- 5,271
- 6,015
ask Ultima (lol)Isn't usually interpreted as a monadic "ground of being."
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
ask Ultima (lol)Isn't usually interpreted as a monadic "ground of being."
Refers more to nature that connects with a Monad rather than a quantity of monads.Isn't usually interpreted as a monadic "ground of being."
… Okay ? I was making an inquiry that I didn’t understand 100% about how Seeker was 0 . I didn’t make that with the intention of trying to be a fricking bother or anything@The_2nd_Existential_Seed Not helpful.
Because God has R>F over Maya who is all Creation.… Okay ? I was making an inquiry that I didn’t understand 100% about how Seeker was 0 . I didn’t make that with the intention of trying to be a fricking bother or anything
Jehovah will be High 1-A or 1-A, since I AM THAT I AM is stronger and the actual Tier 0 of the verse (It doesnt have a profile yet though).Jehovah (WOD)
In reference to stories using Oneness. We can think of it like what an author once said: “Though the characters we create are of our imagination because they came from our thoughts they’re very much us as both the dream and the dreamer.”Considering in most of “The source/beginning/oneness” there always involves division of or part manifest themselves as physical reality and the other as something like metaphysical self (souls) using the former as modes (like body) or that souls are merely a part of wholeness which have to shed the attributes and become one with the source, but at the end of day everything is one. Would it disqualify The oneness from being Tier 0 considering it has parts.
No, they're simply 1-A.and true platonic forms is tier 0
The first thread (covering Low 1-A to High 1-A) was passed, the second one is still being discussed.So what happened? I've been following the CRT on and off. So was the decision made? The impression I'm getting from certain things I've seen is that Ultima won and it ended up being passed. What has been happening?
Yes, that's not the case with platonic forms.Can there be multiple Tier 0 (s) if they all just aspects of the one being?
Unsong probably won't. The God which is stated to hold all attributes, be above all hierarchies, etc. isn't the most simple thing, Atzmus is. Plus a bunch of other issues that should prevent 0, and may even prevent 1-A.God (Unsong) Not really sure
I thought Atzmus was also Unsong.Unsong probably won't. The God which is stated to hold all attributes, be above all hierarchies, etc. isn't the most simple thing, Atzmus is. Plus a bunch of other issues that should prevent 0, and may even prevent 1-A.
Yeah, but it's not presented as a unification of all attributes, which I think should disqualify it from being considered a monad.I thought Atzmus was also Unsong.
Isn’t God an overarching title? That all emanation and aspects are part of it including Atzmus as essence of God and Ein Sof as concealed God before any emanation?Unsong probably won't. The God which is stated to hold all attributes, be above all hierarchies, etc. isn't the most simple thing, Atzmus is. Plus a bunch of other issues that should prevent 0, and may even prevent 1-A.
Not in Unsong.Isn’t God an overarching title? That all emanation and aspects are part of it including Atzmus as essence of God and Ein Sof as concealed God before any emanation?
Yet Atzmus is also of the Divine. God in reference to that is referring to as if he is consider to be existence while nothingness to oppose that. Not to mentions Ein Sof attribute is infinite that’s what’s being described as Atzmus is also another aspect of God that neither has information of 1(wholeness or unity) or 0(nothingness or absence of God).In Unsong, where God is 1, and nothing is 0, Atzmus is no information.
That doesn’t really say much. The short interlude doesn’t really explain that Atzmus is separate of divine as is Ein Sof to another part of it since Ein Sof denotes all levels in the lower worlds. Unsong didn’t pull the concept Atzmus out of nowhere and the source of it still describes Ein Sof and Atzmus as attribute to God while Ein Sof can be called God while Atzmus can’t be spoken of. Which Kabbalah also mentions how God cannot be described by any words because it limits it.And Ein Sof is unity with God that can be accessed by any being leaving the conventional space of their universe, such as through a spaceship.
Yes it does. Everything else is created through combining God (1) and nothingness (0), while Atzmus is the absence of information entirely. How could you say that doesn't indicate that God and Atzmus are distinct?That doesn’t really say much. The short interlude doesn’t really explain that Aztmus is separate of divine
We don't care about the source, we care about how it's described in-verse, where it's described as something distinct and to not be talked about.Unsong didn’t pull the concept as Aztmus out of nowhere and the source of it still describes Ein Sof and Aztmus as attribute to God while Ein Sof can be called God while Aztmus can’t be spoken of. Which Kabbalah also mentions how God can not be described by any words because it limits it.
Ein Sof emanated the worlds? That’s why the profile listed the two keys as part of the God(Divine).Yes it does. Everything else is created through combining God (1) and nothingness (0), while Atzmus is the absence of information entirely. How could you say that doesn't indicate that God and Atzmus are distinct?
Unsong didn’t make the concept. So obviously it’s inspired by the source which does not highlight Aztmus being distinct from God. Ein Sof being God is the reference point which is slightly changed from the original source. So obviously that trait of Divine is reflecting off of what Ein Sof is and Atzmus is the trait that has no information to distinguish it being an entity at all.We don't care about the source, we care about how it's described in-verse, where it's described as something distinct and to not be talked about.
God can be attributed at any level. That’s why one of them is “Ein Sof.” God in reference is being described while Atzmus isn’t because it’s can’t be tied to a trait as essence or the most simplistic thing which ties into every view of God being being ineffable and not to be described. Unsong does not notion away from it rather described a trait of God being everything.Unsong doesn't attribute Atzmus to God. Unsong doesn't say that God can't be described by any words, it in fact describes God and names it based on the principle of maximising the Good in existence.
I don't remember that ever being said in Unsong.Ein Sof emanated the worlds? That’s why the profile listed the two keys as part of the God(Divine).
I know, but we do not care about the source, we care about Unsong's use of it.Unsong didn’t make the concept. So obviously it’s inspired by the source which does not highlight Aztmus being distinct from God. Ein Sof being God is the reference point which is slightly changed from the original source. So obviously that trait of Divine is reflecting off of what Ein Sof is and Atzmus is the trait that has no information to distinguish it being an entity at all.
That's not how Unsong presents it.God can be attributed at any level. That’s why one of them is “Ein Sof.” God in reference is being described while Atzmus isn’t because it’s can’t be tied to a trait as essence or the most simplistic thing which ties into every view of God being being ineffable and not to be described. Unsong does not notion away from it rather described a trait of God being everything.
Agnaa, let’s just agree to disagree.
One last point on you saying Unsong doesn’t use the concept. However, you’re missing key elements that were hinted during the Interlude:There's a good chance you're right about the real-world use of those concepts, but you're demonstrably wrong about how Unsong uses it, and you won't be able to find support for such a specific view in it.
^The interluding is explaining that God can be called Ein Sof which is him before any or prior manifestation. Where even nothingness is contained by it.“The kabbalistic conception is that God withdrew from Himself to create the world. I, for example, am beautiful and intelligent, but not so physically strong. God is perfectly beautiful and intelligent and strong, so by withdrawing a little bit of His beauty and intelligence, and a lot of His strength, and some other things, we end up with an Ana.”
^Regarding when Ein Sof being defined as everything in Creation. How could God(Ein Sof) emanates such imperfection. The fact Unsong didn’t make the concept but follows it from the Source explains how everything including Ein Sof and Atzmus are part of God, of the Divine.“And there’s the rub,” said Ana. “To change any 1s to 0s at all is making the world worse. Less Godly. Creation was taking something that was already perfect – divinity – and making it worse for no reason. A wise woman once said that those who ask how a perfect God create a universe filled with so much that is evil miss a greater conundrum – why would a perfect God create a universe at all?”
I agree with the Roots not being 0. I’m neutral on Yog but I do see your point on that regard. What about God from Seekers?Yog-Sothoth and the Root, likewise, should not end up being considered monads. Yog-Sothoth is explicitly a member of a group of archetypes. He references this twice, and Lovecraft's private letters indicate that he considers Azathoth to be above Yog.
The root doesn't appear to have much of any evidence supporting Monism.
I don't really know the first thing about Seekers.What about God from Seekers?
No problem. This short thread does cover who he/she/it is:I don't really know the first thing about Seekers.
I don't care much about Ein Sof, but that interlude isn't about that. There is literally no mention of Ein Sof in that chapter. It does not say that "God before manifestation was Ein Sof". From other invocations of Ein Sof, we can see that Ein Sof is part of specific Adam Kadmon seeds, of which there are a huge amount across the worlds that were created.One last point on you saying Unsong doesn’t use the concept. However, you’re missing key elements that were hinted during the Interlude:
^The interluding is explaining that God can be called Ein Sof which is him before any or prior manifestation. Where even nothingness is contained by it.
In order to make the world. God had to put himself a face or separate from neither that he was. This is why Atzmus is also an attribute of the Divine. As Zoe questions if God is 1 and Nothingness is 0 where does neither come from. The whole tone shifts from the one point when you regard what was said later:
The answer to that is provided later, with God creating worlds to maximize the sum total good in the cosmos. Since one perfect being (himself) is less good than multiple worlds featuring beings that are less than perfect, but still ultimately more good than bad.^Regarding when Ein Sof being defined as everything in Creation. How could God(Ein Sof) emanates such imperfection. The fact Unsong didn’t make the concept but follows it from the Source explains how everything including Ein Sof and Atzmus are part of God, of the Divine.
Since I said that was my last point. Agnaa feel free to interject but the conversation on this topic in this thread is closed for me.
(Lovecraft letters is a joke)Yog-Sothoth and the Root, likewise, should not end up being considered monads. Yog-Sothoth is explicitly a member of a group of archetypes. He references this twice, and Lovecraft's private letters indicate that he considers Azathoth to be above Yog.
The root doesn't appear to have much of any evidence supporting Monism.
Debatable, but even so Azathoth's portrayal at the top of the hierarchy is consistent with his description in the works as the king of the ultimate void.(Lovecraft letters is a joke)
Headcanon would be pretending the story didn't say there were multiple archetypes, didn't say there were multiple nameless entities, and didn't provide a pluralistic framework for the beings in the void.It's how story depicted them, not with your own headcanon and nitpicking about specific texts, so nuh uh
Very compelling.Same goes for the Root
Maybe. Here we get into the realm of there being many things supporting and opposing such a rating.Regarding Unsong, seperate from the tier 0 discussion, wouldn't God be at least 1-A for creating a world without space or time?
I'm pretty sure it was implied to be ontologically superior.Also, I should mention, "creating a world without space or time" isn't 1-A. The things supporting 1-A within Unsong are quite different.
Yeah, it just comes from sources other than "created a world without space or time".I'm pretty sure it was implied to be ontologically superior.
What contradictions are there for the root?Debatable, but even so Azathoth's portrayal at the top of the hierarchy is consistent with his description in the works as the king of the ultimate void.
Headcanon would be pretending the story didn't say there were multiple archetypes, didn't say there were multiple nameless entities, and didn't provide a pluralistic framework for the beings in the void.
Very compelling.
The Root qualifies for everything Ultima requires for a monadYog-Sothoth and the Root, likewise, should not end up being considered monads. Yog-Sothoth is explicitly a member of a group of archetypes. He references this twice, and Lovecraft's private letters indicate that he considers Azathoth to be above Yog.
The root doesn't appear to have much of any evidence supporting Monism.
No? Everything that tried got erased into nothingness without a trace.Aren’t there multiple instances of things below the root reaching the root?
Yes, the whole goal of the grail wars is to use the 7 servants energy to reach the root. And you can even use it as a power source in general.Aren’t there multiple instances of things below the root reaching the root?
Spare me the accusations.Deagonx doing everything in his power to make sure Root never reaches Tier 0 even if its justifications are extremely clear.
and they dead. gone. in the words of Ragna The BloodedgeAren’t there multiple instances of things below the root reaching the root?
And tell me how that went heh You have infinte more probability to morph into a sweet potato than for even the greatest mage to see the Root.Yes, the whole goal of the grail wars is to use the 7 servants energy to reach the root. And you can even use it as a power source in general.
Cmon. We all know.Spare me the accusations.