Theos-Talk Archives (December 2008 Message tt00247)

Hi Gregg,
Welcome to the club.




How do I see who I am.
>From very young my mother asked me and I said, that I am a part of a 
whole, ... whomb you can call it.
Of course, human,etherical, psychological and physical  in nature.
Not a being who has been before.
While later I have had visions in consciousness( awaking state) about 
some life before.Have to do with Isis, litary in Philae temple.
My brain don't manage me. I am far above that.And it works most of 
the time.Only in supermarket I lost my brain. And money hahah!!!
Why you want to know? Have some resemblances?
Interested Christina.




--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "F Gregg Meagher" 
<f.gregg.meagher@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Christina!
> How do you see 'You' to be?
> Human and Physical in nature?
> Or a 'Being' who has been, let's say dressed into a 'body' suitable 
for a
> journey into the physical experience?
> Does your 'brain' manage you?
> Or, is it a control room with an elaborated sensor system ... for 
you to
> manage within the physical state of existence?
> In brief, for 'you' > Who are you?
> Thanks for your time in reading the above.
> Gregg
> 
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2008 at 9:31 PM, christinaleestemaker <
> christinaleestemaker@...> wrote:
> 
> >   Dear All,
> > If I have read all written about this subject I came to this:
> > There is only one absolute reality which put out its manifestation
> > only through the pralaya state into worlds and different times 
and in
> > different ways.All the same in multidimensional vibrations.
> > So if we see on earth dark, everywere else it could be light or
> > lighter, because it is light.Only question is why we see dark 
depends
> > on the material influenze from this earth.Elsewere under 
influenze of
> > astral,ether or subether makes only there other fews of the same
> > output.
> >
> > How to make it difficult; Christina
> >
> > --- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com <theos-talk%40yahoogroups.com>, 
Leon
> > Maurer <leonmaurer@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Cass,
> > >
> > > Yes, I think we've already broken through the last barrier 
toward
> > > fulfilling HPB's prophesy in the very near future. (Perhaps this
> > is
> > > the great new change that the Mayan calendar has been telling us
> > is
> > > coming around 2012... Not an end, but a beginning. ;-)
> > >
> > > The final proof will come when the ABC model can be demonstrated
> > as
> > > fact beyond a shadow of a doubt. Already research is being
> > planned
> > > that will demonstrate, so everyone can see and experience it, 
that
> > > the universe is a hologram, and what we can know of it is 
already
> > in
> > > our higher mind... Pretty much the way HPB described it (if you
> > can
> > > read the SD "in and around the words and between the lines" and
> > cut
> > > through all the "blinds").
> > >
> > > As for the previous universe and pralaya...
> > >
> > > All that it requires, is for the universe to continue to expand 
--
> > > and lose entropy -- until everything in it dissolves back into 
the
> > > aether or absolute space... With total metric space and its 
mass-
> > > energy "particles" and their forms compacting into infinite 
zero-
> > > (laya) points of spin momentum or "abstract motion" (while still
> > > containing all the information as holographic wave interference
> > > patterns)... While that aether, which in its overall nature is 
like
> > a
> > > "Bose Einstein Condensate" (see wikipedia.com) remains ONE
> > thing...
> > > "Whose center, when manifest, is everywhere and circumference
> > nowhere".
> > >
> > > That "total space" (as Einstein called it) is the cosmic
> > > "singularity" that reflects itself in every potentially 
conscious
> > > black hole at the center of every universal form -- whose still
> > > center, at absolute zero, during pralaya, is pure (sleeping)
> > > potential cosmic consciousness and potential matter... Ready to
> > wake
> > > up again and go through another cosmogenesis, until we all
> > reappear
> > > in the new cycle of life, to further evolve on a higher plane, 
and
> > > take up where we left off in the previous manvantara ;-) See:
> > > http://www.leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/evolution2.gif
> > > Note that the fractal involved field model of cosmogenesis
> > > analogously applies to the physical universe as well as all the
> > > galaxies and other forms of mass-energy, on down through our 
solar
> > > system and planet, to the fundamental particles (spherical
> > standing
> > > waves) of light. See:
> > > (head on cross section of a single spherically polarized photon)
> > > http://www.leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/PhotonField.gif
> > > And compare to: (cosmogenesis at the third Logos)
> > > http://www.leonmaurer.info/ABCimages/Chakrafield-spherical-
col_3.jpg
> > >
> > > For an interesting take on this, see Feynman's talk about light:
> > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjHJ7FmV0M4
> > >
> > > All that -- putting together Einstein's general relativity,
> > Feynman's
> > > quantum electrodynamics, Bohm-Pribram's' holographic paradigm,
> > Kaluza-
> > > Klien-Greene-Witten-Kaku's string and membrane physics --
> > certainly
> > > is "scientific"... And, all of it totally consistent with the 
ABC
> > > model of cosmogenesis, based solely on the formulas in the Book 
of
> > > Dzyan, as explained by HPB.
> > >
> > > Then, when pralaya is over (as the modern scientific pundits
> > > speculate from their mathematics) -- the infinite new universes
> > > (galaxies, solar systems, planets, bacteria, plants, animals,
> > humans,
> > > etc,) spring up everywhere in their time and place, like spray 
in
> > an
> > > ocean of waves... "As above, so below' and."The microcosm(s) 
(is/
> > > are) the mirror(s) of the macrocosm" (as the ancient 
philosopher/
> > > scientist pundits say;-).
> > >
> > > So, the cosmos (like every universe) and every composite form, 
or
> > > particle-wave in it, is a hologram -- within even larger 
holograms
> > --
> > > ad infinitum. And, as the Buddhist and Vedic philosophers say.
> > "All
> > > is Maya" or illusion. (But, this cannot be "scientific," even
> > though
> > > actual -- since conventional science can only deal with the
> > physical/
> > > material or measurable universe). So, what we need is a new
> > > scientific paradigm -- which we might call "philosophical 
science"
> > or
> > > "scientific philosophy" or maybe just plain "theosophy". ;-)
> > >
> > > Best wishes,
> > > Leon Maurer
> > > http://canonizer.com/topic.asp/23/13 (NEW)
> > > http://www.tellworld.com/Astro.Biological.Coenergetics/
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 14, 2008, at 12/14/088:48 PM, Cass Silva wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Leon
> > > >
> > > > Science has finally come around to what HPB said 100 years 
ago.
> > > > Still the problem remains - from where the previous universe 
- I
> > > > guess Pralaya wouldn't explain it as it is a non-scientific
> > > > concept. Did HPB mention anything about conditions during
> > Pralaya?
> > > >
> > > > Cass
> > > >
> > > > ps Just listened to a doco on Steven Hawking - he agrees with
> > > > Greene's theory of multi-dimensional vibration strings (rather
> > than
> > > > particles) and says it explains why gravity is weaker in our 3
> > > > dimensions because it has travelled through 8 others. They are
> > > > more or less stating that Quantum Mechanics explains gravity 
at
> > the
> > > > quantum level ( at the smallest) and marries it with 
Relativity
> > (at
> > > > the largest) and Hawkings Black Hole Theory
> > > >
> > > > If I understood it correctly they cannot explain what they 
call
> > > > 'the singularity' other than to say the symmetry was broken 
and
> > are
> > > > now toying with the idea of universes not unlike particles, 
just
> > > > popping in and out of existence! And this from the greatest
> > minds
> > > > of modern science.
> > > >
> > > > Cass
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ________________________________
> > > > From: Leon Maurer <leonmaurer@>
> > > > To: jcs-online Study forum <jcs-online@yahoogroups.com<jcs-
online%40yahoogroups.com>
> > >
> > > > Sent: Sunday, 14 December, 2008 6:09:51 PM
> > > > Subject: Theos-World Did our cosmos exist before the big bang?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Did our cosmos exist before the big bang?
> > > >
> > > > http://www.newscien tist.com/ article/mg200268 61.500-did- 
our-
> > cosmos-
> > > > exist-before- the-big-bang. html?DCMP= NLC-nletter&
> > > > nsref=mg20026861 .500
> > > >
> > > > http://tinyurl. com/5tkvfb
> > > >
> > > > Very likely -- if the ABC fractal involved holographic field
> > model of
> > > > periodic cosmogenesis is correct.
> > > >
> > > > Leon Maurer
> > > > http://canonizer. com/topic. asp/23/13
> > > > "Note: This canonizer topic ("HARD PROBLEM") enables us to
> > directly
> > > > compare theories and models of consciousness and its
> > interconnections
> > > > with mind, memory, brain, body, senses, etc.. If you agree 
with
> > the
> > > > ABC theory of cosmogenesis -- postulating consciousness as an 
a
> > > > priori quality of ubiquitous absolute space (or any other
> > reasonable
> > > > theory) please feel free to sign on to add your support or, 
if you
> > > > have anything to add or contribute to the topic, or wish to 
post
> > your
> > > > own theory, open a new sub-camp or camp statement."
> > > > http://www.tellworl d.com/Astro. Biological. Coenergetics/
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> If you have not yet found that something, which at times, you know 
is
> missing within you and your life... it is only because 'No One' is 
telling
> you the truth about 'You'!
> 
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>