Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Categories 649
- OBE/Astral Projection 4
- Demonology 20
- Alchemy 22
- Magick 35
- Hypnosis 22
- Movies & Entertainment 31
- Tarot 5
- Gallery 4
- Posting - General Help 9
- Crop Circles 3
- Dowsing 3
- Mystery 102
- Conspiracy Theories 27
- UFOs and ETs 22
- News & Current Events 73
- Psychic Protection 10
- Psychic Training 26
- Remote Viewing 3
- Time Travel 12
- Reiki 34
- Meditation 20
- Past Lives 42
- General 120
Comments
Save
Rene Guenon got fooled. He's talkin' about "this duality betweeen the
Purusa and Prakrti on the hindu tradition or, just to use another expressin'
, that between the "essence" and "substance". These two are about to be
'nderstood as the two poles of any manifestation..."
"Bad idea jeans !" : Prakrti is "matter in its aspect "Mula-Prakrti",
which 's got its mythologykal correpondent in "Mu-Deva", wrongly considered
as "inphernal Shakti".
Prakrti and Purusha are, in fact, con-substantial and indivisible, and
maybe Guenon ment in his statement Maha-Purusha and Mula-Prakrti which are
trully 2 poles (as in Sahasrara and Muladhara).
More : " This way, there' s "essence" and "substance", whether for a
world, meanin' a state of existence determined by certain special conditions
(?!?- dha ... what ?!? - my note), whether for a bein' considered as
particular or even for every each and one of this bein' states, meanin' any
manifestation of this bein' onto the levels of the existence.."
Wrong again (I love this game !) : it' s an absurd definition of "the
world" ("F*ck the entire world !...." - Eminem, I just don' t give a f*ck) -
the only state of existence of a ( ! ) world is given by that particular
world' s state of counsciousness (there' s no such thing as strictly
energetyk or materyal world).
"Understood like this relative way and especially in comparison with the
particular beings, the essence and the substance are basically the same
thing with what the scolastyk philopsophers named as "form" and "matter". "
No, it ain't like that.
1.Matter = Mula - Prakriti and 2. Form = Rupa ; 1 + 2 = the visible
reality, strictly traditional fact.
"(...) we'll add that all that's named "actin'" and "potential", in
aristotelicyanway,alsocorresponds to the essence and the substance ; these two
terms are liable to a more extensyve aplication than that of "form" and
"matter" ; but, basically, tosaytere' s in any bein' a mixture of act and
potential means the same thin, 'cause the act is in itself what participate
to the essence, and the potential what participate to the substance (...)"
No. The act = potential, essence = substance.
It' s like this : an atom of hydrogen remains the same, no matter how
many atoms of hydrogen make a hidrogenate substance.
An atom of anythin' is identykal with any other 5 atoms of anythin',
'cause it is the ESSENCE OF THEIR SUBSTANCE.
This is "The law of much more" !
https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/14657257_849460238487131_3718279217701691261_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=5b45a7c512ab71e833f1d9e2a75e2402&oe=58D2C953