All Just Is, E.C.Nemeth [important books to read .TXT] 📗

can get. But the creation of the universe leaves science baffled no matter how it came about. So they excluded God because they wished to pare down that bafflement to the bare bones. This has caused the bafflement to turn against science and some of its leading edge discoveries. Yet God is the least baffling link in the entire logical heirarchy. The Godhead ties all things together and eliminates doubt.
What’s baffling about that?
Archetypes
Here is where a discussion of archetypes becomes necessary because that concept is the vehicle upon which all understanding is made possible. A clear understanding of archetypes allows a particular pattern to emerge that will logically include God in its reality, unlike science propounds at this time.
An archetype, in general, is defined as a pattern or prototype upon which all related phenomena base their structures and so are merely replicas or copies of the original. A crude parallel is the black outline of a picture in a child’s coloring book. If several children colored in copies of the same picture with completely different color schemes the original outline will not have changed an iota. The spaces that are marked off by the black lines can be colored with any hue in the rainbow but the underlying outline will remain the same even though the various copies of the picture may look a great deal different. In this example the black outline is the archetype of all the copies of the picture that were colored in by the children. That is just one example of an archetype.
There is an archetype at work wherever a particular pattern is repeated regularly. Deductive reasoning has an archetype, as does the whirl of seeds in a sunflower’s pod. Mathematics follows an archetype (perhaps more than one), so does the earth’s weather. Archetypes are present all around us. They convey the meaning behind what our senses perceive. Although these universal templates exist they rarely draw attention to themselves, lost as they are inside the very fabric of our understandings. Our intricate languages are based upon the universal archetypes yet we see only the heavy words.
There are many archetypes woven into our magnificent universal tapestry. Since the universe exists and we are here observing that, it stands to reason that there is a set of templates or archetypes that were present at the very beginning of time which lead inexorably to today’s universe. They are the universal archetypes. Following the same line of reasoning we can expect a fundamental, universal archetype that undergirds the creation of the universe itself.
An informal name for this fundamental archetype is the 12321 Model. So named because of how one becomes three and then becomes one again, thus the ‘one to three to one Model’. The topic or object of discussion raises or uncovers a relevent fact which is then incorporated to deduce or infer a connection between the two. The connection then becomes a separate, entirely new topic or object of discusion to use for further permutations. The universal archetype always follows this same sequence: one, the topic; then three, the topic, its opposte and a possible connection; then one again, the amalgamation of the three. This is how the new understanding, orientation or fact continues to evolve. And that explains the malleability of the universe itself, its constantly changing nature.
In science, the most basic archetypes are the four forces, namely: the force of gravity, the electro-magnetic force and the strong and weak nuclear forces. These four archetypes, science claims, alone or in combination, can account for almost everything, known or unknown, that has ever transpired in the universe, or that ever will. Even with the newest understandings in sub-atomic physics, the four forces still reign supreme.
The question then seems to be whether science’s four forces alone can fully account for every phenomenon in the entire universe. But it isn’t. The real question concerns the nature of the prime archetype. What is the very first template that needs to be before any other can exist? That’s the truly important question.
This is where science got mixed up. It tried to retro-engineer the universe to see if their understanding, their knowledge of the physical universe, could be used to ‘run the time-line backward’ and arrive at a description of the instant of creation. They got very close, well within one second of the initial instant of creation. But they have been unable to push the boundary of their ignorance any closer to the exact moment of creation. They have no tools, no models, which can operate at such high temperatures and pressures. Even mathematics bogs down when the universe was far less than a billionth of a second old.
Does a mere billionth of a second matter in the larger scheme of things you might ask. It’s impossible not to wonder because the prime archetype simply cannot be denied. The prime archetype undergirds all of our understandings and beyond even that, it is responsible for our very existence. If that is of importance then you have your answer – a mere flicker of time is immensely significant.
If the four forces of science and their mathematical constructs were the final truth then they should have lead back to the very first moment of time but they didn’t. There are efforts being made to this day, and going on now for decades, to reconcile the problem using patchwork solutions that have as yet failed to push their theories, along with their understanding, through to the very beginning of the universe.
The two must become one
There is only one last thing we need to comprehend fully in order to move beyond the stopgap of scientific thought. It is that an amalgamation of the forces is possible. There are really only two things in existence in the universe, namely, matter and energy. Yet Einstein’s famous equation begs to differ. It states that there is only energy in two distinct flavors. One type is restricted by the laws governing the electromagnetic force and travels at the velocity of light while the other is trapped inside a vortex supported by three new forces.
Observe the parallel here. The universal archetype seems to have reared its formidable head.
Notice that first there is one force and then there are three more, just as the 12321 Model insists. According to this mode of logic, then, the prime archetype is light, as seen from a scientific viewpoint. We can also say that within the context of the tangible universe the first thing that came into being was light. Some of that light, for reasons unknown from a scientific standpoint, turned into matter at some point early in the development of the universe and simultaneously spawned three new forces. But at the beginning of the universe there was light and light was all there was.
That sounds a great deal like the description of God from earlier in the chapter. If light was all there was then dark was all there was not. Now we have the same description as seen earlier describing God (or Shiva) but with two qualifiers instead of just one. God is all there is and all there is not. Similarly, at the beginning of the universe light was all there was and dark was all there was not.
(From now on the term God will be employed as the purest English symbol for the concept of the Divine, as a generic title without religious connotations, while the references to other names, which implied its still highly subjective nature, will now cease since the point has become evident.)
It may sound silly at this stage but, by adhering to the strictures in place due to the concept of archetypes, the story of the creation of our universe starts to make a strange kind of sense.
To recap, then: All just is; God is all there is and all there is not; at the beginning of the universe light was all there was and dark was all there was not.
This is already a sound beginning to another view of reality. The above smattering of symbols contains the necessary seeds of a new understanding that can flourish in fertile minds and blossom into the means to transcend our mortal limits and create the world anew. For it offers something in return, it provides the motivation and the means to escape the drudgery of daily life. It offers hope and solace. Ultimately, it gives us direction and serves as our collective conscience. It also lends credence to the belief in our souls.
Levels of truth
Logical analysis forces us to consider the nature of the state that existed before the universe was created. In order for the universe to exhibit duality it must have been so mitigated by what came before it. This initial state, the state the instant before the creation of the universe, is beyond our means of verifying but it can be extrapolated by using the idea of the fundamental archetype or inferred by observing the most basic underlying principle of the universe it produced.
To explain, consider the statement All just is as first premise. Using the fundamental archetype as the guiding principle we can infer that the second premise must exhibit not only those properties that preceded it but also those that will follow it. If the third premise in this logical sequence is the actual creation of the universe then we can surmise the possible state that preceded it.
Conversely, by observing the most basic aspect of the universe, its duality as exhibited by the wave/particle relationship of light, we can deduce the most probable state that existed before it. The duality of light is the aspect we are interested in at this point because we have already determined that at the beginning of the universe light was all there was.
Coming from the angle of the fundamental archetype the first premise must be followed by three additional concepts. If inferred by extrapolation based on the primary observation that the universe is essentially dual in nature we come to the conclusion that the state before must have somehow exhibited a singular quality. Although at first glance there seems to be a contradiction here we need to remember that, as mentioned in the introduction, there are different levels of truth and the contradiction is created when those levels are arbitrarily crossed.
Coming from the level of the first premise there must indeed be three additional concepts. If the alternate level is the reference, that of the creation of the universe, then the moment before must have been inclusive in nature. It is based upon this seeming contradiction that the following concepts are the best candidates to represent the state that must have existed prior to the creation of the universe. Keep in mind that this entire process, at this level of truth, is merely speculation based upon the human necessity to catagorize all phenomena. There is, in fact, no way to verify the conclusions about to be presented. Mankind, however, cannot abondon its intellectual proclivities simply because the answers are beyond its ability to understand.
Monopole and nopole
First we must consider two new concepts, the monopole and the nopole. These two ideas are virtually forced upon us by the logical constraints we are placed under simply by being of this world. Our minds insist that in order for our universe of duality to have appeared a dualistic force that then caused it to exhibit similar qualities must have influenced its appearance.
In other words, God had to differentiate in some manner. God caused an inequality to exist where none existed before. That inequality is what the monopole and nopole represent. They may end up simply being intellectual constructs with no actual physical manifestation. That remains to be seen, if it will ever be possible to determine the truth in that regard (lying,