So, I do read classics from time to time and recently have started to notice how awfully lot of them were freemasons.
-
Bram Stoker, author of Dracula - Buckingham and Chandos Lodge No. 1150.
-
Mark Twain, author of Tom Sawyer, Huckleberry Finn and many more - Grand Lodge of Ohio.
-
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author of those cozy Sherlock Holmes mysteries - Phoenix Lodge No. 257 in Southsea.
-
Rudyard Kipling, author of The Jungle Book - Hope and Perseverance Lodge, No. 782, in Lahore.
-
Sir Walter Scott, author of numerous historical novels, including Ivanhoe, Rob Roy and many more - Lodge St David, No. 36 in Edinburgh.
You get the idea. A lot of classic authors were freemasons. Now, even if we discount all the theories about masonry etc, it's still a lot. No, really! Why almost all of our historical, adventure and other classics were written by freemasons? Would those books even be considered classics, if not for the mason membership of those authors? Hell, maybe those books were written with a specific purpose and were made into "famous" classics deliberately, precisely because of freemasonry of their respective authors?
Back then book reading was kind of like Hollywood and Netflix of today and we all know how much propaganda and ridiculous lies are in movies these days... So, seems to me a lot of our history and general worldview might have been created deliberately... and we might be living in an essentially manufactured world, where everything we think we know, might actually be not what it seems to be...
So, what are your thoughts? Does anyone know any more famous freemasons?
a) Mason/mag - "to knead; fashion; fit"...a writer kneads, a reader is FREE to read.
b) Suggested information implies brick; ones consent implies mortar...a mason of free will utilizes these to build walls of ignorance within others.
c) Words are shaped by LETTERS, yet only if one LETS another shape words onto which meaning is added.
d) Ones consent AUTHORIZES the suggested information by another aka ones choice selects chosen ones offer.
information does not imply brick
a) Inspiration cannot be held onto....
b) Information requires ones consent to hold onto it, hence "bricking" ones memory with a burden.
c) Brick/break implies something set apart...flow (inception towards death) sets form (life) apart from one another. Few "inform" many by tempting consent and suggestion together within a contract aka religion (Latin religio; to bind anew).
d) "not" implies suggested nihilism (Latin nihilo; nothing)...consenting to it tempts one to de-nial everything perceivable.
In short...nothing implies suggested information; everything implies perceivable inspiration.
e) IN (being within) FORM (formed by) ATION (action) + IN (being within) SPIRIT (breathing within) ATION (action).
f) Holding onto information makes adapting to inspiration harder...
Thanks for mentioning schauberger in one of your posts, now I'm reading all about him and his books. Live with inspiration rather than suggestions. Nature really can teach and so many people live their lives distant from nature and burdened by suggestions. I feel like you would like Depeche mode, they may be on the dark side and masonic but their lyrics hold much wisdom, and much of it has to do with what you teach. I own all their CDs up to playing the angel. Stripped comes to mind in particular as a song off of one of my favorite albums (black celebration), that talks about peeling back the layers of people's suggested personality. Stripped down to their true nature free of suggestions. Suggestions distract us from who we really are, and stifle the soul. So many of their songs are pertinent I think to what you talk about here.
Living WITHIN inspiration rather than holding suggested information WITHIN self.
Nature moves matter...matter adapting to motion implies learning to teach and teaching to learn. Matter consenting (student) to each other (teacher) corrupts that.
Schaubergers issues started when he tried to teach others what he learned to teach himself within nature.
Hence facing inwards, while reflecting upon the suggested burden held within. The issue with describing this is that WORDS are that suggested burden ones inscribes into self. Doing so makes perceivable sound seem distant...background noise.
Motion equalizes (inception towards death) differences (life)...few tempt many to respond "alike".
Aka Dispatched (inception towards death) Extension (life).
a) Choice can only exist in-between sides aka within balance...holding onto a side imbalances choice.
b) Light implies motion; dark implies matter casting shadows upon each other. In-between that operates momentum as the spectrum of visible light for each differentiated ray within.
The cover one tries to peel off is held within. A masons utilizes ones free will of choice to build a wall of ignorance within self by tempting one to consent to brick after brick of suggested information, hence cementing beliefs/opinions/definitions etc.
Those who try to peel back layers aka loosening bricks aka crumple the joints of masonry are facing both many fortifying that wall of ignorance from within and few holding their hands against the wailing wall, while filling the cracks/joints with wishes...these few also fertilize that wall by fucking it, hence German FUGE/fuck - "joint".
Here's the sleight of hand: The last name was originally spelled "Fucker"... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fugger_family
That being said...both inception to life and life to death imply a "naked" transformation. The natural order implies that which STRIPS, while those struggling with the need to shelter within are being TEASED.
Sleight of hand: "It's always tease; tease; tease..." https://genius.com/The-clash-should-i-stay-or-should-i-go-lyrics
Free to resist (need) suggestion (want). There's no "free of" only free (choice) within dominance (balance)...and dominance (inception towards death) makes free (life) fall aka "falling domino" rhetoric.
Soul/sole aka "one and only"...all moves; each one within struggles with stifling (difficulty breathing), hence suffering through release.
Soul/sole aka all is one in energy...each different song was composed within same sound.
The issue with discerning this is that others suggest pertinent/pertain aka per (forwards) tenere (to hold), hence tempting one to hold onto the temporary formed song, while ignoring the flow of ongoing sound.