After The Champagne

Is more champagne!

Alone.

At least, for a short while, alone.

Where do the angels go, after they have given up on a human?

In the modern times, people have this conception of the mythology of angels - that they are beings employed as a Divine instrument, to intervene in the lives of (some) humans, or to preside at difficult moments in order to salvage something from the chaos and destruction implicit in the danger of that particular stanza.

Shot composition is incredibly
important.

But in the traditions - whether the Norse or the Ancient Greek and even the Sanskrit Vedanta - there are several classes of being, who are cast in that role, and they are not all 'of the same kind.'

Hermes the God is very classically styled as an Angel Being yet he is not that at all by Natural Being although he does perform those types of actions and activities and functions on behalf of others.

Loki is also not at all one of the various types of 'angelic' beings in the Norse system, but he too, has that role often.

There is a sense that even persists down into the common mind of today, in which angels are all regarded as having much to do with what is 'beyond life...' In other words, really -, of Death.

In the mortal human world, people see only what they can see from what is given to their senses to see, and then to store in their material memory.

And so they cannot understand, genuinely, not only what lies before and after a mortal life's terminating-points profile - but, if anything, the more serious part is that they are generally unable to see or understand whenever the Divine Field itself enters into their material affairs.

Potato and tomato
mille-feuilles.

Although, for example, the Ancient King Melqart had a romantic liaison with a 'Star Being' who is also classed as one of the 'Angeloi' by the Greeks - the Nymph Tyros - not a lot is mentioned about the fact that Melqart himself remained a mortal; whereas the Nymph could not be.

When you see people on the Big Screen at the phases in which they attain wide public acclaim for their beauty or a particular talent, on the whole they are not actually the human person that everyone takes them to be, and the 'evidence' is that they never stay that 'identity' throughout the whole of their natural lives - often many are completely unrecognizable after the years of their immediate acclaim as it is being lived.

People say 'acting,' but it is not that. The real star roles are living embodiment. 

And, that's really the point: 'being lived' is a concept that escapes the standard mind.

One of the most fascinating aspects of human thinking about themselves, is how they talk about 'consciousness' and especially also, 'love; and have no clue as to what these are.

Google and all of that silliness will state that 'consciousness is the condition or state of being aware;' the first-person subjective experience of existence, and in particular the feeling of being self-aware.

Of course, it is not that...

And I will presently show you why (not).

Secondly and as a matter which is quite connected - and I am going to use a common phrase that I heard in the mouth of Keltie Knight the other day on her podcast - 'we often think that we are ugly *holes and not worthy of love...' And this is obviously, in the context of the subject of 'Love.'

You can't solve
real crime mysteries
without one of these.

But human mortal belief about itself, comes from the delivery of sense signals into the bio-chemistry, and which effects are stored in material memory cells. And the big mistake that virtually all humans make when it comes to this matter of 'Love,' is that they all proceed secretly thinking along the lines that, well, if, they were 'worthy of being loved' (I imagine they mean they are appealing physically and/or financially well-footed), then, then, they will have their senses fed by the presence of the other, and they will take those sensory stimulations, and have them, possess them - they know this is only for a while because of course naturally, in the end, they are all dead!

There is of course certainly the sense that both parties are getting something. And they will 'generously' call it all -, an exchange (of some kind).

But I have just now said that all they know is what their senses tell them, and this is delimited by their natural mortal lives; in the end, it's all gone.

But you see, it is not all they do... 

And that's the specific problem with the definition of 'consciousness' that is being given everywhere (except her and in some ancient texts).

If it were only what Google and 'sci-entists' say, then we are talking about vegetables.

Consciousness is to do with WILL.

What happens after the 
champagne?

And conscious beings determine to do things, based on their leaning towards (self-)acquiring of sense gratifications, or they will do things based on an unseen, unknown but suspected and theorized conception of what is both good and desirable as in literally 'beautiful,' in an undefinable-in-details, schema.

As soon as you acknowledge this latter aspect, and start to try and implement such things, you will immediately and very suddenly discover people appearing, coming to you out of nowhere, and in a way demanding your attention to help them for some thing or other, to do with these 'ephemeral' or ineffable causes.

And then, you will receive the appearance of what can be construed as one or more, of the Angeloi - who will impart to you and interact with you on the basis of what you really are inside the Field of (and now also understanding) at that point.

And only at that point.

And then, you will have a certain impact and effect on, the people around you.

And if you are unable to keep up with the Field, you will fall back into the mortal world and be like all (the) others (there).

The Nymphs fly away.

And so must you too, know how to do that.

Is prolly coffee.

Consciousness, as 'individual and separate self-awareness,' does not survive Death.

How can it?

The memory cells are all gone.

The person who wills to do things in accord with the Divine Realm's ideas - is tied to those things; and those things are Divine and also Eternal and Immortal. 

Scientists do not accept the existence of those things, because they don't know them and they cannot ever know them.

Scientists do not know them because they all die having wasted all of their lives never grasping enough of the important things.

And their memory cells which contain only the sense signals of gratification and appetite and the insular self, absent of external drive, die with them.

People always talk about what is within and being driven by that, but that is a false direction.

Beauty is apprehended from what is without and comes into one from outside, but touching things which vibrate then harmonically on the inside.

No man forced beauty onto the world. It's the other way around.

When King Melqart was advised to try and find how the Nymph's dog's mouth was so glittery and purplish colorful, it was not that he invented the color in the dog's mouth; he saw it.

And he saw that it was beautiful.

Don't let the Nymph
fly away, alone.

Which gives the lie to HypsElon the fake 'god' of the Old Testament, when 'he' saw that 'it was beautiful.'

If He were really a God, He would have KNOWN that it would be and that it was, so.

Humans themselves are in fact, not beautiful and they are not Divine or Immortal.

They are, by contrast, in the words of Keltie Knight: 'ugly *holes and not worthy to be loved.'

And they feel that insecurity and that's why they are always in chaos and do harmful things.

Unless a person is literally in the presence of the Divine and of the Immortal, they are nothing and can be nothing, and what is passed off as material wealth in the daily world, is just so much dross masquerading as money and power, and served up by the mentally sick and the weak and suffering, and all those who are urged by their senses to desire the satisfactions of those mortal senses.

Humans have a purpose though. They are a field in which flowers can grow.

This, is a re-arrangement of Tchaikovsky's Waltz of the Flowers with some chord styling taken from Dvorak's Rusalka music: