Thomas Friese wrote: > > Yes, but now who is the "author"? Could it not be the person himself, > consciously choosing the life he/she will live, before, as Junger put it > somewhere, they give "existence to Existence"? That is not in contradiction > to your conclusion of the Divine presence. "Divinity must, without a doubt, > be inside us and be recognized as being inside us; otherwise we would have > no concept of gods." Eumeswil
Yes, but it must be stated that EJ's interpretation is not saying that we are the authors, but that instead we have been given the capacity to read, to take that metaphor to its final end. Here, I believe, is where the meaning of the EJ quote lies. > > "To my mind his thought about past-future and visions is nearer to > shu´ar - an Amazonas tribe- culture. This tribe has a veri different > conception of time. They think future is in the past. The preview > don´t imply an absence of free will. It means that our decision was > already taken." > I add a quote referring to dreams from Eumeswil (by far my favorite book, I > confess..) > > "It (the mind during a dream) can open its eyes anywhere - in people, in > things, animals or plants; it gives breath to its creatures and makes them > speak; it acts as their prompter. Yet it is astonished by anything they say, > as if its words were intensified by those echoes. 'In a dream we are gods,' > a Greek said, and he was right." Eumeswil The problem is of course that what the greek says can only be true in the dream because we are able to do almost anything from the point of the dreamer. Rather my point is that even our dreams are "authored" and we have very little if any control over them. Maybe at one point in history or even today some people can dream at will, but this knowledge has almost disapeared at the moment. Still we are not the authors of our own destiny and this is EJ's point. Or to quote a piece of the Quran. "No self know which land it will die in." > One final thought: these ideas remind me of a charming story quoted in Otto > Rank's "The Trauma of Birth." In certain Gnostic writings, the unborn child > is "dropped" by an angel into the womb of the mother who will bring it into > the life it has chosen for itself. Just before the "drop" enters the womb, > it is shown the entire course of its future life, including the place it > will be buried. As it leaves the womb to be born, the angel strikes it under > its nose and blots out all memory of everything it has seen. This > perspective fits very well with what Junger is saying here - and what Carlos > says - the decision was already taken. The vision reminds us of what we have > forgotten. Life can be seen as a process of remembering. Heidegger says that the root problem of the age is Seinsvergessenheit, meaning the question from where do we come and where are we going? Thanks for the response. Abdalbarr
