It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Illumination and Language

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Obviously, Freemasons cannot give up secrets of their craft, and I wouldn't ask them to do it. However, if any of you are feeling particularly generous of spirit, perhaps you could share your thoughts or point me in the right direction.

It occurs to me that language itself is much more mysterious than we know. We seem to be couriers of information that we are only dimly aware of. It's like there is a little man in your . who wants to coordinate with the little man in everyone else's ., but the little men need to keep their intentions hidden from our full awareness, else we, their vehicles, might get in the way of their plans. Hehehe. Obviously, this is just an analogy. I'm not hearing voices in my .. Yet. We could substitute Jung's collective unconscious for the little man.

What is interesting is the clinical research showing that a person can do a thing, not know why he did it, and then invent an explanation and convince himself of the veracity of his explanation. The implications are very, very interesting.

If Freemasonry is what I think it is, then, among other things, it is a way to get back in touch with the true meanings we are receiving and imparting via language. Maybe more than language. Am I on the right track?




posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 09:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by William S. Burroughs
Language is a virus from outer space, and hearing your name is better than seeing your face.


[edit on 6/15/2008 by JoshNorton]



posted on Jun, 15 2008 @ 10:03 PM
link   
reply to post by JoshNorton
 


Close very close



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 12:55 AM
link   
Very mysterious. I've observed it in myself, over the years; a kind of tape recorder effect that takes in language constructs, adopts them into a "code base" of language that I hold as some kind of identity reference, and then, despite knowing better, I'll simply recombine and parrot ideas that aren't necessarily well-formed. We trade these meme nuggets as some kind of currency.

Even stranger is when I go back to something I wrote in the past and clearly read a meaning in there that I didn't consciously intend when I wrote it.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Using language to illuminate the true nature of language, is like your mouth trying to eat itself.

There are entire books on the subject, and the best they can offer is only to point your own . in the general direction and wish you luck.


The very opening sentence in the ancient philosophical Tao te Ching basically states "the name is not the thing itself."

And you're right: many words do not have solid foundations, and simply represent crooked viewpoints. "Justice" is one such word. "Justice" to one man is petty "revenge" to another, and what is the difference besides the point of view? You do something, so someone else does something back as a result.


The [thing] that can be told
is not the eternal [Thing].
The name that can be named
is not the eternal Name.
[...]
Free from desire, you realize the mystery.
Caught in desire, you see only the manifestations.


academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu...



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


I've been to that place, before, internally. What frightens me is that, in that place, there is no good or evil. There is no right or wrong. There is no need for conscience.

Isn't this a problem?



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 02:46 AM
link   
reply to post by applebiter
 


It's only a "problem" in the sense that you have unresolved questions, like a major 7th of a scale that hasn't resolved to the octave yet, if you can relate to that.

I went through the same thing. For a while I just went along, putting up with people and trying to create as little friction as possible for myself, all the while thinking that everything ultimately has absolutely no point behind it, that there is no objective "right" or "wrong" in any sense at all.

I can't tell you what exactly changed that or when, but I can tell you now that my ideals of "right" and "wrong" have more to do with harmony. I will offer you two fundamentally different points of view and then compare them to your body as an example. Many other examples exist in the universe that illustrate these two "poles," even in physics.


The first point of view is what is referred to as "service to self," and the second is "service to others." Before you assume that these views are just as arbitrary as any other, read along and bear with me.

When individuals only seek to ultimately serve themselves, they tend to become selfish, and along with that, egotistical, and thereby deluded, ultimately ignorant, and they become like a cancer or disease upon society in that they do not function harmoniously with others, in a way that is beneficial to all. They are not your Newtons, your Da Vincis, or your Platos. They naturally tend to prefer leaders that have similar values as themselves, and subsequently can cause great amounts of suffering by their apathy to death and destruction when their elected leaders begin wars, etc. Under this "philosophy" things eventually tend to break down into simpler parts and decay, like the concept of entropy in physics. Whether you think suffering is objectively "good" or "bad" or even meaningless, I bet you would writhe just the same if someone cut off your toe. You wouldn't want that to happen to you, and neither would most other people. But that isn't quite my comparison to your body yet.


When people make it their priority to first serve others, they see beyond themselves as the "end-all," even though they may only ever experience the world through their own personal senses. They want to be and feel as though they are part of something bigger than themselves, that requires them to put their own ego and personal desires aside for the greater good of both themselves and others. The technology you're using now, the Internet, for example, would not have come and did not come about through the efforts of one single person. It took a kind of harmony between many individuals to produce it, and without this harmony it would simply not exist. It took cooperation and a kind of "positive energy," and I doubt all the people who have corroborated on it actively fought or spited each other or anything irrational like that. It must have required a mild form of "love."

Each cell in your body, unless it is literally cancerous, works in conjunction with every other cell in your body to try to maintain your health, so that you, something much greater than the sum of each individual cell, can exist. They do this not by your command, but naturally, on their own. You are far more than what would otherwise equate to something like a mass of single-celled organisms. By comparison to that you are almost a god, at least a miracle, and you can do, sense, and realize things that would never otherwise be possible. Your body, and life in general, defies entropy in that it is a growing process of "coming together" rather than a mechanical process of "breaking down."


If you want to take it to another level, you will find yourself bonding with people that you love, but detaching and distancing yourself from people that you dislike. This is another excellent illustration of the same idea, that compassion and love unite things and build them up into something more, a relationship, while selfishness and ignorance tear things down into separateness. They are like Yin and Yang.


Which orientation you align yourself with may ultimately make no difference in the grand scheme of things, because everything has its place, but you may find your own place based on what you wish to experience here, since you have the choice.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 07:34 AM
link   
reply to post by bsbray11
 


Much thanks for taking the time to share those words with me. It rings very true to my ear. Someone told me that it never looks good on the way up. Like a baby reluctant to leave the womb, we are afraid until we start getting the hang of the outside world. Then it gets pretty interesting.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 06:15 PM
link   
Ah... a breakthrough, in linear terms. Neanderthal (with whom I can identify strongly) didn't use language to build a narrative about the self, as modern humans do. They weren't telepathic, they were concurrent. They weren't concerned about ornamentation, because external social cues were not necessary to them. They knew the self as distributed. Their brains were organized differently. They learned holistically, rather than in a linear fashion. It might take them time to learn concepts, and they mightn't gain understanding along a linear trajectory. They could be exposed to information, and then receive a shock that would cause the disparate pieces of information to congeal into a whole.

This must be what the catechism is about. The ritual that confers the degree must supply the shock that causes sudden integration. And the act of integration fires up the dormant wetware, which springs into consciousness and cause the woo-woo Wonderland effect of illumination that I know very well. Expanded identity. Indescribable pleasure. The knowledge that "I AM" more than this body, and that I cannot die.

This has to be true.



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by applebiter
This must be what the catechism is about. The ritual that confers the degree must supply the shock that causes sudden integration. And the act of integration fires up the dormant wetware, which springs into consciousness and cause the woo-woo Wonderland effect of illumination that I know very well.


Uhhh...while I can't speak for all masonry, I'm pretty confident in saying no to this. Memorizing the catechism is simply the traditional way of passing down the ritual, but not everyone thinks its the best way. I am pretty set against it, although I myself did it and will help others memorize it - only because I know rope memorization does nothing for me..nor does it do much for many people. I know quite a few men who have the ritual down to absolute perfection - word for word - and yet wouldn't be able to converse in basic masonic philosophy. Memorization does not equal understanding. I memorized the catechisms and gave them back almost perfectly, in fact I got a standing ovation, but the memorization didn't help me any.

The ritual experience is what most people will remember. I will remember the ritual not because I memorized it, but because I was a candidate. Also...I think you may be taking the whole "illumination" to far - light in masonry has a very specific meaning, and I doubt you'll find anyone whose done the degrees who claims just doing them and memorizing them makes them "illuminated" or "enlightened."


Originally posted by applebiter
Expanded identity. Indescribable pleasure. The knowledge that "I AM" more than this body, and that I cannot die.

This has to be true.


Definitely not for me, nor should it be for most masons who are careful not to make masonry a religion. The knowledge of God is through my religion, not through masonry. Also there is no.."indescribable pleasure" in masonry that I am aware of.

Remember, just because you say "this has to be true" does not mean it is true...



posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 06:55 PM
link   
reply to post by ALightinDarkness
 


Quite so.

And thank you.

[edit on 16-6-2008 by applebiter]



posted on Jun, 20 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
Try Godfrey Higgins' writings and the posts written by TheFetch.



posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by applebiter
 


I like languages. I like to study how phonetics vamp other languages over the different time periods, for example. The Lords Prayer. "OUR FATHER, WHO ART IN HEAVEN, HOLLOWED BE THY NAME".."Hara eret Ennuki El ben Nzi", "or my other favorite. " M I C, K E Y" "M O U S E" M-isis, Kufu i, ra-m-mes es. Mesus or Moses which means "Drawn Out". Funny when you think about it. It's Mic Moses who's litterly drawn out. Disney=NISSI.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
That's interesting stuff. I've just discovered that if one can push one's self out of the way, and really listen when people speak, one will find that the speaker is actually communicating more than one coherent message concurrently, and by way of metaphor - not phonemes. I imagine that deconstructing phonemes could also work, but I'm in awe that people can actually send coherent, multiplexed messages they aren't even aware they are carrying. Find someone with the gift of gab, and you'll have someone who can compose a communication fugue without knowing it. The really humbling part is that... the overlapping messages are of a scale and scope that would be nearly impossible to fake, if not impossible altogether.

There is so much still to learn.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu

Try Godfrey Higgins' writings and the posts written by TheFetch.





I agree with you, Tamahu. Without a doubt,The Fetch has got some of the best cutting edge work on the Net today. He just posted a new article on 666 and compares the number to being the primary message encoded into many of the primary games at the casino.


When you play "black jack", you may not go over 21, or you bust. 21 is the sum of 6, and a "jack" is also known as "He who has no name", which can then be channeled back to a definition of "God". A Jack is the 11'th card, and the sum of 1:11 is 66, and 6*6=36 and the sum of 1:36 is 666. Osiris, who is said to "black" is "the Black Jack", who, being dead, is greeted with a "21 gun salute", a salute done in 3 volley's of 7, revealing 777, itself an Occult cipher for 666.


Source - The Illuminatus Observor

Good to see someone else referencing Fetch in a post about language. No one on the net covers this aspect better.



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by coiledclue
 


Maybe someone could help a poor muggle out, here? I just took a peek at his website, and found a wash of words that looked like English but were somewhat indecipherable to me. My name is not Winston, and I cannot agree that 2 + 2 = 5.

What does this mean? I mean really? Does anyone understand this?

"...That the sum of 1:36 is 666.."

Huh?



posted on Jun, 26 2008 @ 09:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by applebiter
reply to post by coiledclue
 


Maybe someone could help a poor muggle out, here? I just took a peek at his website, and found a wash of words that looked like English but were somewhat indecipherable to me. My name is not Winston, and I cannot agree that 2 + 2 = 5.

What does this mean? I mean really? Does anyone understand this?

"...That the sum of 1:36 is 666.."

Huh?
Don't mind android1296 I mean luciferianx, or now, I suppose we have to call him coiledclue. If his history is any proof, he'll get himself banned again soon enough.

And no, it obviously doesn't make any sense.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 02:13 AM
link   

"...That the sum of 1:36 is 666..Originally posted by applebiter "

Huh?



Don't mind android1296 I mean luciferianx, or now, I suppose we have to call him coiledclue. If his history is any proof, he'll get himself banned again soon enough.

And no, it obviously doesn't make any sense. - Josh Norton





Now in the Tarot the Trump illustrating this letter Sh is and old form of the Stele of Revealing, Nuith with Shu and Seb, the pantacle or magical picture of the old Aeon, as Nuit with Hadit and Ra Hoor Khuit is of the new. The number of this Trump is XX. It is called the Angel, the messenger from Heaven of the new Word. The Trump giving the picture of T is called Strength. It shows the Scarlet Woman, BABALON, riding (or conjoined with) me The Beast ; and this card is my special card, for I am Baphomet, "the Lion and the Serpent," and 666, the "full number" of the Sun. (The "magical numbers" of the Sun are, according to tradition, 6, (6 x 6)=36, (666 / 111, and [epsilon] (1-36)=666.)



It does not make sense and yet this is a Secret Society forum and the primary permitted posters are not even intelligent or knowledgeable enough to even KNOW that 6, 66, 666, and 1:36=666 is a primary code within the Initiated Order higher learning cells.

lol..pathetic to watch people spit to spit on others when your collective ignorance is so contemptible as to be spit upon yourselves.

Do you wonder why people in the Occult tend to have a rather contemptible mentality towards the sheep.

1:36=666 makes perfect sense.

Fetch gets it. You - however - clearly do not.



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 12:02 PM
link   
reply to post by JoshNorton
 


Oh, I got hung up on notation. I read that as "the sum of the ratio of 1 to 36 is 666", which, of course, is nonsense. If you read it as "the sum of all the numbers from 1 to 36 is 666", then it is accurate.

On the other hand, I do not understand what this has to do with the Biblical 666, or anything else for that matter.

[edit on 28-6-2008 by applebiter]



posted on Jun, 28 2008 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS

Now in the Tarot the Trump illustrating this letter Sh is and old form of the Stele of Revealing, Nuith with Shu and Seb, the pantacle or magical picture of the old Aeon, as Nuit with Hadit and Ra Hoor Khuit is of the new. The number of this Trump is XX. It is called the Angel, the messenger from Heaven of the new Word. The Trump giving the picture of T is called Strength. It shows the Scarlet Woman, BABALON, riding (or conjoined with) me The Beast ; and this card is my special card, for I am Baphomet, "the Lion and the Serpent," and 666, the "full number" of the Sun. (The "magical numbers" of the Sun are, according to tradition, 6, (6 x 6)=36, (666 / 111, and [epsilon] (1-36)=666.)


It does not make sense and yet this is a Secret Society forum and the primary permitted posters are not even intelligent or knowledgeable enough to even KNOW that 6, 66, 666, and 1:36=666 is a primary code within the Initiated Order higher learning cells.

Amazing they haven't banned your IP number yet, dude. First, I'm going to call you on the carpet for not citing your external source. Shame on you.

But since you're going with the Aeon = XX interpretation, you're using Crowley's Thoth deck, as opposed to Waite's more traditional Judgement = XX. Fine, we can play that way too. Sure, Crowley called himself the great beast, and said his mark was 666, etc. He was just trying to get attention and piss people off. (It generally worked...) That's about as occult as it gets. 666 has no sinister Kabbalah meaning.; it's not used in ritual or by any self-respecting occultist that I've met. The only power it holds is that which Christians give it in the New Testament. An even then, it's quite likely a typo. There's loads of evidence that the number in Revelations was originally 616, and the King James translation screwed it up along the way.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join