Animal Sacrifice.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"this is true.... we live in a brutal and savage culture; and it's one thing that bothers me about anyone who refers to Nativist culture as "primitive" or "savage". Clearly, it is the other way around."BTW, these words not be offensive if we look closely at them and see what they actually mean. "Primitive" (like "primal") just means "first," i.e., early, original, etc. "Savage" simply means "from the forests." All of the other meanings are secondary ideas we've attached to "earlier civilizations living in the forest."
OTOH I suspect your understabanble umbrage is about what someone actually meant by the words - which was probably somewhat pejorative."
Yes, it's that and more. Same thing with the term "pagan", meaning country folk literally, but to others something nefarious at best.
You see, it's personal with me. I identify with the world tribes that have been slaughtered, bribed, and what's left, tamed and used for nefarious ends, to continue the nefarious plans of those who would enslave the entire planet!
(note: I am aware I used nefarious 3x: [Latin nefārius, from nefās, crime, transgression : ne-, not; see ne in Indo-European roots + fās, divine law; see dhē- in Indo-European roots.] they are breaking divine law!)
-
It was certainly not a breaking of divine law, to displace Isis aeon tribal societies, with Osiris society, with its centralized metropolis, its ONE absolute God, to replace all other gods, its ONE single global culture to replace all the tribal customs, myths, beliefs, and unique identity, the sacrifice of all to the ONE true political rule. Certainly Christianity and most especially the Roman church did a great job of destroying the pagan tribal cultures often by fire (how many where burned literally at the stake, if not figuratively by the hands of passionate bishops). And when the superstition became eventually outlived its power, well then it simply destroyed its own husk and like a phoenix from the ashes arose anew in the form of liberal humanism and enlightenment values that culminated in the crisis of modernism. (Osiris was slain by his own shadow)
Yet as it is written "My prophet is a fool with his one one one"
Shall not the Horus child come forth from the void left in the wake of modernism and slay Seth, the shadow of Osiris, and to replace the rule of unity with that special sort of simultaneous annihilation and duality.
We can not restore the pagan tribes of the past, nor can we continue the Osiris formula of destroying (sacrificing) all than deviate from central concept of unity. Instead the new formula is we must learn to accept all things, the good, the bad and the ugly, also the just plane bizaar or incomprehensible, and turn our backs to nothing, continually synthesizing every new experience. Yet each of us shall synthesize ALL in a unique way, according to the unique WILL and perspective of the individual. And We must never stop learning, never stop synthesizing, never stop destroying ourselves that we may renew ourselves.
We can not hide in the old ways, be they Isis, Osiris, or Set, but we must not reject them either.
-
@Froclown said
"It was certainly not a breaking of divine law, to displace Isis aeon tribal societies, with Osiris society, with its centralized metropolis, its ONE absolute God, to replace all other gods, its ONE single global culture to replace all the tribal customs, myths, beliefs, and unique identity, the sacrifice of all to the ONE true political rule. Certainly Christianity and most especially the Roman church did a great job of destroying the pagan tribal cultures often by fire (how many where burned literally at the stake, if not figuratively by the hands of passionate bishops). And when the superstition became eventually outlived its power, well then it simply destroyed its own husk and like a phoenix from the ashes arose anew in the form of liberal humanism and enlightenment values that culminated in the crisis of modernism. (Osiris was slain by his own shadow)
Yet as it is written "My prophet is a fool with his one one one"
Shall not the Horus child come forth from the void left in the wake of modernism and slay Seth, the shadow of Osiris, and to replace the rule of unity with that special sort of simultaneous annihilation and duality.
We can not restore the pagan tribes of the past, nor can we continue the Osiris formula of destroying (sacrificing) all than deviate from central concept of unity. Instead the new formula is we must learn to accept all things, the good, the bad and the ugly, also the just plane bizaar or incomprehensible, and turn our backs to nothing, continually synthesizing every new experience. Yet each of us shall synthesize ALL in a unique way, according to the unique WILL and perspective of the individual. And We must never stop learning, never stop synthesizing, never stop destroying ourselves that we may renew ourselves.
We can not hide in the old ways, be they Isis, Osiris, or Set, but we must not reject them either."
I'm so glad you have everything figured out; I can go rest now....
I will not tolerate people quoting religious books as justification for slaughter and slavery. Do you think you have some special exception?? Does not the comment warn against the Book?> Doesn't the Book explicitly say it's beyond your comprehension?? Doesn't Class A mean it's meant to inform on a supra-intellectual level??
Maybe you'll think twice when martial law is enacted and you're chipped.
Maybe you would think twice if you saw the unity and eternal values in world mythology. Remember, as above, so below. You can't "replace" or repress an internal "god force", it simply is .... you can either accept it or face the consequences.Lastly, how about state a single idea clearly, make your point and move on to the next point? reading your post is like watching a monkey spasmodically throw a temper in a cage. But perhaps that analogy isn't too far off the mark. Your mind is in a cage and your ego reacts. Take my advice, think for a second; think about what I am going to say to you... the matrix is real. It exists as an analogy to real life, and has been for centuries, and is intensifying rapidly. You and I are under constant psychological programming....You are simply justifying a system that bred you and trained you to think this way. If you could get away from that, you would see it.
And one more thing, when I say I take it personally, I mean it, so don't Bullsh*t me!
-
Underabloodredsky, what are you blithering about.
I thought quite cleary about what I wrote, and it was perfectly consistent with the Osiris aeon to displace pagan culture with centralized world order, and it is perfectly in accord with Horus aeon divine law to re-establish to some extent the old world order but in a new way.
-
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"But perhaps that analogy isn't too far off the mark. Your mind is in a cage and your ego reacts.And one more thing, when I say I take it personally, I mean it, so don't Bullsh*t me!"
By the way you came at him with your above post it seems like you need to "practice what you preach" because it is apparent that your Ego is definitely functioning on an exaggerated level."
I think that's a bunch of B.S. as well.
To be be emotional is how things get done; it's certainly how magick gets done.
Also, don't defend someone who doesn't show respect.... If you read my initial post, I said I take it personally, then he went right on ahead and challenged my post directly. I laid in to him and I will lay into any one that defends slavery and death under any circumstances, but especially under the guise of religion.
What kind of person are you and what kind of community is this that let's that kind of rubbish go unchallenged? Did you read his response, he justifies "world order" and "displacing" people. Doesn't body read history?
Don't you realise that there is no more dangerous talk to human freedom than that? -
@nderabloodredsky said
"To be be emotional is how things get done; it's certainly how magick gets done. "
Emotional force - desire - yes. But not reactivity. Emotional reactivity is a foe of the magician.
BTW, I'm not saying anyone here was reactive - I didn't read those particular posts closely enough to make that judgment. I'm only commenting on the one sentence above, in and of itself.
"What kind of person are you and what kind of community is this that let's that kind of rubbish go unchallenged? Did you read his response, he justifies "world order" and "displacing" people. Doesn't body read history?
Don't you realise that there is no more dangerous talk to human freedom than that?"Speaking as site administrator, I restrict myself more than I restrict others. There are bounds that the particular individual is kept within; but also, as a counter-balance, I am more permissive with ideas I don't agree with. Every now and then, as a participant of this forum, I'd like to shut him down as totally destructive and entirely off the track of Thelema (which, usually, he is); but as administrator I don't do this because we need room for a wide range of ideas (especially those that aren't mine!).
Which means (among other things): Other forum participants need to do exactly what you're doing, and speaking up against things they think are simply wrong. If this is done intelligently, as respectfully as possible, etc., then it strengthens the forum far more than excluding the original ideas would do.
-
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"But perhaps that analogy isn't too far off the mark. Your mind is in a cage and your ego reacts.And one more thing, when I say I take it personally, I mean it, so don't Bullsh*t me!"
By the way you came at him with your above post it seems like you need to "practice what you preach" because it is apparent that your Ego is definitely functioning on an exaggerated level."
I think that's a bunch of B.S. as well.
To be be emotional is how things get done; it's certainly how magick gets done.
Also, don't defend someone who doesn't show respect.... If you read my initial post, I said I take it personally, then he went right on ahead and challenged my post directly. I laid in to him and I will lay into any one that defends slavery and death under any circumstances, but especially under the guise of religion.
What kind of person are you and what kind of community is this that let's that kind of rubbish go unchallenged? Did you read his response, he justifies "world order" and "displacing" people. Doesn't body read history?
"Yes, "body" reads history. Did I ever say anywhere that I agreed with him? No. I also never said one thing about anyone being "emotional" either. I don't know where you got that idea. Lastly, even if I was "defending him" (which I wasn't) I can defend or back whoever the hell I want to, or whatever idea I please.
Displacing the Pagan culture was something which Osirian religons did, it isn't that hard to see. Justifying "world order" and "displacement" isn't always a bad thing, depending on the context. It seems like you are skimming through what he is saying and seeing words which you don't agree with and jumping to conclusions without any clear reason why. Your posts are just pointing out what problems you have with what he posted, you have yet to post a solution. Complaining is easy.
I think you missed the entire idea behind those posts."
You can certainly defend "whoever the hell" you want to, and I will certainly attack any idea that I want to.
And yours and 99% of peoples' reading of history is FALSE because it is not true; it's altered and perverted to serve the official propaganda. Real history equals truth, and that is always the first thing to be eliminated. Official religions (read=centralised), run by evil people (at least) who infiltrated and took over all instruments of power (religious, political, moral, social etc.) in order to enslave and kill pagans, (read=free worshiping, free political, free moralising, free social) people. They in turn took the those enslaved, whoever was left standing, and brainwashed their offspring into cooperating and even justifying their actions and further plans to enslave even more peoples through colonisation. So, I assert plainly and vehemently that centralised government, whether political, religious, or moral is ALWAYS bad, bad on principle, because it contradicts the rights of the INDIVIDUAL!!!
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"To be be emotional is how things get done; it's certainly how magick gets done. "Emotional force - desire - yes. But not reactivity. Emotional reactivity is a foe of the magician.
BTW, I'm not saying anyone here was reactive - I didn't read those particular posts closely enough to make that judgment. I'm only commenting on the one sentence above, in and of itself.
"What kind of person are you and what kind of community is this that let's that kind of rubbish go unchallenged? Did you read his response, he justifies "world order" and "displacing" people. Doesn't body read history?
Don't you realise that there is no more dangerous talk to human freedom than that?"Speaking as site administrator, I restrict myself more than I restrict others. There are bounds that the particular individual is kept within; but also, as a counter-balance, I am more permissive with ideas I don't agree with. Every now and then, as a participant of this forum, I'd like to shut him down as totally destructive and entirely off the track of Thelema (which, usually, he is); but as administrator I don't do this because we need room for a wide range of ideas (especially those that aren't mine!).
Which means (among other things): Other forum participants need to do exactly what you're doing, and speaking up against things they think are simply wrong. If this is done intelligently, as respectfully as possible, etc., then it strengthens the forum far more than excluding the original ideas would do."
I wholly agree with not shutting down free speech, for the more common reasons, but also for even more important reasons:
I want to know who my enemies are, or at least where these illogical, irrational and destructive attitudes and assumptions are coming from so that I can confront them.
BTW, the average person will not comprehend logic, but they will comprehend emotion!
Does any body not see how "civilised" people are emotionally castrated! The argument usually is fear based, "if you don't then you are a bad person and society will be bad." Has any one bothered to check that silent assumption empirically? I was born into a "primitive" culture and they are far more humane and human, i.e. in touch with their feelings than any "civilised" man.
So have your world order, your centralised religious/political/social/moral government. It can even be "Thelema"! Hoo Ray!
Just wait for the other shoe to drop, because it won't be you who is in charge. The people who will be (and are) in charge don't care what the form is. Their only religion is, "Divide and conquer." -
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"Does any body not see how "civilised" people are emotionally castrated! The argument usually is fear based, "if you don't then you are a bad person and society will be bad." Has any one bothered to check that silent assumption empirically? I was born into a "primitive" culture and they are far more humane and human, i.e. in touch with their feelings than any "civilised" man."I lived in a city squat for 2 years with a ton of Punk rock kids and "primitive" crusties while I was addicted to Heroin and living on the streets, and I can agree that these people were far more civil and humane than any white collar jerk-off that buys into capitalism and sunday drives to the church with their family. But this is what we live in, so we need to adapt and evolve (but not throw away our own standards and ideals) just like most everyone else has to do in their countries. I don't wholly agree that it is "fear based", I see it more as a survival tool."
I respect that.
However, I don't agree with your notion of adapt and evolve and survive. I want to live, and live fully!
These are false notions of evolution and adaptation. The argument is, take option "a" ( which is bad) or take option "b" (which is worse). It's an either/or, dichotomous, irrational argument, but one that is used most freely and is at the root of almost all false assumptions. (see Alfred Korzybski).
The reality is we have many options for living, society and government, only limited by our own minds. It supports my argument, I think, if you look at the trends in modern politics, and see how both democracy and communism have moved towards centralised government, which totally contradicts both those theories of government.
Lastly, let me say this: you said that I am just complaining, and that, that is easy to do. First of all, I am not just complaining, and secondly complaining isn't really that easy if you keep going when people want you to stop.
What I'm doing is fighting. I am fighting injustice and ignorance. My weapon is my pen, or in this case my keyboard. I am taking the fight out. Out to the internet, to my work, family, friends, acquaintances. I fight through my art. And I fight to win, which means I don't "react", but think; but I don't think too much, and end up doing nothing for fear of mistakes or failure.
-
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"
@RifRaf said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"But perhaps that analogy isn't too far off the mark. Your mind is in a cage and your ego reacts.And one more thing, when I say I take it personally, I mean it, so don't Bullsh*t me!"
By the way you came at him with your above post it seems like you need to "practice what you preach" because it is apparent that your Ego is definitely functioning on an exaggerated level."
I think that's a bunch of B.S. as well.
To be be emotional is how things get done; it's certainly how magick gets done.
Also, don't defend someone who doesn't show respect.... If you read my initial post, I said I take it personally, then he went right on ahead and challenged my post directly. I laid in to him and I will lay into any one that defends slavery and death under any circumstances, but especially under the guise of religion.
What kind of person are you and what kind of community is this that let's that kind of rubbish go unchallenged? Did you read his response, he justifies "world order" and "displacing" people. Doesn't body read history?"
Did I ever say anywhere that I agreed with him? No. I also never said one thing about anyone being "emotional" either. I don't know where you got that idea."
Its called 'projection' my boy!
" Lastly, even if I was "defending him" (which I wasn't) I can defend or back whoever the hell I want to, or whatever idea I please. "
Not if you disagree with my point-of-view, then you are a liar and a cheat and an ego-inflated maniac, of course!
"Displacing the Pagan culture was something which Osirian religons did"
Technically, a lot of those Pagan cultures WERE Osirian religions. The idea is so vaguely defined that most pagan groups would fall under something like Osirian + Isisian (is that a word? now it is)
"Justifying "world order" and "displacement" isn't always a bad thing, depending on the context. It seems like you are skimming through what he is saying and seeing words which you don't agree with and jumping to conclusions without any clear reason why."
Its called internet forums, my boy! Welcome!
"Afterall, complaining is easy."
Actually taking the time for understanding another's argument? Hard.
IAO131
-
I do not see what your problem is. A hurricane is not a violation of "divine law" and yet hurricanes cause mass destruction and death. So it is with an Aeon, which is a manifestation of zeitgeist, perhaps you could say that the theory of aeons replaces the single world Zeitgeist with multiple currents or geists that simultaneously interweave the tapestry of history.
The current of history called Osiris was Death, Destruction and preparation for Rebirth. In fact the Osiris Aeon denied that all other pagan currents and sought to unify the whole world as one single zeitgeist. Thus it was perfectly in line with the forces of history that the western culture which is to say Christianity (perverted Judeaism with exaggerated slave morality and a chip of resentment turned against the world) The way an aeon manifests is a result of its magus, in this case Christ, so if you want to complain about the violent way in which the aeon of Osiris unfolded itself. Then direct your anger at the one who "came with a sword" to established the divine law and used his power to "cast fire upon the earth and wait".
-
@Froclown said
"I do not see what your problem is."
The "world order" of Roman slaughter and enslavement of peoples and perversion of Religion, the Crusades, Inquisition, Burning of Witches, Heretics and Magicians, Colonisation, the Slave Trade, "displacement" of Native Americans on both North & South Continents, WWI, WWII, and other recent wars, famine in Africa, corporate ownership & control of the food supply and genetic patenting of food, bankrupt and indebted third world nations through the IMF, and the U.S. not far behind.
That is my problem.
What is the cause? False religion and government. You bring up Zeitgeist, have you seen the film? It makes the point. There is a brief scene of a human hand (pentagram) doing arithmetic (science and Quabalah) and this is forcibly taken away and replaced with the Bible and nation-flag (false or perverted symbols and language=irrational thoughts, false assumptions=the method of mental slavery=black magick).
@Froclown said
"The current of history called Osiris was Death, Destruction and preparation for Rebirth. In fact the Osiris aeon denied that all other pagan currents and sought to unify the whole world as one single zeitgeist. Thus it was perfectly in line with the forces of history that the western culture which is to say Christianity (perverted Judaism with exaggerated slave morality and a chip of resentment turned against the world) The way an aeon manifests is a result of its magus, in this case Christ, so if you want to complain about the violent way in which the aeon of Osiris unfolded itself. Then direct your anger at the one who "came with a sword" to established the divine law and used his power to "cast fire upon the earth and wait"."
Lies.
Confusion.
See:
books.google.com/books?id=SB_y56Vlz5kC&pg=PA60#v=onepage&q=&f=false
Hurricanes may kill people, but "Aeons" don't.
Any one who uses religion or politics or morality to slaughter and enslave people is nefarious (against divine law) because it violates several principles, such as Love and Personal Freedom.
Your warped perceptions of Thelema and presumptuous use of "The Book of the Law" as justification for "world order" and the "displacement" of people is no different from the perpetrators of the above quoted history justifying their deeds by the Bible, Torah, Koran, or various political creeds etc.
-
Umm, I don't think I justified anything.
Nor do I think anything needs to be justified.
Its not a normative issue.
The film Zeitgeist was a bunch of mis-applied and confused occultism and media distortion to present liberal propaganda, blaming republican administration for 9-11 and confusing this with astrology and other such nonsense.All I said was, what makes you thing love and freedom = divine order.
Their is no divine order, their is only A-moral natural order. and that is survival of the fittest and generally everyone out for himself first and concern for others only after oneself is satisfied. That is the Divine law.
The old aeon was marked by violence and turmoil because technology increased so fast and cultures were forced into oppositions and competition for the same property right. Its not a matter of morality, just of pure economics, as Crowley put it "ethics in boulderdash"
Do what Thu Wilt shall be the whole of the law
That means we no longer believe in the fairy tail that their is a divine ruler who cares for us and a wants us to be happy and safe and to feel warm fuzzy feelings, The Gods are tyrant, the kinds are often huckseters and loons, the sun is as likely to warm our bones as bake us alive (or give us cancer). It's every man for himself now. But in this is joy of freedom, the freedom to race and to Rape to rip and to rend, the world apart with no guilt and no authority ta shame you.
Thelema is liberty, it is liberty it grow and expand, to create and to destroy as you will, it is the liberty of the fire cracker to take as much of the world with it as it blows!!
Ra-Hoor-Kuit is a God of War and severity. The Thelemite is a Wild beast set free, he is Fenris wolf his chain broken an the day of Ragnarok. A domestic dogwthe day his master died. God is dead, its time we leave behind our domestic conditioning and learn to be wild untamed beasts again!!!
-
@Froclown said
"Their is no divine order"
And there you have it folks, the insight of the fellow not long ago claiming to be a 9=2 (spelling mistakes aside).
"their is only A-moral natural order. and that is survival of the fittest and generally everyone out for himself first and concern for others only after oneself is satisfied. That is the Divine law."
I might agree we could come to agree on the definition of "oneself."
The thing is, as one progresses up the Tree, one's defiition of "self" changes (many times) until the truth of the above is almost the opposite of what it appears to say on the surface.
"Do what Thu Wilt shall be the whole of the law "
Who is Thu?
"That means we no longer believe in the fairy tail that their is a divine ruler who cares for us and a wants us to be happy and safe and to feel warm fuzzy feelings, The Gods are tyrant, the kinds are often huckseters and loons"
Your gods are projections of your own traits.
-
it was but a projection into Gevurah.
And to be fair, I merely claimed the right to take on the 8=3 degree, in so much as I have undergone an experience that very much sounds similar to Crowley's abyss experience. Then of course the work of 8=3 that of preparing a temple in hopes that the secret chiefs would find it worthy it dwell within, or put into non-mystical language. To create at external school which can only prove connection to the inner school by way of time and observation of the fruits of ones efforts.
I see no reason why anything about Thelema should require any Gods or any other non-sense about the divine and supernatiural forces or events. That is all Crowley's waxing poetic, but what he really means, behind all the silly poetic metaphor is pure materialistic, physical science, nothing to do with actual Gods or other mystical hocus pocus. other than as literary devices and ae stand in explanations, when his ere did not yet offer science to his satisfaction.
-
@Froclown said
"I see no reason why anything about Thelema should require any Gods or any other non-sense about the divine and supernatiural forces or events. That is all Crowley's waxing poetic, but what he really means, behind all the silly poetic metaphor is pure materialistic, physical science, nothing to do with actual Gods or other mystical hocus pocus. other than as literary devices and ae stand in explanations, when his ere did not yet offer science to his satisfaction."
I tend to see it the physical sciences as being an attempt to rationalize the .00000001% of the universe which can be perceived. Where mysticism is concerned with the other 99.99999999%.
Thelema? Well, that encompases 666% of the universe
-
@Froclown said
"Then of course the work of 8=3 that of preparing a temple in hopes that the secret chiefs would find it worthy it dwell within"
FWIW that's a 7=4 level task.
"I see no reason why anything about Thelema should require any Gods or any other non-sense about the divine and supernatiural forces or events."
I see no reason that necessarily the word "gods" be used, or that things be labeled with the names of particular (old or new) gods. And I certainly see no reason for perpetuating the dependent pattern of, "Oh Great Mom or Dad, I am so helpless without you, so please bail me out."
But something I regard as essential (to correct ego proportion if nothing else) is the recognition - and, eventually, the direct experience - of something conscious, omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent that is so vastly (infinitely!) past any concept of a concept of a concept of anything at all - and that there is no human authentic way to relate this in any sense to anything you likely think of as "myself."
The only word the English language has for this is "god." If you want to make up a new word for it, and define that word in essentially the same way that the rest of the world defines "god," then go for it.
One needs a healthy love for the unknown and rationally unknowable to get anywhere near the Abyss. One needs a keen, authentic awareness of something vastly beyond oneself to grow past Malkuth.
"but what [Crowley] really means, behind all the silly poetic metaphor is pure materialistic, physical science"
I don't think you could be further from the truth. That statement shows so little comprehension of Crowley, his life, his thinking, and his work as to suggest that you don't really know anything about him.
Now, to my thinking it's virtually a certainty that science sometime over the next few centuries will gradually absorb more and more of this "unknown" into its canon. That is, " think it's ultimately all some aspect of what we'd like to call "science." But (to run with the idea Uni_Verse just posted), it doesn't have much of anything to do with science as it exists today and is certainly not "pure materialistic" and "physical."
"Materialism," as you probably know, refers to a particular deterministic philosophy that nothing at all exists but matter - in the narrow, conventional sense that most people under stand "matter" - and that there is nothing higher or deeper than the [conventional idea of matter] existing. That's simply not true. (If you were physically blind, I bet you'd walk around telling sighted people that color is a fiction, that there is no such thing as color.)
-
yes, I have a better word than God.
Several infact.
Universe, world, nature, the natural world, all space-time, The continuous all, the most general category, the null set, the Ground of Being, the perceptive medium, Nuit, or Kant's noumenon, the thing in itself, which is to say the macrocosm etc.
What it boils down to is the Pure physical reality striped of all human projections.
Then the world of Malkuth, the world of seeming, the world according to one particular Hadit, the classified and categorized world, the world of projected human values, the phenomenal, the microcosm.
Apply a little Discordian phycho-metaphyics. and we see than their are as many little t truths and microcosms as their are individual Hadits, and each human has many different perspectives on which in create many different self contained microcosms, ie different ways to look at the macrocosm and create organized little worlds.
Take this notion and add to it Douglas Adams notion of the "whole general sort of Mish-Mash" which is basically the macro-cosm and then each "parrallel" universe or is a creation of perspective orientation within the Whole mish-mash "which does not itself exist, but is merely the sum of all possible ways to look at it if it did".
Here we have Nuit is merely the sun of all possible Hadits, and Hadit is merely one possible perspective orientation within Nuit.
The first line from chapters I and II of Liber L, and no need to postulate anything supernatural, no cosmic intelligences, no God's anthropic deities waiting at the bounds of infinity to interfere in human affairs.Ever single aspect of occultism and ritual magick has a natural physical cause, effect and explination. The poetry and the imagining of Gods and spirits, connects with us, it activates archetypes, and thus in rituals we call upon Gods, we unite in our minds the image of the sun and the phallus, etc.
However, when we step out of the circle and wish to understand what really we did, we need to put away the poetry and deal with the facts.
If you are in a play, yes, Romeo and Juliette are lovers who meet on the balcony of a mansion and poison, very tragic. But after the play, you know well it was juice not poison, the actor and actress hate each other, and Juliette's balcony is really an old latter.
The events were not real, but the emotions invoked were real.
Likewise the events in ritual are symbols, poetry, play. But the feelings, the mental states, (including audio and visual hallucination) are subjective but real.It is a mistake it attribute literal objective validity to anything so see, feel, or hear in a ritual. The value comes in study of your own mind and the psychological reasons behind why you would have experienced the things as you did.
In psychotherapy the therapist may analyze your dreams, but he does not state the events in your dreams really happened and exist on a dream world plane, where the bogey man in your dream might do harm to other people in the waking world. Rather he looks to see what it is in your own mind that would cause this sort of dream, and what sort of lifestyle change or confrontation with a phobia might alter the dream, or even if using the dream imagery one can conquer a real life phobia by imagining a conflict with the dream monsters. Which is in effect Evokation with no reason to assume spirits or demons exist outside subjective imagination.
I can go on this way and provide naturalistic explanations for all such phenomena. Thus making them useful tools of science and not mystical abstractions that only fill us with spacey awe and wonderment. Very often it seems to me, occultisms do not want to know and to use what they learn in a practical way. They just want to be spaced out junkies addicted to the feeling of amazement at the vast.
"Wow like I am in touch with like these vast powers man, you should fear me and be my friend." Classic sign no inferiority complex expressed as a desire to appear superior in something vague than can't be proven wrong.
-
@Froclown said
"yes, I have a better word than God.
Several infact.
Universe, world, nature, the natural world, all space-time, The continuous all, the most general category, the null set, the Ground of Being, the perceptive medium, Nuit, or Kant's noumenon, the thing in itself, which is to say the macrocosm etc."
Wait a minute, you want to do away with reference to any sort of god and yet give "Nuit" as one of your substitute words? Hysterical! (HINT to the joke: Nuit is one of those "gods" you don't want anything to do with.)
Yeah, "universe" works for me. (Of course, this doesn't have to work for me.) You'll encounter many people who use the two words interchangeably. But pretty much everything else you mentioned is way to small, parochial, etc. to meet the definition I gave in the last post.
"What it boils down to is the Pure physical reality striped of all human projections."
As much as I like, say, "universe" as a working synonym, it's no more immune to human projections than "god" (or, for that matter, "Britney"). And changing the labels doesn't solve the projection problem - instead, you have to solve the projection problem.
"Ever single aspect of occultism and ritual magick has a natural physical cause, effect and explination."
Only if it doesn't work. If it works, then by definition of working, it connects with something metaphysical.
"I can go on this way and provide naturalistic explanations for all such phenomena. Thus making them useful tools of science and not mystical abstractions that only fill us with spacey awe and wonderment."
In other words, that's all it does for you. It's not all that it does for some other people.
"Very often it seems to me, occultisms do not want to know and to use what they learn in a practical way. They just want to be spaced out junkies addicted to the feeling of amazement at the vast."
I don't have a lot of use for that crowd either. But it would be a mistake to lump serious mystics in with the unicorn and rainbow set.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
""Materialism," as you probably know, refers to a particular deterministic philosophy that nothing at all exists as matter - in the narrow, conventional sense that most people under stand "matter""
Jim - surely you mean "nothing at all exists except as matter"?
I have to agree with Froclown in that I believe physics (which includes quantum physics) to be the fundamental basis of Crowley's understanding. I have been tracing why Crowley repeatedly refers to Einstein throughout his writings. In the same way Liber Legis shattered the closed monotheistic system that characterized the Old Aeon into a sidereal/cosmic-oriented multiplicity in 1904, Einstein's discovery of relativity in 1905 shattered the mechanistic, cause/effect Newtonian worldview that had dominated science for approximately 350 years, and Crowley seemed to be profoundly aware of Einstein's significance. The mechanistic Newtonian worldview is below the Abyss whereas the light of the New Aeon emanates from the Supernals. This aeonic shift is reflected in the relationship between the circle and square, the Cross and Rose, the microcosm and macrocosm. Sunlight has penetrated the closed and limited square.
Crowley on Atu XVII The Star:
*It will be seen that every form of energy in this picture is spiral. Zoroaster says, "God is he, having the head of a hawk; having a spiral force." It is interesting to notice that this oracle appears to anticipate the present Aeon, that of the hawk-headed Lord, and also of the mathematical conception of the shape of the Universe as calculated by Einstein and his school. It is only in the lower cup [read: below the Abyss] that the forms of energy issuing forth show rectilinear characteristics. In this may be discovered the doctrine which asserts that the blindness of humanity to all the beauty and wonder of the Universe is due to the illusion of straightness. It is significant that Riemann, Bolyai and Lobatchewsky seem to have been the mathematical prophets of the New Revelation. For the Euclidean geometry depends upon the conception of straight lines, and it is only because the Parallel Postulate was found to be incapable of proof that mathematicians began to conceive that the straight line had no true correspondence with reality. *
His footnote to the above:
The straight line is no more than the limit of any curve. For instance, it is an ellipse whose foci are an "infinite" distance apart. In fact, such use of the Calculus is the one certain way of ensuring "straightness".(BOT, p. 110)
So when you say Crowley's work is non-materialistic I presume this refers to the fact the perception of matter from below the Abyss changes to one from above the Abyss, when the Daughter Malkuth ascends to the throne of the Mother Binah. But wouldn't the perspective of 8=3 be quite similar to the understanding of quantum physics?