it. When studying the Ching, you have to pay attention. Again: What is the Tao? ...
The zero and its complement are producing the one. This is the hardest concept to grasp because it is too simple. The "One and its complement Produce the Two ( 1Sg 2), the Two and its complement Produce the Three and the Three and its complement Produce All Things".
. Let us use the graphic model to shed some more light on this: ...
Draw two dots and connect them with a line. If we call the first dot the thesis and the second dot its antithesis, then the line between them is their synthesis. If we call the Tao zero, or "Nonexistence(WU)" and its antithesis, or complement "Existence(YU)" then "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (WUYUmtSg)" the one. Whether my interpretation (outside the quotes) is valid or not, is for you to decide. But it is clear that what I have added to the incomplete sentence are not Lao Tzu's words. Interpretations (B), such as this, go beyond the syntactic dimension (C).
. Because the Law of Correspondence is universal, it can tell us many things. So let us continue in the graphic mode: If the line you have drawn is not a horizontal one, draw one now. Now draw a point above it. In which dimension is the point relative to the line? ...
It is outside the first dimension. Now connect the point with the endpoints of the line. ...
Now you got a triangle enclosing a plane. You can see that three lines is the minimum number you need to enclose a plane. The plane is the second dimension of space. ...
The three dots mean: Continue on your own, if you can. ...
Now draw a dot in the center of the triangle and connect it with the three corners of the triangle. What you got? ...
A top-view of a tetrahedron. In which dimension is the dot relative to the plane? ...
It is above the plane. The plane is in the second dimension of space while the tetrahedron is a solid. It is in the third dimension of space. Four points, four planes and six lines is the minimum configuration required to enclose a space. How do you move up to the next dimension from there? ...
As the triad is represented by the triangle, so the tetrad is represented by the square. ...
Now put a dot in the center of the square and connect it to the four angles of the square. What have you now? ...
The top-view of a pyramid. The point is its apex and the square is its base. Now things get tricky: The point you have drawn is outside the third dimension of space. But there is no fourth dimension of space. What now? ...
Now using the Law of Correspondence: What is the point in space? …
It is analogous to the solid. In what dimension of time? ...
The tetrad is the highest dimension of space and the lowest dimension of time. As the point is the zero dimension in space so the solid is the zero dimension in time. And the tetrahedron is a solid. . Credit for this progression of N-Term systems goes to P. D Ouspensky. While J. G. Bennett has filled in important detail in this basic progression, he also has given credit to Ouspensky. Ouspensky became a follower of Gurdjieff and Gurdjieff told him: If you would really understand what you have written in your books, I would bow down to you and ask you to become my teacher. I think that we are getting onto something. With J. G. Bennett continuing where Ouspensky has left off, we are getting a solid foundation under our feet. To cut through all that bull, all that unintentionally and intentionally, produced information overload and all that professionally produced dis-information we need a solid foundation to start from.
. Unless we know the truth, which is common knowledge to our political masters, the truth cannot set us free. Only the truth, we know, can set us free.
. I have Googled: Systematics Bennett Blake
again. New stuff there. But in order not to bite off more than I can chew, I will stick to Lao Tzu.
==========================================================
Feb. 24, 2009
. In the last, Feb 20, section, I mentioned the seven Hermetic Laws. A good thing to do would be to get THE SECRET SOURCE in which they are described and inform yourself about them. This makes the things that are governed by one of these laws "IdentifiAble(ptMg)". So, when Lao Tzu says: "Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)", we can also do it.
. Systematics is essentially about twelve N-Term systems. When N = 1, we have the "Monad($1)", when N = 2, we have the "DyAd(dyad)", when N = 3, we have the "TriAd ( 3ad)", etc. In systematics: "Identifying the monad" means: Identify which N-Term system something is analogous to. For instance all "DyAds" are analogous to each other. If you call a Two-Term system a "DyAd", then you have a word (C), or "Name(Mg)", for it.
. A very good exercise would be to "Identify" the seven Hermetic Laws, which are described in THE SECRET SOURCE. First try to identify the Law in which N = 1. That is a "Monad($1)", no problem there. But HOW can a system in which N is greater than one be a monad? ...
After all, the work you are doing is called: Identifying the Monad. ...
The whole emerges through its parts. We have the whole - part dyad here. There is only a paradox here as long as you don't know:
"IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY
Everything is Dual, everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled.
. . . --The Kybalian".
. The whole, which emerges through its parts, is the "Monad($1)". Lao Tzu advises the "KnowErs" and the "WordErs": "Unite Your Dust ($1 H@h)! This is Called the Mystical Union (SiisSü$1)" because it is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. The "Total Sum of the parts of a Carriage is Not a Carriage ($0#5âsWUâs)".
. If you don't believe (C) that Lao Tzu knows (B) that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, and that the unassembled parts of a "Carriage are Not a Carriage (âsWUâs)" then you will translate these five characters in such a way that they don't conflict with WHAT you believe (C) Lao Tzu should be saying. Unless we are aware (A) "Enough(Zu)", our Mind (C) will overrule our intellect (B). This happens automatically because the mind works with Automatic Energy (E6). Conscious Energy (E4) is more inclusive than E6, but it is also more abstract than the lower levels. So, it is much weaker than E6. Unless the lower "Aligns(%8)" itself with the higher, the higher can not be manifested on the lower levels. If E5 "Unites" with E4 (A) and "Repeats(@1)" the truth, which comes through A (the Atman or our soul), A's vision cannot be manifested on earth (D). By "Repeating" the truth intentionally, Sensitive Energy (E5) is stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6). In this Way we can control our own mind instead of having it controlled by our political masters. We will always do what we are programmed to do automatically. If this is the first time you have been exposed to these ideas they may appear to be very complicated. One reason for your problem could be my eagerness to get these ideas across to you and in my eagerness I have dumped too much information on you at once. An experienced communicator (C) would only give you as much as you can chew at one time but I am assuming that there are a few among you who can take it. So please hang in there. With a bit of "Practice(pr)" it will all become clear. Another reason for your difficulties is that the social engineers don't want us to know this. Why? ...
Because if a critical mass of us know their "tricks and stratagems (The Republic at 548a)" then they no longer work. Thus, we can assume that they have ways to prevent you from trying to understand this. They not only "Cause the People to be Without this Knowledge but to be Without the Desire (%eMnWUknWUYÜ)" to know as well.
. The survival of a species depends on its efficiency. The ability to react without first thinking about it can be a matter of life and death. But if the reaction is based on a wrong belief, then that automatic function does not serve the survival of the species. This is why humans with their greater intelligence have survived better than most other species (among the few exceptions would be bed-bugs). But how much longer can we survive if we keep going the way we do? ...
Yü(âs) is in chapters 39 and 80 and Shu(#5) is in 05, 27 and 39. So, which chapter is the above quote from? Please compare other translations with what I have given you here. ...
My interpretation, “….of the parts of a ….”, is given in lower case words. This cannot be evaluated from the syntactic dimension but the validity of the equivalents for the five characters I have chosen can, and should, be evaluated from the syntactic dimension. "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)" but it is good exercise for "WordErs(2er)" so let's do it. The first of the five characters, which make up the sentence I have translated is:
. $0 = "Chih133 10 14 16 39". If you Google: A1 Tao162
You can get the Dictionary-Concordance and with it you can do the work I am doing here yourself. The left component of Chih($0) by itself is No. 5265 in the big Hong Kong dictionary: "To reach; to arrive. Very, the extreme. Greatest, best. Radical 133."
. The complete character is No. 5266: "To cause; to bring about; to occasion or to result in." There is much Lao Tzu implies by the characters he chooses. Star gives us the equivalents other translators have come up with. It is always safe for a translator to use the equivalents respected translators have used, whether they are right or wrong. I am not a respected translator, I don't even speak Chinese but let us see HOW "KnowErs who are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)" would translate the character where it appears in Ching 14: "This TriAd is ImPossible (Tz 3adPUpt) to Fully Analyze ($0*a)". J.Wu is a respected translator and at Ching 16.1,1 he has: "Attain the utmost Emptiness ($0%g%l)". This will have to do for Chih($0). That is one down four to go.
. #5 = "Shu66 05 27 39". "Number, amount, a few". For greater accuracy, I should have said: The "Utmost Number" of parts .... and this is what the "WordErs" should do, but the "KnowErs" are not as much interested in HOW Lao Tzu has said things as they are in WHAT he has said. They are more interested in the content than in the container. That is two down three to go.
. âs = "Yü159 39 80". " .... carriage ....". Three down two to go.
.WU = "Wu86 ...." it is all over the place. For greater accuracy, I should have said: An unassembled carriage does "Not-Exist(WU)" yet. The last character is Yü(âs) again.
. While the work I have just done is not the work thinkers (B) should have to do, they still must know WHAT the talkers (C) can, or should be able to, do. In computer programming the customer (A) gives his "job-description" to the programmer (B), the programmer gives his flowchart to the coder (C) and the coder gives his program to the computer (D). The flowchart tells the coder WHAT to code. It is analogous to the "job-description" the programmer got from the customer. By analogy, the program tells the computer what to execute. It, again, is like a "job-description. You can see from this why computer programming is based on the Law of Correspondence: As A tells B WHAT to do so B tells C WHAT to do and as B tells C WHAT to do so C tells D WHAT to do. We have two triads here and B and C are the connectives in them. There is still more to it. I have already given you more than some of you can chew. If communicators (C) want to communicate this, then they must understand it first. "WordErs Don't seem to Know (C2erPUkn)" this. I am not a communicator, so I can't spell it out for them as they can spell it out for their readers. If I could then we wouldn't need them. The only advise I can give those who don't have to understand this is: Don't bite off more than you can chew.
. When we talk about N-Term systems, the Law of Compensation applies to each of them. Try to figure out why it is not one of the seven Hermetic Laws. ...
If instead of "Compensation" I had said: Complementation I would have made it easier for you but it is not the proper "Name(Mg)" for this Law. Let me give you a hint: Antithesis is the complement of thesis as effect is the antithesis of .... . We have here an incomplete sentence. What would "Complete(cm)" it is one word. This word is the complement of that sentence. The whole which wants to emerge through its parts can't emerge because of the missing part. So it is somehow attracting its complement.
. We learn about this law by studying the Tao Te Ching. Lao Tzu does not describe this law the Way he describes the "Monad($1)", the "Dyad(dyad)" and the "TriAd( 3ad)" but by using it, by leaving out words, phrases and whole sentences, he is using it and in this Way he is describing it. "SubtleTy (Joad), Tao'S Usefulness (A1 Zus)". You don't learn to think by reading, but by thinking. ...
========================================================
Feb. 20, 2009
The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them.
. The above statement applies to words or Chinese characters, to phrases, sentences paragraphs, chapters and, in the case of the Gita and the Ching, even to the whole book.
When the whole is a word, its parts are syllables and the parts of Chinese characters are called "simples" in English. But a word can consist of a single syllable, or a character can be a "simple", a phrase can be a sentence, a sentence can be a paragraph, a paragraph can be a tetrad like a chapter and the whole of the Gita or the Ching can be like a chapter. This is so because the Law of Correspondence applies to many things and, thus, can explain the things it governs. Because of this law, we have the thinking tool called: ...
Analogy. As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. Lao Tzu and other teachers assume that their students know at least some of the seven Hermetic laws. They are described nicely in THE SECRET SOURCE. In the Bhagavad Gita and the Tao Te Ching these laws are used and in this Way they are explained in a "Practical(pr)" Way:
"My Words are Very Easy to Understand (myC2%tezkn)
Very Easy if you Practice (%tezpr) my lessons. as above, in
Heaven, so Below (Tn -), on earth. if
Nobody is Able to Understand (Moabkn) my words, then
Nobody is Able to Carryout (Moabpr)" my instructions. Obviously, nobody can carryout an instruction he doesn't understand. The "if .... then" structure of the last sentence is justified by the fact that theory (B) and "Practice(pr)" are analogous. If a theory does not work in practice, then it is not true. Let's get back to the first line of this section. What is the subject of the first six characters? ...
"The whole" is that about which something is said. What is the connective? The whole ...
"emerges through its ...." There can be some guesswork about where the lines between the three phrases should be drawn because in some sentences the phrases might intersect. As a rule, the subject and the predicate are nouns and the connective is the verb, or a verb phrase. If it is not clear at which point one phrase ends and the next one begins, we might have to leave the syntactic dimension and move up to the semantic dimension to let the intellect (B) decide where the line should be drawn. When the intellect can't figure it out, it has to consult the soul (A).
. Semiotics is not about level A of the "Divided Line (at 509d of the Republic)", it is about the B-C-D triad in which C is the connective and C is about language (C).
. The "and", in the sentence we are working on, tells us that the sentence is "Complete(cm)" and that what follows are subordinate phrases. To see that, just read the sentence without the ",having emerged, ". And if you read it without the "and .... gives meaning to them." then you still have a complete sentence. But, if you already know that the whole emerges though its parts then you might ask: What else is new? So in the syntactic dimension everything is fine but in the semantic dimension something is missing without the subordinate phrases.
. Thought (B) is more abstract and inclusive than word (C). When Sensitive Energy (E5) is stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6), it becomes more concrete and specific. As B becomes C so C becomes D. D is the Aristotelian "material cause". it is the most concrete level of the Aristotelian tetrad. We have an example of this in computer programming: ...
As the programmer (B) tells the coder (C) WHAT to do so the coder tells the computer (D) what to do. In other words C must understand what B wants the computer to turn out and it must know HOW to tell the computer which instruction to execute and in what sequence. The original IBM programming system was phased out but the basic principles according to which the tetrad works can't be phased out. The Aristotelian tetrad is based on the Law of Correspondence.
. By going over the same idea (B) "Again(@1)" and "Again(@1)", by "Repeating(@1)” it often "Enough(Zu)", it becomes a belief (C) and it doesn't matter whether the idea is true or false.
Repeat a lie often “Enough(Zu)” and people will sooner or later believe it.
. Sensitive Energy (E5) is stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6) by "Repetition(@1)". The belief in an idea is more concrete than the idea by itself. The emotions (C) take precedence over our thoughts (B). The mind (C) then bypasses the intellect (B). Then we do things without thinking first and that is more efficient. This is why Aristotle has called level C of his teacher's "Line" the "efficient cause". And this is why the social engineers repeat the things they want us to believe very skillfully and consistently. Social engineering is a science, so this mind-control is done deliberately. But some cult leaders know the same "tricks (548a)" as well.
. I think You have here "Enough" to chew on. ...
. The following is about the problem I have with my landlord but you can skip it.
Jan 22. My application against my landlord for harassing me to the point were I had to move out was dismissed. My landlord's Lawyer told the presiding member of the Landlord and Tenant Board, here in Toronto, not to listen to my case. He was the only one who did the talking and the member "dismissed" my case. This handling of my case alone is a miscarriage of justice because according to the rules, the applicant has to present his case first. The member's "DETERMINATION" ends with: "The Landlord has already been penalized for his conduct and it would be unjust to penalize him further for exactly the same behavior when the offensive behavior ceased.
IT IS ORDERED THAT:
1. The tenant's application be dismissed."
. The penalty my landlord had to pay was $300.00. The "behavior" for which he was penalized was getting me to come to the Landlord and Tennant Board, to get rid of me legally, because on the advise of the Parkdale Community Legal Service I continued to pay rent to protect my tenant's rights, even though it was impossible for me to live there any more. Since he couldn’t evict me for non-payment of rent, he had to come up with something else. After the third unwarranted application the presiding member not only "dismissed" the application but he fined my landlord the $300.00 for causing me to come to the Landlord and Tenant Board for no valid reason. Clearly, this is not "exactly the same behavior" by means of which he got me to move out of the House.
. I took the "DECISION' to PARKDALE LEGAL, after all, they have prepared the case, for me. Let me quote some of it because it helps me to give you the story with a minimum of words.
"REQUEST FOR REVIEW---SERIOUS ERROR IN ORDER TSL-01935 ....
3. For month I have lived under the constant threat of eviction. While I appreciate the $300 in costs, this cannot possibly constitute reimbursement for month of rent paid during which I had no reasonable enjoyment of my unit. ....
4. ....
* Continually attempting to convince me to sign monthly rental agreements when I was clearly not interested in such an arrangement. .... " This is the only thing I would have said differently
in the page long letter. Since I had the legal right to live in the room for which I paid my rent. Why do I have to sign such an agreement? So that he stops harassing me for a while? The reason I didn't sign these contracts was because I didn't want to be legally evicted within one month.
. The REQUEST TO REVIEW was submitted to the Landlord and Tenant Board and it was dismissed before my case was even heard. Here are the reasons:
. " ….
4. When the matter came before the Member, the Landlord's representative essentially made a preliminary motion to dismiss the application without the hearing of any evidence and the hearing proceeded on that basis. I have listened to the entire tape of the hearing before the Member and at no time did the Tenant ask to amend his application in order to add grounds or issues. ...." How could I when I was not allowed to speak?
. If the Member "listened to the entire tape of the hearing" how could she not hear that I interjected that the landlord came into the house ant 10 PM with sledgehammer and broke down a wall right below my room? And that I was prevented from speaking?
"IT IS ORDERED THAT:
The request to review order TST-0935 issued on January 9, 2009 is denied. The order is confirmed and remains unchanged."
.If you are interested in what is going on in our Canadian legal system, I can give you more details and documentation. With my Cuba experience, I don't know if I am the only one who has been attacked by Fidel Castro’s goon squads but here I know that I am not the only one because even the mass media is reporting cases of blatant abuses of justice.
. I know that I am not the only victim of the Justice System. I asked the student of law who was assigned to my case if perhaps I could take the member who "denied" my right to be heard to Small Claims Court because she clearly cost me $3000. My student asked the lawyer, who is training the students, and the answer was: Don't even try. She didn't say that no wrong was done to me but the message was essentially: If you want to throw more good money at a case you can't win, go ahead. If we want to make sense of what is going on in our justice system,Google: David Icke Masonic Oath judge
See what you can make of it.
. If no one is interested in this issue of the abuse of justice, I shall say no more and return to the Tao Te Ching in the next section.
========================================================
Feb. 16, 2009
Determining the syntax of a chapter is a deductive proces, it is a movement from the whole to its parts. We have analyzed Ching 1 and 2, and both chapter have broken down into four paragraphs. In other words, they were tetrads. Now we are going to do the same thing with Ching 03 to find out what it is:
1: PU #3 #f . . . . . . . .%e Mn PU Cê
2: PU Ku df gt .Z %f %e Mn PU do $3
3: PU oo pt YÜ . . . . .%e Mn Hs PU $a
4: Si YI ws mn .Z 85 "ThereFore the rulers in an Intelligent Man'S Government" will ....
4,1: %g .H Hs, *3 .H @3, Jo .H #g and 57 .H @c.
4,2: Cn %e Mn WU kn WU YÜ.
4,3: . . . %e he kn er PU 66 do "Period(Ye)" *3 = Shih40 “….fill”.
5,1: "if you" do WU do "Then(18)" WU PU 85.
Ideally, you Google: "A1 Tao162" for the dictionary-concordance and use it to do your own translation. ...
"Not Honoring those Worthy of honor Causes People Not to Struggle" to emulate them.
"Not Valuing Hard to Get a hold Of Goods Causes People Not To even Steal" them.
"Not Seeing what is DesirAble to see Causes People's Hearts Not to Stir".
"ThereFore the rulers in an Intelligent Man'S Government will
Empty Their subject's Heart,
Fill Their Belly,
Weaken Their Will and
Strengthen Their Body. they will
Always Cause the People to be Without Knowledge and Without the Desire to know.
they will Cause Those Knowing Ones Not to Dare to Do" what is not ("in the interest of themselves, the rulers (The Republic at 338e)"). Period(Ye)"
If you "Govern Without Doing the governing yourself Then Nothing will Not be Governed".
We have a 3+2 pentad here. The "TriAd( 3ad)" is the premise and the "DyAd(dyad)" is the conclusion. The poles of a dyad are always opposites. If the chapter had ended with the "Period(Ye)" then we would have had a tetrad. The Aristotelian tetrad starts with the "final cause" which is the vision (A) which will be manifested at the "final" step as the "material cause". In other words the "Intangible($h)" vision is manifested in tangible form. Steiner says on page 40 of his Occult Signs and Symbols: "Four is the sign of the cosmos or of creation. As far as we can determine with our present organs, the present planetary condition of the earth is its fourth embodiment. Everything that is manifest to us on an earth such as ours presupposes that this creation is its fourth stage." Examples of this is the construction business and the original IBM programming system, which was based on the Aristotelian tetrad. It is safe to say that Lao Tzu knows these number systems.
. Ching 3 is a pentad. What can Steiner tell us about that one? "Five is the number of evil. .... In their development men have become fourfold beings and thereby beings of the created world. Here on earth, however, the fifth member of their being, the spirit self, will be added. Were they to remain fourfold beings, they would be constantly directed by the gods -- toward the good, of course -- but they would never develop their independence. They have become free through the gift of their germinal fifth member, but it is also from this that they have received the ability to do evil. No being can do evil who has not arrived at 'fivefoldness'.” Now look at Ching 12.1,5:
"Hard to Get a hold Of Goods Order Man to Carryout what is Wrong (dfgt Z%f$dmnpr*m)".
*m = Fang38 .
. In systematics the pentad is also called potentiality. The Aristotelian tetrad ends with the actual, while the pentad ends with the "Potential(pt)". Up to the fourth paragraph Lao Tzu describes the "Government(85)" we actually have; while in the fifth paragraph he describes the government we could have if ...
we become aware (A) of which one of Plato's four governments we have, if we know (B) what it does for our rulers and to us and WHAT we can do about it, if we collectively decide (C) to do it and if we do (D) it. Democracy is a potential we, the people, “Can(pt)” actualize. Since our political masters pretend that their type government is a "democracy" they can't prevent us openly to try to establish it but they have their secret ways of preventing it.
. I was a co-founder of the Green Party of Ontario. After a lot of work to get the Party registered and after we have demonstrated that the consensus decision-making process works, the party was hijacked. Today, the members no longer make the decisions. As in all false "Democracies" in the world, the decisions are not made by the elected politicians (C) either but by their unelected advisors (B). The talkers (C) and thinkers (B) form a "DyAd(dyad)", which is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. They know it, but, obviously, we, the "People must be Without that Knowledge (MnWUkn)".
. Our political masters can't allow a real democracy (A) to exist because it would expose their false "democracy" (B), which is the "Intelligent Man'S Government" Lao Tzu is describing at Ching 3.4. As far as I can see, the only country in the world in which a real democracy could be established would be Venezuela. President Hugo Chavez could establish it because nobody is in power to prevent it. Then Venezuela could be the example that would expose the false "democracies”. Tourists would benefit from the efficiency of a government OF the people in which the decisions are made BY the people and thus, FOR the people. But chances that Chavez will "Do the governing Without Doing (Wu Wei Wu)" it himself, that he would help the people to govern themselves are diminishing. He is acting more and more like a dictator (C). Even his former supporters start to get worried. The social engineers know HOW to take advantage of such a situation. Cubans who have lived under Fidel Castro can be trained and financed to tell the Venezuelan voter the truth about dictatorship. Wherever possible the social engineers will use the truth, even if only as "bait". If Chavez realizes that he can't win an election, he has to pull a 9/11 to stay in power. And if he can't pull it off, because the social engineers already know WHAT he has to do, it will be actually better for the people. The smooth talking politicians (C) with their unelected advisors (B) will be in power again and their timocracy (B) is better than a dictatorship (C). The social engineers will use this fact to take advantage of the truth. The problem is that the globalists merely use their timocracies as a springboard for establishing their New World Order, or global dictatorship. The globalists will put in a lot of effort to topple Chavez because he, more than the Moslems, is a threat to their New World Order. He knows too much.
Back to Ching 3. The premise applies to both timocracy (B) and democracy (A) but some interpretation may be in place. When a message is not clear, certain words in a statement can be used to clarify it. Those "Worthy (#f)" of honor, at 3.1,1, may be our teachers. "Those willing to follow me (18meer) Honor (Ku)" me. If you don't think that Lao Tzu's words are "Worth(Ku)" studying, why bother? If you don't think that the knowledge Lao Tzu can impart is "Valuable(Ku)" why study it? "Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ)" to see, not seeing what our ignorance does for our rulers and to us causes us to do nothing about it. Our "Hearts do Not Stir (HsPU$a)". We don't do anything until it is too late. At least that's HOW the globalists must have planned it. Do you think that our political masters don't know that much? Why do you think they are in power? ...
Some "TaoErs (A1er) Do-not Try to Enlighten the People (FyYI72Mn) Instead they keep them in a state of ignorance (41YIÜx Z) the People They are Hard to Govern (Mn Zdf85) why? Because They Know Too-much (YI H^cTO". And that explains what Lao Tzu has told us at Ching 3.4,2.
. If you do your homework and think about what Lao Tzu has said in Ching 3, it makes good sense but I have trouble with one word: "Belly(@3)" at 3.4,1. The only other chapter this character is in is Ching 12: ".... ThereFore the Wise Man (SiYIwsmn) Does Belly, Not Does Eye (do@3PUdo*e". *e = Mu109 "Eye". What does "Do Eye" mean? ... Let's look at Ching 14.1.1: If you "Look at it and you Can't See it then you can Identify It-as Invisible (#M ZPUooMg73#N)". And now let's go to Ching 12.1,1: The "Five Colors Order Our Eyes to go Blind.(*a*b$dmn*e*f)". *a = Wu7 "Five". *b $ê139 "Colors". *e = Mu109 "Eyr". *f = Mang109 "Blind". We must also take a closer look at $d = Ling9 "Law; to cause; ....". If this character is to be translated as "Causes The Eye to go Blind" Lao Tzu would have used "To-cause (%e)". In the older Ma-Wang-Tui Text we still have Shih(%e). Why did it get changed to Ling($d)? ...
Let us consult the ACC (Analysis of Chinese Characters): No. 138 " .... [Picture of] ling, A law, an order, to command, .... (.... See No. 61.)"
No 61 “.... ling .... It is formed of [Picture of] chi, the notion of union, assemblage, being the joining of three lines (see No. 18), Therefore [Picture of Ling($d)] an order, .... (Note that when [mouth] k'ou, is added, we have [Picture of] ming, an order or command by word of mouth, and the decree of heaven)." So at Ching 12.1,1 we are told that this is not a decree by mouth but by the "Five Colors (*a*b)". But that still doesn't tell us why "Belly($d)" is in one of the four phrases in Ching 3.4.1. ...
"In( =)" the "Universe There-are Four divisions of the Big (*f =YU 4TA)" Tao. *f = Yü32. At Ching 25.3 they are listed in the following order: "Tao(A1)" (A), "Heaven(Tn)" (B), "Earth(TI)" (D) and the "King( E)" ( E). At 25.4, "Mankind(mn)" is substituted for "King" and the order is "Reversed($l)". "Aligned Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)". We get: "Man Follows Earth (mnähTI), Earth Follows Heaven (TIähTn), Heaven Follows the Tao (TnähA1) and the Tao Follows ItSelf (A1ähTuJa)". In Plato's "Divided Line (09d)" the order is A, B, C, D but "Man" can't walk on "Earth" before there is an "Earth". There also can be no "Return($l)" before there is a "Going-out(*e)". *e = Shih162.
. In Astrology these four are: Fire (A), air (B), water (C) and earth (D).
In Hinduism the four are: Bhakti (A), jnana (B), raja (C) and karma (D) yoga. The Buddha was a Hindu before he became the Buddha. He has: Vision (A), thought (B), speech (C) and action (D). The Bible and the Gita are addressed to all four types of people but the Ching is addressed primarily to the "KnowErs(kner)" (B). In terms of Gita 3.35, Lao Tzu would say: "Do(do)" your own dharma "Not(PU)" somebody else’s. "Do Belly, Not Do Eye (do@3PUdo*e)"! Now, if “Center(@3)” refers to the intellectual “Center” (B), what do the social engineers fill our head with? …
See the detective work we have to do in the semantic dimension? Yet, this work is no harder for the "KnowErs(kner)" than the work with "Words(C2)" is for the "WordErs (C2er)". Doing their work is just harder for "KnowErs because they are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)".
. To thinkers (B), working on what Lao Tzu and other visionaries (A) put out for them is play. By analogy, to talkers (C) working on what the "KnowErs" (B) put out for them should be play as well but the "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that. I wish that Lao Tzu would be wrong, just this once.
. The four original Hindu castes were: The poets (A. Kavayas.. See Winthrop Sageant's footnote on Gita 4.16.), the Brahmins (B), the Kshatriyas (C), and the Vaisyas (D). The Sudras are out casts. The Brahmins have corrupted the system. I had to go all the way to India to find out what is wrong with Plato's Republic. The Brahmins have put themselves on top of the hierarchy. Knowledge is power .And they are not using it FOR serving the people. The unelected advisors (B) of our elected politicians (C) are in the same position the Brahmins are in. These are the rulers in our "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)".
. Plato has devoted so much space to THE DIVISION OF LABOR because we can't have a healthy society without it. The fact that the social engineers are turning everybody, who lets them, into a jack of all trades, or to get into a profession which is not their dharma, can tell us that this is not the Way to go. There may be money in it but there can be no satisfaction in doing what you didn't come here to do. Money can't buy the joy people get from doing the work they love. No drugs, diversions, perversions or gadgets can be a substitute for doing what you love doing. No psychologist can fill that vacuum in you no matter how much you pay for the treatments. The best entertainment, or therapy, is free. It is doing the work you love doing.
======================================================
Feb. 13, 2009
. On the first page of the Feb. 10 section, I said: "If you .... and if you .... and if you .... and if you .... then you will" benefit from that experience.
. Other than the "then" in that sentence you don't have to know English to know how many phrases there are in it. Try it. ...
Students of the Tao Te Ching, who don't know Chinese, can do the same thing with it. All we have to know is the handful of characters Lao Tzu uses as punctuation and a bit of Lao Tzu's syntax and we can "Identify(Mg)" the structure of most sentences, paragraphs and chapters in Lao Tzu's book.
. When you know the syntax of one chapter then you know the syntax of all the other chapters, which have the same basic pattern. We will analyze the syntax of the first three chapters and then move up into the semantic dimension and analyze Ching 3 from there.
. Before we start, let us hear WHAT Lao Tzu tells us about the syntactic dimension (C):
"WordErs Don't have to Understand (C2erPUkn)" WHAT I say.
. The Chê(er) behind "Word(C2)", tells us that the subject of the sentence is complete. From this we know that "Don't Know (PUkn)" is the predicate. It's what Lao Tzu says about the "WordErs". But we don't have to understand that, to know that this is the predicate. To work in the syntactic dimension of semiotics, we don't have to know Chinese to "Identify(Mg)" the structure of most sentences, paragraphs and chapters in the Ching but it helps to know HOW, or the Way, Lao Tzu says things before we try to understand WHAT he is saying.
. In the syntactic dimension, we work with Automatic Energy (E6). This is the Aristotelian "efficient cause". So, with some practice, "WordErs" can do this work very efficiently. But to learn to work in this dimension, we must listen to WHAT Lao Tzu is telling us about it. We must know HOW he is saying things. Here is another statement about syntax:
"CycliciTy (S1ad), Tao'S Movement".
. "Again(@1)" the Chê(ad) tells us that the subject is complete. So, whether we understand the next three characters or not, we know that it must be the predicate. Why? ...
Because Lao Tzu knows what he is doing and the Chê(ad) doubles as the connective. The inner component of Fan($l) is Yu(@1), it means "Also, and, again, moreover". At Ching 01 and 48, the context demands "Repeat". So when any characters are "Repeated" we have a "Cycle($l)". The cycle can be a phrase, a sentence or a paragraph. In the above translation the sentence is a paragraph. The next one is:
"SubleTy(Joad), Tao'S Usefulness (A1 Zus)". Notice that ad, A1 and , Z are repeated. When characters are "Repeated" twice, we have a "DyAd(dyad)", when they are repeated trice, we have a "TriAd( 3ad)". There are even heptads in the Ching but most chapters are tetrads. There are, however, different types of tetrads. 2+2, 3+1 and 1+3 all add up to four, but these are all different tetrads.
. Before we get into the syntax of Ching 01 let us look at a translation of Ching 1.1,1 and 1.1,2:
The "Tao Can be Taoed (A1ptA1) but Not (Fy) in the Usual Way (CnA1). the
Names Can be Named (MgptMg) but they are Not(Fy) always the Usual Names (CnMg)".
. In other words, the syntax in the Ching is not the usual Chinese syntax and the meaning of the characters are not always the dictionary equivalents. As any good writer does, Lao Tzu defines his terminology at the beginning of his book. Now, which characters are repeated here? ...
pt, Fy, and Cn. So, even if we don't know a single character in these first five characters of the book, we already know that we have two sentences here. If this pattern is not repeated in the third sentence, then the first two sentences form a "DyAd(dyad))" and it is a paragraph.
. The pattern is not repeated. So let’s go to the next paragraph.
!.2,1: WU Mg .Tn .TI .Z B1
1,2.2: YU Mg Wn wU.Z Mg. I try to line the identifiers up as well as I can, but they don't come out on the blog exactly as I see them on my word-processor. Anyway, this approach will have to do. At Ching 1.2, only Mg and the sign of the possessive ( Z) are repeated. Again, the syntax alone tells us that we have another "DyAd" here.
. Reaching up a bit into the semantic dimension, it helps to know that "Nonexistence(WU)" and "Existence(YU)" form a very important "DyAd".
. Next comes the Ku(KU), which tells us that this double-dyad is the premise in this chapter. A double dyad is the 2+2 type of tetrad. Next comes:
1.3,1: Cn WU YÜ YI Kn . H #1
1.3,2: Cn YU .YÜ YI Kn . H *1 In the syntactic dimension we don't have to know what *1 means as long as we can see that the character is different from the other characters and Cn, YÜ, YI, Kn and . H are “Repeated”.
. So we have another "DyAd" here. The fourth and last paragraph begins with:
"These DyAds (Tzdyad) ...." but we don't have the repetitions we have above. So, as far as we are concerned, this one is a "Monad($1)". So what is the structure of Ching 01? ...
Because the punctuation is between the two "DyAds(dyad)", we have a 2+2 tetrad. This is as far as the "WordErs(C2er)" have to take it. The interpretation of Ching 01has to be done in the semantic dimension.
Ching 2. It starts with: As above, in "Heaven so Below (Tn -)", on earth. These two characters refer to the Law of Correspondence. Usually they are between paragraphs, but here they are in front of the chapter. Lao Tzu seems to tell us here that the dyads we have had so far and the one, which comes next are all analogous to each other.
2.1,1: %2 kn %b .Z do %b *2 ug^k
2.1,2: %2 kn gd . Z do .gd .*2 PU gd ^k. Here we have an extra character, but "Good" and "No Good" are opposites. Next comes the "Therefore(KU)" again but this time it comes after the first "DyAd". If all "DyAds" are analogous to each other "Then(KU)" all "TriAds" are analogous to each other as well. Now come six 2+1 triads:
2.3: YU WU mt Sg, df ez mt cm, lg *a mt *b, #2 . - mt *c, #a #b mt Ho, #c 60 mt #e.
The "Mutually(mt)" necessitate is the connective and the "Monad($1)" at the end of each triad is the reconciling impulse in systematics.
2.3: "ThereFore the Wise Man (SiYIwsmn) ....
2.4: He Who (heho) .... ThereFore (SiYI) ....". This would be another 2+2 tetrad. Now that you know the structure of this chapter, you can fill in the "...."s from other translations. Syntax is more concrete than semantics. By starting with syntax first, you have a more solid foundation for the semantic dimension. And with a bit of practice, a communicator can produce this foundation more efficiently and do a better job than I can. Until then, please bear with me.
. I will do the syntax and semantics of Ching 3 in the next section. This work can be done with Automatic Energy (E6), it can be done on automatic, so to say. Try it on Ching 3. ...
=======================================================
Feb. 10. 2009
. The most frustrating and, at the same time, most fruitful thing that happened to me was being put into the victim state of consciousness by reading INTRODUCING Semiotics. If I am the only one who is put into a negative state by books like that, forget it, say no more. But, if I am not, then somebody aught to take a closer look at what is in those books that can do this to us.
. What got me out of Cuba alive was a series of "coincidences", I couldn't have planned myself. What got me out of that victim state of consciousness was a series of conscious (A), intellectual (B), emotional (C) and physical (D) actions, which have to be carried out intentionally.
. It is possible that, by luck, a situation arises which causes us to do the right physical (D) action, which gets us out of that negative state but we can't rely on luck all the time. If even one of the "coincidences " that got me out of Cuba had been missing, I wouldn't be here to tell you about it. If there are others who were attacked for the same reasons I was attacked, but who were not as lucky as I was, then they are in no position to tell you what really happened to them. All you got is an "accident report" and the body.
. If you want to get out of a negative state without counting on luck there are four steps you have to take: 1: Become aware (A) of the state you are in.
2: Know (B) what it does for others and to you. And know what you can do about it.
3: Decide (C) to do it. And 4: Do (D) it.
. If any one of these four steps is missing, you don't get 3/4 out of a negative state, you are still in the same state you were in before you became aware of it.
. Starting with the Jan. 1 section, you only have a description of what I did (D) about the victim state of consciousness I was in. And that work lead to the "Insight(72)" into Ching 14.1. So being put into a negative state is not necessarily a bad thing. Why? …
If you become aware of it and if you know WHAT can be done about it and if you decide to get out of it and if you carryout what you have decided to do then you will get out of it.
. I have described the 4-fold process many times before but this time I was in the negative state so deeply that it was hard to detach from it "Enough(Zu)" in order to observe (A) it. If you can’t get out of a mental state then you can’t objectify it. While you are in a negative state, you loose energy. The energy for observing it, for thinking positive thoughts, the will to use the truth to set you free, is lost. If some knowledge (B) of the truth has become habitual, if it has become a belief (C), then your chances of the truth setting you free is increased. Now, your soul (A) can make your emotional center (C) aware of what is happening to you. Now you know that you are losing Conscious (E4) and Sensitive (E5) Energies and that the longer you stay in that state the more your chances of getting out of it are diminishing. Why? ...
Because it takes the right energy for awareness (E4), thinking (E5) and willing (E6). If that part of us which is at level A of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" can motivate the mind (C) to use the right knowledge (B) to get the body (D) to do the right thing then we are acting as a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. In other words: We are “Acting as One (do 1)”.
"Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ) to see is
Causing People's Hearts Not to Stir (%eMnHsPU$a)". Luan($5) means: "Confusion, rebellion, anarchy" What is implied here is that our "Heart(Hs)" and "Mind(Hs)" must "Rebel($a)" against what we have become aware (A) of. Hsin(Hs) means: "Heart, mind; center".
. Lao Tzu is talking here about step number one of the fourfold process. If we want to understand WHAT Lao Tzu is trying to teach us we must understand his syntax, which is easier for English speaking students than for speakers of Chinese. Many speakers of Chinese cannot understand WHAT Lao Tzu is saying because he uses very little Chinese syntax. They don't ask: What is the subject of the above sentence. Why? ...
Because written Chinese is not a phonetic language like English or Sanskrit. So what is the subject and connective of the above sentence? ...
"Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ) to see, is
Causing People (%eMn)" ...
Now you can use different translations to see how different translators have translated the predicate.
. Nothing will happen if our "Mind remains UnDisturbed (HsPU$a)". Pu(PU) can be read as "Not" or as a prefix. The easiest Way to check the accuracy of my translations is to compare the capitalized words with what other translators have come up with. If there are more than one possible dictionary equivalents of a character, or if the context demands a different equivalent, then we are getting into the semantic dimension. And we shouldn't get into that before we are done with the syntactic dimension. Looking up each character in the dictionary is more work, and it may not always be what the context demands.
. This is really the kind of work the "WordErs(C2er)" should be doing. The "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". Even if the "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" what Lao Tzu means, they can still do their dharma. By the way, I need a Dictionary-Concordance for the Nei Yeh. I have started on it, but there are other things I must invest my time and energy in. To get my Dictionary-Concordance for the Ching, Google: "A1 Tao162" The dictionary is about six pages long. It will help you to do this work on your own.
Let us get back to Ching 14.1. What is its subject? ...
The predicate says something about the subject. So if we don't understand the subject ...
then we don't know WHAT the predicate talking about. So ...
before spending too much time on the predicate, we must know what the subject is.
. Ching 14.1 has the most amazing syntax I have come across in the Ching so far. No wonder it took me that long to figure it out. The problem I have now, is explaining it to you. I will start on it in the next section but I will leave you with a hint here:
A, B, C and D of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" can each be the connective of a triad. There are, thus, four possible triads. They are: E3-A-B, A-B-C, …
B-C-D and C-D-E8. Creative Energy (E3) and Constructive Energy (E8) are outside of our 4-fold human system. A and D are the connectives, or doors, between our world and other worlds, or dimensions.
. "The Upper ( H +)" triad within the tetrad would be the Awareness (A), Thought (B) and Word (C) triad. And if this is so, then "The Lower ( H -)" triad within the tetrad is the Thought, Word and Deed triad.
A-B-C . . . . . . What is the C in the A-B-C triad is the B in the B-C-D triad.
. . . .B-C-D . . The output of the higher is the input of the lower. The affirming impulse in the upper triad is the receptive impulse in the lower triad. The B-C "DyAd(dyad)" appears in both "TriAds( 3ad)", it would be their intersection. The intersection is the connective of another triad. To receive the knowledge (B) the "KnowErs(kner)" put out for the "WordErs(C2er", the communicators (C) must "Align(%8)" themselves with the thinkers (B) and unless a communicator (C) puts this bit of systematics together with Lao Tzu's words this is not going to happen here.
. Don't let this information overwhelm you. Only bite off what you can chew. I have merely put this stuff out as a hint. We will get into it in more detail in the next sections. But, if you manage to put the systematics, you have here, together with Lao Tzu's words, then you don't have to believe (C) what I will say in the next sections; you will know (B) it. And when you do, you are in the semantic dimension. In order not to burden you with too much information too soon, I will not go there in the next section. I will stay in the syntactic dimension until we are ready for the semantic dimension. As Lao Tzu said: Don’t bite off more than you can chew.
=========================================================
Feb. 4, 2009
John C. H. Wu has “will” as the connective and “ripen of themselves” as the
predicate of Ching 23.1,1. Here are two alternatives for its subject: Only the
“Silence in Words(^eC2), will ripen of itself (TuJa)”. And: Only that, which is
“Inaudible(^e) in Words, will ripen of ItSelf (C2TuJa)”.
. These translations can shed light on Ching 11.2 where the “Pot(ut)” represents our body (D), words (C), or thoughts (B). And on 14.1,2 where the content demands “Inaudible” for Hsi(^e).
===================================================
Feb. 2, 2009
Ching 14.1,1 (Chapter 14. Paragraph 1, sentence 1) is about the semantic dimension of Semiotics. It is on level B of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". This is the level our intellect (B) works on. The Hindus call it, Buddhi. Lao Tzu relates it to "Heaven(Tn)". In Astrology it is air. And Gurdjieff has identified it as the "intellectual center". The energy our intellect needs to do its work is Sensitive Energy (E5).
Ching 14.1,2 is about the syntactic dimension of Semiotics. It is on level C of the "Line". This is the level our mind (C) works on. The Hindus call it, Manas. Lao Tzu relates it to Wang( E) or "Humanity(mn)". In Astrology it is water. And Gurdjieff has identified it as the "emotional center". The energy our mind needs to work is Automatic Energy (E6).
Ching 14.1,3 is about the pragmatic dimension of Semiotics. It is on level D. This is the level our body (D) works on. The Hindus refer to it as, Indriyas.. Lao Tzu relates it to "Earth(TI)". In Astrology it is earth. And Gurdjieff has identified it as the "moving center". The energy our body needs to move is Vital Energy (E7).
The reason so many different teachers tell us the same thing is because they are talking about the same thing. Which is? ...
The triad. The "TriAd( 3ad)", Lao Tzu is talking about, is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. So he was talking about Semiotics already 2500 years ago. Morris must have understood the same thing.
. When I read about Semiotics many years ago, I got the impression that it was a triad and thus, if you know it, it is simple. When I Googled it a few Weeks ago I was confounded by the complexity and the triad was not even mentioned. That's what got me going on it. I hope that you can see the simplicity as well.
. Lao Tzu says: "See the Simple (oo*d)"! *d = Su120. HOW can we do that? ...:
Don't bite off more than you can chew! Take it one step at a time and concentrate on your own dharma. "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! Don't try to actualize a potential you don't have.
=======================================================
Jan. 29, 2009
. In the Jan. 22 section, I have given a translation of the Tao Te Ching, chapter 40. To enable you to evaluate it, we have worked on the 15 Chinese characters you have to know in order to read it.
. The first paragraph of Ching 14. consists of four sentences, with a total of 32 characters in it. The pronoun Chih( Z), "Name(Mg)" and the expletive Yüeh(73) appear three times and "Not(PU)" appears four times in that paragraph. But there are still 24 different characters in that paragraph and, if you want to read it, you still have to work on them. And if you want to understand what you read, you have to know at least some syntax.
. I "Know that i Don't Know (knPUkn)" all about Ching 14 but, if you are a writer (C) and you have understood the first paragraph, you know how much work there would be for you to describe it. Now put yourself into my shoes to find out how I must feel about having to describe all of that. "KnowErs are Not Worders (knerPUC2)", "KnowErs are Not good with Words". But I will try, Please bear with me. Here come the subjects of the first three sentences. The subject is that part of a sentence the predicate says something about. After the first subject I have given part of the predicate to give you some idea of what I am trying to get across to you. Lao Tzu uses Yüeh(73) as an expletive. In other words, he wants us to fill in something.
"Look for It (#M Z) and you Can't See (PUoo) it, It-appears-to-be(73) ....".
"Listen for It (@H Z) and you Can't Hear (PU^d) it, ....". Try to
"Touch It (@I Z) and you Can't Get (PUgt) a hold of it ....".
. In these three statements, Lao Tzu has "Identified(Mg)" what those who are on "The Higher ( H +)" level can see (A), think (B) or say (C) and what those who are "Below( -)" them can "Not(PU)" see, hear or touch. The vision (A) is on the top level of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" It can be compared with a 3-dimensional hologram. Such a vision (A) is not a thought (B). Since you can’t see a thought, thinkers (B) can "Not See (PUoo)" it.
. "Without Name is Heaven and Earth'S Conception (WUMgTnTI ZB2)". A concept or thought (B) is not a "Name(Mg)" or word (C). "WordErs are Not Knowers (C2erPUkn)". Since you can’t hear a thought, talkers can "Not Hear (PU^d)" it.
. Verbal instructions (C) are not the physical work (D), which is required to execute them. Since you can’t touch words, the doers (D) can "Not Get (PUgt)" a hold of the words with their hands. But here, at the third sentence, we can see what the lower CAN do about the higher. ...
The doers (D) CAN execute the instructions, which the communicators (C) give them.
By analogy, the "WordErs(C2er)" (C) CAN try to understand the "KnowErs(kner)" (B).
And again, the thinkers (B) CAN try to interpret the poetry (A), which is in the Gita etc..
With a well "Governed Mind Within You (85HsÜp =), well
Governed Words Come-out Of your Mouth (85C2Cuto@l) and well
Governed Tasks are Imposed upon Others (85D20ctomn). But only if the orders are carried out,
Only Then( Ja18) all, In Heaven and Below (Tn -) it, will be well Governed Yi (85Yi)".
The Nei Yeh Chapter 10, lines a to d.
. Only if the lower "Aligns(%8)" itself with the higher will "Order(85)" be established in "Heaven(Tn)" (B), humanity (C) and "Earth(TI)" (D). Here is another message from the Nei Yeh: When you are
"Able to Align yourself with the higher you are Able to be Tranquil (ab%8ab^a) and
Only Then will you be Able to Fix (Ja*aab8b)" the problems on the levels below you. *a = Hou30. Working on the Nei Yeh without a dictionary-Concordance is not easy but I wanted to give you some idea of what is in there. Ting(8b) is the last character in Ching 37 but, since 37 is the only chapter it is in, it doesn't have a two-digit identifier. In that case I identify the character by chapter and line of the Nei Yeh. It is "Alignment(%8)" under a "roof (Rad. 40)".
. Humanity (C) is represented by Wang( E). It looks like an E except that the vertical line goes down the center instead of on the left, as in E. When the line is in the center, we have a cross (+) between the top line (B) and the bottom line (D).
. "The Higher ( H +)" is more inclusive. A can do the work of B, C and D. Lao Tzu has done it: 1/4 of the Ching is prose (C) containing information (B). B can also do the work of C and D. I am doing this writing (C) here right now and I have build a number of 16 foot prototypes of my MINIMUM RESISTANCE BOAT HULL. But I can't build them strong, and at the same time light, "Enough(Zu)" to withstand the stress at breakthrough speeds. We need the DIVISION OF LABOR for projects like that. Plato has devoted much space to it in his Republic because we can't have a healthy society without it. Those on level C, the politicians or leaders, must make the decisions on major projects and those on level D must do the physical work. We all have a physical body, so we all can do physical work but not as well as those whose dharma it is to do that work.
. In terms of J G Bennett's ENERGIES, a higher energy can be stepped down to a lower one, by those on "The Lower" level who are "Aligning (%8)" themselves with "The Higher" level. Those, who are using a higher or lower energy than is required for a given task, are out of "Alignment". And even if I didn't know (B) that I am using the wrong energy for this writing (C) I can still feel (A) it.
(A thought came to me just now: What if you need this stress and frustration to produce the energies needed to produce the "Insights(72)" I am described here? I don't know enough about these energies to answer that question. I just know that I have worked on Ching 14 for over two years and that this "Insight(72)" into 14.1 came to me just now. Why now? What took me so long? It's so obvious to me now, why couldn't I see it before? I will summarize the "Insight" in the next section, which will be in front of this one.)
. The writing (C) I am doing here requires Automatic Energy (E6). Using Sensitive Energy (E5) for it is a wasteful process. But, since no writer is doing it, what can I do? The popper use of energy is to use it for what it is intended. I keep coming back to THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Ignoring the natural division of labor is doing much harm.
. The predicate says something about the subject of a sentence. Please use other translations to find out what the predicates of the first three sentences say about their subjects. ...
Lao Tzu is using Yüeh(73) as an expletive. So what are we to fill in here? ...
The predicates tell us HOW "The Higher" appears to "The Lower".
14.1,1: " .... To-the-lower-it-appears-to-be Invisible (73#N)".
14.1,2: " .... To-the-lower-it-appears-to-be Inaudible (73^e)".
14.1,3: " .... To-the-lower-it-appears-to-be Intangible (73$h)". For
Yi(#N) we get "Yi37 14 41 53". It means "Barbarians; to squat; destroy". For
Hsi(^e) we get "Hsi50 14 23 41 43 70 74". It means "Rare; seldom; to hope; very". And for
Wei($h) we get "Wei60 14 15 36 64". It means "Small, minute; subtle, obscure".
. These equivalents are not what the context of 14.1 demands. This is why Jonathan Star does not give us Dictionary equivalents. Instead he gives us the equivalents different translators have come up with. That should bring us closer to what the context demands here:
"Yi (37) -- Invisible, colorless, very dim // straight, level, even, plain // easy, smooth."
"Hsi (50) -- Soundless, inaudible, very faint //rare, few, seldom, infrequent // ...." And
"Wei (60) -- Mystery, secret, subtle, profound // small, minute, trifle, falling away, formless."
. As you can see from this, that most translators have given us what the context demands and they have given us the Dictionary equivalents where they seem appropriate.
. The work I have to do here is done more efficiently, and better, with Automatic Energy (E6). This is why Aristotle has called level C the "efficient cause". I have to invest Sensitive Energy (E5) on it which is like running a truck with jet fuel. This doesn't mean that jet fuel is better than diesel fuel but certain fuels are not suitable for certain tasks. There is a natural DIVISION OF LABOR and ignoring it is bound to cause problems.
. We have seen from the equivalents we get from well respected translators, that the first few equivalents are what the context of 14.1 demands and the rest is closer to what the dictionary says. If you can "Not See (PUoo)" something, then it is "Invisible" to you, no matter what the dictionary says.
. The Concordance tells us that Yi(#N) is in chapters 14, 41 and 43:
. 41: The "Smooth Way Likely (#NA1Jo) turns out to be a Rough(*x41)" one at the end. This example shows us that sometimes the dictionary equivalents make sense and sometimes they don't. This Way Lao Tzu is keeping his students on their toes. Maybe this is also the function of that unconscious part of mine which consistently manages to slip errors past the conscious part of me. According to Jungian psychologists, this would be my ego.
. 53: " .... my only fear would be to stray from it (J.Wu)". "Stray-from (#N)". There is a subtle hint here but you have to consult other translations to "Get(gt)" it.
. Now let us look for Hsi(^e) in 23, 41, 43, 70 and 74
23: Only "Silent Words (^eC2) will ripen of ThemSelves (TuJa)".
41: The "Greatest Music has the Rarest Sound (TA#a^e#b)". Adapted from R.L. Wing.
43: "Non-Action Has Advantages (WUdo Z$s) But (Tn -) it is
. . . Not-easy to Get-a-hold-of It (^e$s Z)". The translation of the last three characters
. was a bit forced but trying to make sense of Lao Tzu's enigmatic statements is good exercise.
70: "Know Me Ones (Those able to understand me) are Few (knmeer^e).
. . . Follow Me Ones (Those willing to follow me) Value (18meerKu)" my words.
74: "Whoever substitutes for the Master Carpenter in carving,
. . . Rarely escapes injury to his hands. (Wing)" Here we have a not so "Subtle(Jo)" reference to the DIVISION OF LABOR. At Gita 3.35, Krishna tells us that: Not doing your own duty ("svadharma") is dangerous ("bhaya"). At Matthew 25:14 the servant who didn't do his duty is cast into outer darkness. There is also a reference to the Law of Attraction in that parable: "For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not [enough] shall be taken away even that which he hath."
. Now let us look for Wei($h) in 15, 36 and 64.
15: "Those skilful in the ancient Tao Are
. . . subtly ingenious and profoundly intuitive ($h#1Sü*a Wing)." *a = T'ung162
. *a's dictionary equivalents are suggestive of the "general" over "all" vision at A.
36: " .... This is Called a Subtle Insight (Siis$h72)." For the "...." see other translations.
64: "That which is Minute is Easy to Disperse ( H$hezäQ)".
. This was a lot of work for me and I don't like it. Its all work and relatively little play. To me the thinking (B) is play while the writing is work. As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. To writers, the writing (C) is play while the thinking, required to understand what the thinkers can only express poorly, is work for them. It is easier for writers to express their own ideas and still find a publisher for them. Talking is only a part of communication (C); the other part is listening. But "WordErs Don't seem to Know (C2erPUkn)" that. I think that this is a part of our problem. By analogy, thinking (B) is only a part of philosophy; the other part is "Aligning(%8)" ourselves to the poets (A). The Gita is 100% and the Ching is 75% poetry. The Nei Yeh is another book of wisdom which is a 100% poetry. Its translator, Harold D. Roth, believes that it is as good as the Ching, and so do I, and he wonders why it didn't become as popular as the Ching. I believe that it is because Lao Tzu has used 1/4 of his book to explain the poetry in prose. And these explanations can help us to understand the Nei Yeh better as well. But first we need a concordance for it. You can't work on it properly without the kind of ground-work Star has done for the Ching..
. What I am saying here is not for general consumption; it is for writers who are willing to study this stuff in order to be able to say it better. No matter HOW well you can write, if you have nothing worthwhile to say, what good is it? If the truth is not known by a critical mass of the people, it is not going to set us free. It is not "Enough(Zu)" to know HOW to write, writers must also pay attention to WHAT they write. WHAT is said is semantics, HOW it is said is syntactics and WHY it is said is pragmatics. Pragmatists are not much interested in your theories (B). They might ask the thinkers (B): WHY are you telling me this? Does it work? HOW can it be tested? What does it do when it works? Or: How much money can we make with your invention?
. I got the idea of a MINIMUM-RESISTANCE BOAT HULL AROUND 1964. I have worked hard on it. Last year I had to pay my first maintenance fee for U.S. Patent No. 6,834,605. ".... next maintenance fee is due on or before JUNE 28, 2012. Patents run out. Time is of the essence. Because of this I sold my house for 20% below market value to a tenant of mine. The idea was to work full time on the boat instead of having to deal with tenants and maintaining the house. Last year I got illegally evicted. So instead of being able to work on my boat I am fighting legal battles with my former tenant. But we have to take the good with the bad. Ever since I am under this stress, "Insights(72)" into the Tao Te Ching seem to be increasing. Also, since I can no longer work on my boat, I have more time for what I am doing here.
. Does these "Insights(72) come to me because of the stress I am under? Think of HOW Flamenco and the blues was born. Is suffering the price we pay for creativity? Compared to the Gipsies and the African slaves, I am not suffering, I am living in luxury. And if that bit of aggravation brings me those ideas, so be it.
=========================================================
Jan. 27, 2009
. In the last section, which is behind this one, I gave a translation of Ching 40. We also went over the 15 characters you need to read it so that you can verify the accuracy of my translation. The dictionary I normally use is a phonetic one. It has 5000 characters in it. Not all of the roughly 800 characters, which are in the Ching, are in it, so I have to use one that has 7796 characters in it. In that one you sometimes find the word "distinguish" behind the definition. This means that if two characters are not easy to "distinguish", if they are not "different" enough, then, mistaking one for the other can cause confusion. And this brings us to the quote from page 94 of INTRODUCING Semiotics:
"The value of a sign derives from the fact that it is different from .... other signs." There is, thus, valuable information in that book. But, as we are told in "The parable of the tares (Matthew 12:24)": In life we have to take the good with the bad. The question, then, is: ...
What information on Semiotics, that should be there, is not there? ...
On page 118 we read: "Confronting the complexity of semiosis, Morris had divided semiotics into three discrete areas. .... SYNTACTICS .... SEMANTICS .... PRAGMATICS."
. This can be misleading because Morris didn't make these divisions arbitrarily because he was "Confronting the complexity of semiosis", but because he must have realized that these are the "impulses", or indispensable components, of the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad. Thus, Semiotics is a triad. It is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts.
. This can be seen nicely in the original IBM programming system because it was based on the Aristotelian tetrad. The customer is on level A of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)", The programmer is on level B, the coder is on level C and the computer is on level D. Aristotle has called level A the "final cause", level B the "formal cause", level C the "efficient cause" and level D the material cause. The developers of that 4-fold system have called the four causes or "sources" as J.G. Bennett calls them: "Job-description" (A), "Job-analysis" (B), "Coding" (C) and "Execution" (D). That nicely working system was phased out. But our political masters can't phase out the construction business. Customers (A) still describe what they want and, if their demand is supplied, will pay for it. Architects (B) still design buildings and contractors (C) still tell their sub-contractors (D) WHAT to do.
. A produces the demand and B, C and D produce the supply. B does the thinking, C does the talking and D does the physical work. If one of the three "classes", or castes, decides to go on strike, the other two classes can't keep on working. In these N-term systems it is always all or nothing. While the whole is greater than the sum of its parts, these systems are also like a chain, which is only as strong as its weakest link. Thus, to stop a big building project, it suffices if only one of the three "classes" goes on strike.
. I am talking here about THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Please Google:
Protocols of Zion division of labor classes
. In terms of the Aristotelian tetrad, there can be no realization of the "final cause", or the "Job-description" (A), without the "formal cause" (B), the "efficient cause" (C)
. . . . A . . . . . . . and without the "material cause" (D). The reason the four
D . . + . . B . . . . causes correspond to Plato's four levels is because
. . . . C . . . . . . . .Aristotle was Plato's student. All he had to do is, wrap his teacher's "Divided Line" around the cross. The Buddha's "Vision" is on level A, his "Thought" is on level B, his "Speech" is on level C and his "Action" is on level D. If the Buddha, Lao Tzu, the Hindus or Plato knew the tetrad, why should what they say about it be something different? ...
The same goes for the "DyAd(dyad)" R.L, Wing was justified in translating the first two characters of Ching 40 as "Polarity($lad))". At 40.1 and 40.2, Ch ê(ad), Tao(A1) and Chih( Z) are "Repeated($l)". This tells us that we have two "Cycles($l)" here., which we have read as two sentences.. The same goes for Ching 40.3 and 40.4. There Shêng(Sg) and Yü(to) are "Repeated". . This can be seen better at Ching 1.1 where three of the six characters are "Repeated" and only "Name(Mg)" is substituted for the Tao(A1).
. Ching 1.1 and 1.2 is a tetrad followed by the "Then(KU)". At Ching 40, we have the "Heaven Below(Tn -)" between the two "DyAds". Ching 71 has the same kind of 2+2=4 structure. Ching 11 has a 3+1 structure. That is a "TriAd( 3ad)" in front, as the premise, and a "Monad($1)" at the end, as the conclusion.
. When you can "Identify(Mg)" these different structures of sentences paragraphs and chapters At Ching 01, 11 and 40, you can "Identify" the same structures in other chapters as well. When talking about structures, we are talking about syntax (C). That is what we must work on first. To get into the semantic dimension (B), we must be able to take our teacher's "Subtle(Jo)" hints. However, monads, dyads, triads and tetrads serve a twofold function: ...
They convey meaning (B) and ...
they determine the structure (C) of sentences, paragraphs and chapters. So let us look at the "TriAd" in chapter 14 next: When
"Looking for It (#M Z), the above from the below, you can Not See (PUoo) it, its
Name Is Yi(Mg73#N). when
Listening for It (@H Z), the above from the below, you can Not Hear (PU^d) it, its
Name Is Hsi(Mg73^e). when trying to
Get your hands on It (@I Z), the above from the below, you can Not Get (PUgt) it, its
Name Is Wei (Mg73$h). the three components of
This TriAd ( 3ad) are ImPossible (PUpt) to
Fully Examine ($0*a) Because (KU) they are
Undifferentiated And they Work as One (#Obtdo 1)" unit. *a = Chieh149.
. The structure of this paragraph is the 3+1 tetrad we also have at 41.1. The justification for interpreting the "It( Z)" as ", the above from the below", is given in the very next sentence:
"The Above ( H +) is Not Superior (PU*b);
.The Below ( H - ) is Not Inferior (PU@J)". *b = Chuang94. If we translate Chung as "Superior" then its opposite is "Inferior"; if we translate Mei(@J) as "Dark" then its opposite is "Bright". Either Way, it is a correct translation. This is just one of Lao Tzu's rules of syntax. Not all of them are Chinese rules of syntax but, if we want to understand his words, then we must learn his syntax. If you want to know HOW Lao Tzu has said things then you have to learn his syntax; if you want to know WHAT he has said, then you have to learn to take his hints. Taking a hint takes us from the syntactic dimension (C), below, to the semantic dimension (B) above it.
. Often, asking the right questions is more important than getting the answer to a good question. Let us start by asking which triad(s) is our teacher talking about? ...
To find out what the initiating impulse of this triad is, we must ask: ...
What is "the above" in the first sentence? ...
When we know that, we also know what "the below" is because it is on the next level below "the above". Before reading on, try to figure it out yourself. ...
How do I know that "the below" is not two or three levels "below" the "above" ? ...
The structure of dyads, triads and tetrads tells us that. There is much you can know simply by knowing Lao Tau's syntax. There is much we know (B), or believe (C), because of the language we use, because of thinking habits we have been taught or because of ...
the ideas which predominate in the Akashic Field. This is why intentionally "Repeating(@1)" the truth to yourself will not only positively effect you but it will deposit the truth into the Akashic Field, or the collective unconscious. Anyone who takes responsibility for his own thoughts will do that. If you are aware (A) "Enough(Zu), then you will not "Repeat" what the social engineers are programming you to repeat.
. Try to find out what the initiating impulse of the "Upper( +)" "TriAd" is. ...
===========================================================
Jan. 22, 2009
. In the Jan. 20 section I have quoted the first paragraph of page 86 of INTRODUCING Semiotics. I will now quote selectively from that quote again: ".... as a sentence .... unfolds, each sign will modify the sign which precedes it. Meaning will therefore be retroactively constructed .... at the crucial endpoint .... ."
. Since pages 94 and 95 can be used to clarify this, I have quoted them in full in the same section. I will now quote selectively from those pages to summarize WHAT has been said there:
"The value of a sign derives from the fact that it .... indicates that the value of a sign is not immediately present; the value is DEFERRED until the next sign .... 'modifies' it.
. Take the syntagm from the English song ...
TEN GREEN BOTTLES
. As we read from left to right, the 'ten' gets transformed from 'ten what?' ...
... to the answer 'ten green somethings'.
. The question 'ten green what?' is then modified to 'ten green bottles'.
If we extend the syntagm to:
TEN GREEN BOTTLES STANDING ON A WALL
then further modification takes place. .... having deferred our answer to what the bottles are standing on, we envisage the wall not as a bare one, but as one with ten bottles standing on it."
But is TEN GREEN BOTTLES STANDING ON A WALL a complete sentence? ...
No. Anyone, who knows "Enough(Zu)" English, knows that.
. Unless there is a connective behind, TEN GREEN BOTTLES, or behind all of the seven words, we can't know whether it is a complete subject of a sentence. It might be: Ten green bottles, standing on a wall, in an old church, but HOW can we be sure? ...
Only when we see the connective behind the subject. And here "the next sign" does not "modify the sign which precedes it." it complements or completes it. But the subject and the ...
connective do not make up a sentence. What is missing? ...
The predicate. A sentence is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. But take one "impulse", or component away from the "TriAd( 3ad)" and you don't have 2/3 of a triad, but no triad at all. All three impulses are always necessary to make up a triad. In Chinese the connective doesn't have to be represented by anything, but in English, if you want to be correct, you have to represent it at least by a comma. As the comma, or a more explicit connective, follows the subject, so the period follows the predicate.
. Now, this last sentence is not a "TriAd( 3ad)" but a "DyAd(dyad)". Why does an above-below dyad feel as complete as a subject-connective-predicate triad does? ...
Because the dyad is an N-term system just as the triad is. In the dyad, N = 2. In the triad, N = 3. In the tetrad, N = 4, etc. Can a sentence be a tetrad? ...
I don't think so, but paragraphs and chapters can be. We are still talking about syntax here. If you are not familiar with systematics, or Lao Tzu's "DyAds" and "TriAds", then the above details will be unfamiliar to you. Now, what kind of sentence was this? ...
Is not a "TriAd( 3ad)" but a "DyAd(dyad)". Which dyad? ...
The general structure of this sentence is: "If the cause is this, then the effect is that." The "If" and the "then" are merely punctuation, which tells us that we have the cause-effect dyad here. By analogy, the "As" and the "so" is merely punctuation which tells us that we have a dyad here to which the law of correspondence applies.
Let us get back to the TEN GREEN BOTTLES. We can only know whether a phrase is a complete subject if there is a connective behind it. A standard indicative sentence can only emerge if it has two or three phrases to emerge through. In this last sentence, the "if" is the connective. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. Without its two poles, the dyad cannot emerge. Without its three impulses, the triad cannot emerge. Without its four sources, the tetrad cannot emerge, etc.
. Since ten bottle require a plural connective, the word here is "are". TEN GREEN BOTTLES are ... . ".... are" what? ...
Subject and connective alone, do not make up a sentence. What is missing? ...
The connective and predicate may be, are ...
STANDING ON A WALL. Or: .... have old wine in it. Or: .... are valuable.
. As a standard indicative sentence is not complete without its three "impulses", or components
so Semiotics is not complete without its three impulses. Why? ...
Because both are triads. And all triads are analogous to each other.
. Syntactics (C) is more concrete than semantics (B) and more abstract than pragmatics, (D). In other words, language (C) mediates between theory (B) and practice (D). This is why C is the connective in the B-C-D triad. Water shares its fluidity with air and its mass with earth. In Astrology, air is on level B, water on level C and "Earth(TI)" is on level D.
. Since syntactics (C) is the connective in semiotics, semiotics is primarily about communication (C) and not about philosophy (B) or economics (D). The question is now: ...
Why is there so little on syntactics in this introduction to semiotics? ...
Lao Tzu leaves out certain details to get us to fill them in ourselves. Good teachers do that. But I don't think that this is why Derida and other teachers of semiotics do that.
. In chapters 63 and 64, Lao Tzu is teaching, those who are willing to accept him as their teacher, HOW to study his book. Let me apply some of these lessons to the shortest chapter in the Tao Te Ching. Chapter 40 consists of only 21 characters, or "Signs". The first five characters can be translated as:
. "CycliciTy ($lad), Tao'S Movement )A1 Z%k)".
. Chê(ad) tells us that the subject is complete. So this character doubles as a connective. This is why, even in English we don't have to add an "is" to this sentence. A comma will do, and it is more true to the original.
. It is well to get more than one translation of these five characters, but to understand these words better, we have to take a closer look at them. The most obvious approach is, of course, the dictionary but, for some characters, using the Ching itself, is the better Way. To find a character in its different contexts in which Lao Tzu has put it, you need a concordance. An excellent textbook on the Tao Te Ching is Jonathan Star's scholarly work. It has a concordance in it. But identifying a character with a two-digit identifier seems to me a more efficient way because you get around a lot of, otherwise, unavoidable repetitions. So let's go:
. Fan($l) is in four chapters: 25, 40, 65 and 78. I will now go to each of them and have a look at it in different contexts. I will not do this with all of the 21 characters but I will use this one as an example. Besides, if the authors of, INTRODUCING Semiotics, can spent two pages on seven "Signs", then you will hopefully forgive me for spending a few pages on 21 signs:
. Ching 25.2: If we let
"Big Mean Going (TA73*e) out, having
Gone Mean Arriving (*e73$t) and having
Arrived Mean Returning ($t73$l)
Then (KU)" having returned must mean being back home again. *e = Shih162.
. The Ku(KU) at the end of the quote, justifies the "If" at the beginning of this sentence. Please recall what I have said about the if - then structure, above. What Lao Tzu has said at Ching 25.2, also tells us that, whenever Fan($l) is used, this 4-fold "Cycle($l)" may be implied. Because of the "Then(KU)", this sentence is a "DyAd(dyad)" but it can also be read as a "TriAd( 3ad)". ...
Then the "If we let", would be the subject, the quote would be the connective and what follows the "Then" would be the predicate. This Way of reading this sentence is a bit forced but the "TriAd" can tell us something as well.
. Ching 40: Well, that's the one we are working on.
. Ching 65: "Deep and far-reaching is Mystical Virtue! It leads all things to return (SüTÉÜmYi$tYiYüwU$lYi Wu's translation)". In Wing's translation we get "the Natural Law of polarity" for Wu(wU) Fan Yi(Yi). For 40.1, he has "Polarity is the movement of the Tao."
. Ching 78: "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)". One example of that is:
"KnowErs Don't Talk (knerPUC2)
TalkErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn).
. The Dictionary equivalents of Fan($l) are: "But, on the contrary; to turn back, rebel". I normally use "The Five Thousand Dictionary by C.H. Fenn. Notice that the dictionary equivalents are not the most useful here. Lao Tzu often attaches his own meanings to certain words. However, the etymology, or the picture, often implies those added meanings. For instance, "Repeat(@1)". is a component of Fan($l). If a component of a character is already in the Ching, that can tell us something.
. That is one down 14 to go. How come only 14 to go? Aren't there 21 characters? ...
Chê(ad), Tao(A1), Chih( Z), Yu(YU), Shêng(Sg) and Yü(to) appear twice in this chapter, so there is less work for us.
. Chê(ad): This character is all over the place. A good way to find out what it means is to pay attention to it and watch how different translators translate it. I think of it as a noun, or subject, maker. When at the end of a phrase, it usually tells us that a phrase is complete. We don't have a good English equivalent for it. The suffixes, "-Ad", as in "DyAd(dyad)" and "TriAd( 3ad), or "-Er", as in "KnowEr(kner)" and "WordEr(C2er)", are good ones but, as I said above, this character can also double as a connective. This is the only character to which I have assigned two identifiers, "ad" and "er". The Analysis of Chinese Characters (ACC) has this to say about it: "Phrase, speech, document; sign of the end of a paragraph; after other parts of speech it changes them into nouns. This character was invented to represent a connection between members of a text ....". See what I mean? The character is "to represent a connection". This is why it can double as a connective.
. For signaling "the end of a paragraph", Lao Tzu normally uses the "Therefore(KU)", the "ThereFore(SiYI)", the "This is Called (Siis)" and even the "Heaven Below(Tn -)". So Chê(ad) is free to signal the end of a phrase. There are also characters in Chinese which are the equivalent of regular punctuation.
. The syntactic dimension is the container of the semantic dimension. Notice that, as we work on Lao Tzu's syntax, the meanings which are contained in these words automatically emerges. For words to convey their content (B), the Aristotelian "formal cause", they must conform to their content. We know that words are containers from the following figure of speech: When a politician gives us hot air, we often say: His words are empty. And we understand these words. Here we have a nice example of HOW we can learn from language.
. Tao(A1): for that one you can read the various commentaries by different translators.
. Chih( Z) is a sign of the possessive and a pronoun. Again, it appears so frequently that simply by paying attention to it you will find out WHAT it means and HOW Lao Tzu is using it.
. Tung(%k) is in chapters 05, 08, 15, 40 and 50. The equivalent is "Move".
. Here comes 40.2:
. "SubtleTy(Joad), Tao'S Usefulness (A1 Zus)".
. Jo(Jo) is in chapters 03, 36, 40, 55, 76 and 78. Its dictionary equivalents are: "Weak, pliable; weak of purpose". These equivalents can almost be misleading. Level A is the most abstract and subtle level while level D is the most concrete one. The clay pot, at Ching 11.2, is more concrete than its subtle content. ".... In-the-center, where The Nothing in Something is, there is the Pot'S User (*d HWUYUut Zus)". So what is subtler, inside the pot, is the "Pot'S User". Notice that the word "Use(us)" is in both Ching 40 and 11. In Ching 40.3 and 40.4 we also have Yu(YU) and Wu(WU). This can tell us something, if we pay attention to it.
. Notice HOW different chapters shed light on each other. How come? ...
The Tao Te Ching is a hologram. It is the whole of which its 81 chapters are the parts. The whole emerges through its parts and, having emerged, gives meaning to them. ...
. Something to think about. ...
. Yung(us) is in 14 chapters. Its dictionary equivalents are "To use, employ ...." When a character appears often "Enough(Zu)" then we come across it without having to look for it. But then we must pay attention to it.
. The next two characters can mean: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. This above-"Below( -)" dyad is a sentence. Since the other four sentences are paragraphs,
. . . A . . . . . . . in this chapter then this one can be a paragraph
. /. . . \ . . . . . as well. And then this chapter would be a
. /. . . .. . . \ . . . . pentad.. T'ien Hsia (Tn -) can also be read as
C------+-----B . . .punctuation, and this is what we will do for now.
. \ . . . . . ./ . . . . . . You can visualize the pentad as the
. . .\ . . . ./ . . . . . . top view of a pyramid and the tetrad would be
. . . . . C . . . . . . . . the base of the pyramid with A, B, C and D
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at its four corners. When we read Ching 40 as a tetrad, then the next
two paragraphs are 40.3 and 40.4:
. "All Things Come From Existence (WnwUSgtoYU)
. "Existence Comes Form Nonexistence (YUSgtoWU)".
. "All Things(WnwU)" are already at Ching 1.2,2. "Come(Sg)" is an unusual equivalent of Shêng(Sg) but most translators use it because the context demands it. Yü(to) means "From(to)" here. Yu(YU) and Wu(WU) already appear at Ching 1.2 and 1,3. These are the poles of a "DyAd(dyad)". When one is mentioned, the other is implied. At Ching 2.2,1 we have: "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually Produce (YUWUmtDg)". Produce What? ...
"Life(Sg)". As we learn characters which appear in more than one chapter, the work we do to learn them here, is work we don't have to do when we come to the other chapters in which these words appear. For instance, by the time we came to 40.2 we already knew three of the five characters, and at Ching 40.4, we already knew three of the four characters. In other words, the law of attraction is working for us here.
. The last nine characters are easy to translate, but there is more work for a communicator (C) than meets the eye. If you are a WordEr(C2er)" (C) and you understand this chapter, can you imagine how a "KnowEr(kner)" (B) feels about having to communicate this? ...
What is frustrating to me is that, if communicators (C) can understand WHAT I am saying here, then they can produce a better job, in less time and with less effort than I can. I am talking about THE DIVISION OF LABOR here. Obviously, our political masters don't want us to know it. Just Google: Protocols of Zion division of labor
. As you can see, I have left a bit of homework for you. ...
That work will prepare you for my answer, even if it is poorly expressed.
===========================================================
Jan. 20, 2009
. The following quote is from page 89 of INTRODUCING Semiotics: I was warned: Nobody who reads that quote is going to read any further. Let me repeat: This is a quote:
"Diachronically, as a sentence, syntagm or piece of discourse unfolds, each sign will modify the sign which precedes it. Meaning will therefore be retroactively constructed and 'sealed' as a POINT DE CAPITON at the crucial endpoint of the syntagm."
. It may help to know that "the crucial endpoint" of "a sentence" it its predicate. It is also helpful to differentiate between "Meaning", or the semantic dimension (B) and the syntactic dimension (C), which has "retroactively constructed" “Meaning”. One way of rephrasing part of the above "piece of discourse" is: Syntactics (C) is expressing its semantic (B) content in words. Letters A, B, C and D (in brackets) are used in Desmond Lee's translation of Plato's Republic. I found this to be a very useful convention.
. I will now quote pages 94 and 95, which are intended to explain the above quote:
The value of a sign derives from the fact that it is different from adjacent and all other signs. DIFFÉRANCE incorporates this but it also indicates that the value of a sign is not immediately present; its value is DEFERRED until the next sign in the syntagm "modifies" it.
Take the syntagm from the English song ...
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TEN GREEN BOTTLES
As we read from left to right, the "ten" gets transformed from "ten what?" ...
... to the answer "ten green somethings".
. . . [Picture of a "10" and ten un-decipherable signs]
The question "ten green what?"
is then modified to
"ten green bottles". . . . . [Picture of the ten bottles]
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . There is, therefore, (once again) a
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . retroactive construction of meaning.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . So far so good.
Page 95:
If we extend the syntagm to:
. . . . . . . . . TEN GREEN BOTTLES STANDING ON A WALL
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . then further modifications take place. The ten items
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . become items that are standing on the wall and the
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "answer" to "ten what" is deferred again.
By the time that we get to "wall", having deferred
our answer to what the bottles are standing on,
we envisage the wall not as a bare one, but
as one with ten bottles standing on it
[Picture of the wall with ten bottles on it. And Derida's own words written on it:]
THE SIGN "WALL" THEREFORE BEARS THE TRACE OF PREVIOUS TERMS IN THE SYNTAGM (NAMELY "TEN GREEN BOTTLES")
End of quote.
. Derida was given a number of key positions on American Universities. Student of systematics would ask themselves why Derida? Why not a follower of Charles Morris (1901-1931)? ...
Those in control of the Educational System will only promote those who say "what is in the interest of themselves, the rulers, (The Republic at 338e)".
. This doesn't mean that what I have quoted above is wrong. It only means that it is not all that can be said about "a sentence". Finding that something is lacking in a statement about a sentence means that there is room for improvement. And, as far as communication goes, straightforward syntax will do just fine. In other words, what we have here, is improv=able. Now can come the improv=ing and then comes the improv=ed.
. What is lacking not only here, but in general, is some good old-fashioned grammar-school syntax (C). Why would it be missing? ...
The job of well paid, professional, social engineers is to "Always Cause the People to be Without Knowledge (Cn%eMnWUkn)".
. Semantics (B) is about "Meaning". Why, then, is syntactics (C) so important? ...
Because of the Law of Correspondence: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. Let us consult the Hindus: "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths. (Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE)" In terms of J.G. Bennett's ENERGIES, "Purusha" would be the E1-E2-E3 triad. The first sheath around it is E4 (A), around it is E5 (B), our intellect, around it is E6 (C), Manas, the mind, around it is E7 (D), our body and around us is E8, the physical world.
. I hope that a communicator (C) can understand this and will make it more comprehensible for you. Lao Tzu uses a "Pot(ut)" to explain this, because a pot is a container, like the koshas.
"Clay is For Making Pots (*gYIdout).
In-the-center (*d), where
The Nothing in Something ( HWUYU) is, there is the
Pot'S User (ut Zus)." *g = Ch'ih32. *d = Tang102.
. The pot can also be thought of as a mold around E5, As a mold is around its molten content on the physical (E8) level so our mind (C) is around our intellect (B) on the nonphysical levels. The all important question is: Does the mind take on the “form” of the Aristotelian "formal cause" or does it impose its own more concrete shape on our more abstract thoughts? To enclose our intellect, E5 (B), the "efficient cause", E6 (C), must take on the form of its content. As C hardens, its content (B) takes on the form of its container. In other words, the syntactic dimension (C) is analogous to the semantic dimension. But because C is more concrete than B, it is easier for us to understand. The easiest to understand is what you can see and touch (D). Hence the saying: The proof of the pudding is in the eating. On the pragmatic dimension you get the taste (D) of the pudding, on the semantic dimension you only have the word (C) "pudding" and on the semantic dimension you have the more abstract, and less tangible, idea (B) of a pudding. A fairly accurate analogy is the following: B gives the recipe of the pudding to C, C tells D, step by step, WHAT to do, and D, knowing HOW to do each step, does as it is told. In terms of ENERGIES, we are stepping down a higher, more abstract, kind of energy to a lower, more concrete, kind, which at E8 is a material manifestation. There is confusion between E7, our body, and E8, the material world, because we are a mix of material and non-material stuff.
. There is more to be said about the quote, but I don't want to deprive you of the opportunity of doing your own homework....
Our homework consists in analyzing the TEN GREEN BOTTLES, which are STANDING ON THE WALL. I can't guarantee that my answers are better than yours, but you will never know if you don't work on that problem yourself. It is safe to say, however, that, if you have had the benefit of good old fashioned grammar school syntax, your chances of coming up with right answers are improved. But even if you can't make much of the seven words, just trying to do your homework will prepare you for some of the answers. ...
===========================================================
Jan. 19,2009
Psychologists have all kinds of names for the “self-destructive activities”, I have mentioned at the end of the Jan. 18 section. And they can also include suicide: Why go on living when you are not doing what you came here to do? …
==================================================
Jan. 18, 2009
. What I have said at the end of the Jan. 14 section is worth repeating: "The proof of A's vision is in B's thought, the proof of B's s thought in C's word and the proof of C's word is in D's deed." In terms of J.G. Bennett's "ENERGIES", E4, Conscious Energy (A), is stepped down to E5, Sensitive Energy (B), as E5 is stepped down to E6, Automatic Energy (C). And as E5 is stepped down to E6, so E6 is stepped down to E7, Vital Energy (D).
I also want to amend my translation of Ching 71.1: "Knowing that there are things you Can't Know, is Healthy." This is only one possible interpretation of the four capitalized words: Chih(kn) twice, Pu(PU) and Shang( +). They can also be interpreted as: "Knowing that there are things we are Not supposed to Know, is Healthy." because then we can APPLY the lesson of Ching 41.1 to them: Since knowing the truth will set us free, our political masters must prevent us from "Finding-out the Truth (doA1)". If that makes sense to you, then you don't have to believe (C) me. Ajñãna in Sanskrit and Pu Chih in Chinese mean IgNorance. And in the Gita as well as the Ching, we are told that it causes all kinds of trouble.
. In spite of being aware (A) of an unhappy unconscious part of me, it still manages to slip a few errors past me. By letting me see the errors as soon as I have posted the section, it shows me how much power it has over me. If you get used to these errors of mine, they do more good than harm because they keep you on your toes. What Jung is saying about these ego-states is more useful than what Gurdjieff or Eckhat Tolle tell us about them. According to Robert A. Johnson, these unconscious parts of us are talking to us when they are causing us trouble. They are saying: ...
"I am unhappy." But my unconscious part seems to be unwilling or unable to tell me why? "Not Knowing what our unconscious parts Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)." The connective (=), "is" doesn't have to be spelled out in the Ching. Most of Lao Tzu's sentences are straight forward subject - predicate dyads, but the connective (=) is always implied. It is what turns the passive "DyAd(dyad)" into a dynamic "TriAd( 3ad)". And knowing that the connective is usually a verb gives rise to the following valid interpretation: "Not Knowing what we Know, is making us, Sick." Here you have just one example to show how important it is to pay attention to Lao Tzu's syntax.
. Jung's ACTIVE IMAGINATION, as described in Johnson,s INNER WORK, may not work for everybody: Bhakti (A), Jnana (B), Raja (C) and Karma (D) yogis, all have their own path to follow. See Gita 3.35. The time and energy you invest in somebody else's dharma is time and energy you don't invest in your own. Not doing what you came here to do is causing you to be unfulfilled and people try to fill that vacuum with liquor, drugs or by filling, or killing, time with all kinds of self-destructive activities. As Lao Tzu said: "Not Knowing what deep down you Know is Sick."
=============================================================
Jan. 14, 2009
Lao Tzu begins chapter 25 with describing the Tao: It "Exists(YU). it is
Something Undifferentiated and Complete (wU#Ocm). it was complete
Before Heaven and Earth were Born (^7TnTISg). ....
I Don't Know Its Name (myPUkn HMg). the
Character by means of which It is Identified is Tao (Zi Z73A1). if
Forced To give It another Name I-would-call-it Big (57do ZMg73TA)".
. According to Richard Wilhelm the Tao can represent anything the context demands. It is like an algebraic variable ("ein algebraishes Zeichen").
. At Ching 25.3, the "Tao is a division of the Big (A1TA) tao,
Heaven is a division of the Big (TnTa) Earth Big (TITA) and the
King is Also a division of the Big ( E08TA)" Tao.
. In the tetrad, each "source", or component, is equally important. So, in this context, the "Tao" is no more important than "Heaven", "Earth" or the "King". Take any one of the "Four (4)" sources away, and you no longer have a tetrad.
. At Ching 14 Lao Tzu describes the "TriAd( 3ad but he has already given six examples of the +-= triad at Ching 2.2. The "DyAd(dyad)" is "Identified(Mg)" already at Ching 1.1, 1.2 and 1.3, and it is "Named(Mg)" at Ching 1.4.
. I mention these details here not only to show that Lao Tzu sheds light on systematics but to suggest that he can also shed light on SEMIOTICS.
In the Jan. 13 section, I have quoted pages 21 and 44 of BAUDRILLARD for Beginners. I will now select a few words from these quotes and apply systematics to them. Let us start with "signifier .... and .... signified". ...
In general, first comes the "TaoAble (ptA1)" then comes the "TaoIng (doA1)" and then comes the "TaoEd(CnA1)". Now substitite "SIGN" or "signify" for the Tao. ...
First comes the signifi=able, then comes the ...
signifi=ing and then comes the ...
signi=fied, or signal. When the signal signifies, it is the "signifier" or subject. The "signifier" changes the signifiable into the "signified".
. I don't think that the experts on semiotics purposely leave out certain details to make us think but, with Lao Tzu's help, we can do just that. Now, that you have an example of HOW, or the Way, to do it, pick some other words from the quote and do it. ...
Take "APPLYING": ...
First comes the applicable, then comes the "APPLYING" of "SEMIOLOGY" to what it "Can(pt)" be applied to and then comes the applied, which is what you got in the quote. And if you apply systematics to semiotics the applied, or the outcome, is a better understanding of what you knew before. For instance, after reading half of INTRODUCING Semiotics, which is the new title of Semiotics for Beginners, I was duly confused, intimidated, discouraged and even put into the victim-state of consciousness, momentarily. What to do in situations like that? ...
Remember that when you are put into a negative state, you are losing energy and that energy is going somewhere. So first become aware (A) that you are in a negative mental (C) state and that you are losing energy. That knowledge (B) can become your motivator to get you out of that state. Passive knowledge becomes active when you remember and apply it. If you know and apply the truth, then it will set you free. For instance, simply "Knowing that there are things you Can't Know is Healthy (knPUkn +)". For instance, visionaries (A) can't think (B), talk (C) and do physical (D) work as well as those whose dharma it is to specialize in one of these fields. And what you are supposed to specialize in is partly determined by the date you were born.
. If you can see that there is a "wooly distinction" between the subject and the predicate of a sentence, then you have "Identified(Mg)" something refinable. Then can come the refining and then comes the "refined". Take "consumption". ...
First comes the consum=able then the consum=ing and then the consum=ed. Now, where is the consum=er? ...
"forget the consumer." Take the word "conceive". ...
"Without Name is Heaven and Earth'S Conception (WUMgTnTI ZB1)." At Ching 1.1,2 Lao Tzu has said that when speaking about : "Names, there is the NamAble (MgptMg) and its
Opposite, the NamEd (FyCnMg)." So in the next sentence at Ching 1.2,1 "Wu Ming" is the subject, "is" is the connective and "Heaven and Eart'S Conception" is the predicate. There is very little Chinese syntax in the Tao Te Ching but there is lots we can learn about syntax from Lao Tzu. The prefix in Chinese is usually the suffix in English. What does "Without Name (WUMg)" mean in English? ...
The "NamAble", or "IdentifyAble". So what, then does "With Name (YUMg)" mean? ...
The "NamEd" or "IdentifiEd". At Ching 1.1,2 Lao Tzu has substituted Ming(Mg) for Tao(A1). Which word must be substituted for the Tao at Ching 1.2,1? ...
"Conception(B1)". As in English, a conception on the physical (D) level is analogous to a conception on the intellectual (B) level. In the Ching, "Heaven(Tn)" is at level B and "Earth(TI)" is at level D. This is Lao Tzu's subtle way of using the Law of Correspondence: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. So, after having ConceivEd All Things (YUMgWnwU) Their Mother ( ZMU)" gives birth to them.
. Lao Tzu is describing "Eternal(Cn)" laws of nature, which are as true today as they were 2500 years ago. This is why the semantic (B) dimension of semiotics seems to be more important than the syntactic (C) dimension. But once you start working on the Ching, you know that they are equally important. And once you know that much you also know that the pragmatic dimension is as important as the other two. What good is your knowledge, if you don't use it? ...
What good is my knowledge (B) if no communicator (C) is using it? …
As we say in English: The proof of the pudding is in the eating. The proof of A’s vision is in B’s thought, the proof of B’s thought is in C’s word and the proof of C’s word is in D’s deed.
=========================================================
Jan. 13, 2009
. In yesterdays Jan. 12 section, I said that I will work on pages 21 and 44. I will quote them first and then work on them, starting with the easiest statements first.
APPLYING SEMIOLOGY
The wooly distinction of needs and consumers was refined when Baudrillard introduced his structural logic of consumption, where he suggested that the consumer was an EFFECT of the way that consumer goods circulate as meanings -- forget the consumer.
"I can use a basic SEMIOLOGY to extend my argument."
"It is possible to conceive of a science which studies the role of signs as part of social life.
We shall call it SEMIOLOGY." Ferdinand de Saussure (1857 - 1913).
Semiology reconstructs the system of conventions and distributions that enable a group of objects to have particular meanings for social members -- as SIGNS.
Page 44:
IS THE "SUN" REAL?
"The signifier (sound - image 'sun') refers to a signified (the concept - meaning, 'sun') and together they make up a REFERENT---THE SUN." Ferdinand de Saussure.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SIGN
"NO! REALITY IS GOVERNED BY THE SIGN --- projected by it. The 'referent' is the reflection of the sign.”
The "Sun" as signifier (image or word) restricts and induces its signified (concept) and becomes a sign. The real sun (referent) is an EFFECT of this logic.
But where is the "sign - crime" here?
. I shall ignore that last line.
. The image (D), or word (C), induces its concept (B).
. We have the D-C-B triad here.
. Let us identify the higher Semiotic dimension as the positive (+) pole and the lower dimension as the negative (-) one. So D-C-B is the -=+ triad. This is Bennett's Law of Identity.
. "We can start by expanding the symbol 2-3-1 [-=+] to read 'The Receptice Impulse meets with the Reconciling Impulse and is linked thereby to an Affirmation that issues as manifestation.' The receptive impulse cannot realize itself except through the medium of an affirmation; but it cannot blend with it without the help of a reconciling force. Where there is no immediate contact between the affirming and the receptive impulses---as there is in the triads 1-2-3 and 2-1-3 [+-= and -+=] --- the affirmation does not ACT UPON or change the receptive element, but rather enables it TO BE WHAT IT IS." The description of this triad is from page 113 to 116 of THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE Volume two.
. If we invoke the Law of Correspondence, we can say that D is to C as C is to B. This is an Aristotelian Syllogism. In relation to B, C is the negative pole; in relation to D, it is the positive pole. The reconciling impulse is the "Monad($1)” in the "TriAd( 3ad)". It is, thus, both positive and negative. But within the triad it is an equal component with the other two. The three components of the triad are called impulses. Within the triad each impulse is an equal part. This is why within the triad, the monad does no longer contain the poles, but it is somehow a bit of both the positive and negative pole. These two form the dyad in the triad, whether they are in front, in the back or whether the monad is between them. The three impulses of the triad are like the links of a chain, break one and you break the chain.
Let us continue with page 44: The concept "becomes a sign. The real sun (referent) is an effect of this" threefold dynamic. In this triad, the sign (C) is the outcome of this D-B-C, or -+=, triad. This is Bennett's Law of Concentration:
. "Triads initiated in the passive or receptive impulse may, at first, appear to us strange and unnatural. They appear to go 'against time', in the sense that their direction is not towards actualization but from actual to potential [from "Taoed to TaoAble (A1ptA1)"]. If we were to interpret the symbol 2-1-3 [-+=] in ordinary language, we should say: 'Receptivity, meeting Affirmation and blending with it, issues as a Reconciling impulse'. ..." Page 109. The description of this triad goes on for another four pages. To see that systematics is related to semiotics Google: systematics semiotics J G Bennett
. Any connection of what we got here and what I have said in the Jan. 1 2009 to the Jan 5 sections is, of course, purely accidental.
. Returning to page 44:
"The signifier" is the subject and the "signified" is the object. Subject- object is the dyad in this triad. What is the monad? ...
Ferdinand tells us: ...
" .... and together they make up a REFERENT ...." (C). Which triad is he talking about? ...
The sound - image (D), "sun", refers to the concept (B), sun and together they make up the REFERENT (C), SUN. So we got the D-B-C, or -+=, triad again. But why does Baudrillard say: "No!" Your D-B-C triad is wrong and my D-B-C triad is right? ...
. You figure it out. ...
========================================================
Jan. 12, 2009
. A fellow member of our Saturday discussion group brought in: BAUDRILLARD for Beginners by Chris Horrocks and Zoran Jevtic. He gave it to the member who happened to sit next to me. I pointed out the word "Semiotics" to him and he gave the book to me. Everybody in the group knows that I am working on that. So the member who brought the book told me that I can keep it.
. For me, the message is clear: I am supposed to work on that book. Problem is, it is above my head. After leaving through it, I was wondering what a a book on Baudrillard for the average reader would be like?
. On the back-cover it says that this book "cuts beneath the controversy of this misunderstood intellectual to present his radical claims that reality has been replaced by a simulated world of images and events ranging from YV news to Disneyland."
. Near the end of the book, on page 170, we read: ".... This is the last phase of colonialism, the NEW SENTIMENTAL ORDER." From the context we learn that this is also a Subliminal Order. In Fact, it seems to be the NEW WORLD ORDER Mr. Bush is talking about. So from this alone, we can see that Baudrillard is onto something big.
. How do you prevent this truth from getting out? ...
"Ridicule(*a41)". In the context of Ching 41.1 it means more than just that. It means anything that will prevent the truth from getting out, even Baudrillard's own ideas can be used. This is why he, like David Icke, can be called an agent of the enemy.
. Baudrillard is easy to ridicule, because he has made mistakes. Horrocks himself has drawn attention to some problems with some of the "radical claims". A constructive Way of criticizing a theory is to test it to see if it works. But putting ideas (B) to the test (D) is often easier said than done. A cheaper way of showing that an error has been made is by logically proving it.
. The error I found in Baudrillard's theory is called Tamas in Sanskrit. It is described at Gita 18.22. It is mistaking the part for the whole. Semiotics is the whole of which Semantics (B), Syntactics (C) and Pragmatics (D) are the parts. Baudrillard is quoted on page 21 as saying: "I can use a basic SEMIOLOGY to extend my argument." ...
The question is: ...
Which one of the three dimensions of semiotics has he extended? ...
. For me, the way to go from here is to get SEMIOTICS for beginners. The book is out of print, so it is harder to get but I keep on looking. In the mean time, there is still a lot to be learned from Baudrillard. But in order not to become confused, intimidated and put into the victim state of consciousness we must follow Lao Tzu's advise: Don't bite off more than you can chew! When you don't understand something, "Know that you Don't Understand (knPUkn) it. that is Healthy ( +)". Fretting about not knowing something, or pretending that when you "Don't Know that you Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)".
. If you have tried to answer the above question and you couldn't come up with an answer, that is the first step towards getting it, because now you: ...
"Know that you Don't Know" the answer. This will prepare you for the answer I have come up with. But I will not tempt you with it now. If you can just read my answer all you can do is believe (C) or not believe it. You will only know (B) it if you do the thinking (B) yourself.
. If you have the book, here is a hint: I will work on page 21 and 44. ...
=========================================================
Jan. 5, 2009
In the Tao Te Ching, the semantic dimension (B) of semiotics seems to overrule the syntactic dimension (C), But, if you think (B) about it: …
Without Language (C), we wouldn’t even have the book (D) in our hands. This is where the pragmatic dimension (D) comes in.
. Here is the thought, which came to me this morning as a result of reading what I have written on Jan 3:
. The equivalent of the Chang Ming, at 1.1,2, is neither “NamEr” nor “NamEd”, but semantics (B) demands both. Why? …
If you translate the subject of 1.1,2 as:”Named and NamAble (MgptMg)” object, then its “Opposite is the NamIng (FyCnMg)” subject.
. Why do the same two characters also have to mean “NamEd”? …
If you translate, Ming K’o Ming, as: “Name the NamAble!”, then, if the instruction is executed, then the “NamAble is turned into its Opposite, the …
NamEd (ptMgFyCnMg). This is HOW, or the Way, Lao Tzu is forcing, his students, and translators to go beyond the syntactic dimension. The dynamics of the “TriAd( 3ad)” works both deductively (down, or outward) and inductively (up, or inward).
. In the flyer, I said that B becomes C and C becomes D. That was only half the truth. As B is to C, so C is to D. The “Reverse” of this is: As …
D is to C, so C is to B. In both triads, +=- and -=+, the connective (=) is in the middle.
======================================================
Jan. 3, 2009
. The sentence I started to work on is on page 46 of the original German text and it starts at the bottom of page 49 in Lindeman's translation. Before we start on it here, let me fill in a few details which I didn't manage to squeeze onto that one-page flyer I have quoted in the Jan. 1 section. There I have said that "Bennett has identified the poles of the polarity as the Affirming (+) and the Denying (-) impulses". That is true, but it is not the whole truth. The "Negative ( -)" pole of the polarity is also called the "receptive" (-) impulse in systematics, and that is not the opposite of "affirming".
. I further said that "'equals' (=) is what Norm Chomsky calls the connective". But the connective can also mean: "Does-not-equal (Fy)". Fei(Fy) is an emphatic "NO", in the sense of: "On-the-contrary". Ideally subject and predicate are clearly recognizable opposites and the connective clearly states that they are. Ching 1.1,1 is a good example of this: "The changeable object is the opposite of the unchangeable subject (A1ptA1FyCnA1)”. In terms of syntax, this translation is not accurate enough; in terms of semantics, this is what the first six characters mean. In the next sentence we get: "Named and namable is not the namer (MgptMgFyCnMg)". The same six characters can mean many things, like: "Name the NamAble (MgptMg) to get its Opposite (Fy), the NamEd (CnMg)". The "Potential(pt)" is the "Opposite(Fy)" of the actual.When you look at different translations of the Ching, it is often hard to believe that the translators have translated the same characters, yet if what the translators say is true, then they may all be right. The good thing that comes out of this is that different translations of the same characters make you think.
. From the syntactic point of view a translation may be wrong and yet from the semantic point of view it is right. The bottom line of all of this is the pragmatic dimension. How useful is a given translation? In terms of semiotics, three demands have to be satisfied: What is said (C) has to be useful (D), kind (A) and true (B). Raja yoga (C) is also called integral yoga. In the Gita, Arjuna is taught first karma yoga (D), then bhakti yoga (A) and then jnana yoga (B). Semiotics has to do with communication (C), so it is analogous to raja yoga (C). I know what the response to these "Ridiculous(*a41)" ideas is supposed to be. All I can hope for is that one writer (C) can understand this and is able to elicit a politically correct response from his readers.
. In "Taoed and TaoAble (A1ptA1) object is the Opposite (Fy) of the Taoing Subject (CnA1).", Fei(Fy) is the connective in this sentence. The subject and the connective satisfy the demands of both the syntactic and the semantic dimensions, but. "Taoing Subject" is not the equivalent of Ch'ang Tao. But the Tao(A1) means anything the context demands.
. We are getting into nitty gritty stuff here, which I have dealt with earlier in this blog. The reason I have burdened you with this stuff again is because I believe that Lao Tzu can shed light on semiotics. From the example, we got at Ching 1.1,1, we can see that object and subject, or potential and actual, are opposites and the connective tells us that they are. How can a writer make it any clearer?
. And this brings us to the example from Ching 2.2,4, which I have given near the end of the flyer. At Ching 2.2, Lao Tzu gives us six (DyAds(dyad) which are reconciled by the reconciling impulse at the end of the sentence. The six examples either have the form +-= or -+=. As far as I can see, most, or all, of them have the +-= format. The six dyads are: "Existence-Nonexistence (YUWU) .... Difficult-Easy (dfez) .... Long Short (lg*a) .... High and its Negative-opposite (#2 -) .... Melody-Rhythm (#a#b) .... Before-After (#c60)".
. According to Steiner: Two is the number of revelation. This can be seen nicely at Ching 2.2,4: All Lao Tzu had to say is "High(#2)" and all the translators I have read knew that its "Negative-opposite( -)" is "low".
The sentence we are going to work on is interesting because from the semantic point of view Lindeman's translation is correct, it is WHAT Steiner must have meant, but from the point of view of the syntactic dimension it is incorrect because it is not HOW he has said it.
. Steiner has done something here, which Lao Tzu does more frequently: He has implied something which his students have to infer. By not spelling things out he has given his students some work to do. Lindeman has done this work for us. This means that Lindeman has benefitted from the work while his readers can't benefit from doing that work because it is already done. If you like doing crossword puzzles, how would you like it if somebody does the work for you before you have had a chance to do it? ...
. Steiner has told his translators: Don't charter to the laziness of the reader! Gurdjieff has told them: Burry the dog deeper! Jesus said: Don't cast your pearls before the swine! And Lao Tzu says: The "Wise Man (wsmn) Wears Coarse clothes and beneath it, close to his Bosom, he hides his Pearls (@o*a*b#v)". *a = Ho145. *b = Huai61.
. All good teachers know that: Reading doesn't make perfect, practice does.
. Blind "Repetition(@1)" leads to blind belief (C), not to knowledge (B). The social engineers know this bit of psychology, and so must we. Google: Protocols of Zion if you repeat a lie
Now we come to the sentence that got me started on all of this. Let us start with Lindeman's translation: "I must never say that my individual subject thinks; it is much more the case that my subject lives by the grace of thinking."
. In systematics, "identifying the monad" means, in our case, which phrase of this sentence is which impulse of the triad. ...
First we must know what the phrases are. Please try: ...
The semicolon is in Steiner's original. Let us change the punctuation a bit. ...
I must never say that my individual subject thinks, it is much more the case that, my subject lives by the grace of thinking."
. Now let us look at the German original: "Ich darf niemals sagen, dass mein individuelles Subject denkt; dieses lebt vielmehr selbst von des Denkens Gnaden (I must never say, that my individual subject thinks; it rather lives itself by the grace of thinking.)."
. Try to interpret this in light of what we have covered so far. ...
If this is above your head, please don't let it discourage you. This is as far as I can take it myself right now, so it will not get more complicated than this for a while. In fact, as you understand this better, it will become easier. That is why it is so hard for me to see how this obvious stuff can be so hard for people. What it takes is a communicator (C) who has to struggle as hard with these ideas as his readers have to. And please remember, I am not a communicator. I am not explaining things as well as they can be explained by a communicator but I am doing my best.
. We can concentrate now on each of the three phrases individually: ...
Take the predicate. ...
"my subject lives by the grace of thinking." My individual subject, lives by the grace of universal or collective thought and belief. ...
Our personal thought is the opposite of the impersonal collective thought. …
The three dots mean here, that this is still only a theory (B). It still has to be verified or contradicted.
. What does the subject of the sentence tell us? ...
This is a tough or interesting one, depending on how you look at it. …
=========================================================
Jan. 1, 2009
. After I finished the Dec. 26 section, I started to work on: "I must never say that my individual subject thinks; it is much more the case that my subject itself lives by the grace of thinking." This sentence lead me into syntax, which led me to systematics, which led me to semiotics.
. What I remember of it is from an older text in which it was still clear that: Semiotics is the B-C-D triad. This is something analogous to the original IBM programming system in which it was still clear that it was based on the A-B-C-D, or Aristotelian, tetrad.
. Sections Dec. 22 to Dec. 28 contain information, which the right writer (C) could turn into a book, but I shouldn't confuse him with an overload of detail. So I decided not to put anything in front of the Dec. 28 section for the rest of the year. Instead, I started to work on a flyer about SEMIOTICS. If you can understand semiotics as one whole, then you can fit in the parts that fit, and see the ones that don't fit for what they are. In other words, you don't have to allow that overload of information to confuse and intimidate you.
. Below is a corrected and slightly updated version of the flyer.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .SEMIOTICS
If you Google, semiotics, you get an overwhelming amount of complex and contradictory information. Some authors very nicely apologize for it, but they might as well have said:
Forget it, semiotics is not for you, it's too difficult.
What is not made clear is that semiotics is a triad. It is the whole of which the three dimensions of semiotics are the parts. Systematics is one of the many approaches to semiotics. Whether it should be mentioned is for you to decide. Hence this flyer.
If you have learned a bit about the triad from Plato, the Hindus, Lao Tzu, Rudolf Steiner, J.G. Bennett or other teachers, you are likely to wonder why it isn't mentioned.
Even though I have studied under Bennett, most of what know about the "TriAd( 3ad)" and the "DyAd(dyad)" comes from Lao Tzu. A triad is a dyad and a "Monad($1)". Bennett has identifyed the poles of the polarity as the Affirming (+) and Denying (-) impulses and the monad as the Reconciling (=) "impulse". He has called the parts of the triad, "impulses". The three impulses can combine in six different ways: They are: =+-, =-+. +=-, -=+. +-= and -+=.
These are the basics, and as you begin to understand them, you might wonder why they are not mentioned. Semiotics is about communication (C). In language (C) the three impulses are subject, connective and predicate. In this sequence the connective(=) is in the middle, as in "Cows eat Grass." When the verb(=) is in front, as in "Eat your supper!", we have an imperative sentence. They lead us down to the pragmatic dimension (D) because an instruction which can't be executed is meaningless. You also have to "Add one to two!" in order to verify that "One plus two equals three.". Here "One plus two" is the subject, "equals" (=) is what Noam Chomsky calls, the connective and "three" is the predicate. According to WEBSTER'S, "Predicate" means: ".... to affirm .... a statement made about the subject of the sentence".
The fact that the predicate is an affirmation tells us that it is the affirming impulse (+) of the triad. This information helps us to identify a sentence as the -=+ triad. When talking about the structure of sentences, we are dealing with the syntactic dimension (C) of semiotics. Syntax is about HOW something is said. The semantic dimension (B) is about WHAT is said. And these two dimensions are meaningless without the Pragmatic dimension (D)
Semiotics is a triad, no more no less. A triad is a whole that is greater than the sum of its parts. The parts are like the links of a chain, break one and you break the chain. Take away one impulse, and you no longer have a triad. Add awareness (A) to thought, word and deed (B, C and D, on Plato’s “Divided Line (509d)”) and you no longer have the triad, but the A-B-C-D tetrad.
At Ching 2.2,4 (Chapter 2. paragraph 2, sentence 4) Lao Tzu says:
"High and its Negative-opposite Mutually necessitate Altitude (#2 -mt*c)". *c = Ch'ing9.
Usually Hsia( -) is translated as "low". From the standpoint of the semantic dimension, this is correct. It is WHAT Lao Tzu has meant, but it is not HOW he has said it.
With practice, you will learn that, the syntactic dimension is as important as the semantic dimension. And, in time, you will also realize that, the dynamics of this triad is for thought (B) to become word (C) and for word to become deed (D). After you understand the system as a whole, you can fill in the details, not before. See file #5 of PetersTao.blogspot.com
=============================================================
Dec. 28. 2008
. At the end of the Dec. 23 section I have asked you a question:
"What power does the collective thought of humanity have? ..." ...
This question is important. If you try to answer it, then you are preparing yourself for the answer we can get from Steiner, below.
. What I like to add. here, is that belief (C) is more concrete, and thus more powerful, than thought (B). What does that tell us? ...
That the belief of one dumbed down "lackey" is more powerful than the thoughts of two or three intelligent people. If you got that answer yourself, you are an aware (A) and intelligent (B) person. You might have Googled: Protocols of Zion lackey .
Dec. 26, 2008
. There is another bit of information we get from Steiner, which sheds light on other seemingly unrelated things.
. Steiner talks about group-souls: Mice, rats, cats, dogs, horses, ducks, sparrows, bees, roaches and bedbugs, all have a group-soul. According to Steiner, these different group-souls are on the level of a human being. You can talk to some of them.
. The bedbug group-soul would be a rather nasty fellow. He would be like a bloodsucking vampire. And he is very smart. He can use animal blood, and their bodies to incubate the eggs, but he prefers human blood.
. Toronto is infested with bedbugs. Because I was driven out of my house, I now live in a bedbug infested senior apartment building. These bugs crawl all over your body sucking your blood and laying their eggs in your pores. There you incubate them and they hatch fully grown, ready to mate and to lay thousands of eggs again. My bed sheets are bloody all over. We squash a few of them when we turn over in our sleep.
. After I was told about the bugs, a fellow tenant told me that she needed a blood transfusion. If you see blood on your underwear you might have accidentally squashed one of those bugs.
. I take hot baths with three bottles of Hydrogen Peroxide, 3%, in it. The bugs don't seem to like that. The tiny black grains we can see are the eggs which have come out. But one day, there was a fully grown bedbug on my skin in the bathtub. Pop, there it was. The interesting thing was that a thought came into my mind which tried to convince me that it fell on me from above or jumped on me from the edge of the bathtub. The thought was so insistent that I decided to tell you about it. Maybe you know what to make of it. To say any more is not advisable because it can be called a "Ridiculous(*a41)" conspiracy theory. Even describing what I have experienced, which includes the distinct thought, can be counterproductive because even that can be "Ridiculed". But, if "Ridicule" is used blatantly "Enough(Zu)" then, you can ask "Why(86)"?
. You might now be ready to apply the Law of Correspondence to this. ...
What is called the collective unconscious, the Akashic Field or the Morpho-genetic Field contains the record of all the thoughts (B) or beliefs (C) humans have had in the past and have right now. It is the duty of those who are conscious (A) "Enough(Zu)" to see to it that in future more of the truth goes on record.
. For this to happen, it is not "Enough" for the "KnowErs(kner)" (B) to seek and find the truth; it is equally important that the "WordErs(C2er)" (C) communicate it.
. Why are the thinkers (B) and the communicators (C) equally important? ...
Awareness (A), thought (B), word (C) and deed (D) are the "sources", or components of the tetrad. They are like the links of a chain. Break one and you break the chain. The few thinkers who may know the truth have a relatively small effect on the content of the collective human thought Field.
. Our political masters know that a dozen dumbed down zombies have a greater effect on the Field than two or three hard working thinkers have on it. Only what the people know and believe collectively has a significant enough effect on the content of the Field. And that content, in turn, has its effect on what we can think and believe.
. The Law of Attraction is at work here. S/he who has shall have more. Right now, in 2008, our political masters are still in control of the Field. It is high time that we begin to think and talk about the truth, rather than belief their "official version” of it. Unless the truth is known collectively, it has little effect on the content of the field.
. Some very good communicators have started the process with 9/11. It seems to me that with 9/11 our political masters have bitten of more than their well trained social engineers can chew. This is why 9/11 is a good place to start with. Every time a reasonably intelligent person watches one of those excellent documentaries truth is added to the Field. And then, the next time a more dumbed down citizen watches it, s/he will get it too. And this time the Law of Attraction is working for us, for a change. The more truth is recorded in the Field, the easier it becomes to get it out from there.
. As I already said: It is well to start with 9/11 because once we see the Law of Attraction help us with this “trick (The Republic at 548a)” we know that it will help us with other less obvious tricks as well. S/he who has shall have more. Why should our political masters have all that luck?
. Our thoughts and beliefs are recorded in the Akashic record. This is why WHAT you think is so important. This is also why it is so important to our political masters that the majority of dumbed down and non-thinking citizens believes their "official version" of the truth.
. The social engineers can change our perception of the truth, but, try as they may, they can't change the truth. The truth is what it was, is and will be. In the end, the truth always wins. There is nothing hid that shall not be revealed (in 2009?).
.Happy New Year. .
==========================================================
December 23, 2008
. Whenever you are pulling a quote out of its context, you are losing something but see for yourself. The following quotes are from chapter four of Steiner's PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM. I am using Lindeman's translation.
. "Through thinking, CONCEPTS and IDEAS arise. .... When someone sees a tree, his thinking reacts to his observation; to the object there comes then an ideal counterpart [ein ideelles Gegenstück], and he regards the object and ideal counterpart as belonging together. When the object disappears from the field of observation, there remains behind only its ideal counterpart. The latter is the concept of the object. .... I must particularly emphasize that heed be taken at this point of the fact that I have indicated THINKING as my starting point and not CONCEPTS and IDEAS, which are first gained through thinking. These already presuppose thinking. What I have said therefore about the self-sustaining and self-determined nature of thinking cannot simply be transferred to concepts. (I state this here expressly, because herein lies my difference with Hegel. He posits the concept as primary and original.)"
, Here arises the question: Where does vision (A) end and philosophy (B) begin? ...
Steiner was already familiar with Hegel's philosophy before he had his vision and it has made him aware (A) of the shortcomings in Hegel's thoughts. Whether you start out with a vision or with a philosophy, either way, you have to take the good with the bad.
. "The concept cannot be gained from observation [alone] .... concepts are added to the observation. .... Human consciousness is the stage upon which concept and observation meet each other and where they become joined. But this (human) consciousness is thereby characterized at the same time. It is the mediator between thinking and observation."
. Here systematicists could clarify what has been said. The experts might have to correct what I will say about it: "the mediator" is obviously the connective (=) between thought (B) and observation (D). In Hinduism, the Indriyas (our senses) are part of our body (D). So we have the D-A-B triad. First comes the perceivable, then comes the perceiving (=) and then comes the perceived with its concept (B) attached to it. Whether this is the +=- or the -=+ triad is for the experts to tell us.
. "Insofar as the human being observes a thing, this thing appears to him as given; insofar as he thinks, he appears to himself as active. He considers the thing as OBJECT, himself as the thinking SUBJECT. .... But the fact must not be overlooked now that it is only with the help of thinking that we are able to designate ourselves as subject and to set ourselves over against objects. Therefore thinking must never be considered to be a merely subjective activity. Thinking is BEYOND subject and object. ...."
. Compare this with what Laszlo has said about "information" on page 13, and you can see that Steiner was way ahead of his time. But this information was, and is, accessible to anyone who can read the Akashic records. Certainly Lao Tzu must have dipped into it.
"It is not the subject that brings about the relationship, but rather thinking. The subject does not think by virtue of being subject, but rather appears to itself as a subject because it is able to think. The activity which the human being, as THINKING entity, exercises is therefore no merely subjective one, but rather one that is neither subjective nor objective, one that goes beyond these two concepts. I must never say that my individual subject thinks; it is much more the case that my subject itself lives by the grace of thinking. Thinking is an element that leads me out of and above my self, and joins me with objects. But it separates me from them at the same time, inasmuch as it places me over against them as subject."
. And that brings us to the "5th Sphere, Janaloka. …. wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates. (Sutra 13)"
" .... The matter would present itself in an essentially different way, however, if we were able to say what the function of our perceiving is in the genesis of a perception. We would then know what is happening with the perception during the act of perceiving. and could also determine what about it would already have to exist, before it is perceived."
. We are dealing here with the question cutting edge scientists are wrestling with. Steiner is not easy to translate, because even the German original is not always easy to read. Lindeman has done an excellent job. What is "the function of our perceiving (die Function unseres Wahrnemens) in the genesis of a perception (beim Zustandekommen einer Wahrnemung)"? ...
"the act of perceiving (des Wahrnemens)", is the verb, the connective (=), while "the perception (die Wharnemung)" is the noun. It can be either the affirming (+) or the receptive (-) impulse of the triad. If this were not important, then Lao Tzu would not have addressed this problem right at the beginning of his Tao Te Ching:
. "Taoed and TaoAble (A1ptA1) object is the
Opposite (Fy) of the
Constant Tao (CnA1)". Steiner said that the subject is the constant, "das Bleibende" in this "DyAd(dyad)". The object changes from "Potential(pt)" to actual; the "TaoEr(CnA1)" does the changing but does not change itself as a result of the process.
. The six Chinese characters are there. Here we know what exists "before it is perceived". WHAT you perceive depends on HOW you read it.
. We are dealing here with percepts (D) and "Concepts(B2)". "Without Name is Heaven and Earth'S Conception (WUMgTnTI ZB2)." In this "TriAd( 3ad)" first comes the conceivable, then the conceiving (=) and then the conceived, or the concept.
. Systematics can be used to bring clarity into our thoughts. Essentially, it is like a big general purpose thinking tool. When Steiner talks about "the percept (die Wahnemung)", we have first the perceivable, then comes the perceiving (=) and then comes the perceived, or the percept. When the reconciling impulse (=) is in the middle, I follow Noam Chomssky and call it the connective.
. Let me stick my neck out a bit and have the experts correct me, if necessary, that way we might get the ball rolling: The perceivable or the perceived object is on level D of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" The concept (B) we make ourselves about it (right or wrong) is on level B. But on which level is the thinking by means of which we produce the concept(B)? So far I have always associated thinking (B) with level B. But I can be wrong. ...
Maybe the thinking we do is different from the THOUGHT by the grace of which we think. If the means by which we think is the collective unconscious then it is our duty to make sure that the truth will ultimately win.
. What we know (B) or believe (C) is different from Ervin Laszlo's "information". His information is the connective (=) between energy and matter. It is an impulse in the energy-connective-matter triad. It either is the +=- triad, the -=+ triad or both.
. Our individual thoughts (B) and expectations (C) only have that power on the quantum level. The question arises now: ...
What power does the collective thought of humanity have? ...
And HOW do our political masters control that thought? ...
Is it analogous to controlling the economy? ...
You can find some answers to these “Ridiculous(*a41)” questions in the Protocols of Zion.
=============================================================
December 22, 2008
. Page 216 of INNER WORK:
. . . . . . . . . . . "EXPERIENCING THE SPIRITUAL DIMENSION
The third level of Active Imagination is very similar to what people have called visions. ...."
. Plato was a writer (C) who has had visions (A).
. Arjuna in the Bhagavad Gita was a Kshatriya (C). The vision he has had is described in chapter 11 of the Gita.
. Rudolf steiner is quoted in front of the original German text of his PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM: "It joined itself together for me back then (1888), the true cognition of the appearance of the spiritual (des Geistigen) in art ...."
. If he had said: I have joined together: Art, the appearance of the spiritual "and the moral will in man (und das sttliche Wollem im Menschen)" into one whole, then he wouldn't have described a vision (A) but a thought (B).
. This statement is more meaningful to me now, after reading INNER WORK, because for Jung, the moral will of man, has special significance.
. Steiner said that Plato was no philosopher (B). I agree. He said that Plato was a visionary (A). I disagree. Visionaries write in poetry (A) while writers write in prose (C).
. Plato's student, Aristotle, was a philosopher. He could see his teacher's mistakes. But he has wrapped Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" around the cross without giving credit for it to his teacher. Without using the visions of others, philosophers have nothing but their own knowledge base to work with. A computer, using the same knowledge base could do the same work and do it faster and more accurately.
. My teacher, J. G. Bennett was a "writer" (C). He told us so. He has had his vision in a graveyard in Turkey . It must have been after he has met Gurdjieff. Gurdjieff has rejected Mr.B's DRAMATIC UNIVERSE. I think that this was a mistake. I now see a parallel between: Instructors at Sherborne House telling me that systematics doesn't work and fellow members (infiltrators) of The Ontario Green Party trying to convince everybody that the consensus decision making process doesn't work. In spite of their blatant efforts to sabotage it, it did work.
. Eckhart Tolle is an excellent writer (C) and he had his visions to describe. But please see my commentaries on his: A NEW EARTH.
. In Steiner's Threefold Social Order, the economic sphere (D) and the political sphere (C) have been described well, but levels A and B are mixed up. Still, that is two down two to go.
. If a theory works then it is true.
. If a theory is true, then it will work.
. When it comes to “visions”, we have to take the good with the bad.
There is a lot of good information in chapter four of Steiner’s PHILOSOPHY OF FREEDOM but I will save that for the next section.
. Plato's timocracy (B) is based on the B-C-D triad. Our political masters know how to use it. If we learn it from them, that would be three down one to go.
. As I talk to people, I am amazed how well informed they are in spite of the manipulations of the mass media and our lying politicians. They are ready to work for democracy if they are shown how it can be established. Establishing democracy is like a big construction project. The sub-contractors (D) know HOW to do their job but without a contractor (C) telling them where and when to do it they can't do their work. They are like a computer (D) without a program (C). It doesn't matter if the customer (A) is able to pay for the job, or if the blueprint (B) is done, without the contractor the building can't be constructed.
. The fourfold system is like a chain; break one link and you break the chain. Our political masters only have to break one link to have it their way.
=========================================================
December 19, 2008
THE SECRET SOURCE and Science and the Akashic Field are related. The following quote, starting on page 185 of INNER WORK by the Jungian psychologist Robert A. Johnson, will shed light on THE SECRET, which in turn will shed light on cutting edge science.
".... there are now so many systems around that can be confused with Active Imagination but are completely different from it. The main difference is that they work with a prepared script; everything is determined in advance.
. "These systems are sometimes called 'guided imagery," "creative imagery," or by something else. What they all have in common is that everything is PREDETERMINED. You decide in advance what is going to happen in the imagination. The ego decides what it is trying to get out of the unconscious and prepares a script. The idea is to 'program' the unconscious so that it will do what the ego wants it to do.
. "In one system, the whole avowed purpose of using the imagery is to GET WHAT YOU WANT. You close your eyes and visualize the new car or the new job or the house in the country that you want, and you use the power of visualization to get these things. ....
. "The problem with these approaches to imagery is that it is the ego that does all the deciding. The unconscious is seen as a sort of stupid animal that has no viewpoint of its own, no wisdom to contribute. The whole point of the exchange is to train the unconscious to do what the ego wants. The ego's decisions may seem to be good ones; the problem is that the unconscious is not consulted in making them.
. "Active Imagination starts out from a completely different idea about the unconscious. We affirm that the unconscious has its own wisdom, its own viewpoints, and that they are often as balanced, as realistic, as those of the ego-mind. The purpose of Active Imagination is not to 'program' the unconscious but to LISTEN, the unconscious, in turn, will listen to you."
People who have written books like: Talking with God have listened to their unconscious. Our individual unconscious is connected to Yung's collective unconscious. So, a lot of wisdom can come to us through our unconscious, or soul (A)? Also a lot of unusual things can be affected in the outer world through the proper, or improper, use of the collective unconscious.
. Yung's "collective unconscious" would be Ervin Laszlo's "Akashic Field" or Rupert Sheldrake's "Morphogenetic Field". As long as we assume that there are three different fields, we don't have three different authors shed light on the same field.
==========================================================
Dec. 15, 2008.
. Here at this senior apartment building,
914 - 20 West Lodge Ave. Toronto, ON M6K 2T4
we have a library. The only book down my alley is INNER WORK by Robert A, Johnson. Fascinating. You may have noticed the delay. There on page 172 the author quotes Jung: " .... there are things in the psyche which I do not produce themselves and have a their own life." Science and the Akashic Field and INNER WORK are related. It is also clear from the book that Jungian psychologists know that our "soul" (A) is the door between our worls and the infinite, which is within us. The Hindus call the Atman (A) the "Door, Dasamadwara". Too much to describe. Waiting for a communicator (C) to work with. Johnson is a Jungian psychologist. The introverted, cardinal and extroverted feeling (A) types have done their job. There is more than a mutable thinking (B) type can handle alone. The doers (D) need instructions from the leaders (C) but they seem to be put to sleep. Unless they wake up, the rest of us are just wasting our time. Put yourself into the shoes of our political masters: Isn’t that the way you like it? ...
============================================================================================================================
Dec. 7, 2008
. . . . . Science and the Akashic Field, page 12.
"A set of rules informing a set of elements, ....". In terms of computer programming, what are the "rules" and what are the "elements"? ...
In the instruction: A"1""2" (Add "1" to "2"), Add is the rule which "initiates a process" called addition. "1" and "2" are the elements. A "orders and organizes the elements, ....". It causes the "1" to be added to the "2" so now, what was a "2" has become a "3". This is still a far cry from creating "more and more complex structures and interrelations" but it is a good place to start.
. Lao Tzu said: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -), on earth.
Difficult Tasks Necessarily Arise From Easy (dfD2PI%ctoez) ones. By-analogy (Tn -):
Big Tasks Necessarily Arise From Small (TAD2PI%ctoäl)" ones.
. "When we try to create a genuine I-Toe, we can proceed in an analogous way. We can start with the basic kind of things, ....".
. Laszlo must have read the Tao Te Ching: "ThereFore (SiYI) the Wise Man (wsmn) Throughout-his-life (ng) does Not Handle the Big (PUdoTA) task (by himself). and
Thus (KU) he is
Able (to contribute his part towards) Accomplishing The Big (cm HTA)" task.
".... in an analogous way. We can start with the basic kind of things, the things that generate other things without being generated by them." ...
. This is a tough one to comment on, because there is more to it than meets the eye. ...
On the surface we can say that hardware instructions, which are build into the computer, are "the basic kind of things that" can't be "generated by" the software it supports. This may have been true of computers. But it is possible to build hardware into the computer, which can be programmed to work on the hardware. In fact, we, ...
with our physical bodies, are just that kind of hardware. I had trouble with something I read in THE SECRET SOURCE that somehow God is affected by our thoughts, decisions and actions (B-C-D). Now, using this analogy, things become a bit clearer. How do you like me thinking out aloud? ... To follow up on this, find the diagrams of the heptad in this blog and read my commentaries on it. No point repeating it here.
. I have already quoted the rest of the second paragraph of page 12 in the Nov. 30 section. We also have dealt with part of the third paragraph.
. Let me quote selectively from the third and fourth paragraphs: ".... Using the findings of cutting edge particle and field theories, we can identify the foundation that generates all things without itself being generated by other things. This foundation, .... , is the virtual energy sea known as the quantum vacuum. .... The currently known laws by which the existing things of the world are generated from the quantum vacuum are laws of interaction based on the transfer and transformation of energy. .... particle-antiparticle pairs -- are generated in and emerge out of the quantum vacuum."
. This is all above my head, so why did I quote it? ...
The "3rd Sphere" in Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE is called "the Great Vacuum." and the "2nd Sphere. .... is called Sunya, the Vacuum Ordinary." Maybe these vacuums have nothing to do with the “quantum vacuum”, but I just feel that it might be worth for the experts to look at this.
. Also, in systematics, the "laws of interaction" are based on the +=- triad; "Once again, we can expand the symbol 1-3-2 [+=-] to read: 'Affirmation reconciled with Receptivity issues as manifestation'. Here as in the Law of Identity, .... (THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE page 116)" +=- and -=+ have the connective (=) in the middle. Here is just a bit more from the same page: "The omnipotence of God consists in the omnipresence of the Reconciling Power, which enters every triad."
. In the =+- and the =-+ triads it is in front, in the +=- and -=+ triads it is in the middle, and in the +-= and -+= triads it is in the end.
. It is not for me to tell you that this stuff has something to do with the Akashic Field but it is for me to tell the experts out there that here is something interesting to look at.
. Ervin Laszlo has taken the first bold step towards the new paradigm. Now it becomes acceptable to follow his example. How are the social engineers going to prevent us from following Laszlo to the new paradigm? ...
By "Ridiculing(*a41)" the truth? ...
That is going to be counterproductive. Why? ...
If they do "Not Ridicule (PU*a) the truth, then we have
Not Enough Means To find out the Truth (PUZuYIdoA1)." So, by ridiculing those who, like Rupert Sheldrake, are leading us into the new direction, they are telling us that this is the right direction. Our political masters, here in Canada, have given David Icke a very hard time at the Toronto Airport. Which means that ...
he can't be all that bad. If you are into education, you will also find that some professors deliberately push the old paradigm. This can also tell us something about them.
. As far as the rest of the fourth paragraph goes, I could do no more than quote it, and I have better things to do. Like quoting 13.2 in full:
. "In order to account for the presence of a significant number of particles in the universe (of 'matter' as opposed to 'anti-matter'). and for the ongoing, if by no means smooth and linear, evolution of the existing things, we need to recognize the presence of a factor that is neither matter nor energy. The importance of this factor is now acknowledged not only in the human and the social sciences, but also in the physical and the life sciences, it is [...]
INFORMATION -- information as a real and effective factor setting the parameters of the universe at its birth, and thereafter governing the evolution of its basic elements into complex systems.
. “Most of us think of information as data or what a person knows.” Why? …
Because those who know what information is don’t want us to know it. Why? …
Because that knowledge is power.
. Laszlo’s realization of this is significant in more than one way: …
Politically (C), it means that the science of social engineering can no longer be as effective as it was up to now. There is a reason why the money-people (D) own the mass media and why the timocrats (B) are controlling our Educational System. It will now become easier for us to find out the reason.
. God’s omniscience has to do with the information in the Akashic Field. This is one impulse of a “TriAd( 3ad)”. The other is omnipotence. But where does omnipresence fit in? …
Hey, I have left you with another tough problem…
Hint: Look for the heptad.
==========================================================
Dec. 6 2008
. After I post a section I go back to my web-site and and get a printout of what is out there. This time I included a printout of the Nov. 28 and 25 sections along with the Nov. 30 section. And what did I get in the Nov. 25 section? The errors again. This is a problem I am not going to invest my time and energy on. I only know what I have to know to get my message out. To solve this problem is a job for a net-worker (C) and I am not. The time I invest in doing somebody else's dharma is time I don't invest in my own.
At the end of the Now 30 section, I left you with some work to do. ...
Now that you know a bit more about the tetrad by means of ...
The 4-fold original programming system, you can try to "Identify(Mg)" what Laszlo has said about it in the last 2 1/2 pages of Chapter one of his Science and the Akashic Field. The chapter is titled: The Challenge of an Integral Theory of Everything.
. In systematics, identifying which statement corresponds to a component of a system is called: Identifying the Monad. The system we are talking about here is the tetrad. In his translation of the Republic, Desmond Lee has labeled the four monads with letters A, B, C and D. He has done with Plato’s statements what I have asked you to do with the statements Laszlo has made in those 2 1/2 pages. As I said: "This is a tough assignment .... And don't worry about being right or wrong. The important thing, right now, is the exercise." ...
A "simpler, and more sensible" approach "TO A GENUINE TOE" is WHAT a customer (A), with the money to pay for it, would demand of a researcher, who knows HOW to develop such an approach. In the tetrad, the supply is produced by thought, word and deed (B, C and D).
. The "basic and relatively simple starting conditions" are stated in the "job-description" (A). In our computer programming example it was: ...
"Keep the computer busy for a while." The
"algorithms" are produced by the programmer (B). They
"govern their behavior." Whose "behavior"? ...
The coder's (C) “behavior”. A tells B WHAT to do and B knows HOW to do it, B tells C WHAT to do and C knows HOW to do it, and C tells D WHAT to do and D has been designed to do it. Notice the Law of Correspondence at work here. Fire (A), air (B), water (C) and earth (D) signs all have been designed by our creator to do a certain job. Not to do it, is to burry your talents. And that is causing all kinds of trouble.
. In the construction trade, we have the customer (A), the architect (B), the contractor (C) and the sub-contractors (D). Here again, the architect does the thinking, the contractor does the talking and the sub-contractors (D) do the physical (D) work.
. In systematics, the tetrad is also called the law of four. It is a law just as the seven hermetic laws are, which we get in THE SECRET SOURCE. These laws are universal and it is well to look for more examples of the tetrad. The better you know the tetrad, the better you can relate what Laszlo has said to one of the four sources of the tetrad.
. "A finite and surprisingly simple set of basic elements governed by a small set of algorithms can generate great and seemingly incomprehensible complexity merely by allowing the process to unfold in time." ...
The Add instruction is WHAT is build into the computer’s hardware. HOW addition and subtraction is done by the computer is "governed by .... algorithms". The algorithms, which govern the routines in the computer's hardware are the smallest sets "of algorithms” in computer programming. The IBM 1401 had no Multiply (X) and no divide (/ and %) routines. They had to be written in software. But a user of DAB wouldn't know whether a routine is in software or in hardware. You just type: X"08""2" , hit ENTER and you get: X"16""2". The computer does exactly WHAT you tell it to do: If you say: X"8""2" you get: X"6""2". You said: Multiply "8" by "2" ! Eight times two is "16". So if you didn't give the computer enough space to put the sum into, don't blame it for your mistakes.
. In the Forth computer language you start out with a "finite .... set" of instructions. You can use this set to write your own instructions, you give it a name and use it like the other instructions. Good idea. Maybe we can use it in DAB. The only limitation is the number of capital letters in our alphabet. In the original 1401 machine language, and in DAB, an op-code can only be one digit long. Any exception to that rule would cause more trouble than it is worth.
. The original Instruction set of DAB must be finite. No matter how much the chips change, DAB must not change. It must support the original programs which are written on it. But it must not support spyware and backdoor programs which get into DAB itself. This is a challenging task. The best we have to go by is the original IBM 1401 instruction set. The fact that the social engineers got rid of it means that they don't want us to know and use it. DAB must be so simple, transparent efficient and transportable that it will sell itself. Actually it should not be sold, it should be given away. Using the trial and error method of learning and with well designed error-messages, it should be possible to learn it in a matter of days. Then once you know it, you can specialize in the source you are most competent in. That is your dharma. In this way, THE DIVISION OF LABOR will come about naturally, all of its own. I believe that this is what our political masters are most afraid of: That we learn what they know all by ourselves. "Not Knowing what they Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)". Lao Tzu already said this 2500 Years ago. He also said that the rulers in an “Intelligent Man’S Government85) will
Always Cause the People to be Without Knowledge (Cn%eMnWUkn)”. And he said: Don't "Underestimate (the intellectual, political and economic powers of your) Enemy (Üfâb)". Isn’t it about time that we start to listen to him?…
. The developers of the IBM 1401computing system have used the Aristotelian tetrad. They have done the groundwork for us. Now we can take advantage of the greater computing power which comes with the computers we have today. But to do that requires team work. The team must have members of all four levels of society participate in this project. I am not a leader (C); as a thinker (B) I can only advise the communicators (C) on WHAT has to be done. They know HOW to get it done but do they give a damn? ...
Michael Moore said it: "We are communicators." But who are they working for? ...
Who is paying the piper?…
In Plato’s timocracy (B), things are not as simple as that. We are paying the politicians(C), but who are they working for?…
And who are their advisors (B) working for?…
. I have left you with another tough assignment. …
========================================================
Nov. 30, 2008
. Normally I only mark the text without including the big bold heading. On my Nov. 25 section, for some reason, I have included the bold "Dictionary" heading, and that has caused the problem I was addressing in my Nov. 28 section. If you don't include the bold headings in your printout, you don't have to worry about that. However correcting the AAx59 and the =x59"0"G59 , was important enough.
. The Nov. 25 section can be taken as a "job-description" of a customer (A) for a programmer (B) but this time the program is not to be written in Turbo BASIC but in the Intel and Motorola chip machine language. To do his job, the programmer must know what the chips can do. So programmer and coder (C) must work closely together on this job. Essentially, we have a main driver which tests for all kinds of subroutines or commands. DAB is just another subroutine. After exiting from a subroutine you end up in the manual mode, which is another subroutine, but there the computer waits for your command.
. Let me just give you a few more details of the DAB (Do A to B) language, which must be put directly on top of the chip hardware. It is to serve as a platform on top of all chips. A program written in DAB is transportable. It will work on an Intel Chip as well as on the Motorola chip. Only the speed may vary.
. You can write the one-line program, I have given in the Nov. 25 section with a regular word-processor, but you can't execute it from there. You have to program and code a special line-processor in which the ENTER and ESCAPE keys are "Commands". Commands are instructions you give to the computer through the keyboard or with special characters. The Greater-than and Less-than mathematical symbols are also conditional operands, like the equal sign (=) but I can't use them in blogspot.com because here these symbols are commands. And, unless you know what a command does, it is not safe to use it.
. Instead of the blank between instructions you can also put a period. This is a debugging tool. To start again, hit ENTER. You can also replace the period with a blank before you continue.
. I have already introduced one more op-code in the Nov.25 section. ...
Here are two more D = Decrement and B = Branch. The difference between a Go-sub instruction and a Branch instruction is that when you call for a Go-sub, the computer saves the next sequential address in a Return register. R is another Branch instruction Its B address is the saved next sequential address after the Go-sub instruction. Now, when you are in that subroutine and you have to go to other subroutines within that routine, you can't use the Go-sub op-code because it will save the next sequential address in the Return register. And when you call for a Return you don't get out of the subroutine. So you go round and round in that subroutine. Then you are "in a loop", as it is called. These are details I didn't have to figure out, they were already part of the original IBM machine language. These obvious features should also be part of the Intel and Motorola hardware. So programming DAB may be simpler than one, who doesn't know the intentionally complexified hard ware of the Intel chip, may expect.
. Op-codes, I, D, G, B and R don't need an A address. Why? ...
For I and D, the A address is always "1". And for G, B and R it is always the immediate address you are at. You are going from A to B. And A is were you are at. You could use a Brach instruction to return to the next sequential instruction. The Go-sub and Return instructions are only there to speed up the computer and to save you time. And they will only save you time if they don't get you confused.
. As you can see, most of DAB's instruction set comes from the original IBM 1401 instruction set, but because of the more powerful chips we have today improvements can be made. DAB is an emulator of the IBM 1401 machine language. What I have told you about it includes some of these improvements. But developing a universal computer language with a "finite" instruction "set" is not a one man job. I can't do it alone. This platform is to serve as the basis for all programs which are written in DAB. No matter how much the chips may change, the platform we put on top of them must not change. This is a tremendous challenge because the language must sell itself. It must also appeal to people who don't speak English. My own mother tongue is German and it would not appeal as well to a German as to a Canadian because M for Move, A for Add, or S for Subtract are not as obvious in other languages. Because these names for specific instructions are so obvious to us, the whole computer programming course could be taught in seven weeks. And we can still do things now, which computer scientists can't do after seven Years of University. But the main reason for being able to teach it in such a short time is ...
the tetrad. In systematics, Mr.B has called it "the Law of Four". It provides the logic behind the system. When you can understand something, it is easier to remember. Each N-Term system is a law like the seven Hermetic laws, which are given in THE SECRET SOURCE. Using a bit of philosophy (B), I believe that the system can be taught in a matter of days. And we have to be fast, because I don't know how much time we have left.
Let us continue with page 11 of Science and the Akashic Field:
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "APPROACHES TO A GENUINE TOE
"A genuine TOE can be created. Although it is beyond the string and superstring theories in the framework of which physicists attempt to formulate their own super-theory, it is well within the scope of science itself. Indeed, the enterprise of creating a genuine TOE -- an I-TOE -- is simpler than the attempt to create a physical TOE. ...."
. I have only commented on the last of these sentences at the end of the Nov. 17 section. What I said there is worth repeating: "To make a theory (B) work in practice, on the "physical" (D) level should, in theory, be no harder than to make the 4-fold system, as a whole, work on any one of the other three levels. What we need, of course is THE DIVISION OF LABOR. And our political masters don't want us to understand that. Obviously they don't want us to use THE DIVISION OF LABOR because ...
for one thing, we would become as efficient as they are. And because there are more of us ...
. For another thing, when we understand the system they are using, then ...
the things which are unbelievable to us now, become believable. Things are only unbelievable as long as we don't understand them. And when we understand them, then ...
. Science and the Akashic Field page 12:
. "When we try to create a genuine I-TOE, we can proceed in an analogous way. ...." This is where my quote, which started on page 11 ends. We "can proceed in an analogous way" because of the law of correspondence. Let me quote some more: ".... way. We can start with the basic kind of things, the things that generate other things without being generated by them. Then we must state the simplest possible set of rules that can generate the more complex things. In principle we should then be able to explain how every ‘thing’ in the world has come to be."
. Here we have A SUMMARY OF Laszlo's "Insight" ...
Let us read what Lao Tzu has to say about "Insights(72)":
"Enlightened and seeing far into all [of the "Fouur( 4)"] directions (72#J 4*i J.Wu) are you
Able to to do it Without Interfering (abWUdo) with other people's dharma ?(HU)"
Hu(HU) is the question mark. *i = Ta162, "To open, see through; inform".
"To fulfill one's destiny is to be constant ( FUäG73Cn translation J.Wu) to
Know the Constant Is-to-become Enlightened (knCn7372)."
. "To fulfill one's destiny" is to do one's dharma. To know your dharma is to do it constantly. If you do it constantly, then you get more "Insights". How you translate Ming(72) depends on how you translate Yüeh(73). It also depends on the "Insights" you get. We can also translate knCn7372 as: "Know the Constant By-means-of Insight"!
. "Who doesn't show off shines (PUTuooerKU72)". Or more accurately: "Not Self Show Therefore Shine". When the ego gets out of the way our real self (A) comes through.
. ".... This is called 'following the guidance of the inner light (Siis*f72 J.Wu)".
. *f = Hsi145. "Lining, double; to raid; surprise; inherit". Wing is more accurate, He has: "This is called Doubling the Light." While L.Wu uses his "Intuition(72)" more, Wing leaves us wondering what Lao Tzu might have meant? ...
Why didn’t Lao Tzu spell it out the way J.Wu did? ...
He wants us to think and figure it out for ourselves.
Who "Knows Others, He is clever (knmner^c) "He-who(er)" has
Self Knowledge has Insight (Tukner72)".
. ".... This is Called a Subtle Insight (Siis$h72)". Because Wing is more accurate, I often only have to capitalize his words and add the two digit identifiers. This is work a "WordEr(C2er)" can do better than I. "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)".
. The "Bright Way Looks Dim (72A1JO@J)".What is meant here? ...
The right way looks like the wrong way. "Right Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)" ...
The wrong way looks like the right way. There is a way that seemeth right unto a man but the ends thereof are the ways of death. Different words: Same idea.
. "Use Your Light (us H$4) but
Return Again to Your Insights (FU77 H72)".
. At Ching 55 Lao Tzu repeats "Know the Constant Through Insight (knCn7372)!".
. The Last chapter Ming(72) appears in is Ching 65. That is a challenging one. You may know by now where I am coming from. So you can also guess how I would interpret this one. Problem is that many of you have been conditioned to take such an interpretation as a "Ridiculous(*a41)" Conspiracy theory. According to the "official version" of the truth, all Conspiracy theories are "Ridiculous" even if Lao Tzu had spelled it out more clearly. This is why it is better for me to leave the interpretation of this one to you.
. Any character which appears in more than six chapter is worth paying the kind of attention to as we have done here with Ming(72).
Let us get back to Science and the Akashic Field. You can start reading with
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . “APPROACHES TO A GENUINE TOE
on page 11 and continue to the end of the chapter. That is 2 1/2 pages. Too much for me to quote. So you would have to get the book. What is called: "Identifying the monad" in systematics means here: Identify the level on Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" Laszlo is talking about in various statements he has made in those 2 1/2 pages.
. This is a tough assignment because some statements are ambiguous. They could refer to more than one level. This is also a tough assignment for me, so I better let you do it.
. And don't worry about being right or wrong. The important thing, right now, is the exercise.
===========================================================
Nov. 28, 2008
. There are a number of mistakes in my last Nov. 25 section, which are hard to correct. The numerals in blogspot.com are wider than the numerals in a word processor. For instance SAB , which should be at column 28 is closer to column 24. But, with a bit of work, you can figure out the correct addresses. And that work is good for you.
. Also the lines at blogspot are shorter. I tried to compensate for that but I didn't compensate "Enough(Zu)". And I was too eager to get that message out. Except for the "000", which should be at the end of line x, this is no serious problem. But even without that problem, AAx59 should be AAx63 and =x59"0"G11 should be =x61"0"G11 . You increment the units position of a number and test for "100" in the hundreds position. There and in my interpretation of these two instructions I goofed. But what do you expect from a frustrated programmer (B), who is still waiting for a coder (C) to do his job?
=====================================================
a Nov. 25, 2008
b . At the end of the Nov. 21 section I have promised that I will describe a programming
c language called DAB. Part of the delay is due to the fact that this is easier said (C) than
d done (D). Lao Tzu said: "He who finds it Easy to make Promises Necessarily (he$ü*xPI)
finds it hard to keep them (%r09)". *x = No149, ".... promise ....".
. For a start, let me give you a DAB instruction as an example: blankA"1""2"blank ...
The blank in front of an instruction tells the computer that an instruction starts here, and the blank behind it tells it that the instruction is complete. A, S, M and G are examples of op-codes, operation codes. They are what verbs are in an imperative sentence A"1""2" reads : ...
Add "1" to "2". This is simple enough, but to write actual instructions takes more than that, even for my emulator of the simple IBM 1401 machine language. In order to describe DAB to you, I have to burden you with a lot of tedious detail which you must try to remember in order to read the one-line program, I have written below, starts at y01 (line y column 01).
. If this is not your cup of tea, you can skip this section. Here we go:
Letters a, b, c and d in front of the first four lines are alphameric line numbers.
An alphameric line number followed by a two digit column number is a direct address.
In A"1""2" the "1" is the addend, it is called the A Operand. The "2" is the augent, it is called the B Operant. In the program on line x, I have identified them with an A and a B. A and B are "indirect addresses". An indirect address is a name for a direct address. An alphameric number, a to z, is a line number. A line number followed by a two digit column number, 01 to 99, is a direct address. The "1" and the "2" are immediate addresses. In immediate addressing the operands are given in the instruction itself. This makes instructions easier to read but it slows down the computer because immediate and indirect addresses have to be converted to direct addresses before the computer can execute them.
x The program below would be in line y .To execute it, type: "Gy01(ENTER)". 000
M"1"A MAB AAB =B"9"G28 G11 SAB =ABG43 G28 AAx59 =x59"0"G11
123456 7891 1234 567892123 45678931 23 45678 9412 34567 89512345678 96123
. The numbers under the instructions don't line up very well, but you will hopefully get the idea. Here comes the translation and interpretation of the program in line y:
M"1"A , reads:: Move "1" into the A operand. MAB , reads: Move the content of A into B. So now, the content of A and B is "1". AAB , reads: Add the "1" in A to the "1" in B. So now there is a "2" in B. The "1" in A is still there. =B"9"G28 , reads: If (the content of) B = "9" Goto 28. If not, Go back to AAB at column 11 and Add "1" to B until B = "9". If B = "9" Goto SAB at column 28. SAB , reads Subtract A from B. =ABG43, reads: If A = B Goto 43. If not Goto SAB at 28 and Subtract "1" from B until B = A. When there is "1" in both B and A Goto the AAx59 at column 43. AAx63 , reads Add the "1" in A to the units position of the three digit number at line x column 63. =x61"0"G11 , reads: If the hundreds position at x61 = "0" Go back to 11 and start all over again. Five consecutive blanks mean stop.
. How would a customer (A) do the “job-description” of this job? ...
S/he might tell the programmer (B): Just keep the computer busy for a while. The customer might have DAB written as a platform on top of the Motorola and the Intel chip hardware, and s/he wants to know which computer works faster. Which one do you think is faster? ...
I think the Motorola chip is faster. It is simpler than the Intel chip, but because it is simpler it is not promoted as well.
. To find out which one is faster, you don't need three loops, one will do. The programmer could have told the coder Add "1" to "00000" and when you have "10000" stop. ...
I"00000" =03"0"G01
I"00000" , reads: Increment "00000". =03"0"G01 , reads If the number at 03 = "0" Go back to 01 to Increment the five-digit number some more. When 03 = one the computer has done ten-thousand loops and then it doesn't Goto 01 anymore, it bypasses the Goto instruction, gets the five consecutive blanks, and stops. So the customer must have told the programmer to make it a bit more interesting so that you can learn something. So what did the programmer tell the coder? ...
Add one to a number until it is nine, then subtract one from that number until it is one again, and then go around that double loop a hundred times.
. Notice that the "Job-description" (A) and the "Job-analysis" (B) can be described in English, but the coding (C) has to be described in computer languages. DAB can be taught in a few days or weeks, but what we have now takes years. Why? ...
It is all part of a general dumbing down process. The Y2K attempt has failed because there were still too many programmers around (They didn't kill enough). Are they going to give up because they have failed? ...
How long have the Illuminazis been at it? ...
Get Google to search for: Protocols of Zion centuries . Also search for "kingdom".
. What are they going to do next? ...
If you don't try to answer these questions yourself, then what I am going to say will sound like a "Ridiculous(*a41)" "Conspiracy theory" to you. If you were aware (A) that you have been conditioned to see things that way you see them, you couldn't be conditioned that way. This is why Eckhart Tolle puts so much emphasis on awareness (A). Now, then, besides mind-control, what are they going to do to establish their "kingdom"? ...
They are going to use a virus. Globally. If you bought your computer after Y2K it probably already comes with the virus installed in the software, infecting the computers of your friends. Nobody, who doesn't actually look for it, and knows HOW to look for it, will suspect anything. It will quietly tick away until the deadline. When will that be? ...
I don't know, but it will probably happen before 2012.
Can it be prevented? ...
If DAB is right on top of the hardware, there will be no spy-ware, no back-door programs, no virusses, but ...
if the hardware which has been developed after Y2K supports their virus, there is nothing we can do with software.
. Lao Tzu, after making some interesting statements, said : "I by What Means Know (meHOYIkn)" this? How, by what means, can we know what our political masters are doing? ...
By putting ourselves into their shoes. ...
======================================================
Nov. 21, 2008
. We will continue with statements from page 11 of "Science and the Akashic Field". It is quoted at the beginning of the Nov. 18 section. " .... algorithms .... govern their behavior. (This is the basis of all computer simulations: the modelers tell the computer what to do at each step as the modeling process unfolds, and the computer does the rest.)"
. We can infer from this that the computer (D) is at the end of the 4-fold process. It manifests on the material (D) level what has been demanded by the customer (A). The Aristotelian "final cause" (A) is a description of what is to be supplied by the computer at the final phase in material (D) form (B). This is why Aristotle has called level B of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)" the "formal cause" and level D the" material cause". Why did he call level C the "efficient cause? ...
Our mind works with Automatic Energy (E6). It does things automatically. It "Does things Without us Doing (doWUdo)" them. This is why it is well to consult Eckhart Tolle on HOW to prevent it from doing things which are harmful to us. Essentially it boils down to become aware (A) of WHAT it is doing and to determine intellectually (B) whether it is good for us. Awareness requires Conscious Energy (E4) and thinking requires Sensitive Energy (E5).
. In the 4-fold process which underlies "all computer simulations" E4 is stepped down to E5, E5 is stepped down to E6 and E6 is stepped down to E7 (D). The computer and our physical body (D) are on the physical level (E8). The computer does its work with electricity and our body needs Vital Energy (E7) to work on Constructive Energy (E8).
. Our mind (C) is more efficient than our intellect (B) because it does things automatically without asking any questions but E5 is closer to Conscious Energy (E4) than E6 is. I know that this is hard to follow, if this stuff is new to you, but, as Mr.B said: Nothing is gained by making things simpler than they really are.
. Let me try to make this clearer by giving an example from sailing: You can set the sails and the rudder of a sailboat in such a way that it will keep its course relative to the wind. It is like an automatic pilot. This is more efficient than manually steering the boat but it is advisable to check once in a while to see where the boat is taking you.
. By analogy, our mind (C) is like an automatic pilot, it is efficient, but before you hand over control to it, you must make sure that it is programmed properly. Also use E4 and E5 to make sure that it is going in the right direction.
. Our mind (C) "Does things for us Without us Doing (doWUdo)" them. We don't even have to be aware (A) of WHAT it is doing, but is that safe? ...
In these matters it is advisable to consult Eckhart Tolle on how to prevent our automatic pilot from taking over more control than is safe for us. Back to page 11: ".... the modelers tell the computer what to do ....". Who are the modelers? ...
The customer (A) tells B what s/he wants, and B tells C what s/he wants D to do.
. The coder writes the program, and it tells "the computer what to do at each step as the modeling process unfolds". As the computer executes an instruction, it does not look forward or backwards. It concentrates on that one instruction at hand, it concentrates on that one point in the string of instructions it got from C.
. Conceptually, D is analogous to the point, C to the line, B to the plane and A to the solid. But the points are not given randomly, they follow the linear instructions, which follow the lateral thoughts, which are "Aligned(8b)" to the three dimensional hologram at level A. This may all be a bit too abstract for you but, don't worry, all it takes is that one communicator (C) who can understand this, and s/he can make it more comprehensible for you..
. Let me quote the next sentence which is now on page 12: "A finite and surprisingly simple set of basic elements governed by a small set of algorithms can generate great and seemingly incomprehensible complexity merely by allowing the process to unfold in time."
. There are only four "basic elements" in the tetrad but each source is a whole, having parts in turn. We have the Law of Correspondence again. On level C, the "set of algorithms" is the instruction "set". Please go to: NewAgeTao.org where I describe DAB (Do A to B). DAB is my emulator of the IBM 1401 computer language, written in Turbo BASIC. Ideally, you can predict what I will say about the "set of algorithms" in the next section. But, even if you can't, it is well to inform yourself about DAB because I will prepare you for what I will say about it. The IBM 1401 instructions are like ordinary English imperative sentences in which the verb, called the op-code (operation code), comes first. When you understand this instruction set, you understand what coders (C) do. You will then find that it is a “finite and surprisingly simple set of basic elements”.
==================================================
Nov. 20, 2008
. At the end of the Nov. 18 section, I have left you with a question: ...
"Why can't computer science graduates .... program? ..." The answer is obvious: ...
They can't program because they haven't been taught to program. The next question is: ...
Why can anyone, who has taken the seven Week IBM programming course, tell us more about the 4-fold computer programming system than Ervin Laszlo did in the quote we have at the beginning of the Nov. 18 section? ...
The answer is obvious to those who know the tetrad: ...
The tetrad is an N-term system which is part of the hermetic knowledge, which we are not supposed to know. Since the original IBM computer programming system is based on it, the social engineers had to "improve" it. The improvement is essentially a more sophisticated Forth programming language, but in that language the subroutines were written by the programmer. Now they are written by the specialist programmers (B) and coders (C) at Microsoft and packaged in black boxes. If a customer demands a job for which there is no black box the computer scientist is stuck and he has to get somebody who has taken the seven Week course to get him out of trouble. For more information on this, see the internet.
. In short: The IBM programming system is based on the Aristotelian tetrad. And the tetrad is part of hermetic knowledge.
. Let me now comment on one more passage from the quote which we have at the beginning of the Nov. 18 section: ".... it is enough to identify the basic constituents of a system ...."
. The "basic constituents" of the 4-fold computer programming system are: ...
Customer (A), Programmer (B), Coder (C) and the Computer (D). These "sources", or basic components, are the four divisions on Plato's "Divided Line (at 509d of his Republic)". The customer has the vision (A) and the money to pay for the job, the programmer does the thinking (B), s/he develops the algorithm, the coder does the talking (C), s/he talks to the computer in a computer language, and the computer does the physical (D) work.
. The same 4-fold system works in the building trade: ...
Ideally you can "Identify(Mg)" the four sources yourself. ...
The customer (A) describes his dream-house to the architect (B), s/he tells the contractor (C) what to build and he tells his sub-contractors (D) where and when to build it.
. Any system based on the tetrad is a natural system, it can't be improved. It can only be corrupted, as the Brahmins have done in India. And which our political masters intent to do in their New World Order. And if they want to get away with it, then, obviously, ...
they must prevent us from finding out HOW the real system works.
========================================================
Nov. 19, 2008
, In yesterday's, Tuesday Nov. 18, section I said: "Because the 'Akashic Field' is behind everything that happens in the world, many more meaningful coincidences happen than we are usually aware of." I posted that section around 4 PM before I got to my Tuesday Dinners at the Gathering-spot. Its some kind of social club were you pay two dollars for the meal, help preparing it, set the tables, serve, wash the dishes and get peeved at the guests who never pitch in.
. The meeting is at the Walmer Road Baptist Church. The weather was still nice so I decided to walk home from Spadina at Bloor to Landsdowne at Queen. On my way, I went past the Lula Lounge -- 1585 Dundas W. It looked dark from the outside, but through the curtains I could see a live band inside. I went in. It was some kind of private party but nobody was there to ask if it is okay to come in. So I had a beer and a great time. After it was over, a nice lady came over to talk to me. I asked her if there is any admission to pay? No. It turned out to be "The OMO Dance Company's 4th Annual Salsa Party And Fundraiser". She happened to be the Artistic Director of the OMO DANCE COMPANY. I commented on the terrific band and her amazing dancers. She wanted to know what brought me there? Well, I love Latin music and, being very much stuck in the head (B), Art (A) is a wonderful way to lift me out of it once in a while. As we were talking, it occurred to me that it is kind of strange to stumble in here and to be taking to the Artistic Director of this wonderful group. I asked her: "Do you believe in synchronicity?" Yes, she did. In fact, she said that it is no accident that I am sitting here talking to her. Now, that is just her opinion. You don't have to believe it. On the way out, I picked up her newsletter. Let me just quote two lines from it to help you make up your mind:
"I find that for most people, panic attacks come from our inability to see beyond a challenge: settling on our perceived limitations or believing the limitations imposed upon us by others." She was primarily talking about the limitations artists believe in. If others told you that you can't do a certain move, and you believe (C) them, then you can't do that move. Your belief is limiting you.
. According to the Law of Correspondence, what is true individually is also true collectively: ...
If the social engineers can make us believe that our political masters are omniscient and omnipotent, then that belief (C) will dumb us down and make us powerless. That's what social engineering is all about. But in order to make us believe a falsehood, they must manage to bypass our intellect (B). And we don't have to ...
let them. The idea I have just described is not new to me but the way I have described it just now, is original, I like it. The question arises now: ...
How did this original way of conveying a truth come to me? ...
Did I produce it all by myself? or did I have some help? ...
And, if I had some help, who or what has helped me? ...
The same goes for the idea of comparing, what I want to convey about the social engineers, with presenting your case in a court of law. Where did it come from? ...
I thought that this was a pretty good idea but can I really take credit for it? ...
Should I give credit to my landlord, who is giving me a hard time in order to sell the house, which I have sold to him for 20% below market value, for its full market value? ...
. I will continue with the quote from page 11, below, in the next section.
========================================================
Nov. 18, 2008
. I will continue to quote from where I have left off yesterday on page 11:
" .... As we have seen, physical TOEs endeavor to relate all the laws of physics in a single formula .... It is simpler, and more sensible, to look for the basic laws and processes that GIVE RISE TO these entities, and to their interrelations.
. "The computer simulation of complex structures demonstrates that complexity is generated, and can be explained, by basic and relatively simple starting conditions. .... it is enough to identify the basic constituents of a system and give the rules -- the algorithms -- that govern their behavior. (This is the basis of all computer simulations: the modelers tell the computer what to do at each step as the modeling process unfolds, and the computer does the rest.) A finite and surprisingly simple set of basic elements generated by a small set of algorithms can generate great and seemingly incomprehensible complexity merely by allowing the process to unfold in time. A set of rules informing a set of elements initiates a process that orders and organizes the elements, so that they create more and more complex structures and interrelations.
. "When we try to create a genuine I-TOE, we can proceed in an analogous way, ...."
. This is a long quote because I want to use it to prove that the social engineers,, who are in control of the Educational System, control what the students learn. I want to prove that our political masters don't want us to find out what they don't want us to know.
. If I can add anything to what has been said here, it is because I took a seven Week computer programming course.
. Because the "Akashic Field" is behind everything that happens in the world, many more meaningful coincidences happen than we are usually aware of. As we start to pay attention (A) to them, we start to become aware of more of them. It so happens that at this point, with the legal problems I have with landlord, I have filed an application against him in which I have to prove that he has, unjustifiably harassed me to the point where I had to move out. I have no lawyer to represent me, so it is more difficult for me to present my case at the Landlord and Tenant Board. In a way, here in this blog, I am trying to take the social engineers to a court of reason, I this court, Communicators (C) are "analogous" lawyers in a court of law. Please bear with me as I am trying to present my case. It is a difficult case because there is relatively little I can add to what Laszlo has already said. But if I can add even just a little to your understanding of what Laszlo has described, I can say that I have presented my case successfully. But a lot of my success depends on you. Without you making that extra effort, my case is going to be thrown out of court.
. The computer programming system "can be explained by basic and relatively simple starting conditions." As in "Heaven, so Below (Tu -), on earth:
Difficult Tasks Necessarily Arise From Easy (dfD2PI%ctoez)" ones.
. The original IBM computer programming system could be taught in seven Weeks because it is based on the Aristotelian tetrad, and understanding it is relatively easy:
. The customer's "Job-description" is the Aristotelian "final cause" (A), the programmer's "Job-analysis" is the "formal cause" (B), the coder's "Coding" is the "efficient cause” (C), and the computer's "Execution" is the "material cause" (D).
. It is obvious to anyone, who has seen this 4-fold system work, that Aristotle knew what he was talking about. My "Task(D2)" here, is to convince you that this is not taught in our universities and why? ...
I have already explained my own experience of this in this blog, so I will make long story short: My former partner, Jim, asked me to help him and his new, computer scientist, partner with a problem they have been struggling with for Month. I came in after lunch and left before quitting time at 5 PM. The job was done.
. I took that seven Week computer programming course in 1964 at age 29. So many programmers, who didn't get killed before the failed Y2K attempt, are still alive. Most of them can still do what I did in that afternoon. The question I will leave you with is: ...
Why can't computer science graduates, after seven Years of University, program? ...
====================================================
Nov. 17, 2008
. In the previous section I said that I would quote from the contributors who have no Ph.D "selectively". They are: Deepak Chopra, M.D. Jurriaan Kamp, A. Harris Stone, Ed.D., Henrik B. Tschudi and Lady Montagu of Beaulieu. The promise to quote from all of them "selectively" was difficult to keep, so difficult, in fact, that I refuse to keep that promise without exceptions.
. "The most brilliant, comprehensive, .... theory of everything that I have ever read. ... transcends the vision of Darwin, Newton, Einstein, the quantum pioneers, .... " Each of these pioneers has transcended the previous ones by introducing the next "paradigm", which would have come anyway, but they are the "pioneers" who have taken the decisive step into the new direction. And the next step is taken right now by Ervin Laszlo.
. "Science and the Akashic Field shows clearly that science is poised at the threshold of a new paradigm. ...." Jurriaan Kamp, Editor in Chief of ODE MAGAZINE and author of Because People Matter. All contributors, Ph.Ds included, should be quoted in full. But, as far as possible, I am trying to keep my promise.
. "When in search of impacts or nuances useful in discovering and understanding the essential universe, Ervin Laszlo's brilliant new work, Science and the Akashic Field, surpasses previous explorations. The work opens a road to understanding the universe as an integrated entity, connecting science and consciousness, and recognizing the wholeness of the universe, life, and mind. This is a 'MAKE-SENSE-OF-THE-COMPLEX' opus, accessible to every reader" who is willing to read it attentively.
. The reason I have quoted this one in full, will become apparent to you if you read it attentively more than once. Take, for instance: ...
The work opens a road to understanding the ...." ...
The three dots, "..." mean: Please stop to think!, in this blog. ...
Stone didn't say that Laszlo has traveled the "road" to the end. But Laszlo has taken the first decisive step into the new direction. Now others can follow without being "Ridiculed(*a41)". Now we can look at the Bible, the Ching, the Gita or the Nei-yeh and ask: ...
How did these visionaries know what "cutting edge science" is only discovering now? ...
. "There is turmoil and exitement at the cutting edge of cosmology and related sciences. Ervin Laszlo, .... charts a course through it ...." Henrik B Tscudi, Chairman of the Flux Foundation, Oslo Norway.
. "Ervin :Laszlo is, arguably, the most profound thinker alive today." Lady Mantagu of Beaulieu. First Ambassador of The Club of Budapest.
"Akasha (â-kâ-sha) is a Sanskrit word meaning 'ether': all-pervasive space. Originally signifying 'radiation' or 'brilliance,' in Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and most fundamental of the five elements -- the others being vata (air), agni (fire), ap (water, and prithivi (earth). .... (This page is not numbered yet. It would be -1.)"
. These four elements are the elements of Astrology, they are the four parts of the "Big Tao (TAA1)". These are also the four divisions of Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". Akasha is thus the E1-E2-E3 triad of J.G. Bennett's ENERGIES. We also have come across these four "sources" or components, of the tetrad in the "Emerald Tablet" we have studied just before, purely by accident, Laszlo's book.came to my attention.
. According to Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE, Akasha would be Purusha. Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths”. The first is Atma (A), the second id Buddhi (B), the third is Manas (C) and “The fifth and last of these sheaths is gross matter" (E8). It is around our body (D) as D is around C, C is around B, B is around A and A is around Purusha. The Law of Correspondence will make this more comprehensible.
. In "Indian philosophy akasha was considered the first and foremost of the five elements" because it has produced the "fire" (A) around a part of itself. Fire has produced the "air" (B) around itself, B has produced the "water" (C) around itself and our mind (C) has produced its body (D) around itself. With each step down, we have become more limited but also more concrete.
. Our body is part subject (A-B-C-D) and part object (E8). Within the tetrad, A is to B as B is to C, and B is to C as C is to D. A and D are at the boundaries of our four-fold system. they are half inside and half outside of our 4-fold system. This is why the Hindus have called our soul (A) the "Door (Dasamadwara)" A door has a side facing in and a side facing out. Things from outside come into our world through A and they are returned to the other side through D.
. I have described this stuff before, so, if it is new to you, please don't let it confuse you. Just hold it in suspense. We will come back to it. What I also keep repeating is that these are merely theories. What we know from science is that theories, or hypotheses, are no more, or less than that until they are tested. If they work as predicted, then they are more than mere theories (B), and if they don't work as predicted, then they are seen for what they are. Until a theory is tested, it is hard to know whether they are true or not.
. We have an excellent example of that in the original IBM computer programming system: A Computer (D) cannot produce what the customer (A) wants if the "job-description" does not say what s/he wants, or if it has flaws in it the programmer (B) didn't detect, then D cannot produce what A wants. If the "algorithm" (B) has flaws in it, then D cannot produce the output A wants. The word algorism comes up on page 12. If the program (C) has flaws in it, then D cannot produce the desired output. And if the computer malfunctions, then, again, the system does not work We can see from this that the "sources", or components, of this 4-fold system are like the links of a chain: Break one link, and you ...
break the chain.
. The safest thing for me to do is to talk about what I know from experience. I have worked as a computer programmer of the old school for nine years. And then, when the social engineers began to "update" it, I quit.
. ".... physics, the new biology, and the new consciousness research recognize that life and mind are integral elements in the world, and not accidental by-products. (pg. 3)"
. The "integral elements" within a system are like the links of a chain, they are the indispensable components of a system. If you take one of the four sources of the tetrad away, any one, and you don't have 3/4 of the system still working, an N-term system will not work at all. The tetrad is not like a four cylinder engine. it can still work on three cylinders. Not as well, but it can still get you to the garage. But an N-term system is something very precise. In a "DyAd(dyad)" N = 2, in a "TriAd( 3ad)" N = 3, in a tetrad N = 4 etc. If you add to, or subtract from, N then you no longer have the same N-term system. If N = 4, then you have a tetrad; if you subtract one from it then you no longer have a tetrad. But if you delete A, then you still have a working B-C-D triad left. In this case the four-cylinder car analogy is not quite valid. You no longer have a poorly working engine, but a properly working triad.
. A democracy is a 4-fold system. The people (A (demos, in Greek)) make the decisions, in the legislative branch of government (B) these decisions are translated into laws or constitutions, in the judicial branch (C) the laws are applied to specific cases at hand, and in the executive branch (D) the police, or the army, are ordered to enforce the law or to defend the country. The legislative branch also has authority to out-source work to private contractors.
. When the unelected advisors (B) of our politicians (C) make the decisions, we no longer have a democracy (A) but a timocracy (C). A timocracy works well for some people but not for the greatest possible number of people. No matter which politicians we vote for, their handlers are still making the decisions.
. "Ken Wilber, who wrote a book with the title A Theory of Everything ....a genuine TOE. ....Indeed, the enterprise of creating a genuine TOE -- an I-TOE -- is simpler than the attempt to create a physical TOE. (pg.11)"
. A TOE is a Theory Of Everything. To make a theory (B) work in practice, on the "physical" (D) level should, in theory, be no harder than to make the 4-fold system, as a whole, work on any one of the other three levels. What we need, of course is THE DIVISION OF LABOR. And our political masters don't even want us to understand it. This is an example of what I have said in the Nov. 11 section. Our political masters can't prevent Ideas, whose time has come, from coming, but, if you know HOW to look for it, you can see that they are doing their darnest to prevent it, which they can't, but they can slow us down. And they can also help us to speed things up. HOW? …
See Ching 41.1. …
If we learn to use Lao Tzu’s advise we have a “Way(A1)” through this mess.
========================================================
Nov. 16, 2008
. To make room for "Science and the Akashic Field", I had to delete a lot of good stuff at the end of this file. To send out the first chapter of the Nei-yeh I would have to delete the whole of file #1. I think the reason this blog is slowing down is because it is getting too big. I will wait with deleting file #1 until I have about eight files done. That will be a while. I am hoping that in time some help is coming forward. Essentially, I am using the translation of Harold D. Roth anyway. It is just that students of the Nei-yeh need the kind of work done on it Jonathan Star has done on the Tao Te Ching. What I have done with the Ching and intend to do with the Nei-yeh may be a bit more practical than Star's work but it is not as scholarly. I hope that in time the right help will show up because this is not the kind of work I should invest my time an energy in. The reason I want this work done is because I feel that the Nei-yeh can make significant contributions to SCIENCE and the AKASHIC FIELD.
. Of the recommendations for this book, twelve contributors have Ph.Ds and the four, who have not, are highly qualified. Tomorrow I will start quoting as selectively from these four as I will quote from the rest of the book.
===================================================
I am having trouble with this, but I have to delete everything behind these later sections to make room for “Science and the Akashic Field”.
====================================================
Nov. 11, 2006. The idea was to get the phonetic and the radical number of every character I don't recognize. Then I can look for it in the Ching Dictionary-Concordance to find out if it is in the Ching. If it is use the two-digit identifier for it. If it is not in the Ching, record its phonetic and radical number and identify the next character. When we have all characters, which are not in the Ching, identified, we can use the find function of a word processor to assemble the Dictionary-Concordance, and when we have it, we can work on the Nei-yeh as we work on the Ching. What would take a Chinese-speaking writer seconds or minutes to find, can take me hours, or I just give up and don't find it at all. This is not the kind of work I should invest my time and energy in. But the Nei Yeh is important, so I have to study it with or without help. . I went to the Indigo bookstore to see if there is any more on the Yei Yeh by now. There was nothing new, only the translation by Roth, which I have already. But, without him, I would have had no translation at all. The Nei-yeh deserves a Dictionary-concordance, however I am not the best person to do it. If I had the money, I would pay somebody to do it. So I went over to the Tao Te Ching section to see if any new interesting translations are there. No, most of the ones, which are there, I already have. As I went, aimlessly, down a few more shelves "Science and the Akashic Field" came to my attention. As I usually do, I leaved trough it to see if it is worth buying. Deepak Chopra's recommendation on the front page counts for something. The subtitle says: "An Integral Theory of Everything". That's what systematics is about. Is it in the index? No. ".... coherence .... collapse of wave-function .... complementarity principle .... computer simulation .... connections .... consciousness, ...." good stuff, but no principle of correspondence. Is Rudolf Steiner there? No. Steiner has read the akashic records. All I know about them is primarily from him. Is Aristotle, Bennett, Descartes, Hermes, Lao Tzu, the Republic, the Ching or the Gita there? No. These teachers talk about the same "Monad($1)”, "DyAd(dyad)”, “TriAd( 3ad)” etc. in different ways but when you get to know these N-term systems then you know which one these teachers are talking about. You know that they know it. When there is so much consensus between teachers from China, Egypt, Greece, India and the West, how can this whole school of thought be ignored in "An Integral Theory of Everything? ...Let me use the mass media as an analogy: Not all writers (C) who work for it are "agents". Most of them are probably "lackeys". Noam Chomsky explains how come. They have been indoctrinated in school before they got their job. Those who hire, or fire, them are agents. Essentially agents and lackeys write the same stuff. The difference between them is that the "agents" know and the "lackeys" don't know who they are working for. Now apply this same insight to "Science". Remember, the title of the book is "Science and the Akashic Field".. I put the book back into the shelf but then ...science, as we know it today, was not known to the teachers listed above. Their theories (B) were tested but not in a scientific (B-C-D) way. In this triad, C is the connective (=) between theory (B) and practice (D). That's where the funding comes from. You bring in systematics, or something the money people don't like, or are afraid of, and your funding is cut. So it seems to me that scientists need hermetism and hermetists need science.. "Knowing that you Don't Know something is Healthy (knPUkn +)" for both hermetists and scientists. I bought the book. It is by Ervin Laszlo, 169 pages plus References and Index, $19.90. I will work on it the way have worked on the other books that fell into my hands. I will delete file #1 and start there. My blog seems to get too long. I will delete file $1 and start on the Nei Yeh text there. It will be slow going. I will continue here with Laszlo’s book. There is little I can say about it. It is just too good. But there are passages in it I understand well “Enough(Zu)“ and there I can add something too it with the help of Lao Tzu, systematics and perhaps the Nei Yeh. “Synchronicity” is in the book, it has to do with Ervin’s Akashic Field. Whether I got it by accident, by luck or synchronicity is for you to decide.========================================================Nov. 5, 2008"A Summary of The Science"There is a thinking stuff from which all things are made, and which, in its original state, permeates, penetrates, and fills the interspaces of the universe."A thought in this substance produces the thing that is imaged by the thought."A person can form things in his thought, and by impressing his thought upon formless substance can cause the thing he thinks about to be created.". In these three paragraphs Wattles sums up what we have learned from the quotes at 153.1, 153.4 and 165.3 but in simplified form. To "Align(8b)" yourself with money instead of with God must be justified somehow.. What comes through the "Door" (A) is the "ONE" but in the first paragraph it is already "thinking stuff" (B).. What comes to us through A is like a visible but intangible three-dimensional hologram.. At B, the vision (A) is condensed to a two-dimensional flowchart or blueprint.. At C the algorithm is condensed to a one-dimensional string of instructions.. At D, the sub-contractors or the computer carryout the instructions as they come. They don't worry about the whole their job is a part of. When the job is done, not before, they are ready for the next instruction.. It is well to go into detail on a more concrete level but, what happens on level D, is analogous to the higher, more abstract or subtle levels. For instance, the coder (C) codes one block on the flowchart at a time. How the pieces fit together is not the coder's responsibility, that is what the programmer has to figure out... The same goes for the programmer. If s/he asks the customer: "What do you need this job for?" or "Why don't you do it this way?" The customer might say: "That is none of your business." or s/he might say nothing and go to the competition. Can you see from this example how the Law of Correspondence can help us to understand this four-fold system and to see oversimplifications for what they are? .... The safest thing for me to do is to tell you what I know abut the tetrad from personal experience and have you connect it to the first paragraph yourself. .... We come to the second paragraph: "A thought in this substance ...." Thought (B) is the Aristotelian formal cause. It gives "form" to "substance".. "The whole secret of our existence lies in the fact that energy of one quality can be transformed into energy of another quality. (Mr.B)". Thinking takes place with, or "in" Sensitive Energy (E5). By "Repeating(@1)" a thought it becomes more Automatic (E6). This is the efficient cause because what our mind (C) carries out automatically is more efficient and it is also on a more concrete level. When E6 is stepped down to Vital Energy (E7) it becomes like a mold and in it, Wattles. "formless substance" takes "form". As water becomes ice and molten becomes solid, so the formless substance takes the shape of the mold as it hardens.. And now we come to the third paragraph: "A person can form things in his thought ...."In the fourfold process, B follows A, C follows B and D follows C. Notice that Wattles doesn't start with A, but with B. That is a significant difference. In terms of Plato's four governments, it is the difference between a democracy (A) and a timocracy (B).. This is all very hard for me to chew and even harder to express. I will quit here. I had another look at the Nei-yeh. It is 100% poetry so it needs interpretation. I think that Lao Tzu's advise on HOW to read his book can be applied to the Nei-yeh. Not having a concordance for it will slow me down. It will also take up a lot of space. I will delete file 1 and 2 to start from scratch there.======================================================================Nov. 3, 2008. At the end of the last, Nov. 2, section I had an afterthought, which I didn't double-check and, sure enough, my ego slipped one of its usual "errors" past me. Chih( Z) is not one of the "four characters" I have translated. If I wanted to purposely waste your time and energy to get you turned off, I couldn't do a better job than my ego does so consistently. It is hard not to get mad at it, but, if you do that, then it feeds on the energy you lose. Thus, by getting mad at it, you only strengthen it. Again, consult Eckhart Tolle about the ego. What can we do about it? ...As Eckhart says: Become aware (A) of it. We can learn from what it causes us to do. We might benefit from it by going over the passages, the mistakes are in, again. Maybe there is something around there the ego doesn't like, or is afraid of. What is missing here? ...The statement which has the "Rich(#A)" in it. Thank my ego for that. Here it is:"Thus Intelligent Rulers Say (KUwsmnâu): .... I Do-not interfere with the people's Business (meWUD2) And the People (btMn), all by Themselves(Tu), get Rich.(#A).". The last two lines of that same section also give us more food for thought: ...There I have used the GST as an example. "Our former Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, got himself elected by promising to get rid of it. We still have it. Why?" ..."Why(86)" = Yen86, "How? why? final affirmation". Radical 86 is Fire (A). ...Is your knowledge of the "Truth Not Enough (09PUZu)? Why(86) do you Have No knowledge of the Truth? How (YUPU0986)" come? "Because(YI) the rulers in an Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85) .... Always Cause People (Cn%eMn) to be Without Knowledge (WUkn)". "That's-why(86)". All you have to do is read it.. Social engineering is nothing new, it just has been improved over the years.========================================================Nov. 2, 2008. "Repetition(@1)" is used to step down Sensitive Energy (E5) to Automatic Energy (E6).E5 = B. E6 = C.. In the last, Oct. 31, section I have copied messages which are "Repeated" from "The Right to be Rich" on page 94 to "A Summary of The Science" on page 99. By only copying WHAT is said and "Repeated", I have reduced the roughly five pages, to a page and a half. What I have deleted in this way tends to hide the "Repetitions".. What do our authors say about the repeated messages? ..."On a personal level, the expectation of easy riches combined with a sense of absolute entitlement indicates stunted psychological growth and a sense of failure if desires remain unfulfilled. And it should go without saying that the Prosperity Consciousness message, that everyone is entitled to fulfill all their consumerist desires without restriction, ignores the fact that our small planet has its physical limitations and is currently in the throes of potentially cataclysmic reactions against its six billion six hundred million human occupants, whether prosperous or not. (93.2)".. Despite of this obvious flaw of "Prosperity Consciousness", there are also some undeniable truths in Wattles' article. The truth and social engineers don't get along very well, so what is it doing in that article? ...To hide the falsehoods like a worm hides the hook and ...to increase the credibility of the author.. Concentrating on the truth is good for us, no matter where we find it. Repeating the truth, or a falsehood, converts it into a belief (C). A belief is actualized in word (C) or deed (D) with Automatic Energy (E6). It "Does things for, or against, us Without us Doing (doWUdo)" it ourselves. Or mind does it for us without us becoming aware (A) of it. It is, thus, the objective of social engineers to get us to believe things while "Always Causing the People to be Without the Knowledge (Cn%eMnWUkn)" of why we believe it. Lao Tzu has said this 2500 Years ago, so it is a very old "trick(548a)". So let us look for some truths in this article were this trick is used in a more obvious way:. Whether a person "must have many things" depend on WHAT the person wants in life. What can not be denied is that "he cannot" buy "these things unless he has money to buy them with." That is true but it is not what Wattles has said. He said: "he cannot have these things ...." So right from the start, in the very first paragraph, he is already appealing to your uncritical mind (C) instead of to your critical intellect (B). You can "have" things in ways other than buying them. You can: ...Inherit them, have them given to you, find them or even steal them. As you can hopefully see from this example, a falsehood is often disguised as the truth and, if you have accepted it as the truth, Wattles, or any one with his agenda, will have scored a few points. To believe that a writer, who knows these tricks will not use them is naive.".... society is so organized that man must have money in order to become the possessor of things." Same trick "Again(@1)".. "The object of all life is development" of your potential. True! "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! "The purpose of nature is the advancement and unfoldment of life,". Yes, the "Actualization of our Potential" is not only our "right" but our duty.".... no person who has not plenty of money can" buy "all he wants." The same trick is repeated "Again(@1)" here.. "Every person naturally wants to become all that they are capable of becoming. This desire to realize innate possibilities is inherent in human nature; we cannot help wanting to be all that we can be. Success in life is becoming what you want to be." This is a safe thing to believe (C) because it is true, but watch out for what Wattles tries to slip by the intellect (B) next. .... "There is nothing wrong in wanting to get rich" if that is your dharma, if that is the reason you came down here for. But because of the physical limitations of our planet, not "everybody" could have chosen this as his or her dharma. Before you incarnate, you have more of a birds-eye-view of WHAT you are going to get into than you have when you are immersed in it. It seems to be possible to make mistakes even before incarnation but not as likely as we can do it here.. The immersion takes place in stages: First we get "covered (See Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE)" by the "Anandamaya Kosha" (A), then comes the "Jnanamaya Kosha" (B), then comes the "Manomaya Kosha" (C), then comes the "Pranamaya Kosha" (D) and then comes "Gross matter, .... the Annamaya Kosha". The material (E8) world is around our bodies (D) as D is around C, C is around B and B is around A.. In theory, these things are known to our political masters, that would be why ...they have mastery over us. Knowledge is power. They have it and so must we.. "There are three motives for which we live: We live for the body, we live for the mind, we live for the soul. No one of these is better or holier than the other; all are alike desirable, and no one of these three -- body, mind, or soul -- can live fully if either of the others is cut short".. The tree are like the links of a chain, break one and you break the chain. Wattles goes on for another five paragraphs elaborating on this. All of this is well written and very true. If we don't become aware of what he is doing, this should increase his credibility significantly.. "A person's highest happiness is found in the bestowal of benefits on those he loves; love finds its most natural and spontaneous expression in giving." How true! There is so much truth here, and so well expressed, how can anybody be so cold-blooded to still watch out for the falsehoods behind the truth? .... Right after this wonderfully expressed truth, Wattles continues: "The individual who has nothing to give .... ", implying that the only thing a person can give is money or what money can buy. The artists (A) literally give of themselves, and by doing so they are uplifting their audience or whoever is able to appreciate their art. For centuries philosophers (B) like Hermes, Pythagoras, Plato, Lao Tzu and many others have benefited humanity more than the richest person on earth can ever do. Judges or politicians (C) can stand up for justice instead of going after the money or power. A car mechanic (D) can do an honest job instead of ripping off his customers. There are still some mechanics or technicians left who love their work. They don't work for the money but for the satisfaction of a job well done. There are things money can't buy. Volunteers, often doing difficult work, do it not for the money but out of the goodness of their heart.. If you need money to do a service to humanity, and some rich people do, "It is perfectly right that you should desire to be rich." But if you want riches just for your own gratification, it is not "perfectly right".. "There is A Science of Getting Rich". Yes, there is. And WHAT is it good for? .... "The ownership of money .... comes as a result of doing things in a certain way". Yes it does for certain people. Do you want to be one of them? .... "It is a natural law that like causes always produce like effects". As a man soweth, so shall he also reap. The Hindus call it the Law of Karma.77.2. "The Principle of Cause and Effect"Every cause has its Effect; every Effect has its Cause; everything happens according to law". Wattles got that directly from Hermes. Why didn't he tell us? Why didn't the authors of THE SECRET tell us? ...Why did I have to come across THE SECRET SOURCE to find out? ...Did they not know? or are they still trying to hide something? ...If they admit that their system is based on Hermetism then they must also admit what our two authors tell us:"Hermetic philosophy taught that the adept could manifest whatever he aligned his mind to and it would protect and benefit him. But it should be noted that the Hermeticists were talking about aligning their mind to God, not to money. (92.2)". Which means? ...That the "Secret" information is misused. There is a reason "WHY SOME SECRETS SHOULD BE KEPT (167.1)".. "Also, you will do best in a business which is suited to your locality: An ice cream parlor would do better in a warm climate than in Greenland, and a salmon fishery will succeed better in the northwest than in Florida, where there are no salmon." Obviously.. ".... as you get capital the increase becomes more easy and rapid". Yes! He who has shall have more. As you get more money, knowledge or love, the Law of Attraction takes effect.".... You must begin to live in harmony with the laws governing the universe." Am I living in harmony with the universe when because of my greed, I am destroying Mother earth? ...Right after this true statement comes "A Summary of The Science". I will get to that in the next section. Before we leave the subject of "getting rich", let us consult the world's great teachers about it. Jesus, Krishna, Lao Tzu, Mohammed and others must have something to say about that.Try Google.com : Jesus rich man or Lao Tzu rich .... "Rich(#A)" is at Ching 9, 33 and 57:. "Set store by your riches and honour,And you will only reap a crop of calamities. (J.Wu's translation)". " "He-who(ad)" Knows when he has got Enough is Rich (knZuad#A)". If you compare this one with Wu's translation you will see that it is essentially his translation except that I have capitalized the words which are there. Lao Tzu gives us four characters and we have to fill in the missing words. This is HOW Lao Tzu teaches, but the only ones who can benefit from this are the translators, unless you look at the characters yourself. Know, Enough,Chih( Z) and Rich is all we get. Spelling everything out for the student is interfering with his learning process. If you leave studens with "Enough" work to do, they will figure it out all by "Themselves (Tu)".. At Ching 57, Lao Tzu uses "Government (85)" interference as an example of interference in general. "The more taboos and inhibitions there are in the world.The poorer the people become. ...."The more articulate the laws and ordinances,The more robbers and thieves arise. (J.Wu)". The GST (General Sales Tax) we have here in Canada is a good example of this: It is so inefficient, unfair and obscure that the bureaucrats get away with spending two dollars on collecting one. Who are the "robbers and thieves" here? ...Who is benefiting from it? ... Our former Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, got himself elected by promising to get rid of it. We still have it. Why? ...===================================================================Oct. 31, 2008In the last, Oct. 28, section I have started to use the tetrad to work on the article which starts on page 94 of THE SECRET SOURCE with the heading: "The Right to be Rich By Wallace D. Wattles". In using the tetrad, I am trying to accomplish two things: ...1) to help readers to understand that article, and ...2) to help readers to make use of the tetrad. For a start, see the last section. .... A) The customer (A) tells the "problem-solver" (B): "Find out WHAT Mr. Wattles wants me to belive (C) without becoming aware (A) or knowing (B) why I believe it! .... B) The thinker (B) tells the talker (C): "Go over Mr. Wattles' article, identify WHAT he has said, and, if it is repeated, copy it! .... C) I will now play the role of a communicator and try to carryout my own instructions. The idea is to help people to understand WHAT Mr. Wattles is doing. If you are a communicator, you can probably do a better job than I can because: ...According to Plato and other teachers, the social function of "KnowErs(kner)" is to find out the truth. The communication of the truth is the social function of communicators (C). Anyway, there are certain advantages to see HOW a thinker (B) would do the job the talkers (C) should be doing: ...You have "The Right to be Rich". …. No one can rise to his greatest possible height .... unless he has plenty of money .... and he cannot have these things unless he has money to buy them with. .... man must have money in order to become the possessor of things. Therefore, the basis of all advancement must be the science of getting rich. .... "A person's right to life means his right to have the free and unrestricted use of all things .... in other words, his right to be rich, .... No one ought to be satisfied with a little if he is capable of using .... more. .... everyone should have all that can contribute to the .... richness of life...... "Every person naturally wants to become all that they are capable of becoming. .... To understand the science of getting rich is therefore the most essential of all knowledge.." .... The person who does not desire to life more abundantly is abnormal, and so the person who does not desire to have money .... is abnormal. ..... "It is perfectly right that you should desire to be rich. If you are a normal man or woman you cannot help doing so. It is perfectly right that you should give your best attention to the science of getting rich, ..... "There Is A Science of Getting Rich. " .... There are certain laws which govern the process of acquiring riches, and once these laws are learned and obeyed by anyone, that person will get rich ..... "The ownership of money and prosperity comes as a result of doing things in a certain way, and those who do things in this certain way -- whether on purpose or accidentally -- ret rich ..... ".... any man or woman who learns to do things in this certain way will infallibly get rich.. ".... When two people are in the same location and in the same business, and one gets rich while the other remains poor, it shows that getting rich is not primarily a matter of environment. ...when two people in the same business are in the same neighborhood and one gets rich while the other fails, it indicates that getting rich is the result of doing things in a certain way. .... the ability to do things in this certain way is not due solely to the possession of talent, for many people .... who have very little talent get rich.. ".... It is evident that they do not get rich because they possess talents and abilities .... but because they happen to do things in a certain way. ..... "From these things, we must come to the conclusion that getting rich is the result of doing things in a certain way.. "If getting rich is the result of doing things in a certain way .... then any man or woman who can do things in that way can become rich, ..... "....insofar as natural ability is concerned, any man or woman .... can certainly get rich.. ".... If anybody else .... can get rich, so can you, and if anybody else in your state can get rich, so can you.. ".... People get rich in every business and in every profession, ..... ".... getting rich is not dependent upon your …. But upon your learning to do things in a certain way.”. Please notice that this means: “getting rich” depends on “your learning to do things in a certain way” The next thing we are told is:“If you are now in business and anybody else in your locality is getting rich in the same business while you are not getting rich, it is simply because you are not doing things in the same way that the other person is doing them.”. Could that mean that “it is simply because you are not” getting it? ...“Everybody” else can get it, except you. How does that make you feel? …. Let us continue: "No one is prevented from getting rich by lack of capital," .... No matter how poor you may be, if you begin to do things in the certain way you will begin to get rich .... The getting of capital is a part of the process of getting rich and it is a part of the result which invariably follows the doing of things in this certain way.. "You may be the poorest person in the continent .... but if you begin to do things in this way, you must infallibly begin to get rich, ..... "And you can do .... do things in the certain way which always causes success. ..... "A Summary of The Science".. The summary is a little over a page long (about twelve lines) but it requires special attention. In the next section I will go over the article again, concentrating on the truths in it. After that, I will come to the "Summary". If you do that work on your own, you will have something to compare with my work. My social function is to tell "WordErs(C2er)" WHAT work should, or could, be done. Carrying out my own instructions is not my dharma, so please don't expect a perfect job from me. ...=========================================================Oct. 28, 2008. In the last, Oct. 26, section I said that "by studying what our political masters are doing, we find out what our ego is doing." And thus, by finding out what our ego is doing we can find out what our political masters are doing. In that same Oct. 26 section, my ego tried to make you believe that "the B-D dyad, .... get between 'fire' (A) and 'Earth' (D).". On the one hand, finding these typical errors can be good exercise on the other hand they can waste your time and energy and turn you off, which is what these errors are supposed to do. "Ridiculous(*a41)"? ...Of "Calamities There-is-none Greater Than Underestimating (ÜfMOTAto$j) the intellectual, political and economic powers of your Enemy (âb)." This warning applies to both, inner and outer enemies.Let us now go to the quote starting on page 93 of THE SECRET SOURCE. It is very well thought out and written. The purpose of a well written article is to convince you that everything in it is true. When there are falsehoods in it, the author will use the truth to cover them up as a worm is used to cover up the hook. Rudolf Steiner has described that trick in his political lectures. Later I came across that same trick in the transcript of a seminar that is supposed to be a "hoax". Get Google.com to search for: Protocols of Zion bait -- You can also search for the DIVISION OF LABOR in the same file.. Isn't Google amazing? Anyway, some "WorErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that they don't know. They not only fool their readers, but themselves as well.. Let me use some of Rudolf Steiner's writing to make this point a bit clearer: In chapter 1 of his Philosophy of Freedom, he said: ".... Others also start from the same point of view in combating the concept of free will. In germinal form all the expositions relating to this are to be found already in Spinoza. His clear and simple argument against the idea of freedom has been repeated innumerable times since then, but cloaked, for the most part, in the most hairsplitting theoretical doctrines, so that it becomes difficult to discern the plain thought process which alone matters. Spinoza writes in a letter of October or November 1674:". The quote is a page and a half long. After it, Steiner says:" . Because an opinion is here put forward that is clearly and definitely expressed, it is also easy to uncover the basic error that lies within it.One supposes that man carries out an action, when driven to it by some reason or other, with the same necessity as a stone carries out a definite motion after an impact. Only because man has a consciousness of his action does he consider himself to be the free originator of it. In doing so he overlooks, however, the fact that a cause is driving him which he must follow absolutely. The error in this thought process is soon discovered. Spinoza, and all who think like him, overlook the fact that man does not only have a consciousness of his action, but can also have a consciousness of the causes by which he is led.". The long quote is here summarized and refuted in a few lines . This can't be done with the article we are going to work on because it is not a "clear and simple argument". When an argument is unclear, it could be done on purpose. The author might try to hide something. The truth can be used to cover up something. Other than taking note of obvious truths we can also take note of not so obvious "Repetitions(@1)". Things we are supposed to believe are repeated but not as obviously as: You have a democracy. You have a democracy. You have a ....". The same message is spaced far enough apart and phrased differently so that the repetitions are not obvious. If we don't become aware of these repetitions, then we end up believing (C) something without knowing (B) why we believe it. This happens because the message bypasses the intellect (B) and goes straight into the mind (C), where it becomes a belief.. By intentionally "Repeating" the "Truth(A1)" it becomes a more concrete belief (C) but when something is slipped past the intellect it is safe to say that it is not the truth. If this trick didn't work, then the social engineers wouldn't use it so consistently. Let us use this article to find out WHAT the social engineers are doing.. To become aware of messages we are not supposed to become aware of, we must know WHAT the message is, and, why and HOW it is given.. What is repeated in this article is: Anyone can become rich.. Why are you supposed to believe that? ...If you believe that anyone can become rich, except you, how does that make feel? …When you get into a negative state, you loose energy. The payoff in The Games People Play is not money but energy. You might say: But the author doesn't even know me. Well, its not an ordinary game, its a big game.. HOW are you made to believe WHAT you are supposed to believe? ..."Repetition" is not the only means, but it is one we can observe by paying attention to WHAT is repeated. You are now ready for the article. The information we have on it in the book is: "Carolyn Baker in her DailyScare.com blog". And: Baker, Carolyn Apr. 4, 2007, "The Secret": Creating a Culture of Cheerfulness as Rome Burns.. Whether you get the article from the internet or from the book, we will use the tetrad as a thinking and communication tool to work on it.. The customer is on level A. When you go into a restaurant and order a meal, you are the customer. You don't have to tell the kook HOW to prepare your meal, all you have to do is order the meal. To do this, you have to know whether it is on the menu and you have to be willing and able to pay for it.. See how much you already know about step one of the 4-fold process? You just "Didn't Know that you Know (PUknkn)". Now, if you use the Law of Correspondence, you will find out that you already know more about the other three steps than you thought you know. In computer programming, the demand is called the "job-description".. The programmer (B) gets the "job-description". S/he does the "job-analysis". As A must know WHAT B can chew, so B must know WHAT C can chew. B must break down the lob into smaller bites the coder (C) can chew.. Let us now see HOW this theory works in practice. ...If you had the money to hire a professional "Problem solver", that's what programmers used to be called, what would you ask him to do with the article starting on page 94 of THE SECRET SOURCE with the heading"The Right to be RichBy Wallace D. Wattles (1910)"? ...I would say: Find out for me WHAT I am supposed to believe without knowing Why.. If you are a thinker (B) HOW would you break down the job into smaller bites so that the talkers (C) can chew it? ...You could say: "Identify(Mg)" WHAT is said, and, if "Repeated(@1)", copy it! ...Is that "Enough(Zu)"? ...Some "WordErs(C2er)" can chew more than others. For a good writer (C) this would be "Enough". But we are using this example as an exercise. Let us, then, assume that the communicator (C) comes back to the thinker (B) and asks for clarification. ...You would now have to tell the talkers to look for words and phrases like: ..."science of getting rich", "A person's .... right to be rich". "everyone", "Every person", "a normal man or woman", "anyone", "anybody" can "do things in a certain way" and "get rich". Now, would that be good "Enough"? ...A "WordEr" could use the "find" function on his word-processor and copy every statement the above words are in. But would that be good enough? ...No. Why? ...One of the mind’s (Manas (C)) functions is to translate a thought (B) into language (C). So, our mind picks up ideas (B) and not just words (C). After "Enough" "Repetitions(@1)" the mind accepts them as the truth. And these accepted ideas become beliefs (C). If we intentionally repeat our knowledge (B) of the truth in order to establish it in the mind (C) as a belief (C) then "Repetition(@1)" leads to "All Mystery'S Gate (^1#1 Z%1)". But if messages are repeated in such a way that we are not supposed to notice it, then we are being mislead.. So when you try to carryout the, above, instruction, you have to look for the ideas behind the words. Please do the exercise. I will do it in the next section. If you are a writer (C) your work is probably better than mine. Please don't let that turn you off. A "KnowEr is Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". For instance a programmer doesn't have to know HOW to code (in Intel or Motorola machine language). All s/he has to know is WHAT can be coded. This has already happened when I didn't even know the BASIC computer language. My former partner, Jim, who got me the job, still knew the IBM 1401 Machine language. So, in my job-description to him, I would often give him an instruction in the 1401 language to be translated into BASIC.. The original IBM 1401 Machine language was so simple and English-like that a programmer didn't need a "microscope" to read and write it. I have described it at NewAgeTao.org . But the new "improved" machine languages are so complex that THE DIVISION OF LABOR is almost unavoidable. I shall leave you with a question: What could be the reason for this? ...=========================================================Oct. 26, 2008.1] "2. And as all things were from ONE, by the Mediation of one, God2] having created all things in the beginning, which is the beginning3] of all things, and the wisdom of his Father, so all things spring and4] took their original from this one thing by adaptation or fitting itself5] accordingly in number weight and measure, for Wisdom builds her6] own house."The above is the second paragraph in the quote starting at 153.4 of THE SECRET SOURCE, the source of THE SECRET. This is the one we are going to work on now. We have used some grammar school syntax on the first paragraph. This seems to be the best approach to this paragraph as well but, as you will see, it is not as easy.. What is described, in these three quotes we are working on, is the Law of Correspondence. The best known definition of it is: ...As above, so below. As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -)", on earth. Now try to break this sentence down into a straight forward subject - connective - predicate sentence. ...It isn't easy. The "As .... so ...." has to be taken as the connective. This is unusual, but so is the Law of Correspondence which has to be defined somehow. Please do. ...".... as all things were from ONE, .... so all things spring .... from .... one". True or false? ...False. As far as syntax goes, there is nothing wrong with it, But language has to satisfy three requirements. They are listed at Gita 17.15 and, as interpreted by Krishna Murti: Whenever you speak (C), it must be kind (A), true (B) and useful (D). It must satisfy all three dimensions of semiotics: the semantic dimension (B), the syntactic dimension (C) and the pragmatic dimension (D).. You can see from this example that one dimension alone is not "Enough(Zu)". The impulses of a triad are like the links of a chain. Break one and you break ...If a statement is not true, it is also impractical because it ...will not work. The example we have here can be used to illustrate this: ...This sentence is supposed to define the Law of Correspondence but what we get is something like: As above, so ...above. Let us try again: ....".... as all things were from ONE, so .... Wisdom builds her own house." If the "ONE" is Existence (Sat) or Mr.B's E1 Energy, then "Wisdom" would be knowledge (Chit) or Mr.B's E3 Energy. This could be the, matter - form, dyad. As I said before what I am putting out here is only theory (B). I have to keep repeating this for your and my protection. Some of these theories may be original. The experts don't like original ideas. It may get them going trying to refute them. Either way, whether I am right or wrong, we will have learned something. But if the communicators (C) don't do their job, then none of this will happen. Let's go on.153.4,3:1] "3. The Father of this one thing, or that which he useth instead of2] an Agent, in all the Operations thereof, is the Sun, and the mother3] thereof or which supplies the place of a female and Patient is the4] Moon; the Nurse thereof receiving in her lap all the influences of5] heat and moisture, the Sulphur and Mercury of Nature (for the Spirit6] of GOD moveth not but upon the Face of the water) is the Earth. The7] Wind or Air carried in its Belly as one of the links in the chain, that8] link superior things to them that are below."We have here the "Sun", which according to Steiner is "Air" (B). And we have the "Moon" which is "water" (C). There also "is the Earth" (D). But there is no fire (A) in this paragraph. The "Air carried in its Belly as one of the links in the chain, that which link superior things to them that are below": A to B, B to C and C to D. As A is to B, so B is to C. Thus, one thing B carries in its Belly is the knowledge (B) of the Law of Correspondence. It is the knowledge of HOW to "link superior things to them that are below.". I am not an alchemist, to there is a lot of detail I have to leave to the experts.. We will now read a sentence starting at line one of the above paragraph and then jump ahead to the first line of the next paragraph. This should make it easier for you to see the connection between the paragraphs:"3. The Father of this one thing, .... is the Sun" (B)."4. This is the Father original and foundation of all perfection, .... when it is turned into Earth:". HOW is B (theory) "turned into" D (practice)? ...The "job description" comes through A, B develops its algorism, C writes the program, or gives specific instructions to D, and D carries them out. In this way, the theory is manifested by means of our physical bodies (D) here on "Earth" (E8).".... from .... unfixed .... to a most fixed Earth .... To which purpose Thou shalt separate the Earth from the Fire". There is a lot of Alchemy here, but Plato has given us an interpretation of it. His "Divided Line (509d)" comes in handy here. We have already determined to whom the instruction must have been given. It is B, or the B-D dyad. Air (B) and Water (C) get between "Fire" (A) and "Earth" (D). Originally all was "ONE", now the one is split into four parts: A, B, C and D.. The separated "Tao is a part of the Big (A1TA) tao, Heaven is a part of the Big (TnTA) tao, Earth is a part of the Big (TITA) tao and the King is Also a part of the Big ( E08TA)" Tao. In the Ching, Tao = A, Heaven = B, the King,= C and Earth = D. Mr.B's Creative Energy (E3) is the "Janaloka .... wherein the idea of separate existence of Self originates (Sutra 13, THE HOLY SCIENCE)". Why the separation is necessary is described in the same fourth paragraph: ".... for they being united, and the subject being but one thing (like Adam and Eva before their separation, or Plato's Hermaprodite, a man and a woman joined together back to back) could not generate or beget, till all parts be separated, and purged; and the subtle or fine aetheral from the gross, .... strange productions in all the kingdoms of Nature, animal, vegetable and mineral: .... and the method of operation the same: ....".. The method of operation in all three kingdoms is analogous because the Law of Correspondence is universal.. We are told that Plato was in Egypt and initiated there, in Hermetism, we can assume. This is easy to believe because much of what our two authors have given us can be found in The Republic. For instance, Plato said: Because what is inside of us can't be seen as clearly as that which is outside of us, Let us study human society instead. ...He is using the Law of Correspondence: As within, so without; as without, so within. Therefore, by studying human society, we find out about ourselves, by studying what our political masters are doing, we find out what our ego is doing. As without, so within.. To me, the best description of what Plato has learned in Egypt is his analogy of "The Divided Line (509d)":. " 'You must suppose, then, ' I went on, 'that there are these two powers of which I have spoken, and that one of them is supreme over everything in the intelligible order or region. the other over everything in the visible region .... At any rate you have before your mind these two orders of things, the visible and the intelligible.". Next Plato describes the "Line" The line is one originally but now it is first broken into two halves and then the halves are broken into two again. This gives us our four quartes, which are the four sources of the tetrad.. On page 310 of Desmond Lee's translation (Penguin Classics) we have a diagram of the line. A and B are on the top half and C and D are on the bottom half. Astrologically, the Four levels correspond to Fire (A), Air (B), Water (C) and Earth (D). In the Buddha's eight - fold path, the first four steps are: Vision (A), Thought (B), Speech (C) and physical Action (D). This bit of information will help you to understand the following quote starting at the last line of page 154 of THE SECRET SOURCE." .... It ascends from Earth to Heaven, and descendeth from Heaven to Earth, .... and by this means it acquireth the virtue and power of all things above, the subtlety .... of fire, light, heaven and things below .... the lower elements of Earth and Water".. It is interesting that Hermes has equated "light" with "heaven" here. This is what we have in the Ching for level B. To me, coming across this correspondence is very satisfying. If Hermes and Lao Tzu are describing the same thing, it can be expected that the descriptions are analogous to each other but here it is identical. Heaven is heaven whether it is said in Egyptian, Chinese or Greek. "Heaven(Tn)" is the opposite of "Earth(TI)", theory (B) is the opposite of practice (D).. More could be said about this challenging paragraph but, as our teacher said: Don't bite off more than you can chew. In the next section I will start on the quote from Page 93 to 100 of THE SECRET SOURCE. The author is no Hermes, so it will be easier to chew. Try it before I deprive you of the opportunity of determining what is right with it and what some people, like you perhaps, might disagree with. ...===========================================================Oct. 23, 2008. In the last, October 21 section, is another typical error. I quote: "The Law of Compensation is true because it works and it works ..." because ... Did you get the error? ...The quote we are working on is at paragraph 4, page 153 of THE SECRET SOURCE. It is quoted in the Oct. 15 section.. That paragraph is about the Law of Correspondence. "It is .... to show" What? ...That's what I have left you with at the end of the last section. How did you make out? ...Here is my attempt: "It is .... to show the .... diversity .... wrought by that Spirit that worketh .... in all things." The "It" here is the subject and the "is .... to show" is the connective. So far so good but the predicate is not what is there. To make it as simple as possible, a lot of detail had to be deleted.. The purpose of this exercise is to give you something to chew on. Then, when you have chewed "Enough(Zu)" on it, bite of a bit more. Chew again! Bite off some more! Do this until you have chewed all you are "Able(ab)" to chew. When it comes to a tough sentence like this, there are usually things left you are unable to chew. Don't waste your time and energy on that. And don't fret about what you can't do. That is another way of wasting energy. Just "Know that you Don't Know it yet. that is Healthy (knPUkn +); Not Knowing that you don't Know is Sick (PUknkn@p)". "Doing what you Can Do (A1ptA1)" is all you can be expected to do. Wasting your time is also "DoAble(A1pt)" but Lao Tzu doesn't recommend it.. Please look up the word "predicate" in a good dictionary. It tells us something about the subject. The whole eight line paragraph at 153.4 is one sentence. Its subject is the first word in it. It is the pronoun "It". The question is: What does "It" represent? ...Judging by the larger context and the paragraph itself, it is safe to say that "It" represents the Law of Correspondence. The most significant statement in our paragraph is the definition of this Law. It is: ..."the Miracle of one thing". This "one thing" is not a "Monad($1)" but a "DyAd(dyad)". One of its poles has: "that which is inferior ....as that which is superior" and the other pole has: "that which is superior as that which is inferior".. To understand this definition better, we must understand other laws better: For instance "The Principle of Polarity" on page 74 means: "Everything is Dual; everything has poles; ...." As the 81 chapters of the Tao Te Ching shed light on each other, so do the seven Hermetic Laws shed light on each other. Why? ...Because the 81 Chapters and the seven Laws are the parts of "One( 1)" whole which is greater than the sum of its parts. The "Total Sum of the parts of a Chariot Is-not a Chariot ($0#5âsWUâs)". Even though the unassembled parts are not a chariot, if a wheel or the axle is missing, you can't assemble it. The parts of a whole are like the links of a chain, break one and you break the chain. Obviously a chain is not a chariot, they are not identical, but they are analogous to each other because the same principle applies to both. I hope you don't get sick and tired hearing me repeat that same chain example again and again. I am just repeating the same thing to illustrate what a powerful tool analogy is. And why? ...Because it is based on the Law of Correspondence. "This Principle is of universal application and manifestation, .... it is a universal Law. The ancient Hermeticists considered this Principle as one of the most important mental instruments ....(pg. 73)".. Understanding the Law of Correspondence helps us to understand a lot of other things. He who has (the right knowledge) shall have more. For instance, in Sutra 14 of THE HOLY SCIENCE we are told that "Purusha is covered by five koshas or sheaths." We can use the Law of Correspondence to verify this:. As our "Heart" (A) is covered by "Buddhi" (B), so our intellect (B) is covered by "Manas" (C), and as Buddhi is covered by our mind (C) so Manas is covered by "Prana" (D),and as our mind is covered by (or is inside of) our body (D) so Prana is covered (or surrounded by) "Gross matter" (E8).. If the above paragraph is too hard for you to chew, break it down into smaller bites and chew it one smaller bite at a time. Our heart, or soul, is covered by our intellect. If this statement is too hard for you to chew, skip the whole thing, but "Know that you Can't Understand (knPUkn)" it yet. Lao Tzu says: My Words are Very Easy to Understand (myC2%tezkn)" if you don't bite off more of them than you can chew. The instruction Lao Tzu gives in Ching 63 boils down to: Don't bite off more than you can chew! Obviously this instruction is easy to carry out. So why don't readers fail to carryout instructions which are "Easy(ez)" for them? ...Because readers, or translators, don't consider themselves to be Lao Tzu's students. Only if you accept Lao Tzu as your teacher will you be willing to do your homework. To carry out instructions which are easy for you to carry out is ...easy. Have you completed the sentence? If not, why not? ...Because you are unwilling to do it. And if you want to know why you are unwilling to do the simple exercises, Lao Tzu gives us to teach us HOW to think, read Eckhart Tolle's A NEW EARTH. Eckhart can cause you to ask: Why? more often. The interrogative sentence "Why?" is a tremendous tool to put our ego and the social engineers into their proper places. There is a proper place for the ego in us. There is also a proper place for the social engineers in a timocracy (B) but they have no place in a democracy (A). As their pyramid is collapsing some of them might the opportunity to undo some of their bad karma. But time is running out, they can only help us if they tell us their secrets as long as they are secrets. Once we have figured out the truth ourselves, their knowledge is worthless to us.. As far as the big picture goes, we might already know more than "lackeys" or even "agents" know because they are as dumbed down by those on the level above them as they are dumbing down those on the level below them. Their pyramid system is hierarchical just as the IBM programming system is. The two systems are not identical, but they are analogous to each other. By understanding the tetrad, we can understand their pyramid system. The Law of Correspondence applies to both systems. Con you see the "Potential(pt)" of this thinking tool? .... Also the grammar school type exercises we have done are very important. Language (C) can also be used as a thinking tool. Notice that when we use grammar school English more intentionally, we can make complex sentences simpler. How? ...By identifying subordinate phrases. How? ...By enclosing them in commas( or brackets).. Working on paragraphs like the one at 153.4 is more than a grammar school exercise. The same goes for the Ching and the Gita. One thing we learn, as we work on these scriptures, is that there is a lot more in them than meets the eye. "Not Seeing what is DesirAble (PUooptYÜ) to see Causes People's Heart Not to Stir (%eMnHsPU$a)". Doing the work on 153.4, which we have done, shows us that each phrase is important. But we don't have to bite them off all at once. Bite off what you can chew! Chew! Bite off some more! Chew! We can learn to do that automatically. Once the mind (C) with its Automatic Energy (E6) kicks in we are getting into the Law of Attraction. We start to "Work Without Effort (D2WUD2)". The "Work(D2)" gets "Done Without us having to Do (doWUdo)" it ourselves. This is just some of Lao Tzu's advise, which comes in handy when it comes to studying the "Emerald Tablet" of which we got three different versions from our two authors of THE SECRET SOURCE... They told us that Hermetism is not only behind Plato's philosophy but also behind all major religions. That common source can help us to unify them. If I didn't already know some of the things which are in this book, from studying the Ching, the Gita and the Republic, I couldn't comment on it. The book is 174 pages long, but the information in it is very important. It is not "Enough(Zu)" that a few people know it. The social engineers know how to deal with them. A critical mass of the people must know the truth, and it doesn't matter where they get it from.. When "Enough" people know the truth, it will change the morpho-genetic field of our planet. Then the people who are dumbed down, and trained not to think, will automatically pick up the truth as they are now picking up the "official version" of the truth.. Right now, the Law of Attraction is working for our political masters, but if the truth begins to balance the falsehoods which now predominate in the morpho-genetic field then things are going to tip our way. When the truth begins to balance the falsehoods many of those who automatically pick up what is in the morpho-genetic field will be forced to think because of the contradictions they now have to deal with. And those who will not think, will pick up the truth as readily as up to now they have picked up the lies. And this takes us back to line one of our paragraph:. "It is true without any lying". Lies simply will not work anymore. When the truth is known by a critical mass of the people, lies are seen for what they are. What is unbelievable today, will be believable tomorrow. The flip can happen over night. You can contribute to this global transformation simply by informing yourself, but better still, by learning HOW to think. You can inform yourself about the morpho-genetic field by consulting Rupert Sheldrake, and you can learn HOW to think by becoming a student of Lao Tzu. But not everybody has to follow the path of knowledge (B). Right now, the communicators (C) are the bottleneck. Part of each of the four yogas is to "Align(8b)" themselves to the level above them: D to C, C to B, B to A and A (E4) to E3. If "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that they don't know they will communicate their own ideas instead of aligning themselves to B. Our politicians (C) are aligning themselves to their advisors (B) but when the advisors don't align themselves to A, we can't have a democracy. B is the bottleneck. They know it, but they don't want us to know.. Actually there is more to it. Who is at the apex of their pyramid? ...And who is at the apex of our pyramid? …If the people (demos, in Greek) “Align(8b)” themselves with God, God will be at the apex.Here is the Next paragraph 153.4,2:1] "2. "And as all things were from ONE, by the Mediation of one, God2] having created all things in the beginning, which is the beginning3] of all things, and the wisdom of his Father, so all things spring and4] took their original from this one thing by adaptation or fitting itself5] accordingly in number weight and measure, for Wisdom builds her6] own house."Again, we have a single sentence here. This should give you something to chew on. ...=========================================================Oct. 21, 2008. On page 2 of the Oct. 16-31 issue of the Toronto Street News, I came upon a 1/3 page article, I will quote from it in the usual way to give you some idea of what it is about: "The financial system is nothing more than the process of deciding what humanity will do in the future. In other words, it is fundamentally nothing more than mass psychology. Thus, if humanity changed their collective psychology about how to run the planet, it could decide" instead of letting the globalists make that decision for us. It follows a detailed description of "The global pyramid scheme", which we also get from David Icke. We also learn from that article that the bankers can create money out of nothing. That was not new to me. What might be new ...to you as well, is that they can only get away with that as long as they can ...make us believe that they can. A false belief (C) can be replaced by a ...true thought (B). That is why knowledge of the truth can set us free.. The other thing I didn't realize is that their pyramid is collapsing because the globalists are running out of the resources they need to support it. What is meant in the article are our natural resources. What we can add to this is, that they are running out of lies to support their "official versions" of the truth. And that brings us around to the first sentence of our 153.4 quote: "It is true without any lying". Lies will simply no longer work. When the truth is known collectively, dis-information is seen for what it is.. Speaking about the "Financial Crisis" I said: "The real problem is described in books and on the internet." What I have to add now is, that it is also in alternative news papers.Continuing our work on 153.4, we come to: The "one" is differenced .... by accident". This is contradicted by "The Principle of Cause and Effect" we have on page 77 of the same book: " .... everything happens according to law; Chance is but a name for Law not recognized:" In other words, there are no accidents. You don't get into a car or an airplane to have an accident. Yet, accidents happen. You might have been on the cell-phone, or a drunk driver run into you. Just because the causes are "not recognized" when they happen doesn't mean that there are none. You don't get into those towers on 9/11 if you know that they are going to be blown up. People went in because they didn't know it. Some people didn't show up for work because they were lucky. Because the number of absentees was above average on that day, some people had to be warned. Here is work for investigative reporters (C): Don't bother asking the absentees why they didn't show up for work. You will only get a valid or a ready made answer. Find out who these people are: What organizations are they members of? What information is already known about them? Find out what they are doing now. Let's get back to 153.4.. We are talking there about "Universal" things, about an omniscient creator. Do "accidents" happen to Him as they happen to us? Does the Law of Correspondence apply? ...The reason Mr.B has called his four Volume work THE DRAMATIC UNIVERSE is because the universe is dramatic. The outcome of this experiment is left to chance. Why? ...Because our Creator has given us the freedom of choice. THE BOOK OF JOB comes to mind: In chapter 1 verses 6 to 12 the rules of that game were established and in the rest of the chapter what happened next was described. The question here is: ...Who decided the outcome of the game? ... "the Lord"?, "Satan"? or" Job"? ...For more details see The Dramatic Universe Series number one HAZARD Compiled by A.G.E.Blake from the unpublished writings and talks of John G. Bennett.. With that I can leave well enough alone. That is one down three to go: The next two are "that great mystery of Rarefaction and Condensation". As I said, if you are into Alchemy you probably know more about these two than I do. What I know about "Condensation" is, that, when it happens, a gaseous (B) state changes into a liquid (C) state. We can assume that "Rarefaction and Condensation" are the poles of the induction - deduction "DyAd(dyad)", and Condensation - Rarefaction is the deduction - induction "DyAd". Three down one to go.. Even though I know more about this last one than I know about the other three, describing WHAT I know is going to be difficult for me because I am not a communicator (C). But I will try my best. Please bear with me:. The 153.4 paragraph is one sentence. Let us use grammar school syntax to break it down into a number of simpler sentences. ...By simpler sentences I mean sentences consisting of a simple subject, connective and predicate. All subordinate phrases are deleted. The first sentence in line one is, ..."It is true". What does the pronoun "It" represent? ..."It is .... most true". It is the truest of the seven laws, in the sense that the truth "It" represents is the most comprehensible. Why? ...This Law gives us a thinking tool by means of which we can demonstrate its validity. ...Abstract theories (B) are tested in practice (D). If they work, then they are true, if not, then not. The thinking tool by which the Law of Correspondence can be tested is: ...analogy. The Law of Compensation is true because it works and it works ...because it is true. This doesn't mean that the other six laws are not true. but we don't have analogy as a means to understand them. Deduction and induction are also thinking tools, and they are based on natural Laws as well. But we can't use them the Way we can use the building trade or in the original IBM programming system to test the tetrad. To actually test analogy or the tetrad you must have a working knowledge of them in order to make them work, or fail. We can not only see it work, but we can make it work by learning HOW the tool works. And learning HOW analogy works means finding out about the Law of Correspondence.. After all of this interesting work, we still don't know WHAT "It" represents. ...If you take the three dots as a challenge to figure out what "It" represents, then you can compare your answer with mine and you are in a better position to evaluate them. ..."It is .... that which is inferior". True or false? ...The sentence is correct: "It" is the subject, "is" is the connective and "inferior" is a predicate but what is said is False. Why? ...Because "inferior" is not the whole of the predicate which is there. We can't arbitrarily delete words from a phrase. A phrase is a whole like a sentence. Phrases and sentences are analogous to each other. Therefore ...We can use sentences as examples for understanding phrases better. ...The whole is greater than the sum of its parts but the parts are like the links of a chain. Break one and you break the chain. And so, delete an indispensable word from a phrase and you no longer have the ...phrase. So when deleting words from phrases, be as careful as you are when deleting phrases from sentences. A sentence is a triad, it consists of three impulses. A phrase is sometimes only implied or it consists of a single word. It is not identical to a sentence but it is analogous to it. That's why we can use sentences as examples to find out more about phrases.There seems to be a contradiction here. Isn't: "It is inferior." a complete subject, connective, predicate sentence? ...It is, but it is not what is there in our paragraph. Just read it. ..."It is .... that which is inferior as that which is superior". True or false? ...True and false. True because this is roughly what we get at this place in the paragraph. It is also true in that we are told about the ego, only not as explicitly as Eckhart Tolle does.The statement is false because we are not given the full ...definition of the Law of Correspondence at this point.. Which is? ...And now we are forced to speculate. Please try. ...If you come up with the same speculation I came up with, it will be more believable. ..."It is .... that which is inferior .... as that which is superior .... there being one" Law which includes "that which is superior as that which is inferior".. We have the "Reversal(($l)" now. As you struggle with this paragraph you can not help but admire the wisdom and work that must have gone into it. It is simply naive to assume that you can get the truth out of it without putting the necessary work into it. It must have taken much wisdom and work to get the truth in there and so it must take willingness and ability get it out from there.. I remember Mr.B telling us that: The truth is there in the Secret Doctrine. Problem is: ...You must already know it to recognize it there. The same thing is true of the Tao Te Ching. But, unlike the Secret Doctrine and the Emerald Tablet, Lao Tzu explains, in chapters which are easier to understand, HOW to read the chapters which are harder to understand. There are always some chapters we can understand, if we work on them. And if we do, then there will be other chapters we will be able to understand. The trick is not to bite off more than you can chew. That can be a waste of time and energy. Reading books because they are easy to read can be another time-waster. Is the writer (C) really on a level of a Hermes, Jesus, Krishna, or Lao Tzu? Does he understand them and teach what they teach? or is he just a good writer who is good at entertaining you? If you invest time and energy in something, why not invest it in the best? ...And the best can be easy to understand if you don't bite off more than you can chew. What a simple instruction, yet, how hard to carry out. Why? ...Not because of inability but because of ...unwillingness. By the way, did you answer the question just now or did you just read on? ...It takes a certain honesty with yourself to answer such questions. If you read Eckhart Tolle's A NEW EARTH you will learn that your ego will do everything to prevent you from finding out the truth. Why? ...Because knowing the truth about ourselves, or our government, will set us free. As within, sowithout. I hope that after all of this work we now got a good idea of what the Law of Correspondence is. That Law is "to .... accomplish the Miracle of one thing".. That "Miracle of one thing" is Lao Tzu's "Mystic Unit(Sü$1)". That "Unit" is a whole, which is greater than the sum of its parts, but, like a chain, it is only as strong as its weakest link.. The last phrase, starting at the end of line six, is another one of those that are hard to cut down. Start your sentence with "It is .... to show ..." ... See what you can do ...I will give you my attempt in the next section.===========================================================Oct. 15, 2008. In the previous, Oct. 13 section, are two mistakes: Both are under the 7a) statement: ...One is the usual mistake, which my ego puts in automatically with Automatic Energy (E6). It does that consistently whenever my attention (E4) is somewhere else. You can consult Eckhart Tolle about the ego. Have you noticed the other error? ...Asking you to find my errors is one way to profit from them. It is a logical error. ...If you are not a philosopher, it will be harder for you to find. Let me quote the passage in which we have both mistakes: " .... it means for those who are born under a 'fire' sign: ...Don't do the 'work (at 3)' of the 'earth' (D), .... or earth (B) signs". .... To help you to "Identify(Mg) the logical error. let me ask a few questions: To whom is the question given? ... There are four sources in the tetrad: Fire (A), air (B) water (C) and earth (D). How would the instruction have to be phrased if it is given to A, B, C or D? ...The instruction is: Separate A from D. To which source is it given? ...How would it have to be phrased if it is given to A? ...Separate yourself from D. Where does the instruction come from? ...Hint: Consult Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE. ...It is given to B, through A, from E3 "wherein the idea of separate existence originates.". Notice that if you don't do this kind of detective work then you can't understand WHAT Hermes is saying. The same is true of Lao Tzu. The difference is that Lao Tzu teaches, those who are willing to learn, HOW to read his words.. Notice also, that, hadn't it been for me first making the mistake and then ...noticing it, we wouldn't have done the above exercise and not gained this valuable insight.153.2 (Paragraph 2, page 153 of THE SECRET SOURCE)"Later, the Emerald Tabled was translated by Dr. John Everard and published in the 1600s. The copy of this translation includes his original commentary on the text:"The quote starting at 153.4 is broken down into four paragraphs. The first is eight lines long, the second is six, the third is eight lines again and the fourth is almost two pages long.. I will quote each of the first three paragraphs in full and then do the usual work after each one. I will not quote the last paragraph in full but will do the usual work on it1] ". It is true without any lying, certain and most true, that which is2] inferior, or below, is as that which is superior or above, there being3] one Universal matter and form of all things, differenced only by acci-4] dent, and particularly by that great mystery of Rarefaction and Con-5] densation, and that which is superior as that which is inferior, to work6] and accomplish the Miracle of one thing, and to show the great va-7] riety and diversity of operation wrought by that Spirit that worketh8] all things in all things."The first two phrases in line one tell us the same thing we get from the parallel passages of the other two quotes. Different words (C) but same idea (B). Namely that ...the Law of Correspondence is self evident, "there being one Universal matter and form of all things". The "Universal matter could be E1 or Sat, or it could be everything below E7. E7 = D. But it can't be our body (D) because ..Our body is not "Universal", it is like a drop within "Universal matter". It is matter (E8) which is shaped into our human form (B). We can think of Vital Energy (E7 as a mold within which matter is given our specific form. We are made in the image of God. Lao Tzu compares the mold to a "Pot(ut)": “In-the-center (*d), where theNothing in Something ( HYUWU) is, there is thePot'S User (utus)". *d = Tang102.. The Aristotelian formal cause is at level B of his teacher's "Divided Line (509d)". In the Ching "Form" is Hsing(@k). It is in only two chapters. This is an important concept. Let me quote them: Wise men have said that the"Great image is without Form (TA%4WU@k)".Form (B) is added to the image (A) at level B. Now the image A is "With(YU)" form B. Wu - Yu is one "DyAd(dyad)". One of its poles implies the other. The other quote is: The"Tao Produces Them (A1Sg Z),Tê Maintains Them (TÊ@d Z) andMatter takes "Their( Z)" Form (wU@k Z)".. In the Nei-yeh, Hsing(@k) appears more often: At 3a (Chapter 3, line a) we have:"All of the Mind's Forms (1aHs Z@k) are ...." At 4f we have:"The Way is what infuses the body." I have used Harold D. Roth's translation.. The "Way" is Tao(A1) and the "body” is Hsing(@k). At line 14 of the same chapter we have: We do"Not See Its Form (PUoo H@k)".. JG Bennett: We do not know structures, but we know because of structures." Why? ...Because of the structures we have within us. He who has shall have more. Why? ...Because of the Law of Correspondence, we know because of what we already know. As within so without. He who has more knowledge within knows more of what is without.. That Aristotle has associated his formal cause with level B of his teacher's "Divided Line (509d)" tells us that ...he must have known what he was talking about. Plato was the "WordEr(C2er)" and Aristotle was the "KnowEr(kner)" (B), who has used Plato's visions (A) but, probably because of intellectual pride, didn't give Plato credit for it but he did criticize his mistakes. Such activities of the ego can have a significant effect on history. And it is only now, after Eckhart Tolle's A NEW EARTH, that it is possible to say such outrageous things. Let's get back to our text:. The matter - form dyad is not mentioned in the other two texts but it is a very important one. Following Mr.B, matter would be his E9-E10-E11-E12 tetrad, and form would then be the E1-E2-E3-E4 tetrad. E4 = A. The B-C-D-E8 tetrad would then be the connective (=) between the two poles. If the supply of the demand, which was formulated at A, is sent, across ...A, to E1, then E1 is the receptive (-) impulse. So what is E3? ...Which triad do we have? ... These questions are addressed primarily to the experts at the DuVersity. Can you see what I am doing here? ...I am telling the experts WHAT work needs to be done. And if they know HOW to do it and what their dharma is they will do it, in theory (B) at least. Knowing your dharma involves understanding THE DIVISION OF LABOR.Getting things "Done Without Doing (doWUdo)" them yourself makes perfect sense once THE DIVISION OF LABOR is understood and working. In it, A tells B what work to do, B tells C what work to do and C tells D what work to do. Seeing the system at work, also helps us to understand the Law of Correspondence better. None of the four sources or partners is more important than any of the three other ones. The components of any N-term system are like the links in a chain. Weaken one and ... Strengthen one at the expense of any other one and .... The phrase "All Things (WnwU)" appears in 16 chapters in the Ching. Lao Tzu can shed light on the "all things" we have here and at 153.1. With my fellow philosophers (B) this is some kind of comparing notes, but the "WordErs(C2er)" would take this as an instruction if they want to "Actualize their Potential (A1pt)" in order to be able to do their dharma. They can't do their job, which is to: ...Communicate the truth which, when known, will set us free when they don't know the truth themselves. This is why raja (C) yoga is also called integral yoga, it is Gurdjieff's 4th Way School system. This is why Krishna teaches Arjuna in the Gita karma (D), bhakti (A) and jnana (B) yoga. Raja yogis must be able to understand what the jnana yogis are saying and they must know what the karma yogis can do and understand. Why do they need love (A)? ...So that they don't act like our politicians (C). If you are willing to answer these question (the three dots) instead of reading them, a lot of other passages in the Ching will start to make sense to you. Here is a clear-cut instruction to communicators:Compare line two of this quote with the other two parallel passages! ...If you want to do your dharma, "Align(8b)" yourself with the level above you! Why? ...Because if you don't do that, you can't do your dharma. When I was working as a programmer (B), I couldn't do my job without a "job description" from the customer. A computer scientist, who was a partner of my former partner, Jim, couldn't do a job for a customer because he didn't have a black box for it. Jim called me in to do the algorithm (B) for them. The algorithm conveyed to him in the form of a flowchart enabled Jim to do the coding (C). He knew HOW to do the coding in BASIC. The computer (D) knew HOW to do its job, so the job, they had struggled with for Month, got done in one afternoon.. There is a difference between theory (B) and practice (B), and I am very glad that I can back up some of these theories (B) with my practical (D) experience. I am now 73 years old. As I look back over my life I can see that all the major decisions in my life were not made by me. I would never have become a computer programmer, if it had not been for Jim. And how did I end up in India at the feet of Jagadguru Shri Kripalu Mahaprabhu? Kripalu means poet. He was probably the only person in the world who could help me with Plato's Republic. Here is a question maybe some experts can answer. How come I was in Alexandria as a sailor? Well, sailors get to Alexandria. But how come that I, as a steward, got a day off in Beirut, Lebanon, to see the temple of Baal? ... This is not the area of my specialization, but I am still curious. I was only six Weeks in India but there was a sense of being home, of wanting to stay. What do all these subtle feelings of ours mean? As a jnana yogi (B), I live in my head, but these subtle feelings are still there.. And this sense of doing the right thing, of doing what you came here to do, may also have been very subtle at first. But he who has shall have more. And then, years later, you know that this is it. This is WHAT you came here to do. So some water signs (C) may carryout some of my instructions. And, because they did, they carry out more. And it becomes easier for them to understand WHAT I am saying. And so, slowly, the Law of Attraction begins to kick in.. If you "Align" yourself with the level above your own level, then you will do your job, or dharma because it gives you joy (ananda). You follow your bliss rather than the money. Others, may think that you are working very hard. But to you it is play. It may look like hard work to others but you are so busy at it because you love it.. If you don't enjoy what you are doing, then it is not your dharma. Your dharma is something you will do even if you don't get paid for it. My philosophy is my hobby, it is like a full-time job. The poets have done their job. The Gita and the Nei-yeh is a 100% poetry. The Ching is estimated to be 75%. Harold D. Roth, the translator of the Nei-yeh, was wondering, why the Tao Te Ching became so popular and the Nei-yeh didn't. I think the difference is the 25% of prose, in which Lao Tzu explains HOW, or the Way, to read his poetry makes the difference. And we can also use Lao Tzu's advise to read the Nei-yeh and other revelations, like the Emerald Tablet.. So jnana yogis have no excuse that they have no work to do. The excuse that you never heard of the Bible or the Koran simply will not hold water. In the Parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14) The servant who had received the one talent buried it. When the master came he said: "Lord, I knew thee that thou art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown and gathering where thou hast not strawed". He must have thought that this was a good excuse. But his master said: You knew that I "Do things Without Doing (doWUdo)" them myself. I gave one of your fellow servants five and the other got two talents in payment for the work I expected them to do for me. They did their work. What do you think I gave you that talent for? …What does that parable mean to you? ...We all have received our own particular talents. Some get more of it others less: "to every man according to his several ability". Those who get more have more responsibility. But the "unprofitable servant" knew that, even though he only got one talent, he is still responsible for it. "For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not [enough] shall be taken away even that which he hath." If Jesus, Krishna or Lao Tzu know a certain Law, and they talk about it, then, even though HOW they explain it is different, WHAT they are saying has to be the same.. "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! If you do and use it, you will experience joy. First a little, then more. He who has little and uses it, shall have more. That is a Law. It is also a fact that you can't "Actualize a Potential" you don't have. You are not responsible for what you have not received. But if you don't use what you have received, read Matthew 25:14.. Jesus uses analogy. It is such a powerful thinking (B) and communication (C) tool because it is based on the Universal Law of Correspondence.. As you get more into your own dharma, you make decisions, which ordinarily don't make sense. The original idea of getting my house at 390 Jones Ave. here in Toronto was to work spare-time as a landlord and full-time on my dharma. When land lording became too much for me, I sold the house at 20% below marked value to one of my tenants, with the idea to work zero% as a landlord and a 100% on my dharma. Well, things don't always work out the way we want them to work out. But sometimes, in a strange way, things work out better, when things don't work out the way we want them to work out. Or should I say: The way our ego wants them to work? This tenant is causing me more trouble than any tenant has caused me, but strangely, philosophically, I am more productive than I was ever before. It could be just the law of attraction at work. I got more of the right knowledge now than I had before and so it can be expected that more new knowledge comes my way. But still, I think that somehow the stress I am under right now has something to do with my greater productivity. Again, there are more interesting ideas coming my way which I, not being a communicator (C), can get out nicely. But, no worry, I continue to do the best I can.. As we get more into our dharma, we automatically get out of other people's dharma. The instruction at Gita 3.35 is carried out automatically, as if by itself, with Automatic Energy (E6). I "Do it Without Doing (doWUdo)" myself. Here the ego does it for us. What the ego does, does not necessarily have to be a bad thing. The ego can be trained the way a computer can be programmed to do what we want it to do.. But at Sherborn House I was unable to do the Gurdjieff movements. The movement teacher, Pierre Eliot, couldn't believe that somebody could be that uncoordinated, so he figured that I did it to irk him. Well, three Month before the end of the course, I was ready to quit. If Mr.B had not bent the rules a bit for me, I would have been gone. And again, I didn't want to work on maintaining the house and dealing with tenants because doing that was not my dharma. That fact was behind my decision to sell the house. Dharma is often translated as duty. Plato, Krishna and Lao Tzu has a lot to say about "interfering" with other people's duties or dharma. Not doing your own dharma or doing the dharma of others somehow doesn't feel right. I get this feeling when I have to do the communicating (C) of the ideas (B), which come to me. But reaching down to the communicators below my level is still my duty. No matter which level a yogi is on is on. S/he still has to do it, even if the people on the level below don't care. What they don't do with their talents is not your responsibility, but they can't do it if you don't do your job. It is your responsibility to reach down, to "Do what you Can Do (A1ptA1)"! And since we now have the internet, thinkers have to use it. The wife of my former partner, Jim, twisted my arm, she literally forced me to go on this blog. So what excuse would I have now? I remember how reluctant I was to let her put onto this blog. I now know in hindsight that I already suspected how frustrating it would be for me. She must have been under a contract. She just left me no choice and thus, with no excuse. But now I am so thankful to her for getting me onto this blog. Thankful also to the people behind this user-friendly blog. "What seems at first a cup of sorrow is found in the end immortal wine. That pleasure is pure: it is the joy, which arises from a clear vision of the spirit. (Gita 18.37)".. Gita 2.47 comes to mind. I will use Sargeant's translation:"Thy jurisdiction is in action alone;Never in its fruits at any time.Never should the fruit of action be thy motive;*Never let there be attachment in thee to inaction." There is an excellent footnote on this often misinterpreted and translated verse.. I can only speak for myself, but I love doing the work I am doing here. I am not getting paid for it. It is not as good as it could be. It has not the effect it would have within a working tetrad because the communicators (C), who could help us, don't seem to care. But that doesn't deter me from doing my dharma. I am not responsible for what communicators could do for democracy but I am responsible for what I can do. Let's get back to the question I asked a page ago:. What do you come up with when you compare the three parallel statements? ...The question is primarily addressed to communicators (C) because ...in order to communicate something, they must first ...understand it themselves. So what did you come up with? ... What did you notice? ...That here we don't have the "Reversal($1)" we have at 153.1 and 165.3.But it Is there. ..."....that which is inferior ....is as that which is superior". "True Words Likely Reverse" ..."That which is superior" is "as that which is inferior". Ideas which would explain this better keep coming, but doing the work for you would be good for my ego (See how smart I am?) but it is not the best I can do for you. Ideally I concentrate on what I can do best without robbing you of the opportunity of doing what you can (learn to) do best. See Plato about that. He has devoted so much space to THE DIVISION OF LABOR in his Republic because without it, we can't have a healthy society. But, with it, our political masters ...are doing very well. The best we can do right now is to learn from them HOW to do it, learn it ourselves from scratch or combine these two approaches which are open to us.Starting at line three, we are told that the "one" is "differenced by .... accident .... by Rarefaction and condensation, and that which is superior as that which is inferior”. I will work on each of these four causes of the "Division(âo)" of the "One( 1)" in the next section, one at a time.. If you are into Alchemy, you probably know more about two of them than I do. So please get going on it.==============================================================Oct. 13, 2008165.3. The quote from paragraph 3, page 165 of THE SECRET SOURCE is broken down into 14 numbered statements. The first two are at the end of the Sept. 28 section. It is well to have them together with the other two parallel statements so that we can compare them.3) "And things have been from this primal substance through a single act. How wonderful is this work! It is the main [principle] of the world and its maintainer.". The "primal substance" is the first of Mr.B's 12 Energies (E1) The Hindus call it Sat. It is one impulse in the Sat-Chit-Ananda triad.. The "single act" refers to the "the miracle of One (at 2)" It now becomes "this work! It is the main [principle] of the world and its maintainer." The"Tao Produced It (A1Sg Z) and. Tê Maintains It (TÊ@d Z)". Hsü(@d) = "To rear, cultivate .... feed".4) "Its father is the sun and its mother the moon;" Same as 153.1.5) "The wind has borne it in its body, and the earth has nourished it;". Notice the difference between this and the parallel statement at 153.1. These comparisons are good exercise, they force you to think. .... The "fire" at 153.1 is at 7) here.6) "The father of talisman and the protector of miracles6a) whose powers are perfect, and whose lights are confirmed,7) A fire that becomes earth.". The Aristotelian final cause (A) by the mediation of the formal (B) and the efficient (C) causes is manifested in the material cause (D). The form (B) is clothed in earthly matter (D).7a) "Separate the earth from the fire, so you will attain the subtle as more inherent than the gross, with care and sagacity.". You know what Lao Tzu has told us about instructions. ...Nobody who does not understand them is Able to Execute them. So what does: Separate the earth (D) from the fire (A), mean? ...In the macrocosmic sense it means more than we can chew right now, but we will come to some of it in the 153.4 quote. In the microcosmic sense, in terms of the things we are able to do, and are responsible for, it means for those who are born under a "fire" sign: …Don't do the "work (at3)" of the "earth" (D), water (C) or earth (B) signs, because …It is not your business, or dharma.. " .... the subtle" is everything above level C of Plato's "Divided Line (at 509d)". And "the gross", in this context is not just "Gross matter" E8 but everything below B.. When describing THE DIVIDED LINE Plato said: ".... divide a line into two" halves. The upper half, the one above C, is "the intelligible order or region, the other", the lower half below B, is "the visible region". After that is clear, we have to divide the two halves again. This gives us four quarters, which are the four sources of the tetrad, which the Hindus, Lao Tzu, Plato, his student Aristotle and J.G. Bennett have described in more detail. I have lectured on the tetrad at the Toronto Theosophical society from 1964 to 1973. Around 1970 a member of my audience pointed out to me that Mr.B knows more about the tetrad than I do. That is why in 1973 I left for England to study under him.It may not be obvious that Hermes is talking about the tetrad, but if you know it well "Enough(Zu)" then you know that he does.. The first thing Lao Tzu says in the Ching is: "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! It has to be "Your" "Potential(pt)" because you can't actualize a potential you don't have. From these very first two characters of Lao Tzu's book you can see that we can use the Tao Te Ching to interpret interpretations of Hermes' words.. In a practical sense, to "Separate" A from D also implied to separate A from B and C as well. In the tetrad each of the four sources is the opposite of each one of the other three."WordErs Don't Understand (C2erPUkn)" this. This is why you find writers (C) tell their readers: Don't think (B), it is bad for you. In fact, for a raja (C), karma (D) or bhakti (A) yogi to pursue the path of knowledge (B) is bad for them. But to tell a jnana yogi not to do his or her own dharma, is wrong. In fact, each of us can think, talk and tie his shoelaces. If I couldn't talk, I couldn't even say what I am saying here. So to advise people not to do the thinking, talking and doing they are "Able(ab)" to do, is wrong.. We are talking here about the Separation or DIVISION OF LABOR. The "idea of separate existence" comes from E3, through A, to B. See THE HOLY SCIENCE about that.. In order to comprehend the truth, which comes through the "Door, Dasamadwara (A), to B and C and which goes back from D to E1, we need more than one vision (A) of it. But the truth (B), which "The Wind has borne .... in its body, and the earth has nourished" is "One". The vision (A) of the truth, which becomes an algorithm at B, a string of instructions at C and which is manifested at D, is "One".. There is the "Big Truth (TAA1)” which is outside of us and there is the separated Tao(A1) of Ching 25. The thinkers (B) carry it in their "belly", so to say, because …it inside of us, because …we know it.8) "It rises from earth to heaven, so as to draw the lights of the heights to itself, and descends to earth; thus within it are the forces of the above and the below;". If we use the Heptad, then "the forces of the above" are the three impulses of the E1-E2-E3 triad, and "the forces of .... the below” are the three impulses of the thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad.. As I have explained before: N-term systems, as a whole, are "One". Here the two triads are the poles of a dyad in a triad in which A is the connective (=). If you can handle this, please do, if not, skip it.. If we use Mr.B's Dodecad, then the three tetrads in it form a triad in which the B-C-D-E8 tetrad is the connective. In either one of the two interpretations, the connective draws "the light of the heights to itself, and .... thus within it are the forces of the above and the below." According to Arthur Koestler, the holon (=) is a whole and a part. It is both, "the above and the below".. When reading the things I am familiar with, I have no problem understanding them; my problem is describing it. Why? ...Because communication (C) is not my business, or dharma.9) "Because of the light of lights within it, thus does the darkness flee before it.". We are the connective between the above and the below. When the truth is within us, individually or collectively, "thus does the darkness flee before" us.10) "The force of forces, which overcomes every subtle thing and penetrates into everything gross." Had I not worked on Eckhart Tolle's A NEW EARTH before I came to this passage, I would not know what to make of "every subtle thing" (within us). But I did know about the "force .... which .... penetrates into everything gross." As above, in "Heaven so Below (Tn -), on earth. .... the Nothing in Something can Penetrate NO-Space (WUYU#kWU@i)".11) "The structure of the microcosm is in accordance with the structure of the macrocosm.". As within, so without. "JG Bennett: We do not know structures, but we know because of structures." What did Mr.B say here? ...We know because the structures are within us, the microcosm, because ..."The structure of the microcosm is in accordance with the structure of the macrocosm."12) "And accordingly proceed the knowledgeable." Our search for truth begins with becoming aware of the unknowable. The "Knowledge that we Don't Know (knPUkn)" makes the unknowable knowable. You can't solve a problem if you don't know that you have a problem. But knowing that you have a problem alone is not "Enough(Zu)". You must be more specific. You must know WHAT the problem is. So, after you become aware that you have a problem, you must "Know that you Don't Know" WHAT the problem is. And when you do that, the problem becomes "IdentifiAble (ptMg)". Now you can "Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)". That is what makes the problem knowable. This is HOW, or the "Way(A1)", the unknowable becomes the knowable. Next comes the knowing and then comes the known. "And accordingly" ...we proceed from the unknown to the known. And if you know HOW to do that you can figure out things for yourself. You will know (B) whether what I am saying here is true or false, or you “Know that you Don’t Know” it yet. But once you become aware of that, it becomes knowable.. Take the "Financial Crisis" the mass media is "informing" us about. If we believe the “official version” of it, then the real problem is "UnIdentifyAbla (PUptMg)". Why? …The “official version” is designed by social engineers whose job it is to prevent us from finding out the truth. The real problem is described in books and on the internet. It happened before and after it, the rich, who were behind it got richer and the poor and the middle-class got poorer. It is happening again right now. And again, there will be a certain number of suicides. Instead of waking up and doing something about the problem, people kill themselves. And this is precisely what our political masters want you to do: Don’t give us a hard time. Kill yourselves! Of course, they will say that what I am telling you here is a "Ridiculous(*141)" conspiracy theory.. Notice also that the willingness to do the knowing, or thinking (B), is as important as the ability to think. Willingness is the decisive factor when the ability is there and the willingness is not. As you gain a working knowledge of Lao Tzu's lessons, your ability apply these theories (B) in practice (D) increases but you still need the willingness to do it.13) "And to this aspired Hermes who was threefold graced with wisdom."14) "And this is his last book, which he concealed in the chamber.."The interpretations I have given you here are theories (B) only. They must still be proved or disproved. But I have given you all of the 14 statements. This I will not do with the 153.4 quote. It is too long. I will primarily pick those statements from it which can shed light on what I have said about 153.1 and 165.3 so far. If you have the book, you can start working on it already. As Lao Tzu said: Don't bite of more than you can chew. But you must bite off what you can chew. If you do that, then tomorrow you can chew what you can’t chew today. ...==========================================================October 11, 2008Our soul (A) has been called a spark of the Divine and it has been compared with a drop in the ocean. It is like an island in a sea of "Beauty(%b)" and "(Ugliness(ug)".. Lao Tzu started to talk about "The DyAd (Tzdyad)" at Ching 1.4 and he continued with it into Ching 2.1: As above, in "Heaven, so Below (Tn -), on earth. Both Know (%2kn):Beauty'S BeautifyIng (%b Zdo%b) And Ugliness Doing-its thing (*2ug^k).Both Know (%2kn): theGood Ones Doing Good (gd Zdogd) And the No Good Doing-their-thing (*2PUgd^k)".. *2 - Ssu69. Lao Tzu has continued talking about the "DyAd(dyad)" but at the beginning of chapter 2 he has introduced something new. What is it? ...We are talking about the Law of Correspondence here. ...All "DyAds" are analogous to each other.. At Ching 2.2 Lao Tzu gives us six examples of "TriAds ( 3ad)". Here are four of them: "Existence and Nonexistence Mutually produce life (YUWUmt*X).Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed (dfezmtcm). ....High and Its-negative-opposite Mutually necessitate Altitude (#2 -mt*c) ....Before and After Mutually necessitate Sequence (#c60mt#e)" or time.*X = Shêng(Sg). It also means "Life". *c = Ch'ing9. What is the lesson here? ...All "TriAds" are analogous to each other. Please use different translations of these passages to familiarize yourself with the "DyAd" The "TriAd" is described at Ching 14.. If we had the original text of the quote from 153.1 and a concordance for it, we could work on it as we do with the Ching. As it is, we have to compare the three quotes with each other to get a better idea of the ideas behind them. This is what you also have to do if all you have is translations of the Ching which are not accompanied by the standard text. And that forces you to think.. Thinkers use thinking tools as carpenters use woodworking tools. Let us use analogy to "Complete(cm)" the thought we have begun this section with. ...As our soul (A) is like an island in a sea of beauty and ugliness so our intellect (B) ...is like an island in a sea of truth and ...As our intellectual center is like an island in a sea of truth and falsehoods, so our mind (C), or Gurdjieff’s emotional center, is like ...Before I continue with this exercise, please become aware of your emotions (C). If they are strong "Enough(Zu)" they are easy to observe; if they are weak you are at a certain disadvantage. If the impulse to stop reading this nonsense is quite is strong, it is best to stop reading and to go to Eckhart Tolle's book with the question: ...What happened just now? ... If the aversion for this kind of work (which is necessary to find the truth) is weaker, you have not been dumbed down "Enough" yet. Still, please take note of that feeling (A). As we go on, become more aware of any emotions, which might arise. Ask yourself: What do these emotions have to do with the work, which is necessary to find out the truth? ...Let's go on: As our mind is like an island in a sea of ...positive and negative emotions, so our ...body (D) is like an island in a sea of positive and negative ...energies, vibrations or events.. I know that this kind of work can be irritating. We have been programmed that way. A communicator (C) can make this work a bit more palpable for you but no communicator, no matter how good, can do your thinking for you. However, when more people understand a truth, they collectively change the morpho-genetic field around that idea, and then, the same truth, you had to struggle with so hard, becomes easier for others to understand. This is where the law of attraction comes in. Right now, because many people have been programmed to have an aversion against this kind of work, it is not easy to change the morph-genetic field, but when it is changed by a conscious collective effort, people will at first take a more neutral stance towards the truth and then the collective attitude of the people will become more positive towards it. Instead of being "Without the Desire (WUYÜ)" to find out the truth, people will "Have(YU)" that "Desire". Social engineering has more to do with motivation (C) than with thinking (B).. Right now, what Rupert Sheldrake has explained, must serve as the motivation for those people who want to see a positive change in the world. Change starts with though (B), then Sensitive Energy (E5) must be stepped down to Automatic Energy (E6), which must become Vital Energy (E7) This is the energy which moves our body (D). This is why Gurdjieff has called it the moving center.. The falsehoods our intellect (B) has to deal with are put out by professional social engineers in the Educational system, the mass media and on the internet. So falsehoods seem to have an advantage over the truth. Is that so? …Only as long as we are not aware of what they are doing. We can train our intellect and learn to recognize falsehood for what they are, and we can point out particular "tricks and stratagems (548a)" to each other. Then, if we do that, the work of the social engineers are doing becomes counterproductive because, ...by their efforts, they are letting us know what they don't want us to know. Which is? ...The Truth.. I have started out this section with Lao Tzu because without learning some of his lessons, the wisdom of Hermes is inaccessible to us. This doesn't mean that "Other Teachers What they Teach (mn ZSO#l)" isn't the same, but with the Ching we have the advantage of having a very good teacher and a fairly reliable "standard text" of his words. The standard text I rely on is the one which accompanies John C. H. Wu's and R. L. Wing's translations, and which is used in Jonathan Star's scholarly work.. The Nei-yeh is 100% poetry. Somebody has to do the kind of work on it Star has done on the Ching. I mention the Nei-yeh here because it is another valuable original text.. Without an original text, some guesswork is unavoidable. But let us continue our work on the 153.1 quote: The next sentence we come to is:"It ascends from the earth to the heaven and becomes ruler over that which is above and below."Problem here: ...Thought, word and deed (B-C-D) supply the demand of A. And it is shipped back to A, not to "heaven" (B). HOW can we solve that problem? ...We can assume that "Gross matter" (E8) "ascends" through our senses (D) and our mind (C) to "heaven" (B). But if that is WHAT the sentence means, then E8 would have to be the "one". And it "becomes ruler over that which is above and below." And that's the problem.. In the Aristotelian tetrad, the "material cause" (D) covers the "formal cause" (B). B is the algorithm of the "final cause" (A), which is like a hologram, visible, but intangible. On level D, A's intangible demand is supplied in tangible (D) form (B).. Someone might say that the kingdom of "heaven" is to be established on "earth". Or that, A's Will be done on "earth" as it is in "heaven". Can you see the problem with this? ...That the one "becomes ruler over that .... which is below" makes sense, but that "It .... becomes ruler over that which is above" is harder to chew. It would mean that the one "becomes ruler over" itself. This is quite a bit for us to chew on. ...Perhaps the solution to our problem is in the other two quotes. The last sentence of 153.1 is: ""And I have already explained the meaning of the whole of this in two of these books of mine."The footnote behind the 165.3 quote says that it is "Another Arabic version (from the German of Julius Ruska)". While the original texts our three quotes are based on may be different, the truth which is expressed in them must be the same. There is only one tetrad, so, if the people, who describe it, know it, then, what they say about it, must be the same. We can also assume that the translators of the longer versions had access to these two books of Hermes because there are details in them, which are not in the 153.1 quote. I will start with the 165.3 quote because it comes closer to the 153.1 quote, we have already worked on. If you have the book, you can already start working on 165.3. ...==========================================================October 7, 2008. The next sentence we come to in the 153.1 quote is:"The Earth carried it in her belly, and the Wind nourished it in her belly, as Earth which shall become Fire.". The first question we have to answer, to get anywhere with this sentence, is: ...What does "the Wind" represent? ...Originally I intended to go over this first and shortest quote to familiarize ourselves with the text which is elaborated on in the other two longer quotes. It helps to have a good grasp of what is interpreted or commented on.. However, if we don't jump ahead to the last sentence of 153.4,3 (153.4, paragraph 3), we might get stuck with this tough sentence. The sentence from 153.4 is:"The Wind or Air carried in its Belly as one of the links in the chain, that link superior things to them that are below." So "the Wind" is "Air" (B). But now, that we have jumped ahead, we might also have bitten off more than we can chew, unless ...we take it very slowly, one step at a time. Assuming that the pronoun "it" refers to the "one" in both sentences, the question which arises then is: ...In which "belly" was it "carried" at 153.1 and in which "Belly" was it "carried" at 153.4? ...Notice HOW certain question focus your mind (C) on parts of the sentence you didn't pay attention to before. Questions can be compared to a microscope in this case, but they can also be used to focus the intellect (B) on the big picture. They can also be compared to a telescope. Following my own rules, I shall skip what is too hard for me to chew. What I can chew is the following: ...If you have read my previous sections, then you already know what it is: ...B "carried in its Belly as one of the links in the chain, that" which links "superior things to them that are below." I am on level B. A is above me and C is "below". And what is true of level B is true if the other tree levels as well.Each one of the four sources is like a link of a chain. Weaken one and you ...weaken the chain. Break one and you ...Do I have to spell it out? ... Those "that are below" must "Align(8b)" themselves to the level above their own. If they don't link themselves to the "things", or the level which is "superior" to their own, the system will not work. They are creating the bottleneck which prevents the system from working.. If you have followed me this far, you can also see why it is relatively easy for the social engineers to sabotage the system. They don't have to weaken or break all of the four links, breaking one link is "Enough(Zu)". In systems theory, this is known as a break in the "critical path". To prevent us from becoming aware of these known facts, to not connect this knowledge to what is so vitally important to us takes some doing. The question is now: ...How far can the social engineers take it before we wake up? ...At which point will they have bitten off more than they can chew? ...The answer to that question depends on you. How gullible are you? .... Some excellent work has been done on 9/11, in books and documentaries.. To read or to see them, is not a matter of ability but of willingness. We need a critical mass of concerned world citizens to change the morpho-genetic field of our planet. If "Enough" people don't wake up in time to bring about that change, then THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT, or KARMA will take effect. We must reap what we sow. "The penalty good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men (Plato)". Why do you think the social engineers are so busy trying to take our attention away from the things which really matter? ...Because they know what matters.And now we have to relate what Hermes has said about the tetrad with what we know about it. ...As "Air" (B) must "Align(8b)" itself with A, so C must align itself with B. And as C aligns itself with B, so must D align itself with C. I have described this in more detail by means of the computer programming example. If B, C or D fail to bring "superior things to" themselves, the system as a whole will not work. While a system is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts, it is only as strong as its weakest "link".. We can also use the three branches of government as an example: B is the ...legislative branch. There the laws of the land are legislated (ideally by the consensus decision-making process). Originally the senate was intended for that purpose but now it has become a self-serving institution. C is the ...judicial branch. Politicians (C) and judges must use the laws to make their decisions or judgments. But they can only make decisions which can be made "Automatically" (E6). For any non-routine cases, the legislature (B) must be consulted. Within limits, the judicial brach of government has authority over D. And D is the ...executive branch. It is the police, the penal system, the army etc. The politicians (C) also have the authority to delegate work to sub-contractors (D).. When you understand WHAT Plato has said about THE DIVISION OF LABOR in his Republic, which is behind all of this, the functions of the three branches of government are not hard to understand. To make it harder to understand, the social engineers must make it seem to be more complicated than it really is.. The government we have is a timocracy (B). It is a triad. The highest impulse in it is B.. A democracy (A) is a tetrad. The highest source in it are the people collectively (A). Those in power are those who make the decisions. And decisions are made for the decision-maker.. In a dictatorship the decisions are made by the dictator (C), in a timocracy the decisions are made by the unelected advisors (B) of our elected politicians (C), and in a democracy, the decisions are made by the people and therefore they are ...made for the people.Let us now use the Law of Correspondence to shed some more light on what I have tried to get across here: The Tao Te Ching is estimated to be 75% poetry. What comes to us from the other side of the "Door, Dasamadwara" (A), comes through the poets (A) as poetry. The proper function of the Brahmins (B) is to interpret the poetry (A) for the politicians (C). In the Gita, Krishna plays the role of a Brahmin, or teacher, while Arjuna plays the role of a Kshatriya (C), a member of the warrior caste. What the role of Brahmins (B), Kshatriyas (C) and Vaisyas (D) is, is described at Gita 18.41-44. The role of the poets (A), Kavayas (See Gita 4.16), is not explained because the Brahmins have usurped their position. The political system described at Gita 18.41 is the same triad we have here. The truth, which comes through the poets (A), can also come through the people collectively (A). The relationships of A-B, B-C and C-D are analogous to each other: As A is to B so ...B is to C, and as B is to C, so ...C is to D. When the Law of Correspondence is understood, both systems, democracy and the one we have, can be understood and the differences between them can be seen clearly. And the social engineers must prevent this from happening. Why? ...Because knowledge is power. When "Enough" of us know the truth, the truth will set us free. Do you think that our political masters are stupid "Enough" to tell us the truth? ...In capitalism (D) money is power. In a dictatorship (C) might is right. On level B knowledge of HOW to prevent the people from finding out the truth, of HOW to dumb them down, is power. And on level A, Truth is the lifeblood of democracy. When the truth about ourselves is understood well “Enough” it will set us free individually.; when the truth about our government is known collectively by “Enough” people, it will set us free collectively. And, as Plato has said in so many words, for this to happen it is necessary that the “Educational System" is controlled by the people. Hugo Chavez, of Venezuela, has understood that. The first thing he did, after he was elected, was to take the control of the educational system out of the hands of the social engineers.. Knowledge of HOW the social engineers prevent us from finding out the truth is also ...power. To my knowledge, Ching 41.1 is the best example of that. For both types of government, having a working knowledge of THE DIVISION OF LABOR is also power. HOW can that be seen in a practical way? ...By watching HOW our rulers are using it. Another Way to find out is by ...figuring it out ourselves: ...The truth, which is expressed in poetry (A), is readily available in books. ...Interpretations (B) of it can also be found in books and on the internet. ...The break in the "critical path" seems to be at level C. "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that they don't know. So they are doing a professional job in communicating their own ideas instead of the truth which, when known, will set us free. And I suspect that the social engineers have something to do with that.There is still one phrase in the quote from 153.1 left to work on. ...We can translate it as a sentence. ..."Earth" (D) "shall become fire" (A). How do you interpret that? ...Hint: Use the computer programming example. ...The customer (A) tells the programmer (B) WHAT s/he wants.The programmer tells the coder (C) WHAT s/he wants the computer (D) to do. And ...the computer (D) produces the output which is shipped back to the customer (A).The next sentence in the 153.1 quote is: "Feed the Earth from that which is subtle, ...."!. This is an imperative sentence. Lao Tzu says:"Nobody (MO) who is unable to understand an instruction isAble to Carry-it-out (abpr)". Instead of waiting for me to tell you who, I think, is told to "Feed the Earth", please try to figure it out for yourself. ...After you have answered that question, there is still one more: ...What is "that which is subtle"? ... Where does the food (for thought) come “from”? .... It is important that you do your own thinking. As I have said before, what I send to you by way of this blog, are theories (B) only. They still must be tested (D) by people who have different social functions than I have. This means that without THE DIVISION OF LABOR it is unlikely that the right people will even hear about this stuff.. The dharma, business or social function of the communicators (C) is first of all to get the right information. Search engines on the internet are a tremendous tool for helping them with that. Then they must decide which ideas are worth networking, which contain the truth which, when known, will set us free. And then they must be able to see which ideas contain instructions. These must be broken down into specific, explicit, executable, instructions. The doers (D) can then try to execute them. If the theory is true, then they will be able to do it. And, if it works, then it is true. That is how theories are validated. And if a theory does not work, like Steiner’s "Threefold Social order, then it is not true. Pragmatism brings abstract theories (B) right down to earth (D). Is THE DIVISION OF LABOR true? ...If it works it is. And it did work in India before the Brahmins (B) have corrupted it. And it has worked in computer programming before the social engineers got rid of it. And it is still working in the building trade. And it can work again in politics if "Enough" of us gain a working knowledge of it. ...One Way to get some practice in it would be to re-introduce the original IBM programming system as a game.And there is still a question left from the 153.4 quote: ...What is that "link", in B's "Belly", that links "superior things to them that are below"? ...Questions and Ideas often come to me as an intuitive flash in a fraction of of a second, but look at the work I have to do to get these ideas out to you. If it were my dharma, there would be no problem with that but it is not, and that makes it very cumbersome for me. And the quality, as far as the writing goes, is not as good as when a writer (C) does it. The quality of work which is not one's dharma is not as good as the quality of work which is ones dharma. Not only is work, which is not one's dharma or "business", as Plato calls it, not done as efficiently as possible but it is not as satisfactory and satisfying as doing the work which is your dharma.. I will leave you with the question about what is "superior" and what is "below" a given level on Plato's "Divided Line (509d)". .... To understand THE DIVISION OF LABOR we have to get around the social engineers, who are teaching "Political Science", and back to Plato.. Political scientists will actually tell you to the face that: Truth is not the lifeblood of democracy. And they are made to believe (C) it too. Knowledge (B) of the truth can overcome false believes. But trying to change the minds (C) of "Political Scientists" can be a waste of time and energy. It is better for us to inform people who have not invested a lot of time, money and energy in getting a degree in Political Science. The people we have to reach first, before the morpho-genetic field has been changed, are the ones who have not been dumbed down "Enough" yet. These are the people who can still think for themselves. Please do. …=============================================================October 6, 2008. The word, "Mother(MU)" is in Ching 01, 20, 25, 52 and 59. Comparing different translations of the passages in which this word appears and then thinking about it is better than passively reading and believing what I say about it. ...1.2,2 (Ching 1. Paragraph 2, sentence 2):"With Name (YUMg)", after the "Conception(B2)", the "Mother(MU)" gives birth to "All Things (WnwU)". Which "TriAd( 3ad)" is implied here? ...Fater - Mother - Child (+-=). If you don't figure it out yourself, then your ego is telling you: Don't believe this nonsense, he is just making it up. It "can be thy friend, and thy soul can be thine enemy. (Gita 6.5 Juan Mascaró's translation)".. What I have implied here is, that the ego is what Juan has translated as "soul". The word which is there "Atma". As the Tao (A) means what the context demands, so does the Atman (A). This is why translators of the Ching and the Gita have trouble with this word. The footnote in Winthrop Sargeant's translation on Gita 6.5 is relevant here:" * In the case of one who is saving himself by disengaging his mind from its interest in the objects of sense, the mind (manas) will be his friend; in the case of one who wishes not to perish by neglecting to so disengage his mind, the mind (manas) will be his enemy and bring about the opposite of beatitude -- freely adapted from Rãmãnuja, who thus equates manas (mind) with ãtman (self) in interpreting this stanza.". Let me give you Winthrop's translation of the next verse, just for good measure:"For him who has conquered his self by the self,The self is a friend;But for him whose self is not conquered,The self remains hostile, like an enemy.. * "“* See previous footnote”. In the first line, the ego, or mind (C), is “conquered …. By the self” (A). What is the “atman” in the following three lines? …According to Eckhart Tolle it is Buddhi, the intellect (B).. Sanskrit is a phonetic language, like English, so it is easier to translate. Still, words like Atman cause just as much trouble as words like Tao and Te.. To evaluate an interpretation of a passage from the Ching or the Gita takes work. A good writer can make his readers believe (C) that he is right. It is a skill politicians have developed to perfection, but when it comes to the Ching, it is not a matter of believing (C) wether a statement is true but of knowing (B) whether it is true, false or "Knowing that you Don't Know (knPUkn" the answer. For Lao Tzu's students there are only these three possibilities.. The homework Lao Tzu gives us to do is, to "Complete(cm)" the thought (B) he has left incomplete in "Word(C2)". A good teacher give his students ...question, not answers. The words which are missing in the Ching are like the blank lines in textbooks, which the student has to fill in.. "Difficult and Easy Mutually necessitate a task to be Completed (dfezmtcm)". At Ching 63 Lao Tzu tells us in so many words: Don't waste your time and energy on tasks that are too "Difficult(df)" for you. "Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)"! Do what you Can Do! ...What is the lesson here? ...If you are unwilling to do the work you are able to do, then you will be ...Hint: "True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)" ... then you will be ...unable to do the work you are willing to do. "Able(ab)" is in 16 chapters.. Answering the question after the "Hint" is no longer a matter of "Ability(ab)" but of willingness. Like the globalists, the ego has to fight the truth in order to survive. Eckhart Tolle's A NEW EARTH contains ideas whose time has come. What he tells us about the ego enables us to actually see it in action. Credit, for what I am saying here about it, must go to him. I have been in a Swami Chinmayananda study group of the Gita for a long time. We have studied and discussed the passages I have quoted above, but nothing has helped me as much as Eckhart's book.. Lao Tzu says: Don't "Underestimate the intelligence of your Enemy ($jâb)"!...Which "Enemy" is he talking about? ...One ananswer is: The rulers of our "Intelligent Man'S Government (wsmn Z85)". The reason they are hard to recognize for what they are is because they ...Always Cause the People to be Without Knowledge and the Desire (Cn%eMnWUknWUYÜ) to know. To see what they are doing to us only takes common sense. To "Cause(%e)" us not to see it they have to dumb us down. This too is common sense but the social engineers know what to do about that. The only thing the social engineers and the ego can do nothing about is the truth. Look how many times they had to change their “official version” of the truth about 9/11. The truth is what it is. It doesn’t change, and when “Enough” of us know it, the truth will set us free.. Our rulers are not working for us, they are using their intelligence (B) to work against us. Do we have another "Enemy"? ...Our political masters are outside of us, they are objective to us. Is there another enemy? ...Yes, and if you read Eckhart Tolle's description of him, you know exactly who it is. ...If we are identified with our ego, the ego is us. To observe it, we must be "dis-identified" from it, as Eckhart puts it. To "Identify the IdentifiAble (MgptMg)" the identifier must be objective to it. The observed object can't be the observing subject, except in ...meditation. But there the observer is the Atman. And, as Krishna tells us, this only happens by the grace of God. Now things are getting complicated, but please bear with me until a communicator (C) will say it better:. The Atman is the "Ahamkara", the I - maker. If it identifies with the ego ...It IS the ego, and it can't see itself. This is where Eckhart's "dis-identification" comes in. And this is also where I can to leave well "Enough(Zu)" alone. …===========================================================Oct 3, 2008. Ching 1.2"Without Name (WUMg) is Heaven and Earth'S Conception (TnTI ZB2). . . With Name (YUMg) is the birth of all things (WnwU ZMU).". Ching 2."All Things Arise someHow (WnwU%C86). And Not Sui(#e)". Sui170 = "To follow, succeed, accord with". One possible interpretation of this interesting sentence could be that "Intelligent People (wsmn)" don't identify with the "Ten-thousand Things (WnwU)" around them. According to Gita 3.42: Our Body (D) is higher than "Gross matter, the 5th Kosha" (E8). Vital Energy (E7) is the energy which gives form (B) to our body (D). In Sutra 14 it is called "life force or Prana" . But Manas, the mind (C), is higher than the body, and Buddhi, the intellect (B), is higher than the mind. And yet, the Hindus say that we are none of these. The Atman, our soul, can dis-identify from these instruments and say: I get things "Done Without Doing (doWUdo)" them myself. I let My intellect, mind and body do it. In a way, the Atman, or Self (A), is out-sourcing the work which has to be done, it is delegating it. The Atman or the Tao does nothing itself. The "Tao is Always In-Active But Nothing does Not get Done (A1CnWUdobtWUPUdo)". At Ching 3.5, Lao Tzu brings this abstract theory (B) down to the political (C) level. In THE DIVISION OF LABOR the same principle is applied on the economic (D) level. "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2)". For instance, the unelected advisors (B) of our elected politicians (C) shouldn't do the talking (C), and they know it. They know that the politicians can lie more convincingly than they can tell the truth. They know THE DIVISION OF LABOR. Bu they just don't want us to know it. They know that knowledge is power but they don’t want us to know it.. Ching 4: The"Tao is Empty But Use It and Somehow it does Not get Full (A1#4btus ZHuPU^4).Profound It-is (#mxi)! As-if it is Wan Wu'S Ancestor (#nWnwU Z@4)".. Using the Chinese phonetics instead of "All Things" makes it easier to translate.. Ching 5:"Heaven and Earth are Not Human (TnTIPU%5) they"Treat(do)" All Things "As(YI)" Straw Dogs (YIWnwUdo*a*b). someIntelligent Men are InHumane (wsmnPU%5) they"Treat(do)" All-of-the-People "As(YI)" if they are Straw Dogs (YI%i#sdo*a*b)".*a = Ch'u140. *b = Kou94. The "Wise Men (wsmn)" here, are the rulers in an "Intelligent Men'S Government (wsmn Z85)". You can see here how different chapters shed light on each other. Ching 3 and Ching 5 wouldn't make as much sense by themselves.. Ching 8:"Water Benefits All Things (@8gdWnwU)".. Ching 16:"All Things, At-once they Arise together (WnwU*b%c)I sit and watch the cycles (meYIKnFU)".*b = Ping1 "Two together, and, moreover; at once; also; really".. Ching 32: The"Truth(A1) .... "If(41)" Leaders Were Able to Hold-onto It All Things would then Naturally Submit ( EJOab40 ZWnwU41Tu*a)" to them. *a = Pin154 "....submit,". The truth comes from E3, through A and B to C, the "Leaders( E)". If they can hold onto the truth, then the people would naturally Submit to them, because ...truth is the lifeblood of democracy. In a democracy (A), the decisions are made by the people. So, naturally, they will do the work, they, themselves, have decided to do.. Ching 34: The"Big Tao (TAA1) .... All Things Depend on It (WnwU%d Z) ....". Ching 37: The"Tao is Always Without Action But Nothing is Not Done (A1ChWUdobtWUPUdo)"If(41)" a Ruler Would "Wait(Üa)" until he is Able to Hold-onto It (Üa EJOab40 Z)All Things would then Naturally Transform (WnwU41Tuäo)" themselves.. Ching 39:"All Things Attained the One and Thereby became Productive (WnwUgt 1YISg)".. "Unite Your Dust ($1 H@h)! This is Called the Mystic Unit (SiisSü$1)" Why? ...Because this "Unit" is a whole which is greater than the sum of its parts. And this “Unit” is the “One”.. Ching 40: As above, in"Heaven, so Below (Tn -), on earth.All Things Come From Existence (WnwUSgtoYU).Existence Comes From Nonexistence (YUSgtoWU)" Therefore: ...All things come from nonexistence.. Ching 42: The"Two Produces the Three and the Three Produces All Things ( 2Sg 3 3SgWnwU)".. Ching 51: The"Tao Produces Them (A1Sg Z). Te Maintains Them (TÊ@d Z). Matter covers "Their( Z)" Form (wU@k Z) .... All Things (WnwU) Without Exception (MOPU) Worship the Tao (âhA1),".. Ching 62: A"TaoEr (A1er) is Wan Wu'S Hidden (WnwU Z*a)" supporter.". *a = Ao37.. Ching 64: A"Wise Man (wsmn)" helps "All Creatures "To(do)" find Their Own Self But he does Not lead them By-their-nose (WnwU ZTuJabtPU66do)". Credit for the interpretation of Kan(66) goes to J.Wu. Sometimes Lao Tzu is too "Subtle(Jo)" for Thinkers (B) to get his hints, but a more intuitive (A) communicator (C) might get it..Ching 76:"All Things, the Grass, the Trees (WnwU*aäJ) , whenThey are Alive Yeh (ZSgYe) they areTender and Subtle (Juâg); when They are Dead Yeh ( H78Ye) they areRigid and Dry (*b*c)". *a = Tz'ao140. *b = K'u15. *c =Kao75.When a source of the tetrad, or a member of our 4-fold social system, wants to see what happens on the level below it, it is like having to use a microscope to do so; when tying to see what happens on the level above his or her own it is like having to use a telescope. Using the telescope would be analogous to "Aligning(*b)" themselves to the higher level but the higher shouldn't have to come down, at least not in the inductive phase of the "Cycle(FU)". "Aligning" ourselves with the higher level is part of our dharma. WHAT we have to work on comes to us from above. As you can see here, for me, it comes from Lao Tzu. "KnowErs(kner)" (B) can work on ideas (B) without having to use microscopes or telescopes. They can see WHAT they have to work on with their naked eyes.. For me, reading the Tao Te Ching, is a necessary part of my job. But spelling it out, as I have to do here, is not. Writing (C) is the dharma of "WorErs(C2er). "KnowErs(kner) (B) can work on ideas (B) with their naked eyes while "WordErs(C2er)" can work on "Words(C2)" with their naked eyes. Each member of our 4-fold social order is most efficient on his or her own level. That is his Feldraum, her sphere of influence. That is the field (Feld) we are responsible for. Plato has explained this best. Lao Tzu puts it this Way:. "KnowErs are Not good with Words (knerPUC2) WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" what to say. As our political system is set up our politicians don't make the decisions. They are told what to say. And if they are not part of the team, then they don't get elected. For instance, here in Canada, statistically, Kim Campbell should have won the election, but she was going to bring in her own advisors. In other words, she wasn't going to play the game. So Jean Chretien was told WHAT to say, to get the job. An actor couldn't have said it better. The line was: "I was born that way". There is a lot we can learn from politics. That's why Lao Tzu uses examples from the political (C) level.. The point I am trying to make here, is, that the more I am getting into my own dharma the more cumbersome the work of "WordErs" becomes for me. The law of attraction is now working against me. But if a communicator would say WHAT I am trying to get across here, then it would work for us. The idea is right here, ready to be explained better. But to explain anything, no matter how well they can write, writers (C) they must ...understand (B) it before they can explain it, and that's where "Alignment(8b)" comes in.. "Aligning yourself to the level above you is a reaching up.The next sentence we come to at 153.1 is:“Its father is the Sun, its mother is the Moon.”. We have the word “father” in the Gita, but not in the Ching. But we have the word “Mother(MU)”in five chapters: 01, 20, 25, 52 and 59. This might get you going.. Rudolf Steiner said in “Lecture II. September 14, 1907”, as recorded in “Occult Signs and Symbols: “…. man, .... On Saturn, Sun and Moon. His ego, however, was acquired for the first time on earth. …. What we, in the occult sense, term Earth, Water and Air was not jet in existence on Saturn. These bodily states arose on the Sun, Moon and Earth. The densest condition on Saturn was Warmth or Fire. …. Saturn changed into Sun, Air was added to Fire and was the densest condition on the Sun.” So we have: Saturn = Fire (A), Sun = ...Air (B), Moon = Water (C) and Earth (D) = “Earth(TI)”“Without Name(WUMg) was the heaven (B) – earth (D) “Conception(B2)”. If they were conceived without name (C), then they must have been conceived by …Fire (A). Eckhart Tolle didn’t go as far as Steiner did. That’s why he is easier to understand. But if we want to find out what Hermes meant in the quote from 153.1, then we have to consult Steiner. We can also consult Lao Tzu about the "Mother(MU)". Please do. …===========================================================Oct 1, 2008. Ever since the Dalai Lama's book was dropped into my lap, I have adopted the following rules to deal with the information I get in this Way:. Skip everything you don't understand, everything that is obvious, which needs no commentaries, everything which has been dealt with already or which will be dealt with later. Work only on those passages to which you can make useful contributions. In short: Don't bite of more than you can chew but "Tao the TaoAble (A1ptA1)"! Or: Do what you Can Do!. Talking about, making useful contributions, the 153.4 and the 165.3 quotes are excellent examples of that. As you will see.. Let us start with the 153.1 quote: What is this "miracle of one? ...Let us consult Lao Tzu. "One( 1)" is in chapters 10, 11, 14, 22, 25, 39, 42 and 67. It is Yi1. Its phonetic is Yi and its radical number is 1. That information helps you to find a character in a dictionary. If you have one or more translation of the Ching, you can go to chapter 10 and try to predict what I am going to say about it. After you have compared what you have come up with, with what I have come up with, go to chapter 11 and do the same etc. This is much better than passively reading only what I have come up with.. 10: In ".... Embracing the One (^0 1), are you Able to do it Without Separating its parts ? (abWU#DHU)". The dictionary equivalents of Li(#D) are "To part, separate, apart; distant". Hu(HU) is the equivalent of the question mark.. The "DyAd(dyad)", the "TriAd( 3ad)" and all other N-term systems are "One" whole. We speak of it in the singular while we speak of its parts in the plural.. 11: "Thirty Spokes Converge on One Hub ( 3@z*a*b* 1*c)". *a = Fu159. *b = Kung12. *c = Ku159. Since Shih(@z) also means "complete", we can also translate these six characters as: "Three Complete Spokes Unite in One Hub." What does Lao Tzu imply here? ...Three complete parts unite in one whole. He continues: "In-the-center, where The Nothing in Something (*d HWUYU) is, there is the Cart'S Use (*e Zus)." *d =Tang102. *e = Ch'e159 "A cart, carriage". "Use(us)" can also mean "Usefulness" or "User". What is Lao Tzu teaching us now? ...As the spokes and the hub are the parts of a wheel, so the wheels, the axle etc. are the parts of a "Cart(*e)". Some translators assumed that Lao Tzu has made a mistake and that they have to correct him. They have substituted "wheel" for "Cart". That attitude doesn't help the translator nor his readers to find out what Lao Tzu is trying to teach us.. 14: "The TriAd is ImPossible to Fully Examine Because its parts are Mixed together And they Act as One (Tz 3adPUpt$0*aKU#Obtdo 1)". *a = Chieh149. "To examine, ....".. 22: The "Wise man Embraces the One (wsmn^0 1) to bring the shapes which are in heaven down (doTn -#t)" to earth. Wei(do) represents any verb the context demands. T'ien(Tn) in the Ching refers to level B. The equivalents of Shih(#t) are "Shape, fashion; to imitate". Thus, "Shape(#t)" refers to the Aristotelian "formal cause" (B). Which means that ...thinkers (B) must bring WHAT they know, "Down( -)" to the communicators (C) so that C can bring it "Down" to earth (D).25: " .... the king is one of the great four .... ( 4TAbt ECü H 1 J.Wu)".39. Yi( 1) appears seven times at the beginning of this long chapter. Let me give you a quote from its conclusion: "Therefore the Total Sum of the parts of a Carriage Is-not a Carriage (KU$0#5âsWUâs)". This seems to be Lao Tzu's equivalent of: ...The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. And the whole is the "One" which appeared seven times in this chapter.42: The "Tao Produces the One (A1Sg 1) and the One Produces the two ( 1Sg 2)".67: Here "One" simply means the "First( 1)" of "Three Treasures ( 3Ük)".In two of the three quotes I have given you in the previous section, the phrase "all things" appears. We can assume that "all things" means "All Things (WnwU)". The phrase is in chapters 01, 02. 04, -5, 08, 16, 52, 34, 37, 39, 30, 42, 51, 62, 64 and 76. If you have one or more translations of the Ching, you can already work on them. Then, when I got my work done, you can compare yours with mine. This is the Way to learn. Nobody else, not even Lao Tzu, can do your learning for you. ...========================================================Sept. 28, 2008. At the end of the previous , Sept. 23, section, I said: "I have quoted THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE IN FULL". That's the one I am going to start with now.. ".... there is always a Correspondence between the laws and phenomena ....". We know what is meant by "phenomena" (D). What is not so clear is, what is meant by "the laws". ...72.2 ".... the phenomenal world or universe is simply a Mental Creation of THE ALL, subject to the Laws of Created Things, ....". Notice the kind of detective work we have to do. I am looking for clues for a problem we have with one Law in the description of another Law. This is something you can learn from Lao Tzu. The Tao Te Ching is like a hologram. All of its 81 chapters are analogous to each other in a more or less obvious Way. If you study the Ching, you will know some chapters better than others and these are the ones which shed more light on other chapters. The law of attraction is at work here as well. The more chapters you know well "Enough(Zu)" the more light you get.. Here is another clue from 159.3: The "two tablets .... become the foundation and generator of the worlds. This sacred stone .... was sundered by the breath of God, and upon the two parts were drawn in black fire the figures of the Law." You can see from this, that if you seek the answer to a specific question, you will find the answer. Not necessarily in the same book, but when you have the question you will notice the answer; you can't get an answer to a question you don't have. There we have another example of the Law of Correspondence. It goes to the credit of our two authors that we find many answers in the same book. Good authors, like Lao Tzu, don't want you to just read their words, they also want you to think about them. Many quotes in THE SECRET SOURCE, the Source of The Secret, are above my head, but they make me think. In this sense, a book we don't fully understand is more beneficial than a book we fully understand at first reading, because ...there is not much in it which we don't already know.. "There are planes beyond our knowing, ...." They would be E1, E2 and E3 which are on the other side of the "Door, Dasamadwara" (A). But "when we apply the Principle of Correspondence ....", when we apply analogy, "we are able to understand" it.. What are "the various planes of the material, mental and spiritual universe"? ...Usually, I label two of them as, "material" (D) and "spiritual" (A). The "mental would then be the B-C dyad. Does that feel right? ...Not in this context. I think that in this context we have Mr.B's Cosmic Energies (E1-E2-E3-E4), Life Energies (E5-E6-E7-E8) and his Mechanical Energies (E9-E10-E11-E12). This is a hypothesis, like much else I am putting out here, it has to be evaluated and tested. And this is something I can't do. Here we need THE DIVISION OF LABOR. I can tell you WHAT has to be researched, but I can't do the research myself. Without tests backing me up or refuting me, there is only so far I can go out on a limb. As Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew.. Analogy helps us "to understand much that would otherwise be unknowable to us." The unknowable is "Alakshya" in Sanskrit. At Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE it is translated as "the Incomprehensible". It is E3 of Mr.B's Energies. E1 is "Anama, the Nameless." That is Lao Tzu's "NameLess (WUMg)". If we don't know that much, then it is "UnNamAble(PUptMg)" to us. He who has not (enough) shall lose even what he has.. If Hermes, Jesus, Plato, Krishna and Lao Tzu knew the "Truth(A1)", then we get the same truth in Syriac, in Aramaic, in Greek, in Sanskrit, and in Chinese. The languages are not identical and HOW theses teachers describe it is not the same, but WHAT they are saying is analogous because they are describing the same truth. If they are talking about the "DyAd(dyad)", the "TriAd( 3ad)" or about a specific component of an N-term system, then they are talking about the same thing.. "Other Teachers, What they Teach, I Also Teach (mn ZSO#lme08#l) if What-they-teach ( Z)" is true.. Analogy is "one of the most important mental instruments" by means of which we can "reason intelligently from the Known to the Unknown." When we "Know that we Don't Know (knPUkn)" it, the unknowable becomes knowable. Then comes the knowing and then comes the "Known". In this Way, step by step, we move from the "Known to the Unknown." Now the "Unknown" has become the "Known" and now the same "Cycle($l)" starts over "Again(@1)". "CycliciTy ($lad), Tao’S Movement (A1 Z%k)." Two consecutive "Cycles" are not identical, but they are analogous. What do all of these learning cycles have in common? ...If a process works then it is true. "True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)." If a process is true, then it will work. A component of Fan($l) is "Repeat(@1)". Which means? ...That: If the thinking tool you are using works and the "Knowledge(kn)" you start out with is true then the truth is "Likely(JO)" going to "Repeat(@1)". There we have another instantiation of the law of attraction.To stay on the subject we have to jump ahead to 153.1, 153.4 and 165,3. 153.1 is the shortest quote from Hermes, 153.4 is about two and a half pages and 165,3 is about 3/4 page long. There is an unusually long quote from Carolyn Baker's DailyScare.com blog. It is from page 93 to 100. We have to come back to it because it is important. In the meantime we have to learn all we can about the Law of Correspondence because ...when we know one Law well ...it will shed light on other laws. You can go to Google.com and search for: the law of Compensation Good stuff there.. If you don't have THE SECRET SOURCE, I will quote 163.1 in full and the beginning of the other two, to get you going on it.153.1. Truth! Certainty! That in which there is no doubt!. That which is above is from that which is below, and that which is. . below is from that which is above, working the miracle of one.. As all things come from one. Its father is the Sun and its mother is the Moon.. The Earth carried it in her belly, and the Wind nourished it in her. . belly, as Earth which shall become fire.. Feed the Earth from that which is subtle, with the greatest power.. It ascends from the earth to the heaven and becomes ruler over that. . which is above and that which is below.. And I have already explained the meaning of the whole of this in two. of these books of mine.153.4. 1. It is true without lying, certain and most true, that which is. inferior, or below, is as that which is superior or above, there being one Universal matter and form of all things, ...."165.3. 1) Here [is] a true explanation, concerning which there can be no doubt.. 2) It attests: The above from the below, and the below from the. . . above-- the work of the miracle of the One.==========================================================Sept. 23, 2008There is a typical mistake at the end of this section: After “Just one more thing:” E3 should be E1. E1 is the receptive (-) impulse, which is Mr.B’s “2”.. If you go to Google.com and type: seven hermetic laws (ENTER), you get a number of slightly different versions of these laws. The different additional comments are valuable. The advantage for me, of getting this information from the internet, is that I don't have to type it:THE SEVEN HERMETIC PRINCIPLESI THE PRINCIPLE OF MENTALISM.II THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCEIII THE PRINCIPLE OF VIBRATION.IV THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY.V THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM.VI THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT. VII THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER.I. THE PRINCIPLE OF MENTALISM"THE ALL IS MIND; The Universe is Mental."--The Kybalion.II. THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE"As above, so below; as below, so above."--The Kybalion. This Principle embodies the truth that there is always a Correspondence between the laws and phenomena of the various planes of Being and Life. The old Hermetic axiom ran in these words: "As above, so below; as below, so above." and the grasping of this Principle gives one the means of solving many a dark paradox, and hidden secret of Nature. There are planes beyond our knowing, but when we apply the Principle of Correspondence tothem we are able to understand much that would otherwise be unknowable to us.. This Principle is of universal application and manifestation, on the various planes of the material, mental, and spiritual universe--it is an Universal Law.. The ancient Hermetists considered this Principle as one of the most important mental instruments by which man was able to pry aside the obstacles which hid from view the Unknown. Its use even tore aside the Veil of Isis to the extent that a glimpse of the face of the goddess might be caught. Just as a knowledge of the Principles of Geometry enables man to measure distant suns and their movements, while seated in his observatory, so a knowledge of the Principle of Correspondence enables Man to reason intelligently from the Known to the Unknown. Studying the monad, he understands the archangel.III. THE PRINCIPLE OF VIBRATION"Nothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates." --The Kybalion.IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY"Everything is Dual; everything has poles; everything has its pair of opposites; like and unlike are the same; opposites are identical in nature,but different in degree; extremes meet; all truths are but half-truths; all paradoxes may be reconciled."--The Kybalion.V. THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM "Everything flows, out and in; everything has its tides; all things rise and fall; the pendulum-swing manifests in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates."--The KybalionVI. THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE AND EFFECT "Every Cause has its Effect; every Effect has its Cause; everything happens according to Law; Chance is but a name for Law not recognized; there are many planes of causation, but nothing escapes the Law."--The KybalionVII. THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER "Gender is in everything; everything has its Masculine and Feminine Principles; Gender manifests on al planes."--The Kybalion.http://bobert1.home.mindspring.com/kybalion.html#ch%202The order in which the principles are given is different in different versions, but THE PRINCIPLE OF MENTALISM.is always the first. There is still some work left to be done on this one. The work left is the application of systematics to this principle. If you find it difficult to follow me here, you can skip down to the last section of Sept. 18, in which we gradually approach this principle and when you are ready you can return to this one... . .E2 . . . . . . Please connect E1 with E2, E2 with E3, E3 with BE3 . + . E1 . . . B with C, C with D and D with E1 with straight. . . A . . . . . . .lines. This will give youD . .+ . .B . . . . "The Double Square Symbol" you can find on. . . C . . . . . . .page 52 of Volume III of "The Dramatic Universe".. . . . . . . . . . . . You can also think of it as the figure 8. In the Buddha's 8-fold path, A = Right Vision, B = Right Thought, C = Right Speech and D = Right Action. Coming back to A again it is now Right Livelihood. Your livelihood is right, when you make your living at doing your dharma. E1 = Right Contemplation (At least that's the translation I like.), E2 is Right Meditation. (Notice here that at Gita 13.24 C is the yoga of "meditation, (dyãnena)".),. E3 = Concentration.. So far, so good but what follows is more speculative and needs to be proved or disproved: The E3-A-B triad is jnana yoga, the D-A-E1 triad is karma yoga, the E2-A-C triad seems to be raja yoga and the E2-A dyad seems to be bhakti yoga. People say the darnest things when they can't actually see it themselves. And now things get even more interesting:. The E1-E2-E3 triad is one pole of a dyad in which B-C-D is the other pole. These "Two Produce a Triad ( 2Sg 3)" in which A is the connective. Which one of Mr.B's six triads is it? ...The Atman (A) is in the Maharloka. "This, the connecting link, is the only way between the spiritual and material creation and is called the Door, Dasamadwara. (Sutra 13, THE HOLY SCIENCE)". Here, "the spiritual" would be the E1-E2-E3 triad and "the material creation" would be the B-C-D triad. A "TriAd( 3ad)" is a "Unit($1)". So, what we can say at this point is that we have the +=- or the ...-=+ triads . Given the information you have this far, on this blog,, can you determine which one of the two it is? ...The "job-description comes from E3, through A, to B and the supply of the demand is returned from D, through A, to E1. Which one of the three impulses is E1? ...It is receiving the output from D. Which impulse is E3? ...It is giving the "job-description, job-order or problem-statement to B. ...We know that E2 is the connective (=), so which triad do we have? ...E1 receives the supply. In systematcs that is the receptive (-) impulse. Mr.B identifies it by a "2". E3 gives the demand through A to B. In systematics this is the affirming (+) impulse. In Astrology it is the fixed sign. Mr.B identifies it by a "1". The reconciling (=) impulse is identified by a "3". If we start the triad with E3, then we have the +=- or 1-3-2 triad.This is Mr.B's "Law of Interaction.. Once again we can expand the symbol 1-3-2 to read: 'Affirmation reconciled with Receptivity issues as manifestation'. (page 116 of the DRAMATIC UNIVERSE)". Mr.B goes on for another four pages. I am unwilling to quote it all. I can't even give useful comments on it because I don't understand it well "Enough(Zu)". And, as Lao Tzu said: Don't bite off more than you can chew. So in the next section we will finally get to The Law of Correspondence. I have quoted THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE IN FULL, so that you can start to work on it. …. Just one more thing: If we start the triad with E3, then E3 is the initiating impulse and we have the -=+ triad.This is Mr.B's "Law of Identity.. We may start by expanding the symbol 2-3-1 to read 'The Receptive Impulse meets with the Reconciling Impulse and is linked thereby to an affirmation.' The receptive impulse cannot realize itself except through the medium of an affirmation; ....". For instance the thinkers (B) cannot realize their potential without E3. "but" Mr.B continues: The receptive "cannot blend with it without the help of a reconciling force." A is the "Door Dasamadwara". The only way we can reach the other side, is through A.. Digesting this, should keep you busy for a while. ...===================================================Sept. 18, 200871.2. We have arrived at"The Seven Hermetic Lawsas Stated in The Kybalion. ..... The Seven Hermetic Principles, upon which the entire Hermetic philosophy is based, are as. follows:. I. THE PRINCIPLE OF MENTALISM. II THE PRINCIPLE OF CORRESPONDENCE. III. THE PRINCIPLE OF VIBRATION. IV. THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY. V. THE PRINCIPLE OF RHYTHM. VI. THE PRINCIPLE OF CAUSE and EFFECT. VII. THE PRINCIPLE OF GENDER". All of these are based on the dyad. ...What can that tell us? ...Before we can answer that question we must know in what sense all of these principles are based on the dyad. That THE PRINCIPLE OF POLARITY has to do with polarities and that CAUSE - EFFECT is a dyad, is obvious but you might have had trouble with some of the other ones. The hardest principles to relate to the dyad are the first two. So let us start at the end and carefully work up to them. As Lao Tzu said: ...Don't bite off more than you can chew.78.1"VII. The Principle of GenderGender is in everything; everything has its Masculine and Feminine Principles; ...." And . masculine - feminine is a dyad.77.2"VI. The Principle of Cause and EffectEvery Cause has its Effect; every Effect has its Cause; ...." Every Cause has its Effect."True Words Likely Reverse (%8C2JO$l)": Every Effect has its Cause.76.2"V. The Principle of RhythmEverything flows, out and in; everything has its tides; all things rise and fall; the pendulum-swing manifests in everything; the measure of the swing to the right is the measure of the swing to the left; rhythm compensates.". This one could be called the law of compensation. When the swing to the right is complete it must be complemented by the swing to the left. This one is important to understand systematics: Each part of a system is like a link of a chain. If one is missing, it must be found. If one is weak, it must be strengthened. The missing or weak part must be complemented to complete the whole. The whole will not work without all of its parts. For instance, the tetrad has four parts called sources. Take one away and you don't have 3/4 of a tetrad left, you have ...no tetrad left at all. It simply will not work. These are the basics of systems theory and of systematics.The closer a system is to being complete, the stronger the pull or attraction to draw the missing part in. He who has shall have more. If we had thinkers (B) and communicators (C) cooperating we would form a dyad, and then our complement will be, the ...doers (D). They would then be attracted and join the team.. To get the tetrad going we need a working knowledge (B) of the system and the right motivation (C) to translate the theory into practice (D). In the building trade there is a motivator. and before the original 4-fold IBM programming system was phased out, the same motivator was there as well. That's why these systems work and worked. And the motivator is? ...Money. And what is the motivator of our rulers (B) who are using the triad? ...Money, knowledge and power. And what has to be the motivator of the people (A)? ...Knowledge and love, or ananda, bliss. Enough of us must follow our bliss.. Which source of the tetrad can be said to be complete? ...The vision at level A. The Bhagawad Gita, the Bible, the Koran and the Tao Te Ching are the best examples of these revelations (A) because they are best known. There are other revelations worth working on. What we have to do with these revelations is called "Comparative Religion" These scriptures must be interpreted (B). These interpretations are available on the internet. Actually, the senate (B), the chamber of sober second thought, would be the right place to do this "sober second thought" in. Because the senators are unwilling or unable to do that, the senate should be abandoned. It is a waste of taxpayer's money.. There is an enormous amount of information on the internet, partly because professional social engineers are busy to add disinformation to what is there. And not all that is there is useable. Thus it takes work on the part of net-workers (C) to separate the wheat from the chaff. This is hard work, but it is also good exercise. It makes a better net-worker out of you. The wheat is essentially information which is true. It is primarily produced by thinkers (B) who are doing their dharma. Such thinkers are philosophers, lovers, philos, of truth, Sophia. In Hinduism, these are the jnana yogis. Anything you do with love with your body (D) is karma yoga, any thing you do with love with your mind (C) is raja yoga, anything you do with love with your intellect (B) is jnana yoga and anything you do with love with your heart (A) is bhakti yoga. Bhakti yoga is the path of devotion. Real artists have that same devotion to their art. they love it. They couldn't produce real art without that love for it.. I once had a Flamenco guitarist from Spain living in my house. This guy was practicing eight hours a day. How can you do that if you don't have that love for it. And no amount of ambition can do it for you if you don't have the talent for it. You can't "Actualize a Potential (A1pt)" you don't have.. Now, the task of real net-workers is to "Identify(Mg)" work of real "thinkers". Real thinkers either express the truth (poorly) or they "Ridicule (*a)41)" it (professionally).. As communicators (C) have to work on interpretations (B) of revelations (A), so the thinkers have to work on the revelations. There we have the law of correspondence again. The dharma of "KnowErs(kner)" (B) and of "WordErs(C2er)" (C) is not identical, but it is analogous. The communicators have a good example in politicians. If politicians can lie more convincingly than their advisors can tell the truth. then communicators (C), who are working for the truth, should be able to communicate it better than the thinkers (B) can.? ...Are the communicators sleeping on the job? ... Are they listening? ...We got the internet now. What are they waiting for?... What is wrong? ...Just because somebody can talk as convincingly as a politician, it doesn't mean that it is true. A real communicator (C) must motivate his readers to want to know the truth, to question the writer's own words, to make clear statements which can be understood or instructions which can be carried out.The doers(D) must be able to ask the communicators (C) for clarification if the instructions are not clear enough. Similarly the communicators should be able to ask the thinkers (B) for clarification, if they don't understand something. By analogy, the thinkers should be able to ask the visionaries (A) for clarifications. And that is done in channeling sessions. But there are good and bad ones. Personally, I prefer the time-tested texts.. The information for "WordErs" (C) is there, in books and on the internet but "WordErs Don't Know (C2erPUkn)" that they don't know. They assume that they already know it all so that they don't need the thinkers. Ego has a bit to do with that but let’s not "Underestimate our Enemy ($jâb)".. The dharma of raja yogis is to get the karma yogis to test the statements of the jnana yogis. That work is analogous to the work jnana yogis are doing with revelations. ...They make "Many statements Few (TO$q)". ...If Plato said in Greek what Krishna said in Sanskrit and Lao Tzu said in Chinese, then we don't need three different versions of the same truth. One will do. Similarly, if ten thinkers say the same thing on the internet, that should be "Enough(Zu)" reason to get it tested. Then, if it works, it is true. And then you don't have to repeat the same truth ten times. And if it doesn't work, forget about it, don't waste any more time on it. Either way, you have reduced the "Many to a Few".. Since we have no working B-C dyad, the best the doers can do is to work by trial and error. This is not the ideal, but it is better than nothing. Trial and error is one way to solve a problem but it is not as efficient as the Thought, word and deed (B-C-D) triad. Why? ...Because the "formal" (B) and the "efficient cause" (C)is missing... Since we don't have the B-C dyad to start with, there is nothing to attract our complement it. And you can be sure that our rulers ...are doing their best to keep it that way.74.2"IV. The Principle of PolarityEverything is Dual; everything has poles ..." but to change the "Monad($1)" into a "DyAd(dyad)", the poles must be ..."Identified(Mg)". Thesis - antithesis, in Hegelian dialectics, is the dyad which attracts its complement, which is the ...synthesis. The "DyAd" is in most N-term system which is larger than N=1. So the dyad is important, but is it the only system? ...I said "most" N-term systems instead of: all N-term systems, because I don't know systematics well "Enough" to make absolute statements about it. What I will say about it, however, is as true of systems theory as it is of systematics: The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.. It is the dyad which is incomplete when there is only a monad, It is the triad which is incomplete when there is only a dyad, it is the tetrad which is incomplete when there is only the triad, etc. What does the incomplete system cause to happen? ...The N=X term system causes the N=X-1 term system to attract the missing monad. For instance, when a thinker (B) says: Is there a communicator who is willing and able to communicate the stuff I have here? Is there? ...Willingness or motivation is a big factor in human systems. Let us use the building trade as an example. What motivates the architect (B), the contractor (C) and the sub-contractors (D) to build the customer's (A) house? ...Money. In computer programming, in which component(s) is motivation not a factor ...The computer (D) and for most jobs computer software (C). It is amazing how the mind (C), working with Automatic Energy (E6) can be simulated.. In order to become an actual N=X term system an N=X-1 term system must be complemented by one monad. It is as if the potential system tells the actual system: "Actualize your Potential (A1pt)"! When the parts of the whole are there and arranged in the right order, the whole can emerge through its parts and, having emerged, it will give meaning to them.If the lower is not aware of the higher, it would be satisfied to remain on the level it is, but because the higher is calling it, the lower becomes uncomfortable. This is one way of putting it. Will a communicator please say this better? ...This is important but, if a communicator can't see it what would motivate him to do it? ...We can develop our talents to some extent. In fact, that is our duty but we can't Actualize a Potential (A1pt)" we don't have. We are not responsible for the talents we don't have. But to "Actualize our Potential" to the fullest, we need THE DIVISION OF LABOR. It is as if humanity is responsible for it collectively.73.3"III. The Principle of VibrationNothing rests; everything moves; everything vibrates.". When you hit a key on the piano keyboard, you cause a string to vibrate back and forth. Every back and forth is one vibration. The number of vibrations per second is its frequency. Seven white keys on the piano are one octave. Starting at C, you get C, D, E, F, G, A and B. The next key up is C again. It is the C of the next higher octave. It vibrates at twice the frequency of the C in the octave below it and at half the frequency of the of the C in the octave above it. You can play a song, starting in any octave. The song you play is the same, but the octave you play it in is different. The same song, played in a higher octave, is not identical to the same song played in lower octave but the songs are ...analogous. I hope that you can see that I am leading up to the law of correspondence. But I am going to skip it for now, because we are going to get back to it after we have dealt with:72.1"I. The Principle of Mentalism. "THE ALL is MIND; The Universe is Mental." This law".... also explains that all the phenomenal world or universe is simply a Mental Creation of THE ALL, subject to the Laws of Created Things, and that the universe, as a whole and in its parts or units, has its existence in the mind of THE ALL, in which Mind we 'live and move and have our being.'....". The reason it is so hard to find the dyad in this principle is because THE ALL contains everything else. It is a whole. Which whole? ...Let us consult Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE: "The foremost of these is Satyaloka, Sat, ...." Sat is an impulse in the Sat-Chit-Ananda triad. One translation of these three is Existence-Knowledge-Bliss. Sat comes up in Sutra 6 as well: "Buddhi, the Intelligence; Manas, the Mind. Being thus magnetized, it has two poles, one of which attracts it toward the Real Substance, Sat, and the other repels it from the same. The former is called Sattwa or Buddhi, the Intelligence, which determines what is Truth; and the latter, being a particle of Repulsion, the Almighty Force spiritualized .... produces the ideal world for enjoyment (ananda) and is called Anandatwa or Manas, the Mind.". There is a lot in there. Too much to elaborate on. It is better for you to figure out the details on your own. Let me just give you a few more quotes from the same Sutra to get you going: "The Atom, under the influence of Chit (universal knowledge) forms the Chitta called Buddhi, Intelligence. Its opposite is Manas, Mind, in which lives the Jiva: the self with Ahamkara, Ego, the idea of separate existence." This is quite a mouthful, so better not bite off more than you can chew at one time.. This is one approach to show that the first Principle is a dyad. I did a sneaky thing, I let you figure it out yourself. There is another approach: ...Systematics. I have already described the octad and the heptad before but this is important, so I will do it again, but not today. Please go back to the August 6 section, at the end of which I have dealt with the heptad and the octad. You can use that information to figure out what I am going to say. Then when I post it in a few days you can compare your answers with mine. Good exercise, much better than just reading this stuff. ...====================================================Sept 17, 200843.1"Troward voraciously studied Rosicrucian teachings. According to Claude Brodeur:. Troward has based his philosophy on the principle of a "Universal. Subconscious Mind," and that man's subconscious is no more nor less. than universal and infinite God consciousness . . . . This kind of think-. ing puts a Rosicrucian stamp on the new religious thinking called. New Thought.THE ROSICRUCIANS ANDHERMETIC BROTHERHOODS". Knowledge is power. Some of these brotherhoods use their knowledge for good while others use it for world domination, like Hitler did. These are called globalists, illuminati etc.. Rupert Sheldrake has called the "Universal Subconscious mind" the "morpho-genetic field". Are you surprised that he was "Greatly Ridiculed (TA*a41)"? ...51.4"The Hermetic Origin of the Mind Cure. Mind leads phenomena. Mind is the main factor and forerunner of all actions. If one speaks or acts with a cruel mind,. Misery follows, as the cart follows the horse.. Phenomena are led by the mind.. Mind is the main factor and forerunner of all actions. If one speaks or acts with a pure mind,. Happiness follows, as the shadow follows its source.. . -- Dharmapada". So here we have a Hindu "Origin". This is a reference to the law of karma. Ideally, our thoughts (B) follow "Right Vision" (A), our speech (C) follows "Right Thought" and our "actions" (D) follow "Right Speech (the Buddha)".52.6". 1. Mind is changeable "spiritual matter." a receptive, moldable. something, susceptible to numerous subtle influences, often errone. ous opinions (operating even when one is not consciously thinking. about them).. 2. Man is spiritual and has spiritual senses.. 3. "Spiritual man can become open to and use spiritual power." That. means that man is not to follow his own inclinations, but to pursue. Wisdom's way.". "Mind" here must be Manas (C) because it uses Automatic Energy (E6). That is why it is "operating even when one is not" aware of it.. Our "own inclinations" are primarily determined by our own ego.. "Wisdoms way" is "Heaven'S Way (Tn ZA1)". In the Ching, T'ien(Tn) is on level B.. How "to pursue Wisdom's way"? ...According to Steiner, and others, A can trigger action (D) directly without the mediation of B and C. And B can also trigger action directly without the mediation of C. This is possible because A-D and B-D are dyads. But this is the exception. Ordinarily, to translate a theory (B) into action (D), C must "Align(8b)" itself with B, and D must "Align" itself with C. We have the B-C-D triad here. This is HOW an idea (B) is manifested (D). How to get the mind (C) to make a true idea (B) its own, so that C will automatically (E6) cause it to be executed (D) whenever the opportunity arises? ...Our intellect (B) uses the more conscious Sensitive Energy (E5). By programming the mind (C) to take over automatically (E6), good things can happen without us being aware of it. Get good things “Done Without having to Do (doWUdo)” them yourself. HOW can we program the mind? …By "Repetition(@1)". The social engineers know how to do it and so must we. We can save a lot of time by learning from them. This is another thing "WordErs(C2er)" can do without me having to hold their hand.54.1".... Man must be lifted up, so that all who believe on Him will have eternal Life. ...." See John 3:14 and 3:15. HOW is Man to be lifted up? ...By C aligning itself to the truth on level B. The knowledge (B) of the truth will then, in time, becomes a belief (C). And those "who believe on Him", who is the way and the truth, will "be lifted up". At least that’s my interpretation of these words. As I said before, these theories (B) have to be tested in practice (D). I can't do it, I can only tell C what has to be tested. I don't have the vision (A), I am not a communicator (C), who is able to translate ideas (B) into instructions, and I am not a pragmatist (D), who is able to carryout (D) these instructions. We are all specialists. For a jnana yogi (B) it is nothing to be ashamed of that s/he can't do what others have specialized in. It is just a shame that we don't have THE DIVISION OF LABOR.==========================================================Sept. 16, 200832.1".... Once the mind of the adept is aligned with the mind of God, the adept can affect change in the world simply trough thought."32.2".... We become the God-mind once we align ourselves to its thoughts." True or false? ...If we assume that the "God-mind" is at E1, E2 or E3, then it is "Anama, the Nameless", "Agama, the Inaccessible" or "Alakshya, the Incomprehensible".-- Sutra 13 of THE HOLY SCIENCE.. We can use one book to contradict another book, but, if we don't fully understand either one of them, HOW can we know which one is true and which one is false? ...I have studied the Gita, the Secret Doctrine and the Philosophy of Freedom in study-groups. One advantage of studying a book in a group is that you can ask the group-leader questions. I also had Jagadguru Shri Kripalu Mahaprabhu help me with Plato's Republic. And now there is the Tao Te Ching. My search for the truth began in 1944 with six years of Sunday-School.. This background helps me now to understand some things I read in books and it helps me to do the kind of work on them, you see me doing right now. I am still learning, but there are some things I have learned, and one of them, I like to share with you right now: Let us Listen to Rudolf Steiner:. "Others also start from the same point of view .... In germinal form all the expositions relating to this are to be found already in Spinoza. His clear and simple argument against .... has been repeated innumerable times since then, but cloaked, for the most part, in the most hairsplitting theoretical doctrines, so that it becomes difficult to discern the plain thought process which alone matters. (The Philosophy of Freedom Chapter 1. Translation by William Lindeman)".. It doesn't matter which "point of view" certain writers defend or what the "argument" is "against". The point I am trying to make here is that certain writers make things more complicated than they really are "so that it becomes difficult to discern the plain thought process which alone matters." This became clear to me from studying Eckhart Tolle's book. At first I thought that writers (C) do this on purpose so that people can't understand it. In this way they can't find any errors in it. As I said before, you can only tell whether a statement is true or false if you fully understand what the author is talking about. Now, thanks to Eckhart, I know that our ego can do that, which means that we are not necessarily aware of doing it. We are all doing it to a greater or lesser extent depending how aware (A) we are of it. For more details on this important subject, see my commentaries on A NEW EARTH. Or, better still, get his book.. Now Steiner gives the long quote from Spinoza and then he says: "Because an opinion is here put forward that is clearly and definitely expressed, it is also easy to uncover the basic error that lies within it. .... The error in this thought process is soon discovered. Spinoza, and all who think like him, overlook the fact that ...." Since we are not studying The PHILOSOPHY of FREEDOM we don't have to go into the details. The point is that some writers use very complex and sophisticated language to make it difficult to understand them. This will cause their readers to say: Oh, this is such a learned authority; how can I contradict him? Well, if you don't let him intimidate you, you might find good reasons to contradict him.. What I have said here does not apply to our two authors. What the "God-mind" is, has been explained previously and, once you know that, we can understand WHAT our authors have meant. Because we have here a statement, which is as "clearly and definitely expressed" as a statement by Spinoza, "it is also easy to uncover the basic error that lies within it.". Now, what is an "error" when it comes to the question of freedom versus determinism is only an oversight in this book.. We can only know whether an author is right or wrong if we know WHAT he is talking about. We can find out by using thinking tools. To introduce analogy to you I will jump ahead to73.1: "II. The Principle of Correspondence .... is a Universal Law. The ancient Hermeticists considered this Principle as one of the most important mental instruments by which man was able to pray aside the obstacles which hid from view the Unknown." The “unknowable” is E3 and analogy might make it knowable.. One of the "mental instruments" which is based on the law of correspondence is analogy. So instead of believing (C) or not believing the authors of books, we can do our own thinking. For instance: When a contractor (C) tells his subcontractor (D): "Put the kitchen sink here" and the plumber does it, what happened? ...Please look at 32.2. ...If you have figured it out what I will say next on your own, then ...you don't have to believe it, you will know it. ...There is a difference between knowing (B) and believing (C). ...What happens between the verbal (C) and the physical (D) levels is something we can all see (D). There is nothing we have to believe (C) here. We have all seen and experienced instances where an instruction was given and which was carried out. It is not too hard to think of examples of that. For instance: If you have a well-trained dog, what verbal instructions (C) do you give him and HOW does your dog translate them into action (A)? ...And what happens when an instruction is not carried out? ...What happens when you ignore the three dots? ...Then D was not "Aligned(8b)" with C. If the computer does not execute the instructions it gets then it is malfunctioning. You have to get it repaired or replaced.. Now let us move up one level. What happens between the architect (B) and the contractor (C)? Or between the programmer (B) and the coder (C)? ...C must be "aligned" to B if the customer's demand (A) is to be supplied. If C is unwilling to listen to B and to carryout B's instructions then the job is not going to get done and the customer isn't going to pay for goods that aren't delivered. The customer's money is a good motivator. But HOW do I get a communicator (C) to make what I am saying here, more accessible to more people? ...Who is our customer now? ...Let us go up one more level. ...HOW does B "Align" itself with A? ...In computer programming, the programmer (B) gets his "job-description" from the customer (A). In philosophy, what comes through A, is the "job-description. The Hindus say, that the Atman (A) is the "Door, Dasamadwara". What comes through A to B is the truth from E3.. There is a lot of truth in THE SECRET SOURCE. Our authors have done a tremendous amount of research, more than I can do. By studying this book, I am aligning myself to the truth which comes through it.. At 32.2 a few details are missing. If I call that a mistake, then I would have to call most of Lao Tzu's statements mistakes as well. These are merely generalizations for which we have to fill the blanks, as an exercise. And when you don't know that, it ...might be misleading.==========================================================Sept. 15, 2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . THE SECRET SOURCEThe book is 182 pages long. The bibliography takes up the last eight pages. On page 175 we have: Bergier, Jacques and Louis Pauwels with their The Morning of the Magicians. The work I have done on it is in this blog. Then, still on the same first page, there is: Blawatski, H.P. and Byrne, Rhonda with her The Secret. I have worked on that one too. Leadbeater, C.W. is well known among Theosophists. Then there is Sitchin, Zecharia. He probably knows too much. And then there is Rudolf Steiner. But that's about all I know of the roughly 150 books, which are listed in the bibliography.. How can one, or even two, authors pack all of that information into a relatively small book? What is that book really about? Here is part of the first paragraph: It is at 10.1 (Page 10.Paragraph 1).".... without being deluged with a phenomenon paradoxically know as The Secret.". So the book is about The Secret. Where does the information in that book comes from, what is its SOURCE and HOW has that information been used? ...Our authors have done a tremendous amount of work. There is no way I can do justice to it. But, as in the other books I have worked on, there are some passages in it I can elaborate on.20.3: ". Soul, then, is an eternal intellectual essence, having for purpose the. reason of itself; and when it thinks with it, it doth attract unto itself. the harmonies intention.It was due to this concept, that thoughts attract things in the world, that the New Thought movement developed the Law of Attraction ....". We have the power to choose; it is within our power to choose the. better, and in like way to choose the worse, according to our will. And. if our choice clings to evil things it doth consort with the corporeal na-. ture; and for this cause fate rules o'er him who makes this choice.Compared with:. The man or woman who is filled with love sees love on all sides and. attracts the love of others. The man with hate in his heart gets all the. hate he can stand.". The text which starts with the blank dot blank inside the quote marks are quotes. The lines I have deleted in the fourth paragraph, after the "Law of Attraction ..." are important but they would take me into more than I am willing to chew. I am trying to stick to the "Law of Attraction" and to "our choice", our freedom of choice.. "Soul .... is an eternal intellectual essence, ...." True or false? ...Our intellect (B) is Buddhi in Sanskrit. When the Hindus say: "Neti, neti, neti!", they mean: I am not my body, not my mind (Manas) and not my intellect (Buddhi). When we die, our body goes first, then goes our mind and then goes our intellect. The Atman is the spark of the Divine, it doesn't go. But often in this blog, I have associated our soul (A) with the Atman (A). In this I am following translators and commentators on the Gita. There are, however, other commentators who say that not Atman (A), but Buddhi (B) should be translated as soul (B). ...As Christians we should know that the soul can't be the Atman because the Atman can't be lost, but Buddhi can be. Jesus said the same thing: What does it profit a man if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul (Matthew 16:26).. This subject can get very complicated because, if you reincarnate before you have lost your mind, you still have it, and if you reincarnate before you have lost your intellect, you still have it. That means that you don't necessarily have to start with nothing to do your dharma and to undo past karma. We are getting into details here I am not familiar "Enough(Zu)" with, but in theory, no, or very few, people who reincarnate have to start from scratch.. Now back to the quote: If our intellect is the "soul" the quote makes more sense. What can be said tentatively about 20.3 is that, if our "I maker (Ahamkara)" (A) identifies with the intellect (B) it becomes the intellect. When it uses the intellect to think with it says: “I think”.. 203 is the most difficult paragraph of the five I have quoted here.. It is one sentence. The subject is about the "soul". And the predicate leads up to "the Law of Attraction". The soul has "for purpose the reason of itself, and when it thinks with it, ...."? ...What does the soul (B?) think (B) with? ...All I can say at this point is that the soul (A) uses its intellect (B) as the intellect uses its physical brain (D). This is analogous to the way a programmer uses his computer (D). Notice that I am leading up to the law of correspondence.. Now let us look at 20.5:. ".... It is within our power to choose .... according to our will." The question we have dealt with above was: Is our soul on level A, level B or on both levels? …Here, at 20.5, the question is: …What level is our will on? ...When we say: Not my will (C) be done but Thy Will (A), we are talking about two wills. By adding the C and the A (in brackets) I have told you what I think which level the will is on. But is that true? ...On page 21 of Mr.B's ENERGIES we have "The Supreme Will" for E1, and for E4 we have "Man's 'I', Will". So when a bhakti yogi (A) says: Not my will but Thine be done! God's Will is E1 but the will of all of us is always be E6 (C). These things are hard for me to chew, because, as a jnana yogi (B), I don't have the direct experience of them. Philosophers (B) have to take the word of those who have had the experience, and they can't all be trusted because all of us have an ego. One thing is safe to say: Because we have an intellect (B) and a will, we can make decisions. And because we are the ones who make them, we are responsible for them.=========================================================
