Seperation of humans in to male and female the first step to destruction.

Hi

During my casual reading of Egar Cayces transcripts (the sleeping prophet) I came across a conversation regarding the state of man.
Within this reading Cayce refers to a civilisation existing roughly 200,000 years ago. This civilisation existed as one being. However they were then split into female and male. This first seperation brought about difference and thus distrust. This expanded into races,nationalism and religion.
In some of his other readings he refers to the soul as existing with man. However ones soul is submerged in the life of that being. This brings in the idea of enlightenment and wakening.

Is Cayce pointing to a time where those living in the ancient civilisation were spiritually awake and seen everyone as the same: a unique soul. By creating a physical seperation the soul has become submerged within the life of the being. This is amplified through the ages with more and more division further submerging the soul within the density of the beings life.

When we look around today we see this. People are spiritually asleep as they have created a life controlled by time and responsibilities. The soul is drowning and is unable to awaken unless one can withdraw oneself from this world.

I understand many will point to cayce as being dubious but I am using this as an example.

Would this first seperation be the first step toward our inevitable destruction? Because in my opinion nationalism is just an expanded principle of family.

Could u imagine a world where all beings were unique in there spirit and not divided in groups trying to find someone or something to relate to....to belong.

originally posted by: InMyShell
Hi

During my casual reading of Egar Cayces transcripts (the sleeping prophet) I came across a conversation regarding the state of man.
Within this reading Cayce refers to a civilisation existing roughly 200,000 years ago. This civilisation existed as one being. However they were then split into female and male. This first seperation brought about difference and thus distrust. This expanded into races,nationalism and religion.
In some of his other readings he refers to the soul as existing with man. However ones soul is submerged in the life of that being. This brings in the idea of enlightenment and wakening.

Is Cayce pointing to a time where those living in the ancient civilisation were spiritually awake and seen everyone as the same: a unique soul. By creating a physical seperation the soul has become submerged within the life of the being. This is amplified through the ages with more and more division further submerging the soul within the density of the beings life.

When we look around today we see this. People are spiritually asleep as they have created a life controlled by time and responsibilities. The soul is drowning and is unable to awaken unless one can withdraw oneself from this world.

I understand many will point to cayce as being dubious but I am using this as an example.

Would this first seperation be the first step toward our inevitable destruction? Because in my opinion nationalism is just an expanded principle of family.

Could u imagine a world where all beings were unique in there spirit and not divided in groups trying to find someone or something to relate to....to belong.

The division between male and female sexes happened way before mammals even developed. Read some science books. Put down the fiction.

Having two sexes increases genetic diversity. That's its natural purpose, seen throughout the animal and plant kingdoms. If you are using Edgar Cayce as an example, it's an example of ignorant ramblings about something he obviously knew nothing about.

a reply to: InMyShell

So in order to save society, I have to let David into the bathroom with my little girl?

Seems Legit.

I understand what is taught in main stream science. However our view of the bigger picture is so small it is impossible to say what happened.

The physical act of sex can still work without the seperation into female and male. It could have been purely a reproductive function. Whereas today it is in almost every part of our lives.

The idea of spirituality is accepted from ancient civilisation. Yet because our new scientific toys cannot confirm or deny it then it is not valid.

I accept from a purely scientific point of view one cannot accept it. Not because it's not real but because we haven't the tools to measure it. Much like observing space. We were unable to confirm of distant planets existed. But with new technology we have been able to confirm.

Don't mock the idea. Would it not be easier to mock ourselves for not having the tools to conclusively determine if the idea is real?

a reply to: InMyShell

We do have the tools and we have measured it, and sexual reproduction arose over a billion years before anything resembling a modern human ever walked the Earth.

a reply to: InMyShell

It seems reasonable to assume that separation, strife, times of hardship, turmoil and warfare all conspire to subdue the spirituality of first the individual, leading to the entire civilisation, at least those directly affected.

A theory would be that in times of trouble, our physicality overrides that of our spiritual elements purely as a defense mechanism for the physical.

Subduing the spiritual to concentrate on survival of the body through whatever is causing the strife and trouble. In times of plenty, peace and tranquility, our subconcious or primitive brain, can afford to take a back seat to our spiritual sides once again.

To envision it, try to imagine meditating with a jackhammer going at full pelt right next to you, thrash metal playing at full volume on the other side of you...you're not going to feel particularly spiritual or peaceful and our spirituality is subdued...the noise in this analogy, would be the strife, warfare, hardship and so on.

a reply to: InMyShell

... and in other news, a random insane 'YouTuber' explains how cardboard is the cause of all war.

a reply to: chr0naut

Not literally surely...all that war would never fit.

The process of selection is key. The most appealing form is chosen to keep the line 'fit' and better insure survival.

All critters select each other this way.

Humans on the other hand have become somewhat muddled in their selection process.

a reply to: intrptr

Considering some people marry their horses, cars and whatnot, and prefer sex with latex balloons...i'd have to agree our survival of the fittest compass has gone haywire.

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: intrptr

Considering some people marry their horses, cars and whatnot, and prefer sex with latex balloons...i'd have to agree our survival of the fittest compass has gone haywire.

Or is it working perfectly?

Think Darwin awards!!

a reply to: Sargeras

Lol...i see your point!

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: chr0naut

Not literally surely...all that war would never fit.

You can get rolls of it!!!!

I get what you are getting at OP it could be considered one of the first and most basic divisions of humanity ... How can constant division be good for our collective evolution?

But have a feeling Cayce is leading you down a silly rabbit hole , the sort where up is down and left is right.

Counterparts actually make sense ... Look at plumbing or electricity ... Those parts are male and female because they compliment each other and together they get the job done.

Personally I think j the real magic of life happens when opposites collide,causing friction at first but eventually complimenting each other for a greater good... Like child birth .

a reply to: SteamyJeans

I like ur view on where greatness emerges out of hardship. Where the human mind is pushed to the limits in order to survive....which we have done.

But could this human resilience be a new trait. Could this not have been a symptom of this survival evolution?

All the great civilisations were great until they crumble down....maybe we were great once and lost it all in this cyclical on running soap opera.

On side note I was using Cayces name as it was what sparked the thought in me and brought me to what was the first division which led to a world where we are divided on everything.

originally posted by: PsychoEmperor
a reply to: InMyShell

So in order to save society, I have to let David into the bathroom with my little girl?

Seems Legit.

Only if David is passable and dont do anything toward your little girl why not? Female looking Transgenders pass by you every day and you dont notice them. now a female congresswoman.. thats a diffrent story.

a reply to: InMyShell

Interesting concept but.
Even the many said GODS of this planet EA*RTH mentioned in various religions where said to be male or females... WHy must mankind not be?

NAMASTE*******

Ignore the material reductionists. They're stuck in the cave and mock those looking for the light outside. Here are some answers to the questions in your mind:

Plato's Symposium - Aristophanes

“…human nature was originally one and we were a whole, and the desire and pursuit of the whole is called love. There was a time, I say, when we were one, but now because of the wickedness of mankind God has dispersed us… And if we are not obedient to the gods, there is a danger that we shall remain split… Wherefore let us exhort all men to piety in all things, that we may avoid evil and obtain the good, taking Love for our leader and commander.
Let no one oppose him--he is the enemy of the gods who opposes him. For if we are friends of God and at peace with him we shall find our own true loves, which rarely happens in this world at present. I am serious… my words have a wider application -they include men and women everywhere; and I believe that if our loves were perfectly accomplished, and each one returning to his primeval nature had his original true love, then our race would be happy. And if this would be best of all, the best in the next degree must in present circumstances be the nearest approach to such a union; and that will be the attainment of a congenial love.
Wherefore, if we would praise him who has given to us the benefit, we must praise the god Love, who is our greatest benefactor, both leading us in this life back to our own nature, and giving us high hopes for the future, for he promises that if we are pious, he will restore us to our original state, and heal us and make us happy and blessed.”


Gospel of Philip L. 71

"When Eve was in Adam, there was no death; when she was separated from him, death came. If she enters back into him, and he accepts her, there will be no more death"

a reply to: InMyShell

So everything in nature was one 200.000 years ago?