Frequently I receive some feedback, from friends and foes alike, complaining of my usage of strange words and concepts within my articles, especially when I throw in some of less than 30 words of Yoruba I use in my written articles (namely, the names of the 16 principles of Ifá, the names of the six archetypes complexes, and the word Eshu and Odu).
Am I throwing it all in a pot to confuse everybody? Justify some weird religion, mumbo jumbo, voodoo style?
Hmm, I invite you to look at my articles again from this view: I never EXPLAIN anything using the Odu (or other paradigms). I put the concepts SIDE-BY-SIDE of the phenomenon in question.
In other words, you don’t have to know anything about Ifá, or my reformulation of it as Quantum-Fá, if you see these funny words. You could simply ignore them. But you could also USE them to look at what I’m pointing at. You could use it as a concordance to define what the Ifá names are pointing at.
For example, the enigma known as ‘power-change’ has a representation in Ifá as the principle (Olodu) of ‘Osa’. Voilá, you understand the phenomenon of ‘power-change’ and you’ll have a glimpse of its meaning as one of the 16 Ifá principles. Likewise, if you look at its representation in Quantum Fá’s number system of Eshu flows, the number 9 (nine), you’ll understand its underlying force. I was tempted to put Tesla’s number model on the page but that would be throwing off the lid even more. Or perhaps, not? He certainly got some deep understandings of its working.
Same for the Elliott Wave concordance:
(this image may be copyrighted, I didnt find the owner)
The beauty of the Elliott Wave is that it lnks the number progression with Fibonacci relationships and demonstrates the universality of the model in nature and society alike.
‘Power-change’ here is represented as the ‘correction wave’, number 9, Osa, you name it. Whatever you like it.
Here again, I prefer to point to parallel models of paradigms, instead of clothing one model in a bunch of words.
Concor-dancing, it you like!
The mystery lies deep within the phenomenon, not within the clumsy words that point to it.
UPDATE:
I forgot the home-work challenge question:
If we look at a contiously rising frequency layout, a piano keyboard for example, where would be ‘power-change’?
B or C or?
(this is asking in other words, where is the next root? At the octave (8)? or at the next two up (10) which would be ‘D’ (Re)?