Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

@Nungali regarding the zoroastrian principles you qouted, would you like to share some on your journey to getting less angrimanu and ahura Mazda (forgive my spelling)

🙋‍♂️ link?

I appreciate this. Even tho i see him as mostly a mythological being, i think his sayings are beautifull and the narrative of forgiveness, sacrifice and ressuraction as powerfull. I also belive in God as in a singualar, transcendent deity. The trinity is a good concept aswell. If that makes me Christian i do not know. I think it is undeniable that the church is a hoax and all that, and all my knowledge of the bible is just what i have picked up naturally by living in a traditional western country. When it comes to the more lulu part of scripture i just throw them in the bin. But in the bigger picture, how can you hate a guy who said (well, he probally did not, but at least it is attributed to him,) said stuff like this: I know barley anything about judaism or islam tho. This might just be my perfection, but i get the sense they are often reluctant to talk about their faith with outsider. ———— and by all means, no pressure, If you intend this to be a eastern forum that is of course fully up to you.

From a historic point of view, i think its influence can not be undetstated. You can not talk about «the western mind» without mentioning christianity, even If the person is not a beliver personally. Same goes for islam in the mid east and, i assume, for judaism and eastern belief. «I am the alpha and omega» edit: speaking for my self, i grew up in a nation where only 30% belive in god and had zero dogma pushed down my throat, but the Christ narrative is still ingrained in me.

I was searching a bit, and found someone saying that this «thing» or maybe «lack of thing» that daoism is, can not be described. Fair enough, putting reality in to concepts and words is reductive, but how can i, as an outsider, get a sense of something that can not be named, described or defined? I will take a look at the links at a later date, but will be busy for a while 🤓

Say that to Yahwe or Kellogs

But that leads to a further, but maybe more fruitfull question, what does that consist of? I feel «happiness» is to hollow and fleeting to be the answer. I study economics right, and i dont know why it took me so long to realize that i hate 80% of it. I think i just liked the sense of «going somewhere,» but now i would choose a meaningfull job with 30k over «white-snip» one with 100k. Could i have a word with him? Ah im complaining, it goes up and down i guess. ____________ I think the argument for free will i rather weak, so in a way i think we are just observeres. Even observing «descisions.» I listened to a podcast with Elon Musk, where he said that the reason for a simulation would be that «the creator» didnt know what would happen.

Considering that everything is precievied, analyzed and interperted in our own mind, is anything at all objective, or is it just a dream?

meaning /ˈmiːnɪŋ/ noun what is meant by a word, text, concept, or action. Edit: purpose /ˈpəːpəs/ noun 1. the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. "the purpose of the meeting is to appoint a trustee"

Can a sense of meaning ever be objective?

Come to think about it, im not sure i really understand what meaning acctually means. Like, from the perspective of man fish and deer are put in the «human food-categori.» I doubt fish and deer agree. edit: fixing my uenglush (autocorrect messes it up somethime)

Strong postbiity, but then we are left with nihilism, and im not sure im strong enough to handle that. The few times ive truly felt a «purpose» is in romantic relationships. After my period of sickness however, i am more isolated then ever before.

@Nungali is beehive the meaning of Life?

Could the meaning of life be discovered in silence and mindfullness? Does anyone here feel that they have found it, or are we just flying on a rock in a massive universe?

So, Jung said it was in the darkest period you discover you purpose. I feel i am in one of my Harder periods now. I feel lost. To Jung, the meaning of life was finding something youd be willing to sacrifice you life for, and becomning who you are (individuation). Like oak «seed» is supposed to evolve into a magnificent oak.

I think this is a good point of view. On surface level they seem dogmatic, boring, even insane, but i do think gnosticism, sufism, mystical jewish traditions are interresting. It is not that important to me personally, just thought about it since all other major traditions are represented.

So, in what cultures where they common before christianity, did they represent the same, how far can it be thraced back etc.

I will sir, but right now i need to hammer Out 50 Pages in ten days, so… priorites. But i do appreicate it.

Reminds me of the etymology of Wotan, Villi and Ve (Odin and his brothers, creator of mankind), which translates to shamanic fury, the will and the sacred. Thesis, anti-thesis, synthesis. It works for loads of stuff, and it makes sense. I should probally post this in @Nungalis thread, but i havent got around to reading it yet. But i will. Makes sense tho. How we start as one ocean, duality arises from a induviduated observer, a wave in the ocean, and a trinitarian unity is what we are left with when we combine duality and «all is one».

And yes, @Cobie, after a Google search it is clear that it is overwhelmingley considered a fraud, and i understand your concern about confirnation bias

I love the myths and epics and poetry of the indo-europeans. We know they had a concept of a drink that made them immortal/gods: wine of Dionyous, Soma, Mead of poetry… I dont know why i meantioned that, i just think it is cool. Anyway, we know quite a bit of their myths and epics and gods, but it seems to me, their practice (like magic), is for the most part lost? How did the indo-euro pagans seek approach the divine? There is only one of the brances that is still alive, hinduism, so maybe thats a start? Or maybe they did not care so much about religion or the gods, but saw the divine in nature and tried to live life fully.

Dont worry, no reason to say good bye. Just thought it included some historical events that wouldnt have been known at the time (Bronze age collapse) and that the language was older. And i did Ask the opposite question aswell, and admitted that it seems you are correct.

There are some intruging aspects of it though, all tho as you correctly point out, most mainstream academics are sceptical today. I asked chatgdp for some of the reasons it might be real: Certainly, here's the translation of the arguments that suggest the "Oera Linda Book" might be authentic, into English: 1. **Detailed Narratives:** Some proponents claim that the book's detailed and complex narratives are too sophisticated to be purely fictional, especially considering the time of its first presentation. These narratives could indicate a deeper knowledge of history or culture that was unknown at that time. 2. **Lack of Motive for Forgery:** Those arguing for the book's authenticity suggest there was no clear motive for forgery, particularly since there was no apparent financial or personal gain for the author. 3. **Linguistic Characteristics:** Some linguists and researchers have pointed out unique aspects of the language used in the book, which they claim could indicate an origin earlier than the 19th century. 4. **Cultural Resonance:** The fact that the book has had some cultural and historical impact, especially among certain groups in the Netherlands and among some neopagan or nationalist movements, has been used to argue for its significance, if not its authenticity. 5. **Mystique and Occult Interest:** The interest in the book within esoteric and occult circles has sometimes been used as evidence of its unique nature or hidden truths. It's important to note that these arguments are not widely accepted in the scientific community, and most historians and linguists still consider the "Oera Linda Book" to be a forgery. The evidence and methodologies used to support its authenticity have often been criticized as inadequate or flawed. The overwhelming scientific consensus is that the book is a product of the 19th century, rather than an authentic ancient text. —————— shouldnt it be fairly easy to test when a book was written?

Possibly, ill take a look at the previous posts.

Neither am i. I have the sense that christianity is mainly a greek invention, and that both jewdaism and Islam has heavy pagan origin. So does Christianity to be fair, but that seems to be more european pagansism and mithras. Also, from what i have gathered from the quran, they are really not aware of Christian and jewish scripture, and yeah… abrahamic is not a good description, but as a sub-forum i figured it could work.