The following is a somewhat esoterically inspired reflection, which may also be thought-provoking (I have marked the dream: Rescue with a thick red background, since unfortunately in this esoteric reflection it is decisive for the negative fate of the Beloved Being). The will to “rescue” is formed from the contemplation of the past of the Beloved Being and unfolds its negative effect also from the fact that the lover is a stranger at this time and not a confessor. It (the will to rescue) therefore comes too soon.
- He, a stranger with longing (change), circling (out of abundance)
- She, a confessor with ideals (dignity), a centre
- He, a stranger, with dream (rescue), circling (from the abundance)
- She, a confessor, in distress, a centre
- He, a stranger, on the run, circling (threatened by fragmentation through gravity)
- She, a confessor, on the run, a center (pushing him away from gravity)
- He, a confessor, in distress, a centre
- She, a stranger, with dream(loss) (unloved), circling (into emptiness)
- He, a confessor, with ideals (dignity), a centre
- She, a stranger, with longing(loss) (change), circling (into emptiness)
- He, a confessor, with realism, a center (into the fullness) (not done)
- She, a stranger, with realism, circling (into the fullness) (not done)
While we are on the esoteric side, I would also like to give some thoughts on the religious aspect. Let’s make the following assumptions:
- With Adam we mean the change that goes through all forms in paradise without experiencing the true meaning (being lost). He is free of dignity (unclothed). He feels no contradictions, because he is in the state of calm, because he does not rebel but passively follows the course of things. Adam is the straight lines going down from up above and not touching each other (individually different but unrelated transformations) that are filled with the life energy. He is the joyful spark and the fool who staggers into life, ignorant and protected. Paradoxically, the change is out of time, because he initiates time again and again (without context)
- With Eve dignity is meant, because she chooses the things that promote the beautiful and the good (ideals). According to the biblical story she came out of Adam. This makes sense because change (chaos) brings (makes visible) dignity as a certain/sensible way through the chaos inherent in it. By taking a certain path in the constant change, she is the decision maker / magician who chooses the paths by which people come forth. Eve is the choosing line, which touches the vertical straight lines of Adam at a certain point / horizontaly (individual, temporal, conscious decision). Through Eve’s choice(s) people wear clothes according to the biblical story, which is a sign of dignity. Dignity is a struggle within time to preserve the dignity threatened by the passage of time (by context). What is the horizontal line of Eve which crosses the vertical lines of Adam at certain points (meaningful points)? A serpentine line (a snake).
The terms here already point to the “cross” as a symbol, which we can look at again in an article in this context.
I have spoken of lines in connection with my esoteric contemplation on Adam/Eve. This here again as a diagram, so that one can better understand the above described before one’s own spiritual eye. It is important to realize that both lines follow their own “demon”. They are influenced by each other, but in a subtle way and not in an original way. The horizontal line follows a path that crosses the blue lines to maintain dignity. The vertical lines are more playful and incomprehensible because they change without preserving dignity. Here we can name the two tarot cards “The Magician” (Dignity) and “The Fool” (Change). While we are already at the esoteric speculations, we can see as well in the cabalistic “Tree of Life” the two original Sephiroth Chockmah/Wisdom (Change) and Binah/Understanding (Dignity). So we are dealing here with original forces whose meaning can be realized at a very young age, so that we are shaped to belong to dignity or change.
Dignity needs the protection of “rescue” in change. Change is threatening to dignity, because dignity comes from change and all other parts in change that are not chosen by dignity (dignity is choosing) are rejected by it. These rejected parts in change threaten the dignity and its special meaning/sense. It is therefore necessary that the consciousness of change is made aware of the value of dignity, and that it then keeps the other aspects of change in check and calms them down, so that dignity is not threatened. Where dignity is allowed to grow, it is conducive to love and abundance, since the coherence of the dignified path gives birth to a sense that is conducive. Where dignity is assaulted and cannot flourish, the situation of the “unloved” arises, since the consciousness in change recognizes that “saving” has failed and that something beautiful (the dignity) was not allowed to exist in the face of the other forces. This makes the change insecure in its ability to “rescue”, which makes it more difficult for similar events in the future.
Man and woman (lover and beloved) have their own “change” and “dignity” within themselves and they have their individual life story in which the change and dignity has been stabilized or destabilized by the world they have found. If “saving” could be stabilized, then dignity was promoted and in time it was a positive experience, because dignity is the way to positive experience in this world. Koheränz promotes dignity, while Inkoheränz damages it. The God of the Old Testament who supposedly created Adam has proven to be incoherent in the biblical story because he defiled dignity. In fact, the God of the Old Testament proves to be the remaining parts of Adam that were not chosen by Eve (agglomeration). Before the formation of Eve, he was even more holistic. This God, through the work of goodness in creation (in Adam and Eve), left the bad parts to himself and became apparently threatening to man in the world (he became “unloved”) — unloved as a sorted out, leftover, is therefore also a creator (hence the assumption of some Gnostics that we humans can also set out to save these left behind parts of meaning). Here I have now noticed that “rescue” has to decide what is to be saved (which parts) and which parts are rejected.
What could be meant by “Lilith”? Adam’s first wife. She was probably the woman who was/meant (reality) for Adam (change), while Eve was a part of Adam’s rib? (a choice / dignity in Adam’s dream world). If Adam follows his Eve (the Eve in him) then he will get the strength he needs for Lilith (dignity) outside of him. Therefore Lilith is the dignity itself which contains the change, while Adam is the change which contains the dignity. When Adam, strengthened by the confrontation with his dream world, is ripe for reality, he can meet Lilith.
I hope the esoteric/religious excursion was also helpful. However, I don’t take it too seriously as I want to focus on the individual experience. Now that the emotional fields are described (which I assign to the concept of “change”), I will consider how I can focus on the individually right way through these fields (which I assign to Dignity and the Beloved Subject). Since the spreading of individual experiences on the internet on a public blog does not work well, I will think about how this can be done. Maybe this will not be part of the blog.
Here are a few more notes that go into more detail about the whole complex of change/dignity and that are still buzzing around in my head:
- Change and dignity do not have to be seen as male and female in principle. We find, for example, in Stephenie Meyer’s novel “Host” an example of the conflict between change (in the book: Wanderer, Wanda) and dignity (the individual, in the book: Melanie) that takes place free of a typical gender assignment and where it is more about how this conflict takes place in one’s own soul (two souls in my breast).
- The change feels deep inside and discovers and uncovers what there is. It does not have things, but it brings them out. It wants it all and therefore has none of it. Change is boundless and dignity is limited.
- The song “Slip inside this house” by the band 13th floor elevators is a classic of psychedelic hippie music. This song, whose meaning is difficult to understand, is actually also about the fact that the change wanders into a house where it can become homely, which means that it gets to know the dignity and can come to rest.
- Dignity is the individual, change is the template
- The dignity makes decisions in matters of the heart, the change presents the spirit (what there is)
- Dignity is weak on its own, it needs support to resist change. It needs: “rescue” in change. It needs: that change limits itself to protect it from dissolution in change, so that it does not become “unloved”. If dignity would not be (permanently) seen by change, both of their ways go into the unloved worlds.
- In dignity the human being feels pain and salvation, which is caused by the attrition of dignity through change.
- In change is the peace of mind and the calm of the wind. Movement and stillness.
- Change is a unicorn, a mythical creature and a dreamer
- Dignity alone is pushed to extremes by change, for it alone is fixed, but alert and reactive to change. Change is not normally affected by extremes, for it is mobile. If change truly recognizes dignity, then it is a human being and no longer a unicorn, and then it suffers from damaging dignity.
- Fidelity to the word is a matter of dignity, as is the correct use of commas. The comma is a meaningful one. If it says: In the beginning was the word, then the word is a matter of dignity and change, because it is a condensation of possibilities to a definiteness.
There is the situation that I also describe here in the blog, in which change wants to convince the dignity of its value and also dignity wants to convince the change of its value. People show themselves here as avatars of these force fields and thus collide with each other. Horn on horn, test of strength. Equal, even if disappointing. Test of strength because it vibrates especially here. The lover will pull out all the stops again shortly before the decision of unloved: “The lover has lost” and try to influence this decision by irregularly trying to cover up his already revealed loss. To do this, he will invoke honest emotions, live them out in front of unloved to show her that emotions are only changeable and that it wasn’t so bad that he had a moment of weakness. With this he wants to show that he can also do differently: “Why don’t you do it differently then?!” It’s definitely valuable to put a lot of research into this clash, because it’s a middle ground. It’s not the beginning and not the end but it’s the crossroads. There is also the energy potential that drives me to write these articles. The Beloved Subject becomes especially firm and static, immovable in this situation and the Lover becomes especially virbating, evasive and wandering. Exactly at this crossroads the lover mocks again by speaking of agreement / balance / compensation although it is obvious that he does this as a reaction! to the rejection (foresightedly) and not of his own accord. It is like being woven into a web that the lover has built himself. So what exactly made him go into losing? It is already previous reasons from the past where he was still stuck (from an older cycle with “unloved”) that he brings up at this point, they may have nothing to do with the situation, but they let him suspect that he is losing and so he reveals his fears that he suspects it to avoid rejection (“look I’m scared, I’ve already noticed that it’s going in a direction where I’m always going to lose”).
Some thoughts on change and dignity I was able to collect with the help of the Kaballah texts (tree of life) from the following website, which I will not spread further here, as it is too imprecise and too arbitrary. I could not assign my fields to the Sephira exactly and therefore I did my “own thing” which is more valuable for the sense than to fit into this existing scheme only to chum up to what already exists in the world: However, it seems to me that the conflict between change and dignity takes place in the Sephira: “unconscious” and “higher self” (I could think about that much). See: http://magieausbildung.de/dominus-liminis/
How is it possible that the lover does not unbalance the Beloved Subject? He must not show “rescue” and must keep it within himself. But he only receives the lessons for this in the reflection on his misconduct. In his chance he has no access to the lessons he receives later. One can say, why didn’t he know already that he would bring the Beloved Subject out of balance, if he shows her that he wants to “rescue” and brings with him the corresponding hopes (trembling, believing), which give him a certain dignity to follow this path. It is a bit of a chicken/egg problem.
How is it possible that the Beloved Subject, after the mutual loss of balance, makes contact again? Not clear. Probably a chance has already been given after the mutual loss of contact and the Lover has not done his lessons and one is already in the second cycle, so to speak, in which the Beloved Subject was already so generous to get back in the front line after the mutual loss of balance and to give another chance.
- She is a spirit that is cooled down by bodies like him.
- He is a body that is fired upwards by spirits like hers.
Higher self (soul) is a problem for both
– Faith vs. Chance (philanthropist vs. misanthropist)
The unconscious is a problem for both.
– Both do not respect their boundaries. He reveals too much and she wants to know everything. Keep your boundaries.
- Gravity, planets in orbits around each other.
- Passers-by in two trains passing each other in different directions (encounter)
- Avalon as link of crosses, Christ
- Reminders of the invalidity of magic and ego tricks in the face of karmic truth (“you may dabble in your magic but please remember, a debt of souls will always be repaid”)
- Medusa (dignity) petrifies the neutral Buddha (change)
- Why should a Buddha use magic and ego tricks when he is neutral and part of change?
- Why should Medusa, despite her dignity, petrify a neutral Buddha who has nothing to do with her concerns (not interfering) — because dignity can also mean using their power and force to remain protected. Neutral my ass: it was an ego-buddha who controlled the change
- Meaningfulness as gravitation
- Did I choose these esoteric thoughts, or did these thoughts/concepts choose me to deal with them.
- Is esotericism (Kaballah, sign of the zodiac) as magic not suitable to give any consideration or support for my search for meaning?
- How can I repel magical influences
Esotericism offers itself, but it is not able to truly comprehend (in individual experience) the path of dignity (meaningful magic), because it tries to approach the truth by detours. All the above esoteric considerations are therefore distractions and confusions that hinder me in my concentration on the dignified.
The “change” is high like a ray or a line up into the sky and through the spheres. It is in motion and fluctuates between the stars of its spheres, which it logically and widely summarizes and separates from each other in all possible combinations.
The “dignity” is like a line that crosses this beam in the horizontal. It chooses a path through this ray of possibilities for change. The individual being as a meaningful path. Serpentine lines
“Change” and “dignity” intersect, but are not heading in the same direction.
– For”Change” everything means the same. It wanders on all paths and is free from the constraints of meaning but also free from the beauty of meaning. It is neutral and (out)balanced.
– the “dignity” walks a certain path, which can be hard and stony or joyful and beautiful. Highs and lows through meaningful decisions and limitation.
Sometimes it happens that the lover in “change” is in the same place of his line as the beloved subject in “dignity” is in her line. Then they meet to realize that they are moving in different directions at that time.
But we humans are guests on these trains travelling through the universe. We can change trains and we can think about these different ways of interacting with the sense and the world. We will be able to make our experiences and broaden our horizons. But can we immerse ourselves deeply in the polar forces, so that we understand and feel them as a native who grew up in this path? I don’t know and I will still think about these trains and travellers.
Perhaps someone must first be a changeable one before he discovers the sense of dignity, if he has explored enough stars from which to choose a meaningful path.
And if someone has been in dignity for too long, then perhaps he or she thirsts for the tranquility of changeability?
I find this difficult to assess, but I think that dignity is appropriate for the human being. Man may be a spark in the beginning, exploring and discovering everything, but with time he decides to do something meaningful.
The dignity infects the change and hits his subconscious and so he cannot change as before. He is conquered to meaningfulness. Change is a Buddha and dignity takes him away from the path of balance, on which he, sitting on it, considers everything as meaningful and non meaningful. Cassiopeia, Medusa petrifies, change petrifies.
The emotional fields as such are all change. So they don’t take me out into the meaningful real exchange with X. They are the rods or rays… they’re all individual rods or rays that are not connected. I’ve been contemplating something all along that only reflects me and who I am. Separate rods or rays going from top to bottom. The lines of connection between these rods and rays are still missing and only then comes the true path of connection which has nothing to do with the emotional fields (which is its own). What triggered me much more than the emotions is the path that went through these fields, it went horizontally and in certain places. So some parts of the fields have no relevance at all for this individual path that went through the fields individually. I met a person for whom the meaningful path through the fields was much more important than fathoming and staying in the fields. That was the atopian for me.
What about the individual stories and professions (vocations) that one takes up in life? They convey rigidity to a certain template. A software developer becomes part of the change, because it is about divide and rule. A judge or lawyer becomes part of dignity, because it is about the meaningful way, because law should help to preserve dignity.
What about the “wrong third party” who leads influence on the communication of change and dignity. The power is in the hands of the system. Small trigger points can be enough to destabilize communication. The fate of the individual and the enormously important means of communication, which is central between change and dignity, is taken away from the individual and transferred into a system. What is the meaning of this in relation to the Lover and the Beloved Subject. Can they still truly meet each other? Can our system be such that it overlays all communication with incoherence? It has always been the case that communication has been unclear, but the transmission interference takes on a new quality in that it can be authorised/supervised/released/blocked by other people (dating platforms etc.). Thus, control is possible and our society is basically exposed to the control of powerful people and also the contact between lover and loved subject is destabilized and fragmented, for example to keep people “occupied” (okcupid), so that they spend time permanently on a platform and not find love and come together. See: The Grey Lords of Momo and the Time Thieves (Michael Ende).
What about Avalon as a place of connection (symbol: Chalice Cross) and Christ as the sighted one who can protect the unloved being? Does this path find another passage in our world? Can it still be experienced, or is it prevented by systematic means and can it only be experienced by the individual human being in his own solitude and no longer in exchange with others.
What am I? What influences affect me. Sometimes the image of Mordred from the Arthusian legend is forced upon me in my mind as a subconsciously working force on me (see also: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordred,_Sohn_des_Artus). The following resonated: “Mordred is not portrayed in the book as the villain, but as a young man trying to escape his fate and win his father’s love through bravery… a psychological portrait of adventure, magic, fate and the search for identity.”