Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

Baldur, son of Odin, was the most beloved of the gods. He is sometimes reffered to as the norse Jesus. He is beauty personified, and also asscociated with easter. The death of Baldur is one of the more famous stories of the Eddas. Baldur had a dream about his death, and when Odin and Freya (his parrents), got to know about this, traveled far and wide and asked every stone, plant, river, animal and an all other beings to promise not to harm him. They all agreed. As Baldr now had become immortal, the gods made a game out of throwing things at him. Loki (trickster and a jotun, but never the less a god) disguised himself, as tricksters do, and asked Freya: did everything promise not to harm him? To witch she responded yes, everything but the mistletoe, but why worry about something so small and insignificant? Loki, still in disguise, approached the blind god Hothr and gave him an arrow with the tip of a mistletoe, and invited him to join the game. The blind god fired his bow, and Baldr died. All beings where in great distress, because they knew that the death marked the (beginning) of the end, ragnarrok. Fimbulvinter (the great winter, lasting for three seasons) set in. The sun disappears, laws and morals falls away. The struggle of survival. Men starve, brothers fight brothers. The forces of utgard march against the Asgard, and mankind joins the battle as well. The midgard serpent and Thor fights each other, leaving both dead. Fenrir swallows Odin and his men, the einherjar (those who died in battle and went to valhalla). All giants, gods and men die in this battle. The world is submerged in water. Baldr, now in the underworld ruled by Lokis daughter Hel, promised to realise him on the condition that the whole world. Lif and Lifthrasir, destined to survive Ragnarrok, ventured out in time and went on to populate the earth. They worshipped Balder as their main god. Now, there are various accounts, a lot of unknown elements and also errors in my retteling of it, but i think its pretty cool. The brave god of beauty, associated with spring, dies on the hands of a blind men, tricked by a Loki and killed by an overlooked/insignificant plant. When the god of easter dies, the long winter sets in, and all hell breaks loose. The world cries, hell sets loose and both the forces of evil and good is killed. Two humans remain, life, and their main deity is the god of beauty and spring himself... And, lastly, there is a deity that we know almost nothing about. We know that he is the son of Odin, will avenge his father and kill Fenrir, the wolf. Fenrir is both the son of Loki, and Loki is at times called Fenris Fenrir. Fenrir (Old Norse 'fen-dweller')[3] or Fenrisúlfr (Old Norse "Fenrir's wolf", often translated "Fenris-wolf"), kind of poetic, no?

Indo-European Cosmology Sometimes I've pondered how our ancestors viewed gods: whether they were literal "men in the sky" whom they worshipped, or if they had a more sophisticated understanding. Therefore, I'll explore this a bit here. In mythological context, "cosmology" refers to the study of how the universe, cosmos, was created and structured according to a specific cultural or religious belief system. Cosmology in mythology usually explores how the world came into being, how it operates, and how it's organized, based on the mythological narratives and beliefs of a particular culture or religion. The great void Völuspá (trans. Bellows): Sea nor cool waves nor sand there were Earth had not been, nor heaven above, But a yawning gap, and grass nowhere. Rigveda 10:129 (trans. Doniger): There was neither non-existence nor existence then there was neither the realm of space nor the sky which is beyond... There was neither death nor immortality then. There was no distinguishing sign of night nor of day. Hesiot: It was said that in the beginning of time there was chaos. Chaos existed without form or purpose. And from chaos there came Gaia who was the earth and who created all the land. She was the primordial being of the earth and she would give birth to the heavens, who was known as Uranus. Click to expand... So, from all these traditions we see clear similarities, about how the world was created from nothing. The beginning of the universe, or everything, is so unthinkable for us that nobody can do it any better. In Norse mythology, the creation narrative goes something like this: Ginnungagap describes the primordial state of infinite emptiness or abyss in Norse mythology. It's a state of total disorder and infinity that existed before the universe was created. In Ginnungagap, there is nothing except the potential for creation. From Ginnungagap arose two realms, Niflheim and Muspelheim. Creation narrative: In Norse mythology, especially in the poem "Voluspá" in the Elder Edda, the creation of the world is described. Creation starts with Ginnungagap and continues with the two realms, Niflheim and Muspelheim, coming into existence. In contrast to Muspelheim, which is the realm of fire and heat, Niflheim is the realm of ice and cold. The name "Niflheim" comes from the Old Norse word "Nifl," meaning "mist" or "fog," and "heim," meaning "world" or "home." It's in the meeting between these that the first beings come into existence. The cosmic cow Audhumbla licks the giant Ymir (the devourer) out of the ice, and he is slaughtered by the three brothers Odin, Vili, and Ve, who shape the earth out of his body parts. Thus, the universe was created by "sacrificing" chaos and transforming it into order. We see a very similar symbolism in the Greek creation narrative. Logos, Chaos, and Cosmos Zoroastrianism shares certain concepts that can be compared to the idea of a cosmic order or principle. In Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda is the supreme god, representing goodness, light, and truth. Ahura Mazda is the creator of the universe and the source of all goodness and order. In this understanding, Ahura Mazda can be regarded as a form of cosmic principle or logos governing the universe toward goodness and justice. Zoroastrianism also teaches about the struggle between good (Ahura Mazda) and evil (Angra Mainyu or Ahriman). In Norse mythology, certain concepts can be compared to the idea of a cosmic order or principle. In Norse mythology, there is a belief in fate or "ørlög" that governs the universe. Ørlög can be seen as a form of cosmic destiny or order that affects all actions and events. Destiny is woven by Norns, who are the goddesses who determine fate. The word "chaos" originates from Greek mythology and philosophy. It comes from the Greek word "χάος" (pronounced "khaos"), meaning "void," "abyss," or "disorder." In Greek mythology, chaos referred to the original state of disorder and emptiness that existed before the universe was created. In Hesiod's work "Theogony," as mentioned earlier, chaos is described as the original state where everything was in disorder, and nothing was defined or organized. It was only through cosmic forces and divine action that chaos was shaped and structured, and the universe took shape. Etymologically, the word "chaos" comes from the Greek verb "χαίνω" (pronounced "khaino"), meaning "to yawn open," "to gape," or "to make empty." The word "cosmos" also comes from Greek, from the word "κόσμος" (pronounced "kosmos"). Originally, it had a broad meaning referring to world order, beauty, and harmony. Etymologically, it's related to the verb "κοσμέω" (pronounced "kosmeo"), meaning "to arrange" or "to adorn." In Greek philosophy, the term "cosmos" was used to describe the ordered and harmonious structure of the universe. This included both the physical world and the moral and social order. According to this philosophy, the cosmos was an expression of perfect harmony and balance. I've read Aurelius' meditations where he describes "unright" actions, behavior, and conduct as "ungrammatical (that which goes against "all-nature")." Since logos (order) also means word, I find this interesting. In the beginning was Logos, and Logos was with God, and Logos was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made. In him was life; and the life was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not. Concept of God The fundamental Indo-European root for divine creation is *dheh1, meaning "to set in place, lay down, or establish", as evidenced in the Hittite expression nēbis dēgan dāir ("... established heaven (and) earth"), the young Avestan formula kə huvāpå raocåscā dāt təmåscā? ("What skillful artificer made the regions of light and dark?"), the name of the Vedic creator god Dhātr, and possibly in the Greek name Thetis, presented as a semi-divine goddess in Alcman's poetry. The concept of the cosmic egg, symbolizing the primordial state from which the universe arises, is also found in many Indo-European creation myths. A similar description of the appearance of the universe before the act of creation is also found in the Vedic, Germanic, and partly in the Greek tradition. The basic word for "god" in Proto-Indo-European is *deiwós ("celestial"), itself a derivative of *dei- ("to shine, be bright"). On the other hand, the word for "earth" (*dʰéǵʰōm) has roots in both "earthly" and "human", as evidenced particularly in the Latin cognates humus and homo. This suggests a hierarchical perception of humanity's status in relation to the gods, confirmed by the use of the term "mortal" (*mr̩tós) as a synonym for "human" as opposed to the never-dying gods in Indo-European traditions. The idea is expressed in the Homeric phrase "of the immortal gods and of men who walk on earth". (wiki) A Monistic Understanding of Gods So, these are just my thoughts, but I suspect that Indo-European traditions operated with a monistic or pantheistic understanding of gods, rather than a polytheistic one. Dyeius Pater (sky-father) gave rise to a variety of gods, illustrated below: Odin was known as All-father. Prajapati is also known as "Father of all creatures", and his role as a creator figure and deity with a central role in cosmology can be compared to Odin's role as Allfather in Norse mythology. Zeus plays a similar role in Greek mythology. My theory is that all gods (their offspring) are aspects of this one god - the Allfather who gave life to everything, and not literally a "man in the sky." Hymn to Zeus – Cleanthes, ca. 3th century bc Translated by Stephen Hanselman Ill end it with a reconstuction of the indo-european creation myth done by David Anthony, «the horse, the wheel and the language» p. 132: Sources: some wiki articles (can link if somebody wants), a little use of chatgpt, the ones mentioned in texts.

@steveid like to lurk around If possible

Ich weiss, I am not asking about spesific, but general experience. There is a reason I am asking.

Speaking of intellectual ability:

Anyone bragging about it is retarted. That being said, in fairness it does measure problem solving ability very well, and does correlate strongly to academic and career achievement. What it does not, is say anything about more important stuff like wisdom, rationality, empathy, social skills… list goes on

Come to think about it, 2.4 billion belive that, so it might be the most popular opinion of all time. I am only Christian in the sense that as an european, it feels easier to me to understand then more foreign religions. But as said, all path worthy of its name point at the same thing. This is Whats called mysticism, is it not?

Unpopular opinion: yall need Jesus. The truth, the way and life, none enter the kingdom but trough him.

The vocals of this man…

Probally - generational and lazyness

Virtue ethics ressonates deeply with me. I belive it is true, and the path to a life well lived. I know shamefully little about it, however. So little that i leave it do chatgdp for an introduction: «Virtue ethics is a philosophical approach that emphasizes the development of moral character and virtues such as honesty, courage, and compassion. It focuses on the moral agent rather than specific actions or consequences, aiming for individuals to cultivate virtuous traits and habits that lead to ethical behavior. This approach traces its origins back to ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle, who believed that living a virtuous life leads to eudaimonia, or flourishing.» I am hoping to hear your thoughts on it, how to live, a deeper understanding etc. A poorly written thread, but I hope it can lead to a productive discourse.

I think questions are more usefull than answers, young socrates. Answers can be wrong, questions can not. Friedrich Nietzsche

I have only read a few pages, but it is incredebilly well written. Just wanted to share how he discribes the initial capture (his exact age is not mentioned, but he is obviously a child): I am hooked, and will probally finish it in a day or two, and then come back with a review. Fascinating stuff.

Sounds perfect, thank you

These imortal words, inscrived at the temple of Apollo, Delphi has ressonated and inspired countless wise men aswell as the Intellectually challenged, as my self. It is seen by many as the only and most important «commandnent.» What does it mean to you?

I agree, but you can tune in to it by focusing on breath for instance, dont you think?

And if the elements themselves suffer nothing by their perpetual conversion of one into another, that dissolution, and alteration, which is so common unto all, why should it be feared by any? Is not this according to nature? But nothing that is according to nature can be evil. (…) You came into the world as a part. You will vanish in that which gave you birth, or rather you will be taken up into its generative reason by the process of change. (…) If souls survive death for all eternity, how can the heavens hold them all? Or for that matter, how can the earth hold all the bodies that have been buried in it? The answers are the same. Just as on earth, with the passage of time, decaying and transmogrified corpses make way for the newly dead, so souls released into the heavens, after a season of flight, begin to break up, burn, and be absorbed back into the womb of reason, leaving room for souls just beginning to fly. This is the answer for those who believe that souls survive death. (…) 23. Everything is fitting for me, my Universe, which fits thy purpose. Nothing in thy good time is too early or too late for me; everything is fruit for me which thy seasons, Nature, bear; from thee, in thee, to thee are all things. The poet sings: 'Dear city of Cecrops', and will you not say: 'Dear city of God'? ― Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Thank you, @stirling. Id like to clarify a few things. It is not that I do not belive in "higher states" or the possibility of everything suddenly becomming clear and a deep sense of unity. In fact, I have experienced it. I think I more so have a problem with the term, trying to "teach it," and the idea of it being constant and everlasting bliss. Trying to teach it, and trying to achieve it, does in my opinion only complicate and lead to confusion. It makes it a chase, and make it sounds grander then it is (IMO), when inner peace in many ways is giving in, to stop looking, to accept. Do I make sense? As mentioned, I too have felt this deep sense of peace and unity. But it happened out of the blue, it passed relativley quickley and to complicate things further: shortly after I went psychotic haha. I agree very much that it is not limitied to buddhism, or any other teaching. I think you find the theme of "higher counciousness" in every faith/philosophy worthy of its name. Hinduism, christian heaven, sufism, buddhism ofc... Take one of my favorite verses of norse writing. This is from Havamal stanza 137-138 (havamal = sayings of the high one, aka Odin.) I know that I hung on a windy tree nine long nights, wounded with a spear, dedicated to Odin, myself to myself, on that tree of which no man knows from where its roots run. No bread did they give me nor a drink from a horn, downwards I peered; I took up the runes, screaming I took them, then I fell back from there Then i fell back from there... I find it hard to articulate why, but I think that a sense of unity is nesserily fleeting and that a life long feeling of peace/unity is impossible. I think unity in a way implies duality, - - = +. As said, maybe I make no sense, but I have already said that talking about it is (IMO) useless. It happens when it happens, if it happens. Maybe it is one of those things that can only be pointed at. From the gnostic gospel of Thomas: (3) Jesus said, "If those who lead you say to you, 'See, the kingdom is in the sky,' then the birds of the sky will precede you. If they say to you, 'It is in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is inside of you, and it is outside of you. When you come to know yourselves, then you will become known, and you will realize that it is you who are the sons of the living father. But if you will not know yourselves, you dwell in poverty and it is you who are that poverty (97) Jesus said, "The kingdom of the father is like a certain woman who was carrying a jar full of meal. While she was walking on the road, still some distance from home, the handle of the jar broke and the meal emptied out behind her on the road. She did not realize it; she had noticed no accident. When she reached her house, she set the jar down and found it empty." (113) His disciples said to him, "When will the kingdom come?" 11 "It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying 'here it is' or 'there it is.' Rather, the kingdom of the father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it." Isha Upanishad, verse 16: 16. O Sun, sole traveller of the Heavens, controller of all, Surya, son of Prajapati remove thy rays and gather up thy burning light. I behold thy glorious form; 1 am he, the Purusha within thee. These are some of the texts that ressonates with me. To others they might be meaningless. And what is meaningfull to them might be meaningless to me. Did I make any sense?

Hmmm… I probally have a lot, but some I is better unsaid. Lets see. 1. I think enlighentment (awakening from delusion, Freedom for suffering, constant sense of unity) is impossible/does not exist, needlessy complicates «higher counciousness» and causes a lot of confusion and pain, in having people chase something I dont think can be chased. Even telling people it cant be chased, it is in you, confuses people. The gateless gate. I dont like (or just dont understand) it.. 2. capitalism poisons everything. that is it for now.

This footnote is from «the right to be lazy» (1883,) though i might as well qoute the full chapter, as i think it is relevant:

Civilisation makes humans comodities, cattle. Imagine life in uruk, pure hell If you Ask me. Id prefer life in pre-columbian amazon any day of the weak. Allthough i think things got a little better in Europe when the «slave empires» dissapeared, life under the industrial revolution must have been pure hell. Humans are made for fruits, nuts, fish and meat, not grain. We are supposed to move around and hunt, not sit on a school bench 8 hours a day and the rest on phone/pc. Humans are egalitarian by nature, not enslavers, god kings and mass murderers (warriors). Chris Ryan, author of civilized to death once said: no one gets ptsd from being kind. Edit: health declind massivley in the first civilisations. Violence exploded. Class became thing. Property and raiding, overpopulation… I am convinced that if we accepted that we are animals, and tried to make enviorments to further human flourishing rather then profit, we would be way better of. edit two: I have heard hunther gatheres only «worked» (hunted) for 2-4 hours daily. @Nungali?

I think it made us sick, really. I dont want to get political, so please dont take any offense If you love these things or have a different opinion, but my opinion is that industrialisation, alienation, extreme capitalism and marketing, as well as materialism, poisons everything. In these societies, you are not treated as a human being, but a commodity. If your «cost» is higher then your «benefit,» you are basically worthless. Europe and NA in the 1800s must have been pure hell. Id rather live in the woods or on a farm then in an early factory or mine, no doubt about it. Footnotes [1] At the first Congress of Charities held at Brussels in 1817 one of the richest manufacturers of Marquette, near Lille, M. Scrive, to the plaudits of the members of the congress declared with the noble satisfaction of a duty performed: “We have introduced certain methods of diversion for the children. We teach them to sing during their work, also to count while working.” That distracts them and makes them accept bravely “those twelve hours of labor which are necessary to procure their means of existence.” Twelve hours of labor, and such labor, imposed on children less than twelve years old! The materialists will always regret that there is no hell in which to confine these Christian philanthropic murderers of childhood. question to mods: is it possible to add a poll with: a) are you western b ) eastern c) other and D) is there a schism?

Very interresting. How did you come to this realization? Edit: for me, early hindu texts like the bhagavad gita and upanishads changed my perception of myself. I think they are brilliantly and clearly written. Few other texts... no other text (I have read) acctually, has been able to do that so masterfully for me. They also happens to be the only hindu texts ive read, so I think I should read more

Double haha