He returns to the same experience later in the lecture, restating that he has experienced the Crucifixion as sheer ecstasy through six whirling vortices and repeating the words of the voice that laid itself down within him to sleep and dream.
Date (happened)
8 April 1960
conclusion · probable
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
1 claim, no conflict: 1960-04-08 (passage:529017).
8 April 1960
estimated · probable · preferred
Reasoning
The distinctive six-vortex Crucifixion is the temple-splitting third act in Neville's repeatedly dated Four Mighty Acts sequence, whose established date is 1960-04-08. Confidence is probable because this passage names the experience but does not repeat its date.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/passage-inherit: lowered `certain` -> `doubtful`. This date was inherited from lecture node 1055, whose own 1959-05-10 delivery claim has been refuted, and no other node in the corpus holds that date live — so the only witness for this date is one the corpus has disproved. Lowered, never refuted (#2461 §1 rule (b)): what collapsed is the evidence for WHEN, not the event. This row was reached through a PASSAGE source, which every earlier rule-(b) pass was structurally blind to. || v1.1/l7/preferred-refuted-source/odd-c1: source lecture refutes this date; lowered to doubtful and removed preferred after event/source read. The old row mistakes earlier tonight for the experience date. Existing d2 independently identifies the six-vortex Crucifixion with the established 1960-04-08 Four Mighty Acts occurrence. || v1.1/l7/preferred-refuted-source/c2: fourth-question adjudication found this is a transcript-tied false date, not an independently evidenced night; The passage does not date the six-vortex event to 1959; an independently reasoned 1960-04-08 replacement exists.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Reasoning
The old claim mistook an intra-lecture cross-reference for the experience date and inherited nid1055's now-refuted 1959-05-10 delivery attribution.
Told / reported
18 June 1971
conclusion · probable
Why
dc1-agreement-20261004, pm-actor-551 (PM 8702)
Reasoning
1 claim, no conflict: 1971-06-18 (node:1055).
18 June 1971
estimated · probable
Why
Lane L7 (#2354) re-derivation. Supersedes in substance, not in storage, the refuted-date told claim(s) on this event; those rows stand per append-only.
Reasoning
Re-derived, not walked down. The existing told claim(s) on this event took their date from a delivery claim on node 1055 that the corpus has since REFUTED, so the corpus was asserting that Neville told this on a day it separately says he did not lecture. That is a contradiction rather than an over-confidence, and lowering the confidence would have hidden it instead of resolving it. The refutation stands and the told claim is the wrong side of it. Node 1055 surviving (non-refuted) claim: 1971-6-18 at `probable`. All claims on the node: 1959-5-10 refuted; 1971-6-18 probable (preferred). Superseded here: delta 0: 1959-05-10 at `certain` (run `corpus v1 / phase3b`) | delta 1: 1959-05-10 at `probable` (run `v1.1/l4/ceiling/c2`). The telling is dated by its lecture, so with the refuted date removed from consideration the surviving claim is what the telling inherits, at that claim own confidence and no higher.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Reasoning
|| v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1055, 1959-5-10) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-6-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
10 May 1959
stated · refuted
Why
Corrects the confidence of the told claim written by run `corpus v1 / phase3b` at delta 0 on this event; that claim is left standing per append-only. Ceiling rule #2132.
Reasoning
Confidence only; the date is not re-adjudicated and is left exactly as written. This claim is derived from the delivery claims of node 1055 and asserts `certain`, but the strongest claim that node carries is `probable`, so there is nothing for `certain` to inherit from. nid 1055 delivery claims: 1959-5-10 doubtful; 1971-6-18 probable. Walked back to `probable`, the ceiling. Whether the DATE is right is a separate question this row does not touch; if the evidence turns out to support more confidence, it will have to come from a source other than this node. || v1.1/l7/told-close: the delivery claim this was derived from (nid 1055, 1959-5-10) was refuted by the L7 adjudication (#2363). The corrected told claim from the same lecture stands at 1971-6-18. This row is retired rather than deleted so the derivation history remains readable.
Sources
Source
- Who Paul Really Is ¶36 (I have experienced Crucifixion, as Paul said he did. And it’s ecstasy . . sheer ecstasy! Six vortices . . whirling vortices: a vortex, a vortex, a vortex, a vortex, and then the two feet are vortices, and I can’t tell you the thrill when you are drawn in…)
1 tellings, oldest first. A date in brackets shows how it is known; "circa", "after" and "possible" dates are rough.
| Date |
Lecture or book |
Telling |
Passage |
| 1971-06-18 [exact/probable/final] |
Who Paul Really Is |
No! I tell you what I have told you earlier tonight: I have experienced Crucifixion, as Paul said he did. And it’s ecstasy . . sheer ecstasy! Six vortices . . whirling vortices: a vortex, a vortex, a vortex, a vortex, and then the two feet are vortices, and I can’t tell you the thrill when you are drawn into this body through these six vortices! And then the voice rings out, “I laid myself down within you to sleep, and as I slept, I dreamt a dream. I dreamt . . Yes, I knew exactly what he is dreaming. He is dreaming that He is I, and when He awakes, I AM He! The two shall become one. For here… |
529017 |