|
Lucifer
Aug 16, 2009 23:50:59 GMT -5
Post by ~Sephity~ on Aug 16, 2009 23:50:59 GMT -5
So please illuminate us on other factors than lucifer.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 17, 2009 0:46:50 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 17, 2009 0:46:50 GMT -5
So please illuminate us on other factors than lucifer. Am I your dear professor, to which you say "Illuminate us of this or that" no I am not. I speak what I so desire to, not of what satisfies your fancy.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 17, 2009 2:25:26 GMT -5
Post by ~Sephity~ on Aug 17, 2009 2:25:26 GMT -5
My apologies of being too blunt, may I say that we would much appreciate you joining in on more of the boards than a single aspect. I didn't mean to offend you, if i did. If you speak of what you want to, then why do you wish to only speak of lucifer instead of other topics as well? I appreciate your point of view on the lucifer board and would like to see what you think of some of the other things here.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 17, 2009 6:50:50 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 17, 2009 6:50:50 GMT -5
I usually only speak of things which interest me, those which hold no relevance to my current state of being and reality, I make no incentive to pursue them.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 17, 2009 16:42:23 GMT -5
Post by KG on Aug 17, 2009 16:42:23 GMT -5
I admire a lot of what you have said here. You are right on many counts... and I can't say you are ever really wrong, just that I do not understand the source of it.
Yes the theory of reality is a slippery slope. It really has no definition, and there is always the question, what is real? For some it is material, for others emotional, and for others still spiritual... and never will these three theories and their theorists agree on any definition of reality.
Very true. I am both content, in my world, and curious aoout others. That is why we have this forum to compare notes on our spiritual and astral experiences.
Yes, balance is very important, but what is this fire you speak of. There are many kinds of fire. There is cleansing fire (which burns the chaff but leaves the wheat), destroying fire (which utterly destorys), fire that does not consume (as in the burning bush) There is the warm glow of controled fire (campfire) I think you said your fire consumes, but in what way? Does it burn slowly like a candle using all the energy of your life, there for you to enjoy until you pass of old age, or does it eat you alive, quickly and frighteningly? Is it consuming as one eats to live, absorbing what it needs and leaving the rest? Or does it come suddenly, and take without a reason?
I suppose the passing of time burns away existance, at least to our perceptions. Is that like your fire? Or are was speaking of an appocolypse or armegeddon?
But when you speak of how Lucifer feels you seem so sure that is how he feels. Now I do not know how Lucifer feels, or what he thinks. I have never spoken with him to ask him, and I do not empath his pain or pleasure, because I do not know him. I know others, but not him personally. I was, I think we were all wondering if you knew him, since you speak of him so easily, or if you know some entity who knows him? Or are you speaking of an internal and personal Lucifer? Like an inspiration that you have named Lucifer?
Minus the charcoal soot and red rain I feel the same. I can relate to hearing the sound of your name with every step on the cobblestone walk, and I know what you mean about the lantern. What you say about God is inspiring. "He is my purpose and my existance manifest, for he is my Will." I really love that. May I quote you?
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 21, 2009 7:15:05 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 21, 2009 7:15:05 GMT -5
Do you ever just sit there as all life and reality moves about you, with each reality laid out before you, and the choices are set upon your hands to choose which reality you so desire to navigate to.
For the infinite of realities swirls about all, it is the individual who chooses which reality to embrace, which life to experience. For every life experienced by you, all the other possibilities are simultaneously playing out and in by yet again you, but I think not all are aware of this and focus only on the direction they are facing. How with every moment the many shards, shadows, and lantern bearers of your own self are dancing with one another in synchronized fashion. For one moment you are in their shoes and the next moment they are in yours, eternally fluctuating.
I once asked a question, if all have a counterpart, then where is that individuals counterpart? The words put forth in response were "What if that individual's counterpart were its' own self?".
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 21, 2009 19:02:52 GMT -5
Post by Xavrael on Aug 21, 2009 19:02:52 GMT -5
incidentally, you could not be your own counterpart because in all of the realities, you are still you. Different situations and life choices, but you're you. In the same place and in all places, dead, alive,and neither.
Still. If looked at a in a different way - a person's counter part (if talking about it in a...soul mate type fashion) could very well be another part of themselves. that isn't them. but is similar if not cut from the same cloth.
or something. Never really matters honestly. Most only work in one "reality" anyway. Living within the consequences of each choice, in a linear path in a very non linear web of choices.
For most, there is no looking back. or to the sides. or up or down when it comes to multidimentionality (Yes. new word. Bwaha!) and alternet realities which really arn't alternate at all, so much as ripples given life with each decision made. But again. Doesn't really matter. there is the stone path. and there are the winding alleys inbetween, made by others. Only one is the original road though!
Again. Doesn't matter. (yes. i know i've said this multiple times. and for whatever reason it makes sense. Regardless of any and all knowledge regarding these other places, Most, only deal with this one. *shrug* everything else is... well. A lot like the 20th dimensional being (exaggeration) trying to appear as such to 3 dimensional beings, and the 3rd dimensional being actually figuring out exactly what the hell is looking at him strangely.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 22, 2009 5:01:34 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 22, 2009 5:01:34 GMT -5
Who you are is warped by the one shaping perception, you, and every whisper and shade of you in this world, reality, dream scape, and among the infinite, is all one and the same. Every individual, you, and all individuals of this world, are one and the same, all counterparts to your own self.
This entire world, and this entire reality is but a grain of salt in the jar that sits upon the table, and just as this entire omniverse is but a grain of salt, a sphere of sand, so too is it a counterpart unto its own self, unto all the other grains of sand and salt which lay above and beneath it and to every angle of space which so folds upon it like a blanket most warm.
The more warped by Will reality is, so too the more your own counterpart you are.
You, and every entity you have ever grazed and has so grazed upon you, are all one and the same, from murderers to peace keepers, all one and the same, for you are composed of both and a plethora more. Soul mates are not "destined", they are a concept which is willingly embraced by individuals sharing a mutual need. Your cards passed to another's hand, and so too theirs passed to yours, does it equate to their hand going directly to you, and yours to them? Why only if you so choose to perceive it that way, but your Aces and Kings trickle from them like rain falling upon a most wide spread civilization, for all soaked and hazed in one degree and another.
Linear paths on a web of non linear choices, a maze with an infinite of hallways, which taken is chosen by the wanderer. You may so walk the web as long as you so need it, but an illusion only serves it's purpose for as long as perception fails to perceive that which is not in your sight.
Alternate realities are but a concept, a simple word used to convey thoughts within your very head, the furnace of your imagination and contemplation. Up, down, right, left, they are but views divided, if you so choose to perceive fragmented then do so with utmost joy. But I perceive not so, for the vision which flows forth from me is a sphere of light most inverted, an infinite of retraction outward in all reality. And so as it retracts outward, expanding, it so too is contracting upon its' own self infinitely bringing all together as One single, grain.
A single blade of grass understands you more so then you do your own self.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 22, 2009 13:12:06 GMT -5
Post by Kata Samoes on Aug 22, 2009 13:12:06 GMT -5
I disagree, Cassiel.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 22, 2009 17:00:38 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 22, 2009 17:00:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 23, 2009 19:45:25 GMT -5
Post by KG on Aug 23, 2009 19:45:25 GMT -5
Cassiel and Xav, I think Clarifying a confusing point may get you both on the same page for part of this. Counterpart has many defintions... which do each of you mean. counterpart - a person or thing having the same function or characteristics as another counterpart - a duplicate copy wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwncounterpart - Either of two parts that fit together, or complement one another; A duplicate of a legal document; One which resembles another; One which has corresponding functions or characteristics en.wiktionary.org/wiki/counterpartcounterpart - perform similar functions in totally different realms typelogic.com/pairs.htmlPersonally I think that while a person can perform a similar function to another being, and be very similar to another person, empath another person, mimic another person, and even channel another person, they are still not that person, and there are subtle differences between even the most similar individuals. All this is just words... which are inadaquate. Have either of you ever read 'Cloud of the Unknowing' It was written by an annonomous 14th century monk in Latin... it was translated word for word in English. I read it, and honestly my point is not so much about what he said, but what he was unable to say. I have to say that it was the most difficult read I have ever attempted. Latin has a different sentence structure, so it is Subject object verb. Not subject verb object like english, so a word for word translation out of Latin is like Yoda speak. That was not the problem though. I read a lot of stuff translated out of Latin, and I have even translated things out of Latin before. The problem was that the Monk could not find words to express what he was trying to describe. He was a visionary, who spent most of his time in an extatic state. He was so excited about what he saw, but he was unable to describe it in words. Words fail in the face of the ineffable. I still highly recomend the book. I think it would be beneficial to anyone interested in spiritual things, but I won't lie it is hard to plow through. Words are tricky... fullness, empiness, universal, monotheism, polytheism, God is nothing (Nervana,) God is everything (The whole universe,) energic view vs. entity based view... there is eastern thought and western thought, and modern thought and ancient thought... which is true... well I've seen enough to know that I think all of it is true, and no one way of looking at it is completely right. Do you know why that is, because everyone of these theories is describing the exact same thing with words... translated through a flawed human brain, which is incapable of processing what we experience into mere words... there is always another way to look at things, and given time we always see the other half. There is no true and absolute statement about ourselves, that is not matched by an equally true opposite idea... and when we realize that we realize that explaining ones self is an egoic practice, explaining God is impossible, and explaining anything else is all about POV... yet we have to communicate.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 23, 2009 19:53:11 GMT -5
Post by Wunderkind on Aug 23, 2009 19:53:11 GMT -5
That's why I think birds do it better. Words don't exist in the same sense that they do for a human; just emotion, pictures, and colors- and sound, but that's different, too. Ever tried debating with a bird? It's hard. ;D And trees... plants in general, but especially trees for their age and root connection. I wouldn't debate or argue with a tree, because for them it is also different. Their motives aren't structured to deal with a debate in the most common sense. Which then pans into:
I don't agree. Plants know things, and they filter this information out in the most fascinating of ways, but it isn't about understanding anything. Their state of mind isn't to understand, it's to be. For them, you can't have one with the other. You either understand, or you are. To be is to not understand, and in understanding you aren't any more.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 23, 2009 20:06:47 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 23, 2009 20:06:47 GMT -5
That's why I think birds do it better. Words don't exist in the same sense that they do for a human; just emotion, pictures, and colors- and sound, but that's different, too. Ever tried debating with a bird? It's hard. ;D And trees... plants in general, but especially trees for their age and root connection. I wouldn't debate or argue with a tree, because for them it is also different. Their motives aren't structured to deal with a debate in the most common sense. Which then pans into: I don't agree. Plants know things, and they filter this information out in the most fascinating of ways, but it isn't about understanding anything. Their state of mind isn't to understand, it's to be. For them, you can't have one with the other. You either understand, or you are. To be is to not understand, and in understanding you aren't any more. Each perception is centered around the individual wielding it, to view their own self different from others. Such as a individual viewing their self different from a blade of grass, a tree. Just as individuals so believe they understand others more so then the individuals understand their own self, just as you have spoken for the single individual blade of grass, stating what is and what is not for that individual, as if you know that individual more so then it does its' own self. As too does the blade of grass perceive you, knowing you more so then you know your own self. I view that the state of being, the mind, the thought, contemplation, the existence of a individual blade of grass, is one and the same as you. Humans, spirits, trees, dogs, ants, clouds, time, space, oblivion, ,concept and lack of concept, God, is all one and the same to me. A single individual with who I so speak and dance.
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 23, 2009 21:12:59 GMT -5
Post by Wunderkind on Aug 23, 2009 21:12:59 GMT -5
I'd also like to know your answer to Kim's question on what you mean by counterpart. That's why I think birds do it better. Words don't exist in the same sense that they do for a human; just emotion, pictures, and colors- and sound, but that's different, too. Ever tried debating with a bird? It's hard. ;D And trees... plants in general, but especially trees for their age and root connection. I wouldn't debate or argue with a tree, because for them it is also different. Their motives aren't structured to deal with a debate in the most common sense. Which then pans into: I don't agree. Plants know things, and they filter this information out in the most fascinating of ways, but it isn't about understanding anything. Their state of mind isn't to understand, it's to be. For them, you can't have one with the other. You either understand, or you are. To be is to not understand, and in understanding you aren't any more. Each perception is centered around the individual wielding it, to view their own self different from others. Such as a individual viewing their self different from a blade of grass, a tree. Just as individuals so believe they understand others more so then the individuals understand their own self, just as you have spoken for the single individual blade of grass, stating what is and what is not for that individual, as if you know that individual more so then it does its' own self. As too does the blade of grass perceive you, knowing you more so then you know your own self. The thing is, as you say, "as if." I don't Know or Understand the blade of grass better than it Knows itself, and it does not Know me better than I Know myself. I do know what it has chosen to tell me about itself, from what it Knows of itself. And even if I did truly understand them on the same level or better than they did so themselves, I would not translate into something that could be easily read (as Kim has mentioned). I speak for the plants fully acknowledging that translating all these things into words, so much is said and what remains is still so little. "Spoken for" does not equal "Know." It's odd to think of it this way, but you sound a lot like a young tree in terms of perception, or one of those Nigerian e-mails in terms of communication. How long have you been perceiving this?
|
|
|
Lucifer
Aug 23, 2009 21:55:28 GMT -5
Post by cassiel on Aug 23, 2009 21:55:28 GMT -5
Perception is what you make it of it, an illusion crafted by Will.
Regardless of what "I" convey when I so speak the word counterpart, it does not matter to me. For each individuals desire will shape their perception of what counterpart is to them and others, regardless of what it truly is.
For as you have already stated, you so speak without knowing, to hear without understanding is as knowledge without wisdom.
|
|