[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

Search:


View post   

>> No.20106536 [View]
File: 992 KB, 1481x2433, mikhailarkhxviieeuwmuseumofthegreekinstitute-for-byzantine-and-post-byzantine-studie (2) (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20106536

>>20106161

A rough definition of the Humanstate of Being, according to Guénon and the loose descriptors of language:

"The "gross state" in fact is nothing else than the corporeal existence itself, to which [...] human individuality belongs by one of its modalities only, and not in its integral development. As to the "subtle state", it includes, in the first place, the extra-corporeal modalities of the human being, or of every other being situated in the same state of existence, and also, in the second place, all other individual states [...] It may be said, therefore, that the human being, considered in its integrality, comprises a certain sum of possibilities which constitute its corporeal or gross modality, and in addition, a multitude of other possibilities, which, extending in different directions beyond the corporeal modality, constitute its subtle modalities; but all these possibilities together represent, nonetheless, one and the same degree of universal Existence. Itfollows fromthis that human individuality is at once much more and much less than Westerners generally suppose it to be: much more, because they recognize in it scarcely anything except the corporeal modality, which includes but the smallest fraction of its possibilities; much less, however, because this individuality, far from really constituting the whole being, is but one state of that being among an indefinite multitude of other states. Moreover the sum of all these states is still nothing at all in relation to the personality, which alone is the true being, because it alone represents its permanent and unconditioned state, and because there is nothing else which can be considered as absolutely real."

Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta, chapter 2: «Fundamental distinction between the 'Self' and the 'ego'», p. 28.

_________________________________________
The image here is an icon of St. Michael who filled the role of Hermes (notice similar caps) as the primary Psychopomp, in the pic attached, the inscription above the body says reads:

Φρήξον ψυχή μου τα ορώμενα

It is a shortened version of this:

Φρήξον ψυχή μου τα ορώμενα, φρήξετε πάντες αδελφοί το πικρόν ποτήριον του θανάτου

“Tremble, my soul, at the sight, tremble all, brothers, at the bitter cup of death.”

If we look at Michael’s upraised left hand, we can see that he holds the soul of the dead man in the form of an infant wrapped in what the King James Bible calls “swaddling clothes.” It comes from the old practice of binding infants in strips of cloth to restrain their movements and calm them — a practice that largely fell out of use in Europe in the 17th century. In icons it is common to depict the soul of the dead as a new-born infant.

>> No.20106527 [DELETED]  [View]
File: 992 KB, 1481x2433, mikhailarkhxviieeuwmuseumofthegreekinstitute-for-byzantine-and-post-byzantine-studie (2) (1).jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
20106527

>>20106161


A rough definition of the Humanstate of Being, according to Guénon and the loose descriptors of language:

"The "gross state" in fact is nothing else than the corporeal existence itself, to which [...] human individuality belongs by one of its modalities only, and not in its integral development. As to the "subtle state", it includes, in the first place, the extra-corporeal modalities of the human being, or of every other being situated in the same state of existence, and also, in the second place, all other individual states [...] It may be said, therefore, that the human being, considered in its integrality, comprises a certain sum of possibilities which constitute its corporeal or gross modality, and in addition, a multitude of other possibilities, which, extending in different directions beyond the corporeal modality, constitute its subtle modalities; but all these possibilities together represent, nonetheless, one and the same degree of universal Existence. Itfollows fromthis that human individuality is at once much more and much less than Westerners generally suppose it to be: much more, because they recognize in it scarcely anything except the corporeal modality, which includes but the smallest fraction of its possibilities; much less, however, because this individuality, far from really constituting the whole being, is but one state of that being among an indefinite multitude of other states. Moreover the sum of all these states is still nothing at all in relation to the personality, which alone is the true being, because it alone represents its permanent and unconditioned state, and because there is nothing else which can be considered as absolutely real."

Man and His Becoming According to the Vedanta, chapter 2: «Fundamental distinction between the 'Self' and the 'ego'», p. 28.

The icon of St. Michael who filled the role of Hermes (notice similar caps) as the primary Psychopomp, in the pic attached, the inscription above the body says reads:

Φρήξον ψυχή μου τα ορώμενα

It is a shortened version of this:

Φρήξον ψυχή μου τα ορώμενα, φρήξετε πάντες αδελφοί το πικρόν ποτήριον του θανάτου

“Tremble, my soul, at the sight, tremble all, brothers, at the bitter cup of death.”

If we look at Michael’s upraised left hand, we can see that he holds the soul of the dead man in the form of an infant wrapped in what the King James Bible calls “swaddling clothes.” It comes from the old practice of binding infants in strips of cloth to restrain their movements and calm them — a practice that largely fell out of use in Europe in the 17th century. In icons it is common to depict the soul of the dead as a new-born infant.

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]