The purpose after full comprehension of itself?

[SanteriSatama]

Lou, as a child, have you also been on the dodgeball team? You seem pretty good at it. Seriously, I'm running out of tricks here I keep trying to lead the conversation to the crux of the matter, you keep pulling ace-grade evasive maneuvers I'm still unsure if you do this on purpose or if there's really a chance to bring that to attention - that's why I keep trying .

Good observation. There are layers beneath layers, and what really is the crux of the matter is what and how we attend both consciously and subconsciously, on purpose and instinctively. That's all part of how we nurture and shape each others paths.

The limitations of language and thought are not fixed, and they stretch along as elemental transformations take place. Ability to comprehend and speak more clearly follows the elemental transformations, which give the ability to see the path so far in a new light, forming a spiral-like cycle of a sort. Abstract symbols are not the real stuff of concrete elemental processes, symbols are related in the way of hungry curiosity. Which killed the proverbial cat.

Lou: You're doing it wrong! You're not surrendering in the right way.
People: What do you mean? We do exactly as you said - we surrender and accept whatever happens.
Lou: No, no. You should only surrender to what is good and leads to balance
People: What good? We thought there's no good or bad? We are in the middle of all, in perfect balance and surrender.
Lou: No, you're not! You are not in balance. You are surrendering to your will and not to the Divine Will. You are mixing them up!
People: But then how do we tell the difference?
Lou: The Divine Will is good for all.
People: But then we are giving priority to 'good'! We thought that this is dangerously biased! Both good and bad have equal rights to exist.
Lou: No, no. It's not that simple. There is 'good' and 'bad' that should be in balance and this in itself is 'Good'. Balance betwee 'good' and 'bad' is 'Good', disbalance between 'good' and 'bad' is 'Bad'.
People: So we have to go one-sidedly towards 'Good' after all?
Lou: Well, yes... No... Yes... I mean ... 'Good' and 'Bad' must also be in balance.
People: So we should have balance between balance and disbalance of 'good' and 'bad'?
Lou: Yes!
People: But isn't this exactly what we are doing? Some of us destroy the balance, some keep it?
Lou: Yes, exactly! But you're not doing it in a balanced way! Half should be keeping it, half should be destroying it.
People: Now we get it! But how do we decide who should keep it and who should destroy it?
Lou: Surrender to the choiceless-choice!
People: But that was what we were doing all along, remember?
Lou: Yes, but you are doing it wrong!
People: Wait a minute! Are you telling us that we are somehow in a lower position than you? That you're doing it right because you are properly developed and we're doing it wrong because we are less developed?
Lou: No, no. We are all differently developed but it's all good. I'm just telling you that you are mixing up your will with Divine Will.
People: Which returns us to the question: how do we distinguish? We hear both voices - some tell us to destroy the balance, some tell us to keep it. Which is which?

Excellent!

[Cleric K]

A bit more Shu,

You ask, "And the question is still unsettled. How to do the good without giving preference to the good?" My response is that you compassionately feed both wolves and allow the process to work its mysterious ways through natural phases.

Thanks Shu, (I take it this is how everyone is called now - the Egyptian analog of 'bro' )

But, yes, I abound with contradictions and share them. This is a whole other conversation, one about the path of heart, that I may be sharing in the future but not now while I'm in process.

Got it. This helps me know how to talk with you, what should I try to explain and what should stay open-ended

It may be that all music of the corporeal realm is a 'transcription' of the so-called 'music of the spheres' ~ indeed, is it Mozart I recall saying this of how his music was inspired and composed? And as lovely as some insect or bird songs may be, its human expression has vastly surpassed it in complexity. One wonders 'Who' is really listening?

I won't get into the human vs Nature music topic but would like to share that on a walk through the hills and fields yesterday I was also enjoying the musical accompanying of this little fellow. BTW I find the app BirdNet very useful (available for Android and iOS). It allows recording bird sounds with the phone and identifies the species (much like Shazam for music). It works surprisingly well.

Other than that, music really is unique in its 'vertical integration'. This is the true mission of all arts but, for example, in the visual arts there's a more or less orthogonal relation between the purely sensory and the soul experience. One still needs to read the artistic forms (much in the sense in the previous post about the occult script) and experience the domain of spiritual experience/feeling/idea that the artists has condensed into the forms. Music is unique because in certain sense it forces us in the gradient between the higher script and the purely sensory perception of tone. Of course, it is up to the listener's abilities to read the music sufficiently deeply but still, everyone experiences to some extent something of the higher order wholeness which unites the separate sounds into a holistic being. Music is one of the most suitable languages for speak of the hidden 'geometry' of reality. It allows to speak almost directly and not metaphorically about the hierarchical integrative process of being. Very exciting topic with lots of revelations.

Here's one more Shepard Tone and mind bending fractal

[Cleric K]

Very good intro to Magic Eye for those unfamiliar:

[SanteriSatama]

First, to clear out the authority and control stuff. It is true that it is possible to use these things as control mechanism but they are very distinguishable from a genuine esoteric path. In the latter everything that is being done increases freedom and understanding - what you call - deconstructing limiting conditionings and thought patterns. In the former case there's a clear undertone of 'take it as it is, no questions asked'.

The aspect of control and anarchy if far from simple, it is delicate to the extreme and outmost important. How we shape each other into good anarchists who can both do their chosen purpose and give space to other purposes naturally involves also various forms of control. What we can never afford to do is to think and believe that we are ready and complete in that respect and brush of conscience. Yes, as the word says it's a science, and the self-correcting aspect of science has no end. Sharing a meditation as plain and open to interpretation is a form of self-control of giving and keeping space. Space for the something else than mechanisms and phenomena of authoritarian following and various forms of guru-business.

It's not accidental that I used the comparison to reading above. In reality, objects for meditation have deep relation to reading, although on a higher level.

You hear well here the non-accident . English has major terminological handicap in this respect, as it has only one word 'number' for the whole range of complexity involved. In my language loan word 'numero' refers to the numeric signs that can be written, but instead of "number theory" we have 'lukuteoria' for the math concept. Luku is an ancient word which means reading, not only letters and numbers but also various other signs and tracks, as well as uttering an incantation, a rune, a spell etc. words of confidence (loitsu, luote). In the noun form the word 'luku' refers to two-way process. Greek word for reading is anagnosis. The iterative ana- carries similar meaning of two-way process of gnosis and logos, and the meaning of re-membering, how we embody both the medicine and and poison aspects of farmakon of writing-reading. Which returns to the ethical complexities of anarchy and control, of good proportion and right dosage, so that on some level of holistic reading, we can benefit from the art and enjoy more medicine and less poison and keep learning and improving.

A friend of mine once said that "Symbols are from the ass". A good exercise is to interpret that in more than one way, and not to attach and fixate to any single interpretation. .

[Soul_of_Shu]

A bit more Shu,

You ask, "And the question is still unsettled. How to do the good without giving preference to the good?" My response is that you compassionately feed both wolves and allow the process to work its mysterious ways through natural phases.

Cleric responds: Thanks Shu, (I take it this is how everyone is called now - the Egyptian analog of 'bro' )

@Cleric ... Well, I'd prefer that youz guyz stick with 'bro' as the generic male-bonding moniker, since I'm already bemused enough by being misquoted (which, btw, has been corrected in Lou's next to last post on the previous page intended to be addressed to you)

[Soul_of_Shu]

It may be that all music of the corporeal realm is a 'transcription' of the so-called 'music of the spheres' ~ indeed, is it Mozart I recall saying this of how his music was inspired and composed? And as lovely as some insect or bird songs may be, its human expression has vastly surpassed it in complexity. One wonders 'Who' is really listening?

Other than that, music really is unique in its 'vertical integration'. This is the true mission of all arts but, for example, in the visual arts there's a more or less orthogonal relation between the purely sensory and the soul experience. One still needs to read the artistic forms (much in the sense in the previous post about the occult script) and experience the domain of spiritual experience/feeling/idea that the artists has condensed into the forms. Music is unique because in certain sense it forces us in the gradient between the higher script and the purely sensory perception of tone. Of course, it is up to the listener's abilities to read the music sufficiently deeply but still, everyone experiences to some extent something of the higher order wholeness which unites the separate sounds into a holistic being. Music is one of the most suitable languages for speak of the hidden 'geometry' of reality. It allows to speak almost directly and not metaphorically about the hierarchical integrative process of being. Very exciting topic with lots of revelations.

Here's one more Shepard Tone and mind bending fractal

Thanks Cleric for that elaboration on what I was attempting to get at, without quite having your analytical skill set.

[Cleric K]

What we can never afford to do is to think and believe that we are ready and complete in that respect and brush of conscience. Yes, as the word says it's a science, and the self-correcting aspect of science has no end.

Absolutely!

A friend of mine once said that "Symbols are from the ass". A good exercise is to interpret that in more than one way, and not to attach and fixate to any single interpretation.

Exercise - yes. The ability to see potential and not only concrete manifestation is crucial. That's a good example of knowing how to use polarities together. To understand each other here we should constantly strive to widen the perimeter of our ideas, as to include the perspective of the other. This is the circle, the periphery, multiplicity. Yet we gain nothing if we only stay there. Once we encompass the space of possibilities we should concentrate at the center, the concrete, the precise idea that our correspondent has in mind. This is not always easy - especially in a philosophical discourse. Sometimes we simply can't widen enough our horizon such that we intersect the domain of the ideas that our correspondent is projecting. Or we may be encompassing them as a possibility but because of specific predispositions of our organization, we see the center in the wrong place. Every such expansion and contraction is not only an exchange of ideas but at the same time intimate learning process for ourselves. Every success or failure to comprehend what we are being communicated, is a private lesson contributing to the never ending self-correcting aspect. Interestingly, when we experience things in this way we receive much more joy in communication. Not only we are doing the primary goal - to communicate, not only we are learning and improving in the process but it's also a joyous process. And this joy we receive even if we comprehend ideal perspectives that don't integrate well with our own holistic process. The joy comes from the experience of slight consciousness expansion. Every act of communication with another soul, even if we don't share the view, gives us the conditions to experience an 'altered' state, to expand our palette of experiential chords and seek for the next level of unity.

[SanteriSatama]

Once we encompass the space of possibilities we should concentrate at the center, the concrete, the precise idea that our correspondent has in mind. This is not always easy - especially in a philosophical discourse. Sometimes we simply can't widen enough our horizon such that we intersect the domain of the ideas that our correspondent is projecting. Or we may be encompassing them as a possibility but because of specific predispositions of our organization, we see the center in the wrong place.

Well, gravity and centrifugal forces (such as light) are complementary. When centered in the Heart we are not in the wrong place, as through that center we can observe decentralized distribution of centers in each.

Your question "How many centers / how big center" was to the point, but to the wrong point, as the frame of quantification and size are in a way misleading. You being the center of the world does not imply that others are not. More important and difficult question is whether and when a center is open or close.

[Lou Gold]

Cleric,

People: Which returns us to the question: how do we distinguish? We hear both voices - some tell us to destroy the balance, some tell us to keep it. Which is which?

Really interesting how you receive or represent my dialog because I really don't feel I can judge another's process and, yet, it seems I come across that way for you. I'll surely contemplate it.

My position has two parts general and personal to me. (1) The general is that everything manifests along with its opposite -- good/evil, joy/pain, etc/etc is how it works and to be real one tries to see or metaphorically 'feed' both wolves. (2) My personal way stresses "Be calm - Be clear - See the faults - See the suffering - Give your love" and in following this I rise, fall and bounce about a lot with as much trust as I can call forth. 3) I can't tell another how it works for them but can only say how it goes for me. 4) I react against lingo that says, "When you see this or that you realize this or that, as I often don't experience it in that fashion. So I ask for the personal pronoun and the report of one's own direct 'I' experience. In my experience it's often more important to get down into my gut feeling than to rise into a higher vibration. I like Orwell's statement, “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.” I agree. 5) I distrust the ascent bias of "work ethic" achievement culture. I trust play more than ambition. I see the child as the most magical. I believe love does not have to be earned but is entitled as a birthright by all. 6) In actual life, my activist creds are strong and I often find most meaning in being still. 6) Finally, and this is what I suspect might hook you is that it is an aspect of my nature to highlight contradictions (heyoka style) and this results in your offered storyline, which I appreciate.

I'm more limited than I think
and
I'm more free than I thought.

[Soul_of_Shu]

Lou ... Once again you seem to be attributing quotes to Shu that Shu did not write.