The Matter and Semantic of Spirits.
-
@Bereshith said
"You got 3 gunas, 7 chakras, 10 sephiroth. If you want to qualify entities made up of the Mind/Force/Substance in a way that humans can relate to it, then you need to start there. They provide both the philosophical base and the ability to confirm the attributions through personal experimentation.
But, honestly, now that the correspondences of 777 were brought up (since the above is what they're based on), I wonder what you can add to that but doubt until you yourself have the inner senses to confirm or deny the taxonomy presented there.
Until you have that,* everything *is merely someone else's pet theory of consciousness, eternally assailable by the sword of Empiricism and the shield of relativity."
I'm not sure I want to use esoteric maps for empirical purposes here. The foundation would then have to many assumptions - make sense? Imagine my map is for someone who has no experience in such matters, is cosmologically agnostic (potentially even atheist), and needs a map that can provide them an overview of what they can experience (i.e. thoughts, ideas, feelings) and expand upon those experiences (spirits, subtle energies, healings, etc) while providing an empirical overview of the relationship of consciousness to the content to which it perceives.
-
@ldfriend56 said
"
I'm not sure I want to use esoteric maps for empirical purposes here. The foundation would then have to many assumptions - make sense? "Only if I would agree that the Tree of Life is a "esoteric map" instead of an "empirical map," which I don't.
If a magician's evocation and experience of spirits may be called empirical at all, it is in a limited sense. To the best of my current knowledge, not just anybody can draw the symbols, light the smoke, and say the words with the result that the exact results are produced every time for everybody. If we're talking about Empiricism proper, that's my understanding of what's required to fit its criteria. (possibly discussion-worthy)
However, if we allow ourselves to speak of evocation and the experience of spirits as "empirical" simply because the process relies on experimentation - without the condition that everybody can do it given the proper instructions and tools - then I would argue that the Tree of Life is entirely as "empirical" as the evocation and experience of spirits. It is not entirely philosophical in my experience.
"Imagine my map is for someone who has no experience in such matters, is cosmologically agnostic (potentially even atheist), and needs a map that can provide them an overview of what they can experience (i.e. thoughts, ideas, feelings) and expand upon those experiences (spirits, subtle energies, healings, etc) while providing an empirical overview of the relationship of consciousness to the content to which it perceives."
In my understanding, this is entirely the kind of map the Tree of Life provides. I'm beginning to think that you think the Tree of Life is only a matter of occult dogma. It is a map of "thoughts, ideas, and feelings," complete with the transitional pathways between them. For even more precise classification, one may imagine the entire Tree inside each of its sephiroth. But... It is a map of both the process of manifestation and of the human consciousness - macrocosm and microcosm.
For instance, even if we just take three of the concepts you listed, "thoughts, ideas, feelings," you'd still have to relate them to one another in some fashion. You'll have to determine how a "thought" is different from an "feeling" and have a concept map that suggests how "thoughts" are related to "feelings" unless you just want disconnected categories. And, well, that's what the Tree of Life is.
Anyway, I don't mean to beat you over the head with it, but it does seem like you think it exists in a different category than what you're describing, and I think it's almost exactly what you're describing - in addition to being philosophically valid. But it doesn't have to be all dressed up in Hebrew either...
I'm also glad I got the chance to clarify my thoughts on the empiricism wording. That always gets caught in my lens.
-
Hm, while reading over some of the replies, I did a bit of thinking:
There what the spirit/spirits are no only changes with the system but also at one point a person is in that system.At the outset of a persons spiritual journey, for all intents and purposes, spirits existed outside the person.
Rather, they are outside a persons conscious awareness and control (though, perhaps they may be directed - but that is a slight divergence from my point).
As a person progresses, becomes aware, integrates those entities into their consciousness, for all intents and purposes they become a part of them in whatever fashion suits the spirit(s) in question.This may make it detrimental to hammering out a definitive empirical placement.
As the Adept who says "they are part of me" might confuse and hamper a Neophytes process of developing awareness with the goal of integration.Anywho, I hope I did not add to the confusion.
-
@Frater Potater said
"I'm wondering how much longer we will continue to dress it in language like "spirits" and "demons". I understand that thinking about this too much can strain the personal work, but I also wonder if this is the most progressive way to be approaching the situation (from an empirical point of view)? I hope that as time moves on we can approach a more universal way of relating these things.
The language we currently employ is pretty "loaded". Words like god, demon, or spirit all carry such a heavy connotation. We don't perceive reality the same way as ancient cultures did. We have a much wider amount of information to base our conclusions on. How do we tread this line and find new ways to effectively explore/communicate these ideas with each other, while at the same time avoiding the creation of yet another dogmatic, useless religious system?"
I am also of this opinion, and don't think simply referring to ancient interpretations of the phenomena of "spirits", "demons", "gods" & "angels" is going to get us any further in understanding them.
Crowley's "Method of Science" (and I agree he must have meant empiricism for many reasons) has not even started to make an impact on research on them; his own work was deemed a starting point by him, not an end until the next 2100-year-cycle started imo.
-
@Frater Potater said
"
@Bereshith said
"To the best of my current knowledge, not just anybody can draw the symbols, light the smoke, and say the words with the result that the exact results are produced every time for everybody."What about "if you do certain things, certain results follow"?"
I would ask - Is that intended as a promise for everyone? Is there empirical data to back up that claim if it is understood of a promise for success to everyone? I think it's intended more as a statement of the irrelevance of what one believes about magic while experimenting with the art.
The main difference, as I see it, between Empiricism proper and the empiricism of the magician is that Empiricism proper would demand that anyone can reproduce the results of any experiment - regardless of the degree of their skepticism during the process.
However, in my understanding, many of the experiments of the magician require an element of ...what to call it... affirmative expectation? (faith? belief?) that the operation will be successful. I've tended to make a distinction between experiments that can be successfully be completed by a doubtful person following instructions and experiments that require the affirmative expectation of the experimenter. That fact doesn't make the process of magical experimentation any less experimental, but it does seem to introduce a level of subjectivity that makes me want to make a distinction between what I see as more and less strict versions of empiricism.
Discussion/correction welcome.
@Frater Potater said
"
@Bereshith said
"However, if we allow ourselves to speak of evocation and the experience of spirits as "empirical" simply because the process relies on experimentation - without the condition that everybody can do it given the proper instructions and tools - then I would argue that the Tree of Life is entirely as "empirical" as the evocation and experience of spirits. It is not entirely philosophical in my experience."How do we determine whether or not we've received any information of value? We may be able to check the results with 777, and we may receive a plethora of information about ourselves, and our relation to any given concept on the tree... but this still doesn't answer such fundamental questions as "what is the origin or purpose of existence, the universe, and spirit/spirits?"
Not unless we make a lot of assumptions based on nothing more than what we experience via the brain..."
Well, honestly, this is a digression from what can be known empirically to existentialism. The fact that the original poster had combined both into his expectations was something I tried to point out earlier as a potential frustration. A decision has to be made somewhere along the way as to whether the "Primal Will" is a "Primal Will to Good" or not. I'm not sure I could call that an empirically derivable result.
@Frater Potater said
"I'm wondering how much longer we will continue to dress it in language like "spirits" and "demons". I understand that thinking about this too much can strain the personal work, but I also wonder if this is the most progressive way to be approaching the situation (from an empirical point of view)? I hope that as time moves on we can approach a more universal way of relating these things.
The language we currently employ is pretty "loaded". Words like god, demon, or spirit all carry such a heavy connotation. We don't perceive reality the same way as ancient cultures did. We have a much wider amount of information to base our conclusions on. How do we tread this line and find new ways to effectively explore/communicate these ideas with each other, while at the same time avoiding the creation of yet another dogmatic, useless religious system?"
lol... Personally, I refuse to take a position. Everything usually boils down to two fundamental perspectives. Depends on the lens, not the object. You know? Words...
-
@Bereshith said
"
@ldfriend56 said
"
I'm not sure I want to use esoteric maps for empirical purposes here. The foundation would then have to many assumptions - make sense? "Only if I would agree that the Tree of Life is a "esoteric map" instead of an "empirical map," which I don't."
really? I'm interested more here - it's been years and years since I played with the tree, and my understanding probably needs an update, but what is the tree if not a map to place our experiences of the subtle realms? it's those subtle realms that I am defining as 'esoteric'.
"
If a magician's evocation and experience of spirits may be called empirical at all, it is in a limited sense. To the best of my current knowledge, not just anybody can draw the symbols, light the smoke, and say the words with the result that the exact results are produced every time for everybody. If we're talking about Empiricism proper, that's my understanding of what's required to fit its criteria. (possibly discussion-worthy)
However, if we allow ourselves to speak of evocation and the experience of spirits as "empirical" simply because the process relies on experimentation - without the condition that everybody can do it given the proper instructions and tools - then I would argue that the Tree of Life is entirely as "empirical" as the evocation and experience of spirits. It is not entirely philosophical in my experience. "
I think the common experience in phenomenology (1st person experience) could be considered 'empirical' to at least list, such as ideas, thoughts, dreams, etc. As to the evocation of spirits, I imagine that is not something your average joe can experience - however the average joe can have an experience of the spirit world by dabbling in DMT or ayahuasca related practices and in this sense, I would imagine that the experience of spirits would be more common
I said: Imagine my map is for someone who has no experience in such matters, is cosmologically agnostic (potentially even atheist), and needs a map that can provide them an overview of what they can experience (i.e. thoughts, ideas, feelings) and expand upon those experiences (spirits, subtle energies, healings, etc) while providing an empirical overview of the relationship of consciousness to the content to which it perceives.
"
In my understanding, this is entirely the kind of map the Tree of Life provides. I'm beginning to think that you think the Tree of Life is only a matter of occult dogma. It is a map of "thoughts, ideas, and feelings," complete with the transitional pathways between them. For even more precise classification, one may imagine the entire Tree inside each of its sephiroth. But... It is a map of both the process of manifestation and of the human consciousness - macrocosm and microcosm. "
Like I said, i probably need an update in my understanding of the tree - I always understood the tree as like a filing system and it's primary concern was mapping subtle phenomenon.
"
For instance, even if we just take three of the concepts you listed, "thoughts, ideas, feelings," you'd still have to relate them to one another in some fashion. You'll have to determine how a "thought" is different from an "feeling" and have a concept map that suggests how "thoughts" are related to "feelings" unless you just want disconnected categories. And, well, that's what the Tree of Life is. "
I'm very skeptical of anything that could map actual 'feelings' because a map is ultimately symbolic and feelings are not words or symbols but pure experiences of being, and at best all we could do would be to just map our idea about the feeling. How would the tree get around this conundrum?
"
Anyway, I don't mean to beat you over the head with it, but it does seem like you think it exists in a different category than what you're describing, and I think it's almost exactly what you're describing - in addition to being philosophically valid. But it doesn't have to be all dressed up in Hebrew either..."
well first off, the tree is not my map, and by map of course I mean something that is communicated in passage, prose, written in copy, not exactly a taxonomy or literal 'map' like the tree - for me to create my own map is a way for me to test my own understanding...I guess that is really what this exercise is for me - I know i can understand something when I can put something into my own language, communicate it, and find agreement with others who have similar understanding.
I am interested in bringing any value of the tree into this, like I said I probably need an update to understanding there.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"Hm, while reading over some of the replies, I did a bit of thinking:
There what the spirit/spirits are no only changes with the system but also at one point a person is in that system.At the outset of a persons spiritual journey, for all intents and purposes, spirits existed outside the person.
Rather, they are outside a persons conscious awareness and control (though, perhaps they may be directed - but that is a slight divergence from my point).
As a person progresses, becomes aware, integrates those entities into their consciousness, for all intents and purposes they become a part of them in whatever fashion suits the spirit(s) in question.This may make it detrimental to hammering out a definitive empirical placement.
As the Adept who says "they are part of me" might confuse and hamper a Neophytes process of developing awareness with the goal of integration.Anywho, I hope I did not add to the confusion."
no thank you this is very insightful indeed! it does make the territory more complex, because this would suggest that perhaps spirits are no more than a component of our psyche to begin with to have such a feature.
For example, in my most recent explorations, the world of Vegatalismo from the Amazon. The most common practice amongst the vegatalistas is the 'dieta', where one goes into isolation and drinks, consumes a particular master plant mixture (non hallucinogenic) for a period of time. The process is very alchemical - the practitioner literally has to break down the cells in the body by consuming very little food and what food they consume is bland and devoid of salts, sugars, etc etc. During this process, the 'master teacher' , that particular plant spirit, comes to literally reside in the cells of the body, and is indeed apart of the practitioner physically, and then the practitioner can call on that spirit through an icaro and have the 'powers' of that particular spirit come to aid him/her. So spirits in this manner of a quite distinct order of being if they can be present to multiple people at different locations at once! I hope this does not come off as trite.
Also, as Jim said that the plant spirits of the amazon would be the same as the plant spirits of shinto or the amazon as they would in the west, I am still not convinced they are. I believe there would be some cross over, but the plant spirits of the amazon appear to have many of the same abilities as angels or higher order beings in western magick.
Also, interesting enough, in the amazon there has been much convergence with this practice and outside religion, such as christianity. However, there are many traditions down there that have fused with Rosicrusianism, and blend european esoteric traditions. Indeed, a few shamans claim to use ayahuasca to call in 'the european doctors' as they are called into the room! This is a matter of great interest to me.
-
double post again, sorry I am in formatting hell.
-
@Frater Potater said
"
@ldfriend56 said
" Is it only measurable through our ideas and concepts (creating abstractions) about it?"This is the real tricky part.... because the mind is so easily deceived. On top of that, you have everyones conflicting ideas and abstractions competing with each other, and forming into dogmas."
oh yes exactly - and this is what makes the process entirely subjective. Which is how it has become that I want to remodel all of this in as objective as a form as possible.
Take ideas (there does not seem to be much interest here in addressing the relationship between ideas and spirits, but I'm hoping a few will chime in) and even dreams. We all experience ideas and most have dreams, so although the experience of ideas is quite subjective, the fact that we all share some experiential information in common that we refer to as 'ideas' is objective - so relating 'spirits' to ideas seems like a nice foundation to begin.
thoughts here?
My previous comment: How I interpret this so far, and please if anyone can chime in and make a correction if I am veering or straying to far. Under the circumstances Jim explained quite eloquently. Empirically, we can accept that human beings have access to information that, at present time, does not appear to have any physically measurable component. This information can take the form in experience as thoughts, feelings, concepts, ideas, abstractions, but it can also take the form of an 'other' such as Spirits, Gods, angels etc. Ancient philosophies from antiquity suggest that the realm of the physical, which is simply 'content' in the realm of phenomenology (1st person experience) - share a 'mother' substance in common with all non- physical substance. This substance (SPIRIT singular and proper?) is not measurable and not accessible in the world of the measurable senses - so to even begin the pursuit of discovering empirically this substance in measurable form may be impossible.
" I'm wondering what the actual value of this "information" is. What do we get from the experiences if we can't confirm or substantiate anything?"
If we cannot substantiate any information we receive from * heightened personal experience* (a broader term which includes dreams, meditations, visions, communication with other intelligences) through experimentation, trial and practice in practical every day life, then of course it's value objectively is close to zero I imagine.
Consider; how is this not any different from information we receive from the pure experience of having 'ah-ha!'s? Ideas, the experiences therein, also deliver information that is not yet substantiated. The world of the sciences also receives this conundrum that is also rooted in personal experience epistemologically speaking.
How we substantiate any information naturally would make quite a difference I imagine. Human Intelligence appears to me to play a role here, regardless of the truth value of the sources of experience, is that Human Being appears to, objectively speaking that is, be a moderator of information - we naturally organize any information by it's truth value (relational to our points of view, and thelemically, we could even say 'Wills'.) If spirits do or not exist objectively, this is still true either way. If Spirits are true, however, it also may suggest a wider relationship our quality of sentience plays in the universe, which can tell us something about the universe we objectively inhabit. That's another way of looking where I am at in my broader view.
I sort of fumbled the formatting in this post so I am going to address the rest of your post in the next reply.
-
Frater Potater says.
"Is there a reason to believe in spirits, or is magic (without a k) just another faith based religion that doesn't give us any answers beyond a feeling of inner certainty?"
back to moderating information. From my POV, it's best to moderate some information by keeping it in the unknown or mystery and allowing the mystery to occupy the truth value until we can determine what is useful and what is not useful. I believe the responsibility to determine this rests squarely on the individual. - Any ideas that suggest an order to our lives also face this same issue though, right? Even academia and science. If you want to see what faith based frenzy material models of science can also invoke, have a trip over to reddit.com/r/atheism
"If these things are substantial, than where do we begin to study spiritual phenomena in an empirical sense? Is it neurological, is it psychosomatic, etc.?"
I believe at this time that it is through the study and listing of ideas as a dynamic and key component of first person experience, and finding what sort of information ideas and spirits share in common. Ideas too are a huge unknown neurologically, we still have not found an 'idea'. Funny that the thing that unites all of us about this strange phenomenon is that we all experience them and that is what we collectively hold to be objectively true.
Here is where i am sure thee is broad agreement on this forum
Bodies are physical and measurable. Ideas and spirits are not measurable and non physical.
"
We all experience consciousness in a body.
It's a faulty instrument though. All we can do is hope to train the mind so that it presents us with the purest form of "idea, concept, abstraction, etc." that is available."
absolutely agreed!
-
double post, sorry!
-
@OldFriend said
"I said: Imagine my map is for someone who has no experience in such matters, is cosmologically agnostic (potentially even atheist), and needs a map that can provide them an overview of what they can experience (i.e. thoughts, ideas, feelings) and expand upon those experiences (spirits, subtle energies, healings, etc) while providing an empirical overview of the relationship of consciousness to the content to which it perceives.
"I'm sorry. I got nothing for ya.
But if what you really want is what's written above and nothing more, what prevents you from going ahead and creating such a map? If the map is intended to be entirely empirical and suited to the agnostic/atheist, with categories that do not require other esoteric experiences or knowledge, then what do you require that you cannot provide yourself?
-
@Bereshith said
"
But if what you really want is what's written above and nothing more, what prevents you from going ahead and creating such a map? If the map is intended to be entirely empirical and suited to the agnostic/atheist, with categories that do not require other esoteric experiences or knowledge, then what do you require that you cannot provide yourself?"I've had a little bit of an ah-ha from these discussions, something that helps me clarify my query. It's more to do with the distinctions of the experience that spirits can take. Jim mentioned in any early post that contacting spirits is easy and we do it all the time, all we need to do is get a little punch drunk and viola. So this suggests that the experience with spirits does not mean one is having an experience of spirits.
So what are the variations of the experiences of 'spirits'? I'm going to meditate on this one.
That is the question and thank you all for helping me understand my query better.
-
@ldfriend56 said
"
really? I'm interested more here - it's been years and years since I played with the tree, and my understanding probably needs an update, but what is the tree if not a map to place our experiences of the subtle realms? it's those subtle realms that I am defining as 'esoteric'.
"I would say your understanding requires an update....
The tree is not a map to place our experiences of the subtle realms.
It is a map to place our EXPERIENCES. (<- note the period
). -
"I would say your understanding requires an update....
The tree is not a map to place our experiences of the subtle realms.
It is a map to place our EXPERIENCES. (<- note the period )."Malkuth - physical results, sounds, materializations
Yesod - Visions, dreams
Hod - scientific knowledge, ideas
Netzach - desiresehhh... I'd have to start thinking harder to go further up, but maybe you get the idea.
But if you resist the format because it requires extra knowledge on the part of the intended audience or the tacit acceptance by them of occult philosophy, then you gotta make that part yourself based on something you think that they would or could accept.
-
@Bereshith said
"
Malkuth - physical results, sounds, materializations
Yesod - Visions, dreams
Hod - scientific knowledge, ideas
Netzach - desires"
Just as one might propose this map of how humans experience, it can be also used to map out a particular experience.
Take, for example, a personal favorite of mine : geometry.
0/1 - Point / Circle or Circle / Point
2 - Line
3 - Area (Shape)
4 - VolumePerhaps "organization tool" would be a better description than "map."
-
Or as a map of human consciousness it's looked at from the bottom up.
Malkuth: I am a man of earth and flesh. I know my body. I understand the need to work. I feel hunger and cold and heat and all these things. Perhaps that is all there is?
followed by
Yesod: I believe this is how the world works. Someone or something seems to be behind it all. There's a great deal that seems invisible about it, how fascinating.
balanced with
Hod & Netzach
Hod: These are the rules behind this seeming order I perceive. Cause leads to effect. If I do this, I have come to expect that. 1+1=2. Blue is a good color to wear when I want to influence people in a positive, beneficiary way.
and
Netzach: I have these feelings about all this. One seems to follow the other, and my emotional rate is quite palpable and comparative to what else is around me. I also have a sense that the conditions of others and their emotions, these things seem directly influential as well. Even inanimate things now have personality!and so on up the Tree.
-
Your physical and aethyrial dimensions also change and evolve as these thoughts evolve, going up the tree.
Here, viewing the universe at Malkuth, we are not even Ishim yet, or individual, balanced souls of flame. Our bodies will eventually be tossed, turned, pulled, and pushed through the divine Fire to become these Ishim.
This is all a very lengthy process that one might grasp if one is having problems feeling out their own personal definition of the Tree in their mind.
After humans, elves, and finally Ishim, we are expected to climb the tree, (and have to, by ALL means, unless you wish to fall down and down into the dusk of death and become at best a black brother, at worst a weak one.)
So there's not just integrating experience of the other sephiroth in mind, emotion and body here at Malkuth, but the mountain of Abeignus we must climb certainly takes the form of the sephiroth and paths of the Tree.
Kerubs, what we will become after climbing to Yesod, are described almost erroneously in the old testament as having four wings. Later on in the bible, I forget exactly where but Revelations is one of the places, Kerubim are described as having six wings, just like the Seraphim.
If a visionary, (
), prophet in the old testament, probably "eating the grass of the Arabs", and "Manna," had a dimension of the universe hidden from him for his own psychological protection, you can imagine the games we animals play to keep the truth of the Tree and all that goes with it from blasting us with that Divine Light.The man needs a dose of what Nuit has strangely to offer.
Of course I mean Love, balance, and a circumference view of the Universe as a whole. Love must be kept in the mind as the reason for doing anything and everything, being the Law of the Universe. -
I love Pie.
Have not checked out Lloyd Pie though, Miss Dara.
From what I can gather at a first glance is he is one of the chosen to release information to those who wish to know more. Now, we must remember the divine patterns of this when contemplating:
For David Icke, and many like him, are "placed" where they are by those who control information. However, many things I have read by him corroborate with my experiences.
[I used to be obsessed with "aliens" when I was younger, mainly because they entered my room at night when I was very young, dragged me out of my bed, into flying machines, tied me down on metallic chairs and tables, and did their little theatrical dance of "fear" in front of me to try to help me coordinate myself while in the most agonizing, terrible fear. Physically, the "greys" are future versions of ourselves from a f@!ked tangent where we tried to take over the power of the Sun with technology.
They come back in time to try to correct this mistake, they themselves trapped in a place where they are forced to collect genetic "life material" from us, their past selves, in order to survive. So no more meat, no more veggies, just fluids from humans and cows. Every once in awhile, a farmer military personnel will find a completely drained human in areas close to White Sands and whatnot, letting those who know, know that they are uncontrollably persistent in "survival", and that they will probably go very far to do so. A warning.
Since then, I have come to the realization that they are illusory aspects of ourselves that we must try to balance with these strange drugs, meditation, Magick and Kabbala.]Honestly, I stopped watching these kind of things years ago, however I still watch or read something like this once in awhile to let myself know how far I have come from my fear of the unknown.
(They scared me so bad as a child I could not sleep in my own room until I was six or seven. My dad, ironically, has had plenty of experiences, was the lead investigator for MUFON in our state, but when I identified pictures of greys as the reason I could not sleep in my room, he only responded with, "Oh, you're just having nightmares. Just forget about it." Making me feel completely alone in the predicament.Interesting story, when I was seventeen, I ate lysergic acid diethylamide for the second time, this time combining it with cannabis, and the first vision I had, unexpectedly, was an entire legion of greys, billions of them, all around me, which might have made me void my bowels if not on the acid, for I took one good scary look around, got bored of them, rose above them, the vision of them dropping off and disappearing. I have not had fear of them since that amazing night.
Star-f#!ked is a word I came up with that night to describe my state of being.
I note that your reply was number 93.
I bid thee a fair day, Miss Dara.
-
Well Dara, from what I can gather there are many greys in the Universe. And yes, after the huge technological/nuclear fkup, they needed the Annunaki to hook up their genetics right, in order to survive. Happens to a lot of species, including us.
A huge revelation if you would be interested, Miss Dara, the Annunaki are just "future" versions of greys that are a part of an even bigger disaster, though they have some leverage in Creation. They fixed their own genes, if you catch me.
This ties directly into the theory that when people eat animals, they eat another being's body, another soul's physical incarnation. When people eat plants, they are just eating a part of themselves that their souls are connected directly to.
It's really just divinity's way of slowing down the process of creation so we can catch up. What's wrong with a "lesser", slave future version of yourself burning up as long as you are made to survive by it. Everything is enveloped by fire to evolve, nature is trying to take it easy on us.
From all else I can gather, the greys from zeta reticuli used to be like us, ended up making millions of planets of their past selves to devour, took way too much advantage of nature's leeway, and lost their connection to "regular" incarnation, no genetic material to eat, just gradually falling deeper in space where the fire will eventually devour them.
"We", as Earthlings, still have a chance to turn this horrible catastrophe around, and our current social and magical resonance proves this. We can certainly feel some uncertain disaster in the works of the future, however we can feel the Great Work, and it's divine power of evolution well above what we, as Earthlings, would consider catastrophic.
Now you've got me commenting on pure illusion.
Love Is the Law, Love under Will