Pythagorean Hylozoics

This thread is yet again another attempt (my 4th I think) to learn about the subject of this thread's title: Pythagorean Hylozoics

I'm not interested in hearing it debunked, but if you know anything about it, please contact me by post here, pm or email.

Please note this:

Public discussion of banned members is not allowed [on ATS].

so please do not mention the subject.

Lars Adelskogh on Pythagorean Hylozoics:
"Most people do not need any explanation why they live, why they are here. They are either
happy with their existence or unhappy, and in neither case can a book like this make them any
happier. It is not for them that this book has been written.

There is another group of people, however, not very large but growing; those who have
become aware of their need of an explanation. The majority of them have tried one thing or
another without being satisfied: religion, philosophy, science, occultism or new age teachings.
They have an instinct telling them that it cannot be such as the authorities say, that there must
be something more, something bigger, something enormously more important than what the
authorities call “the world as we know it”.

This group could be called the independent seekers. They are independent because they
want to decide themselves what they are to accept. They are seekers because they have not
found anything that holds when examined by their innate critical sense, and so they go on
seeking." - www.hylozoik.se...

edit on 11-6-2013 by nimrod20032003 because: (no reason given)

edit on 11-6-2013 by nimrod20032003 because: violated t&s

edit on 11-6-2013 by nimrod20032003 because: t&c not t&s

PS: I always use the same username whether here or elsewhere and I only use the big free providers.

edit on 11-6-2013 by nimrod20032003 because: error

reply to post by nimrod20032003

Thank you for your effort in beginning this thread about Hylozoic, which interests me a lot.
At least, we can learn and discuss about this "treasure/gift" together.
Since it contains lots of materials/books, an overall summary of it may helps,

In short, a purpose of Hylozoics is to seek to vindicate and ennoble the entire neglected edifice of esoterics given to us since 1875, and offer it as a great supporting systems of understanding that has everything to do with human freedom, service and caring and the promotion of human development under the great law of love and truth without alloy, pretence or duplicity. Just simply bolstering all the goodness of the divine Spirit in man with a new excellence in the understanding ourselves and the subtle world within and around us all.

Main Table of Contents
Preface
Introduction with some key Definitions
Chapter One Grand Anatomy
Chapter Two The Cosmic Physical Plane
Chapter Three The First Self Triad
Chapter Four The Lotus

For more information, click here.

reply to post by Oness

Greetings:

Very interesting.

Just so happens, we have a rather extensive library, which includes many of the published works of Helena Blavatsky, among many others of the same ilk.

Perhaps not by chance, a book my father published - Oahspe - seems to have a similar take on many of the subjects presented... going to your site now.

Thank you for your time, consideration, participation and links.

[color=magenta]Peace Love Light
tfw [color=magenta]Liberty & Equality or Revolution

Originally posted by thorfourwinds
Just so happens, we have a rather extensive library, which includes many of the published works of Helena Blavatsky, among many others of the same ilk.

I think this may be of a different "ilk" altogether.

Actually Henry T. Laurency (laurency.com) [paraphrased] says that theosophy (Blavatsky), anthroposophy (Steiner), and the many Rosicrucian sects are vague and incomplete systems whose authors were ignorant of hylozoics.

And that Pythagorean hylozoics is actually a mental system, a mathematical description of reality, affording sufficient knowledge of reality and life to liberate mankind from its disorienting idiologies, illusions and fictions. It tries to represent reality in mental concepts, so that the mentalist can have a vision of the nature, meaning, and goal of existence.

reply to post by nimrod20032003


I'm getting the unsettling feeling that people here are intimidated by these subjects mixed with ATS. With all the flags and stars but barely any comments, I'm guessing people are afraid of being banned just for discussing something that could possibly be linked to that one thread that just got tossed into Hoax. I keep seeing banned people left and right.

I don't know what's up but the site certainly didn't like what it was reading. It was in the "gray" and it got shut down for lack of proof. I guess proof is needed in the gray area now. I don't know. Just be careful about what you post, I guess.

"Hylozoics is a mental system. By this is meant a system that man can comprehend and use by his mental consciousness, his intellect and common sense. In problems belonging to the world view, emotion is no source of illumination and no sure guide. Only reason can decide whether alleged facts are true facts, judge their possibility, credibility, or probability.

But facts as such do not suffice. Single, disconnected facts confuse rather than explain. Facts must be put together into contexts and contexts be combined into still larger units: into systems. Every thinking man makes himself a system. Every new thing he learns he connects with his former learning, incorporating the new with the system he has already got and goes on building, consciously or unconsciously. All rational thinking is done in systems. And that is so because understanding always goes from universals to particulars, from a whole to details.

The hylozoic system makes it possible to unite that striving after knowledge which here in the West has during hundreds of years been divided into mutually conflicting movements: theology, philosophy, and science. Such division and conflict is always proof of ignorance. Reality is one and single. Therefore, there can be only one true knowledge of reality, only one tenable world view. Life views, on the other hand, should indeed be as numerous as thinking people, since everybody should formulate his own view of what he wants from life and what he is prepared to give in return." - The Explanation by Lars Adelskogh

I'm still hoping somebody with some real knowledge of Pythagorean Hylozoics will stop by.

Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by nimrod20032003

 

I'm getting the unsettling feeling that people here are intimidated by these subjects mixed with ATS. With all the flags and stars but barely any comments, I'm guessing people are afraid of being banned just for discussing something that could possibly be linked to that one thread that just got tossed into Hoax. I keep seeing banned people left and right.

I don't know what's up but the site certainly didn't like what it was reading. It was in the "gray" and it got shut down for lack of proof. I guess proof is needed in the gray area now. I don't know. Just be careful about what you post, I guess.

More on Pythagoras:
Pythagorean metempsychosis,a fascinating read.
plato.stanford.edu...

plato.stanford.edu...

Originally posted by Cuervo
With all the flags and stars but barely any comments

It's gotta be a first - a thread with more flags than posts - curiouser and curiouser

Well, keep up the good work.

reply to post by Raxoxane


Thanks for that it WAS a fascinating read.

It may not be reasonabe to extrapolate "metempsychosis" - which is specifically humans reincarnating into animal bodies and vice versa - from a story in which Pythagorus stopped the beating of a dog because he recognized his friend in it's whimpering, tho.

Reincarnation I might buy, which normally is just human to human with perhaps the posssibility that animals can "upgrade", but NOT the other way around.

I've already read enough about Hylozoics to know it does NOT teach that humans incarnate as animals.

Originally posted by nimrod20032003

"Hylozoics is a mental system. By this is meant a system that man can comprehend and use by his mental consciousness, his intellect and common sense. In problems belonging to the world view, emotion is no source of illumination and no sure guide. Only reason can decide whether alleged facts are true facts, judge their possibility, credibility, or probability.

You cannot make even the simplest decisions without being guided by affect. Emotion is a tool in the cognitive toolbox, and reason has been likened to the rider of the elephant of affect. If you fail to recognize the value in emotional feedback, or have neurological abnormalities that result in impaired or inflamed affect, it is tantamount to having a serious handicap, and translates accordingly in the life paths of those so afflicted.

Facts are facts regardless of how one feels about them, but knowing how one feels about any given set of facts is a vital precursor to acting upon them.

I know you solar lodge guyzos fear and loathe things like reflection and vulnerability, but your full range of humanity is diminished when your emotions are discounted or reviled.

And besides, positivism relies on a higher authority (take your pick) who dictates reality. Given the Observer Effect, a constructivist approach to structuring our societies and our personal cognitive functioning will probably yield a richer, more profound reality than the impoverished and authoritarian positivist vision.

And then there's this:

Seeing as how math is only provable with more math, a tautology arises. The only math which is known by humans is the math that is knowable by humans.It might seem obvious, but it's really important, because mathmetical realists believe that beyond the math we currently know is more math. They believe in an objective mathematical universe with concepts we might one day discover, we might never discover, and, for whatever reason, might not be able to discover. In the absence of a direct observation of mathematics... mathematical realism boils down to a kind of faith, a faith in a mathematical entity or set of entities which is out there in the universe waiting to be discovered, and would be there regardless of whether there are humans or not. To my ears, the belief in a mathematical universe you can't perceive or directly interact with sounds less like science and more like the opposite of science.

^ Just so we can drop the pretext that the subject of the OP has a claim to positivist authority of any kind, least of all of the scientific variety.

Ok, I'm completely new to the subject and truly do not wish to derail the thread. So educate me, why would a thread on this topic be banned or forbidden?

Especially in the grey area.

reply to post by mr-lizard


Yeah I was wondering this also...please someone enlighten us.

The last 2 posts are really not helpful.

If you wish to discuss the topic, do so.

If you wish to find out why threads are closed, submit a complaint and someone will contact you.

This is not the place for that.

Maybe we are getting too close to the truth and ATS is not as truth friendly as we might think it is??? I've been looking for info on this subject too. Does anyone have any book or video recommendations?

I know Ford Johnson mentions hylozoism a little in his book "Confessions of a God Seeker"

Any info would be greatly appreciated.

Originally posted by snakeoiladdict
You cannot make even the simplest decisions without being guided by affect.

I don't see where anybody has said otherwise. But "guided by" does not necessarily mean PRIMARILY influenced by. For myself, I would LIKE to be primarily guided by reason (whether usually sucessful or not is another matter :-).

Originally posted by snakeoiladdict
I know you solar lodge guyzos fear and loathe things like reflection and vulnerability, but your full range of humanity is diminished when your emotions are discounted or reviled.

I don't know what you're trying to get at with this comment but your post smells generally of ad hominem and scarecrows (strawman :-).

And once again - so far I see no indication that hylozoics "discounts" or "reviles" the emotions.

I like to give the benefit of the doubt, get a few facts, and perhaps, oh I don't know, maybe do a little analysis before I pronounce judgement on something I just heard of a coupla days ago

Originally posted by nimrod20032003

Originally posted by snakeoiladdict
You cannot make even the simplest decisions without being guided by affect.

I don't see where anybody has said otherwise. But "guided by" does not necessarily mean PRIMARILY influenced by. For myself, I would LIKE to be primarily guided by reason (whether usually sucessful or not is another matter :-).

How very... er... reasonable of you. After parsing the linked text, I pulled the impression that emotion is considered a faculty humanity is intended to evolve away from, as well as a general latent tone of contempt toward "emotionalism".

Here are some salient passages:

Emotional consciousness includes desires and feelings, mental consciousness comprises thoughts and ideas. At the emotional stage man is dominated by his desires and feelings, and his dawning common sense fights as serious odds against his illusion-creating wishful thinking. At the subsequent mental stage, man strives to become independent of emotionality.

The stage of barbarism is the first of the five stages of development that the monad goes through in the human kingdom; see 1.34.12.

In esoterics, intuition means at least causal consciousness (47:1-3), but often also essential consciousness (46:1-7), so that a distinction has to be made between causal and essential intuition, two radically different modes of perceiving reality. However, this true intuition has nothing whatsoever in common with what most people call their “intuition”, which is emo­tional thinking with a scanty mental content.

I could go on, but I'd hate to bore anyone.

If you discard emotional input, or think for a moment that your decisions aren't primarily informed by affect, then you are either delusional or may qualify for clinical psychopathy.

I don't know what you're trying to get at with this comment but your post smells generally of ad hominem and scarecrows (strawman :-).

I like to give the benefit of the doubt, get a few facts, and perhaps, oh I don't know, maybe do a little analysis before I pronounce judgement on something I just heard of a coupla days ago

And isn't that precisely the pose you're adopting? The guy who only heard of it a couple of days ago? Pending more material (and it's thin), I'm inclined to think this is just another hackjob esoteric mashup. I went for the "emotionality" and the math, as they were the only things one can actually address in that swamp of Vedo/Theosopho/The Secret/Emerald Tablets ripoffery.

Hell, maybe even thorforwinds' pop unwittingly contributed to it.

Who can say?

its entirely possible, given the general premise of the "banned" thread, that this particular discipline or study is a fabrication or a riff on the ancient Pythagorean cult.

it is not difficult to find info on the Pythagorean cult, so I assume you are hoping someone to reveal a dusty old tome clearly labeled with the words "thee olde Pythagorean hylozoics"?

something about your earnestness and insistence is offputting to me. pages and pages of questions submitted to the initiate, so many that he could never be reasonably expected to answer. and now a thread saying essentially "give me my infos, ATS".

here's a thought: go to your local university library and bury your head for a few days. and then come back and YOU tell US what this is all about.


I'm looking forward to reading your report....

reply to post by thorfourwinds

Originally posted by thorfourwinds
Perhaps not by chance, a book my father published - Oahspe - seems to have a similar take on many of the subjects presented... going to your site now.

Thank you. Just so happens——It seems like Synchronicity, which has its meaning.
As to Oahspe, I only know about it from the Ra materials,

Questioner: Can you tell me who was responsible for transmitting the book Oahspe?
Ra: I am Ra. This was transmitted by one of Confederation social memory complex status whose idea, as offered to the Council, was to use some of the known physical history of the so-called religions or religious distortions of your cycle in order to veil and partially unveil aspects or primal distortions of the Law of One. All names can be taken to be created for their vibrational characteristics. The information buried within has to do with a deeper understanding of love and light, and the attempts of infinite intelligence through many messengers to teach/learn those entities of your sphere.

reply to post by nimrod20032003

Originally posted by nimrod20032003
Reincarnation I might buy, which normally is just human to human with perhaps the posssibility that animals can "upgrade", but NOT the other way around.I've already read enough about Hylozoics to know it does NOT teach that humans incarnate as animals.

In general, you're right, but in some cases, it may not. For example, In Ra materials,

Questioner: What happened to Maldek(whose destruction supposedly led to the formation of the asteroid belt)— or the people on Maldek to cause them to lose their planet?
Ra: The peoples of Maldek had a civilization somewhat similar to that of the societal complex known to you as Atlantis in that it gained much technological information and used it without care for the preservation of their sphere following to a majority extent the complex of thought, ideas, and actions which you may associate with your so-called negative polarity or the service to self.(....)The devastation that wracked their biosphere and caused its disintegration resulted from what you call war. After this experience of learn/teaching, the group decision was to place upon itself a type of what you may call karma alleviation. For this purpose they came into incarnation within your planetary sphere in what were not acceptable human forms(Ape). This then they have been experiencing until the distortions of destruction are replaced by distortions towards the desire for a less distorted vision of service to others. Since this was the conscious decision of the great majority of those beings in the Maldek experience, the transition to this planet began approximately five hundred thousand of your years ago and the type of body complex available at that time was used.

Questioner: And have any of the Maldek entities transformed now? Are they now still second-density or are they forming some third-density planet now?
Ra: The consciousness of these entities has always been third-density. The alleviation mechanism was designed by the placement of this consciousness in second-dimensional physical chemical complexes which are not able to be dextrous or manipulative to the extent which is appropriate to the workings of the third-density distortions of the mind complex.

So for karma alleviation, Maldek entities incarnated as ape(of 2-density, which is the density of animals, plants and even minerals.) In Buddhism(Blavatsky was instrumental in the Western transmission and revival of Theravada Buddhism), there are also concepts of "the six great divisions in the wheel of karma".
However, you're right in sense of consciousness-evolution, as Ra said "The consciousness of these entities has always been third-density".


reply to post by snakeoiladdict

Originally posted by snakeoiladdict
If you discard emotional input, or think for a moment that your decisions aren't primarily informed by affect, then you are either delusional or may qualify for clinical psychopathy.

I think you misunderstand its point. We don't say we should discard emotional input, which is necessary for balancing ourselves.
But as we evolve, we will become more rational human, (which not means we're impassive,) and not be influenced by irrational emotion as before. So we will be more integrated than ever.
As to the materials you provided, I really like it, and IMO, it doesn't contradict that off-site content you provided, if we look it at a dialectical or eclectic way.

Namaste~

reply to post by tgidkp

Originally posted by tgidkp
its entirely possible, given the general premise of the "banned" thread, that this particular discipline or study is a fabrication or a riff on the ancient Pythagorean cult.

Gee you think?

Aside from being initiated into a true school I don't see how anyone can expect to understand any of this stuff in a comprehensive manner. One like myself can only hope to thumb a ride like in The hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy from random Hoaxers on internet forums. Some so called intelligent people might frown upon my technique but it has fully proven itself more than once....amazing inexplicable knowledge I have gained just by thumbing a ride.

Fabrications or and riffs like anything on the net about Pythagorean hylozoics or any other teaching of mystery schools and no different than the fossils and toys we use today to understand dinosaurs IMHO. But I feel this is by design solely because true knowledge has to be lived through and sought after kind of like putting a puzzle together. From this point of view a fabrication by default is an opportunity to read between the lines if adept.

You have a better chance of getting hit by lightning than joining the US Air Force with a GED but people still take the ASVAB kind of a deal. I never joined the armed forces but I once "thumbed a ride" from a USAF pilot while working at Mcd's, as I handed him his burger through the drive trough window I asked him what he recommended i study to better my chances and he responded aero(something) engineering (not aeronautic engineering). I never studied that nor took any ASVAB but hopefully a point was made.....

There are people in this world that know tings we can't even comprehend, and knowledge sometimes dies if it is not shared. These people know this and sometimes are dumb enough to try and keep it alive as it withers away by what ever means they see fit. Ah, but people are always to quick to stomp pearls hen they see them.

"keep only what resonates with you" I don't understand why understanding what this really means is so hard for most.

I'm just sharing my thoughts, not accusing you of anything.

The Rat.

reply to post by snakeoiladdict

And isn't that precisely the pose you're adopting? The guy who only heard of it a couple of days ago?

That is a pretty thinly veiled insult isn't it? That I'm just a guy "adopting the pose" that I only "heard of it a couple days ago"?

It is not a "pose" but the truth, please cease and desist with the insults or provide some evidence, heck ANY evidence of your accusations (besides your emotions I mean) ]

And as far as your strawman regarding negating, denigrating, or otherwise denouncing the emotions - it'd probably help if you understood the terminology for one.

And for two, see Oness' post:

I think you misunderstand its point. We don't say we should discard emotional input, which is necessary for balancing ourselves.
But as we evolve, we will become more rational human, (which not means we're impassive,) and not be influenced by irrational emotion as before. So we will be more integrated than ever.