Patrons of the Sacred Art

Can't log in? Contact Us

OPEN TO REGISTER: Click HERE if you want to join Alchemy Forums!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 99

Thread: The Lord is a Coward

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In-Between
    Posts
    7,515
    Blog Entries
    3
    From "True Blood", Sookie's exchange with Vampire Eric, after Godric's True Death:

    Sookie: He's your maker isn't he?
    Eric: Don't use words you don't understand.
    Sookie: You have a lot of love for him.
    Eric: Don't use words I don't understand.
    Slàinte Mhath, Mo Leannan Ḅidheach!|

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    856
    Blog Entries
    7
    Jesus will not save you. God will not help. Even if you are pure of heart and faithfull. You are not a servant of Gods, you are servants to each other.

    How do you serve God? Do you feed him grapes in heaven? You serve each other, you feed, you clothe, you help another person. You don't serve God, you don't even meet him.

    We save each other and we save ourselves. No one gets fed if we leave everything up to heaven.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    In the moment...
    Posts
    9,873
    Blog Entries
    2
    If you feed others you feed God.

    Don’t let the delusion of reality confuse you regarding the reality of the illusion.


  4. #74
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Posts
    856
    Blog Entries
    7
    Yes thats it. Unfortunately only another person can save you from the bullet, if they are not busy and inclined to do so.
    God won't show up. Feed each other instead.

  5. #75
    Join Date
    May 2022
    Location
    Wrong Island
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    The Holy Spirit is the World Soul or Spiritus Mundi. Different religions have different names for it.

    An esotericist will look beyond those superficialities.
    Amen.

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In-Between
    Posts
    7,515
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    An esotericist will look beyond those superficialities.
    Not if those "superficialities" are deceptive by design, IMO.
    Slàinte Mhath, Mo Leannan Ḅidheach!|

  7. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Andro View Post
    Not if those "superficialities" are deceptive by design, IMO.
    I am not sure how many "sacred texts" are deceptive by design (safe for alchemical writings, of course ). Even if you personally - or even the majority of modern readers, including the followers of the respective faith a text is associated with - may not agree to everything written by the author from his or her particular socio-cultural perspective. What matters is to separate the wheat from the chaff, or the timeless truth from the all too human stuff. Just because I find some gems in a particular work doesn't mean that I need to subscribe to all of its creator's beliefs - I rarely do!

    Bear in mind that many keep following a certain faith because they sense a degree of truth in it, even when its shortcomings are blatantly obvious. For them in particular, it might be helpful to realize that they don't need to renounce the whole system, but are free to focus on the kernel of spiritual truth it contains instead.

    And make no mistake... Even those who later distanced themselves from the faith of their upbringing are invariably indoctrinated by it on a subconscious level. So some kind of differentiating review from a more mature perspective would be a useful exercise for most of us!

    I am not sure why you posted this scheme here. Anyhow, I see nothing particularly wrong with it and would say that it's essentially in agreement with most metaphysical systems (even though terms employed tend to vary from one to another).

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In-Between
    Posts
    7,515
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    And make no mistake...
    You're asking for the impossible

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    Even those who later distanced themselves from the faith of their upbringing are invariably indoctrinated by it on a subconscious level.
    I don't have any "faith of upbringing". All the views I am expressing on those topics are from my own explorations over the past decades.

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    So some kind of differentiating review from a more mature perspective would be a useful exercise for most of us!
    That's exactly why I'm deliberately "differentiating" between "Soul" and "Spirit". They are not interchangeable, at least in light of my own direct explorations.

    This could be an example of a "more mature" perspective. A "less mature" perspective would not differentiate (for example) between the actual letter and the envelope it arrived in. Or would declare them as "interchangeable".

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    I am not sure why you posted this scheme here.
    Because it illustrates how the "Soul" is "mortal" (unlike "Spirit", but this part is not directly conveyed by the diagram).

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    Anyhow, I see nothing particularly wrong with it and would say that it's essentially in agreement with most metaphysical systems.
    To a certain extent. However, in this diagram, I would replace "Afterlife" with a clearer term, but that's already beyond the scope...

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    (even though terms employed tend to vary from one to another).
    And herein lies the culprit. IMO.

    For me, it's all about the psycho-linguistic mechanics. "Car" and "passenger" are not interchangeable terms. At least not "in here".

    But ultimately, beyond dualistic reality constructs, none of those terms matter.
    Slàinte Mhath, Mo Leannan Ḅidheach!|

  9. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Andro View Post
    That's exactly why I'm deliberately "differentiating" between "Soul" and "Spirit". They are not interchangeable, at least in light of my own direct explorations.

    This could be an example of a "more mature" perspective. A "less mature" perspective would not differentiate (for example) between the actual letter and the envelope it arrived in. Or would declare them as "interchangeable".
    Just to clarify, personally, I usually don't apply these terms interchangeably. I simply noticed that some authors use one in lieu of the other, but with the exact same meaning. Anyhow, this discussion doesn't seem to be leading anywhere right now...

    Let's take a look at your diagram and use the terms as employed there (for clarity's sake).

    Because it illustrates how the "Soul" is "mortal" (unlike "Spirit", but this part is not directly conveyed by the diagram).
    In accordance with this diagram, I would highlight that Soul is made of the undifferentiated life force or prime matter temporarily shaped by Spirit. With Spirit - as the "in-forming" agency - in a sense being 'above' Soul (as the diagram shows).

    For the record, I would personally use the two terms with reversed meaning, since to me, Soul/Sulfur signifies this archetypal, form giving agency, and Spirit the originally undifferentiated life force.

    On the bottom, you have the level of the body or physical, which corresponds to the Salt principle.

    Form acts on (subtle and subsequently physical) matter, it is not the other way around.

    To a certain extent. However, in this diagram, I would replace "Afterlife" with a clearer term, but that's already beyond the scope...
    Agreed. 'Afterlife' could refer to any level of existence beyond the physical.

    For me, it's all about the psycho-linguistic mechanics. "Car" and "passenger" are not interchangeable terms. At least not "in here".

    But ultimately, beyond dualistic reality constructs, none of those terms matter.
    Dogma is the antithesis of interconnectedness.
    Last edited by Michael Sternbach; 08-13-2022 at 12:14 AM.

  10. #80
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    In-Between
    Posts
    7,515
    Blog Entries
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael Sternbach View Post
    Dogma is the antithesis of interconnectedness.
    Once the Principles are grasped/grokked, dogma is indeed totally disposable.

    "Truth" is one. But it has as many angles as there are points of inquiry.
    Slàinte Mhath, Mo Leannan Ḅidheach!|

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts