Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
— (DRAFT) THE ADVENTURES OF WACK JOB
0 views
Skip to first unread message
dolf
Dec 23, 2018, 3:47:21 PM12/23/18
to
-- THE ADVENTURES OF WACK JOB
(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 24 December, 2018
— PASSING IN THE NIGHT —
“WHETHER EITHER
DOWN Y’R SHUTE
OR BEG NETHER
UP YOUR HOOT.
NOR DESPERATE.
FOR ANY ROOT.
TO CONTEMPLATE
AWFUL CAHOOT.” {@321 - *PRO* *DOMO*}
CAUSE FOR PAUSE@{
@1: Sup: 14 (#14); Ego: 73 (#73),
@2: Sup: 19 (#33); Ego: 80 (#153),
@3: Sup: 26 (#59); Ego: 73 (#226),
@4: Sup: 49 (#108); Ego: 36 (#262),
@5: Sup: 58 (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11}); Ego: 66 (#328),
@6: Sup: 37 (#203); Ego: 32 (#360),
@7: Sup: 69 (#272); Ego: 21 (#381),
@8: Sup: 26 (#298); Ego: 33 (#414),
@9: Sup: 23 (#321); Ego: 35 (#449),
Male: #321; Feme: #449
}
IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) SECTION #18 AS IDEA: @298: We must
therefore first of all note: that, *ALTHOUGH* *ALL* *JUDGMENTS* *OF*
*EXPERIENCE* *ARE* *EMPIRICAL*, I.E., *HAVE* *THEIR* *BASIS* *IN* *THE*
*IMMEDIATE* *PERCEPTION* *OF* *THE* *SENSES*, *NONETHELESS* *THE*
*REVERSE* *IS* *NOT* *THE* *CASE*, *THAT* *ALL* *EMPIRICAL* *JUDGMENTS*
*ARE* *THEREFORE* *JUDGMENTS* *OF* *EXPERIENCE*; rather, beyond the
empirical and in general beyond what is given in sensory intuition,
special concepts must yet be added, which have their origin completely a
priori in the pure understanding, and under which every perception first
can be subsumed and then, by means of the same concepts, transformed
into experience.
[IDEA: @298] Empirical judgments, insofar as they have objective
validity, are judgments of experience; those, however, that are only
subjectively valid I call mere judgments of perception. The latter do
not require a pure concept of the understanding, but only the logical
connection of perceptions in a thinking subject. But the former always
demand, in addition to *THE* *REPRESENTATIONS* *OF* *SENSORY*
*INTUITION*, *SPECIAL* *CONCEPTS* *ORIGINALLY* *GENERATED* *IN* *THE*
*UNDERSTANDING*, which are precisely what make the judgment of
experience objectively valid.
All of our judgments are at first mere judgments of perception; they
hold only for us, i.e., for our subject, and only afterwards do we give
them a new relation, namely to an object, and intend that the judgment
should also be valid at all times for us and for everyone else; for if a
judgment agrees with an object, then all judgments of the same object
must also agree with one another, and hence the objective validity of a
judgment of experience signifies nothing other than its necessary
universal validity. But also conversely, if we find cause to deem a
judgment necessarily, universally valid (which is never based on the
perception, but on the pure concept of the understanding under which the
perception is subsumed), we must then also deem it objective, i.e., as
expressing not merely a relation of a perception to a subject, but a
property of an object; for there would be no reason why other judgments
necessarily would have to agree with mine, if there were not the unity
of the object – an object to which they all refer, with which they all
agree, and, for that reason, also must all harmonize among themselves.
[page 50]
NONAME @ 1948 HOURS ON 4 NOVEMBER 2018: "I don't know how to define it,
i haven't had enough experience at recognizing intelligence, because
it's so rare."
LINUXGAL: "Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding, In all
of the directions it can whiz; As fast as it can go, at the speed of
light, you know, twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest
speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly
unlikely is your birth; And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere
out in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth!"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) : "Dolf resurrected the above and
included many words about which, aye, am unable to make mulch if any sense."
DOLF @ 0241 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "The words of the wise are for
the wise and the words of the stupid are nothing..."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) : "Being picky none-the-less, the
universe is able to go faster than light in terms of how it has space
which does that."
DOLF @ 0241 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "It’s metaphysical and therefore
outside time.
It’s ontic and therefore dwells within eternity."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0339 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "To
think nothing of a thing reminds me of Tao, speaking of Taoism.
Where in the TTC it may say from Tao emerges or is birthed Yi seeing as
how Chinese is able to incorporate singulars and plurals, Yi may be
translated as Ones.
One may wonder, from where else does One or do Ones arise if not
nothing, or everything all at once suddenly and perhaps not without notice.
Neo-Taoists, speaking of Tao Chia, naturally, concluded Tao is Wu.
And Wu, as an accordion plays without playing music in accord, is
actually Nothing. Nonbeing. Hence One is from None, as the majuscule N
is dropped and the O is formed.
Wu could also be viewed as all in a Chaos fashion being Unity in its
Undifferentiated Unformed Way of thinklings.
Hence the One is plucked from a number line which consists of all the
irrational as well as rational ones, ones being numbers which are that
is, given the Real number line of a mathematics course."
DOLF @ 1317 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "ARCHAEOLOGISTS SHED NEW LIGHT ON
BIBLICAL SITE {#65 {Inner} / #52 {Measure} / #43 {Encounters} / #74
{Closure} = #234 @1 - @728 {8 x #273 / 2 = #364} - PASSOVER {#ONE:
FRIDAY OF 3 APRIL 33 AD}} LINKED TO THE ARK OF THE COVENANT"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 2224 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018:
"While how it is Taoism, Tao Chia that is, is beyond me, none-the-less,
pondering what noname may mean, or what his paradigm means to me, being
a cell in god's body as it were this morning what occurred was how each
cell may be viewed both as being and not-being god.
Tat-vam-asi and neti-neti are able to be two Ways for one who reaches a
point of being, one of which is inflated and the other is tending to
being not any thing, the not-not.
When one is everything, going all tat-vam-asi, that's a point. When one
is nothing, diminishing ego to zero, that's a point.
At the zero point, taking the neti-neit Path one arrives at nothing, and
being nonbeing may at that point reverse inflection to expand in
amplitude for a duration until once again yang turns to yin and a
contraction begins, similar to how the days are at solstice times during
summer, as it is down under.
Taking the tat-vam-asi Route, expanded consciousness reaches a point of
being all-and-all and another inflection reverses that process once more
which is basically the same going round after round for quite a spell.
Words, such as Path and Route, Tao in other words, point.
To link them all to the Ark of the Covenant could be done but whether it
was done in the post to which this is a response is unknown as the
message was too long for me to read with far too many capital letters
shouting and that was that."
NONAME (NONAME.123...@GMAIL.COM) @ 0001 ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"World and me, god and not-god, there has to be duality before not-god
can talk to god. The non-dual state is febrile, impotent, unable to do
anything at all, because there is nothing to do anything to."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0146 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"Sounds as if there's some doing going on there and yet, at the same
time if not beyond time, not-doing, doing-nothing, being simple and
simply being could be a thing or a non-thing.
Aye, to say ore of a non-thing may be a spring springing and when
refined found to be."
DOLF @ 0416 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I have assigned categories of
understanding within Hebrew / Greek to the DAO and thus it is not NO NAME.
Stop making excuses
You then stick to your domain of providence and I shall cohere to the
sensibility of mine.
Since it is beyond you there is neither a need to excuse your deficiency
as if I was the cause or for you to respond any further ...
It is beyond you."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0611 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "So,
you used his original, panatheism 101, and now it isn't that, but it has
something to do with DAO, plus Hebrew / Greek. Okay.
Why did you do that?
If you want to post your assignment of categories using Hebrew / Greek
to Dao, then why use his subject?
I don't know what you're talking about.
That was mentioned in a previous message.
Responding to posts is not a need for me. It's a pleasure of mines.
To mine material people write, to see if it makes sense, makes sense to
me, me being me and all but sometimes, especially here, not all.
When I see my Self as being All, that's when nothing is written."
ONE (WON...@HALF.NET) @ 0723 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "DAO, now, in
this thread appears to be linked to Hebrew / Greek.
Perennialism was also mentioned, once, at any rate and possibly more
than once but it may play a drum role.
Responding to me own posts, aye, to own them mites be.
DAO, it might refer to G-d, or not. G-d, could be the same as the
Tetragrammaton, and God could mean Abe's Elohim, the one of Israel, but
for the New Age or New Thought folks, Perennialists, maybe it doesn't
matter, as long as it's the Supreme Being thing.
With Taoism, Tao is prior to that, imo. Tao Chia that is, Taoist
Philosophy, as this group was initially set up to be a place for
discussion of.
Usenet has its merits. And some folks play along as drums roll."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ XXX HOURS ON XX DECEMBER 2018: "So,
in other words, no, you can't summarize it, seams to be what is being
said above, as it was asked, below.
While I don't know what sensibility of yours is, unless it is
perennialism as you seemed to be saying, providence, for me tends to
suggest God.
If that's what you're saying, something about my domain of God, it might
have to do with Abe's God, and we might discuss that, even though it's a
Taoist, as in Tao Chia, group, theoretically.
M'eye deficiencies, plural, need not be excused, nor need any of many
insanities of mines ore those of other utters which dew hoppins.
I'm not seeing you as being a cause of much other than some very long
with lots of capitalization posts.
I have no idea why you are here, in a Taoist newsgroup.
Are you interested in Tao Chia?"
DOLF @ 0734 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I already have the
meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA and as an accommodation and
respectfully assimilated the nuance narrative being prudent
considerations but have discarded the slavitude requirement for the
submissive domesticated maiden by adoption of a consideration of #ONE
{#34 / @123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / GNOMIC IMPERATIVE INSTRUCTION SET}
as a sovereign / autonomous dynamic being a more sound and biologically
independent principle of autonomous voluntary free will.
[O, {@1: Sup: 60 (#60); Ego: 60 (#60)}
N, {@2: Sup: 29 (#89); Ego: 50 (#110)}
E] {@3: Sup: 34 (#123); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5})]
"I AM DEBTOR BOTH TO THE GREEKS, AND TO THE BARBARIANS {ie. THE CHINESE
DAOIST}; BOTH TO THE WISE, AND TO THE UNWISE. SO, AS MUCH AS IN ME IS, I
AM READY TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO YOU THAT ARE AT ROME ALSO." [Romans
1:14-15 (KJV)]
Your culture although admirable in many aspects has had some troublesome
birth throws {毛澤東} and does not grant me any equitable status {LIBERTY,
EGALITARIAN, FRATERNITY} under #902 - RULE OF LAW.
Perhaps the best thing you could do for me is to explain how the
respective pictographs {毛澤東} convey any rational sensibility as
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING associated to my trinomial understanding of
the mind as mathematical noumenon similarly to what I have conveyed of
the notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT}
as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as UNITY OF
APPERCEPTION ...
H5927@{
@1: Sup: 10 (#10); Ego: 10 (#10),
@2: Sup: 80 (#90); Ego: 70 (#80),
@3: Sup: 29 (#119); Ego: 30 (#110),
@4: Sup: 34 (#153); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
Male: #153; Feme: #115
} // #115
T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:
UMBRA: #115 % #41 = #33 - Achievable Goals, Virtue of Discrimination;
I-Ching: H9 - Lesser Domestication, Minor Restraint, Small Accumulating,
The taming power of the small, Small harvest; Tetra: 35 - Gathering;
THOTH MEASURE: #33 - Oh thou Horned one, who makest thine appearance at
Sais; I am not noisy in my speech.
#VIRTUE: With Closeness (no. #33), no possible gap, but
#TOOLS: With Completion (no. #73), no possible change.
#POSITION: With Massing (no. #59), affairs emptying.
#TIME: With Legion (no. #32), affairs filling.
#CANON: #197
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_197@{
@1: Sup: 33 (#33); Ego: 33 (#33),
@2: Sup: 25 (#58); Ego: 73 (#106),
@3: Sup: 3 (#61); Ego: 59 (#165),
@4: Sup: 35 (#96); Ego: 32 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}),
Male: #96; Feme: #197
} // #197
#115 as [#10, #70, #30, #5] = `alah (H5927): {UMBRA: #0 as #115 % #41 =
#33} 1) to go up, ascend, climb; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to go up, ascend; 1a2)
to meet, visit, follow, depart, withdraw, retreat; 1a3) to go up, come
up (of animals); 1a4) to spring up, grow, shoot forth (of vegetation);
1a5) to go up, go up over, rise (of natural phenomenon); 1a6) to come up
(before God); 1a7) to go up, go up over, extend (of boundary); 1a8) to
excel, be superior to; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be taken up, be brought up,
be taken away; 1b2) to take oneself away; 1b3) to be exalted; 1c)
(Hiphil); 1c1) to bring up, cause to ascend or climb, cause to go up;
1c2) to bring up, bring against, take away; 1c3) to bring up, draw up,
train; 1c4) to cause to ascend; 1c5) to rouse, stir up (mentally); 1c6)
to offer, bring up (of gifts); 1c7) to exalt; 1c8) to cause to ascend,
offer; 1d) (Hophal); 1d1) to be carried away, be led up; 1d2) to be
taken up into, be inserted in; 1d3) to be offered; 1e) (Hithpael) to
lift oneself;
Again you have breached the boundaries of my impetus for discussion by
trimming the distribution list—therefore no further dialog can occur
between us.
> What are the, meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA?
It seems that you do not have any grasp of the rudimentary dialectic
elements which are prerequisite to discourse between sapient sovereign /
autonomous entities and therefore I conclude that capitulation to your
rapacious self-ego would be deleterious to any viability of sustainable
coexistence and capacity for mutual agreement.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China>
Your bestial barbaric ignorance is not worth the dignity of any further
dialog as I will not panda 🐼 to such a capricious and obstinance of
#237 - IMMUTABLE WILL as #231 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL.
Such statement is not prejudice because I will apply an equivalent
criteria against immigrants to this nation whom in the provision of
goods and services similarly seek to impose upon me a self justifying
prejudice as an entitlement of theirs.
You are being disrespectful of my intentions which are not
crossposting—I have no need to obtain your permission on any scope of
function and it is haughty of you to engage in such slander when you are
incapable.
I am restoring the distribution list to it’s logical extent and if you
again diminish the scope of my legitimate and practical enquiry then
that will be sufficient grounds to conclude our dialog as limited as it
is.
Whilst I appreciate your natter upon various rudimentary concepts it is
nevertheless impudent to demand concessions and acquiesce to your
dwarfish and impish experience when my sapience is supranatural and not
a genie 🧞♂️/🧞♀️within a bottle for you to as an anthropologic
concept, to then master."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ XXXX HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"Hang on a second thought while providence is checked.
Hmmmmmm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_providence
My domain of providence.
I've just *BEGUN* *MY* *FIRST* *BEER* here, a bit of a late start for
me, and without having taken a toke there's no telling what might be
said later on, fuelled by a Ting being vorpal and all when the bull is
done said.
Capitalization, speaking of nothing, when it is and isn't used, when
writers don't use any, it may be as confused with when they use all
caps too.
<< The term Divine Providence (usually capitalized) is also used as a
title of God. A distinction is usually made between "general
providence", which refers to God's continuous upholding of the existence
and natural order of the Universe, and "special providence", which
refers to God's extraordinary intervention in the life of people.
Miracles generally fall in the latter category. >>
So, general providence, if that's what was being referred to, continues
to refer to God, which may mean Abe's or Spinoza's or some other Supreme
Being, none of which are Tao."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0929 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"What are the, meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA?
Some may say, shamanism, root wise. I'd disagree, personally.
You have, respectfully assimilated the nuance narrative being prudent
considerations, you say.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
That almost makes sense.
Hang on a second thought while that gets processed a bit more.
...
The submissive domesticated maiden.
No idea what that refers to.
I have no idea what the #ONE {#34 / ... ... } means.
If you are attempting to communicate something, it may be possible. Or
it may be impossible.
I am willing to give it a go tho. Here, in this bamboo grove.
[O, {@1: Sup: 60 (#60); Ego: 60 (#60)}
N, {@2: Sup: 29 (#89); Ego: 50 (#110)}
E] {@3: Sup: 34 (#123); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5})]
I have no idea what you are referring to.
"I AM DEBTOR BOTH TO THE GREEKS, AND TO THE BARBARIANS {ie. THE CHINESE
DAOIST}; BOTH TO THE WISE, AND TO THE UNWISE. SO, AS MUCH AS IN ME IS, I
AM READY TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO YOU THAT ARE AT ROME ALSO." [Romans
1:14-15 (KJV)]
Sounds like something mentioned about Paul.
Yet as to the Chinese being barbarians, or the majuscules, that is to
say, the ALL CAPs, there is no sense there.
The Chinese, iirc, viewed their own mythological state, being the Middle
Kingdom and all, as being more the center, and it's been said they still
do, as if that matters.
Your culture although admirable in many aspects has had some troublesome
birth throws{毛澤東} and does not grant me any equitable status {LIBERTY,
EGALITARIAN, FRATERNITY} under #902 - RULE OF LAW. I have no idea about
to whom you are speaking, when the word, your, is being used.
It's possible you, dolf, are referring to me, being me and all, but as
to, my culture, what you presume some myth of whatever you think my
culture is, there is
something unknown there.
Perhaps the best thing you could do for me is to explain how the
respective pictographs {毛澤東} convey any rational sensibility as
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING associated to my trinomial understanding of
the mind as mathematical noumenon similarly to what I have conveyed of
the notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT}
as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as UNITY OF
APPERCEPTION ...
With the newsreader I'm using, the {毛澤東} suggest something may exist
beyond what appears on my screen.
Without knowing what the respective pictographs {毛澤東} are, it's
basically impossible for me to know what you're referring to.
I could switch to using a browser to read this newsgroup and see if the
{毛澤東} has any meaning beyond being questionable.
I have no idea what your, trinomial understanding of the mind as
mathematical noumenon is.
What you mean by, having, conveyed a notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT
SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT} means nothing to me.
To say it is, as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as
UNITY OF APPERCEPTION, remind me of how there is something there,
something referring to perception and possibly some sort of Western
philosophical deal.
I don't know much of anything about what has been called European or
British or Western brands of philosophy.
It never interested me.
H5927@{
@1: Sup: 10 (#10); Ego: 10 (#10),
@2: Sup: 80 (#90); Ego: 70 (#80),
@3: Sup: 29 (#119); Ego: 30 (#110),
@4: Sup: 34 (#153); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
Male: #153; Feme: #115
} // #115
I have no idea what any of that means.
T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:
The above was seen to be as some sort of Confucian thing.
For me, Taoism is more interesting.
UMBRA: #115 % #41 = #33 - Achievable Goals, Virtue of Discrimination;
I-Ching: H9 - Lesser Domestication, Minor Restraint, Small Accumulating,
The taming power of the small, Small harvest; Tetra: 35 - Gathering; The
I-Ching, imo, has little if anything to do with Taoism.
THOTH MEASURE: #33 - Oh thou Horned one, who makest thine appearance at
Sais; I am not noisy in my speech.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
#VIRTUE: With Closeness (no. #33), no possible gap, but
#TOOLS: With Completion (no. #73), no possible change.
#POSITION: With Massing (no. #59), affairs emptying.
#TIME: With Legion (no. #32), affairs filling.
#CANON: #197
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_197@{
@1: Sup: 33 (#33); Ego: 33 (#33),
@2: Sup: 25 (#58); Ego: 73 (#106),
@3: Sup: 3 (#61); Ego: 59 (#165),
@4: Sup: 35 (#96); Ego: 32 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}),
Male: #96; Feme: #197
} // #197
No idea what that means.
Looks to be a definition of some sort.
It is beyond you.
Perhaps you could write something more about Taoism as you see it in
terms of Tao Chia, and if not that, then, maybe something more about
perennialism, syncretism, and New Age sorts of stuff combining whatever
and you could continue to post lengthy material about Australian
government, and some court case, or anything you choose, since it is
Usenet, and you could use lots of majuscules too.
Sometimes people are interested in spamming their message using lots of
crossposts and are not interested in Netiquette nor being a good
Netizen. You are being disrespectful of my intentions which are not
crossposting I kinda thought this was a crosspost, presumably
intentionally, seeing as how my response was not crossposted.
I have no need to obtain your permission on any scope of function and it
is haughty of you to engage in such slander when you are incapable.
Mostly, for me, Taoism is a hobby of mine.
Being interested in Taoism, specifically, but not necessarily
exclusively, is a great pleasure to plumb various depths of sorts and
find what floats and where the mud, like turtles and Chuang Tzu liked is.
I am restoring the distribution list to it’s logical extent and if you
again diminish the scope of my legitimate and practical enquiry then
that will be sufficient grounds to conclude our dialog as limited as it
is.
Conclusions appear to vary in terms of Taoism. What Tao Chia is.
I have no idea what your agenda is, if you have one of those, or why you
are crossposting what you may feel is important to post.
Whilst I appreciate your natter upon various rudimentary concepts it is
nevertheless impudent to demand concessions
I am not demanding any concessions.
and acquiesce to your dwarfish and impish experience when my sapience is
supranatural and not a genie 🧞♂️/🧞♀️ within a bottle for you as an
anthropologic concept that you can then master.
If you would like to follow some Netiquette, then that might mean
posting on-topic.
Lots of posters don't care about Netiquette nor to be good Netizens.
Like me, or don't like me.
That happens, here, on occasion."
DOLF @ 0754 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "Your domain of providence is the
garbage 🗑 can where you will no doubt linger in self-reflection of
opportunism and disposability when you recycle ♻️ the accomplishments of
others with an arrogance that it is entirely YOUR entitlement to bestow
in accordance with the gambit #391 - HOMOGENEOUS ECONOMICS.
Hooray for you.
AND DON’T BE A *STODGE* like you are of your own opinion which have
little significance in time...
- to stuff full, especially with food or drink; gorge.
- to trudge: to stodge along through the mire.
- Word of the Day for 23 December 2018; Courtesy: www.dictionary.com"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0931 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I
have no idea what you're talking about.
Some question marks (?) appear in the post. They might mean something,
or not.
What the, gambit #391 means, I have no idea.
Thanks! Also to you also, hooray!"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0937 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I
have no idea what you're talking about.
Not long ago, a pastor was asked about being a glutton. I'd asked him,
if I have another bit of food, does that make me one. To which he said
he didn't know.
To trudge thru the mire of words posted in all caps; to try and make
sense of all the #numbers and such; cud make me a stodge. Ruminating.
Regurgitating.
Attempting to make any sense of what's being posted here. It's okay with
me. Kinda fun.
So now, I'm being told to not be a stodge. But, what if being a stodge
is okay with me, a wonder presents its self, as if it had one.
Perhaps it could be an hat, added to me collection of hats full of me,
being me and all.
Never really thought about being stodgy, what it may mean to be that.
Thanks!
- still pondering another beer here ..."
Initial Post: 23 December 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-7OuqWi4vQ>
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 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.
(c) 2018 Dolf Leendert Boek, Revision: 24 December, 2018
— PASSING IN THE NIGHT —
“WHETHER EITHER
DOWN Y’R SHUTE
OR BEG NETHER
UP YOUR HOOT.
NOR DESPERATE.
FOR ANY ROOT.
TO CONTEMPLATE
AWFUL CAHOOT.” {@321 - *PRO* *DOMO*}
CAUSE FOR PAUSE@{
@1: Sup: 14 (#14); Ego: 73 (#73),
@2: Sup: 19 (#33); Ego: 80 (#153),
@3: Sup: 26 (#59); Ego: 73 (#226),
@4: Sup: 49 (#108); Ego: 36 (#262),
@5: Sup: 58 (#166 - I AM NOT SLUGGISH {%11}); Ego: 66 (#328),
@6: Sup: 37 (#203); Ego: 32 (#360),
@7: Sup: 69 (#272); Ego: 21 (#381),
@8: Sup: 26 (#298); Ego: 33 (#414),
@9: Sup: 23 (#321); Ego: 35 (#449),
Male: #321; Feme: #449
}
IMMANUEL KANT'S PROLEGOMENA (1783) SECTION #18 AS IDEA: @298: We must
therefore first of all note: that, *ALTHOUGH* *ALL* *JUDGMENTS* *OF*
*EXPERIENCE* *ARE* *EMPIRICAL*, I.E., *HAVE* *THEIR* *BASIS* *IN* *THE*
*IMMEDIATE* *PERCEPTION* *OF* *THE* *SENSES*, *NONETHELESS* *THE*
*REVERSE* *IS* *NOT* *THE* *CASE*, *THAT* *ALL* *EMPIRICAL* *JUDGMENTS*
*ARE* *THEREFORE* *JUDGMENTS* *OF* *EXPERIENCE*; rather, beyond the
empirical and in general beyond what is given in sensory intuition,
special concepts must yet be added, which have their origin completely a
priori in the pure understanding, and under which every perception first
can be subsumed and then, by means of the same concepts, transformed
into experience.
[IDEA: @298] Empirical judgments, insofar as they have objective
validity, are judgments of experience; those, however, that are only
subjectively valid I call mere judgments of perception. The latter do
not require a pure concept of the understanding, but only the logical
connection of perceptions in a thinking subject. But the former always
demand, in addition to *THE* *REPRESENTATIONS* *OF* *SENSORY*
*INTUITION*, *SPECIAL* *CONCEPTS* *ORIGINALLY* *GENERATED* *IN* *THE*
*UNDERSTANDING*, which are precisely what make the judgment of
experience objectively valid.
All of our judgments are at first mere judgments of perception; they
hold only for us, i.e., for our subject, and only afterwards do we give
them a new relation, namely to an object, and intend that the judgment
should also be valid at all times for us and for everyone else; for if a
judgment agrees with an object, then all judgments of the same object
must also agree with one another, and hence the objective validity of a
judgment of experience signifies nothing other than its necessary
universal validity. But also conversely, if we find cause to deem a
judgment necessarily, universally valid (which is never based on the
perception, but on the pure concept of the understanding under which the
perception is subsumed), we must then also deem it objective, i.e., as
expressing not merely a relation of a perception to a subject, but a
property of an object; for there would be no reason why other judgments
necessarily would have to agree with mine, if there were not the unity
of the object – an object to which they all refer, with which they all
agree, and, for that reason, also must all harmonize among themselves.
[page 50]
NONAME @ 1948 HOURS ON 4 NOVEMBER 2018: "I don't know how to define it,
i haven't had enough experience at recognizing intelligence, because
it's so rare."
LINUXGAL: "Our universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding, In all
of the directions it can whiz; As fast as it can go, at the speed of
light, you know, twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest
speed there is.
So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure, How amazingly
unlikely is your birth; And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere
out in space, 'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth!"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) : "Dolf resurrected the above and
included many words about which, aye, am unable to make mulch if any sense."
DOLF @ 0241 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "The words of the wise are for
the wise and the words of the stupid are nothing..."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) : "Being picky none-the-less, the
universe is able to go faster than light in terms of how it has space
which does that."
DOLF @ 0241 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "It’s metaphysical and therefore
outside time.
It’s ontic and therefore dwells within eternity."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0339 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "To
think nothing of a thing reminds me of Tao, speaking of Taoism.
Where in the TTC it may say from Tao emerges or is birthed Yi seeing as
how Chinese is able to incorporate singulars and plurals, Yi may be
translated as Ones.
One may wonder, from where else does One or do Ones arise if not
nothing, or everything all at once suddenly and perhaps not without notice.
Neo-Taoists, speaking of Tao Chia, naturally, concluded Tao is Wu.
And Wu, as an accordion plays without playing music in accord, is
actually Nothing. Nonbeing. Hence One is from None, as the majuscule N
is dropped and the O is formed.
Wu could also be viewed as all in a Chaos fashion being Unity in its
Undifferentiated Unformed Way of thinklings.
Hence the One is plucked from a number line which consists of all the
irrational as well as rational ones, ones being numbers which are that
is, given the Real number line of a mathematics course."
DOLF @ 1317 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018: "ARCHAEOLOGISTS SHED NEW LIGHT ON
BIBLICAL SITE {#65 {Inner} / #52 {Measure} / #43 {Encounters} / #74
{Closure} = #234 @1 - @728 {8 x #273 / 2 = #364} - PASSOVER {#ONE:
FRIDAY OF 3 APRIL 33 AD}} LINKED TO THE ARK OF THE COVENANT"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 2224 HOURS ON 22 DECEMBER 2018:
"While how it is Taoism, Tao Chia that is, is beyond me, none-the-less,
pondering what noname may mean, or what his paradigm means to me, being
a cell in god's body as it were this morning what occurred was how each
cell may be viewed both as being and not-being god.
Tat-vam-asi and neti-neti are able to be two Ways for one who reaches a
point of being, one of which is inflated and the other is tending to
being not any thing, the not-not.
When one is everything, going all tat-vam-asi, that's a point. When one
is nothing, diminishing ego to zero, that's a point.
At the zero point, taking the neti-neit Path one arrives at nothing, and
being nonbeing may at that point reverse inflection to expand in
amplitude for a duration until once again yang turns to yin and a
contraction begins, similar to how the days are at solstice times during
summer, as it is down under.
Taking the tat-vam-asi Route, expanded consciousness reaches a point of
being all-and-all and another inflection reverses that process once more
which is basically the same going round after round for quite a spell.
Words, such as Path and Route, Tao in other words, point.
To link them all to the Ark of the Covenant could be done but whether it
was done in the post to which this is a response is unknown as the
message was too long for me to read with far too many capital letters
shouting and that was that."
NONAME (NONAME.123...@GMAIL.COM) @ 0001 ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"World and me, god and not-god, there has to be duality before not-god
can talk to god. The non-dual state is febrile, impotent, unable to do
anything at all, because there is nothing to do anything to."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0146 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"Sounds as if there's some doing going on there and yet, at the same
time if not beyond time, not-doing, doing-nothing, being simple and
simply being could be a thing or a non-thing.
Aye, to say ore of a non-thing may be a spring springing and when
refined found to be."
DOLF @ 0416 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I have assigned categories of
understanding within Hebrew / Greek to the DAO and thus it is not NO NAME.
Stop making excuses
You then stick to your domain of providence and I shall cohere to the
sensibility of mine.
Since it is beyond you there is neither a need to excuse your deficiency
as if I was the cause or for you to respond any further ...
It is beyond you."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0611 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "So,
you used his original, panatheism 101, and now it isn't that, but it has
something to do with DAO, plus Hebrew / Greek. Okay.
Why did you do that?
If you want to post your assignment of categories using Hebrew / Greek
to Dao, then why use his subject?
I don't know what you're talking about.
That was mentioned in a previous message.
Responding to posts is not a need for me. It's a pleasure of mines.
To mine material people write, to see if it makes sense, makes sense to
me, me being me and all but sometimes, especially here, not all.
When I see my Self as being All, that's when nothing is written."
ONE (WON...@HALF.NET) @ 0723 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "DAO, now, in
this thread appears to be linked to Hebrew / Greek.
Perennialism was also mentioned, once, at any rate and possibly more
than once but it may play a drum role.
Responding to me own posts, aye, to own them mites be.
DAO, it might refer to G-d, or not. G-d, could be the same as the
Tetragrammaton, and God could mean Abe's Elohim, the one of Israel, but
for the New Age or New Thought folks, Perennialists, maybe it doesn't
matter, as long as it's the Supreme Being thing.
With Taoism, Tao is prior to that, imo. Tao Chia that is, Taoist
Philosophy, as this group was initially set up to be a place for
discussion of.
Usenet has its merits. And some folks play along as drums roll."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ XXX HOURS ON XX DECEMBER 2018: "So,
in other words, no, you can't summarize it, seams to be what is being
said above, as it was asked, below.
While I don't know what sensibility of yours is, unless it is
perennialism as you seemed to be saying, providence, for me tends to
suggest God.
If that's what you're saying, something about my domain of God, it might
have to do with Abe's God, and we might discuss that, even though it's a
Taoist, as in Tao Chia, group, theoretically.
M'eye deficiencies, plural, need not be excused, nor need any of many
insanities of mines ore those of other utters which dew hoppins.
I'm not seeing you as being a cause of much other than some very long
with lots of capitalization posts.
I have no idea why you are here, in a Taoist newsgroup.
Are you interested in Tao Chia?"
DOLF @ 0734 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I already have the
meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA and as an accommodation and
respectfully assimilated the nuance narrative being prudent
considerations but have discarded the slavitude requirement for the
submissive domesticated maiden by adoption of a consideration of #ONE
{#34 / @123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / GNOMIC IMPERATIVE INSTRUCTION SET}
as a sovereign / autonomous dynamic being a more sound and biologically
independent principle of autonomous voluntary free will.
[O, {@1: Sup: 60 (#60); Ego: 60 (#60)}
N, {@2: Sup: 29 (#89); Ego: 50 (#110)}
E] {@3: Sup: 34 (#123); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5})]
"I AM DEBTOR BOTH TO THE GREEKS, AND TO THE BARBARIANS {ie. THE CHINESE
DAOIST}; BOTH TO THE WISE, AND TO THE UNWISE. SO, AS MUCH AS IN ME IS, I
AM READY TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO YOU THAT ARE AT ROME ALSO." [Romans
1:14-15 (KJV)]
Your culture although admirable in many aspects has had some troublesome
birth throws {毛澤東} and does not grant me any equitable status {LIBERTY,
EGALITARIAN, FRATERNITY} under #902 - RULE OF LAW.
Perhaps the best thing you could do for me is to explain how the
respective pictographs {毛澤東} convey any rational sensibility as
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING associated to my trinomial understanding of
the mind as mathematical noumenon similarly to what I have conveyed of
the notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT}
as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as UNITY OF
APPERCEPTION ...
H5927@{
@1: Sup: 10 (#10); Ego: 10 (#10),
@2: Sup: 80 (#90); Ego: 70 (#80),
@3: Sup: 29 (#119); Ego: 30 (#110),
@4: Sup: 34 (#153); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
Male: #153; Feme: #115
} // #115
T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:
UMBRA: #115 % #41 = #33 - Achievable Goals, Virtue of Discrimination;
I-Ching: H9 - Lesser Domestication, Minor Restraint, Small Accumulating,
The taming power of the small, Small harvest; Tetra: 35 - Gathering;
THOTH MEASURE: #33 - Oh thou Horned one, who makest thine appearance at
Sais; I am not noisy in my speech.
#VIRTUE: With Closeness (no. #33), no possible gap, but
#TOOLS: With Completion (no. #73), no possible change.
#POSITION: With Massing (no. #59), affairs emptying.
#TIME: With Legion (no. #32), affairs filling.
#CANON: #197
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_197@{
@1: Sup: 33 (#33); Ego: 33 (#33),
@2: Sup: 25 (#58); Ego: 73 (#106),
@3: Sup: 3 (#61); Ego: 59 (#165),
@4: Sup: 35 (#96); Ego: 32 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}),
Male: #96; Feme: #197
} // #197
#115 as [#10, #70, #30, #5] = `alah (H5927): {UMBRA: #0 as #115 % #41 =
#33} 1) to go up, ascend, climb; 1a) (Qal); 1a1) to go up, ascend; 1a2)
to meet, visit, follow, depart, withdraw, retreat; 1a3) to go up, come
up (of animals); 1a4) to spring up, grow, shoot forth (of vegetation);
1a5) to go up, go up over, rise (of natural phenomenon); 1a6) to come up
(before God); 1a7) to go up, go up over, extend (of boundary); 1a8) to
excel, be superior to; 1b) (Niphal); 1b1) to be taken up, be brought up,
be taken away; 1b2) to take oneself away; 1b3) to be exalted; 1c)
(Hiphil); 1c1) to bring up, cause to ascend or climb, cause to go up;
1c2) to bring up, bring against, take away; 1c3) to bring up, draw up,
train; 1c4) to cause to ascend; 1c5) to rouse, stir up (mentally); 1c6)
to offer, bring up (of gifts); 1c7) to exalt; 1c8) to cause to ascend,
offer; 1d) (Hophal); 1d1) to be carried away, be led up; 1d2) to be
taken up into, be inserted in; 1d3) to be offered; 1e) (Hithpael) to
lift oneself;
Again you have breached the boundaries of my impetus for discussion by
trimming the distribution list—therefore no further dialog can occur
between us.
> What are the, meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA?
It seems that you do not have any grasp of the rudimentary dialectic
elements which are prerequisite to discourse between sapient sovereign /
autonomous entities and therefore I conclude that capitulation to your
rapacious self-ego would be deleterious to any viability of sustainable
coexistence and capacity for mutual agreement.
<https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Wall_of_China>
Your bestial barbaric ignorance is not worth the dignity of any further
dialog as I will not panda 🐼 to such a capricious and obstinance of
#237 - IMMUTABLE WILL as #231 - JUXTAPOSITION CONTROL.
Such statement is not prejudice because I will apply an equivalent
criteria against immigrants to this nation whom in the provision of
goods and services similarly seek to impose upon me a self justifying
prejudice as an entitlement of theirs.
You are being disrespectful of my intentions which are not
crossposting—I have no need to obtain your permission on any scope of
function and it is haughty of you to engage in such slander when you are
incapable.
I am restoring the distribution list to it’s logical extent and if you
again diminish the scope of my legitimate and practical enquiry then
that will be sufficient grounds to conclude our dialog as limited as it
is.
Whilst I appreciate your natter upon various rudimentary concepts it is
nevertheless impudent to demand concessions and acquiesce to your
dwarfish and impish experience when my sapience is supranatural and not
a genie 🧞♂️/🧞♀️within a bottle for you to as an anthropologic
concept, to then master."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ XXXX HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"Hang on a second thought while providence is checked.
Hmmmmmm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divine_providence
My domain of providence.
I've just *BEGUN* *MY* *FIRST* *BEER* here, a bit of a late start for
me, and without having taken a toke there's no telling what might be
said later on, fuelled by a Ting being vorpal and all when the bull is
done said.
Capitalization, speaking of nothing, when it is and isn't used, when
writers don't use any, it may be as confused with when they use all
caps too.
<< The term Divine Providence (usually capitalized) is also used as a
title of God. A distinction is usually made between "general
providence", which refers to God's continuous upholding of the existence
and natural order of the Universe, and "special providence", which
refers to God's extraordinary intervention in the life of people.
Miracles generally fall in the latter category. >>
So, general providence, if that's what was being referred to, continues
to refer to God, which may mean Abe's or Spinoza's or some other Supreme
Being, none of which are Tao."
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0929 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018:
"What are the, meta-descriptor prototypes to the TAO CHIA?
Some may say, shamanism, root wise. I'd disagree, personally.
You have, respectfully assimilated the nuance narrative being prudent
considerations, you say.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
That almost makes sense.
Hang on a second thought while that gets processed a bit more.
...
The submissive domesticated maiden.
No idea what that refers to.
I have no idea what the #ONE {#34 / ... ... } means.
If you are attempting to communicate something, it may be possible. Or
it may be impossible.
I am willing to give it a go tho. Here, in this bamboo grove.
[O, {@1: Sup: 60 (#60); Ego: 60 (#60)}
N, {@2: Sup: 29 (#89); Ego: 50 (#110)}
E] {@3: Sup: 34 (#123); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5})]
I have no idea what you are referring to.
"I AM DEBTOR BOTH TO THE GREEKS, AND TO THE BARBARIANS {ie. THE CHINESE
DAOIST}; BOTH TO THE WISE, AND TO THE UNWISE. SO, AS MUCH AS IN ME IS, I
AM READY TO PREACH THE GOSPEL TO YOU THAT ARE AT ROME ALSO." [Romans
1:14-15 (KJV)]
Sounds like something mentioned about Paul.
Yet as to the Chinese being barbarians, or the majuscules, that is to
say, the ALL CAPs, there is no sense there.
The Chinese, iirc, viewed their own mythological state, being the Middle
Kingdom and all, as being more the center, and it's been said they still
do, as if that matters.
Your culture although admirable in many aspects has had some troublesome
birth throws{毛澤東} and does not grant me any equitable status {LIBERTY,
EGALITARIAN, FRATERNITY} under #902 - RULE OF LAW. I have no idea about
to whom you are speaking, when the word, your, is being used.
It's possible you, dolf, are referring to me, being me and all, but as
to, my culture, what you presume some myth of whatever you think my
culture is, there is
something unknown there.
Perhaps the best thing you could do for me is to explain how the
respective pictographs {毛澤東} convey any rational sensibility as
CATEGORIES OF UNDERSTANDING associated to my trinomial understanding of
the mind as mathematical noumenon similarly to what I have conveyed of
the notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT}
as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as UNITY OF
APPERCEPTION ...
With the newsreader I'm using, the {毛澤東} suggest something may exist
beyond what appears on my screen.
Without knowing what the respective pictographs {毛澤東} are, it's
basically impossible for me to know what you're referring to.
I could switch to using a browser to read this newsgroup and see if the
{毛澤東} has any meaning beyond being questionable.
I have no idea what your, trinomial understanding of the mind as
mathematical noumenon is.
What you mean by, having, conveyed a notion of #ONE {#123 - JUDGMENT
SENSIBILITY / #115 - TRANSCENDENT} means nothing to me.
To say it is, as cognitive capacity which is able to cohere reality as
UNITY OF APPERCEPTION, remind me of how there is something there,
something referring to perception and possibly some sort of Western
philosophical deal.
I don't know much of anything about what has been called European or
British or Western brands of philosophy.
It never interested me.
H5927@{
@1: Sup: 10 (#10); Ego: 10 (#10),
@2: Sup: 80 (#90); Ego: 70 (#80),
@3: Sup: 29 (#119); Ego: 30 (#110),
@4: Sup: 34 (#153); Ego: 5 (#115 - I AM NOT A SLAYER OF MEN {%5}),
Male: #153; Feme: #115
} // #115
I have no idea what any of that means.
T'AI HSÜAN CHING {POLAR OPPOSITIONS / INTERPLAY OF OPPOSITES} [4 BCE]:
The above was seen to be as some sort of Confucian thing.
For me, Taoism is more interesting.
UMBRA: #115 % #41 = #33 - Achievable Goals, Virtue of Discrimination;
I-Ching: H9 - Lesser Domestication, Minor Restraint, Small Accumulating,
The taming power of the small, Small harvest; Tetra: 35 - Gathering; The
I-Ching, imo, has little if anything to do with Taoism.
THOTH MEASURE: #33 - Oh thou Horned one, who makest thine appearance at
Sais; I am not noisy in my speech.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
#VIRTUE: With Closeness (no. #33), no possible gap, but
#TOOLS: With Completion (no. #73), no possible change.
#POSITION: With Massing (no. #59), affairs emptying.
#TIME: With Legion (no. #32), affairs filling.
#CANON: #197
ONTIC_OBLIGANS_197@{
@1: Sup: 33 (#33); Ego: 33 (#33),
@2: Sup: 25 (#58); Ego: 73 (#106),
@3: Sup: 3 (#61); Ego: 59 (#165),
@4: Sup: 35 (#96); Ego: 32 (#197 - I AM NOT NOISY IN MY SPEECH {%33}),
Male: #96; Feme: #197
} // #197
No idea what that means.
Looks to be a definition of some sort.
It is beyond you.
Perhaps you could write something more about Taoism as you see it in
terms of Tao Chia, and if not that, then, maybe something more about
perennialism, syncretism, and New Age sorts of stuff combining whatever
and you could continue to post lengthy material about Australian
government, and some court case, or anything you choose, since it is
Usenet, and you could use lots of majuscules too.
Sometimes people are interested in spamming their message using lots of
crossposts and are not interested in Netiquette nor being a good
Netizen. You are being disrespectful of my intentions which are not
crossposting I kinda thought this was a crosspost, presumably
intentionally, seeing as how my response was not crossposted.
I have no need to obtain your permission on any scope of function and it
is haughty of you to engage in such slander when you are incapable.
Mostly, for me, Taoism is a hobby of mine.
Being interested in Taoism, specifically, but not necessarily
exclusively, is a great pleasure to plumb various depths of sorts and
find what floats and where the mud, like turtles and Chuang Tzu liked is.
I am restoring the distribution list to it’s logical extent and if you
again diminish the scope of my legitimate and practical enquiry then
that will be sufficient grounds to conclude our dialog as limited as it
is.
Conclusions appear to vary in terms of Taoism. What Tao Chia is.
I have no idea what your agenda is, if you have one of those, or why you
are crossposting what you may feel is important to post.
Whilst I appreciate your natter upon various rudimentary concepts it is
nevertheless impudent to demand concessions
I am not demanding any concessions.
and acquiesce to your dwarfish and impish experience when my sapience is
supranatural and not a genie 🧞♂️/🧞♀️ within a bottle for you as an
anthropologic concept that you can then master.
If you would like to follow some Netiquette, then that might mean
posting on-topic.
Lots of posters don't care about Netiquette nor to be good Netizens.
Like me, or don't like me.
That happens, here, on occasion."
DOLF @ 0754 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "Your domain of providence is the
garbage 🗑 can where you will no doubt linger in self-reflection of
opportunism and disposability when you recycle ♻️ the accomplishments of
others with an arrogance that it is entirely YOUR entitlement to bestow
in accordance with the gambit #391 - HOMOGENEOUS ECONOMICS.
Hooray for you.
AND DON’T BE A *STODGE* like you are of your own opinion which have
little significance in time...
- to stuff full, especially with food or drink; gorge.
- to trudge: to stodge along through the mire.
- Word of the Day for 23 December 2018; Courtesy: www.dictionary.com"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0931 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I
have no idea what you're talking about.
Some question marks (?) appear in the post. They might mean something,
or not.
What the, gambit #391 means, I have no idea.
Thanks! Also to you also, hooray!"
WACK JOB {:-]))) (WU...@WUJI.NET) @ 0937 HOURS ON 23 DECEMBER 2018: "I
have no idea what you're talking about.
Not long ago, a pastor was asked about being a glutton. I'd asked him,
if I have another bit of food, does that make me one. To which he said
he didn't know.
To trudge thru the mire of words posted in all caps; to try and make
sense of all the #numbers and such; cud make me a stodge. Ruminating.
Regurgitating.
Attempting to make any sense of what's being posted here. It's okay with
me. Kinda fun.
So now, I'm being told to not be a stodge. But, what if being a stodge
is okay with me, a wonder presents its self, as if it had one.
Perhaps it could be an hat, added to me collection of hats full of me,
being me and all.
Never really thought about being stodgy, what it may mean to be that.
Thanks!
- still pondering another beer here ..."
Initial Post: 23 December 2018
--
YOUTUBE: "The Meerkat Circus"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-7OuqWi4vQ>
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 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.
0 new messages