Let us take a look at how the bird is represented in popular culture.
Consider Dracula. Archetypal bird figure. Magical being who feeds off of the masses. Able to fly, to hypnotize, to control, to do as he pleases. Has an aversion to crosses.
Look at Superman. Here is a good bird who fights for Truth, Justice, and the American way. Who is but a hobbled reflection of Nietzsche's Uberman. And let us not forget George Bernard Shaw's Man and Superman. In Shaw's work Superman is Don Juan, borrowed from Mozart's Don Giovanni. Don Juan as Superman turns up again in the works of Carlos Castaneda.
This figure is a representation of Faust, the man who made a deal with the devil for power. And who is Faust if not Simon Magus? He who sought the secret of the power that Peter possessed.
And what of the twelve sparrows that Jesus formed from clay?
The lord said to the disciples, "[...] from every house. Gather (things) into the father's house; but do not steal and remove (anything) while in the father's house."
Gospel of Philip 55:37-56:1-2 (Layton)
The disciples were thieves as well, taking from every house and gathering the things in the father's house. Like birds bringing shiny objects back to their nests. This is the nature of the relationship between the Church and those who support the Church. Teach the people the wonders of faith and then take advantage of the generosity of the faithful. The only disadvantage being that others might attempt to take advantage of the faithful as well. And so the crucifix serves as a warning to those able to perceive its overt message.
Saturday, June 28, 2003
Monday, June 09, 2003
Making Female Male
114 Simon Peter says to them: "Let Mary go out from our midst, for women are not worthy of life!"
Jesus says: "See, I will guide her so as to make her male so that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who has become male will enter the Kingdom of heaven."
I have noticed that this saying is almost always approached as a metaphor. To even think of it in a literal sense is absurd. So let us examine the absurdity. Let us suppose that the saying is to be understood that Jesus is going to guide Mary and make her male, in the physical sense of the word.
Are there any legends of women becoming male around the proper era?
Well, there is the Fable of Iphis and Ianthe
It is a long fable, the gist of which is: as a wife is about to give birth, her husband demands a boy, threatening to kill the child if it is a girl.
The wife gives birth to a girl which she disguises as a boy. The child is named Iphis. She is dressed and raised as a boy.
When Iphis turns thirteen, she becomes engaged to Ianthe, the most beautiful girl in Phaestus. Ianthe and Iphis are in love, but Iphis knows that shecan't fulfill that love. A woman is not to love another woman, so she appeals to her mother for help. The wedding is put off for as long as possible, but they soon run out of excuses. On the night before the wedding, the distraught mother prays to Isis that the goddess finds some way to end her daughter's misery. When she arises from the altar Iphis has been transformed into a man.
Isis, the Great Mother, performs a gender change from female to male.
The Fable of Iphis and Ianthe
But having done whate'er she could devise,
And empty'd all her magazine of lies,
The time approach'd; the next ensuing day
The fatal secret must to light betray.
Then Telethusa had recourse to pray'r,
She, and her daughter with dishevel'd hair;
Trembling with fear, great Isis they ador'd,
Embrac'd her altar, and her aid implor'd.
Fair queen, who dost on fruitful Egypt smile,
Who sway'st the sceptre of the Pharian isle,
And sev'n-fold falls of disemboguing Nile,
Relieve, in this our last distress, she said,
A suppliant mother, and a mournful maid.
Thou, Goddess, thou wert present to my sight;
Reveal'd I saw thee by thy own fair light:
I saw thee in my dream, as now I see,
With all thy marks of awful majesty:
The glorious train that compass'd thee around;
And heard the hollow timbrels holy sound.
Thy words I noted, which I still retain;
Let not thy sacred oracles be vain.
That Iphis lives, that I myself am free
From shame, and punishment, I owe to thee.
On thy protection all our hopes depend.
Thy counsel sav'd us, let thy pow'r defend.
Her tears pursu'd her words; and while she spoke,
The Goddess nodded, and her altar shook:
The temple doors, as with a blast of wind,
Were heard to clap; the lunar horns that bind
The brows of Isis cast a blaze around;
The trembling timbrel made a murm'ring sound.
Some hopes these happy omens did impart;
Forth went the mother with a beating heart:
Not much in fear, nor fully satisfy'd;
But Iphis follow'd with a larger stride:
The whiteness of her skin forsook her face;
Her looks embolden'd with an awful grace;
Her features, and her strength together grew,
And her long hair to curling locks withdrew.
Her sparkling eyes with manly vigour shone,
Big was her voice, audacious was her tone.
The latent parts, at length reveal'd, began
To shoot, and spread, and burnish into man.
The maid becomes a youth; no more delay
Your vows, but look, and confidently pay.
Their gifts the parents to the temple bear:
The votive tables this inscription wear;
Iphis the man, has to the Goddess paid
The vows, that Iphis offer'd when a maid.
Now when the star of day had shewn his face,
Venus and Juno with their presence grace
The nuptial rites, and Hymen from above
Descending to compleat their happy love;
The Gods of marriage lend their mutual aid;
And the warm youth enjoys the lovely maid.
http://classics.mit.edu/Ovid/metam.9.ninth.html
So we have a legendary account of a woman being turned miraculousy into a man by the goddess Isis. So sex change was conceived of during that distant age.
Now I'd like to turn back to the saying.
Simon Peter says to them: "Let Mary go out from our midst, for women are not worthy of life!"
Calm down Peter. Why is he so upset? Because Jesus is revealing the inner secrets of his teachings and Mary is there, listening with the other disciples. Mary shouldn't have access to this knowledge because she is a woman. With that in mind let us examine a piece of text from the Library of Photius, an account from Diodorus Siculus:
There was an Epidaurian child, named Callo, orphaned of both her parents, who was supposed to be a girl. Now the orifice with which women are naturally provided had in her case no opening, but beside the so-called pecten [pubis] she had from birth a perforation through which she excreted the liquid residues.
On reaching maturity she became the wife of a fellow-citizen. For two years she lived with him, and since she was incapable of intercourse as a woman, she was obliged to submit to unnatural embraces. Later a tumour appeared on her genitals and because it gave rise to great pain a number of physicians were called in. None of the others would take the responsibility for treating her, but a certain apothecary, who offered to cure her, cut into the swollen area, whereupon a man's privates were protruded, namely testicles and an imperforate penis. While all the others stood amazed at the extraordinary event, the apothecary took steps to remedy the remaining deficiencies. First of all, cutting into the glans, he made a passage into the urethra, and inserting a silver catheter drew off the liquid residues. Then, by scarifying the perforated area, he brought the parts together. After achieving a cure in this manner he demanded double fees, saying that he had received a female invalid and made her into a healthy young man.
Callo laid aside her loom-shuttles and all other instruments of woman's work, and taking in their stead the garb andstatus of a man, changed her name (by adding a single letter, N, at the end) to Callon. It is stated by some that before changing to man's form she had been a priestess of Demeter, and that because she had witnessed things not to be seen by a man, she was brought for trial for impiety. (Diodorus Siculus, XXXII 11 [ = Photius, Library, codex 244, 378b])
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Observe the fact that Callo as a woman had been a priestess in the cult of Demeter. When she became a man she was brought to trial, because the secrets she knew were not lawful for a man to know. Compare to Peter's attitude to Mary.
Another point of interest, Demeter is the Greek version of Isis.
Jesus says: "See, I will guide her so as to make her male so that she also may become a living spirit like you males. For every woman who has become male will enter the Kingdom of heaven."
I have noticed that this saying is almost always approached as a metaphor. To even think of it in a literal sense is absurd. So let us examine the absurdity. Let us suppose that the saying is to be understood that Jesus is going to guide Mary and make her male, in the physical sense of the word.
Are there any legends of women becoming male around the proper era?
Well, there is the Fable of Iphis and Ianthe
It is a long fable, the gist of which is: as a wife is about to give birth, her husband demands a boy, threatening to kill the child if it is a girl.
The wife gives birth to a girl which she disguises as a boy. The child is named Iphis. She is dressed and raised as a boy.
When Iphis turns thirteen, she becomes engaged to Ianthe, the most beautiful girl in Phaestus. Ianthe and Iphis are in love, but Iphis knows that shecan't fulfill that love. A woman is not to love another woman, so she appeals to her mother for help. The wedding is put off for as long as possible, but they soon run out of excuses. On the night before the wedding, the distraught mother prays to Isis that the goddess finds some way to end her daughter's misery. When she arises from the altar Iphis has been transformed into a man.
Isis, the Great Mother, performs a gender change from female to male.
The Fable of Iphis and Ianthe
But having done whate'er she could devise,
And empty'd all her magazine of lies,
The time approach'd; the next ensuing day
The fatal secret must to light betray.
Then Telethusa had recourse to pray'r,
She, and her daughter with dishevel'd hair;
Trembling with fear, great Isis they ador'd,
Embrac'd her altar, and her aid implor'd.
Fair queen, who dost on fruitful Egypt smile,
Who sway'st the sceptre of the Pharian isle,
And sev'n-fold falls of disemboguing Nile,
Relieve, in this our last distress, she said,
A suppliant mother, and a mournful maid.
Thou, Goddess, thou wert present to my sight;
Reveal'd I saw thee by thy own fair light:
I saw thee in my dream, as now I see,
With all thy marks of awful majesty:
The glorious train that compass'd thee around;
And heard the hollow timbrels holy sound.
Thy words I noted, which I still retain;
Let not thy sacred oracles be vain.
That Iphis lives, that I myself am free
From shame, and punishment, I owe to thee.
On thy protection all our hopes depend.
Thy counsel sav'd us, let thy pow'r defend.
Her tears pursu'd her words; and while she spoke,
The Goddess nodded, and her altar shook:
The temple doors, as with a blast of wind,
Were heard to clap; the lunar horns that bind
The brows of Isis cast a blaze around;
The trembling timbrel made a murm'ring sound.
Some hopes these happy omens did impart;
Forth went the mother with a beating heart:
Not much in fear, nor fully satisfy'd;
But Iphis follow'd with a larger stride:
The whiteness of her skin forsook her face;
Her looks embolden'd with an awful grace;
Her features, and her strength together grew,
And her long hair to curling locks withdrew.
Her sparkling eyes with manly vigour shone,
Big was her voice, audacious was her tone.
The latent parts, at length reveal'd, began
To shoot, and spread, and burnish into man.
The maid becomes a youth; no more delay
Your vows, but look, and confidently pay.
Their gifts the parents to the temple bear:
The votive tables this inscription wear;
Iphis the man, has to the Goddess paid
The vows, that Iphis offer'd when a maid.
Now when the star of day had shewn his face,
Venus and Juno with their presence grace
The nuptial rites, and Hymen from above
Descending to compleat their happy love;
The Gods of marriage lend their mutual aid;
And the warm youth enjoys the lovely maid.
http://classics.mit.edu/Ovid/metam.9.ninth.html
So we have a legendary account of a woman being turned miraculousy into a man by the goddess Isis. So sex change was conceived of during that distant age.
Now I'd like to turn back to the saying.
Simon Peter says to them: "Let Mary go out from our midst, for women are not worthy of life!"
Calm down Peter. Why is he so upset? Because Jesus is revealing the inner secrets of his teachings and Mary is there, listening with the other disciples. Mary shouldn't have access to this knowledge because she is a woman. With that in mind let us examine a piece of text from the Library of Photius, an account from Diodorus Siculus:
There was an Epidaurian child, named Callo, orphaned of both her parents, who was supposed to be a girl. Now the orifice with which women are naturally provided had in her case no opening, but beside the so-called pecten [pubis] she had from birth a perforation through which she excreted the liquid residues.
On reaching maturity she became the wife of a fellow-citizen. For two years she lived with him, and since she was incapable of intercourse as a woman, she was obliged to submit to unnatural embraces. Later a tumour appeared on her genitals and because it gave rise to great pain a number of physicians were called in. None of the others would take the responsibility for treating her, but a certain apothecary, who offered to cure her, cut into the swollen area, whereupon a man's privates were protruded, namely testicles and an imperforate penis. While all the others stood amazed at the extraordinary event, the apothecary took steps to remedy the remaining deficiencies. First of all, cutting into the glans, he made a passage into the urethra, and inserting a silver catheter drew off the liquid residues. Then, by scarifying the perforated area, he brought the parts together. After achieving a cure in this manner he demanded double fees, saying that he had received a female invalid and made her into a healthy young man.
Callo laid aside her loom-shuttles and all other instruments of woman's work, and taking in their stead the garb andstatus of a man, changed her name (by adding a single letter, N, at the end) to Callon. It is stated by some that before changing to man's form she had been a priestess of Demeter, and that because she had witnessed things not to be seen by a man, she was brought for trial for impiety. (Diodorus Siculus, XXXII 11 [ = Photius, Library, codex 244, 378b])
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Observe the fact that Callo as a woman had been a priestess in the cult of Demeter. When she became a man she was brought to trial, because the secrets she knew were not lawful for a man to know. Compare to Peter's attitude to Mary.
Another point of interest, Demeter is the Greek version of Isis.
Sunday, June 08, 2003
Stereoscopic Training, Reloaded
Remember,
you are to make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
you are to make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and an image in place of an image,
only then shall you exit the Matrix.
you are to make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
you are to make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and an image in place of an image,
only then shall you exit the Matrix.
THE PARABLE OF THE EYE OF THE SQUINT-EYED
THE PARABLE OF THE EYE OF THE SQUINT-EYED
Now let's take a look at a sacred Islamic text on just this question.
Excerpt from THE ENCLOSED GARDEN OF THE TRUTH
EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY J. STEPHENSON,
[1910]
A squint-eyed son asked his father, O thou whose words are as a key to the things that are locked up, why saidst thou that a squinter sees double? I see no more things than there are; if a squint-eyed person counted things crookedly, the two moons that are in the heavens would seem four.
But he who spoke thus spoke in error; for if a squinter looks at a dome, it is doubled.
Now let's take a look at a sacred Islamic text on just this question.
Excerpt from THE ENCLOSED GARDEN OF THE TRUTH
EDITED AND TRANSLATED BY J. STEPHENSON,
[1910]
A squint-eyed son asked his father, O thou whose words are as a key to the things that are locked up, why saidst thou that a squinter sees double? I see no more things than there are; if a squint-eyed person counted things crookedly, the two moons that are in the heavens would seem four.
But he who spoke thus spoke in error; for if a squinter looks at a dome, it is doubled.
Meaning of STRABISMUS
Some questions have been raised as to the meaning of the word strabismus. It has been observed that this word means 'squint.' It has then been suggested that the word squint is to be understood as wat one does with one's eyes in the bright light, one squeeses them half-shut. And so, the arguement runs, strabismus has nothing to do with having crossed-eyes and everything to do with having one's eyes half open.
Let's see what the HyperDictionary can tell us.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, v. t.
1. To turn to an oblique position; to direct obliquely; as,
to squint an eye.
2. To cause to look with noncoincident optic axes.
He . . . squints the eye, and makes the harelid.
--Shak.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, n.
1. The act or habit of squinting.
2. (Med.) A want of coincidence of the axes of the eyes;
strabismus.
3. (Arch.) Same as {Hagioscope}.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, a. [Cf. D. schuinte a slope, schuin,
schuinisch, sloping, oblique, schuins slopingly. Cf.
{Askant}, {Askance}, {Asquint}.]
1. Looking obliquely. Specifically (Med.), not having the
optic axes coincident; -- said of the eyes. See {Squint},
n., 2.
2. Fig.: Looking askance. ``Squint suspicion.'' --Milton.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, v. i. [imp. & p. p. {Squinted}; p. pr. & vb. n.
{Squinting}.]
1. To see or look obliquely, asquint, or awry, or with a
furtive glance.
Some can squint when they will. --Bacon.
2. (Med.) To have the axes of the eyes not coincident; -- to
be cross-eyed.
3. To deviate from a true line; to run obliquely.
From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]
squint
adj : (used especially of glances) directed to one side with or as
if with doubt or suspicion or envy; "her eyes with
their misted askance look"- Elizabeth Bowen; "sidelong
glances" [syn: {askance}, {askant}, {asquint}, {squint-eyed},
{squinty}, {sidelong}]
n : abnormal alignment of one or both eyes [syn: {strabismus}]
v 1: partly close one's eyes; "The children squinted to frighten
each other" [syn: {squinch}, {cross one's eyes}]
2: be cross-eyed; have a squint or strabismus
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
strabismus
SYLLABICATION: stra·bis·mus
PRONUNCIATION: str-bzms
NOUN: A visual defect in which one eye cannot focus with the other on an object because of imbalance of the eye muscles. Also called squint.
ETYMOLOGY: New Latin, from Greek strabismos, condition of squinting, from strabizein, to squint, from strabos, squinting. See streb(h)- in Appendix I.
OTHER FORMS: stra·bismal (-ml) , stra·bismic (-mk) -ADJECTIVE
ENTRY: streb(h)-
DEFINITION: To wind, turn. European root. 1. strepto-, strop, strophe, strophoid, strophulus; anastrophe, apostrophe, oustrophedon, catastrophe, diastrophism, from Greek strephein, to wind, turn, twist, with o-grade derivatives stroph, a turning, and strophion, headband. 2. Unaspirated o-grade form *strob-. strobilus; stroboscope, from Greek strobos, a whirling, whirlwind. 3. Unaspirated zero-grade form *stb-. strabismus, strabotomy, from Greek strabos, squinting. (In Pokorny 1. (s)ter- 1022.)
Let's see what the HyperDictionary can tell us.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, v. t.
1. To turn to an oblique position; to direct obliquely; as,
to squint an eye.
2. To cause to look with noncoincident optic axes.
He . . . squints the eye, and makes the harelid.
--Shak.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, n.
1. The act or habit of squinting.
2. (Med.) A want of coincidence of the axes of the eyes;
strabismus.
3. (Arch.) Same as {Hagioscope}.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, a. [Cf. D. schuinte a slope, schuin,
schuinisch, sloping, oblique, schuins slopingly. Cf.
{Askant}, {Askance}, {Asquint}.]
1. Looking obliquely. Specifically (Med.), not having the
optic axes coincident; -- said of the eyes. See {Squint},
n., 2.
2. Fig.: Looking askance. ``Squint suspicion.'' --Milton.
From Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913) [web1913]
Squint \Squint\, v. i. [imp. & p. p. {Squinted}; p. pr. & vb. n.
{Squinting}.]
1. To see or look obliquely, asquint, or awry, or with a
furtive glance.
Some can squint when they will. --Bacon.
2. (Med.) To have the axes of the eyes not coincident; -- to
be cross-eyed.
3. To deviate from a true line; to run obliquely.
From WordNet (r) 1.7 [wn]
squint
adj : (used especially of glances) directed to one side with or as
if with doubt or suspicion or envy; "her eyes with
their misted askance look"- Elizabeth Bowen; "sidelong
glances" [syn: {askance}, {askant}, {asquint}, {squint-eyed},
{squinty}, {sidelong}]
n : abnormal alignment of one or both eyes [syn: {strabismus}]
v 1: partly close one's eyes; "The children squinted to frighten
each other" [syn: {squinch}, {cross one's eyes}]
2: be cross-eyed; have a squint or strabismus
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language
strabismus
SYLLABICATION: stra·bis·mus
PRONUNCIATION: str-bzms
NOUN: A visual defect in which one eye cannot focus with the other on an object because of imbalance of the eye muscles. Also called squint.
ETYMOLOGY: New Latin, from Greek strabismos, condition of squinting, from strabizein, to squint, from strabos, squinting. See streb(h)- in Appendix I.
OTHER FORMS: stra·bismal (-ml) , stra·bismic (-mk) -ADJECTIVE
ENTRY: streb(h)-
DEFINITION: To wind, turn. European root. 1. strepto-, strop, strophe, strophoid, strophulus; anastrophe, apostrophe, oustrophedon, catastrophe, diastrophism, from Greek strephein, to wind, turn, twist, with o-grade derivatives stroph, a turning, and strophion, headband. 2. Unaspirated o-grade form *strob-. strobilus; stroboscope, from Greek strobos, a whirling, whirlwind. 3. Unaspirated zero-grade form *stb-. strabismus, strabotomy, from Greek strabos, squinting. (In Pokorny 1. (s)ter- 1022.)
Saturday, June 07, 2003
Conscience is the inner voice that warns us that someone might be looking.
Conscience is the inner voice that warns us that someone might be looking.
H. L. Mencken
The conscience has its source in what Freud would call the super ego, the psyche, the soul, which is one's social identity.
"Borges and I"
Text is from Borges, Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings (New York: New Directions, 1964), pp.246-47.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other one, the one called Borges, is the one things happen to. I walk through the streets of Buenos Aires and stop for a moment, perhaps mechanically now, to look at the arch of an entrance hall and the grillwork on the gate; I know of Borges from the mail and see his name on a list of professors or in a biographical dictionary. I like hourglasses, maps, eighteenth-century typography, the taste of coffee and the prose of Stevenson; he shares these preferences, but in a vain way that turns them into the attributes of an actor. It would be an exaggeration to say that ours is a hostile relationship; I live, let myself go on living, so that Borges may contrive his literature, and this literature justifies me. It is no effort for me to confess that he has achieved some valid pages, but those pages cannot save me, perhaps because what is good belongs to no one, not even to him, but rather to the language and to tradition. Besides, I am destined to perish, definitively, and only some instant of myself can survive in him. Little by little, I am giving over everything to him, though I am quite aware of his perverse custom of falsifying and magnifying things.
Spinoza knew that all things long to persist in their being; the stone eternally wants to be a stone and the tiger a tiger. I shall remain in Borges, not in myself (if it is true that I am someone), but I recognize myself less in his books than in many others or in the laborious strumming of a guitar. Years ago I tried to free myself from him and went from the mythologies of the suburbs to the games with time and infinity, but those games belong to Borges now and I shall have to imagine other things. Thus my life is a flight and I lose everything and everything belongs to oblivion, or to him.
I do not know which of us has written this page.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/english016/borges/borges.html
Though we may not all be in control of our higher emotional center, we all have one. It is concerned with our place in our society, our role, our identity. To simply lump this with the mind is clearly a mistake.
H. L. Mencken
The conscience has its source in what Freud would call the super ego, the psyche, the soul, which is one's social identity.
"Borges and I"
Text is from Borges, Labyrinths: Selected Stories and Other Writings (New York: New Directions, 1964), pp.246-47.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The other one, the one called Borges, is the one things happen to. I walk through the streets of Buenos Aires and stop for a moment, perhaps mechanically now, to look at the arch of an entrance hall and the grillwork on the gate; I know of Borges from the mail and see his name on a list of professors or in a biographical dictionary. I like hourglasses, maps, eighteenth-century typography, the taste of coffee and the prose of Stevenson; he shares these preferences, but in a vain way that turns them into the attributes of an actor. It would be an exaggeration to say that ours is a hostile relationship; I live, let myself go on living, so that Borges may contrive his literature, and this literature justifies me. It is no effort for me to confess that he has achieved some valid pages, but those pages cannot save me, perhaps because what is good belongs to no one, not even to him, but rather to the language and to tradition. Besides, I am destined to perish, definitively, and only some instant of myself can survive in him. Little by little, I am giving over everything to him, though I am quite aware of his perverse custom of falsifying and magnifying things.
Spinoza knew that all things long to persist in their being; the stone eternally wants to be a stone and the tiger a tiger. I shall remain in Borges, not in myself (if it is true that I am someone), but I recognize myself less in his books than in many others or in the laborious strumming of a guitar. Years ago I tried to free myself from him and went from the mythologies of the suburbs to the games with time and infinity, but those games belong to Borges now and I shall have to imagine other things. Thus my life is a flight and I lose everything and everything belongs to oblivion, or to him.
I do not know which of us has written this page.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/english016/borges/borges.html
Though we may not all be in control of our higher emotional center, we all have one. It is concerned with our place in our society, our role, our identity. To simply lump this with the mind is clearly a mistake.
Wednesday, June 04, 2003
Folding the Two into One
The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when [thine eye] is evil, thy body also [is] full of darkness.
Luke 11:34
light: luchnos lookh'-nos from the base of - leukos 3022; a portable lamp or other illuminator (literally or figuratively):--candle, light.
body: soma so'-mah from sozo 4982; the body (as a sound whole), used in a very wide application, literally or figuratively:--bodily, body, slave.
eye: ophthalmos of-thal-mos' from optanomai - optanomai 3700; the eye (literally or figuratively); by implication, vision; figuratively, envy (from the jealous side-glance):--eye, sight.
single: haplous hap-looce' probably from a - a 1 (as a particle of union) and the base of pleko 4120; properly, folded together, i.e. single (figuratively, clear):--single.
evil: poneros pon-ay-ros' from a derivative of ponos 4192; hurtful, i.e. evil (properly, in effect or influence, and thus differing from kakos 2556, which refers rather to essential character, as well as from sapros 4550, which indicates degeneracy from original virtue); figuratively, calamitous; also (passively) ill, i.e. diseased; but especially (morally) culpable, i.e. derelict, vicious, facinorous; neuter (singular) mischief, malice, or (plural) guilt; masculine (singular) the devil, or (plural) sinners:--bad, evil, grievous, harm, lewd, malicious, wicked(-ness). See also poneroteros 4191.
darkness: skoteinos skot-i-nos' - skotos 4655; opaque, i.e. (figuratively) benighted:--dark, full of darkness.
The term used for single is the conundrum that drew us here. It means 'folded together. If we follow the base pleko we find plek'-o a primary word; to twine or braid:--plait.
Vision is one, is folded together, braided into a unity.
Before an infant develops the muscular coordination to move the eyes together, the eyes may move randomly, and the baby may appear intermittently cross-eyed. This is normal for a child under the age of two months. Between two and three months, the infant's eyes begin to move together, and can track a moving object. At around four months, the infant can usually detect and reach for a nearby object. The infant can usually distinguish between objects by six months. Vision improves during the next six months as control of binocular vision develops. In binocular vision, the information transmitted from each eye to the brain along the optic nerve is transformed into a single image. Binocular vision depends on the ability of the eyes to align properly.
Eye and Vision Development
Strabismus is the general term for an eye imbalance, when the eyes don't work well together. The term comes from the Greek work Strabismos, meaning to look askance, or the evil eye.
When your two eyes focus upon a single image you see in stereo. But when the eyes are crossed you possess the evil eye.
Infants however develop stereo vision slowly. In the beginning the eyes are often crossed. Imagine a man and a woman of equal height, standing side by side, facing you. Were this pair actually before you, it would be possible for you to allow your eyes to drift out of focus so that one eye's image of the man overlays the other eye's image of the woman.
The saying is instructing us not to focus, to replace a single eye with eyes. Then we are to replace a hand with a hand, and a foot with a foot. We are to make man and woman a single one.
More practice at:
Stereoscopic Drawings
Luke 11:34
light: luchnos lookh'-nos from the base of - leukos 3022; a portable lamp or other illuminator (literally or figuratively):--candle, light.
body: soma so'-mah from sozo 4982; the body (as a sound whole), used in a very wide application, literally or figuratively:--bodily, body, slave.
eye: ophthalmos of-thal-mos' from optanomai - optanomai 3700; the eye (literally or figuratively); by implication, vision; figuratively, envy (from the jealous side-glance):--eye, sight.
single: haplous hap-looce' probably from a - a 1 (as a particle of union) and the base of pleko 4120; properly, folded together, i.e. single (figuratively, clear):--single.
evil: poneros pon-ay-ros' from a derivative of ponos 4192; hurtful, i.e. evil (properly, in effect or influence, and thus differing from kakos 2556, which refers rather to essential character, as well as from sapros 4550, which indicates degeneracy from original virtue); figuratively, calamitous; also (passively) ill, i.e. diseased; but especially (morally) culpable, i.e. derelict, vicious, facinorous; neuter (singular) mischief, malice, or (plural) guilt; masculine (singular) the devil, or (plural) sinners:--bad, evil, grievous, harm, lewd, malicious, wicked(-ness). See also poneroteros 4191.
darkness: skoteinos skot-i-nos' - skotos 4655; opaque, i.e. (figuratively) benighted:--dark, full of darkness.
The term used for single is the conundrum that drew us here. It means 'folded together. If we follow the base pleko we find plek'-o a primary word; to twine or braid:--plait.
Vision is one, is folded together, braided into a unity.
Before an infant develops the muscular coordination to move the eyes together, the eyes may move randomly, and the baby may appear intermittently cross-eyed. This is normal for a child under the age of two months. Between two and three months, the infant's eyes begin to move together, and can track a moving object. At around four months, the infant can usually detect and reach for a nearby object. The infant can usually distinguish between objects by six months. Vision improves during the next six months as control of binocular vision develops. In binocular vision, the information transmitted from each eye to the brain along the optic nerve is transformed into a single image. Binocular vision depends on the ability of the eyes to align properly.
Eye and Vision Development
Strabismus is the general term for an eye imbalance, when the eyes don't work well together. The term comes from the Greek work Strabismos, meaning to look askance, or the evil eye.
When your two eyes focus upon a single image you see in stereo. But when the eyes are crossed you possess the evil eye.
Infants however develop stereo vision slowly. In the beginning the eyes are often crossed. Imagine a man and a woman of equal height, standing side by side, facing you. Were this pair actually before you, it would be possible for you to allow your eyes to drift out of focus so that one eye's image of the man overlays the other eye's image of the woman.
The saying is instructing us not to focus, to replace a single eye with eyes. Then we are to replace a hand with a hand, and a foot with a foot. We are to make man and woman a single one.
More practice at:
Stereoscopic Drawings
The Suckling Infants of Saying 22
My primary assumption is that I know nothing. The second is that the text is what it claims to be, a text rife with hidden meanings. Third, that the instructions for solving the text are given within the text itself.
(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go out from among us, for women are not worthy of the life.
Jesus said: Look, I will lead her that I may make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Sayings 22 and 114 are linked in that saying 114 has a woman becoming male and 22 has male and female being made into a single one, so that the male is not male and the female not female. Consider the text as a literary puzzle, with 22 providing clues to the meaning hidden within 114.
(22) Jesus saw some infants who were being suckled.
He said to his disciples: These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom.
They said to him: If we then become children, shall we enter the kingdom?
Jesus said to them:
When you make the two one,
and when you make the inside as the outside,
and the outside as the inside, and the upper as the lower,
and when you make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
and when you make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and a foot in place of a foot,
an image in place of an image,
then shall you enter the kingdom.
Read the saying carefully and try to visualize the scene. What are the infants experiencing? Let me be a bit more concrete. There is an infant and its mother. What is the infant doing and why is it doing what it is doing? Think motivation. If you were an infant and you're doing what this infant is described as doing, what force was it that drove you to do so?
Indeed, the child was hungry. The child's stomach is empty, there is a void.
At the outset of the process:
Inside the child is empty.
Outside the breast is full.
So the child's goal is to make the inside as the outside, which will result in the outside source reaching the same condition as the inside of the child was at the beginning of the process. With the end result that mother, who is in the upper position in the relationship, will arrive at the same state the infant existed in at the start of the process.
The second half of the saying can be identified by the return to the theme of making two into one. Notice the one aspect that fails to fall into perfect symmetry.
and when you make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
and when you make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and a foot in place of a foot,
an image in place of an image,
then shall you enter the kingdom.
It is the eyes in place of an eye. Everything else is perfectly symmetrical. Yes, and why is our attention being directed to the eyes, to vision? What is special about the vision of infants, of newborns?
The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.
Luke 11:34
I suggest taking a close look at this verse. Notice the two qualities your eye can possess. It can be SINGLE or it can be EVIL. We should examine the significant words in this verse very closely, giving special consideration to the definitions of the original Greek words used.
The following link may be of some help.
King James Bible With Strongs Dictionary
(114) Simon Peter said to them: Let Mary go out from among us, for women are not worthy of the life.
Jesus said: Look, I will lead her that I may make her male, in order that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who makes herself male will enter into the kingdom of heaven.
Sayings 22 and 114 are linked in that saying 114 has a woman becoming male and 22 has male and female being made into a single one, so that the male is not male and the female not female. Consider the text as a literary puzzle, with 22 providing clues to the meaning hidden within 114.
(22) Jesus saw some infants who were being suckled.
He said to his disciples: These infants being suckled are like those who enter the kingdom.
They said to him: If we then become children, shall we enter the kingdom?
Jesus said to them:
When you make the two one,
and when you make the inside as the outside,
and the outside as the inside, and the upper as the lower,
and when you make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
and when you make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and a foot in place of a foot,
an image in place of an image,
then shall you enter the kingdom.
Read the saying carefully and try to visualize the scene. What are the infants experiencing? Let me be a bit more concrete. There is an infant and its mother. What is the infant doing and why is it doing what it is doing? Think motivation. If you were an infant and you're doing what this infant is described as doing, what force was it that drove you to do so?
Indeed, the child was hungry. The child's stomach is empty, there is a void.
At the outset of the process:
Inside the child is empty.
Outside the breast is full.
So the child's goal is to make the inside as the outside, which will result in the outside source reaching the same condition as the inside of the child was at the beginning of the process. With the end result that mother, who is in the upper position in the relationship, will arrive at the same state the infant existed in at the start of the process.
The second half of the saying can be identified by the return to the theme of making two into one. Notice the one aspect that fails to fall into perfect symmetry.
and when you make the male and the female into a single one,
so that the male is not male and the female not female,
and when you make eyes in place of an eye,
and a hand in place of a hand,
and a foot in place of a foot,
an image in place of an image,
then shall you enter the kingdom.
It is the eyes in place of an eye. Everything else is perfectly symmetrical. Yes, and why is our attention being directed to the eyes, to vision? What is special about the vision of infants, of newborns?
The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light; but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.
Luke 11:34
I suggest taking a close look at this verse. Notice the two qualities your eye can possess. It can be SINGLE or it can be EVIL. We should examine the significant words in this verse very closely, giving special consideration to the definitions of the original Greek words used.
The following link may be of some help.
King James Bible With Strongs Dictionary
Wednesday, May 28, 2003
Classic Gnosticism versus the Gnosticism of Thomas
You may recall that my position is that classic Gnosticism was created in order to counter the information contained in the Gospel of Thomas, which is a real work of Gnosticism, in the true sense of the word.
When one understands the proper manner in which to approach the Gospel of Thomas, the secrets contained within the Judeo-Christian tradition can be accessed. But there were those who wished to keep this information hidden. And so a text was constructed which answered the enigmas raised within the Gospel of Thomas, so that one need look no further. This text was the Apocryphon of John, the defining text of classic Gnosticism.
For example take:
(7) Jesus said: Blessed is the lion which the man eats, and the lion will become man; and cursed is the man whom the lion eats, and the lion will become man.
And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth.
AoJ 10:7-19
(18) The disciples said to Jesus: Tell us how our end will be.
Jesus said: Since you have discovered the beginning, why do you seek the end? For where the beginning is, there will the end be. Blessed is he who shall stand at the beginning (in the beginning), and he shall know the end, and shall not taste death.
In the Apocryphon of John we learn what happened before the beginning as recounted in Genesis.
(29) Jesus said, "It is amazing if it was for the spirit that flesh came into existence. And it is amazing indeed if spirit (came into existence) for the sake of the body. But as for me, I am amazed at how this great wealth has come to dwell in this poverty."
The Apocryphon of John shows how it came to pass that spirit became trapped in the flesh.
The Apocryphon of John
Due to the many themes which Thomas shares with John it is easy to see how Thomas came to be regarded simply as another work in the classic Gnostic tradition. But Thomas does not belong in this tradition at all. This tradition was created in order to provide answers to the questions raised by Thomas, but these answers are not the ones that the text of Thomas originally referred to. In order to discover the intended solutions one would have to dig deeply through the Judeo-Christian tradition. However since Thomas is classified as belonging to the same tradition as the Apocryphon of John one wouldn't feel any need to dig deeper since a quick glance through John provides a ready answer to each enigma. Hence there is no apparent reason to look any further.
When one understands the proper manner in which to approach the Gospel of Thomas, the secrets contained within the Judeo-Christian tradition can be accessed. But there were those who wished to keep this information hidden. And so a text was constructed which answered the enigmas raised within the Gospel of Thomas, so that one need look no further. This text was the Apocryphon of John, the defining text of classic Gnosticism.
For example take:
(7) Jesus said: Blessed is the lion which the man eats, and the lion will become man; and cursed is the man whom the lion eats, and the lion will become man.
And when she saw (the consequences of) her desire, it changed into a form of a lion-faced serpent. And its eyes were like lightning fires which flash. She cast it away from her, outside that place, that no one of the immortal ones might see it, for she had created it in ignorance. And she surrounded it with a luminous cloud, and she placed a throne in the middle of the cloud that no one might see it except the holy Spirit who is called the mother of the living. And she called his name Yaltabaoth.
AoJ 10:7-19
(18) The disciples said to Jesus: Tell us how our end will be.
Jesus said: Since you have discovered the beginning, why do you seek the end? For where the beginning is, there will the end be. Blessed is he who shall stand at the beginning (in the beginning), and he shall know the end, and shall not taste death.
In the Apocryphon of John we learn what happened before the beginning as recounted in Genesis.
(29) Jesus said, "It is amazing if it was for the spirit that flesh came into existence. And it is amazing indeed if spirit (came into existence) for the sake of the body. But as for me, I am amazed at how this great wealth has come to dwell in this poverty."
The Apocryphon of John shows how it came to pass that spirit became trapped in the flesh.
The Apocryphon of John
Due to the many themes which Thomas shares with John it is easy to see how Thomas came to be regarded simply as another work in the classic Gnostic tradition. But Thomas does not belong in this tradition at all. This tradition was created in order to provide answers to the questions raised by Thomas, but these answers are not the ones that the text of Thomas originally referred to. In order to discover the intended solutions one would have to dig deeply through the Judeo-Christian tradition. However since Thomas is classified as belonging to the same tradition as the Apocryphon of John one wouldn't feel any need to dig deeper since a quick glance through John provides a ready answer to each enigma. Hence there is no apparent reason to look any further.
Sunday, May 25, 2003
Should We Exclude Jesus Making Mary Male
So let us carefully examine the arguments for this saying being a late addition to the Gospel of Thomas.
One thing which must be mentioned before we begin. The primary reason that Logion 114 is considered a late addition is simply because it is the last saying. If someone wanted to add something to an existing document their only option, other than rewriting the entire document, is to tack on something at the end of the text. If you are going to question the validity of a piece of text, the final section of the document is always an easy target.
a. The saying begins with a disciple, Simon Peter, addressing the other disciples. This literary device is otherwise never used by Thomas.
As you know, I take the view that the text should be studied in reverse order, which effectively makes this the first saying. Here we have Simon Peter attempting to impose his will on the group. Jesus then soundly puts him in his place. After this event Peter is not in a position to question Mary's presence. His wings have been effectively clipped. And so Peter is no longer depicted in the document as asserting his authority before the other disciples.
b. The idea of one "guided" by Jesus occurs only here.
Actually it is closer to being led by Jesus. The same word is used in sayings 34 and 3:
(34) Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person both will fall into a hole."
(3) Jesus said: If those who lead you say to you: See, the kingdom is in heaven, then the birds of the heaven will go before you; if they say to you: It is in the sea, then the fish will go before you. But the kingdom is within you, and it is outside of you. When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will know that you are the sons of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you are in poverty, and you are poverty.
Naturally the meaning in 114 is quite the opposite, it is Jesus that is doing the leading in this instance. So yes, it can be argued that this is the only instance where Jesus is doing the leading, but being led is a common theme of Thomas. Taking 114 as the first in order, one can read the entire text of Thomas as instructions from Jesus.
c. In Thomas D we find the phrase "Kingdom of the Father" appearing in 96, 97, 98, 99, 113. Only in 114 is "Kingdom of Heaven" used.
There are only two other instances of "Kingdom of Heaven" being used in the entire document, at numbers 20 and 54. As there is only one "Kingdom of Heaven" saying per each of these hypothetical 'chapters', excepting C which has none, why should only this occurrence be judged as being fundamentally different from the others?
Perhaps the "Kingdom of Heaven" sayings have some special significance to set it apart from "Kingdom of the Father," and Mary, as the guided, is being specifically directed towards these sayings.
d. Only in 114 do we hear anything like the idea that a person should "become a living spirit."
Yet there are many concepts within the sayings which occur only once in the work. Should each of those be brought into question as well? 'Go to Jacob the Just' is but a single example.
e. Finally, this logion is in direct contradiction to 22. There the male should become female, the female become male and neither should be any longer male or female. Here, in 114 the status "male" is positively valued and the status "female" is negatively valued. Indeed, the woman should become male.
Notice how 114 leads us directly to 22. 21 is the next saying after 22 if we continue following a reverse order throughout the document. With that in mind, let's look at 21.
21) Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are Your disciples like?"
He said, "They are like children ...
Mary is directly engaging Jesus. This is the only saying which opens with Jesus being addressed by a named individual. Except perhaps for 114 which opens with Peter addressing either Jesus or the group as a whole.
So we have come full circle. Not only does 114 function as an integral piece of the collection, it also serves as the portal through which the document as a whole must be approached.
One thing which must be mentioned before we begin. The primary reason that Logion 114 is considered a late addition is simply because it is the last saying. If someone wanted to add something to an existing document their only option, other than rewriting the entire document, is to tack on something at the end of the text. If you are going to question the validity of a piece of text, the final section of the document is always an easy target.
a. The saying begins with a disciple, Simon Peter, addressing the other disciples. This literary device is otherwise never used by Thomas.
As you know, I take the view that the text should be studied in reverse order, which effectively makes this the first saying. Here we have Simon Peter attempting to impose his will on the group. Jesus then soundly puts him in his place. After this event Peter is not in a position to question Mary's presence. His wings have been effectively clipped. And so Peter is no longer depicted in the document as asserting his authority before the other disciples.
b. The idea of one "guided" by Jesus occurs only here.
Actually it is closer to being led by Jesus. The same word is used in sayings 34 and 3:
(34) Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person both will fall into a hole."
(3) Jesus said: If those who lead you say to you: See, the kingdom is in heaven, then the birds of the heaven will go before you; if they say to you: It is in the sea, then the fish will go before you. But the kingdom is within you, and it is outside of you. When you know yourselves, then you will be known, and you will know that you are the sons of the living Father. But if you do not know yourselves, then you are in poverty, and you are poverty.
Naturally the meaning in 114 is quite the opposite, it is Jesus that is doing the leading in this instance. So yes, it can be argued that this is the only instance where Jesus is doing the leading, but being led is a common theme of Thomas. Taking 114 as the first in order, one can read the entire text of Thomas as instructions from Jesus.
c. In Thomas D we find the phrase "Kingdom of the Father" appearing in 96, 97, 98, 99, 113. Only in 114 is "Kingdom of Heaven" used.
There are only two other instances of "Kingdom of Heaven" being used in the entire document, at numbers 20 and 54. As there is only one "Kingdom of Heaven" saying per each of these hypothetical 'chapters', excepting C which has none, why should only this occurrence be judged as being fundamentally different from the others?
Perhaps the "Kingdom of Heaven" sayings have some special significance to set it apart from "Kingdom of the Father," and Mary, as the guided, is being specifically directed towards these sayings.
d. Only in 114 do we hear anything like the idea that a person should "become a living spirit."
Yet there are many concepts within the sayings which occur only once in the work. Should each of those be brought into question as well? 'Go to Jacob the Just' is but a single example.
e. Finally, this logion is in direct contradiction to 22. There the male should become female, the female become male and neither should be any longer male or female. Here, in 114 the status "male" is positively valued and the status "female" is negatively valued. Indeed, the woman should become male.
Notice how 114 leads us directly to 22. 21 is the next saying after 22 if we continue following a reverse order throughout the document. With that in mind, let's look at 21.
21) Mary said to Jesus, "Whom are Your disciples like?"
He said, "They are like children ...
Mary is directly engaging Jesus. This is the only saying which opens with Jesus being addressed by a named individual. Except perhaps for 114 which opens with Peter addressing either Jesus or the group as a whole.
So we have come full circle. Not only does 114 function as an integral piece of the collection, it also serves as the portal through which the document as a whole must be approached.
Thursday, May 22, 2003
Making Mary Male
(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
In order to understand the significance of this saying one must first realize that there has been a concerted movement to have this saying classified as a late addition to the text. A thorough examination of the arguments put forth to support such a contention is required before any in depth consideration be given to the significance of the saying itself.
Stevan Davies' arguments for 114 being a late addition are at the following link:
The Structure of Thomas
I have pasted the core of the argument below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2) The final Logion 114 can be seen to have been added to the text of Thomas at a later date. This is not dependent on whether we agree that Thomas had four chapters, for much of the terminology of this saying is absent in the rest of Thomas:
a. The saying begins with a disciple, Simon Peter, addressing the other disciples. This literary device is otherwise never used by Thomas.
b. The idea of one "guided" by Jesus occurs only here.
c. In Thomas D we find the phrase "Kingdom of the Father" appearing in 96, 97, 98, 99, 113. Only in 114 is "Kingdom of Heaven" used.
d. Only in 114 do we hear anything like the idea that a person should "become a living spirit."
e. Finally, this logion is in direct contradiction to 22. There the male should become female, the female become male and neither should be any longer male or female. Here, in 114 the status "male" is positively valued and the status "female" is negatively valued. Indeed, the woman should become male.
Given Thomas' fluidity of terminology and lack of fully systematic ideology, any one of these discrepancies could be overlooked. There are, however, too many unique and anomalous usages in 114 to allow us to consider it part of the original Gospel of Thomas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can any of these arguments be addressed? We will see in the next post.
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."
In order to understand the significance of this saying one must first realize that there has been a concerted movement to have this saying classified as a late addition to the text. A thorough examination of the arguments put forth to support such a contention is required before any in depth consideration be given to the significance of the saying itself.
Stevan Davies' arguments for 114 being a late addition are at the following link:
The Structure of Thomas
I have pasted the core of the argument below:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
2) The final Logion 114 can be seen to have been added to the text of Thomas at a later date. This is not dependent on whether we agree that Thomas had four chapters, for much of the terminology of this saying is absent in the rest of Thomas:
a. The saying begins with a disciple, Simon Peter, addressing the other disciples. This literary device is otherwise never used by Thomas.
b. The idea of one "guided" by Jesus occurs only here.
c. In Thomas D we find the phrase "Kingdom of the Father" appearing in 96, 97, 98, 99, 113. Only in 114 is "Kingdom of Heaven" used.
d. Only in 114 do we hear anything like the idea that a person should "become a living spirit."
e. Finally, this logion is in direct contradiction to 22. There the male should become female, the female become male and neither should be any longer male or female. Here, in 114 the status "male" is positively valued and the status "female" is negatively valued. Indeed, the woman should become male.
Given Thomas' fluidity of terminology and lack of fully systematic ideology, any one of these discrepancies could be overlooked. There are, however, too many unique and anomalous usages in 114 to allow us to consider it part of the original Gospel of Thomas.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can any of these arguments be addressed? We will see in the next post.
Wednesday, May 21, 2003
And the First shall be Last
Some have sought to support the normal method of reading the Gospel of Thomas in the ordinary front-to-back manner by, for example, suggesting that the three things which Jesus tells Thomas in 13 are the same three things which Jesus speaks of in 14.
(13) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I resemble." Simon Peter said to him, "A just angel is what you resemble." Matthew said to him, "An intelligent philosopher is what you resemble." Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth utterly will not let me say what you resemble." Jesus said, "I am not your (sing.) teacher, for you have drunk and become intoxicated from the bubbling wellspring that I have personally measured out. And he took him, withdrew, and said three sayings to him. Now, when Thomas came to his companions they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?" Thomas said to them, "If I say to you (plur.) one of the sayings that he said to me, you will take stones and stone me, and fire will come out of the stones and burn you up."
14) Jesus said to them: If you fast, you will put a sin to your charge; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your inner spirits. And if you go into any land and walk about in the regions, if they receive you, eat what is set before you; heal the sick among them. For what goes into your mouth will not defile you; but what comes out of your mouth, that is what will defile you.
The only problem with this is that 14 mentions four things and not three. Ok, maybe the diet part is tacked on, right? But what about the first part of saying 6?
(6) His disciples questioned him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? And how shall we pray? Shall we give alms? And what kind of diet shall we follow?" ...
See the problem? Anyway, concerning the reverse ordering of the sayings look at the order Thomas has in sayings 6 and 14. Fasting, Prayer, Alms Giving and Diet. Now let's look at the Sermon on the Mount.
1. Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
3. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
4. That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5. And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
9. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11. Give us this day our daily bread.
12. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
16. Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
17. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
18. That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
Matt 6:1-18
Alms giving, prayer, and fasting. Ok, fine, no diet. But three in a row, in reverse order. Coincidence? Then what about the two parables, "new cloth on an old coat" and "new wine in old wineskins", which appear in that order, one right after the other, in all three synoptic gospels (Luke 5:36-38, Mark 2:21-22, and Matthew 9:16-17)? In GoT 47, these two parables are also contiguous, but in reverse order.
My rationale for reading in reverse order is based on the saying, 'the first shall be last'. Notice the various ways it is used in the synoptic Gospels.
22. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23. And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
24. And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
27. And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
28. Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee.
29. And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30. But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with
persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
31. But many that are first shall be last; and the last first.
32. And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him,
33. Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles.
Mark 10:22-33
Here we have the rich man who is first, but he will be last, and those last in this world will be first..
Matthew 19
22. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
23. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Whothen can be saved?
26. But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
27. Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
28. And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
30. But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.
1. For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2. And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3. And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4. And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.
5. Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6. And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
7. They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
8. So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9. And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
10. But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
11. And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12. Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13. But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14. Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
16. So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
17. And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them,
18. Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
19. And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.
Matthew 20
Notice at the beginning, the story of the rich man is repeated, and at the end we have the 'many are called few are chosen' bit, but bracketed in between the two 'first last, last first' markers we see an entirely different view of the issue. All workers receive the same wage for the day. Those workers who were first to start working get the same as those who began to work at the final hour. So the last came out first, and the first last.
What is especially interesting is the manner in which this section was hidden. The chapter division separated the marker from the beginning of the parable. So rather than seeing the text as a single block of three examples, it appeared as two blocks of two separate examples.
21. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.
22. And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!
23. And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.
24. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.
25. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called
benefactors.
26. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
27. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.
Luke 22:21-27
31. For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.
32. But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.
33. And he came to Capernaum: and being in the house he asked them, What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?
34. But they held their peace: for by the way they had disputed among themselves, who should be the greatest.
35. And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.
36. And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them,
37. Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
Mark 9:29-37
One thing I'd like to point out. Notice how quickly the disciples go from discussing the betrayer to arguing amongst themselves which of them was the greatest, especially in Luke. For the last shall be first.
And one more for our list:
23. Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
24. Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
25. When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
26. Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
27. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
28. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.
29. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
30. And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.
Luke 13:25-30
(13) Jesus said to his disciples, "Compare me to something and tell me what I resemble." Simon Peter said to him, "A just angel is what you resemble." Matthew said to him, "An intelligent philosopher is what you resemble." Thomas said to him, "Teacher, my mouth utterly will not let me say what you resemble." Jesus said, "I am not your (sing.) teacher, for you have drunk and become intoxicated from the bubbling wellspring that I have personally measured out. And he took him, withdrew, and said three sayings to him. Now, when Thomas came to his companions they asked him, "What did Jesus say to you?" Thomas said to them, "If I say to you (plur.) one of the sayings that he said to me, you will take stones and stone me, and fire will come out of the stones and burn you up."
14) Jesus said to them: If you fast, you will put a sin to your charge; and if you pray, you will be condemned; and if you give alms, you will do harm to your inner spirits. And if you go into any land and walk about in the regions, if they receive you, eat what is set before you; heal the sick among them. For what goes into your mouth will not defile you; but what comes out of your mouth, that is what will defile you.
The only problem with this is that 14 mentions four things and not three. Ok, maybe the diet part is tacked on, right? But what about the first part of saying 6?
(6) His disciples questioned him and said to him, "Do you want us to fast? And how shall we pray? Shall we give alms? And what kind of diet shall we follow?" ...
See the problem? Anyway, concerning the reverse ordering of the sayings look at the order Thomas has in sayings 6 and 14. Fasting, Prayer, Alms Giving and Diet. Now let's look at the Sermon on the Mount.
1. Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven.
2. Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
3. But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:
4. That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.
5. And when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
6. But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly.
7. But when ye pray, use not vain repetitions, as the heathen do: for they think that they shall be heard for their much speaking.
8. Be not ye therefore like unto them: for your Father knoweth what things ye have need of, before ye ask him.
9. After this manner therefore pray ye: Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed be thy name.
10. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.
11. Give us this day our daily bread.
12. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
13. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil: For thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen.
14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you:
15. But if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.
16. Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
17. But thou, when thou fastest, anoint thine head, and wash thy face;
18. That thou appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret: and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.
Matt 6:1-18
Alms giving, prayer, and fasting. Ok, fine, no diet. But three in a row, in reverse order. Coincidence? Then what about the two parables, "new cloth on an old coat" and "new wine in old wineskins", which appear in that order, one right after the other, in all three synoptic gospels (Luke 5:36-38, Mark 2:21-22, and Matthew 9:16-17)? In GoT 47, these two parables are also contiguous, but in reverse order.
My rationale for reading in reverse order is based on the saying, 'the first shall be last'. Notice the various ways it is used in the synoptic Gospels.
22. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.
23. And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!
24. And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!
25. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
26. And they were astonished out of measure, saying among themselves, Who then can be saved?
27. And Jesus looking upon them saith, With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible.
28. Then Peter began to say unto him, Lo, we have left all, and have followed thee.
29. And Jesus answered and said, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my sake, and the gospel's,
30. But he shall receive an hundredfold now in this time, houses, and brethren, and sisters, and mothers, and children, and lands, with
persecutions; and in the world to come eternal life.
31. But many that are first shall be last; and the last first.
32. And they were in the way going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before them: and they were amazed; and as they followed, they were afraid. And he took again the twelve, and began to tell them what things should happen unto him,
33. Saying, Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be delivered unto the chief priests, and unto the scribes; and they shall condemn him to death, and shall deliver him to the Gentiles.
Mark 10:22-33
Here we have the rich man who is first, but he will be last, and those last in this world will be first..
Matthew 19
22. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions.
23. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
24. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
25. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Whothen can be saved?
26. But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
27. Then answered Peter and said unto him, Behold, we have forsaken all, and followed thee; what shall we have therefore?
28. And Jesus said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
29. And every one that hath forsaken houses, or brethren, or sisters, or father, or mother, or wife, or children, or lands, for my name's sake, shall receive an hundredfold, and shall inherit everlasting life.
30. But many that are first shall be last; and the last shall be first.
1. For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard.
2. And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard.
3. And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace,
4. And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way.
5. Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise.
6. And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle?
7. They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive.
8. So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first.
9. And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny.
10. But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny.
11. And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house,
12. Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day.
13. But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny?
14. Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee.
15. Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good?
16. So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.
17. And Jesus going up to Jerusalem took the twelve disciples apart in the way, and said unto them,
18. Behold, we go up to Jerusalem; and the Son of man shall be betrayed unto the chief priests and unto the scribes, and they shall condemn him to death,
19. And shall deliver him to the Gentiles to mock, and to scourge, and to crucify him: and the third day he shall rise again.
Matthew 20
Notice at the beginning, the story of the rich man is repeated, and at the end we have the 'many are called few are chosen' bit, but bracketed in between the two 'first last, last first' markers we see an entirely different view of the issue. All workers receive the same wage for the day. Those workers who were first to start working get the same as those who began to work at the final hour. So the last came out first, and the first last.
What is especially interesting is the manner in which this section was hidden. The chapter division separated the marker from the beginning of the parable. So rather than seeing the text as a single block of three examples, it appeared as two blocks of two separate examples.
21. But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table.
22. And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!
23. And they began to inquire among themselves, which of them it was that should do this thing.
24. And there was also a strife among them, which of them should be accounted the greatest.
25. And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and they that exercise authority upon them are called
benefactors.
26. But ye shall not be so: but he that is greatest among you, let him be as the younger; and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.
27. For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at meat? but I am among you as he that serveth.
Luke 22:21-27
31. For he taught his disciples, and said unto them, The Son of man is delivered into the hands of men, and they shall kill him; and after that he is killed, he shall rise the third day.
32. But they understood not that saying, and were afraid to ask him.
33. And he came to Capernaum: and being in the house he asked them, What was it that ye disputed among yourselves by the way?
34. But they held their peace: for by the way they had disputed among themselves, who should be the greatest.
35. And he sat down, and called the twelve, and saith unto them, If any man desire to be first, the same shall be last of all, and servant of all.
36. And he took a child, and set him in the midst of them: and when he had taken him in his arms, he said unto them,
37. Whosoever shall receive one of such children in my name, receiveth me: and whosoever shall receive me, receiveth not me, but him that sent me.
Mark 9:29-37
One thing I'd like to point out. Notice how quickly the disciples go from discussing the betrayer to arguing amongst themselves which of them was the greatest, especially in Luke. For the last shall be first.
And one more for our list:
23. Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few that be saved? And he said unto them,
24. Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.
25. When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are:
26. Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets.
27. But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence ye are; depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.
28. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves thrust out.
29. And they shall come from the east, and from the west, and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down in the kingdom of God.
30. And, behold, there are last which shall be first, and there are first which shall be last.
Luke 13:25-30
Friday, May 16, 2003
Body as Record of Past
Some have observed that in order for an object to move, space and time have to exist.
This is true. Bear in mind that space and matter are opposites. Matter marks the border of space just as space marks the border of matter. Space is the absence of matter. Matter is at one end of the scale of solidity with space at the other extreme. So while matter is modeled by a single sphere, space requires a more complex arrangement. As the progression begins from single sphere, it is necessary to leave a complete examination of space for a later stage of the presentation.
Which brings us to time. Yes, in order for an object to move, space and time have to exist. But for a single sphere in an apparently limitless void only one aspect of time is required. The past. That sphere has a past.
Let us continue. A single sphere surrounded by the void, alone and at rest. But then a second sphere enters the picture. The two spheres approach one another until they make contact. Smash! Worlds in collision. Energy is released. The event is recorded in the crust of both spheres. At that moment of impact the spheres entered the present.
Consider your own body. Every scar a frozen energy event.
Your body is a record of your past, while your perceptions bring you into the present.
A tap upon your shoulder, the warmth of the sun shining on your skin. Both are special case examples of the generalized principle embodied by the two body model. The tap on your shoulder involved two bodies coming in contact resulting in an exchange of energy causing the tappee to become aware of the tapper. A photon shoots forth from the Sun flying outward at the speed of light until it makes contact with the surface of your skin causing an exchange of energy that is experienced as warmth when combined with the billions of other photons also engaged in this dual body interaction.
Duality results in awareness. The perceiver and the perceived. You experience perceptions as occurring in the present, now. Your body is a recording of the experiences it has undergone in its past.
This is true. Bear in mind that space and matter are opposites. Matter marks the border of space just as space marks the border of matter. Space is the absence of matter. Matter is at one end of the scale of solidity with space at the other extreme. So while matter is modeled by a single sphere, space requires a more complex arrangement. As the progression begins from single sphere, it is necessary to leave a complete examination of space for a later stage of the presentation.
Which brings us to time. Yes, in order for an object to move, space and time have to exist. But for a single sphere in an apparently limitless void only one aspect of time is required. The past. That sphere has a past.
Let us continue. A single sphere surrounded by the void, alone and at rest. But then a second sphere enters the picture. The two spheres approach one another until they make contact. Smash! Worlds in collision. Energy is released. The event is recorded in the crust of both spheres. At that moment of impact the spheres entered the present.
Consider your own body. Every scar a frozen energy event.
Your body is a record of your past, while your perceptions bring you into the present.
A tap upon your shoulder, the warmth of the sun shining on your skin. Both are special case examples of the generalized principle embodied by the two body model. The tap on your shoulder involved two bodies coming in contact resulting in an exchange of energy causing the tappee to become aware of the tapper. A photon shoots forth from the Sun flying outward at the speed of light until it makes contact with the surface of your skin causing an exchange of energy that is experienced as warmth when combined with the billions of other photons also engaged in this dual body interaction.
Duality results in awareness. The perceiver and the perceived. You experience perceptions as occurring in the present, now. Your body is a recording of the experiences it has undergone in its past.
Beware the Apocryphon of John
The three synoptic Gospels formed a door of sorts, through which one could pass into the inner secrets contained within the Bible. And so a fourth work was prepared by those intent on keeping those secrets secret, one which sealed this opening shut. And in response yet another text was crafted, one designed to by-pass the barrier thrown up by John by opening a backdoor. Thomas was the key text. Thomas asked the right questions, leading one back to both the synoptic Gospels and Genesis. Once again a text was written. One which set about answering the questions raised by Thomas by creating an entire alternative backstory. Classic gnosticism has nothing to do with the message secreted within the teachings of Jesus. Jesus wasn't teaching Greek metaphysics.
So the Apocryphon of John hits the scene. It is supposedly suppressed, along with Thomas and many, many others. but, strangely the church fathers wrote detailed descriptions of the so-called Apocryphon of John. Strange, if they feared the teaching so much, but of Thomas, hardly a word. The classic Joannine forms of gnosticism flourished, at least if the lurid descriptions of the fathers are to be believed. And then came massive suppression. Many texts were destroyed and the secrets contained within Thomas were forgotten by all. Yet the church has kept the memory of classic Joannine gnosticism safe in its stewardship.
Consider what might have happened had Hitler won World War Two. Let us suppose that the Nag Hammadi library was found as before, but was then acquired by the Nazis. The Apocryphon of John is studied and it is announced that the Jews worship the mad creator god. The Catholic church continues to side with Hitler and changes the cannon in response to the revelation. It drops all of the Hebrew books while accepting key texts from Joannine Gnostic cannon. The dawn of a new dark age.
When one reads Thomas through the veil of John its meaning darkens and twists.
21 ... What they resemble is children living in a plot of land that is not theirs. When the owners of the land come they will say, 'Surrender our land to us.' They, for their part, strip naked in their presence in order to give it back to them, and they give them their land. ...
In classic gnosticism removing the clothes is a metaphor for removing the flesh. You see how such a viewpoint could be misconstrued as justification of genocide.
So the Apocryphon of John hits the scene. It is supposedly suppressed, along with Thomas and many, many others. but, strangely the church fathers wrote detailed descriptions of the so-called Apocryphon of John. Strange, if they feared the teaching so much, but of Thomas, hardly a word. The classic Joannine forms of gnosticism flourished, at least if the lurid descriptions of the fathers are to be believed. And then came massive suppression. Many texts were destroyed and the secrets contained within Thomas were forgotten by all. Yet the church has kept the memory of classic Joannine gnosticism safe in its stewardship.
Consider what might have happened had Hitler won World War Two. Let us suppose that the Nag Hammadi library was found as before, but was then acquired by the Nazis. The Apocryphon of John is studied and it is announced that the Jews worship the mad creator god. The Catholic church continues to side with Hitler and changes the cannon in response to the revelation. It drops all of the Hebrew books while accepting key texts from Joannine Gnostic cannon. The dawn of a new dark age.
When one reads Thomas through the veil of John its meaning darkens and twists.
21 ... What they resemble is children living in a plot of land that is not theirs. When the owners of the land come they will say, 'Surrender our land to us.' They, for their part, strip naked in their presence in order to give it back to them, and they give them their land. ...
In classic gnosticism removing the clothes is a metaphor for removing the flesh. You see how such a viewpoint could be misconstrued as justification of genocide.
Wednesday, May 14, 2003
The Monad
Surely it is close to impossible to determine with any certainty what Pythagoras's view of number was. What we can be reasonably sure of is that Pythagoras formed figures from small spherical objects in order to determine the properties possessed by specific numbers. Another thing is clear, were we to examine numbers of spheres in the same manner as he, we are almost certain to receive the same results.
But let us suppose that the explanation of numbers which has come to us was not based on experimentation, but rather formed upon the pillar of abstraction. In such a case the essence of number is derived out of airy ideals. Which is not to say that the results are false, simply that they are not open to verification. Some aspects of the teaching are unarguably correct, odd and even numbers, for example. What is open to question is the sexing of odd numbers as male and even numbers as female. Such a treatment might appear logical on paper, but when one examines structures formed from the appropriate number of spheres its absurdity becomes all too apparent. The question is one of what took precedence, actual properties or metaphysical concepts.
Let us examine One. The Monad. The source of all numbers. Good, desirable, essential, indivisible.
And the first principle of numbers is in substance the first monad, which is a male monad, begetting as a father all other numbers.
Ok, One is the father of all numbers, it is good, desirable, essential and indivisible.
Who can argue with that? Who would dare to question such a self-evident definition of One?
Consider a single sphere suspended in a limitless void. The sphere is alone and the emptiness surrounding it is absolute. Note that the sphere cannot be said to be in motion since motion is a relative term. Without another object to move relative to motion cannot exist. So this sphere is frozen.
Imagine that this sphere is an omnivorous ball of protoplasm, the blob, if you will. It is homogenous, it is one. More importantly, it is dormant. It isn't hunting, it isn't perceiving, it simply is. If this sphere were an eye it would be blind as there is nothing to see. It would not possess awareness there is nothing for it to be aware of.
To be One is to be either asleep or a corpse.
But let us suppose that the explanation of numbers which has come to us was not based on experimentation, but rather formed upon the pillar of abstraction. In such a case the essence of number is derived out of airy ideals. Which is not to say that the results are false, simply that they are not open to verification. Some aspects of the teaching are unarguably correct, odd and even numbers, for example. What is open to question is the sexing of odd numbers as male and even numbers as female. Such a treatment might appear logical on paper, but when one examines structures formed from the appropriate number of spheres its absurdity becomes all too apparent. The question is one of what took precedence, actual properties or metaphysical concepts.
Let us examine One. The Monad. The source of all numbers. Good, desirable, essential, indivisible.
And the first principle of numbers is in substance the first monad, which is a male monad, begetting as a father all other numbers.
Ok, One is the father of all numbers, it is good, desirable, essential and indivisible.
Who can argue with that? Who would dare to question such a self-evident definition of One?
Consider a single sphere suspended in a limitless void. The sphere is alone and the emptiness surrounding it is absolute. Note that the sphere cannot be said to be in motion since motion is a relative term. Without another object to move relative to motion cannot exist. So this sphere is frozen.
Imagine that this sphere is an omnivorous ball of protoplasm, the blob, if you will. It is homogenous, it is one. More importantly, it is dormant. It isn't hunting, it isn't perceiving, it simply is. If this sphere were an eye it would be blind as there is nothing to see. It would not possess awareness there is nothing for it to be aware of.
To be One is to be either asleep or a corpse.
Sunday, May 11, 2003
Pythagoras, Beans, and Jesus
Consider the numerical system based upon the structures formed from groups of spheres. The knowledge gleaned from such a study is universally applicable. Even if it becomes lost it is always right out in the open, ready to be rediscovered. But people will not search for what they believe they already possess. We have been taught an alternative system, a stylized, idealized system devoid of any inherent significance. And we never suspect that an alternative, equally valid perspective exists.
What does it matter, why should we care? It doesn't, and we shouldn't. This is a matter of interest solely to seekers.
A universal system of knowledge. One equally valid regardless of era or empire. Suppose there existed a puzzle which could only be solved by someone in possession of such a system of knowledge. Without the proper key the puzzle is simply an enigma, but over time a variety of false or incomplete solutions are derived as various keys are applied. Until there is no enigma, nothing out of place, the mystery long since faded.
That is where we find ourselves, ahold of a key without a single idea as to exactly where to apply it. It seems that all of the mysteries were solved long, long ago. We have but one clue, one sign of a connection however subtle between the Pythagorean system and the Gospels. It would seem that any further examination would have to be based on a deeper examination of the manner in which the Pythagorean numerical system intersects Judeo-Christian cosmology.
The only problem being that we don't have much of an idea of what made up the original Pythagorean system. What we do have is an explanation of the Pythagorean numerological system as explicated by Plato which is itself highly suspect.
By examining the system and seeing what it says we might then compare that with the results of our own parallel examination based on the properties possessed by like number of spheres. Given that the Platonic version is suspected of being an invention it will be quite interesting to see precisely what it fails to say. Much the same way that out of all the various rationales behind the bean prohibition, the one suggestion never voiced was that of using the beans as counters, the one explanation in unquestionable agreement with the precepts of the teaching.
Jesus said: Recognize what is before you, and what is hidden from you will be revealed to you; for there is nothing hidden that will not be made manifest.
GoT 5
What does it matter, why should we care? It doesn't, and we shouldn't. This is a matter of interest solely to seekers.
A universal system of knowledge. One equally valid regardless of era or empire. Suppose there existed a puzzle which could only be solved by someone in possession of such a system of knowledge. Without the proper key the puzzle is simply an enigma, but over time a variety of false or incomplete solutions are derived as various keys are applied. Until there is no enigma, nothing out of place, the mystery long since faded.
That is where we find ourselves, ahold of a key without a single idea as to exactly where to apply it. It seems that all of the mysteries were solved long, long ago. We have but one clue, one sign of a connection however subtle between the Pythagorean system and the Gospels. It would seem that any further examination would have to be based on a deeper examination of the manner in which the Pythagorean numerical system intersects Judeo-Christian cosmology.
The only problem being that we don't have much of an idea of what made up the original Pythagorean system. What we do have is an explanation of the Pythagorean numerological system as explicated by Plato which is itself highly suspect.
By examining the system and seeing what it says we might then compare that with the results of our own parallel examination based on the properties possessed by like number of spheres. Given that the Platonic version is suspected of being an invention it will be quite interesting to see precisely what it fails to say. Much the same way that out of all the various rationales behind the bean prohibition, the one suggestion never voiced was that of using the beans as counters, the one explanation in unquestionable agreement with the precepts of the teaching.
Jesus said: Recognize what is before you, and what is hidden from you will be revealed to you; for there is nothing hidden that will not be made manifest.
GoT 5
Beans, Beans, the Mystical Fruit
The use of beans as a tool for the exploration of number leads to the discovery of triangular numbers. When arranging groups of spheres, the patterns they fall into are dictated by their shape. Three spheres of equal size are going to assume the shape of a triangle.
.....*.....
....* *...
Four spheres brought together in the shape of a square form an unstable structure.
.....* *.....
.....* *.....
The spheres naturally maintain a sixty degree relationship with one another. The power of attraction pulls the square into a diamond shape.
.....*.....
....* *...
.....*.....
Hence it follows that triangles are an inherent feature of numerical structure while squares are less so. The ratios found in the New Testament are built from the first three triangular numbers.
...........*..........
..........* *........
...........*.........
..........* *.......
.........* * *......
...........*..........
..........* *.........
.........* * *.......
........* * * *.....
But once again, the value of these numbers stems from the manner by which like quantities of spheres can be stacked one upon the other.
Consider the one verse within the Gospels which contains the word PSEPHIZO:
For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth (PSEPHIZO) the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?
Luke 14:28
Notice what is being built, a tower, which is perfectly in keeping with the shape of the structure formed from the spheres.
Such clues provide us with a window into an alternative system of numerical understanding, one not based on axioms, but one built around experience. Axioms are 'self-evident' beliefs, while experience supplies one with knowledge.
Consider the classic Platonic dimensional progression. A zero dimensional point moves in a straight line generating a one-dimensional object. A line moving perpendicular to itself in a plane generates a square, the basic object of the second dimension. Move a square perpendicular to itself and you form a cube, a three-dimensional object.
Where are the axioms above? Observe the various imaginary objects. The illusionary zero dimensional point, the one dimensional line, and the two dimensional square. All are abstractions, without basis in reality and yet somehow, from them one arrives at a real object, a cube.
A progression built up from physical experience begins not with an idealized concept of an imaginary point but with a single sphere.
.....*.....
....* *...
Four spheres brought together in the shape of a square form an unstable structure.
.....* *.....
.....* *.....
The spheres naturally maintain a sixty degree relationship with one another. The power of attraction pulls the square into a diamond shape.
.....*.....
....* *...
.....*.....
Hence it follows that triangles are an inherent feature of numerical structure while squares are less so. The ratios found in the New Testament are built from the first three triangular numbers.
...........*..........
..........* *........
...........*.........
..........* *.......
.........* * *......
...........*..........
..........* *.........
.........* * *.......
........* * * *.....
But once again, the value of these numbers stems from the manner by which like quantities of spheres can be stacked one upon the other.
Consider the one verse within the Gospels which contains the word PSEPHIZO:
For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth (PSEPHIZO) the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it?
Luke 14:28
Notice what is being built, a tower, which is perfectly in keeping with the shape of the structure formed from the spheres.
Such clues provide us with a window into an alternative system of numerical understanding, one not based on axioms, but one built around experience. Axioms are 'self-evident' beliefs, while experience supplies one with knowledge.
Consider the classic Platonic dimensional progression. A zero dimensional point moves in a straight line generating a one-dimensional object. A line moving perpendicular to itself in a plane generates a square, the basic object of the second dimension. Move a square perpendicular to itself and you form a cube, a three-dimensional object.
Where are the axioms above? Observe the various imaginary objects. The illusionary zero dimensional point, the one dimensional line, and the two dimensional square. All are abstractions, without basis in reality and yet somehow, from them one arrives at a real object, a cube.
A progression built up from physical experience begins not with an idealized concept of an imaginary point but with a single sphere.
Saturday, May 10, 2003
Pythagoras, Beans, and Psephizo
So let us suppose that Pythagoras prohibited the consumption of the
garbanzo bean and not the fava bean. The reason for the taboo was
that Pythagoras used the beans in his calculations. Pythagoras used
the beans in the construction of mathematical figures.
Indeed, the Greek word Psephizo means to count with pebbles, to compute, calculate, or reckon. Interestingly enough another meaning is to give one's vote by casting a pebble into an urn. Where have we seen this before? Oh yes, one of the various explanations for why Pythagoras forbade beans was that they were used for voting. Here we find it connected with using pebbles for calculating, but dried garbanzo beans have several advantages over pebbles. The beans weigh less and have a general uniformity in both size and shape.
I must point out that the current view on pebble and bean based
calculating systems holds that they were very primitive systems. Say
that you were counting cattle, for each animal one bean is put in a
bag. In the end you have as many head of cattle as there are beans in
the bag. Such a system is sadly inefficient. You still don't know how
many cattle you have, only that it is the same as the number of beans
that you have in the bag.
But there exists another option.
And he taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his
doctrine,
Hearken; Behold, there went out a sower to sow:
And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the
fowls of the air came and devoured it up.
And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and
immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth:
But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root,
it withered away.
And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it,
and it yielded no fruit.
And other fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and
increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some
an hundred.
And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mark 4:2-9
Notice the yield. Thirty, sixty, and one hundred. Why go from thirty
to sixty, a doubling, and then from sixty to one hundred?
Jesus said, "Listen, a sower came forth, took a handful, and cast.
Now, some fell upon the path, and the birds came and picked them out.
Others fell upon rock, and they did not take root in the soil, and
did not send up ears. And others fell upon the thorns, and they
choked the seed; and the grubs devoured them. And others fell upon
good soil, and it sent up good crops and yielded sixty per measure
and a hundred and twenty per measure."
GoT #9
The above parallel saying from the Gospel of Thomas gives what I
consider to be a logical doubling, from sixty (60) to one hundred and
twenty (120). But it only serves to underscore the mystery behind the
actual ratios used in Mark and Matthew.
Exactly which ratios are we looking at? 30, 60, and 100. The greatest
common denominator being 10, reducing these numbers to 3, 6, and 10.
Which gives us what exactly?
Suppose you were using garbanzo beans for psephizo, for counting.
Counting sheep perhaps. For the first ten you form a triangle of ten
beans.
----.----
---. .---
--. . .-- 10
-. . . .-
Then, the next six beans, representing the next six sheep, form the
second layer.
----.----
---. .--- 6
--. . .--
And upon those are placed three more beans.
----.----
---. .--- 3
Until at last, the final bean, the sower as it were, caps the
structure.
----.---- 1
Giving us a grand total of twenty beans per tetrahedron.
Such a method of counting left one with easy to calculate units, and
it is clear from the usage in the Gospel that these ratios were known
to the NT authors.
garbanzo bean and not the fava bean. The reason for the taboo was
that Pythagoras used the beans in his calculations. Pythagoras used
the beans in the construction of mathematical figures.
Indeed, the Greek word Psephizo means to count with pebbles, to compute, calculate, or reckon. Interestingly enough another meaning is to give one's vote by casting a pebble into an urn. Where have we seen this before? Oh yes, one of the various explanations for why Pythagoras forbade beans was that they were used for voting. Here we find it connected with using pebbles for calculating, but dried garbanzo beans have several advantages over pebbles. The beans weigh less and have a general uniformity in both size and shape.
I must point out that the current view on pebble and bean based
calculating systems holds that they were very primitive systems. Say
that you were counting cattle, for each animal one bean is put in a
bag. In the end you have as many head of cattle as there are beans in
the bag. Such a system is sadly inefficient. You still don't know how
many cattle you have, only that it is the same as the number of beans
that you have in the bag.
But there exists another option.
And he taught them many things by parables, and said unto them in his
doctrine,
Hearken; Behold, there went out a sower to sow:
And it came to pass, as he sowed, some fell by the way side, and the
fowls of the air came and devoured it up.
And some fell on stony ground, where it had not much earth; and
immediately it sprang up, because it had no depth of earth:
But when the sun was up, it was scorched; and because it had no root,
it withered away.
And some fell among thorns, and the thorns grew up, and choked it,
and it yielded no fruit.
And other fell on good ground, and did yield fruit that sprang up and
increased; and brought forth, some thirty, and some sixty, and some
an hundred.
And he said unto them, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.
Mark 4:2-9
Notice the yield. Thirty, sixty, and one hundred. Why go from thirty
to sixty, a doubling, and then from sixty to one hundred?
Jesus said, "Listen, a sower came forth, took a handful, and cast.
Now, some fell upon the path, and the birds came and picked them out.
Others fell upon rock, and they did not take root in the soil, and
did not send up ears. And others fell upon the thorns, and they
choked the seed; and the grubs devoured them. And others fell upon
good soil, and it sent up good crops and yielded sixty per measure
and a hundred and twenty per measure."
GoT #9
The above parallel saying from the Gospel of Thomas gives what I
consider to be a logical doubling, from sixty (60) to one hundred and
twenty (120). But it only serves to underscore the mystery behind the
actual ratios used in Mark and Matthew.
Exactly which ratios are we looking at? 30, 60, and 100. The greatest
common denominator being 10, reducing these numbers to 3, 6, and 10.
Which gives us what exactly?
Suppose you were using garbanzo beans for psephizo, for counting.
Counting sheep perhaps. For the first ten you form a triangle of ten
beans.
----.----
---. .---
--. . .-- 10
-. . . .-
Then, the next six beans, representing the next six sheep, form the
second layer.
----.----
---. .--- 6
--. . .--
And upon those are placed three more beans.
----.----
---. .--- 3
Until at last, the final bean, the sower as it were, caps the
structure.
----.---- 1
Giving us a grand total of twenty beans per tetrahedron.
Such a method of counting left one with easy to calculate units, and
it is clear from the usage in the Gospel that these ratios were known
to the NT authors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)