There are 2 enlightenment states, not 1. [Archive]

cleft_asunder

20-03-2007, 01:02 AM

I'm going to keep this short because I need to do much more reading on this subject, but I am currently convinced that the state called "enlightenment" is a trick, or more accurately the ultimate state of the Matrix used to captivate intelligent individuals and perhaps shackle them even further into the Matrix. The creator of the Matrix is Lucifer, and 1 of the 2 enlightenments is Luciferian enlightenment. Do not think that I am Christian because I believe in Lucifer, I abandoned religion when I was 16. But there are many truths and falsehoods in religious texts, and it is possible to find out what's going on through them. David Icke too believes in the Matrix mind, or "evil," or something along those lines, which is the last link to the Matrix.

The Luciferian enlightenment is a dead end --a nothingness and a Godless state, or most accurately true Atheism. If I had to put it into one sentence, I would say that Luciferian enlightenment is the realisation that there is nothing to do, and no reason to do it. I believe I may have experienced this state a week ago while doing 6.5g of mushrooms. Or at least I got a taste of it, and I wasn't captivated. Picture yourself realising in the ultimate and deepest sense that there is no reason to do anything because purpose doesn't exist. While I realised this, I was laying down on my bed and I had absolutely NO motivation, or drive, or willingness to move because there was no reason to perform any action. I didn't move a muscle; totally silent for hours in the same position. I stopped my mind, but I was scared because I already knew what I would find: That if I stopped my mind and realised my "true self," that it would be the worst thing conceivable: that I am nothingness, and that nothingness gives rise to somethingness, or the world, fo eternity. In other words, there is no meaning and the only reason anything is happening is because there is no other way, and it is all happening for no reason--it just is. And that's life. I felt like killing myself. (but I'm good now)

The second enlightenment state is the true enlightenment state. I strongly believe it exists because there is an inconsitency between those that call themselves enlightened. On one hand we have people who are enlightened, like Osho, who know that God does not exist, and who talk in terms of peace, duality, the end of desire which is the end of suffering, nothingness and no-God. And on the other we have people who describe enlightenment in terms of Love, balance, non-duality, mother, father, joy, creativity, bliss, and who know that God DOES exist. Traditional Native Americans are an example of the latter. So what the heck? The "heck" is that there are two states, and 1 is Luciferian.

Think about it, we have two completely opposite enlightenments. Is it just me or is the first one completely consitent with Lucifer? And the second, completely consistent with the loving creator?

LUCIFERIAN ENLIGHTENMENT

1)Duality: Evil must exist for good to exist. Hot must exist for cold to exist. Always there must be 2! In other words, eternal division.

2)Division: Non unity, unbalance.

3)Peace: The end of desire which is the end of suffering, but in fact it is the end of creativity and a powerlessness. It may be peaceful, but it is not true peace-- it is a void. It is stagnation, a cold and purposeless state, a nothingness out of which the Matrix emerges. Life goes on for no reason except to keep itself going using the divine energy that souled entities contain. In other words, the Matrix uses us as "batteries," because it cannot get direct energy from God.

4)Powerlessness: The ultimate succumbing to the Matrix. The loss of our divine power, and the surrender to nothingness.

Have you noticed that "enlightened" people such as Osho, as peaceful and sincere as they may be, don't know what the fuck is going on? Osho didn't know about the Illuminati. He didn't know about UFO's and aliens, nor did he prophesy anything. Yet on the other side, we have people like Edgar Cayce who have a connection to God and predict things. We have Shaman and Native American medicine people who have a very close connection to God and who are given messages in their dreams, who see visions, et cetera. It is so clear to me that we are talking about 2 different states here! Is it not obvious? Is it not profound? To me this is just fucking amazing!

If you guys were interested in this, below is where I got me ideas. They are a must read.

http://www.xeeatwelve.com/articles/mirra.html
http://www.truthism.com/
http://www.energygrid.com/spirit/2006/11tl-falseenlightenment.html

shenoma

20-03-2007, 03:10 AM

All you have discovered is the choice of what to believe is real. What if all of it is real? I known of the first nothingness you spoke of, I have felt it or not felt it, whatever. It's a trap, a test if you will to see what will you choose. Should it matter that there might not be a reason for anything? I choice not to care if there isn't, I am still breathing and still alive, that is all that truly matters. There is a god, why it decided to split itself up is still the grand mystery.

i am all i am

20-03-2007, 03:17 AM

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITES DEFINE YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

Two enlightenment states is an idea of paired opposites.

The good and bad, the right and wrong, etc. This is a trap.

there was no reason to perform any action.

There is no reason except that which you give. Your choice to experience something is all the reason that exists, for your experience is solely for you.

With LOVE.
________________________________

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITRES DEFIEN YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

Anders Lindman

20-03-2007, 04:05 AM

The Luciferian enlightenment is a dead end --a nothingness and a Godless state, or most accurately true Atheism. If I had to put it into one sentence, I would say that Luciferian enlightenment is the realisation that there is nothing to do, and no reason to do it. I believe I may have experienced this state a week ago while doing 6.5g of mushrooms. Or at least I got a taste of it, and I wasn't captivated. Picture yourself realising in the ultimate and deepest sense that there is no reason to do anything because purpose doesn't exist. While I realised this, I was laying down on my bed and I had absolutely NO motivation, or drive, or willingness to move because there was no reason to perform any action. I didn't move a muscle; totally silent for hours in the same position. I stopped my mind, but I was scared because I already knew what I would find: That if I stopped my mind and realised my "true self," that it would be the worst thing conceivable: that I am nothingness, and that nothingness gives rise to somethingness, or the world, fo eternity. In other words, there is no meaning and the only reason anything is happening is because there is no other way, and it is all happening for no reason--it just is. And that's life. I felt like killing myself. (but I'm good now)

Absolutely. That's a good description of a false state. Your mind said that you were nothingness, yet at the same time your mind said that everything was pointless, and, as you describe, being in a very negative emotional state. How can nothingness feel such negative emotions?!!! Indeed, that kind of experience is a Luciferian and completely false 'oneness'.

awakensong

20-03-2007, 04:31 AM

cleft_asunder,

Some of what you said is fine, but who or what is the "God" you would believe in? How would that not return us to duality, if there was this entity separate from ourselves?

I don't believe at ALL, either, in what you call the "Luciferian" version of Enlightenment. To me, there is definitely a purpose and reason for life, but I also do not understand who or what you are calling God. Could you expand on this, please?

Also, I would caution everyone about the xeeatwelve site. See here for further information and warning about her: http://educate-yourself.org/lte/amitakhsethramtha11oct06.shtml

Of Amitakh Stanford, Seth, Ramtha, & the New Age Movement
" ...Amitakh is a psyop and loads of other stuff. These things would matter little to us, if in the future we are attempting to pass notes from the gulag! If there is a reasonable explanation for the many distractions upon us now, keeping us from realizing the true threats would be the most obvious. " Channelz *

seamus

20-03-2007, 05:04 AM

I guess there are quite a few of us who experienced that state on this board. I have, several times. I attempted to go into the void, but what kept me from doing it was not a desire to do nothing. To let go of everything and trust that the universe would give me what I need is the ultimate in love. I was at that point not ready to give up my ideas about God and Devil. Nor was I ready to close the door, pull the plug on my idea that humanity will somehow pull itself out of the mess it is in. Pulling the plug is not in itself a condemnation of humanity, but to predicate my happiness upon whether humans live up to my expectations, is attachment, and unhealthy. True love does not care if it is returned in kind. That's what going into the nothing is all about. It only looks like nothing on this side. I am trying to get that reality firmly into my mind and heart.

I think that this "Luciferian" enlightenment is a possibility for true enlightenment. There really is no reason to "do" anything, except love. Love is not nothingness. It is the origin of all. To the attached and emotionally charged mind, however, it will look like a black hole which will swallow your soul. I liken this to the wrathful deities of the Buddhists which lose their power to cause fear when one is non-attached and equanimous.

The duality path of mother/father, me/you is also a possibility for true enlightenment, if one can see other beings as extensions of self, and love them appropriately. Shankaracharya was one who did such. Amma is one who does such.

I propose that rather than not knowing what is going on, people like Osho (with whom I am barely familiar) only care about love, its manifestations, and the universal law. Why should they trouble themselves about beings from other planets? What is to be gained? I don't believe that any physical being that is capable of interstellar travel, could be evil. They would have collectively blown themselves up before reaching that capability. There are beings much higher than we, who guard the gates of space from fools.

We aren't the first to discover the atom bomb, or an analogue of it, anyway. What destroyed atlantis? Something more powerful than we can yet imagine. Their collective karma pulled the land into the water. When you put yourself on top, you manifest your own oppressor. Thoughtforms can be powerful, but a karmic manifestation? Unstoppable. The illuminati are more afraid than anyone else on this planet, owing directly to their oppression of sentient beings. Remember Zorg, in the 5th Element? He is the archetype of the illuminati. The evil one in this case is their own karma.

I am remembering things as my mind clears itself of the dusty cobwebs of dogma I have been wrapped in for the last 17 years. I have hope that I may help others who are likewise trapped. Revulsion of the nothing is founded in either a great karmic debt, or ignorance of that blessed law of One, combined with indoctrinated fear (darkness is bad!).

s

awakensong

20-03-2007, 05:34 AM

Here is one of the very first things I read when I embarked on my research about Oneness. It is written by what is presented as 2 women, offering opposite views, but I personally think it is one woman offering both views.

I don't agree that she has explained either view quite correctly, but I do and have always thought there is a way to combine the two into the correct answer.

http://world.std.com/~snet/lovewill.htm

tru3

20-03-2007, 06:28 AM

The second enlightenment state is the true enlightenment state. I strongly believe it exists because there is an inconsitency between those that call themselves enlightened. On one hand we have people who are enlightened, like Osho, who know that God does not exist, and who talk in terms of peace, duality, the end of desire which is the end of suffering, nothingness and no-God. And on the other we have people who describe enlightenment in terms of Love, balance, non-duality, mother, father, joy, creativity, bliss, and who know that God DOES exist. Traditional Native Americans are an example of the latter. So what the heck? The "heck" is that there are two states, and 1 is Luciferian.

first of all, imo enlightenment, if it exists at all, is simply removing illusion. if it did not already exist in us, it would not be permanent and lasting, and therefore not worth having, to me.

we already are that which we seek!

second, it's my experience that the same awareness that now ponders this duality is the same awareness who experienced the effect of the mushrooms. that Awareness, your true nature, shines at all times, in the face of the horror and the bliss. it is constant, unmovable, indestructable in the face of this abyssal "split".

by focusing on the seen, we play the game, and pay the price of admission: it is we who decide which is real, and which is illusion. we can observe energy as particles, or as waves, but not both at the same time. we have to choose. and, once we choose, we can always choose again, differently. that's the good news, to me. :)

third, imo, luciferic consciousness is a construct, a projection of the illusion of Power, an evasion of Bliss, a defilement of Divinity. it is a high school lab experiment that blew up in our faces, and we weren't wearing goggles because we were careless, so we've been blind a long, long, time. i believe now is an incredible time to be alive, because there appears to be an opportunity coming, simply to choose differently.

l.c. is non-reality. no one can escape Reality, and that reality is ever-present Conscious Awareness. it is Who we Are, right now, reading the words on this screen. no initiations, no demands, no crazy wisdom, no giving away autonomy to some imaginary "higher power". just us. just Being. whatever we are, whatever we give, we get back. if i want to be accepted and understood, i give acceptance and strive first to understand. that's true wisdom, in my book.

l.c. wants to replace "god", which is impossible. it is less than duality, it is no-thing.

there are those that say l.c. was actually necessary for "god" to experience "itself".

i say judge by results.

cleft_asunder

20-03-2007, 07:35 AM

awakensong

20-03-2007, 07:53 AM

Weather she's an agent or not is not important, I still agree with the article I posted above--that there is something wrong with this creation.

Are we sure it's a "creation"? If so, how do we know and prove it? I would agree that "something is wrong" but I don't know whether I would blame it on any entity, especially since all the ancients the world over knew when they first wrote their 'sacred texts' that the gods they were speaking of were planets (Saturn was always known as "El" or "Helios"), and "creation" was the formation of this galaxy or solar system, and the incoming comet Venus which rearranged everything.

In every culture without exception, the Mother Goddess is always, always known as the planet Venus. The Red Sphere within was what she gave birth to, which became the planet Mars, which in every culture has always been called the Warrior or Cosmic Hero.

To then come into more present-day eras and personify these things, give them human or "alien" names and forms, and blame them for everything that isn't perfect, just further serves to separate mankind, set up territorial "Gods" and cause wars, fear and total chaos and dysfunction among the human race.

tru3

20-03-2007, 02:12 PM

I'm looking forward to reading that. Regardless, remember that the best way to sell a lie is to mix it with 90% truth. In other words, not everything is disinformation. Weather she's an agent or not is not important, I still agree with the article I posted above--that there is something wrong with this creation.

I'll comment on the rest tomorrow.

very good point. we do tend to throw the baby out with the bathwater, don't we? :)

look forward to your impressions.

bigus_dickus

20-03-2007, 04:34 PM

first of all, imo enlightenment, if it exists at all, is simply removing illusion. if it did not already exist in us, it would not be permanent and lasting, and therefore not worth having, to me.

we already are that which we seek!

spot on!

there is no enlightenment!

what do you think "illuminati" means. i am not going to lecture you about your own language, but sometimes the obvious is not seen.

there is no enlightenment, because you are already a spark of "light", that you have "endarkened".

anyone who wants to be "enlightened", has to do nothing. there is a lot of stuff to not do or to undo, to get rid of the mental parasite that clouds their vision.

we people are already enlightened at the moment we show up here. we are like a light bulb, and then a lot of shit starts covering it so it does not glow.

there is no evil person anywhere, but there are people who take so much of that "shit" upon them, that they appear "evil" to most. however, that "shit" is the product of the "most", who need "evil" people to justify their "enlightenment".

we already know what is truth and what is lie. why don't we just quit pretending that we don't?

gaussito

20-03-2007, 04:41 PM

Hi, I agree with you. I think the "enlightment" state you describe is the borderline of the matrix, which I like to call the construct, if you remember the movie, a state with all white sorrounding you, and (apparently) nothing at all. But the construct still remains, with its basic rules, the rules of Duality. There is a key to find out the nature of this state, and that is How do you feel in your inner self. There is no Peace, or Love, in such state, just a sensation of "emptiness". It's no enlightment at all, just the void, the construct. Maybe one could even create his own version of the matrix there, I don't know, but of course it's a trap. I think many people have believed being in "Nirvana" in such state. I'm considering seriously your theory that the Construct is actually Luciferian, because it's essentially opposed to the One consciousness, which, I think, you call God. The One consciousness is the only self manifested Consciousness, which everything is part of, and comes from, but the everyday language is not very useful to describe it... Thank you, you helped me take one step forward.

i am all i am

20-03-2007, 05:07 PM

spot on!

there is no enlightenment!

there is no enlightenment, because you are already a spark of "light", that you have "endarkened".

anyone who wants to be "enlightened", has to do nothing. there is a lot of stuff to not do or to undo, to get rid of the mental parasite that clouds their vision.

we people are already enlightened at the moment we show up here. we are like a light bulb, and then a lot of shit starts covering it so it does not glow.

there is no evil person anywhere, but there are people who take so much of that "shit" upon them, that they appear "evil" to most. however, that "shit" is the product of the "most", who need "evil" people to justify their "enlightenment".

we already know what is truth and what is lie. why don't we just quit pretending that we don't?

Thank you for stating this so clearly Bigus Dickus.

Although, I believe that you are always shining, even whilst covered in shit. It's like the sun being obscured by clouds. While you can't see the sun because of the clouds, it is still there, shining away.

I always thought when people said, "Where did the sun go ?", on a cloudy day, to be not 'seeing the forest for the trees'.

With LOVE.
_____________________________________

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITES DEFINE YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

tru3

20-03-2007, 05:17 PM

Thank you for stating this so clearly Bigus Dickus.

Although, I believe that you are always shining, even whilst covered in shit. It's like the sun being obscured by clouds. While you can't see the sun because of the clouds, it is still there, shining away.

I always thought when people said, "Where did the sun go ?", on a cloudy day, to be not 'seeing the forest for the trees'.

With LOVE.
_____________________________________

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITES DEFINE YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

b.d.,

if brevity is the soul of wit, you gotta lotta wit! :)

seamus

20-03-2007, 05:26 PM

first of all, imo enlightenment, if it exists at all, is simply removing illusion. if it did not already exist in us, it would not be permanent and lasting, and therefore not worth having, to me.

we already are that which we seek!

Right on, brotha!

second, it's my experience that the same awareness that now ponders this duality is the same awareness who experienced the effect of the mushrooms. that Awareness, your true nature, shines at all times, in the face of the horror and the bliss. it is constant, unmovable, indestructable in the face of this abyssal "split".

I have noticed many times, that when I am in that scary place, there is a part of me that is almost detached, just observing what's going on, and my emotional part is like, "Hey, why aren't you paying attention? This is REALLY SCARY!" LOL

by focusing on the seen, we play the game, and pay the price of admission: it is we who decide which is real, and which is illusion. we can observe energy as particles, or as waves, but not both at the same time. we have to choose. and, once we choose, we can always choose again, differently. that's the good news, to me. :)

Hey ya know that's totally right.

third, imo, luciferic consciousness is a construct, a projection of the illusion of Power, an evasion of Bliss, a defilement of Divinity. it is a high school lab experiment that blew up in our faces, and we weren't wearing goggles because we were careless, so we've been blind a long, long, time. i believe now is an incredible time to be alive, because there appears to be an opportunity coming, simply to choose differently.

Hmm I think you and I must be thinking of different things when talking LC. That's okay though. What I mean is non-action, volition to non-volition. It sounds like what you are talking about is what I would call Gnostic Illumination, which, yeah, is nasty. What a hell.

l.c. is non-reality. no one can escape Reality, and that reality is ever-present Conscious Awareness. it is Who we Are, right now, reading the words on this screen. no initiations, no demands, no crazy wisdom, no giving away autonomy to some imaginary "higher power". just us. just Being. whatever we are, whatever we give, we get back. if i want to be accepted and understood, i give acceptance and strive first to understand. that's true wisdom, in my book.

Yes. the universe is a mirror! If we give ultimate love, guess what we get! Woohoo!

Upon further reflection I wonder that perhaps what I referred to as that possible black hole experience is merely the gateway to get to the seocnd state I described, where one sees all as a reflection of oneself, worthy of total love and acceptance.

l.c. wants to replace "god", which is impossible. it is less than duality, it is no-thing. I am certain now that my terminology was less than perfect (isn't it always that way?) when describing the state of unattached equanimity. But our terms in general are flawed when referring to the Light and manifestations thereof.

there are those that say l.c. was actually necessary for "god" to experience "itself".

i say judge by results.

The result is that the universe is a mirror. I don't buy that the experiment blew up and "ended" in catastrophe. It is still a very interesting and viable experiment. There's more to the matrix than slavery and hardship. The matrix acts as a mirror. The matrix is the physical universe, which is really just a lower vibration of energy. It is incapable of being evil just as the mirror is incapable of lying. What we bring with us is what we see. Just like when Luke Skywalker goes into the scary swamp.

Remember what Lynn Grabhorn said, that the beings of pure light are alive, but they don't have LIFE. We, by necessity in the matrix, have life! Mortality is not a manifestation of the nature of the matrix but of our impure selves. There are other planets where pure love is the rule. We are really at the bottom rung of sentient evolution. Take the opportunity to go up!

Respectfully submitted,

s

bigus_dickus

20-03-2007, 05:26 PM

Although, I believe that you are always shining, even whilst covered in shit. It's like the sun being obscured by clouds. While you can't see the sun because of the clouds, it is still there, shining away.

I always thought when people said, "Where did the sun go ?", on a cloudy day, to be not 'seeing the forest for the trees'.

exactly. this is indirectly implied in my post too.

what do you think we would call them "clouds"?

i call them judgment, denial, self irresponsibility, self victimization, attachment, unfaithfulness, even hope... that all roots in fear. the "human condition" of the current age.

i am all i am

20-03-2007, 05:35 PM

b.d.,

if brevity is the soul of wit, you gotta lotta wit! :)

Or. . . your wit is really Bigus, Dickus !!!

With LOVE,
_____________________________________

WHEN PAIRED OPPOSITES DEFINE YOUR BELIEFS, YOUR BELIEFS WILL IMPRISON YOU.

cleft_asunder

20-03-2007, 08:26 PM

spot on!

there is no enlightenment!

what do you think "illuminati" means. i am not going to lecture you about your own language, but sometimes the obvious is not seen.

there is no enlightenment, because you are already a spark of "light", that you have "endarkened".

anyone who wants to be "enlightened", has to do nothing. there is a lot of stuff to not do or to undo, to get rid of the mental parasite that clouds their vision.

we people are already enlightened at the moment we show up here. we are like a light bulb, and then a lot of shit starts covering it so it does not glow.

there is no evil person anywhere, but there are people who take so much of that "shit" upon them, that they appear "evil" to most. however, that "shit" is the product of the "most", who need "evil" people to justify their "enlightenment".

we already know what is truth and what is lie. why don't we just quit pretending that we don't?

See this is precisely what I contest, the Easter tradition experience of Nirvana or Enlightenment. I do not believe it is the end-all, but a last resort or final trick of the Matrix. It's the ultimate that Lucifer can offer you. And on the other hand we have real enlightenment.

cleft_asunder

20-03-2007, 08:45 PM

Are we sure it's a "creation"? If so, how do we know and prove it? I would agree that "something is wrong" but I don't know whether I would blame it on any entity, especially since all the ancients the world over knew when they first wrote their 'sacred texts' that the gods they were speaking of were planets (Saturn was always known as "El" or "Helios"), and "creation" was the formation of this galaxy or solar system, and the incoming comet Venus which rearranged everything.

In every culture without exception, the Mother Goddess is always, always known as the planet Venus. The Red Sphere within was what she gave birth to, which became the planet Mars, which in every culture has always been called the Warrior or Cosmic Hero.

To then come into more present-day eras and personify these things, give them human or "alien" names and forms, and blame them for everything that isn't perfect, just further serves to separate mankind, set up territorial "Gods" and cause wars, fear and total chaos and dysfunction among the human race.

The word proof doesn't mean much to me any more. I think in terms of evidence for and against, in terms of probability and liklyhood and obviousness and logic. When I look at the world around me, it is obvious that it is a construct. I say this because it is too complex not to be--it looks, in every detail, to be an intentional construction by an intelligence. Every detail is thought out from the possibility of art, to food, to sex, to the laws, to dimensions, to the atom bomb, to a door hinge, to cars, et cetera. When the universe was created it was created with the possibility of everything already realised. So for example, when we "invented" the automobile we didn't really invent it, we discovered it. Everything has already been invented by the creator of the universe, we are merely discovering. But what I am really suggesting is that the universe is an obvious construct because of it's complexity in terms of what we can do in it.

To better understand what I mean, picture yourself looking at famous pieces of art. For example, the sculpure David. When you look at it there is no doubt that it was contructed with the utmost skill and precision for a purpose, that being pleasure to the eye and intellect. It certainly didn't build itself, and certainly isn't a random act of nature that we discovered --it was created plain and simple. Who can contest this? Yet when we apply this same outlook on the universe which actually houses possibilities such as David and everything you see, we don't see how miraculous it is. Calling the universe a random act or a thing NOT created by an intelligence --either God, or Lucifer-- is "infinitely" more absurd than calling the sculpture David a random act of nature or a thing not created by an intelligence.

http://www.firenzeviva.com/SS_Annunziata/david.jpg
When we see David, we say "My God! Who is the genius behind this!? Who is the creator?"

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/97/Great.attractor.arp.750pix.jpg/250px-Great.attractor.arp.750pix.jpg
But when we look at our world and the cosmos, we become doubtful that there is a creator, because we aren't really thinking about it at all.

adramelech

20-03-2007, 10:41 PM

awakensong

20-03-2007, 11:42 PM

So inaccurate. I'm not sure what's worse, referring to these beings as literal "gods" or literal "planets". I'm sure they love both, though, simply being power hungry egomaniacs.
If you believe that is inacurrate, and what I said can be proven to be true in the astronomical and magical texts of ancient cultures, then please submit the texts that prove to you what I've said is wrong.

The Babylonians absolutely referred to their god "Shamash" as the planet Saturn - they make it perfectly clear, which is also known in the west as El and Jehovah.

Who is "they" which you refer to and how do you prove your claim?

awakensong

20-03-2007, 11:49 PM

Here are some of my own resources:
http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040923saturn-ancient.htm

Saturn in Ancient Times
The Greeks called it the god "Helios". The Romans called it "Sol". These familiar figures have a long history, and the more one learns about their links to the earlier cultures, the more a mystery of origins comes into focus. Long before Greek and Roman times, the Egyptians worshipped the luminary Atum or Ra, just as the Sumerians honored Utu and the Babylonians the god Shamash. Astronomers and priests celebrated this light of heaven as the "Universal Monarch," the "father" of civilization and the celestial prototype of kings.

There is no mystery as to the present astronomical associations of these figures. But more archaic traditions, coming from many and diverse cultures, identify the great "sun" gods with the motionless center of heaven, the celestial pole. They speak of a primeval sun, an exemplary or "best" sun, ruling before the present sun. The god's station was the summit of the world axis, from which he ultimately fell in a heaven-altering catastrophe. Perhaps the best known story is the Greek account of Kronos, founder of the Golden Age, eventually driven from his seat at the top of the world by his son Zeus.
To what body did these strange traditions refer? Today we take for granted that the ancient words we translate as "helios" and "sol" originated as references to the Sun that illuminates our every day. In many languages the words for this axial figure did indeed become the words for the Sun. But the later identity could not obscure the more archaic idea--of a former, stationary light at the pole, whose every feature defies any identification with the Sun in our sky today.

As strange as it may seem, early astronomical traditions identify the "primeval sun" as the planet Saturn, the distant planet which the alchemists called the "best sun" and which the Babylonians, the founders of astronomy, identified as the exemplary light of heaven, the "sun"-god Shamash. ("Shamash is the planet Saturn", the astronomical texts say.) In archaic copies of Plato's Timaeus, the word for the planet Saturn is Helios, the "sun" god. Popular Greek traditions identified Saturn as Kronos, alter ego of Helios, and Kronos is said to have ruled "over the pole". But only a handful of scholars have bothered to trace the parallel referents in other cultures, or to address the unanswered questions.

Worldwide drawings and symbols of the once-dominant luminary show a disc with rays, a disc with spokes, a disc with a central orb or eye, a disc with a crescent upon it. Today we require a powerful telescope to see Saturn as a disc. We must fly a space probe close to the planet to see rays and spokes. Even then the spokes are intermittent and dark. The ancient astronomers, however, described the spokes as those of a cosmic wheel. They were "streams of fire", the "glory" of heaven.

Our telescopes and probes can see things the ancients couldn't: Saturn's unexpected excess of heat, its radio emissions, its x-rays, its swirling bands of storm-clouds. These things are unexpected to modern astronomers. To the ancient astronomers (had they possessed the technologically enhanced senses of probes), the things our instruments now witness would likely be understandable. For they remembered their gods as energetic and active, wielders of the thunderbolt. And they also remembered the fates of the gods, recounting how the once palpable ruler of the sky went so untouchably far away.

http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/geocentrism/sumerians.html

There is much known about ancient Sumerian iconography, including what symbols they used for the god of the sun Utu/Shamash, and for another bright celestrial object, Saturn.

"Saturn through the Ages (http://www.12x30.net/saturn.html)," an article that includes Sumerian symbols for "sun" and "saturn".

Sumerian symbol for Saturn (http://www.12x30.net/):
http://www.edwardtbabinski.us/geocentrism/saturn.jpg

awakensong

20-03-2007, 11:56 PM

And more resources:

http://www.watch.pair.com/leo.html
In his book, The Illuminati Formula Used to Create an Undetectable Total Mind Controlled Slave, Fritz Springmeier explains the singular importance of Saturn in the occult world:
"Saturn/Chronos was the father of all Gods in the mythology of the ancient world. David M. Talbot in his book The Saturn Myth documents how all over the world Saturn has been worshipped even more than the sun god. Saturn has been the secret god of the occult. When (sic.) we read in Deut. 18:9-10, 'When thou art come into the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or daughter to pass through the fire, or that useth divination, or an observer of times, or an enchanter, or a witch.' All of these practices are abominations done by Satanists today and are becoming commoner among Americans. Note that the first item mentioned by Moses in this passage was passing (putting) children into the fire (of Molech)... The worship of Molech was the worship of Saturn." (49:159 (http://www.watch.pair.com/notes.html#r49))
Quoting Scripture as proof, Springmeier proceeds to demonstrate that Saturn was, in fact, Molech:
"Amos wrote, 'Did ye bring unto me sacrifices and offerings in the wilderness forty years, O House of Israel? Yea, ye have borne the tabernacle of your king ('siccuth malkecem', or in the Septuagint it reads 'skenen tou Moloch'!!), and the shrine (kiyyun) of your images, the star of your God, which ye made to yourselves' AMS 5:25-26
"The Christian Stephen quotes these passages of Amos and connects it with the worship of the golden calf (bull or Taurus). His words on this are recorded in Acts 7:41. He further connects it in the next verse with the worship of 'the hosts of heaven'. In line with translations like the Septuagint, he states in verse 43 that Amos 5 refers to the cult 'of Moloch and the star of the god Rephan'.
"...Further, the word Chiun...has been represented by the word Rephan in Acts 7:43. Rephan is Kaivan (Chiun) which is the Arabian and Syrian way of saying Saturn. The adoration of the calf (bull) in the wilderness was an important act of defiance by the Israelites—while Moses went up on the mountain to speak to God face to face. This worship of the bull was actually worship of Saturn! Some call this star worship, and the bull was worshipped because at that time the constellation Taurus (the Bull) marked the position of the sun at the time of the spring equinox...
"Moloch, then was the Sun God, ruing the Zodiac period from Taurus to Serpens and Scorpio which is when the sun is hottest." (49:159-160 (http://www.watch.pair.com/notes.html#r49))

Doing a search on "David Talbott" will yield many results worth considering, imo. I have ordered his DVD "Thunderbolts of the Gods".

cleft_asunder

21-03-2007, 02:22 AM

awakensong

21-03-2007, 03:07 AM

Are we hijacking the thread today? I don't see what Saturn has to do with 2 enlightenment states. Hey I'm flexible, but when it comes to historical interpretation... ugh.

If you don't like historical interpretation, how is anyone to know that if you don't say so when you start the thread? And besides, history is the best source in many cases, so why is it wrong or bad? And it was also the way for me to defend my presentation. You can't outlaw the defense, can you?

Here is what Saturn has to do with 2 enlightenment states. It sort of 'evolved' to this yesterday:

Weather she's an agent or not is not important, I still agree with the article I posted above--that there is something wrong with this creation.

To which I gave my response to you personally here on the board:
Are we sure it's a "creation"? If so, how do we know and prove it? I would agree that "something is wrong" but I don't know whether I would blame it on any entity, especially since all the ancients the world over knew when they first wrote their 'sacred texts' that the gods they were speaking of were planets (Saturn was always known as "El" or "Helios"), and "creation" was the formation of this galaxy or solar system, and the incoming comet Venus which rearranged everything.

In every culture without exception, the Mother Goddess is always, always known as the planet Venus. The Red Sphere within was what she gave birth to, which became the planet Mars, which in every culture has always been called the Warrior or Cosmic Hero.

To then come into more present-day eras and personify these things, give them human or "alien" names and forms, and blame them for everything that isn't perfect, just further serves to separate mankind, set up territorial "Gods" and cause wars, fear and total chaos and dysfunction among the human race.

Then what I would consider the hijacking occured when someone barged into the conversation I was having with you, the original poster, and said I was wrong.

btw, to the person who did do that to me, if anyone is ever 'wrong', it is considered a sign of a weak argument or no argument to attack that person as an individual instead of taking issue with the content of their post directly.

cleft_asunder

21-03-2007, 03:42 AM

If you don't like historical interpretation, how is anyone to know that if you don't say so when you start the thread? And besides, history is the best source in many cases, so why is it wrong or bad? And it was also the way for me to defend my presentation. You can't outlaw the defense, can you?

Here is what Saturn has to do with 2 enlightenment states. It sort of 'evolved' to this yesterday:

To which I gave my response to you personally here on the board:

Then what I would consider the hijacking occured when someone barged into the conversation I was having with you, the original poster, and said I was wrong.

btw, to the person who did do that to me, if anyone is ever 'wrong', it is considered a sign of a weak argument or no argument to attack that person as an individual instead of taking issue with the content of their post directly.

I've already addressed your "Are we sure this is a creation?" question on page 2. Yes, I firmly, without doubt, believe that all the evidence points to this as being a creation. Do you have some sort of alternate idea I'm not aware of?

As for weather the gods were planets or what not, I'm not convinced. I strongly believe that the gods were literally Reptilians/Greys. I am convinced Credo Mutwa didn't go on video because it was a dream of his. There is too much material, such as with abductions, to disclude taking the subject of Reptilians et cetera seriously. Either way, you're not going to convince me and I'm not going to convince you. Yes I do believe that malevolent beings who have no morales control humans and are the couse of all our problems. The "human nature" things is old, and I was done with that a while ago. It's just not consistant with the world I'm living in. When I turn on the T.V., I see strategically engineered manipulation in every commercial, show, documentary, et cetera. I see people inventing cars that run on water (CNN) and nothing becomes of it. Oh let me guess, it's "because of the oil companies." I should make myself a shirt.

Look, human nature is a tricky thing. On one hand the Reptilian brain might have been added there so that humans can become scapegoats, and more easily controlled. It certainly makes sense. On the other hand we have the VERY significant idea that organic portals may exist. I never gave it much thought until I finally decided to take it seriouly. I believe it could very well be true that half our population are puppets directly taking orders from the Matrix-mind itself. So how can we talk about human nature cleanly? All I know is that the idea that humans are 100% responsible for their current state is an idea that didn't hold up to scrutiny, and it's not making a comeback.

tru3

21-03-2007, 06:40 AM

See this is precisely what I contest, the Easter tradition experience of Nirvana or Enlightenment. I do not believe it is the end-all, but a last resort or final trick of the Matrix. It's the ultimate that Lucifer can offer you. And on the other hand we have real enlightenment.

cleft,

this is not what i'm referring to. nirvana literally means extinction. i'm saying let's really LIVE. i'm saying empower yourself. i'm talking about simple self-enquiry, that anyone can do with a certain amount of spiritual will. focus on the seer, not the seen. who is it that sees the david? who is it that sees the vision of the shroom? it is the same Presence, just so. the predator retreats from this question. once the "center of gravity" is firmly fixed in the Self, one can never be owned, ever again. the mystery is no one can say when that will be. it simply takes persistence, one foot in front of the other on the path, and keep going right on through the terrible loneliness, alienation and boredom that often arises. focus on who is experiencing these. let the journey and the destination take care of themselves.

no mandalas or mantras are needed. just awareness of what's going on within yourself. observe it. witness it. the longer one does, the more apparent it becomes that one identifies with things that are temporary and fleeting. they are not You. we're chasing them all the time, but to what end? suffering and delusion.

what i'm saying is that it's possible to fall right through the trap-door of this notion of 2, right into not-two. not even one, for that would imply a second.

adramelech

21-03-2007, 10:10 PM

If you believe that is inacurrate, and what I said can be proven to be true in the astronomical and magical texts of ancient cultures, then please submit the texts that prove to you what I've said is wrong.

The Babylonians absolutely referred to their god "Shamash" as the planet Saturn - they make it perfectly clear, which is also known in the west as El and Jehovah.

Who is "they" which you refer to and how do you prove your claim?

I apologize, I'm really not in the mood to debate astro-theology for the hundredth time, I probably shouldn't have said anything. The chief misconception at play is getting stuck on one aspect of the ancient "gods" and using it to explain all others. The beings we now refer to as "gods" were known as planets, poles, seasons, emotions, virtues... all manner of archtypes and honorifics were leveled their way. But at the core were simply powerful entities that were worshipped and feared by humanity, who attempted to explain them as forces of nature.

Nothing you say is actually "wrong", just incomplete. Actually, I did a pretty big write up on the whole Saturn worship/days of the week thing, talking about Ninurta and all that jazz not too long ago.

Cleft, the argument of "human nature" or self-blame for victimization is indeed very tired and shows at best a lack of cursory research into the subject, at worst deep denial, Stockholm Syndrome, battered wives syndrome. It becomes even more amusing when you realize that there is absolutely no such thing as "human nature" because we don't even know what "human" is.