Death and Thelema
-
I'm curious about this, also. I can't think of an exception off hand.
-
@Froclown said
"Why can it not be that the material universe is GOD.
"
93!
Good comments and lots to think about. However, if you read any of the primary sources of Western Mystery Schools, including the Kabbalah, you will see the material world is just ONE aspect and there are much higher aspects. On the tree of life only the final Sephiroth in the 4th world is the "material world." It is the lowest and actually in small proportion to the rest of the tree. It is the one we are in at this moment but it is not the only world, and thus itself can't be GOD. It may be contained in God, and God can dwell there, but ithe material is just one small part and thus can't be the WHOLE (God) as you are saying. However, your writing brings up many interesting points and observations. I am no means an expert, so I am open to correction if I'm in error.
-
yes, but western occultism originated in the 1500 and we have refined our understanding of more or less everything since then.
malkuth is not so much a representative of the material universe as such, but of direct sensory perception. It is sensation without cognition of what is sensed. Yesod is the bank of what plato would have called forms, it is ideas and concepts, which sensory perceptions invoke into awareness.
Tiphereth is the awareness itself, the conscious mind, and Kether is the unconscious mind, it is more than this it is the source of all things that we may potentially be aware of. beyond Kether in the ayn soph is the actual material universe all things that are, that which we can be aware and that which we are incapable of being aware.
Thus Malkuth is immediate sensation (those aspects of the material universe that happen to be bumping up against us) and Kether is all possible phenomena, that which may bump up against us.
Tiphereth is the mind, awareness itself. not that of which one is aware but the knower inside the shell of the known.
Anyway all we are aware of is our inner world, which includes the whole tree of life, but the material universe it bigger than us, it contains out entire universe of awareness, it is Nuit.
Out of Nuit precipitates Kether which is the sum of one's entire subjective universe reduced to a single point (hadit).
Thus Hadit is the microcosm and Nuit is the macrocosm.
Or in Kantian language Nuit is nuemena and Hadit is phenomena
-
@Froclown said
"yes, but western occultism originated in the 1500 and we have refined our understanding of more or less everything since then.
malkuth is not so much a representative of the material universe as such, but of direct sensory perception. It is sensation without cognition of what is sensed. Yesod is the bank of what plato would have called forms, it is ideas and concepts, which sensory perceptions invoke into awareness."
There is a very common Qabalistic interpretation that Assiah doesn't exist as such - that the field of physical sensation is only a registration of impressions, and the apparency of the element Earth is a consequence of the interaction of the other three Elements.
I'm saying this is the only p.o.v., only that this is one of the two equally common interprtations of the same observations.
-
well certain schools of materialism, marxism, for example would say that it is spirit which is an illusion and all elements are actually made up of earth.
But this is nothing new, the oldest philosophers each in his turn tried to show that his favorite element was the one true element. Thales with is water, Anaxamander with fire, Anaxamendes with air, etc. The Hereclitis who had was back to fire against but a new conception of fire.
In any effect. My point is that all of these are just interchangeable symbols in our minds, that our minds are nothing more than the information contained in our brains and thus reduce to the same substance as our brains.
Which is to say that substance(s) of which our brains is formed is the source of all perception and thus of all we know to exist.
That everything we see is a symbolic representation at best of some true substance which we can not have un-mediated awareness.
Thus, materialism is the appropriate stance to take, since by definition what is in the mind is ideal and what the mind is made out of is material. Thus, since ideas are made up of material, rather than material being a result of ideas, it is only logical that we assume that material is the source of all impressions.
If we take idealism, then we assume that the software creates the computer itself, which is clearly not the case. Thoughts do not produce my brains, by brains produces thought. Since all I see and hear is also a thought produced by my brain in some respect. It must be that my brains is a material entity in a world of other material entities, and thoughts are incidental to the sort of material entity that is my brain.
And thus this material world of which all my thoughts originate seem to match up with what we know of "GOD", or at least of the eastern concepts of Tao and Brahma, and is clear match for what Crowley calls NUIT.
This is most clear in the comments on Liber AL, where Crowley states Nuit is matter and Hadit is Movement. Noun and Verb.
-
@DavidH said
"Good comments and lots to think about. However, if you read any of the primary sources of Western Mystery Schools, including the Kabbalah, you will see the material world is just ONE aspect and there are much higher aspects. On the tree of life only the final Sephiroth in the 4th world is the "material world." It is the lowest and actually in small proportion to the rest of the tree. It is the one we are in at this moment but it is not the only world, and thus itself can't be GOD. It may be contained in God, and God can dwell there, but ithe material is just one small part and thus can't be the WHOLE (God) as you are saying. "
The Kabbalah is based on a mythos which assumes that the universe had a beginning. While there is observational evidence that the Big Bang did occur as theorized, one should keep in mind that a century ago we thought all of the stars were contained in our own galaxy. Understanding the human existence is a matter of perspective - and civilization's perspective is evolving all the time. I think that atheism/pantheism and theism just provide different perspectives (and different jargon) of the same mountain of truth. Is your God my collective unconsciousness?
On the subject of metaphorical death (which is what this thread is supposed to be about), I see it also as a transitional thing, or more precisely as a transformational thing. If you add wheels to a crate anyone seeing it from that point on sees only a wagon, not a crate. It isn't a crate anymore- its life as a crate has come to an end, despite it never being physically destroyed.
The Universe is Change: every Change is the effect of an Act of Love: all Acts of Love contain Pure Joy. Die daily! - Heart of the Master Ch II.
Love is the union of the wheels to the crate.
-
@Froclown said
"yes, but western occultism originated in the 1500 and we have refined our understanding of more or less everything since then.
"
I would not say that Western Occultism orginated in the 1500's. Maybe it came more out in the open at that point because of the reformation and break of power against the Church, but the Western Mysteries are derived from many sources that existed much earlier. The Kabbalah, the Old testament, Egyptian mysteries, Gnosticism, etc.
-
@jw said
"The Kabbalah is based on a mythos which assumes that the universe had a beginning. "
Yes, this is correct once you get to Kether, but not before. If the big bang (kether) was the creation of the universe then it came out of nothing (beyond the veils). Before the manifestiation of Kether, time would not exist, thus "God" always was and always will be.
The universe has to have a beginning because the only thing without a beginning is NOTHING (beyond the veils of kether into negative existence). Manifestation is the bringing into time, which implies a beginning.
Jim, am I on the right track with this Kabbalistically speaking?
-
@jw said
"The Kabbalah is based on a mythos which assumes that the universe had a beginning. "
Perhaps the Kabbalah, but not the Qabalah.
That is, the rabbinical-driven Hebraic form does rest on that assumption (as does the leading edge of contemporary science).
OTOH the Hermetic strain, including Crowley's elegant 0=2 formula, doesn't necessarily presume that - it allows for either p.o.v.
-
@DavidH said
"
@jw said
"The Kabbalah is based on a mythos which assumes that the universe had a beginning. "
The universe has to have a beginning because the only thing without a beginning is NOTHING (beyond the veils of kether into negative existence)."Looking away from the Kabbalah for a moment, perhaps you would entertain the idea that the universe always existed and we either don't see the big picture (i.e. a part of the universe beyond quasars our telescopes have yet to detect) or our known universe is part of a recurring cycle of Big-Bang and Big-Crunch.
My point being- If God can be described as "always was and always will be" then why can't the Universe instead be described as "always was and always will be", and just leave God out of the equation? Is the Universe really not impressive enough?
I'm not disrespecting the Kabbalah or your belief in it. As a cosmological theory I find Kabbalah very interesting, but I find its principles to be much more useful as metaphors for personal development.
-
93!
Well, since I don't KNOW the answer, I'd say your idea is just as good as mine. Mine just happens to serve me better at this point in time.
