qolon

It's a wonder then, given that Mark Durie is the Vicar of St Mary's Anglican
Church, Caulfield and Associate Professor of Department of Linguistics and
Applied Linguistics at University of Melbourne and the Fellow of the
Australian Academy of Humanities.

Whether he could address this issue 29 November 2004 for which I have
received no reply:

Newsgroups: aus.education, aus.education.bio-newtech, aus.politics,
aus.religion.christian, aus.religion.judaism
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2004 07:07:56 GMT
Subject: -- [html] Melbourne University Linguistics Wasn't Interested in a
trans-cultural, trans-linguistic, trans-ideological Noumenon

I was wandering down A'Beckett Street today when by strange happenstance, I
caught up with a friend who works at Melbourne University. I had previously
asked him to convey my vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic Noumenon to a linguisitics
lecturer who had recently returned from academic pursuits in Germany.

For further on the vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic Noumenon see:

Introduction - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/introduction.html
Chapter 1 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/morphine.html
Chapter 2 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/bullet.html
Chapter 3 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/centrum.html

That given the lecturer's vast experience in linguistic, that he might like
to proffer an opinion on the mathematical paradigm as a statement of the
natural, regulative, metempiricial and jurisprudent philosophical basis to
language--He categorically said, that since it had a relationship to Neural
Linguistic Programming, that he wasn't interested in passing any further
opinion on the subject.

Indeed my friend could find none at Melbourne University, who were willing
to provide an opinion.

It appears to be the continued lack of regard for these human, religious and
Australian Constitutional Rights of 1901 as principles of autonomous
sovereignty and individual accountability which are institutionally denied
by the Roman Catholic Church, and that are the single largest cause of
ignorance of them and opportunity for their abuse within Australia.

This religious/political dichotomy upon a Divine mandate for good governance
is in part due to the historical reality the Vatican City
Religious/Political State, as an entity was re-established in 1929 CE by
Benito Mussolini under the Lateran Pact.

The 13 November 2002 visit by the Roman Catholic Pontifex Maximus to the
Italian Parliament, was an attempt to effectively repair the rupture of
church and state symbolically caused by the invasion of the papal
territories by Italian troops in 1870. The Vatican responded to that affront
by ordering Italian Catholics to refrain from voting or participating in the
political life of the new state, only relenting in 1913.

Thus at the time of the enactment of our Australian Constitution of 1901, it
must be remember that the Roman Catholic Church was then the enemy of
democracies. The religious/political state is an anathema to and a denier
of human, religious and Constitutional Rights which bestow autonomous
sovereignty and individual accountability.

- dolf

Christian Legal Society - Victoria
Seminar:
Religious Tolerance Laws:

A Challenge to Our Freedom of Speech?
When: Thursday 2 June 2005
Time: Between 5:30pm and 7:30pm
Where: Maddocks
Level 7, 140 William St, Melbourne
Guest Speakers Include:

Mark Durie
Vicar of St Mary's Anglican Church, Caulfield, Associate Professor of
Department of Linguistics and Applied Linguistics at University of
Melbourne, Fellow of the Australian Academy of Humanities

Dr. Ian Spry, Queen's Counsel
Editor of "National Observer" a publication of the Council for the National
Interest (CNI), former member of the Law Faculties of University of
Melbourne and Monash University

Dr. David Mitchell
Human Rights Law specialist, retired Barrister, former Attorney-General of
the Kingdom of Lesotho

Professor Augusto Zimmermann
Brazilian Constitutional Law Professor and PhD candidate, Faculty of Law,
Monash University. Author of "General Theory of Democratic Federalism"
(1999) and "Course on Constitutional Law" (2002) in Brazil.

Murray Baird

Managing Partner of Moores Legal, Box Hill

All are welcome to attend.

To indicate your intention to attend or for more information please email rsvp[at]cls.org.au
"Qolon" <telos@iprimus.net> wrote in message news:...
I think it important to take very strong exception to this statement which
is advanced by Mark Durie, Vicar of St Mary's Caulfield as not only being
false, but the root cause for sectarian fundamentalism within Australia
failing to adhere to and claiming that religious belief places them above
the human, religious and constitutional rights as sovereign autonomous
principles and individual accountability which are framed by our system of
jurisprudence: "However it is more likely that Judge Higgins' discussion of
this matter merely demonstrates a poor grasp of Islamic jurisprudence. It is
hardly surprising that an Australian judge is not qualified to rule on a
matter of Islamic law."

The number based metaphysical system deployed by Judge Higgins as the basis
for reasoning and wisdom as jurisprudence, is not only entirely consistent
with Islamic jurisprudunce, but pre-dates it. - dolf
"James Forsyth" <james@bigbeing.com.au> wrote in message
news:428e810b@news.alphalink.com.au...
For another perspective from Taenia Solium's spamming, emotive hypocritical
accusations of hatred (at bottom) I quote my brother Mark Durie:

Daniel Scot's (in)credible testimony

Mark Durie

In December of 2004, Judge Michael Higgins, presiding at the Victorian Civil
and Administrative Tribunal,

found Pastors Daniel Scot and Danny Nalliah guilty of inciting religious
hatred against Victorian Muslims. This

was a historic case, the first finding of religious vilification under new
Victorian legislation.

The case of the ICV vs Catch the Fire is a complex one. On the one side it
is said to be about vilification of

Muslims. On the other side it is said to be about freedom of speech, and in
particular the freedom to publicly

criticize a religious ideology. The case marks a significant translation of
concepts of race into the realm of

religious identity and belief. As such it deserves to be studied carefully.

One aspect of Judge Higgins' findings which seems especially likely to
provoke controversy, is his approach to

witnesses' credibility. Broadly speaking, His Honour found that all seven
witnesses for the complainants could

be relied upon, but in one way or another he rejected all the five witnesses
for the respondents, and refused the

respondents' requests to call two additional expert witnesses.

His Honour's treatment of Pastor Daniel Scot, one of the respondents in the
case, deserves careful scrutiny.

Daniel Scot had given a seminar about the Qur'an which became a principal
focus of the complaint before the

Tribunal. In considering whether Scot had vilified Muslims, the issue of his
integrity proved to be critical.

Judge Higgins found that Scot was not 'credible'. He stated concerning Scot
"I have considerable doubt that

what he told the seminar was his real beliefs about the Qur'an": in other
words he seemed to be lying. His

Honour also found Scot to be opportunistic and unbalanced in his method of
teaching, that he selected material

because it conveyed a bad impression of Muslims.

Judge Higgins considered that because of his lack of credibility Scot could
not be considered to have acted

'reasonably and in good faith'. This meant that Scot had no protection from
the religious exception in the Act,

which protects conduct which is conducted for a 'genuine' religious purpose,
'reasonably and in good faith'.

Judge Higgins cited two examples of Scot's dishonesty. One was Scot's report
that he had written three books,

when in fact these were works in progress which he distributed at his
seminars in photocopied form, under his

birthname Sidiqqi rather than his assumed name of Daniel Scot. Scot would
not be the first author to selfpublish

using photocopying, to consider his books works in progress, and to use a
nom de plume. However of

much greater interest is the second instance of Scot's allegedly dishonest
behaviour.

Mercy for amputees?

As second example, Judge Higgins cites Scot's discussion of the penalty for
theft. Under cross examination,

Scot had said that only after a thief's hand is cut off (Sura 5: 38) is he
to be shown mercy (Sura 5:39). His

Honour describes Scot's discussion of this as 'astounding', and his
reasoning 'illogical and unsustainable'. He

comes to this view based on an assertion from the bar table, and without
hearing any evidence that Scot's

interpretations were wrong.

The matter arose because it had been put to Scot by counsel for the
complainants that he could have drawn his

audience's attention to Sura 5:39, to balance the interpretation of 5:38. In
other words, his listeners could have

been informed that the Qur'an could be read more sympathetically, that the
mercy of 5:39 might reduce the

penalty of 5:38.

As it happens, Scot's interpretation of this passage is traditional and
quite accurate. Hadiths place these two

verses together in a specific 'context of revelation' (asbab al-nuzul): they
were 'revealed' during an incident

involving the punishment of a female thief during Muhammad's lifetime.

The hadiths which support this interpretation (see e.g. tafsir.com) make
crystal clear that mercy is to be applied

after amputation. Muhammad even declares that if his own daughter Fatimah
had stolen something, he would

have her hand cut off.

This is an example of a theological principle relating to Islamic hudud
punishments, that the penalty atones for

the crime. After punishment the person is considered purified and free of
the offence, acceptable to Muhammad

and to God, in this life and the next, and thus a worthy recipient of kind
treatment. Indeed the Hadiths relating

to these verses describe how Muhammad showed kindness to the female thief
after her hand had been

amputated. The correct interpretation of verse 39 is that Muslims should
treat amputated thieves with kindness

and mercy, as long as they have repented after punishment, and do not steal
any more. Scot's teaching in the

seminar, and his replies under cross-examination, hold up very well.

His Honour's apparent confusion over this matter is apparent when he further
reports that: "Verse 40 then spells

out punishment of a severe kind, e.g. losing a leg, for a further offence."
In fact verse 40 says nothing of the

sort, and the only reference to this verse during the hearing was that Scot
had made a mark against it for some

reason in his copy of the Qur'an! It is puzzling to say the least how His
Honour could have come to this

conclusion about verse 40.

One reading of His Honour's finding is that he is rejecting orthodox Islamic
interpretations of the Qur'an as

'illogical, unsustainable' and 'astounding'. Many might find this a bold and
courageous judgment.

However it is more likely that Judge Higgins' discussion of this matter
merely demonstrates a poor grasp of

Islamic jurisprudence. It is hardly surprising that an Australian judge is
not qualified to rule on a matter of

Islamic law. What is more troubling is that Judge Higgins had been presented
with considerable amounts of

evidence throughout the trial from both sides concerning the fact that the
Qur'an is to be interpreted in context,

and that this context would include the Hadiths. Yet he apparently
overlooked all this in a crucial consideration

of the question of Scot's credibility, a matter on which the whole outcome
of the trial hinged. If Scot's answers

seemed to His Honour to be incomprehensible and 'astounding', this was
enough to prove his dishonesty.

Another troubling aspect of this particular matter is that Judge Higgins had
found Scot was too 'literalistic' in

his approach to the Qur'an, and that he did not attend to context. This lay
at the heart of his objection to Scot's

manner of interpreting the Qur'an. Yet in relying on his own ability to
interpret the text, His Honour ignores

context, and does the very thing he has criticized Scot for.

His Honour also appears to rely too much on his own legal world view- that
it is illogical to apply mercy after

punishment. He does not take into account the theological values attached to
the concept of mercy in Islam, and

specifically the eternal dimension of relationship with Allah, which means
that people are as much in need of

Allah's mercy after punishment as they were before.

All this goes to vindicate Scot, who rightly defends his interpretation of
the verses - however counter-intuitive

it sounds to an Australian judge's ears - because he appears to have studied
the matter and has taken into

account the context in which the verses arose.

Did Scot warn tell his listeners that many Muslims do not accept his views?

This is not the only situation where it is hard to reconcile the transcript
with His Honour's findings. During

cross-examination the following interchange occurs between the Queen's
Counsel Brind Woinarski and Daniel

Scot:

Woinarski: You didn't tell this audience what many, many Moslems

here in Australia believe, did you?

Scot: I said that many, many Moslems don't believe it, yes.

Yet His Honour reports this as

"He agreed that he did not tell them that there were many Muslims in
Australia who did not hold the

same beliefs. "

Here His Honour appears to treat the word 'yes' as if it was an unqualified
answer to the 'yes/no' question,

without putting it in the context of Scot's whole answer. His report of the
exchange thus ends up being the

opposite of what Scot had said in cross-examination.

The point is of real importance, because it goes to the heart of the
complaint: did Scot vilify Australian

Muslims? Scot had said during the seminar that the 'vast majority' of
Muslims did not embrace the

interpretations he was teaching of the Qur'an and because of this he warned
that 'we have not to be fearful of

Muslim people'. However this aspect of Scot's message during the seminar is
passed over when His Honour

wrongly reports "He agreed that he did not tell them. "

Muslim demons or demonic Muslims?

Scot's credibility is also undermined by the way His Honour reports a list
of statements he was alleged to have

made during the course of the seminar. What is missing is an acknowledgment
that several of these 'offensive'

statements were in fact reports from the Qur'an and Hadiths.

This omission verges on the absurd when His Honour reports Scot as stating
that "Muslims are demons"

(paragraph 383.6). Such a statement, if true, would indeed give a very
negative impression of Scot's credibility.

In reality Scot had reported that according to the Qur'an, "a group of
demons - in Arabic it's called a 'jinn' .

became Muslim". (This relates to Sura 46.)

In His Honour's findings "a group of jinns became Muslims" becomes "Muslims
are demons". This entirely

wrong report was picked up by the media all around the world. For example a
radio talkback host in Melbourne

was abusing Scot within hours of the ruling being handed down, calling him
an 'idiot' for saying this very thing.

In fact Scot said nothing of the sort. If His Honour had not been silent
about the fact that Scot was speaking

about the Qur'an, such public vilification might have been avoided.

Conclusion

This was an exceedingly complex case, and more could be said about His
Honour's handling of Scot's evidence.

His Honour's findings on the credibility of other witnesses also deserve
scrutiny.

Also of interest are Judge Higgins' rulings on Christian and Islamic
theology. His Honour found, for example,

that Wahhabism is "fundamentalist" and irrelevant to the Australian Islamic
scene, and despite his repeated

references to Muhammad as '"the Prophet", he found that the Qur'an is an
"ancient historical do***ent" whose

violent verses relate to contexts which "have no relevance to the 21st
Century."

Setting all such matters to one side, what is sadly ironic about the
Victorian Racial and Religious Tolerance Act

is that it incites vilification. A complainant will seek to show that the
respondent's conduct has threatened

religious harmony, that they have vile intentions, that they are inciting
hatred and are dishonest. In this respect,

and to this point of the legal proceedings, the Islamic Council has
succeeded in pursuing just such a case against

Pastor Daniel Scot.

It is abundantly clear that such proceedings do not promote religious
harmony. In the case of the Islamic

Council of Victoria vs Catch the Fire Danny Nalliah and Daniel Scot,
incompatible religious world views have

been in collision. There were theological sparks flying all throughout the
case. In the end, Judge Higgins came

to his decision in part by finding one side not to be credible, and in part
by declaring aspects of the Qur'an to be

irrelevant to 21st century life. However, in the manner of reaching this
conclusion, his rulings raise more

questions than they answer, closure has not been achieved, and further
damage has been done to religious

harmony. It seems inevitable that the decision will be appealed.

The Act itself states that it is meant to be interpreted in a way which
promotes conciliation and resolves tensions

between groups in the community. This case has demonstrated some profound
difficulties faced by our legal

system in achieving this admirable goal.

It is high time for the Victorian government to review the religious aspects
of this Act, and to consider whether

they could be removed altogether, making it simply a Racial Tolerance Act.

-----------

Mark Durie holds a PhD in linguistics with a specialization in the language
and culture of the Acehnese. He is

Vicar of St Mary's Caulfield and writes regularly on matters of comparative
theology. Although he was called

as an expert witness in this case, His Honour did not allow his testimony into evidence.
"Taenia Solium" <rambam@bigpond.net.au> wrote in message news:87mzqpear6.fsf_-_@kafka.homenet...

qolon

Here is a latter draft of the centrum chapter...

There is an interesting comment made by Hegel (27/8/1770 to 14/11/1831 CE)
in relation to how he observes Kepler's 3 cosmological laws on elliptical
orbits {ie. #1 = FOCUS; #2 = EQUITY; #3 = RATIO} as being an essential
component to his own a priori as dialectical method as view of world history
being the unfolding of Spirit in time, as nature is the unfolding of the
Idea in space.

Kepler, he asserts must have been "familiar 'a priori' with ellipses, with
cubes and squares, and with ideas of their relations, before he could
discover, from the empirical data, those immortal 'Laws' of his, which are
none other than forms of thought pertaining to those classes of conceptions.
He who is unfamiliar with the science that embraces these abstracts
elementary conceptions, is as little capable-though he may have gazed on the
firm and the motions of the celestial bodies for a lifetime-of understanding
those Laws, as of discovering them. From this want of acquaintance with the
ideas that relate to the development of Freedom, proceed a part of those
objections which are brought against the philosophical consideration of a
science usually regarded as one of mere experience; the so called 'a priori'
[dialectical] method."

- dolf

Introduction - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/introduction.html
Chapter 1 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/morphine.html
Chapter 2 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/bullet.html
Chapter 3 - http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/centrum.html

Centrum
"Infinity itself is the actual Logos as concept ([i]). Both the 'logical'
and the 'subjective' grounding of infinity-as we call them in short-are
already carried out in the thoroughly concrete investigation . [and found
that] everything [was] still at the beginning and is more within the scope
of a confrontation with tradition; it has not yet found its own necessary
shape. This happens for the first time in the 'System of Science' {ie. The
science, whose system is at issue, is the totality of the highest and most
essential knowledge as philosophy-The way in which philosophy unfolds itself
as absolute knowledge. By providing all sciences with their foundation,
philosophy must certainly be a science [p10]}, whose first part, the
Phenomenology, represents the grounding we mentioned as our 2nd point (the
grounding of infinity in the subject and as subject), while the second part,
the Logic, implements the 1st grounding that we mentioned above (the logical
grounding), which is inherently and necessarily grounded in the 2nd one."
[Martin Heidegger (1889-1976 CE), "Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit"]

Memorial Capstone of Royal Arch Freemasons Australia dated 30 May 1999
Hotel Sofitel 25 Collins Street, Melbourne
- http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum1.jpg
- http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum5.jpg
- http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum2.jpg


0850 hours on 14th January 2002 - Victorian State Treasury Building, 1
Treasury Place, Melbourne: I once again wore my rainbow sash and was
standing in the centre of a roadway/footpath bearing the State of Victoria's
coat of arms, outside the Victorian Government Treasury buildings in
Treasury Lane, Melbourne.

In some regards, this vantage point amongst the bronze vestiges as statues
of Victoria's past Premiers, is not at all unlike the Memorial capstone of
the Royal Arch Freemasons Australia dated 30 May 1999, that is situated in
the centre of a circular garden in the forecourt of the Hotel Sofitel, 25
Collins Street, Melbourne.

According to the quintessential Freemason General Albert Pike, (28/12/1809
to 2/4/1891 CE), if the Point within the Circle means anything to the
student {ie. of the Sciences} who carefully traces out its problems, "let
him beware how he approaches his task. Each problem has only one answer. To
Master that answer he must be absolutely unbiased and accept the conclusion
without demur for that alone will be the Truth-no other answer can be true,
and if he rebel against the Truth and choose to disbelieve, his will be the
loss, the suffering and the punishment for the consequences. This is the law
of Personal responsibility." [p 18]

This issue of 'Personal responsibility' is as Heidegger (1889-1976 CE)
suggests, is concerned with renewing the question of ontology-'the most
central problem of Western philosophy-the question of being, which relates
to Logos not only in terms of method but in terms of content. One cannot
decide whether or not philosophy is the science by considering some
epistemological criterion or other. This decision can be made only from out
of the actual content and the inner necessities of the first (alpha or arch)
and last (omega or telos) [Revelation 1:11; 22:13] problem of philosophy-the
question of being-ousia.' ([ii])

Pike gives within his treatise on "the point within a circle", a common
Masonic Hebrew Kabbalah as view held by a brotherhood of fidelity with
Masonic associations that went as far back as his own lodge No. 1, chartered
in 1788, by the Grand Lodge of Virginia as No. 25:

"Now the ancients were accustomed to use the letters of the alphabet for
computation before the Arabians invented their numerals which are every
where used today. Every letter was a numeral and had a numerical value.
Hence words could be converted into numbers and numbers into words and many
curious ciphers were the result. This gave rise to that curious system of
mystery writing which is yet known by the name of Kabbalah because by it the
secrets of the ancient Hebrew and Egyptian mysteries were preserved for the
future interpretation of initiates.

to merely illustrate one important fact showing how wide a meaning has this
point or its symbol Yod.

The Yod is frequently used as a substitute for the point and is in fact the
Dot itself, though more often fashioned as a comma. As representing the ONE
God therefore, it primarily means ONE, the centre of all things. Within the
circle of the universe there are multitudes of points and all these might be
piled one on another on the central point and it would yet be one point. So
all things come from and return to God.

When used as a numeral the letter Yod meant 10 and this is the number which
Pythagoras and others called the perfect number, the number of Heaven. For
after completing the circle of the nine digits, we return to One again and
in the 10 we have the '1' and the circle or '0'. Pythagoras called this the
Pillar and the circle (or F as Phi).

To the mathematician the 10 represents the circle and its diameter and it is
the ancient problem of the relation of the diameter of a circle to its
cir***ference that gave so many important mathematical rules and made
possible those exact measurements of the ancient architects. We know this
problem today as the 'PI proportion' wherein the diameter represents one and
the relation to the cir***ference is expressed as 3.14156.+.

Yet even this is no new discovery, as this same proportion expressed in a
circle . bears a striking resemblance to the Royal Arch Masons Circle with
its eight mystic letters." [p 3-4; See also image above
http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum1.jpg ] ([iii])

He then deploys the traditional Alchemical Kabbalistic view concerning the
centre {#41 / Mem as Thursday 13th to Monday 17th September 2001 as septet
vMeme #369 matrices +Heterosquare (Spirogyra Order) #249 (+81)/#289 (+41) =
#330 as Plane #8 = Transforming Nature/Act of Nature {Autonomous Nature}}
and the transposing of planets that are about the wheel {ie. the septet
vMeme/Moment Kabbalistic Homoiotic Noumenon}; and which advises to take
always one masculine {vMeme #369 matrix Plane #10 as Negative Order}, and
then one feminine {vMeme #369 matrix Plane #9 as Positive Order}, one for
the spirit of the soul, and the other for the air-spirit {ie. vMeme #369
matrix Plane #4 as Ambulatory Rhetorical Form}:

"The old Kabbalists symbolized the operations of Nature in a most perfect
and beautiful way {ie. in order to resolve the enigma that the square root
of 2 is an incommensurate value and therefore an irrational number}. They
said that the One in order to become Two, reflected itself in the waters
below, which was another way of expressing the sublime sentence of [Genesis
1:1-3]

When the One becomes active, we have duality, for Force acts upon Matter.
The One being active and representing the male creative principle, the Two
is passive and represents the female principle in Nature. These two
principles may be regarded as opposite ends of the same pole and the pole is
the diameter of the circle. At its two ends are erected those parallel lines
[See image below right]. Hence, following out this line of thought, the
poles or duality may be said to symbolize all phases of this curious
phenomenon in Nature such as 'Good and Evil', past and present, passive and
active, etc., according to the context of the passage sought to be
illustrated.

Astronomically speaking the two parallel lines mark the solsticial points of
21 June and 22 December in the Sun's orbit and the immovable feasts of
Masonic faternity.

Yet it was with no desire to introduce into Masonry any sectarian principle
or 'orthodox' dogma as will be plain from the following that the early
Christians called themselves Saint John Brothers and that operative Guilds
of Freemasons traveled and worked over Europe under that name. For as one of
the early Christian Fathers said, 'That which we call Christianity has
always existed.' In those days, Christianity was not yet split into hundreds
of warring factions.

It was but a continuation under another name of the old doctrines and wisdom
we still call Masonry. It was the Gnosis or Knowledge-the 'Wisdom Religion'.

The Guild Masons in their ancient charges were told to obey the laws and
reverence the religion of the countries in which they lived. They were the
direct descendents of the Roman Collegia." [p 13]

Earlier I raised the notion that for Hegel (27/8/1770 to 14/11/1831 CE)
world history is represented by the manner in which the Spirit develops
gradually into its purest form, ultimately recognizing its own essential
freedom. To Hegel, 'world history is thus the unfolding of Spirit in time,
as nature is the unfolding of the Idea in space.' The dialectical process
thus virtually defines the meaning of history for Hegel: "the idea of
freedom as the absolute and final aim; secondly, the means for realizing it,
ie. the subjective side of knowledge and will, with its life, movement, and
activity. We then recognized the State as the moral Whole and the Reality of
Freedom, and consequently as the objective of these two elements. For
although we make this distinction into two aspects for our consideration, it
must be remarked that they are intimately connected; and that their
connection is involved in the idea of each when examined separately. We
have, on the one hand, recognized the Idea in the definite form of Freedom
conscious of and willing itself-having itself alone as its object: involving
at the same time, the pure and simple Idea of Reason, and likewise, that
which we have called subject-self-consciousness-Spirit actually existing in
the World.

If, on the other hand, we consider Subjectivity, we find that subjective
knowledge and will is Thought. But by the very act of thoughtful cognition
and volition, I will the universal object-the substance of absolute Reason.
We observe, therefore, an essential union between the objective side-the
Idea-and the subjective side-the personality that conceives and wills it-The
objective existence of this union is the State, which is therefore the basis
and centre of the other concrete elements of the life of the people-Art, of
Law, of Morals, of Religion, of Science. All the activity of Spirit has only
this object-the becoming conscious of this union, ie. of its own Freedom.
Among the forms of this conscious union 'Religion' occupies the highest
position. In it, Spirit-rising above the limits of temporal and secular
existence-becomes conscious of the Absolute Spirit, and in this
consciousness of the self-existent Being, renounces individual interest; it
lasts this aside in Devotion-a state of mind in which it refuses to occupy
itself any longer with the limited and particular." ([iv])

There exists upon this point, a religious/political contention as dichotomy
over a Divine mandate for good governance, which is in part due to the
historical reality. That the Vatican City as an entity of
Religious/Political State was only re-established in 1929 CE by Benito
Mussolini under the Lateran Pact. At the time of the enactment of our
Australian Constitution of 1901, it ought to be remembered that the Roman
Catholic Church was then the enemy of democracies. The religious/political
state is an anathema to and a denier of human, religious and Constitutional
Rights, which bestow autonomous sovereignty and individual accountability:

"[A folly] which we meet with in our time, is that of pretending to invent
and carry out political Constitutions independently of religion. The
Catholic confession, although sharing the Christian name with the
Protestant, does not concede to the State an inherent Justice and Morality-a
concession which in the Protestant principle is fundamental. This tearing
away of the political morality of the Constitution from its natural
connection, is necessary to the genius of that religion, inasmuch as it does
not recognize Justice and Morality as independent and substantial-But thus
excluded from intrinsic worth, torn away from their last refuge, the
sanctuary of conscience, the calm retreat where religion has its abode, the
principles and institutions of political legislation are destitute of a real
centre, to the same degree as they are compelled to remain abstract and
indefinite." ([v])

It was only on 13 November 2002 ([vi]), that the Roman Papal Authority as
Pontifex Maximus visited the Italian Parliament and symbolically closed the
Vatican's territorial dispute with the Italian state:

"By making the first papal visit to the Italian parliament, where he urged
MPs to place spiritual values at the heart of their political action.

The first non-Italian Pope in five centuries paid tribute to Italian
democracy at a time when the standing of its parliamentary representatives
is at a particularly low ebb. His 40-minute speech was repeatedly
interrupted by applause as he avoided party political issues to appeal for
the respect of fundamental human rights and emphasize the shared values that
unite Italian society.

He was welcomed to a packed chamber by a ceremonial band in ****ed hats with
red and white plumes, which performed the Vatican and Italian national
anthems.

He stood to attention, a small, hunched figure in white flanked by the tall
speakers of the two houses of parliament, as church and state symbolically
repaired the rupture caused by the invasion of the papal territories by
Italian troops in 1870.

The Vatican responded to that affront by ordering Italian Catholics to
refrain from voting or participating in the political life of the new state,
only relenting in 1913." [© 14 November 2002, Guardian Newspapers Limited]

The Letters Patent which enact the Constitution and the 4 'elements' in the
paragraph of Section 116 of Australia's 1901 Constitution give witness to a
regulative philosophical view of autonomy {22/7 = 3W1D} as freedom from
superstitious sectarianism {Ennead + Male/Female Combo}, that were designed
to protect Seventh-day Sabbath keepers from the cruelty and abuses as
arbitrary values perpetuated in the name of Christianity by Sunday
Sabbatarians.

This Seventh-day Sabbath chronology is not only intrinsic to the Torah, but
the only means {'persuading them concerning Jesus from both the Law of Moses
and the Prophets' [Acts 28:23]} of establishing the Kabbalah's historical
claim to Jesus of Nazareth {

#4 - Torah @ Sinai 50J ...
#5 - 2nd Temple (457 BCE) 72J2W1D ...
#6 - Jesus of Nazareth (Midst of 70th week) 490 years = 10J ...
#7 - Telos (122J3W1D) .

}, whose Christian image as Madonna and Child is otherwise drawn from the
Egyptian myth of Sut-Typhon and its connection with the usual July rising of
the star Sirius assigned to Isis-Sothis within the Egyptian, Greek and Roman
cosmologies. Such legislation ought to no less protect me as a Seventh-day
Sabbath, Torah observant Christian [Acts 13:38-42] of Dutch/Friesian
parentage, from the later European rise of a messianic mysticism also
deploying the astrological traditionally conveyed by the Hebrew/Greek
Kabbalah that is so much the foundation to present day hymeneal values held
by Western Christian (Sunday Sabbatarians) forms of fundamentalism, Jewish
mystical practice {cf: The Egyptian Kabbalistic Astrological notion of
Oriphiel (Rempham [Acts 7:43; Amos 5:26-27]) - Chief of the Order of Thrones
[#3] & the Genius of Time being assigned to the planetary daemon Saturn} and
the impetus to Adolf Hitler's religious philosophy as expressed by his 4
Nuremberg Laws:

"In 1935, the first Nuremberg Law (so-called because they were announced at
the first great Nazi rally held at Nuremberg) proclaimed the Reich
Citizenship Law which meant Jews could no longer call themselves Germans and
had no political rights. A second Nuremberg Law was called the Law for the
Protection of German Blood and German Honor, which banned marriage and ***
between those defined as Germans and those defined as Jews."

A consequence to this line of reasoning as philosophical consideration of a
Telos apogee as Genesis Creation Reprise {ie.

6,000 years = Law @ Sinai + 12 x King David's Creation Reprise {6J = 294
years} + 22/7 {3W1D} cf: John Reuchlin (1455-1522 CE) and Johannes Kepler
(1571-1630)

}, is the realisation that the Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant
Christian Church's Ecclesiastical Hierarchy's claim to being theologically
and historically representative of Hebrew/Greek Christianity is
fraudulent--having no continuing substance in fact.

My participation within such a genre of metaphysical, philosophical and
theological thought is entirely compatible with the principles enumerated by
Section 10 of the Ombudsman Act 1973, namely: '.before commencing the duties
of his office or as such an officer, take an oath or make an affirmation
that he will faithfully and impartially perform the duties of such office of
his duties as such officer (whichever is applicable).'

There arises the possibility of the question, that there is amongst sworn
members of the Victoria Police and others such as the Ombudsman's office
pursuant to Section 10 of the Ombudsman Act, a pervasive lack of
understanding of metaphysical philosophical and theological paradigms and
therefore a singular absence of fecundity and fidelity regarding such oath
of office subsequent to 2000 CE, Y2K and Jubilee 2000 due to the absence of
any valid teleological argument for the existence of God.

I then read aloud the following prepared statement as a public protestation
against religious rights abuses:

"Our Australian Constitution is founded upon a religious hypocrisy and
Monarchy which, in lack of remorse and justification for its religious
rights oppression of the past, is now indistinguishable from Fascism. It's
officials luxuriate in Office, and the hearts of its populace is so devoid
of civility and decency towards the needs of its fellow human being as to be
obdurated. So that nothing remains but for God to withdraw his Grace from
their accursed souls.

The enemy rejoices in their reproaches and their hearts are not upright-Your
justice LORD, when will it come, why is your hand slow to repay them?"
([vii])

Whereupon, a female Government Protective Security Officer (PSO) approached
me and attempted to push me away and suggested that I move to the Treasury
Gardens nearby to have my say. I declined this offer because-as you are now
aware-on Sunday 28 October 2001, I had protested upon the occasion of an
assemblage of uniformed Police, gathering in relation to a pay dispute.

Consequently, I continued reading loudly my prepared statement unabated by
the PSO's actions, which caused the female PSO to obtained additional
resources from the Government Treasury Buildings before returning with
another male PSO.

Together they dragged me backwards some 30 feet causing me to lose all
footing, whereupon at the top of the stairs they released me, causing me to
fall down the stairs and strike the back of my head on the steps.

From there I got to my feet, placed a hand over the profusely bleeding wound
and walked via Collins Street, Elizabeth Street, Lonsdale Street and William
Street to the Royal Melbourne Hospital for medical attention. All the way
bringing to everyone's attention, the matter by continuing to read aloud my
prepared statement as a public protestation against constitutional rights
abuses. ([viii])

At the intersection of Lonsdale and William Streets, upon the footpath
diagonally opposite the present County Court, a female asked me what had
happened. I conveyed to her the cir***stances bringing about my wounding and
indicated that in all the distance I'd traveled, she was the first to
enquire into my wellbeing.

Senior officers of the Ethical Standards Department and the Ombudsman's
Office have reviewed the investigation and concur with the findings, {ie.
that it is alleged you were committing offences under the Crown Land
Reserves (Treasury Reserve) Regulations 1999 and upon your refusal to leave,
were trespassing and the Land Act 1958} subject to any other matters which
might be put. At this stage no further action is proposed in relation to the
complaint. Accordingly, it is appropriate to convey the details of the
incident fact sheet:

"At the above date and time, I was situated in the atrium when [a male PSO]
informed me that the unknown male [the author of this do***ent] standing
directly/outside the front entrance to 1 Treasury Place had been observed to
be preaching/chanting gospel in a loud voice for approximately 10 minutes.
At the time there were a number of staff members attending.

I approached the unknown male and asked him to continue his preaching in the
Treasury garden area. The male ignored my request and I again iterated on at
least (5) occasions. The male stood his ground totally ignoring my request.

I then said, 'You're on crown Land, I am an authorized officer and I again
request you to leave immediately, if you do not leave, you will be
trespassing.' The male escalated his speech in an attempt to drown out my
request. I then took hold of his left arm in an attempt to move him on. The
male stood his ground and continued in an escalated voice. I then attended
in the atrium where [a male PSO] was situated and requested that he attend
with me. In the company with [a male PSO] we approached the male who
continued to preach/chant at the top of his voice and I said, 'Please leave
now and go into the park area where you can continue'.

The male ignored my request at which time, I instructed [the male PSO] to
take hold of the male's right arm and I took hold of his left arm. The male
continued to stand his ground, resisting our hold upon him. As a result we
attempted to forcibly remove him by walking him backward off the precinct,
down the steps and into the garden area. The male became increasingly
aggressive in his attempt to resist our hold upon him forcing us to release
our hold upon him.

As a result the male slipped on the steps and fell to the ground, causing
the crown of his head to come in contact with the corner of the concrete
step. I observed blood gushing from the top of his head [and] a large pool
of blood on the landing between the two sets of steps."

I'm surprised at this continued finding concerning an alleged aggression on
my part. I held with both hands, a single piece of reflex copy paper during
the instance of being dragged backwards 30 feet, having lost my footing. The
term 'wet paper bag' would in the cir***stance describe an act of only
marginally less aggression:

"After having reviewed your correspondence and examined the investigation it
seems to me that there is no evidence to support what you alleged. The
officers involved have provided a version of events different to your own
and there is no corroboration for your version of events.

It is therefore not possible for me to reach a conclusive view as to what
took place. While I do not consider that you will be satisfied with my
response, given the cir***stances of this matter, I do not consider further
enquires by [the Office of Police Integrity] would take this matter
further." [Office of Police Integrity 23 March 2005]

Hegel once again, provides us with a means for understanding such an outcome
related to inconclusiveness of actual substance: "[The] Spirit can be called
the human law, because it is essentially in the form of a reality that is
conscious of itself. In the form of universality it is the known law, and
the prevailing custom; in the form of individuality it is the actual
certainty of itself in the individual as such, and the certainty of itself
as a simple individuality is that Spirit as government. Its truth is the
authority, which is openly accepted, and manifest to all; a concrete
existence that has freely issued forth.

Confronting this clearly manifest ethical power there is, however, another
power, the Divine Law. For the ethical power of the state, being the
movement of self-conscious action, finds its antithesis in the simple and
immediate essence of the ethical sphere; as actual universality it is a
force actively opposed to individual being-for-self; and as actuality in
general it finds in that inner sense something other than ethical power of
the state." ([ix])

Paradoxically, for Hegel the moment of reality which expresses the ethical
sphere in this element of immediacy or simple being, or which is an
immediate consciousness of itself, both as essence and as this particular
self, in an 'other', ie. as a natural ethical community. Is one which gets
an existence through its interference with the happiness of the Family, and
by dissolving individual self-consciousness into the universal, it creates
for itself in what it suppresses and what is at the same time essential to
it an internal enemy-Autonomous sovereignty and individual accountability.

- http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum3.jpg
- http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/images/aum4.jpg

Draft: 22 May 2005

Endnotes:

[i] Martin Heidegger (1889-1976 CE), 'Mediatedness & the
Dialectical Movement' on 'Hegel's Phenomenology of Spirit', © 1988 Indiana
University Press, ISBN 0-253-20910-2, p 78

[ii] Heidegger, ibid 'Introduction - The Task of the Phenomenology
of Spirit as the First Part of the System of Science', p 13

[iii] That as an occidental, metaphysical, existential and
theological philosophical statement, it might be reasonable to ask whether
there are any chronological & heretical theological errors in Christology
and what consequence this might have on 100 (1899-1999 CE) years of
Australian 3rd TAU Freemasonary: Mem, Aleph, Shin, Kaf, He, Heth, Shin as
conveyed by the Memorial Capstone.

[iv] Heidegger, ibid 'Introduction - The Task of the Phenomenology
of Spirit as the First Part of the System of Science', p 48-49

[v] Heidegger, ibid 'Introduction - The Task of the Phenomenology
of Spirit as the First Part of the System of Science', p 52

[vi] The following contemporaneous issue, bears a strange parallel
to this 'point within a circle' paradigm concerning a relationship between
individual accountability and good governance associated with autonomous
sovereignty: "The Liberal Party shadow Treasurer for Victoria, Robert Dean
failed to keep his electoral roll registration up-to-date, admitting that he
would be unable to contest his seat in the State election to be held on 30
November 2002. Dean was removed from the electoral roll when the Victorian
Electoral Commission discovered he was not living at his nominated address
in the seat of Gembrook.

This 14 November 2002 announcement came the day before Dean had been due to
comment upon the Government's revised Budget figures, and Doyle was thus
forced to listen to Treasurer John Brumby querying how the Liberal Party
could hope to govern the state if its Shadow Treasurer could not attend to
his own affairs. Doyle later spoke of the Dean bombshell as having caused
the party to lose crucial momentum in its campaigning." [Current Issues
Brief No 13 Victorian Election 2002
http://www.aph.gov.au/library/pubs/CIB/2002-03/03Cib13.htm reference to 'So
where, exactly, do you live, Dr Dean?', editorial, The Age, 15 November 2002
and Karen Kissane, 'Robert Doyle', The Age, 29 November 2002]

[vii] Letter dated 6 March 2003 to Victoria Police Freedom of
Information Officer

[viii] Letter dated 6 March 2003 to Victoria Police Freedom of
Information Officer

[ix] Georg Hegel 1807 CE, 'The Ethical Order', 'Phenomenology of
Spirit', ISB 0-19-824597-1, p 267-268, 288

qolon

Further to the last, it has informally been conveyed to me to the contrary
regarding Pastor Rowland Croucher's assertions of Mark Durie being the Vicar
of St Mary's Anglican Church who is participating in:

"A Challenge to Our Freedom of Speech?"
When: Thursday 2 June 2005;
Time: Between 5:30pm and 7:30pm
Where: Maddocks Level 7, 140 William St, Melbourne

That he has been prohibited by the Univeristy of Melbourne in representing
himself as: "Associate Professor of Department of Linguistics and Applied
Linguistics at University of Melbourne"

I own the intellectual property to a mathematical/chronological and
taxonomical teleological proof {ie.

Which is consistent with the Genesis view, in that all occurrence which can
be measured in time and the LOGOS comes from the apeiron, where the
relativity of the time sequence itself underlies the religious statement
that God is 'arch kai teles' {cf: 'I am as Alpha and the Omega, the
Beginning-arche and the End-telos' [Revelation 1:8; 21:6-8; 22:13], ie.
Telos ('achariyth) = Arch (re'shiyth) + c² : Genesis/Arch as (22/7) 3W1D ...
Jubilee & Torah @ Sinai as 50J + 12 x 6J as 'oth 294 year cycle + 3W1D =
6,000 (122J3W1D) years as Saturday 1 January 2000 + solar eclipse on 25
December 2000 + 6 days = Telos}, which as the logos, penetrates and rules
all being.

As the philosopher Martin Heidegger (1889-1976 CE), suggests of "Hegel's
(1770-1831 CE) Phenomenology of Spirit"] "Infinity itself is the actual
Logos as concept. Both the 'logical' and the 'subjective' grounding of
infinity-as we call them in short-are already carried out in the thoroughly
concrete investigation . [and found that] everything [was] still at the
beginning and is more within the scope of a confrontation with tradition; it
has not yet found its own necessary shape. This happens for the first time
in the 'System of Science' {ie. The science, whose system is at issue, is
the totality of the highest and most essential knowledge as philosophy-The
way in which philosophy unfolds itself as absolute knowledge. By providing
all sciences with their foundation, philosophy must certainly be a science
[p10]}, whose first part, the Phenomenology, represents the grounding we
mentioned as our 2nd point (the grounding of infinity in the subject and as
subject), while the second part, the Logic, implements the 1st grounding
that we mentioned above (the logical grounding), which is inherently and
necessarily grounded in the 2nd one." [Martin Heidegger (1889-1976 CE),
'Mediatedness & the Dialectical Movement' on 'Hegel's Phenomenology of
Spirit', © 1988 Indiana University Press, ISBN 0-253-20910-2, p 78]

} as Kabbalistic Homoiotic Noumenon.

And as there is an irreconcilable difference between such belief as that
which I hold as intellectual and autonomous property as being compatible
with the Letters Patent to the Australian Constitution of 1901 and therefore
the law as opposed to the practice of Christianity within Australia today
which, due to its lack of any real separation of Church and State [viz.
Victoria's Church of England Act No. 45/1854], that it is impossible for
many Christians as fascists to assert they are Abraham's children by faith.
[Romans 4:16]

Unless of course you can come up with another logical explanation for the
relationship of the LOGOS to INFINITY as the basis for a teleological
argument for the existence of God, one must therefore assume that your
system as tax free haven and government sanctioned religious belief is a
lie.

- dolf
- <http://home.iprimus.com.au/telos/centrum.html>