Wow is PI the name of God?

a reply to: Itisnowagain

Yeah. I got that impression before.

Names and labels imply 'things'. But what is there really?
Here and now there may seem as if there is a 'you' seeing 'what there is to be seen' - that makes two. But really there is not two. Two is an illusion.
What there is is what there is.
Without the 'seeing and knowing' there is nothing 'appearing'
God is seeing and knowing. God is non conceptual - not a word. All concepts arise within the non conceptual and are made of the non conceptual.
The non conceptual is not a thing but can appear as words/concepts.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

It is a chain something that can bind us all together or tear us all apart. Thats what a name or label is; it is a very powerful thing that often gets used and abused for just that very reason. It can bind ourselves to something or someone in the recognition of it in attachment; but that comes from the feelings of the entire mass one of trust, something that feels right on the whole mass of experience up to that point.

Of course such a thing comes with great responsibility; having so very much power... Body, speech, and mind all three of those are a generation of force and power, so controlling all three of those domains becomes mastery of the vehicle, it's out put, and course. Of course others will want to harness that for themselves in others for some intent; such a thing is control... it only exists because of the power of words that others have formed attachments too.

Santa Claus etc may not be real as a tangible entity just what one would call "the Christmas Spirit" but as a concept it holds just as much power as a natural force, when set into motion as one when people embody it... when such things are embodied then that might as well be said as existent... of course the danger is in how such things get embodied. None of the concepts may be real; but the effects of those embodying it? Very real... even if it does not represent it accurately at all... such as the concept of "love" when people embody it or say it... relative in it's expression by what someone percieves that to be. That is where personality arises in that embodiment of whatever it is one is expressing through a so called self.

The ego or mind; holds a ton of these attachments as an expression of a "self" when obviously it is just ideas of that expressing through them called a self; so of course? Pressing such things onto others is like pen territory or real-estate how many times have you heard "indoctrinate" in politics? It is people and groups vying for that influence or power; and those jealous that they may be swayed in some way other than where they want them to go... so freewill? In such a manner it may seem like there is no choice, but when realizing there is no self just an expression of energies? Then freewill becomes apparent. That will not put a halt to mob mentality anywhere except in oneself... as when the ego self or mind dies? All there is is simply the all.

But until such a state is realized in non-attachment; then names and words are going to have power to control; flowing right on through as energy itsef; of course one can embody many energies feel those personalities coursing through them and in such a manner what self? It is lost going through everything that has no self just the same or has realized such to some degree. Some personalities of course; one may find abrasive and unwelcome... simply because of the energy they embody is too unpleasant like that of hungry ghosts/hell beings or basically the overly attached to one facet of life in an expression of obsession. When there are far more facets to living than one taste... seeing life is suffering as one taste was the kick in the pants to say well if there is another taste after looking at all of this? Lets have it; and well that's all anyone has ever pointed too from realization he other flavor always there always present just the same.

But that's how name and labels get, keep, and have the power that they do as they are formation to ideological realities either formed by an individual as a self or in total as some group... it is like a river with several different currents; when the goal is to cross? Any one of them can sweep you away.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

There is some interesting math behind "The Song of Deborah" in the bible.
Secret places you can find Sangaku such as Soddy's hexlet where you can talk to people like Jimi Hendrix.

a reply to: Itisnowagain

That happens on the other side of the glass door..

a reply to: Cauliflower

I rather enjoy the Japanese concept that a base or number line; isn't really a line, line... but instead an infinite radius.

a reply to: BigBrotherDarkness

I don't think anyone's yet proven that a straight line is straight or that parallel lines never intersect.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

By definition, both are trusims. Actually.
Both are mathematical constructs.

a reply to: Phage

I'm thinking of Cartesian lines running in actual reality, where some say that the shape of the universe may cause parallel lines to intersect, in which case a straight line isn't absolutely straight but curved by the boundaries of spacetime. Flat might be the one thing that's absolutely impossible, making it yes, nothing but a construct. That's strangely funny in a way that I can't quite put my finger on.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

I'm thinking of Cartesian lines running in actual reality,

Then you are off on the wrong foot. Cartesian lines are infinite yet infinity is undefined.

It is assumed that if a line is infinite... take it from there. The thing is, as far as Cartesian geometry is concerned, it works.

originally posted by: AnkhMorpork

originally posted by: namelesss

originally posted by: anonentity
Wow is PI the name of God?

The Original name of God, basically is an equation.

Absolute nonsense!
You sound like the Jehovah Witnesses claiming that they, alone, know God's 'name' by which he responds.
What ignorant vanity!
God, being Omni-, One, is all inclusive!
That means that every 'name' is God's name!
Every hand is God's hand!
Every eye is God's eye!

It was very simply stated when Moses asked God's name, he was not given one (preventing idolatry and ignorance);
"I Am that I Am!
We Are that We Are!"

Not anything exists that is not God!
To say that 'this is', and 'that isn't' God('s), is just ignorance and shortsightedness and vanity.

He was just describing the content of the video referenced in the OP, nothing more.

Everyone jumps when they see the word God with their own strong bias.

Just watch the video and then you'll be up to speed on what we're really talking about here, which is a very very fascinating puzzle.

If this is the subject;
"The Original name of God, basically is an equation. When the name of God is taken from the original Hebrew, its an equation. Which can be calculated and the conclusions of the calculation is mind blowing.",
I really don't need to see it to respond, as I did.
Those assertions are enough to focus my response.

Couldn't watch it (1/2hr!?!?), subtitles/captions were crap.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork


Do dimensions actually exist? because you have dimensions in dreams. Or do we just perceive dimensions to make sense of things. Since no one can prove reality isn't a lucid dream, the whole foundations of our perceived reality could be up for deeper analysis.

a reply to: anonentity

So, you're into solipsism.
I think it's pointless, actually.

There is no light at the end of this tunnel.

a reply to: anonentity

It's possible, anything is.

We could all be upside down pygmies seeing the world as we think it is rather than the way it actually is.

That would suck wouldn't it, i mean finding out your an upside down pygmy holy crap!

a reply to: Phage


I thought you were one for proof, when actually their is none.

a reply to: AnkhMorpork

The infinity of the radius after whatever geometry is met wraps back around and encapsulates it... that's sort of the point I was getting at; in such a manner it becomes a conceptual bubble or sphere of thought as a form... whether it carries any function? Bepends on what is inside the bubble or sphere... of course then like a black hole it can suck one in as a matter of focus in an all consuming sort of way until *pop* and on about your way, however a fragment of it is left inside like a packet of data to be retrived at some point; of course like a photo the more it is retrieved or handled the more the edges are going to wear and the original changes the more data insertions are made retrieving and extracting the data... of course that means more real estate and time or energy being consumed, with each contact in the attachment to whatever that may be, even if one does not care for whatever it is; that is still an attachment and an exchange of energy.

Eh, thought forms no big deal... a puff of smoke in the wind

a reply to: anonentity

Best thought of as a variable of spatial density even formlessness carries such a thing, called awareness... even if there is nothing that could be consciously perceived; awareness is always present.

edit to add: How much one wants to temporaly distribute to any given subject is only a matter relative to time in which one wants to devote to some occuring phenomena as a point of focus.