Philosophical Speculations

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

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 3:00 pm So what do we make of infinitely descending chord progressions?

Fascinating, thanks! My first observation is that by arranging the root notes of the chords of his favorite infinite descend into new triads, we get ascending progression which alters between major and minor chords:

F A C
G Bb D
Ab C Eb
Bb Db F
B Eb Gb
Db E Ab
D Gb A
E G B

The left hand row is Mixolydian mode, the right hand row Aeolian (ie. natural minor scale), but what on earth is the middle row? Maybe I made a mistake somewhere, but it has three half-notes and does not fit the system of church modes based on major scale with intervals 2-2-1-2-2-2-1.

The middle row mode is just alteration of 1 and 2 semitones, and can't be played on white piano keys only:
A (1) Bb (2) C (1) Db (2) Eb (1) E (2) Gb (1) G (2) A

The scale has both minor and major 3rd and only flat 5. Maybe it has a name in some system, but I've not run into it before even in oriental scales. Yet, it has it's own distinct melodic character worth exploring.

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 5:22 pm It may be that all music of the corporeal realm is a 'transcription' of the so-called 'music of the spheres' ~ indeed, is it Mozart I recall saying this of how his music was inspired and composed? And as lovely as some insect or bird songs may be, its human expression has vastly surpassed it in complexity. One wonders 'Who' is really listening?

And as lovely as some insect or bird songs may be, its human expression has vastly surpassed it in complexity.

I consciously and experientially deny this. After a few summer-long vigils on a mountain ridge in an old-growth forest I realized that I somehow no longer cared if I ever again heard Mozart again and this does not reduce my joy in listening to him. Thinking that human expression might surpass the beautiful productions of other structures (conscious agents) of nature is anthropocentric hubris.

This little one goes directly to my heart. Check out the chords. However, it hardly matches the harmonics of the forest. And beyond all productions, the sounds of silence may excel.

j000rmas wrote: ↑Thu Mar 11, 2021 1:33 pm Just finished reading Rationalist Spirituality, what a crazy ride, loved it.

My confusion is regarding this;

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.

Are we talking about the present purpose and after this current ongoing purpose is complete there will arise new purposes that can be answered there and at that point?

Is it more like a cycle like in hinduism (Yuga cycle)?

Can awareness full comprehension of itself be wiped clean and start over again?

The purpose for boundless awareness is to have full comprehension and awareness of itself. After this, individualization will be lifted as it has served its purpose.

The purpose is the pure joy of awareness or (with Blake), "Eternity is in love with the productions of time."

PS: Full comprehension (mental grasping) is not an option.

Lou Gold wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:26 pm

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:16 pm I don't know about grumpy Lou, but loving-to-argue Lou is clearly still in his element here.

Absolutely! When my mom used to get upset with me arguing with my grandpa, he would tell her, "it's ok ... this is how the boy learns." 75 years later it still works.

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

There are two Lous.
1. One says that it's all a matter of perfect balance, everything is already good as it is - there's a place for everything under Heaven. There's no higher/lower, better/worse, right/wrong. Just be here now in the choiceless-choice. Everything is perfect in the way it is.
2. The other is activist. He looks out and sees something seriously out of balance there. He feels an urgent need that things be moved in the direction of balance.

On one side we have the perfect balance in the choiceless-choice and accept with trust whatever happens. But at the same time we're unhappy with this whatever. We think that it should happen otherwise. So how do we resolve this conflict? How do we act such that we give preference to a certain direction, while at the same time trying not to give preference to any direction, since they are all equally valid?

Lou thinks he has found a solution - the acting should come from the choiceless-choice - we surrender to Cosmic Will and everything should be laid down perfectly because it comes from the very Source of Cosmic Balance and Harmony. So the great Mission begins to help restore the balance. People are thought that secret of the choiceless-choice - surrender to the all-that-is.

Unfortunately the results seem mixed. Lots of people surrender but the choiceless-choice seems to choose things that Lou still finds off-balance. Some commit crimes because they surrendered to the choiceless-choice. Other simply pursuit their pleasures in the same manner. It seems that everyone is simply doing whatever they want. Nothing seems to improve. Things are as out of balance as always. So Lou says:

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

... And so the circle rolled and rolled. And the question is still unsettled. How to do the good without giving preference to the good?

Everything above with much Love and gratitude to you, Lou! <3


PS: Theme for meditation: In some legends one Lou is called Soul, the other Lou is called Spirit, the Feminine and Masculine.

Lou Gold wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 11:58 pmI consciously and experientially deny this.

Big surprise there

SanteriSatama wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 1:05 am Yes, except for the "must" part. As you notice, the main thing about that meditation is that it is fairly easy to communicate and share and doesn't require academic or other elitist background to grasp, and yet has potential to help to deconstruct some limiting conditionings and thought patterns as well as to open whatever experiences it opens. There is no must, no teleology of control mechanism, no authority.

I see that you've went through this with Ashvin. I'll add some more.

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

So putting aside the control stuff, let's see about the 'must'. It can be understood in the following sense: "In order to understand written text one must learn to read" (similar to Ashvin's water example but taken more closely to the meditation context). Is there another way? In principle yes - it might be possible to figure out the meaning of the writings with much effort. This is what archaeologists try to do with ancients texts. But it's not easy at all. So if we base our school system in this way, letting the children figure out the writing system by themselves, what are the chances of success?

You say "the main thing about that meditation is that it is fairly easy to communicate and share and doesn't require academic or other elitist background to grasp". That's right but what are the chances that a materialistically thinking person (with no spiritual conceptions) would grasp the spiritual polarities that you experience in that meditation? For me it was easy because I know quite well about what polarity you speak, thus the sphere was a different symbol to express some deeper spiritual experience that we both grasp, just as we can express some concept in words in different languages. But think for yourself what was necessary in your life path to reach the clear experience of this polarity. I don't know, maybe you were born with that understanding but for me it came as a process. So if we don't want to leave it to chance we really need to say many things to the person if he is to ever get an idea what the meditation is about.

It's not accidental that I used the comparison to reading above. In reality, objects for meditation have deep relation to reading, although on a higher level. In sensory reading we have perceptions of letters and these are elucidated by ideas which clearly don't exist within the ink itself. The ideas come from the world of Ideas in which we live. The written letters and their hierarchical structures (word, sentence, paragraph, etc.) serve as idea-space coordinates that lead us into the appropriate domain where the ideas are to be found. It is similar in higher cognition. We learn to read the patterns, forms, dynamics of our inner and outer life. If we simply stare at them we might never understanding anything more, just as an illiterate man can stare at letters all day but the ideas of the written texts will never pop up. The esoteric student begins by changing the habits of how he looks at the contents of consciousness. In ordinary life we accept most things at face value. A thought pattern, conflicting feelings, sympathies, antipathies - all this is accepted as the final output of consciousness. When we begin training, we gradually make the habit to look on thoughts, feelings, perceptions, etc. as runes that must be read. The world of perceptions is Maya, just as written text is Maya for one who can't read. And immediately we should note that this reading has nothing to do with interpretation, in the way, for examples, how dreams are interpreted. This is simply an act of divination, we stay in our intellectual state and simply assign meanings to everything. Reading the runes of the world of perceptions depends on the appropriate shift of consciousness. Just as regular reading puts us into contacts with ideas, so this occult reading puts us in contact with higher order ideas which are no longer static concepts of the intellect but living creative forces full of meaning. Magic Eye stereograms can be used as analogy but we must remember that it's just that - a limited analogy. In certain sense the contents of perceptions are still there but similarly to stereograms, they receive additional dimension of depth which reveals the occult script, that we call supersensible perceptions with corresponding higher order meaning. So this new depth at first makes perceptible hidden connections to our own elements of thinking, feeling, willing and sensory perceptions. The Magic Eye depth structure of these connections reveal structures that can be investigated and given names, like astral body, etheric body, soul organs, etc.

Occult symbols for meditations are tools for approaching these higher-order ideas. For example, one very important such symbol, known from ancient times, is the circle with a dot in its center (one more reason to take the center seriously ). A lot can be spoken about this symbol. Center and periphery. Everything in genuine Initiatic science is such that it leads us toward realities. We understand a symbol of meditation not when we are able to recite from memory some definition of it but when we experience for ourselves the deeper realities from which the symbol was extracted in the first place. Or in other words, we understand the symbol when we can produce it ourselves as concentrated description of our inner experience, just as regular words are produced as symbols of inner idea-states. Yet initially we need to struggle with lots of effort and patience in meditation while we still have only the symbol and its logical understanding but not yet the realities.

The symbols extract something specific from higher experiences. For example, the essence of the sphere and waves meditation is the same as what is encoded in the Star of David. The same holds for the modern Merkaba. In the final run these symbols only serve their purposes if we can reach the archetypal Poles - the Cosmic Feminine and the Cosmic Masculine. Then the symbol has served its purpose. It's only a medium of exchange, just as written text is.

Cleric K wrote: ↑Mon Mar 15, 2021 12:42 am

Lou Gold wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:26 pm

Soul_of_Shu wrote: ↑Sun Mar 14, 2021 12:16 pm I don't know about grumpy Lou, but loving-to-argue Lou is clearly still in his element here.

Absolutely! When my mom used to get upset with me arguing with my grandpa, he would tell her, "it's ok ... this is how the boy learns." 75 years later it still works.

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

There are two Lous.
1. One says that it's all a matter of perfect balance, everything is already good as it is - there's a place for everything under Heaven. There's no higher/lower, better/worse, right/wrong. Just be here now in the choiceless-choice. Everything is perfect in the way it is.
2. The other is activist. He looks out and sees something seriously out of balance there. He feels an urgent need that things be moved in the direction of balance.

On one side we have the perfect balance in the choiceless-choice and accept with trust whatever happens. But at the same time we're unhappy with this whatever. We think that it should happen otherwise. So how do we resolve this conflict? How do we act such that we give preference to a certain direction, while at the same time trying not to give preference to any direction, since they are all equally valid?

Lou thinks he has found a solution - the acting should come from the choiceless-choice - we surrender to Cosmic Will and everything should be laid down perfectly because it comes from the very Source of Cosmic Balance and Harmony. So the great Mission begins to help restore the balance. People are thought that secret of the choiceless-choice - surrender to the all-that-is.

Unfortunately the results seem mixed. Lots of people surrender but the choiceless-choice seems to choose things that Lou still finds off-balance. Some commit crimes because they surrendered to the choiceless-choice. Other simply pursuit their pleasures in the same manner. It seems that everyone is simply doing whatever they want. Nothing seems to improve. Things are as out of balance as always. So Lou says:

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

... And so the circle rolled and rolled. And the question is still unsettled. How to do the good without giving preference to the good?

Everything above with much Love and gratitude to you, Lou! <3


PS: Theme for meditation: In some legends one Lou is called Soul, the other Lou is called Spirit, the Feminine and Masculine.

You've got an interesting mental meander there, undoubtedly the way you see it. Thanks for the sharing.

IN FACT, activism is actually my choiceless-choice. I'm always compelled toward it no matter how much I resist. Right now my action is to feed both wolves.

Interestingly, I synchronously in conversations with others already wrote my response (perhaps anticipating your words?). In full disclosure, I should report that for a few days I've been taking some prednisone to reduce pulmonary inflammation and this most likely contributes a steroid energetic spin. But, yes, I abound with contradictions and share them. This is a whole other conversation, one about the path of heart, that I may be sharing in the future but not now while I'm in process. Meanwhile, here is my morning mental meander.

ON PARADOX

Modernity is obsessed with individual freedom. It boils down to "can we stay clean without taking baths and stay firm without practice?" Of course not. Good outcomes depend on good habits. Perhaps, the best habit in the realm of constant change is to minimize external intervention beyond the personal.

To keep it simple the Tao offers, "There was never a big problem that could not have been solved when it was small."

Nevertheless, shit happens like sunk costs and bumps from steroids/asteroids and volcanic eruptions. This is where one begins to grok the role of transcorporeal consciousness recycling through various forms.

Goethe observes: "The spectacle of Nature is always new, for she is always renewing the spectators. Life is her most exquisite invention; and death is her expert contrivance to get plenty of life."

Buddhism observes: "Form is emptiness. Emptiness is not other than form."

Blake says: "Eternity is in love with the productions of time."

Jesus advices: "Tell them I am movement and rest."

The shaman focuses on finding the way more than discovering the truth. With a wounded humility, grounded in humus he/she accepts the mysterious fact of joy and pain, life and death being one and we get on with it.

Welcome to the world.

Much love to ya, Shu.

A bit more Cleric

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

You say, I keep trying to lead the conversation to the crux of the matter, you keep pulling ace-grade evasive maneuvers. In my personal process, which I do not push on others, the Way shown by Jesus was to be Son of Man and Son of God including his choiceless-choice acceptance that this would lead to the Crucifiction. I'm feeling this more clearly in these Lenten days when I'm contemplating the Caminho da Cruz, which is one of my spiritual practices. Not for all but wondrous for those who feel called.

And back to the musical theme, our polymath genius boy JC tonight won another Grammy (Best Arrangement) for brilliantly pulsing the scales of balance back and forth -- light and dark, life and death, sounds and silence. Are you still asking for resolution? Tell them, "I am movement and rest."