BardonPraxis Message Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Main Index][Thread Index]
RE: Does Water give form to Fire ?
Message 01605 of 3835
- To: <BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com>
- Subject: RE: [BardonPraxis] Does Water give form to Fire ?
- From: "Monroy, Marco E SI-FSIB" <m.monroy@...>
- Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:09:49 +0200
- Thread-index: AcOYH9o21OvEBQ4lSNeyciqX47NbNgAN1A2Q
- Thread-topic: [BardonPraxis] Does Water give form to Fire ?
NB
I normally do not answer to questions as Rawns comments always gives us a much
better and higher perspective; however this time I could not help myself. When
we attempt to theorize and explain every thing and try to give meaning and
labels to the theory we "totally" miss the point. By doing this we remain in
the physical plane and cant open "other" doors.
The four elements are opposites while Akasha is the centre of them all. Where
does cold ends and heat begins in an eternal thermometer?? IT is known that the
inside of the Sun is extremely cold, yet the outside burns at extremely hot
temperature.. What I am trying to say is that all elements are integrated, and
interdependent, you can not completely isolate one from the others..
Marco
-----Original Message----
From: newbieonekenhobby [mailto:newbieonekenhobby@...]
Sent: 21 October 2003 22:22
To: BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [BardonPraxis] Does Water give form to Fire ?
In Rawn's comments on IIH, I read in the "Theory Section":
<<The magnetic Fluid *gives form* to the Electric force>> (emphasis
mine).
Taking this literally, meaning that the creation deriving from the
Electric force takes actual shape through the influence of the
magnetic Fluid, is it possible to infer that Water gives form to
Fire ?
a) Superficially this looked obvious to me given the attributes of
the respective Elements. But suddenly I was not sure this
was "licit".
b) Since *Water* somewhat looks like an instantiation of the
*Magnetic* Fluid or its concrete manifestation (sorry - I don't find
the words), and the equivalent for Fire, the deduction seems logical
from that angle also
At the same time, since they are not at the same level, and given
the explicit additional attributes of Water and Fire, I was not sure
this was authorized.
What is correct ? Or am I "pedaling besides the bicycle" :-) ? Or
should I wait till level 8 :-( ?
Many thanks.
NB
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=194081.4074964.5287182.1261774/D=egroupweb/S=1705077360:HM/A=1706996/R=0/SIG=11p5b9ris/*http://www.ediets.com/start.cfm?code=30509&media=atkins>
click here
<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=194081.4074964.5287182.1261774/D=egroupmail/S=:HM/A=1706996/rand=563751104>
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
BardonPraxis-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Main Index |
Thread Index