On 16 Feb, 15:45, ornamentalmind <[email protected]> wrote: > The relative mind understands reality using 3 methods…one of which is > analogy. So Pat, your associations are just that. >
Yup. I've no problem with that. I even used the word 'analogous' in what I wrote. And the word 'relates'. Simply because they are analogous, though, I find interesting. Especially in light of the concept that God uses 'The Word' to create reality. Although saying they are 'just that' could be taken as derogatory (I will refuse to take it that way), I perfectly realise that that they ARE analogies. Whether or not they are ONLY analogies, well, that may take a very in- depth analysis of the Qur'an on a gematric level. And THAT will take a few experts and a few years. Remember, we're less than 24 hours away from that moment of inspiration. Give it some time. I'll certainly be explaining it to the local Sheik, when I next meet him. > On Feb 16, 5:57 am, Pat <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > I thought that, since the concept of ‘The Pen’ had been > > discussed, that I might take this opportunity to mention a couple of > > things. Firstly, the concept of ‘The Pen’ and how it relates to ‘The > > Word of God’ might be obvious to some but not others. It was a > > concept that was revealed in the very first Revelation to the Prophet > > Mohammed (pbuh). > > The first 5 lines of Surah 96 (Al Alaq [the Clot]) were the very > > first lines revealed and here they are: > > > 96:1 Read! In the name of your Lord and Cherisher, who created > > Iqra! Bismi rabbika-lladhi khalaq > > > 96:2 Created man from a clot of congealed blood. > > Khalaq-al-insana min alaq > > > 96:3 Read! And your Lord is Most Bountiful > > Iqra! Wa Rabbuka-al-Akram > > > 96:4 He who taught by the Pen > > Alladhi allama bil-qalam > > > 96:5 Taught man that which he knew not. > > Allam al insana ma lam ya lam. > > > If you read the transliterated Arabic above, you can get a feel > > for the rhythm and the rhyme that simply doesn’t come across in the > > translation. The entire Qur’an of 6,616 verses is like that. That’s > > why it was easy to learn for native Arabic speakers, who were used to > > oral traditions and story-telling. Also, the word Qur’an means > > ‘recital’, as it was intended to be spoken, as it was, originally, > > revealed to a man, The Prophet Mohammed (pbuh), who was illiterate. > > And no one has been able since, to create any poetry like it—not in > > rhythm, rhyme and depth of meaning. > > It dawned on me, over the weekend, that there is another analogy > > between ‘The Pen’, ‘The Word of God’, language and matter itself. It > > has been a part of Jewish, Christian and Islamic doctrine that God > > created the universe via His ‘Word’. But what, exactly, IS His Word? > > Let’s look at language and see how it relates to matter. I think > > sentences act like molecules. Each one has a particular purpose, > > structure and quality. Yet they are made of words. That makes words > > akin to atoms. But atoms are further divided into the sub-atomic > > particles of hadrons and leptons like words are comprised of letters > > which are either consonants or vowels. Yet even letters can be viewed > > as being made of lines, either straight or curved. Here is an > > allusion to String Theory and the concept of closed and open strings. > > Also, atoms (words) fall into 8 periods in the Periodic Table of > > Elements. These are, in a way, akin to the 8 parts of speech: nouns, > > verbs, pronouns, adjectives, adverbs, conjunctions, prepositions and > > interjections. Yet some elements fall into transitional groups. > > Theses would be akin to the concepts of participles and gerunds. A > > participle is a verb-like word that acts like an adjective, e.g., the > > word ‘sinking’ in the sentence: “Every time I see the film ‘Titanic’, > > I get a certain sinking feeling. The word ‘sinking’, although it is a > > verb, acts as an adjective to describe the word ‘feeling’ and is, > > technically, a participle. The word ‘feeling’ in that sentence, > > although it is a verb, acts like a noun and is, technically, a > > gerund. These are transitional parts of speech where one type of word > > acts as a different part of speech than it may appear. > > So, let’s map out the parts of speech to the Periodic Table based > > on Semitic language. Firstly, it’s easy to see that interjections > > stand alone and do not combine with other parts of speech; therefore, > > the interjection is Period 8 (The Inert or Noble gases). All Semitic > > languages have their root words as verbs. Verbs are conjugated, have > > tenses, number and person. They are the most configurable and seem > > the most likely to sit at Period 1, as the Period 1 atoms combine with > > other atoms the most. Period 2, then, would seem to be nouns. In > > Semitic languages, nouns are formed from their root verb stems because > > every action implies an actor. Also, after Period 2 are the > > Transitional Elements. These are the verb forms that act as either > > nouns (gerunds) or adjectives (participles). Following that logic, at > > the other end of the Transitional Elements is Period 3, which must be > > the adjectives. Now, we have to go back to the other end of the > > table. Pronouns stand for specific nouns, that is, they each have a > > single antecedent, a noun upon which they depend. This seems akin to > > the Period 7 Halogen group as they can only combine with one other > > atom. Period 6 has two open places for connection with ‘others’ and > > so seems to fit in well with the concept of a conjunction, which links > > two ‘other’ things together. The Period 5 group has three open places > > for connection and seems a best fit for the concept of the preposition > > which can relate one object to another either directly or indirectly > > or both. That leaves Period 4 as the adverbs. And each period is > > covered and directly corresponds to a part of speech. If you think > > I’ve left out the ‘article’, then think again. The Lanthanide group > > is most akin to the ‘definite article’, as they are all (well, with > > the single exception of Promethium) non-radioactive and are stable > > elements. This leaves the Actinide group to be representative of the > > ‘indefinite article’ as they are all radio-active and unstable and, in > > that respect, indefinite, because they are unstable. And now, all > > parts of speech are covered by their corresponding aspect of the > > Periodic Table of Elements. > > It is my hypothesis that God creates through these words or > > elements and it is on that basis that the concept of ‘The Pen’ relates > > to how God creates. This completes the examples of how God’s creative > > Word can be analogous to fermions, that is, the hadrons and leptons > > that comprise atoms/elements. > > Yet there are subtle inferences that are implied. For example, > > the pen and the voice are the forces behind written and spoken > > language. And, of course, in each case, there must be an author and a > > speaker. These are other forces that act behind the pen and the > > voice. So, there are four forces behind this creative ability that > > are analogous to the four bosonic forces of electro-magnetism, > > gravity, and the weak and strong atomic forces. Of all of these, the > > analogy of ‘The Pen’ to the electro-magnetic force is the most obvious > > because a pen is useless without ink. So, as the ink goes with the > > pen, the electric and magnetic forces are always found together. The > > voice, then, must be most analogous to gravity, as it is unseen but > > moves us in ways unimaginable. This leaves the weak and strong forces > > being analogous to the author (weak) and the speaker (strong). I > > believe that the spoken word is more powerful than the written word > > simply because one must learn to read in order for the written word to > > be understood, whereas hearing is all that is required for the spoken > > word to be comprehended. Put another way, an illiterate individual > > can be moved by the spoken word but not by the written. Also, like > > the strong atomic force, the spoken word is only heard by those who > > can hear it (ignoring, of course, recordings OF spoken words, which > > have made, only in recent years, the spoken word reach farther); > > whereas the written word, like the weak atomic force, can stretch over > > longer distances across both space and time. > > There! That’s just a few thoughts I had before going to bed last > > night. Let me know what you think.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
