Sir Darius the Clairvoyent

Thank you, beautifull Words 

On 17.1.2024 at 1:09 AM, Nungali said:

 

I think he was having an identity crises and wanted some feedback or reassurance  . 

@snowymountains May i ask whats your experience with meditation is, what method you use and so on?

I do not like these terms, as i asscociate it with «alpha bros» preying on insecure teen boys trough YouTube, or fake gurus. However, i have been digging my self into a little bit of hole recently, and there are areas that need some… fixing. 
 

Do you have any rouitine, methods, practice, authors etc. that you follow and reccomend, and how do you approach these things yourself?

The unwise man is awake all night, 
and ponders everything over; 
when morning comes he is weary in mind, and all is a burden as ever.

Havamal, stanza 23

On 15.1.2024 at 4:59 PM, CityHermit! said:

Why would you ask strangers online instead of just reading key texts, which are free, and figuring out what you can on your own, before you find a teacher, if you want to, or can?

Because it is so foreign to me that I dont even have a mental picture of it. Not to mention the lingo; the terms used means absolutley nothing to me, it is just sounds and  letters. Thats why it would be helpfull with a brief intro or reccomendation to further readin, as i did not know where to start. And I got that, so thank you all.
 

It is like university: everything you learn in class available online, but you need a proffesor to tell you what to read, where to begin and to clarify. In addition to that, I prefer conversation with humans to wiki articles.

Anyway, enough justification now : )

On 13.1.2024 at 10:01 PM, Nungali said:

 

yes, it can seem that way  and sometimes I feel like that . But if there isnt  an afterlife and this one life is all we get , that just makes it more precious, important and  wonderful ... dont waste you time guys !  It might be the only one you got .

 

And considering and meditating on that , one might even eventually be able to add  'ecstatic' to one's list of 'appreciations' .

I find it hard to articulate, but i feel convinced that there must be one. I think it is down to two things:

1. fundementally everything is made of the same matter, it only changes form.

2.  Conciousness, the largest mystery there is in my opinion. Can you imaging not excisting? We know that the mind can «create» seemingly real experiences, but we do not know that matter can create coinciousness. 
 

The word «mattee» is interresting as well. It has its roots from latin mater, meaning mother.

The Domain, Not of Matter, but of What Matters

Jordan Peterson

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.
― Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

I do not belive that I, as in the container of flesh and blood people call Mathias, will live on. I definetly hope it doesnt. But i belive councioussnsess is eternal. 
 

_________________________________
 

When you say the philosophers stone, i doubt you are talking about a rock, but rather alchemy. But what do you mean by that?

Sort of a related note. In his writings, he mentions «all-nature,» «cosmic law,» etc. quite a lot. Today, someone might call this the naturalistic falacy, defined as:
 

Quote

The naturalistic fallacy is the belief that something or someone's behavior should be accepted as natural because it occurs in the natural world or fits into what people perceive as normal for their society. This fallacy aims to prove that what is seen as natural is good and what is seen as unnatural is evil.

But is it acctually a fallacy? In my opinion, it has more weight behind then other moral systems, that seems entirely arbitrary to me.

So, I am now in the procces of reading this book. I do not read cover to cover, as it was written not in an attempt to win a pulitzer, but to reflect. This is reflected in the Norwegian tittle of the work: «to my self.»

A little note before i continue: Aurelius wrote in greek, I am reading a Norwegian translation and translating it to english, so it will naturally be flawed.

In the forward (by Viggo Johansen,) he raises the following question: how can a book written by the most powerfull person on the plannet, 1800 years ago, be relavent for us today?

He writers: (…) every evening he (Aurelius) sits down to write, in order to remember who he is - a human. Not an emperor, but a human.

For this reason, stoicism can appeal to the emperor himself, the slave Epiktet, and us. Our shell and roles are vastly different, but we are united in being human, and feel the same love, anger, desire to live authenticly, attempt to live morally and mortality. Since the will is free, we are free as well. We can be forced to act a certain way, but no one but our self controls our will, reactions and thoughts.

What does it mean to be human? Science can not help us here. Science assumed that man and nature is purley material, but Viggo points out that this is just an assumption, and nothing more. A plausible assumption, but and assumption none the less. Wise men and traditions have, however, allways talked about spirit and soul.

Aurelius writers:
«Things can never touch the soul, but stand inert outside it, so that disquiet can arise only from fancies within.»

Allthough we are more advanced technologicaly advanced today, are we any wiser? Do we understand what it is to be human? I would say no. I would even say we are less developted in this aspect. And i think this «book» shows that. It has been read and admired for almost 2000 years, by slaves, commoners and nobility as well - it touches on what it means to be human.

Here are a few qoutes:
 

I will also include Hymn to Zeus, witch was included in the Norwegian edition of meditations. It might be my favorite «poem.»
 

Cleanthes, 331-232bc, Translated by Stephen Hanselman

Any thoughts?

————————————————————-

I made two very similar threads, so ill delete one of them and add them to this:

Havent watched this yet, but educated, unbiased guy:

shall Watch tommorow morning : )

Havent watched this yet, but educated, unbiased guy:

shall Watch tommorow morning : )

On 15.1.2024 at 11:19 PM, Nungali said:

 

They are questions not statements .

 Wonder who Yahwe was asking.. his chosen people, the other tribal gods or the supreme ONE.

Wise advice ans beautifull concept «ikigai».

appreciate it, @blue eyed snake❤️‍🔥

Good evening godt folk,

So, i have recently finished my economics degree. It could lead to decently well paid jobs, but, the problem is: i am not sure if its right for me. I love the theoretical stuff, but when it is all + and - and accounting i desbise it deeply. My options now are: finding a job, taking a few other courses in humaniora and use that to find another or related line of work.
But this is not just about me. Id like to hear your experience, advice, what cources you have felt particularly rewarding (be it money/life view/spiritual... you get my point ; )

3 hours ago, Nungali said:

and the collapse of 'civilisation as we know it '  .

Does this excite you?

I made a little summary on a history forum, where i made the same thread. Thought people here might have a little different perspective however. Anyway:

Scimmed trough some chapters of "A little history of economics" by Niall Kishtainy in order to add some context and flesh to the conversation:



Economics is the study of how societies utilize their resources. Although this is an oversimplification, wealthy societies are successful in producing goods and services, while poorer ones are not. This has nothing to do with laziness, and everything to do with the effective use of resources. Resources are limited, but people's desires are not. Therefore, individuals have to make choices and prioritize their needs based on the costs associated with them.

People work for money, in order to afford what they want, and then we have the financial sector aswell as the goverment as fundemental partipicants of the modern economic system. The modern field of economics was born with capitalism. Pre-capitalism, people relied on working the land, either for themself or for a land lord, hunting and gathering as well as trade and reciprocity. With the first civilisations, we saw division of labour and social hierachies.

For Plato, the ideal economy was not one of markets, but one where people did what they where "born/meant" to do (the whole bronze, silver and gold souls thing). Society should ideally be a close polis/city state ruled by a philosopher king. Wisdom should be pursuied, the wise should rule and pursuit of wealth was viewed with discust. Kings and soldiers (gold and bronze) should not be allowed private property, in fear that it would corrupt them and lead to competition and distrust. Aristotle agreed with this sentiment, but feared that sharing everything would lead to even more competition. People should exchange goods for goods. Money could be a helpfull tool in this regard, but commerce and wealth herding was in his opinion still dubuous and unatural. Money lending was even more disgusting.

"the type of character which results from weath is that of a prosperous fool"
Aristotle

We see similar sentiments by medival christian thinkers. I am sure everyone here knows why only jews did banking in Europe. Then we have the rise feudalism, where the economy was centered around relationship and hierachy (God - king - land lords/nobility - peasants. But still, it was not about profit and greed was despised. The correct selling price for food was not "how much can i possibly get for this" but rather "what is fair".

With developments in technology and a change in attitude, Venice created the first Eruopean, commercial empire since antiquity. At the beggining of the 11th century the pope said that no merchant could ever enter heaven, by the end of it, a merchant with called Homobonus was made a saint.

Somewhere around 1500-1800 mercantalism arose. Basic idea is that a country should export more than they export, and this could be done achieved by interventions like tarrifs. This would bring in precious metals, witch was considered the measure of wealth at the time. The state played a significant role in regulating and controlling trade, often granting special privileges and monopolies to certain merchant companies. In return, these merchants supported and financed the state's economic and colonial endeavors. The state would issue charters and grants to merchant companies, giving them exclusive rights to trade in specific regions or commodities. These companies, such as the British East India Company or the Dutch East India Company, were given significant powers and authority to carry out trade, establish colonies, and even wage wars in certain cases. Mercantalism is often considered the precourser of capitalism.

The word "physiocrat," translated from French to English, means "rule by nature." They originated in 18th-century France, an authoritarian agricultural society where the third estate was heavily taxed and mercantilism was the prevailing economic policy. Mercantilism regarded the amount of precious metals as a measure of a country's wealth, and trade barriers as a means to maximize it. By ensuring that the country exported more than it imported, they also secured a positive flow of precious metals (favorable trade balance). Therefore, domestic production was also protected from foreign competition. Trading privileges were common.

The physiocrats turned this almost upside down. For them, all value stemmed from the harvesting of nature. By increasing the surplus of agriculture, a society became richer. They considered regulations, high taxation of farmers, and trading privileges as an evil, precisely because it ate away at the aforementioned surplus. This "hands-off" idea has been described as "laissez faire," which can be translated to "allow to do."

Francois Quesnay described a model where the surplus from agriculture created ripple effects in society at large. The farmers (the productive class) paid rent to landowners. The landowners (the unproductive class) traded with craftsmen (the sterile class), who in turn bought grain from the farmers.

The physiocrats are praised for moving away from money and gold as a measure of wealth. However, their view was somewhat narrow, as value was limited to the harvesting of nature, and not the total production of goods and services (GDP) that is often used today.

____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I havent yet touched upon full out capitalism and marxisim, which would be the natural continuation, but to be honest, I got a little tired. Maybe later.

13 minutes ago, Maddie said:

 

Then we would go back to bartering like we did in the stone age. 

That wasnt limited to the stoneage my Friend, first coins was taken in use 600bc

I am really curious about this. Any thoughts?

Asked ChatGPT If there is reason to belive pagan Europe belived in reincarnation:

Here is the translation of the Norwegian text into English:

"There is some historical and archaeological evidence suggesting that certain pre-Christian European cultures might have believed in a form of reincarnation. However, these pieces of evidence are often indirect and open to interpretation. Here are some examples:

1. **Celtic Belief**: Some historical sources, such as the works of the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus and the Roman philosopher and historian Julius Caesar, suggest that the Celts might have believed in reincarnation or the immortality of the soul. Julius Caesar wrote that the Celts believed the soul moved from one body to another after death, which can be interpreted as a form of reincarnation.

2. **Nordic Mythology**: There is less direct evidence for reincarnation in pre-Christian Nordic belief. Some interpretations of the Edda poems and other ancient texts suggest a belief in the continuation of the soul after death, but it is unclear if this refers to reincarnation in the traditional sense.

3. **Greek Philosophy**: Although not technically 'pre-Christian European' in the same cultural context as Celtic or Nordic beliefs, ancient Greek philosophers like Pythagoras and later Plato had ideas that can be interpreted as reincarnation. Plato's works, especially 'Phaedo' and 'The Republic', contain references to the immortality of the soul and reincarnation.

4. **Archaeological Findings**: Some archaeological findings, such as burial customs and ritual objects, have been interpreted as indications of a belief in life after death, but there are rarely clear pieces of evidence for reincarnation.

It is important to note that much of our understanding of pre-Christian European belief systems comes from secondary sources, often written by outsiders (like Roman historians) or from oral traditions that were recorded after the advent of Christianity. Therefore, interpretations of these sources should be taken with a certain degree of caution."

Also asked for relevant articles. Havent read them myself (yet), but If anyone are interrested:

https://www.ancient-origins.net/history/hidden-beliefs-covered-church-resurrection-and-reincarnation-early-christianity-006320
 

https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/afterlife-germanic-concepts

edit: allthough distantly related, it is interresting to note that the closest living tradition to the various european pagan once, is hinduism.

Personally, i think reincarnation is the most «logical» stance on the «afterlife.» Nothing disappear or is created from nothing, it only changes form.

 “From earth you have come, to earth you shall return, and from earth you shall arise.”

Out of curiosity, in pre Christian Europe, belief in reincarnation was common, no?

55 minutes ago, Chang dao ling said:

Yehova is the God in Bible right? And Jesus is his son. 

Weeell… depends on who you Ask haha, and i think it is safer is you Ask @Nungali or @SirPalomides

But yes, Yehova is mentioned and Jesus is said to be the son of God.

3 minutes ago, Nungali said:

... but have you buried the shoe box with the money in it in your back yard yet ?

My doubts overcame me:( any alternatives?

3 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

That one you wrote about  ;  

 

"  .....   He did made me join his cult with help of black magic, where we harras people for their faith and for their faith only of course, (because we are biased and accademics can be wrong (but fictonal Moses cannot)). " 

 

 

Haha yess, id love to learn more. Maybe with time

On 27.11.2023 at 9:36 PM, Nungali said:

in my tradition

What tradition would that be, my friend?