Theos-Talk Archives (May 2000 Message tt00163)

> Dear Kim,
>
> Wow.  Thankyou so much.  If you're on the list then I'm yours!

I am, but generally I prefer the sweet peace of silent contemplation. But
perhaps this time a greater harmony may be achieved through a little
conflict. A space can be too restricted, whether little communities in
Cyperspace, or puritan minds.
The latter should remember that the great mind of old HPB herself was like
the inventory of a 17th c. curiosity museum or a chinese apothecary, full of
weird things, egyptian rarities and pulverized remains.
Puritans need not worry for their intellectual virtue, closed minds will no
doubt remain stale. And the old lady herself, the master of syncretic and
synthetic thought, might be imagined rumbling from the grave.

> I resonate to your writing like a new silver bell, like body- surfing in
the
> beautiful waters of Dana Point Beach in the early or late hours.
Thankyou.
>
> I like the other feedback too.  I am starting to get uncomfortable not
> having colleages who will stand up and speak their minds and their hearts.
> We can all learn together.  Many are simply testing the waters with their
> opposition.  Electric Fire in relationship to Fire by Friction yields
Solar
> Fire or OBJECTIVITY!!!

Nothing arouses my spirit more than a shouting croud, it tends towards a
murky self-existence of its own, unless dismembered in the cradle by the
muscle of gentle reason.

> So let's fight each other with a bemused smile on our faces and love in
our
> hearts.  Such joy is ours!

:-) I miss so much the ancient indian rules for such interaction. Brilliant
young philosophers like Shankara would study and then venture out on a
digvijaya, a philosophical tour of world-conquest, challenging the sharpest
minds of all schools.
The looser of such duels would generally have to become disciples of the
conquerer.
So much for orthodoxy in old India!

> George Spencer-Brown wrote down the LAWS OF FORM in the late sixities.
> Collin Johnson, author of the superb book WHY, writes in that book that he
> had a telephone interview with Spencer-Brown in which Spencer-Brown
clearly
> stated that the Buddha had taught the     LAWS OF FORM ( . . .mutual
arising
> . . .).  He discovered this in 1984.
> He was so happy about it.

His ideas is extremely interesting, not the least because he, like Leibniz,
derives his ideas from a mathematical system. But sometimes he gets carried
away, fx. when considering Shakyamuni "the only other author who evidently
discovered these laws (of Form)."

> George Spencer-Brown thinks that he has proved that all of Boolean algebra
> and arithmetic can be derived through logical deductive steps from two
> ideas:
>
> 1. The Idea of Distinction
> 2. The Idea of Indication
>
> This all seems to relate back to Nagajuna, etc.

Or:
0. the unlimited or unrestricted space, mahaakasha, infinity
1. The distinction or boundary decided upon, leading to:
2. Indication is the restricted space, the field of action, a system, cell,
universe, etc.

See the opening lines of "Laws of Form:"

"The theme of this book is that a universe comes into being when a space is
severed or taken apart. The skin of a living organism cuts off an outside
from an inside. So does the circumference of a circle in a plane. By tracing
the way we represent such a severance, we can begin to reconstruct, with an
accuracy and coverage that appear almost uncanny, the basic forms underlying
linguistic, mathematical, physical, and biological science, and can begin to
see how the familiar laws of our own experience follow inexorably from the
original act of severance. The act itself already remembered, even if
unconsciously, as our first attempt to distinguish different things in a
world where, in the first place, the boundaries can be drawn anywhere we
please. At this stage the universe cannot be distinguished from how we act
upon it, and the world may seem like shifting sand beneath our feet."

And then consider the idea contained in the first picture of the opening
lines of the SD Proem.

> I have a wonderful unpublished collection of quotes from HPB, AAB, Allen
> Watts and other like Chang (THE BUDDHIST TEACHING OF TOTALITY).  That you
> might love.  Anyone who is interested please let me know.  I am eager to
> share it.  I compiled it.  Me!  Me!  (grinn, smile, puffed up, etc.)

Send it along. If it is large file, please send it to my private e-mail
adress. :-)

> I think that the space you have outlined so well is the funnest space
there
> is.  Zero, One, Two  It is this area that can help all of us wanna-be's
> focus as we struggle, in our own individual freedom soaked ways, towards
> really understanding Life.

Have you ever thought of the fact that in a binary system your triad yields
0, 1, 10(2).
The idea contained in these three (both 0 and 10 are primarily ideas)
remains the same in the decimal or sumerian hexad systems, but the
mathematical properties differ, when considered as representations of ideas
rather than mere values. It would be easy to construct a philosophy based on
this triad.
    But is is far more important whether nature reacts to these ideas as we
conceive them. According to esoteric philosophy we are only able to observe
the top of the iceberg in the case of macrocosmic systems, but the primitive
cell might give us a clue to the operations in a system. At least we have
the guiding principles within sight.

At the core of the guiding principle of the human cell, the logos or DNA,
recognises a language containing a set of four values (whether represented
by numbers or letters) in three-letter words. The Messenger RNA (or Fohat)
also recognises four values.

To be faithful to the language of nature, your philosophy would perhaps need
a language consisting of a primary set and a seconday set

> Your friend indeed,
> Gene
>
> Tell me more!

> May I have permission to share this Kim-Gene exchange with the 22 member
> esoteric science group?

Certainly, and feedback is very welcome. If we get too "pseudo-theosophical"
we can always share thoughts in private e-mail.

Kim


-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.