Unbearable Ambition

“No, not.” “No, not really.” “Not, no.”
these are phrases that come to mind.

Hitler had 5 of those in his natal chart, neatly arranged.

Yes. I think we should have a tree house.

Now the question of navigating this transient web as humans both inward and outward. As MM has shown elsewhere these scales mirror in consciousness, and can in a subtle consciousness mirror in such a way that they connect more directly through their actual spin logic, hook into the absolute future and come to resonate and produce what has hitherto been known as states of divine consciousness.

To share fully what I have learned as being tradition but do not understand -
11, 22, 33 are counted as semi-irreducible - as exalted versions of 2, 4 and 6; this would have to account for the justification of the decimal system. That this system is not completely arbitrary can be grasped from the magic number of five in two: 144.

What comes to mind for me is “MACHINES”.

Are you saying what I think you’re saying?

Let’s call it the “Big O’ Tree” house. That’s a double entendre. It will be home for us and ironic hell for bigots.

I know.

That’s why I asked you like that.

That said. Please go to M&M’s genius thread and see what I figured out with the help of Artimas.

Your brain is going to go boom.

That would be correct.

11 x 11 = 121

22 x 22 = 484

33 x 33 = 1089

The sequence is 4 7 9

1 4 7

2 5 8

3 6 9

The sum of those numbers is |1694|.

The sequence is 2.

Half of 1694 is |847|

1694 x 2 = |3388| ←

33 x 33 = 1089

88 x 88 = |7744|

The sum of those numbers is |8833|. ←

33 + 88 = |121|

What numbers in the Magic Square we highlighted? 1 4 7 2 8 3 9. Altogether, that’s |34|. The sequence is 7.

What numbers weren’t highlighted? 5 and 6. Altogether, that’s |11|. The sequence is 1.

If you ask me, these number are 1 off from both, .33 and 42 (the answer to life).

We have 41, add a 1, you get 42.

We have a 34, subtract a 1, you get 33.

11 + 1 = |12|

One last thing: The highlighted numbers are doing something wicked. 2 + 1 = |3| 3 = |3| 4+7+8+9 =|28| Is this Universe really saying “Two 8’s?”. That gives us |3388|.

I wasn’t aware you were Fixed Cross, you’ve made some very good posts on this forum

Thanks for the discussion, I’m going to take some time to let it sink in.

I look forward to reading more of your posts here and through the links you directed me to earlier.

Yes, the level of transience of or our states - and thus the subtlety of our selfvaluing overall control determines the degree of our our human genius, our ‘freedom from determinism’ - the degree to which our consciousness includes (differentiates and activates) the possibilities that cause its movements. Selfcontrol means stabilized futurality, means ‘faith’ in the sense of knowing ones paradigm of potential, mind being not just morally committed but carnally wedded to reality.

I am not sure; in any case I am saying I am an astrologer, and that Hitler was a magician - in the sense of a phenomenon driven by short-cut ties to and between different causal logics operating on us through the system in which Earth is embedded. The system is highly electrical. Subtle cross-referential spectral resonance shifts are pervasive in the electricity of our brains. I am sure half of my readers will drop me. And this is indeed a matter that is more comfortably discussed behind closed doors. But I find it important to make it known that to my mind the astrological logics are wholly derived from geometrical properties of the relations between the primordial numbers; 2, 3, 4 and 6 figure into the building of the 12-fold Zodiac, where the permutations of of 3- and 4-foldness form the backbone of the typology. The central cardinalities are the two horizons on the path of the earths rotation; both around the sun (“signs” - segments, not constellations) and around its axis (“houses”), and the intersections of the suns ecliptic with the zenith meridian, nadir and midheaven (corresponding in the greater wheel to 0 Cancer and 0 Capricorn). The Vedic system orients not on geometrical points but on constellations; it is thus each 60 years one degree further off from the western system on which it appears to founded by the fact that the difference is now something like 27 degrees, which means that the split must have occurred less than two millennia ago, at which point the Vedic philosophy was already dying. And indeed astrology makes a lot more sense if its coordinates are based on physical angles and proximities, rather than on endless depths of endlessly differentiated radiation from indeterminate ‘constellations’, relying on a model rather lacking in dimensionality.

Aye.

Thank you! You have a musical mind.
I will enjoy Strauss.

Transience gave us the power to imagine and to experience the Universe as it is rather than animate us purely on stimuli and physiological reaction.

Well, let’s test that theory. Take a sign that is based on 0 or 1 and take a sign that is based on 9 or 8. If the former are both numbers that represent fundamental aspect and the latter the opposite, then perhaps those numbers truly mean something on a much higher scale that is beyond the ambiguous implication of it that’s commonly hunting down the gullible.

Based on 0? Not sure what you mean, but:

1 Aries, cardinal fire, initiative, expansion (primary)
8 Scorpio, fixed water, containment, perseverance (secondary)

Astrology is based on the angles between the planets from the birth perspective, when the electrical system of the organism is separated from its mother’s.
These angles produce a system called harmonics, where 360 is 1. Of these harmonics the 1, 2, 3 and 4 are enough to create the 12 fold system of cardinalities and elements. Elements pertain to expansion and contraction, phases of density, Water is the final, perfected contained element, fire the first, expansive and self-generating. Mutable fire, 9 Sagittarius, is consuming and dispersing across the board.

The principle is two fold - self-valuing (cardinal-fixed) and valuing (fixed-mutable).

Al this is speculative -
I know astrology primarily as a collection of empirical data. All information (sun in aquarius = ) is [limited] and charts must be read whole. This means integrating the geometry into an overall pattern.
But the geometry extends to a system of qualities, which is not reducible to numbers without knowing fully the complete chemical structures of the planets and the Sun - it is easier to atomically deconstruct a brain to achieve the same ends. Order is humanly reducible to principle, but quality is not; therefore all human attempts to this end bring about a reduction of the human quality.

I’m a Scorpio.

I agree. But I would appreciate it if you could further expound on your knowledge of astrology, while keeping out “esoteric” terms. Use words that I can understand. I do not like names. All I need is the basis of the design and it will come to me on its own.

I will try to steer for comprehensible substance - tell me if this is lacking in clarity and if so where specifically, or otherwise what specifically you need to know to begin.

The only objectifying test of astrology is an empirical one.
One test is for someone to give me a number of points in time and space on Earth one of which is their birth, and the astrologer tries to pick out the right chart based on what he perceives of the person.

Another is for the astrology to outright say the sun is here moon there, ascendant this and probably A in the xth house, B in y, etc.

I can not sustain a success rate in the later, because I don’t try for one. But this is what a professional astrologer had to be able to do when the art was taken seriously. It is still taken seriously, but it is being obscured by printing horoscopes based on the isolated position of the sun, which is virtually certain to be irrelevant or incorrect, given that aspects determine everything. But everything. There is nothing that is not explicit in a chart or a progressed chart. And with explicit I mean explicit: exact conjunctions at momentous events are ubiquitous. Probability is not even a factor. It is more like gravity. The only restriction to it is that the human life is beyond comprehension - not that its set of strengths and weaknesses and course of obstacles is not absolutely determined. The interplay between many such determined paths through the human density of transience, causes the courses of fate (2) versus destiny (1), a choice which is determined at - only, it looks like - angular portals of intensification or multiplication.

We are always under the influence, first of the sun and our own orbit(ascendant), then moon (semi-retrograding, ‘slipping’ moon points are crucial to avoid error in magic (shortcutting relations by invoking numerical and qualitative patterns of propagation)) - and then of the planets. I can not account for their force except on a level of deep subtlety; as I said we are all of us on Earth embedded not only on Earth but in the flat plane of the Suns outposts, and this whole is blanked covered by the scintillating intelligence of the magnetic fields, propagating their ‘logics’ in gods knows what complexities but all of our brains are directly embedded in this system, in some fields more even than they are ‘stuck on our spines’. A brain can keep functioning without a body, and still be uninfluenced by its location on Earth, by the position of the Sun, but also by the moons phase and proximity to the Earth, which causes the tides but also correlates with increases and decreases of conceptions and murders and pull at the waters in our body and brain. The moon is primarily connected to the body and the mother, as it influences the waters and the bleeding. We are not isolated from our system. We can of course live in bunkers; it is likely that to be born and conceived in a bunker means to be born more ‘neutrally’, whatever that means; more in terms of genes perhaps, with less character of ones own. More in terms of the times, the architecture of the bunker, the clothes -
to be born under the stars then means to be delivered free to oneself.

A third is a reading of a chart without knowledge of the person it applies to.

A fourth test is semi empirical, it is a reading done of the person with the chart next to him. This is what is by far the most common and easy and unfalsifiable and what makes the image of astrology. If I had a the money to hire some programmers and advertising space I could make dating site whose worth would run in the billions because it has an unsurpassed success rate. I have a lot of date, gathered by specialist friend, of the type of alignments that are consistent in lasting romantic bonds. The consistencies are strong enough to make marketable predictions; if out of a pool of 500 there are 48-51 men with moon on the woman’s Juno, there are also 48-51 women with moon on the mans Juno. So genders relations to planets are interchangeable, but planetary relations are not. It is the coherence of patterns Every body is a step in the pattern. Ever alignment is a shared step, a resonance of will and identity.

Astrology by numbers -

1 and 8 are related to drive
2 and 7 are related to value
3 and 6 are related to intelligence
4 and 5 are related to identity
9 is related to law and expansion
10 is related to structural drive, will to power
11 related to universal value, knowledge,
12 is related to completion, ‘divine love’ as well as ‘self-undoing’.

12 as 4 times 3 is the only thing that properly comes after the nine (thus not 10 or 11), as 369 is enclosed in itself but becomes ‘matter’ when it steps out of itself into a fourth step, a dimension outside of itself, the stability and of the square or the tetrahedron, the ‘house’. But in the house the self is undone, the core chain is broken.

10 and 11 are states of suspension before either expansion or collapse. They are therefore regarded as signs of mystery and independence.

Is there any way you can apply this to, say, our mathematical design?

That said - all numbers are found in you depending on which “universal powers” you focus on, correct? It would make sense because I have it all.

That information on the moon affecting water and bleeding was something I was thinking about off an on.

I also suggest to explain the moon moving away - it’s because it will reach a point where it stops moving backwards and start moving forwards - ad infinitum.

Remember, this entire planet is perpetuating via sea and land. What is sea will be land and what is land will be sea later.

:character-spamcan:

Sorry to hear that. I enjoyed the conversation and found you worthwhile discussing with, which is not at all common on the internet.

Jakob, as a genius you over think things.

Please stop letting fear tactics consume you. The government already does what James did (as unruly and pathetic as he is) and more. It’s not like James did anything the government isn’t doing right now with our information from company to company.

Get over here and stop letting fear degrade your future. The only things that can blur your vision is damage to your sight and yourself - are you going to seriously let this consume you? James is nothing - will always be nothing - ignore the faceless figure and get back to making your future. Don’t let someone’s sociopathy get to you - that’s how you feed them. I already told that kid that he was a vulture and a vampire that feeds on the life of others - we all know what kind of inhumane creature they are for preying on people to compensate for their irritable lifestyle. Whether you like it or not, James isn’t the only fucked up creature in this world - most of this species are fucked up; always judging real people based on facetious media outlets and incomplete data. It’s a sick world out there - James is just a byproduct of that sick world.

Don’t you get the psychology behind it? James is targeting you because YOU are a threat to HIM. He targets you because he envies you. He tries to feed off of you because it’s a twisted version of love. I’m not even kidding when I say this - love is commonly twisted into unrecognizable states - this is one of them. James gives you attention in a twisted way like the boy gives the girl attention. When you run away, you are then creating an enemy - when you stand, you create envy.

Do you understand? You’re Jon Stewart/Steven Colbert - James is Bill O’ Reilly/Bill O’ Reilly.

I understand that James makes you see him like this (removing the word “hunter” & “sexual”, of course):

But James is more like this:

Land of David by Jakob M.

That is probably the bravest gesture of exposing your “heart”.

It certainly touched mine.

Beautifully done, perhaps that is your unbearable ambition.

The heart, the jewel, the essence of who we are.