Duality and Thelema
-
@Dar es Alrah said
"
What is 'passive love'?There is love that is given. There is love that is received. I have no idea what passive love is, Jim!"
"
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/passive
1a (2) : **receptive **to outside impressions or influences
3a : **receiving **or enduring without resistance" -
@Dar es Alrah said
"What is 'passive love'?"
I would say: In stillness, to be unresistingly, vacuously receptive.
"There is love that is given. There is love that is received. I have no idea what passive love is, Jim!"
Though I'm not at all convinced that such a thing exists in human relationships (see my prior remarks about pitchers and catchers), in the meditative-mystical sense it would be utter receptiveness without assertion.
-
"But that's only going to work if you could recognise passive in mam and active in dad, otherwise there won't be associations in your unconscious to make those connections to. Right? "
Actually, that's inconsistent with Jung's theory of the archetypes of the collective unconscious. While our own mothers and fathers influence the archetype's interactions in our indvidual dream lives, the archetypes themselves are considered to be built up in the human species from millenia of stronger, taller, more aggressive males and weaker, smaller, more nurturing females. It's considered to be the imprint of the evolutionary memory of the species.
And at this point, I've pretty much exhausted my knowledge and theories on the topic. You can choose the disagree with Jung about the nature of the archetypes, but for me personally, it's counterproductive. It just moves me backward into the direction of psychic disorder and chaos.
-
@Dar es Alrah said
"Utter receptiveness would be regarded as an active process rather than a passive one."
I suppose you could define it that way, but it isn't how most people relate to the word.
I just now decided to check a dictionary - and dictionary.com was all I had at hand here at work. It's interesting to me that they don't define passive so much in terms of REAL inactivity, but of apparent inactivity. Various definitions include phrases like "not reacting visibly," "not participating readily," "not involving visible reaction," or in any fashion being the object rather than the subject of the action. (And the latter is perfectly consistent with the grammatical usage.)
Personally, I like more rigorous, literal usage and would tend to prefer a usage state where passive=inactive; but I see that this isn't conventional usage, as recorded by dictionaries (which tend to focus on how people actually use language).
I do think you're making a sound point here, and that "passive" is too frequently used for atavistic reasons when "receptive" is the more accurate descriptor.
-
I love you guys
Intellectually, I can't keep up, as I'm only 17 and have lots of brain yet to develop.
But emotionally, I follow you all more than I can express and seeing you all battle each other with such honor truly helps my own battles, while giving me many directions to follow all along.
I wish I could be up there with you all! One day, one day... -
@Dar es Alrah said
"
I must say - you're a very well read young man. I'm not sure I'd heard of the Eleusinian Mysteries when I was your age, never mind looked into them.
I find myself being continually impressed by just how educated young people are these days about a broad range of topics. I assume that's down to the internet, with innate intelligence and curiosity making the most of the these avenues open to it. In short - you seem quite 'up there' to me. "I have my moments
I've felt a draw to mythology since I was five or six years old, so it's always been something I could sit down and talk about. It frustrated me when I was younger that no one else seemed to realize the fact that all the religions everyone seemed so worked up about were just cultural redundancies of older and far more sublime mythologies. Zeus and Hermes made a much better Christianity in my eyes than the Father and Son of my mother's leaning. Ending up in Thelema was just the natural progression of that kind of thinking.And I can tell you that my education(and that of my peers) had absolutely nothing to do with my schooling. In fact, I dropped out last October. The sheer insanity of the school system in this country(the U.S. of course) nearly drove me over the edge. Tainted history, outdated science, taught by people with no handle on their egos whatsoever is not the kind of institution to look for psychological progression. No learning, only superficial memorization of information. Even though I got A's on all of my tests, I was considered a delinquent by the powers-that-be. Then, once I was opened up to Crowley(and all of the Karmic madness that surrounds such an occurrence!), I had my alternative path and out the door I went.
It's like this for so many young people here. We look to our parents, our trusted elders, and we see them even more lost, scared, and confused than we are. Just egos self-destructing in the face of all the chaos. All we can try to do is get out of the way and hope they don't make too big of a mess of the Earth we all hoped to inherit. But I can also tell you that there is a phenomenon altogether unique and magical occurring in the minds of the young. There is an Indigo fire burning behind their eyes; the children readily await the coming of the Hierophant, to be taught something REAL by a teacher that deserves our attention, and to unleash our true creative capabilities.
So, again, thank you for showing me that there actually are adults in the world that are still setting an example and foundation for true evolutionary progression. Warms my heart
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
@Dar es Alrah said
"I was watching a couple of Ted talks by Sir Ken Robinson about **(http://www.youtube.com/watch?annotation_id=annotation_148916&feature=iv&src_vid=iG9CE55wbtY&v=r9LelXa3U_I:fnlpg5ne)."
Neat, I watched those same talks myself a while back, and I agree with much of what he says. He is certainly a noteworthy contemporary in my book.
By the way, my own understanding of "passive" has rarely been rendered as "intert/incapable" in the framework of my own mind. Although I have come across that in my readings, I more often understand it better as "recieving," which I have always understood to be an action in its own right. "Observation" also comes to mind as an appropriate example.
Activity is no less apparent to a silent mind. In fact, a silent mind would seem to me to be even more aware of any action taking place. By my take, Nuit is all-embracing of Hadit's lordship, even as maintaining the peace of perfect stillness is in itself a call to action. Indeed, how can any of us hope to "achieve Hadit" without the embrace of Nuit? This, of course, implies a reciprocal of equal importance, and I think this thread could use a good dose of 0=2, whether the reality of either of the two parties on the right half of the equation are being imagined or Not (see Liber NV and Liber HAD).
I hadn't realized definitions like "inert" which, to me, imply such underpinnings as "incapability," had become in anyway predominate to people's understanding the concept of "passive." While that emphasis may be important in certain situations or circumstances, it in no way relates to how I commonly understand the term, and I felt a need to come back here and clarify that.
Love is the law, love under will.
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Dar, that etymological analysis was enlightening; thank you for sharing that.
It is now absolutely clear to me that there are indeed important distinctions between "passive" and "receptive" that beg to be clarified for all intents and purposes.
I have to agree the "giving/recieving" terminology is a much more accurate discriptor than "active/passive" for multiple reasons, many of which have already been enumerated.
Love is the law, love under will.
-
@Dar - As much as my devil would like to play, and protest, and play at protesting, he agrees with you too much in essence...
boo... guess I'll..., um, I mean I guess he'll... he'll have to go look elsewhere for some good, honest bedevilment...
-
I personally think that the word passive is not inappropriate at all, and now that the origin was shared I think so even more.
I don't recall what the gland is called, but women have an extra gland in our body. This glands sole purpose is to make a woman forget the pain and suffeing of childbirth.
My own body it seems is working against me, for the sake of the species.
Sure wished it worked on wiping out other memories.....
-
@Dar es Alrah said
"
I declare... I just don't understand how us watery and earthy females manage to get up in the morning without the the stimulation of you men... and obviously there has to be a man somewhere behind me pulling my strings and putting words into my mouth too - as my intellect is so obviously inferior to you lot.. oh my wise Lords and Masters of Magick! Please, please - rouse me from my static, latent forces and insert your dynamic potency into my latency! Oh hang on... that was too enthusiastic wasn't it...? pretends to be passive once more so as not to upset the men."
It seems someone wandered out of the kitchen.
-
@Middleman said
"
@Dar es Alrah said
"I declare... I just don't understand how us watery and earthy females manage to get up in the morning without the the stimulation of you men... and obviously there has to be a man somewhere behind me pulling my strings and putting words into my mouth too - as my intellect is so obviously inferior to you lot.. oh my wise Lords and Masters of Magick! Please, please - rouse me from my static, latent forces and insert your dynamic potency into my latency! Oh hang on... that was too enthusiastic wasn't it...? pretends to be passive once more so as not to upset the men."
It seems someone wandered out of the kitchen."
Priceless.
Although it may end up being your last post, tact is a vital skill my friend, learn it.
-
@Dar es Alrah said
"
@Middleman said
"It seems someone wandered out of the kitchen."It seems something wandered out of the zoo."
Seems all this talk of Duality is descending to the level of Nephesh?
Remember: As Brothers (and Sisters) fight ye!
-
Really?
You think?
Ya know what thou, Dar is a big girl and can speak for herself, but.......
If you know that what you are saying is going to illicit a negative response, and the comments really do not add at all to the growth and health of life.....And I know that it is known to many of the regulars and longtime posters, that some members are extremely different, explosive and in the cyber world may seem extreme....
Why would you carry it on?
do you think she forgot, do you think she came back for more?
Janet is an extremely carring, considerate and honest young lady and I know I count my lucky stars that she was able to return to TOT, with her head on straight and her passion on her sleeve.She is not a bird, she is a human being with feelings.
I spend hours a day in my kitchen, and I love it. I am a wonderful human being, maybe if more people spent time in the kitchen learning how to nurture life, life that was brought into this plane through suffering you blokes can only dream up, maybe then you can experience passion, and understand what the F she is getting at.