chinu
chinu
Impatience for what ? jackI think Time assassinates impatience and is perhaps the highest power in the universe
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Impatience for what ? jackI think Time assassinates impatience and is perhaps the highest power in the universe
That because you are not the merle
Chinu is like that poor merle, not a poet (In a poet's language)And being not Merle, I do not share Merle's components. Therefore, multiple things do not share components.
And in a poetry language i want to say that you need the eyes of merle to see how all this works, rather than the eyes of a poet.Therefore, there is no reason to think that just because love is a major factor of human behavior, that love is somehow all-pervasive in the universe.
Chinu is like that poor merle, not a poet (In a poet's language)
And in a poetry language i want to say that you need the eyes of merle to see how all this works, rather than the eyes of a poet.
No, human have three eyes, two eyes to see things the way the eyes owner is, and one for to see the things truely how they are.But no human eyes can see things truly how they are.
Human eyes can only see things the way the eyes' owner is.
No, one cannot be full of love until one opens that third eye.A person full of love will see love everywhere.
One is full of fear because one LOVES to live in the illusion that is all around him/her, Otherwise there isn't any reason of fear.A person full of fear will see fear everywhere.
One is full of apathy because one LOVES to quit the world which is all around him/her, otherwise there isn't any reason for being apathyA person full of apathy will see apathy everywhere.
LOVE is persident over there too..There's also plenty of combinations of these as people are multifaceted.
You must say; that you LOVE to see these things like this way.I see in Planets, Moons, and Stars, the Jotnar spoken of in tales. I see in the forces that govern our societies the Aesir, and the forces that provide sustenance the Vanir. I see in the forces that keep families together, or driving them apart, the Alfar.
No, you see this because you LOVE to be AsatruI see these because I am Asatru.
No, human have three eyes, two eyes to see things the way the eyes owner is, and one for to see the things truely how they are.
No, one cannot be full of love until one opens that third eye.
One is full of fear because one LOVES to live in the illusion that is all around him/her, Otherwise there isn't any reason of fear.
One is full of apathy because one LOVES to quit the world which is all around him/her, otherwise there isn't any reason for being apathy
LOVE is persident over there too..
You must say; that you LOVE to see these things like this way.
No, you see this because you LOVE to be Asatru
LOVE is the highest, indeed highest truth of the truths.
Oye oye oye you started like me ?Just as easily, I can say that you only see love everywhere because you LOVE to see love everywhere,
Anyways, what do you mean by KALI ? RiverwolfBesides, my third eye has opened on occasion briefly. Indeed, the Oneness of all things was perfectly clear, but I didn't see love. I saw Kali.
Doesnt matter how you spin it.
Gravity holds whole galaxies together, electromagnetic force does not.
A black hole has more power then all electromagnetic forces combined.
in theory or imagination doesnt cut it
relativistic jets are thought by some to be powered by the black hole, so that is not overcoming anything.
So, you LOVE not to quit the play ?
Anyways, don't be sad, George. Because you are currently playing this Game, and if there's any NEW work infront of you, that is "Quitting the Game" rather than "Playing the Game".
I hope, you would have not taken any interest in my perspectives, George.
Ok, you are not sad, as you are saying this, So i have to agree, i can't disagree.I most certainly Love to continue the game, Chinu.
I am certainly not sad-
Thanks Chinu
Maybe, Riverwolf is talking about this Kali, but i have to wait for his reply, in order to continue.Google says Kali is The most terrifying goddess, wife of Shiva. She is typically depicted as black, naked, old, and hideous.
Google says Shiva is One of the principal Hindu deities, worshiped as the destroyer and restorer of worlds and in numerous other forms. Shiva is often conceived as a member of the triad also including Brahma and Vishnu.
I see the world as very new. It is like a stupid teenager. It is not black. It is very colorful. It is not naked if you are willing to clothe it. I do not know what hideous means. I could look it up. But I am done procrastinating for now. Are you procrastinating?
Anyways, Thanks very much for taking time, Wind.
What do you think ?
What's the difference between love and food? They both fill and nourish...love cannot feed a child who is starved for food;
nor can food feed a child who is starved for love.
Oye oye oye you started like me ?
Anyways, what do you mean by KALI ? Riverwolf
Google says Kali is The most terrifying goddess, wife of Shiva. She is typically depicted as black, naked, old, and hideous.
Google says Shiva is One of the principal Hindu deities, worshiped as the destroyer and restorer of worlds and in numerous other forms. Shiva is often conceived as a member of the triad also including Brahma and Vishnu.
And what do you think is the difference between LOVE and GOD ?As a Theist, I would say God is the highest power. If I didn't believe in God, I would say the Universe itself- although it is mostly space.
For example: If the case, mother and her son are hungry since many days because they both are lost in any jungle, and they get some very limited food after many days that is just for one person to eat.What's the difference between love and food? They both fill and nourish...
Your MIND was on her, or your HEARTI mean, the image of Kali enveloped everything. Why Kali? Probably because my mind was on her for quite some time at the time.
Nowadays, I'd probably see something else. (What, exactly, I don't know.)