NaturaNaturans

History If the trinity

Recommended Posts

I have a long paper on it , but not just before Christianity , on  the basic aspects of the concept as a principle in  nature  , physics (including sub atomic physics ) , cosmology , philosophy  and religions  .... if you want to read it .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Nungali said:

I have a long paper on it , but not just before Christianity , on  the basic aspects of the concept as a principle in  nature  , physics (including sub atomic physics ) , cosmology , philosophy  and religions  .... if you want to read it .

 

Please share

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay ... I cant find the posts  here  and it appears to have vanished off my desktop . I will hunt for one of my flash drives and try to copy it to here later .

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hinduism has the Trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. The creator, the sustainer, and the destroyer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Maddie said:

Hinduism has the Trinity of Brahma, Vishnu, and Shiva. The creator, the sustainer, and the destroyer.

 

Hinduism also has Brahman beyond all categories, including the three mentioned.  (or the Self, for instance per the Upanishads),

Edited by old3bob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, old3bob said:

 

Hinduism also has Brahman beyond all categories, including the three mentioned.  (or the Self, for instance per the Upanishads),

 

You're correct but the question was about trinity's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buddhism has the trinity of the three kayas - 

the enlightened body, speech, and mind (dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, and nirmianakaya)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, steve said:

Buddhism has the trinity of the three kayas - 

the enlightened body, speech, and mind (dharmakaya, sambhogakaya, and nirmianakaya)

 

Reminds me of the etymology of Wotan, Villi and Ve (Odin and his brothers, creator of mankind), which translates to shamanic fury, the will and the sacred.

 

Thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis. It works for loads of stuff, and it makes sense. I should probally post this in @Nungalis thread, but i havent got around to reading it yet. But i will.

 

Makes sense tho. How we start as one ocean,¬†duality arises from a induviduated observer, a wave in the ocean, and a trinitarian unity is what we are left with when we combine duality and ¬ęall is one¬Ľ.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Maddie said:

 

You're correct but the question was about trinity's.

 

just making it clear that that is not the end of the story...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, old3bob said:

 

just making it clear that that is not the end of the story...  

 

The clarification has been accomplished ūüôāūüėČ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 is possibly the most important number in engineering.  It's best known best for its remarkable strength and stability.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Maddie said:

Let's not forget the most important Trinity ever

 

 

 

Screenshot_2023-11-21-09-45-20-60_680d03679600f7af0b4c700c6b270fe7.jpg

 

 

Check out those baps  ! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Above we have an image of the three Gunas  ; 

 

7 hours ago, NaturaNaturans said:

Reminds me of the etymology of Wotan, Villi and Ve (Odin and his brothers, creator of mankind), which translates to shamanic fury, the will and the sacred.

 

Thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis. It works for loads of stuff, and it makes sense. I should probally post this in @Nungalis thread, but i havent got around to reading it yet. But i will.

 

Makes sense tho. How we start as one ocean,¬†duality arises from a induviduated observer, a wave in the ocean, and a trinitarian unity is what we are left with when we combine duality and ¬ęall is one¬Ľ.

 

read it ... you will see how  the 3 : 4  'thing' is a universal principle .  ie; 3 things come together to form an 'ideal'  (non material , but 'real ) form or pattern and from this emerges , or they result in, a 4th material , or 'further towards material' product .   Its basic  '4 element' theory ; fire water air ... earth 'solid material reality stuff ' .

 

4 principles each in 3 modes  with a 'quintessential'  'apart from that'  origin .

 

(  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintessence )

 

I postulate it came from the pattern of the human hand  ; four fingers in 3 parts and a thumb  ... or the pattern is just so universal that it works good for a hand  < shrug > .

 

The 4 powers of physics ; electo-magnetic force, strong force, weak force,  ( which can all be 'unified' )  and Gravity .  They cant fit gravity into the 'Unified field' theory as it , according to this concept, is 'out side' ... or a 'result of' the other three .

 

There is an old thread around somewhere  where we played with moving  the G constant  to the other side of the accepted  formulae ... ie  AFTER  the = sign  and not before it .

 

The other addition to the 3:4  pattern is often  a 7  based system , which I think was based on the observation of the 7 'heavenly wanderers ' .

 

 

The Principles

 Mysterious Energy, triform, mysterious Matter, in fourfold and sevenfold division, the interplay of which things weave the dance of the Veil of Life upon the Face of the Spirit ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets do some 'geometry'  of  consciousness / coming into existence :

 

First is 1 , the point , a concept with no dimensional  measurements .  The point can only be aware of itself as nothing else exists yet .

 

But it can be aware of itself , so we have extended awareness  to two things ; the point itself and its awareness of itself . The point has moved , 'as it where ' to go 'outside itself ' to 'look back at itself '  , 'to consider what it might be .  A moving point  defines a line . We are in one dimension .

 

The point 'self' and the 'awareness of / looking at the point / self creates an opinion , observation , understanding ... a third thing . Now we have three points on the one dimensional field ; a triangle and the concept of 2D ; the 'surface ' .   Its all ' flat ' and in the 'ideal world ' , above normal perceptions .  To cross this 'abyss ', we have to come 'up'  from the surface   and create a 3D 'shape ' .

 

so first (is actually  0 , that 'field we are imagining this in '  , or the 'time space continuum ' as some prefer ) is point, then line, surface  (all ideal concepts , even in drawn geometry a line has thickness and depth as well as length ) and then shape .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, old3bob said:

 


In the lyrics: “I gave her my heart but she wanted my soul“

What does that mean?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Her meaning :  He didnt go deep enough .

 

His meaning :   Women are never satisfied .

 

My meaning ;  He got frightened when ,  after giving her his heart , he felt his illusion of individual self dissolving   and the 'barrier' that separated him from her , no longer being there . 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Nungali said:

Above we have an image of the three Gunas  ; 

 

 

read it ... you will see how  the 3 : 4  'thing' is a universal principle .  ie; 3 things come together to form an 'ideal'  (non material , but 'real ) form or pattern and from this emerges , or they result in, a 4th material , or 'further towards material' product .   Its basic  '4 element' theory ; fire water air ... earth 'solid material reality stuff ' .

 

4 principles each in 3 modes  with a 'quintessential'  'apart from that'  origin .

 

(  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quintessence )

 

I postulate it came from the pattern of the human hand  ; four fingers in 3 parts and a thumb  ... or the pattern is just so universal that it works good for a hand  < shrug > .

 

The 4 powers of physics ; electo-magnetic force, strong force, weak force,  ( which can all be 'unified' )  and Gravity .  They cant fit gravity into the 'Unified field' theory as it , according to this concept, is 'out side' ... or a 'result of' the other three .

 

There is an old thread around somewhere  where we played with moving  the G constant  to the other side of the accepted  formulae ... ie  AFTER  the = sign  and not before it .

 

The other addition to the 3:4  pattern is often  a 7  based system , which I think was based on the observation of the 7 'heavenly wanderers ' .

 

 

The Principles

 Mysterious Energy, triform, mysterious Matter, in fourfold and sevenfold division, the interplay of which things weave the dance of the Veil of Life upon the Face of the Spirit ...

I will sir, but right now i need to hammer Out 50 Pages in ten days, so… priorites. But i do appreicate it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My favorite Trinity is the Three Pure Ones, you can read about them in Wikipedia article linked below:

 

The Pure Ones

 

There are many pictures of them on the internet, such as the pretty ones below:

 

th?id=OIP.nunCDGlY_kJmNTppZX5UCgHaEK%26p

 

As to the notion that this type of practice is a religion, I have said this elsewhere:

 

On 8/5/2022 at 10:24 AM, Zhongyongdaoist said:

I am in complete disagreement with the notion that "Daoism is a religion".  As far as I am concerned as a practitioner of what is usually referred to as "Relitigous Daoism", that it is a complete misnomer to call it such foisted on it by Western scholars of "religions", that it would be more properly referred to as "Ritual Daoism" and its structure would be better modeled by something like Freemasonry.  Basically Ritual Daosim was developed by Fangshi for Fangshi, as a combination of professional guild and teaching hall and has nothing to do with the "worship" of gods in the sense of a grovelling submission to such beings motivated by threats of punishment and promises of rewards for such behavior.  It's all about learning and practicing magic, which involves a great deal of time and study as anyone who has read and studied the works of Professor Jerry Alan Johnson can amply justify.  (Emphasis mine, ZYD)

 

Even the famous Freemason author J. S. M. Ward would agree with this assessment and a treatment of it such is he gave the Hung Society as he gave in his three volume account of its rites and teachings.  Those who are interested can follow the links below to nice PDFs.  Personally, I have a first edition signed by the author, but these PDF are very useful for study.

 

Volume One

 

Volume Two

 

Volume Three

 

You can read about the history of the Hung Society on Wikipedia here:

Tiandihui

I am quite aware of the organization's unsavory later history, but the above information is provided here as an example of how Ritual Daoism should be regarded and treated in my opinion.

 

Now for a little historical background on the development of the Trinity concept in Chistianity, which, as will probably surprise many people has its origin in Plato, not the Hebrew Old Testament, as is made clear by the following quoted from the Stanford Encyclopedia article on the development of Trinitarian doctrine:

 

Quote

 

1. Introduction

 

A direct influence on second century Christian theology is the Jewish philosopher and theologian Philo of Alexandria (a.k.a. Philo Judaeus) (ca. 20 BCE‚Äďca. 50 CE), the product of Alexandrian Middle Platonism (with elements of Stoicism and Pythagoreanism). Inspired by the Timaeus of Plato, Philo read the Jewish Bible as teaching that God created the cosmos by his Word (logos), the first-born son of God. Alternately, or via further emanation from this Word, God creates by means of his creative power and his royal power, conceived of both as his powers, and yet as agents distinct from him, giving him, as it were, metaphysical distance from the material world (Philo Works; Dillon 1996, 139‚Äď83; Morgan 1853, 63‚Äď148; Norton 1859, 332‚Äď74; Wolfson 1973, 60‚Äď97).

 

 

The whole discussion from which the above is taken, is interesting.

 

I could post more, but this post is long enough already.  I hope that the above material is interesting and helpful.

 

ZYD

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites