LBRP Divine Name Sequence
-
"
The fact that you think that Thelema has anything to say about the accessibility of "spiritual and magical truth that meets strict criteria" is special pleading. "Now I'm not entirely sure you know what that term means, but I guess it doesn't matter.
"In your previous post you quote "the Law is for all" as justification for this democratization of information but you miss the first part of that line:
"the ordeals I write not: the rituals shall be half known and half concealed: the Law is for all.""
Touché. That was more of a poetic device than a proof text though. I stand by my statement that Thelema shouldn't conceal spiritual truth unless it's for one of two reasons given above.
"He was also suggesting that, unless you had any unanswered questions from the original post, the thread should be wrapped up because anything further would take things off-topic, as it seems to have done."
I rest my case.
-
Don't get stuck in this, man.
Should or should not, it just is.
One of the foremost scholars in the world provides a website for us to come learn what he can tell us for free. Let that be good enough.
He doesn't even know us. But he's tolerated my grumpy ass for years.
-
Both of you are misreading my post. I've said time and time again that I don't hold anything at all against Jim for not posting the secret. He promised, and I respect that. I've also made it clear how grateful I am for all the things he does post. Jim has no obligation to share anything. Moreover, I'm a "guest" here in that I'm on the TOT forum without actually being in TOT. I see that as an amazing privledge.
I thought it'd be interesting to segue this thread into a discussion about secret-keeping in general. I wanted to hear what people's thoughts were about it. I'm done complaining and I was curious on the issue. But being met with the same thelemic drivel is definitely off-putting. I'm tired of the many watered-down thought-terminating clichés that plague discussions on Thelema. Thelema literally has its own special class of abused phrases that ought to be blacklisted.
But I guess I'll let this thread die now. If anyone has any thoughts about the reason behind privledged information (besides the two I've mentioned, that Jim echoed) I'd like to hear them. I truly am intellectually curious on the reason that some methods are kept secret, if those methods do not fit the two criterion mentioned already (protecting an adept from harm and withholding an initiation ritual or magical word so it's more powerful later). This isn't me bitching anymore; I'm legitimately interested on this issue, and I think it's related enough to my OP to not be off-topic. But if people are going to interpret everything I say as complaining and ingratitude, I'd rather not hear it.
TL;DL: Everyone, stop implying I'm ungrateful. I am indebted to Jim for his help. I'm interested in continuing a discussion concerning the reason and morality behind magical secret keeping. If no one else is interested (or if the discussion has become too emotional and can't continue healthily) I'll happily let this thread die.
-
It's best to start a new thread for a new topic.
That keeps the forum in better shape in general - makes it more functional for research purposes because people can look for discussions in threads that have a relevant name, etc. Otherwise, it's all a mess.
Also this current thread probably will be deleted one of these days soon, and if you start a new subject that, n fact, generates discussion on a different topic, then that would all go into the dump bucket at the same time.
@Luce said
"I'm tired of the many watered-down thought-terminating clichés that plague discussions on Thelema. Thelema literally has its own special class of abused phrases that ought to be blacklisted."
That might make an interesting new thread on its own. Feel free to start one and discuss what you think those phrases are and why they need to go.
"I truly am intellectually curious on the reason that some methods are kept secret, if those methods do not fit the two criterion mentioned already (protecting an adept from harm and withholding an initiation ritual or magical word so it's more powerful later)."
Another related but distinctive reason: Some information is almost certain to be misunderstood most of the time by most people - until they are ready for it. If it were to be simply incomprehensible, that wouldn't be a problem. But, worse, most people are likely to put a wrong interpretation on many things because normal passage through our society hasn't prepared them to think certain thoughts and understand certain things. To put out information that has a high likelihood of outright misleading someone is irresponsible, so some concepts are withheld until someone demonstrates their readiness for them. (Within an initiatic system, the overall structure - when things are done right - is designed to lead people to readiness for certain ideas a little bit before they are given out).
"Everyone, stop implying I'm ungrateful."
I have not perceived you as ungrateful
"I am indebted to Jim for his help. I'm interested in continuing a discussion concerning the reason and morality behind magical secret keeping. If no one else is interested (or if the discussion has become too emotional and can't continue healthily) I'll happily let this thread die."
I haven't seen it getting emotional at all, but it is OT to the present thread.
-
I'd be happy to continue a conversation about the relative merits of magical secrets or about what you're misinterpreting as Thelemic clichés, but this isn't the thread for it. If you do want to have that discussion, start a new thread, not in the Qabalah sub-forum, with a title and OP that reflects what you're actually interested in discussing.
-
Thanks for the explanation, Jim. That makes sense to me. Kinda like how a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I can see that. I wouldn't tell a child how to put keys into the ignition of a car and turn it on... Until I was ready to fully teach him how to drive.
I understand why this thread might be dumped; thanks for the heads up though. I've memorized any info I think might be helpful, and I don't want what I've said to give anything away (but I probably haven't gotten that close yet).
I'll keep my search going! I've read three of the primary pre-zohar kabbalahistic texts and nada so far, but who knows, right? I just hope I haven't read it already and didn't know it xD
-
OMG I GOT IT. I freaking got it! All that hard work... I finally got it!!!!!!!
OMG.
Jim, I wanted to check with you to see if you are online... I was reaaallly hoping I could post it to see if you delete it, but I wanted to make sure if I was right, it wouldn't be hanging around on the forum for all to see.
Soo...
will you be super mad if I post it? Is that okay?
-
I'm here.
-
You are very much on the right track in terms of sources. What you have uncovered just might lead you to it eventually
Good work. -
Slightly off topic, and apologies for that, but just wanted to remark that this:
@Jim Eshelman said
"you might want to observe that any ritual that has you charging east, south, west, and north in sequence with Cube of Space attributions stimulates four chakras in sequence, from throat downward."
...is really cool. Connecting with the fibonacci sequence in the geometry of the pentagram: 3, 5, 8... 358 = serpent = messiah. Revealing the "central magical force" at the root of this "Medicine of Metals and Stone of the Wise".
-
BTW, if U ignore Cube of Space and simply take the elemental sequence around the circle (Air, Fire, Water, Earth), then this is also a descending sequence of chakras, but starting at heart instead of throat.
-
Mem-shin-yod-heth...
Nun-heth-shin...
Serpent in Eden was... Messiah??
Creepy.
Makes me think of Wake World, when the Fairy Prince brings the sleepy one through the path of Ayin... "He's the Savior of the world" or something like that.
I must have heard that before but shit. That's a decently large number too. The larger the number, the less chance of mere coincidence (like rolling two dice: the probability is a bell curve, with the larger numbers being one of the tails).
"And Moses made a serpent [nachash] of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived." -- Numbers 21:9
"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up" -- John 3:14
-
"The Serpent is the Savior" - a doctrine so powerful and socially disruptive that it was hidden for millennia under a veil of shame.
-
OMG is it true?? What does that mean? What does that mean about the Christian concept of Original Sin?
It seems that eating from the tree was good. But then why is man so naturally evil? I mean, I know thelemites like to say we aren't evil, but when you see the crap that happens in the world... It seems SOMETHING happened to us that made part of us have the potential for great injustice.
-
@Luce said
"OMG is it true?? What does that mean? What does that mean about the Christian concept of Original Sin?"
It's bogus. I take that to be kinda basic. I reject it outright - at least, in the sense that the Christian's conceive of it.
The actual "original sin" that the myth veils is become self-conscious - developing a Ruach. That's the step that fits all the symbols and fulfills all the criteria of the story.
-
And is the Serpent Satan? I know xians always assume, and Jews did identify him with Satan at some point BC. And Revelation identifies Satan with the Devil and the Ancient Serpent. Do you think the Serpent is Satan? By Satan I mean the being that's mentioned in the Bible, like in Job when he terrorizes Job's family, or when Saran stands accusing Joshua in the book of Zechariah.
-
I should probably make a new thread for this... Or maybe this has already been hammered out on this forum.
I know original sin is seen as bogus, but I guess I still accept it in the sense that there sure is SOMETHING wrong with people. It's one thing to say our proclivities toward sex aren't wrong, but it's another thing to see genocide and think that everything is peachy. When you have people that are able to torture and dismember children, clearly something is wrong with people.
-
@Luce said
"And is the Serpent Satan?"
It isn't stated explicitly in Genesis. That's a common interpretation. But remember that Satan's earliest named appearance, in Job, has him being God's collaborator.
I suggest reading Elaine Pagels' book The Origins of Satan for some deep insight into this.
"Do you think the Serpent is Satan?"
Close enough. But one must understand the nature of Satan, who is a great Briatic figure comparable to an archangel (which even the Christian legend says he once was).
Look at his name; Shiyn Teyth Nun. A letter of Fire, one which means "serpent," and one of which is the serpent of Scorpio.
"By Satan I mean the being that's mentioned in the Bible, like in Job when he terrorizes Job's family, or when Saran stands accusing Joshua in the book of Zechariah."
You've read Job incorrectly (but in a popular way). He isn't terrorizing Job's family. God is terrorizing Job and his family (though partly through his agent, Satan, his good buddy good pal, who is at most a prosecuting attorney and actually appears to be more a management consultant).