Lately I've been coming up on the expression, 0=2. In an occult context, what does this mean exactly?
Thanks.
2006-12-30
17:22:24
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
I'm not joking.
from the small bits I understand [and yes, this is also a valid mathematical function I believe], that it has something to do with the universe existing, or something.
2006-12-30
17:28:46 ·
update #1
From the bits I've collected, the "Nothing [That is the undefined, full of possibilities of origination]" is the 0 of the Qabalistic tree of life, while the 2 is the rest. However, I do not see why this is 2.
2006-12-30
17:47:42 ·
update #2
Hi Stanton.
As with all these formulations, there is more than one significance - which of course is the merit of it, as it enables you to explore the meaning in the way that's most valuable to yourself at the time.
You've got the general idea of the "0" already : that might be taken to represent what some people call the Unmanifest (although obviously there are other names in various systems of thought, e.g. the Qabalah).
The "2" might be taken to represent the Manifest (or more specifically the physical universe, though that would probably be rarer in an occult context).
The reason it is represented by "2" rather than "1" is that it is being viewed in a dualistic sense, as a field of oppositions and branching generation.
Of course it's not necessary to view the Manifest in this way, but it is common within Western esoteric thought.
2006-12-31 01:28:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I would like to see your context as I believe this is something I may understand, however I'd be guessing without more information.
One argument might be:
If the first number is 0 then 0 has identity with 1 because we count beginning with 1. Butt if 1 has identity with 0 and we do not begin counting with zero then we must begin counting with 2. So then 0 must have identity with 2 because we must begin counting with 2. But then if 2 has identity with 0 we must begin counting with 3, ad infinitium...
Another argument might be:
If we take this back to creation, in the begining nothing existed but nothing is nothing which is to say it cannot exist and nothing ceases to exist by creating everything. But everything includes nothing and when everything is manifest nothing is manifest and everything then ceases to exist. Everything and nothing are therefor co-creators of one another and each has identitiy with the other such that these 2 elements imply all of creation but creation is founded upon nothing or 0, and so, in this manner it is possible for 2 to have identity with 0.
One further argument may be:
I tend to consider every whole number N as a range limited to and inclusive of its immediate neighbors with values of N-1 and N and N+1. Numbers have no meaning without a context, so any single number has no value at all except in context to other numbers. By thinking of any number as a range of 3 values, a minimum context is established. In this manner the number 1 may have identity with both 0 and 2, so 0 also has identity with 2.
If you will provide additional context for your question I may be able to provide a better answer. I wish I knew your references, as this is a field of conjecture I find very interesting.
Those folks who cannot understand that 2 + 2 need not equal 4 need to stretch their imaginations a bit...
To my way of thinking 2 + 2 has a potential solution range inclusive of 2 through 6, since 2 may be expressed as 1, 2, or 3 and the sum of these has minimum/maximum values of 2 and 6.
Numbers are a funny lot, particularly when we begin to examine infinite sets, and infinite subsets and supersets. In the context of infinite sets any finite number has a value that approaches zero so closely that for all intents and purposes all numbers are 0. Hmm... looks like I've just come up with a fourth argument, because 2 would also be the same as 0 in this context.
Cheers!
2006-12-31 02:30:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by greg.gourdian 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Could you show us how this symbol has been used in context? Does it come after a certain kind of statement, for example? Because I've read up on the occult, and I don't recognize it. Thanks.
2006-12-31 01:41:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by Vaughn 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is not an occult expression, it is a Christian literalist expression meaning, "We can believe anything we want to. Don't give us any facts."
2006-12-31 01:33:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by homo erectus 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ask the 1+1=1 chick. She's got this math thing down!
2006-12-31 01:26:07
·
answer #5
·
answered by Sugar Shack Sheryl 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
Good one Sugar Shack!
2006-12-31 01:26:55
·
answer #6
·
answered by Miss k 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
it is not a good sign
better go buy some garlic and hang it on your door
2006-12-31 01:29:36
·
answer #7
·
answered by Josephus 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Nothing, that's what.
2006-12-31 01:24:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by Vader 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
nothing
2006-12-31 01:28:12
·
answer #9
·
answered by Dr. Brooke 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Its means ............................................... =o)
2006-12-31 01:31:32
·
answer #10
·
answered by Dee 5
·
0⤊
1⤋