WingMakers Forum
Visit SUMBOLA - The Social Reading Platform
Publishers, Authors, Readers, and Talent wanted.


All times are UTC - 5 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Symbology and Myth and....Storytelling
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 3:45 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The wise have given lessons to the world in different forms suited to the evolution of the people at a particular time, and the first and most original form of education that the wise gave to the world was symbolical. This method of teaching has been valued in all ages, and will always have its importance. That is not beauty which is not veiled. In the veiling and unveiling of beauty is the purpose of life. Beauty is that which is always out of reach. You see it and you do not see it. You touch it and you cannot touch it. It is seen and yet veiled; it is known and yet unknown. And therefore words are often inadequate to express the beauty of Truth. Therefore symbolism is adopted by the wise.

Hazrat Inayat Khan



The symbology of religious ideas

Hazrat Inayat Khan



...The religions of the ancient Egyptians, of the Greeks, of the Hindus, and of the Parsis, all have symbols which express the essential truth hidden under each of them. There is symbolism in Christianity and in many other religions. Man has often rebelled against symbolism, but this is natural, as man has always revolted against things he cannot understand. There has been a wave of opposition to symbolism in both the East and the West. In the East it came in the period of Islam, and in the West it re-echoed in the Reformation. No doubt when the sacred symbols are made into patents by the religions which want to monopolize the whole truth for themselves, it encourages that tendency in human nature which is always ready either to accept or to reject things. However, one can say without exaggeration that symbology has served to keep the ancient wisdom intact for ages. There are many ideas relating to human nature, to the nature of life, to God and His many attributes, and to the path towards the goal, which can be and have been expressed in symbols.

To a person who sees only the surface of life, symbols mean nothing. The secret of symbols is revealed to souls who can see through life, whose glance penetrates through objects. Verily, the things of the world disclose themselves to the seer and in this uncovering beauty is hidden. There is a great joy in understanding, especially in understanding things which mean nothing to most people. It requires intuition to read symbols, even something deeper than intuition, namely insight. To the one to whom symbols speak of their nature and of their secret, each symbol is in itself a living manuscript. Symbology is the best means of learning the mysteries of life, and also one of the best ways of passing on ideas which will continue to live after the teacher has passed away. It is speaking without speaking; it is writing without writing. The symbol may be said to be an ocean in a drop.

http://www.sufimovement.org/symbology.htm

[Edited on 3-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:39 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The Precolumbian cosmogonies constitute a modality of the archetypal Cosmogony (in which man is included), out beyond any personal speculation, and despite the variety of forms or modes in which it is expressed in accordance with the characteristics of space, time, or manner–which both conceal and reveal its prototypal content, its essence. This is why these cosmogonies are still alive today, in the indigenous peoples' symbols and myths, waiting to be experienced through knowledge of them, through their invocation, in order for them to generate all of the magnitude of their potential energy. Ancient men have disappeared, but not their eternal gods–Quetzalcóatl, Kukulkan, Viracocha1–who still live with us, and shape a large part of the history of our American countries and (although we do not notice it) our own history.
Actually, many millions of persons–in the north, middle, and south of America–still call upon them in ancient traditional rites, as well as under different religious forms of folklore. The deity, in itself, is the same for all of the peoples who know it, regardless of what they call it, or of the particular shape it takes. This is valid for all traditions, living or dead, since the deity is ultimately one alone, although its manifestations be multiple. When the Nahuatl sages, the tlamatinime, were questioned about their beliefs by the first twelve Catholic religious to arrive in Mexico, and heard from the lips of their inquisitors that their gods no longer existed, they asked to die with them. Then they accepted to speak calmly. "We will talk a bit, we shall reveal the secret, the ark of Our Lord." "You have said that we do not know the Lord closely and intimately, the one to whom the heavens and the earth belong. You have said that our gods are not true. This is a new word that you utter, and so we are disturbed, and so we are uncomfortable. Our forebears, you see, those who have been, those who have lived upon the earth, were not accustomed to speak in this way." Whereupon, in simple fashion, that they might be understood, they enumerated and described a series of images of the divinity, their tradition, and their ritual, which, incidentally, corresponded to Christian analogues. Then they summed up: "We know to whom we owe life, to whom we owe birth, to whom we owe generation, to whom we owe growth, how we must pray, how we must beseech."

As we see by their own words, the tlamatinime were simply incapable of grasping the missionaries' proposition. It was beyond them. How could human beings suppress the gods by decree? And how could the one reality, the one certain thing, be annihilated by illusions and shadow? Let us hear them: "Surely we still do not believe [what you say]. We do not hold it for the truth, though this may offend you."2

Offended or not, the conquistadors proceeded to abolish the Precolumbians' image of the world, space, and time, their conception of life and man, and their myths and rites. They destroyed nearly the totality of their culture. And since, unfortunately, these cultures are seemingly dead, in order to hear them we must follow a difficult process of reconstruction, by way of its fragments, incomplete codes and monuments, the chronicles of the conquistadors, and various other testimonials, as well as by still living cultural remnants, of folklore, dance, the designs wrought on fabric and basketwork, and so on. But especially, we shall be on firm footing if we attend to these cultures' clear, precise cosmogonic and theogonic symbols and myths (which correspond to the symbols and myths of other peoples), including their model of the universe and their cultural structures–evident, for example, in the constructive symbol, with its geometrical and numerical basis.

This will enable us to make an analogical approach to a knowledge of the Indians' traditions, and to have a sufficiently distinct vision of them, at least as the foundation of an attempt to grasp them in their essence, so that they will no longer signify only mournful ruins or meaningless relics, or an unknown, hypothetical, and glorious past of which we remain altogether ignorant. On the other hand, as we have said, despite the plunder, systematic annihilation, and manifold harassment they have suffered, the Precolumbian traditions are still alive and flourishing, revealed in their symbols, in their myths, and in their cosmogony, in their archetypal ideas, their harmonious modules, and their gods, which only wait to be called back to life in order to actualize their potency. That is, they need only be apprehended, understood with the heart, in order to act upon us.



NOTES
* Note from the translator: The author makes use of the terms America and American, throughout this work, in their most extensive meaning, including in them not only North America (U.S.A. and Canada), but also Central and South America.
1 Of whom it is said that they are to return.
2 El libro de los Coloquios de los Doce, chap. 6 of the Nahuatl text published by W. Lehmann.

http://www.geocities.com/indoamerica/sacred01.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 4:54 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
SACRED COSMOLOGY
FEDERICO GONZALEZ
III
SYMBOLS, MYTHS, AND RITES
We must make certain specifications with regard to what the symbol is for Symbology, and accordingly, what this science studies and expresses, as well as offer an idea of what an ensemble of symbols in action is. By ensemble of symbols in action, we mean the world of symbol as it is experienced by a traditional or primitive society, a society in which symbol as well as myth, and especially rite (which encompasses the totality of a people's daily activities) are still flourishing. In such a society, symbols are understood in their essential meaning as direct connection with the sacred, and not as convention, allegory, or metaphor, not as something vague and exterior to the being. For traditional, primitive societies, the symbol–and every expression or manifestation, whether macrocosmic or microcosmic, is symbolical–constitutes a real sign, or ensemble of living signs fused and related with one another through the plurality of their significates, shaping a revealing language or ciphered code of their own, through which they also cohere with the society in which they are manifested.
This is owing to the fact that symbol, like myth or rite, is the bridge between a reality that is sensible, perceptible, and cognizable at first glance, and the mystery of its authentic, concealed nature, which is its origin. After all, symbol, myth, and rite are an expression that reveals itself in their manifestation, and effectively establish the bond between the known and the unknown, between a level of reality that is ordinarily perceived and the invisible principles that have occasioned it. At the same time, this bond constitutes their raison d'être as such, to which they attest in their transformation into vehicles. This immediately endows them with a sacred character–one of taboo, if you will–in their capacity as a direct expression of the principles, forces, and original energies of which they are the messengers. 1

It goes without saying that the notion of symbol held in contemporary society is very different. This is due to the fact that symbol is no longer known, or is employed as a simple convention, and in some cases scarcely endowed with a substitutive value; or else as something probable, used as a synonym for what might perhaps come to be–that is, for something allegorical and incomplete that would need a rational translation and logical or analytic interpretation in order to be understood. This comes down to saying that it is no longer taken unequivocally as the emissary of an energy and force, but is confronted as an object independent of its medium, an object that must be considered empirically in the laboratory of the mind. Such is the discomfiture and diffidence that it arouses. Of course, it also very frequently occurs–almost as the norm–that symbols are not even noticed, or simply are ignored, as if they did not actually exist because we do not notice or consume them, or as if they had no value because they are unknown and their significates are ignored.

This is owing to the fact of a society like ours, pridefully desacralized, which has sundered its connection with origins and the idea of a level superior to simple matter, or to physical, empirical verification–a society that refuses to accept symbols (except, on occasion, in their most elementary psychological aspects). Symbol, as mediator between two realities–or levels of reality–is deprived of meaning in a schema of this kind, and its understanding is limited to the version that makes of it an obscure, nearly meaningless sign indicative only of something equally nonsignifying or relative. Then the world becomes a gray mass, a horizontal multiplication of undefined gestures performed in mechanical fashion, almost without our intending them, and saying nothing to anyone, on account of the self-censorship imposed on us by the formation bestowed by today's society. In function of these models of thought, everything remains outside of us, and is foreign to us, since the symbolical path of communication has been interrupted.

Now symbols, myths, and rites present themselves as different from ourselves, static objects to which we attribute determinate formal or exterior, exclusively literal and quantitative, characteristics. Thus we deny their generative potential, their identity as dynamic subjects–in other words, their raison d'être. Now, logically enough, they seem to us false and improbable, as open to change as labels, or as passé–we suppose, in our ignorance–as the observation of the cycles of the moon, sun, and stars, and everything on which antiquity relied, in the "dark ages" before progress had been invented.

Something stands between us and symbol today, just as between us and reality. Individualism has separated us from our context to the point that there is constantly a space between what is and ourselves, between being and otherness. This space guarantees to us moderns the idea that we possess a "personality," with which we identify, and which thus makes us strangers to ourselves and our context by obliging us to accept this way of seeing. This view of ours is altogether committed to the conditioning in which we are born and live–and as whose accomplices we act, since it is no one but ourselves who keep these values imposed on the field of our consciousness.

The result of this separation is distress and desire, solitude and disintegration. After all, the cohesion guaranteed by symbols, their mediating function, goes unacknowledged, has been forgotten, or, still worse, is twisted by our current understanding, which shows us the reality of the world as external and hostile, as foreign as it is indifferent. It becomes something as cold, distant, and empty of content as ourselves, while it is actually a matter of a universe perfectly integrated in the harmony of its parts and correspondences, and not a reality expressing itself as fragmentary. The universe is a gigantic organism, which includes ourselves in the sanguine torrent of its cosmic life, but which we are accustomed to contemplate as an atrocious or curious thing, failing to relate it immediately to ourselves–or perhaps, in the best of cases, seeing it as something agreeable when observed from a bit of a distance.

For Symbology, symbol, myth, and rite actively testify, on the sensible level, to the energies that have given them shape. Accordingly, there must be a very precise correlativity between symbol (and myth and rite) and what it manifests, without which it would express nothing. This correspondence between idea and form (understanding the latter term not in the scholastic sense, but in its current meaning), between essence and substance, nonmanifestation and manifestation, makes of symbol the precise unit for tightly binding together two opposed natures, which, in the symbolic body–as dynamic subject and static object–find their complementarity. On the other hand, it is well said that the lesser is the symbol of the greater, and not vice versa–a specification referring especially to the possibility of an exact comprehension of the thought of a traditional society–the Precolumbian–that acknowledges the symbol as the universal language that has been able to fecundate it and give it life. In this sense, symbols have created societies, and not societies their symbols (not to forget their mutual interaction), since they are woven into the very weft of life and man.


Codex Vaticano B

From a certain standpoint, there is nothing outside of the symbol–as neither is there anything outside the cosmos–inasmuch as symbol expresses the totality of the possible; all things are meaningful, and reflect the unmanifested by way of the manifested. Accordingly, one must not invent symbols and myths. They are already given, they are eternal, and they reveal themselves to man, or better, in man. Human beings in themselves symbolize the cosmos "in little," on a reduced scale, (not to pretend that the macrocosm is specifically symbolizing him). Civilizing, revealing, and saving heroes like Quetzalcóatl or Viracocha are not human beings who, as such, and thanks to their merits, have been deified or transformed into stars. On the contrary, they are gods or stars who–like men–have fallen from the firmament, and must traverse the lower world and die by self-sacrifice, in order to be reborn to their true identity and occupy their authentic place in heaven, which of course is their origin.
For the Precolumbian cultures, this universal rite is exemplified in the vault of heaven, especially by the Sun, the Moon, and Venus–but by all of the other stars, and by their cycles of appearance and disappearance, death and resurrection. Upon these cycles depend the earth and the human being, and in these cycles the American cultures have seen the highest manifestation of the models or universal and eternal archetypes upon which they have founded their cosmogony. The laws of analogy and correspondence are based on the interrelation of a lesser, known level, with a greater, unknown one. The known symbolizes the unknown one, and the latter can never be a symbol of the former.

A traditional and/or archaic society adopts the viewpoint of unity, and makes it its own. From the one, all things emanate: life, sustenance and culture. Modern society, meanwhile, embraces the standpoint of multiplicity–that of a fragmented, self-sufficient individuality which progresses indefinitely through the play of its dialectic. The first focus is synthetic, the second analytic. The traditional tends toward simultaneity, the concentric view, while the other tends toward succession, toward the immense trifle. The modern perspective is constructed by way of the logic of rationalism; contrariwise, antiquity ordered its vision of the world by means of analogy and its mechanisms of association. Here the correspondence among phenomena, beings, and things is natural, inasmuch as they symbolize distinct aspects of the universal principles that have generated them. There is nothing coincidental in this kind of world, for everything acquires its meaning in the whole, and man reveres a superior will that reveals itself analogically within his conscience. And it is in virtue of this complementarity that all things, phenomena and beings, seek one another and correspond, attract and reject, but not exclude, one another. They are at war or they live in peace, but they have a harmonious meaning that imitates the rhythm of the universal inhalation and exhalation.

The elements of kinship among things are evident, then; things vibrate at the same frequency, and have been generated by a single matrix; shapes, colors, and all possible qualities or differentiations are but modalities of a single wave subject to identical principles expressed in the totality of the cosmic concert. Like attracts like, and fuses and joins with it. And opposites do not eliminate one another, as there is a point of common equilibrium–which is neither the one nor the other, neither this nor that–where all things coincide, to return once more to a state of opposition and then to join once more in complementarity. This does not cancel individual responsibility, since it is within the heart of the human being–as protagonist of the cosmic drama–and not elsewhere that this fact is produced, as well as understood and grasped, and accordingly it is in that heart that contradictions are reconciled. In a certain sense, all life is dependent on this man, who thus becomes aware of his being, and his true responsibility as intermediary symbol between earth and heaven. Then, and in this light, the things that surround him will be sacralized, and he himself will emulate the qualities of the gods–will enflesh the universal principles with which he synchronizes in simultaneity.

In such a society, things do not occur in linear fashion, in a foreseeable manner. Every day is the first day of creation, and everything is so alive that any thing can occur at any moment. The human being does not imagine or project what will come, but constantly experiences the eternity of the present. For Precolumbian thought, the cosmos and life are being created at this very moment. They are not a historical fact, and they actively participate in their generation. True, existence seen in this way is a risk, and doubtless an ongoing adventure. And so it is not strange that it is conceived as a moment of passage and a locus of transformation, like a dream from which one must awaken. Time has not occurred before, nor will it occur after, because it is always occurring, is constantly present, and embraces the totality of space, where it always expresses itself as something supernatural: charged with constructive and destructive energies represented by numina and sacred numbers, as we observe in the Mesoamerican calendars. Movement, which is an image of immobility, is the visible trace of time in its self-manifestation, and it is thanks to this trace that we can accede to the eternity of its repose. And it is by way of analogies, which bind symbols, myths, and rites with their uncreated origin, that human beings can play their role and fulfill their destiny in relation to the laws and structures of the cosmogonic model which we will now consider.




NOTES
1 From this point forward, when we refer to symbol, we must also understand myth and rite, since, from our perspective, the three are identical, and perform exactly the same revelatory function. Myth, which of course is symbolical, manifests an exemplar deed, which, as such, organizes the life of those who believe and trust in it. Furthermore, it constitutes their integral belief, and accordingly, institutes their trust, since, in any traditional society, myth is the very manifestation of truth at the human level. Rites are symbols in action, and express in a direct way the beliefs and the cosmogony that the mythical histories likewise transmit. These three complementary manifestations reveal the most profound secrets of life, the cosmos, and being. They mold all of the possible images of traditional man, and thereby the latter's identity.

SACRED COSMOLOGY
FEDERICO GONZALEZ
III
SYMBOLS, MYTHS, AND RITES
We must make certain specifications with regard to what the symbol is for Symbology, and accordingly, what this science studies and expresses, as well as offer an idea of what an ensemble of symbols in action is. By ensemble of symbols in action, we mean the world of symbol as it is experienced by a traditional or primitive society, a society in which symbol as well as myth, and especially rite (which encompasses the totality of a people's daily activities) are still flourishing. In such a society, symbols are understood in their essential meaning as direct connection with the sacred, and not as convention, allegory, or metaphor, not as something vague and exterior to the being. For traditional, primitive societies, the symbol–and every expression or manifestation, whether macrocosmic or microcosmic, is symbolical–constitutes a real sign, or ensemble of living signs fused and related with one another through the plurality of their significates, shaping a revealing language or ciphered code of their own, through which they also cohere with the society in which they are manifested.
This is owing to the fact that symbol, like myth or rite, is the bridge between a reality that is sensible, perceptible, and cognizable at first glance, and the mystery of its authentic, concealed nature, which is its origin. After all, symbol, myth, and rite are an expression that reveals itself in their manifestation, and effectively establish the bond between the known and the unknown, between a level of reality that is ordinarily perceived and the invisible principles that have occasioned it. At the same time, this bond constitutes their raison d'être as such, to which they attest in their transformation into vehicles. This immediately endows them with a sacred character–one of taboo, if you will–in their capacity as a direct expression of the principles, forces, and original energies of which they are the messengers. 1

It goes without saying that the notion of symbol held in contemporary society is very different. This is due to the fact that symbol is no longer known, or is employed as a simple convention, and in some cases scarcely endowed with a substitutive value; or else as something probable, used as a synonym for what might perhaps come to be–that is, for something allegorical and incomplete that would need a rational translation and logical or analytic interpretation in order to be understood. This comes down to saying that it is no longer taken unequivocally as the emissary of an energy and force, but is confronted as an object independent of its medium, an object that must be considered empirically in the laboratory of the mind. Such is the discomfiture and diffidence that it arouses. Of course, it also very frequently occurs–almost as the norm–that symbols are not even noticed, or simply are ignored, as if they did not actually exist because we do not notice or consume them, or as if they had no value because they are unknown and their significates are ignored.

This is owing to the fact of a society like ours, pridefully desacralized, which has sundered its connection with origins and the idea of a level superior to simple matter, or to physical, empirical verification–a society that refuses to accept symbols (except, on occasion, in their most elementary psychological aspects). Symbol, as mediator between two realities–or levels of reality–is deprived of meaning in a schema of this kind, and its understanding is limited to the version that makes of it an obscure, nearly meaningless sign indicative only of something equally nonsignifying or relative. Then the world becomes a gray mass, a horizontal multiplication of undefined gestures performed in mechanical fashion, almost without our intending them, and saying nothing to anyone, on account of the self-censorship imposed on us by the formation bestowed by today's society. In function of these models of thought, everything remains outside of us, and is foreign to us, since the symbolical path of communication has been interrupted.

Now symbols, myths, and rites present themselves as different from ourselves, static objects to which we attribute determinate formal or exterior, exclusively literal and quantitative, characteristics. Thus we deny their generative potential, their identity as dynamic subjects–in other words, their raison d'être. Now, logically enough, they seem to us false and improbable, as open to change as labels, or as passé–we suppose, in our ignorance–as the observation of the cycles of the moon, sun, and stars, and everything on which antiquity relied, in the "dark ages" before progress had been invented.

Something stands between us and symbol today, just as between us and reality. Individualism has separated us from our context to the point that there is constantly a space between what is and ourselves, between being and otherness. This space guarantees to us moderns the idea that we possess a "personality," with which we identify, and which thus makes us strangers to ourselves and our context by obliging us to accept this way of seeing. This view of ours is altogether committed to the conditioning in which we are born and live–and as whose accomplices we act, since it is no one but ourselves who keep these values imposed on the field of our consciousness.

The result of this separation is distress and desire, solitude and disintegration. After all, the cohesion guaranteed by symbols, their mediating function, goes unacknowledged, has been forgotten, or, still worse, is twisted by our current understanding, which shows us the reality of the world as external and hostile, as foreign as it is indifferent. It becomes something as cold, distant, and empty of content as ourselves, while it is actually a matter of a universe perfectly integrated in the harmony of its parts and correspondences, and not a reality expressing itself as fragmentary. The universe is a gigantic organism, which includes ourselves in the sanguine torrent of its cosmic life, but which we are accustomed to contemplate as an atrocious or curious thing, failing to relate it immediately to ourselves–or perhaps, in the best of cases, seeing it as something agreeable when observed from a bit of a distance.

For Symbology, symbol, myth, and rite actively testify, on the sensible level, to the energies that have given them shape. Accordingly, there must be a very precise correlativity between symbol (and myth and rite) and what it manifests, without which it would express nothing. This correspondence between idea and form (understanding the latter term not in the scholastic sense, but in its current meaning), between essence and substance, nonmanifestation and manifestation, makes of symbol the precise unit for tightly binding together two opposed natures, which, in the symbolic body–as dynamic subject and static object–find their complementarity. On the other hand, it is well said that the lesser is the symbol of the greater, and not vice versa–a specification referring especially to the possibility of an exact comprehension of the thought of a traditional society–the Precolumbian–that acknowledges the symbol as the universal language that has been able to fecundate it and give it life. In this sense, symbols have created societies, and not societies their symbols (not to forget their mutual interaction), since they are woven into the very weft of life and man.


Codex Vaticano B

From a certain standpoint, there is nothing outside of the symbol–as neither is there anything outside the cosmos–inasmuch as symbol expresses the totality of the possible; all things are meaningful, and reflect the unmanifested by way of the manifested. Accordingly, one must not invent symbols and myths. They are already given, they are eternal, and they reveal themselves to man, or better, in man. Human beings in themselves symbolize the cosmos "in little," on a reduced scale, (not to pretend that the macrocosm is specifically symbolizing him). Civilizing, revealing, and saving heroes like Quetzalcóatl or Viracocha are not human beings who, as such, and thanks to their merits, have been deified or transformed into stars. On the contrary, they are gods or stars who–like men–have fallen from the firmament, and must traverse the lower world and die by self-sacrifice, in order to be reborn to their true identity and occupy their authentic place in heaven, which of course is their origin.
For the Precolumbian cultures, this universal rite is exemplified in the vault of heaven, especially by the Sun, the Moon, and Venus–but by all of the other stars, and by their cycles of appearance and disappearance, death and resurrection. Upon these cycles depend the earth and the human being, and in these cycles the American cultures have seen the highest manifestation of the models or universal and eternal archetypes upon which they have founded their cosmogony. The laws of analogy and correspondence are based on the interrelation of a lesser, known level, with a greater, unknown one. The known symbolizes the unknown one, and the latter can never be a symbol of the former.

A traditional and/or archaic society adopts the viewpoint of unity, and makes it its own. From the one, all things emanate: life, sustenance and culture. Modern society, meanwhile, embraces the standpoint of multiplicity–that of a fragmented, self-sufficient individuality which progresses indefinitely through the play of its dialectic. The first focus is synthetic, the second analytic. The traditional tends toward simultaneity, the concentric view, while the other tends toward succession, toward the immense trifle. The modern perspective is constructed by way of the logic of rationalism; contrariwise, antiquity ordered its vision of the world by means of analogy and its mechanisms of association. Here the correspondence among phenomena, beings, and things is natural, inasmuch as they symbolize distinct aspects of the universal principles that have generated them. There is nothing coincidental in this kind of world, for everything acquires its meaning in the whole, and man reveres a superior will that reveals itself analogically within his conscience. And it is in virtue of this complementarity that all things, phenomena and beings, seek one another and correspond, attract and reject, but not exclude, one another. They are at war or they live in peace, but they have a harmonious meaning that imitates the rhythm of the universal inhalation and exhalation.

The elements of kinship among things are evident, then; things vibrate at the same frequency, and have been generated by a single matrix; shapes, colors, and all possible qualities or differentiations are but modalities of a single wave subject to identical principles expressed in the totality of the cosmic concert. Like attracts like, and fuses and joins with it. And opposites do not eliminate one another, as there is a point of common equilibrium–which is neither the one nor the other, neither this nor that–where all things coincide, to return once more to a state of opposition and then to join once more in complementarity. This does not cancel individual responsibility, since it is within the heart of the human being–as protagonist of the cosmic drama–and not elsewhere that this fact is produced, as well as understood and grasped, and accordingly it is in that heart that contradictions are reconciled. In a certain sense, all life is dependent on this man, who thus becomes aware of his being, and his true responsibility as intermediary symbol between earth and heaven. Then, and in this light, the things that surround him will be sacralized, and he himself will emulate the qualities of the gods–will enflesh the universal principles with which he synchronizes in simultaneity.

In such a society, things do not occur in linear fashion, in a foreseeable manner. Every day is the first day of creation, and everything is so alive that any thing can occur at any moment. The human being does not imagine or project what will come, but constantly experiences the eternity of the present. For Precolumbian thought, the cosmos and life are being created at this very moment. They are not a historical fact, and they actively participate in their generation. True, existence seen in this way is a risk, and doubtless an ongoing adventure. And so it is not strange that it is conceived as a moment of passage and a locus of transformation, like a dream from which one must awaken. Time has not occurred before, nor will it occur after, because it is always occurring, is constantly present, and embraces the totality of space, where it always expresses itself as something supernatural: charged with constructive and destructive energies represented by numina and sacred numbers, as we observe in the Mesoamerican calendars. Movement, which is an image of immobility, is the visible trace of time in its self-manifestation, and it is thanks to this trace that we can accede to the eternity of its repose. And it is by way of analogies, which bind symbols, myths, and rites with their uncreated origin, that human beings can play their role and fulfill their destiny in relation to the laws and structures of the cosmogonic model which we will now consider.




NOTES
1 From this point forward, when we refer to symbol, we must also understand myth and rite, since, from our perspective, the three are identical, and perform exactly the same revelatory function. Myth, which of course is symbolical, manifests an exemplar deed, which, as such, organizes the life of those who believe and trust in it. Furthermore, it constitutes their integral belief, and accordingly, institutes their trust, since, in any traditional society, myth is the very manifestation of truth at the human level. Rites are symbols in action, and express in a direct way the beliefs and the cosmogony that the mythical histories likewise transmit. These three complementary manifestations reveal the most profound secrets of life, the cosmos, and being. They mold all of the possible images of traditional man, and thereby the latter's identity.


SACRED COSMOLOGY
FEDERICO GONZALEZ
III
SYMBOLS, MYTHS, AND RITES
We must make certain specifications with regard to what the symbol is for Symbology, and accordingly, what this science studies and expresses, as well as offer an idea of what an ensemble of symbols in action is. By ensemble of symbols in action, we mean the world of symbol as it is experienced by a traditional or primitive society, a society in which symbol as well as myth, and especially rite (which encompasses the totality of a people's daily activities) are still flourishing. In such a society, symbols are understood in their essential meaning as direct connection with the sacred, and not as convention, allegory, or metaphor, not as something vague and exterior to the being. For traditional, primitive societies, the symbol–and every expression or manifestation, whether macrocosmic or microcosmic, is symbolical–constitutes a real sign, or ensemble of living signs fused and related with one another through the plurality of their significates, shaping a revealing language or ciphered code of their own, through which they also cohere with the society in which they are manifested.
This is owing to the fact that symbol, like myth or rite, is the bridge between a reality that is sensible, perceptible, and cognizable at first glance, and the mystery of its authentic, concealed nature, which is its origin. After all, symbol, myth, and rite are an expression that reveals itself in their manifestation, and effectively establish the bond between the known and the unknown, between a level of reality that is ordinarily perceived and the invisible principles that have occasioned it. At the same time, this bond constitutes their raison d'être as such, to which they attest in their transformation into vehicles. This immediately endows them with a sacred character–one of taboo, if you will–in their capacity as a direct expression of the principles, forces, and original energies of which they are the messengers. 1

It goes without saying that the notion of symbol held in contemporary society is very different. This is due to the fact that symbol is no longer known, or is employed as a simple convention, and in some cases scarcely endowed with a substitutive value; or else as something probable, used as a synonym for what might perhaps come to be–that is, for something allegorical and incomplete that would need a rational translation and logical or analytic interpretation in order to be understood. This comes down to saying that it is no longer taken unequivocally as the emissary of an energy and force, but is confronted as an object independent of its medium, an object that must be considered empirically in the laboratory of the mind. Such is the discomfiture and diffidence that it arouses. Of course, it also very frequently occurs–almost as the norm–that symbols are not even noticed, or simply are ignored, as if they did not actually exist because we do not notice or consume them, or as if they had no value because they are unknown and their significates are ignored.

This is owing to the fact of a society like ours, pridefully desacralized, which has sundered its connection with origins and the idea of a level superior to simple matter, or to physical, empirical verification–a society that refuses to accept symbols (except, on occasion, in their most elementary psychological aspects). Symbol, as mediator between two realities–or levels of reality–is deprived of meaning in a schema of this kind, and its understanding is limited to the version that makes of it an obscure, nearly meaningless sign indicative only of something equally nonsignifying or relative. Then the world becomes a gray mass, a horizontal multiplication of undefined gestures performed in mechanical fashion, almost without our intending them, and saying nothing to anyone, on account of the self-censorship imposed on us by the formation bestowed by today's society. In function of these models of thought, everything remains outside of us, and is foreign to us, since the symbolical path of communication has been interrupted.

Now symbols, myths, and rites present themselves as different from ourselves, static objects to which we attribute determinate formal or exterior, exclusively literal and quantitative, characteristics. Thus we deny their generative potential, their identity as dynamic subjects–in other words, their raison d'être. Now, logically enough, they seem to us false and improbable, as open to change as labels, or as passé–we suppose, in our ignorance–as the observation of the cycles of the moon, sun, and stars, and everything on which antiquity relied, in the "dark ages" before progress had been invented.

Something stands between us and symbol today, just as between us and reality. Individualism has separated us from our context to the point that there is constantly a space between what is and ourselves, between being and otherness. This space guarantees to us moderns the idea that we possess a "personality," with which we identify, and which thus makes us strangers to ourselves and our context by obliging us to accept this way of seeing. This view of ours is altogether committed to the conditioning in which we are born and live–and as whose accomplices we act, since it is no one but ourselves who keep these values imposed on the field of our consciousness.

The result of this separation is distress and desire, solitude and disintegration. After all, the cohesion guaranteed by symbols, their mediating function, goes unacknowledged, has been forgotten, or, still worse, is twisted by our current understanding, which shows us the reality of the world as external and hostile, as foreign as it is indifferent. It becomes something as cold, distant, and empty of content as ourselves, while it is actually a matter of a universe perfectly integrated in the harmony of its parts and correspondences, and not a reality expressing itself as fragmentary. The universe is a gigantic organism, which includes ourselves in the sanguine torrent of its cosmic life, but which we are accustomed to contemplate as an atrocious or curious thing, failing to relate it immediately to ourselves–or perhaps, in the best of cases, seeing it as something agreeable when observed from a bit of a distance.

For Symbology, symbol, myth, and rite actively testify, on the sensible level, to the energies that have given them shape. Accordingly, there must be a very precise correlativity between symbol (and myth and rite) and what it manifests, without which it would express nothing. This correspondence between idea and form (understanding the latter term not in the scholastic sense, but in its current meaning), between essence and substance, nonmanifestation and manifestation, makes of symbol the precise unit for tightly binding together two opposed natures, which, in the symbolic body–as dynamic subject and static object–find their complementarity. On the other hand, it is well said that the lesser is the symbol of the greater, and not vice versa–a specification referring especially to the possibility of an exact comprehension of the thought of a traditional society–the Precolumbian–that acknowledges the symbol as the universal language that has been able to fecundate it and give it life. In this sense, symbols have created societies, and not societies their symbols (not to forget their mutual interaction), since they are woven into the very weft of life and man.


Codex Vaticano B

From a certain standpoint, there is nothing outside of the symbol–as neither is there anything outside the cosmos–inasmuch as symbol expresses the totality of the possible; all things are meaningful, and reflect the unmanifested by way of the manifested. Accordingly, one must not invent symbols and myths. They are already given, they are eternal, and they reveal themselves to man, or better, in man. Human beings in themselves symbolize the cosmos "in little," on a reduced scale, (not to pretend that the macrocosm is specifically symbolizing him). Civilizing, revealing, and saving heroes like Quetzalcóatl or Viracocha are not human beings who, as such, and thanks to their merits, have been deified or transformed into stars. On the contrary, they are gods or stars who–like men–have fallen from the firmament, and must traverse the lower world and die by self-sacrifice, in order to be reborn to their true identity and occupy their authentic place in heaven, which of course is their origin.
For the Precolumbian cultures, this universal rite is exemplified in the vault of heaven, especially by the Sun, the Moon, and Venus–but by all of the other stars, and by their cycles of appearance and disappearance, death and resurrection. Upon these cycles depend the earth and the human being, and in these cycles the American cultures have seen the highest manifestation of the models or universal and eternal archetypes upon which they have founded their cosmogony. The laws of analogy and correspondence are based on the interrelation of a lesser, known level, with a greater, unknown one. The known symbolizes the unknown one, and the latter can never be a symbol of the former.

A traditional and/or archaic society adopts the viewpoint of unity, and makes it its own. From the one, all things emanate: life, sustenance and culture. Modern society, meanwhile, embraces the standpoint of multiplicity–that of a fragmented, self-sufficient individuality which progresses indefinitely through the play of its dialectic. The first focus is synthetic, the second analytic. The traditional tends toward simultaneity, the concentric view, while the other tends toward succession, toward the immense trifle. The modern perspective is constructed by way of the logic of rationalism; contrariwise, antiquity ordered its vision of the world by means of analogy and its mechanisms of association. Here the correspondence among phenomena, beings, and things is natural, inasmuch as they symbolize distinct aspects of the universal principles that have generated them. There is nothing coincidental in this kind of world, for everything acquires its meaning in the whole, and man reveres a superior will that reveals itself analogically within his conscience. And it is in virtue of this complementarity that all things, phenomena and beings, seek one another and correspond, attract and reject, but not exclude, one another. They are at war or they live in peace, but they have a harmonious meaning that imitates the rhythm of the universal inhalation and exhalation.

The elements of kinship among things are evident, then; things vibrate at the same frequency, and have been generated by a single matrix; shapes, colors, and all possible qualities or differentiations are but modalities of a single wave subject to identical principles expressed in the totality of the cosmic concert. Like attracts like, and fuses and joins with it. And opposites do not eliminate one another, as there is a point of common equilibrium–which is neither the one nor the other, neither this nor that–where all things coincide, to return once more to a state of opposition and then to join once more in complementarity. This does not cancel individual responsibility, since it is within the heart of the human being–as protagonist of the cosmic drama–and not elsewhere that this fact is produced, as well as understood and grasped, and accordingly it is in that heart that contradictions are reconciled. In a certain sense, all life is dependent on this man, who thus becomes aware of his being, and his true responsibility as intermediary symbol between earth and heaven. Then, and in this light, the things that surround him will be sacralized, and he himself will emulate the qualities of the gods–will enflesh the universal principles with which he synchronizes in simultaneity.

In such a society, things do not occur in linear fashion, in a foreseeable manner. Every day is the first day of creation, and everything is so alive that any thing can occur at any moment. The human being does not imagine or project what will come, but constantly experiences the eternity of the present. For Precolumbian thought, the cosmos and life are being created at this very moment. They are not a historical fact, and they actively participate in their generation. True, existence seen in this way is a risk, and doubtless an ongoing adventure. And so it is not strange that it is conceived as a moment of passage and a locus of transformation, like a dream from which one must awaken. Time has not occurred before, nor will it occur after, because it is always occurring, is constantly present, and embraces the totality of space, where it always expresses itself as something supernatural: charged with constructive and destructive energies represented by numina and sacred numbers, as we observe in the Mesoamerican calendars. Movement, which is an image of immobility, is the visible trace of time in its self-manifestation, and it is thanks to this trace that we can accede to the eternity of its repose. And it is by way of analogies, which bind symbols, myths, and rites with their uncreated origin, that human beings can play their role and fulfill their destiny in relation to the laws and structures of the cosmogonic model which we will now consider.




NOTES
1 From this point forward, when we refer to symbol, we must also understand myth and rite, since, from our perspective, the three are identical, and perform exactly the same revelatory function. Myth, which of course is symbolical, manifests an exemplar deed, which, as such, organizes the life of those who believe and trust in it. Furthermore, it constitutes their integral belief, and accordingly, institutes their trust, since, in any traditional society, myth is the very manifestation of truth at the human level. Rites are symbols in action, and express in a direct way the beliefs and the cosmogony that the mythical histories likewise transmit. These three complementary manifestations reveal the most profound secrets of life, the cosmos, and being. They mold all of the possible images of traditional man, and thereby the latter's identity.

http://www.geocities.com/indoamerica/sacred03.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 5:26 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Chapter Nine
VISIONS FROM
THE TWILIGHT ZONE
"Rod Serling's popular television series "The Twilight Zone" held viewers spellbound for many years (and still does so in reruns) by putting the episodes' heroes in obviously dangerous circumstances - a fatal accident, a terminal illness, a trapping in a time warp - from which they miraculously emerged unharmed because of some incredible twist of fate. In most instances, the miracle was the handiwork of a person, seemingly ordinary, who proved to have extraordinary powers - an "angel" if you wish.

"But the fascination for the viewer was the Twilight Zone; for when all was said and done, the episode's hero - and with him or her the viewer - was uncertain of what had happened. Was the danger only imagined? Was it all just a dream - and thus the "miracle" that resolved the inevitable ending no miracle at all; the "angel" no angel at all; the time warp not another dimension, for none of them had really taken place . . .

"In some episodes, however, the hero's and the viewer's puzzlement was given a final twist that made the program worthy of its name. At the very end, as hero and viewer are almost certain that it was all imagined, a dream, a passing trick of the subconscious mind, a tale that has no foothold in the real world - a physical object comes into play. Sometime during the episode the hero picked up, or rather is given, a small object that he absentmindedly put in his/her pocket, or a ring put on the finger, or a talisman worn as a necklace. As all other aspects of the imagined and unreal episode, the object too had to be imagined and nonreal. But as the viewer and the hero are certain that all had faded into its nonreality, the hero finds the object in his pocket or on his finger - a reality left over from an unreality. And thus Rod Serling has shown us, between reality and nonreality, between the rational and the irrational, we were passing through a Twilight Zone.

"Four thousand years earlier, a Sumerian king found himself in a Twilight Zone, and recorded his experience on two clay cylinders (that are now on display in the Louvre Museum in Paris).

"The king's name was Gudea and he reigned in the Sumerian city Lagash circa 2100 B.C. Lagash was the "Cult Center" of Ninurta, the Foremost Son of Enlil, and he dwelt with his spouse Bau in the city's sacred precinct called the Girsu - hence his local epithet NIN.GIRSU, "Lord of the Girsu." At about that time, owing to an intensification of the struggle for supremacy on Earth that pitted primarily Enki's Firstborn Marduk against Enlil's clan, Ninurta/Ningirsu obtained the permission of his father Enlil to build a new temple in the Girsu - a temple so magnificent that it would express the rights of Ninurta to the supremacy.... one that would emulate the Great Pyramid of Giza on the one hand and that, upon its vast platform, would hold stone circles that could serve as sophisticated astronomical observatories. The need to find a reliable and faithful worshipper to carry out the grandiose plans and to follow intelligently the designs of the Divine Architects served as the background for the ensuing events recorded by Gudea.

"The series of events began with a dream that Gudea had one night; it was a vision of Divine Encounters. And it was so vivid that it transported the king into a Twilight Zone; for when Gudea awoke, an object that he had seen only in his dream was now physically on his lap. Somehow, the boundary between unreality and reality had been crossed.

"Utterly perplexed by the ocurrence, Gudea asked for and received permission to seek the advice of the oracle goddess Nanshe in her "House of Fate-Solving" in another city. Reaching the place by boat.... Gudea porceeded to tell her what had happened....

In the dream [I saw]
a man who was bright, shining like Heaven
- great in Heaven, great on Earth -
who by his headdress was a Dingir (god).
At his side was the divine Storm Bird;
Like a devouring storm under his feet
two lions crouched, on the right and on the left.
He commanded me to build his temple.

"A celestial omen then followed whose meaning, Gudea told the dream-solving goddess, he did not understand: the sun upon Kishar (the planet Jupiter) was suddenly seen on the horizon. A female then appeared and gave Gudea celestial instructions....

A woman
who was she? Who was she not?
the image of a temple-structure
she carried on her hand -
in her hand she held a holy stylus;
The tablet of her favorable star of heaven
she bore.

"As the woman was consulting the star tablet, a third divine being appeared.... he was a male:

A second man appeared, he had the
look of a hero, endowed with strength.
A tablet of lapis lazuli in his hand he held.
The plan of a temple he drew on it.
He placed before me a holy carrying basket;
Upon it he placed a pure brickmaking mold;
the destined brick was inside it.
A large vessel stood before me;
on it was engraved the Tibu bird which shines
brilliantly day and night.
A freight-ass crouched to my right.

"The text suggests that all these objects somehow materialized during the dream, but regarding one of them there is absolutely no doubt that it was made to cross from the dream dimension to the dimension of physical reality; for when Gudea awoke, he found the lapis lazuli stone tablet on his lap, with the plan of the temple etched upon it. He commemorated the miracle in one of his statues....

"....Back in Lagash Gudea contemplated the words of the oracle goddess and studied the divine tablet that had materialized on his lap. The more he thought about the varied instructions the more he was baffled, especially so regarding the astronomical orientation and timing.

Mr. Sitchin explains how Gudea went day by day seeking guidance, until all was ready for:

"....time to start making the bricks. They had to be made from clay according to the mold and sample that appeared to Gudea in his first vision-dream. We read in column XIX, verse 19 (The Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea, by Ira M. Price), that Gudea "brought the brick, placed it in the temple." It follows from this statement that Gudea had the brick (and by inference the required mold) in his physical possession; the brick and the mold were thus two more objects (in addition to the lapis lazuli tablet) that crossed the boundary in a Twilight Zone.

***
Chapter Nine
VISIONS FROM
THE TWILIGHT ZONE
"Rod Serling's popular television series "The Twilight Zone" held viewers spellbound for many years (and still does so in reruns) by putting the episodes' heroes in obviously dangerous circumstances - a fatal accident, a terminal illness, a trapping in a time warp - from which they miraculously emerged unharmed because of some incredible twist of fate. In most instances, the miracle was the handiwork of a person, seemingly ordinary, who proved to have extraordinary powers - an "angel" if you wish.

"But the fascination for the viewer was the Twilight Zone; for when all was said and done, the episode's hero - and with him or her the viewer - was uncertain of what had happened. Was the danger only imagined? Was it all just a dream - and thus the "miracle" that resolved the inevitable ending no miracle at all; the "angel" no angel at all; the time warp not another dimension, for none of them had really taken place . . .

"In some episodes, however, the hero's and the viewer's puzzlement was given a final twist that made the program worthy of its name. At the very end, as hero and viewer are almost certain that it was all imagined, a dream, a passing trick of the subconscious mind, a tale that has no foothold in the real world - a physical object comes into play. Sometime during the episode the hero picked up, or rather is given, a small object that he absentmindedly put in his/her pocket, or a ring put on the finger, or a talisman worn as a necklace. As all other aspects of the imagined and unreal episode, the object too had to be imagined and nonreal. But as the viewer and the hero are certain that all had faded into its nonreality, the hero finds the object in his pocket or on his finger - a reality left over from an unreality. And thus Rod Serling has shown us, between reality and nonreality, between the rational and the irrational, we were passing through a Twilight Zone.

"Four thousand years earlier, a Sumerian king found himself in a Twilight Zone, and recorded his experience on two clay cylinders (that are now on display in the Louvre Museum in Paris).

"The king's name was Gudea and he reigned in the Sumerian city Lagash circa 2100 B.C. Lagash was the "Cult Center" of Ninurta, the Foremost Son of Enlil, and he dwelt with his spouse Bau in the city's sacred precinct called the Girsu - hence his local epithet NIN.GIRSU, "Lord of the Girsu." At about that time, owing to an intensification of the struggle for supremacy on Earth that pitted primarily Enki's Firstborn Marduk against Enlil's clan, Ninurta/Ningirsu obtained the permission of his father Enlil to build a new temple in the Girsu - a temple so magnificent that it would express the rights of Ninurta to the supremacy.... one that would emulate the Great Pyramid of Giza on the one hand and that, upon its vast platform, would hold stone circles that could serve as sophisticated astronomical observatories. The need to find a reliable and faithful worshipper to carry out the grandiose plans and to follow intelligently the designs of the Divine Architects served as the background for the ensuing events recorded by Gudea.

"The series of events began with a dream that Gudea had one night; it was a vision of Divine Encounters. And it was so vivid that it transported the king into a Twilight Zone; for when Gudea awoke, an object that he had seen only in his dream was now physically on his lap. Somehow, the boundary between unreality and reality had been crossed.

"Utterly perplexed by the ocurrence, Gudea asked for and received permission to seek the advice of the oracle goddess Nanshe in her "House of Fate-Solving" in another city. Reaching the place by boat.... Gudea porceeded to tell her what had happened....

In the dream [I saw]
a man who was bright, shining like Heaven
- great in Heaven, great on Earth -
who by his headdress was a Dingir (god).
At his side was the divine Storm Bird;
Like a devouring storm under his feet
two lions crouched, on the right and on the left.
He commanded me to build his temple.

"A celestial omen then followed whose meaning, Gudea told the dream-solving goddess, he did not understand: the sun upon Kishar (the planet Jupiter) was suddenly seen on the horizon. A female then appeared and gave Gudea celestial instructions....

A woman
who was she? Who was she not?
the image of a temple-structure
she carried on her hand -
in her hand she held a holy stylus;
The tablet of her favorable star of heaven
she bore.

"As the woman was consulting the star tablet, a third divine being appeared.... he was a male:

A second man appeared, he had the
look of a hero, endowed with strength.
A tablet of lapis lazuli in his hand he held.
The plan of a temple he drew on it.
He placed before me a holy carrying basket;
Upon it he placed a pure brickmaking mold;
the destined brick was inside it.
A large vessel stood before me;
on it was engraved the Tibu bird which shines
brilliantly day and night.
A freight-ass crouched to my right.

"The text suggests that all these objects somehow materialized during the dream, but regarding one of them there is absolutely no doubt that it was made to cross from the dream dimension to the dimension of physical reality; for when Gudea awoke, he found the lapis lazuli stone tablet on his lap, with the plan of the temple etched upon it. He commemorated the miracle in one of his statues....

"....Back in Lagash Gudea contemplated the words of the oracle goddess and studied the divine tablet that had materialized on his lap. The more he thought about the varied instructions the more he was baffled, especially so regarding the astronomical orientation and timing.

Mr. Sitchin explains how Gudea went day by day seeking guidance, until all was ready for:

"....time to start making the bricks. They had to be made from clay according to the mold and sample that appeared to Gudea in his first vision-dream. We read in column XIX, verse 19 (The Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea, by Ira M. Price), that Gudea "brought the brick, placed it in the temple." It follows from this statement that Gudea had the brick (and by inference the required mold) in his physical possession; the brick and the mold were thus two more objects (in addition to the lapis lazuli tablet) that crossed the boundary in a Twilight Zone.

***
Chapter Nine
VISIONS FROM
THE TWILIGHT ZONE
"Rod Serling's popular television series "The Twilight Zone" held viewers spellbound for many years (and still does so in reruns) by putting the episodes' heroes in obviously dangerous circumstances - a fatal accident, a terminal illness, a trapping in a time warp - from which they miraculously emerged unharmed because of some incredible twist of fate. In most instances, the miracle was the handiwork of a person, seemingly ordinary, who proved to have extraordinary powers - an "angel" if you wish.

"But the fascination for the viewer was the Twilight Zone; for when all was said and done, the episode's hero - and with him or her the viewer - was uncertain of what had happened. Was the danger only imagined? Was it all just a dream - and thus the "miracle" that resolved the inevitable ending no miracle at all; the "angel" no angel at all; the time warp not another dimension, for none of them had really taken place . . .

"In some episodes, however, the hero's and the viewer's puzzlement was given a final twist that made the program worthy of its name. At the very end, as hero and viewer are almost certain that it was all imagined, a dream, a passing trick of the subconscious mind, a tale that has no foothold in the real world - a physical object comes into play. Sometime during the episode the hero picked up, or rather is given, a small object that he absentmindedly put in his/her pocket, or a ring put on the finger, or a talisman worn as a necklace. As all other aspects of the imagined and unreal episode, the object too had to be imagined and nonreal. But as the viewer and the hero are certain that all had faded into its nonreality, the hero finds the object in his pocket or on his finger - a reality left over from an unreality. And thus Rod Serling has shown us, between reality and nonreality, between the rational and the irrational, we were passing through a Twilight Zone.

"Four thousand years earlier, a Sumerian king found himself in a Twilight Zone, and recorded his experience on two clay cylinders (that are now on display in the Louvre Museum in Paris).

"The king's name was Gudea and he reigned in the Sumerian city Lagash circa 2100 B.C. Lagash was the "Cult Center" of Ninurta, the Foremost Son of Enlil, and he dwelt with his spouse Bau in the city's sacred precinct called the Girsu - hence his local epithet NIN.GIRSU, "Lord of the Girsu." At about that time, owing to an intensification of the struggle for supremacy on Earth that pitted primarily Enki's Firstborn Marduk against Enlil's clan, Ninurta/Ningirsu obtained the permission of his father Enlil to build a new temple in the Girsu - a temple so magnificent that it would express the rights of Ninurta to the supremacy.... one that would emulate the Great Pyramid of Giza on the one hand and that, upon its vast platform, would hold stone circles that could serve as sophisticated astronomical observatories. The need to find a reliable and faithful worshipper to carry out the grandiose plans and to follow intelligently the designs of the Divine Architects served as the background for the ensuing events recorded by Gudea.

"The series of events began with a dream that Gudea had one night; it was a vision of Divine Encounters. And it was so vivid that it transported the king into a Twilight Zone; for when Gudea awoke, an object that he had seen only in his dream was now physically on his lap. Somehow, the boundary between unreality and reality had been crossed.

"Utterly perplexed by the ocurrence, Gudea asked for and received permission to seek the advice of the oracle goddess Nanshe in her "House of Fate-Solving" in another city. Reaching the place by boat.... Gudea porceeded to tell her what had happened....

In the dream [I saw]
a man who was bright, shining like Heaven
- great in Heaven, great on Earth -
who by his headdress was a Dingir (god).
At his side was the divine Storm Bird;
Like a devouring storm under his feet
two lions crouched, on the right and on the left.
He commanded me to build his temple.

"A celestial omen then followed whose meaning, Gudea told the dream-solving goddess, he did not understand: the sun upon Kishar (the planet Jupiter) was suddenly seen on the horizon. A female then appeared and gave Gudea celestial instructions....

A woman
who was she? Who was she not?
the image of a temple-structure
she carried on her hand -
in her hand she held a holy stylus;
The tablet of her favorable star of heaven
she bore.

"As the woman was consulting the star tablet, a third divine being appeared.... he was a male:

A second man appeared, he had the
look of a hero, endowed with strength.
A tablet of lapis lazuli in his hand he held.
The plan of a temple he drew on it.
He placed before me a holy carrying basket;
Upon it he placed a pure brickmaking mold;
the destined brick was inside it.
A large vessel stood before me;
on it was engraved the Tibu bird which shines
brilliantly day and night.
A freight-ass crouched to my right.

"The text suggests that all these objects somehow materialized during the dream, but regarding one of them there is absolutely no doubt that it was made to cross from the dream dimension to the dimension of physical reality; for when Gudea awoke, he found the lapis lazuli stone tablet on his lap, with the plan of the temple etched upon it. He commemorated the miracle in one of his statues....

"....Back in Lagash Gudea contemplated the words of the oracle goddess and studied the divine tablet that had materialized on his lap. The more he thought about the varied instructions the more he was baffled, especially so regarding the astronomical orientation and timing.

Mr. Sitchin explains how Gudea went day by day seeking guidance, until all was ready for:

"....time to start making the bricks. They had to be made from clay according to the mold and sample that appeared to Gudea in his first vision-dream. We read in column XIX, verse 19 (The Great Cylinder Inscriptions A and B of Gudea, by Ira M. Price), that Gudea "brought the brick, placed it in the temple." It follows from this statement that Gudea had the brick (and by inference the required mold) in his physical possession; the brick and the mold were thus two more objects (in addition to the lapis lazuli tablet) that crossed the boundary in a Twilight Zone.

***
http://www.geocities.com/elchasqui_2/ZS ... ook8i.html
http://www.geocities.com/elchasqui_2/ZSitchinbook8.html

[Edited on 3-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:06 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
ANCIENT LANDMARKS
XVIII
EGYPTIAN SYMBOLISM AND ANIMAL WORSHIP

THE sincere and unprejudiced student of comparative religions comes at last to see that without the help of symbology no ancient Scripture can ever be correctly understood. No Egyptian papyrus, no Indian olla, no Assyrian tile, or Hebrew scroll, should be read and accepted literally. Besides, the symbology must be studied from every one of its aspects, for each nation had its own peculiar methods of expression. The point to which even the most truth-loving and truth-searching Orientalist seems to remain blind, is the fact that every symbol is a many-faced diamond, each face of which not merely bears several interpretations, but relates likewise to several sciences. Many myths which, on the surface, have only an astronomical bearing, conceal facts in regard to the evolution of rounds and races which are of the utmost significance.

One of the best known, at least the most frequently represented, is that of the sun. Ra made his passage across the heavens in a boat from which streamed a blue light -- the "Sun's son." A first bark, the Saktit (Sakti?) boat, received him at birth and carried him from the Eastern to the Southern extremity of the world. Mazit, the second bark, received him at noon and bore him into the land of Manu, which is at the entrance of Hades; other barks ... conveyed him by night, from his setting until his arising at morn. In the formulae of the "Book of Knowing that which is in Hades," the dead sun remains in the bark Saktit during part of the night, and it is only to traverse the fourth and fifth hours that he changesinto another. Sometimes he entered the barks alone, and then they were magic and self-directed. Such is the bark of the sun in the other world, for although carrying a full crew, yet for the most part it progresses at its own will, and without their help. Sometimes they were equipped with a full crew, having a pilot at the prow to take soundings in the channel and forecast the wind, a pilot astern to steer, a quartermaster in the midst to transmit the orders of the pilot at the prow to the pilot at the stern, and half a dozen sailors to handle the oars. (Maspero, "Dawn of Civilization," p. 90).

If we may be permitted to identify the boats with the Saktis, considered as the "principles" -- whose powers they are, the above symbolism is most suggestive. According to Theosophical teaching, at each round or period of evolution, man enters a body or "boat" composed of the substance of that particular round. At "noon," or the mid-point of evolution, man was borne into "the land of Manu, which is at the entrance into Hades;" Hades is the earth of physical existence, into which the "Manu," or man, enters and becomes a seven-fold being having his "full crew" on board. The barks referred to in the "Book of Knowing that which is in Hades" at the fourth and fifth hours of the night, correspond at least to the fourth and fifth rounds, when man has donned his "coats of skin," which after the fifth "hour" or round, will give place to more ethereal "barks" or vestures. After death the "crew" is of no use to the magic boat, for the lower principles which these useless sailors represent, die out and disappear.

The first-born of Ra by the goddess Hathor was Shu. He is solar energy. "The blossoms of Shu" are the sun's rays. In Chapter XVII of the Book of the Dead, Shu places the sky on top of the staircase in the City of the Eight. According to tradition earth and sky, or Seb and Neith, were two lovers lost in Nu, fast locked in each other's embrace. On the day of creation Shu, coming forth from the primeval waters, stepped between them and seizing Neith with both hands lifted her above his head. Although the starry body of the goddess extended in space, her head to the West, her feet and hands touched the earth, forming the four pillars of the firmament. Usually these supports are referred to as the pillars of Shu. It was Shu who was depicted holding up the sky and possibly from him the Greeks derived their representations of Atlas.

Seb is the Egyptian Saturn, ushering in a new cycle of evolution. Esoterically he is nearer to Parabrahman than Brahma. He is called the "Great Cackler," who laid the world upon his head, and is represented with a black swan or goose. Darkness, always associated with "beginnings," is symbolized in all religions by black birds. Two black doves flew from Egypt and settling on the oaks of Dodona, gave their names to the Grecian gods. In Chapter LIV of the Book of the Dead Seb's egg is referred to as the "egg conceived at the hour of the great one of the Dual Force."

According to tradition the golden age of Ra had gone, for even the gods die. All of them were represented as mummies and in Chapter VIII, are the words, "I am that Osiris in the West, and Osiris knoweth the day in which he shall be no more." The children of earth had become rebellious, bringing down upon themselves the wrath of Ra and their almost complete destruction by Hathor, whose hand was stayed by the repentant god, and a new race produced from mandragora plants. Afterwards mounting upon the back of a cow, Ra disappeared into the heavens. Shu and Tefnut (the double Lion-god) reigned in his stead. They represent the first differentiation of substance: as applied to Rounds and Races, the second in descending order. In this aspect, Seb ushers in the third and more material world, while his four children rule over the fourth.

This line of descent formed the basis of the Egyptian Enneads, or four pairs proceeding from the One. This gives us the ogdoad, or eight (the double cube of good and evil) of which Ra, or Tem, was the ninth, counting from below up. In the City of the Eight (Hermopolis) where Hermes was adored, Hermes was the One who contained in himself the double cube. Eight was the number of the caduceus or wand of Mercury, the figure being made by the intertwining of the two serpents of good and evil, or the joining of two cubes. There were as many Enneads as there were cities, but all are merely personifications covering the one general scheme or idea. Considering, then, a typical one, we have Tem (or Ra) who is said to have emanated Shu from himself; Shu and Tefnut; Seb and Neith; Osiris and Isis; Set and Nepthys -- lower aspects of Osiris and Isis. Thus the exoteric system of the Egyptians, as H. P. Blavatsky has pointed out, dealt with but five planes out of the seven, the pairs having to do with the four lower ones.

Hathor was always represented as a cow, sacred also to Isis, the Universal Mother -- Nature. Both goddesses were allied to the sun and the moon, as the disk and the cow's horns (which form a crescent) prove. In the Vedas the dawn of creation is represented by a cow. This dawn is Hathor, and the day which follows -- or Nature already formed -- is Isis, for both are one except in point of time. Isis is cow-horned, the cow of plenty, and as the mother of Horus (the physical world) she is the "mother of all that lives." The right eye of Horus, or the Sun, was called the cow of Hathor. In Chapter XVII of the Book of the Dead, the cow Meh-urt, is called "the Eye of Ra;" while in Chapter CIX the sun is represented as a spotted calf when Sibu (Seb) its father was a bull and Hathor a heifer. The vignette to Chapter CLXX shows a cow wearing the solar disk upon her head and around her neck the symbol of life.

The symbol of life is the ankh or ansated cross of the Egyptians -- the Tau with a handle. In illustrations of the Sunrise the sun's disk is upheld by two arms emerging from the ankh, the ankh itself supported by the Tet or Didu or Osiris. This emblem is a short pillar or disbranched tree-trunk surmounted by four cross bars, reminiscent of the tree fabled to have held the dead body of Osiris. Might it not be the sacred Ashwatta tree which the Egyptian Avatar had cut down with the strong axe of dispassion? It was also thought to be the backbone of Osiris after he had been "reconstructed" and "set up" by Isis. In Chapter LXXVIII of the Ritual the deceased says: "He (Osiris) hath stablished my heart through his own backbone; he hath stablished my heart through his own great and exceeding strength." This is evidence that the tree-like formation of the nerves radiating from the spine had not escaped the attention of the Egyptians, nor were they without their Trees of Life.

The sycamores planted on the edge of the desert were supposed to be inhabited by Hathor, Neith and other goddesses, and numerous vignettes represent the deceased as stopping before these trees to receive water and bread -- the Water and Bread of Life -- from the goddess whose body emerges from the sheltering foliage. The persea tree was the symbol of the "Sacred Heart" of Horus. The pear-like shape of its fruit, especially of its kernel, resembles the heart. It is sometimes seen on the head of Isis, the mother of Horus, the fruit being cut open and the heart-like kernel exposed to view. Here again we trace a form of worship, that of the "Sacred Heart" of Jesus and of the Virgin Mary by the Catholics, back to Egypt.

The use of these symbols seems fitting and justifiable, but why did the Egyptians worship animals? Why was the sun represented as a beetle? Why was the cat sacred to Bast, the jackal to Anubis, the hawk to Horus, the ibis to Thot? And how came Set to be incarnated in the fennec and Osiris and Ptah in the bull? The wise Egyptians never did worship animals, although as the true ideas were lost, the ignorant masses did. In "A Weird Tale"(1) a hint in regard to this symbolism is given. It is stated therein that there was an occult reason back of it and that the ancient Egyptians never did anything unscientifically; that there are undoubtedly types (of forms and intelligences) and that forms having been once assumed and seen by the seers always repeated the same forms to those persons. Therefore having taken a certain view of invisible nature, every symbol was made to conform or be consistent with that view. This partial explanation might also be applied to the fairies seen sometimes by children and psychic persons. The form of the fairy, or of an idea for the matter of that, once seen or held by an individual repeats itself and may even be photographed, which picture is then taken to be the real form or the fact; but this form is very often merely in the imagination that fashioned it and may neither be true to the type of elemental seen or to the fact. It is true, nevertheless, that Nature has evolved certain patterns which she copies wherever feasible; and just as the tree pattern may be traced in the formation of certain crystals on up through the vegetable, animal and human kingdoms, so there are likewise types of sentiency and function found in the vegetable and animal kingdoms which are reproduced in man, for Nature is One. "All beings are the same in kind and differ only in degree." If we realized the unity of all the kingdoms, if we saw, as the Egyptians did, the divine form of Amen-Ra in all forms, we would treat our younger brothers better -- we would neither wantonly kill animals nor torture them in the perverted belief that thereby man is better served or benefited.

A passage from the Book of the Dead, (quoted in the Secret Doctrine, II, p. 635) reads: "I am the mouse." "I am the hawk." "I am the ape." ... "I am the crocodile whose soul comes FROM MEN." This corroborates the teaching that "while the human monad has passed on globe A and others, in the First Round, through all the three kingdoms -- the mineral, the vegetable, and the animal -- in this our Fourth Round, every mammal has sprung from Man ... not the form of flesh, blood, and bones, now referred to as Man,... but the inner divine MONAD with its manifold principles or aspects." Furthermore, all animals are the cast-off clothing of man; for man impresses all the lives in his body by his thought and feeling, and these lives entering into the bodies of animals, give them their peculiar characteristics. Thus, in a sense, they become the mirror in which man may see his own features and have frequent occasion to scorn his own image. The types in the early periods of evolution, therefore, must have been brought over from a prior mankind. As might be expected, then, in Egyptian symbolism there is a correspondence between the characteristics and functions of the animals and of the gods.

The cat, associated with the moon, was sacred to the cat-goddess Bast or Pasht, and to kill one was to court death. The Egyptian word for cat is mau, meaning to see, and both the moon and the cat were seers by night. As the moon reflects the light of the sun, so the cat was supposed to reflect the moon on account of its phosphorescent eyes. In the form of the goddess Bast the cat keeps watch for the sun, with her paw holding down and bruising the head of the serpent of darkness, the sun's eternal enemy. In Chapter XVII of the Book of the Dead, "The male cat is Ra himself, and he is called 'Mau'" (Seer), while the illustrations represent him in action similar to Bast. The chief-priest of Amen-Ra was called "Oiru mau," Master of Visions, he who beheld God "face to face."

The sun is represented as a beetle in the solar boat -- the "Boat of millions of years" -- and is referred to as giving birth to beings in his name of Khepera. Khepera is the beetle or scarabaeus, the symbol of rebirth. The word is derived from the verb kheper, to become, to build again. Like the beetle the sun appeared to come up out of the earth and to ascend aloft as with wings. The winged globe is but another form of the scarabaeus and the egg, relating both to the rebirth of man and to his spiritual regeneration. No mummy is found without several of these green or blue beetles.

The jackal-headed god was Anubis, the "Opener of the Ways." The jackal's omniscience as to where any dead body is hidden, his absolute certainty of direction in the trackless desert, made him a fitting symbol of Anubis, who not only guided the dead along the trackless path of the underworld, but also led the reincarnating entity into the underworld of physical existence. Anubis is often identified with Horus and with Hermes, the Higher Mind; he is the knowledge on any plane which leads one whithersoever he has need to go. Anubis is also connected with the dog-star, the Sothis of the Egyptians.

The ibis, sacred to Thot, was held in the greatest veneration. It kills the land serpents and makes havoc among the crocodile eggs, thus saving Egypt from being overrun by these saurians. The black and white ibis was sacred to the moon, because this planet has a dark as well as a light side. Under the form of an ibis Thot watched over the Egyptians and taught them the occult arts and sciences. Maspero affirms that the word "Thot" means ibis. The ibis religiosa is said to have magical properties, in common with many other birds. At all events, he who killed either an ibis or the golden sparrow-hawk risked death. The hawk, the keen-sighted, was the symbol of the sun, of Horus and of the human soul.

The fennec is the Egyptian fox, appropriate symbol of Set whose craftiness conceived the coffin into which Osiris was enticed and confined, thus causing his death. Apis the white bull, sacred to Osiris and into which he was supposed to incarnate, was typical of the universal generative or evolving power in nature. Mariette Bey discovered near Memphis the Serapaeum, an imposing subterranean crypt containing the mummies of thirty sacred bulls. The mummification of various sacred animals would show that the Egyptians took the utmost care to conserve the "lives" in any highly evolved type or species. The bull is also the Taurus of the zodiac, connected with all the "First-born" solar gods. Christians associated this constellation with Christ. Here again, the Egyptians no more worshipped the bull than Christians worship the lamb. The ram is always a symbol of physical generation, the ram or the goat of Mendes being another symbol of Osiris.

Maspero suggests that the habit of certain monkeys assembling, as it were in full court, and chattering noisily a little before sunrise and just before sunset, may have justified the Egyptians in entrusting the apes with the duty of hailing Ra morning and evening. In the illustrations of the Sunrise previously mentioned, six apes hail the sun; the Papyrus of Hu-nefer gives seven. In Chapter C of the Book of the Dead, the deceased says, "I have united myself unto the divine apes who sing at the dawn and I am a divine Being among them." The dog-headed ape was a Hermetic symbol, filling the same office in Egypt that Hanuman did in India. In Chapter XLII the defunct says, "I am the dog-headed ape of gold, three palms and two fingers high."

The crocodiles in the Celestial Nile are five, and the god Toum calls them forth in his fifth creation. When Osiris, "the defunct Sun," is buried and enters into Amenti, the sacred crocodiles plunge into the abyss of primordial waters. When the Sun of life rises, they re-emerge from the sacred river. In the Secret Doctrine the Fifth Group is said to be a very mysterious one, as it is connected with the Microcosmic Pentagon, the five-pointed star representing man. In India and in Egypt those Dhyanis were connected with the crocodile, and their abode is in the zodiacal sign of Capricorn. In Egypt the defunct was transformed into a crocodile -- Sebakh or Sevekh, the "Seventh" -- showing it to be a type of intelligence, a dragon in reality, not a crocodile. (S.D. I, 219; II, 580). The mummy donned the head of a crocodile to indicate that it was a soul arriving from earth. The instructions appended to Chapter CLXIII are that it should be read before a serpent with two legs, meaning thereby a Dragon of Wisdom, or Hierophant. The evil serpent, "the enemy of Ra" was Apep (Apophis) whose power was greatest at the full of the moon, his overthrow being the subject of Chapter XXXIX.

Chapter LXXIII is devoted to the transformation into the Bennu bird, the Egyptian phoenix, symbol of the cycle of rebirth. The deceased says: "I came (literally 'I flew') into being from unformed matter. I came into existence like the god Khepera. I have germinated like the things (i.e., the plants) which germinate, and I have dressed myself like the tortoise. I am [of] the germs of every god."

In this incomplete list of animal symbols must be included a curious little insect called the praying mantis, the "diviner" who led the deceased unerringly to the underworld. It was greatly honored in Egypt, the Greeks attributed to it supernatural powers, and the Arabs declare that it always prays with its head toward Mecca. We might connote with it the state called manticism, during which the gift of prophecy is developed. (See chapter in Isis Unveiled, "Before the Veil.")

The lotus was pre-eminently the flower of Egypt. The lotus seeds, even before they germinate, contain perfectly formed leaves -- the miniature of the perfect plants they will some day become, thus showing how idea comes to be made visible, which is true of the birth of a world as of a man. Its roots growing in the mud, and its blossoms in the air typify the human nature -- its body grown out of the lower kingdoms, and the soul belonging to the higher spiritual regions. In Chapter LXXI of the Ritual -- making the transformation into a lotus, a human head springs from the flower, and the god exclaims: "I am the pure Lotus, emerging from the Luminous One... I carry the messages of Horus. I am the pure lotus which comes from the Solar Fields." So the god Khnoom, the moist principle of life, sits on a throne within a lotus. Thot is often seated on a lotus. Finally, it is the goddess Hiquet, under the shape of a frog, who rests on the lotus. This undeniably most ancient of goddesses, on account of her amphibious nature, was one of the chief cosmic deities connected with creation. Because the frog comes to life after being buried for years under rocks or in old walls, it was typical of resurrection. A frog or toad enshrined in a lotus, or simply without the flower, was the form chosen by the early Christians for their church lamps, on which were engraved the words, "I am the resurrection."

Was the general character of Egyptian religion monotheistic, polytheistic or pantheistic, is a question that has caused endless discussion. The epithet "the only god," which on the surface might imply monotheism, was applied to several gods. In the Papyrus of Nesi-Khonsu, Amen-Ra is addressed as "the One One," "the divine form who dwelleth in the forms of all the gods;" but this concept was held only by the educated and the priesthood. Then, as now, the true teaching existed: that behind all forms is a nameless, invisible Power, the source of all manifested life, expressed in such passages as this: "You look and you see it not -- it is colorless; you listen and you hear it not -- it is voiceless; you desire to handle it -- you touch it not -- it is formless."

Budge says in the Collection of Moral Aphorisms composed by ancient sages are several allusions to a divine power to which no personal name is given. The word used to indicate this is Neter, translated "God" by him in the following examples taken from the Precepts of Kagema and the Precepts of Ptah-hotep, whose many instructions remind one of the Proverbs of Solomon:

"The things which God doeth cannot be known."

"Terrify not men. God is opposed thereto."

"When thou ploughest, labour in the field God (Karma) hath given thee."

The Teaching of Amenemapht clearly shows, says this author, that the writer distinguished between Deity and the gods Ra, Thot, etc.

"Leave the angry man in the hands of God. God (Karma) knows how to requite him."

"Take good heed to the Lord of the Universe." (The Self).

"Truth is the great bearer of Deity."

In the Teaching of Khensu-hetep, Budge finds a more intimate, personal Heavenly Being:

"It is God who gives thee existence."

"The Deity is the judge of the truth."

"The house of God abominates overmuch speaking. Pray with a loving heart, the words of which are hidden. He will do what is needful for thee, he will hear thy petitions and will accept thy oblations." (The God within each being).

In Chapter CXXV of the Book of the Dead, the defunct says, "I have not cursed God" and "I have not contemned the god of my city," showing the Egyptian admitted the existence of another Neter besides the god of his native place.

Whatever the Egyptian thought as to Deity or to the gods, he knew he was himself "of the germs of every god." He never considered himself a poor worm of the dust, as do Christians, but ever declared,

"Thou, Ra, art in me and I am in thee; and thy
attributes are my attributes."
AMEN-RA



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMPILER'S NOTE: The following is a separate item which followed the above article but was on the same page. I felt it was useful to include it here:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ONE TREE OF KNOWLEDGE

No one can study ancient philosophies seriously without perceiving that the striking similitude of conception between all -- in their exoteric form very often, in their hidden spirit invariably -- is the result of no mere coincidence, but of a concurrent design: and that there was, during the youth of mankind, one language, one knowledge, one universal religion, where there were no churches, no creeds or sects, but when every man was a priest unto himself. And, if it is shown that already in those ages which are shut out from our sight by the exuberant growth of tradition, human religious thought developed in uniform sympathy in every portion of the globe; then, it becomes evident that, born under whatever latitude, in the cold North or the burning South, in the East or West, that thought was inspired by the same revelations, and man was nurtured under the protecting shadow of the same TREE OF KNOWLEDGE.--S.D. I, p. 341.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.wisdomworld.org/additional/a ... rship.html

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:40 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Symbolism
Symbolism began as a literary movement that developed from Romanticism in France in the second half of the 19th century, taking its themes of decadence, dandyism and mysticism from the novels of J.K. Huysmans. The poet Jean Moreas gave the term general currency in his manifesto in Le Figaro in 1886, though the poet Stephane Mallarme developed its ideas of suggestion, ambiguity and symbolism rather than direct conveyance of meaning: 'Suggestion, that is the dream', he declared. Like Romanticism, Symbolism favoured feelings over reason, but was more intellectual in its conception. Huysmans in his novels A Rebours and La bas was significant in promoting the painters Gustave Moreau and Odilon Redon and drawing the visual arts into the movement.
The use of symbols has had a long tradition in European art, and we may see origins of 19th century Symbolism in the mystical and visionary works of Piranesi, Fuseli, Goya and Friedrich. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood's return to an Early Renaissance style and mood was a more contemporary influence, The art of Symbolist painters such as Puvis de Chavannes and Eugene Carriere was thus characterized by a desire to use evocative subjects and images rather than explicit analogy or direct description. However, the movement was more interested in the content and concept of expression of the inner life rather than artistic style or form. Many Symbolists were also interested in the macabre, the mysterious and the morbid, which has been seen as a phenomenon of the fin de siecle. Symbolism had far reaching influences as a movement in reaction to Realism and Impressionism, and the Nabis and Gauguin were closely related to the Symbolists, as well as the Swiss painter Ferdinand Hodler and the Norwegian Edvard Munch.

- From "The Bulfinch Guide to Art History" Symbolism
Symbolism began as a literary movement that developed from Romanticism in France in the second half of the 19th century, taking its themes of decadence, dandyism and mysticism from the novels of J.K. Huysmans. The poet Jean Moreas gave the term general currency in his manifesto in Le Figaro in 1886, though the poet Stephane Mallarme developed its ideas of suggestion, ambiguity and symbolism rather than direct conveyance of meaning: 'Suggestion, that is the dream', he declared. Like Romanticism, Symbolism favoured feelings over reason, but was more intellectual in its conception. Huysmans in his novels A Rebours and La bas was significant in promoting the painters Gustave Moreau and Odilon Redon and drawing the visual arts into the movement.
The use of symbols has had a long tradition in European art, and we may see origins of 19th century Symbolism in the mystical and visionary works of Piranesi, Fuseli, Goya and Friedrich. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood's return to an Early Renaissance style and mood was a more contemporary influence, The art of Symbolist painters such as Puvis de Chavannes and Eugene Carriere was thus characterized by a desire to use evocative subjects and images rather than explicit analogy or direct description. However, the movement was more interested in the content and concept of expression of the inner life rather than artistic style or form. Many Symbolists were also interested in the macabre, the mysterious and the morbid, which has been seen as a phenomenon of the fin de siecle. Symbolism had far reaching influences as a movement in reaction to Realism and Impressionism, and the Nabis and Gauguin were closely related to the Symbolists, as well as the Swiss painter Ferdinand Hodler and the Norwegian Edvard Munch.

- From "The Bulfinch Guide to Art History"
Symbolism
Symbolism began as a literary movement that developed from Romanticism in France in the second half of the 19th century, taking its themes of decadence, dandyism and mysticism from the novels of J.K. Huysmans. The poet Jean Moreas gave the term general currency in his manifesto in Le Figaro in 1886, though the poet Stephane Mallarme developed its ideas of suggestion, ambiguity and symbolism rather than direct conveyance of meaning: 'Suggestion, that is the dream', he declared. Like Romanticism, Symbolism favoured feelings over reason, but was more intellectual in its conception. Huysmans in his novels A Rebours and La bas was significant in promoting the painters Gustave Moreau and Odilon Redon and drawing the visual arts into the movement.
The use of symbols has had a long tradition in European art, and we may see origins of 19th century Symbolism in the mystical and visionary works of Piranesi, Fuseli, Goya and Friedrich. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood's return to an Early Renaissance style and mood was a more contemporary influence, The art of Symbolist painters such as Puvis de Chavannes and Eugene Carriere was thus characterized by a desire to use evocative subjects and images rather than explicit analogy or direct description. However, the movement was more interested in the content and concept of expression of the inner life rather than artistic style or form. Many Symbolists were also interested in the macabre, the mysterious and the morbid, which has been seen as a phenomenon of the fin de siecle. Symbolism had far reaching influences as a movement in reaction to Realism and Impressionism, and the Nabis and Gauguin were closely related to the Symbolists, as well as the Swiss painter Ferdinand Hodler and the Norwegian Edvard Munch.

- From "The Bulfinch Guide to Art History"

http://www.artchive.com/artchive/symbolism.html

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:44 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Hindu scriptures convey deeper philosophical truths, not obvious immediately to ordinary individuals. Like all manifest creation, they also have a manifest content and a hidden content. The hidden part unravels itself to the extent we discover the truth in ourselves. The following articles are an attempt in this direction. If you have any ideas of your own on Symbolism in Hinduism we request you to share them with us.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/symbolism.asp

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:48 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
A Dance of Forms

"Myriad forms appear, interdependent and unobstructed, as the lama of symbolic appearance in the outer world. Indescribable is this dance of magical forms. Experiencing the natural freedom of form and emptiness, I pray to the lama: Bless me with the direct understanding of Nirmanakaya -- Enlightenment skillfully manifesting as the world of form."

http://www.khandro.net/symbolism%20_toc.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 6:58 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Symbolism


Updated 30 July 2003

It has been said that a picture is worth a thousand words. Symbolism is the Language of pictures, and thereby conveys information enormously more efficiently (in terms of sheer quantities) and also more selectively. The latter point deserves some thought.

A symbol conjures in the mind a picture, complete with multiple meanings.

The infinity sign, for example, is alternatively written as either OO or ¥. The first version signifies completeness, being composed of a male, solar, right-handed, clockwise circle matched with a female, lunar, left-handed, counterclockwise circle. The figure eight on its side used to mean sexual union and the sense of perfection (two becoming one). “Since neither circle lies above the other as in the figure eight, the infinity sign implies equality between male and female powers, leading to intimate knowledge of ‘the infinite’.” [1]

This same sign can then be modified ever so slightly by joining and overlapping the circles to form the Vesica Pisces -- a female yoni or vulva; the feminine creative force or the Mother-spirit that gave birth to the world and the gods. Known also as the “vessel of the fish” (based on women’s sexual secretions smelling like fish), it became the symbol of Jesus Christ (the birth of a son of the god). “In pre-patriarchal philosophy the general explanation for sexual activity was that spiritual nourishment for males was inherent in the act of ‘plugging in’ to this female power, resulting not only in a moment or two of godlike bliss, but also in an essential contact with the mysterious magic inside a woman’s body that could actually produce new life.” [1]

All of the above two paragraphs -- and a great deal more -- can be gleamed from the sign of two circles horizontally joined. This includes the indefinable nature of the infinity sign in Sacred Mathematics and Connective Physics. What is fascinating is the fact that so much can be conveyed -- albeit with variations in interpretation -- with such simplicity.

http://www.halexandria.org/dward034.htm

(As an aside and indirectly associated with this topic check out the article on Dyslexia:
http://www.halexandria.org/dward412.htm )

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:01 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Connective Physics




Philosophical and spiritual traditions throughout the world have long assumed an unbounded and connected universe. [3/10/05] For example...

"...and the ancients, who were superior to us and dwelt nearer to the Gods [the Anunnaki?] , have handed down a tradition that all things that are said to exist consist of a One and Many and contain in themselves the connate principles of Limit and Unlimitedness." [Plato, Philebus 16c]

There is, however, a profound distinction between having an intellectual understanding of such concepts, and having this understanding so firmly ingrained in one’s being that benefiting from this unlimited interconnectedness becomes routine. This webpage and its assorted quantum leaps are intended to suggest a greater credibility to these basic truths, and thereby diminish or eliminate the lingering doubts which serve only as a time buffer to incorporating these truths into our daily lives.

The basis of these investigations begins with a fundamental extension of basic theoretical physics and its associated, “laws”. This extension, when plumbed to its depths, is shown to yield a wealth of information about the most profound properties of the universe. A basic Mathematical Theory demonstrates that in agreement with ancient philosophical traditions, all of the universe is indeed connected, and furthermore that there are no limits to the available flow of energy via such connections.

This new, relatively simple physical theory can then be shown to be connected to elements of Sacred Geometry, Hyperdimensional Physics, the Golden Mean and various anomalous events such as:

Creativity,

Spoon bending,

Homeopathy and other health practices,

Karate,

Crop circles,

Tornadoes,

Free energy systems,

Advanced inertial propulsion systems,

And the list goes on and on.

In addition, if Consciousness is considered to have anti-entropic, connective properties (including ESP), then the theory connects with this aspect of reality as well.

A principal point of departure is The Fifth Element, wherein we leap into the fray with a non-mathematical treatment (but with easy links to the mathematics -- in the guise of Mathematical Theory and More Math) of what constitutes the “best evidence” of our universal connections and unlimited resources. Related physics includes Zero-Point Energy, Mach’s Principle, Inertial Propulsion (i.e., without reaction mass), Superstrings, Superconductivity, Sonoluminescence, David Bohm and the EPR Experiment (aka the Einstein-Poldalsky-Rosen Experiment).

Lothar Schäfer [1] has noted in this regard that, “The nature of physical reality is non-local. That is, an observation made in one part of the universe may have an instantaneous, faster-than-light effect on the possibilities of a second observer a long distance away.”

Ultimately, all of these topics form links to the subject of Consciousness, Mind-Matter (and Mind-Body) issues, Consciousness and Physics, the theories of Arthur Young, brief forays into useful perspectives on the Laws of Thermodynamics and other topics of mainstream (i.e. on which most everyone agrees) physics, science, and other intriguing perspectives. [4/1/05] The latter includes Maxwell's Equations, as well as a departure from mainstream physics, Creative Evolution.

Eventually, there is New Energy Ramifications, Sacred Mathematics, Conspiracies, Creating Reality, and the physics and promise of the ORME. All of these have direct links to the basic theory of The Fifth Element.

It’s a fascinating ride! Just keep in mind -- for motivational purposes -- the fact that Socrates related virtue of knowledge. People’s understanding of physical reality, their Paradigms, invariably affect their way of life. “If we know and understand, we can choose to be good.” [1] While so-called Objectivity based science must exclude purpose from its description of nature, a true scientific objectivity inevitably forces us to conclude that living organisms incorporate purpose.

Ultimately, “To live in accordance with the essence of things, as Socrates said, is the premise of the moral life. One cannot live in peace of mind without at the same time being in harmony with reality.” Also, “The premises of a moral life is based on a covenant with reality.” “No life is authentic that is in conflict with the order of the universe.” And not knowing the order of the universe constitutes a serious handicap in lving a moral life!

http://www.halexandria.org/dward008.htm

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:10 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
http://websyte.com/alan/symbolsm.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:12 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
http://home.btclick.com/scimah/Quantumphenomena.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:16 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Introduction to alchemical symbolism
.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Alchemical manuscripts and books have always been illustrated with symbolic figures. There are, of course, simple signs used to notate various alchemical substances and processes, but the symbolism used in alchemy went much further than the mere use of special signs.
Alchemy used symbols figuratively and allegorically, not just to represent an idea but to extend it and reveal its wider implications. For example, there is a considerable use of animal symbolism, the green lion, the black toad, the double headed-eagle, the serpent seizing its tail - various human figures, the old dying king, the white queen, the knight - as well as stylised forms of apparatus in which these figures interact.



It is important to realise that there is no fixed, rigid alchemical language of symbolism, and it is not possible to draw up a comprehensive dictionary 'meaning' for each symbol, which will describe its use in every alchemical text. Different alchemists used the same symbol in different ways, and even within the same work an individual symbol can have many meanings. Although there are core 'meanings' to some symbols, their significance must be read from the symbolic context in which they appear. This can make the study of alchemical symbolism a frustrating experience for those who expect exactitude and fixed meanings for symbols. Instead we must go along with the alchemists, read their texts, try to enter into their view of the world, and beware importing or projecting our own perceptions of their symbols or rushing to a quick judgement of their meaning. Symbols must be seen as part of the whole emblem, not as isolated elements. Often an emblem is part of a sequence illustrating a more complex process, and so each symbol must be seen in the wider context of this extended process.

The above emblem is part of such a sequence being the fifth figure of the 'twelve keys of Basil Valentine'. We have to realise that lions appear four times in the sequence doing different things, the flower in three separate places, the burning head in two emblems. We cannot hope to unravel the meaning of this sequence until we can see it as a totality. Each individual symbol can appear with a different significance at different stages of the process, undergoing a sudden metamorphosis, or a more gradual purification. In studying such sequences of symbols it is best to put photocopies of the whole sequence up on a board or the wall of one's room, and try to find patterns or links between the individual symbols and emblems. Often there is an underlying geometric pattern which reveals how the symbolism works.

The tableau presented in these emblems are not just a stylised way of bringing symbols together, but are often windows onto an ongoing drama. Sometimes it is not the individual symbols that are important, but what they are doing and how they are relating to the other symbolic elements of the emblem (for example, giving or receiving an object). The emblem sequences show the evolving alchemical process as a drama, a theatre of symbols, and one must sense the underlying process in order to understand the symbolic sequence. In this way alchemical figures are allegorical, and indeed we often find alchemists using complex allegories to explain their processes.

There is an extensive documentation of alchemical symbolism at another section of this site.

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/symbolic.html

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:20 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The Symbolism within Rosslyn Chapel


The heyday of Christian symbolism in the western Christian faith was during the medieval period and was most frequently given expression in the numerous European medieval churches and Cathedrals.





Unfortunately, few of us today can readily interpret that symbolism the meaning of which would have been easily understood by a large number of people. At the time of the Reformation (c.1559) much church ornamentation was condemned as idolatrous and destroyed or removed. Symbolism was not condemned per se but the teaching of their meaning declined to the extent that 440 years later few now understand that Christian symbolism, its’ meaning, or how to interpret it. The recent century has seen an accelerated secularisation of western society and this has contributed greatly to the inability to appreciate a true understanding of such symbolism.





Human kind is nothing if not inquisitive and recently people have begun to ask what their ancestors understood such symbolism to be, what individual symbols stood for, and how they were used and appreciated. This recent re-examination of symbolism has emphasised the position of Rosslyn Chapel and introduced numerous hypotheses which attempt to link modern Scottish Freemasonry with the Chapel and the medieval Knights Templar. These recent hypotheses are just that, thoughts, ideas etc., for no proof has yet been produced in support of any of them.* The reader may be interested to learn of the recently published book: An Illustrated Guide to Rosslyn Chapel etc., which discusses these very points. To read a review of that book click here.

http://www.rosslyntemplars.org.uk/Rosslyn_Symbolism.htm

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:24 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
http://www.khandro.net/about_numbers.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:36 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
"THE MANY MEANINGS OF THE MATRIX"

featuring Larry Wachowski and Ken Wilber

Compiled by RevolutioN, Sentient1, iceblink, blanket, Jestas

Ken: You yourself have not talked about your interpretation of The Matrix trilogy or what you were attempting to say, because you didn't want it to become dogma, in other words you wanted people to be free to interpret the movies the way they wanted to, and they have the freedom to do that, and as soon as the movie-maker gets up and says "This is the meaning of The Matrix, and this is the source", this really limits people, I think it's a very wise thing to do...

Larry: Yeah, I mean, you make a work of art, and you want it to be provocative, you want people to dialog about it, [Ken: Right.] you don't want them to rely on somebody to tell them what it is, or... it's like, the whole nature of the movie is exactly that... inspect it and pursue it yourself...

Ken: Right.

Larry: Yeah, it seems hypocritical for us to go out and tell everybody what it's supposed to be about, or what you're supposed to think about it, and even if I was to do it, or Andy was to do it, and in the gentlest of terms and try to contextualize it as what it means to us...

Ken: Right.

Larry: It... because, by the very nature of us being the creators of it, it becomes, you know, law...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ... it becomes THE interpretation, and anyone else's interpretation is just... some crazy individual that really doesn't get it.

Ken: Right, right.

Larry: I don't wanna devalue anybody's opinion of it, because they're all... that's, I don't know, I think that's one of the reasons that art is a worthwhile experience...

Ken: So, you decline to do the traditional director's commentary over the films, so, Warners then suggested, that...

Larry: They had a bunch of, like, typical DVD commentary ideas, and, you know, we found, you know, we found most commentary pretty mundane, pretty boring, pretty pleonastic, pretty shallow...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ...and, you know, I'm not very interested in most commentary, and so I started thinking about it and talked about it with Andy and we were like, oh, what would be interesting? And so, we had this idea that... trying to create tracks that reflected our hope for the movie, which would be that the the movie would inspire people to think about it...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ...and inspire dialog about everything... [they laugh] And so, we thought that basically demonstrating the range of dialogs that the movie has inspired would inspire its own dialog about not only The Matrix, but the way that we talk about art...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ...and so, suddenly, the commentary wouldn't be just about The Matrix, it would be about something bigger, something larger, it would have a larger scope to it, and er, so we told Warner Brothers that... "GREAT!" [Ken laughs] But, I mean, how we would go about doing it is getting two critics to talk about the movie, who hated the movie...

Ken: Right. [laughs]

Larry: ...and two philosophers who saw the movie and were inspired by the movie, and juxtapose those two different dialogs against each other, and Warner Brothers was like "You wanna put... let me get this straight..." [Ken starts laughing loudly] "...you wanna put two critics who hated the movie, talking about the movie for six hours?" "Yeah!" [Ken continues to laugh] And, you know, not only because I think it will be interesting, and, the dialog, the internal way that they've come to these opinions will be interesting...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ...it will be interesting to see how the critic talks about the movie, and, that they don't like, and they don't see anything in it, and then it'll be interesting seeing how two philosophers would talk about it, and see something in it, and see something that works in it...

Ken: Right.

Larry: ...and listening to those two perspectives, I think will be inherently interesting...

Ken: Yeah, yeah. So that's what were gonna do and as you know it's sort of, erm, it puts me in a somewhat awkward position because you and I have an agreement. We spent hours discussing what I think the films mean, what you yourself, your own interpretation of the film. We have an understanding that I'm not gonna discuss your interpretation of the film with anybody, that that's a private thing, and you and a few friends talk about it and we're keeping that, you know, to ourselves, so to speak. At the same time, I'm being asked to give my interpretation for public, but I've already done that and you already came up here with a film crew and shot three hours of me giving my blow by blow interpretation of all three. As you know, I think it's incredibly gutsy because the whole key to the Matrix trilogy, this is my interpretation, is given in really in the last fifteen, twenty minutes of the third film, that the rosetta stone is when Neo, for example, is saying of the machines, "If you could only see them like I see em...they're all light. They're made of light", and so on... That interpretation is the key to all three of the films, and it's incredibly gutsy, because film number one...that, so many people sort of relate to film number one because it makes sense -- you think it makes sense if you don't see the other two, it seems a very simple story if you look at just film one. It's very Manichean actually, which is, everything in the matrix is bad, everything outside of the matrix is good, everybody in the matrix is trapped, everybody outside of the matrix is free, and that very simple kinda dualistic thing, the machines are bad and they're trying to hurt freedom and so on...and so everybody goes wow that's great, and then you go and you watch part two, and you get in to about the part where Neo's talking to the Oracle and says "you're not human are you?", she goes "No." "You're a program aren't you?" "Yeah." And everybody starts scratching their head because now all of a sudden we're taken, and I've told you this, in months, in my opinion, we're taken out of the realm of movie and into the realm of complex literature, because this is a very sophisticated plot now with a whole lot of pieces and a lot of the pieces of the puzzle aren't really given until that last part of the third film. And that's where you kind of, all of a sudden, things really start to fall into place. They start to fall into place with the speech from the Architect, they start to fall into place actually when the first speech from the Oracle, first talk with the Oracle, er, Smith is a real key to all of this, anyway, it's that overall interpretation which is really that body, mind and spirit appear in the Matrix trilogy both in their alienated forms and then in their resurrected or healed or more integrated forms, which happens towards the end of the third part. And that's why it's very confusing to some people if they don't get that overall big picture, that's why sorta part one makes sense and then they get lost a little bit in part two and part three. So, so I sorta stuck to that interpretation, as you know, when Josh was filming here at the La [?] but then I find myself every now and then, you know, having to kinda bite my lip and say, whoa, I happen to know that Larry agrees with me on this part, or something like that [Laughs], because I wanted to say...

Larry: That's what I was saying, it's like, it just becomes a natural validation.

Ken: I know. [laughs]

Larry: I'm here to say that your opinion is whacked! [both laugh]

Ken: "I don't know that tall skinny guy, he just came in off the street and started talking to Cornel, we have no bloody idea who he is." Um, we've talked about the nature of interpretation as well, and the sort of more integral a context you have, the more certain similar meanings can start to emerge for somebody, and, we, you know, you and I both are, you know, we're integrally informed. I mean, we share a passion for that sort of integral approach. So I think, without giving any of the things away, there's certain, certain areas of this, you know, overall production that you and I certainly see eye to eye on.

Larry: Yeah, and you know, I..., the third movie, is, it has its revelation moments, but they're all based on things that have been built up through all three movies...

Ken: Certainly.

Larry: The beginnings, the little tiny introductions to each film has kind of a reflection of what each movie is about... and, you know, we say, we sort of, in those little tiny prefaces to each film, we kind of tell the audience where we are in the journey of development...

Ken: Right.

Larry: I mean, the Matrix is an exploration of consciousness, those little tiny bits and pieces at the beginning of each of the films sort of, tries to help you map it out a little bit...

Ken: Right. That to me is what makes it, like I say, such rich literature, that there's just multiple levels of meaning and I think that the critics have missed it on that basis, when they don't stand back and see a bigger picture they are free to criticise it in any way they want for the same reason as anybody is free to interpret in anyway...

Larry: Yeah, I'm hoping that there will be some level of, that the problem will be somewhat self-evident, that, you know, in a way that you describe things as having an interior and an exterior, the way that the Matrix kinda is in a lot of ways about that, and the exterior tends to remain very obvious, very surface based, observation based. And I'm kind of hoping that these two dialogs that'll be juxtaposed will be kind of about an exterior and an interior, and the critics will be essentially interested in surfaces, and philosophers will be interested in interiors.

Ken: Well let's certainly hope so, but, you know, we'll just go down there, and bash around...

Larry: Yeah.

Ken: Hmm, are you and your dad still reading SES? [Sex, Ecology, Spirituality: The Spirit of Evolution 1995]

Larry: Yeah!

Ken: Very cool...

Larry: We're about half way through it.

Ken: Very cool.

Larry: It's very good, sorta very good, very interesting sort of discussion about you and what I perceive to be, er, your relationship to Hegel, which could be completely wrong [Ken laughs], I kinda went on the riff [?] with him about it.

Ken: Does he have an interest in that?

Larry: Did he?

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: Yeah, of course, we talked about it, and, er, it's definitely, I would say, the book that has the most in it [Ken: Yeah.], that I got the most out of and that has kind of, I think, the clearest... developed the clearest, book...

Ken: Yeah. Yeah, I think what happened with SES, it was the first, really the first book... that, all of the books leading up to that were in a sense dealing with a particular piece of what that book pulls together, to kinda integrate them all, and something sorta changed for me at that point because, seeing that more, kind of comprehensive picture brought just a really great deal of clarity [Larry: Yeah.] ... that, my god, there's just so much of it, and sometimes people get, by the time they get to chapter five or six they've forgotten chapter one or two, three...

Larry: Oh you're pretty good about going back, I mean that, this solid tradition of I think good writers that write in these veins, they remind you when you have to be reminded [Ken: Yeah.] They create their own language and they remind you of the definitions of the language when you need to have a reminder [Ken: Right.] I don't think many people [laughs] well I love that in this book you can struggle with very difficult concepts, and then there'll be a sentence where you'll use a word like SUPERSPECIALLY [They laugh] as a technical defining term... [More laughter]

Ken: But your interest goes back to all of these, I mean the people that are dealt with in that book like Hegel and Nietzsche and Plotinus and all that, this is a love of yours, I mean this is something you've been interested in, in really ages like I was, I mean, it's all kind of coming together in a certain sense...

Larry: Yeah, well I mean, I've been looking, looking for a reason [They laugh] which is,...I was talking to my father about it, it's like with the four quadrants, what still holds the quadrants together is still that zero, that omega point, that center of the x-y axis, right? There's not four Big Bangs, there's only one [Ken: Right.], and it sits there exactly in the center, but it's interesting in some ways that's the only, I mean, that's why Schopenhauer is so dead on, is like that point is the only point worth talking about in some regards, 'cause it's the beginning of it all, it unites all four quadrants, it pulls everything together. If you don't have it, then they're all separate again [Ken: Exactly.] and it's all nothing. But, you can't... if you make it entirely about that then you are making it about nothing, because you can't know.

Ken: Right, and that sort of, that empty ground is the same as that original point [Larry: Yeah.], which is your original face...

Larry: Yeah. So it's interesting that you talk like he does, like Schopenhauer does, you can talk so well about the quadrants [besides: "Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung" has also four parts and there's some correlation with Wilber's terminology] and yet, when you talk about the thing that holds them all together it becomes difficult to talk about.

Ken: Yeah. Well, and that's the thing that holds them all together is, it's not something, you know, it's not another quadrant in addition to those, it's not something outside of it. I sometimes say that it's the page on which the diagram is written, or something like that, but that's just another...

Larry: I think it's the origin point of them, the thing that pulls, the thing that allows you to say that they're all, these four quadrants relate to each other, and are not just separate things...

Ken: I agree.

Larry: ...holding up by themselves. The thing that holds them is that zero point...

Ken: Exactly, and that zero point...

Larry: That was the... in the beginning of the third movie when there's like... we're like: "How do we start the third movie?" ...which is gonna talk about the things that are so hard to talk about [Ken: Right.] it's like: Ok, you go to black and then you have to have a moment of Big Bang and that's the origin of everything, the origin of thought, the origin of consciousness, whatever it is, in that moment it's like 'from that nothing to everything' is everything... [Ken laughs]

Ken: And that's the same origin point...

Larry: Yeah.

Ken: Absolutely, I agree, yeah. There's a great line, that, everybody knows ontogeny and phylogeny, but there's also microgeny, which means the moment to moment movement through the sequence, and so, for example if I see an apple, the microgenetic movement is, there's an impulse, there's an impression, there's a simple sensation, then I form an image, that I might think about an apple as a concept and then I can have my personal reactions to it, et cetera.

Larry: Yeah.

Ken: And microgeny recapitulates ontogeny which recapitulates phylogeny which recapitulates cosmology. So from the Big Bang up to this moment is all that same sequence of the unfolding of the four quadrants but it's also repeated moment to moment out of that empty origin, right now, moment to moment. And that's the interesting thing about it because when you discover your original face, the face you had before the Big Bang, then you've discovered that moment as well - that's the satori moment, that's realising this radical self that's all-embracing and all-encompassing - out of that moment to moment all that thing's emerged, all the quadrants emerged, all the levels, all the lines, that same origin point that you're talking about, and that is what holds the quadrants together, because the quadrants are just dimensions or aspects of that origin, moment to moment, this very moment now.

Larry: Yeah.

Ken: And you gave a pictorial representation of that at the beginning of the third...

Larry: Well, we tried to. [Ken laughs]

Ken. But you've been interested in this as long as I have, in terms of, you know, the span of your adult life. When you and I first talked on the phone, when we first connected, as you know, we spent three and a half hours, and it was just non-stop talking about all these things, and it's so, um...

Larry: Couple of chatty cabbies [?] [Laughter] Well you know, it was like one of those great moments where you meet someone, and you talk, and you have a confirmation or a validation about, about the world [Ken: Right.] It's like you have connection, you have instantly a feeling of fellowship or community, [Ken: Right.] and, it was nice, nice feeling, it's a nice feeling...

Ken: Ongoing...

Larry: Yeah. It's interesting too, that, I was talking to my friend Jeff, artist on the Matrix, and talking about how human beings have this, you know, we're social, we're social animals, it's like, so much of our reality is our construction based on communication. We have a point of view about the world and we validate it through finding another human being that has a similar point of view, and thus we say ahhh! [Ken laughs] You know, it's like, because we can't really know anything, [Ken: Yeah, yeah.] so if we just get enough people together, we can believe in castles in the sky...

Ken: Right.

Larry: Until I get this tape back... [Ken laughs loudly] I realise that I sound like a dork! [Ken laughs] Reciprocity is what it is -- it's what friendships are based on, you help me with this DVD, I talk to you, I don't talk to people, you don't talk to people...

Ken: That's right.

Larry: We're showing how much we care...

Ken: [laughing] Mutual extortion!

Larry: Yeah! Mutual extortion... Mutual exploitation!

Ken: But I think, I think this is very sweet though, is that, seriously, I don't think either one of us would be doing this if we hadn't really struck up an almost immediate resonance, because, as you know, I've turned down doing anything public at all, whatsoever for over twenty-five years, and doing an interview on tape, on film for you and Josh was the first time I've done this, and you don't talk about this stuff to anybody, which is well known, and so I...

Larry: Well, we have a very similar outlook on the nature of celebrity and public [Ken: Right.] experience of it - that it's not such a great thing... [Ken laughs]

Ken: But, I mean, what's so amazing is how... well, I mean, it's pretty easy to understand how an academic philosopher can avoid the limelight, but, how, you know, the codirector and writer of the most astonishing movie experience of the last several decades can avoid the limelight... You were talking about when you were over in Japan for one of the openings and [laughs] they're like [laughs]... you know every body else is...

Larry: Yeah we're actually standing next to press row...

Ken: Exactly...

Larry: Like the entire row of like cameras and video cameras and all these reporters are standing there and we're like standing right next to 'em...

Ken: Right... [laughs]

Larry: And everyone's like and... this woman is watching as Carrie-Anne and Keanu come down the aisle and they're all taking pictures and very excited and, then Joel Silver comes down the aisle and she's like...

Ken: The producer...

Larry: you know gets very excited who's standing next to me this Japanese woman she's like [Japanese accent impersonation, breathes hard] "It's Joel Silver! Joel Silver! Joel Silver!" *Ken and Larry laugh* I'm like "Ohhh... who's he?" She's like... [laughter]

Ken: She's elbowing *you* and saying "look! look! There's the producer!" Oh God! And you're sitting there... you're, you're appropriately excited of course? [Ken continues laughing]

Larry: Oh of course, well I had to find out who he was first... "Who is he? Ohhh... *he's* responsible for the Matrix... Ohhh." [Ken continues laughing] No, I mean, not, not to say anything bad about Joel...

Ken: No, understood.

Larry: Our... leader...

Ken: Or ah, or the Japanese woman for that matter.

Larry: No, no she was, she was sweet, she was very nice but I, I felt very... happy with the fact that they didn't know who we were. *laughs*

Ken: Yeah..*laughs* Um, incidentally I, well wait, you're, now, but you're not just, you know, for ah, things that I believe are public knowledge, you're not planning on going back and, and filming anymore Matrix things for the foreseeable future right now. Ah you, you filmed the three of those you know in one long, intense five-ish year period and you've sort of taken a break from that right now, yeah?

Larry: Yeah, the actual full span is probably ten years...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: ...that we've been working on it...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: and it's just you know that's, that's the story, I don't know, we'll see...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: Down the line I'm hoping that I, I recover enough to even wanna make another movie.

Ken: Yeah. Yeah. So you'll just sorta wait and see what unfolds?

Larry: Yeah, yeah...

Ken: Yeah?

Larry: can't say that... I don't know, I used to love movies. *Ken laughs loudly* I used to go to movies all the time, I used to, you know, watch hundreds of them, hundreds a year and... now I can't stand them. *laughter* Somebody asked me what did the Matrix, you know, do to us in terms of watching other movies, and probably the most distorting aspect of having made these films is looking at movies and just feeling such a lack of ambition on the part of people who are making them...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: That I kind, I kind of think like -- why bother?

Ken: Yeah. Yeah.

Larry: It's like, if they can't generate ambition and energy, why should I be interested?

Ken: Yeah. Yeah. Well I you know look, I think that's an occupational hazard of anytime you try to bring some sort of quality or excellence to anything, I mean, frankly I feel the same way about writers, you know, I mean I bust my ass on these things and I pick up books and read through it, I go, "Jesus, this person you know, I could do this... between stoplights. I mean, this is, this is just horrible!"

Larry: Yeah, which is interesting, because at the same time, that is the thing that really enables you in the beginning. It's like, Kubrick used to talk about how when you know when he first started he would go to the movies and he'd say "Christ, that was crap. I could do that standing on my head."

Ken: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

Larry: And it's like, and you know you forget that crap is there before and after you do it. But in, before you do it it's like "Whoa!" it's inspiring. *laughs* And then after you do it, it's just...

Ken: Still there.

Larry: Yeah. It's kinda like ah, defeating in a way.

Ken: Yeah. Yeah. Ah, so, before I forget, what was your take on Hegel?

Larry: Oh, we were talking about how... this is very complicated, but essentially the ah, the Hegelian idea that the development of everything is leading towards the singularity of the individual, right?

Ken: Yep.

Larry: It's the whole process, that mystical, that eros that you talk about that's underneath everything has been bringing us toward the development of self-awareness and consciousness. Well I guess consciousness, and then self-awareness.

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: And how that development, that ah, I guess in your terms it would be the holonic development...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: ...leads towards the singularity, it's like, the base leading towards the singularity of the individual. Right?

Ken: Ah, ah well, but not, but... individuality's not, not an omega for me, it's sort of er...on...

Larry: Correct, that is, but I mean, I mean, you see the development, well, you see that progression as a development.

Ken: I think so, from what you've said so far I think so, yeah.

Larry: But then whereas he arrives, you know, he basically says "Here I am, I'm Hegel, I'm self-awareness, I'm the omega point incarnate"... you then turn around and reverse out of that pyramid.

Ken: ...through further development.

Larry: Yes.

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: Which is, which is an interesting shape, I guess, that was the nature of our discussion, because generally people want to be describing things that, you know, reach a pinnacle and not then turn around and get out of the pinnacle.

Ken: Right. Yeah I know, it's just an occupational hazard when people get into evolutionary developmental thinking, they sort of find themselves perched miraculously on top of the heap, and I find ourselves miraculously about half way up the heap and more than that, the heap is unending in a manifest domain. You get off of the evolutionary spiral, which is very important to come to terms with, but you find freedom from it by finding that origin point we were talking about, that underlies all of it. And that doesn't exist in time, that doesn't pop out at the top, in time, that's the timeless ground of all of it, and so, you know...

Larry: Right, but the path there, is a development of an ever re-expanding path...

Ken: In a sense, sure...

Larry: Whereas you start off, and, you know, we're going from base matter, atoms, molecules, cells, living organisms, up to the triune brain, and you know, that is a progression, a developmental progression which kind of suggests a value statement there, leading towards this, this entity, this... leading towards Hegel [Ken laughs] leads to Hegel's family,then leads to Hegel's tribe [Ken: Oh God!], Hegel's nation state, and then... the world, and then, you know, the non-dual awareness, which brings you back to the superbase element -- the non-dual awareness.

Ken: One of the main differences between anybody writing now and somebody writing in the time of Schopenhauer is just, you know, science keeps progressing, to the extent that we make the assumption that science finds something out about some sort of relatively objective world. Then, you know, it's... there's... god, we've got so much more science we know about now, starting with the evolutionary sequence itself, astonishing things that those developmentalists up to Hegel still had no conception, of the geographical spans of time and all of the studies that have been done on the, you know... Darwin was taking their ideas and applying it to biology, it would be another century before...

Larry: Yeah, it's totally intuitive work.

Ken: It's amazing they got as far as they did...

Larry: Yeah.

Ken: We can be certain of that...

Larry: No, it is amazing, it's just, it's uhh, it's staggering... [Ken laughs]

Ken: Is your dad, did your dad, was he, obviously he's very bright about all these things, but had he studied any of the idealists or just sort of knew in general what some of them had talked about?

Larry: Ah yeah, he's read a lot...

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: He kind of got into Schopenhauer more because I was so into him.

Ken: Yeah.

Larry ...forced it down his throat!

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: Yeah, and he's probably more of a marxist than I am [Ken laughs], in terms of these ideas affecting and informing history...

Ken: Right. Well ok, we'll give him the lower right quadrant then... [laughs]

Larry: [mumbling]...social systems...

Ken: Yeah, um, ok, alright, so is Karen, is Karen coming down, are we going to see her?

Larry: Yeah, she's going to be there.

Ken: Oh Cool...

Larry: She's going to be there, that should be fun, she's looking forward to seeing you again.

Ken: When are, where are you guys staying?

Larry: Um, well, probably either stay at the Viceroy or we'll stay at um, we may bring our dog...

Ken: Oh, sure you've got a dog? [Ken laughs]

Larry: Yeah the dog died and we got one, this is the balance of the universe...

Ken: [laughs] And the Viceroy doesn't allow dogs, so you might stay someplace else?

Larry: Yeah, it does not, we might stay somewhere else, where are you guys staying?

Ken: I might stay at the Standard, I'm just going down by myself, I going to stay at the Standard...

Larry: The Standard?

Ken: Yeah.

Larry: The one in West Hollywood?

Ken: I think so.

Larry: That's a hipster place...

Ken: You bet.

Larry: For a hipster dude!

Ken: Absolutely! Me and West Hollywood, made for each other...

Larry: Metrosexual that you are!

Ken: I'm metrosexual, exactly...

Larry: I was going to try to arrange a dinner with Joel, I think it could be [Ken: that'd be great] ...fun

Ken: That'd be great...

Larry: If you actually are flying over the Getty center you can see Joel's House, it's pretty cool...

Ken: Wow.

Larry: The red box!

Ken: So ok, I'm free, I'm free that Friday evening and then all Saturday and Saturday evening and Sunday and Sunday evening, so...

Larry: Doing some socialising?

Ken: Well I thought since I'm down there, you know, might as well... I don't get out much.



Larry Wachowski

The co-writer and co-director of the coolest trilogy in recent memory speaks on The Matrix, the tricky role of interpretation in art, and the significance of integral philosophy...

Listen to it at Integral Naked

http://www.matrixfans.net/symbolism/meanings.php

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 7:42 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Mandala means 'circle' in the Sanskrit language, and mandala art refers to symbols that are drawn, sketched or painted in a circular frame. Mandala art has been used throughout the world as a process of self-expression, in the service of personal growth and spiritual transformation. Tibetan Buddhism has employed mandala art for thousands of years to capture the images of the countless demons and gods which it believes both plague and uplift humanity. Navajo sand painters use them in their healing rites. Many native people use the Medicine Wheel, a mandala form, to connect to earth energies and the wisdom of nature.

The very fact that mandalas are drawn round can lead us to an experience of wholeness when we take the time to make them and then wonder what they mean. In the strict use of the mandala, there is a central point or focus within the symbol from which radiates a symmetrical design. This suggests there is a center within each one of us to which everything is related, by which everything is ordered, and which is itself a source of energy and power. Virtually every spiritual and religious system known to man asserts the reality of such an inner center. The Romans worshiped it as the genius within. The Greeks called it the inner daemon. Christian religions speak about the soul and the Christ within. In psychology we speak of the Higher Self.

http://www.michaelbrown.org/html/mandala_symbolism.html

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:09 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Totem Poles

Introdution
Gyáa'aang is the Haida language word for the tall red cedar poles carved with images from family histories on the northern Northwest Coast. These heraldic columns have come to be called "totem poles." John Wallace, a Haida pole carver, told Viola Garfield that the translation of the word gyáa' aang is "man stands up straight," a descriptive rather than literal translation. The term "totem pole" is not a native Northwest Coast phrase. In fact, the use of the term "totem" to refer to the Northwest Coast images of family crests or emblems is not strictly accurate. The word "totem" itself derives from an Ojibwa word, "ototeman," and "totemism" in anthropological terms refers to the belief that a kin group is descended from a certain animal and treats it with special care, refraining from eating or hunting it. The figures carved on Northwest Coast poles generally represent ancestors and supernatural beings that were once encountered by the ancestors of the lineage, who thereby acquired the right to represent them as crests, symbols of their identity, and records of their history.



Several different types of these monumental poles include: tall house frontal poles placed against the house front, often serving as doorways of houses with the entrance through a hole at the bottom; carved interior house posts that support roof beams; free standing memorial poles placed in front of houses to honor deceased chiefs; and mortuary poles made to house the coffins of important people in a niche at the top. Tall multiple-figure poles were first made only by the northern Northwest Coast Haida, Tlingit, and Tsimshian peoples in Southeast Alaska and British Columbia. Large human welcome figures and interior house posts were made by the Kwakwaka'wakw and Nuu-chah-nulth people further south, and the Coast Salish people in Southern British Columbia and western Washington also carved large human figures representing ancestors and spirit helpers on interior house posts and as grave monuments.

The Haida from the Queen Charlotte Islands in British Columbia and Dall and Prince of Wales Islands in Southeast Alaska have oral histories that indicate the tradition of carving poles is a very ancient one among their people. The very first drawing of a carved house frontal pole on the Northwest Coast was made by John Bartlett in the Haida village of Dadens on North Island in 1791. Viola Garfield recorded a story from John Wallace in Hydaburg, Alaska, in 1941 that tells about the supernatural being who first taught human beings to carve poles at North Island:


http://content.lib.washington.edu/aipnw/wright.html

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:18 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Phoenix: The Phoenix or mythical Bird.

http://www.winshop.com.au/annew/Phoenix.html

[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:30 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Angel Symbolism
http://www.likeacat.com/index.asp?PageA ... ustom&ID=1

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:34 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
... the content of the collective unconscious
is made up essentially of archetypes ...
Carl Jung

Drawing upon Carl Jung’s work on the archetype and the collective unconscious, the Archive for Research in Archetypal Symbolism (ARAS) is a pictorial and written archive of mythological, ritualistic, and symbolic images from all over the world and from all epochs of human history. The collection probes the universality of archetypal themes and provides a testament to the deep and abiding connections that unite the disparate factions of the human family.

http://aras.org/

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:37 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The Tarot deck contains archetypal symbols that can be related to the analytical psychology of the Swiss psychologist, Carl Jung. The Tarot deck, especially the major arcana or trump cards, can be used effectively in therapy. The client, with the assistance of the therapist, conducts a reading or uses several cards to tell a story and then discusses possible meanings of the symbols in his or her own words. The therapist then relates the symbolic meanings given by the client to the client's problem in much the same manner as in Jungian dream analysis. This therapeutic process can be explained by using a chaos model. Using a chaos model of therapy, a period of psychic instability is deliberately induced by the therapist through stimulation of the imagination via the Tarot symbols. Concentration on the Tarot symbols induces bifurcation points that the therapist then uses to direct change toward desired attractors. This is similar to the well-known techniques of paradoxical communication, paradoxical intervention, and prescribing the symptom, all of which induce a temporary condition of psychic instability that is required for a bifurcation.

http://www.schuelers.com/chaos/chaos7.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:47 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The Wisdom Garden



Stories are medicine. They have such power; they do not require that we do, be, act anything —we need only listen. The remedies for repair or reclamation of any lost psychic drive are contained in stories. Stories engender the excitement, sadness, questions, longings, and understandings that spontaneously bring the archetype back to the surface.

I encourage people to do their own mining of story, for the scraped knuckles, the sleeping on cold ground, the groping in the dark, and the adventures on the way are worth everything. There must be a little spilled blood on every story if it is to carry the medicine.


— Clarissa Pinkola Estés




Here you will find a diversity of texts and stories from all kinds of sources: books, articles, even songs. As with the rest of the material in Lakota, I suggest that you pay attention to your intuition when choosing which one(s) to read: it might be just what you need to hear right now! Enjoy

http://www.elexion.com/lakota/textos/textos2.htm

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 8:57 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
The Symbolism of the Ukrainian Easter Egg.

http://www.uazone.net/holidays/EasterEggs.html

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 03, 2006 9:01 pm 
Offline
Posting Freak
User avatar
 Profile

Joined: Tue May 03, 2005 7:31 pm
Posts: 18439
Location: QUANTUSUM
Symbols for the Huichol
By Robert Otey and adapted here from his Site with his kind permission.


Deer - Maize - Peyote
These are the most important symbols for the Huichol.
They represent a culture in transition from hunting and gathering strategies to that of a sedentary agrarian lifestyle.

The deer holds the intimate role of symbolizing the Huichol people. The character of the Huichol as a group tends to be light, flexible, and humorous. They have avoided open warfare, neither fighting against the Spanish nor for the Mexican government, but have always maintained their traditions and freedoms. They call themselves Wixalika which means prophets or healers.

The Peyote cactus is the centerpiece of their sacred ritualism. It is the vehicle by which they obtain their mystical union with the gods. It has been revered for centuries by the Huichol for its curative properties and its ability to "enlighten" the one who partakes of it.

The Huichol do not have a word which corresponds to what we of the Western tradition have called hallucination. Our definition of the word would be unthinkable for a Huichol who knows nothing of such foolish terms concocted by a paranoid establishment and its "paid for" psychologists. The flow of sacred imaging through the mind's eye is always present within the individual as can be seen by the various ways of accessing it around the world through shamanic, religious, meditative and various forms of physical manipulation and chemical means. The Huichol have practised this way of seeing beyond the normal physical realm for eons and live in communal balance long before the Europeans arrived with their chains.


The Peyoteròs, as they are called, perform a pilgrimage yearly to obtain the magic cactus, as pictured here, from the scorching desert of San Luis Potosi. This sacred place they call Wirikuta or the "Field of Flowers" is hundreds of miles from their traditional homeland.



The cactus is eaten by young and old alike. With the direction of the shaman and the support of the group, each Peyoterò is free to transcend the limitations of their ordinary sensory perceptions and see with the mind's eye, the heart of the great spirit, the interconnectedness of all things seen and unseen.

The Images expressed in their artwork are always representing stories, legends of their mythology that organize every aspect of their world and lives. The basis of their rituals are the songs of the Shamans (Marakame) and the main one says:"If you have been made of corn (eekoo) and you eat the peyote (heekoori) - the cactus that is the real core of the corn - you become the Jaguar (maye), that hunts your deer (maxra) - that is your own spirit - and listen to the song of the oldest and biggest deer (Tamatz Kauyumari) - who gives you the power - and Scorpion (Terooka) and the feather sticks (Moowieri) to heal, sing and dance".


The geometric intricacy of their art reflects the patterns of primordial archetypes present within each of us. Their art is a literal physical translation of imagery seen during their expanded state of awareness, induced by their sacred cactus. This art is a tangible manifestation of their experience in the realm of the gods for each of us to see, touch, and commune with, becoming vehicles for our own contemplation and transformation.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/huichol/ ... l#Wirikuta

http://www.mexconnect.com/mex_/huichol/ ... index.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------





[Edited on 4-10-2006 by Shayalana]

_________________
The SI IS.

"Oneness, Truthfulness and Equality"


Cathedral - CS&N
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MaSU0ABrnY


Top
 

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Copyright © 2005-2012 WingMakers.co.uk