R: R: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Etheric Realm, Keely and the "devices""question
- Oh yes Starman I know that radioactivity is a reversed anti-etheric realm
but my example was just about the risk of walking on the borders of
different realms- in this case sensible and subsensible- with no awakening
to an upper morality or love-wisdom level.
It's the same attitude, whatever realm we are trying to investigate. Just
the attitude that doesn't care of the need of the triple step on morality
for one on cognition.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Wednesday, August 28, 2002 8:51 PM
Subject: Re: R: R: [anthroposophy] Re: Etheric Realm, Keely and the
> okcgbr@... writes:
> > Dear Starman,
> > that's neither a matter of stupid and blind fear (I'm not a "beghina" )
nor a matter of " luddism".
> > This one was ta Seventeenth century's ignorance son, while mine and
others' care about the risks of some steps behind the border of etheric
realm is based on study and cognition and , if we trace a link to the A and
H bombs questions, on historical facts too.
> *******I'm puzzled. What did the atomic and hydrogen bombs have to do with
etheric technology? It's based on the opposite forces to radio-activity.
> List owner: firstname.lastname@example.org
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/