Unhacking Wars - comment 67183

Seth says ...
well, mark i claim that anytime there is a identity boundary, the same kind of dynamics emerge.  it does not matter much what creates the boundary between that which is inside and that which is outside.  therefore if #ego separates what people are inside from that which is outside and therefore creating the excuse for #RWG,  then if a group of people are separated for other people, the same fetures will emerge.  And guess what, we see that happening again and again in almost whatever grouping that gets defined. 
Interesting identity boundary described by RS about the elementals in 

These beings do not feel their self — their ego — as man feels his in the physical world; they permeate that self with their will much more than man does his; they will their own existence as it were, and feel their existence as something which they give to themselves through their will. On the other hand, with regard to their thinking, they have not the feeling that they are creating their thoughts, as man creates his; they feel all their thoughts as suggestions, as something which is not in them but in the universe, and which is streaming out of the universe into their being. Thus in these beings no doubt can ever arise but that their thoughts are the reflection of the thought-order poured forth into the universe. They do not think their own thoughts, but cosmic thoughts. With their activity of thought they live in cosmic thoughts; but they will their existence. Their life of feeling is shaped in accordance with this will and thought of theirs. They feel themselves to be a link in the whole cosmic system; and they feel the necessity of willing their existence in a manner corresponding to that system.
                                               R.S. The Threshold of the Spiritual World (*)

Comments


One may not like to imagine a spiritual world interpenetrating the physical world of 5-senses but such thoughts & possibilities broaden one’s ontology rather than just a munge of vibrations & senses limited to our ears, eyes, nose, tongue + mouth & the skin & touch organs & an aura of beliefs to mix it all up.
Free yourself & get rid of beliefs ! - M.R.

BTW, PR’s ontology doesn’t require one just your own dedication to contemplation & discovery of what’s SO!

What specific “beings” are RS talking about?  That is important to know to hear what he is saying.

i agree.  i do not separate them at all.  In my ontology there is no physical world and a separate spiritual one.  But i do recognize the world and the #metaworld ← the world about the world, about the world, about the world … ad infinitum,  as deep, or as high, as you want to go. 

The elementals – those below humans – salamanders sylphs gnomes & undines – see the Wikipedia.


I like the statue of the undine:


I suspect that you do but your intellect munges them together.  I suspect that the distinction between the last time you actually swam in water didn’t get confused with the distinction of running along a trail in the woods.  A metaworld is just abstraction in imagination. 

Well yes certainly it is my intellect that combines what others call “the spiritual world” and the “physical world” together into just one world in which i live  and experience.  That is my story.

I do not think dividing the world into spiritual and physical  helps me live.   I have seen, from the outside,  how others live according to that distinction.    It does not look like  something that i want to do. 

Sure i can well distinguish the last time i swam in water between walking on a tril in the wooods.  I rarly run there so am not sure to what you refer.  

Yep my description of “a metaworld” is an abstraction.  It is a mathmatical abstraction.  It is that kind of domain.  Those kind of abstractions are the #context from whence the thoughts emerged.  #GoodThough … i thought you liked mathmatics  … #GW was certainly into it.

I doubt it is mathematical: mathematics has logic & rules & theorems & axioms & calculation – etc. The nature of counting at the beginning of it all is that of naming – not an abstraction. If you look into RS – abstraction & munging is Ahrimanic – ran into it yesterday – counter to human evolution – losing distinction through generalization.

the abstractions of mathmatics and logic go way beyond just counting and naming. 

Lately i have discovered a way to read #RS such that he makes much more sense to me than taking him literally.  Now i read him like i hear a saga or a drama or a ancient myth … like star wars … or star trek … or the matrix … or the holy bible.  It is all allagory.  Even in his lecture on the 8th spere he says that himself before he starts talking.  Did you catch it? 

Yep – mathematics of cosmology has left the planet ; however began with notion of numbers & counting. Make up your own mythology – da #juice is good. null – the full 20+ pages of Liber M by GW is very interesting – only hinted at in one page of Z is Z.

BTW, interpenetrating is but a physical metaphor.  Some of my experience could not describe such any more than one can describe everything happening in a dream.

null Well the fun part of the #metaworld is that each of us actually does get to “make up our own mythology” … and yes the #juice is good null … hard to feel good without it.
 
i #LoaSwim

I’ll let you find the 1-pager .  I have no desire to publish the whole thing which would probably mire thing deep in some sort of RWG. It’s p. 343 volume 3. My copies of vol 3 – extremely rare – only ~ 3 left would break spine if I tried to scan it.  BTW M stands for mythos – which is why it came up here.

yeah i think i kew what you meant.