Enochophobia
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
""Orange Fizz""You turning yellow on us? <vbg>"
Well done!
-
@Dar said
"
@Orange Fizz said
"It's also just interesting to me, I guess, that it seems like a lot of people involved in WMT and Thelema converse with gods, angels and demons for no apparent reason or very everyday reasons pertaining to their health, work and relationships[1] or just plain curiosity... "From 'On Duty' by AC:
"B. YOUR DUTY TO OTHER INDIVIDUAL MEN AND WOMEN
- "Love is the law, love under will."
Unite yourself passionately with every other form of
consciousness, thus destroying the sense of
seperateness from the Whole, and creating a new
base-line in the Universe from which to measure it."
The source of all beings is the same source - whether this is another man or woman, a God, an Angel, an Elemental, a Demon, an Animal etc."
I know. But, are you really stable in that realization? If so, there's no real need to do much of anything with anyone unless you just want to help them.
- "Love is the law, love under will."
-
Oh, nevermind, I see... it's supposed to be the process / route to that understanding. Interesting. I wonder if it works.
-
@Dar said
"
@Orange Fizz said
"I know. But, are you really stable in that realization? If so, there's no real need to do much of anything with anyone unless you just want to help them."We've all incarnated into the animal bodies of social and sexual creatures. I find that rather significant. Divided for loves sake..."
It depends on what you think that means. In my view, it is somewhat complicated, but very easy to understand once you get all the details filled in. It's related to Crowley's "star sponge vision" and his explanation of Nuit and Hadit but these concepts leave a lot of detail to be filled in, perhaps by such ritual work, I don't know. In my understanding, what you've just said as an explanation can be read at least 2 ways, one of which is very much off the mark or at least very contradictory to the other interpretation. Here are the two ways I can read your statement: (1) we have all divided intentionally for love's sake and for the sake of union (but for some strange reason we don't remember that, eh?), and (2) "love" has two meanings, one pertaining to desire (incomplete) and one pertaining to compassion (complete)... not realizing the nature of our own minds, we create the world from our desire and lust in the result, still never recognizing our own minds and our real nature. This can go on endlessly through many incarnations. The primal source, empty and cognizant, is ultimately the "compassionate space mother" which allows all. In this way, the projection of our world can be seen as a "ladder of lights" leading back to "heaven," and explains the maxim "nothing is true, everything is permitted" as well as the notion that "all beings have been your mother countless times in the past" since our projections project and intermingle themselves... this is what I was getting at before when I said that magickal work can be like stirring your finger through ink in a bowl of water; one drop clouds the whole bowl. Ink takes a long time to settle to the bottom where we can see the clear nature of the water again. Being social and sexual in itself is no more significant than a schizophrenic talking with the radio and masturbating in the corner, is it? If you don't recognize your own nature, it is all just distraction and masturbation of one sort or the other.
So, anyway, yes, 'divided for love's sake' but depending on your interpretation of that, you can spend an awfully long time suffering in ignorance.
-
@Dar said
"
"In most experiences of intense Joy I forget myself and exist in the moment…"That has nothing to do with what I'm talking about. That is a normal aspect of everyday deluded mind in a forgetful state and not transcendental any more than Alzheimers is transcendental. In my training, I am not shooting for bliss states. At all. That is a very big distraction called a "pleasant obstacle" along the same lines of becoming a great meditator and suddenly finding yourself surrounded by groupies.
@Dar said
"A true nature doesn't belong to 'you'."
Right.
@Dar said
"Our lifes and existance are a sacrament, whether we realise this or not. Therefore - the pain of division and ignorance is as nothing."
"Sacrament" is a suspect word, imo, meaningless conceptual baggage. Everything is as nothing, but to the person who experiences himself suffering through it can be everything, the weight of which is too much to bare. Without recognizing and stabilizing the view of that "inner" essenceless essence we are talking about (or I am talking about at least), all talk about it is just conceptual baggage.
@Dar said
"The ego owns nothing, creates nothing, enjoys nothing, not even itself as it is an illusion,"
Somewhat agree; the ego owns nothing, but it creates and enjoys illusions with the help of the inherently cognizant awareness of the source, which is empty awareness.
@Dar said
"but even this illusion of ourselves as a constant thing is enjoyed by the source of it all."
Right, but "enjoyed" here is a very suspect word and its relation to the source is also suspect. The source itself is not a thing, either, and any aspect of enjoyment comes from a projected ego which then has great difficulty recognizing the source. The source is free from all obstacles and utterly beyond concepts. A realized being may project an 'enjoyment body' but that is not the state we find ourselves in now. Recognition of the source is so subtle it is described as a hair tip, quite easy to miss. But, in missing that hair tip, it is like light projecting through a crystal and endless rainbows appear. Those projections are the natural potential and energy of the source which we get lost in where we find self and other and all the endless thoughts like a chain of friends rising up to support each other. This seems very useful because without logic and compassion of others to support us, we would be utterly lost in confusion... but this is precisely the state of hell beings, ghosts, other types of beings we would call "spirit" beings and dumb animals who are raised in awful conditions just to be slaughtered for our food. These projections are so close to the source it is impossible to separate from the source, but they are also so far removed it is like an infinite chasm.
@Dar said
"Existance is pure joy"
This holy book is up to each person to interpret for himself and those who discuss it should be shunned as sources of pestilence. In other words, I disagree with the following…
@Dar said
"and the source of all is 'getting it on' through you as part of it's universal wank fest when you simply open your eyes every morning, listen to the birds, or have your breakfast."
…or I should clarify that it is only partly true, imo, and can be interpreted a few ways. From what you've said thus far, I am pretty sure you mean something else, but I would only agree insofar as the source is the cognizant awareness in all sentient beings.Though we share a co-created reality, the source isn't an overmind controlling all (no, you didn't say it was, I'm just clarifying my view) and though the source is ultimately what can cognize all manner of physical activity and mental phenomenon (what else could but empty cognizing awareness?), that does not quite equate to all experience as being pure joy, since joy is a limitation and the source is beyond any limitation, not to mention joy has its relative opposite in misery.
The urge to become fulfilled is what draws people on a spiritual path, otherwise nobody would bother. This urge does not express "joy" but rather discontent, ambition not yet satisfied. All joys are like this in the relative world we experience. "Existence is pure joy" is only a phrase that makes sense for those who have gone beyond the relative and I mean REALLY gone beyond, which is what I believe this verse is really referring to, personally.
@Dar said
"You were talking about knowing the real nature of the mind, and out of respect for your Buddhist leanings I'll pop my Zen hat on."
Buddhism is not all the same, but I do appreciate Mahayana and Zen more than Theravada. There is nothing in Dogen's words here I disagree with, but it does not make any point I have not considered, either. I do appreciate Buddhism, all of the methods are good, but what I ultimately believe is not limited to those methods since the great perfection is beyond all conceptual limitations.
-
btw, if Jim reads this exchange and says all of my ideas are decidedly NOT in agreement with Thelema's cosmology and view of the source, the ego self, relative existence, etc. then I will have finally gotten my answer as to how compatible all of this is and drop all such discussion in the future!
The reason I've been hanging out here is because I haven't been quite sure since there appears to be some very obvious overlap and I just realized this came out so effortlessly and naturally. I don't think I could have planned it, but this is essentially the heart of the matter for me all summed up in this thread. I was actually studying the Qabalah a bit recently and thinking maybe it really all is compatible... Is Jim Ipsissimus or whatever the highest degree is? Even if not, I am sure he is the best authority on Thelema that I know, so I would be interested if he had anything to say. -
@Dar said
"Is Jim Ipsissimus...?
That's like declaring yourself to be Jesus Christ you know. 
"Just passing through to clarify that this is yours and Big Citrus' (Peach Fuzz's?) discussion, not mine. (Not sure how Jesus got into this, though LOL.)
Fortunately, anyone at all is always saved from ever having to address this question: "[The Ipsissimus] is sworn to accept this Grade in the presence of a witness, and to express its nature in word and deed, but to withdraw Himself at once within the veils of his natural manifestation as a man, and to keep silence during his human life as to the fact of his attainment, even to the other members of the Order." (One Star in Sight)
And no, this is not a back-handed way of saying, "Er, ahum, you, uh, know I can't answer that, y'know?"
Nonetheless, Popeye's mantram serves all of us well, y'know?
-
So... Jim is yam... made out of spinach?
Just came back from "Sunday funday" which = 1 bloody marry followed by another bloody marry about an hour later and then I had to order another beer cuz the credit card minimum was $20 and then we got a free drink, so we split another Brooklyn lager... I'm a little unmindful now and don't want to read anything and answer inappropriately. I just opened my browser and this thread popped up, so I wanted to comment... Dar, I appreciate your response, but like I said I'm not as mindful as I'd like to be now, so I skipped it and went on to page 2 to see if Jim responded. He did, but was not what I was hoping for (naturally, he always does that to me except when I don't expect him to and then he over-delivers!)... must be an Ipsissimus thing
-
Oh! One thing I realized as soon as we left the house was that I crapped on this thread unintentionally. I don't want to carry on this discussion in here. It's a thread about Enochophobia... sorry about that, OP. Like I said, this all came out quite naturally and without effort on my part at all (thanks, Dar!) and I couldn't have asked these questions better if I tried... but, I did not mean to derail the thread. I will respect that and switch this topic elsewhere if it is to be continued.
-
Bloody Mary.
There is only one R. Sorry about before.
-
-
Just a quick note to end this. I thought perhaps I was being clear, but its becoming more obvious to me what is meant by the necessity of being "introduced" to the natural state and the subtlety of a hair tip. Dar, What I am referring to is not nihilistist (or eternalist), btw. Also, not really supposed to discuss this stuff openly and I have to stop now even though I already f'ed up. Thought I had said enough to know whether or not it jibes with Thelema but so far all I can see is that it's been misunderstood, so unfortunately I'm in the same position except now I may have actually learned to keep samaya... probably not, though. Blabbermouthery is something I consistently succeed at.
-
@Dar said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Nonetheless, Popeye's mantram serves all of us well, y'know?"amused
D'ya know? I was trying to work out where Spinach came into it at first...
[added: whoops accidental gematria. lol]"
Because of a wrong digit number.