“For Example” & “For Instance”
(I was awoken at 2:59am with the revelations for this entry)
…..There are so many examples of different wORds & phrases which have been taught by text-books & teachers as meaning “the same thing”. However, I AM Thank-full that I have been En’Lightened once-again – merely by con’templating both the root-wORd and pre-fixes of these two very common phrases, which (after reading this) you Shall see, are clearly NOT comprehended by those who are supposed to-Be “experts” on the subject.
…..And, as with so many of these types of wORds & phrases, it IS very-difficult to ex-plain them sans the use of the very same language which IS so ill-conceived. There-fORe, “I shall use the very chains which have served to bind US, in order to set We-ALL free again”.
…..Both of the terms “for Example” & “for Instance” are said to-Be used to-provide some… “example” of a “thing” which One IS ex-plaining. And nearly every English text-book it states that: “for Example” & “for Instance” mean exactly the same thing… but, Surprise!
… They Don’t.
See if you can discover the difference between these too “examples”…
“The wORds con’tained within the pages of ‘The “Lu”-Cipher’ show that: there IS a much-deeper fORm of “Magick” in the-use-of Language than We have previously thought. For example, the wORd ‘understand’ IS probably the most mal-conceived & mis-used wORd in ‘The Common’ of The English Language.”
“There are many things which inspired Me to write this book. For instance, the very nature of wORds and their use in Language IS – with absolutely no doubt in My Mind – the highest fORm of what has-been, traditionally, referred to as “Magick” to have been ‘un-leashed’ in the wORld.”
…..I have actually given a clue to the difference in the meanings and usage in the “ex-amples” above. Take a moment to absorb (ab-S-ORb) them before reading-on. And, as always (all-ways), it IS a matter of the prefixes and root-words…
- Ex = Apart-from; “Out-side-of”; separate-from…
- In = Interior, on the “In-side-of”; a part of (internally)…
Ample = Plenty; Large; Full; Abundant; More Than Sufficient; Etc….
Stance = Posture; Position; Manner; “Point-Of-View”; Opinion; Perception…
…..So how does this fit with what has been taught about these two terms? And remember that: “The Magick Of Language” was, first, only taught to those who were initiated into “certain circles” – either through privilege or price. And commun-ic-ation was only taught in the most basic and rudimentary forms – as was necessary, to those who were either NOT privileged and wealthy… Thus the language itself was expounded by Those-Who lacked the deeper Know-Ledge & Comprehension of It. These two terms are very good examples of this.
…..The prefixes “Ex-” and “In-” are almost direct opposites. And the root-words “Ample”, an adjective & and “Stance”, an abstract-noun – do not appear to-Be in-any-way related or similar. So how could these two phrases mean the same thing? Well… they don’t. But they are similar. Similar in-that: they are both used to provide a “thing” which can-Be used as comparison to an other “thing” or idea be’ing expressed – in-order-to illustrate a previously-made Point or Statement.
…..However, by the very nature of the elements of the wORds alone – The wORd, “Example” should, then, be-used to-refer-to something Exterior; some “thing” which IS solid & concrete; not a concept, idea, or intangible “thing”. And con-versely, the wORd, “Instance” should Be-use to-refer-to something Internal – such-as a Thought, Feeling, Concept, Idea, etc..
…..But why “Ample” and “Stance”. The latter case may be a bit easier to con’ceive – how-ever with the former, it is a bit more obscure. But as there is no shortage of external “things” in The wORld (in-other-wORds, there is an “Ample” supply of “things”) then it can-Be thought-of, and used thusly…
Suppose that I am telling you about some “thing” – and, as The Human Brain learns and Comes To Know a “thing” by comparing it to other “things”, similar in nature – I then show you (through other wORds) an “ample” supply of other external “things” (or even just one of the “Ample” supply) with-which you can use to compare the original “thing” which I am talking about. In this way, you shall have a better Comprehension of what I have been ex-plaining.
Example = Some external and tangible thing used to illustrate, through comparison, an other thing be’ing spoken-of.
…..In the case of the wORd, “Stance”, the elements of the wORd are less obscure but the final definition may-Be more-so than with the previous wORd. However we can combine both the definitions of one’s opinion with the common definition of the way in which a person stands. In martial arts we refer to the particular way in-which a person stands as his “Stance”. If the person’s stance is: strong, solid, and done properly – even if there be not a great deal of physical strength to hold that person in position, it can-be very difficult to knock Him over. Likewise, if a person “takes a stance” (takes an opinion about something) which He feels strongly about and can “internally” identify with, then that person can truly “Know” a thing (at least as it relates to that person’s reality). In this way, the person’s ideas about it may be very hard to shake; just like the “Stance” of the martial artist.
“Instance” = (literally) An internal stance on something; The way in-which a person thinks and/or believes about something.
…..As stated above, the wORd alone – defined but not used in a sentence – may not seem to be as clear as with the word “Example”. But, once One’s eyes have been opened to a thing, it IS very-difficult NOT to see it. So, to use the wORd “Example” to talk about something internal, “just doesn’t feel right” anymore, does it?
…..When making reference to some external tangible thing in order to illustrate or explain some other thing, use the phrase: “For Example…”
(For the example above, I used this phrase to refer to the wORd “understand” as an “example” of one of the many wORds in the pages of “The “Lu”-Cipher”.)
…..When making reference to some internal intangible thing which can only be illustrated or explained by the listener using his or her imagination, then use the phrase: “For Instance…”
(For the second example above, I used this phrase to refer to “the very nature of wORds…”, being a concept – and thus, an intangible thing – as an “instance” of one of the things which inspired Me to write “The “Lu”-Cipher”.)
…..Now, most people (those whose eyes have not-yet been opened – or, just not-yet opened enough) will probably never notice the difference… But Their Minds certainly shall. And, as We ALL Will to-Be: not just Men and Wo-Men, but “Men and Wo-Men of Renown” (from: “re-named”, “re-numbered”, thus: “re-Known”… Known through-out The Ages – again & again through the telling of our wORds & Deeds) – then, the fact that a mundane would not notice, is no motivation (motive-action) for We-ALL. Most – if asked – could not say for sure, what makes one person a good speaker and an Ather A Great Orator. This is especially true if they were to say the very same wORds in the same pitch, tone, melody and with the same inflection.
…..But I can tell you – the answer is simple. A speaker says words. An Orator, chooses his words very carefully; knowing the very elements-of: not only each word, but, even the very elements of the wORds used, and how they wORk to’gether perfectly – in-Order-that every-thing said is a Master-Piece.
…..Metaphorically speaking – any person can follow a recipe exactly as written with the precise measurements of all the ingredients – but only the One who knows each ingredient; each element – and how they inter-act and re-act with each-other; how the external elements as well: timing, temperature, elevation, and even the mood & feelings of the One putting the elements to’gether… Only a One such as this can be called a “Master”. To the former: water is water & and salt is salt. He knows-NOT the difference be’tween “this one” & “that”. But, a “One” knows that water & salt – taken from different sources, and imbued with different vibrations – and thus, different characteristics – though appearing to-Be “the same”, are actually vastly different.
…..And the same IS true with the difference between a person who only knows the accepted definitions – or worse yet – merely the common usage of a wORd; never inquiring further – and a One who can Truly Be called “Orator”… (OR + A + TOR = “The Light Of Thor”… Thus – “One whose wORds strike with the Light-In-ing Bolt Action of Thor’s Hammer”).