> They really don't mesh since the Creator is aloof from the
> Cosmos whereas Atrilith was capable of manifestation within
> it. The Invisible God can manifest in the Cosmos but it is
> not the Creator when it does so.
I agree with you about the Creator, but I think much the same is true of Atrilith. A. doesn't _manifest_ within the cosmos, though he's in some sense "mystically knowable" from within it, which I think is a very different proposition. (Some Lunar (and Western?) mystics also claim to be able to 'know' the Creator, for example.)
As analogues go, I grant that this is pretty speculative and vague stuff, though.
> >I have no problem with westerners somehow
> >equating Vith and Zzabur, but you wouldn't get enlightened
> >Gloranthan metaphysicists to agree that they are equals,
> >while they just might agree down to 1/Atrilith/Creator.
> This is giving supremacy to the mystical perspective, an error.
If we read Nils as saying that this is what _Eastern_ 'enlightened Gloranthan metaphysicists' (and their symps) say, then I agree with him. I'm happy to stand mute as to whether it's to any degree 'objectively true'.
Sla'n libh,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail