Gvildenu | Mintys / Lygtys

Lygtys

Lygtis

Lygtis išsako kaip veiksmas veda iš vienos proto būsenos (padalinimo) į kitą proto būseną (padalinimą).
Veiksmai, pavyzdžiui, 2+3=5 reiškia, kad trejybė slypėjo jau dvejybėje, tad tą trejybę galima padalinti dvejybe. Tik pasikeitė kampas. O tas kampas irgi jau glūdėjo, padalintas, padalinime, ir tik iškilo. Taip kad pasidalinimas persitvarkė. Tad tai prilygintina persitvarkymams.

0+1=1

God goes beyond himself, out of the unbounded and into the bounded, thus generating Everything.

Everything has no bounds, and yet serves as its own bounds, whereas God is unbounded, and ever goes beyond his own bounds.

1+1=2

God is of himself. What is there for God do?

God may be, or not be, that is all the same to him, and presents no challenge. I imagine for God only one challenge. Yes, God may be, but is he necessarily? In other words, if God were not, would he still be?

The answer is presumably that God would still be. God is absolutely necessary. But the challenge is quite huge. It involves God creating a world that is least favorable to him. And then demonstrating what happens. There is a lot to do!

This is just as in a mathematical proof by contradiction. We suppose that X does not exist, and then show, as a consequence, that X does exist. On the other hand, if X exists, then we also have that X exists. So, in any case, X exists.

In this way, there arise two tracks, working in parallel. There is one track where it is assumed that God exists. We may think of this as defining the spiritual world. There is another track where it is supposed that God does not exist, but then God may appear even so. We may think of this as describing our physical world. Our physical world is designed, if at all, as a place where the Creator is not at the forefront, but rather has made room for everything else. Just like a master artist, his own presence in his work is not given, not obvious. Yet, more and more, he will be seen in his work, and engaged through it, until he is manifest and tangible in his existence.

So, first he goes beyond himself - opposites coexist. Then it becomes clear that he was always - all is the same.

God goes beyond himself. He ventures from his existence into his nonexistence. He is unbounded, and so he ventures into the bounded. This is to say, he enters structure. God is spirit, and good is spirit in structure. But, more generally, beyond God, and within structure, is the other. The other may or may not be good. The other may or may not be spirit.

Many people ponder, how can there be God, if there is so much bad? But God wants all the good. He therefore wants the good that is of itself, but also he wants all the good that comes with the bad. He wants all of it. This is to say, with anything bad that ever happens, there is always at least the slightest bit of good that it comes with, which is why I imagine God allows for it.

Will God arise in the physical world, in the world of structure? This is only if the other realizes that there is more than just structure, there is more than just good, there is more than just everything. The other must return the world to God by recognizing that God is from beyond the world, beyond good, beyond everything.

Activity is one's relationship with oneself. One's self is one's empathy for others. God goes beyond himself to others, and has empathy for them.

1+2=3

engaging is the activity of anything. It is defined by the equation 1+2=3?. Here, one perspective is given by understanding the original wholeness (thus taking a stand). Then another perspective comes from considering the whole as the ability to take up a new perspective, immerse oneself in it, identify with it (a specific perspective)(thus engaging!)(and following through). And a third perspective comes from accepting completely that new perspective (as a scope), but now disengaging from it, reflecting on it (as a general situation which others might take up), and again extending the meaning of that whole. In general, this adds two perspectives (upon the wholeness) alongside the existing ones in a division of everything. In this way, the original wholeness is engaged. This is the basis for activity, identification with situations for perspectives.

1+3=4

recurring is the activity of something. It is defined by the equation 1+3=4. Here the whole is identified with a level that gives its separation from (and relationship with) a groundless perspective (and thereby gives a scope, a projection). That groundless perspective may be thought of as a godlet, a human that has found itself within the structure, but without any grounds. For this groundless perspective, the whole may be located at various levels (projections). The whole is originally the grounded situation (why) which is separated from a groundless perspective by everything. Another is the grounded perspective (how) (that looks onto the grounded situation) and is separated from a groundless perspective by anything. Another (what) is given by a groundless situation (which recurs!) which the grounded perspective may look upon (in coincidence with the grounded situation), and that situation is separated from a groundless perspective by something, that is, by what that perspective sees in that situation. A final perspective (whether) is given by the groundless perspective itself (the recurrence) which is separated from itself by nothing. This is the basis for redundancy and slack.

4+1=5

Sprendimas (penkerybė) išplečia žinojimą (ketverybę). Apie įvykį (ateityje) arba priežastingumą galime žinoti tvirtai (kaip bus) arba tik galimai (kaip galėtų būti).