Luck?

[prynne]

If we would deliver ourselves from our toe the friend would come.

Gene, two creations of human? Can you explain?

 

[yly2pg1]

During cold war, the material of the MiG is always a matter of great interest to the US military!

It is said the material do not have "squeak and rattle" problem at high Mach. Probably some lesson learnt from the debris in Siberia.

"Two creations of human"
There are few theories. Like to listen more!

 

[prynne]

Yes, I eagerly await till Gene arrives in the Library. My heart goes out to you Gene, in your tribulations. By the way, I have heard that some are able to clear knee and joint pain through fasting. If you are able. Some cannot go without food, you may have that type of disposition.

My feeling, too, is that there are a few theories. I also have the feeling, that as soon as one completely 'bites' into the 'apple' of the theory, one has not seen the whole truth. It is only when one theory presents itself as destiny that truth will fit the jacket.

This does not mean that I dont think what we call aliens, angels, gods, will materialize (either from 'out there' or 'in here', Thank you Martin, for the quote from Seth. ) in the year 2012. Where did these metals come from, in Siberia, in the desert in America.

This perspective:

"There seems little doubt that the Chaldean Anu and the Sanskrit Anu (atom) are identic in origin. Anu is a title of the formative Brahma who philosophically is often envisaged as the cosmic atom or infinite universe. The mystical significance is the ever-invisible, unreachable divine center -- whether of a being or universe -- which is the divine-spiritual focus of essential consciousness, from which flow forth all the streams of consciousness in its multiform varieties. Anu (Sanskrit) As a noun, an atom of matter; as an adjective, atomic, fine, minute. A title of Brahma, conceived as both infinitesimal and universal, thus pointing to the pantheistic character of divinity. Hence, every Anu is "a centre of potential vitality, with latent intelligence in it" (SD 1:567; cf FSO 273-5, 431). In the Bhagavad-Gita (8:9) Arjuna is enjoined to meditate on the "seer," i.e., the enlightened, omniscient One, who is "more atomic than the atom" (anor aniyamsam) and yet "the supporter of all" (cf VP 1:2, 5:1; ChU 3:14, 3-4, Katha 2:20, MU 3:1, 7). "

from the website: http://rgrace.org/100/110anu.html

 

[prynne]

Also, a hesitation about creation-ism. "Not a good beginning, but a good end".

 

[martin]

Jane Roberts, the medium of Seth, also visited libraries sometimes, but those were inner libraries.

I have visited ascension2000.com, Gene, and I don't see much similarity between the Seth material and the material that is presented there.
I wrote in another post in this thread that our sciences sometimes suffer from a lack of inner space and I feel a similar lack of inner space (and freedom) when I read this and related websites and books. In general there is a tendency to project things outward that really don't belong there.
Spaceships (crashed or in the air), ancient tools buried somewhere in a desert, texts in code, portals like the one in Stargate, revolutionary events in the near future, and so on, it is good stuff for science fiction books and movies, but ..
And I wouldn't underestimate the government of the US and other governments. Remains of Sumerian technology in Iraq? They know very well that it doesn't work that way.

 

[gene]

Well, I am in an internet coffee shop right now. Unfortunately, I don't have a lot of material right now about the two creations. This was brought up to me years ago in college by a very intelligent, highly intelligent Jewish fellow. I didn't think much of it til later on. Then recently, I saw a book at Borders that went into this in detail. I hope to stop off at Borders tonight and look for that book. I don't have a Bible with me right now, and I can't quote much, but if you read the first chapter of Genesis, and compare it to the second chapter, you will see that the sequence of the creation in the two chapters is different. Also, I think, but don't quote me on this, that in the first chapter the term G*d is used, where in the second chapter, the term Lord G*d is used. There are many possibilities inherent in the terminology, but one meaning that is not beyond the scope of possibilities is the Lord refers to the chief of the gods. Kind of like a general or admiral. The translations of the Sumerian done by Zachariah Sitchin would summarize this in a sense in that according to the Sumerian texts, genetic engineering was performed on a hominid that was already present on the earth, This was done by th3e chief science officer of the annunaki. A battle evolved between Enki, the chief science officer and Enlil, his half brother, about the proper use and functionality of the newly created human. Much of this story is controversial not in its overall perspective, but in many of the details. I am not sure that all of the Sumerian language has been correctly translated, doesn't mean though it is just plain wrong.

Gene

 

[gene]

Martin

If you do a google search on the site, you will find several hits on Seth. Here is one small example of the connection.

http://ascension2000.com/Shift-of-the-Ages/shift06.htm

And a quote:

For the rest of this chapter, we will present the words of Seth from the appendix section of ?The Seth Material,? which help us to understand how the basic spherical units of energy in the Cosmos interact with each other. It took us several years to actually match up all of this information with scientific data, but now as we conclude the three volumes of the series, we have found some degree of proof for almost every point that Seth had made back in 1969. This original text was invaluable in helping us to understand what was going on, as it provided crucial data that was missing in Ra?s own Law of One series. In order to avoid repeating the phrase ?[emphasis added],? the reader should be advised that almost all italicized or bolded portions of text were added by this author after-the-fact, in order to help enhance comprehension. When we write ?Note:? followed by text in parentheses, these are our comments added in.

Gene

 

[gene]

I like the grace site, thanks for that link.

Gene

 

[gene]

Thank you Prynne for that information about fasting. I used to fast on a regular basis, but as time and life went by I got out of it, and have not had the discipline to do it in the last few years. I did have an operation on my right knee a few years ago, when, while practicing certain kinds of martial arts steps, I tore some cartilege. There is absolutely no excuse for someone with my knowledge to have arthritis in the knees, yet I do, very minor, but there nontheless. I expect that I tore cartilege again, but this time, I have no idea how. Had I been consistent in practicing tai chi over the years, and not so dependent on the eating of meat, (especially for a virgo rising who has some trouble digesting meats) I would never have developed any arthritis. I will say this though, that all my parents and grandparents suffered terribly from arthritis when they were my age, but my situation is very mild. When my right knee was operated on, the doctors said they have never found anyone over the age of 50 that did not have some arthritis in the knees. When I had my operation, there were two other people at the office where I worked that had the same operation from the same doctor at around the same time. After they were operated on they were on crutches for at least a month. After my operation I was playing basketball a week later and never used crutches. (I did have a minor setback though from playing basketball and my supervisor at work said, no more basketball for you.) They also gave me some pain killer pills which I never needed and never took. As an adult I have never even taken an aspirin or a bufferin. So I am doing something right, but I still do a lot of things wrong and am paying the price for it. If it doesn't go away, I am going to have to go to the VA Hospital to have an mri done. I may have to have another operation.

Thanks,
Gene

 

[prynne]

Gene, does not seem like fasting is the cure for your knee. Rehab, Prana.

Martin, how did Jane gain access to those libraries? Edgar Caycee talks about them.

 

[martin]

I don't remember exactly how Jane got access to these libraries, Prynne. I believe it was part of her own excursions into the unknown, more or less independent of Seth.
There are quotes of the Seth material on the ascension2000 site but I don't think that Jane would be very happy with the overall atmosphere of the site and their conclusions. The Seth material is certainly much deeper and more subtle than this.
I don't know what to make of Wilcock. He seems to be a kind of crackpot guru and he can be interesting sometimes. Still, I wouldn't take him too seriously.

 

[gene]

One place you can get a good discussion about the two creations is in a book called, "The Genesis Race, by Will Hart.

Gene

 

[yly2pg1]

" In the Bhagavad-Gita (8:9) Arjuna is enjoined to meditate on the "seer," i.e., the enlightened, omniscient One, who is "more atomic than the atom" (anor aniyamsam) and yet "the supporter of all" (cf VP 1:2, 5:1; ChU 3:14, 3-4, Katha 2:20, MU 3:1, 7). "

This is about the same as what is said in Falun Gong. I have no difficulty to come to see the truth. I think 'a more atomic than a atom' also refer to a realm, a hyper-dymension, where beings (like seer in this case) are much more refined and 'penetrating' than we are.

Having come this point about the refined world and refined body, i personally believe the physical built-up of the alien is very sensitive, not only to the ambient of the earth, but also to the mental activity of our human race. Due to the extreme entropies created via our human race mental activity, it posts a kind of harmful effect to the 'fine atom' of their body. To rid off this effect, a periodic cleansing is carried out via some of the phenomenons, e.g. the hurricane.

 

[prynne]

This makes so much sense! Now I understand much more... Chi/Prana/Omni-Science counter acts entropy. This is why the peaceful mind of the sages and yogis is helpful to the conditions of this realm....the saying about one candle, in the dark. This must be why the YiJing likes it so much, is so happy (it seems to me) if one can keep one's happiness and peace for others during a crisis. "Your mind should be stable even if the sky falls."

 

[yly2pg1]

Negative entropy is not achievable by our current science and technology! And Prynne, you are right about the counter acts of entropy! It is a candle in the dark, a 'vacuum' the in polluted world, the 'Dan Tian' in the practice of Chi Gong, the 'eye' of the hurricane ... the lists go on.

 

[gene]

Fits right in with Richard Hoagland's hyperdimensional physics.

http://www.enterprisemission.com/hyper1.html

And junk DNA, apparently junk dna is not so junk. It takes information into and out of dimensions which we are consciously not aware of, and because of this we can change, with effort, our dna.

Gene

 

[gene]

In the I Ching, pretty much all the pairs of hexagrams relate to entropy. Involution and evolution. One of the best examples is the pair 23 and 24. 63 and 64 are also very clear on this. In the Bible the story of the Prodigal son relates to this and so does the descent of the Hebrew tribe into and then out of Egypt. So also the birth of Jesus, going into Egypt then back out. I am not too familiar with Hinduism but I believe they have the three powers? One is the Shiva, I believe, the destroyer, and one is a creator? and there is a third, can't remember if it is a neutral power or what. Somewhat like the proton, electron, and neutron. Or in Christianity, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, (mother).

Gene

 

[gene]

Hi Prynne

Very true. Mind must remain stable. This is what the pair of hexagrams 51 and 52 is all about. In fifty one, he does not let the sacrificial spoon fall, although there is terror all about. In 52 he remains still. There are so many ways the I Ching teaches us this too.

Thoughts are things. I am certainly not a rich man, so it may seem like I don't know what I am talking about. But I have nevertheless created my life with the thoughts that I think deep down inside. We all do, whether we realize it or not. If we are nervous, if we are tense, we are focused on what we don't want. When we are focused on what we don't want we bring it to us. Thoughts are things. When we become cool, calm, collected, relaxed, we are thinking positively even down in the subconscious mind, this brings those conditions to us. This is what confidence really is, it is not the arrogance that many seem to mistake it for. Arrogance is only a coverup for fear.

There are only two forces in the universe. Love and fear, and they are opposites. You either attract what you love, or you attract what you fear. Later, I hope to get into this more in relation to hexagram 61, for now, let's just say, "a crane calling in the shade." There is no proton, there is no electron, there is no neutron, but thinking makes it so. So when we are calm and collected, we create the illusion of reality that we want. This is the real meaning of the story of Jesus calming the waves. It wasn't to proove he was God. It was to show us the way. Also, this is the meaning of the saying, to him that has shall be given even more, and to him that hath not shall be taken even that he has. For coming from love produces, coming from fear takes away. It is as simple as that.

"For as he thinketh in his heart, so is he."
Proverbs.

 

[prynne]

Bhrama, creator. Vishnu, sustainer.

 

[prynne]

Gene. DNA.

Gene therapy. I like your thoughts. 51,52, very interesting.

 

[pakua]

Hi all,

Can I get back to the heading of this thread for a minute?

If good luck can't be caused by any action, can it be caused by thought? One would think so, if you read those new agey things that go something like "you attract what you think about", but I'm getting the sense that it's entirely random, and can't be influenced.

I'm thinking where it says in IC "good fortune", even that is not for certain, unless you get into the right attitude, but in that case, it's already "pre-ordained" by the times.

Any thoughts?

 

[prynne]

Sure just a second though Pakua, I wanted to post this for Gene and anyone who is interested. What Gene has written here is in sync with gnostic beliefs, that the creation was a mistake, that divine spark is imprisoned here, that the secret gnosis is the way for the spark to be reunited with it's divine creation:

The Apocryphon of John gnostic text:

"Now I have come to teach you what is and what was and what will come to pass, that you may know the things which are not revealed and those which are revealed, and to teach you concerning the unwavering race of the perfect Man. Now, therefore, lift up your face, that you may receive the things that I shall teach you today, and may tell them to your fellow spirits who are from the unwavering race of the perfect Man."

And I asked to know it, and he said to me, "The Monad is a monarchy with nothing above it. It is he who exists as God and Father of everything, the invisible One who is above everything, who exists as incorruption, which is in the pure light into which no eye can look.

"He is the invisible Spirit, of whom it is not right to think of him as a god, or something similar. For he is more than a god, since there is nothing above him, for no one lords it over him. For he does not exist in something inferior to him, since everything exists in him. For it is he who establishes himself. He is eternal, since he does not need anything. For he is total perfection. He did not lack anything, that he might be completed by it; rather he is always completely perfect in light. He is illimitable, since there is no one prior to him to set limits to him. He is unsearchable, since there exists no one prior to him to examine him. He is immeasurable, since there was no one prior to him to measure him. He is invisible, since no one saw him. He is eternal, since he exists eternally. He is ineffable, since no one was able to comprehend him to speak about him. He is unnameable, since there is no one prior to him to give him a name.

"He is immeasurable light, which is pure, holy (and) immaculate. He is ineffable, being perfect in incorruptibility. (He is) not in perfection, nor in blessedness, nor in divinity, but he is far superior. He is not corporeal nor is he incorporeal. He is neither large nor is he small. There is no way to say, 'What is his quantity?' or, 'What is his quality?', for no one can know him. He is not someone among (other) beings, rather he is far superior. Not that he is (simply) superior, but his essence does not partake in the aeons nor in time. For he who partakes in an aeon was prepared beforehand. Time was not apportioned to him, since he does not receive anything from another, for it would be received on loan. For he who precedes someone does not lack, that he may receive from him. For rather, it is the latter that looks expectantly at him in his light.

"For the perfection is majestic. He is pure, immeasurable mind. He is an aeon-giving aeon. He is life-giving life. He is a blessedness-giving blessed one. He is knowledge-giving knowledge. He is goodness-giving goodness. He is mercy and redemption-giving mercy. He is grace-giving grace, not because he possesses it, but because he gives the immeasurable, incomprehensible light. "

on so on and so on. you get the picture.

 

[gene]

Hi Pakua

I think some of what I wrote immediately above does relate to this. Ultimately, there is no luck, good bad or indifferent, there is none whatsoever. Anything that comes to us comes to us from a conscious universe that responds to our vibrations. It does not seem like it, because it is subconscious thought that does it, not conscious. It is only until we have experienced the death of the ego, (Christ on the cross) that we rip the veil between the conscious and the subconscious. (And the veil of the temple was rent from top to bottom) This is also expressed in the story of the marriage at Cana as a symbol of the marriage of subconscious and conscious. When this happens we have mastery, and can think any thought we want, and when we do this we truly create our own reality. But don't get me wrong, what is in the subconscious has been in some indirect way, at some time been put there by the conscious mind. Whatever our dominant thoughts are, they become our beliefs. When we understand this, then we are able to totally forgive ourselves. And that is the way out, the only way out. For when we forgive ourselves, we forgive others, and when we forgive others we forgive ourselves. For there is no separation. None whatsoever. Whatever you see outside of yourself, no matter what it is, is you. It is merely a screen, a projection, like a movie projected onto a screen. "All the world is a stage, and we each one in our own times play many parts." The trick is to sit back and enjoy the show. Develop that part of you that is an observer, and look upon yourself and your actions objectively. Then it doesn't matter if you are rich or poor, you just sit back and enjoy the show, and the nice thing is, the plot in the movie begins to change. It changes when we no longer identify with it. We are simply observers of ourselves. The perceiver that perceives, and thus creates the reality that is out there. There is no such thing as luck.

Gene

 

[gene]

Hi Prynne

I suspect it is very much in synch with gnostic thought. It was the Roman Empire that dominated the Christian religious atmosphere from the third century on. And every aspect of the original religion was as thouroughly removed as they were able to do it. Religion? Actually it is not a religion. It is a way of life, based on the truth. If someone were to force me to say I belonged to some religious or philosophical belief, I do believe I would say Gnostic Christian. In truth though, I consider myself more a gnostic christian buddhist taoist.

The idea I don't believe is so removed from Eastern religion. (by religion I mean philosophical thought, the only religion I consider truly a religion is Roman Catholicism) In the Bible we have the story of God and the Devil. It is sometimes referred to also as the cross versus the dragon. And in many societies we have the story of the dragon slayer, St George of the cross, etc. etc. etc. On an allegorical level this can refer to the "mistake" as you put it. Then God becomes preduality. The Devil, as the number deus, becomes duality. The one eternal nowness, nonexistence split into opposites, and thus we have the changes. As a result, everything than can be polarized is. This includes good and evil (for in reality there is neither, there simply is) And among the opposites of course, is inevitably the polarity of oneness and separation. So the Devil is merely a symbol for the separation from God. In other words, the ego. The devil becomes merely the ego. Now the ego, enthroned on his throne of separation, by its very nature hates God. This hatred stems from the believe that it was forced to be separate due to some terrible thing that it had done to displease God. And we all have within us, whether we realize it or not, deep in the unconscious, this memory of this illusory separation. And with this feeling of separation is a horrible aweful feeling of guilt and anger. Because of this guilt and anger, we unconsciously terrorize ourselves, to the point of eventually killing ourselves. Many of us lead lives of poverty, because we have this inner denial of oneness with god, because we feel we have sinned, by separating from god, and every since then, we hide from the oneness of God. And religions are brilliant at this, hiding from God by supposed rituals that we think bring us closer to God. After the separation, the fall, "The Lord God came looking for the man that he had created, and he said 'Adam, where are you?' And Adam said, I heard thy voice in the Garden, and I was afraid, and I hid myself." This is the result of separation. We hide ourselves from God, because we are afraid, thinking we are guilty. And the only answer, the only hope, is in forgiveness. This is what the ego cannot handle, is forgiveness. For God sees no evil, he sees no good, he sees only oneness. And as such the universal god force judges no one, condemns no one, for in doing so, he would judge himself. And if we are all one, how can we sin? How can we be evil? What was the fall, really? Its all an illusion, and as the Beattles sang, I am the walrus.

 

[prynne]

KooKooKaChooo.

 

[jeanystar]

I am he as you are he and you are me and we are all together...
I'm crying.


I like your post, Gene, btw.

Prynne, is that your favorite beatles song? ( :

 

[prynne]

"Across the Universe"...'Words are flowing out like endless rain into a paper cup,They slither while they pass, they slip away across the universe......Jai Guru Deva Om Nothing's Gonna Change my World',

"Two of Us", 'Two of us riding nowhere, Spending someone's Hard earned pay, Two of us Sunday driving, Not arriving, On our way back home'

"Julia". 'Half of what I say is meaningless, but I say it just to reach you

Jeanystar : )'

Pakua: In Brad's post. early in this thread. believe he said that in the Yi there IS an IMPLIED correlation between action and luck, but that one is encouraged to act as if there isnt. ??

 

[candid]

Pakua: "Can I get back to the heading of this thread for a minute?"

Bring in the return!

"If good luck can't be caused by any action, can it be caused by thought?"

Cause and effect seem to rule the action/thought domain. Does that really address random luck, as in "lucky"? I think luck is that which comes across our path with no other cause than us being in its path. Now, if we were forewarned of this luck, and proceeded to walk under the ladder anyway, that would be misfortune.

So the oracle is that magic which enables us to take ordinary occurrences and transform them into fortune or misfortune.

 

[jerryd]

Candid, jerry here, if luck is defined as random, "any action" relating to it seems inadvertent to the luck it self. Does this (luck) in any way relate to what we call Fate? Or predestination, which we can do nothing about if it exists at any level. So if you or I believe in predestination then luck is exactly what it is in it's randomness, a fated event. I am not speaking of gambeling or lotteries but chance happenings which are seen as fortuitous, luck can also be just as negative as positive. Majic there for could be luck discuised as conjured predestination. Yi I believe is not majic or even a predestination but an inate guift to some and a learned talent for others. As an oricle or tool, I as an insturment of Yi and of human origin believe in the science and technology of today. But I also believe it may have come from the same place as the guift of devination. The ferminent carries all the past and perhaps all the future if there is to be any.

 

[pakua]

"one is encouraged to act as if there isnt. ??"

From a practical point of view, I take it that there's no connection. If I have to forget about it, it may as well not exist. Sort of like that saying, "don't do good deeds for any reward", even if you know there may be one, you still have to forget about it.

" luck is that which comes across our path with no other cause than us being in its path. "

How does Yi know about this in advance? Does it detect somehow that you're in a certain "good-luck (or bad) flow or ripple" or something?

"We are simply observers of ourselves"

Gene, I find this exceedingly difficult. How does one perceive and act consciously at the same time, while still acting without intent, and without simply following any old (or new) impulse that happens to pop up?