Dialogue 16 ~ Summary

This is a condensed version of what I had written about in dialogue 16, as I am going to be referring to this often and it will be of assistance to me. 

~~~~

“It is interesting to think about a deity or God (or the oneness as Pythagoras was referring to) as having a triple aspect … a sentient being which has of yet no form, but it does have order within itself through contemplation of itself; it is whole and complete in itself. In order to have experience of itself (to be conscious 'of something'), it has to allow for another; this other is not equal to its source (the one) in that it is other and it has form (it is an idea or an imagining of the one) … it is not that there are two in reality … all thought has emerged from the one and is in relation to the one; even if thought migrates through any number of forms or interpretations of itself, it cannot in reality ever be separate from its source. 

Parmenides was correct in saying that there has been misapprehension of becoming. A form cannot create itself anew or ‘out of nothing’; it can choose to accept or reject in relation to what it already is; its form will change as with its thought of itself. This changing of form is not random or ‘magic’; all change takes place within context and according to natural scales or resonant frequencies (harmonics) as are relating to that form; an appearance of ‘becoming’ is about ratio and is closer to a piece of music that is played from birth to death and beyond. 

It is the trine characteristic or aspect of the source of all that is, which reveals the truth of what is, as well as allows for all differentiations and representations of what is – the one and the many.

If a human conceives of the self as akin to a seed that is growing into its full potential within the sentient being that is the Cosmos … thought takes place within a context of right relationship or ratio (harmonics) and form (a person’s worldview) shifts accordingly. It can even be said that this relationship has precedence in any concept of what constitutes and governs moral or ethical behaviour.

To ‘lose one’s truth’ is effectively an experience of the conscious self (thought) being ‘knocked out of orbit’ in relation to one’s own being … in relationship with ‘all that is’. Unconscious conflict (dissonance) arises … its nature is such that a person is unable to be in right relationship with others (given as the one and the many are congruent) and to behave accordingly. Such a person can view life and their relationships with others through a lens of personal need or usefulness; experiences are interpreted through an individual value system, rather than if they had been perceived in right relationship with truth.”