PDA

View Full Version : God-Code & the Gnostic Monad


zero1
18-03-2008, 09:35 PM
What informs Reality? What's the code? What in-formation determines atoms, particles, evolution, gravity etc?

In ancient Gnosticism, which predates its own Christian form philosophically, the concept of the Monad (which is also present in Plato) was, I believe, an attempt to understand what substance (ie. Code) the Universe was formed out of. The Monad ideal was understood as describing the Substance of GOD, the All or the Source. So we're talking about the Source Code, here.

Now, intellectually in the world and the minds of men who create World-Systems, MONEY is the substance of God given representative value. This is the underlying cornerstone of Economics, the esoteric secret of Economics if you like. But its value is not REAL, because money is assigned only representative value, which is to say that its worth in trade for goods and services (ie. Energy) is established only beacuse it is agreed upon by consensus and social convention. The meaning of the word "represent" is to make present again, that is to invoke. And what is invoked? GOD, of course, through money, His monadic substance. It's a con, a mind trick because you are confident and it can then be claimed (by those "in-the-know") that God is present in the transaction to validate it, like a magic spell, you see. It thus involves faith, belief.

Understand? Clever, isn't it...mon-ey/mon-ad, same word different affix.

But to discuss the Monad, the code of God, in terms of Objective reality (ie. existentialist philosophy), we must go deeper.

We must ask, what is the God-code of Reality? Were the Gnostics knowlegable about this in terms of their belief in the False Reality (Matrix) created by the Demiurge? For Demiurge, you could also read Great Architect or even Blind Watchmaker...

I would like your opinions. No need to go deep into metaphysics or anything, the Universe-as-Computer analogy (if it is only an analogy...) works fine for the purposes of this thread.

So, what information is Reality operating upon? Can it be defined, categorized? How does it relate to our perceptions, our breath, our Words?

Thanks in advance. :) All replies are appreciated, I know this is a complicated subject, but...one worth considering. I hope.

ie11
21-03-2008, 01:35 PM
all i can say right now is that is a brilliant question a fucking brilliant post

cyberdaemon
21-03-2008, 06:51 PM
Here is your god code

Physicists discover that the structure of a brain cell is the same as the entire universe.

"Oh God, guide me, protect me; make of me a shining lamp and a brilliant star." -- Abdu’l-Bahá

http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/Pickover/pc/neuron-galaxy.jpg

kblood
21-03-2008, 07:07 PM
Marco Rodin and Nassim Haramein both seeks this answer I believe, and if they didnt find it, then at least they seem to have uncovered parts of it.

http://www.markorodin.com/

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4907540922643918266

zero1
21-03-2008, 11:37 PM
Thanks oe11, Cyberdaemon and Kblood. Excellent stuff there. :)

kblood
22-03-2008, 01:21 AM
Thanks oe11, Cyberdaemon and Kblood. Excellent stuff there. :)

Same to you :) I never thought much about this monad stuff, and your post describes it well, and why its important to look into.

phildee3
22-03-2008, 10:54 AM
Here is a fascinating graphic description/manifestation of the code
(you need Java to view it):

http://www.heartcoherence.com/anu-of-theosophy/ray_colours.htm




So, what information is Reality operating upon? Can it be defined, categorized?



No I don't think so.
Being infinite and eternal, both spatially and temporally, it is beyond definition.
It can, however, be described in various ways such as this as well as in the life of numbers.

kblood
22-03-2008, 12:07 PM
No I don't think so.
Being infinite and eternal, both spatially and temporally, it is beyond definition.
It can, however, be described in various ways such as this as well as in the life of numbers.

Nassim and Rodin try to define it with fractals and vortexes. Fractals are always infinite, or a fractal wouldnt be a fractral. I dont believe its just one simple thing though, its many, that needs to be defined individually. Many important numbers that repeats again and again, important shapes, and important patterns.

phildee3
22-03-2008, 12:47 PM
Nassim and Rodin try to define it with fractals and vortexes. Fractals are always infinite, or a fractal wouldnt be a fractral. I dont believe its just one simple thing though, its many, that needs to be defined individually. Many important numbers that repeats again and again, important shapes, and important patterns.



I've not had time to watch the Nassim lecture yet, although I'm very much looking forward to it. I know that it's going to be worthwhile from seeing the first few minutes and it will probably be a special "night in" with my other half.

Yes, they try to define it but do they succeed?

I don't think we will ever be able to define the infinite.
The effort is worthwhile, though, because to contemplate such things leads to its inner comprehension.
It can be realised (internally) but not defined (externally), imo.

Like Leadbeater's ultimate atom, fractals are descriptions/manifestations of the code. They can never define it because the complete set can never be produced within the spatial/temporal realm that we are attempting to define it in.

Neither can individual manifestations of the code define it, because they, themselves, contain infinite iterations.

kblood
22-03-2008, 01:20 PM
The link I posted isnt the full video, because I downloaded one from youtube or google vid that is 4 hours long, and I believe this one is only 1 hour long. The 4 hour long one might not even be the full video, so I will get back to looking for more of his vids when I have the time.

phildee3
22-03-2008, 01:42 PM
The link I posted isnt the full video, because I downloaded one from youtube or google vid that is 4 hours long, and I believe this one is only 1 hour long.



It's 1 hr 43 mins. which is about the limit of my attention span! :)

He explains, at the beginning, that it's an abridged version of his lecture which is at least 10 hrs. long.

kblood
22-03-2008, 04:02 PM
Ahh, 10 hours. Thanks for noticing :) I split the 4 ours up, and watched it over a few weeks. I hope to make time to watch the rest when I find it.

phildee3
22-03-2008, 10:28 PM
Ahh, 10 hours. Thanks for noticing :) I split the 4 ours up, and watched it over a few weeks. I hope to make time to watch the rest when I find it.



Post the link when you do - PD3

kblood
22-03-2008, 10:36 PM
Full first part:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6151699791256390335&q=nassim+haramein&total=10&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Cant find more than first part, the rest need to be bought from the website it seems.

phildee3
23-03-2008, 08:58 PM
I just wached the whole of the 1 hr 43 mins Nassim lecture.

Excellent!! Thank you kb.

If anyone's not seen it yet, I highly recommend it; - and watch it right through to the end.

Particularly interesting is how he repeatedly describes Leadbeater's "ultimate atom" in the dynamics of the inner/outer energy feedback loop. He traces it with his hands over and over again!

synergy777
24-03-2008, 09:54 PM
Jill Bolte Taylor: My stroke of insight

http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/229

offers a biological/scientific insight into maya/illusion/wave-particle duality = energy field/electric universe-ocean of energy

synergy777
24-03-2008, 09:55 PM
also the neuron/galaxy, gives us the micro/macro - holographic/fractual aspect.

then add to this the fibonacci/pi ratio, galaxies, storms/hurricanes to nautilus shells etc

zero1
07-05-2008, 09:25 PM
For anyone wishing to comment in compliment of Crazyman's excellent thread on money. :cool:

kblood
08-05-2008, 12:15 AM
I just wached the whole of the 1 hr 43 mins Nassim lecture.

Excellent!! Thank you kb.

If anyone's not seen it yet, I highly recommend it; - and watch it right through to the end.

Particularly interesting is how he repeatedly describes Leadbeater's "ultimate atom" in the dynamics of the inner/outer energy feedback loop. He traces it with his hands over and over again!

Oh yes :) Tracing sacred geometry with your hands is always a good way to use magic. The most ancient code there is :D It even helps you think, as this man clearly proved. I learned alot from watching it.