[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Main Index][Thread Index]

# Re: TMO and MPE

#### Message 01436 of 3835

- To: BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com
- Subject: Re: TMO and MPE
- From: "forestofsymbols" <forestofsymbols@...>
- Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2003 03:22:40 -0000
- In-reply-to: <006d01c373f1$2f432cf0$c6a17fd8@ownerbqacdlzy6>
- User-agent: eGroups-EW/0.82

    Rawn, Chuck, and everyone,

    Thanks again for the posts. Part of me is probably writing these
    questions just so I can read the responses. Perhaps at this time, it
    would be wiser for me to discontinue this line of inquiry until I
    have progressed further, but who always does the wise thing?

    I suppose when I refer to the astral body, I'm not thinking of it
    as existing on a matrix of three dimensional space. I'm thinking of
    it like the fourth spatial dimension (to be distinguished from the
    fourth dimension of "time".)

    Now we are probably all familiar with the standard dimensional
    models. On the first dimension, we have a point. It is entirely self-
    referential, having no height, width, or depth. On the second
    dimension, we add two axis, the "x" and "y", or "north-south"
    and "east-west". Here is the realm of flat objects, squares, circles,
    and so on. The third dimension adds a new direction, z, depth. Now we
    can move up and down, and plot three-dimensional objects: spheres,
    cubes and so on.

    The fourth dimension, then, would add an additional axis that
    would be difficult for us to see. Some call it "ana" and "kata", or
    perhaps axis "a". The difference between the fourth and third
    dimension would be as drastic as the difference between the second
    and third. Edwin Abbott wrote a book called "Flatland" illustrating
    how two dimensional beings come to discover the miraculous nature of
    the third dimension. The Flatlander, living in two dimensions, only
    sees in two dimensions, north-south and east-west. He doesn't see or
    experience the third dimension, and much magic is performed simply by
    using the up-down axis which to the Flatlander is invisible and
    inconceivable.

    By analogy, one could think how a being who can exist in the fourth
    dimension might appear to work miracles on the third dimension. A few
    examples help to illustrate this (if anyone finds these ideas
    interesting, a fun read is "The Fourth Dimension" by Rudy Rucker).

    Teleportation. A Flatlander who lives in two dimensional space
    might be quite surprised to see us vanish before his eyes and appear
    somewhere else altogether, instantanesly. The trick is simply that a
    three dimensional being "vanishes" up into the third dimension,
    and "reappears" simply by coming down.

    Omniscient vision. Flatland would be visible, inside and outside,
    to the three-dimensional being who simply rises up and looks down
    over the flat landscape. She would be able to see even inside bodies
    which are sealed in two-dimensions, but open to the view by the
    third.

    In the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, many people
    turned to the fourth dimension to explain mystical powers in a
    similar manner.

    Drawing this back to Bardon and the Kabbalah, Bardon speaks often
    in the language of his time (speaking of electrical and magnetic
    charges and fluids, for example, is very much representative of this
    period). Likewise, the time in which he was alive saw an interest in
    the fourth spatial dimension (Abbott's book came out in the 1880's;
    some say cubism and Picasso's paintings are an attempt to represent
    a "fourth dimensional view of things", etc.) as well as a rising
    interest in eastern mysticism and occultism as eastern ideas started
    to mingle in the west (the birth of theosophy; Vivikenanda
    introducing the West to Hindi yoga; Gurdjieff and Ouspensky are
    products of this time period). And Bardon himself states that the
    astral plane is "often depicted as the fourth dimension." Of course,
    the fourth dimension of the mystics has other properties as well; it
    is more fluid and etheric than the third dimension, as well as being
    the site of the "blueprint" of physical objects.

    To locate the subtle body in three dimensional space would be
    clearly wrong, just as saying that a square contains a cube. But it
    would also be wrong to say that there is no intersection between
    dimensions: a cube, after all, is made up of an infinite number of
    squares stacked on one another. So it makes sense for some one to
    say "the heart chakra is located in the heart". It may not be the
    heart, or contained by the physical space of the heart, but the
    physical location of the heart might be the place where the astral
    and the physical intersect.

    One could make the bold leap that the "ana-kata" axis might be the
    same as the "a depth of good, a depth of evil" of the Sefer Yetzirah
    1:5. Good, in Judaism and Christianity, means "like God." Evil would
    be "unlike God" (God in the more common sense, not in the ALL in All
    sense). To move in the fourth dimension would be to move in
    the "direction" of the subtle, the spiritual, the Kether or in the
    direction of the gross, the physical, Malkhut. This is not to say
    that Malkhut is morally evil, it is simply further down the spiritual
    ladder.

    In this case, the solar plexus indeed contains the beginning of
    the form. The form, as it were, existing in the
    astral/fourth/spiritual dimension, requiring us to move outside of
    three dimensional time and space and onto axis "a".

    I'm not saying this is the right view, or even a good view, but
    this is where I'm coming from. Sorry for all the words, but they do
    tend to multiply.

    mj

    --- In BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com, "Rawn Clark" <rawnclark@n...>
    wrote:
    > Dear 'mj',
    >
    > >> So is Greer being reckless by suggesting Tifereth be located in
    the
    > area of the heart, and by encouraging beginners to cultivate this
    area?
    > <<
    >
    > I don't have "Circles of Power" so I don't know what his actual
    > instructions are.
    >
    > >> One of my reasons for thinking Tifereth might be in the area of
    > the heart was in mapping directly the tree of life onto the chakra
    > system, so that the Muladhara chakra relates to Malkhut, Swadisthana
    > to Yesod, and so on. Clearly, this is not entirely accurate and
    needs
    > to be rethought. <<
    >
    > As Chuck pointed out, there's no profit to be had from trying to
    make
    > this direct correlation. Lots of folks have tried but in my
    opinion,
    > this is pointless and leads to a mis-understanding of the Tree of
    Life.
    >
    > >> I did note that Bardon places the "depth point" of the person in
    the
    > solar plexus. <<
    >
    > This is one of those points in IIH where if you have not done
    everything
    > that Bardon has instructed up to that point in the Work, you will
    assume
    > incorrectly. Some call this a "blind".
    >
    > At the beginning of Step Five, Bardon wrote an interesting little
    essay
    > about Archimedes and the depth point. Near the end of which he
    stated:
    > "The scholar is advised to meditate very intensively about this
    problem,
    > and he will be able to open up profundities he never dreamed of and
    a
    > high intuition will be his reward." *Assuming* that the scholar
    > actually had pursued this intensive meditation about the depth
    point, he
    > then proceeded to introduce "Space Magic" and the transference of
    the
    > scholar's consciousness into the depth point of external objects.
    If
    > the scholar did not already figure out that the depth point is
    *not* a
    > point in physical space, then these exercises with external objects
    will
    > either teach them this or become incredibly frustrating.
    >
    > Let's look at the meditation that Bardon described. It's based upon
    > transferring your consciousness to the exact center point of a form.
    > When you do that you'll find that the center of any form is
    *infinitely
    > small*. In other words, is has no spatial value, no size
    whatsoever.
    > Furthermore, within that center point, one finds the *infinitely
    > infinite*.
    >
    > Simply transferring your consciousness into the physical center of
    an
    > object has very little value as an exercise and has no relevance to
    the
    > depth point. Furthermore, the solar plexus is not the exact
    physical
    > center of most human bodies. Nor is it in any way the "beginning
    of the
    > form", as Bardon described the depth point.
    >
    > Ultimately, the scholar pursuing these exercises will figure these
    > things out and realize that Bardon's words here cannot be taken
    > literally.
    >
    > My best to you,
    > :) Rawn Clark
    > 05 Sept 2003
    > rawnclark@n...
    > rawn@a...
    > http://www.ABardonCompanion.com
    > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BardonPraxis
    > http://E.webring.com/hub?ring=arionthebardonwe

- References:
  - Re: Re: TMO and MPE
    - From: "Rawn Clark" <rawnclark@...>

- Prev by Date: Re: heart centre / solar plexus / subconscious
- Next by Date: ET
- Previous by thread: Re: Re: TMO and MPE
- Next by thread: ET
- Indexes:
  - Main
  - Thread

Main Index | Thread Index