"In the previous ages (Wisdom, Ritual, and Doubt), there were “more- than-human” beings. During this time, in what constitutes ancient prehistory, there was no “civilization”, but an “era of gods”. According to Hesiod (Greek poet, circa 700 B.C.E.), mortal people lived as if they were gods, and no miserable old age came their way. That cycle ended, but those beings continued to live upon the earth in an invisible way, mantling themselves in dark mist and watching over mortal men. "...in the realm of Yima, the Persian King of the Golden Age, before the new cosmic events forced him to withdraw into a 'subterranean' refuge (the inhabitants of which were thus enabled to evade the dark and painful destiny befallen the new generations), there was neither disease nor death... men and immortal gods shared one common life...” Such descriptions are typical of countless traditions of different cultures which comprise in part the Chronicles of Earth.
These beings did not experience time as we do, but had a super- temporal sense of Time. They regarded time qualitatively (not quantitatively) and as a rhythm (not a series). From their view, time did not flow uniformly or indefinitely, but was broken down into cycles and periods in which every moment had its own meaning and specific value in relation to all others. Certain numbers, such as five (Wicca), seven (Tarot), nine (Numerology) twelve (Astrology), and one thousand (Tao de Ching), were used not to express specific quantities, but rather to show typical structures of rhythm; such that different durations might still remain symbolically equivalent. Meanwhile, the modern world experiences the illusion of time escaping or slipping away, with one’s goal to somehow capture it -- an attempt that can obviously never be achieved. The distinction between cyclical and linear thinking shows itself in modern astronomy’s use of a faulty “Bode’s Law”, while the Harmony of the Spheres, being a measure of cycles or orbital periods is the more relevant measure -- a measure where the end result is not strictly the time to complete a cycle, but the nature and relationship of the cycle itself. It is the interaction of the different orbital patterns that is more important than any subdivision of one cycle and what that might mean. Astrology, at its fundamental base, is thus a hint of this super-temporal view of time, where geometric relationships create the patterns of Sacred Geometry. And therein lies its importance. In the beginning of the Kali Yuga there was not only science, but a very advanced form. Having originated from god-like beings, this science was dangerous to mankind or anyone not properly appreciative of the fundamentals. It was thus confined to temples as “mysteries”, but where it eventually became extinct, when the only thing the ‘sacred flame’ could do was burn." http://www.halexandria.org/dward030.htm On Jul 20, 6:42 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > i thought of continuing in the same thread becoz it seems connected to > it...what are your ideas about time..i mean your experience of it...when i > htought about it , i felt.. well i'll explain it this way.. its as though i > am standing in a river.. facing the current..and the water just flows flows > beneath me.. and i am rooted to the same spot...this making of time.. or > objectifying it.. it distorts a lot doesnt it...i mean when you say there is > not enuf time.. how can that be...we have all the Time we need...my thoughts > are confused and unclear..but i'd like you all to say something... > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 11:04 AM, pol.science kid <[email protected]>wrote: > > > > > wow..that was an argument over the 'eye'.. so why dont they use the color > > wheel? how do you know its plastic..;-) > > > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 2:56 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Yes, shades of mind is good. Better than this monochrome blue plastic > >> eye, like I said: > > >>http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye/browse_frm/thread/b34c37072d... > > >> On 19 Jul., 17:45, DarkwaterBlight <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > Perhaps as in moderators can be shady at times? :P Shades of mind is > >> > an interesting concept though! > > >> > On Jul 19, 1:03 am, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > shades?.. really?... in what sense...you mean shades of mind..? i > >> didnt > >> > > really give it an actual thought except for taking it at face > >> > > value;-)..becoz i found it interesting..you can illuminate it for me.. > > >> > > On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 1:24 AM, gabbydott <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > now that I hear you saying it, it could somehow be related to shade > >> > > > concept, what do you sense? > > >> > > > On 18 Jul., 09:19, "pol.science kid" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > a differing shame concept........wow.... > > >> > > > > On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:30 PM, gabbydott <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > A quality person? Is that the opposite of a quantity person? > >> Also I > >> > > > > > don't see what Fier ought to feel ashamed of. I interpreted the > >> blog > >> > > > > > link in the given context as a reference to find further > >> information/ > >> > > > > > reasons/proof. A clear case of transparency lived. Whereas I've > >> > > > > > learned to accept the hidden blog-interest-communication as part > >> of a > >> > > > > > culture that knows why it has a differing shame concept. > > >> > > > > > On 17 Jul., 09:34, iam deheretic <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > Molly is a very fine and quality person, and she is right > >> about your > >> > > > > > > shameless self promotion, It has been my experience here that > >> most > >> > > > people > >> > > > > > > that stay around have a special talent. The name calling you > >> are > >> > > > doing is > >> > > > > > > really more a reflection of your self.. because what you said > >> about > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > moderators, well they fit in many categories but not those you > >> > > > listed. > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > path to wisdom begins first by ,, - - - never mind you know it > >> > > > everything > >> > > > > > > already. > >> > > > > > > Allan > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Fiercely Free < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 9:30 pm, Molly <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > > > > > > > Just to clarify, FF, Minds Eye does not have a problem > >> with links > >> > > > > > > > > other than the ones used as a signature in a post to > >> direct folks > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > > > > your personal website. This is what is generally > >> considered > >> > > > shameless > >> > > > > > > > > self promotion or spam in internet groups. We otherwise > >> like > >> > > > links > >> > > > > > > > > that give more info (or humor) to the discussion. > > >> > > > > > > > Your mindless usage of the words like shameless self > >> promotion etc. > >> > > > > > > > clearly reflects the abysmally low quality of atheist > >> education > >> > > > > > > > system. Entire squad moderators on this Minds-Eye group > >> seems to be > >> > > > a > >> > > > > > > > group of hopelessly INCOMPETENT STUPID LOAFERS, having no > >> > > > common-sense > >> > > > > > > > at all. Minds-Eye moderators are not consistent. I will > >> quote a > >> > > > > > > > comment from one of the Minds-Eye moderators "vamadevanada" > >> (May > >> > > > 18, > >> > > > > > > > 2010) : > >> > > > > > > > I know. And I have access to libraries. It means > >> nothing, in > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > > course of a discussion. > > >> > > > > > > > Here, you do not offer books or blogs in the middle of a > >> > > > > > > > conversation. > >> > > > > > > > You only put across yourself, what you know and have to > >> say, in > >> > > > > > > > terms > >> > > > > > > > and using words I can understand. And I suppose I speak > >> for > >> > > > > > > > everyone > >> > > > > > > > here. > > >> > > > > > > > Your affinity towards moderated world is in proportion to > >> your > >> > > > > > > > mediocrity. You are lucky because it is only my decency > >> which is > >> > > > > > > > preventing me from using unparlimentary words that start > >> with > >> > > > alphabet > >> > > > > > > > "f". Otherwise worthless egotist intellectual morons like > >> you do > >> > > > not > >> > > > > > > > deserve anything else than that. > > >> > > > > > > > Note : I can give you the link to the above mentioned > >> comment of > >> > > > > > > > moderator. But that also may not be in line with the > >> meaningless > >> > > > > > > > guideline of Minds-Eye group. > > >> > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 11:46 am, Fiercely Free <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Jul 14, 1:43 am, DarkwaterBlight < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > > > wrote:> > >> > > > > > > > At any rate, FF, bipolar coordinates are used for 2 > >> dimensional > >> > > > > > > > > > > illustrations and bipolar system is a term coined by > >> Kaplan. > >> > > > "A > >> > > > > > loose > >> > > > > > > > > > > bipolar system is a construct in international > >> relations > >> > > > posited > >> > > > > > by > >> > > > > > > > > > > theorist Morton Kaplan in his work "System and Process > >> in > >> > > > > > > > > > > International Politics." The model was largely meant > >> to > >> > > > reflect > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > > > Cold War-era, two-superpower geopolitical > >> arrangement." > > >> > > > > > > > > > The bipolar system forms the basis of > >> civilization. > >> > > > > > > > > > Fundamentally, it represents the conflict between the > >> good & > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > bad. > >> > > > > > > > > > It can be applied to global political system as well. > >> Then why > >> > > > do > >> > > > > > such > >> > > > > > > > > > politically interpreted versions of bipolar system > >> appear to be > >> > > > > > > > > > inadequate ? Reason is obvious. Those who proposed such > >> > > > political > >> > > > > > > > > > theories were NOT as neutral as they were supposed to > >> be. It is > >> > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > > ignorance of those who interprete. Basic bipolar model > >> cannot > >> > > > not > >> > > > > > be > >> > > > > > > > > > blamed for that. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Are you suggesting that our universe is a folded 2D > >> universe > >> > > > > > giving > >> > > > > > > > the > >> > > > > > > > > > > appearance of a multiverse for lack of a good vantage > >> point?! > > >> > > > > > > > > > In the absence of true infinity, multiverse system > >> will > >> > > > never > >> > > > > > > > > > become multipolar system. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > Read more: What Is a Loose Bipolar System? | > >> eHow.comhttp:// > > >>www.ehow.com/facts_6529365_loose-bipolar-system_.html#ixzz0tb4... > > >> > > > > > > > > > Thanks for the reference link, DarkwaterBlight. > >> (You have > >> > > > > > shown > >> > > > > > > > > > the courage to go against Minds-Eye guidelines regarding > >> > > > links.) > > >> > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 1:12 pm, Fiercely Free <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 6:45 pm, DarkwaterBlight < > >> > > > [email protected]> > >> > > > > > > > wrote:> Samir, I like your blog! Yes I am sure few would > >> agree that > >> > > > you > >> > > > > > are > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > the most intelligent person on this globe. Your > >> post > >> > > > implies > >> > > > > > > > duality > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > and I am sure reason would suggest that duality is > >> but an > >> > > > > > > > illusion. > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > The mutiverse concept is provided for in quantum > >> physics > >> > > > as > >> > > > > > well > >> > > > > > > > as > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > other advanced theories but all fall short of > >> PROVING > >> > > > > > anything > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > therefore these multi layers can ONLY exist in > >> Minds-Eye > >> > > > > > space as > >> > > > > > > > far > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > as we are concerned! The fact that this world is > >> > > > competitive > >> > > > > > and > >> > > > > > > > will > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > always challenge claims made by those who oppose > >> is not > >> > > > an > >> > > > > > issue. > >> > > > > > > > The > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > issue is being able to support claims made and > >> > > > persevering. > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > I see no duality or subsequent illusion in my > >> post. My > >> > > > > > > > objection > >> > > > > > > > > > > > was for the term "Infinite" and in the absence of > >> infinite > >> > > > > > layers, > >> > > > > > > > > > > > multiverse system will NOT be different from bipolar > >> > > > system. > >> > > > > > So, > >> > > > > > > > now > >> > > > > > > > > > > > the onus of supporting claims about "infinite number > >> of > >> > > > layers > >> > > > > > on > >> > > > > > > > > > > > Minds-Eye" rests upon the organisers of Minds-Eye... > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 13, 8:23 am, Fiercely Free < > >> [email protected]> > >> > > > wrote: > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > Any multiverse system will eventually boil > >> down > >> > > > to a > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
