Give Thanks for the responses...
ArkI, I appreciate the introspective nature of the I's response. And your good nature is what common sense should guide us all towards, but I suppose commandment and teachings are there to guide us in the same way. As I said before, many a man will piss his life away, some need inspiration in so many different ways; while some men are naturally inclined towards the Right, yet even if this is any of the I out there, where there is not room for improvement, then the final product of human potential is. Though our final potential in completion can exist in the human body for some time, it will not forever. Our lives are here NOW, for the moment. I would absolutely advocate every I to focus on that alone, yet appreciating the Now will inevitably draw One towards appreciation of the future. Realizing that it is not this body that rules us might be of use to some.
I did begin this reasoning as a means to explore the symbology of some of His Majesty's thoughts, physically manifested. They must have been for some purpose, but if it means bringing up the "death" word then we have to make the word mum...
the I said:"If I were to focus on one of the theories of death, which theory should I believe? The theory that appeals most to I, or the theory that appeals to most? I choose to focus on Life and leave theories to others."
Perhaps His Majesty had direct knowledge,not a theory, and maybe...just maybe...there are some clues, and maybe some of the clues are quite obvious. The clues which I've been speaking on are pointing directly to a view of mortality that, as I've said before, does not end with "death", but is rather a transformation from the mortal body to the immortal soul, something which I imagine even those participating in "my death conversation" think about on a regular basis.
the I said: "If Selassie I did talk about it, it is very unlikely that He went into an in depth conversation about it, as you are discussing."
The planning that went into the process of creating the first sarcophagus, the removing of that pair, the designing and creation of the second pair, surely required some "in depth" thought if not "in depth" conversation. His Majesty's interview, if One wants to call it that, with Ms.Fallaci and His comments on the deaths of His son and His Empress are completely related, but at this point I'm not trying to argue about this aspect of His Majesty, but all are revealing. It is not my intention to draw anyone to some sky God, for there is no such thing, but we must look somewhere. Now where should that be, well....if heaven is in the sky, then the birds are in heaven, if heaven is in the sea, then the fish are in heaven, so where should Ones look for the Ancient of Days....Ark I the I has already answered that, and getting the I to see it my way is not what I'm trying to do. I wish we could get a better reasoning going on but the I knows the I Self and it's better to spend the Now on what is important to the I. I do appreciate the I's last post.
Ilee..."Patriarchy as Natural Order"....I'm not sure I want the quarrel, but that's very patriarchal of you. Hermaphroditic God phenomenon as the I calls it is really a reference to the androgynous quality that the Supreme Being possesses and from the beginning of our creation we've been trying to assign human form to it, but as I've been trying to assert, there will be a shift in the form we see ourselves in Now and the form we return to. I know the I knows this, so I'm unsure why the I is hanging on to patriarchy.
SELAM
|
|