PDA

View Full Version : March 19 SuperMoon



rogerc
03-11-2011, 01:47 AM
http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/images/stories/supermoon-02.jpg


Here it is people, your best opportunity during a full moon to catch or condense the spiritus mundi according to your devices in the past 18 years and whats more......its a full moon....... in spring. I only pray that its a clear and calm night devoid of wind..but a slight northerly prevailing breeze is ok I guess.

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/will-supermoon-cause-earthquake-storm-natural-disasters-1442/

Seth-Ra
03-12-2011, 03:47 AM
Some think this new Full Moon is going to cause disaster - and just like that, in the build-up to it (waxing crescent atm), bam, Japan gets nailed! Coincidence - i think we shall see on the 19th. :cool:

Personally though, im looking forward to it, and hoping plenty of dew falls that night. :D



~Seth-Ra

Donna Matrix
03-12-2011, 04:51 AM
Great its my birthday! My crystals have already reminded me of the event. If nothing else, put water out for charging.

vega33
03-12-2011, 04:55 AM
@Seth-Ra: its funny, I got my copy of von Welling's Opus Mago-Cabbalisticum a few days ago, and he was mentioning the idea that the moon emits its own kind of light separate from the solar radiation it reflections, a radiation visible @ new moon in an appropriate sky. It was very well received that I was reading this just before the closest approach of this body to earth in a while.

I remember experiencing the sense of Luna during the eclipse several years ago at Burning Man. It was quite an epoptic experience. I hope the upcoming experience will be just as enlightening :D

Seth-Ra
03-12-2011, 05:01 AM
Oh yeah, i love the moon - i was born on a full moon (hence my "lunacy"? :D), and my Gemini-ness makes me notice things mostly during Full and New (opposites of each other), so im looking forward to this one.
Yeah id think there is a special sort of light emitted/reflected from it - definitely something magickal about it. ;)

Donna, yeah definitely set out water or some other something to charge, at the least. :)

Ive currently been called back to work, so i was all the more thrilled to see it will be on a Saturday - perfect for my schedule. ^.^



~Seth-Ra

sleeveless
03-18-2011, 06:45 PM
Full moon and menstruation? For me it is almout always the same time just one day here and there... it feels like somthing extra, crazy but dubbel..like a wild "animal"...I feel a little bit like a magnet and flesh-like meat but the mind is somewere else..do anybody recognize the feeling (I know it is more boys here but you maybe have something to say)

In turkish menstruations means (aybaşı); the moons beginning or the months beginning...ay =moon or month. başı=beginning (beginning of the moon)

When is the beginnning of the moon is it when you cant see it or is it when it is full...?

Maybe I am on the wrong side of the month?

solomon levi
03-18-2011, 09:06 PM
Hi Sleeveless.
What comes to mind is Castaneda's words on this subject. To paraphrase, what guys perceive as 'moody' or 'bitchy'
at the time of menstruation is really a woman coming into power. Like you said, "crazy but double". During this time,
a woman is simply willing to put up with less shit - she sees a clearer picture of truth and strikes out against those
things or people that would limit her. According to Castaneda, a woman, by virtue of possessing a womb, is a more
powerful magician than a man potentially. Of course she has to learn to harness and distribute this power with the
same discipline that a man must.

I've always thought the new moon (when you can't see it) is the beginning and the full moon is the middle.

There's lots of etymological connections between moon and mind (mens), month, mental, etc.

Andro
03-19-2011, 06:51 PM
Castaneda's words on this subject.

To be well noted. These are Castaneda's words, and probably originate from a specific lineage of teachings. There are other lineages which affirm significantly different perspectives.


'moody' or 'bitchy' at the time of menstruation is really a woman coming into power.

Sounds also like emotionally unstable to me. Certainly not like someone coming into real power. Being moody and bitchy MAY (in some cases) be an indicator of someone having an internal re-arrangement of energies which MAY (in RARE cases) lead to increased personal power - but this is absolutely not limited to women and menstruation.


According to Castaneda, a woman, by virtue of possessing a womb, is a more powerful magician than a man, potentially.

Here's a different view: A man, by virtue of possessing a penis, is a more powerful magician than a woman, potentially.

And another one: Gays and Lesbians, by virtue of possessing better access to both their inner polarities, are more powerful magicians than heteros, potentially.

One can take any genetic make-up and make up a plausible explanation for certain advantages, according to one's own convenience, belief system or training lineage.

Jane Elliott (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane_Elliott), in her brilliant 'Blue-Eyed/Brown-Eyed' training seminars, invented a brilliant and extremely credible explanation why blue-eyed people are likely to be less intelligent than brown-eyed people.
She used a pseudo-scientific explanation, by stating that the melanin responsible for making brown-eyed children was also linked to intelligence and ability, therefore the brown pigmentation would result in an increase of these qualities. It was of course utter nonsense, but very difficult NOT to believe by the seminar participants.

The magical/shamanic potential can originate from whatever you draw it from, in your genetic and spiritual make-up. Gender is one factor out of many, certainly not something to emphasize like Castaneda does.

The womb thing, in particular - I find it to be completely irrelevant in this context. Some women have their wombs surgically removed (Hysterectomy). Should/would this diminish their magical abilities?

Also, I definitely do NOT consider Castaneda as a balanced person or ultimate shamanic/magical authority. Just my perspective, of course.

From another thread, but in related context:



Before its capture, it is genderless.
After its capture, we can say that it is feminine.
But suffice it to work correctly with to get a male side and then an androgynous side.
It is therefore equally male / female / androgynous / genderless.

Non-Duality (and how it is reached) is a not an easy concept to actually LIVE and ACT upon.

solomon levi
03-19-2011, 07:34 PM
Hi Androgynus.
Of course there are many alternative views. I didn't claim otherwise and I don't think people need to be told that. It's a given as far as I'm concerned.
If people don't already know that then my telling them won't make any difference.

Quote A: "but this is absolutely not limited to women and menstruation."
Again, this is a given IMO. I wasn't claiming otherwise.
Emotionally unstable, in my experience, is indeed a doorway to power or to insanity, depending on what you do with that instability/volatility/fluidity/mercury - a poison and a medicine.
"Moody" and "bitchy" are interpretations with often negative connotations. People rarely view the positive aspects of menstruation.

Quote A: "Here's a different view: A man, by virtue of possessing a penis, is a more powerful magician than a woman, potentially.
And another one: Gays and Lesbians, by virtue of possessing better access to both their inner polarities, are more powerful magicians than heteros, potentially.
One can take any genetic make-up and make up a plausible explanation for certain advantages, according to one's own convenience, belief system or training lineage."

Sleeveless didn't ask about penises or gays and lesbians so I didn't mention them. One of the first things DJ teaches CC is that our view of the world is a description,
one among millions of descriptions. So you're preaching to the quoir. In no way have I stated any absolute truths. Sleeveless asked some questions. I pulled some
answers from my inventory. She will decide if they are useful or not. It doesn't matter to me.
That said, many alchemists have emphasized the womb/athanor/vase. Others have emphasized the penis/sword.

Quote A: "The womb thing, in particular - I find it to be completely irrelevant in this context. Some women have their wombs surgically removed (Hysterectomy). Should/would this diminish their magical abilities?"

According to CC, yes. Also having children diminishes one's magical abilities.
I am not going to defend CC. I can only speak for myself and I have been able to verify most of his teachings.
For a seer, these are not opinions made from the mind, but energy seen directly. You are making logical arguments that have nothing
to do with seeing energy. To properly argue, one must see how the womb is utilised energetically, not unlike the dan tien.
If you want to argue on logic, there are examples of female domination throughout nature (bees for example) which have nothing
to do with logic or opinion or personal preference. Again, not an absolute argument, but at least in the field of nature and out of the field of human mind.
(Though I agree with Leodegarius that human is within nature - I haven't had time to post my views to that thread)

quote A: "Non-Duality (and how it is reached) is a not an easy concept to actually LIVE and ACT upon."

Sleeveless didn't ask about nonduality. Why do you bring that into this? Are you insinuating that my reply to sleeveless suggests I'm a failure at nonduality??

It's funny what different people see as "completely irrelevant". You have brought many "completely irrelevant" ideas into this conversation about menstruation.

Andro
03-19-2011, 08:42 PM
I mentioned non-duality with regard to genderization, which is a dualistic manifestation.

Of course I am not suggesting that you - or anyone else - is a failure at non-duality. I can only make such evaluations about myself, if at all, and can also tell you that I myself consider to be far from it.

Womb/penis/menstruation/genders/orientations/moon cycles are effects and manifestations of higher causes/energies.
These energies do not necessarily need to be 'incarnated' to have an effect. I think we need to look beyond the vulgar manifestations to better understand the energies at work.

Every Artist 'impregnated' by inspiration, has a 'womb' where this seed is nurtured into his or her Work, regardless of gender.

Every person or experience or work of art that inspires us, has a 'penis' by which it dispenses the 'seed'.

Like I have mentioned many times before, vulgar nature is dualistically balanced (Yin/Yang model). Philosophical Balance goes beyond that.

A man can be nurturing without a womb, just like a woman can be inspiring and 'seeding' without a penis.

My comments also originate in observation of energies at work. A womb does not have to be physical to nurture, unless one wishes a physical child.
'Womb' energies are not (in my experience) confined to the presence of an actual physical womb, let alone gender. This is not a 'logical' statement for me, but based on shamanic observation and insight.
I could even specify where the womb energies are concentrated in male physical bodies, but I'll leave this one out for time being (or not being :))

My criticism is mainly of Castaneda (in this context), and what he has to say about the physical womb of women as potentially related to enhanced magical abilities.

We all have penises and we all have wombs - philosophically and spiritually speaking - regardless of gender. Otherwise we would be confined to lab alchemy or to making babies exclusively :)

But for the internal aspects of transformation, it is IMO and IME absolutely necessary to recognize that we possess BOTH within ourselves.

I find Castaneda's categorization very limited and limiting.
It remains confined to the physical realm (in this context) and focusing on effect instead of cause, on manifestation instead of principle, on Matter instead of Quality.

And yes, what one finds relevant - another can find completely irrelevant. It's the nature of diversity and we should celebrate it ! ! !
✂-----------------------------------

Awani
03-20-2011, 03:45 AM
It is very bright!

:cool:

solomon levi
03-21-2011, 06:11 PM
Quote A:
"I mentioned non-duality with regard to genderization, which is a dualistic manifestation."

I still don't get it. Are you saying no one should respond to sleeveless' question because it is genderized? She was asking about menstruation - obviously genderized.
Still don't see what nonduality has to do with her question, unless you want to tell her not to ask such questions - to be nondual/nongender. I don't care to tell her or anyone that.


Quote A: "Of course I am not suggesting that you - or anyone else - is a failure at non-duality. I can only make such evaluations about myself, if at all, and can also tell you that
I myself consider to be far from it."
previous quote: "Non-Duality (and how it is reached) is a not an easy concept to actually LIVE and ACT upon."

Hmmm. Well, in your previous post you mention real power. Real nonduality is never not being lived and acted upon. It's all there is. :)


Quote A: "Womb/penis/menstruation/genders/orientations/moon cycles are effects and manifestations of higher causes/energies.
These energies do not necessarily need to be 'incarnated' to have an effect. I think we need to look beyond the vulgar manifestations to better understand the energies at work."

I'm not sure how that would apply to sleeveless' question. Aren't you jumping out of context?. All I did was respond to sleeveless' inquiry to what people may know about menstruation.
I wasn't trying to make any alchemical or nondual statements. If you have such responses, why not address them to her instead of criticising my response?


Quote A: "Every Artist 'impregnated' by inspiration, has a 'womb' where this seed is nurtured into his or her Work, regardless of gender.
Every person or experience or work of art that inspires us, has a 'penis' by which it dispenses the 'seed'.
Like I have mentioned many times before, vulgar nature is dualistically balanced (Yin/Yang model). Philosophical Balance goes beyond that.
A man can be nurturing without a womb, just like a woman can be inspiring and 'seeding' without a penis.
My comments also originate in observation of energies at work. A womb does not have to be physical to nurture, unless one wishes a physical child.
'Womb' energies are not (in my experience) confined to the presence of an actual physical womb, let alone gender. This is not a 'logical' statement for me, but based on shamanic observation and insight.
I could even specify where the womb energies are concentrated in male physical bodies, but I'll leave this one out for time being (or not being )"

I wouldn't argue with that. But you've expanded the topic from wombs to "womb energies". They're not the same thing. You can talk about male womb energies all you like
and the objective truth will still be that men don't have babies and that men and women are made differently. Whether that difference makes one potentially more magical
than another we can debate, but I'm not going to debate about men having wombs with you. :)

Quote A: "My criticism is mainly of Castaneda (in this context), and what he has to say about the physical womb of women as potentially related to enhanced magical abilities.
We all have penises and we all have wombs - philosophically and spiritually speaking - regardless of gender. Otherwise we would be confined to lab alchemy or to making babies exclusively."

But you are making this a philosophical and spiritual debate when for Castaneda it was a physical one. Your criticism is not at all convincing to me, but maybe to someone else.
I don't see what the confusion is for. Can I not win this debate simply by asking you to develop an egg into a fetus inside of a penis? You can't do it. Why? Why can you in a womb?


Quote A: "But for the internal aspects of transformation, it is IMO and IME absolutely necessary to recognize that we possess BOTH within ourselves.
I find Castaneda's categorization very limited and limiting.
It remains confined to the physical realm (in this context) and focusing on effect instead of cause, on manifestation instead of principle, on Matter instead of Quality."


It is only limiting if it doesn't describe actual reality, which you haven't proven. If it is an energetic fact, then it isn't limiting, any more than saying that Arnold Schwartzenegger
has bigger muscles than I do is limiting. It's just the simple truth.
I am not saying that women are more magical than men because they have wombs. I'm saying Carlos said that, and that to me it is not inconceivable.
I haven't proved it true or false, but I can imagine it without it being a blaspheme against nature. And I wouldn't be the only one in history to think that women rule the world. :)
If it is true, it doesn't mean anything less to men for me. Men still are what they are, and that is more powerful than I have yet imagined - I see no limit in it.
Especially when one considers the death defier from CC's books - he was able to become a man or a woman by changing his luminosity. He/she also altered his luminosity
to mimic the luminosity of inorganic being, which is what made him a death defier, able to live thousands of years.
So you see, CC doesn't make it merely about the physical. Why form an opinion without reading the books?

solomon levi
03-21-2011, 07:52 PM
Great its my birthday! My crystals have already reminded me of the event. If nothing else, put water out for charging.

Oh! Happy belated birthday Donna. Hope it was wonderful. :)

Donna Matrix
03-21-2011, 11:18 PM
Thank You Solomon!
I went to go see japanese sacred court music. Found it disturbing owing to a little reed instrument that sounded like a dying duck. Came home at intermission and we had hash brownies. That was good, but still give credit to my boyfriend for trying. It was a noble effort.

Managed to collect two gallons of rain water during this moon! I am very excited.