Category Archives: Sacred Geometry

My sacred geometry

My sacred geometry represents tree of life (gaia, persephone) and the divine ladder as well as noetic structure (athena)

That’s what the metatron cube represents at the top (ascension, illumination, gnosis)

The colors I suppose represent the causal unfoldment of forms from divine white light (plotinus)

The star of David serves as a reminder that this is a pointer to the highest divine structure (star)

We are the bottom node not realizing our metaphysical archetypal structure (posidonius)

I suppose if anywhere our Id is represented as the szyzgy of color (rainbow) which represents the full myriad of sexuality as it exists for both genders.

Fitting it’s at the center

and to top off with a little synchronous after reading

Metaphysics

My hope in life is to get at the metaphysics of life. You’re probably wondering. Yeah, right. How are you going to do that Mr Plato?

I didn’t just start with nothing. I started with something. I started specifically with artificial neural networks and then genetic algorithms. Then I studied classical philosophy, classical theories of mind, modern theories of system dynamics related to neuroscience (ex libet), then modern works on neural networks (Jeff Heaton and various projects on github that model ANN’s), and then finally the creme de le creme for my lack in understanding of physics. Statistics and classical philosophy.

You’re probably laughing at me. I would be too. But the final piece, that magical divining piece is my masters in quantitative data science (ex using cv and holdout analysis using simple binary bifurcation of all independent variables) I can do kmeans, clustering, binary logistic regression, proportions to get adequate descriptions of reality using tests of significance. That piece helps me put together what it was that Plato was talking about with cognizable ideas with data science. It merely confirms what I believed I could surmise myself from summarizing. Holdout analysis is what brumbraugh talks about contrast pov’s. Wisdom of the crowd’s is sampling. Essences is means. All this talk about circle’s point and many radii is 1:M. Proclus talks about indexing. See, I’m not crazy. Aristotle’s logic and categories helped with UML programming (member variables and process logic). Plato’s forms with system modeling (classes). Archimedes with Pi. Pi with error terms in statistics. Hypatia with applying circles to other areas than pi (conic shapes). These ideas were slowly added into systems of science from universal laws inferred from philosophy.

I side with Plato and Plotinus and Brumbraugh that reality is somewhat understandable and you don’t need to know it all to approximate most of it (majority). You can understand it. What you cannot understand does not exist. What you understand are impressed upon you as ideas or archetypes. We can expand this understanding using theories like physics, math or statistics to identify systems. Within statistics population means represent essences. I’m good at taxonomy and maybe identifying psychological causal relations. But as to systems of laws of reality. That is harder to get at. One has to setup experiments that can be tested within the model. That helps get to a base. But then you have to infer the metaphysical from the base. What does that mean? When you see a circle and you understand that the irrational number pi the RATIO of the diameter (width) to the circumference (surface length) and that RATIO’s are what are real numbers and if you understand that it’s this irrational number that is REAL and it expresses the convex of the circle.

Procession, Reversion.

Circle is Divine

What is divine? A mandala, a circle. A circle is divine.

Not because it’s a mandala. I just drew the connection between what Jung said about mandala’s being circle’s… as they often come up in people’s minds under stress.

Anyways… why a circle? Because of pi really. I mean any irrational number could qualify for why I picked pi (infinite, random), but the real reason I picked pi is because of it’s association with the mandala effect and the visual effect of a circle. A circle isn’t something you can easily draw with a ruler or by hand. It requires a compass and specialized tools. We can do it, but it is not easy to mimic and yet it exists in nature. It exists in nature as some type of entity, or tied to this thing known as a circle.

That is what I’m getting at. Matter is drawing itself around circles and laden within that formula of a sphere is pi and it is everywhere in our lives and in our mathematics and in our minds.

And Archimedes, Plotinus, Porphyry, Hypatia, Proclus, and Damascius, I would argue Plato by at least extension of the Sun, definately Parmindes with the One (sphere) and maybe democritus with the atom, all have in common the circle.

So what is divine. The circle. The circle is divine. So divine all your answers from the circle.

The Circle & Neoplatonism

The Circle-Radii Analogy in Plotinus, Proclus, and Damascius, and Its Legacy

Continuing on an earlier discussion

It doesn’t really talk about pi which is kind of disheartening, but then at the same time it expands on theories aside from pi. Instead of circumference and diameter (which is necessary for pi); there is a lot of discussion on the circumference, radii, and point. The reason I find lack of discussion of pi disheartening is because pi is the missing ratio between the center (diamter) and circumference (exterior) and this dynamis of infinite number is like an RNG, but I can’t find any proof that pi is good for RNG, but I see it in the error term. Point being I’m afraid these philosopher’s discussions might be merely pythagorean numerology numeration (still useful) vs actual math based inferences… but philosophy is meant to help bridge the gap between complex metaphysics and understanding… and I think here the hope is to infer some simple analogy of where the divine One is at as opposed to dealing with complex irrational numbers.

It doesn’t really talk about pi which is kind of disheartening, but then at the same time it expands on theories aside from pi. Instead of circumference and diameter (which is necessary for pi); there is a lot of discussion on the circumference, radii, and point. The reason I find lack of discussion of pi disheartening. Is I believe pi is the missing ratio between the center (diameter) and circumference (exterior) and this dynamis of infinite number is like an RNG, but I can’t find any proof that pi is good for RNG, but I see it in the error term. Point being I’m afraid these philosopher’s discussions might be merely pythagorean numerology numeration (still useful) vs actual math based inferences… but philosophy is meant to help bridge the gap between complex metaphysics and understanding… and I think here the hope is to infer some simple analogy of where the divine One is at as opposed to dealing with complex irrational numbers.

The One is often associated with either the point, or behind the point and that get’s tricky. The behind the point would stress some type of immateriality (Augustine borrows this) yet at the same time by this allegory can be inferred by analogy visa natural philosophy

In Agora Hypatia had circle mania and I saw it and I thought about pi in error terms in statistics and now I read this with Plotinus, Proclus, and Damascius. Damascius associates the point with an enfolded one where the radii unfold out. Psuedo dionysius associates the one with the point where all the radii intersect. What’s interesting is in Eric D Perl’s work, he uses the concept of enfoldment as well.

Note: Archimedes was the philosopher who came up with an accurate estimate of Pi (~212 BC).

One of the points they are getting at is the radii are like the forms (archetypes) while the surface of the radii or their aggregation make up the circle. The circle (outer edge) is like matter or the instances (I’m not exactly sure). But the center is the One or often behind the center.

Unity was either contained in the One or after the one depending on the philosopher (unity implies multiplicity) , but was analogous to a 1:M relationship. Which is why the cross sections of radii and 1:M relationship for forms and databases make so much sense. As well as pi being in the error term in statistics as the class differentiating term when all other constants in the regression equation have been found.

The 1:M is interesting because a circle if representing a 1:M represents a dimension (just like in R). Then a sphere represents a 2d dimensional space differentiated into a spherical form. Something like that. Point being a circle represents a dimension just like a sphere represents gravity (gravity represents space dimension as it curves space to a sphere)

The One is often associated with either the point, or behind the point and that get’s tricky. The behind the point would stress some type of immateriality (Augustine borrows this) yet at the same time by this allegory can be inferred by analogy visa natural philosophy

In Agora Hypatia had circle mania and I saw it and I thought about pi in error terms in statistics and now I read this with Plotinus, Proclus, and Damascius. Damascius associates the point with an enfolded one where the radii unfold out. Psuedo dionysius associates the one with the point where all the radii intersect. What’s interesting is in Eric D Perl’s work, he uses the concept of enoldment as well.

Note: Archimedes was the philosopher who came up with an accurate estimate of Pi (~212 BC).

One of the points they are getting at is the radii are like the forms (archetypes) while the surface of the radii or their aggregation make up the circle. The circle (outer edge) is like matter or the instances (I’m not exactly sure). But the center is the One or often behind the center.

Unity was either contained in the One or after the one depending on the philosopher (unity implies multiplicity) , but was analogous to a 1:M relationship. Which is why the cross sections of radii and 1:M relationship for forms and databases make so much sense. As well as pi being in the error term in statistics as the class differentiating term when all other constants in the regression equation have been found.

The 1:M is interesting because a circle if representing a 1:M represents a dimension (just like in R). Then a sphere represents a 2d dimensional space differentiated into a spherical form. Something like that. Point being a circle represents a dimension just like a sphere represents gravity (gravity represents space dimension as it curves space to a sphere)

Proclus on the One and the Analogy of the Circle

Proclus expanding on Plotinus use of the circle to describe the 3 hypostases of Neoplatonism.

“But up there they are all in unity: if you take what corresponds to the center, you will find everything in it; if you take the procession coming out of the center, you will find that this also contains everything; and likewise if you take the reversion. When you have seen that they are all of them in each other, and have discounted the imperfection implicit in their extendedness, and have banished from thought the spatial position around which they are distributed, you will discover the truly real circle itself—the circle which goes forth in itself, defines itself, and acts in relation to itself; which is both one and many; which remains, goes forth, and reverts [toward itself]; which has its most indivisible and unitary part firmly fixed, but is moving away from it in every direction by virtue of the straight line and the Unlimited that it contains in itself, and yet from itself wraps [itself] back into unity, urged by its own similarity and self-identity towards the partless [center] of its own nature and the One that has been hidden there. And once it has embraced [this center], it becomes homogeneous with it and with its own plurality as it revolves about it. For that which reverts imitates what has remained fixed; and the circumference is like a separated center converging upon it, striving to be the center and become one with it and to bring the reversion back to the point from which the procession began.21 (154,2–24; trans. Morrow, modified)”

Soul as Unity

Continuing on my earlier post

I’m reading Cambridge Companion to Plotinus inbetween Jung trying to synthesize between the two and after reading about the szyzgy (a pair of opposites in an archetypal form, which is a type of cognitive dissonance resolution). In occult symbolism, rich . Basically, yin/yang (Jung quotes the use of yin/yang). I’ve always found the connection with Love/Strive and Yin/Yang unmistakable, procession/reversion. Masculine/feminine, sun/moon.
Anyways…
“His [Plotinus] innovations were rooted in a tradition that he knew harmonized with his metaphysical system, centered on the procession of plurality from the One.”
This “procession of plurality” is what stood out to me. I’ve been asking here if there was any such thing as a male/female pair, and the best I could find was the neopythagorean monad/dyad before it was sectioned off into the One and nous. However… I think the One projects onto the second hypostases a few things to include the nous which itself is constructed of this pair if you will but also the 4 elements as well as soul (unity). Basically, there are different aggregate formal models that with a little bit from each sphere of influence, you end up with a “being” with archetypal influence exerted upon it through this duality.
These are just ideas, I’m not hard setting them in anything other than initial impressions from what I’ve read so far.

Dare I say the 5th element is unity? I’m not sure, I honestly have no idea. I know there is a 5th element and it’s equated with spirit or soul of somekind (quintaessence).

I’m trying to interpret it neoplatonically, considering that essence of being is a unity of form(s), I figured life is a unity of forms (procession), and death (reversion) is a dissolution of such, i.e. entropy (literally, then soul would be the complex counter-entropy of ever increasing complexity of unity of life).

So I figured maybe the 5th element is unity, combining all 4 forces to unify a being. I’ve been contemplating the idea that with dual aspect monism, that the psyche aspect of matter and the idea of an eternal soul. I equate the soul with unity of being. So upon death. the soul’s unity reconfiigure’s itself somewhere else into some other object-subject form configuration in the continual procession/reversion of the cosmos, but this essence of unity is what is cognized (as the idea) between aware subjects and objects. Honestly, I think the essence isn’t so superficial as an object without consciousness. I think the essence is consciousness (following from interpretations of Parmenides being defined as such) and all material form wraps around this center of awareness in a manifestation of presentation (I’ve been getting this interpretation from recent neoplatonic readings, matter isn’t real).

There are other players who are enjoined in this material presentation, but none-the-less, matter wraps around their center of ensouled unity to display a material eidetic presentation. In other words, the soul’s unity provides a gravity of living matter in the cosmos. Upon death, the soul will find a new home where it will reconstruct itself around matter to experience a manifestation of reality. This ensouled matter is a construct of earth (gravity, matter), fire (warmth, heat, light), air (oxygen, space to move), water (sustenance, flux) with soul provided by the One as a unity bringing them together (dare I say through our very own sun).

Soul as Divine Mirror, Nous

The Soul can be thought of as a mirror reflecting external appearances. We think our ideas our our own, but in actuality, they are based upon external inputs molded inside a single unitary agent (mirror).

Outside of this there is a reflected mess of inter-reflections. These create an unconscious conscious. A secondary nous if you will. An emergent set of ideas based upon the reflections (mirrors) shining off of each other, each mirror has it’s own color tone to it. This overall color scheme that is in the mix of all these mirrors is somewhat semi conscious. It is intelligent to an extent that it can be sensed and assist.

My assumption is this is when symbols that have high visibility are used that also have emotional and symbolic meaning attached to them. This is when this secondary nous takes notice.

This intermixture of reflected colors is the Zeitgeist. Like the ‘holy spirit’ existing in the background that everyone can’t quite touch but they can all feel in one way or another in their daily lives through social expectations, norms, and consequences.

Jung-Proclus-Empedocles Art

Empedocles 4 elements has a lot to unpack

Fire, water

As heat, life
Energy, life
Energy, death

Positive, negative
Energy

Air and earth
As absence and presence
Or simply matter
Matter

Each element hints at a duality (flux) almost like a yin yang. Considering the yin yang has 2 patches for each color (2×2=4).

Plus Aristotle’s 5th element

Sacred Geometry along with yin yang which symbolizes the dual/quad opposing forces of empedocles

How I view Jung and Proclus fit in

River Lethe

Proclean Dionysian Jungian Archetypes Henads

“The signs, it’s roles, and it’s supernatural connections” – Alcibiades and the Socratic Lover-Educator p 5

The Gods are elements/archetypes of human psyche that offer subconscious prescripts.  I believe the archetypes influence our [re]incarnations between genders.

“i am a child of earth and starry heaven”

The Animus Mundi heard me and introduced me to my Anima’s.  I projected some inner anima archetype (my inner Diva Hypatia) in a state of bachic frenzy while I saw my favorite female fronted punk band Tsunami Bomb.  Just the week prior I was on a [synchronous] walk through downtown long beach just before midnight that made me aware of the show, it literally was a right place right time type of situation.

That night at the show I literally was trying to summon some angels.  I told these gorgeous ladies (Andrea and Marissa) about Gnostic Archetypes and Hypatia.  I was talking to them about Animus Mundi (and others outside before the show) as well as related posts on IG just prior to the show.

We experience the divine mind via its logos, or the concept of logos (logos loosely means speech, but that to Express a logical set of ideas) in general. Loosely translated as platonic ideas which enter our heads

If our mind is a bundle of subsystems and it can be posited that governments are semi conscious, then societies and planetary orbits exhibit similar states. Homeostatic states (exhibits an internal essence/unity), often with a nuclei (analagous to a regression model with coefficients).

Integrated information theory

“Are you, then, of the opinion that intelligence (nous) alone exists nowhere and that you by some good chance seized hold of it, while—as you think—those surpassingly large and infinitely numerous things [all the earth and water] are in such orderly condition through some senselessness?”

Socrates (Nous)

Peoples lives are books in the library of god (Me)

Mind orders all things

I think neoplatonism is about seeing the mind (nous) as a type of feedback loop (synchronicity) akin to normal self awareness through our own understanding of existing in nuemenal reality. I.e. we are aware of mind/nous and we see it is acting through us by bringing to us ideas and our thoughts are its and we are one and same. (Our ideas are nous’ ideas). We (selves) become aware we (us and nous) are similar and we see the eternal mind acting through us. We greet/become aware of the divine mind.

In other words, we recognize that ideas are external to us and eternal and they emerge through us via archetypes (henads/angels/seraphs what have you, basically conglomerate ideas)

The appearances are all represented internally as ideas. Once we recognize them as such, if we move past this POV that these ideas are external impressions of eternal ideas, we begin to see the divine mind working on us.

The key is the ideas are external to us.

Anaxagoras “Mind orders all thinngs”

The divine mind has a will, a logos, providence/manifest destiny. this is where I addendum neoplatonism. As in its desired expressed ideals for us as expressed via the good/henads/nous acted through us via surviving archetypes and ideals. In other words. The world soul/nous has an active spirit working on us as expressed through the ideals we set in our daily lives. I think those that are aware of the nous’ eternal nature yet active presence in the moment receive a reciprocal affect. This is the impression I get from contemplating my own life events contrasted with what I’m reading, especially w Jungian synchronicity and archetypes

I’m just a window of the divine mind. As in what I think are my thoughts are merely a mask for its thoughts. My brain is an engine utilized by the ideas. We all are.

It’s a mix and match of tabula rasa w eternal ideas. Collective unconscious is real and is innate within us but its latent, the self constructed ego on top is tabula rasa but is impressionable/instrinctly linked w these biological undertones (unconscious) that Jung was getting at (and frued), same w plato (innate forms)

Bios: Each life is a story in the nous.

Each individual idea shared across stories (experienced as deja vu and epiphanies (intuitive insights), common themes, idioms/maxims) are an example of the eternal ideas (deduplicated data or form) as stored in space/time as jungian collective unconscious/zeitgeist.

These ideas exist in us as overlapping venn diagrams. The more powerful the concept/idea, the more likely it is a henad.

Jungian archetypes ~ henads.

 

1

I actually haven’t read any Jung directly or even indirectly. I was made acquainted via the blue book of aa. I then acquired his red book and read a page and equated it w esoteric gnosticism and stopped. All I know are his ideas on archetypes and synchronicity which I believe and see in neoplatonism and everyday life (prescripts) as well as joseph Campbell motifs in stories of which I have my own scientific American evidence for. I have a story about how all stories share the same elements across continents to when the bering straight had a land bridge and another on the history of ideas (shape of ancient thought) and platos discussion in the republic about controlling myths we are exposed to and the idea behind the realm of ideas and Greek bios and daimons/proclean henads aka dionysian Angel’s or kabbalah seraphim as arche’s as well as aristotles discussion on actuality and potentiality and teleology

2

https://divinearchetypes.org/blogs/news/working-with-the-archetype-of-dionysus-irrational-wisdom?fbclid=IwAR3NTDuCL16yWqBVX3lff68mNsHBM8oeLU132_BRAGBBGpAmnMaHqBdx3I4

Interesting prototype of archetypes . Explains why both Marc Anthony and alcibiades died in drag

This dark does not mean negative but deep. A few synonyms for soulful are emotional, unfathomable, profound, fervent, heartfelt, sincere, passionate, along with meaningful, significant, eloquent, expressive, moving, stirring, sad, and mournful. An interesting definition that sums up soul is the definition of Soul Music. “Broadly speaking, soul comes from gospel (the sacred) and blues (the profane). Blues was mainly a musical style that praised the fleshly desire; whereas, gospel was more oriented toward spiritual inspiration.

This is the death and rebirth cycle: dark into light, light into dark or the alchemical turning of the Grape into wine that is personified here. One gets to cycle between all aspects of soul with its natural rhythms.

Take a moment to sit with this: “My lips got lost on the way.” Rumi is talking about divine direction. One frequently has a mark set within the conscious mind, and in this poem the mark was the “lips,” although he was lucky in that instead he “connected with the most tender part of her,” the soul. He goes on to cite a known simile for the soul, the moon. And in true form to the soul, what “a wild looking baby” they will have! This is talking about the deep plumbing of one’s depths that will produce an outcome that is beyond the abilities of the rational mind. The Grape has often called women and men to step out of their ordinary lives and to revel in nature, support the divine feminine, and to discover an ecstatic element in themselves. In short, the Grape serves as a “priestess,” and initiates woman and men to the experience of Soul or the Great Goddess embodied in us all.

3

I am a huge believer in archetypal psychology and I believe archetypes are the henads of Dionysius (angels/seraphs). My theory is that archetypes are anthropological psychological auto-trophies/tropes that work well together to better the species and exist in a collective unconscious (space/time as memory store via bios of past lives)

https://www.verywellmind.com/what-are-jungs-4-major-archety…

Where do these archetypes come from then? The collective unconscious, Jung believed, was where these archetypes exist. He suggested that these models are innate, universal, and hereditary. Archetypes are unlearned and function to organize how we experience certain things.

“All the most powerful ideas in history go back to archetypes,” Jung explained in his book The Structure of the Psyche.

Jung rejected the concept of tabula rasa or the notion that the human mind is a blank slate at birth to be written on solely by experience. He believed that the human mind retains fundamental, unconscious, biological aspects of our ancestors. These ‘primordial images,’ as he initially dubbed them, serve as a basic foundation of how to be human.

These archaic and mythic characters that make up the archetypes reside with all people from all over the world, Jung believed, at it is these archetypes that symbolize basic human motivations, values, and personalities. He believed that each archetype played a role in personality, but felt that most people were dominated by one specific archetype. The actual way in which an archetype is expressed or realized depends upon a number of factors including an individual’s cultural influences and unique personal experiences.

Four Types contrasted with Plato’s Triparate Soul

Persona (Ego/ID) – This is where the 10 jungian archetypes surface. Also the crossover with Freud. These chosen archetypes influence the prescripts for shadow, self, and anima

Shadow (Appetetive)

Self (Rational)


The Anima or Animus (Emotive)
The anima is a feminine image in the male psyche, and the animus is a male image in the female psyche. The anima/animus represents the “true self” rather than the image we present to others and serves as the primary source of communication with the collective unconscious.

Full Article on 4 Archetypes