The Final Truth - A Theory of Practice
The Thirteen Intentions of Creation
Gustavo Henrique ("gus")
A Creational theory with focus on practical matters.
Theories play a very important role in our lives by helping us make sense of the world through accurate models of reality. Primarily, a theory is concerned with finding answers that can increase our knowledge about the universe, answers that do not necessarily have practical consequences. If scientific theories were elaborated just for immediate and practical purposes, then a lot of them would not even exist today. Having knowledge is priceless, while doing something with it is just a matter of paying the right price.
Problems have to be completely understood before they can be solved efficiently. For that reason, a theoretical research can be carried out for a long time without achieving concrete results, since scientists cannot risk their reputation by submitting incomplete theories to million-dollar experiments. Anyway, still no theory is beyond practical application and should only be contemplated as a work of art. The problem is that making a theory yield practical results requires as much work as ellaborating the theory itself. A classical example of this dilemma is the stereotype of the mad university professor that daydreams about fantastic theories but fails to impress the upper management due to lack of objectivity in his research. Eventually the management decides to cut off research funds, but if only they had waited a few more days the professor could have changed the world with a new discovery.
There is a strong relationship between the possibilities for application of a theory and how valuable and effective a theory is seen by public eyes. If a theory can be proven to be consistent with observations after rigorous testing and experimentation, then it becomes a valuable tool for predicting master phenomena. The relevance and specificity of those predictions will determine how potentially useful the theory is. This view is known as instrumentalism. In this highly pragmatic view, theories are seen as mere instruments that one can use to gain control over the processes of reality, and it does not matter if the theory also satisfies philosophical aspirations of achieving the highest truth.
Any scientist with a philosophical inch knows that although each new theory is better and may last longer than the last, the only thing that remains constant inside him is a primal instinct to find the truth. The search for absolute truth has always been the motivation behind philosophical inquiry. Some of the greatest ancient philosophers had this ambition in abundance, and that is mainly what set them apart from less-known thinkers. But the active search for an ideal truth was halted with the advent of the pragmatic conception. The pragmatist is only concerned with the difference that a theory will make in his reality. It makes no sense for the pragmatists to look for a truth that is completely independent of their reality. For them, that which is valid and true is that which is real (factual) or has the possibility of becoming real through action in the physical world.
What happened next is that the pragmatic conception together with religious dogmatism have played a strong role in discouraging people from seeking the truth themselves. It turned out that pragmatism was not only a ideological movement defended by a few philosophers, but also an entirely new way of thinking that grew to affect social philosophy as well. In many ways pragmatism helped to lay the grounds for materialism. The result is that knowledge of the truth is taken for granted; it is handed down to people by institutions. People are not supposed to look beyond the "facts" of life for answers. Truth for them is that which is laid upon their eyes: the physical world -- they are entitled to take action upon it or shut up.
What pragmatists seem to ignore is that there is a reflexive relationship as well as a two-way communication between theory and practice. Theory is not supposed to eternally feed practice; the inverse must happen sometimes. While practice already includes the act of elaborating a theory, a theory can change our outlook on reality and thus even determine what we consider practical. Theoretical knowledge can contribute to the efficiency of practical action, whereas practical action can bring to our awareness facts that complement and refine our knowledge.
Unfortunately, the supposition that theory and practice are essential to each other also seems to be more true in theory than in practice, because that is not what seems to have seeped into the public consciousness. The common view is that theory and practice are separate entities that do not go along with each other. While theoretical behavior relies on careful planning and attention to principles and details, practical behavior has been associated to action without thinking and with focus solely on "getting things done" at all costs. In other words, people reject thinking as too impractical and time-consuming even when a lack of it may very well prove disastrous.1
________________________
1 Take Note of Something Different. 23 April 2008 < http://www.take-note.com/session24.htm >.
Practice, or praxis, usually refers to a situation where taking direct action is the only real challenge, action that dispenses with the theoretical considerations. In other words, the motivation for practical action is the very necessity for deliberate and spontaneous action, such as when there is a need for immediate results.
But there is a great deal of relativity present in the concept of practice, because any kind of behavior can be aimed at obtaining practical results, which leads us to an important distinction: a practical approach is not the same as giving importance to any kind of activity. It would be irrelevant to do so, because there is no such thing as a true state of inactivity. Even when there is an appearance of rest or inaction, activity is still present due to its status of universal principle; an example being that all atoms are in a state of constant energetic fluctuation even when the temperature drops infinitely toward reaching absolute zero.1
Without activity there is no circulation of energy, and thus there is not a circuit, a closed system where energy is contained. Without a containment, there can be no energy present at all, because energy is not an entity in and of itself -- there is no such thing as formless energy. We know that energy is required to bring things into reality, but it does not stop at that: energy is what brings the entire reality into reality. Consequently, without energy it would be no longer possible for a corporeal (physical) reality to exist, which means that existence would become insubstantial, and probably very boring.
It is important to establish a common denominator for the term reality, as this term is quite relative. In other words, we need to be talking about a reality that everyone can identify with. We may start from the principle that reality is better defined as the baseline for those sensations that feel more intense than others, sensations that hook our perception better. It is obvious that physical reality feels sufficiently intense for most people, and so it is the perfect candidate to be the common denominator for the term reality.
Since there is no true state of inactivity, practice is really concerned with those activities considered useful according to the values held by someone and their culture (society). Behind the "do something" provocation that people commonly throw at each other, there is always a hint of "do as I do" or "do what is considered valid." However, a common-sense exception for this rule is that it really does not make sense to possess an instrument such as the human body and never use it. Anyway, whether it is in accordance to cultural values or ingrained common sense, practical action is really just action seen as useful.
Bonus image (click to open)Because of the external judgement imposed by society on the individual, people often walk into situations only for the sake of displaying action. This of course can be very dangerous, since no course of action is free of risks. To jump into a situation without a proper understanding and assessment of risks is tantamount to enter a war zone unarmed: remarkable, but stupid.
Practice may have degenerated into those activities composing one's social duty or role, but it is still a central aspect of life. In fact, practice focus on what is essential to human life: survival. By mastering practice, the art of survival, we can master reality. That is why it is necessary for us to have a theory of practice. Any theory that is not of practice is still not realized in what we do and how we live; it is still removed from our reality and will ultimately fail to provide us with real answers.
In many ways, a theory of practice is a theory of Reality with capital R, and not a theory based on what we believe or expect reality to be. A theory of practice is really the unification of theory and pratice in a wider frame of reference for greater understanding of Reality. In addition, a theory of Reality is no ordinary theory because it must be guaranteed to work always. Reality Itself is ruthless and never fails to work regardless of whether people like It or not, and so should a theory about It. For this reason, a theory of pratice must provide us with final answers or it will be just another theory doomed to fail.
________________________
1 Even when temperature approaches the hypothetical absolute zero until it is practically there, atomic motion (energy) is still expected to exist according to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle.
Like the mortals who develop them, theories do not have an infinite life. Scientists can only hope to learn as much from a theory for as long as possible. It is just a matter of time until circumstances change and a theory's ability to support new discoveries begins to fail. In other words, all theories lose their value sooner or later. But let us try to be more reasonable here: it is never only a matter of failure vs. success. Some theories are more persistent than others, and not all of them have to be rewritten from scratch every time that something goes wrong. The bottom line is simply that we can never be sure about the continued success of a theory without actually testing it for an eternity.
Any physical theory is always provisional, in the sense that it is only a hypothesis: you can never prove it. No matter how many times the results of experiments agree with some theory, you can never be sure that the next time the result will not contradict the theory. (Stephen Hawking)
If we can never prove a theory to be the ultimate one, then looking for one that escapes this rule must be an act of faith. Science does not require faith from anyone, but it is just natural that a technological world, for example, will have high hopes on the physical sciences. The ironic thing is that having faith in science is actually the same as people having faith in themselves, because science is nothing more than the result of a collective effort to understand the universe rationally. Science works at the level of the collective consciousness, or consensus reality, a level where everyone can relate with without getting into conflict about how the reality of the universe works.
On the other hand, faith in the context of scientific inquiry is irrelevant because science seeks certainty, a state of mind that excludes the need for faith. Still, the degree of confidence that people have in a theory plays an important role in determining its success. As the confidence in a theory grows, the theory grows as well, because more people start using and supporting it. The difference is that having confidence is not unjustified or without basis like having pure belief or faith. The only problem with confidence, or any other positive attitude for that matter, is that nothing can replace scientific certainty. In science, to have certainty is to have the ability of being able to predict.
The fact that theories eventually fail is considered one of the greatest strengths of science, because there is no way to achieve more reliable conclusions without it. In other words, science sees its own limitations as the factor that promotes its constant development. However, scientific development is not cumulative (Kuhn 96). Instead, we see a succession of revolutions (paradigm shifts) where newer scientific models replace older models almost completely. Every time that a new paradigm arises, science has no other choice than to disregard a good part of its current work. Real and continuous progress is only found in the natural evolution of human consciousness, the same process that generates new paradigms that force science to readapt itself.
But let us assume that there is progress behind science after all. With this in mind, we can ask ourselves the following: how long until there is enough improvement? Do we even know exactly where we are going? That is, we cannot afford having no destiny in sight while certain problems continue to plague humanity. It is not prudent to stay in a slow path of evolution when we have a real possibility of getting the process over with at once. Instead of asking the same questions over and over again, we should ask ourselves about the reason why we keep making questions.
To resolve this uncertain fate and finally put science in a path of steady progress, we need a theory that does not have limitations, a theory that is not susceptible to failure. It is indeed counterintuitive to even conceive such theory as being scientific, and it is probably not even a good idea to call it a theory. Therefore, consider that we are not talking about any theory; we are talking about a final theory. The list below shows the requirements of a final theory should it ever arise.
Theories, as models, are not reality; models are built on top of reality. For this reason, no scientific / physical theory can be final because they are all superficial; they cannot give us deeper understanding. We either know how things really are or we hold tight to an elaborate hunch that we consider sufficiently accurate. Well, just as all scientific theories tend to fail, a gap in our understanding eventually becomes our downfall. A final theory, on the other hand, could provide us with an understanding so accurate that there would be almost no difference between theory and practice, knowledge and action, or model and reality. The "gap," if existent, would be too insignificant to ever force us to abandon the theory completely.
Realistically speaking, it is impossible for a theory to predict or explain everything directly, but a final theory could at least offer us a starting point for such task, with the rest becoming only a matter of derivation. In other words, a final theory is not the end of knowledge and the desire to learn, but instead it is the final excitement needed for the acquisition of all remaining knowledge. Why not learn the basics first and then have fun experimenting with your fundamental knowledge for the rest of eternity? It is possible to enjoy a continued learning process just as much as the fact that you have already learned the essential.
Whether a final theory explains everything or not is not even the most important requirement. Above all, a final theory should put an end to the most bugging philosophical, scientific and religious questions, so that there would be little left in people's minds besides a raw desire for action based on an understanding of how Reality works. In other words, with a final theory there would exist no more doubts to prevent people from assuming a fully powered practical approach to solve their problems. Instead of continuing to learn by mistakes, people would be able to skip the possibility for error completely and instead go directly to that which is guaranteed to work. Instead of contemplating or ignoring the Truth, people would put It into practice.
It is even more important that people can achieve peace of mind. As researcher Ian Xel Lungold put it, the stability of our peace of mind is directly related to our degree of certainty. With this in mind, a final theorhy is simply a theory that can provide us with the highest degree of certainty. In this manner a final theory serves as the ultimate scientific theory, the ultimate religion and also the ultimate philosophy. It's only a matter of how much it can be developed toward each of these three directions.
Anyway, it is true that theoretical knowledge will never replace direct experience of the Truth, and so even a final theory is still an interpretation, not an awareness. A person needs to internalize the experience of what is true, and not only contempate it from an external perspective. Therefore, we must be aware we never reach an end to our knowledge, but this does not mean that we can reach a virtual / theoretical end to our knowledge if wework to simplify your knowledge instead of accumulating more redundant information that do not fit together. The next section will show how this is possible.
Scientists know that laws that apply only to a limited range of phenomena are but minor expressions of fundamental laws that apply to the whole universe. Furthermore, when researchers are sorting information about a certain field of knowledge, they invariably notice a small number of root concepts from which all other concepts stem from. In Biology, for example, there are hierarchical models describing the various levels on which life is structured, such as those involving life forms and their evolution from common ancestors. In sum, these examples show us that there is hierarchy present in every organization found in the universe.
In face of the principle of hierarchy, what any field of knowledge tries to do is integrate information around a point of reference. In this context, a point of reference is some kind of primary (central) knowledge that justifies the very existence of all secondary (peripheral) knowledge. If you can have a point of reference in your knowledge, the rest becomes just a matter of derivation. This means that only a very small subset of all knowledge will be useful to you, while the rest becomes useful only when supported by this subset. Many times we fail to understand some aspect of the world because we lack a point of reference acting as the support for our knowledge.
Let us make an analogy. Consider the point of reference as a tiny circle surrounded by several fragments of bigger circles. Also, consider that there are many paths leading to the tiny circle coming from the outside area, but none of them are free of the clutter caused by the fragments. See the illustration below.
Figure 1.1 - Point of reference
The fragments represent fragmented information and distorted knowledge, while the tiny circle represents complete information and perfect knowledge, but in a relatively small quantity. A person can try to put all fragments back together as perfect circles, but, as trying to use scrap metal parts to build a spaceship, the task is clearly out of hand. Alternatively, the person can just force way through the fragments and go directly to the tiny circle. Once in the center the person can project and expand the tiny circle outwards so that it serves as a mold or support for the reconstruction of the bigger circles.
Does this analogy mean that we should ignore all available information and just go directly after the most fundamental knowledge there is? No, but if you do not focus on addressing the core of the problem first, then all other information remains peripheral and meaningless. Information needs context in order to make ense, and contexts carry a hierarchical structure, then if we can understand the center of the hierarchy, all informadion inside this context will fall into perspective. it is at this manner that Fundamental knwoledge is preferable than peripheral knowledge.
In order to have a point of reference, we need concepts thta are absolute. We cannot achieve unified understanding without absolutes. Absolutes simply are, everything else is an illusion. There is no real cause or beginning for absolutes. You don't question an absolute concept, you just accept it. Questioning it is a sign of denial / non-acceptance of your part. The subject of absolute concepts are going to be very importanbt in this book. We have a small ist on appendix 1 at the last (thirteenth elemtn). By this book we will eventually define some fo them ,but mostly they are open to one's personal interpretation.
We have discussed in earlier sections how something like a final theory may be possible for us to achieve. In this section we will merely exercise one possible way of reaching such theory. Indeed, there are many ways, but only one theory may appear in the end, because a final theory should have no contestants if it really deserves to be called final.
It all begins with us addressing the logical part of the problem. The most logical conclusion that we have as rational beings is that it is impossible to disprove the existence of something beyond. Those who glorify nonexistence are still giving credit to something that lies beyond their immediate perception, which, by the way, is one of existence. In other words, faith in a higher concept of existence is present in all levels of intelligence.
No complex logic is necessary for us to conclude that everything that exists or will ever exist is part of a great whole. It does not matter: whatever you can imagine, or not imagine, will be part of this Whole. There is only the Whole. Even if there was something outside of or detached from everything, we can still rise our perspective even more and again see uncorrupted wholeness. Therefore, we can accept as inalienable truth that, for an infinite number of greater perspectives, the Whole is continuously reaffirmed as a recursive totality, an overall existence that keeps engulfing / encompassing everything. To this overall existence we give the name of Creation (All That Is).
Figure 1.2 - The Whole
Although Creation is all-inclusive, we still cannot say that Creation is everything. At the same time that Creation already is everything, It is also much more, going even beyond the mere notion of "isness" (i.e, what is and what is not). The main reason for this is because Creation is an absolute concept. We have already seen examples of absolute concepts: the Whole, Reality, etc. What the Whole and other absolute concepts have in common is that there is never really an objective limit for what they represent, and no amount of explanation can convey what it means for them to be absolute. That is why even giving Creation a name is ridiculous: whatever Creation really is, is beyond the name Creation. In reality, we are talking about a certain Absolute that transcends all denominations.
The Tao [absolute] that can be named, expressed or defined is not the eternal Tao [the Absolute]. Even the finest name is insufficient to define It. (Lao Tzu in Tao Te Ching 1)
Nobody is really sure of how to define the Absolute properly, but we know due to an overwhelming intuitive force that it has an infinite, perfect and perpetual nature. Organized religions tap into this latent knowledge present in everyone and try to spin it along a certain line of interpretations. What religion does not realize is that any ideas about the unlimited will still be unbelievably limited. Generally, what is left after all belief systems have been demistified is acceptance of the transcendental nature of the Absolute. Surprisingly enough, however, it is through this act of acceptance that better interpretation of the Absolute may come.
The natural urge to understand the Absolute is present in everyone, but it is initially dealt with in a very primitive way. Most people expect to find their point of reference in the form of an universal principle that is above all others. At first, they never try to determine a fixed set of principles -- just one. They end learning the hard way: all their favorite principles fail to maintain their status as such, because it would be a great shame to the Absolute if It was restricted to a single interpretation. On the following paragraphs we will see examples of how these primitive conceptions arise and then turn out as dead ends.
As they look further for an universal truth, people become fascinated with certain life philosophies up to the point that they forget or ignore anything that may be discordant with their views. But philosophy is not the least bit concerned with finding answers that can put an end to the search for truth: an attitude consistent with reality, because in practice there are always new questions arising that force people to adopt new paradigms. Humans are naive by nature, and thus it is easy for them to consider every new paradigm as definitive. This process repeats itself for a long time until the person starts wondering if the final truth is of a complex nature and thus beyond a single answer. This is a major breakthrough, because suddenly it becomes important that the person increases her knowledge by getting to know as many points of view as possible.
A new kind of conclusion tends to arise when the person reaches an intellectual dead end after many failed attempts at trying to comprehend the Absolute. They are usually very relativistic and/or extremist conclusions, such as that the universe is infinitely complex, or that there is as many universal principles as people can come up with. The problem with these conclusions is that they hide a state of fascination with infinity. It is not far-fetched to think that there is an infinite number of ways to view the universe, but such "non-approach" defeats our purpose of trying to find universal principles (i.e., that are true regardless of what anyone thinks). It would be impossible for us to ever become acquainted with an infinite number of principles, and we would never fully move from theory to practice.
There is nothing wrong with the concept of infinity, but when worshiped in isolation it is mistakenly taken as a limit, a fixed ideal. Infinity cannot be taken as a limit because it is already defined as being greater than any limit. Infinity only gives the illusion that it can be sought as an ideal, because, in reality, it is always more than what it appears to be. Consequently, being infatuated with infinity alone is dangerous and can keep someone inside a path with no real destination in sight.
Figure 1.3 - Infinity
The Greeks saw the idea of infinity as being absurd and chaotic. Indeed, infinity is often employed as a supplementary word for uncertainty about certain quantities in the universe. There is, for example, an exact amount of particles in the universe just as there must be a certain amount of distance, a certain shape and size, and a certain amount of mass for everything. There is enough evidence for us to believe in Absolutea finite universe; otherwise, we are left with irrational conclusions such as infinity, conclusions that in reality provide us with no answers at all.
As we continue with our search for universal truth, we eventually come to the next obvious indication: the Absolute has no specific smell, color, form or name, and all attempts to define It are in vain. It seems that the Absolute is always beyond anything that can be said about It, perhaps because our fixation with trying to define It is what prevents us from understanding It. As usual, people often jump into the conclusion that the Absolute is completely void of definition, and they start to believe that the Absolute is tantamount to nothingness. Well, this is a major breakthrough in the understanding of the Absolute, because something that does not exist is certainly beyond any rational definition.
Zero, a concrete representation (symbol) for nothingness, is different from other numbers to the extent that it cannot be canceled as when we subtract a number from itself, because zero is already its own additive inverse: 0 = 0. Also, zero is always present before and after operands and signals in an equation, as well as before and after decimal places in a number (e.g., 001.000 = 01.0 = 1). All of this makes of zero an omnipresent abstract concept in mathematics, a concept that accurately reflects the absoluteness of the Absolute.
Zero could very well be the answer that we are looking for if it was not for a major flaw: by pointing a finger to zero and isolating it as a concept, we are still creating a duality composed of zero and its absence: non-zero. For instance, if we name an unknown object as "greel," then we automatically create an opposite composed of whatever is not greel by being outside / beyond greel. Therefore, the presence of non-zero makes of zero an unworthy definition for the Absolute, because nothing can have an exclusive existence outside something that is supposed to be all-inclusive.
Nonetheless, if our chosen principle was really nothingness (zero), it can only mean that we have not found a principle yet. Unlike in the real world where there is no such a thing as a perfect nothing (e.g., perfect vacuum in space), the word nothing in the strict sense really means absolute nonexistence. Therefore, an ideology based on nothingness / zero should also acknowledge that no universal principle can exist, and this creates a functional contradiction that renders zero unusable as something to be sustained ideologically. In one hand proponents of this ideology are following a principle after all, while in the other they believe no such principle should exist. Well, such contradiction is in fact just another dead end resulting from people's fascination with extremes.
Common sense naively defines nothing as the "absence of thing." Absence, however, is still a state, while nothingness is not supposed to be a state, nor a state that is not a state, nor a state that is not a state that is not a state, and so on ad infinitum. The fact that the word nothing exists is proof that we cannot address a "no-thing" if we do not treat it as "some-thing." In sum, there is no way to talk about nothing without falling in contradiction, and if we consider that we have been talking about it in the last few paragraphs, including this one, then we cannot even be sure of our own assertions! This leads us to conclude that thinking or talking about nothing is completely irrelevant and a distraction from more important (useful) issues.
Apart from being conceptual numbers, infinity and zero are also abstract concepts that ultimately equate to each other, because when exclusively sought as ideals they both lead nowhere. In many ways, going nowhere is the same as never leaving the place. People will be deceiving themselves by walking in circles exactly how a dog chases its own tail; they will be always looking for something, and yet never being able to find it. Seeking infinity is a task that never comes to fruition, and seeking zero is an absurd, because you cannot approach or avoid something that is simply not there. The only difference between infinity and zero is that those who seek infinity do not even know that they are walking in circles, because infinity is a masked zero.
Figure 1.4 - Twisted zero
It is obvious why infinity and zero have failed to give us a satisfactory understanding about the Absolute: they are irrational concepts, and what cannot be understood by reason alone cannot be properly defined. Therefore, we still cannot say anything about the Absolute except that it is not restricted to zero, infinity and any other singular and extreme notion for that matter. As we hinted before, people jump from principle to principle and never settle down for the possibility that a finite number of principles, perhaps even including zero and infinity, could be working together to embody the Absolute. Indeed, as we will see in the next chapter, a fixed number of principles, and not just one, is the best possible guess that someone can have about the Absolute.
________________________
1 Adapted from translations by Western scholars who have interpreted this classical Chinese work. The second sentence is credited to Stan Rosenthal's translation. 8 Dec 2009 <http://www.vl-site.org/taoism/ttcstan1.html >.
The Model of Creation is an abstract and conceptual model that illustrates the main aspects of Creation. The main idea is that a fundamental structure has been photographed in abstract terms as if we were enjoying a panoramical view of Creation. Such possibility, however, is purely hypothetical, because nothing can really exist outside of Creation according to the definition given in Section 1.5: Creation is a recursive totality that includes all possible realities, and thus there is no outside that is not already a part of It.
There are four elements in the Model of Creation: Origin, Line, End and Result. They are shown in the diagram below.
Figure 2.1 - The Model of Creation
When we said that Creation is not only the Origin but also all other elements in the Model, we were referring to the paradoxical nature of absolute concepts such as Creation. An absolute concept does not have to be just one thing in particular; on the contrary, it can be everything and nothing at the same time. As nothing, Creation is the Origin, and as everything, Creation is the entire diagram shown in the Model. More specifically, the distance between the Origin and the Result can be considered a blown-up version of the Origin, while the Origin is a condensed version of that same distance.
Figure 2.2
Myths of Creation
In several myths of Creation, the notion of a supreme intelligence behind all creation is strongly related to the idea of an omniscient and omnipotent being that was present before the creation of the universe. This notion is prevalent among cultures formed by individual beings, and for a very specific reason: As individual beings, their perspective is, of course, individual, and so for them there is no such thing as a consciousness that is not individual. This means that they cannot help but personify Creation as an universal consciousness, and then individualize this Consciousness. The result of an absolute concept such as Creation that becomes individualized and personified is an absolute being that may be given the name of Creator. (Note: as you may have noticed, there is a reflective relationship between how beings imagine a creator god and what the beings are themselves in their own spiritual nature. An interesting discussion about this can be found in Section 5.#.)
Creation, Creator, the Whole and Consciousness are all absolute concepts due to their transcendental nature. Of course, an absolute concept must be referring to an uncontested authority, and so two or more of them can only be different names for the same Thing. Nonetheless, it is just not worth that we give the Absolute only one denomination, because each absolute concept represents a different aspect of the Absolute that would go unnoticed if not mentioned. There is nothing wrong with us using different tools to try to build a concrete meaning for the Absolute; we only need to remember that the Absolute is certainly not restricted to have only one identity, or to even have an identity at all. (Note: as you may have noticed, capitalization is a way to ensure that we are talking about an absolute concept instead of the ordinary meaning of the word / term.)
Existence = Universe = Whole = Creation = Reality = ..Schematics #.# - Absolute concepts
Absolute concepts refer to infinite quantities and thus cannot be fully defined by limited means of interpretation. Of course, their meanings can always be approximated with words and other symbolic representations, but the moment we bring in a symbolic description of an absolute concept, we define it, and the moment we define it we frame it in limitation and we deceive its true essence. Also, even the idea that there is some kind of final meaning "waiting" to be discovered is misleading, because the concept of meaning implies that nothing is quite what it is, but rather is representative of something else. In other words, an attempt to convey meaning to an absolute concept is always in the open, because whatever the Absolute and Its associates is may transcend even the meaning of meaning.
As a personified absolute concept, the Creator represents someone that is immanifest and manifest at the same time. As manifest, He/She is All That Is (Creation), and as immanifest, He/She is beyond anything that can be imagined. The Creator is the essence, the spirit and the substance of Creation, while Creation is the entirety of existence, which implies that It must include everything. Therefore, the Creator is everywhere (omnipresent) and nowhere in particular and thus cannot be conceived as a mere individual for someone to idolize. We can assume then that the Creator does not need or want any kind of special attention or devotion. In fact, worshiping the Creator may be a rude thing to do as when someone passes judgment on the outer appearance of a person while ignoring who the person really is beyond the body.
God is a common denomination for the Creator seen as an anthropomorphic deity. The Creator, of course, is beyond such categorization: He/She is far more like an abstract entity representing an universal and eternal consciousness than He/She is an individualized being with a definite (human) form. The Creator is beyond form, but still He/She is the eternal aspect of the form, the eternal force that holds ideas together in manifested form.
Anyway, people are free to have limited ideas about the Creator. The problem is that at the same moment that they identify the Creator with a god, the potential for the existence of an opposite, an anti-god, is automatically created. Naturally, one can argue that a creator can still be counterbalanced with an anti-creator, but then we must ask ourselves about who created the anti-creator as well, since by definition an anti-creator cannot create, only destroy. Therefore, eventually we have to stop our causal reasoning and acknowledge the existence of a self-creating creator, that is, an absolute creator that creates and/or recreates himself continually along with everything else.
Figure 2.# - Ancient of Days
Another reason why Creator is a much better denomination than God is because it puts extra emphasis on the act of creating and the role of creator, both of which are fundamental notions from a logical perspective: if something exists, it must have been created by some kind of intelligence. Anyway, there is nothing wrong with using the term God as long as we are strictly referring to the Creator. In other words, the name by which we refer to the Creator is not all important as long as we have the understanding that we are talking about a personified absolute concept, a certain facet of the Absolute, which is boundless and cannot even be properly described with the utilization of a single name.
The idea of antithesis concerning the Creator, or God, is not exclusively held by mythical personages such as Satan and Lucifer. Everything is potentially the inverse of the Creator, because Creation is nothing more than a mirror image of the Creator. This notion also applies to the idea of a god, which is strictly symbolic, because it is in symbols that the potential for an inverted (reflected) image of the Creator lies. Symbols are aspects of Creation. They are like features of the Creator's image in the mirror. When symbols are worshiped as sacred, this gives them the potential for their realization as forces that oppose the Creator. The problem, of course, is that symbols are finite, static and fixed representations. Therefore, whenever people take a symbolic approach to the Creator, they are actually idolizing something that is the exact opposite of what He/She represents: an infinite, dynamic and transcendental power.
Figure 2.# - Creation mirrors Creator
The mythical story of Lucifer, the angel that rebelled against God, is a good example of a creature that opposes its creator. The story has its origins in ancient mystical literature, but it has been incorporated by monotheistic belief systems, mainly Christianity. Basically, the story says that Lucifer was the wisest, the most beautiful, and the most powerful angel in heaven. Eventually, Lucifer reasoned about his superiority, he became self-aware, and this gave him the desire to become as great as God, his Father, and to be worshiped as such. Naturally, Lucifer's prideful and selfish aspirations turned him from God and led him to be cast out of heaven for disobedience; hence the famous archetype of the fallen angel.
Figure 2.# - Fall of Lucifer
The story of Lucifer is practically the same plot found in Creation myths in which a primordial consciousness forgets about itself through self-contemplation. Suppose that an universal consciousness, initially pure, becomes delighted in its own consciousness and decides to imagine itself in order to explore the "universal" part of its being. Because of this, Consciousness gets momentarily caught in Its own imagination; It falls asleep due to the enchantment of Its bright image of light while a dream takes over Its mind. This act alone gives birth to an entire imaginary universe, an artificial design / creation that Consciousness believes to be real but ultimately is not. It is also believed that a "disaster" occurs at the moment of self-contemplation, because Consciousness gets disconnected from Its infinite mind resulting in dissociation and amnesia. The more Consciousness falls inside Its dream, the more it fragments Itself.
Lucifer represents the greatest error (sin) ever committed by Consciousness when in possession of free will. It is the primordial error that results in the first light of Creation, and that is why Lucifer is sometimes called the Angel of Light or the Morning Star. Whether Lucifer's act was evil or sinful is not important because the Creator is ultimately in charge of everything, including even that which sounds erroneous. That which falls like Lucifer, falls for the highest good of All. The Creator is like a highly talented painter that is always trying new moves with his painting brush to purposely create mistakes that turn out as beautiful in the end. In other words, failure is a primitive but necessary step for the advent of Creation, as schematized below.
divine perfection -> failure -> CreationSchematics 2.#
Cosmos is the name given to the current universe seen as a coherent whole. The cosmos is believed to have started with the Big Bang because a rational analysis of the cosmogenic process implies that there must be a first cause for the origin of the universe.1 Unlike Creation, an universe has a definite beginning and a foreseeable end; it is something momentary like a picture or a photograph of Creation, while Creation Itself is eternal. Since an universe is the highest system that can be measured, then it is safe to suppose that anything before it is unmeasurable. This means that there is nothing to be detected before an universe, and so the only explanation for a first cause would be that something literally came out of nothing. Such explanation may sound silly, but it is in the usage of the word nothing that we find out about the paradox of existence, which we will now discuss.
Since before time and space were, the Tao [the Absolute] is. It is beyond is and is not. ... (Lao Tzu in Tao Te Ching 2)
Considering that all forms in an universe are forms of energy, let us suppose that everything before the universe was energy in a pure state. There were no attributes, qualities, or activities; there was only chaos. There was nothing, but nothing as something, nothing as a paradox that turns the mere being/non-being alternative into an inconceivable state of existence unified with nonexistence. It was a primordial division, a separation of that "nothing-as-something" that resulted in the formation of the universe. This is the basic creation myth. As for the primordial act of separation, it can be interpreted as a spontaneous desire to create that the Creator had, or perhaps a desire for self-expression in the case we are talking about a primordial consciousness.
Figure 2.#
Rationality dictates that whatever exists has a cause for its existence. Consequently, such rationale can get us inside an infinite succession of questions about the cause of the existence of the previous cause. The problem is that when we keep asking for a chain of causes we generally fail to see that the only concept that remains unchallenged and unquestioned is that of Existence. In other words, Existence is the primordial cause, the cause that has no cause, or the cause that is its own cause. The fact is that Existence is an absolute concept like Creation because there is no way to deny that "to exist" entails everything.
While Creation is the answer for "what is the Absolute?," the Creator is certainly the answer for "who is the Absolute?." That is, the Creator is the personification of everything that exists taken as a whole; He/She is Existence personified. This means that there is no beginning or end that applies to the Creator and his Creation, because the principle always precedes the event. When something is brought into existence or ceases to exist, it is an event, an effect, while Existence remains the immutable principle or cause. Therefore, any chain of cause and effect starts and ends with absolute concepts, all of which refer to a primal and self-existent energy (i.e., whose existence does not depend upon anything).
Throughout the ages many philosophers have questioned the meaning of Existence. For example, one of philosophy's most perplexing questions is "why there is something instead of nothing?." To ask this question is to ask for the cause of Existence and at the same time imply that there is some kind of higher purpose for Existence other than Existence Itself. Such question, of course, is irrelevant if we consider that Existence is already the highest purpose. Another strong point against this question is that Existence is paradoxical: both nonexistence (nothing) and existence (something) already coexist as the two sides of the coin named Existence. Finally, we can also answer the question with another question: if nothing, by definition, is lack of existence, then how could it exist?
Artificial CreationThe Artificial Creation (AC) is a virtual reality that represents a featureless image of the Creator like a silhouette or shadow. For example, depending on the angle of vision, a shadow is always distorting the true shape of who / what is casting it and it does not reflect the features (qualities) of that person / object. In contrast, the Divine Creation (DC) is a genuine and flawless depiction of the Creator including His attributes, characteristics, and most importantly, His intentions of how Creation should be. Both versions of Creation, divine and artificial, can be said to be images of the Creator, or imaginations produced by an infinite consciousness, but the fundamental difference is that one is genuine (real) and the other is false (virtual).
For example, if we consider the Artificial and Divine Creations as photographs of Creation, the AC assumes the role of the negative photographic film, and the DC assumes the role of the positive film. That is why both the Artificial and Divine Creations are not absolute concepts themselves: any static / photographic representation of Creation invariably discards the transcendental quality that is characteristic of an absolute concept.
| Creation | |
|---|---|
| Artificial | Divine |
| limited | unlimited |
| temporary | eternal |
| flawed | perfect |
| distorted | clear |
| repetitive | innovative |
| fragmented | whole |
| pseudo | genuine |
| dead | alive |
| physical | spiritual |
In a virtual reality, everything is programmed, and not actually real in the sense of a reality that feels natural. But then, how is it possible that the obvious surroundings composing one's reality are not real? Well, reality is a very subjective term. What is real for a person may very well be illusory for another, because reality is simply the baseline of that which feels more intense (realistic) for someone. The fact is that there is always a degree of illusion in any reality, as well as a degree of realism in any illusion, but ultimately reality and illusion are synonyms because reality implies in that which is manifested, and what is manifest is always the outer appearance and not the insubstantial spirit of who / what casts the image. In other words, nothing is ever as it seems.
Anyway, even a clear and bright manifestation of the Creator is still deceptive to a certain degree, because images have no substance of their own; it is that which is casting (creating) the image that does. Therefore, every image ends up being an illusion. This is why Maya, a concept in Hinduism meaning "world of illusion," is sometimes used to refer to Creation. As one of the main aspects of the Absolute, Creation is a great illusion or manifestation, and since Creation includes all possible realities, then illusion and reality are indeed equivalent concepts on a fundamental level. The only thing that can be considered absolutely real and true is the spirit, the creative power behind the person who creates her own reality, a power that is linked to the Spirit of Creation: the Creator.
Figure 2.# - Creative explosion
The AC is an universe ruled by time and space, hence dimensionality. Its existence, however, is not limited by the values that time and space can assume as the variables they are. This means that the AC has no boundaries in the physical or temporal sense, because time and space can vary from zero to infinity. The only limitation of the AC is that It lacks creative power to be able to keep up with an infinite amount of time and space, and so It eventually has to repeat the same spatio-temporal configurations over and over again like a broken record. That is what makes this particular version of Creation artificial. Now, for Creation in its absolute version, not only there are no limits in time and space, but also no limits in creativity.
Figure 2.# (2.# expanded) - The Model of Creation
In the Model of Creation, the arrow represents how the Line keeps advancing toward the End, while ignoring that the Result is a maximum limit for any big advancement in one single direction. This means that the universe of the AC can freely expand toward infinity or contract toward zero, but such illusory extremes are never really achieved in practice. The Result is the only end that can really be achieved, although that only happens in theory, because in practice the process of the Line never stops for anything. The Result may represent the end of all knowledge through a theoretical model, or maybe through wisdom and experience, whereas life, evolution, or whatever is our interpretation of the Line just keeps advancing toward infinity or zero -- which direction is taken is open to individual choice.
Let us assume a perspective from inside / within the universe of the AC. The most important consequence is that the Model of Creation suffers an inversion of principles: the End and the Origin exchange places. This exchange, however, has nothing to do with a simple horizontal flip of the Model. What really happens is that instead of infinity and zero unified at the Origin, we now have the extremely dualistic nature of the End operating as the fundamental principle of the universe. Everything begins to revolve around infinity or zero, with the Result being highly overlooked in the process. But perhaps the biggest change is that the Divine Creation vanishes from our sight to become like a distant and illusory oasis.
|
|
|
As we can see in Figure 2.#, zero is at the place originally occupied by a singularity. A singularity is what the Divine Creation comes to be in terms of manifestation. Therefore, the main reason why the Origin disappears from the Model altogether is because the Divine Creation suddenly becomes null numerically, void spatially, instantaneous temporally, invisible visually, and ignored ideologically. In other words, the main consequence of being inside the AC is that any sign of the Divine Creation is almost completely gone. We say almost for obvious reasons: the AC is not only finite and temporary, but also fundamentally flawed / imperfect, reason why it cannot shun the Divine Creation completely.
Zero and infinity are the conceptual extremes of any system, and an universe by definition is the largest system, that is, the system that includes all the others. The universe of the AC is populated with extreme forces that either approach zero or infinity, but never both simultaneously. It is an universe torn between two opposite tendencies exerted by two conceptual magnetic poles: one at infinity, and the other nowhere to be found. The only way for these two tendencies or forces to actually coexist without doing it simultaneously is through alternation (i.e, each one has its turn), which is the basis for vibration. Therefore, the AC is completely based on polarity, because for something to vibrate it has to have two points or poles between which to oscillate.
Figure 2.# - Polarity
________________________
1
2 As translated by Stephen Mitchell (1992), one of the many Western scholars who have interpreted this classical Chinese work.
If we wanted to be brief and crude, we would say that the Thirteen Intentions of Creation are Creation Itself -- no more, no less -- even though no definition can do justice for what is already cause and consequence for everything. The Thirteen Intentions are the basis for all knowledge because they determine every conceivable aspect not mattering if it is concrete, abstract or imaginary. The Thirteen Intentions also tell us about the nature of reality and consciousness; the physical, natural and spiritual laws; and the unifying knowledge found in the great paradox of Existence. It is really very simple: no grand unified theory of everything is worth its name if it is not based on the Thirteen Intentions of Creation.
The Thirteen Intentions can also be interpreted as divine energies, levels, principles, archetypes, steps, tones, commands or laws of Creation -- you name it. But, for a better understanding, imagine some kind of universal consciousness, a creator god if you will, that possesses a finite number of intentions regarding how his creation should work / operate / behave. Every creation has its creator, and the will of the creator can be found even in the smallest details of his creation. This is also true in the case of the Thirteen Intentions, and in Chapter 3 we will see examples of how everything is simply and intuitively defined / programmed through them.
The premise of this book is to offer logical explanations for why the Thirteen Intentions are at the center of everything, but remember that it is impossible to completely justify the existence of something that is already the cause for everything. In other words, there is no real explanation for something that is self-explanatory, although we can still try to understand how this and other facts surrounding the Thirteen Intentions are true. Also, be aware that the Thirteen Intentions already constitute the simplest and most fundamental way to look at Creation, because beyond what we can communicate about this knowledge there is only the unspeakable, the inconceivable, which leaves no place for any kind of discussion, only direct experience.
The Thirteen Intentions are initially abstract and thus cannot be put into concrete terms easily. However, much like a psychic can use words to describe invisible energies sensed by him, we can find concrete meanings (words) that most approximate how each Intention feels like. There is no real logic behind such invisible process because any logical analysis can only come after the Intentions have been translated from a sensational domain to an objective one. The translation that is contained in this book is a list of directives for each Intention.
Besides directives, each Intention is also associated to certain qualities, concepts and techniques. To see a complete description of each Intention go to Appendix 1. You might as well use Appendix 1 as a reference for the remainder of this book.
As universal principlesThe Thirteen Intentions can also be seen as an universal decree formed by thirteen principles or ideas. This possibility comes from the fact that there is no other set of principles more fundamental to the universe. They can also be taken as laws or commandments, but the fact is that not all of them work or behave as laws, although some of them are directly associated to certain spiritual laws well-known by practitioners of spirituality. In most cases, however, it is better to think about them strictly as Intentions of Creation.
What really makes the Thirteen Intentions special as principles haivng universal validity, is that they can be applied onto themselves. Each Intention can clarify aspects about each other and/or the whole set. This means that all the knowledge about the Thirteen intentions is found in the Thirteen Intentions themselves! In the remainder of this document, we will be making references to Intentions when they prove something about themselves using the IC #n (Intention of Creation) where n is a number.
As program commandsThe Thirteen Intentions can be interpreted as the command statements (elementary instructions) of a low-level programming language used to write the program that renders Creation as a virtual reality. In computer science, a program is a set of commands ordered in a specific way to produce deterministic (predictable) results that can solve a certain computational problem. One program only differs from another in relation to how its commands are ordered. Two programs written in the same language and with the same order of commands should be identical and thus produce the same results.
The Artificial Creation (AC), which is the physical universe, is the output of the program of Creation. We have already seen that in contrast to the Divine Creation, the AC is pretty much like a virtual reality (VR). A virtual reality is an artificial (false) reality that contrasts with a natural (true) reality. By definition, a VR cannot have an independent existence from a natural reality; after all, it is created inside one. For example, VRs that are based on real-world technology rely on computers for data storage and execution (processing). A technological VR does not differ from the VR of Creation except for what creates it: the AC is a product of consciousness instead of technology. Therefore, the "supercomputer" running the program of Creation and processing the AC and the physical reality contained therein is Consciousness Itself.
As we saw in Section 2.1, a perspective from inside the AC is centered on polarity, and where there is polarity there is the possibility for challenges and competition -- a game scenario. The AC is very much like a VR game for those experiencing It. Games are feedback control systems where players make their inputs to get desired outcomes in an attempt to compete with the other players. Playing games is good for the acquisition of intense experiences, but players should always remember that no game has a clear and eternal winner except for the one who created it: the programmer. The programmer is beyond all rules and parameters that have been established according to the programmed logic of his world / game. Naturally, with respect to Creation seen as a VR game, the role of the programmer belongs to the Creator and/or Consciousness, although Creator makes more sense within this context.
Once inside a VR game world, new players will initially get the impression that they are participating in an exciting adventure with all sorts of scenarios randomly appearing before them. However, the programmer who created the game knows that the output generated by the program is not random at all, but instead it happens according to a receipt of commands that he has chosen carefully. The programmer knows all possible outputs of his program, and the game designer knows all possible outcomes of his game. For someone who plays a game without the same kind of technical knowledge and awareness that the game creator / programmer / designer has, they can easily become mesmerized with the apparent ingeniousness and complexity of the game for a while.
In the same manner that a VR has an underlying programming, the AC is completely programmatic in all of its 12 levels ranging from physical to metaphysical. The programming is not always obvious for those fully immersed in a VR, and they should remain forever ignorant if it was not for some kind of miracle that can prompt them to recognize the artificial aspects of their reality. Well, Consciousness is who creates and fuels the AC, and so It holds the last card when it comes to maintaining the latter. This is reflected in the evolution of an individual consciousness, an evolution that happens through the power of Intention #13, a power that can miraculously overcome any situation. Therefore, a being experiencing a VR can override all programming in the same manner that someone can cause a dream to end by suddenly becoming lucid, and this happens sooner or later because one of the characteristics of consciousness is that it is always evolving beyond (IC #13) its current level.
Inside the game of Creation, namely the Game, the conscious units (players) represent a systemic anomaly because their non-deterministic and spontaneous behavior based on free will (IC #13) enters in conflict with the deterministic nature of the artificial world. However, in the end it is not really a matter of conflict for the players, because it was them as a collective who designed the Game for the purpose of experience. See, all players share the consciousness (IC #12) phenomenon; that is, they are individual expressions of an universal consciousness who is actually willing (IC #13) to play the Game. The Game exists to be won on a personal (conscious) level, and as such it is vital for one's evolutionary existence. At least on an unconscious level, there is no unwanted challenge for any player, because the unconscious is the gateway linking all consciousness to a single, infinite and universal consciousness. (Note: in Section 5.# we will learn more about the nature of consciousness and why it is a spontaneous natural phenomenon that defies all scientific determinism.)
The AC is the perfect scenario for an extreme experience of conflict. It is designed to bring the maximum challenge to each participant. The core theme of any game is free will vs. determinism -- the ultimate challenge. The Game is fun while it lasts, but it must be seen to its ending. The Creator as an universal consciousness is who designed and created the Game and so It can very well destroy it. Evolution of consciousness for all players is the actual end or goal of the Game, and once enough (sufficiency - IC #11) of this goal has been achieved, players will slowly exit the virtual simulation and the Game will eventually end (Finalization - IC #12). Naturally, continued evolution, or eternity (IC #13), must go on, and so nothing stops Consciousness from starting a new game that will offer a whole new set of experiences.
Not only the Thirteen Intentions define a fundamental (low-level) programming language for Creation, but they also function as the program of Creation. They are instructions in a routine that is the main body (function) of the program of Creation. This program can run continuously as long as it is powered by Intention #13, and while it runs, the sequence of Intentions is repeated over and over again in an infinite loop or recursion. Each Intention is like a machine instruction, a computational step, and they are executed in the order presented in this book. Once the program of Creation is actually running, the Intentions can be thought as commands that will control (program) one's consciousness up to a certain point.
Now, suppose that we want to write the program of Creation in algorithmic form. An algorithm is precisely a series of steps designed to solve a certain computational problem. All we have to do is analyze the directives of each Intention of Creation and figure out their basic function over consciousness. In the pseudocode below we make use of keywords (mnemonics) to identify the instructions associated with each Intention.
| Command | Keyword | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 01 | START | Consciousness becomes individuated. The process begins. |
| 02 | DIVIDE | Consciousness becomes separate from Its original self; It assumes a false identity. |
| 03 | ACTIVATE | Consciouness becomes electrical signals. |
| 04 | MATERIALIZE | Consciousness becomes a body. |
| 05 | LIVE | Consciousness becomes life, vital energy. Consciousness moves around, explores and experiments. |
| 06 | EVALUATE | Consciousness becomes a variable; Its level (value) oscillates. Experiences are acquired through ups and downs. Consciousness is learning. |
| 07 | ADD | Consciousness, the variable, reaches an equilibrium (stable value) and is now ready to increase all the way. |
| 08 | MULTIPLY | Consciousness, the variable, increases exponentially; Its level (value) tends to infinity. Experiences become increasingly intense. |
| 09 | SUBTRACT | Consciousness, the variable, has Its level (value) greatly decreased. Experiences are distilled until only their essence remains. |
| 10 | INTEGRATE | Consciousness becomes a spirit. All experiences have been completely assimilated. |
| 11 | PREPARE | Consciousness prepares itself to return to its original state (self). Consciousness, the variable, has Its level (value) rounded to the nearest integer. The process is about to end. |
| 12 | RETURN/END | Consciousness finally returns to Its original self as universal consciousness. The process ends. |
| 13 | RESTART/CONTINUE | Consciousness wants new experiences; It wants to start the process all over again. |
The program of Creation is implemented by consciousness and operates upon consciousness. The difference is that the former is Consciousness with capital C and the latter is someone's personal consciousness. This also means that both The input and the output of the program is consciousness, with the output hopefuly being a higher level of consciousness. the problem that this progrma solves is exatcly how rovide one's consciousness with evolution even if one is already sure that there has already been enough. It does not matter what one may think, because from the perspetive of Intention #13 evolution is never enough, never over. It is designed to Intention #13 is eternal revolution, which can be interpreted as evolution on top of evolution, that is, infi-, multi-dimensional evolution.
The Program effectively ends with Intention #12, and so the 13th command / instruction should not exist. However, it exists because we are doing a linear (procedural) abstraction of what is actually a non-linear process. The Program runs forever iterating over itself in recursive fashion. 13 is the command that makes the program/routine CALLS ITSELF (recursion). The output of one instance of the Program becomes the input of a new instance. Therefore, the Program is always ending, yet in the mind of Consciousness the experiences acquired are eternal, and they help to build new scenarios.
Finally, as one's consciousness escalates within the Game, it eventually overrides the program. What was once a preprogrammed (automated) being, begins to become a programmer as it remembers its true identity as Creator. When this happens, it is a sign that the Game is reaching its end. After all, programmers don't have much time to play games; they are too busy creating them.
We have already seen in 1.5 - Principles how zero and infinity cannot give us a proper (definitive) answer with respect to the universal truth, and so we decided that maybe the number of universal principles is a finite one. Indeed, discovering the Thirteen Intentions is just a matter of finding principle by principle until there is a number of them that finally covers everything. If the number of Intentions was any higher than 13, it would not be possible for us to settle at this number and not suffer with a feeling of incompleteness. In fact, that is exactly what happens when we are aware of less than 13 Intentions.
To discover an Intention is to understand its meaning with respect to all of Creation. Fortunately, one Intention leads to the discovery of another very easily. When we have already found out about a few Intentions, it does not take long until we become aware of all of the first 12 Intentions. The only exception to the chain reaction of discoveries is Intention #13, because this Intention can only be found by pure intuition, that is, by one of those "a-ha!" moments.
Anyway, as it is the case in any field of research, a researcher eventually reaches a point that if he simply knows the truth then he no longer has to believe in it. The truth is that there is not a real cause for the fact that 13 is the right quantity, because it is something that becomes self-explanatory after we learn about the sheer amount of evidence pointing to this exact number of steps for the cosmology of Creation. The Thirteen Intentions are the end of all knowledge, and as we learn more about them, this notion only gets reinforced. There is an overwhelming amount of evidence that supports number 13 as being the right one, and amassing all this evidence is one of the main goals of this book. We will see in Chapter 3 how the Thirteen Intentions literally implement reality in all of its details.
Should you just believe that there are 13 Intentions of Creation? Of course not, because first you have to prove this to yourself. Believing is not knowing. You must be rooted in a state of knowing, not based entirely upon beliefs, most of which are false. People believe that they have to believe and in the process they forget about the importance of having genuine knowledge, of having certainty. A belief is a form of self-deception -- you either know or you don't, so why fool yourself? If you have to believe in something then you have already been defeated in your quest for knowledge, but do not worry: there is nothing better than beginning this quest with the certainty that all that you know is that you do not know anything.
Why the name Intention?All Intentions are only different aspects extracted from the great singularity that is Creation. Of course, Intention #13 coincides with the singularity manifest, and so it is more than only an aspect. Anyway, to help us visualize the cause for the name Intention, we can imagine each Intention as a vortex. When something is caught inside a vortex, it is dragged toward the core, which lies at the innermost extreme of the vortex. Consider that as something gets near the core, tension (frequency of vibration) tends to infinity. Now, from the word innermost we have the prefix in, and so by joining in with tension we get intension. Sure, an intension is not the same as an intention, but the two words share the same etymological root. While intention may refer to a mental state, a state of intension is specifically one of internal tension, and thus, for all matters, internal is the same as mental. Indeed, each Intention of Creation functions as a psychoactive frequency, a mode of consciousness, that causes a certain degree of tension on those assuming that particular intention inside themselves.
Figure 2.# - 12 around 1
Which Intention is more important?
None in reality. Each Intention has unique properties that are essential to the whole set. All Intentions are unique (IC #1) and equally (IC #6) important. However, according to the directive Representation (IC #1) there must be one Intention that represents all the others: a leader. A leader is not necessarily better than all the others, but is simply ellected because of his skills to be the spokesperson and to represent the group. A leader is usually an authority that is occupying the highest (IC #8) place. Well, if we need just one Intention to represent all the others, and one that occupies the highest place, then that can only be Intention #13.
Intention #13 is the representative (IC #1) of all Intentions, but since both Representation and Unification are directives from Intention #1, another way to see it is that Intention #13 is all the first 12 Intentions unified. In other words, Intention #13 not only has an independent existence but also single-handedly represents the entirety of the first 12 Intentions. Therefore, when we need to address something about all the Intentions taken as one, we can very well do this by using Intention #13.
Numbers are born when we seek to divide the energy continuum of the universe by isolating and attributing symbols to its different aspects. We say aspects, not parts, because the energy continuum is undifferentiated at first, and there are really only different ways of seeing the same thing. The filter of differentiation (IC #2) that breaks down the continuum in parts lies only in our own perception, and it is the result of a process known as reasoning.
Symbols are a way to further bring into evidence the difference between elements, a difference that is always one of energy in the universe. There are many complex symbols, but they all stem from one fundamental type: numbers. If we imagine the energy continuum of the universe as a line that includes an infinite number of smaller lines (segments), then a number is what symbolizes the difference of size between one line segment and another.
Figure 2.2 - Extended real number line (mathematics)
The Pythagoreans, those that followed the philosophical doctrine of Pythagoras, believed that reality is fundamentally mathematical. They were remarkably correct if we consider that the Thirteen Intentions tell us the same thing: Intention #3 (reality) follows after Intention #2 in the sequence, and so reality should evolve from what Intention #2 represents: linearity, the root concept for the notion of number. For instance, we know that reality in the geometrical sense is only possible after nothing becomes something spontaneously, that is, such as when a point, the nothing-as-something in geometry, suddenly extends into a line (IC #2). On the other hand, reality as we know it and perceive it is the outcome of our identification (IC #2) and classification (IC #2) of the many aspects of Creation.
This is the reason why numbers are incredibly fundamental to reality, and why mathematics is an exemplar science that shows us the rationality in the order of the universe. Numbers are a reflection of reality, and thus are significant with respect to every aspect of it. Even numbers that pop up casually in everyday life are carrying important information that if successfully decoded can increase our understanding of reality.
Until now we have been treating numbers as only having quantitative meaning for the purpose of evaluation. People do not associate a meaning to a number except that of value, but what most do not realize is that numbers also have qualitative meaning, because they correspond to different types of energy and awareness directly related to the Thirteen Intentions of Creation. That is why the key to understand how exactly a number is meaningful lies in finding which Intentions of Creation are attached to it.
Numerology is the field that researches into the occult and qualitative meaning of numbers. It tells us about the number archetypes, that is, the significance and the associations that each number carries. While mathematics sees numbers only as a mean, numerology sees numbers both as means and end. In fact, there is no reason why numbers alone cannot provide us with answers as well. Many ancient cultures saw numbers as being everything except meaningless. They had a deep consideration for numbers in themselves (Barrow 102) and even based important aspects of their culture on them; all of this when they knew very little or nothing about mathematical formulas behind the workings of Nature.
Numerological meaningThe whole idea of numerological analysis is finding the numerological meaning of integral numbers (integers). In the case of the decimal system, which uses the digits 0 to 9, the set of basic meanings are those of the single-digit numbers 1 to 9 excluding zero whose meaning is simply "lack of meaning." But If a number has more than one digit, its meaning is seen as a composition, combination of the meanings of numbers 1 to 9. Thus, When we want to find the composite meaning of a number, we must first break the number down and analyse each digit separately, as for example: 13 = 1 + 3 ; 6782 = 6 + 7 + 8 + 2.
Numerically speaking, zero is officialy introduced with Intention #10, but, as you can see, it comes attached to number 1. This is because the meaning of zero is that of a paradox (IC #10). Although zero is considered an ideal from the perspective of Intention #9, it eventually reveals itself as being a paradox, an absurd. It is possible to go as close to zero as possible in reality, but zero taken as a limit is an absurd idea, and also the reason why Intention #9 leads to #10. Zero is always a relative concept, and only absolute concepts can operate as Intentions of Creation. At most, zero is an integral part of the paradoxical Intention #10, which represents a dynamic whole that merges opposite extremes.
Naturally, the meanings of numbers 1 to 13 come directly from their respective Intentions of Creation, and so we do not need to focus on these numbers for now since we already know what each Intention means. Our goal lies in numbers 14 up to infinity that do not have Intentions associated to them. their meanings come from different combinations of the first nine Intentions, forming composite meanings. See the examples below.
14 -> 1 + 4 -> an ideal (IC #1) structure (IC #4) 27 -> 2 + 7 -> a limited (IC #2) vibration (IC #7) 31 -> 3 + 1 -> a manifested (IC #3) singularity (#1) 465 -> 4 + 6 + 5 -> a variating (IC #6) potential (IC #5) object (IC #4) 564 -> 5 + 6 + 4 -> an equilibrated (IC #6) material (IC #4) energy (IC #5)Schematics 2.#
But the most important practice in Numerology is to reduce numbers with more than one digit to the sum of its digits and continue until a single-digit number is reached. This process of simplification is also known as pythagoerean math or numerological arithmetic, and it is an attempt to find the root/elementary/basic (IC #1) meaning behind the composite meaning of a number.
10 -> 1 20 -> 2 30 -> 3 40 -> 4 11 -> 2 21 -> 3 31 -> 4 41 -> 5 12 -> 3 22 -> 4 32 -> 5 42 -> 6 13 -> 4 23 -> 5 33 -> 6 43 -> 7 14 -> 5 24 -> 6 34 -> 7 44 -> 8 15 -> 6 25 -> 7 35 -> 8 45 -> 9 16 -> 7 26 -> 8 36 -> 9 46 -> 1 17 -> 8 27 -> 9 37 -> 1 47 -> 2 18 -> 9 28 -> 1 38 -> 2 48 -> 3 19 -> 1 29 -> 2 39 -> 3 49 -> 4Schematics 2.# - Digital rooting
The purpose for this process is simply a matter of convenience if one wants to get down to what the composite meaning of a number adds up to (results) in simple terms. It's like reaching a conclusion, a summation for what is the outcome of the combination of two or more number meanings. From one side it is an unified meaning that sums up pretty well, on the other hand it wastes important details only found on the composite meaning. Therefore, In any way it does subsitute the composite meaning. A few examples are included below.
14 -> 1 + 4 = 5 -> an ideal (IC #1) structure (IC #4) results in robustness 27 -> 2 + 7 = 9 -> challenging (IC #2) vibrations (IC #7) are certainly found in meditation (IC #9) 31 -> 3 + 1 = 4 -> a manifested (IC #3) individual (#1) thing is obviously an object (IC #4) 465 -> 4 + 6 + 5 = 15 = 1 + 5 = 6 -> a variating (IC #6) potential (IC #5) object (IC #4) leads to equilibrium (IC #6)Schematics 2.#
There is nothing magical about this process alone because it even depends on which numeral system is adopted. If we were using the hexadecimal system, which uses sixteen symbols, we would have fifteen symbols corresponding to fifteen basic meanings, and all multi-digit hexadecimal numbers could have their composite meanings reduced to one of these fifteen basic meanings. Of course, all numerological meanings are ultimately borrowed from the Thirteen Intentions, and fifteen basic meanings would extrapolate the number of meanings that are really basic and fundamental with respect to Creation. we would be mistakenly attribtuing a fundamental status to the nomerological meaning of the fourteenth and fifteen symbols of the hexadecimal system.
Numbers with repeating digits introduce the notion of multiplication (IC #8) in our analysis. at first there is only one single-digit meaning contained in the number, but multiplied one, two or more times. Multiplifiation is the same as amplifying/reinforcing the single-digit meaning of that number by an arrbitrary number of times, but this reinforcement itself has meaning, because it happens through another number. against through or by in the same way when we say (one number by another).
44 -> 4 x 2 = 8 -> an object (IC #4) reinforced by separation (IC #2) 666 -> 6 x 3 = 18 = 1 + 8 = 9 -> equilibrium (IC #6) reinforced by manifestation (IC #3)Schematics 2.#
More examples, but this time with no repeating digits:
3 x 4 = 12 -> reality (IC #3) happening through form (IC #4) equals consciousness (IC #12)Schematics 2.#
For numbers containing the digit zero, we do not have a combination of intentions anymore, but just one intention at a higher order (IC #8). a highe rorder means the same energy is at a higher level, being more intense and more powerful. the more zeros you add, the higher it is. SInce Intensification is a directive of Intention #10, then any Intention or combination of Intentions can be multiplied (IC #8) by Intention #10, that reuslts in the same energy at a higher level at which it is felt more intensily . See the following examples:
30 = 3 x 10 -> manifestation (IC #3) at a higher order 350 = 35 x 10 -> (3 + 5) x 10 -> electric (IC #3) energy (IC #5) at a higher order 50000 = 5 x 10^3 -> an explosion (IC #5) whose destructive power is at the order of ten thousand unitsSchematics 2.#
FInally, For numbers 10, 11, 12 and 13, and their corresponding Intentions of Creation, we can still analyse them numerogilically, yet there is no need since we already know their meaning as Intentions of Creation. Their meanings as Intentions of Creation andas numbers are two separate things, but they stil coincide with each other, as shown below.
| Number | Description |
|---|---|
| 10 |
A representant (IC #1) of higher order, such as a deity, is necessarily divine (IC #10). A singularity (IC #1) of higher order is even more dense (IC #10). |
| 11 |
Motivation (IC #1) means that you are following your destiny (IC #11). Two singularities (IC #1) can only be infinitesimally next to each other (Proximation - IC #11) due to the infinite gravitational force around them. |
| 12 |
The separation (IC #2) of a romantic couple can still be ideal (IC #1) if there is still communication (IC #12). |
| 13 |
An ideal (IC #1) creation (IC #3) is one that lasts for all eternity (IC #13). The best (IC #1) celebrity (public [consensus reality - IC #3] image [IC #3]) is the one that is continuously renewing (IC #13) his/her image. |
We are not going to talk about love as if it was a mere feeling or emotion; on the contrary, we are going to ascribe a cosmic significance to it in the same way that we did with the Thirteen Intentions of Creation: Love is the primary, the highest and the most powerful expression of energy in the universe. Love is the substance of everything that is, the foundation of all existence. It is incredibly difficult to convey the true meaning of love to another person because love transcends any form of representation. In fact, it is only through personal experiences that a true knowledge of love can be attained.
Figure 2.# - Love
There is very little room for a rational interpretation of love. Shortly after coming into existence, a being is still immature and thus experiences love as an irrational feeling or urge. As the time passes, the being starts building a bridge from rationality to irrationality. Knowledge is what anyone gets after sufficient time being a rational person. Beings can sense and feel love, but such state is difficult to achieve and does not last as long as the being is not mature enough to be able to access and control an infinite source of energy. In short, to see love from a rational perspective is the ultimate intellectual challenge, and to control it as an energy is the ultimate physical challenge.
The word love in its ordinary usage is so loaded with assumptions that it is almost impossible to define it in a way that does not contradict the true meaning / nature of love. As many spiritual teachings like to put it, love is very close to the idea of an unconditional and transcendental force, meaning that it does not care about limits or conditions. Anyway, due to the great confusion surrounding the meaning of love, let us consider Love (IC #13) instead, with capital L, which should coincide with the definition given on the first paragraph: love as an infinite level of energy.
Many sources have referred to Love as the basic law of the Universe, the only law we have. A famous phrase was coined by occultist Aleister Crowley: "Love is the law, love under will." Indeed, a law such as Love expects a degree of commitment and discipline requiring that one's will is aligned with it and not under it as satanic or Crowleyian philosophy would like us to believe. In the case of Love, no restrictions are cast upon anyone's will, and that alone acts as the whole of the law, but for anyone to actually be in a state of unrestricted will, or true will, great discipline and training is necessary. Therefore, in the end Love turns out as being the most restrictive law of all, but also the most liberating when understood correctly.
The general alias for Love seen as a law is Law of Allowance, which in turn is said to reflect the Will of the Creator. Love determines just one rule: to allow and accept (IC #13) everything, dearly and unconditionally. This may sound contradictory for a law, but the Law of Allowance does dictate something: free will must be maintained at all costs. Above all, free will is the right of being, the right of choosing to be, and this means that Love protects existence by ensuring that everything can exist (be) and continue (IC #13) to exist unrestrained. Also, by even allowing its negation to exist, such as hate or fear, Love maximizes the possibilities for free will.
If you had to follow just one law, that would be Love, but the paradox is that Love is the only law that does not require obedience, although we can also say that Its only requirement is that we should remain free to obey It or not, and so we are necessarily obeying It in one way or another. Perhaps a lazy individual does not even want to decide wether he wants to obey Love or not, but he would still be choosing not to have to make a choice since there is no such thing as an existence without choices. In fact, to make a choice is the only available option for everyone regardless of which choice is made.
Choices can be made consciously or unconsciously. When choices are made unconsciously, a person will play the victim role as the consequences arise and she does not know where they came from. On the other hand, it is through the conscious affirmation of our choices that we exert free will, and so we abide by Love, whereas our freedom dissipates when we remain oblivious to our choices. Still, even an unconscious being abides by Love, at least indirectly, because once the being chose consciously not to choose and not to have responsibility anymore. Therefore, Love is the only law that everybody can be happy with, because there are no obligations except accepting responsibility for our own choices.
In the song "All is Full of Love" by singer Björk, the concept that Love is an omnipresent energy is well illustrated with the passage "All is full of love, you just ain't receiving." In other words, the problem was never really about the search for Love; instead, it is about a simple decision to embrace Love right now and ever. It is a matter of letting Love flow inside us naturally, without resistance. Also, still considering love as an omnipresent energy, we may conclude that the Law of Allowance is already implemented everywhere in the universe; it is therefore useless to try to dispute with It or run away from It.
It should be clear by now that it is not really possible to reject Love, as Love is what is responsible for the miracle of existence. Love is already implemented and realized with full force in all forms of existence. This fact turns the idea of following and/or applying Love into a pointless task, because everyone is already doing this in one way or another -- everyone is a part of Creation (overall existence). On the other hand, acknowledging that everything is already full of love and there is no need for us to worry about anything is also pointless, because we are merely stating the obvious and using it as an excuse to drop our responsibility.
Love does not require any kind of special devotion; It does not expect us to do anything in Its name, or that we act in a certain way all the time. Love only expect us to accept and surrender ourselves to our true will (a.k.a. Will with capital W). The fact that Intention #12 is right under Intention #13 in the sequence of Intentions shows us that any kind of consciousness (IC #12) almost inherits all of the Will of the Creator, which is Love. The only missing part between Intentions #12 and #13 is the unique account that comes with individuality (IC #1). In other words, individuals have their own unique way of expressing Love, and that is what following one's Will (IC #13) means.
12 + 1 = 13 -> consciousness (IC #12) with individuality (IC #1) results in a being with its own Will (IC #13) based on Love, the will of the Creator.Schematics 2.#
Figure #.#
One of the most efficient ways to express love, as the Law of Allowance implies, is to simply allow things to happen, allow things to change, and allow things to continue. However, it is important to understand that allowance here does not necessarily mean inaction, as passiveness can also play the inverse role and tamper with the free flow of things. For example: In a river stream full of fish, suppose that one fish gets stuck and you decide to set it free. This is Love in action, while the same is not valid if you try to impede the fishes from going with the flow, or if you remain passive when there is a clear need for intervention.
Allowance involves a subtle transformation of consciousness from denial (fear) to acceptance (Love). An entire reality of pain and suffering can miraculously change when it becomes accepted, because corrective actions can be taken far more efficiently when fear has been eliminated. First you accept, then you do whatever is necessary to correct the problem. Unfortunately, the contrary can also happen when people stay in denial about almost everything and they even work to remain in this state.
Love is a paradoxical concept for the simple fact that It is a law that does not work as one. A law that is already fully operational and cannot be violated is no more no less than just the way things are. We have also seen that there is no reason for us to forget about all problems just because "love will prevail." Yes It will, but only at the very end of the journey back to the Source. (See the Model of Creation in Section 2.1.) Creation is sustained by Love, and the core of Creation can be thought as being a point where infinite, perfect and genuine love resides. Everybody is already virtually present at the Source, but not everybody has realized this state. For the majority there is always more work to do, and that is why it is important that they avoid falling into extremes of denial of Love or denial of reality.
When we state the importance of Love as for example with the phrase "Infinite love is the only truth. Everything else is illusion" (David Icke), we are not crazy or deluded, but we may be putting too much emphasis on the obvious; we may be forgetting that real understanding of Love can only come with direct personal experience, and experience by definition is something that happens through a series of real situations. Reality (Existence) is important because It provides the jumping platform that propel us toward greater understanding of what Love really is. This book in particular attempts to show how absolute and paradoxical concepts such as Love are not removed from reality, no matter how grim that reality appears to be.
Relationship with the Thirteen Intentions of CreationIntention #13 is the most powerful energy of Creation, or, to be more exact, the divine energy that we call Love. However, from within the Artificial Creation (AC) Love is actually spread out, fragmented, and must be rediscovered through a series of experiences that form a line of evolution for the individual. In fact, evolution is the name of the process of Creation, a process that justifies the existence of the universe (the AC). Figuratively speaking, if there was no evolution there would be no need for the AC and the Thirteen Intentions, and Creation would remain as an immanifest singularity without levels of energy forming an evolutionary ladder.
Each one of the Thirteen Intentions is a different way to express Love, with Intention #13 being the one that brings Love forward in Its full glory. Such genuine love is sometimes referred to as "unconditional" love. The problem with such denomination is that unconditional still sounds as a condition within the context of the Law of Allowance. Love in action is comprehension, understanding, cognition, knowledge, ability, mastering, respect, logic and certainty, and all based on wisdom, which in no circumstance means a complete lack of conditions. That is why there is no such thing as unconditional love inside the AC; there is only a learning process toward reaching Love with capital L, and any accomplishments during this process are at most approximations of what Love really is. Love as the universal law cannot be directly applied in practice because it involves a level of self-awareness and self-responsibility that has nothing to do with us doing some thing or another in particular, but that also depends on every single action of our part.
Figure 2.# - The fallacy of unconditional love
Is it justified to kill for Love? Certainly not when we are wise and always looking for a better solution, but in reality there is no answer to this question because Love is above the category that elicited it. The question itself carries a fundamental mistake: trying to answer it is giving in to the possibility that Love can fail. But Love is absolute and cannot be violated. A feeling of Love provides us with wisdom beyond words that will decide the best course of action we should take. however, this does not mean that we cannot devise a code of conduct compatible with this feeling.
Therefore, it is only when we break Love down into rules and directives that we can begin to understand It from a more rational and scientific viewpoint, and thus find effective ways to follow and apply It in our lives. That is where the Thirteen Intentions of Creation come in. With the Thirteen Intntions it is possible for us to plan in advance, take decisions and translate our understanding of Love into rational thoughts. Then we will be able to make decisions according to the best possible principles, the Will of the Creator. This is mainly what Chapter 4 is all about: to show how the Intentions can be applied in practice.
To exemplify, suppose that we could see Creation as a spherical jewel floating alone in the void. With the creation of the universe, or from a perspective located inside the AC, it can be said that this jewel has been shattered into numerous pieces. The jewel still exists as a fragmented whole, but it is no longer in a pristine condition. In any case, the jewel seen as a single object is the Divine Creation, whereas the Artificial Creation corresponds to how the jewel looks like as a bunch of fragments from the outside or a bunch of facets from the inside -- both scenarios are valid.
Figure 2.#
The highest purpose of life is simply to experience, which in turn means to learn more about Love. To learn about Love is an eternal task in reality, but one that can be made discrete in the form of cycles (lives). This means that living itself is life's purpose, because life is a modal unit of experience. Life is supposed to be lived according to your Will. The purpose is to keep living, to evolve and to let others live and evolve too. There is no such thing as a restrictive plan with respect to life, because that would go against free will, which is an incorruptible right according to the Law of Allowance. However, discipline is always good to ensure that you are living in the best possible manner. Discipline yourself by making your own rules based on your Will and the directives of Creation, because then you can amplify your experiences and serve as an example to others.
FearFear is basically a feeling of spiritual disconnection. Fear emanates from the shadowy part of the Self that is temporarily separated from the Divine. Fear arises when one gazes into nothingness, the void that once was occupied by a spirit. The vibration of fear takes over when one cannot find their essence / spirit anymore. Fear is the greatest barrier to personal growth, a barrier that prevents a being from acquiring self-awareness and rediscovering its spiritual identity. Fear can easily spiral out of control and transform into despair as one gazes deeper into the abyss of the soul. However, not all is lost, because according to German philosopher Goethe, "Tiefer, tiefer, irgendwo in der Tiefe gibt es ein Licht." (Translation: "Deeper, deeper, somewhere in the depth there is a light.")
Figure 2.# - Fear
If we are supposed to come up with an opposite for Love, then that opposite is fear, not hate. Hate is actually the opposite of Love's lesser / ordinary version: love with small l. We have already exposed unconditional love as being a fallacious and extremist version of Love, and such judgment applies the same for other ordinary notions of love because they all tend to be extreme and imbalanced. Ordinary love is extremist like hate, and so the two are pretty much sides of the same coin. On the other hand, Love reigns supreme over all sides as if they were one, and a force against Love does not really exist except as an extremely distorted form / aspect of Love Itself. Although it is true that everything in the universe is a matter of love vs. fear, you can see that this conception is only valid when we are talking about ordinary love, because there is no opposition at all when fear is in reality Love playing an inverse role of Itself. This means that an opposition between fear and Love is nothing more than an illusion propagated by fear itself.
Figure 2.# - Coin
It would be a great shame for Love to do battle with a counterfeit opposition. True love comes from a much higher plane than the unconditional version that requires its adherents to turn the other cheek in masochistic style. The Big L may also turn the other cheek, but not because It is incapable to react: being Love an infinite power, all fights are already decided in Its favor. What Love represents at the level of Intention #13 is already an eternal victory, while the battles and competitions involving the polarity aspects of Love are just for fun, just for the laughs, since playfulness is one of the main characteristics of Love. Think about it: if you do not care about losing or winning, then what good is a game to you?
Fear is considered the primary instinct of survival (self-preservation) in dangerous situations. But here we are more interested in the energy of fear and its fundamental nature, not in physiological and psychological effects caused by fear. We are talking about fear in the spiritual sense, because fear is like a barrier causing one to be disconnected from the Spirit. Fear is the principle by which consciousness is persuaded to continue to maintain that barrier, which is needed for a preservation of the Self inside the Game. In Section 2.2 we had a glimpse of the actual source code of the universe as the program (game) of Creation and we saw how consciousness becomes individuated when it first enters this game. Well, fear makes sure that the player (consciousness) has a chance of surviving all stages in the game. Fear prevents the player from giving up too soon and will leave him with no choice other than progressing.
When you avoid something out of fear, it's only because that thing still exerts influence over you, and you may just right into it without knowing. just fall back to it in the drop of a hat. fear is a great attractor, and we always attract that which we fear. A negative attitude based on fear draws a negative experience that will feed that fear of yours. fear has to be overcome / mastered first through acceptance of it, and then by confronting it. just sitting and acknolwdgeing the fear is not enough. One must transform the fear into higher levels of understanding, and the highest level is Love. The key is to experience and subsequently to learn to control and direct the fear energy, transforms his fear into fury, caution, courage... the fear energy is which is Love on the mirror, , so reaching out for Love automatically means letting go of fear. translates to a unfocused, uncontrolled love. not put into action or movement. lack of control of one's energy.
To put it simply, fear is ignorance, unawareness and, deep inside, denial of Love, because there is always a choice at the level of the subconscious mind. We have already made the connection between fear and denial when we were discussing Love in the beginning of this section. Fear is always associated with denial of some integral aspect of Creation, and most importantly, everything that Intention #13 represents. Intention #13 can represent many things, but one of Its most important aspects on a personal level is change. Change always involves some loss by the introduction of the new and the removal of the old. False expectations instead of acceptance of whatever may come is what characterizes a fearful approach to the new (IC #13). When the new is falsely imagined beforehand rather than being accepted for what it is, it is turned into an unknown, and all fear is generated by unknowns. In addition, fear involves an ignorant perspective of denial, which means that the fearful entity does not even understand the reason for its feelings of repulsion.
... all our worries and wars are based upon change. We fear that something will happen, or we fear that it won't; so we fight to prevent change or to speed up the process. But whatever we do, change is 100 percent guaranteed. The only question is its rate. Slow change we interpret as evolution, fast as revolution. Changes are the epitome of Unknowns -- the greatest of fear generators. (Monroe 2)
Figure 2.# - Love and fear
Whereas Love is latent in the first few Intentions of Creation, fear is potent, and can be pictured as being a natural force pushing away from Intention #13. Considering that this force must go through Intentions #3 and #2 in order to reach Intention #1, we can resume the focus, the culmination of fear as being an existence (IC #3) that is removed (IC #2) from Love in the most absolute (IC #1) manner. But how absurd does this sound when we already know that Love is absolute? Surprisingly, not so absurd considering that absolute (IC #1) existence (IC #3) -> 1 + 3 -> 13 -> IC #13, which means that fear still guides one to Intention #13 after all. Indeed, what is shown in Figure 2.# is a perspective from within the illusory reality of the Artificial Creation. It only appears that fear opposes Love, because in reality fear is a force of attraction toward Love without the conscious participation of the individual.
Figure 2.#
Intention #13 is is a singularity (IC #1) manifested (IC #3) meaning that It is self-sufficient, It is whole unto itself, and does not need the other Intentions, including Intention #2. Now if fear is denial of love, it is also denial of what Intention #13 represent, and so fear justifies the existence of polarity which means two poles and not just a singularity. Fear in adition is a potent (IC #5): it pushes the poles fara way from each other as possible, that is, extrapolate (IC #8). it wants the two poles to be completely (IC #10) separate. biut it can at most make an approximation (IC #11). ANyway, see Note how we have mentioned ICs #5, #8, #10 ansd #11 come into the picture just because of the process of polarization which is directly related to fear. We could also derived the other itnentions. but the fact is the firts 12 intentiosn only have their existence justified because of thsi process of division that we call fear.inshort this processa alone involves all 12 intentions.
Let us see some examples of how fear is simultaneously repulsion from Intention #13 and attraction to Intention #1. Fear of death, for example, is supported by the belief that there is only one (IC #1) life that must be preserved as sacred; however, according to Intention #13, there is continued existence as long as there is will (IC #13) to exist, not mattering how many lives happen during the process. There is also fear of life when one is afraid of not living according to external (IC #2) conventions (Representation - IC #1) that require conformity to social standards. The person due to fear chooses to conform instead of expressing her individuality. Interestingly enough, according to numerological math we have individuality (IC #1) expressed (IC #3) -> 1 + 3 -> 13 -> IC #13, and so fear of non-conforming goes against Intention #13 as well.
Now, if fear is a force that pushes away from Love, we may ask ourselves: away from Love toward what? Well, the answer is nothing, because the very premise of the question is an absurd. Indeed, fear is love of nothing; it is still Love, but without control by the hands of the individual. For example, the Divine Creation disappearing in the inverted Model of Creation means that the Source can no longer be found. The Source contains an infinite amount of love, and the fact that all this love is suddenly gone creates a feeling of disconnection that leaves the being completely lost. At Its essence, Source is Love and as such Love is the only real (authentic) energy in the universe; all else is just illusion associated with the game of separation, which is fear, that defines the physical universe. Fear is the shadow of illusory disconnection from the Source, which is everybody's original home. Fearful beings are attracted to nothing because it is a placeholder for where their Home was. Fear manifests as denial of reality in favor of nothing because instead of looking forward to go back, the beings are looking back to where they came from.
Still according to Figure 2.#, consider that fear is a magnetic pole at Intention #1 whose force of attraction, or sphere of influence, is stronger at Intention #2 (separation), #3 (illusion) and #4 (physical existence). Therefore, we can say that fear is rooted in the illusory perception of separation that pervades the physical universe. Anyway, and perhaps fortunately, fear is gradually released as there is attunement to higher Intentions of Creation. As the being suffers a spiritual (IC #9) transformation, focus shifts from fear to Love, and an ignorant approach to Love is replaced with a conscious one. Fear is the foreshadowing of this transformation. Indeed, it is always a surprise for those who held a negative connotation about fear to see that their greatest fears were essential to their spiritual awakening. From a victim of fear they have become masters of Love. They were on the right path all the time -- they just did not know it.
In spite of fear being an illusion considered by many as the cause of negative experiences, fear is vital for an evolutionary existence. In Figure 2.# we can see that without a force of repulsion that creates separation there would be no distance or difference between Intention #1 and #13. This 12-fold distance is the conceptual length of an evolutionary process for consciousness as it traverses the universe. In short, fear sets forth and justifies an entire context of evolution and spiritual progression. Fear is only fear as long as there is lack of spirituality, a phase in which the being is unknowingly seeking Love while guided by its own fear. That is, the being needs fear until it is ready to practice and experience Love.
Fear is the original disassociative distraction of the spirit of Creation. The Spirit, or Consciousness forgets about Itself, but it is a wilful act so that it can remember about its nature anew. In other words, it is a like the mythical Luciferian rebellion, a denial of Love, so that Love can be rediscovered, because rediscovering Love is the only way to learn more about It. To deny Love is still just an experience, but perhaps not the most pleasurable one, reason why it cannot be sustained forever. however multiple attempts can be are done continually, efefctively creating a continuous process. in intention #13 acceptance and eternity are related; therefore, there is no such as "eternal denial". there is only eternal accepatnce and temporary denial. denial _is_ the temporary process, while greater and greater acceptance is a continuous, eternal process.
To say that there is a state where one becomes fearless is an exxageration. Some degree of fear is always present. However, when we are able to accept our fear, we can control / master it. Courage is mastery of fear. Denial of fear is the only obstacle to its transcendence. The only thing we have to deny is denial itself, The only thing to fear is fear itself, and that is how fear eventually cancels itself out. A fearless / courageous person is more afraid of not facing their fear than what they fear. Also, if ic 3 representes infintie power (5 + 8 = 13), and fear is denial of what ic13represents, then our deepest fear as beings (IC #13) is that we are powerful beyond measure, and that we can overcome all of our fears.
To conclude, know that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with fear. When Consciousness enters the game of Creation and becomes individualized, it is only natural that a feeling of loneliness sets in on the being. But it is these emotions based on fear that will lead the being back to its original home where true love can be found. In other words, without a number of fear-based lessons there is no way for the being to finally be able to see (remember) the bright (loving) side of existence. One must never forget the fact that Love rules over everything. Fear is only the illusion that there is something wrong with Creation, or that life in the universe is unsafe. There is nothing to fear but fear itself, and this implies that ultimately there is nothing to fear.
Light & DarkLove in action should lead to unity, coexistence, comprehension and cooperation; therefore, when we are talking about love set against hate, we are talking about love with small l. Between love and hate, the first is when Love is approached by an immature spirit, while the second is when Love is approached by a rebellious spirit. There is passion in both sides: love is a positive passion and hate is a negative passion. Also, in both cases there is non-acceptance of what Love represents, and this means that there is a dose of fear on both sides. The idea here is really one of polarity (IC #2): love and hate are opposite forces, and a force by definition is exerted by a pole. There is no real difference between love and hate, because each aspect / polarity has the other in its heart. (Example: the immature is rebellious at heart and vice-versa.) Therefore, any vocabulary used to describe love can also be applied to hate, and vice-versa, because the only thing that we can be sure is that both sides possess a low degree of connection to Love's energies.
Figure 2.#
The idea behind opposition is polarity. A pole by definition implies in the existence of another pole. With respect to any pair of opposites in the universe, one pole is always attracting to the direction of Love, which is the right / good direction after all. (How could it be that the best side is not the side with infinite balance, wisdom and freedom?). But we can also extrapolate and claim that Love is wrong / evil, and indeed It is in a paradoxical sense: fear is the hallmark of Love's severity and toughness. There is darkness in Love in the same manner that a loving person is not immune from casting a shadow. Think of a father that wants to teach his son how to grow stronger, but he must do that indirectly by lending minimal assistance so to not spoil the child. The fact is that Love can be defined in a recursive fashion exactly as we did with the Whole (IC #13). Love is the output of a continuous process of atonement for any pair of opposites that eventually arises. The pair is neutralized and made back into one. Therefore, Love always wins by transcending dualism, but It still leaves room for an eventual challenge.
Love inside the context of polarity gives rise to two extremes: one of light and one of darkness. Light and Dark are more fitting names for the polarities because they clearly indicate that we are working with a contrast of ideas. What is not obvious is that both Dark and Light share the same power source: the Source (IC #13). In fact, it is denial (fear) of the absoluteness of the Source that results in some seeing It as an emission of white light or black light, because in reality the Source emits both types of light at the same time that it emits no type in particular. The closest denomination of color / energy to what we are describing here is golden light, which corresponds to the perfect energetic balance of Love. (Note: it may appear that we are being more figurative than literal here, but when positive and negative energies are seen for what they are, they can only assume one appearance or another according to the binary and extremist nature of the universe. We will learn more about these aspects of color in Chapter 3.)
Figure 2.# - Light and Dark
Bonus image (click to open)
Symbolically speaking, the main difference between the respective sources for Light and Dark is that one emits a very bright light and the other emits a deep darkness. Therefore, whether it is due to obfuscation by too much light or due to lack of visibility within the darkness, followers of both factions are continually tripping and falling on their way to the Source. All paths lead to the Source and all of them are fundamentally rocky (challenging - IC #2), because the universe is after all an illusion based on polarity. Being polarity the main characteristic of Intention #2, then it also implies in the presence of challenges. Anyway, instead of exclusively focusing on the light at the end of the road, a balanced perspective based on Love gives as much importance to the journey as well to the goal, and in fact it sees no difference: the journey (evolution - IC #11) becomes the goal (end - IC #12), which in turn becomes an eternal beginning for the sake of experience (i.e., eternal (IC #13) beginning (IC #1) -> 13 + 1 = 14 -> 1 + 4 = 5 -> IC #5 -> experience).
Figure 2.#
The polarities operate under the principle of fear, and use it as their main weapon. Fear is a force that pushes for total separation between poles. Both polarities want to be the "monopole" that concentrates all the power for itself, but of course that this is impossible as long as there are two competing for hegemony. Dark and Light are perceived as different depending on your perspective, but the truth is that they are identical (IC #6). An individual can have both Dark- and Light-based traits and alternate between them. What does not change is that both sides display fear-based purposes: a darksider's approach is more direct and so it is willing to do anything to cause fear that will feed its source; a lightsider's approach is more indirect and so it expects everyone to eventually worship (fear) its "superior" source. The fact is that both sides desire everyone to feed their respective power sources with fear energy. These sources are always represented by something external: gods, masters, symbols or even oneself when there is a self-serving attitude. (The self-centered individual worships self from an external perspective. This is also polarization.)
Figure 2.# - Power sources
Since the polarities are identical sides of the same coin, then anything that is said about one will be inversely proportional to the other. Still, we can draw many parallels between Dark and Light. As an example, consider that darksiders have no higher purpose other than just to deny Love in the most explicit manner. They simply like to cause fear on others, specially because they require the generated fear energy to increase their own power. Lightsiders seek to accept Love, but a lack of understanding prevents such acceptance to occur in practice. (They fail to fully accept Love because they cannot allow Dark to exist, and such attitute violates the Law of Allowance.) On a subconscious level, lack of understanding about Love is the same as denial of It. In addition, lightsiders hold an external representation of Love in such high regard that their fear (denial) of Love becomes accepted. When mastering of fear stops at acceptance, it turns into worship of that which is feared. Since both polarities depend on fear to even exist, lightsiders can also be said to require fear energy when they expect everyone to worship their all-powerful source of light mistakenly equated to Love.
The polarities do not have an existence independent from each other. After all, they are polarities, and polarity corresponds to Intention #2, whereas the notion of existence is only introduced later with Intention #3. But it is by Intention #6 that we can begin to understand how the polarities come into existence as a whole: they are equal halves that form a dynamic balancing act, a spinning yin-yang kind of thing. In other words, it is not only a matter of us recognizing how the polarities coexist in the big picture; we must also take into account a dynamic relationship in which the polarities feed on their mutual desire to confront each other, because they would both starve and die if those feeding channels were removed.
Figure 2.# - Yin Yang
Fear, a force of extreme polarization, is an illusion. Attraction toward what Love represents is the only valid and real force in Creation. It is only when there is denial of Love that an inversely proportional force seems to exist, and so the complex interplay of forces characterizing the universe begins. Denial of Love corresponds to when we assume an inverted perspective of Creation, which means that the standard sequence of Intentions becomes inverted as well, with Intention #1 replacing Intention #13. In the inverted "mode" of Creation, we have a force of unification (IC #1) based on separation (IC #2) instead of a force of universalization (IC #12) based on approximation (IC #11). Fear is attraction (unification) based on repulsion, or attraction toward finite difference, while Love is attraction (approximation) that seeks to cross boundaries and eliminate differences, or attraction toward infinite sameness -- like attracts like.
The polarities subscribe to the quest for total separation that characterizes fear, but they are still affected by an universal force of attraction based on Approximation (IC #11). By analogy, this force is the inverse of a repulsive force based on Separation (IC #2). The latter pushes for oneness as Intention #1, while the former pushes for Oneness as Intention #13. There is repulsion and attraction happening simultaneously over the polarities, much like in a love-hate relationship. In other words, the two forces respectively based on Intention #2 and #11 end up equilibrating each other to create the spinning motion of a binary system.
Figure 2.# - Polarities as a whole
Polarity is a fundamental aspect of Creation. The game of Creation requires both polarities to be active both on a macroscopic and microcospic scale. No matter how much one has raised their consciousness above duality, for an external judge they will always fall into one side (Dark) or the other (Light). Of course that somewhere in the course of eternity one may achieve 100% control over both the Light and Dark aspects of their being. The only one who already occupies this position of absolute balance is the Creator, who is after all a personification of Love.
Polarities exist in all levels of Creation, but they are active only in some. As will be further explained in Chapter 3, polarities are active only up to the sixth density. In the seventh density there is only positive orientation toward Love, and then comes the next higher octave. (Note: a negative orientation in this case is one that is still focusing on Intention #2 [polarity] or lower instead of Intention #13 [newfound unity].) In the sixth density, the positive entity is already facing the right side, but the negative entity has an additional step to take: a 180 degree turn to face the positive side. It is however a simple reorientation that the entity has to make considering that one who reaches the top of the mountain but ends in the shadowy side only needs to take a small step into the sunny side.
When a person needs to learn and evolve, it does not matter if this is done though a positive (Light) or negative (Dark) path. What is important is that one becomes aware of where one is ultimately going. A darksider will learn a lot in his path of darkness, but eventually such path reveals itself as being wrong under the true light of Love, not under the false light of the Lightside. There is always time, however, to change the road that one is on. Similarly, a lightsider roams erratically in his path because he is being blinded by the Light, and this too eventually turns into a mistake as the lightsider is unable to complete his course. There is really no Darkside or Lightside; there is only evolution toward greater wisdom acquired through experience. Wisdom does not have a polarity.
The good thing about polarity is that it appears to be a very simple game: Light is the inverse of Dark, and the absence of one means the presence of the other. However, polarity games do not look so simple when we rise above the chess board, because then we can see the many possibilities for moves and strategies. Being equal (IC #6) halves, one polarity can imitate the other easily. Dark in particular is better known for its ability to imitate Light in a very shameless and deceiving manner. As an example, consider that whenever we are talking about the top of a pyramidal hierarchy, we are already implying extreme polarization (e.g., top vs. bottom). Since between the two polarities the one that tends to be more explicit (extreme) is Dark, then it is safe to say that every "master of light" who insists on being placed at the top is a darksider in disguise. If it expects or demands worship, it is not divine.
Another aspect of the chess game of polarity is how both Light and Dark think that they deserve the throne. Both factions consider themselves as "illuminated" and the other as being "in the dark." This is interesting, because it shows how the polarities are nothing more than sides of a coin that is constantly flipping. In the end it is only a matter of perspective. The truth, as we already know, is that one side cannot exist without the other. Without Light there is no Dark and vice-versa. They have to both exist to exist.
Dark and Light cannot be beaten in their own game because the very purpose of the game is that players adopt the "win/lose" mentality. A polarity game exists as long as there are hopes that the game will end once the forces of Light overcome the forces of Dark, or vice-versa. But Dark cannot exist without Light. The game only ends when both factions self-destruct, because one faction cannot destroy the other without destroying itself in the process. Were Dark to destroy Light, it would self-destruct into nothingness (IC #9). Nonetheless, a polarity game can be won on a personal level when you remove yourself from it without guilt or remorse. One should not attempt to destroy polarity; one should transcend it by evolving past desires for action against another. For each person that leaves a polarity game that will remove one pawn of Dark and one pawn of Light, all according to the cosmic law of balance (IC #6). In fact, it can be said that Dark and Light already exist in perfect (IC #12) balance according to a perspective based on Love.
Light and Dark are not completely unaware that they cooperate with each other on behalf of Love. They may pretend to want to destroy each other, or to avoid each other, but deep inside they know that they need each other. It is a love-hate relationship. The interplay of forces caused by such convoluted relationship creates a stalemate that is fundamental to Creation, one that keeps the game of Creation running. One side acting actually helps the other by giving it motivation / purpose to react. What would it be the purpose of a lightsider if not fighting off the "dark forces"?
While Light feeds Dark and vice-versa, an incarnation of true love lies above the battle field, laughing, observing, learning and participating indirectly through all sides as well as by a side of its own. It is certainly insuffienct to say that Love is a neutral side, because although it assumes the role of a neutral side, it is also more than just a side, and carries a richer proposal other than just neutrality or indifference. Love is the only extreme that unifies, equilibrates and integrates all other extremes in a perfect balance.
Good & EvilBy now we should be able to see beyond dramatic / emotional tales of good and evil. By our analysis of the polarities (Light and Dark), we should be able to see that the good/evil duality is just an illusion. However, judgement of good and evil is not always relative: at the same time that there is no absolute good and evil, Love (perfect balance) ends up being the absolute good, and fear, the absolute evil. Definitions of justice may change with the passage of time. He who wins becomes the good while he who loses becomes the evil. However, on a higher level, justice neve becomes injustice. The power of Love makes sure that Good prevails, although Evil is the eternal runner-up. Evil only manages to make itself heard once in a while, trying to balace itself against Good.
Neither polarities are intrinsically good or evil; instead, it is fascination with any one of them that can be considered evil. It is when someone moves toward an extreme due to fear that can be considered evil. They will hate what they believe to be evil and they will love what they believ eto be good. Again, we have the duality of love and hate here, which is characterized by fear, which can be considered the absolute evil, but only if we remember that fear is Love playing an inverse role of Itself. Love is the Absolute, and this absolute can be seen both as good or evil, because there is freedom to accept It or deny It.
Is evil necessary? Well, Love, the will of the Creator, allows everything to exist, including EVIL. The Creator sees no evil/good duality, he only sees infintie possibilities for creativity -- free will. From a more religious perspective, God (the Creator) allows Evil to exist to reinforce his Word and our search for Him, but does not rely on it as an integral part of his Creation. So, no, evil is not necessary unless someone believes it is for them. Evil exists in our free-will as a potential, and we may need it so that we can learn and make decisions. Everyone has potential for both good and evil. Of course, the less we rely on the existence of evil to learn, the better. It is certainly a stupid way to learn.
Evil may be born as a complement to benevolent forces in the universe, but it always fades away as the forces of good eventually shine brighter. Evil may not necessary as a manifested STATE, but it is necessary as an potential STATE as we have already explained. The idea is that Evil, Once it is manifested it should not be tolerated as some kind of force required to balance Good. This is a dangerous misconception. Once Evil has played its card, because maybe the forces of Good were a little asleep, it should be annihilated.
[Under construction]
In Chapter 2 we saw how the Thirteen Intentions of Creation can be interpreted as distinct steps in a sequence; however, a purely sequential approach hides the fact that they are actually discretizations of a continuous process. Seeing the Intentions as individual entities is convenient for an initial study, but we eventually realize that it is not possible to completely separate the meanings of one Intention from those of the next.1
Figure 3.1 - Intentions intersecting
But what kind of process do the Intentions define? We ought to find an answer if we try to define what a process is according to the Intentions themselves. In first place, Intention #2 (Linearization) is the one that better depicts what a process is, because all processes entail a linear abstraction (sequence) of events. Second, a process is understood insofar as we can see into its development, because then we can analyze it from beginning to end, and we are able to see it coming full-circle before our eyes. This leads us to the following:
process (IC #2) as a whole (IC #10) -> 2 + 10 = 12 -> IC #12Schematics 3.1 - A process seen as a whole (full circle) is necessarily finite (IC #12)
Can we imagine a process described by the sequence of Intentions? Yes, and while we are at it let us call such process as Process with capital P. As noted before, a process that can be seen in its entirety is necessarily a finite (IC #12) process. Therefore, we can assume that the Process must begin and end with some Intention of Creation, and since we know that Intention #1 represents beginning and Intention #12 represents end, then the Process can only be contained in the interval from Intention #1 to #12. In short, the Process is actually a 12-Intention process. Intention #13 is the only Intention that escapes and transcends this Process.
Every process produces a result once it ends, an output, and the 12-Intention process is no exception: we already know that it ends with Intention #12. But what does that mean? What is the output? Well, by numerological arithmetic we have the following: 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 so that the actual result of Intention #12 is Intention #3, which in turn brings the directive Circulation and the idea of a cycle to our attention. In short, the result when the 12-Intention process finishes can only be the completion of a cycle, which is equivalent to the idea of a full circle. Another way of coming to this conclusion is shown below.
IC #12 -> unified (IC #1) linearization (IC #2) -> a line that is unified -> circle ; cycleSchematics 3.2
The Cycle of Life is the name given to the cyclical process formed by the first twelve Intentions of Creation. It is far from being an ordinary cycle; instead, it is the blueprint, the fundamental standard cycle of Nature / Creation that determines the pattern behind all cycles. Many people think that only biological life (living systems) follows natural cycles, but we cannot forget that there is energetic activity (IC #3) in all things in the universe regardless of their size or origin. By the very nature of reality, any kind of energetic activity is describing pulse waves, which are nothing more than cycles. That is, from a micro or macro perspective, everything in the universe operates according to cycles.
Figure 3.2 - Pulses
As a process, the Cycle of Life is actually non-linear because of its cyclical nature. But of course that any cyclical process is still subject to a linear interpretation by the very definition of process. In other words, the Cycle of Life is both linear and non-linear as a process: we can picture it sideways and see the progress from beginning to end or we can picture it from the front and see a juxtaposition of spirals forming an outermost circle as shown in Figure 3.3. The outermost circle alone can represent the entire process and/or the result of the process. This is interesting, because by Intention #3 the idea of a circle is linked to the directive Manifestation. But manifestation of what? Of something, anything. The product of the Cycle of Life is the manifest (physical) universe itself, which is frequently called as "reality." That is why the Cycle of Life is so important for us to understand the nature of reality.
Cycle of Life -> 12-Intention process -> 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3)Schematics 3.3
 |
 |
We can expect to find the pattern of the Cycle of Life in whatever direction we look, especially when we are analyzing something that is more fundamental with respect to Nature and thus to the Thirteen Intentions of Creation. More specifically, any aspect in Creation can be characterized by the first twelve Intentions organized sequentially to describe a finite process that results in a cycle. That is what is behind the nature of reality.
Figure 3.4
We can correlate Figure 3.4 with the idea of a fractal. The word fractal comes from the Latin fractus meaning "fracture." Above all, a fractal exhibits self-similarity, which is the tendency for an overall geometric pattern to be repeated across all levels of magnification. Therefore, no matter how much we zoom in a fractal, we still get the same shape / pattern approximately. That is how the Cycle of Life alone can provide us with all the knowledge necessary for a comprehension of the organization of the universe. If you understand that there are only 12 types of building blocks, you understand it all.
Relationship with Intention #13By Intention #3 we have the directives Manifestation and Circulation, the latter of which gives birth to the idea of a cycle. Consider also the notion of duration (length) from Intention #2. Now, considering that Intention #2 evolves into #3 by the sequence of Intentions, we can say that when a duration of any sort becomes manifest, it can only describe a cycle; it can only function as a cycle. This means that all things including abstract concepts have a lifespan (duration) in the form of a cycle.
Consequently, every phenomenon in Nature is cyclical. Planetary, galactic and even cosmic cycles are like ordinary biological (life) cycles yet operating at a greater scale of energy. There are macroscopic as well as microscopic cycles. There are always cycles within cycles. Cycles of different magnitudes work together to form a giant cosmic wheel. Each cycle possesses its own internal "clock" that ultimately synchronizes with cycles above and below it. At the end of a cycle there is always a new cycle beginning at a higher order / level of energy and consciousness -- it never ends. Going from one cycle to the next is like an ascension for consciousness.
Intention #13 is the one responsible for the transition between cycles. The resulting process is a cyclical evolution forming a spiral that never comes to an end. A spiral is formed as one cycle connects to another in a continuous fashion. It is not a coincidence that Intention #13 is the last Intention of Creation, because it plays the most important role as an ending that guarantees a continuous supply of new beginnings. Intention #13 is eternity itself. In fact, if we consider the word end as meaning purpose, we can say that the end of all Creation is continued evolution and nothing more.
With the eternal power of Intention #13, the Cycle of Life can transform from a finite and sequential process to a continuous and recursive process. The perpetuation of this process is acomplished through the recylication of every ending (IC #12) in the Cycle of Life into something new (IC #13): a new beginning. By Intention #13 we no longer have a process per se, but more of a flow, a greater process by which everything flows. The Cycle of Life being a finite process serves as a building block for an infintie process in which there is continuous rennovation of this cycle.
The only way for a finite process to last forever is through a greater process that causes it to repeat. Indeed, Intention #13 makes sure that there is continuous renovation of the Cycle of Life. However, how much different every new cycle appears to be is relative: a copy is always a new copy not mattering if it looks identical to the mold. A cycle can be excitingly new for some and incredibly boring (repetitive) for others. The bottom line is that all cycles are somewhat new (IC #13), because at least in some detail they will differ, but as instances / copies of the Cycle of Life they still follow the same receipt.
As an unit of cyclic timeSo we know that the cycle of life is the fundamental pattern behind all cycles, and that it has 12 events correpsonding tot he Intentions of Creation. Of course that, for example, the life cycle of a rock is very dull: all that we can say for sure is that it has a beginning and an end, which amounts to only two events in place of where there should be twelve. The reason for this discrepancy is because the Cycle of Life is a life cycle seen from a multidimensional perspective. Even the simplest of the things can become more complex when seen from a higher-dimensional perspective. See the following example:
Figure 3.5 - Cube versus tesseract
Psychological time is a frame of perception that extends from birth to death based on how the individual experiences life. Imagine if we could take a picture of someone's life so that the entire set of experiences could be archived in a file in some kind of holographic database for the purpose of an universal record keeping.2 There would probably see a strong resemblance to the Cycle of Life in the resultant energetic patterns of oscillation in the life of the individual, even though every life cycle has an unique signature.
Therefore, the Cycle of Life is the template for a file that encases all 3D experiences in the life of a person plus one more dimensional experience considered temporal by us: the fourth dimension. for every dimension on top of another, the dimensions below are folded as an infinitesimal unit that can be lined up for spatial measurement of the new dimension. we use 2D units (eg, inches, milimeters, etc.) to measure 3d objects and we use 3D units, as our minds depend on a sucession of 3D scenarios to measure the duration of events. try it yourself, chamber of sensorial deprivation where time would go? and you will lose track of time.
The fifth dimension can be visualized as a temporal plane containing all possible timelines and probable lifetimes. We know that a plane is composed of an infinite number of lines, and so eahc line is an infinitesimal unit. if we imagine each line as being a timeline with an arbitrary length, then each timeline would be an instance of the Cycle of Life, a fourth dimensional line wrapped to a life experience. therefore, the Cycle of Life serves as an unit of measurement for the fifth dimension.
from a 3d perpective we measure the duration of events using a linear interpretation of time as an absolute variable, but in the fifth dimension we measure duration according to cyclical an interpretation of time that has a multitude of instances of the cycle of life entire timelines and lifetimes, as the hours, minustes and seconds of regular time. therefore, the cycle of life is a process that encapsulates time and space, and not the other way around.
it is worth rememebring that the cycle fo life, as part of the thirteen intentions of creation, isn't restricted to anything . it is an abstract pattern and cab be applied even to the fifh the sixth and any finite or infinite number of dimensions. it is just that inside the context of cyclical time, the cycle of life really does indeed spans only four dimensions. in the context of other an abstract qualities from even higher dimensions than the fifth, the cycle fo life would still apply but probably with much less relevance, as even the concept of life would not even apply to such dimensions.
Graphical representationIn the same manner that the invisible energies of the Thirteen Intentions can be interpreted as directives, imagining a graphical representation for the Cycle of Life is only a matter of giving form to the Thirteen Intentions. It may seem like a difficult task, but we have already been given a hint: the Cycle of Life is a cycle.
Figure 3.6 - Cycle
Cycles and waves have a lot in common, especially because wave patterns originate from cyclical processes. Ocean waves, for example, are formed due to orbital, seasonal (weather) and tectonic cycles. In wave theory, the conclusion of one period of a wave is said to be one cycle that has ended, while frequency is the number of cycles per an arbitrary unit of time.
Change (IC #13) in terms of space and time is always associated with Oscillation (IC #6), since where there is no disturbance there is no change. An important distinction in physics is that scientists model oscillations mathematically and call the results as waves instead of the actual phenomena that may or may not be explicitly observed as waves. Therefore, in most cases when we use the term wave, we are actually talking about a graphical representation known as a waveform. A waveform is generally a x-y graph of a varying quantity over time and it is used to represent energy signals.
Figure 3.7 - Waveform
When looking at a waveform, we can appreciate the two main properties of a wave: wavelength and amplitude. Amplitude is the maximum positive vertical displacement corresponding to the magnitude of oscillation, while wavelength is the distance between two sequential peaks. They are graphically defined as:
Figure 3.8 - Wave properties
The basic, pure building blocks of all waves is the sine wave, also known as the sinusoidal wave. Sine waves are "well-behaved", periodic waves with definite frequency and wavelength and thus are more appropiate for consistent study of waves. the most complex wave shape is still a simple sum of sine waves of different wavelengths. This shape of waveform is often encountered in natural phenomena, while complex and chaotic (non-pure?) shapes tend to correspoind in artificial phenomena.
Figure 3.9 - Sine wave
When we look at a waveform we are seeing a static drawing, but if we try to follow the curve visually as a flow, we can even sense a momentum in certain regions. To put it in another way, there is a thrust in a horizontal or vertical direction in certain segments of the curve. Sometimes the curve wants to explode horizontally, other times vertically, and sometimes the force is even in both directions. These two tendencies can be said to correspond to more or less wavelength or amplitude.
Horizontal Tendency (DH) -> lower amplitude, higher wavelength Vertical Tendency (DV) -> higher amplitude, lower wavelengthSchematics 3.4
If waves are models originated from cyclical processes, then we should be able to build a waveform for the Cycle of Life. We can take the first twelve Intentions and evaluate their meanings in terms of wavelength, amplitude, horizontal and vertical tendency, and then try to draw them as the peaks and valleys of a wave. We should also take into consideration that some Intentions are very extreme and translate as null amplitude and/or wavelength, or have tendencies toward infinite amplitude or wavelength.
| IC # | DH:DV | Language | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 0:0 |
|
beginning; singular event; singularity; point |
| 2 | +:0 |
|
line; length; extension |
| 3 | +:+ |
|
expression; manifestation; visibility |
| 4 | +:+ |
| closed shape; form; object |
| 5 | ∞:+ |
|
potency; horsepower; acceleration; horizontal thrust |
| 6 | ∞:+ |
|
settle down; accommodate; rest |
| 7 | +:∞ |
|
align; orient |
| 8 | 0:∞ |
|
more; higher; infinity; vertical thrust |
| 9 | +:∞ |
|
less; zero; nothing |
| 10 | 0:0 |
|
concentrated; dense; particle; instant; singular event; singularity; point |
| 11 | ∞:0 |
|
not enough; seek last frontier; incompletion |
| 12 | 0:0 |
|
ending; singular event; singularity; point |
| DH: horizontal tendency ; DV: vertical tendency ; +: at least some | |||
Figure 3.# - Graphical representation for the Cycle of Life
The graph above is far from being a plot based on real data; it is more like a product of intuition than of data analysis. What we really did was determine the visual chracteristic of each step (Intention) of the "flow" of Creation while trying to represent it as a wave. We start from the assumption that a standard wave is supposed to go up and down, up and down, but here we have addiitonal possibilities to consider: horizontal or vertical tendency. Also, beginnig with Intention #9 we get into heavy abstraction. Since the transition between each Intention is supposed to be smooth, We try to linearize the abstraction, as for example: The graph "collapses" at Intention #10: Fir we went to infinity (IC #8) then to zero (IC #9), and if the graph ended at Intention #9, it would stay at zero; however, Intention #10 is a limit point case where both zero and infininty are present at once.
For other Intentions the graph would have discontinuities If we were to do complete justice to their meaning. Intention #8, for example, has the characteristic of a vertical (90 degrees) line going upward toward infinity. In the graph, however, this would introduce a vertical disconinuity. Also, Intention #8's line is slanted and not vertical because wenever we have the idea of process we must take duration into consideration, and this means a disllocation along the horziontal axis. The same case applies for Intention #11: it is a process happening inside a singularity, hence Intention #11 not being represented as a a singular event.
PhasesLooking at the graph of the Cycle of Life, we can see that not all Intentions have a significant extension. Some are depicted as mere dots that could very well represent instantaneous events, such as a beginning (IC #1), an atonement (IC #10) and an ending (IC #12). The Intentions that have extension and duration are the phases of the Cycle of Life. A phase is any point of the graph that demarcates one stage or portion of the cycle's duration.
Figure 3.# - Phases of the Cycle of Life
The phases correspond to those intentions that have the quality of length (IC #2) present in them. The phases correspond to those portions of the graph displaying horizontal and/or vertical tendencies, that is, processes of approximation (IC #11) that take some time. Numerollogicla math, 1 + 1 = 2 which means that tendency (IC #11) will necessarily imply in length or duration (IC #2).
A stage is bla bla bla.. We are accostumed to think of a life cycle as having just a few stages, but in the Cycle of Life we have nine. It has to do with the fact that the Cycle of Life spans four dimensions: three main events represent the cycle alone, but when we add four dimensions to three evetns three events are seen through four dimensions, 3 x 4 = 12, see below.
Energy x TimeIn the graph of the Cycle of Life you might have noticed that the axes have no meaning associated to them, much less units of measurement, but this does not mean that they have nothing to do with spatio-temporal concepts. There is no problem in trying to associate a few quantities to the axes and see how it plays out. After all, the Cycle of Life is an universal pattern valid to all phenomena that can be quantified (measured).
Because the Y-axis tends to infinity at Intention #8, there is not a definite amplitude that applies to the whole waveform of the Cycle of Life. An amplitude must be a finite maximum vertical displacement. However, if we isolate certain intervals of the waveform as if they were standing alone, then the concept of amplitude can apply to these intervals individually. Still, the wave will have maximum vertical displacement at some points, namely amplitude, but these maximums will not be related to anything in particular. Indeed, amplitude is just another name for a literal quantity, i.e., quantity that is not of something physical.
Figure 3.# - Literal quantity
To quantify is to measure, and so a literal quantity (amplitude) is just a measurement that is not of something in particular (e.g., length, time), but also can be of anything. This means that there is an amplitude for everything that exists, and every thing is completely characterized by its amplitude. In this respect, amplitude and the idea of pure energy are directly related with each other. People frequently talk about energy as if it was an absolute measurement not restricted to a form in particular, but this does not mean that they believe that energy exists in this state. The fact is that everybody knows that energy is an absolute variable with respect to life, and this is the reason why the term can be applied in all kinds of imaginative ways without sounding unrealistic.
For most practical uses, the terms energy and amplitude are interchangeable. Most waveforms treat amplitude as the amount of energy (power) that is being transferred by the wave. Therefore, there is no doubt that energy is an appropriate choice for the Y-axis of the Cycle of Life.
Thus for a more practical application of the Cycle of Life, we can make the vertical axis denote energy and the horizontal axis denote time, because all processes have duration. The Cycle of Life then becomes very clear if applied to ordinary living systems that are born, experience highs and lows of energy, and die.
Figure 3.# - Energy x Time
Until now we are discussing only two variables that are explicit. the other two (DH and DV) are implicit and have been already discussed. that makes it four variables. remember that we said before that tmainly because the Cycle of Life has four dimensions. each spatial dimension is obviously associated to an intention, as we will see in 3.2 - Dimensions, but in the graph each dimensions is turned into a variable, which means that each dimension has a certain quality that cna be measured.
| # | Variable | Quality | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | E | Energy | The first dimension as a variable is energy. |
| 2 | DH | Matter | The second dimension as a variable is matter. |
| 3 | DV | Intelligence | The third dimension as a variable is intelligence. |
| 4 | T | Time | The fourth dimension as a variable is time. |
Let us imagine that the space sorrounding the curve as being the spatial representation of Zero, a void, that serves as abstratc propagation medium for the intentional flow of creation. According to Intention #2, the principle of duality can be found in every conceptualization, and thus even in zero. Indeed, the idea of absolute nothingness, or zero, zero can be seen as real or imaginary. the first case when it is absolute, as the real lack of something, and the other as a symbol representing the imagination of nothingness that can only be approximated in reality.
zero (real) -> zero in the strict sense zero (imaginary) -> as close to zero as possibleSchematics 3.#
Curiosly, In mathematics we find that zero also has two distinct representations: one grouped with the positive numbers and gripued with the negatives known as negative zero. with this in mind, the graph can also be considered as having a positive and negative quadrant. one for real zero, and other for imaginary zero. the positive quadrant deals with everything real, and the negative with everything imaginary.
but we can reach the same conclusion through the ICs themselves. both quadrants span the vertical axis (energy) which corresponds to ic 5. 5 can be formed by two numbers either by 1+ 4 or 2 + 3. 3 is on the upper quadrant, while 4 on the lower, therefore:
(+) quadrant -> real (IC #3) ; individual / subjective (IC #1) (-) quadrant -> imaginary (IC #?? ???) ; material / objective (IC #4)Schematics 3.#
Figure 3.# - Real and imaginary in the Cycle of Life
knowing that the upper quadrant representes real, and the lower, helps wiht the interpretation of the graph of nthe Cycle of Life. it also helps with udnerstanding why some intentions are below and others on top, or crossing like ic #8. the intentions that have imaginary aspects are #4 and #7 and lower half (beginning) of #8. and the real are #3, #5, #6, the upper half of #8 and #9. other intentions are free from this categorization.
________________________
1
Due to this fact, there's a good chance that the list of Intentions presented in this book is not 100% accurate. please refer to the (proceed to website for up-to-date list)
2 the akashic records are....
There is more than one possible interpretation for what a dimension is. In the strict geometric sense, a dimension is one of the three standard spatial dimensions: width, height and depth. However, due to a fundamental connection between dimension and frequency range, we can extrapolate the former's meaning to refer to parallel universes, planes of existence and even levels of consciousness. (In the last case individual perception is attuned to a certain frequency range interpreted by the physical senses as an N-dimensional world.)
Regardless of denomination, whenever we are talking about a dimension we are implying the measurement of some property or quality. There is no such thing as a dimension that does not embody some kind of measurement, since the very word dimension comes from the Latin "measured out." Modern physics presupposes that extra dimensions exist at incredibly small scales. In other words, dimensions beyond the fourth are infinitesimally condensed, almost reaching a singularity, but they still have some measurable magnitude -- it just lies beyond what humans and their instruments can detect.
A phase in the Cycle of Life is the same thing as a dimension, because the phases correspond to those Intentions that admit dimensionality (length). Associating one dimension to each phase gives a total of nine dimensions. However, there is nothing impeding that the entire extension formed by all the phases can be considered a dimension as well: the 10th dimension.
Figure 3.# - Dimensions in the Cycle of Life
A dimension is not necessarily physical and so it does not need to have a perceptible size. Therefore, from a physical perspective some dimensions are very much abstract and conceptual. In the Cycle of Life, you can see that the first and ninth phases do not possess an appreciable amount of energy, yet phase by definition implies in duration, and a duration must always be in relation to some form of energy variation. Therefore, there must still exist a speck of energy in the ninth dimension, for example. The idea is that this energy is of a finer quality; it is an extremely thin and subtle form of energy that lies in-between the smallest units of matter. As an example, we can conceive the 10th dimension as being an ether, which is a conceptual / theoretical substance that permeates everything and thus embodies space itself.
Note that we are associating dimensions to Intentions and not Intentions to dimensions because the Intentions of Creation are always the root of any association. But once the root association has been done, we can proceed and associate Intentions to dimensions in order to complement our understanding of the numerological meaning of each dimension. For example: Intentions after #9 are completely abstract, paradoxical and meaningless with respect to spatial concepts such as length and dimension. This means that the number of dimensions that are truly spatial is nine. Therefore, although Intention #9 has a direct correspondence with the eighth dimension, we can establish an indirect but nonetheless true connection between Intention #9, the last Intention that has something to do with spatiality (length), and the ninth dimension, the last spatial dimension.
Basically, there are two types of dimension: spatial and temporal. As depicted in Figure 3.#, the first nine dimensions have spatial characteristics. The 10th dimension, however, is non-spatial because it does not occupy a space of its own in the graph, yet it does have extension borrowed from the first nine dimensions. Therefore, the 10th dimension is paradoxical like Intention #10: it is non-spatial yet it has extension. Well, the problem lies in our denomination: in the context of a non-spatial dimension, we are talking about duration (time), not extension (space). Indeed, as we will discuss it later, a number of spatial dimensions can be taken as one, as a continuum, and the result is a temporal dimension.
Another difference between the 10th dimension and the spatial dimensions is that they are associated to phases in the Cycle of Life, while the 10th is not. However, nothing stops the 10th dimension from having an indirect (numeric) association with Intention #10. Furthermore, there are two additional "levels" beyond the 10th dimension that are not dimensions per se, because they deal with null or infinite space-time; however, as we did with the 10th dimension, we can still find dimensionality in their lack of dimensionality. The 11th level is adimensional because it is completely void of space and time, and the 12th is transdimensional because it transcends all dimensionality. In spite of their characteristics, we can still refer to these levels by the name of dimension if we consider them as dimensions of consciousness.
| Dimension | Direct IC | Indirect IC | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1st | #2 | #1 | spatial |
| 2nd | #3 | #2 | spatial |
| 3rd | #4 | #3 | spatial |
| 4th | #5 | #4 | spatial |
| 5th | #6 | #5 | spatial |
| 6th | #7 | #6 | spatial |
| 7th | #8 | #7 | spatial |
| 8th | #9 | #8 | spatial |
| 9th | #11 | #9 | spatial |
| 10th | NA | #10 | temporal |
| 11th | NA | #11 | adimensional / atemporal |
| 12th | NA | #12 | transdimensional / universal |
A dimension by itself is nothing more than an idea, but if we consider a bunch of them simultaneously and orthogonal to each other, the result is the property known as space. More specifically, a minimum of three dimensions is required to give birth to the general notion of space, because space is primarily characterized by the existence of material (3D) objects. In other words, the notion of space is only relevant when there is spatial relationship resulting from the presence of at least one object.
A purely spatial perception tends to interpret space as if it was a three-dimensional "hole", but the fact is that without observable three-dimensional mass, space loses any sign of dimensionality and is therefore meaningless as such. Space acquires relevance only when there are material objects, just as the notion of distance only makes sense when there is a relation of position (coordinates) between points. In sum, the three-dimensional (spatial) perception that characterizes space is imparted by material objects.
Figure #.#
Space is a fundamental property of physics, and as such it inspires many definitions and few convincing answers. Many have struggled to come to terms with the meaning of space before, but it turns out that space cannot be understood outside of its role as an essential part of the perception process. In fact, space does not need a definition because the term is already intuitively defined.
The classical view of space is that of an ultimate reality where objects and physical phenomena take place. Simple and effective, this view shares its roots with Newton's deterministic physics that introduced the notion of absolute space (i.e., whose existence is independent of physical phenomena). Although Newton's view acknowledges that motion and rest are relative notions, it still has the necessity to define space as being a property that is above observers and their frames of reference, and thus space itself becomes the authority that decides whether there is motion and/or acceleration happening at all.
A possible criticism of spatial absolutism is that it is irrelevant that we try to imagine space as something "out there" when there is nothing about space making of it a real thing with its own independent meaning and existence. Space does not possess a reality of its own, and more importantly, it does not exist "outside" time and perception. Instead, perception is always changing with time, and this change manifests itself as physical phenomena along with the property known as space. In this section we will not discuss the details about how this manifestation takes place, but consider the following according to the Intentions of Creation:
consciousness (IC #12) -> 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3)Schematics 3.#
According to the Thirteen Intentions of Creation, the concept of space along with the concepts of time, movement and life can all be found in Intention #5. This means that the very process of being alive, and the resulting perception thereof, is what makes time and space a reality. Therefore, it is always better that we understand how these concepts are not separate from each other and how they are all relative to perception. Alternatively, we can go even further and study these concepts under the light of consciousness, which is the essence of perception. Consciousness is the only true authority with respect to what takes place in the physical world.
Perception can be roughly defined as "the mental apprehension of a certain number of things." This means that perception is always restricted to those things that it can perceive, and it is unable to grasp anything beyond itself. For this reason, if someone's perception is restricted to space only, they will simply not be able to understand how time and space are relative to perception, because the relativity becomes clear only when the two concepts are perceived as one. Since space does not exist without time, one can very well conclude that a perception that sees only space is trapped in monocularity. Space is just one side of the spatio-temporal "coin."
Empty spaceThe main consequence of the belief in absolute space is the notion of empty space. In this view, space is supposed to exist "out there" even when there is absolutely nothing. However, deep analysis of the nature of reality can show us that the idea of an empty space is not so much obvious as one would think, and in fact, if we extrapolate our results from this analysis, we can even conclude that this belief is just as meaningless as the belief in a space that exists independently from our perception.
A particular example showing how absurd is the notion of empty space arises from the problem of the boundary. In this case, a boundary is the middle between two extremes that does not constitute a third extreme, but instead unifies the two extremes into a paradox. The problem is that boundaries are always ignored by a monocular perception, which sees only one thing at a time but never both at once unseparated. A monocular perception cannot distinguish between total absence and multiple, unseparated presence, and the result is that it fails to recognize states where one thing does not exclude the other.
Figure 3.#
In the example illustrated above, a multiocular perception should be able to see that presence and absence of thing are states that are simultaneously present at the boundary, which in turn, at least momentaneously, equates object with empty space. Of course that such conclusion does not make a lot of sense, because real-life objects are not the same as emptyness; however, if we discard the word emptyness and consider space as being as much as a thing as the things contained in it, then we will simply have thing = thing at the boundary, and that certainly makes sense.
But what does it mean that space is a thing? It means that in the end there is only one thing going on between creatures and space: a continuous perception process attached to time. That is, if we add the time dimension to a spatial perception, the material objects and the spaces between them will be perceived as the features of a four-dimensional continuum, because absence of thing in three-dimensional space still constitutes presence in four dimensions. In short, empty space can be considered a four-dimensional "thing", which is also an event if we consider the fourth dimension as time.
With respect to Figure 3.#, one can still argue that an array of atoms constitute the definitive barrier between empty space and object. This surely sounds like a comforting answer, but the actual nature of reality according to the Intentions of Creation is based on continuous (IC #13) interaction (IC #12) between an infinite (IC #8) number of elements everywhere (IC #10). This means that a reductionist analysis can be performed endlessly and still never be able to find an absolute line of separation between elements; instead, two elements always have some kind of connection accomplished through even smaller elements. (Note: everything has a threshold, and size is no exception: things can only get as small as the concept of size remains applicable, because anything beyond starts fading into abstraction [IC #9] and finally into a paradox [e.g., infinitely small = infinitely big].)
By 12 -> 1 + 2 = 3 we have that Intention #3 (reality) is the fruit of interconnectedness (IC #12). But how can we corroborate this hypothesis? Well, it is not easy to demonstrate how fundamental qualities of Creation such as continuity and interconnectedness have their place in a macroscopic world where things definitely appear to be disconnected. In the case of physical reality, for example, there are those who prefer to discard everything as an illusion, but it seems that being an illusion does not make of a reality something less real to a perception conditioned by it. That is why it is important to understand that there is no such thing as a fixed absolute reality valid for everyone, except if we restrict the meaning of everyone to a group of individuals having the same experiences and thus living the same reality.
Physical reality was generally seen as something absolute to all levels of perception until experiments in modern physics overthrew this concept. Because of this, many people jumped to the other extreme and concluded that "reality is an illusion." Well, for most people reality will always be sufficiently concrete, a "persistent illusion" as Albert Einstein said, but experiments have shown that it can also be probabilistic and undetermined when perception crosses a certain threshold. That is, determinism and indeterminism are not mutually exclusive, although indeterminism has the advantage of being more essential to the nature of reality.
Quantum physics was the new science that came to explain the anomalous behavior of subatomic particles. It also introduced a new view of the configuration of microscopic space that turned the classical deterministic / Newtonian approach into something quite inappropriate for this level. Instead of the classical idea of particles bumping into each other, detecting and analyzing elementary particles at the quantum scale requires a statistical approach applied to wave theory. In fact, the classical notion of space barely holds at atomic and subatomic levels, because wave concepts in physics are nonobjective, and most importantly, non-spatial.
Although the wave model is abstract, wave functions can mathematically describe all kinds of real, continuous-effect phenomena in Nature. What quantum mechanics did was to extend the wave model to describe the state of a particle according to the Heisenberg principle.1 The wave function was then treated as if it determines a distribution or set of probabilities. This distribution can be worked out accurately, but not the actual location of a particle. Instead, the position of a particle is described by the probability corresponding to the Y-values of the waveform. For example, a particular Y-value defining a sharp peak means that we have a greater chance of locating the particle at a point in space associated to that value.
Figure #.#
These interesting concepts brought by quantum physics mean that subatomic particles hardly behave as corpuscles; instead, they are spread out as clouds or propensities corresponding to the probabilities of where they might be found. There are no well-defined boundaries marking where one particle begins and another ends, nor there is certainty about the momentum or position of a particle.2 The more precise one measurement is, the more diffuse the other becomes. But the indeterminism is not there to mislead; instead, it is evidence that better understanding about the nature of space comes with seeing it more like an ocean of energy about which we need to make approximations to surface what we want to see.3
As discussed in Section 3.1, amplitude has a relation with energy in the sense that it refers to any amount of pure energy. In a probability wave, the amplitude is actually a probability amplitude, and it extends itself from one side to another. Therefore, a probability wave can be said to describe a smooth distribution of energy where certain regions have greater concentration than others. The dense regions are particles with well-defined positions and ill-defined momentums (momenta); the less dense regions are particles with ill-defined positions and well-defined momentums. In both cases, the particles are infinitely dispersed either because they vibrate wildly in a sense that they are at multiple places at the same time, or because they are not in a definite place due to their erratic movement. With this in mind, we can make the following analogy regarding the nature of space:
Figure #.# - Quantum energy distribution
Time
For any interval of spatial dimensions that begins with the first dimension, the dimension that comes right after the last in the interval is the one that goes through and enfolds all the previous dimensions, with the result being a continuum. This is equivalent to how each Intention of Creation includes and extends the ones before it.
 |
 |
Continuum simply means that there is continuity instead of discontinuity, or that there is continuity behind apparent discontinuity. But a more interesting implication in the presence of a continuum is that you can never really say that a part is not a manifestation of the whole. It only takes a few changes in perception for someone to see that what once appeared as an isolated part is actually connected to another part, and then another and another in a never-ending assemblage. In fact, one can classify as many parts as desired, but ultimately there is no end to the succession of aspects in Nature that can be categorized as parts.
Any interval of spatial dimensions is a continuum. By its own definition, a continuum does not admit the presence of separation; instead, it always presents itself as a whole. There are only different ways for us to see a continuum in its entirety, ways that bring to our attention different aspects of the same thing. Therefore, an observer is necessarily seeing a single object (continuum) wherever he looks. The idea of parts only arises with the idea of multiplicity, which is in fact an illusion: an observer that sees multiple parts / objects is actually looking at a single crystalline object from different angles that bring to his attention different facets of that same object.
Figure #.# - Facets
In reality, a continuum is experienced by an observer as a world full of objects that keep appearing everywhere he looks. Every observed object is merely an aspect of the continuum as well as the continuum already manifested in full. In other words, everything that is observed is a valid representation of the continuum in its entirety, and there is not an object or part that can be considered the ultimate manifestation of the continuum. This is a valid analogy because it is based on the holographic principle that the whole is in every part. At least conceptually, the physical universe is a hologram, an example being the striking similarities between the atomic model and the galactic model.
Furthermore, the act of seeing an object necessarily implies in the presence of a surrounding space, a higher dimension that includes both object and observer. It is a matter of logic: Delineation (IC #2) leads to the automatic creation of two sides: one current and one beyond. That is, at the very instant that we determine an interval of dimensions, we automatically create a higher dimension beyond that interval. Such logic may give us the impression that the number of dimensions is infinite, but as we saw in this section's introduction, there are two more transcendental levels beyond the 10 standard dimensions. These levels transform the possibility of an infinite number of dimensions into an infinite fractal recursion applied to the same base number of dimensions, just as the Cycle of Life is the same basic process renewed for all eternity thanks to Intention #13.
For example, with respect to 3D space, 2D objects (images) and the 2D spaces between them are nothing more than features of a 3D continuum, which in our analogy is a 3D sphere floating inside a 4D space. In the same manner, 3D objects and the 3D spaces between them are nothing more than the features of a 4D continuum, which is a 4D sphere floating inside a 5D space. As you can see, this analogy can be applied to any pair of consecutive spatial dimensions, and that is with the notions of object and space still holding as true, but perhaps changed into more abstract concepts.
Figure #.# - External perspective
Bonus image (click to open)
Bonus image (click to open)
A second example: An observer inside three-dimensional space sees several images (2D objects) forming what he may deem as material (3D) objects; however the images only seem as 3D objects because the observer acquired a sense of depth in his perception as a collateral effect of being partially immersed in the higher dimension. This analogy can be applied to even higher dimensions as well, with the notion of space and depth still holding as true. The dimension that includes the observer always exert some effect in his perception that gives a sense of depth to wathever he is looking at.
Figure #.# - Water reflection
A higher dimension has a particular space or zone of its own (e.g., the ninth dimension is the interval [8.0,9.0]), but at the same time this interval has an equivalence with the interval composed by all the lower dimensions. Therefore, whenever we are talking about the nth dimension, for example, we will not only be reffering to that dimension's particular zone, but also to the interval [0.0,n-1] which is equivalent to [n-1,n]. The equivalence is with respect to energy and vibration in a way that the higher dimension alone makes up for the entire combined vibrational level of the lower dimensions. We will see more about vibration in 3.5 - Densities.
Figure 3.# - Equivalence between dimensions
Relatively speaking, a higher dimension is always experienced as a temporal dimension (time) by creatures living inside the corresponding spatial continuum. This dimension directly above the creatures plays the role of time as long as it stays removed from their perception: a priori, time is a non-observable dimension. For example, by the equivalence between dimensions shown in Figure 3.#, the fourth dimension would be the embodiment of all dimensions directly perceived by the 3D creatures as well as an extra dimension that controls their lives. In other words, the fourth dimension is everywhere around the creatures as well as nowhere to be found. Now, for creatures standing somewhere inside the interval [2.0,3.0], they would have a partial 3D experience because they are not fully outside the third dimension in order to have a full 3D experience.
The consequence of being stuck inside a spatial dimension is that time seems like an omnipresent force. The resident creatures have no choice other than to take time as an unidirectional force that controls everything, and as an absolute variable that controls the system they are in. But consciousness is what ultimately determines reality, not time. All that it takes for a being to cross over from one dimension to the next is a shift in perception, and that is exactly what follows after someone experiences a great expansion of consciousness. This process is known as a dimensional shift.
In a dimensional shift, time and space exchange places. What was once perceived as space-time, or just space, becomes time-space, or hyperspace, and walking a distance in the new time-space environment will be like time-traveling in the previous space-time environment. With that said, time and space are like mirror images of one another, and as two sides of the same coin, they are not really separate from each other. However, from the inside of a continuum, space and time are perceived as separate entities because, as we have already seen, there is always a higher dimension that a being's awareness cannot reach and go beyond. If the being could only rise his consciousness to an extra-dimensional level, he would see time and space as undifferentiated.
Most often, A paranormal experience is needed for a person to begin to understand how time and space are opposite aspects of the same phenomenom, and also to demistify the godlike status of time. But it is still possible to formulate about this possibility: Einstein, for example, postulated about the relativity of space and time, but what he really did was rising his intellect to a level where he was able to visualize the three-dimensional continuum. This means that intellectualty-wise he was inside the fourth dimension, at least intelectually. Nonetheless he could not explain the nature of time, as this would require his intellect to be at the same level or above the fourth dimension. By beign physically present inside the fourth dimension, the inexorable nature of time would begin to break, and one would be able to manipulate it.
MotionMotion, as we all know, is always in relation to a frame of reference: an object inside a train will obviously appear to be at rest for a passenger inside the train, but not for a fixed observer at the station. In other words, the motion of a body is only as valid as it can be validated by an observer watching the body change position according to his unique perspective. There is not an absolute frame of reference where a determined (measured) motion is always valid for all observers. What is not obvious for most people is that the same relativity applies to time, because time is really only a function of the perceived motion (change) of things inside the visual range of an observer.
motion and acceleration requires energy or force. energization and acceleration are essentially the same in physical terms, and Both are directives of Intention #5. the more energized the observer is, or the more energized the system that acts as his referential is, the closer to lightspeed he will be, and all the relative movement of things around him will seem increasingly slower. realized that the idea of movement, as well as the idea of time, were totally relative to the observer, which is also the same case for space.
[Under construction]
The 10th dimension[Under construction]
The 11th dimension[Under construction]
The 12th dimension[Under construction]
Other dimensions[Under construction]
________________________
1 heisenberg uncer. principle.
2 Momentum is defined as the product of the mass and velocity of an object. An alternative way to interpret it is as quantity of movement. It differs from velocity in that it is a vectorial quantity, and because it involves mass, its total value in a closed system never changes.
3 Establishing probabilities is a way to approximate what cannot be determined for sure. We should not underestimate its usefulness in ???: probability in quantum mechanics can offer the same degree of predictability found in classical mechanics.
In Chapter 1 we defined Creation as an absolute concept, and we equated it to an overall existence. But in the same manner that Creation with capital C is not the same as creation, the act of creating, Existence with capital E is not the same as existence, some form of reality among others. Therefore, it is imperative that we redefine these concepts as follows:
creation -> the act of creating -> Intention #3
existence -> some form (IC #4) of reality (IC #3) is what consciousness (IC #12) is all about ->
3 x 4 = 12 -> Intention #12
Existence / Creation ->
all (IC #10) realities (IC #3) -> 10 + 3 = 13 -> Intention #13
a singular / absolute / overall (IC #1) existence (IC #12) -> 1 + 12 = 13 -> Intention #13
Schematics 3.#
Whether we call It Existence or Creation, we are still talking about the Absolute mentioned in Chapter 1.
Seeing Existence as absolute yields an interesting implication: it makes of it a paradox. In Section 1.5 we saw how wholeness can be recursively defined on top of its own negation. In other words, an absolute concept is paradoxical by nature because it incorporates and includes even that which opposes it, that is, even its own "shadow." In the case of Existence, this definition means that both the essence of what is and what is not (nonexistence) will be a part of it, as contradictory as this may sound.
Another way to reach this same conclusion about Existence is as follows: Existence is beyond definition, and indeed, this is the case if we consider it as an absolute concept. However, if someone does not agree with this, they can still go and try to define Existence, but this will require the consideration of an opposite: nonexistence. It is not possible to define (IC #2) something properly if the definition is not done through an opposite (IC #2), that is, something that provides a contrast for reference. Anyway, nonexistence cannot be considered a valid counterpart for Existence due to the latter's absolute status.
Existence is directly linked with and has its basis in consciousness. When what was previously unknown to our consciousness becomes known, it is the same as if the thing had been brought into existence for us. According to this logic, if we ever come to experience nonexistence, it will become a valid mode of existence for us, because we will be conscious of it. Nevertheless, if nonexistence does not allow for consciousness, then nonexistence cannot exist, because no one can ever be conscious of it in order to prove its existence. In any case, nonexistence is just another mode of existence, or it does not exist, leaving only Existence as the triumphant absolute concept.
Now, if nonexistence is out of the game, then there is no way left to define Existence. From a rational standpoint, this means that it may not be possible for us to believe that Existence is true if we cannot even define it. But as Descartes said, "I think therefore I exist": if we are here discussing and thinking about Existence, then we are proof to ourselves that Existence must be true. The result of these two conflicting views over Existence is a paradox. In other words, Existence is better understood and defined by its own paradoxical nature.
Existence is essentially paradoxical in nature, but as it can be and often is perceived linearly, so is it possible to not be enlightened about it. ( 1)
It is worth noticing that one of the limitations of rational (linear) thinking is that it sees paradoxes as problems that must be resolved. But sometimes a paradox is the answer, not the problem. Paradoxes in Nature appear to be contradictions, but they actually express a non-dual truth: the coexistence of opposites. Holistic thinking, for example, accepts paradoxes as they are because it knows that the actual nature of the thing being analyzed is all-inclusive and cannot be divided without loss of information. Rational thinking, in contrast, needs to be able to separate and classify (IC #2) things completely before accepting them as true. It is not a surprise that rationality fails miserably in face of the paradoxical (IC #10) nature of Existence, because there is no room for a rational interpretation anyway: Existence is all possible realities (IC #3) happening at once (instant - IC #10).
In Section 1 we saw the transcendental nature of Existence how can be better understood through a recursive definition for the Whole. A whole is the objective notion of a totality. and the Whole with capital W is an objective equivalent for Existence. Note the word objective: it has to do with visualizing an object as, for example, a circle whose circumference is nowhere and center is everywhere. In everywhere we look ,there is existence, even in the smallest speck of reality, but still we can never find its bounradies circumference.
Fortunately there is already a conceptualization of Existence and its paradoxical nature: a singularity. In physics, a singularity is defined as a point in spacetime at which gravitational forces are extreme, and at which physical quantities become infinite and space and time become infinitely distorted / warped. In astronomy and astrophysics, a singularity is expected to be what lies at the core of a black hole. In any case, physics cannot study singularities directly because they are a phenomenom where physical laws and equations "break down".
Image #.# - Singularity
The idea of a "living" paradox, a manifested singularity is a very good representation for Existence. Zero and infinity are the two fundamental extremes that represent the essence of polarity, the two poles that delimit rational thought. A singularity finally promotoes the identity of these two extremes, because a singularity is a nothing (zero) that is also everything (infinity). Instead of the monocular perspective that there can only be zero, or infnity at any one time, we can now actually see both at once unseparated, forming a singular whole. Even more, we can give it a formal definition in the form of a conceptual equation:
0 + infinity = 1Schematics 3.# - Universal equation
According to numerological math, another way to define Existence is as follows: singular (IC #1) unvierse -> 1 + 12 = 13 -> Intention #13, and so Existence (IC #13) is the Universe with capital U, i.e., the universe taken as one. Of course, the word universe already implies a single instance, and that is why we saw in 3.2 - Dimensions that the term Multiverse fits under the context of Intention #13 (Existence) better.
Additionaly, consider that by numerological math. reality (IC #3) is the output (result) of the universe (IC #12) since 1 + 2 = 3 -> reality (IC #3). This means that an equation that is valid to and symbolizes Existence is also valid to the Universe. Now, if realities are the outputs of universes, then Reality is the output of the Universe (Existence), and so the equation in schemtics can very well be called an universal equation that is valid to Reality, some kind of collective dream that all beings share.
Although symbolizing Existence and being valid to all realities, the universal equation has little value except as a philosophical truth/consideration that everything is one, and one is everything. In order to make it more useful, we will have to transform it into a real mathematical equation so that it can accuraterly describe what touches us more directly: our own ordinary reality, not the universal Reality. That is, we need to find a way to work this equation mathematically until we able to see how the truth contained in it also reflects in the fleeting aspects that compose our reality.
We can transform the universal equation into a real mathematical equation, more especifically a single-variational equation, if we make the following distinction: Since this equation is conceptual, the presence of zero and infinity is also purely conceptual, which means that both concepts are present as imaginary ideals. However, for a realistic version of this equation, zero and infinity would have to give place to approximations to their respective ideals, because they don't exist in Nature. In real-world vocabulary this means that zero becomes a fixed limit, and infinity becomes an unbounded limit.
Consider that a + b = 1 is the prototype of a realistic incarnation of the equation in Schematics 3.#. Also, consider that a→0 and b→∞, where symbol → reads as "tends to." One thing that a and b have in common is that they both converge to a limit, and although they do this in opposite directions, a convergence (IC #11) by definition is a process that only ends (IC #12) at infinity. Therefore, consider x such that
and
.
For simplicity purposes, a and b can both be expressed in function of x: a = ± x-1 and b = x. As a result, there will be two versions of the prototype equation:
x-1 + x = 1
and
-x-1 + x = 1.
Equation 3.2 has no solutions among the positive and negative numbers, but it is possible to find what is known as complex solutions using imaginary numbers. Imaginary numbers are born from the symbolic manipulation of "impossible" magnitudes. These magnitudes differ from real numbers to the extent that they are metaphysical, that is, they are not restricted to the physical notion of linear extension (length) that defines real numbers. In short, these numbers are essentially meaningless, but this does not stop them from having applications in many fields of science.
We shall focus only on solving Equation 3.3 because we seek the meaning that the universal equation holds with respect to physical reality, hence the title of this section "???", this meaning of course can only be found in the real solutions of Eq. 3.3, while the complex (non-real) solutions of eq 1 are for now completely useless to our purpose.
If we multiply both sides of Equation 3.3 by x, we obtain the quadratic equation x2 - x - 1 = 0. We can now attempt to solve this equation with the quadratic formula;2 hence,
x = (1 ± √5) ⁄ 2 ⇒ 
.
As displayed above, there are two possible solutions for Equation 3.3. Curiously, but not coincidentally, the first value for x is the value of Phi, a well-known mathematical constant whose name is borrowed from the Greek letter Φ. Also known as the golden number, Phi is the first one of three universal constants directly related with the Thirteen Intentions of Creation. We will see how this relationship takes place, but for now we shall focus only on Phi and its amazing properties.
Phi, the Golden NumberWelcome to the wonderful world of Phi. This little constant has amazed mathematicians and philosophers throughout the ages mainly because of its unique properties. Some have called it a mystical number, while others have called it magical, but apart from mysticism, it is a fact that many natural phenomena exhibit some relation to Phi. There are Phi geometries in DNA, in galaxies, in organic structures, in musical sounds, in arts and even in systems linked to the dynamics of human consciousness (e.g., financial markets). In fact, the degree that Phi occurs in Nature seems to be only limited to the degree of creativity that a person can have when studying the geometries present in the aforementioned scenarios.
1.6180339887 4989484820 4586834365 6381177203 0917980576 2862135448 6227052604 6281890244 9707207204 1893911374 8475408807 5386891752 1266338622 2353693179 3180060766 7263544333 8908659593 9582905638 3226613199 2829026788 0675208766 8925017116 9620703222 1043216269 5486262963 1361443814 9758701220 3408058879 5445474924 6185695364 8644492410 4432077134 4947049565 8467885098 7433944221 2544877066 4780915884 6074998871 2400765217 0575179788 3416625624 9407589069 7040002812 1042762177 1117778053 1531714101 1704666599 1466979873 1761356006 7087480710 1317952368 9427521948 4353056783 0022878569 9782977834 7845878228 9110976250 0302696156 1700250464 3382437764 8610283831 2683303724 2926752631 1653392473 1671112115 8818638513 3162038400 5222165791 2866752946 5490681131 7159934323 5973494985 0904094762 1322298101 7261070596 1164562990 9816290555 2085247903 5240602017 2799747175 3427775927 7862561943 2082750513 1218156285 5122248093 9471234145 1702237358 0577278616 0086883829 5230459264 7878017889 9219902707 7690389532 1968198615 1437803149 9741106926 0886742962 2675756052 3172777520 ..Schematics 3.# - Phi
Figure #.# - Phi letters
The fact that we were able to derive Phi from the universal equation is not a mere coincidence: When we transforfmed the universal equation from a conceptual form to a variational form, and thus an algebraic equation, Phi and its conjugate were the values that solved the equation and reaffirmed / maintained the original meaningunity of opposites. Therefore, if Phi solves the universal equation that is supposed applies to all aspects of reality even when they are opposites to each other, it must acts as an universal constant behind the fabric of reality.
The ratio derived from Phi is known as the golden mean (a.k.a. golden ratio, divine proportion), and it can be expressed as the ratios 1:φ or 1:φ-1. Tthe golden mean offers the perfect balance (IC #6) between excess and deficiency in the universe. This means that if we want to do something stand out in relation to another, with the golden mean we can do this in a way so that the opposites complement each other perfectly and so they maintain a bond or an unity that is aesthetically beautiful. In the end, it is the whole that will stand out, and the opposites will be equal in the sense that they are undifferentiated from the whole picture.
Figure #.# - Golden section
Most sources say that the golden mean is present in Nature, but it is more appropriate to say that Nature is based on the golden mean. Examples could be given to fill several books, but it is more important that we understand how this is possible. An even more counterintuitive implication born from the fact that Phi is an universal constant is to say that artificial structures are also based on golden mean. This is also true, but only meaningful and obvious from a multidimensional perspective.
Artificial structures are those created by intelligent beings for complex and unnatural purposes. Thereforem, the objects will reflect their complex purposes and not natural patterns. As we add more dimensions to our analysis, eventually all complexity fades back into the natural patterns of creation. We saw an example of this in section when we the cycle of life was shown to apply even to the life of a rock, yet from a fourth dimensional perspective, except we are talking about the inverse here: complexity becomes simplicity in the fourth dimension. the reason for this is because secion crossing from one idmension to another implies a shift (IC #9), meaning that everything is inverted.
Figure #.#
[Under construction]
Creational constants[Under construction]
E (Euler's number)[Under construction]
Pi[Under construction]
________________________
1 Transcix. "What is enlightenment?" Online posting. 14 Oct. 2006. 23 April 2007 < http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message302358/pg1 >.
2 the quadratic formula is used to solve quadratic equations of the type ax^2+bx+c=0,
In this chapter we will learn ways that the knowledge imparted by the Thirteen Intentions of Creation can be applied in practice. It is nonetheless critical that you understand that the Thirteen Intentions are nothing more than a set of tools at your disposal. The Thirteen Intentions should be to you as a number of ways to express and realize your Will (IC #13). Notice how your Will is at the same level as all the Intentions taken as one: Intention #13. Therefore, your Will and the Thirteen Intentions taken as one are the same thing: your Will is composed of 13 Intentions. The key is to live by the law of your Will, which is also the Will of the Creator: Love. In this chapter we will present a practical definition for Love that will also serve as a definition for what everyone really wants deep inside.
The first impulse displayed by most people is anxiety associated to the fact that they want to follow and obey the Thirteen Intentions as soon as possible. They want to put themselves under what the Thirteen Intentions represent. The problem is that when one follows the Thirteen Intentions, they are actually following their own Will disguised as a belief system. It is needless to say that this approach will be just another attempt by the individual to escape self-responsibility. As noted in Chapter 2, all beliefs are self-deception. First and most importantly is that you get to know and understand what the Thirteen Intentions are and then you can proceed to apply them in your life effectively. Belief in the Thirteen Intentions is far from being the same as understanding them.
However, even the idea that the Thirteen Intentions can somehow be applied in practice is questionable. The Thirteen Intentions are the programming behind Reality and so everything / everyone already follows them in one way or another. It is irrelevant that we try to apply reality on top of reality because we already do it all the time! You can only really choose to become aware of the underlying plan / programming of Creation or not, and if you do become aware then your existence and evolution will be much more hassle-free. Again, it all falls down to achieving peace of mind. Everybody wants to be at peace with themselves. With a greater awareness of the nature of reality, you will be able to recognize patterns better, and it is from the recognition of patterns that peace of mind can come.
Anyway, the Thirteen Intentions can be used to manipulate reality at the conscious level to the extent that they allow you to concentrate all of your energy only on a few (13) things that really matter. By concentrating on a certain Intention you are already concentrating on what is of most significance to the reality you are in. However, you cannot expect the Intentions to make decisions for you. You cannot expect the Intentions to do the work for you while you remain with your arms crossed. Do you want to be a programmer or a program? The challenge is to become the programmer and stop being programmed by Reality / Creation. As long as your free will does not dictate the rules by which you live, you are being controlled by external (alien) forces. Your free will should be above the programmatic nature of reality. Your free will should be the true nature of your reality.
The most practical result everybody is really trying to achieve is relief from practical results. Consequently, much more important that obtaining practical results is that we strive to obtain more consciousness, which will ultimately determine whether we have peace of mind or not. Nothing short of an infinite level of consciousness is sufficient for a perfect application of the Truth. Your only compromise at all times must be with Infinity, because anything less is a contradiction, a fraud. Relatively speaking, no amount of action we take is ever sufficient when we lack consciousness, because everything that we do is a fuck-up that could be made a million times better.
The search for the Truth is a matter of personal development; it is an internal (spiritual - IC #9) journey as we strive to increase our energy and expand our consciousness. Energy and consciousness are names for the same universal variable whose only purpose is to increase its value perpetually. This variable describes the only kind of power that can only grow and never decrease: spiritual power. However, many people believe that there are shortcuts in life that can provide them with more power than they actually deserve -- a great trap. And so people keep looking for nonexistent shortcuts. The truth is that there are no shortcuts, and one must learn the art of "escaping forward," that is, always advancing instead of retreating. In a spiritual sense, there is no way out in our evolution except when we go straight up to the wall and we bang head against it until it breaks.
"The Truth lies within" -- truer words have never been spoken. This means that a practical application of the universal and fundamental knowledge presented in this book will really only depend on how much you can realize the truth that the Thirteen Intentions are not "out there," but within yourself. They are Creational intentions after all, and only living beings can have intent. That is why knowledge of the Thirteen Intentions can make you more proficient in "bending" yourself as in the spoon metaphor of the movie Matrix, The (1999). The full dialogue between two characters of the movie, Neo and the Spoon Child, is shown below.
[Neo tries to bend a spoon only using his mind.]
Spoon Child: Do not try to bend the spoon, that is impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth.
Neo: What truth?
Spoon Child: There is no spoon.
Neo: There is no spoon?
Spoon Child: Then you will see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself.
Bending yourself means changing (IC #13) yourself on a deep and personal level. Such task is nonetheless something akin to a miracle because it requires a consciousness change willed. Waiting for circumstances outside of your control to provoke permanent changes in your life is the biggest self-deception. You have to stop wanting and waiting for abstract forces of Nature to magically change your life for you. All that you will get with such an indirect and passive approach is the illusion of change. Stop wanting it and be it. You have to develop a mindset that increases your sense of self-responsibility up to infinity and leaves no other option in your mind besides the immediate need for you to be that change that you want to see in yourself. Change on a personal level must be done at all times, never "later." This is very difficult to achieve and requires that you find your true identity as a spiritual and godlike entity that has complete control over its destiny. (More on this topic later in this chapter.)
Therefore, in order to find the Truth you got to really be wanting to know who you are on a spiritual level. It does not matter how many beliefs you subscribe to, because none of it matters if you do not know how it all relates to you. It all comes down to you. That is why all knowledge is ultimately self-knowledge, and knowledge of the Thirteen Intentions, being the most powerful there is, can help you achieve a greater level of self-knowledge. But you have to regard this knowledge as a tool, nothing more. A tool is by definition an inanimate object that cannot do all the work by itself. The big difference with respect to the Thirteen Intentions is that they represent a tool that is alive (IC #5) and thus can almost do all the work for you, but you still have to put the final nail to impede the construction from falling apart. In other words, you can find the lot of all knowledge, you can find the Truth, but it may still fall through without you.
By getting to know yourself better you are expanding your sphere of consciousness, and at each rest stop during this process you can see by looking at your old self that you have successfully climbed another ledge. (Note: self-knowledge.). The effect is progressive as the individual evolves in consciousness and thus in his ability to create from intent. (Note: Thirteen Intentions.) The more expanded the awareness, the more powerful the intent, the more successful and automatic the creation and the more realized the consciousness. (Note: It is not a surprise that by 12 + 3 -> consciousness results in realizairton, automation and creation, etc.) therefore, the degree of power you have matters when you use the tool (intent) that which will invebitably be one of the any one Thirteen Intentions, or all of them at once if your will is aligned with Intention #13.
Purpose of CreationAccording to Intention #1, there is always a purpose behind something; there is always a meaning, a cause. There is, for example, a purpose for life and a purpose for evolution, and they differ from one another, though the latter includes and overrides the former. We may not be aware of the final purpose, but it exists in the sense that there is a straight answer that applies to everyone regardless of their beliefs, and this answer, if understood in the right context, can be more enlightening than relativistic answers such as "the purpose is that there is no purpose" or "the meaning is the meaning you give it." Notice how these last statements are contradictory considering that they imply that relativity is an absolute. Since relativity is not an absolute in Creation, specially because there is always order (IC #7) behind / beyond the perceived chaos, then anyone claiming these answers as final is simply ignorant of the final truth.
In Section 2.1, we learned that absolute concepts such as Existence are self-causing: they are their own purpose. The purpose for the Absolute (IC #13) is the Absolute, period. That is the highest purpose that anyone can have in their lives. But the problem is that we need to further elaborate on the nature of this grand purpose until we can achieve a level of certainty that will allow us to apply it in our lives. For now, consider that this purpose is spiritual and it coincides with what Intention #13 is all about: Love. We will better characterize and define this purpose later, because that is what matters to us after all: a well-defined purpose that covers everything.
Most people don't have a well-defined purpose in their lives; but of course, not everyone is looking to have one. Sometimes their purpose is to just experience the basic things that life has to offer and not necessarily do something "great" with it. To justify this purpose most people subscribe to the "enjoy life" philosophy, which is in tune with the highest purpose of Creation after all, as shown in the figure below. The problem is that a philosophy that sees life itself as the purpose of life is still not the highest purpose that one can have in their mind. The highest purpose is spiritual and lies at Intention #13, hence it is bigger / greater than life (IC #5) itself. It is a purpose that remains valid for all eternity, and so, in theory, it should span many lives.
Figure 4.# - Purpose of Creation
Life is neither sacred nor insignificant; it just is. From a spiritual perspective, life is just an enriching experience that is not necessarily the first or the last. Belief in life after death is not even a requirement for us to be able to see everything as part of a bigger context: a plan of Creation as described by the Thirteen Intentions. Still, most people look for answers only inside the context of life because their focus is restricted to life, and so they are unable to find higher purpose that could provide them with everlasting fulfillment. Nonetheless, a conscious application of philosophies that see life as sacred has great potential, because then people can extrapolate the purpose of life as they see it and end up achieving great things. On the other hand, when people are not aware of any significant purpose, they will simply limit themselves to experience life without any sort of extrapolation; it can be argued that such basic experience is their purpose after all.
The biggest problem is not being ignorant about the purpose of life, but assuming that a certain course in life must be followed in detriment of all other possible courses. This in itself is an assumption that controls people's minds and limits the amount of energy and motivation they can have. For example, when one is part of a society, there is often stress and anxiety associated to the fact that the individual must honor a lifelong contract and yet he is not aware of having signed anything. Therefore, the individual keeps pushing himself to have the motivation to "do something" and "become someone" while inside society, but he does not have enough self-motivation because deep inside he feels obligated. One should not honor agreements in which they did not participate. Many people are brainwashed by society in this aspect, although in the end it is the individual that is allowing himself to be manipulated.
Self-motivation is something very hard to achieve, hence the reason why so many people choose to remain trapped in situations where responsibilities are automatically assigned to them by external sources / authorities. Professional workers in society often think that their work model is the most sacred form of responsibility, but it may be in fact less work compared to what it would take them to free their minds and become self-motivated. One does not have any responsibility at all except that which they decide to have for themselves, and freedom is already the ultimate responsibility that anyone can have. The price of freedom is eternal self-vigilance and infinite self-responsibility.
Greater motivation can only arise when there is freedom, which is above all a state of mind. Funnily enough, it is when the individual ceases to think that he ought to have motivation to do certain things that he also starts having motivation to do everything. If one strives for nothing too much in particular, they automatically acquire the energy (motivation) to strive for everything at once. For this reason, there is truth in the statement "the purpose is to not have a purpose." A spiritual purpose is indeed along these lines, as it tends to be quite paradoxical (IC #10). Only a spiritual purpose allows for infinite possibilities in the same way that a free mind acknowledges infinite possibilities.
Everything in the universe is energy assuming one form or another. But what is energy after all? Mainstream science defines it as the "capacity to do work," "usable power," etc. Well, all of these definitions are somewhat circular considering that by Intention #5 the concepts of power, force and work are all interchangeable with energy. The fact is that energy is something beyond definition because it corresponds to an universal principle, an Intention of Creation. Energy is already what provides the definition for several concepts with respect to life and the universe. For this reason, it is suitable for a fundamental analysis that we treat energy as the absolute variable of the universe, because it applies to all systems living or not. That is, on a fundamental level all measurements are made in terms of energy.
Vibration and consciousness are also valid names for the absolute variable of the universe. These two concepts along with energy are all intrinsically related and in fact are the same abstract property under different names. For most practical purposes, the concept of energy is a better denomination because it is closer to physical world concepts. In other words, to see energy as a variable serves a more practical purpose for us than in the case of vibration and consciousness. Energy by itself is an abstract property and as such its existence is questionable -- we cannot really prove it -- but still everything that exists is an effect produced by energy similar to the idea in metaphysics that spirit (IC #9) animates matter (IC #4).
There are qualities of energy in the universe: some are coarser whereas some are finer, the latter being of a more ethereal / spiritual nature. What the absolute variable of the universe really is, is the concept of pure (IC #13) energy turned into a variable. Pure energy is an abstract concept and as such cannot be measured, but inside the physical world energy assumes many forms that can be measured. In the scale of Table 4.#, vacuum energy is closest to the idea of a completely pure form of energy. Vacuum energy has the highest quality because it is in fact virtually infinite energy as a form of energy. Vacuum energy is actually spiritual energy emanation from the SOurce (IC #13) and a ssuch it is extremely subtle and fluid and thus not easily harnessed or measured, at least not directly. Because it is present at all points in space, vacuum energy is the most abundant form of energy and yet the most difficult to be acessed directly to be utilized as a source of energy. In this case the other qualities of energy may act as intermediary sources.
| Energy | IC | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
mass | #5 | ||||
| heat | #6 | |||||
| sound | #7 | |||||
| scalar | #8 | |||||
| vacuum (zero-point) | #9 |
The five qualities of energy shown in table 4.# are nothing more than degrees of energetic purity. They are simply different states of the same substance, a divine essence, which is actually the Void (IC #13). In other words, The Void also possesses a nature and substance of its own from which all matter and energy are derived. It is hardly "nothing" considering that it is already the source of everything. or more empty than empty space and more full than the materials. the qualities of energy we seen here are still part of a vibratory / energetic scale while the VOid goes beyond vibration or any idea of levels of energy. there is absolutely no energy as well as infintie, pure energy in the VOid. it is nothing as well as everything because the Void is also the Whole.
In this chapter we are interested in how the individual can accumulate (IC #8) and control his energy. This is a fundamental step in anyone's evolution because a being must always increase its personal power to solve new problems that arise. It is well known that a problem cannot be solved on the level on which it was created. For example, if a problem is at level x, you need to be at level x+1 to be able to solve it. You cannot perform at a high level without enough energy. Also, you always need more energy to achieve control (power) over your current energy level. Power begets more power. There is never enough energy -- there is always a need for more. The answer for all problems is infinite power / energy right now, not later.
The good news is that the energy of any system already tends to increase under optimal (natural) conditions. This is by natural law, more specifically due to Intentions #8, #11 and #13. However, a constant (IC #13) and interrupted increase only takes place in the realm of vibration (IC #7). The reason why it is only energy as vibration that can rise to infinity is simple: Intention #8 following immediately after Intention #7 can only mean that the principle of accumulation (IC #8) applies to vibration and not to the standard concept of energy as defined by Intention #5. Intention #5 merely defines the concept of physical (IC #4) energy, which is really energy in the form of mass and thus attached / restricted to a physical body. Vibrational energy is non-local and thus not restricted to the boundaries of a system, although it can be temporarily associated to one. On the other hand, physical energy cannot increase infinitely without exceeding the system's limits and destroying it in the process. For this reason, physical energy requires constant maintenance to remain in an acceptable / optimal level that is neither too high nor too low.
Figure 4.# - Exponential growth of energy
absolute (IC #1) variable (IC #6) -> 1 + 6 = 7 -> IC #7 -> vibration ; frequencySchematics 4.#
As seen in 3.5 - Densities, every system has a base level of vibration that we can call as its frequency. A system only exists to the extent that it incorporates a specific frequency: change (e.g., increase) the base frequency and we are no longer talking about the same system. However, sometimes a change of frequency is not only because we have changed the focus of our analysis, but also because the system we were analyzing is now dead: A system is nothing more than a certain amount of energy; therefore, the tendency for energy to keep increasing on a metaphysical (vibrational) level eventually exhausts the system by also triggering the physical (systemic) energy to blow out of proportion. As a result, the system suffers great instability and finally reach its death, since it only existed to the extent that its energy remained stable (IC #7), that is, within a characteristic frequency range.
If vibration is the absolute variable of the universe, it can only increase for any system. But, as we can see by Table 4.#, vibration is also one of the qualities of energy: sound, and if mass-energy and sound are qualities of the same substance, then physical energy can also be interpreted in terms of vibration. It is thus acceptable when someone says that a system suffered a process that "lowered" its vibration. Technically, however, a system variable measuring vibration can only be fixed or rising. Whether there has been an increase or a decrease in a system's physical energy, that still constitutes a fixation or an increase in its vibrational energy. The reason for this is because vibration by itself cannot suffer an oscillation considering that it already is oscillation assuming a definite frequency value. Accordingly, when analyzing a system in isolation we notice oscillations in its energy, but beyond that system we discover that the disturbances are the result of an evolutionary process involving another system that includes the latter as a subsystem. Therefore, we find out that the vibrational energy of a system is always rising by an indirect association with the energy of a greater system.
In the graph below, there are actually three axes. The y-axis is is a scalar / vertical (IC #8) component for the values that the absolute variable of the universe takes. For the y-axis, only the amplitude of waves matters. the x-axis is there to depict a possible differnce in the scales of cyclical duration (time). The blue diagonal line constitutes a third axis. The third axis is energy of a pure vibrational nature rising steadily across systems, even when the physical energy is oscilalting locally (i.e., within a system). Now, what is important is that yhe third axis includes the y-axis as a vertical component but is unrelated to the x-axis. Thereforem, the concept of ever-increasing vibrational energy that assumes different frequency values (light-blue dots) for each system make sense only with respec to the y-axis, because the x-axis it coudl not be direcelt realted to a increase in frequency considering that by definition frequency is inversewly proportional to wavelength. it is onky with respect to thethrid axis that energy, frequency and vibration increase as one idependenly from factors such as wavelemngth or time, though thesefactors are still relevant for our analysis.
Figure 4.#
Figure 4.#
By the graphs above, notice that there is an aspect of energy that never dies, it just changes form (system - IC #4). From system to system, energy achieves immortality. In physics, this concept is known as the first law of thermodynamics, which states that energy can never be destroyed or created. A system can be said to produce or generate energy (work), but it is actually borrowing that energy from a higher-quality (i.e., higher-frequency) and more abundant energy source corresponding to a greater system. The universe is the greatest system; it is both the ultimate energy source as well as the ultimate isolated macroscopic system. In systems theory, however, an universe is merely the environment for a system, and it supplies all the energy the system needs. Therefore, when a system dies whatever energy was contained in it ends reabsorbed by the environment. The system simply disintegrates back into the environment after it has reached its maximum level of entropy.1
Now we are going to see a more realistic depiction of the evolution of a system on a pourely energetic level. thogh a system remains is supposed stable during its entire life, there is an ongoing need for metaphbysicla and thus meta-systemic evolution, that sthe system must evolve beyond itself. AS we said beforem, this will eventually trigger the system's energy to blow out of proportion. A singularity in this case can represents a state of maximum energy for that system hwich by approximation is so much compared to the system's normal energ ylevels that itpretty much infinite -- it isj ust too much relative ot that system. Thus The wave associated to the system collapses into a singularity according tot he stages we see i n Figure 4.#. All systems end with a singularity (death). It is pretty much the only thing we can be certain about their future. Figure 4.# is actually an adaptation of exponential growth of energy sene in figure 4.# to a waveform. As the rate of growth tends to infinity in, the wave is collpasing, more enegry is comrpessed into the present instea dof beig evenly distibuted along a horizontal axis of time.
Figure 4.#
In essence, there is a natural law of evolution (IC #11) for Creation. It is a flow of Creation as we saw in Chapter 3 when we were analysing the Cycle of Life. What makes this evolution hard to define is the fact that it goes into into higher degrees of everything and nothing in particular: energy, power, order, complexity, entropy, vibration, consciousness, etc. Everything at the same time. ultimately , of course, we are talking about energy of apurely scalar nature, thta is, is is defined by amplitufe only. any quantity is a quantity of thsi energy before it is quantity of anything else. this energy flows across systems and even dimensions. it is anabstract and transcendental (ic #13) property. In one level / dimension it may appear to be decreasing, in another it is t keeps rising . none of the secondaryaspects of this energy may take will impoede it from keep rising. What we interpreted as deviations of this evolution were only temporariry and local and pretty mcuh illusory as well.
What we know by the intentions is that Change (ic #13) is the only comstant, and depending on Intention #11 change is always positive. Therefore, any change is fundamentallyis related to ncrease in energy, there is always progress being made, even if we cannot detect it. any change in anture is actually spomtaneous energetic growth in anture, a process fundamentallydescribed by the exponential function as per the universal constant Euler associated to Intention #11. iot is important that one become aware of thsi process and so eventually you can control the rate of change and consequenlt the flow of energy into your lives, and understand to see progress even when others see none.
________________________
1 In physics, entropy is the measure of the disorder (chaos) of any system. According to the second law of thermodynamics, the entropy of any isolated system can only increase over time. It is a spontaneous process. In the case of open systems, entropy can decrease locally and temporarily due to external agency, but the tendency for it to only increase becomes valid again if we keep expanding our analysis over time and space to incorporate the entire system's life and finally the entire universe: there is always a positive net change in entropy for the universe. For this reason, entropy is sometimes considered an universal principle of which the second law is a mere expression.
[Under construction]
528hz: the frequency of Love[Under construction]
825hz: the frequency of Evolution[Under construction]
Image 4.#
[Under construction]
Consciousness generally refers to a living being's awareness of several things about itself, its own existence, and the world around it, including but not restricted to sensations, perceptions, emotions and thoughts. Psychology and other sciences of mind also consider consciousness as being the quality or state of being aware. These common-sense definitions, however, are vague (circular), because awareness and consciousness are practically the same thing: awareness is a subproduct of consciousness. Therefore, let us stay away from orthodox and circular definitions and instead try to build a more natural approach to an explanation of consciousness.
To be conscious involves a lot of things. As conscious beings ourselves, we are trapped inside the consciousness phenomenon. Our intellect and perception are subject to consciousness, and not the other way around. This means that we cannot simply expect to fully define consciousness if we are not totally "above" and beyond it to see the entire process unfolding before our "eyes." Because of this, many people feel that consciousness has no place in the objective world of science, although a lot of "unobservables" in Nature can be and have been the targets of scientific investigations before. There are no boundaries for scientific inquiry, but the nature of consciousness seems to be just as unlimited.
One of the reasons why there is no scientifically acceptable definition or interpretation of consciousness is because it can mean several things to different people. Consciousness is ultimately a personal state, and there are even different states or levels of it, including those that are too subjective for a scientific (objective) analysis. However, the difficulty to define consciousness does not mean that consciousness is some kind of mysterious entity that escapes all forms of scientific analysis. Consciousness can be studied as a scientific problem like any other, but it eventually breaches the limits of philosophical thought and scientific analysis, mainly because it introduces a series of paradoxes, as for example the fact that consciousness seems to be caused by brain processes, but at the same time any causal relationship from a physical (third-person) perspective takes a first-person consciousness to be aware of it. Who came first, the egg or the chicken?
Sorry. Content beyond this point will only be available in the paid version of this book.
Suffering arises from feelings that are stronger than the individual's capacity to assimilate them. Suffering is intense and obscure, and with causes that are unknown or ignored (denied) by the individual. Aspects of one's existence that cannot be understood nor accepted eventually become too intense to be ignored. It is only natural that suffering arises according to the sequence of Intentions of Creation: sensations (IC #7) increase (IC #8) internally (IC #9) until they become very intense (IC #10) to produce a personal singularity, an existential paradox (IC #10).
Sorry. Content beyond this point will only be available in the paid version of this book.
| Directives | Unification, Origination, Simplification, Principiation, Singularization, Individualization, Prioritization, Adoration, Representation, Exemplification, Idealization, Declaration, Motivation |
| Qualities | autonomy, unity, individuality, monocularity, originality, priority, simplicity, singularity |
| Concepts | absoluteness, choice, idea, individual, origin, point, principle, purpose, uniqueness, unit |
|
Adoration: To be the best so that you can be adored. To be the one. Declaration: To declare your choices. Individualization: To cultivate your individuality. To distinguish yourself. Motivation: To always have a motive, a purpose. Origination: To give credit to the original version of things. Principiation: To take the first step. To have principles. Prioritization: To identify what is more important. Representation: To be a leader. To be an example. Simplification: To simplify toward the quantity of one. Singularization: To reduce toward the quantity of one. Unification: To make everything into one. To be one with everything. |
|
| Phrases |
- "Begin at the beginning." - "The first step is the most difficult, but also the most important." - "There can be only one." |
| Directives | Polarization, Differentiation, Linearization, Mensuration, Rationalization, Isolation, Delineation, Limitation, Identification, Separation, Externalization, Classification |
| Qualities | diversity, polarity, duality, linearity, dimensionality, rationality, quantity |
| Concepts | challenge, definition, failure, length, limit, line, opposition, pole, value, quantity |
|
Delineation: To define the boundaries between things well. Identification: To point something out. To identify a problem before rushing to find a solution. Polarization: To cut through the nonsense to the essential challenge. Limitation: To establish limits. Externalization: To look for and follow an ideal. |
|
| Phrases | - "One thing at a time." |
| Directives | Activation, Animation, Manifestation, Realization, Electrization, Stimulation, Circulation, Creation, Automation, Imagination |
| Qualities | activity, electricity, reality, creativity, visibility |
| Concepts | action, circuit, creation, cycle, current, effect, expression, illusion, image, light, practice, stimulus |
|
Activation: To put things into circulation. To get things up and running. Automation: To be like a robot. Manifestation: To bring something into existence. Realization: To get things done. |
|
| Phrases |
- "Just do it." - "Let there be light!" |
| Directives | Formation, Formalization, Solidification, Stabilization, Foundation, Structuration, Materialization, Objectification, Concretization |
| Qualities | objectivity, physicality, solidity, supportability, stability |
| Concepts | base, body, form, material, model, object, objective, structure, system |
|
Formation: To give form and shape to something. Foundation: To build a strong structure, a solid and firm basis. Concretization: To aim for concrete results. |
|
| Phrases | - |
| Directives | Potentiation, Infuriation, Energization, Excitation, Acceleration, Irradiation, Exploration, Experimentation, Corporation, Movimentation |
| Qualities | aggressivity, energy, horizontality, opportunity, potency |
| Concepts | adventure, effort, explosion, experience, power, practice, force, human, life, muscle, movement, radiance, risk, smartness, strain, time, work |
|
Corporation: To do physical work and exercises. Excitation: To do what excites you. Experimentation: To jump into an exciting adventure. Exploration: To take an opportunity. Irradiation: To irradiate great energy (potency). |
|
| Phrases |
- "Seize the day." |
[Under construction]
| Directives | Compensation, Accommodation, Equilibration, Variation, Oscillation, Alternation, Equalization, Fluctuation |
| Qualities | equality, periodicity, variety |
| Concepts | wave, balance, equilibrium, intelligence |
|
Equalization: To seek equal distribution between parts. Equilibration: Do not favor one thing over another too much. |
|
| Phrases | |
[Under construction]
| Directives | Harmonization, Syntonization, Reverberation, Sensation, Vibration, Intonation, Inspiration, Situation, Orientation, Association, Organization |
| Qualities | harmony, syntony, frequency |
| Concepts | sound, music, plan, order, tone, alignment, wisdom |
|
Harmonization: Keep things in equilibrium. Syntonization: To get in tune with a situation. Inspiration: Seek what inspires you. |
|
| Phrases | |
[Under construction]
| Directives | Maximization, Magnification, Amplification, Accumulation, Augmentation, Verticalization, Exaggeration, Extrapolation, Multiplication |
| Qualities | extremity, infinity, productivity |
| Concepts | ambition, excess, profit, production |
| Phrases |
- "Think big." - "The sky is the limit." - "The more, the better." |
| Directives | Spiritualization, Nullification, Annihilation, Cancellation, Certification, Confirmation, Internalization, Specification, Meditation, Anticipation, Liberation |
| Qualities | certainty, spirituality, impeccability |
| Concepts | discipline, focus, peace, shift, spirit, zero |
|
Nullification: To clear a debt as soon as possible. Certification: To achieve peace of mind by being sure about things. Specification: To go directly to the point. Anticipation: To make sure that something happens before it is too late. Liberation: To get rid of certain things for greater peace of mind. |
|
| Phrases |
- "The sooner, the better." - "The only way out is within." |
| Directives | Integration, Assimilation, Adaptation, Particularization, Divination, Instantiation, Concentration, Densification, Intensification, Totalization, Optimization |
| Qualities | density, divinity, indivisibility, instantaneity, intensity, integrity, tiny, totality, relativity |
| Concepts | chaos, completeness, detail, instance, instant, paradox, particle, whole, world |
|
Optimization: To account for all details. |
|
| Phrases |
- "It is now or never." - "God is in the details." |
[Under construction]
| Directives | Approximation, Regulation, Moderation, Adequation, Preparation, Destination, Qualification, Graduation |
| Qualities | destiny, quality, proximity, sufficiency, tendency |
| Concepts | evolution, fitness, incompletion, persistence, progression |
| Phrases |
- "Don't stop until you get enough." (Michael Jackson in Off the Wall) - "Don't give up." |
[Under construction]
| Directives | Finalization, Termination, Crystalization, Personification, Cooperation, Communication, Dedication, Sacrification, Universalization, Dissemination, Solicitation, Conscientization |
| Qualities | community, personality, finality |
| Concepts | self, consciousness, crystal, decision, end, exit, death, completion, perfection, universe |
| Phrases | - "It only ends when it ends." |
[Under construction]
| Mantra | I AM |
| Directives | Acceptation, Perpetuation, Salvation, Immortalization, Preservation, Propagation, Continuation, Transformation, Transmutation, Regeneration, Purification, Renovation |
| Qualities | eternity, immortality, purity, spontaneity |
| Concepts | being, change, flow, freedom, miracle, new, permanence, perseverance, revolution, transcendence, transition, ascension, will |
| Absolute concepts | Love, Creation, Reality, Existence, Source, Creator, Oneness, Isness, the Whole, the Void, Will, Spirit, Higher Self, Consciousness, Truth, Infinity |
| Phrases |
- "The only constant is change." - "Everything is transitory." - "Everything will flow." - "It's never over." - "The end is a new beginning." - "Everything is already as it should be." |
Copyright © 2008-2010 Conspiracy Knowledge Base
You are free to reproduce parts of this work as long as you give credit to the author. When copying parts of this work, make sure to always include a notice identifying the original title and author. You may also distribute this work as a whole as long as you do not add or remove anything from the original content. You may not mutilate the content, or leave off contact, copyright and authorship information. You may not use this work for commercial purposes.
13 intentions of creation, truth, metaphysics, creation, theory
