Re: the reasons for Reason
- Dear Gerry,
Just sort-of struggling-out of my ilness now, which NEARLY deprived
me from "THINKING" because of this Stupid-thing, which is
Boys, oh boys... I'm SO GRATEFUL to be able to THINK again, and leave
this "automatical-pilot" of trying to keep-up a nice-, social-
behaviour to my surroundings behind me...
It really SCARED me, how heavy-, and continuous "physical-pain"
suddenly can be so "overwhelming" that one can't concentrate
anylonger on the thoughts of one's own-mind...
I urged myself to concentrate, but sometimes I simply couldn't!
I never have gone through such an "ordeal" before, but what "rescued"
me every-time again was a little-flash of "KNOWING" about "call-it-
Sorry if I should have bothered you with this; but none of my
friends/children/who-ever would be able to "understand"; so I choose
to keep silent about this experience.
I somehow am feeling that You will not think me too "stupid", when
With Warm Regards,
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, "Gerry" <gerryhsp@y...> wrote:
> --- In email@example.com, "jachthondus" <rompy@x> wrote:
> > Dear Gerry,
> > Thank you SO MUCH for your kind-and-patient-response to my
> > I apologize for not yet having had the opportunity to answer you,
> > my professional-life has been a sort-of "hectic" during the last
> > week; and more-over I've fallen ill now.
> > You can be sure that your message has been highly appreciated!
> > Hope to meet you tomorrow.
> > With Warm Regards,
> > Jach.
> No problem at all, Jach. We can absolutely empathize with Life's
> constant demands and occasional setbacks. You take care of
> and join us when you're ready. We'll still be here. :-)
- Hello Gerry
On 29-Feb-04, you wrote:
> http://www.nmsi.ac.uk/piclib/imagerecord.asp?id=10411307 This is a
> nutshell version attributing the image's first known use to French
> astronomer Camille Flammarion in 1888.
I cannot remember the name of his book, but Flammarion was into the
Occult and Metaphysical, more or less Theosophical in tone if I
remember right, so he may have consciously altered the older 16th
Century image to suit his more modern Occult outlook. Just another
coincidence, though perhaps. AFAIK, he was not involved in the late
19th century French Gnostic movement, though I could be wrong on
Mike Leavitt ac998@...