[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]

- Prev by Date: Does Water give form to Fire ?
- Next by Date: Re: Does Water give form to Fire ? - complement to my question
- Previous by thread: Re: Re: Does Water give form to Fire ? - complement to my question
- Next by thread: Re: Does Water give form to Fire ?
- Indexes:
  - Main
  - Thread

Main Index | Thread Index