Organic Portals: Human variation

[BlackCartouche]

OK, then add this from the C's,

Of course, all overseen from the center axis 6D position on that Tree... so again, 'who' inserted this thought form and why? Can/Do 'reflections' insert anything? Wouldn't that 'reflection' be in the 'sleeping' position... i.e. the thought that manifests as energy, that later takes on the form of matter(from our perspective in 3d)? This is why I asked about the Ra interaction of catalyst insertion to push the catalyst... sort of like how the West conquered the Americas.... of later Admiral Perry's insertion into Japan that lead to the whole Meiji restoration period and then empire building abroad after internal consolidation... same pattern as in Europe... or any empire it seems, depending upon local conditions. I'm wondering if this 'failure' was such an insertion of catalyst? If so, it makes you wonder about what went 'wrong'... assuming the thought got skewed after insertion into our s/t or t/s continuum. Wouldn't 6d level engineers be able to see all the possibility/probabiiity vectors that would result? If so, then what sort of 'active' nature do these 6dSTS reflections have? Just wondering.

Hi gdpetti

I think the crux is this part here: "These reflections exist for balance".
This suggests STO creative (positive) principle-force of dispersal/expansion requires STS limitation (negative) principle-force of restriction/constriction is the action-reaction interplay needed to hold existence aka consciousness together. We like to think of pure STS constriction constricts until all there is is 'nothingness' unto non-existence - because its the opposite of STO creativity and expansion. But, maybe without STS de-active constriction 'reaction' to STO active creative-expansion 'action', the force of STO creative expansion over-disperses its expansion-principle force until creation becomes dissipated altogether and, ironically, the end result is no different to the end-result if left to the pure STS principle.
Essentially, 7D All is One isn't a "failure" of inserted skewed thought (manifested as matter) as such... Its a matter of understanding Consciousness requires a sort of 'sado-masochist' streak to hold itself altogether, so it would seem, because the the active push/pull positive/negative interaction force as STO/STS is itself the interplay for all-their-is is-lessons continuous "school of learning" that defines and drives the very nature of consciousness itself, thus existence itself.

For me, in the 'mechanical' sense, it also boils down to the impact-point of expansion of STO creation-force coming into contact with absolute NON-existence - which is NOT in and of itself STS, because STS exists through STO and is merely the result of this expansion impact-point contact zone (osit). The impact-point of STO creative-force expansion into NON-existence does so CREATES the chaos from whence STS is born (osit). The point Consciousness/Existence perpetually expanding and spiraling 'outward' impacting NON-existence is the resultant birth of chaos and pain and STS - because to be born/reborn is to be born/reborn in and of... pain and chaos and STS. Consciousness then takes this as perpetual lessons to learn from turning Chaos into Order - aka STS into STO - thus giving itself the perpetual "meaning" required to exist.

Hope that makes some sense (I'm still not sure if I'm 100% sure meself!)

 

[yumi]

the cross symbolizes the "passage from a cycle to the crossroads of a larger cycle", perhaps...
it reminds me of an Egyptian symbol.
and concerning an "absolute non-existence", it seems to me that it is an illusion, that is to say that there is none, precisely. Perhaps it is a question of considering non-existence as "what is not already" in our world where everything is happening at the same time. Let us not forget that we are food for thought. In the beginning, thought seeks to know itself, "becomes aware of itself", as an emotion forming the circle of the living. and I like it that way.

 

[yumi]

"What is absolute nothingness?
A: A mere thought."

a sterile thought ? an inconceivable idea ? a formless thought ?
hum...I'll think about it.

 

[yumi]

the thought would therefore be hungry, hungry for our mind; as if we were the mirror of our thoughts.
somewhat schizoidal consideration.
I hope for a good transit!

 

[yumi]

infinite knowledge for unlimited recognition, that may be the unifying gravity of an eternal lesson, in transit to ourselves. I am now very relaxed to start the year 2019.

for organic portals, too, I followed the trail of creativity, knowing that a soul can land at any time (?), and that they only preach by example (?)

 

[yumi]

"for organic portals, too, I followed the trail of creativity, knowing that a soul can land at any time (?),
and that they only preach by example (?)"

I come to a delicate question, can we consider a "being" who has no empathy as human?
Also, "psychopaths" would not have more "consciousness/emotions" than those they are able to exploit for their survival? it is similar to the idea of feeding exclusively on negatives. I seriously doubt the idea of a "negative consciousness", but it is possible that the communication of unifying thought is essentially "emotional high"; and maby it can help to understand something?

 

[yumi]

"and that they only preach by example (?)"

it gives them an unfortunate tendency, such as a pre-disposition to "high-flying" morality, not suffering from contradiction; not without a certain addiction to "low emotions"... which, given our situation, would lead them systematically to side with "the winners" (?). By resonance, it affects us, especially "below the belt", and I imagine; that they necessarily conform to "our egos";
reminding us "what makes us one?"
en français, qu'est-ce qui fait qu'on fait qu'un ?

 

[yumi]

perhaps to say that, "soulless people" do not have their own free will, but if they also reflect our inclinations, it can help us against their will? it would be a question of being vigilant about lending qualities to those who do not have them, at the risk of it turning against us; it is part of the idea of avoiding "taking our desires for reality". POs feed on our desires, defecate our frustrations? "a form of recycling"
Sorry for the analogy.

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

"What is absolute nothingness?
A: A mere thought."

a sterile thought ? an inconceivable idea ? a formless thought ?
hum...I'll think about it.

means that there is no such thing as absolute nothingness (in the context in which the question was asked)
another thing,I'm not the best example of it, but try to write all your thoughts in one message to the readers' liking, greetings.

 

[yumi]

means that there is no such thing as absolute nothingness (in the context in which the question was asked)
another thing,I'm not the best example of it, but try to write all your thoughts in one message to the readers' liking, greetings.

it may mean that the context does not allow us to cross a certain line, that of the "understandable living". a little like trying to put ourselves in the place of what is not of our nature. (?)
(yes, I'll try to make an effort to stay in form, thanks!).

 

[ApotheosisMMC.]

it may mean that the context does not allow us to cross a certain line, that of the "understandable living". a little like trying to put ourselves in the place of what is not of our nature. (?)
(yes, I'll try to make an effort to stay in form, thanks!).

although the Cs advise not to take things so literally in this case and reading the whole section it is understood that the answer is literal ... there is no non-existence in its pure state as reality of the universe ... way to non-being in certain contexts, but no non-existence can not exist ... reread the entire section if you have doubts, I think you are trying to find other meanings to a question that is really simple in this case as I see it.

 

[yumi]

"way to non-being in certain contexts"
we're not talking about "no-way" but rather "how to get your life sucked a-way" (?)
existence, without conscience...an impossibility, hence the law of one; and "never one without the other", no doubt,
"Life is a hell of a Lesson"

 

[Ina]

I was looking at the etimology of the verb (to) exist and I found some simillarity between the Latin exsistere and assistere. Can anyone help with some sources of info regarding the etimological history of the two verbs? It seems to me that at least initially, the words existence and assistance had a different meaning and purpose.
existence (n.)
late 14c., "reality," from Old French existence, from Medieval Latin existentia/exsistentia, from existentem/exsistentem (nominative existens/exsistens) "existent," present participle of Latin existere/exsistere "stand forth, come out, emerge; appear, be visible, come to light; arise, be produced; turn into," and, as a secondary meaning, "exist, be;" from ex "forth" (see ex-) + sistere "cause to stand," from PIE *si-st-, reduplicated form of root *sta- "to stand, make or be firm."
_existence | Origin and meaning of existence by Online Etymology Dictionary

 

[mrtn]

My etymological dictionary states it in a similar way (but in German). And the link to sistere (to cause to stand, stop, halt) of both words makes sense.
to stop = becoming less volatile and more specific/definite/concrete/durable, thus it is used as to come into being as existere.
assistere/adsistere is then like acting (or becoming) towards [sb/sth] being (towards something that exists).

The english come into being is a little weird here when describing the latin existere / come out [into] being.
I guess the vision here was/is that creation is an outwards process from some level but ending inwards into level of perception or world on the other end.

Did you think that both words were not connected that way or did you think they each meant something different previously than what they are used for now?

 

[BlackCartouche]

Im coming round to the thought (no pun!) that Existence vs Non-existence is an absolutely "all or nothing" affair. Either existence exists absolutely, or non-existence NOT exist absolutely! Its absolutely ALL of one or absolutely ALL of the other. Since we DO exist (even if illusory) therefor it stands to reason absolute Existence is ALL there is, has, and will be - and Non-existence isn't, hasn't, and will never 'be'.