Destiny

**Antares** · 26th October 2019, 06:08 AM

Originally Posted by olyris

I would say that all the little good spirits you meet along the way remind you to be happy. Yang, on the other hand, reminds you to be positive.

Let's change the perspective. What are *we* to remind the good and yang spirits about? Even, if "good" and "yang" were like gods to us?

**olyris** · 26th October 2019, 09:04 AM

I would say that the sage knows that within this mix of good and all other things, there is light, in a dark place.

**Antares** · 24th November 2019, 01:59 PM

After short time I wrote on the forum about the realities to choose and destiny, now I think I got a better clarity of it.

A destiny as a rigid scheme to our lives doesn't exist at all. There might be some "spots" in our life time-line that are important, but mostly what is going to happen is a certain "theme" or "quality" and the related decisions to be made.
I think that life is about decisions that we need to make, and destiny's role is to provide us with those circumstances (whatever they are) where we are triggered to make a certain decision.

Then, after we finish a particular incarnation, a summary of all the important decisions (weighted with their quality, not their form or superficial meaning) is made, and the final "judgement" of the overall result may appear. This is related to the ancient egyptian concept of Maat: symbolized by the balance scales.

Choosing life alternatives
I wrote a short blog post on making the important life choices here https://www.astraldynamics.com.au/en...s-with-I-Ching

**Antares** · 28th January 2020, 04:00 PM

How destiny - an unconscious choices - are made in practice... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yROe6r3QFco&t=341

**CFTraveler** · 29th January 2020, 07:22 PM

I feel that I have to insert my opinion here, not about the theme but about the detour this took with the latest video content.
Elohim is a plural form of God- all the ancient religions saw God in nature, God being pantheistic, and 'the gods' were representations of archetypes in nature.
Sitchin came at the Sumerian tablets with preconceived notions, and not enough preparation on the Sumerian language. He read what he wanted to read in them- what I call 'spiritual materialism'. The strange notion that anything that is referred to in ancient times with symbolic languages must have happened. That is the result of modern faulty scholarship- the fact that children are not taught the symbolic language of the psyche and in literature, and the literalization of scripture. This is what is behind this type of thinking, and what is now becoming detrimental to our spiritual evolution.
End of rant.

**Antares** · 29th January 2020, 07:55 PM

Originally Posted by CFTraveler

I feel that I have to insert my opinion here, not about the theme but about the detour this took with the latest video content.
Elohim is a plural form of God- all the ancient religions saw God in nature, God being pantheistic, and 'the gods' were representations of archetypes in nature.
Sitchin came at the Sumerian tablets with preconceived notions, and not enough preparation on the Sumerian language. He read what he wanted to read in them- what I call 'spiritual materialism'. The strange notion that anything that is referred to in ancient times with symbolic languages must have happened. That is the result of modern faulty scholarship- the fact that children are not taught the symbolic language of the psyche and in literature, and the literalization of scripture. This is what is behind this type of thinking, and what is now becoming detrimental to our spiritual evolution.
End of rant.

Yes, this also made me wondering... This was also my first reaction to Z. Sitchin: that he was wrong, because I believed that there is a hidden symbolism in this whole Sumerian mythological / cosmological system.

And I still am certain that in many parts Sitchin was not quite right in his books and statements. However, I started recently to wonder if this "spiritual materialism" is not something that really took a place, and perhaps in this Sitchin or similar to him people could be actually correct...

Let me explain this. To be strict, we cannot assume that every mythology (like Sumerian) was: 1. purely symbolic cosmology, and 2. even if it was, wasn't later modified and adjusted to needs of some extra-terrestials, powerful enough to present themselves as gods in front of those people.

The known history of Mesopotamia seems to confirm that: the Sumerian civilization appeared like out of nowhere - and it was very advanced in those times in the moment when it appeared. They had everything suddenly developed: writing, agriculture, some advanced irrigation methods, advanced building techniques, and many more, not to mention the mathematics which actually form still the basis for what we use in XXI-th century, after several thousands of years - math did not change in its essence from that time (the only interesting point is that there is missing theoretical / philosophical background for this ancient mathematics - so it seems like this knowledge had been transferred, typically as algorithms of solving certain mathematical problems!)

Sumerian people were also often quite exact in their descriptions or sculptures representing the gods.

So there might be more "matter" to this seemingly "spiritual" cosmology, either created by "gods" or just modified by them, I suspect... (just like - possibly - almost all religions were manipulated afterwards, christianity being probably the most apparent example).