Help

 

The Readers Way i.e., the Hearth 'fire' way.

Use the 'find' indicator {''search box''} to establish that 'general' idea...on those 'key' words. [ under windows / 'Edit'. NOT the search box opposite. Internal use only]. All key words are highlighted; in one form or another. Paragraphs, therefore - sooner or later - become linked. The aim is to attempt to understand them in the broader context, in order to define the subject, i.e., what this subject defines as the Micro within the Macro, {the 'self' within the 'bigger' picture}. 'Home' page gives an idea of what to look for. 'Help' page gives an idea of the 'framework'. Both together with Part 1 DOWN to a defining paragraph {i.e., in relation to the ''divine bit''} gives one a chance to 'see' the parts within the whole {mind set?}. All else are superfluous to requirements IN RELATION to that MAIN objective. But sooner or later link up to same principle. See it as an objective exercise. As you do when attempting to learn any subject.

One example: "It was a long while before I found my way about in the labyrinth of alchemical thought processes, for no Ariadne had put a thread into my hand. Reading the 16th century texts I noticed that certain strange expressions and turns of phrase were frequently repeated....I saw that these were used again and again in a particular sense, but I could not make out what that sense was. I therefore decided to start a lexicon of key phrases with cross references. In the course of time I assembled several thousand such key phrases....I worked along philological lines, as if I was trying to solve the riddle of an unknown language." [Chapter entitled 'The Work' from the book 'Memories, Dreams and Reflections' / C. G. Jung].

Gnosis ? i.e., in the gnostic sense of the word?

That first sentence is the most important. As an example of objectifying something to oneself. In order to gain a sense of something internal. 'Soul' in relation to spirit? As a means....?

'Sixth' sense? Intuition?

From an 'abstract' perspective: ''What is that ''Spark'' which ''hangs from the flame?''. It is Jiva, the Monad in conjunction with Manas, or rather its aroma - that which remains from each personality, when worthy, and hangs from Atma-Buddhi, the Flame, by the thread of life. In whatever way interpreted, and into what ever number of principles the human being is divided, it may easily be shown that this doctrine is supported by all the ancient religions...." [Page 238/9 'The Secret Doctrine' / H. P. Blavatsky].

As one example: The author Lucie Lamy uses the phrase ''Divine spark'' throughout in the book 'Egyptian Mysteries'. Coincidence?

A working example in the {practical} sense of the word: "Almost every scientist who has ever kept a journal reports sudden flashes of insight....certain knowledge that reaches the surface {'horizon'?} by some unknown route: 'I felt an instant and complete certainty,' wrote the mathematician Poincare, who solved an incredibly difficult problem while 'daydreaming' on a bus. Of a similar experience the great Karl Friedrich Gauss wrote: 'As a sudden flash of light {'eureka'?} the enigma was solved...For my part, I am unable to name the nature of the thread which connected that which I previously knew with that which made my success possible.'....The 'thread' has been named intuition - not that this explains its nature. It seems to be a second path to understanding. Reason is of course safer and surer {Try ''pure'' to get a ''hang on it'' }....The Minoan Greeks called her Ariadne {''most pure''}. Being a seafaring people, they recognized her power of drawing up the tides, as if by an invisible thread; they suspected that she likewise drew at the 'tides of human affairs'. Ariadne's thread is one of the great magic instruments of Greek mythology. It was the clew that guided Theseus through the dark windings of the labyrinth. It has become one of the most powerful metaphors of all ages, so that even the word clew, which once meant only a ball {'knot'?} of thread, now even means guidance to a hidden answer {center?}. Thus Gauss was guided through the labyrinth of his own unconscious by a thread he could not name." [Page 40 'Arachne Rising: The Search for the Thirteenth Sign of the Zodiac' / J. Vogh].

Try ''Duality'' to get a further ''hang on it'' {i.e., as one example pure/Unpure} - ALL AS A MEANS....?

Short version, [i.e., framework]. In the Exoteric sense of the word.

1...Explained elsewhere. Part 1.

2...This world and ’That’ world, they imply co-exist. [ Physical world together with the other ‘world/domain’. Commonly known as the ’afterlife’.] This reader prefers the word ‘Domain/s’. Its a neutral word. It helps with the objective clause. Try it.

The Egyptians symbolised it with upper and lower Egypt. {‘Mirror’ image of north/south. Symbolic only. Not exact}. With their headgear-The Pschent or ‘double’ crown; as the symbolism for the co-existence, { two halves coming together}. Or the single uraeus. Biblical equivalent..."The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be 'single', thy whole body {'temple'?} shall be filled with light", [Matthew 6:22]. Explained within.

Minds eye?

With the Hebrews, one of their methods was with the 'Star of David.' Two triangles. One pointing up. The other down {'wet'/'dry'}. This world and that domain. Both triangles interlocking = Co-existence.

When [C] was included [ explained elsewhere ] it was always represented as a circle. Hence the two triangles within one circle. Russian, {sometimes Greek} Orthodox equivalent = Two horizontal bars on one vertical.

Both domains also known as the tree of life and the tree of knowledge. ’That’ domain relating {more} to the tree of life. Why?

Because the Third [3..] common factor that they imply is that the life ’bit’ relates more to that ‘domain’ than it does to this one. Hence the reason; they ‘believe’...you find yourself in that one when this one ‘ends’. A transition from ‘A’ TO ‘B’. From ‘this’ Domain to ‘that’ one.

What they are implying therefore is that all living forms while alive in this physical world [A] have something of [B] within them as they eat and breath. That ‘something’ relates to our origins. Hence the reason for the transition. From this world to that one. It has a certain logic to it...but only once you begin to understand what they imply by the ’Divine bit’ [represented; in one form or another; with 'Gods and/or Goddesses'] - in relation to A, B and eventually...C. [ Explained elsewhere ] . All as a means...?

''The 'flag' as a symbol of the presence of any ''divine'' being - god or goddess - harkens back to one of the oldest goddesses, Neith, the weaver. Her name in early hieroglyphs was written as N-t, and it meant ''the goddess.'' Subsequently, N-t-r became any god or goddess. N-t in hieroglyphs also is part of the word meaning ''to knit'' or ''to weave'' or ''to net'' {'153'?}....In Alexandria, the cosmopolis of ancient cultures where many languages merged, the ancient Egyptian word neter and the Coptic Christian word for ''the god'' came to be pronounced something like netjer; from this, the essence of the Latin word for NATURE, natura, emerged....the early Christian name for 'God'...." [Page 35 'The Union of Isis and Thoth' / N. Ellis and N. Scully].

'Center' or 'off center' as a ''point of consciousness''?

''What for example, is needed to make possible the internal narrative, the collection of stories we string together to form our basic sense of self? The answer is of course, memory. It is only by remembering what i did yesterday that i can identify myself as the person who did these things. The key point is that it is a particular degree of memory that is needed, neither stronger nor weaker {above/below the 'horizon'?}. The Italian novelist Italo Calvino , one of the many modern writers who have followed the ancient philosophy, puts it precisely: 'Memory has to be strong enough to enable us to act without forgetting what we wanted to do, to learn without ceasing to be the same person, but it also has to be weak enough to allow us to keep moving into the future. Other balances are necessary ....for us to think freely, to weave thoughts around that central sense of self'.....We also have the ability to move our point of consciousness around our interior life...." [Page 43 'The Secret History of the World' / J. Black].

Question. Is it not surprising that even though we can in this 'age' create our own life 'forms' we still cannot get beyond that ''primordial soup''. The marvels we can do with the D.N.A structure {to name but one} - the living embodiment of life. Yet what are the origins of that structure? Its ''beginnings''. What is that link between animate/inanimate that even in this age of technological wonders cannot get us closer to a legitimate answer other than a ''soup''.

This subject ''hints'' of a possible answer.

Refresher: "Serious mysteries may be describable only in terms of paradox, or in what passes for jest.''

'Trickster' character?

Mr William Ockham.

4...[B] not only co-exists but as implied by the same authors, existed; in part; prior to [A] How? Hypothetically using Ockhams Razor there can only be two possibilities; if true. By evolution, i.e., Physics evolution, i.e., as part of the ‘Big bang/inflation theory’, not yet identified. In other words both possibly developing together. Or by design. What ever that implies. A simplistic way of explaining it...is to identify [B] hypothetically, with the word ‘eternal’ which after all is what the ’afterlife’ is purported to be. Therefore should not something that 'represents'; ‘eternal’; have existed prior to something not so eternal. [A]?

Finite / infinite?

5...The [B] factor; according to the same authors; [ and therefore by the same logic/implication [c]...explained elsewhere ] gives each living form what can only be described as a ‘replica’ {'double'} i.e., in the internal sense of the word i.e., practical analogy: superconductivity? {Bose - Einstein condensates} that takes on the 'form' {metaphorically speaking OR should that be metaphysically speaking?} of its external 'shell'?

'Tree' of life.

N.B. 'Was' sceptre {uas} = ''vivifying sap''. {'He who has created himself'}.

The Egyptians referred to same process {principle?} as 'Khonsu' {i.e., in its 'infant' stages}. Enlarged within.

Remember...objectivity. To understand a mind set. Regardless of those first impressions.

Biblical link.. "Remember him.....before the silver cord is severed, or the golden bowl is broken". [Ecclesiastes 12:6] link to the 'golden child', symbolism of. Explained within.

Karnak. '15' aspects having come together. A ''dawning'' of something.

Question. A back up system? Biology informs us - as to the same - which is one of the reasons we have two {duplicate?} of most things. Why should {evolution?} not 'back up' its primary beginnings {source?}. Its primary 'framework' {i.e., information of. ''Spooky at a distance''?}. The real question however is - which is the 'more' real one? While recalling that one of the 'forms' has a sell-by-date attached to it. Enlarged within.

OR "I knew of a man, who was caught up to the third heaven...whether in the body or out of the body i do not know. And he was caught up into paradise and told things that are not to be told, that no mortal is permitted to repeat." [2 Corinithians 12:2 - 4].

 

A working example?: "Another friend, Lyall Watson, had described how, when his vehicle {'car/chariot'? Enlarged within} - overturned in Kenya, he suddenly found himself hovering above the bus, and looking at the head and shoulders of a boy who had been hurled half way through the canvas roof. It occurred to him that if the bus rolled any further, the boy would be crushed. A few minutes later he recovered consciousness in the driving seat, got out of the vehicle, and recued the boy, who was in exactly the position he had seen a few moments ago. Now, if these friends were telling the truth - and I was strongly inclined to believe that they were - then human beings possess at least two 'powers' that were unsuspected by Heraclitus, Schopenhauer, and Samuel Beckett: the power to 'see' the future, and the power to leave the body." [Introduction to the new Edition of the book 'Beyond the Occult: Twenty Years Research into the Paranormal' / C. Wilson].

Doppelganger?

Remember those FIRST IMPRESSIONS. Always follow through with a second, a third, a fourth etc, until a balance is achieved.

Libra? i.e., the only sign that is represented with something inanimate.

Above / below the 'horizon' - as a means...?

Falcons?

The ancient Egyptians referred to that 'process' eventually as ones ‘Ka’. Represented by the figure Osiris. The Alchemists, in a round about way, referred to it, [as a 'physical' representation of... in 'its' early stages]... as the ‘Philosophers stone’.

The beginnings of which is represented, in the Egyptian case "with a large block of squared granite" that was found on a ledge {'ridge'?} within the pit at the extreme lower end of the Subterranean Chamber within the Great pyramid, i.e.,within, or below the Primordial mound. Think about it. Explained within i e.,Hebrew equivalent ''Hewn / UNhewn.''

'Cubit'? Remen cubit?

The Hebrews symbolized it with the ‘Ark of the covenant’. That rectangular box that was forever being carried around. Rectangular in relation to the human form. Link to the ‘Turin shroud’. Forever at ‘ones side’. [ Key ] Symbolic, [ implied by the same authors ] of carrying ones own ‘real self’ around, i.e., coexistence of both.

''Double cube''?

Notice the ark of the covenant ‘disappeared’ somewhere beyond the river Jordan. Inside the ‘temple’. [ Key. Explained elsewhere]. Most individuals with a basic understanding of the subject are aware that everything up to that same river implies; is symbolic ...is a representation, of the physical world. As does the ‘forty years in the wilderness’. Beyond that river is indicative of the 'next journey’. The ‘next leg’, i.e., B-C. Within ones ‘whole’ journey. The Egyptian equivalent was the Nile.

Some fish as most cultures know... swim/travel back to their original source as part of their life's journey, especially esotericism's favourite fish. The Salmon. This journey is the crux of all the same lore. Why?

Why the fish? Because water is also symbolic [ in part ] of the life force. The Egyptians called it the Duat [Tibetans = Bardo link], represented by the Nile, i.e., symbolic of ...the medium by which that journey takes place. For a possible ’technical’ term of the same...’A symbol is an energy-evoking and direct agent’. Think about it. In relation to those positives/ negatives {archetypes?} within a ‘river’. { J. Campbell. ’Flight of the Wild Gander’. Chapter five. Part seven}. That link to the word ''archetype.'' Benefit of. Explained within.

6....Not only, [ implied by the same authors ] is A to B possible, but once in [B] a further transition is possible. From B to ‘C’. Represented with the Salmon in some esoteric lore  {North American Indians}, or as with the Sumerians the 'figure' of Oannes,{half man,half fish}. Or ‘The Twelve Gates of the duat’ in Egyptian lore and/or...’The book of the dead’.

Explained by such authors as N.Ellis. ’Awakening Osiris’, [i.e., relative to what 'thirteen' represents]. Or the Sumerian equivalent...The word ‘Til..mun.’ Or Heaven, hell and limbo of Christian lore.  Heaven equals an analogy to the 'top level’ [C]. Explained within.

Question. If A/B co-exist, what happens to 'B' when 'A' no longer exists? Science informs us that someday the physical world/universe [ 'A' ], will no longer exist. Can something 'exist' without its 'partner'? In other words could 'B' exist on its own? If not what does that imply. "End of days"? Hence that link to the Greek use of describing the 'afterlife' as...'Millions of years', instead of 'eternal'. Therefore do we have to be somewhere, before that event happens? i.e.,'C'. That logic again. Or is it nothing more than a fairy story?

In the old testament ‘C’ is represented by the concept of... ‘The new Jerusalem’. An indirect/direct link to the word ‘Zion’ {depending on author}. Or in the new testament by the word ‘'Resurrection’'. Its physical 'representation', to those in the know i.e., Shamans {if only in relation to the start of that 'next leg'}, being the 'system of Sirius'. Known as 'the land of the fish'. Think about it in relation to the 'Pole star'. The 'gateway' to the next 'life'. What that same tribe call...'The navel of the world'. ['Sirius Mystery']. Symbolic of, only.

The main point however, is ’C’ is not a part of ‘B’, {only in part, not whole, explained within}... it is beyond ‘B’. What ever that implies.

The profession of Builders are connected to the Freemasonry ‘mystery club’...as well as to the construction of the Cathedrals, of which the symmetry and symbolism of what is known as the ‘Vesica Pisces is used throughout their construction and is a very good example of that same esoteric lore. Two circles,symbolic of ‘this’ world and ‘that’. Joined together from equal distances that form a shape when joined. Symbolic of that co-existence. That same shape that later on would be used by the Christians. The symbol of the Fish [ Key ].

A 'flowering' ?

Those same 'proportions' that make the Vesica piscis, also within the Hebrew 'Tree of life'. Known throughout this subject as 'sacred geometry'. That same 'geometry' that is 'shown' within pyramids, cathedrals and paintings, as a representation of an 'understanding', {by way of the 'Golden mean' or ratio etc}. That 'understanding' that is represented in many cultures, by way of a 'development'.... from a 'seed' to a 'flower',{''chakra'' link} - as explained throughout in such publications as 'The Ancient Secret of the Flower of Life'. Mentioned elsewhere. {Page 41, for information on the above, i.e.,Vesica piscis}.

Further KEYS - found within. Find them to understand them. To understand the self within the bigger picture. The 'Micro' within the 'Macro.' Before you ask yourself that bigger question. Fact or fiction. A possibility or not? At least an understanding of a subject will be got. No prose intended.

Question. If all the above implies an understanding of 'beliefs' that represent the 'mind set' of all those that attempt to understand them - all the way back to the 'oral' tradition. {Neolithic / Palaeolithic} - should this 'subject material' therefore not be a part of such major, known {curriculum?} subjects as anthropology? {REGARDLESS of what we think of subject material}.

 

Material updated/added too, at regular intervals.