|
Soliloquy
of Mind Evading Certainty
One of Doug's favorite personages has said recently,
"Doug, Suares uses ordinary language to communicate directly
to ordinary people his message, and what he thinks we need to
understand about Qabala, its Autiot, its Gematria and their metaphysics
of reality. That is what I like most about Suares. I am a teacher
of tertiary memes, and I grasp and see how Suares teaches via
good, simple, direct writing. Furthermore, in his teaching, he
shows us that a single pass at any subject is never enough to
fathom its depths. We, as does reality, must fractally recurse
all memes tautologously, to evolve our learning. I think, Doug,
you showed your readers how that is what Feynman recommended
to his sister regarding how
to study other authors' works about physi[c]al reality in
order to attain a Doctor's Degree in Physics."
Doug agrees with Al's assessment of Suares. She qualifies
that each re reading of Suares takes us deeper into his memeory
palace, his labyrinth of recorded, energy~welled thought.
Over a decade ago, Bethahava bought a book for Doug.
She did it unsolicited. It was one of her recommendations, a
book she thought Doug should read, similar as how unsolicited,
she bought Holy Blood, Holy Grail for Doug. Bethahava's
unsolicited books have always, eventually, turned out to be important
to Doug, more than he could have imagined.
So Bethahava's purchase of Jorge Luis Borges' Collected
Fictions (certainty~evading essays) has recently turned out
to be of great importance for Doug.
Borges' Collected Fictional Essays (translated by
Andrew Hurley, 1998) are, in Doug's opine, Borges' "Soliloquy
of Mind Evading Certainty."
Perhaps of sublime interest here is my favorite personage,
I call her Al, recently asked me, "Doug do you have
Borges' Essays, The Aleph, and his The Zahir?"
I reacted to her query with shallow familiarity. I
reiterated Bethahava's unsolicited book purchases, and how I
always took too long to dig into them. Now, I mean too
long...Beth has passed...it's been nearly five years.
I did read Borges' The Gospel According to Mark,
near time of Bethahava's passing. Since then I also read one
of Borges' essays (The Library of Babel, similar Asimov's
Foundation Series) about a labyrinthian archive of knowledge,
a kind of Bibliographique Labyrinth of Palatial Standing
Under (i.e., peaceful, war free, psychological humility...).
Until just recently (early CeodE 2015) I hadn't been reading Borges...at
all.
So, at Al's suggestion, Doug sat quietly and read
The Aleph.
Next day, again, he sat quietly and read The Zahir.
Both of those essays, indirectly, are about Qabala,
Autiot, Gematria. They are about Al's and my recent forays into
those quantum~holographic~multicursal~labyrinthian
evasions of certainty.
Doug asked self, "What is Al trying to show you,
to teach you?"
Was she mixing all in all, in a sense by encouraging
my certainty~evading Chautauqua into Aleph, Zahir,
and Labyrinths? Why labyrinths?
I went back to Hurley's list of Borges' essays. I
looked for words which begged a soliloquy of self's labyrinthian
nous. Aha! Voila! I found it: The Garden of
Forking Paths! A goosebump moment!
Borges' The Garden of Forking Paths essay is
exemplary of what Doug fathoms as quantum~labyrinthian nous
evading certainty which, anecdotally, Doug refers "Quantum~Stagings."
Is it clear to you, gentle reader, that this is Doug's
soliloquy, Doug's 'dialogue (omnilogue)' with self regarding
quantum~labyrinthian nous? Sonu Shamdasani refers it,
in his translation of Jung's Red Book, "divine madness."
Shamdasani also refers it, paraphrased, "Muse infusion of
peace." Beth and Al as Doug's Muses, infusing him with certainty-evading
peace and all its quantum~nostrums. Gnosis and Qabala call it
"Wisdom, Sophia." See footnote 80, p. 238, 'Liber Primus,'
Jung's Redbook, Norton 2009 hardbound first edition.
Doug calls it, "Quantum~Reality." Quantum~wave~functions
hologrally, biblically, complementarily~antinomially, "...mixing
all in all." Recapitulating (re~head~ulating, rethinkqing,
Esher~ing) quantum~peace!
I ask you to do a little imagining here.
Imagine Aleph as a point of light. Imagine
Zahir as a point of light. Imagine Borges' Forking
Paths as omniscribing what happens "co~ihnside
a point of light."
Some theoreticians refer our points of light, "wormholes."
Some Gnostics and Qabalists refer our points of light, "Grails."
Can we co~ihnside points
of light? Is that what we really mean by seeing, by Ayn, and
Ayn's Zayn?
Are we classically, deterministically certain what
we will find co~ihnside our points
of light? Is it wise to want to? What do Gnosis and Qabala (as
omniscribed by Suares, for example) mean by "embrace indetermination,"
and "embrace uncertainty," and "evade certainty?"
What does Doug mean when he writes, "Why is Peace a Symptom of Uncertainty?"
Does a wise mind, a wise nous, embrace dialectical-certainty?
Doug - 5,9Feb2015,8Jul2015.
Soliloquy
of Mind Evading Certainty
|
. In that Tao symbol, 6 (white, male) and 9 (dark,
female) are mirror-reversed.