|
Post by LorrB on Dec 1, 2011 13:28:56 GMT 9.5
Want to try deciphering the symbolism appearing below? Might be a bit of fun.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Dec 1, 2011 16:41:16 GMT 9.5
One of the globes shows the signs of the zodiac. This aspect is not studied in most lodges
|
|
|
Post by chingus on Dec 1, 2011 16:46:36 GMT 9.5
Agreed, we make an oblique reference to the star-decked heaven in the 1° but that's about it.
|
|
|
Post by Henka on Dec 2, 2011 1:41:12 GMT 9.5
One of the globes shows the signs of the zodiac. This aspect is not studied in most lodges That's because you are supposed to study it yourself.
|
|
|
Post by paul on Dec 2, 2011 5:30:49 GMT 9.5
Alternately, organised Masonry no longer knows what is important about the zodiac.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 2, 2011 8:37:13 GMT 9.5
The Zodiac stands at the head of the Pillar of Mercy on the Tree of Life and is called Chokmah. The Tree of Life consists of Three Pillars, that on the left is the Pillar of Severity, that on the right is the Pillar of Mercy, and the Middle Pillar is called the Pillar of Equilibrium. The Zodiac represents the Male Yang energies, Pure Energy, Spiritual Force and the Cosmic Father. www.newthoughtkabbalah.com/treeoflife.htmOne might view the Twelve Tribes (R.Arch) as corresponding to the Zodiac or the Celestial Globe.
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 2, 2011 13:31:21 GMT 9.5
12, what are the odds.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 2, 2011 14:42:02 GMT 9.5
What are the odds that Terrestrial Column is named Binah, who is sometimes called the Divorced Woman or Widow, and represents Yin Energy, Compassion, Pure Love and Understanding, the Cosmic Mother?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 3, 2011 2:13:05 GMT 9.5
I'd say the odds are pretty good.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 5, 2011 7:17:13 GMT 9.5
The Broken Column?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 5, 2011 9:15:46 GMT 9.5
Our brains are designed to find patterns or to organize stimuli into patterns.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 5, 2011 10:25:54 GMT 9.5
What has that got to do with a broken column?
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 5, 2011 10:27:04 GMT 9.5
Our brains are designed to find patterns or to organize stimuli into patterns. Who designed?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Dec 5, 2011 10:35:15 GMT 9.5
Is that little scene with the broken column and Father Time a simple morality added later by those who had not read the history of the Widow Isis?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 5, 2011 12:28:11 GMT 9.5
Our brains are designed to find patterns or to organize stimuli into patterns. Who designed? Nobody designed. Complexity theory.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 5, 2011 13:35:29 GMT 9.5
Complexity Theory and Chaos Theory - related? Both are just theories Why would our brains 'be designed' to 'find patterns' and 'organise stimuli'? Doesn't all this happen before our brains are formed and before we are born?
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 6, 2011 1:19:11 GMT 9.5
Yup, "just" theories.
How would any brain do anything before it is formed?
|
|
|
Post by paul on Dec 6, 2011 6:21:27 GMT 9.5
How would any brain do anything before it is formed? Perhaps there is a "phantom limb" (mind) before the physical brain is formed around the patterning field.
|
|
|
Post by LorrB on Dec 6, 2011 7:12:58 GMT 9.5
That is what I was hinting at. Mind comes first, mind affects matter, mind is the builder. The implicate and explicate orders of David Bohm... The implicate order represents the proposal of a general metaphysical concept in terms of which it is claimed that matter and consciousness might both be understood, in the sense that it is proposed that both matter and consciousness: (i) enfold the structure of the whole within each region, and (ii) involve continuous processes of enfoldment and unfoldment. For example, in the case of matter, entities such as atoms may represent continuous enfoldment and unfoldment which manifests as a relatively stable and autonomous entity that can be observed to follow a relatively well-defined path in space-time. In the case of consciousness, Bohm pointed toward evidence presented by Karl Pribram that memories may be enfolded within every region of the brain rather than being localized (for example in particular regions of the brain, cells, or atoms).
Bohm went on to say:
As in our discussion of matter in general, it is now necessary to go into the question of how in consciousness the explicate order is what is manifest ... the manifest content of consciousness is based essentially on memory, which is what allows such content to be held in a fairly constant form. Of course, to make possible such constancy it is also necessary that this content be organized, not only through relatively fixed association but also with the aid of the rules of logic, and of our basic categories of space, time causality, universality, etc. ... there will be a strong background of recurrent stable, and separable features, against which the transitory and changing aspects of the unbroken flow of experience will be seen as fleeting impressions that tend to be arranged and ordered mainly in terms of the vast totality of the relatively static and fragmented content of [memories].
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicate_and_explicate_order_according_to_David_Bohm
|
|
|
Post by brandt on Dec 7, 2011 1:42:23 GMT 9.5
You may be falling into a false dichotomy. Does there need to be a difference between brain and mind?
|
|