Session 4 April 2015

[Shared Joy]

Divine will... mmm wonder why they had to put "configurations" and "permutations" separated. Math says depending on how you see it, there is different combinations and permutations, close to an infinite potential if you are able to repeat the element. If you had 7 base elements you are able to configure them into a branch that achieves a limit, combining nature into an artificial branch achieving a specific repetition of patterns which form strict reality maybe, but then what limits artificiallity from configuring itself as the base materials?

Mouravieff says the lower centers achieve a total of 987 configurations. I find that funny, if I remember good guy Fulcanelli died in 1987.

What is the difference between the natural and the artificial if both are made by the same thing? what defines nature anyway? what separates the creator from the creation if both have the same power? what is the difference between myself and another forum member?

I get the idea that this perception of what "chaos" is from science and humans is nothing but constant expansion and creation.

Numbers, words, all the same logo just forming different permutations, wonder why the mind requires a specific order.

Hi Prometeo,

ancient Chinese texts mention 5 elements which were the symbolic matter and their combinations formed the "10,000 things" that is the large variety of phenomena, objects, living beings. These all are natural. Also their permutation generates energy: like the water cycle when it goes from gas to liquid then solid. Each time energy exchange is produced (released or absorbed).

But there is this infinite ocean of energy which is self-existent and fuels all processes and contains ALL information as to what things might become in these processes.

Artificial things usually start from natural things which are tempered with such us in genetic alterations. They cannot make a new organism with a completely new genetic makeup, so they modify something already existent.

Maybe is just a simplistic way to explain something which is infinitely complex, but my knowledge is limited at this time.

I'm sure, that all that seems to be complicated now, will look extremely simple when we have access to more knowledge.

Just my thoughts
Joy

 

[cubbex]

Divine will... mmm wonder why they had to put "configurations" and "permutations" separated. Math says depending on how you see it, there is different combinations and permutations, close to an infinite potential if you are able to repeat the element. If you had 7 base elements you are able to configure them into a branch that achieves a limit, combining nature into an artificial branch achieving a specific repetition of patterns which form strict reality maybe, but then what limits artificiallity from configuring itself as the base materials?

Mouravieff says the lower centers achieve a total of 987 configurations. I find that funny, if I remember good guy Fulcanelli died in 1987.

What is the difference between the natural and the artificial if both are made by the same thing? what defines nature anyway? what separates the creator from the creation if both have the same power? what is the difference between myself and another forum member?

I get the idea that this perception of what "chaos" is from science and humans is nothing but constant expansion and creation.

Numbers, words, all the same logo just forming different permutations, wonder why the mind requires a specific order.

Hi Prometeo,

ancient Chinese texts mention 5 elements which were the symbolic matter and their combinations formed the "10,000 things" that is the large variety of phenomena, objects, living beings. These all are natural. Also their permutation generates energy: like the water cycle when it goes from gas to liquid then solid. Each time energy exchange is produced (released or absorbed).

But there is this infinite ocean of energy which is self-existent and fuels all processes and contains ALL information as to what things might become in these processes.

Artificial things usually start from natural things which are tempered with such us in genetic alterations. They cannot make a new organism with a completely new genetic makeup, so they modify something already existent.

Maybe is just a simplistic way to explain something which is infinitely complex, but my knowledge is limited at this time.

I'm sure, that all that seems to be complicated now, will look extremely simple when we have access to more knowledge.

Just my thoughts
Joy

Heh ok, my questions were partially rhetorical. By the way sorry for the date of death. 1889 was the date, 1907 was the date for the friend 1907 William Thomson. Why did I see an "8"? It appears the lodge of scientist (souls?) are interconnected one way or the other, as if a bunch of souls sproud.

Divine will... mmm wonder why they had to put "configurations" and "permutations" separated. Math says depending on how you see it, there is different combinations and permutations, close to an infinite potential if you are able to repeat the element. If you had 7 base elements you are able to configure them into a branch that achieves a limit, combining nature into an artificial branch achieving a specific repetition of patterns which form strict reality maybe, but then what limits artificiallity from configuring itself as the base materials?

Mouravieff says the lower centers achieve a total of 987 configurations. I find that funny, if I remember good guy Fulcanelli died in 1987.

What is the difference between the natural and the artificial if both are made by the same thing? what defines nature anyway? what separates the creator from the creation if both have the same power? what is the difference between myself and another forum member?

I get the idea that this perception of what "chaos" is from science and humans is nothing but constant expansion and creation.

Numbers, words, all the same logo just forming different permutations, wonder why the mind requires a specific order.

Prometeo,

Actually, I have wondered about the difference between the "artificial" and "natural" as you mention. Obviously (to me anyway) is the 4D STS manipulation that even includes "time loops" is not quite what I would call "natural" but has to use natural or "real" technology to mess with some established structure.

So, the best I can speculate is that if there is "freewill" but it may depend on "awareness" within the "reality" of the truly "natural" to achieve a certain level of maturity to choose to manipulate the "prime creator's" expanding design. I now think that it could be either STS or STO.

I don't know if you are familiar with the Cs mention of the Quorum but they say that there is at certain levels a blending of STS and STO which seems to indicate that there is not such a black and white separation of STS and STO. I think this may be why we (myself included) may not see the difference between "artificial" and "natural" when it comes to the "chaos" around us.

What if the "order" you mention is determined by choice?

May I say how much I like your answers? I really like you man. My questions aim at observing humans who truly believe to be saints and "natural" organisms, but the "5th option" and informational theory exposition in Barcelona from the group makes me think that even if organic, humans and all were completelly engineered to be what they are. Not a new concept. If that is the case how sure are we that humans are natural or not? How natural are they if they barely know the pieces of their machine, which are so easy to influence. If you would create a mind made of millions of tiny pieces inside a matrix, no matter how much pieces they are, all of the possible combinations already predict a human's life, while this person thinks that he/she has free will, but what is free will if everything appears to be a programmed drama? a drama programmed in possibilites.

My question aims at answering if consciousness is indeed a byproduct of acquiring knowledge or if it is a pre programmed movie like Mouravieff says. A friend said "nothing hurts more than life". Naturally I've been fiding my own ideas and concepts which I rarely share for fear of the common negative feedback from my peers, and find that few people have thought the same but at least they have! lol. Too bad that the name of guys like Shakespeare gets dirty when drones like Vincent Bridges start talking about them, saying a bunch of nonsense.

Have some of you thought about the mustard seed concept? in cassiopaean glossary is described mostly as genetics. I think it goes beyond genetics. If the tree of life comes from a base, observing the seed of such tree would let you see all of it, as if it was a tiny seed full of potential.

People assume souled beings are not robots, but they still assume that a soul can be predicted by a series of traits like empathy. If the soul can be predicted on its patterns then it has no true free will at least in the sense we think of it, and it is not that different of a robot.

 

[SeekinTruth]

My question aims at answering if consciousness is indeed a byproduct of acquiring knowledge or if it is a pre programmed movie like Mouravieff says. A friend said "nothing hurts more than life".

Prometeo, I don't see why it can't be both. As Mouravieff says, there's a way of being released from the recurring mechanical unfolding of "the film of one's life" by developing higher states of consciousness. Yes, for the most part, we are robots (but extremely complex and sophisticated robots, so it's difficult for many to see that) - that's what Gurdjieff was saying in so many different ways. But that's what the 4th Way is all about: to use the Work on the self to release ourselves from being biological automatons and become real humans without the quotation marks, if able to complete the Work, we'd be able to achieve the full potential for humans that is rarely ever even approached. Most don't come anywhere near the true potential.

Also, if there was no free will, there would be no point to anything. And the raving psychopaths and their minions would always get what they wanted/were after. Obviously that's not the case, so there must be some freedom to respond differently than they always think will be the "pre-determined" outcome (not to mention the hypothesized 4th Density STS that keep having to try their schemes over and over again because they can't accept the outcomes and probability that they can't have more than they already have - the balance always reverts). FWIW.

 

[tschai]

Divine will... mmm wonder why they had to put "configurations" and "permutations" separated. Math says depending on how you see it, there is different combinations and permutations, close to an infinite potential if you are able to repeat the element. If you had 7 base elements you are able to configure them into a branch that achieves a limit, combining nature into an artificial branch achieving a specific repetition of patterns which form strict reality maybe, but then what limits artificiallity from configuring itself as the base materials?

Mouravieff says the lower centers achieve a total of 987 configurations. I find that funny, if I remember good guy Fulcanelli died in 1987.

What is the difference between the natural and the artificial if both are made by the same thing? what defines nature anyway? what separates the creator from the creation if both have the same power? what is the difference between myself and another forum member?

I get the idea that this perception of what "chaos" is from science and humans is nothing but constant expansion and creation.

Numbers, words, all the same logo just forming different permutations, wonder why the mind requires a specific order.

Hi Prometeo,

ancient Chinese texts mention 5 elements which were the symbolic matter and their combinations formed the "10,000 things" that is the large variety of phenomena, objects, living beings. These all are natural. Also their permutation generates energy: like the water cycle when it goes from gas to liquid then solid. Each time energy exchange is produced (released or absorbed).

But there is this infinite ocean of energy which is self-existent and fuels all processes and contains ALL information as to what things might become in these processes.

Artificial things usually start from natural things which are tempered with such us in genetic alterations. They cannot make a new organism with a completely new genetic makeup, so they modify something already existent.

Maybe is just a simplistic way to explain something which is infinitely complex, but my knowledge is limited at this time.

I'm sure, that all that seems to be complicated now, will look extremely simple when we have access to more knowledge.

Just my thoughts
Joy

Summed up very succinctly! I like this explanation very much indeed!

 

[cubbex]

Summed up very succinctly! I like this explanation very much indeed!

Not really, from my perspective.

My question aims at answering if consciousness is indeed a byproduct of acquiring knowledge or if it is a pre programmed movie like Mouravieff says. A friend said "nothing hurts more than life".

Also, if there was no free will, there would be no point to anything. And the raving psychopaths and their minions would always get what they wanted/were after. Obviously that's not the case, so there must be some freedom to respond differently than they always think will be the "pre-determined" outcome (not to mention the hypothesized 4th Density STS that keep having to try their schemes over and over again because they can't accept the outcomes and probability that they can't have more than they already have - the balance always reverts). FWIW.

There is no point for anything really, we'll all die eventually but we think things like the "wave" will change that; it will not, not even 4th density will make anybody understand what they have to understand by themselves. And if there is a point for anything then there's no need for free will, if such free will is ultimately forced to fall into that "point". The lesson is the interesting thing at the end. And to this day you still think the psychopaths don't get what they want? they do, not all because they know no limits for their ambition. The thing is looking at the environment as a series of possibilities based on the elements bouncing in it. Doubt the sun will shine one day and psychopaths will dissappear, lol oh god if that happens nobody would learn their lesson.

I also think you don't see things correctly. The 4th STS clearly can control a lot unless some "divine intervention" and naturally that doesn't happen for all humans, but for those of rare very giving nature. Haven't anyone thought this has nothing to do with any "affection" type of purpose but probably just a mere business mechanic? Have any of you thought that these lizards and human society are made for each other? like, to this point in time humans can't accept that their society are predatory in nature too? blame the psychopath of course, or blame the microbes. The lizzies and the psychos come and push humans, then they say "i'm just a potato, I blame you for my horrible life, just let me be in my mortal existence", well why not right? but that is not the case, it won't happen by just doing that. The prey and the predator are related in nature for each other, when will all of humans acquire some responsability?

Soul as I see it, is not a word which describes the astral body or spiritual body. Soul is synonim of Will. If there is a soul there is a will. I think humanity has no will at all in general.

I read comments in this forum that make me facepalm like "this reality is horrible because of psychopaths or microbes", noo, this reality is horrible because humanity do enjoy to swim, swallow, and go through their existence through all of the offered illusions. Simple as that. Why do they need an authority to come and give them everything on the mouth? information only used so that they can fix themselves and go back to the system.

Another: "Ohh these psychopaths are human predators, bad bad, by the way this bacon tastes so good!!"

We need to work harder, see harder, not just read books and memorize words. Everyone can memorize words, but few can break the glass and see things as they are. Few.

Sshh I really ranted here, sorry hehe.

 

[tschai]

Summed up very succinctly! I like this explanation very much indeed!

Not really, from my perspective.
And what precisely aside from your "rant" is your perspective that you take exception to in the above statement? I think it dovetails very nicely with what we have learned from the Cs et al regarding the nature of Creation- you say there is no point to anything -so you are saying your existence is pointless?

My question aims at answering if consciousness is indeed a byproduct of acquiring knowledge or if it is a pre programmed movie like Mouravieff says. A friend said "nothing hurts more than life".

Also, if there was no free will, there would be no point to anything. And the raving psychopaths and their minions would always get what they wanted/were after. Obviously that's not the case, so there must be some freedom to respond differently than they always think will be the "pre-determined" outcome (not to mention the hypothesized 4th Density STS that keep having to try their schemes over and over again because they can't accept the outcomes and probability that they can't have more than they already have - the balance always reverts). FWIW.

There is no point for anything really, we'll all die eventually but we think things like the "wave" will change that; it will not, not even 4th density will make anybody understand what they have to understand by themselves. And if there is a point for anything then there's no need for free will, if such free will is ultimately forced to fall into that "point". The lesson is the interesting thing at the end. And to this day you still think the psychopaths don't get what they want? they do, not all because they know no limits for their ambition. The thing is looking at the environment as a series of possibilities based on the elements bouncing in it. Doubt the sun will shine one day and psychopaths will dissappear, lol oh god if that happens nobody would learn their lesson.

I also think you don't see things correctly. The 4th STS clearly can control a lot unless some "divine intervention" and naturally that doesn't happen for all humans, but for those of rare very giving nature. Haven't anyone thought this has nothing to do with any "affection" type of purpose but probably just a mere business mechanic? Have any of you thought that these lizards and human society are made for each other? like, to this point in time humans can't accept that their society are predatory in nature too? blame the psychopath of course, or blame the microbes. The lizzies and the psychos come and push humans, then they say "i'm just a potato, I blame you for my horrible life, just let me be in my mortal existence", well why not right? but that is not the case, it won't happen by just doing that. The prey and the predator are related in nature for each other, when will all of humans acquire some responsability?

Soul as I see it, is not a word which describes the astral body or spiritual body. Soul is synonim of Will. If there is a soul there is a will. I think humanity has no will at all in general.

I read comments in this forum that make me facepalm like "this reality is horrible because of psychopaths or microbes", noo, this reality is horrible because humanity do enjoy to swim, swallow, and go through their existence through all of the offered illusions. Simple as that. Why do they need an authority to come and give them everything on the mouth? information only used so that they can fix themselves and go back to the system.

Another: "Ohh these psychopaths are human predators, bad bad, by the way this bacon tastes so good!!"

We need to work harder, see harder, not just read books and memorize words. Everyone can memorize words, but few can break the glass and see things as they are. Few.

Sshh I really ranted here, sorry hehe.

 

[cubbex]

Because it pokes your obvious preference for asian lore and because it focus too much on genes and the body.

 

[tschai]

Because it pokes your obvious preference for asian lore and because it focus too much on genes and the body.

So having a preference for "Asian lore" is a fault in your eyes? Interesting. I guess it's good to have an erudite individual such as yourself that has everything figured out here to tell us these things, yes? I suppose you count yourself among the few that can break the glass as you state and see things as they are...please feel feel to pass on your infinite wisdom to us lesser mortals so we may aspire to reach the heights to which you have achieved. Mean while I will enjoy some bacon...and contemplate my pointless existence in a pointless universe in which preferences for anything and everything is pointless

 

[cubbex]

Because it pokes your obvious preference for asian lore and because it focus too much on genes and the body.

So having a preference for "Asian lore" is a fault in your eyes? Interesting. I guess it's good to have an erudite individual such as yourself that has everything figured out here to tell us these things, yes? I suppose you count yourself among the few that can break the glass as you state and see things as they are...please feel feel to pass on your infinite wisdom to us lesser mortals so we may aspire to reach the heights to which you have achieved. Mean while I will enjoy some bacon...and contemplate my pointless existence in a pointless universe in which preferences for anything and everything is pointless

Admit it, if I share with you a phrase that sort of reflects the words of the cassiopaean or any prefered source from your taste, and then I tell you a white bearded CHINESE man told me this, you'd like to agree with me. Easy to deceive and influence those who only want to see what they prefer to see. I disagree with his points, but find some of them interesting, which lets me to a disagreement to the idea he explains it all.

Find funny your agressive reaction. Btw, add some rice to that bacon !

There is no point in a network if people like you take this nazi attitude the moment someone disagrees with your preference. Diversity is better than none. Even Putin says that, a world made of many diverse cultures.

 

[mkrnhr]

Prometeo and tschai, it's clear you're both having fun poking at each other. It's cute, but try to minimize the noise to signal ratio ;)

 

[tschai]

Prometeo and tschai, it's clear you're both having fun poking at each other. It's cute, but try to minimize the noise to signal ratio ;)

Sorry, but I lost my normal restraint and just could not resist I will refrain from further exchanges

 

[cubbex]

Prometeo and tschai, it's clear you're both having fun poking at each other. It's cute, but try to minimize the noise to signal ratio ;)

Sorry, but I lost my normal restraint and just could not resist I will refrain from further exchanges

:D That's how we learn, mirth mirth, by the way I'm half assian lol, and love samurai and ninja culture and all that tai chi energy, got a good book on quigong ready to be read and practiced.

 

[goyacobol]

Prometeo and tschai, it's clear you're both having fun poking at each other. It's cute, but try to minimize the noise to signal ratio ;)

Sorry, but I lost my normal restraint and just could not resist I will refrain from further exchanges

:D That's how we learn, mirth mirth, by the way I'm half assian lol, and love samurai and ninja culture and all that tai chi energy, got a good book on quigong ready to be read and practiced.

Prometeo, tschai and mkrnhr,

I personally don't have a problem of the back and forth since it helps me "see" where others are coming from so to speak. And, I have previously leaned towards the more hopeful/wishful thinking side of many topics. I think the truth may lie in the middle of Prometeo and tschai's points of view. I have been thinking lately that my "hope-er" is not quite what it used to be considering all we try to learn here and the vast scale of the universe.

I now feel that I can better understand some of the more "negative" reactions expressed here as valid opinions as I try to keep my "hope-er" going. I do think if we take the more negative view we should try to also express what keeps us going and at least share what we see as the way to break the "glass ceiling" that was mentioned the the Session 4 April 2015 session. I appreciate all the diversity here more as I read the posts in a more comprehensive way and realize others have the same doubts and struggles piecing together the clues given by the Cs. FWIW

 

[tschai]

Prometeo and tschai, it's clear you're both having fun poking at each other. It's cute, but try to minimize the noise to signal ratio ;)

Sorry, but I lost my normal restraint and just could not resist I will refrain from further exchanges

:D That's how we learn, mirth mirth, by the way I'm half assian lol, and love samurai and ninja culture and all that tai chi energy, got a good book on quigong ready to be read and practiced.

Prometeo, tschai and mkrnhr,

I personally don't have a problem of the back and forth since it helps me "see" where others are coming from so to speak. And, I have previously leaned towards the more hopeful/wishful thinking side of many topics. I think the truth may lie in the middle of Prometeo and tschai's points of view. I have been thinking lately that my "hope-er" is not quite what it used to be considering all we try to learn here and the vast scale of the universe.

I now feel that I can better understand some of the more "negative" reactions expressed here as valid opinions as I try to keep my "hope-er" going. I do think if we take the more negative view we should try to also express what keeps us going and at least share what we see as the way to break the "glass ceiling" that was mentioned the the Session 4 April 2015 session. I appreciate all the diversity here more as I read the posts in a more comprehensive way and realize others have the same doubts and struggles piecing together the clues given by the Cs. FWIW

Perhaps I should have said "Dovetails nicely with MY current understanding of the Creation"

I merely wanted to know why an exception was taken to my comment on Shared Joys sharing of the Chinese excerpt-and I would not have known it was Chinese if not stated that it was in fact Chinese-and it would not have mattered to me if it were Chinese, Celtic, Hindu or otherwise-I have no "preference" as to the source. It is up to us to determine if it is valid or meshes with our current understanding.

My reaction, as I stated was an evaporation of my normal restraint-I felt that in light of what had been posted previously a good bit of ego and self importance was at play-so I thought to "poke" a bit, which in hind sight was inconsiderate to the other Forum members-if mrknr had not said stop it kids, it could have gone on for a good bit and wasted valuable time and energy better spent elsewhere.

At no point however did I resort to name calling (being called a "Nazi" is a bit over the top, I think) and from the exchange I do not see how one would derive a preference for "Asian lore"-possibly because I have a Samurai as my avatar? And what matters if I or anyone else here has a fondness for all things Asian? That is our free will choice-and really does not bear commentary-especially in the negative light that was given

Just stating for the record, why I reacted the way I did

 

[dankhiar]

What an interesting session. I am literally so confused right now. I'm going to copy/paste a small part just for quick reference.

Q: (L) Okay. Well, that's enough of that. I have another question here. The other question that people were a little curious about on the forum that I noticed was: they wanted to know at what age or stage of development does the soul of an individual enter into the body of a baby that's about to be born?

A: It cannot be set in stone; remember that about half of all babies never house individualized souls. In some cases it can be very early, and others, as late as early adulthood.

Q: (Pierre) Wow.

(Galatea) So I guess they're waiting around the body's frequency to change.

(L) So, is that true? A soul can be hanging around, and there's, say for example, a body that's close to the frequency they need, but not quite, and they have to wait until something happens or changes?

A: Yes

I always thought of us humans as souls occupying a body, instead of a body carrying a soul. What's up with that now? Does that mean that if, at this moment, I am not the first soul my body has carried, that the memories I keep within are not actually mine?

What an interesting concept. I also want to bring up some questions regarding souls changing or altering the body's DNA. I always thought of that to be kind of in an internal level. But could it be that souls can change a person's appearance too? Also, I wonder if it feels different to be around someone with a different soul. Actually, nevermind. The soul wouldn't have switched if the body hadn't changed in the first place, right? But wouldn't it give off a different "aura."

Using this concept, I wonder if I've ever had a soul change. I guess it wouldn't matter if we're all one and we do this for the sole purpose of learning. But I feel like that would be very confusing and emotionally taxing for a new soul to get accustomed to an old body's memory. I wonder how often this happens. But now that I think about it, some people do feel disconnected from themselves and their environment. Could this be part of the reason for it, or just a contributing factor? Considering that everything ties in with everything else, I don't even know how to ask questions anymore. I have changed and rephrased, subtracted and added questions as I kept writing. Writing sure is a great way to lay things down in order to get a clearer view of your thoughts. For me anyways. But that's besides the point.