Seek your total individuality. Do not define it. Any definition of yourself is a deceptive hideout.

Detail:

"When I escape a final definition of myself, I joyfully exclaim, 'I am not only that.' " Page 140, Second Coming of Reb YhShWh, Weiser paperback, 1994, 226 total pages.

All social collectives emphasize OSFA. Collectives only permit a OSFA Boris Sidisean demos will spirit: "Our way or the highway." Paraphrased from page 141. Ibid.

All social collectives are spiritually dead, Mawt-Hamawt.

Collectives use ants, termites, bees as dialectically 'elegant' exemplars of their dead social spirits. Collectives worship the dead. This shows us whyings gnosis denigrates hylic-psychic thing-king as degenerate. Collective minds are degenerate.

Main stream media (MSM) today illustrates this collective degeneracy par excellence.

We have an answer to Pink Floyd's (The SOMitic brick Wall.) insistent, "Teacher, leave us kids alone." Collectives build brick walls! Dialectical either-or walls. Psychic-hylic diodes of thought control.

Individual consciousness can overthrow all collectives' walls! This represents the collective's greatest fear. They should be afraid. A current collective called 'science' declares its own current destruction "deconstruction," tearing down one 'scientific' brick after another: Parmenides, Plato, Aristotle, Buridan, Newton, and Einstein, etc. While our quantum~Planck~rate clock keeps on ticking, ticking, ticking into many futurings, unlimited and perpetually absolutely~fluxing omnimensional manifoldings of realityings... Clifford Geertz describes this quantum disassembly well in his Available Light. Jung describes it in his Red Book as an individual process of leaving 'spirit of temporality,' and entering 'spirit of quantum (the small) depths.'

Doug has recently emphasized Suares' use of antinomial as a powerful quantum wMBU™ tool. We have an opportunity to illustrate antinomialism in one of its purest emerqancies here.

Suares claims there are two Satans (in Farewell Discourse: Peter - Satan one, and Judas - Satan two). For example, Peter is antinomial Judas. Why? Peter was catholically, collectively working against Jesus' individualism. Judas was assisting Jesus' story of individualism: Gnosis.

In this Detail, Suares is showing us all collectives are like Peter: Satan one. All anti-collective individuals are like Judas: Satan two. Collectivism (Satan one: worseship) antinomial individualism (Satan two: bettership). This is pneumatically very subtle, yet incredibly powerful. We see two views. One of collectivism's view of individuals. Another as individualism's view of collectivism. Each calls other, "Satan." Two Satans!

Quantum~reality deals with this very well. It offers Mae-wan Ho's quanton(coherence,autonomy) without any classical contradiction. I.e., quantum~coherence of fluxing quantons as islandic~individuals isn't classically, collectively synthetic...it isn't faux mechanical-Newtonian objective and predicable social 'organization.' (It isn't faux like Keynesianism. Simply, Keynesianism isn't quantum!)

Doug - 29Apr2013.

2Jan2015 - A problem with Peter:

Learning about all of this isn't easy. Doug has spent over a decade attempting to understand it.

Following Suares' lead (as Doug, historically, has followed Pirsig, James, Bergson, et al.) Doug has found that, again, translators (and those who intentionally re engineered Autiot texts) intentionally altered semantics to fit their vulgate sensibilities.

Issues here with Peter as Satan one and Judas as Satan two are not as simple as Doug has portrayed them. It turns out that Suares does a better job of describing 'a problem of Peter' in his Cipher of Genesis, pp. 188-189. Importance of Suares' words there cannot be over emphasized. Allow Doug, with great respect for Suares and his opus, to transcribe part of p. 188 and ~all of p. 189 here (Doug left off a beginning of Suares' apology, last line of p. 189):

	Suares' Original Text	Doug's Intratext Hermeneutics
Page 188.	"In Caesarea, however, it was not understood. And yet the population, little satisfied with the promised 'new look' of the old god Pan, was groping for something new. Jesus became the object of this search, as Matthew recorded. When YhShWh asks, 'Who do men say that I, Ben~Adam, am?' the answer is: Some say thou art John the Baptist: some Elias: and others, Jeremiah, or one of the other prophets (Matt. xvi, 14). It is obvious that no one has understood. Turning then to his disciples, the Rabbi asks, But who say ye that I am? "We have only Greek versions of their answer. It is even probable that the first texts of the gospels were in the Hellenistic language. However, certain clues, especially in Matthew, lead us to believe that the Rabbi taught in Hebrew. We can infer from them that Jesus tried to oppose the Hellenistic revival by revealing the deep sense of the original Revelation. But the minds of his contemporaries were not ready to understand the Aleph~Bayt. "The Hellenistic answer, attributed to Simon, 'Thou art Khristos,' is preposterous. The very idea of being called Khristos—or Christ, the Anointed, in modern language—so horrified the Rabbi that he later on charged...his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus Christ (Matt. xvi, 20). And WHAT HE MEANT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN OTHER THAN WHAT HE SAID. "In Hebrew, Simon probably said: 'Thou art Ben~YHWH~Elohim (or Ben~YHWH), thus emphasizing the Rabbi's statement. And this answer would have been in accordance with the profound original theme of Genesis, which, ever since the appearance of YHWH, proclaims the primacy of his symbolic..."	"In Caesarea, however, it was not understood. And yet the population, little satisfied with the promised 'new look' of the old god Pan, was groping for something new. Jesus became the object of this search, as Matthew recorded. When YhShWh asks, 'Who do men say that I, Ben~Adam, am?' the answer is: Some say thou art John the Baptist: some Elias: and others, Jeremiah, or one of the other prophets (Matt. xvi, 14). It is obvious that no one has understood (that Ben~Adam means evolution of Aleph in blood...it does not mean 'son of man'). Turning then to his disciples, the Rabbi asks, But who say ye that I am? "We have only Greek (hylic) versions of their answer. It is even probable that the first texts of the gospels were in the Hellenistic language. However, certain clues, especially in Matthew, lead us to believe that the Rabbi taught in Hebrew (Modern Hebrew is Anglicized. Jesus decried dialectic (static bivalency) as Satan (bad language and bad thingking.) Jesus taught using Qabala's Autiot and its Gematria. Qabala is autsimilar Buddhist Li~la as Game of Life). We can infer from them that Jesus tried to oppose the Hellenistic revival by revealing the deep sense of the original Revelation (Aleph~Bayt and Moses' Ehieh~Esher~Ehieh: Qabala is Qabala). But the minds of his contemporaries were not ready to understand the Aleph~Bayt. "The Hellenistic answer, attributed to Simon, 'Thou art Khristos,' is preposterous. The very idea of being called Khristos—or Christ, the Anointed, in modern language—so horrified the Rabbi that he later on charged...his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus Christ (Matt. xvi, 20). And WHAT HE MEANT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN OTHER THAN WHAT HE SAID. (See Gospels Thomas and Philip, among others. Nag Hammadi Library has these and many other 'non approved' texts.) "In Hebrew, Simon probably said: 'Thou art Ben~YHWH~Elohim (or Ben~YHWH), thus emphasizing the Rabbi's statement. And this answer would have been in accordance with the profound original theme of Genesis, which, ever since the appearance of YHWH (the demiurge: it has no Sheen..., it has life, Hay, but that Hay is Yodc without Aleph), proclaims the primacy of his symbolic..." Commentary copyright Doug Renselle - 2015-2029.
Page 189.	"...offspring over the earth's (Adamah's) offspring of flesh and blood. We remember Caheen, son of this primal cosmic energy, rising above his brother Hevel, and Hevel thereby being reduced to a mere pool of blood. We have learned, through all the allegories, of the struggle between the Aleph, which wills to spring forth, and the blood which tends to stifle it. "In conformity with this process, the Rabbi probably answered Simon in terms of which Matthew still shows some visible signs: Blessed art thou, Simon Bar~Yona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven (Matt. xvi, 17). "We know that the 'father' is YHWH. As to 'heaven,' Shamaim, we have seen that it is the action of Sheen (a cosmic breath) upon the symbolic 'waters' (Maim) of life as existence, and we also know that it is the action of timeless YHWH permanently pervading the Universe. We can thus compare Shamaim and YHWH: Shamaim: Sheen~Mem~Yod~Mem: 300.40.10.40 YHWH: Yod~Hay~Waw~Hay: 10.5.6.5 "This comparison of the two schemata reveals that the schema YHWH (as 'father') truly is included in Shamaim: no. 10 corresponding to 300 shows it in existence, no. 5 and 5 corresponding to 40 and 40 shows them alive, and no. 6 corresponding to no. 10 shows it to be fruitful. "By declaring himself Ben~YHWH Jesus identified himself with Israel: And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, thus saith YHWH, Israel is my son, my first~born (Exod. iv, 22), and we do not see any reason for not accepting that statement. An interesting fact is Jesus qualifying Simon Bar~Yona: son of Yona, the dove. It is not generally known that the dove personifying the Holy Spirit has been, since time immemorial, the symbol of Israel. "Let us follow the scene, step by step. YhShWh says, 'I am Ben~Adam.' Simon must have replied, 'I know that you are Ben~YHWH.' In this reply, the Rabbi sees that Simon understands the origin and ultimate purpose of human evolution."	"...offspring over the earth's (Adamah's) offspring of flesh and blood. We remember Caheen, son of this primal cosmic energy, rising above his brother Hevel, and Hevel thereby being reduced to a mere pool of blood. We have learned, through all the allegories, of the struggle between the Aleph, which wills to spring forth, and the blood which tends to stifle it. "In conformity with this process, the Rabbi probably answered Peter in terms of which Matthew still shows some visible signs: Blessed art thou, Peter~Bar~Yona: for (the hylic poverty of) flesh and blood hath not revealed it (evolution of Aleph in blood: Ben~Adam) unto thee, but my father which is in heaven (Matt. xvi, 17). "We know that the (dead, demiurgical) 'father' is YHWH. As to 'heaven,' Shamaim, we have seen that it is the action of Sheen (a cosmic (evolutionary) breath) upon the symbolic 'waters' (Maim) of life as existenceq, and we also know that it is the action of timeless (ever present dialectical demiurge) YHWH permanently pervading the Universe. We can thus compare Shamaim and YHWH: Shamaim: Sheen~Mem~Yod~Mem: 300.40.10.40 YHWH: Yod~Hay~Waw~Hay: 10.5.6.5 "This comparison of the two schemata reveals that the schema YHWH (as (dead, demiurgical) 'father') truly is included in Shamaim: no. 10 corresponding to 300 shows it in existencec, no. 5 and 5 corresponding to 40 and 40 shows them alive, and no. 6 corresponding to no. 10 shows it to be fruitful. (Again, though, lacking Aleph in Yod.) "By declaring himself Ben~YHWH (an evolution of his initial demiurgic self toward becoming a mature YhShWh) Jesus identified himself with Israel: And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, thus saith YHWH, Israel is my son, my first~born (Exod. iv, 22), and we do not see any reason for not accepting that statement. An interesting fact is Jesus qualifying Peter Bar~Yona: son of Yona, the dove. It is not generally known that the dove personifying the Holy Spirit has been, since time immemorial, the symbol of Israel. (Israel was founded by Isaac post Abraham...Islam was founded by Ishmael post Abraham...) "Let us follow the scene, step by step. YhShWh says, 'I am Ben~Adam.' Peter must have replied, 'I know that you are Ben~YHWH.' In this reply, the Rabbi sees that Peter understands the origin and ultimate purpose of human evolution."
Appended Commentary ©Doug Renselle, 2015-2029

To Doug, after decades of doing his best to understand, to Doug anyway (and to Suares, et al.), how Hellenistic translators altered semantic value of original Autiot text into dialectical Greek. Either by intent, malice, possibly hylic ignorance...outcomes are incontrovertible. Our world evidences every day now results of people believing, having faith in, a desultorous and fake Khristos! Of course Simon~Peter took the rap. Suares is saying here, that Simon~Peter is innocent. Guilt lies in Greeks, whose Babel so-called 'christians' adhered. It's a sad story, but its results now are very clear. Christianity is simply a lie, a bare faced lie!

Something incredibly important emerges here. Suares' use of Bar as son (in Doug's opinion, Bar (not Ben) is a correct translation of son) compared to Suares' description of Peter's understanding (last paragraph, p. 189) of Ben as evolution of. Specifically Ben~Adam as evolution of Aleph in Blood, and Ben~YHWH as evolution of the demiurge. We may choose to see that Jesus (Ben~Adam) in all of us starts out demiurgic (hylic) and evolves toward psyche (the called), thence psyche~pneuma (the elect). This is a growth of y~our Yod from Mem (immaturity) to finalMem (maturity). Many don't make it. Those who remain hylic (apparently) become extinct. When we grasp Aleph in Yod, we mature well. When we deny Aleph in Yod we beg self's immature extinction.

Happy New Year!

Doug - 2Jan2015.

You have n¤ total individuality in any 'classical' sense. You have (are) a quantum~coherent, Jungian~islandic, quantized, absolutely changing, middle~including ensemble of perpetually evolving quantons.

Suares understands Doug's comcision here. He didn't have quantum~language and quantum~semasiology at hand to explain better. Doug is making up for that in his comcision.

Readers please realize that Suares was a Jew. Too, he didn't write this text in English. He wrote in Hebrew, perhaps Spanish and French too. His original French text was translated in 1994 by Bernard Suares.

French clearly isn't Anglican, but it does share dialectical issues with English and other 'objective,' 'formal,' 'canonic' languages. If Suares had written this text in Hebrew, it wouldn't have reached as wide an audience, and Doug's comcision wouldn't be necessary. Quantonics raison d'etre for doing quantum~remediation of English is to enable Autiot~like (cosmic energy-like) quantum~comcisionings like what you are reading here.

Begin A Doug Personal Experience Aside: It is nearly four years since my beloved Beth unexpectedly passed...transitioned. Her loss for me was a personal tragedy, but I am not alone. This happens to all of us...often more than once in a life time. My loss of Beth left me empty. She was so special and we were so compatible in terms of two of us making one happy and rewarding human interrelationshiping. I knew she was unique. Her friends called her, "An Old Soul." Patients in nursing homes we visited could see her Aureola (spiritual halo). I could feel her spiritual energy and she shared it as completely as she had qua to do so. We love[d] one another. Love was a word she used every day, and gradually she taught me to use that word about us. Prior her death I was using it every day regarding us. She had changed Doug! Beth had a degree in psychology, and she had a very physial (not physical) quantum~mind. She took to my opus almost gleefully. She was my champion. Foolishly, after my loss of her presence in my life, I considered potentia of finding another similar Beth. In 2011 I thought I had found that person (as a friend, but like a family (surrogate daughter) too), I was mistaken. It took three years to grasp my mistake. I am writing this personal experience here since it exemplifies an ostentation of Suares' Proposition 1: "Seek your total individuality. Do not define it. Any definition of yourself is a deceptive hideout." My personal experience helped me to understand my mistake. Let's reword Suares' proposition to allow Doug to make his point: "Seek others' total individualities. Do not define others. Any definition of others tends to force them into a deceptive hideout." My 'friend' did that to me. She tried to use a dialectical (mechanical-formal-objective) tool called Myers-Briggs to put me in one of its Babelian detention centers. At first, I shrugged it off as humorous, but she persisted. Then I realized I was only a guinea pig to her. No love there, just a mechanical mind trying her best to destroy my quantum~free~will individuality. Prior this she exhibited another dialectical surprise, "I hate love!" She said that. In our goodbye meeting I asked her, "How can one, who loves love, love one who hates love?" Doug - 27Feb2014. End A Doug Personal Experience Aside.

You will not find your total individuality. It is your total individuality that sees you, that witnesses your doings. It acts in our space-time continuum but is not restricted to it.

Detail:

Immortality is perpetual. In quantum~gnostic~immortality's immanence there are 'no' finals. There is 'no' "getting done," "arriving," "resting on one's laurels," etc.

Autsimilar biological cell death and resurrection which occurs about one million times per second in a 'living' human body, immortality is perpetual livings and dyings of one's body. One's quantum~incomplete soul, forever ascending and self~revealing, is epiecclesiastic (Doug's coining) one's series of life emerqancies. This is one of several gnostic revelations which both Jesus and Jung (among others) have exemplified for all of us who are outside classicism's brick-wall closed collectives: two of our best brick-walled, closed exemplars are 'christianity' and 'islam.' How can we assess that? They both call other: "Satan." Both are antinomially members of collectives all of which are Satan one. Essene and Chaldaean gnostics (and possibly others; Doug lacks detail knowledge of others, e.g., Perataen, Manichaean, Valentiniun, Ophite, Naassene, etc.) find their faith in open quantum~individualism and thus are autonomous members of quantum~coherent~uncollective Satan two.

To find one's total individuality is an act of classical finality: to finish self. But that act defines self and thus kills it, Mawt-Hamawts it. Making self mortal (or suffering an illusion, a self delusion, of self finality).

'christians' call this one-life centric final death: "the eschaton."

Doug - 29Apr2013.

Your total individuality is your soul. It abides an independent plurality of universes. Because it is alive, it is evolving. Because it is outside of time, its evolution is only the time you need to permit it to find you. Because it is omnimensional, it contributes to the composition of an Ecclesia. It is one and innumerable. [Doug's bold green QELR for quantum~exegesis.]

Detail:

There isn't much Doug can write here which hasn't been covered already in Propositions one and two. Perhaps it is better to just quote two of Suares' most enlightening paragraphs:

"The only thing we can really do is to put ourselves at the service of our natural talents. If we do so without exploiting our talents for personal profit (and most people do exploit their talents for personal profit), then those talents are at the service of the Timeless Energy [AKA reserve energy], which is their origin. By becoming their humble servant, we open up channels that Soul will use. Gradually we discover much more in us that we knew we had--more intelligence, more capacities, more inner gifts, and wider horizons. Our soul prospers, growing richly and vigorously. It grows and grows and grows. It wants to grow until it catches fire!

"So let us never limit ourselves to what the environment has made us. If it has turned us into a janitor or sales clerk or corporation president or artist, let us realize that we could just as well be a plumber, movie actor, philosopher, or healer. The more open our viewpoint, the greater our soul's harvest." Pages 146-147, ibid. Doug's brackets.

Doug - 29Apr2013.

Suares is using classical language to describe a living quantum~reality. Jung does similarly with YhShWh as a quantum~being in his Plate 127, which Doug has reviewed in depth.

There are deluded, dialectical, classical Ecclesia_c and there are quantum Ecclesia_q as Suaresean~Jungian quantum~complementary antinomials similar Yod_c and Yod_q. Essene~tially your ensemble_q is in an Ecclesia_q and said Ecclesia_q issi ihn your ensemble "without any classical contradiction." (Pagels, et al., make a serious case for YhShWh as an Essene Gnostic. For example, see Pagels' Johannine Gospel in Gnostic Exegesis.)

Quantumly your evolving_q totality_q is islandically_q individual_q, quantized, alive, and c¤hærænt its both l¤cal and n¤nl¤cal hologra[[il][m][ph]]ic comtextings. Its quantons(wavings,waviclings) are both individual and c¤hærænt an quantum~unlimited~reality.

4.

Your soul will not find you as long as your [Jungian] consciousness is made of stuff of false evidences created [intelligently designed] by your [dialectical] mind: as long as you do not feel a sense of suffocation in those space-time [dialectical] false evidences. [Doug's brackets for emphasis.]

Detail:

Simply, Doug agrees. 30Apr2013.

Observe, according his Red Book translation by Sonu Shamdasani, that Jung struggled immensely escaping his dialectical false evidences.

Again we observe, with Quantonics intuition, antinomials soul_c and soul_q. Jung, to Doug, appears to agree with such an assessment. Jung's soul is immanent and grailic.

The death of false evidences is a psychological death, announcer of resurrection. Each false evidence denounced opens a window in the inner space where the measurable dies.

Detail:

'False evidences' roughly correspond these classical ideas and notions:

• monism (essentially socialists' and central planners' tyrannous insistence on one 'global' system fits all)
• discoverable 'laws' which are perpetually true
• stoppability
• analyticity
• objectivity
• Aristotle's sillygisms
  • identity
  • contradiction
  • excluded-middle
• lisr:
  • localability
  • isolability
  • separability
  • reducibility
• closure
• conservation
• 'scientific' measurement based upon those classical ideas and notions
• etc.

Despite some of Suares' own (bad habit) dialectisms he homes in on Essene~nce. One bothersome aspect of Suares' apparent (partial) dialectism is his use of 'truth.' Does he intend truth_q which evolves? Does he intend truth_c (leading to 'law') which is perpetually, state-ically always 'true?' Ideal classical unchangeable truth_c? Doug infers from Suares' insistence on a living and conscious cosmic~flux~reality that he intends truth_q which evolves. Note that quantum~truthings do n¤t deprive individuals of their freedoms, especially freedom of individual self~evolution of body and mind.

Begin Doug Aside on Truth - 19Jul2013:

Let's describe two kinds of truth: truth_c and truth_q:

• truth_c
  • truth of certainty
  • truth of determination
  • singular truth
  • monistic truth
  • static truth
  • "received objective knowledge as 'truth_c' (See contradiction, opposition, state, truth, etc.)
  • 'c a t h o l i c' truth, AKA 'universal' truth
  • etc.
• truth_q
  • uncertainty (Suares, see his Second Coming of Reb YhShWh, p. 56, Weiser Press, 1994, translated by Bernard Suares)
  • indetermination (Suares, Ibid.)
  • truthings
  • radical quantum~pluralism of truthings
  • evolving truthings (Suares describes Ben Adam as "Evolution of Aleph in Blood," see recurrences of this in his opus. He emphatically disavows a classical and naïve static_c and concrete_c interpretation of Ben Adam as 'Son of Man.' Said evolution is toward better! and bettership!)
  • self~other evolution_q of truthings as truth_q: truth_q as an agent of its own evolutionary_q changings_q (See antinomy, chance, change, choice (AKA heresy), evolution, scintillation~quantization, transmutation, etc.)
  • comtextually complementary (hologra[[ail][m][ph]]ic) truthings (Study Suares narrative on antinomialism of piecemeal quantonic energy~welling dualities which classical nous naïvely refers ideal 'dialectical opposition.')
  • etc.

Truthings hyper truth!

Analogously flux_q hyper state_c.

Are you still a dialectician...? Are you still serfing self_c into extinction? (Doug's coining of 'serfing.')

Doug - 19Jul2013.

End Doug Aside on Truth - 19Jul2013.

Suares writes it concisely, "As responsible adults, it is our duty to denounce and deflate these hallucinations (classical false evidences)." Page 153, ibid.

He tells us to ferret out these false evidences and desnouer each one-by-one. Unmask them. Uncloak them. Exegetize them!

In that process we granularly yet quantumly eliminate 'false evidences' in ourselves. We gradually excise dialectic's metastatic cancer cells from our individual psyche~pneuma . Suares refers this, "Personal salvation." Page 154, ibid. Again, Doug agrees!

Doug claims we can globally eradicate them by killing academe's hero: dialectic. Get rid of dialectic in your individual self!

Suares shook Doug's timbers with this, "...philosophers will find truth when they can die in their own words." Doug agrees if Suares is saying that philosophers, as all others, will find truthings when they kill dialectic in themselves.

Actually quantum~reality does this for us. Quantization and its companion scintillation change all and always change. Quantum~reality, via quantons(scin,quan) kills (i.e., Qof destroys all illusions of) dialectic and formal-mechanical objective thing-king. So all of our words and their sema quantally evolve and mutate. These mutations destroy their ancestors. This evolutionary process evolves_q those ancestors out of existence. Due perpetual and ubiquitous quanta and their scintillation, then

"This means, of course that we must die to every minute [every Planck moment] of every day, die to every thought, to every definition of ourselves and of our supposed relationship with a God of our projection. Far from being a suicidal process, this is on the contrary a cleaning of our 'house,' a letting go of the mechanism of existence to which Yod [per se, by itself] would have us cling." Carlo Suares in his Cipher of Genesis, page 86. Doug's brackets. Always keep Aleph with your Yod. (Doug is paraphrasing Pirsig's "...always keep DQ with your SQ.") 3Oct2015 - Doug.

Begin Aside on Bethany Ritual to "...die in their own words:"

Doug being a novice in Qabala and Autiot often has trouble grasping Suares' meanings, e.g., just above his "...philosophers will find truth when they can die in their own words." What in our world did he intend by "...die in their own words?" Doug may have found a clue in Baigent, Leigh, and Lincoln's Holy Blood, Holy Grail. Of relevance are p. 343 (HBHG) re: Schonfield's comments about Lazarus and his symbolic death at Bethany thence enigma of Priori de Sion's mandate for using Bethany symbolically at Rennes-le-Chateau.

According to Schonfield Jesus dispatched Lazarus (Magdalene's brother; Jesus' best friend) to Bethany for a Qabalic Essene ritual symbolic death "in words only." Ponder sword vav words...

Doug needs to add more here on details of Bethany and semasiologies surrounding Bethany's specialness.

Other than its ritual, Doug still doesn't understand why? Doug - 26Feb2014.

Begin 22-23Mar2014 Aside on Doug's Understanding Why?:

Doug is currently (with great ignorance and an imperative of humility) studying Suares' ciphering of Sepher Yetsira and its Sefirot. Given Doug's ignorance and a mandate to destroy hubris as a testosteronic illusion, Doug senses he may offer some level of understanding here. This offering will stand until something better emerges.

In Sepher Yetsira its 22 Autiot are grouped into at least three quantum islands of thought:

• Three Mothers (Aleph~Mem~Sheen)
• Seven Doubles (Vayt~Bayt, Djimel~Ghimel, Thallet~Dallet, Khaf~Kaf, Phay~Pay, Raysh~Shyar, Thav~Tav; think of each pair having this Heraclitean omnifying of antinomial_q c¤mm¤n interrelationshipings: open (unpointed and capable of mixing), and closed (pointed and incapable of mixing)
  • Notice dual~phase_q self~referent_q evolving_q antinomial_q complementarity_q of each of seven Auts. For example, Dallet may represent a door, and said door's self~evolution antinomially complements self as door~open vis-à-vis door~closed. We see quanton(open,closed). Please obtain enthymemetic (partial_q) antinomial_q complementarity_q of openness_q and closedness_q. Closed: Dallet is known by a point on its Aut. Open: Thallet is known by lack of a point on its Aut. Self_q fractal_q recursion_q issi required ihn each of seven Auts' doubles_q. Doug - 23Mar2014. Doug, as a novice unintentionally reversed Open and Closed. Hopefully they appear better now. Doug - 6Apr2014.
• Twelve Simples (Hay~Waw, Zayn~Hhayt, Tayt~Yod, Lammed~Noun, Sammekh~Ayn, Tsadde~Qof)
  • Notice pairwise coobsfective_q antinomial_q complementary_q other~reference_q symbol pair by symbol pair. Other_q fractal_q recursion_q issi required ihn each of six pairs of Aut symbols. Be astounded: AI_q is built~ihn to Sepher Yetsira's omniscriptionings_q of cosmic reality! Doug - 23Mar2014.

Our focus here is Seven Doubles and for this naïve exemplar Vayt~Bayt.

Each of Sepher Yetsira's doubles represents pair by pair a shared rudimentary semantic (excluding each pairs' ostensed semantics, unique to each pair) like this (using Vayt~Bayt as an exemplar):

• Vayt (unpointed) represents a new beginning, a new life "trajectory," and
• Bayt (same Aut symbol, pointed) represents an ending of a prior life trajectory.

In quantonics, Doug shows this in his quantum script as:

• quanton(Vayt,Bayt) issi quanton(new_life_beginning,old_life_ending) (imagine this in a perpetual_q loop_q life_q ontology_q)
• quanton(Bayt_as_a_new_beginning_borne_of_old_Vayt's_ending,Vayt's_next_new_beginning_after_prior_life_phase's_ending).

You see Doug using Aut symbols as words, and you may choose to see a sense of "dying in those words" in order for new beginnings to emerge from those old words: quantons(beginnings,endings) forever... We see immortality as perpetuity.

Think of an eggshell as (quanton(strong_enough_to_protect_chick's_germ_of_life(Vayt),weak_enough_for_chick_to_escape(Bayt's_end_of_shell_trajectory)).

Classical psychiatry must find a way to end its current trajectory_c (break its vocabulary-thought_c shell_c) and begin a newer meliorated_q life_q existence_q!

Doug just watched one of his favorite movies which offers an exemplar in real life. In Shadows in the Sun, Harvey Keitel (an experienced and successful author) tells his protégé to throw away (Bayt) his current manuscript and give his story a new life trajectory (Vayt). Notice whatings we are seeings hereings issi whatings Doug refers quantum~included~middle~antinomial~complementarity: quanton(Vayt,Bayt). Vayt issi ihn Bayt and Bayt issi ihn Vayt.

Doug.

End 22-23Mar2014 Aside on Doug's Understanding Why?.

End Bethany Ritual Aside.

Jung-like, Suares ends proposition 5 like this, "In the inner space of my being, which is now wide open, there is nothing left of me that can be measured. I find only a psychological death and an indescribable freedom." Page 154, ibid.

And from Jung, to round this off nicely, "The hero [dialectic]--the beloved figure of the people, should fall. All heroes bring themselves down by carrying the heroic [dialectical] attitude beyond a certain limit, and hence lose their footing." Refer Jung's Red Book, Liber Primus, 'Splitting of the Spirit,' page 240, footnote 102, Norton, 2009. This applies to Earth societies more than ever, CeodE 2013. Doug's brackets. Keynesian religion, like dialectic, is killing itself. Bravo!

Doug - 1May2013.

Suares, clearly here, is describing one's own killing of one's own dialectical predilections. In dialectic's place emerges a New Way of Thinking and Believing: quantum, qabala, etc.

Jung describes this as "killing one's (failed and failing) hero." Suares refers it "Second Coming."

In Quantonics Doug shows this as an inner rejection of all dialectical ideas, canon, dogma, and orthodoxy...while replacing those ideas with novel memes and memeos all Qabalic and Quantonic~quantum.

In our novel Ways of Believing and Doing, there no longer is measurement, what Doug calls scalarbation: 'value.' Our eyes are opened to quantum~omnitoring of evolving~living quantum~processings: Value.

This death of the measurable in the inner space is a personal [individual] experience. All that is said to you about it will prevent it from occurring. Do not listen to the professionals of any religions. Doug's brackets.

Detail:

• Yod (10) is Aleph's (1's) antinomial, and.
• Phay (80) is Hhayt's (8's) antinomial.
• ditto, pairwise, 2 and 20, 3 and 30, 4 and 40, 5 and 50, 6 and 60, 7 and 70, 9 and 90.

Doug - 10Jun2013.

Beyond this death, our infinitely multiple individuality reveals our present person that we are only one of its multifarious manifestations. We then meet the other manifestations of our soul [an quantum~ostentation] spread out through history, still present and alive. Doug's brackets.

Detail:

There

So this consciousness emanating from our soul integrates its earthly past and also its future. It knows itself continuous, without limits. It is all-consciousness, it penetrates every consciousness, it understands every consciousness, and that understanding is love.

Detail:

There

Jung's "Love Triumphant."

Doug 25-26Apr2013.