— PARIS IS BURNING: OBSCURANTISM, OBSTINANCE, OBMUTESCENCE AND
OBSTRUCTIONISM AS PRINCIPLE OF #312 - *CONTRADICTION* {#364 x 4 + #371 =
#1827 - #FIVE YEARS OF SILENCE} BEING THE MISNOMERED FOUNDATIONAL BASIS TO
ROMAN CATHOLIC BLASPHEMOUS PYTHAGOREAN PIETY
(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 5 December, 2018
YOUTUBE: “The Sound Of Silence (Disturbed)”
THAT OBSCURANTISM, OBSTINANCE, OBMUTESCENCE AND OBSTRUCTIONISM AS PRINCIPLE
OF #312 - *CONTRADICTION* {#364 x 4 + #371 = #1827 - ROMAN CATHOLIC
LITURGICAL BLASPHEMY} BEING MISNOMERED PIETY {#OPINION: #5 + #6 = #11 as
Collegium of Pontiffs from 510 BCE AS PONTIFICATED DEIFIED IGNORANCE AND
NARCISSISM: #Aleph (1 - #1), #He (5 - #5) = #6 - ROYAL ARCH FREEMASONS}
“The acusmata indicate that the Pythagorean way of life embodied a strict
regimen not just regarding religious ritual and diet but also in almost
every aspect of life. Some of the restrictions appear to be largely
arbitrary taboos, e.g., “one must put the right shoe on first” or “ONE MUST
NOT TRAVEL THE PUBLIC ROADS” (Iamblichus, VP 83, probably from Aristotle).
48 8 64
56 40 24
16 72 32 = #120 / #360 {#EIGHT *AS* *EGYPTIAN* *ANKH* / *ROMAN* *IMPERIAL*
*EMPIRE* *GOVERNANCE* *PROTOTYPE*}
[#8 , #16, #24, #32, #40 <— *HITLER'S* *TABLE* *TALK* IDEA @120 ON 24TH
JANUARY 1942 (A FUTURE REFORMER OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM), #48, #56, #64, #72]
#56 (3) - PHOHEL (Principalities-Angels) = #224 {*MENS* *REA*: #334 as
[#40, #4, #200, #20, #10, #20, #40] = derek (H1870): {#1 as #224 % #41 =
#19} 1) way, road, distance, journey, manner; 1a) road, way, path; 1b)
journey; 1c) direction; 1d) manner, habit, way; 1e) of course of life
(figurative); 1f) of moral character (figurative);
On the other hand, some aspects of the Pythagorean life involved a moral
discipline that was greatly admired, even by outsiders. Pythagorean silence
is an important example. Isocrates reports that even in the fourth century
people “marvel more at the silence of those who profess to be his pupils
than at those who have the greatest reputation for speaking” (Busiris 28).
THE ABILITY TO REMAIN SILENT WAS SEEN AS IMPORTANT TRAINING IN
SELF-CONTROL, AND THE LATER TRADITION REPORTS THAT THOSE WHO WANTED TO
BECOME PYTHAGOREANS HAD TO OBSERVE A FIVE-YEAR SILENCE (Iamblichus, VP
72).” [<https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pythagoras/>]
Nous: #6
Time:
Date:
Torah:
Dao: Female Superiority, Completion of Form
Tetra: #66 - Departure
I-Ching: H25 - No Errancy, Without Embroiling, Innocence, Pestilence
Prototype: *HOMOIOS* {#506 / #379} / HETEROS {#492 / #372} / TORAH {#488 /
#370}
<http://www.grapple369.com?zen:7,row:1,col:2,nous:6&idea:{m,380}&idea:{f,235}&idea:{m,506}&idea:{f,379}&PROTOTYPE:HOMOIOS>
***@zen: 7, row: 1, col: 2, nous: 6 [Date: (none), Time: (none),
Super: #506 / #73 - Employing Deeming, Daring to Act; I-Ching: H46 -
Climbing, Moving/Pushing Upward, Ascending; Tetra: 7 - Ascent, Ego: #379 /
#6 - Female Superiority, Completion of Form; I-Ching: H25 - No Errancy,
Without Embroiling, Innocence, Pestilence; Tetra: 66 - Departure]
@215 - I AM NEITHER A LIAR NOR A DOER OF MISCHIEF {%34}
@235 = [#20, #7, #200, #8] = zarach (H2224): {UMBRA: #1 as #215 % #41 =
#10} 1) to rise, come forth, break out, arise, rise up, shine; 1a) (Qal);
1a1) to rise; 1a2) to come out, appear;
It also provides understanding of the underlying methodology as the
precedent IDEA @215 assigned to Adolf Hitler’s Table Talk depiction as the
shooting of one hundred and thirty bible students whom were indicted by the
highest military court of the Wehrmacht charged with demoralization of the
armed forces.
#325 as [#5, #50, #70, #200] = heis (G1520): {#12 as #215 % #41 = #10} 1)
*ONE*
If one has no conception of NOUMENON what occurs within #41 - ONTIC
necessity terms is a chaotic / indiscriminate / promiscuous determination
of media which is habitually applied to #CENTRE of being that has a
consequence upon VOLUNTARY FREE WILL:
#902 - RULE OF LAW (EGALITÉ {9 JULY 1900}: #22 x #41 as *ONTIC* necessity
comprising a subset of 21 consonants with #VOWELS of Semitic origins),
#492 - VOLUNTARY FREE WILL (LIBERTÉ {17 SEPTEMBER 1900}: #12 X #41), and
#391 - HOMOGENIOUS PRINCIPLES (FRATERNITÉ {29 OCTOBER 1900}) OF CIVIL
SOCIETY
OR
#492 - VOLUNTARY FREEWILL {#41 x #12 - CIRCULARITY OF BEING} MINUS
#391 -
HOMOIOS FRATERNITY EQUALS
#101 - #KORPPIONOIKEUS AS ANY VEXATION MEANING:
'THE #260 - RAVEN / RAPE IS RIGHT' AS SCHEMA AND COVENANT OF DEATH
MANDALAY_SWAY@{
@1: Sup: 4 (#4); Ego: 4 (#4),
@2: Sup: 14 (#18); Ego: 10 (#14),
@3: Sup: 15 (#33); Ego: 1 (#15),
@4: Sup: 24 (#57); Ego: 9 (#24),
@5: Sup: 32 (#89); Ego: 8 (#32),
@6: Sup: 52 (#141); Ego: 20 (#52),
@7: Sup: 60 (#201); Ego: 8 (#60),
@8: Sup: 17 (#218 - *OR* *DEATH* *ITS* *SWAY*); Ego: 38 (#98),
Male: #218; Feme: #98
} // #260 <— SYNTHETICAL JUDGMENTS: SYNTHETIC A POSTERIORI HYPOTHESIS OF AN
AGREEMENT OF CONCLUSION
#260 as [#4, #10, #1, #9, #8, #20, #8, #200] = diatheke (G1242): {#31 as
#60 % #41 = #19} 1) a disposition, arrangement, of any sort, which one
wishes to be valid, the last disposition which one makes of his earthly
possessions after his death, a testament or will; 2) *A* *COMPACT*, *A*
*COVENANT*, *A* *TESTAMENT*; 2a) *GOD'S* *COVENANT* *WITH* *NOAH*, etc.;
— LEST WE FORGET ODE —
"{@1} THEY SHALL GROW NOT OLD, {@2} AS WE THAT ARE LEFT GROW OLD;
{@3} AGE SHALL NOT WEARY THEM, {@4} NOR THE YEARS CONDEMN.
{@5 - #231 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL} AT THE GOING DOWN OF THE SUN AND IN THE
MORNING
{@6} WE WILL REMEMBER THEM."
@5: Sup: 74 (#231 - *AT* *THE* *GOING* *DOWN* *OF* *THE* *SUN* *AND* *IN*
*THE* *MORNING*); Ego: 12 (#206) <— ANALYTICAL JUDGMENTS: ANALYTIC A
POSTERIORI BY DIALECTIC EXTRUSION AS IDEA EXISTENCE OF JUXTAPOSITION
CONTROL ASSOCIATED WITH THE ODE
KANT within his antimony discourse proves the antithesis, that time has no
beginning, by showing that if time had a beginning, then there must have
been "empty time" out of which time arose. This is incoherent (for Kant)
for the following reason: Since, necessarily, no time elapses in this #451
- *PRE-TEMPORAL* *VOID*, then there could be no alteration, and therefore
nothing (including time) would ever come to be: so the antithesis is
proven. Reason makes equal claim to each proof, since they are both
correct, so the question of the limits of time must be regarded as
meaningless.
#451 - *ABYSS* / *PRE-TEMPORAL* *VOID* + #41 x n - ONTIC FACULTY = #492 -
VOLUNTARY FREE WILL {ie. 12 x #41 as CIRCULARITY of BEING} and through
inclusion of #41 x n - ONTIC FACULTY as a cognitive conceptualisation then
allows for stages of development.
THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE GENESIS BIBLICAL TEXT RELATES
TO AN #451 - COSMOGONIC PREMISE FOR NATURE AND #41 - ONTIC NECESSITY BASIS
OF HOMOIOTIC #492 - VOLUNTARY FREE WILL, TRINOMIAL MORALITY AND
JURISPRUDENCE:
#8 - Transforming Nature: {DOUBLE: #4 - Nature Amended in its Nature {#7 -
Engendering Nature}}
#11 x #41 = #451 - COSMOGONY {#KAF {#20} / #M {#40}} as TERRA-FORMING is
the conveyance of discovery as natural secrets which influences the spread
of Light and Industry by Government and Non-Government Organisations as
conducive for sustainable #9 - Autonomous Nature.
KANT'S PROLEGOMENA SECOND ANALOGY - PRINCIPLE OF TIME-SUCCESSION ACCORDING
TO THE LAW OF CAUSALITY [IDEA: B232]
ALL ALTERATIONS TAKE PLACE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW OF THE CONNECTION OF
CAUSE AND EFFECT.
PROOF: I perceive that *APPEARANCES* *SUCCEED* *ONE* *ANOTHER*, *THAT*
*IS*, *THAT* [IDEA: @B233] *ONE* *STATE* *OF* *A* *THING* *EXISTS* *AT*
*ONE* *TIME*, *THE* *OPPOSITE* *OF* *WHICH* *EXISTED* *IN* *THE* *PREVIOUS*
*STATE*. *I* *AM* *THEREFORE* *ACTUALLY* *CONNECTING* *TWO* *PERCEPTIONS*
*IN* *TIME*. Now connection is no act of mere sense and intuition, but is
here the product of a *SYNTHETIC* *FACULTY* *OF* *THE* *IMAGINATION* *THAT*
*DETERMINES* *THE* *INNER* *SENSE* *WITH* *RESPECT* *TO* *RELATION* *IN*
*TIME*. The imagination can however conjoin the aforementioned two states
in two different ways, so that either one or the other would precede in
time; for time cannot be perceived in itself and what precedes and what
follows in objects determined, as it were empirically, in relation to it.
*I* *AM* *THEREFORE* *CONSCIOUS* *ONLY* *THAT* *MY* *IMAGINATION* *PLACES*
*ONE* *STATE* *BEFORE*, *THE* *OTHER* *AFTER*, not that in the object
[IDEA: @B234] one precedes the other; or, in other words, the objective
relation of the appearances that succeed one another remains undetermined
through mere perception. In order then for this relation to be cognized as
determined, the relation between the two states must be so thought that it
is thereby determined with necessity which of them must be placed before,
which after, and not the reverse. However, the concept that carries with it
a necessity of synthetic unity can only be a pure concept of the
understanding, which does not lie in perception – and here it is the
concept of the relation of cause and effect, in which the former determines
the latter in time as consequence, and not merely as something that could
precede it in the imagination (or not be perceived at all). It is, then,
only because we subject the succession of appearances, hence all
alterations, to the law of causality that experience itself – i.e.,
empirical cognition of the appearances – is possible; hence the appearances
themselves as objects of experience are possible only in accordance with
this very law.
The apprehension of the manifold of appearances is always successive.
[IDEA: @A189] The representations of the parts succeed one another. Whether
they also succeed one another in the object is a further point for
reflection, which is not included in the first point. Now one can in fact
call everything, and even every representation insofar as one is conscious
of it, an object; but it is a matter for deeper investigation what this
word is to signify regarding [IDEA: @B235] appearances, not insofar as they
(as representations) are objects, but only in so far as they designate an
object. In as much as they, merely as representations, [IDEA: @A190] are
at the same time objects of consciousness, they are not at all to be
distinguished from apprehension, i.e., reception into the synthesis of the
imagination, and one must then say: that the manifold of appearances is
always generated successively in the mind. Were appearances things in
themselves, then no human being would be able to conclude from the
succession of representations how the manifold of those appearances might
be conjoined in the object. For in the end we have to do only with our own
representations; how things in themselves may be (without regard to
representations through which they affect us) is completely beyond our
sphere of cognition. Now although the appearances are not things in
themselves, and nevertheless are the only thing that can be given to us for
cognition, I still have to show what in the appearances themselves may suit
the manifold for a conjoining in time, notwithstanding that its
representation in apprehension is always successive. Thus, for example, the
apprehension of the manifold in the appearances of a house that stands
before me is successive. Now the question is: whether the manifold of this
house itself also is successive in itself, which of course no one will
grant. However, as soon as I raise my concept of an object up to
transcendental significance, the house is now indeed no thing in itself,
but [IDEA: @B236] only an appearance, i.e., a representation, whose
transcendental object is [IDEA: @A191] unknown; what, then, shall I
understand by the question: (ie. *EH*... *WHICH* *POPULARITY* *DID* *YOU*
*SAY*..?} how might the manifold be conjoined in the appearance itself
(*WHICH* *IS* *STILL* *NOTHING* *IN* *ITSELF*)? That which lies in the
successive apprehension is here viewed as representation, while the
appearance that is given to me, notwithstanding that it is nothing more
than a sum of such representations, is viewed as their object – with which
my concept, which I extract from the representations of apprehension, has
to agree. Since truth is the agreement of cognition with object, it can
easily be seen that here one can ask only about the formal conditions of
empirical truth, and that appearance, in counter-relation with the
representations of apprehension, can only be represented as their object
that is distinct from them if it falls under a rule that distinguishes it
from every other apprehension and makes one way of conjoining the manifold
necessary. That in the appearance which contains the condition of this
necessary rule of apprehension is the object.
Let us now proceed to our problem. That something happens – i.e., that
something, or some state, comes to be that wasn’t there before – [IDEA:
@B237 - *USE* *OF* *FORCEFUL* *WILL*] cannot be perceived empirically
unless preceded by an appearance that [IDEA: @A192] does not contain this
state in itself; for a reality following upon an empty time, hence, a
coming to be that no state of things precedes, can be apprehended just as
little as empty time itself. Every apprehension of an event is therefore a
perception that follows upon another perception. Since this is, though, the
case with every synthesis of apprehension, as I have shown above in the
appearance of a house, it does not in this way yet distinguish itself from
the others. But I also note: that if, in an appearance containing a
happening, I call the preceding state of perception A {ie. *POPALARITY*
*AS* *PEDIGREE* *OF* *A* *PASHTUN* *KING*} and the succeeding one B {ie.
*MACRON’S* *POPULARITY*}, then B can only follow A in the apprehension,
while the perception A cannot follow but only precede B. I see for example
a ship drifting downstream. My perception of its location further down
succeeds the perception of its location further up the course of the river,
and it is impossible that in the apprehension of this appearance the ship
should first be perceived further downstream but afterwards further
upstream. Here, then, the order in the succession of perceptions in the
apprehension is determined, and the apprehension is bound by that order. In
the previous example of a house, in the apprehension my perceptions could
start at the [IDEA: @B238] top of the house and end with the ground, or
else start from below and end above, just as they could apprehend the
manifold of empirical intuition from the right or the left. In the series
of these perceptions there [IDEA: @A193] was, then, no determined order
making it necessary when in the apprehension I had to begin in order to
conjoin the manifold empirically. This rule is, however, always to be met
with in the perception of something that happens, and it makes the order of
the perceptions succeeding one another (in the apprehension of this
appearance) necessary.
In our case, therefore, I will have to derive the subjective sequence of
the apprehension from the objective sequence of the appearances, because
otherwise the former is completely undetermined and does not distinguish
any one appearance from the rest. By itself the former proves nothing about
the connection of the manifold in the object, because it is completely
arbitrary. This connection will therefore consist in the order of the
manifold of the appearance according to which the apprehension of the one
(what happens) follows upon that of the other (which precedes) according to
a rule. Only in this way can I gain the right to say of the appearance
itself, and not merely of my apprehension: that in it a sequence is to be
found – which is as much as to say that I cannot institute the apprehension
otherwise than exactly in this sequence. [CAMBRIDGE TEXTS IN THE HISTORY OF
PHILOSOPHY, Kant's Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics, IDEAS @B232 TO
@B238 / @A189 TO @A193]
The various PDF resources being essays as work in progress notations for
the prospect of producing a viable syncretism with Immanuel Kant's Ground
Work for the Metaphysics of Morals are now available within the directory:
<http://www.grapple369.com/Groundwork/>
Initial Post: 4 December 2018
SUBJECT WAS: IF WE REGULATED OUR LIFE WITH A SOBER MIND
Post by unknown"If we regulated our life with a sober mind and directed all of our
interest toward spiritual things, and if we ate as much as we needed to
satisfy our necessary needs and offered our entire lives to good works, we
would not have any need of the help rendered by the fast.
But because human nature is indifferent and gives itself over mostly to
comforts and gratifications, for this reason the philanthropic Lord, like a
loving and caring father, devised the therapy of the fast for us, so that
our gratifications would be completely stopped and that our worldly cares
be transferred to spiritual works.
So, if there are some who have gathered here and who are hindered by
somatic ailments and cannot remain without food, I advise them to nullify
the somatic ailment and not to deprive themselves from this spiritual
teaching, but to care for it even more."
Saint John Chrysostom, On Fasting.
"For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in
your spirit, which are God's." 1 Corinthians 6:20
Draw nigh unto God and He will draw nigh unto you.
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"
SEE ALSO AS RELATIONSHIP: *INVALIDATING* {Perennial philosophy (HETEROS
{#390 - ROBBERS} v’s HOMOIOS {#391 - STEWARDS OF GOD’S HOUSE} THEORY OF
NUMBER) as universal of right and wrong...} *THE* *ORTHODOX* *AND* *ROMAN*
*CATHOLIC* *CHURCH'S* *CLAIM* {#390 as 1, #100, #80, #1, #3, #5, #200 as
harpax (G727): {#11 as #242} 1) rapacious, ravenous; 2) a extortioner, a
robber} *TO* *JUBILEE2000* *AS* *BEING* *DELUSIONAL* *AND* *FRAUDULENT*
Private “Saint Andrews” Street on the edge of the Central Business District
dated 16th May, 2000 - This report is prepared in response to a TP00/55 as
a Notice of an Application for Planning Permit
<http://www.grapple369.com/jubilee2000.html>
SEE ALSO: HYPOSTASIS as DAO OF NATURE (Chinese: ZIRAN) / COURSE (Greek:
TROCHOS) OF NATURE (Greek: GENESIS) [James 3:6]
Chinese HAN Dynasty (206 BCE - 220CE) Hexagon Trigrams to Tetragram
assignments proposed by Yang Hsiung (53BCE - 18CE) which by 4BCE
(translation published within English as first European language in 1993),
first appeared in draft form as a meta-thesis titled T'AI HSUAN CHING {ie.
Canon of Supreme Mystery} on Natural Divination associated with the theory
of number, annual seasonal chronology and astrology reliant upon the seven
visible planets as cosmological mother image and the zodiac.
It shows the ZIRAN as the DAO of NATURE / COURSE-trochos OF NATURE-genesis
[James 3:6] as HYPOSTATIS comprising #81 trinomial tetragrammaton x 4.5 day
= #364.5 day / year as HOMOIOS THEORY OF NUMBER which is an amalgam of the
64 hexagrams as binomial trigrams / 81 as trinomial tetragrammaton rather
than its encapsulated contrived use as the microcosm to redefine the
macrocosm as the quintessence of the Pythagorean [Babylonian] as binomial
canon of transposition as HETEROS THEORY OF NUMBER.
<http://www.grapple369.com/nature.html>
The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities No. 43 of Act 2006 defines
a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING” and the question is, if it is permissible to
extend this definition to be a "PERSON MEANS A HUMAN BEING AS A CONSCIOUS
REALITY OF HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] WHO IS INSTANTIATED WITHIN THE TEMPORAL
REALITY AS THEN THE CAUSE FOR REASONING AND RATIONALITY."
That my mathematical theoretical noumenon defines the meta-descriptor
prototypes which are prerequisite to the BEING of HOMO [iOS] SAPIEN [T] as
EXISTENCE / *OUSIA*.
<http://www.grapple369.com/Grapple.zip> (Download resources)
After all the ENNEAD of THOTH and not the Roman Catholic Eucharist,
expresses an Anthropic Cosmological Principle which appears within its
geometric conception as being equivalent to the Pythagorean
TETRAD/TETRACTYS