Peter:
>
> I refer you to the Vithelan Creation Myth where Durapdur becomes
> aware of the measures of Time, Space and Consciousness and perceives
> a lesser version of himself within those measures, Atrilith. Ergo
> Atrilith was manifested within the Cosmos.
Atrilith did manifest in/as the world, but then was subsumed into Durapdur when the act of creation was done, so I'd agree in part with both. Now, Atrilith is no longr immanent, it is of the Ultimate.
Me:
>
> >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.
Peter:
>
> This is giving supremacy to the mystical perspective, an error.
Alex:
>
> If we read Nils as saying that this is what _Eastern_ 'enlightened
> Gloranthan metaphysicists' (and their symps) say, then I agree with
> him.
Oops, didn't catch that. Now I see the objection. Yes, I mean eastern metaphysicists.
Peter:
>
> In which case they would be crap metaphysicians.
- -..
> Zzabur is Vith's equal or equivalent in that he is the primal
> master of the Western perspective just as Vith is the primal
> master of the Eastern. I fail to see how they would 'disagree
> completely' about this.
Aha! That's what you mean. Sure, I agree that the mythical function of master/ruling deity is equivalent to the mythical function of master/ruling deity.
And that's as far as Vith and Zzabur can be compared. Their mythical presence is very different. They are likely to show up in each other's myths, as rivals or otherwise, unlike impersonal entities like Atrilith and the Creator.
Powered by hypermail