I tried all morning to upload my regression audio into youtube, its just too long of a regression to post, it exceeds the file size. The regression is about 90 minutes and just not possible to upload. If anyone would like a copy I would have to mail you the CD. If down the road anyone is interested PM me. The most surprising thing had been I was prepared for the regression to show me something related only, not there. When I came out of it I thought I had been under 15 minutes tops. The only reason I am offering is because it allows someone to see from within that perspective. The world of YouTube, Facebook, etc., I am just too old fashioned!
Pleased to meet you all and any Cathars!
- Thread starter Valerian
- Start date
There are plenty of file-sharing options, e.g. Microsoft OneDrive or Google Drive.
You might also split the audio recording into two or more sections and upload each of them separately to youtube, for example.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Kaye,
You may need to get some help from the younger generation. I always try to get help from my children--for whom this type of thing is very natural. Youtube would be ideal. As Speedwell points out, you can probably split the regression into two or three separate parts. Likewise, you can more easily (no typing!) record your accounts of your month of dream revelations and/or other thoughts/insights as you recover your past and move forward into the future. I have seen many people on Youtube with their own channels, which allow them to also link other videos that they think are worthwhile. I'd love to see you do something like this. Maybe the "Cathar Journal" or "Cathar Diaries" with your own videos* and links to related videos you think are worthwhile (and accurate) on the subject.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I'm sure Youtube itself has numerous videos on how to accomplish the foregoing. However, I'm usually too lazy and just ask the youngsters for help.
PPS--*Videos is a term used loosely. Many videos are really just audios with a static design or image for a video image.
You may need to get some help from the younger generation. I always try to get help from my children--for whom this type of thing is very natural. Youtube would be ideal. As Speedwell points out, you can probably split the regression into two or three separate parts. Likewise, you can more easily (no typing!) record your accounts of your month of dream revelations and/or other thoughts/insights as you recover your past and move forward into the future. I have seen many people on Youtube with their own channels, which allow them to also link other videos that they think are worthwhile. I'd love to see you do something like this. Maybe the "Cathar Journal" or "Cathar Diaries" with your own videos* and links to related videos you think are worthwhile (and accurate) on the subject.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I'm sure Youtube itself has numerous videos on how to accomplish the foregoing. However, I'm usually too lazy and just ask the youngsters for help.
PPS--*Videos is a term used loosely. Many videos are really just audios with a static design or image for a video image.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi All,
A whole day without any new input on this topic. I hate to say it, but after getting used to a daily dose, I feel like I've gone a day without coffee.
Sigh!
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I've been listening to Catharism Youtubes while driving today, but since I've listened to all of the better ones already, this is a bit like soggy cereal.
A whole day without any new input on this topic. I hate to say it, but after getting used to a daily dose, I feel like I've gone a day without coffee.
Sigh! Cordially,
S&S
PS--I've been listening to Catharism Youtubes while driving today, but since I've listened to all of the better ones already, this is a bit like soggy cereal.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
PSS--One of the things I learned listening to a video on the Inquisition (that I should have known, but didn't), was that the inquisitors were especially interested in finding and destroying any and all written materials in regard to what they considered to be heresy. As the narrator put it, they knew that even if they completely eliminated its living adherents (as they often did), a "heresy" could still spring back to life if the writings supporting it remained. If such writings were around, they might "infect" another, and they would have to do their work all over again. So, they made sure to eliminate everything that might present a "danger", leaving nothing of importance behind. This explains a lot.
PSSS--One might think they would only take such care dealing with the wealthy and propertied, who could read and own such books. However, they realized that books could be scattered for safekeeping to others in the "heresy" and consequently took equal care even with the unlettered and their humble dwellings. Nothing was to be allowed to survive--anywhere.
PSSS--One might think they would only take such care dealing with the wealthy and propertied, who could read and own such books. However, they realized that books could be scattered for safekeeping to others in the "heresy" and consequently took equal care even with the unlettered and their humble dwellings. Nothing was to be allowed to survive--anywhere.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Credente welcome! Especially welcome are "good men" and "good women"!
Note: "Cathars referred to their male elect as bons omes, The Occitan for "good men". In Latin the term is boni homines and in modern French bonnes hommes, also meaning "Good Men". Women members of the elect were bonas femnas, "good women". In Latin the term is bone femine and in modern French Bonnes Femmes, also meaning "Good Women". Together they were "good Christians", but good men and good women themselves frequently referred to each other as 'the friends of God'." (Quoted from Cathar.info - the best site for information on this subject IMO).
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I find it somewhat ironic that the names used for the peace loving leaders of the Christians referred to by their enemies as "Cathars" were later incorporated into the long used slogan for the U.S. Marine Corp.: “We’re Looking for a Few Good Men.”
That is not said to diss the U.S. Marine Corp.--folks for whom I also have great admiration. (That is especially true as this is Memorial Day weekend here in the U.S.). However, I can't help but notice that it is a bit of a strange juxtaposition: Ultimate warriors and ultimate pacifists being referred to by the same term. Still, at least one connection stands out: bravery and willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice--their lives--for what they consider to be a higher cause.
Note: "Cathars referred to their male elect as bons omes, The Occitan for "good men". In Latin the term is boni homines and in modern French bonnes hommes, also meaning "Good Men". Women members of the elect were bonas femnas, "good women". In Latin the term is bone femine and in modern French Bonnes Femmes, also meaning "Good Women". Together they were "good Christians", but good men and good women themselves frequently referred to each other as 'the friends of God'." (Quoted from Cathar.info - the best site for information on this subject IMO).
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I find it somewhat ironic that the names used for the peace loving leaders of the Christians referred to by their enemies as "Cathars" were later incorporated into the long used slogan for the U.S. Marine Corp.: “We’re Looking for a Few Good Men.”
That is not said to diss the U.S. Marine Corp.--folks for whom I also have great admiration. (That is especially true as this is Memorial Day weekend here in the U.S.). However, I can't help but notice that it is a bit of a strange juxtaposition: Ultimate warriors and ultimate pacifists being referred to by the same term. Still, at least one connection stands out: bravery and willingness to make the ultimate sacrifice--their lives--for what they consider to be a higher cause.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Since I am talking to myself at the moment, I might as well say a few other things that are on my mind. Some of these might be controversial among those who idolize the Cathar movement.
To begin: Every great painting must be cleaned from time-to-time. Also, there is a difference between being a conservative and being a traditionalist. A conservative wants to conserve and even strengthen the original, the traditionalist wants to leave everything alone, trusting that what has accumulated over the ages is all good. Unfortunately, the latter position is based on the mistaken notion that things do not change over time and/or change only for the better.
Going back to the example of the great painting, it is one of the wonders of the modern era to be able to delicately and carefully restore the works of the great masters, often dulled and darkened by the centuries, to their original brilliance and form. This is what a "reformation" is or should be about in the religious context, and this is what the original "reformers" of the church sought--though I will not otherwise judge the merits or success of their efforts.
The original collision between Catholic and Cathar, thesis and antithesis, resulted in the absolute extirpation of the latter. However, it also wrought a mini-reformation in Catholicism, and the example of the Cathars led to many changes for the better in the "old" faith--restoring (just a bit) some of its lost brilliance. However, I believe it would be an error to assume that the Catharism of that period, more than a millenia from its founding, had not also lost some of its original brilliance and luster.
Recovering what Catharism "was" when destroyed will be a huge step. However, Catharism was also more than 1000 years past the time of its founding by the Greatest of Masters and his apostles. It is not unreasonable to believe that it also--despite its beauty and brilliance--may have changed in some ways for the worst since established. There may be need to delicately and carefully seek to do with Catharism what is done with the works of the old masters: Clear from it all the nonsense, dust and grime that accumulate over time in order to restore it to its original brilliance.
Just my opinion. From this you can see that I count myself to be a conservative and not a traditionalist.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I should add, in defense of the traditionalist, that it can often be argued that an attempt to "clean and restore" may merely mess things up worse, that the attempt may be merely an attempt to re-make the original to coincide more with the views of the ones seeking the clean-up, etc. Traditionalists aren't always wrong when they say "hands off". There are almost always two sides to everything.
To begin: Every great painting must be cleaned from time-to-time. Also, there is a difference between being a conservative and being a traditionalist. A conservative wants to conserve and even strengthen the original, the traditionalist wants to leave everything alone, trusting that what has accumulated over the ages is all good. Unfortunately, the latter position is based on the mistaken notion that things do not change over time and/or change only for the better.
Going back to the example of the great painting, it is one of the wonders of the modern era to be able to delicately and carefully restore the works of the great masters, often dulled and darkened by the centuries, to their original brilliance and form. This is what a "reformation" is or should be about in the religious context, and this is what the original "reformers" of the church sought--though I will not otherwise judge the merits or success of their efforts.
The original collision between Catholic and Cathar, thesis and antithesis, resulted in the absolute extirpation of the latter. However, it also wrought a mini-reformation in Catholicism, and the example of the Cathars led to many changes for the better in the "old" faith--restoring (just a bit) some of its lost brilliance. However, I believe it would be an error to assume that the Catharism of that period, more than a millenia from its founding, had not also lost some of its original brilliance and luster.
Recovering what Catharism "was" when destroyed will be a huge step. However, Catharism was also more than 1000 years past the time of its founding by the Greatest of Masters and his apostles. It is not unreasonable to believe that it also--despite its beauty and brilliance--may have changed in some ways for the worst since established. There may be need to delicately and carefully seek to do with Catharism what is done with the works of the old masters: Clear from it all the nonsense, dust and grime that accumulate over time in order to restore it to its original brilliance.
Just my opinion. From this you can see that I count myself to be a conservative and not a traditionalist.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I should add, in defense of the traditionalist, that it can often be argued that an attempt to "clean and restore" may merely mess things up worse, that the attempt may be merely an attempt to re-make the original to coincide more with the views of the ones seeking the clean-up, etc. Traditionalists aren't always wrong when they say "hands off". There are almost always two sides to everything.
Last edited:
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
It should be obvious that I am admirer of the site Cathar.info. Whoever put it together has done exhaustive research and does a very good job of portraying what, or as much as can presently be know about what, Catharism was and its origins.
One of the things I found interesting was his/her discussion of three strands of original Christianity, which are said to be the Pauline strand, the Johannine strand, and the Jewish strand.
Hypotheses of this type are not new, and propose that one stream of Christianity was heavily influenced by Paul, another by the Apostle John, and the last by James, the brother of Jesus.
The Jewish strand (with James as its guiding light), which sought to preserve a more "Jewish" Jesus and Christianity, allegedly lost its base when Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 and died out over the next couple of hundred years.
The Johannine strand is seen by the scholar at Cathar.info as being the source for Catharism (and is often seen to be the source of a lot of Gnostic movements -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Christianity).
This is contrasted by him with the Pauline strand (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Christianity) which he sees as being the source of what later became know as Catholic Christianity.
I think I have seen other discussions where the three early strands are Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, reflecting the types of viewpoints and approaches that were characteristic to these cultures. Once again, the Hebrew/Jewish strand drops out, and the struggle ends up being between Greek ideas / philosophy (in the Neo-Platonism of the day) and the more pragmatic, control minded, and literalist Romans. The Neo-Platonist influences seem to reach their peak with the Origenists (many of whom were reincarnationist) but are eventually crushed by the Imperial power, which is (for obvious reasons) more sympathetic to the "Latin/Roman" influence. In Imperial Christianity, as I look at it, Imperial Rule and Divine Rule are mirror images, with both being absolute and all who don't toe the line being condemned and sentenced to the worst punishments imaginable by an absolute Imperial ruler. Rebels and guilty we may be, but this type of analysis does not comport with the example given in the parable of the Prodigal Son where God is not compared to a proud emperor, but to a loving father.
However, either way, the early battle ends around 500-600 A.D. with what I refer to myself as Imperial Christianity holding the field and crushing and excluding all others. The interesting thing to me is that the reincarnationist thread/strand apparently did not completely fade with the crushing of the Origenists, but apparently continued undercover and growing until it was once again a threat to the chosen orthodoxy 500-600 years later and had to be CRUSHED once again, with even more violence and ruthlessness. Nonetheless, here it is cropping up again after all of these years.
Hmmm. Well, this may have been a long (and possibly pointless) meander through history, but it seems to me that there is a message here somewhere. It seems that the Truth will come out. And God, who is a God of Truth, will make sure that no matter how many times Truth is dead and buried, it will rise again from the dead--much to the consternation of those who killed it and think it is gone for good.
One of the things I found interesting was his/her discussion of three strands of original Christianity, which are said to be the Pauline strand, the Johannine strand, and the Jewish strand.
Hypotheses of this type are not new, and propose that one stream of Christianity was heavily influenced by Paul, another by the Apostle John, and the last by James, the brother of Jesus.
The Jewish strand (with James as its guiding light), which sought to preserve a more "Jewish" Jesus and Christianity, allegedly lost its base when Jerusalem was destroyed in A.D. 70 and died out over the next couple of hundred years.
The Johannine strand is seen by the scholar at Cathar.info as being the source for Catharism (and is often seen to be the source of a lot of Gnostic movements -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johannine_Christianity).
This is contrasted by him with the Pauline strand (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_Christianity) which he sees as being the source of what later became know as Catholic Christianity.
I think I have seen other discussions where the three early strands are Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, reflecting the types of viewpoints and approaches that were characteristic to these cultures. Once again, the Hebrew/Jewish strand drops out, and the struggle ends up being between Greek ideas / philosophy (in the Neo-Platonism of the day) and the more pragmatic, control minded, and literalist Romans. The Neo-Platonist influences seem to reach their peak with the Origenists (many of whom were reincarnationist) but are eventually crushed by the Imperial power, which is (for obvious reasons) more sympathetic to the "Latin/Roman" influence. In Imperial Christianity, as I look at it, Imperial Rule and Divine Rule are mirror images, with both being absolute and all who don't toe the line being condemned and sentenced to the worst punishments imaginable by an absolute Imperial ruler. Rebels and guilty we may be, but this type of analysis does not comport with the example given in the parable of the Prodigal Son where God is not compared to a proud emperor, but to a loving father.
However, either way, the early battle ends around 500-600 A.D. with what I refer to myself as Imperial Christianity holding the field and crushing and excluding all others. The interesting thing to me is that the reincarnationist thread/strand apparently did not completely fade with the crushing of the Origenists, but apparently continued undercover and growing until it was once again a threat to the chosen orthodoxy 500-600 years later and had to be CRUSHED once again, with even more violence and ruthlessness. Nonetheless, here it is cropping up again after all of these years.
Hmmm. Well, this may have been a long (and possibly pointless) meander through history, but it seems to me that there is a message here somewhere. It seems that the Truth will come out. And God, who is a God of Truth, will make sure that no matter how many times Truth is dead and buried, it will rise again from the dead--much to the consternation of those who killed it and think it is gone for good.
Some interesting comments. Taking the example of the Great Painting, I suppose my view is that it is at its best when the paint is not yet dry. By the time it is lauded as 'great', it is already in decline, the longer this state persists, the less it is 'great', the more instead a mere fragment of the past, frozen in time. I guess I don't believe in either greatness nor in freezing to preserve these moments. My ideal is the creative process, the living, breathing now.
How one might apply these thoughts to Catharism I'm not sure - I feel pretty sure that my words will be re-interpreted to mean something other than what I intended. It is one of the frustrations of life on this planet, the difficulties of clear communication.
How one might apply these thoughts to Catharism I'm not sure - I feel pretty sure that my words will be re-interpreted to mean something other than what I intended. It is one of the frustrations of life on this planet, the difficulties of clear communication.
KenJ
Moderator Emeritus
Precisely what I was trying to say when I wrote yesterday about trying to replicate the Sistine Chapel ceiling using stick-figures, but that was something that I truly felt was in trying to describe my reincarnation experiences than anything else.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Speedwell,
I understand the importance of being creative in the moment and the ongoing creative process, but I can't agree in terms of great art getting worse the older it gets. The reason why certain "art" is considered great (whether visual, musical, etc.) is that it transcends time and remains great. We can listen to the music of Mozart or gaze at a great painting from the past and still appreciate its greatness. It will still be considered great music and art--unless the nature of humankind itself changes--a thousand years from now.
Cordially,
S&S
I understand the importance of being creative in the moment and the ongoing creative process, but I can't agree in terms of great art getting worse the older it gets. The reason why certain "art" is considered great (whether visual, musical, etc.) is that it transcends time and remains great. We can listen to the music of Mozart or gaze at a great painting from the past and still appreciate its greatness. It will still be considered great music and art--unless the nature of humankind itself changes--a thousand years from now.
Cordially,
S&S
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
It is amazing to me that only a week has passed since Kaye's last post. I have wondered at myself in regard to Catharism. It did not necessarily grab me by the throat when I first heard of it--which goes back a ways. But my polite curiosity and interest have changed step by step over time. Long before Kaye posted, I had been drawn in, and frustrated by the limitations. All I could study was the bowdlerized sanitized twisted remnants of something--something that was seemingly calling to me from the inside as well as from the outside. Was I there when the bons omes walked and the fires burned? I do not know, but I am not typically one to become so obsessed. There have been lots of transient movements and philosophies I have studied or "looked into" in my quest for whatever I am looking for, but none have resonated as strongly. So, perhaps I was there. It is something I am going to have to look into. I have not had much luck with regression, but Ken has mentioned something I have not tried which worked for him. It may not work for me, and perhaps it is still not the right time, but I will not know until I try.
S&S
S&S
S&S,
Something is calling you. Obviously.
Only one warning, not to scare you but as a preparation for possible outcomes and only based on what I have understood from a close friend (my friend S). He was there too with the Cathars, he's an honest truthseeker. But in regressions, he also found himself on the other side of the fence, part of the Inquisition, not once but multiple times throughout time. He only wants to mention this and doesn't go into details. (he's not proud of it)
It doesn't have to be the case in your past lives but still an issue to meditate on for all of us. What's the difference between the victim and the perpetrator? They are actors in the same play and help each other to find (some) Truth. I dare to call my friend an obsessed looker for truth, at least in the past (as recently as in this life as well). When your soul is really focussed on the understanding of how concepts work out, it might be that the opposites will be explored too. Compare it to the male-female opposition to experience the same concepts from a different angle. Victim-perpetrator is such an opposition too.
Just park this idea somewhere in the back of your head. Maybe you won't need it, or maybe one day it will be useful to understand some findings from the past. Then you're prepared not to judge but to understand that flipping the coin sometimes is needed for your soul to get a full understanding during our series of lives.
Something is calling you. Obviously.
Only one warning, not to scare you but as a preparation for possible outcomes and only based on what I have understood from a close friend (my friend S). He was there too with the Cathars, he's an honest truthseeker. But in regressions, he also found himself on the other side of the fence, part of the Inquisition, not once but multiple times throughout time. He only wants to mention this and doesn't go into details. (he's not proud of it)
It doesn't have to be the case in your past lives but still an issue to meditate on for all of us. What's the difference between the victim and the perpetrator? They are actors in the same play and help each other to find (some) Truth. I dare to call my friend an obsessed looker for truth, at least in the past (as recently as in this life as well). When your soul is really focussed on the understanding of how concepts work out, it might be that the opposites will be explored too. Compare it to the male-female opposition to experience the same concepts from a different angle. Victim-perpetrator is such an opposition too.
Just park this idea somewhere in the back of your head. Maybe you won't need it, or maybe one day it will be useful to understand some findings from the past. Then you're prepared not to judge but to understand that flipping the coin sometimes is needed for your soul to get a full understanding during our series of lives.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Firefly,
Your warning is very apropos, and not something I had considered. However, it is always a possibility in this field, though I consider it doubtful that I was an inquisitor for the same reason that I doubt I was a perfecti. My doubt in regard to the former as well as the latter is based on the same flaws I see in myself: I don't think I have the necessary "starch" in my soul to play either role. C. S. Lewis once famously observed that the really great sinners and saints are very similar in a certain key respect: they both are characterized by enormous will-power. It is the power of an indomitable will that keeps them persisting against all forms of hardship and opposition, sometimes to a very bitter end. I.e., as I consider the overly dreamy, easily distracted and indolent nature I struggle with, and an aging body that shows all the signs of over-indulgence, I don't think I have what it takes to "make the grade" in either category.
However, I also sometimes think that there might be something exactly opposite underneath. Something that could be raised to life by the right . . . cause (?). Actually, it frightens me to some extent, as I know that if it is there and can be brought out it will be like many of the other "no turning back" aspects of life. The change is irreversible, and it is quite likely to lead me through all of the aforesaid hardship and opposition to a possibly bitter end.
Nonetheless, isn't that what my endless searching has been all about? Am I looking for the key that will unlock that particular door? I have studied many approaches in my life, and spent some time with each. None has had that impact on me in the end, though I have retained pieces of each and Christ, unshakeable, remains in the center.
Now I have come to a "way" that is closed off and seemingly walled over--buried alive by the Inquisition. I cannot seem to move past it even though I cannot fully penetrate it. It would be very ironic to find that I was one of those who helped to bury it--but not without a certain poetic justice. I don't particularly like to use the word "karma", preferring to think in terms of reaping what you sow. But I have to admit that in such a case, I would definitely be reaping (at least in part) what I had sown. Whether the pain and misery sown was reaped elsewhere and elsewhen, is an open question, though some of the fear I experience in trying to penetrate the past might say yes.
Well, either way, I am ready to find out. Thanks for the warning. It is appreciated.
Cordially,
S&S
Your warning is very apropos, and not something I had considered. However, it is always a possibility in this field, though I consider it doubtful that I was an inquisitor for the same reason that I doubt I was a perfecti. My doubt in regard to the former as well as the latter is based on the same flaws I see in myself: I don't think I have the necessary "starch" in my soul to play either role. C. S. Lewis once famously observed that the really great sinners and saints are very similar in a certain key respect: they both are characterized by enormous will-power. It is the power of an indomitable will that keeps them persisting against all forms of hardship and opposition, sometimes to a very bitter end. I.e., as I consider the overly dreamy, easily distracted and indolent nature I struggle with, and an aging body that shows all the signs of over-indulgence, I don't think I have what it takes to "make the grade" in either category.
However, I also sometimes think that there might be something exactly opposite underneath. Something that could be raised to life by the right . . . cause (?). Actually, it frightens me to some extent, as I know that if it is there and can be brought out it will be like many of the other "no turning back" aspects of life. The change is irreversible, and it is quite likely to lead me through all of the aforesaid hardship and opposition to a possibly bitter end.
Nonetheless, isn't that what my endless searching has been all about? Am I looking for the key that will unlock that particular door? I have studied many approaches in my life, and spent some time with each. None has had that impact on me in the end, though I have retained pieces of each and Christ, unshakeable, remains in the center.
Now I have come to a "way" that is closed off and seemingly walled over--buried alive by the Inquisition. I cannot seem to move past it even though I cannot fully penetrate it. It would be very ironic to find that I was one of those who helped to bury it--but not without a certain poetic justice. I don't particularly like to use the word "karma", preferring to think in terms of reaping what you sow. But I have to admit that in such a case, I would definitely be reaping (at least in part) what I had sown. Whether the pain and misery sown was reaped elsewhere and elsewhen, is an open question, though some of the fear I experience in trying to penetrate the past might say yes.
Well, either way, I am ready to find out. Thanks for the warning. It is appreciated.
Cordially,
S&S
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Ken,
If I played the inquisitor, I certainly hope that it was that way. There certainly seems to be grounds for believing in such direct agreements among the members of a small intimate "soul" group. But I have to wonder when it comes to the large scale sweeping events of history. I.e., the artillery shell that came from 1000s of yards away to kill a person and several others was not necessarily fired by a member of his soul group--which would necessarily have to include all of the others killed as well. What about the bomb dropped on Nagasaki? What about the people that went to the gas chambers in WWII? I suppose it is possible that all agreed to be there and die at that particular time/place--even though that agreement might not have been "with" the perpetrators. Actually, something Kaye says she was told (above) also seems to back up that idea in terms of the Cathars. I don't know, but after the scope moves from the few who know each other intimately to the many who don't, I get a bit uneasy with that concept. Does the fact that someone agreed to the suffering they would receive in a particular lifetime exonerate those who caused it? Maybe I am just not ready to follow through on all of the implications there.
Cordially,
S&S
If I played the inquisitor, I certainly hope that it was that way. There certainly seems to be grounds for believing in such direct agreements among the members of a small intimate "soul" group. But I have to wonder when it comes to the large scale sweeping events of history. I.e., the artillery shell that came from 1000s of yards away to kill a person and several others was not necessarily fired by a member of his soul group--which would necessarily have to include all of the others killed as well. What about the bomb dropped on Nagasaki? What about the people that went to the gas chambers in WWII? I suppose it is possible that all agreed to be there and die at that particular time/place--even though that agreement might not have been "with" the perpetrators. Actually, something Kaye says she was told (above) also seems to back up that idea in terms of the Cathars. I don't know, but after the scope moves from the few who know each other intimately to the many who don't, I get a bit uneasy with that concept. Does the fact that someone agreed to the suffering they would receive in a particular lifetime exonerate those who caused it? Maybe I am just not ready to follow through on all of the implications there.
Cordially,
S&S
The last age.
Active Member
Right now the earth's axis is off enough, to change the flight path of aeroplanes .
The last age.
Active Member
SeaAnd Sky ,first I love your posts ? Long ago after much studying I discarded any adhesion to Cathar beliefs . One of the problems for me is that
people are not looking at history and belief from above , but from a subjective ,very personal point of view, and this is what the church was created to
prevent , as it causes endless fractures , a sea of endless possiblities , where everyone is down below and lost , finally .
For me God created both matter and non matter ,the flesh and the spirit ,everything in a harmonious whole which had worked perfectly,and which Christ came back, to bring into order .
It took me some time to digest why Catharism was a serious threat to the Church, positing as it does the idea of two creators ,one of the good ,and one of the bad , splitting Creation .
As it happens ,I have had the opportunity to study the effects close at hand , as I live there .I also have had the opportunity of studying other French
communities to see the difference , and there is a difference , a real one .
Many seem to forget that the church had a role, and I believe they fulfilled it, as it was to teach of the true God Universally ,and to prevent serious heresies about the True God from arising in the minds and hearts of people ;Because some methods were cruel or excessive perhaps God will in time judge, and those involved will pay the price , but Jesus did say He did not come to make peace ,but with a sword .
Deep heresies are dangerous for human advancement ,and if they are bad enough distort the life here on earth ,as well as in heaven .
As I have been led to believe the idea of two creators was the reason for preventing Catharism ,not in itself reincarnation .
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Last Age,
As you may have noted from my Post #97, I acknowledge the fact that some scraping and dusting may be necessary, but first we need to recover what was lost. At the moment, we do not truly know the complete scope and nature of the original beliefs of the Cathars. Practically the only witness we have to Cathar doctrine and practices is that of their enemies, who vigilantly sought both to slander and destroy them. However, even with that caveat, I have my concerns about the type of hard dualism that was brought to them by Nicetas of the Bogomils and others. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicetas_(Bogomil_bishop). Other sources report that before the intervention of Nicetas, the Cathars practiced a mitigated dualism that was not unlike that normal among ascetic Christians. (E.g., in accordance with 2 Cor. 4:4 and other scripture).
I am adverse to all forms of Gnosticism (as I understand it), but I do not believe that was the original faith of the Cathars, that all of them were hard dualists at the time of their extermination, or that they deserved what they received at the hands of the Roman church and its helpers. In this regard I cannot agree, and consider that what was done to them was not only unjustified, but a permanent stain on the reputation and history of the Roman church. One prevents heresies by preaching, education and example. To do otherwise is to sink to the level of the enemies of Christ, who swept out of the desert to conquer, kill and/or enslave all who would not bend the knee to their brand of oppression and insanity. I never wish to see the people of God adopt such despicable methods or seek to justify doing so. To my mind the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition are something that should be repented, not applauded.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I'm adding this P.S. to apologize for such a harsh response, but not to change it. I'm usually gentler in my approach. However, this is a subject about which I feel very passionate. That passion is not particularly directed at the Roman church, with which I normally agree on many things, but against many others in the world today who seek to crush and/or restrict freedom of belief and expression. It is for this reason that I believe that what was done to the Cathars was very, very wrong.
As you may have noted from my Post #97, I acknowledge the fact that some scraping and dusting may be necessary, but first we need to recover what was lost. At the moment, we do not truly know the complete scope and nature of the original beliefs of the Cathars. Practically the only witness we have to Cathar doctrine and practices is that of their enemies, who vigilantly sought both to slander and destroy them. However, even with that caveat, I have my concerns about the type of hard dualism that was brought to them by Nicetas of the Bogomils and others. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicetas_(Bogomil_bishop). Other sources report that before the intervention of Nicetas, the Cathars practiced a mitigated dualism that was not unlike that normal among ascetic Christians. (E.g., in accordance with 2 Cor. 4:4 and other scripture).
I am adverse to all forms of Gnosticism (as I understand it), but I do not believe that was the original faith of the Cathars, that all of them were hard dualists at the time of their extermination, or that they deserved what they received at the hands of the Roman church and its helpers. In this regard I cannot agree, and consider that what was done to them was not only unjustified, but a permanent stain on the reputation and history of the Roman church. One prevents heresies by preaching, education and example. To do otherwise is to sink to the level of the enemies of Christ, who swept out of the desert to conquer, kill and/or enslave all who would not bend the knee to their brand of oppression and insanity. I never wish to see the people of God adopt such despicable methods or seek to justify doing so. To my mind the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition are something that should be repented, not applauded.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I'm adding this P.S. to apologize for such a harsh response, but not to change it. I'm usually gentler in my approach. However, this is a subject about which I feel very passionate. That passion is not particularly directed at the Roman church, with which I normally agree on many things, but against many others in the world today who seek to crush and/or restrict freedom of belief and expression. It is for this reason that I believe that what was done to the Cathars was very, very wrong.
Last edited:
I agree, not easy. One of the reasons I didn't want to see my own death in my Mayan life is that deep down I am scared to recognize the one who actually killed me. It's like I already know that answer.
I think that we shouldn't mix levels. When people do wrong, they should be held accountable for in the same life. No question about that. This goes above our personal religious believes. It's also a soul question that justice be done in the end.
It doesn't matter what the Higher Soul opinions are. On a lower level, we just follow the laws of that level. Simple as that.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Firefly,
I don't think you ever got a response in re this question, but I'll take a stab at it. The scriptures quote John the Baptist as saying that he baptized with water, but the one who was coming was greater than him and would baptize with the Holy Spirit and with fire. There have been a lot of different interpretations of what "fire" means in this quote. Some seem to think that the Holy Spirit was given to the good guys and the fire indicated the bad guys getting judgment/punishment (or alternatively, the inevitable persecution of Christ's followers).
It seems to me that these were taken by the Cathars as combined in Jesus' baptism of his followers in the Holy Spirit and Fire. This "baptism" (= immersion) was conveyed by the laying on of hands, and was considered by the Cathars to be identical to the Consolamentum. It was not by water, but considered to be "of the Holy Spirit and fire" (as said by John). Further, at the original Pentecost the Bible says that "tongues" of fire rested on their heads. So, the Cathars like many others probably saw this as the fulfillment of John's prophecy.
Further than this I cannot say, but after receiving this at Pentecost, the Apostles were greatly empowered. They became bold and inspired in proclaiming Jesus, converting people, able to heal, perform miracles, and went forth with courage to fulfill their tasks and receive martyrdom. Based on this, I would say that the "fire" meant something more than just "fired up". It definitely includes this, but there also seems to be power of some sort conveyed, especially (in the context where it is quoted by Kaye) the ability to withstand and possibility transcend the experience of being burned alive.
Kundalini? I don't know. That seems like a different type of process from the things I've read, but . . . .
Cordially,
S&S
PS--I'm just taking a shot at it in Kaye's continued absence. I'll be curious to get her take on the matter when/if she returns.
Last edited:
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
All:
I'm pleased to have a wonderful new resource to convey.
The presenter, Maria Soresina is an Italian scholar who specializes in Dante and his connection to the Cathars. You can read about her here, though I had to use Google translate: https://translate.google.com/transl...wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Soresina&prev=search
Dante's connection to the Cathars was certainly something I knew nothing about and didn't know existed. And, yes, after listening to her, I am now convinced that he was one (in stealth mode). She is charming and articulate, but that is just from watching her and listening to her--to understand her I had to rely on the subtitles graciously provided. In any case, I think her knowledge of the Cathars as well as Dante is about as complete as could be hoped for in this era, and I learned a good many things about both that I did not know. It is also good to have a different perspective on what was practically a pan-European movement through Italian eyes based on Italian Catharism, rather than the usual view of things focused just on the Languedoc region. So, if you have the least bit of interest in this area, please watch. There are 10 videos on this topic, but they can be taken in easy bites at your own pace. So, don't make excuses if you're a Cathar fan:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJuTlqdCrDs
7-10: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmh_h2abX517xVXH4OFPhGECFfY780k_2
PS--I learned many things I did not know before, as well as having some unpleasant representations made about the Cathars dispelled.
Cordially,
S&S
I'm pleased to have a wonderful new resource to convey.
The presenter, Maria Soresina is an Italian scholar who specializes in Dante and his connection to the Cathars. You can read about her here, though I had to use Google translate: https://translate.google.com/transl...wikipedia.org/wiki/Maria_Soresina&prev=search
Dante's connection to the Cathars was certainly something I knew nothing about and didn't know existed. And, yes, after listening to her, I am now convinced that he was one (in stealth mode). She is charming and articulate, but that is just from watching her and listening to her--to understand her I had to rely on the subtitles graciously provided. In any case, I think her knowledge of the Cathars as well as Dante is about as complete as could be hoped for in this era, and I learned a good many things about both that I did not know. It is also good to have a different perspective on what was practically a pan-European movement through Italian eyes based on Italian Catharism, rather than the usual view of things focused just on the Languedoc region. So, if you have the least bit of interest in this area, please watch. There are 10 videos on this topic, but they can be taken in easy bites at your own pace. So, don't make excuses if you're a Cathar fan:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJuTlqdCrDs
7-10: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLmh_h2abX517xVXH4OFPhGECFfY780k_2
PS--I learned many things I did not know before, as well as having some unpleasant representations made about the Cathars dispelled.
Cordially,
S&S
Last edited:
Thanks for trying. It is not easy to understand Kundalini. Don't think that it is just an exclusive Hindu concept because it is not. It is known in all kind of cultures and religions under different names. So I was curious if 'the fire within' from the Cathars could refer to the same phenomenon.
The Kundalini is a kind of potential within all of us. It's an enormous amount of energy that under certain conditions can awaken. I am not a good describer but I'll do my best.
For some people, especially in the eastern traditions, this awakening might happen in a smooth and gentle way mostly because of spiritual practices and the strict guidance of a teacher.
But, as I said that this phenomenon happens all over the world, there are many people that are not prepared or without the knowledge or guidance when they get the experience of the awakening and rising of this enormous energy potential from within. In this case, the process will be rough(er). You'll feel real fire in your body and going through your veins.
Now you'll wonder what purpose is behind all of this? Well, it's a great spiritual process. In the past, this kundalini force was kept as an esoteric secret, in almost all cultures. This massive energy is Life Force herself (although some make a distinction between Kundalini and Life Force, I just try to explain it in the most simple way). When it starts to flow freely through your body, it also connects you with Everything that Is. It's high energy and it takes time to adapt oneself to it. The reason why many people want to reach this awakening and rising of the energy is that it is considered the way to enlightenment.
It certainly gives much: insights, knowledge, wisdom. Personally, I don't think that enlightenment is just an ever during stage. It comes and it goes. The best examples are those guru's that start as genuine teachers but later on get trapped in filthy scandals.
I can hardly imagine that the Cathars were not aware of this phenomenon. They would not advertise this knowledge, that's for sure. So for me, it's possible that they only referred to it as 'the fire within' without further explanation for the common believers.
This is an interesting video, Ken. Thanks. This is a real Chi master.
Some people consider the Chi equal to the Kundalini and others make a distinction.
In my intuition, the Kundalini force is a personal process. It really is high energy. The theory is that this energy lies dormant (in every one of us) at the base of our spine. When it 'awakens', the energy rises up along our spine, clearing all the chakras and ends at the top of our head. According to theory, the energy should circle back to where it started from. In an unawakened state, this kundalini energy also flows ( a little bit) through our system, because if not, we would be dead. It's the Life Force.
As far as I understand about Chi, this energy runs through meridians. That's why those healers use needles and pressure on specific points in our body.
It's related, not quite the same. I am not a real expert on this matter.
Some people consider the Chi equal to the Kundalini and others make a distinction.
In my intuition, the Kundalini force is a personal process. It really is high energy. The theory is that this energy lies dormant (in every one of us) at the base of our spine. When it 'awakens', the energy rises up along our spine, clearing all the chakras and ends at the top of our head. According to theory, the energy should circle back to where it started from. In an unawakened state, this kundalini energy also flows ( a little bit) through our system, because if not, we would be dead. It's the Life Force.
As far as I understand about Chi, this energy runs through meridians. That's why those healers use needles and pressure on specific points in our body.
It's related, not quite the same. I am not a real expert on this matter.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Firefly/Ken,
Firefly, you could very well be right about the Cathar "Good Men" and "Good Women" and the "fire". That is one of the reasons I am so frustrated by the barrier to knowledge created by the destruction of all living Cathars and, probably, their most important esoteric writings.
Ken, I've seen this guy before. He is amazing. Most seem to consider Chi (China), Ki (Japan), Prana (India), etc. to be the same thing--a circulating energy/life force for the human body. As Firefly says, you're not alive if you don't have this going on. Of course, cultivating it like this guy has done may require special talents as well as special training. However, the rising of Kundalini is usually taken to be something beyond even the type of extraordinary thing seen here. I'm trying to think of an analogy, but having a hard time doing so. In short, the Kundalini not only is supposedly many times more powerful, it is supposed to more or less rewire and revamp your whole energy system and take it to a whole new level--one where almost unimaginable things can become possible both in terms of perception and in terms of action. Hmmm. Analogies--your home generator (even if souped up like this guy is) compared to a power station? Probably I'm out of my league on this--someone else may be able to do better both in terms of explanation as well as in actual experienced descriptions.
Cordially,
S&S
Firefly, you could very well be right about the Cathar "Good Men" and "Good Women" and the "fire". That is one of the reasons I am so frustrated by the barrier to knowledge created by the destruction of all living Cathars and, probably, their most important esoteric writings.
Ken, I've seen this guy before. He is amazing. Most seem to consider Chi (China), Ki (Japan), Prana (India), etc. to be the same thing--a circulating energy/life force for the human body. As Firefly says, you're not alive if you don't have this going on. Of course, cultivating it like this guy has done may require special talents as well as special training. However, the rising of Kundalini is usually taken to be something beyond even the type of extraordinary thing seen here. I'm trying to think of an analogy, but having a hard time doing so. In short, the Kundalini not only is supposedly many times more powerful, it is supposed to more or less rewire and revamp your whole energy system and take it to a whole new level--one where almost unimaginable things can become possible both in terms of perception and in terms of action. Hmmm. Analogies--your home generator (even if souped up like this guy is) compared to a power station? Probably I'm out of my league on this--someone else may be able to do better both in terms of explanation as well as in actual experienced descriptions.
Cordially,
S&S
S&S,
You made a nice description of the rising of the Kundalini.
I did experience this, three years ago. A bit the rough way, but still smoother than you could have expected from someone who was unprepared.
You made a nice description of the rising of the Kundalini.
I did experience this, three years ago. A bit the rough way, but still smoother than you could have expected from someone who was unprepared.
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi Ken,
Some looked real to me, others I couldn't tell. In truth, I got as far as some of the "wind" scenes, and they looked like they might have just involved some gesturing during wind gusts on the one hand and/or taking advantage of vortexes formed in known areas between buildings. Anyhow, some !!! other not so much. I've had the same experience looking at some of the cool poltergeist videos put up on Youtube. Some look real, but . . .
Cordially,
S&S
Some looked real to me, others I couldn't tell. In truth, I got as far as some of the "wind" scenes, and they looked like they might have just involved some gesturing during wind gusts on the one hand and/or taking advantage of vortexes formed in known areas between buildings. Anyhow, some !!! other not so much. I've had the same experience looking at some of the cool poltergeist videos put up on Youtube. Some look real, but . . .
Cordially,
S&S
SeaAndSky
Senior Registered
Hi All,
Reincarnation Video (#6 above).
I had some time, so I went through and did a translation of the introduction from Italian into English (using online resources) on Video 6: Reincarnation, as I thought that might be of the most immediate interest. After that, I went through and tried to transcribe as much as I could in regard to Cathar positions on the subject as recited by Maria Soresina in the video. Obviously, there will be a lot of redundancy in these two, but I thought both would prove useful. (I did, however, skip her coverage of how Dante shows his adherence to those positions in the Divine Comedy--but this you can get from watching the video).
So, first, the summary given online of the video:
“What happens after death? " This is perhaps the most distressing question that man has always posed, and which he continues to ask himself. The answers given are innumerable. There are those who think that nothing happens, but the great majority of people believe (or rather hope) that there is a life after death, that their personality does not fade into nothingness, and that from the height of the heavens one can see how the lives of children and grandchildren proceed.
The hope that there is something after death also hides a need for justice: that the honest and the good are rewarded and, above all, that the bad ones be punished.
All religions foresee it, albeit in different ways, attributable to two systems: on the one hand the universal judgment with its relative reward or eternal punishment; on the other hand reincarnation.
It is absurd to ask which is the best system, or, worse still, which is the "true" one. In the history of man these two visions have always been present, both satisfying the need for justice: in the Catholic system evil is punished with Hell, in the other it is expiated in the course of many lives.
The belief in reincarnation has an ancient history, Pythagoras and Plato believed in it, and circulated in the first centuries of Christianity until, in 553, it was condemned as a heretic.
The Cathars believed in reincarnation and it seems to me unequivocal that even Dante believed in it. In my opinion, various passages that present difficulties of interpretation and illogicality can only be resolved using the concept of reincarnation. In the video I analyze one, the most significant also because it is found in the penultimate song of the poem.
It could be objected that Dante speaks in clear letters of resurrection. But the Cathars also believed in the resurrection. Not in that of material bodies, of course. The Cathars believed that with the resurrection all the spirits would have had a glorious body, called "robe", but also - and the thing sounds strange - their "throne" and their "crown".
This particular terminology - and used exclusively by the Cathars - is present in the Comedy: and this is one of the many rather irrefutable proofs of Dante's catharism."
Next, here are my transcribed notes taken from the subtitled dialog of the Video:
The Cathars sought return to the original order, which included the separation of spirit from matter. Somehow particles of spirit have been trapped in matter, in particular, in human bodies. Our duty is to free these elements of light. A lifetime is not long enough. The spirit is forced to reincarnate. When the last particle of spirit is free, the world will end. There will be again a total separation of spirit and matter. I.e., the restoration of the original order, the apocatastasis. It is absurd to question whether the system of Catholic resurrection of Cathar reincarnation is best—both satisfy the requirements of justice. In the Catholic system evil is punished in Hell. In the other it is expiated through numerous lives. The belief in reincarnation circulated in the first centuries of Christianity up to when, in 533, the Second Council of Constantinople condemned it a heretic. It is founded on the Gospel where certain words seem to allude to reincarnation. From the first Christians it passed to the Cathars. That they believed in reincarnation is doubtless. But the Cathars also believed in resurrection, not of the body of course, the body belongs to the material world and is destined for death and corruption. That’s what the apostle Paul says: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15: 50). The apostle Paul distinguishes between an animal and a spiritual body, a terrestrial and a celestial incorruptible glorious body. The Cathars called “resurrection” the return to this body called “glorious” or “vesture”. The Cathars believed in the end times but with no Last Judgment, instead the end of the struggle between the two principles. No eternal Hell, but the liberation of every particle of light imprisoned in matter. This is a common belief of all the doctrines which believe in reincarnation. The Cathars believed that with the resurrection all spirits would get a glorious body called “vesture” or “white vesture” but also—their “throne” and their “crown”. The former apparently represents their return to their position in and among the hosts of Heaven, while the crown is apparently a crown of light.
Cordially,
S&S
Reincarnation Video (#6 above).
I had some time, so I went through and did a translation of the introduction from Italian into English (using online resources) on Video 6: Reincarnation, as I thought that might be of the most immediate interest. After that, I went through and tried to transcribe as much as I could in regard to Cathar positions on the subject as recited by Maria Soresina in the video. Obviously, there will be a lot of redundancy in these two, but I thought both would prove useful. (I did, however, skip her coverage of how Dante shows his adherence to those positions in the Divine Comedy--but this you can get from watching the video).
So, first, the summary given online of the video:
“What happens after death? " This is perhaps the most distressing question that man has always posed, and which he continues to ask himself. The answers given are innumerable. There are those who think that nothing happens, but the great majority of people believe (or rather hope) that there is a life after death, that their personality does not fade into nothingness, and that from the height of the heavens one can see how the lives of children and grandchildren proceed.
The hope that there is something after death also hides a need for justice: that the honest and the good are rewarded and, above all, that the bad ones be punished.
All religions foresee it, albeit in different ways, attributable to two systems: on the one hand the universal judgment with its relative reward or eternal punishment; on the other hand reincarnation.
It is absurd to ask which is the best system, or, worse still, which is the "true" one. In the history of man these two visions have always been present, both satisfying the need for justice: in the Catholic system evil is punished with Hell, in the other it is expiated in the course of many lives.
The belief in reincarnation has an ancient history, Pythagoras and Plato believed in it, and circulated in the first centuries of Christianity until, in 553, it was condemned as a heretic.
The Cathars believed in reincarnation and it seems to me unequivocal that even Dante believed in it. In my opinion, various passages that present difficulties of interpretation and illogicality can only be resolved using the concept of reincarnation. In the video I analyze one, the most significant also because it is found in the penultimate song of the poem.
It could be objected that Dante speaks in clear letters of resurrection. But the Cathars also believed in the resurrection. Not in that of material bodies, of course. The Cathars believed that with the resurrection all the spirits would have had a glorious body, called "robe", but also - and the thing sounds strange - their "throne" and their "crown".
This particular terminology - and used exclusively by the Cathars - is present in the Comedy: and this is one of the many rather irrefutable proofs of Dante's catharism."
Next, here are my transcribed notes taken from the subtitled dialog of the Video:
The Cathars sought return to the original order, which included the separation of spirit from matter. Somehow particles of spirit have been trapped in matter, in particular, in human bodies. Our duty is to free these elements of light. A lifetime is not long enough. The spirit is forced to reincarnate. When the last particle of spirit is free, the world will end. There will be again a total separation of spirit and matter. I.e., the restoration of the original order, the apocatastasis. It is absurd to question whether the system of Catholic resurrection of Cathar reincarnation is best—both satisfy the requirements of justice. In the Catholic system evil is punished in Hell. In the other it is expiated through numerous lives. The belief in reincarnation circulated in the first centuries of Christianity up to when, in 533, the Second Council of Constantinople condemned it a heretic. It is founded on the Gospel where certain words seem to allude to reincarnation. From the first Christians it passed to the Cathars. That they believed in reincarnation is doubtless. But the Cathars also believed in resurrection, not of the body of course, the body belongs to the material world and is destined for death and corruption. That’s what the apostle Paul says: “Flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 15: 50). The apostle Paul distinguishes between an animal and a spiritual body, a terrestrial and a celestial incorruptible glorious body. The Cathars called “resurrection” the return to this body called “glorious” or “vesture”. The Cathars believed in the end times but with no Last Judgment, instead the end of the struggle between the two principles. No eternal Hell, but the liberation of every particle of light imprisoned in matter. This is a common belief of all the doctrines which believe in reincarnation. The Cathars believed that with the resurrection all spirits would get a glorious body called “vesture” or “white vesture” but also—their “throne” and their “crown”. The former apparently represents their return to their position in and among the hosts of Heaven, while the crown is apparently a crown of light.
Cordially,
S&S
Last edited:
Interesting S&S, I really appreciate reading about the original believes of the Cathars.
This is interesting. As a religion, they are as anthropocentric as the Catholics. I wonder what their story of Creation is.
For people who don't know the meaning of anthropocentrism: it's a point of view that places the human spirit as the center of the Universe. It was all 'made' for us the human spirits to enjoy. Some religions also state that when the humans spiral downwards with their moral standards, this will cause the end of the material World. According to the Cathars, it seems this end game will come as soon as the last human spirit will be freed from the material chains but then anyhow: this World will end.
So, now we are interested to know why we are forced to reincarnate, according to the Cathars. What do they think is the higher purpose of this system? The reward is at the end, a state of bliss/wisdom/angelical existence. Does this mean that we as souls had a lower status at the beginning? Did we start as baby souls?
The text mentions that 'particles of Light' got entrapped in the matter. I bet they thought this was the Devil's work and that the Devil makes us reincarnate over and over again until we are able to free ourselves from this devilish prison by raising vibrations. That would make sense. The Devil as Creator of our World. That's also why they were so fiercely persecuted in the past. The Inquisition thought they were worshippers of the Devil (which in fact they were not) and were eager to extinguish every single bit of the existence of this doctrine.
This is interesting. As a religion, they are as anthropocentric as the Catholics. I wonder what their story of Creation is.
For people who don't know the meaning of anthropocentrism: it's a point of view that places the human spirit as the center of the Universe. It was all 'made' for us the human spirits to enjoy. Some religions also state that when the humans spiral downwards with their moral standards, this will cause the end of the material World. According to the Cathars, it seems this end game will come as soon as the last human spirit will be freed from the material chains but then anyhow: this World will end.
So, now we are interested to know why we are forced to reincarnate, according to the Cathars. What do they think is the higher purpose of this system? The reward is at the end, a state of bliss/wisdom/angelical existence. Does this mean that we as souls had a lower status at the beginning? Did we start as baby souls?
The text mentions that 'particles of Light' got entrapped in the matter. I bet they thought this was the Devil's work and that the Devil makes us reincarnate over and over again until we are able to free ourselves from this devilish prison by raising vibrations. That would make sense. The Devil as Creator of our World. That's also why they were so fiercely persecuted in the past. The Inquisition thought they were worshippers of the Devil (which in fact they were not) and were eager to extinguish every single bit of the existence of this doctrine.