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.

 

Saw this in my dream, please help me figure it out

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 06:32 AM
link   
I had a dream recently, and boy was it strange. Im not going to go into what happened during the dream, but this image was repeatedly flashed to me:




I have never seen it before in my life, which is why the image appearing in my dreams is even more odd.

Everytime the image came up, somebody in the dream would say symbol(or cymbal, i wasn't sure).

My mind kept connecting it to Cymbal, but i play music so that might have been why. Im sure the people in my dream meant symbol though.

It says its from the Book of Murdok.

Does anyone know what this symbol means? Where it came from?




posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Basically....

Bear through this video - it should be very informative to what you have experienced.

I am not big into theology, I can't help you analyze it on those levels - but I see that symbol as sacred (ancient/present) geometry.

Reminds me of the star of David - Which I like to call the star of Divide - because it also symbolizes patriarch and matriarch / left brain joining right brain / solar + lunar --- Sword and chalice. I think this is only the most basic definition of this symbol though.


edit on 27-8-2011 by ThinkingCap because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 06:56 AM
link   
I assume that you DID read that Book of Marduk, right?



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 07:18 AM
link   
reply to post by demonseed
 


If I am clear that you are ONLY asking about the symbol on the cover and not about Marduk or the tablets, then it is the following......

A sigil: This specific one was created by Sarah Banas.

Sigils are visual focii; as such, they make use of the
eyes and the brain to make their impact.

A way to bypass the conscious mind, as all the
thinking is done during its construction, not
its use

Sigils are a door to the unconscious; most reactions to
artistic principles happen on a subconscious level.


Now I have to ask if you had never seen this symbol, how did you find it on the internet????

edit on 27-8-2011 by MRSeuphoric1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 07:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by demonseed
I had a dream recently, and boy was it strange. Im not going to go into what happened during the dream, but this image was repeatedly flashed to me:




I have never seen it before in my life, which is why the image appearing in my dreams is even more odd.

Everytime the image came up, somebody in the dream would say symbol(or cymbal, i wasn't sure).

My mind kept connecting it to Cymbal, but i play music so that might have been why. Im sure the people in my dream meant symbol though.

It says its from the Book of Murdok.

Does anyone know what this symbol means? Where it came from?



Okay. So, you have never seen this image before, and yet, you went out on Google (I'm assuming) and found it on the web after waking up from a dream where it was right there and (obviously quite clearly) presenting itself in this exact manner. And this is exactly the imagine that you saw in your dream.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that you'd like me to take a good look at this book and to spend some time with whatever the hell it states as being critical for me to know. Maybe I'm psychic, but that intuitive impression just flashed across my mind as I read your opening post.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by ThinkingCap
 


I'm always fascinated by the intense amount of explanation offered concerning the shapes and their significance, but the complete lack of concern over the primordial nature of "spirit" or why "spirit" is compelled to do what "spirit" does. What's the imperative that this "spirit" is serving? What is being served by the existence of "spirit"? Reality is real, and if a notion wants to be embraced as reality, then it has to deal with the very same issues that all real things deal with.

I like how the "spirit" doesn't physically exist, and yet it chooses to physically affect something else that doesn't physically exist. As if a physical lack of existence can physically impact a literal void. That one small reality glitch causes the whole "spirit created the 1st circle" idea to fall flat on its...well, whatever it has to fall flat on, I guess.

I accept the concept of redundant patterns within the structure of residual information, and how these patterns collect to build progressive development within the corporeal realm, but at some point we have to throw away the cartoon allegories and deal with the nuts and bolts of what's real beneath all of this.



posted on Aug, 27 2011 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 

I am interested in the points you brought up, and I have a few questions to add, so I'm going to jump in here a bit if that's alright? (At least until the OP comes back to clarify things a bit more)


Originally posted by NorEaster

I'm always fascinated by the intense amount of explanation offered concerning the shapes and their significance, but the complete lack of concern over the primordial nature of "spirit" or why "spirit" is compelled to do what "spirit" does. What's the imperative that this "spirit" is serving? What is being served by the existence of "spirit"? Reality is real, and if a notion wants to be embraced as reality, then it has to deal with the very same issues that all real things deal with.

In a way, I think that those sacred geometry shapes and their inter-relations are the building blocks of a spiritual and physical 'experience'. They are a blue-print to what could be possible.
Maybe we can never know the true nature of things. Take a binary code representation of a full operating system, one would need to be higher up the hierarchy ladder in order to understand a small portion's full significance.

As to why spirit is compelled to act the way it does: What if we had the ability to go back in time to when we were born so that we could re-learn everything we knew, and even more? At the end of my life, I might want to do it in order to push myself harder the 'next' time around. Couldn't that be the compelling nature of the spirit-actions?

In that case, if you take the thought way out of the box, then perhaps the OP could have written that book in a past-life, and his dreams are asking him to re-learn it in a new way? To push himself further this time around and add to the knowledge? Although, conversely, it might be telling him to stay clear of the topic completely.


Originally posted by NorEaster

I accept the concept of redundant patterns within the structure of residual information, and how these patterns collect to build progressive development within the corporeal realm, but at some point we have to throw away the cartoon allegories and deal with the nuts and bolts of what's real beneath all of this.


I completely agree with you, and well said. The thing that I find difficultly with, is actually dealing with the nuts and bolts themselves. There are always multiple reasons for why things happen the way they do.

There could be hundred's of possible reasons why he saw that image. How can one work their way backwards to the source if the path's are all intertwined? Sometimes, i think life that would not be as amazing if I didn't ponder these things. Maybe that is the true nature of the underlying reason?
I dunno, as I said, just interested in hearing your views if I understood your post correctly



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 01:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by MRSeuphoric1
reply to post by demonseed
 




Now I have to ask if you had never seen this symbol, how did you find it on the internet????

edit on 27-8-2011 by MRSeuphoric1 because: (no reason given)


That is another weird thing that i forgot to mention.

I was looking at Sumerian Idols, just for fun. Then i saw in one of the images this symbol and realized i found it.



posted on Aug, 28 2011 @ 09:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by dyllels
reply to post by NorEaster
 

I am interested in the points you brought up, and I have a few questions to add, so I'm going to jump in here a bit if that's alright? (At least until the OP comes back to clarify things a bit more)


I like how you launched this response. Thank you for your good example here.



Originally posted by NorEaster

I'm always fascinated by the intense amount of explanation offered concerning the shapes and their significance, but the complete lack of concern over the primordial nature of "spirit" or why "spirit" is compelled to do what "spirit" does. What's the imperative that this "spirit" is serving? What is being served by the existence of "spirit"? Reality is real, and if a notion wants to be embraced as reality, then it has to deal with the very same issues that all real things deal with.

In a way, I think that those sacred geometry shapes and their inter-relations are the building blocks of a spiritual and physical 'experience'. They are a blue-print to what could be possible.
Maybe we can never know the true nature of things. Take a binary code representation of a full operating system, one would need to be higher up the hierarchy ladder in order to understand a small portion's full significance.

As to why spirit is compelled to act the way it does: What if we had the ability to go back in time to when we were born so that we could re-learn everything we knew, and even more? At the end of my life, I might want to do it in order to push myself harder the 'next' time around. Couldn't that be the compelling nature of the spirit-actions?


If you assume that "spirit" has conscious thought, then sure, this is certainly plausible. However, conscious thought is not primordial. It's an epitome expression of the highest capacity for physical existence. It's overwhelmingly complex and sophisticated - well, unless being a rock is far more developed and sophisticated a material accomplishment than being a human being, but then I'm going to suggest that being a fully cognizant human being is far more of a corporeal organizational accomplishment, and that human conscious awareness is a much more sophisticated level of informational expression than what may or may not be authored by a rock as it sits in a field.

I understand the notion of a primordial consciousness, but for a host of empirical and logical reasons, I'm completely unable to embrace such a notion. The nature of conscious awareness is much too complex and sophisticated for consciousness to be a primordial existential expression. In a person's philosophy, anything is possible. But, when you start having to detail the "nuts and bolts" of how things have emerged - or can possibly emerge - into dependable and consistent existence, philosophies begin to constrict aggressively, and they tend to conform to the sorts of things that have proven themselves, time and time again, to be dependable and consistently real.

I'm not a philosopher. I've considered myself a metaphysicist (although some here have their own opinion concerning the applicable definition of that term) and work within a much more restricted field of plausibility as a result. The plausible must dovetail perfectly with the well established, even if only by way of responsible extrapolation until further information is revealed. A fully disconnected premise doesn't fulfill that requirement, and until it can be responsibly connected to everything that's been well-established as constant and reliably available, I simply can't embrace it. My "science" includes much more than the material, but not more than can be successful associated with what has become commonplace and foundational.


In that case, if you take the thought way out of the box, then perhaps the OP could have written that book in a past-life, and his dreams are asking him to re-learn it in a new way? To push himself further this time around and add to the knowledge? Although, conversely, it might be telling him to stay clear of the topic completely.


The topic is fine, but to challenge him on the veracity of his claim is fine too. If I post a topic that suggests that humanity is a means to an end, but only in this specific situation that we find ourself in, then I'm welcoming challenges to that suggestion. Hell, it's quite a suggestion, and if I post that topic, I'm prepared to explain how it is that I've come to that notion. If I launch a thread that states that I just had a supernatural experience, then I'm prepared to detail that experience in response to those who will gather to suggest that I'm either making stuff up or have misunderstood a perfectly natural event as being supernatural in nature.

I found the extreme specificity of his claim to be very similar to the claims of others that I've run into - on other boards, as well as on this board - who were eventually proven to be steering people toward a specific book or website, where further information awaits them. It's called marketing, and these forums are hotbeds of that sort of thing. If that's what's up here, then fine. But, that doesn't mean that I can't challenge it in a subtle, or even not so subtle, manner.



Originally posted by NorEaster

I accept the concept of redundant patterns within the structure of residual information, and how these patterns collect to build progressive development within the corporeal realm, but at some point we have to throw away the cartoon allegories and deal with the nuts and bolts of what's real beneath all of this.


I completely agree with you, and well said. The thing that I find difficultly with, is actually dealing with the nuts and bolts themselves. There are always multiple reasons for why things happen the way they do.



Actually, then you get down to the nuts and bolts of things, the reasons why become very limited. When you take those few reasons down to their nuts and bolts level, the source of the impetus reduces to one. And that's the nature of reality. Each thing that happens - each event to its own source - occurs as a result of one cause. This is what's real. The notion that "it could've been anything" isn't true, and is just intellectual inertia in full display. There aren't "always multiple reasons why things happen the way they do." Each event has its initiation. Each event is unique, even if they can be connected together within a larger trajectory suite. Again, there is a fundamental real, and all that exists adheres to that fundamental real, even as it all contributes to that real and further defines it.


There could be hundred's of possible reasons why he saw that image. How can one work their way backwards to the source if the path's are all intertwined?


Actually, the suggestion I made had nothing to do with why he "saw that image". The suggestion I made had to do with why he launched a thread claiming to have seen that image. It's a subtle difference, but not a insignificant difference. Not as many intertwining paths there. One easy to determine cause for that event.


Sometimes, i think life that would not be as amazing if I didn't ponder these things. Maybe that is the true nature of the underlying reason?


Maybe it is, and maybe my reason for challenging these things is broadly aligned with your reason for ponder these things? I want to learn from people, and challenging their assertions is a way to get deeper into the full nature of what they are asserting. I love being challenged. It helps me dig deep into whatever it is that I've decided to embrace, and it has happened (the 9/11 conspiracy controversy and the Christian narrative enigma are two such examples in my own life) that I've been forced to reconsider my views and even deal with a wholesale revision of my own view on the subject. Imagine having to completely rethink something as foundational as your belief in the Christian gospel narrative. If you think that accepting it as being debunked was easy, then you weren't raised a Christian.

The 9/11 conspiracy issue was nothing compared to having to accept that Jesus was a Greek/Hebrew allegorical character that the Romans hijacked for their own empire-uniting religion's purposes. It still hurts to have to challenge that beautiful allegory when it is offered as evidence against a truthful premise. I miss Jesus as a human being who was crucified and who died for my sins. I wish it had been true, and had survived the examination of historical/logical veracity.


I dunno, as I said, just interested in hearing your views if I understood your post correctly


These are my views on that OP - relatively speaking. And, to whether you understood my post, it's hard to say. I suppose that you probably did. Then again, what often happens here is that a response is tailored to suggest that the post being responded to somehow missed the point that it was, itself, responding to. Just so that we're clear, I was challenging the OP's stated premise that he actually saw that image in his dream, and had never seen that image before seeing it in his dream and, immediately upon finding it on the Internet, not being able to understanding what it means, and subsequently posting it here for someone to help him understand what it means.

One glaring issue is the fact that if he found that image, then he could've found page after page of associated text concerning what that image means. And if he really wanted to know what that image means, he would've simply read what those pages contained, instead of asserting in this thread that what it is, is a complete mystery to him. Hell, he found the image. How do you find such an obscure image if you don't know the name of the image or (at least) relevant information about that image? I've used Google many times, and it doesn't work if you draw a picture and upload it into the search engine. You have to know the specific term - or at least terms that will bring you into the neighborhood.

Then, once you've found the image, that image has a name or a term attached to it. From there, it's one step to learning virtually everything you ever wanted to know about that image. It's not like finding it scrawled on the wall of an ancient catacomb, and then having to piece it all together over 90 minutes while foreign spies are trying to kill you and your beautiful (but equally mysterious) bombshell sidekick that you just scored in a wine bar in Brussels during the opening scenes. These days, you just click on the photo and then click "Remove Frame", and ta da, all you ever needed to know about that enigmatic image.

Maybe I'm too logical, but the whole premise seemed contrived, and I simply decided to challenge it. If I post something sketchy, then by all means challenge me on it. I welcome challenges.

edit on 8/28/2011 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 30 2011 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by NorEaster
 


Thanks for that great response. You really helped me push the boundaries with some of my thoughts on his matter. Whenever I think that I am coming to terms with my "reality-theories", I am presented with things from a completely different angle and I'm left pondering for days.

Always like hearing things from your perspective, so thanks NorEaster. Now I've just got to wait for my brain-dust to settle, so that I can reboot.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join