Elementals Explained

In the philosophical alchemy of ancient times, and among many eastern philosophers and Buddhists today, four elements comprise the physical world, and one additional element facilitates their manifestation. The four elements are: Earth, Air, Fire, and Water. The fifth element is Aether. But is there a place for this seemingly outdated conceptualizing in the age of advanced science? 

As unlikely as it may seem, the five elements do resonate conceptually with five of the nine dimensions of Omniverse. As clarified by the Dalai Lama, their proper order, from least to greatest density is: aether, air, fire, water, and earth. But what about the other four dimensions of Omniverse? Are there no equivalent correspondent designations for them? Yes, there are. The other four, we discovered using Noetitek™, are represented by what the Renaissance occultist and physician, Paracelsus, called “elementals”—spirit entities. 

The hierarchical order that applies to elementals is, however, opposite to that of the alchemical elements: Gnomes (earth), Undines (water), Salamanders (fire), and Sylphs (air). Not surprising to us, the mythological elementals, as a group, reflect an allegory that matches the Creation story set forth in the Book of Genesis and also describes a process that is rational and understandable in scientific terms. Details will be included in our book.


Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

4 Responses to “Elementals Explained”

  1. Valiant Says:

    As you acknowledge, alchemical elements and elementals are quaint concepts that were used long before the age of science. That kind of thinking seems to me to be akin to superstition. Why should anyone give this conceptualizing credence in the 21st century?

  2. PluribusOne™ Says:

    If you want to be science-minded you will have to study the facts of the matter in depth before making a judgment. These antiquated terms are not to be taken entirely literally; they are analogical and metaphorical as I think I pointed out in an earlier post, and they are not without value. There are many ways of knowing, and “primitive,” for example, is not synonymous with “erroneous.” The significant fact is that Aristotle and others understood that the universe has building blocks, and they had some sense of their interrelationship, perhaps a better sense than has been assumed.

  3. Valiant Says:

    Elsewhere you say there are nine dimensions or ten dimensions. Are you saying that their order is from least dense to most dense?

  4. PluribusOne™ Says:

    It does not follow such simple logic, although the correspondences do form a pattern that is not illogical. We would provide the complete breakdown here, but it would not make much sense without lengthy discussion. We are working on our book and looking for the right publisher. Our desire is to educate, not obfuscate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s