Joining the A.'.A.'.
-
@Froclown said
"Moses was a magus and thus a teacher of the A.'.A.'. system as was Buddha, Mohamad and the originator of hinduism."
That is ridiculous.
Frow...as an Adept of an authentic AA lineage, I find this thread vulgar and pointless.If you do get your group going, for fecks sake dont call it the AA...youre making a complete fool out of yourself.....why not call it "Insert Name of Order: an order aspiring to he AA path" etc.....you must be honest and let people know that your authority is not chartered, it is assumed. ..by you.
-
@Froclown said
"Ok maybe I can not claim the Grade of any particular order per-sey
but my understanding is that the only criteria for 8=3 in the A.'.A.'. is to have experienced the crossing of the great abyss. Which based on the descriptions crowley has given for what it is like to have this experience, I feel I have experienced it.
The attainment of this nature I see not as having met some official criteria of the order, of passing and sort of examination of occult knowledge etc. Rather its an experience or state one attains like having an orgasm. You can't see that some one did not ever have an orgasm just because they did not study for 20 years in your particular sex school, nor can you claim they had not attained beyond the grade of virgin just because the person they had sex with was not a member of your club. "
@A.C. in Liber O said
"There is little danger that any student, however idle or stupid, will fail to get some result; but there is great danger that he will be led astray, obsessed and overwhelmed by his results, even though it be by those which it is necessary that he should attain. Too often, moreover, he mistaketh the first resting-place for the goal, and taketh off his armour as if he were a victor ere the fight is well begun.
It is desirable that the student should never attach to any result the importance which it at first seems to possess."
I too have experienced an abyssal crossing, which to my eyes at the time, matched very well with Crowley's descriptions of the event. I now understand that Crowley uses language that I can understand, and describes these events and states in ways that I can wrap my imagination around. I also understand that in each world on the tree of life, there is a whole entire tree, "scaled down" if you will. It is further said that inside each of the sepherah of those trees is a still smaller tree. You might be familiar with the Mandelbrot Set, and the concept of self-similarity: you can find the entire mandlebrot set repeated in nonidentical but similar versions of itself at smaller and smaller scales, ad infinitum. As above, so below. In other words, no matter what "scale" you're at, there are always abysses to be crossed. In mid 2008, I crossed the largest abyss of my life, and so it seemed to me, because I'd never experienced anything so huge before, that I had reached "The End", and had discovered "The Secret". For a brief moment, I too might have declared myself 8=3 and shed my armor in relief... until I looked upward, and discovered that the hill I was standing on was merely a bump on the first of the Yggdrasil's roots.
-
well, if I take a college syllabus for a physics class my Proff Brown, and I assign the reading and the class work of that syllabus and I grade the class based on the criteria of that syllabus,
it seems rather silly to me that I would call my class, a study of Dr Brown's physics notes, or some such thing, rather than to just call it physics 101.
I never claimed that I invented the A.'.A.'. I only claimed that I would distribute the information to the initiate at the right time and in the right order, based on his journal records, and that I would proctor exams, grading them on the A.'.A.'. criteria.
If I open a Piano school, but I denote that I am not the inventer of pianos, must I call it hammer-string-chime-box lessons, because heaven forbid that some one learn to play piano if not from the one TRUE ALL MIGHTY AUTHORITY on pianos,
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
"well, if I take a college syllabus for a physics class my Proff Brown, and I assign the reading and the class work of that syllabus and I grade the class based on the criteria of that syllabus,
it seems rather silly to me that I would call my class, a study of Dr Brown's physics notes, or some such thing, rather than to just call it physics 101."
That's a bit of a stretch. First of all, what would qualify you to teach Physics 101? You may have taken Professor Brown's Physics 101 class, but does that make you a qualified Professor of Physics? From what I understand of the education system, you would need either a Master's or a PhD in order to teach at a university or college level. Sure, you can distribute the syllabus and "grade" "papers" you "assign" to your "students", but without the proper credentials, you'd be nothing more than what the medical community would call a "quack". Or in layman's terms, a fraud.
"If I open a Piano school, but I denote that I am not the inventer of pianos, must I call it hammer-string-chime-box lessons, because heaven forbid that some one learn to play piano if not from the one TRUE ALL MIGHTY AUTHORITY on pianos"
This is another leap in logic. The piano, being an instrument that can be mastered relatively easily by just about anyone, doesn't require credentials in order to teach. There is more apparent validity if a piano teacher is, say, inducted in the Royal Conservatory of Music, or at the very least, has been teaching for twenty-odd years, but there is no general certification that needs to be acquired in order to teach the instrument. The piano, after all, isn't a science.
"I never claimed that I invented the A.'.A.'. I only claimed that I would distribute the information to the initiate at the right time and in the right order, based on his journal records, and that I would proctor exams, grading them on the A.'.A.'. criteria. "
Fine. But does that give you the right to call your order The A.'.A.'.? As in the example demonstrated above (re: Professor Brown's Physics 101), unless you've, let's say, acquired An A.'.A.'. Master's or PhD, you would not be qualified to call yourself a Professor of the A.'.A.'., and therefore have no claim to the title.
As I said in another post, if you want to form an Order using the source material of the A.'.A.'. and supplement it with additional material of your own device, go for it. I see nothing wrong with that per se, as I've done the same. BUT YOUR ORDER IS NOT THE A.'.A.'., nor is mine. We have our own initiation ceremonies, our own corpus of material in addition to the A.'.A.'. syllabus of the grades, our own Outer College system of fundamental preliminary training, and our own general methodology revolving around our own particular set of ideas. Otherwise, what would be the point of forming the Order in the first place if all we're doing is mimicking the A.'.A.'. word for word, step for step? Our Students could just as easily join the A.'.A.'. itself!
Operate in SERVICE to the A.'.A.'., the Great White Brotherhood, whatever... but you are not the A.'.A.'. Proper.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in LVX,
-M -
If all you want to be affilitated with is the "Invisible A.'.A.'.," then let your affiliation be likewise invisible, for that is a matter of the heart, and there are members who do not know it by that name and those who seek it without calling it by that name. Trust that they will be drawn to you by the strenght of this real invisible connection.
If you want to be affiliated with the visible A.'.A.'. and their path of instruction, then do the Work they themselves require for that affiliation. Anything else is in a sense "false advertisement." Indeed, why even ask us? They exist. They have an email address. Just ask...!
But you want to claim visible affiliation with an Invisibly Body without having passed the tests or gaining the "accreditation" of that same Invisible Body's own visible vehicle - whose sole job it is to test and accredit - to judge whether a person can claim the right to visibly instruct in their "invisible" name!
@Froclown said
"well, if I take a college syllabus for a physics class my Proff Brown, and I assign the reading and the class work of that syllabus and I grade the class based on the criteria of that syllabus,
it seems rather silly to me that I would call my class, a study of Dr Brown's physics notes, or some such thing, rather than to just call it physics 101.
"Except that Dr. Brown has a PhD in his field, has spent a lifetime gaining the knowledge to add something NEW to that field of scientific endeavor in his doctoral dissertation, and has had to defend himself and his ideas before other PhDs TWICE - once at the Master's level (Thesis and Defense to prove he had the ability to do quality empirical research), and a second time at the Doctoral level (Dissertation and Defense - to ensure the quality of the new knowledge he has desired to add to the field).
He has earned the right to openly proclaim himself their "peer" and instruct on "their level" only by putting himself through their very rigorous challenges and passing those challenges to THEIR satisfaction.
You could teach a physics tutorial, but you could not honestly and ethically call it "Physics 101" because the "101" is a specific classification of that class by Dr. Brown's university, at which you do not teach because you do not have your PhD and have not applied to work there. At the very least, you would have to have a Master's degree and be working under the authority of other PhD's. Universities have standards for their instructors just as the visible A.'.A.'. does.
You could open a piano school and call it whatever you want as long as you had knowledge other people wanted. However, as soon as you call the class "Piano 101," you are once again falsely advertising the class as part of a specific university's classification system, and the same requirements would have to be satisfied. The "101" becomes a title you tacked on to imply "university quality" to people, but there have been no standards passed to ensure that the teaching is of that same "university quality."
Carrying the analogy further, there is a little "seminary" in my hometown that teaches local pastors the study of the Christian Scriptures and theology. They can call themselves "seminary" or "college," perhaps even "university," but until they have met the accreditation criteria of a respected organization such as The Association of Theological Schools in the United States and Canada, their degrees are meaningless, for no standard has been met to ensure the quality of that instruction or the ethics of conferring their "degree."
Where they differ from you is that they are content with not claiming any affiliation with the ATS - the very body whose sole job it is to test and accredit! Are you not seeing the parallel?
I think this is an absolutely perfect example of what everyone is trying in different ways to express to you.
I consider what you aspire to do as one of the noblest of all things to do.
Do the Work required to achieve it.
I offer you some useful questions for yourself: Why do you want to avoid this Work? If you truly believe the visible A.'.A.'. are the "hands and feet" of the Invisible Brotherhood, why do you continually ask us for permission to skip the Work required of you by them? We are not the body that has that authority. Why ask us?
Perhaps you really just want to be persuaded to do the Work! If you truly had the "internal spiritual go-ahead," you would not have to ask pee-ons like us what we thought about it.
It is your own personal sense of integrity that you are fighting. You want to be visibly considered an "Equal teacher" without doing visibly "equal Work." That obvious conflict exists within you or you would not be here asking this queston. Stop projecting that internal conflict outward onto us. When your own sense of integrity is satisfied, you won't need to debate anything with us...
All I personally am ever going to say to you is "NO." lol...! So, stop trying to satisfy me!
Satisfy your Self. "Do that, and no other shall say nay."
Your brother in passion if not in agreement...
"Faithful are the wounds of a friend, But deceitful are the kisses of an enemy."
-
I would say YES, DO IT! Don't listen to anyone's horseshit.
-
I never said I need permission
My whole point is that I don't need permission.
Best example, anyone who picks up a copy of the Nicomedian Ethics, and reads it, studies it and learns it, is perfectly qualified to teach Aristotle's ethic to others. Because it is openly published and available, one does not have to go through a secret channel to get the information, their is no priest of Aristotle, who hide his books and only allow select students access to the books, when they have proven worthy. Anyone anywhere can read his books.
The A.'.A.'. maybe at one time was one secret system, with its texts kept secret, but they are out in the open now, and if anyone studies Thelema, Crowely's works in general and Magick in even more general, they can offer interpretations of the texts, and rituals that produce the intended results.
The structuring of the A.'.A.'. texts, as well as the fact it is open which texts go with which grade and what practices with which texts, it is not a stretch to create a lesson plan, which presents the material to a particular individual.
The same as one does not present a 5th grader with calculus, as it may "blow his mind" and give up an all math. But one needs no special lineage from Descartes to teach calculus, but you do need to learn basic math, algebra, geometry, trig, and then calculus.
If some one learns Math on their own at home and not in a school, that person is perfectly able to teach Mathematics to anyone else, by taking the vast body of mathematical knowledge and presenting it lesson by lesson to the student.
As such a propose that A.'.A.'. is a subject of study, not so much a particular organization with Authority to teach that subject of study.
I mean the whole essence of the Thelema is that Authority comes from within the individual, not from a central or external source.
-
@Froclown said
"The A.'.A.'. maybe at one time was one secret system, with its texts kept secret"
No, not at all. That was never the case. With only a very few exceptions, all of it was intentionally published openly.
Of course, having access to the publically available documents shouldn't be confused with being a member.
"As such a propose that A.'.A.'. is a subject of study, not so much a particular organization with Authority to teach that subject of study. "
It can be treated as a subject of study, most certainly - just as, say, the Daughters of the American Revolution can be a subject of study. That's, of course, quite a different matter from saying that one is a member of the Daughters of the American Revolution.
"I mean the whole essence of the Thelema is that Authority comes from within the individual, not from a central or external source."
You keep confusing Thelema and the A.'.A.'., btw.
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
"I never said I need permission
My whole point is that I don't need permission. "
Yet once again you return to debate the issue instead of acting.
"28. Now a curse upon Because and his kin!
-
May Because be accursed for ever!
-
If Will stops and cries Why, invoking Because, then Will stops & does nought.
-
If Power asks why, then is Power weakness.
-
Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise.
-
Enough of Because! Be he damned for a dog!
-
But ye, o my people, rise up & awake!
"
It's pretty easy to play the role of the "Dweller" in this particular thread. Maybe elsewhere, or another time, we'll swap roles, and you'll keep pointing to an idea that I keep missing.
[...folds hands and executes Kung Fu bow.. then takes stance...]
What is the difference between "asking permission" and declaring that you "don't need permission" if you are still waiting for others to give aggreement to your "lack of need for permission" before you act?
There is a "Because" stopping you from acting and keeping you in the debate.
How badly do you want this experience? Are you willing to pay all possible consequences for finding out whether you are right or wrong? Do you want this experience badly enough to slay "Because" and forge ahead into the unforeseen?
If "yes," then, I don't know what to tell you except that you're in The Game! Go ALL IN...! Play with all your might! Learn what you learn and become what you become..! Who am I to instruct someone so armed - who demands to learn directly from Life firsthand?
But don't sit here and bitch because you asked first, and I said "no."
["No!" is the first and easiest of my Kung Fu moves. That fact that you can't get around it and continue to show up for more tells me something about you. ]
I've attempted to give you the best answer I can come up with for you from an ethical perspective. You disagree. Enough said. Such is Ethics. But now you keep debating and not acting, one way or the other. I continue to use my Kung Fu "No," and I stop you from acting all day long.
It's so simple, it's boring. There's nothing left for me to do but goad you into action!
You have my permission...!
What you must do... Do it Quickly...!
[This is my second Kung Fu move. I step out of the way, let your momentum carry you, and give you a push as you go by. Have I helped you? Or hurt you? I don't know. Do you? You chose the direction. I simply stopped resisting you! I just pushed you where you were already headed...! What does my "agreement" even mean? Will it help you or harm you? Reality is the sole judge, and a harsh one.]
Honestly, these are elementary lessons in Will. Are you sure you are 8=3?
[And now, with my Kung Fu, I attack your confidence. I fill you with self-doubt.]
How conscious can you be about what you are Willing if you don't know the steps to this dance I'm illustrating for you..? How prepared to teach others as long as you continue this foolishness with me...?
[I strike again...!]
And what subject...? The subject of Will...? How? When you can't even get yourself past me - a buffoon on an internet forum?
[A third strike...! ... I relax from my stance, fold my hands, and bow in respect to my brother in passion if not in agreement.]
You are still thinking in terms of "should" and "ought" and not asking questions about "unexpected possible outcomes" and "consequences for others." You ask the questions of a child wanting permission to do something fun, not those of a teacher who considers the serious responsibility and repercussions of what he seeks to undertake.
Indeed, do Physics, Piano, Ethics, or Mathematics stimulate an internal force famous for driving the unprepared insane?
This is my judgment on the way you "fight" and not another attack. It is perhaps the most important thing I can tell you about this debate, though it may sting to hear.
[Bows again deeply to the Buddha on his Journey.]
Love is the Law. Love under Will.
-
-
Good point. Go off and teach, Froclown, and maintain that it is whatever you say it is. Find your converts and your disciples in your own sect of A:A. Why bother to discuss with us why you think it is O.K. to use the terms you use the way you use them? Do your own thing.
We don't agree and we don't have to agree, and no one is interested in disagreeing with you too much longer. What's the point?
Good Luck in your endeavor for the one true path (defined by you, of course.)
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
well, as I was trynig to explain in another thread, I am working my way into the SL Gorean community, as a scribe, which will get be access to all the elements of Gor culture and Phliosophy as its is practices in real time and in simulation.
Once I get is as a Scribe I would like to develop a white caste structrue on SL. The white caste are the priests which mediate between the Sardar (a sort of gorean secret chiefs) and the people. The white caste help set up all the rituals and customs of Gor and promote the virtues and caste codes, etc. The priests who administer the formula of the law as well as the prophets that adjust the formula to the Will of the Sardar and the changing times.
I was hoping since their is little to no white caste on Gor, that I could structure this Caste of initiates on the A.'.A.'. models, where the lowest members of the white caste are brought in as probationers, by a neophyte in each city, and the A.'.A.'. skeleton used to hang Gorean symbols and ideals upon, thus spreading Thelema to a rather large community.
The white caste that transcends the particular city, walls, laws, customs, etc, and the city itself run as the OTO, a social order based on the caste system of grades, where the high castes are the minority, and the white caste very few and their identity not know to the city the represent. Only known in person to their the student of their choice.
-
Ah...! That's what I was missing!
Sometimes you have to read these threads from the very beginning and not skim them, it seems.
Listen, bro. From the heart...
You're only going to find more of what you've already found. People in "Second Life" aren't going to take you seriously because it's "Second Life" and not Real Life. You're going to be rather frustrated with your "Initiates" who are expecting something "cooler" and more immediately entertaining that the very real, very difficult path you expect them to follow according to your instruction (your claims to be able to deliver that instruction notwithstanding). They are going to laugh when they first figure out you're taking yourself so seriously, and then they are going to start pulling your chain for it. People in Second Life don't expect Real Life effort. They are avoiding it every time they sign on.
It's entertainment.
People in Real Life - real-live Thelemites - aren't going to take you seriously because you're talking about a fantasy environment. In fact, they're probably going to be a bit pissed at you for making them look stupid by dragging something very precious, personal, and powerful to them through the mud of the false, "poser reality" that these fantasy online environments capitalize on.
The fact is that the more involved a person is in a fantasy online environment - the more disconnected from their own Real Life they usually tend to be. It's a form of escape from the "mundane" everyday life that they have not mastered and do not wish to participate in.
Everything you want to teach in this environment.... The subject matter is actually about NOT escaping into fantasy. It's about FACING harsh realities and ENGAGING Real Life in a way that makes it no longer mundane. It's about Conquering and making it fun again...! It's about how you interact with Real people in Real Life with your Real body and its Real energies.
It's about getting out from behind a computer screen and LIVING...!
But at the end of the day it comes down to one thing...
Why should you have the right to make people come to YOU for advancement in this *Second Life *A.'.A.'., when YOU won't submit to the same IN REAL LIFE....?
This is where *you *avoid real life challenges and seek to have these desires fulfilled in Second Life, where it's easier for you because you made the rules...! And if you're doing it, why do you think you'll have "Initiates" who are any more dedicated to the Work?
They'll probaby be just as dedicated to your Second Life A.'.A.'. as you are to the Real Life A.'.A.'.
All that said.... I can't justify spending any more time on this thread...
-
what exactly is the problem with virtual reality. So called Real reality is merely a construct of the mind. a model of sensory inputs. see Robert Anton Wilson. second life is merely a model of information from the input of pixel data to the eyes. A human mind is on both sides of the equation. the VR environment is no different that the astral plane, only the with coMputer networks we can easliY distinguish real events from imaginations and results are more standardized.
In the not too distant future direct neural implants to the wireless network will have bring cyberspace and the "real world" into direct contact each over laping the other, cyber space is not an escape from reality it is the forging of a whole new level to reality.
-
Froclown,
I think you might like Snow Crash.
Love and L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
@Froclown said
"the VR environment is no different that the astral plane, only the with coMputer networks we can easliY distinguish real events from imaginations and results are more standardized."
With the above statements you've shown (more than once in those few words) that you haven't a clue about the astral plane.
-
@Froclown said
"what exactly is the problem with virtual reality. So called Real reality is merely a construct of the mind. a model of sensory inputs. see Robert Anton Wilson. second life is merely a model of information from the input of pixel data to the eyes. A human mind is on both sides of the equation. the VR environment is no different that the astral plane, only the with coMputer networks we can easliY distinguish real events from imaginations and results are more standardized.
In the not too distant future direct neural implants to the wireless network will have bring cyberspace and the "real world" into direct contact each over laping the other, cyber space is not an escape from reality it is the forging of a whole new level to reality."
How much time have you spent attempting to improve "Gorian" society versus cleaning up your house, or yard, or neighborhood, or city?
How much time structuring a Gorian caste system versus participating in the real world politics?
How much time thinking about the role of women in Gorian society versus finding a girlfriend and being overwhelmed in that dance of love and will?
How much time adjusting the color, height, physic, and hair of your avatar versus perfecting the real temple of Life that your body is?
In Virtual Reality, your time, intellect, and passions get dispersed and used up in an environment where there are no real consequences, good or bad. It's easy not to learn one's lessons. It's easy not to evolve. It's easy to ignore the Reality where the laws of action and reaction instruct us how best to live.
Man..., VR may play a very important role in our future. I can imagine humanity evolving into a highly organized and interactive community that functions more efficiently together by such means. Maybe one day.... But right now, on a very large scale, it's where people go to live out fantasies they can't create in Real Life. They change their Avatars and their profile instead of working on their very real health and success.
but ...Who am I, man? Who am I to tell you what your Will is. I'm sure Life has some people devoted to this aspect of our evolution. Maybe you're one of those people. But, honestly, right now you don't have that quality about you that suggests you're doing your True Will. Investigating it, sure - maybe! And for this reason, I'm just a little bit hesitant to press my own ideas about the value of VR too strongly onto you.
But right now you're having a lot of trouble communicating your ideas with Real Live fellow students who wonder what the point is to your ramblings and excitement. Honestly, at times it kind of seems like you're skirting the line of being someone who has lost the ability to communicate meaningfully with others who are not "in to" Second Life. The question remains, "What Real Life value is this to you?" and "Is your own Real Life sufficiently healthy and balanced in practical ways?" Because on the larger scale in the general population, the risk of getting lost in the pure escapism of VR is prevailing, and the best judge of what is of value is its effect (good or bad) on the Real Lives of people.
Of course, who says that's important? Maybe it's your will to burn up in the pleasure of an experience like a falling star..., and damn the rest...!
But you keep coming back to the idea of "teaching" and "advancement" through the grade system. As such, you have to demonstrate mastery of this REAL life and the REAL forces within yourself. This requires healthy bodies and balanced minds. It requires someone be very in touch with physical reality and its rules as the "touchstone" of their experience.
This understanding is part of the very* first *step on the Path - as I see it anyway...
But what do I know? You're asking for advice and struggling with a concept, so I'm responding to that. Some could fault me for spending too much time with you. They could tell me to let failure, experience, and your own Higher Self teach you. Who am I to try to keep your from these experiences of trial and error, success and failure? They are your birthright...! Indeed, if you succeed at what you aim to do, then what other proof do you need, and what better way to prove me wrong?
We're coming to the end of our conversation. And you'll have to make up your own mind about it. You'll have to satisfy yourSelf in the end, so... while I think I've said some things of value,
....you're absolutely going to have to stop listening to me...
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Firstly, I must humbly bow before the might of your Kung-Fu, Frater AVV. You move swiftly through the dance with the ease of one who flows with the current, and I applaud you! I have watched your effortless and graceful motions with an eye of admiration.
You've said more on this topic than I care to elucidate upon any further, so I will leave the conversation in your capable hands.
Keep dancing, brother!
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in LVX,
-M -
@Maleficia said
"
Firstly, I must humbly bow before the might of your Kung-Fu, Frater AVV. You move swiftly through the dance with the ease of one who flows with the current, and I applaud you! I have watched your effortless and graceful motions with an eye of admiration
Keep dancing, brother!
-M"Well, thanks... lol... I had fun creating that image. I hope I didn't lose my point in my attempt to illustrate it though...
The point was actually to demonstrate the power that we can give to other people when we externalize our inner conflicts. No one has any power to hinder, encourage, or cause self-doubt unless we give it to them! There is no "Kung Fu" except to know this battle is really internal.
A "No!" has no power unless the hearer has a doubt about their internal "Yes!"
A "Yes!" has no power if the hearer has an internal "No!"
And there is no vulnerability to "attack" unless a part of the hearer agrees with the attack - unless they "let it in." Otherwise, they are impervious.
The whole silly display is to refocus the hearer's attention away from the *external *debate and onto the internal debate - to prove that I'm not really the one the hearer is fighting because I don't really have any power.
The battle is within, and it is the Self which must be satisfied. When this is true, the "Kung Fu" has no power whatsoever....
So, what course of action would satisfy the Self to the extent that there is no longer any hesitation to act nor abilty to hinder acting...?