Professor challenges Mayan calendar opinion

http://www.news-journalonline.com/NewsJournalOnline/News/Local/newWEST04031506.htm

March 15, 2006

Professor challenges Mayan calendar opinion
By MARK HARPER
Education Writer

The end of the world will come on Dec. 21, 2012. Or not.

While some New Age authors and teachers are touting that date as an apocalypse, a Stetson University professor is challenging the reasoning behind it.

At a public lecture at the Volusia County Library Center on City Island today, Robert Sitler plans to discuss "The 2012 Phenomenon: A New Age Appropriation of an Ancient Mayan Calendar," an article he wrote last month for Nova Religio, the Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions.

Sitler, an associate professor of Spanish language and literature, has been studying and teaching Mayan culture since arriving at Stetson in 1994. He contends the Mayan calendar has long been the subject of "gross misinterpretation" on several hundred Web sites and in a continuous stream of books.

Those postings and printings are evidence of a growing public interest in the Mayan Long Count calendar, which had fallen out of use by the Mayans of Guatemala, Mexico and Belize, long before the Spanish conquerors had arrived.

The 2012 date is the last day of the current "b'aktun" cycle, or period of 144,000 days, and the final day of an even longer period consisting of 13 such cycles. No one knows why the calendar is arranged with an end date, Sitler said. But the Mayans were known for their accurate knowledge of astronomy.

"It's a weird concept to many because the calendar seems to have a preordained ending date," said Jeremy Puma, a Seattle resident and St. Augustine native who writes Fantastic Planet, a "gnostic" blog. He noted in an e-mail interview that the Mayans used the calendar for planting crops and other purposes, but the New Age movement "seems to have glommed onto the calendar's more mythological aspects."

First and foremost, Sitler and Puma agree, is New Age author Jose Arguelles, most famed for his declaration of a "Harmonic Convergence" in August 1987. The Harmonic Convergence, Arguelles said, was the "exponential acceleration of the wave harmonic of history as it phases into a moment of unprecedented synchronization," and "a shift point into the last 25 years of the galactic beam."

Sitler says Arguelles' approach is Mayan culture with "creative abandon," and when challenged, will note that his version of a 260-day Mayan ritual calendar, which differs significantly from the actual calendar used by some Maya even today, is a version of the "Galactic Maya," rather than the indigenous Maya.

"Arguelles is merely the best-known teacher in an ever-expanding international group that includes dozens of highly inventive and often eccentric individuals reaching out to the New Age public with their ideas concerning 2012," Sitler said. He notes the existence of a Web site that features a running clock until Dec. 21, 2012, with links to another selling T-shirts bearing the 2012 date and featuring several pop-up ads.

Despite the blatant commercialism, there remains a lot of interest in the subject, said Jeff Dorian, director of the MetaScience Research Forum, a local group that meets monthly at the Edgewater Public Library. Dorian said he has long wanted to land an expert in the Mayan calendar to speak to his group.

"There is a percentage of people who believe the end of the Mayan calendar will be the end of everything," Dorian said. "There's about as many interpretations of the Mayan calendar as there are experts."

Inside an Ormond Beach New Age shop, the Crystal Connection, a thumping of drums, soft whistle of a flute and screech of an unidentifiable rainforest avian greets visitors. Books line the shelves, carrying titles such as, "The Fourth Dimension," "The Book of Thoth," and "Waking the Tiger: Healing Trauma." Also available: pyramids, amethysts from Uruguay, angels and fairies (spelled "faeries", presumably to seem more Gaelic).

Roger Hollander, owner of the shop, said he doesn't believe 2012 will bring the end of the world. But, he adds: "There are many people that believe this. Some believe this strongly."

Hollander, who also owns similar shops in Indian Rocks Beach and St. Augustine, believes a change could be coming in 2012.

"The world will have a better, a deeper sense of consciousness. By then, (people) should be worn out doing it how they're doing it now. We'll either be here or we won't; we'll just have to experience it."

Sitler predicts the Mayans' culture could lend 2012 "an attractive power that may eventually even outstrip" Y2K, the hype surrounding the year 2000.

This brings to mind that scene from the movie Contact, where all the new agers gather in the desert to have a welcome party for the aliens - it brings to mind the whole sheeple phenomenon, and how no matter what the subject at hand, a lack of critical thinking rules the day. While I do believe the 'end' of the Mayan calendar was put in place to mark the end of several cycles, I'm not convinced that this means the end of anything else. I've come to think that the 'mass extinction' approaching us will occur years before 2012 - and that when this 2012 date arrives, it may mark simply the beginning of the next go round. I don't know for sure, but the fact that focusing on this 2012 date is the latest new age fad seems to point to distraction on a grand scale. Of course, as with all else, we shall see.

The cassiopaeans keep repeating, not to anticipate and I think that is a very important point. We have to stop leaking our energy and therefore not give authority to anybody or any 'thing' outside of ourselves. Socrates is supposed to have said " I know that I don't know, but that I know".
The way I see it, then the substitute for knowing is believing, which is second hand knowledge and useless. It implies that we have given our authority to somebody else, whether that be a person or an institution or a 'holy text'. In regard to the Mayan prophecy of 2012, it seems to be used in many circles for bringing the anticipation levels up another notch and once again is based on belief, as we truly don't know.

In the last chapters of the 'wave series', Laura gives a great analogy of the orchestra. As the orchestra is warming up, all the musicians are tuning their instruments. It is important to listen to one's own instrument in order for it to be tuned and to produce beautiful music. If we spend most of the time if not all of the time in just listening to other people tuning their instruments, then no authentic music will arise from the instrument that we are playing.

Anders

Here is a link with some astronomical explanations and images:

http://www.astunit.com/astrocrud/2012.htm

Apparently, from all I read on the subject, the Mayans first pinpointed the 2012 date, and then worked their way backwards to the "beginning" of the cycle (3114 BCE), which they elaborated between those two dates.

Also apparently, the 2012 date was significant to the Mayans because of two astronomical events, which the popularizers of the calender claim occur upon this date. The first event is the sun (from the geo-perspective) passing through the galactic equator. The second event is that of the sun crossing in front a narrow band of dust in the Cygnus constellation that seems to slice through the Milky Way.

Writers such as John Major Jenkins (whose site I happened to be browsing only yesterday and is now off-line), and the following site:

http://www.greatdreams.com/2012.htm claim that

The date December 21st, 2012 A.D. (13.0.0.0.0 in the Long Count), represents an extremely close conjunction of the Winter Solstice Sun with the crossing point of the Galactic Equator (Equator of the Milky Way) and the Ecliptic (path of the Sun), what that ancient Maya recognized as the Sacred Tree. This is an event that has been coming to resonance very slowly over thousands and thousands of years. It will come to resolution at exactly 11:11 am GMT.

The place where the December solstice sun crosses the Milky Way is precisely the location of the
"dark-rift in the Milky Way ...'xibalba be' - the road to the underworld."

On the winter solstice of 2012, the noonday Sun exactly conjuncts the crossing point of the sun's ecliptic
with the galactic plane, while also closely conjuncting the exact the center of the galaxy.

Click to expand...

Beliefs aside, the fact remains that the crossing of the galacting equator and the crossing of the Cygnus Rift (or Northern Coalsack as it is commonly called), are two different events occuring on two different dates. The galactic equator does not cross the Rift and the Rift does not align precisely with the galactic center which is unobservable to the naked eye and even with optical spectrum telescopes. The Rift aligns with a point somewhere a bit north of the galactic nucleic bulge.

In particular, the Cygnus Rift has a certain width, and the sun entered it in 1955 and will leave it in 2100. It will cross its center in 2030. Regarding the crossing of the galactic equator, the solar disc touched it first in 1980 and its disk will finally traverse it in 2016. Precise conjunction with the solar center occured in 1998.

Another interesting point is that there has been a long standing disagreement between Jenkins and Arguelles regarding the calender itself. Arguelles decided that the date of Feb 29th was too "Gregorian" so he removed those leap year dates from his calendar. Jenkins claims his version comes from existing Mayan tribes in Guatemala and is the "original" version.

Even so Arguelles has a much wider following, selling many products related to his calender called "Dreamspell". In the mid-90's he has also managed to get "Mayan elders" to proclaim him official "Closer of the Cycle" of the Kali Yuga (not a Mayan term obviously), which according to Jenkins is traditionally a role of a sort of suppressor of all things spiritual at the end of the age.

The question for me is: why the date 2012. There is apparently nothing special about that date, yet both Jenkins traditional calendar and Arguelles' "Dreamspell" version agree upon it (apparently a common reference, where variations come upon working backwards from that date).

In addition, others are trying to force the 11:11 factor into the picture, some of them claiming that the REAL end date is Oct. 28th 2011 (again at 11:11 am).

Regarding the discrepancy of the two "significant" astronomical events one can only speculate that since the Mayans had no telescopes (although they had long sited the planet Uranus long before any European with a telescope), they could not distinguish the Rift from the galactic equator. They could have pinpointed the 2012 date as a result of that mistake.

Regarding the meaning of the event, it seems to be a dire prediction because the dust cloud passing through the Milky Way obscures the galactic nucleus, which the Mayans considered the hub of creation. Even so, we have been in it since 1955, and will be in it for years yet. Even if one extrapolates an average between 1998 and 2030, which are the two separate event dates, it comes to 2014.

Unfortunately, many people are banking on this date and believe that down to the second it signifies some "poof!" type of transition. Others, like Jenkins (I have not seen anything of his after 2003) modified their views to say this is only the beginning of the "changes". To me, it's just another kind of Christian millenialist syndrome.

Even so, the human collective regardless of pathocratically promoted pseudo-prophecies does feel that we are in some kind of major transition period. Given the complex and non-linear nature of reality making any specific prediction is unrealistic at best and can even be STS COINTELPRO.

ven so, the human collective regardless of pathocratically promoted pseudo-prophecies does feel that we are in some kind of major transition period. Given the complex and non-linear nature of reality making any specific prediction is unrealistic at best and can even be STS COINTELPRO.

Click to expand...

Exactly. In my opinion, it's "smells" like there is some schedule, and in order to the events to develop in a desired manner, they must fit into some specific time frame. Not too soon and not too late.
There is another apparent aspect - gradual preperation/changing of human race perception so that the creation of "future wonders" will be possible. Today majority of human race is not "ready" for alien invasion, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible. So, the probability factor of such things is extremely low, and apparently this is very important on a hyperdimensional level. So they need time to prepare/modify perception, like hypnotizer prepairing his crowd befor the show. He tell people that today they will see wonders beyond normal human abilities, that in this room laws of nature change somehow. He gently "softening the ground" of people's state of mind, their thought process, and so they start to accept a possibility that such thing maybe possible. And they are the ones who make it possible.

Castaneda have a term for such thing - Assembly point. This is a point of perceptional fixation of human being (FRV or frequency envelope). It's possible to move it, actually it's changes it's location when we are asleep. Drugs also do it. It's changes our perception of the surround reality. So when Hypnotiser talk to the crowd, he is trying to loose this fixation, because without it, it's will be extremely hard to do "wonders" if most of the people (who are creating some sort of mutual thought net) have a concrete beliefs or sure that such things are pure nonsence.
So what is happening today in this world, PTB using fear and panic trying to loose a fixation of the masses, point them toward a direction, where alien invasion or comets rain are highly possible. To make people think about such things, create specific thoughtforms. And they give a specific date, because as time will go by, and we will get closer to this date, more people will start to notice strange things and connect it to this event or period, because they heard about it in so many places.
People have to know, that all of us have the actual power to change the outcome.

Keit said:

Today majority of human race is not "ready" for alien invasion, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible. So, the probability factor of such things is extremely low, and apparently this is very important on a hyperdimensional level. So they need time to prepare/modify perception, like hypnotizer prepairing his crowd befor the show. He tell people that today they will see wonders beyond normal human abilities, that in this room laws of nature change somehow. He gently "softening the ground" of people's state of mind, their thought process, and so they start to accept a possibility that such thing maybe possible. And they are the ones who make it possible.

Click to expand...

I can't say anything about the probability factor of the hyperdimensional level, because I'm here in 3D. IMO what you say here sounds like YCYOR (You create your own reality).

Like: "If I don't think that aliens exist, there won't be an alien invasion." or "If I only have nice thoughts, nothing bad will happen to me"

I don't think it's that easy. If I remember right, the C's said, that we are to 4D STS entities, what animals are to us. Some are food and some are for pleasure. So since we can go and kill an animal anytime we want, I don't think that hyperdimensional STS are bound to some modification of our perception, until they can do us harm.

ArdVan said:

IMO what you say here sounds like YCYOR (You create your own reality).

Like: "If I don't think that aliens exist, there won't be an alien invasion." or "If I only have nice thoughts, nothing bad will happen to me"

Click to expand...

I didn't interpret it like that at all, in fact I saw no evidence of this kind of perspective in Keit's post whatsoever. In fact a concrete example of what he is referring to, a kind of psychological preparation of the populace, can be seen in the news today on the Signs page (namely an investigation of what may be microscopic extraterrestrial life). The Cassiopaeans have mentioned that "invasion happens when programming is complete", and there was a discussion about recent explorations of Mars where the C's mention that microscopic life forms are easier to accept than intelligent 'extraterrestrials'.

There is more to consider than whether or not 4D STS can do what they want with us. What they want may require a certain kind of preparation, remember that their aim is control, mostly from behind the scenes, rather than panic.

Ardvan, I think the difference is, this is not just one animal, but an entire race. So I suppose its kind of like genetically modifying cows, we can't just change the whole race, we need to find out how to do it safely first, or we might cause ourselves more problems than benefits. I think something similar could be true with the lizzies, they can't just "jump in" and do what they want, they know they have to "lay the groundwork" first, so they don't get a "bad" reaction.

ArdVan said:

I don't think it's that easy. If I remember right, the C's said, that we are to 4D STS entities, what animals are to us. Some are food and some are for pleasure. So since we can go and kill an animal anytime we want, I don't think that hyperdimensional STS are bound to some modification of our perception, until they can do us harm.

Click to expand...

There is indeed more to consider whether or not 4D STS can have their way with us. The comparison the C's made is an analogy, and one can be misled if it is taken too literally. Within the boundaries of that analogy, however, there a big differences among animals and big differences and variations among humans.

For example try killing an elephant with your bare hands, or a lion. We tend to think of this relationship in terms of masters and domesticated beasts. Perhaps some humans are domesticated. If all were, I don't think we would even be discussing this. Sure, if humans wanted they could wipe all animal life on the planet. And if animals wanted and could organize they could wipe all humans from the planet.

That's a difference here, and why the analogy is accurate in some ways and perhaps incomplete in others. Humans CAN organize, they can understand, and they can make choices. Armed with knowledge we as formidable to 4D STS as a lion is to villager with a pop-gun. Otherwise, why are we even discussing anything? The point of the C's material and all the ideas presented IMO is to provide a basis for thought and exploration, not to take everything verbatim and to the letter.

ArdVan said:

Like: "If I don't think that aliens exist, there won't be an alien invasion." or "If I only have nice thoughts, nothing bad will happen to me"

Click to expand...

Conversly: "If I believe there will be an invasion and that I am nothing but an animal to the invaders, and have only thoughts of impending doom..." what? We have YCYOR (which I also do not think Keit was implying) on one end of the spectrum, and Kismet-worshipping fatalism at the other. Balance is the friend of Knowledge and begets action capability. Going to extremes may be all too easy, but all it can do is undermine Knowledge as well as action capability.

What's the point of Knowledge, furthermore, if we cannot use it to make changes, and yes, even create or recreate our reality to something better than what is being forced upon us? And how can we effect change if we don't believe it is possible?

Thank for pointing out my mistake. After trying to write a reply I found out, what went wrong: It was this sentence that let me to think of YCYOR.

Keit said:

Today majority of human race is not "ready" for alien invasion, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible.

Click to expand...

But I did read it that way:

Today (the) majority of human race will not be invaded, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible.

Click to expand...

So how would you call that? Jumping to an early conclusion? Or maybe wishful thinking. ;)

I found this out when I saw that I wanted to write in my reply: "But this isn't an explanation for me why an invasion could be prevented that way?

So, sorry for the confusion. And yes, English isn't my mother tongue. :P

ArdVan said:

Thank for pointing out my mistake. After trying to write a reply I found out, what went wrong: It was this sentence that let me to think of YCYOR.

Keit said:

Today majority of human race is not "ready" for alien invasion, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible.

Click to expand...

But I did read it that way:

Today (the) majority of human race will not be invaded, simply because they don't believe it or don't think that such thing is really possible.

Click to expand...

So how would you call that? Jumping to an early conclusion? Or maybe wishful thinking. ;)

I found this out when I saw that I wanted to write in my reply: "But this isn't an explanation for me why an invasion could be prevented that way?

So, sorry for the confusion. And yes, English isn't my mother tongue. :P

Click to expand...

Actually, I do think that it's somehow connected to YCYOR idea, but not in a sense we are familiar with.
For a long time I've been fascinated with the idea of using "as above so below" principle on brain functions.
Especially the phenomenon of "insight" or eureka. And I remember explanation of one of the experiments during "cognitive science" course:
There is a person who voluntarely participates in the experiment. He is held in the room alone, with no other equipment then two ropes connected to the opposed sides of the wall and scissors. His goal is to connect two ropes. But he have no available tools to do it (beside scissors). If he will grab one of the ropes, he won't be able to reach the other one. So, the task is to "spark" the insight pool and look for solution.
It's can be a very interesting exercise, but I think that it's pointing out something else. Those who participate in this experience, naturaly get hungry after some time. So, someone else enters their room during the experiment, to give them food. But during his walk he "accidentally" touch one of the ropes, slightly swinging it in the air. He puts the food on the table and then leave.
Several seconds after - the experiment subject have the "Ahaa" effect. He realise that the solution for this problem, is to hold one rope and using scissors to swing the other rope in the air and catch it in the process of "flight".
BUT, and this is a huge but.... His insight was based on external information/stimuli. In fact, this person who brought the food, was part of the experiment. And his goal was to give to the subject a clue in a curtain direction. So, on one hand hand you have a genuine "insight", on the other hand - manipulation. Maybe, if the subject had an opportunity to think longer, he could come up with other solution. The fact that someone was directing his choice - hints that there is an intentional interference. The goal was to "help" the subject to reach desired for experimentators conclusion. But I think that in this particular case, there was no other solution, and it's mainly because the ENVIRONMENT (the room) was designed like this.

If I remember correctly, in one of the Star trek movies, captain Kirk is asked about his success in solving the unsolvable problem in Starfleet academy. This problem was designed not to be solved, but Kirk was the only one who solved it. And he said that he "cheated". He solved it by cracking the problem rules and changing them.

Now, PTB control us in this environment we call our reality/3d/earth. And I think that they control us by shaping our actual creativity, insights and "Aha" moments. They direct our attention toward specific topics, lock our thought process in the way we wont be able or even desire to look the other way. When we think that we have our creating moments, we actually eating the same soup,but from another plate with a different shape. And this is closely connected to the topic of "free will".

Several days ago SOTT published the following article:

Prepared Minds Have More Aha Moments
http://signs-of-the-times.org/signs/chains/signs20060411_PharmaFascism.php#6ba09bf41033ade9eb6cdf6ed9c
"The research suggests that people can mentally prepare to have an "Aha!" solution even before a problem is presented. Specifically, as people prepare for problems that they solve with insight, their pattern of brain activity suggests that they are focusing attention inwardly, are ready to switch to new trains of thought, and perhaps are actively silencing irrelevant thoughts.

These findings are important because they show that people can mentally prepare to solve problems with different thinking styles and that these different forms of preparation can be identified with specific patterns of brain activity. This study may eventually lead to an understanding of how to put people in the optimal "frame of mind" to deal with particular types of problems. "

Click to expand...

When this quote contains lot of revelations and possible interpretations (creative/new thinking, significant synchronisities, etc...) in this case I'll explore only one. That this can be a perfect manipulative tool on minds of those who UNAWARE/ doesn't work on building their own creativity pool.
In my opinion, and this is my working hypothethis, that such principle is "helping" PTB to sustain current environment, by "helping" people to think in specific way, by "tapping" them into System connections/creativity pool. And here comes the issue of free will.

Take a look at the following quote about Libet experiment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet
"Researchers carrying out Libet's procedure would ask each participant to sit at a desk in front of the oscilloscope timer. They would affix the EEG electrodes to the participant's scalp, and would then instruct the subject to carry out some small, simple motor activity, such as pressing a button, or flexing a finger or wrist, within a certain time frame. No limits were placed on the number of times the subject could perform the action within this period.

During the experiment, the subject would be asked to note the position of the dot on the oscilloscope timer when "he/she was first aware of the wish or urge to act" (control tests with Libet's equipment demonstrated a comfortable margin of error of only -50 milliseconds). Pressing the button also recorded the position of the dot on the oscillator, this time electronically. By comparing the marked time of the button's pushing and the subject's conscious decision to act, researchers were able to calculate the total time of the trial from the subject's initial volition through to the resultant action. On average, approximately two hundred milliseconds elapsed between the first appearance of conscious will to press the button and the act of pressing it.

Researchers also analyzed EEG recordings for each trial with respect to the timing of the action. It was noted that brain activity involved in the initiation of the action, primarily centered in the secondary motor cortex, occurred, on average, approximately five hundred milliseconds before the trial ended with the pushing of the button. That is to say, researchers recorded mounting brain activity related to the resultant action as many as three hundred milliseconds before subjects reported the first awareness of conscious will to act. In other words, apparently conscious decisions to act were preceded by an unconscious buildup of electrical charge within the brain - this buildup came to be called Bereitschaftspotential or readiness potential.

[edit]
The implications of Libet's experiments
If unconscious processes in the brain are the true initiator of volitional acts, as Libet's experiments suggest, then little room remains for the operations of free will. If the brain has already taken steps to initiate an action before we are aware of any desire to perform it, the causal role of consciousness in volition is all but eliminated."

Click to expand...

So we see that the idea of "insight" connected also to the idea of "free will". If you are placed in the environmnet with limited possibilities, you have limited will (and not a FREE will, this is an illusion) and limited possible insights. All of them can be controled and dealt with, if the environment designed in such way. And my hypothethis is, that our environment/reality/3d is actually not limited at all, that we have infinite number of possible insights and real free will, but PTB go to the great efford to convince us that this is not so. And untill now they succeeded. But If a person will do a conscious work on himself, analyze his thoughts and actions, understand the reason behind them, he will modify his "connections" with creativity pool. Opening and creating new possibilites.

Keit said:

So we see that the idea of "insight" connected also to the idea of "free will". If you are placed in the environmnet with limited possibilities, you have limited will (and not a FREE will, this is an illusion) and limited possible insights. All of them can be controled and dealt with, if the environment designed in such way. And my hypothethis is, that our environment/reality/3d is actually not limited at all, that we have infinite number of possible insights and real free will, but PTB go to the great efford to convince us that this is not so. And untill now they succeeded. But If a person will do a conscious work on himself, analyze his thoughts and actions, understand the reason behind them, he will modify his "connections" with creativity pool. Opening and creating new possibilites.

Click to expand...

This is why I like Ra's term: distortions of free will. What is free will? If free will is NOT determinism, it seems to lose some meaning. If everything has a cause, it is determined by that cause. But if an event doesn't have a cause, does it have any meaning? Seemingly not. It seems the only mystery, first cause, is the Absolute, or God. From that (the only REAL free will), each subsequent density has a distorted free will. In 3d we are almost completely controlled by 3d causes (A influences). To us, it seems that anything from a higher level is uncaused, or random, but I think this is just a higher-dimensional cause. It is more free than 3d, but still determined by higher laws. So I'm not so sure that we have infinite possibilities on 3d. If we do, I think of it more as aligning with our destiny or the free will of ourselves in a higher density. Then we aren't really creating NEW possibilites, but choosing the ones that already exist in a future state. What do you think?

Determinism is associated with lack of freedom, I gather? Is that really true? I have a certain determined if not determinable nature. And my choices base themselves upon that nature. Does that make them any less free? Let's put it another way. Life is made of organic molecules. So is excrement. Yet, life is more than excrement and continues to be a mystery in its essence, because of its unfathomable complexity, depth and organization.

Our determined nature is also a mystery. To know/experience that mystery, and include in it all that we are, we must be more than we are. Hence we grow beyond previous determinisms or versions of ourselves. And yet we still haven't gone outside ourselves and never will, although we encompass more at each self-expansion.

The path this growth takes is the movement of free will, because only therein can that path be true to our determined nature (determined because it exists) which will always be unfathomable to us in its entirety at any given moment. So free will is really making the choices truest to our nature, and is thus correspondent to knowing and experiencing that nature. And since first cause is in all of us, we remain the mystery which unfolds through our choices.

IMO, I believe we have infinite possibilities in 3D, but that the scope of probabilities are restricted. Implying lack of possibility places a limitation that something can never be. At this point we know that many things cannot be NOW, and under current conditions. I believe we are learning to generate the conditions where latent possibilities (the seemingly impossible, but truly improbable) can activate. And I believe we are coming into a more conscious relationship with being vs. non-being.

Some choices are between paths already in existence. Other choices involve emerging new probabilities into existence from non-being (or other densities) and/or elliminating probabilities from being and placing them into non-being, thus bringing their corresponding possibilities into latency. All of this as free will is coherent with our essential nature, at the very core of which lies the ultimate mystery. Inhibiting our essential nature or being divorced from it thus inhibits free will.

In a view where God is outside of you, there cannot be free will because the apparent determined nature is finite and potentials are bounded. You can only be a subset of the only true mystery in that case, where most religions prefer to place us.

In a view where God is your ultimate nature or center, free will is the natural outcome because potentials are unbounded, although still determinable in existence. If we trace ourselves back to first cause, then we see that even our formative nature is generated by free will, and not in isolation, but in relation to all the rest of all that is.

EsoQuest said:

Determinism is associated with lack of freedom, I gather? Is that really true? I have a certain determined if not determinable nature. And my choices base themselves upon that nature. Does that make them any less free? Let's put it another way. Life is made of organic molecules. So is excrement. Yet, life is more than excrement and continues to be a mystery in its essence, because of its unfathomable complexity, depth and organization.

Click to expand...

Exactly. What some philosophers call the "illusion of free will" is more accurately the "distortion of free will," osit. Even if you view all our choices as pre-incarnational, and finding our "true selves" as "destiny," we are still a living part of the first cause, choosing to live and experience that absolute freedom at the level we can handle with our primitive machines. However, I think Gurdjieff was right saying that we are not free, yet. If we're still determined by A influences, that's the lowest degree of free will possible at this level. But by aligning with higher influences, less distorted causes, we become more free.

Our determined nature is also a mystery. To know/experience that mystery, and include in it all that we are, we must be more than we are. Hence we grow beyond previous determinisms or versions of ourselves. And yet we still haven't gone outside ourselves and never will, although we encompass more at each self-expansion.

The path this growth takes is the movement of free will, because only therein can that path be true to our determined nature (determined because it exists) which will always be unfathomable to us in its entirety at any given moment. So free will is really making the choices truest to our nature, and is thus correspondent to knowing and experiencing that nature. And since first cause is in all of us, we remain the mystery which unfolds through our choices.

Click to expand...

Beautiful. :)

If we trace ourselves back to first cause, then we see that even our formative nature is generated by free will, and not in isolation, but in relation to all the rest of all that is.

Click to expand...

Very neatly put Esoquest.

It is a topic, that I have thought a lot about. Free will vs. No free will. And your post brings it nicely together, from what I have learned sofar reading the C's and the RA material and life experiences in general. It is what makes this learning so interesting IMO.

It is like a thread of the web of the matrix is removed when some new insight is gathered, thus creating greater freedom and in your words

Esoquest said:

...and/or elliminating probabilities from being and placing them into non-being, thus bringing their corresponding possibilities into latency.

Click to expand...