Comments on Chapter 4 - PLEYARENS
I was pretty sure I read that the plejarens can have upto 3 wives. So why does this chapter say that Plejarens are monogomous?
--Roob 07:20, 18 July 2010 (BST)
The Plejaran wives get one husband only.
--Bigfoot 07:26, 18 July 2010 (BST)
I can't imagine 3 wives. Is that 3 wives for each planet residence you occupy. Let's say you have time share on 3,000 planets, that would be a whole lot of loving. :) j/k
--Mark 12:39, 18 July 2010 (BST)
Mark your a nut:) but I like where your going!
--zameen 16:57, 18 July 2010 (BST)
It is true that the Plejarens are monogamous, even though the Plejaren men may have several wives. The book "The Law of Love" explains that Earth humans have a false understanding of monogamy. Even though the men may have several wives, the marriage is still considered as one bond and one union (mono-gamy = one-marriage) with the man and the wives. This sentence from the Goblet of Truth gives some more details:
32)And it is rightful that the woman has one man only, because it is only through one man alone that a procreation (fertilisation) for descendants can come about; a man, however, may have three women, because he is capable of undertaking several procreations (fertilisations) with several women, but it is given for him to be able to be fair to all women in all things and in their provision and in their equality; and if a man has several women then a bond (marriage) applies with each of them, within which the other women are also included and take part.
It is one bond of a loving relationship, even though there are several members in the one union.
--Sanjin 19:16, 18 July 2010 (BST)
I have an ALTERNATE interpretation. Once the the BIG BANG occured we were all in one tiny spec of existence, HENCE maximum distribution of outgoing matter once the BANG occured. EVENTUALLY once we reach that absolute absolutum they speak of we will all be together ONCE again. :) We will have a ton of wives reaching level 1 absolutum once accumulated. I am ABSOLUTELY full of joy at this time. :) j/k
--Mark 22:13, 18 July 2010 (BST)