Some Liber Tzaddi questions
-
Nearly all of the words are anti-Mars (or weak Mars) words: weak, timid, cowardly, tearful are pretty clear on this. The other two are the same rough feel. - As an Aries-themed work, this isn't surprising.
-
@Ash said
"Fantasy? Why would Heru-Ra-Ha bring us fantasy? Is there an antiquated or obscure meaning I'm missing to this word?"
Yes, it means imagination, the ability to create mental imagery. (It's still an odd word in this context, IMO, but the writer was obviously into alliteration here.)
-
@Ash said
"
"21. Light, Life, Love; Force, Fantasy, Fire; these do I bring you: mine hands are full of these."
Fantasy? Why would Heru-Ra-Ha bring us fantasy? Is there an antiquated or obscure meaning I'm missing to this word?
"I understand it as the power of re-birth, continually coming into being.
consider the Esoteric Meaning of the 24th path of Tree of Life, Nun: "The Imaginative Consciousness. It provides an Image to all created things that have an appearance, in a Form fitting to each." -
@Jim Eshelman said
"Hmm. I was thinking about where the question comes from. I suspect you think that there is something unreal about fantasy. On the one hand, imagination is the capacity to forge very substantial things in Yetzirah. On the other hand... material reality comes about much the same way."
Is "fantasy" basically what is created by imagination? Could you help me out with a good definition of "fantasy?" I understand what you're getting at but I feel like I'm missing something that ties it together.
Also: thank you all for your comments.
93, 93/93.
-
@Ash said
"Is "fantasy" basically what is created by imagination? Could you help me out with a good definition of "fantasy?" I understand what you're getting at but I feel like I'm missing something that ties it together."
-
Being able to separate fantasy from reality is very important.
Fantasy has the power to move us. It is the realm of unbridled imagination. Often times our fantasies are the manifestations of subconscious desires and motives.
Sometimes though, our fantasies sweep us away. We become distracted by them. In the substance of each fantasy may be found the true will, but glamor blinds us from being able to perceive it clearly. So blinded are we that we continue indulging in layering fantasies until the True Will is lost and obscured.
There's been a lot of talk about this lately here.
@Jim Eshleman said
"I suspect you think that there is something unreal about fantasy. On the one hand, imagination is the capacity to forge very substantial things in Yetzirah. On the other hand... material reality comes about much the same way."
Could you explain what you mean by this? This statement doesn't seem to make much sense. What do you mean "forge very substantial things in yetzirah"? Why do you say "material reality comes about much the same way"?
Of course a fantasy is "real" to the person experiencing. It's unreal though in the sense that it doesn't exist in some other dimension apart from this one. I say it's important for a person to be able to distinguish fantasy from reality because it's very easy to cross the line into delusion. If we are here defining fantasy, we might as well define delusion.
Acting out fantasies on the material plane, that's another thread altogether.
-
@chioa khan said
"Of course a fantasy is "real" to the person experiencing. It's unreal though in the sense that it doesn't exist in some other dimension apart from this one. I say it's important for a person to be able to distinguish fantasy from reality because it's very easy to cross the line into delusion. If we are here defining fantasy, we might as well define delusion."
This is a good point. I would frame it like this: under the interpretation of Thelema advanced on these forums, is it possible at all for a person to be deluded? If it is, how is a "delusion" defined, how is a delusion distinguished from the acts of imagination that supposedly create "real" things, and by what criteria can an individual distinguish (for himself or herself) the difference between delusions and imaginations in which they supposedly create "real" things?
-
@chioa khan said
"
@Jim Eshleman said
"I suspect you think that there is something unreal about fantasy. On the one hand, imagination is the capacity to forge very substantial things in Yetzirah. On the other hand... material reality comes about much the same way."Could you explain what you mean by this? This statement doesn't seem to make much sense. What do you mean "forge very substantial things in yetzirah"? Why do you say "material reality comes about much the same way"?"
Of coure it doesn't make sense to you. But... I've said it in simple language. Perhaps the piece you are missing is that each of the four Worlds consists ofactual substance, behaving in a particular way distinctive to that Word, and perceptible to those who have their perceptions away in that world.
I'm saying (in part) that the way one forges psychological objects out of psychological substance is fundamentally the same as the way one forges physical objects out of physical substance.
"Of course a fantasy is "real" to the person experiencing. It's unreal though in the sense that it doesn't exist in some other dimension apart from this one."
Suspecting that by "dimension" you mean the same thing that I mean by "World," tjhen you are mistaken. (But you already knew I'd say that, you are baiting me, and you're getting ready to cause a boatload of trouble again for which, in the end, I likely will have to take disagreeable steps.)
" I say it's important for a person to be able to distinguish fantasy from reality because it's very easy to cross the line into delusion. If we are here defining fantasy, we might as well define delusion."
The dictionary serves us well enough. Delusion is a wrong idea. It is error. The word is especially used to mean an intractible idea resistant to reason or evidence, such as the hobby horse you repeatedly ride to the party these days.
One can become deluded as easily from the misvaluation of perceptions of physical aspects of the universe as from the misvaluation of perceptions of the metaphysical aspects of the universe.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Delusion is a wrong idea. It is error."
Ok. And how do you, specifically, determine whether one of your ideas is a "delusion" or whether it is some "reality that you are forging on another World"?
I'm asking how you, personally, specifically, distinguish the two ("to you").
-
@Los said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Delusion is a wrong idea. It is error."Ok. And how do you, specifically, determine whether one of your ideas is a "delusion" or whether it is some "reality that you are forging on another World"?
I'm asking how you, personally, specifically, distinguish the two ("to you")."
That depends on the situation, of course. (This is NOT a short answer type of question.) Really, how does one determine whether or not one's perception of physical matters is delusional?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Of coure it doesn't make sense to you."
That's because it was barely a sentence. It wouldn't have made sense to most people.
Or do you mean to suggest that I am so "beneath you" that I could never apprehend your true meaning? Sounds like you're saying the only people who "get it" will be in your little club.
@Jim Eshelman said
"Perhaps the piece you are missing is that each of the four Worlds consists ofactual substance, behaving in a particular way distinctive to that Word, and perceptible to those who have their perceptions away in that world."
Yes, I get that. The piece I think you are missing is that the word "world" is just a nice convenience. It doesn't mean that on some other planet, or in some other dimension, there is an alternately "real" environment inhabited by creates and forces, the same way that this one is. When moving "through the worlds" you don't actually "travel" anywhere.
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm saying (in part) that the way one forges psychological objects out of psychological substance is fundamentally the same as the way one forges physical objects out of physical substance."
Again, I'm not sure what you mean with this sentence. Could you be more explicit?
I especially don't know what you mean when you say "forge physical objects".
When I play my guitar, I'm not "making" the notes. I'm not actually "creating" anything. The sounds are a reaction of waves moving through the air, vibrations. The perception of them is made up in my brain, etc. All the matter and energy is already there. This is more like "interacting" in my environment, than "creating" it as I move along.
Even my thoughts are an extension of my physical environment. They are not "forged of nothing". It all has to do with chemicals and neurons and circumstance. All possible ideas and inspirations are just a reaction to the stimulus.
@Jim Eshelman said
"Suspecting that by "dimension" you mean the same thing that I mean by "World," tjhen you are mistaken. (But you already knew I'd say that, you are baiting me, and you're getting ready to cause a boatload of trouble again for which, in the end, I likely will have to take disagreeable steps.)"
Mistaken how? What makes you right, and all these other people wrong? If you could prove such a thing, you'd have won the nobel prize and made big headlines by now.
No one is baiting you for anything. That's paranoid. You don't have to respond. There you go threatening to censor me because I dare to advance an unpopular opinion. Funny how you consider it "causing a buttload of trouble" to subject these ideas to even the smallest bit of scrutiny. The mere idea of a challenge to your perspective is offensive to you, but that's not my fault. Don't put it on me because you can't think of a way to respond that doesn't fall back on your usual pattern of behavior. I can't believe someone as "initiated" as you hasn't found a better way to interact with people like me and Los by now.
Like it or not, the emerging perspective of reality - based on the knowledge we currently have available - is a materialist one. With or without me here on this forum, that's just "how it is". It's like evolution. You can deny it all you want, but it doesn't change anything. I don't have to be here stating this, for it to be apparent.
@Jim Eshelman said
"The dictionary serves us well enough. Delusion is a wrong idea. It is error. The word is especially used to mean an intractible idea resistant to reason or evidence, such as the hobby horse you repeatedly ride to the party these days.
One can become deluded as easily from the misvaluation of perceptions of physical aspects of the universe as from the misvaluation of perceptions of the metaphysical aspects of the universe."
Delusion is the wrong idea for what? I think it's an appropriate word for what goes on here. Especially by the definition you just gave. Resistant to reason, and evidence? Well that sounds like a lot of the stories we read on here. Ghosts, magic powers, past lives, etc.
Nice little twist you put on the end there. As if to say that people who think like me are the real deluded ones. You may disagree but some of us don't believe there is any such thing as a "metaphysical" aspect to the universe. Thats a word that we humans use when we are especially ignorant of very normal, very natural processes. These things often times become "demystified" as humans "figure it out". You'll notice that we no longer believe lightning to be caused by demons. We know the sun does not "die and go away" when it sets.
We've "figured out" so many things by now, that to still think that there are worlds inhabited by goblins is a little silly. It's a fantasy.
@Jim Eshelman said
"That depends on the situation, of course. (This is NOT a short answer type of question.) Really, how does one determine whether or not one's perception of physical matters is delusional?"
Are you seriously asking me how I personally determine fantasy from reality? It's not that hard, I'd be glad to offer you some pointers if you need the help. You correctly point out that the delusion occurs in our perceptions, however I feel the need to reiterate that all matters are "physical matters".
Sorry to Ash for "hijacking" this thread. It seems to have grown from a discussion of the book, to a discussion of what is meant by the word "fantasy".
-
@chioa khan said
"Or do you mean to suggest that I am so "beneath you" that I could never apprehend your true meaning? Sounds like you're saying the only people who "get it" will be in your little club.
"True as that might be, it isn't what I meant. I meant that you've locked your mind against the fundamental spiritual reality of the universe, and there fore you're going to continue not to understand statements such as this.
BTW, I'm not going to continue to engage you in this incarnation any more than on others. As an anti-magical, anti-spirituality bigot, I'm not clear why you're even here on a site that is first and foremost about spiritual, magical matters; but I won't chase you off until you inevitably run things into the ground again.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@chioa khan said
"Or do you mean to suggest that I am so "beneath you" that I could never apprehend your true meaning? Sounds like you're saying the only people who "get it" will be in your little club. "True as that might be, it isn't what I meant. I meant that you've locked your mind against the fundamental spiritual reality of the universe, and there fore you're going to continue not to understand statements such as this.
BTW, I'm not going to continue to engage you in this incarnation any more than on others. As an anti-magical, anti-spirituality bigot, I'm not clear why you're even here on a site that is first and foremost about spiritual, magical matters; but I won't chase you off until you inevitably run things into the ground again."
Jim, by the phrase "in this incarnation" do you mean: the new forum-incarnation, i.e. new username, for an old ex forum member?
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@chioa khan said
"Or do you mean to suggest that I am so "beneath you" that I could never apprehend your true meaning? Sounds like you're saying the only people who "get it" will be in your little club. "True as that might be, it isn't what I meant. I meant that you've locked your mind against the fundamental spiritual reality of the universe, and there fore you're going to continue not to understand statements such as this."
Your statement is not authoritative. There is no fundamental spiritual reality. Conversely I could say you have closed your mind to the fundamental material reality of all things. I suppose time will tell which perspective will win out.
Your argument resembles that of a christian person who refuses to look at the factual basis for evolution. Apparently they don't like being told Jesus never existed either. Nothing you say or think will change the facts.
It doesn't seem like your about to admit you could be wrong about anything. It makes me wonder what makes you so confident that you possess this super power of infallibility.
"BTW, I'm not going to continue to engage you in this incarnation any more than on others. As an anti-magical, anti-spirituality bigot, I'm not clear why you're even here on a site that is first and foremost about spiritual, magical matters; but I won't chase you off until you inevitably run things into the ground again."
Bigot? Oh come on James. That's ridiculous. This is like any christian person who insists that gay marriage is an attack on their values. It's like postulating a non-existent war on christmas. Just like Fox (faux) news does.
I am actually incredibly interested in Magick, with a K. That is the philosophy advanced by Aleister Crowley. He went to great lengths to define what he meant. Have you ever actually read Book 4?
Not only does he say that he chose this special spelling to distinguish his new philosophy from the kind of unscientific and faith-based magic which you promote, but he also defined it very clearly with phrases like "The discovery of the True Will" and "causing change in conformity to the will". Where on earth do you get the assumption that I have to subscribe to all your new age clap trap in order to take an interest?
I always assumed you were here propagating Crowley's philosophy of magick. I was a bit slow to pick up on the fact that you are not interested in Crowley's real philosophy at all.
Now before you accuse me of calling you a fraud, or attacking you, just be sure that I know this is only my opinion. But it's an opinion that I feel I arrived at objectively and without personal bias or prejudice. I wanted to believe you, trust me. I know you certainly believe yourself, so no hard feelings ok?
Thelema actually has nothing to do with practical magic; or paganism; or any new age clap trap. I interpret Crowley's words to suggest that Thelema deals only with the discovery and execution of the true will. Causing changes in conformity with that will, and maybe spreading the message of liberty and freedom for those who are so inclined (it's certainly not a moral imperative). I'm very much interested in this thelema, and in magick, but not at all interested in what you are trying to pass off as thelema. You can understand my confusion.
Since when is it a requirement for people to buy into any religious or spiritualist notion in order to practice thelema?
Perhaps you should think about changing the name/platform of your organization away from Thelema and Crowley, so that you can avoid having to deal with people like me and Los in the future. I only expect that many more people will become materialist or atheist with the passage of time. A lot of the ideas and practices you promote seem awful superfluous and unnecessary to the practice of thelema. The only thing thelemic about it is the imagery and themes you have chosen to display.
Maybe you could call it "temple of Jim's creation", or "temple of generic new age philosophies", or something else like that?
-
Danica, the former.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Los said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Delusion is a wrong idea. It is error."Ok. And how do you, specifically, determine whether one of your ideas is a "delusion" or whether it is some "reality that you are forging on another World"?
I'm asking how you, personally, specifically, distinguish the two ("to you")."
That depends on the situation, of course. (This is NOT a short answer type of question.)"
Well, I ask because I don’t think that imagining stuff “forges” it in some other world (and I hold that position on the basis that there is absolutely no evidence to support your claim that imagination does "forge" things). So to me, imagining something and then believing that it exists as anything other than purely make believe is a delusion. If you’re suggesting that there are some cases where it’s not a delusion, then you need, for yourself, a specific way to distinguish between the two.
Let’s use the example of a magician who uses his imagination to “forge” an elemental being to serve him. You seem to be suggesting that, in cases like that, such a being would actually exist on some other World, as opposed to simply being make believe.
From my perspective, what you’re suggesting would be a textbook delusion.
But you seem to be saying that there are at least some cases in which it wouldn’t be a delusion, in which the “operation” really could “forge” some kind of being.
If that’s the case, then how, according to you, would a magician go about demonstrating to himself that the being actually does exist on some other world (and that he is not, in fact, suffering from a delusion)?
"Really, how does one determine whether or not one's perception of physical matters is delusional?"
Evidence. If you've ever encountered an optical illusion and then discovered that you were in error about your perception of that physical thing, you've demonstrated to yourself the usefulness of evidence is making that determination.
So in this case, I'm asking you for the evidence that would enable you to distinguish something you've "forged on another world" from a delusion.
-
Los, would you accept anecdotal evidence as some degree of evidence to your question(s)? Because unfortunately, until I can invent a machine that projects my mental images on a screen for all to witness and verify, you can only take my word for it.
Back in the 90s I involved myself in one of those "new age" things that I thought I'd take a ride on just for the heck of it. My ex-wife had given me admission to a seminar thing as a birthday present, a shaman of the "dreamtime" had come from the land down under and was teaching a brief course. After the talk he offered a guided meditation. Those of us that bought the ticket and took the ride of the guided meditation did not equal the number who had watched his lecture on the aboriginal people, the concept of the dreamtime, and whatnot. It was a smaller room we had moved to and he did the usual guided meditation relaxation technique. By this time I knew that method well enough, in its many forms, and so went into my own version of obtaining an alpha brainwave consciousness and patiently waited for him to guide the others to the state. Then the journey began.
I was by this time already well read on shamanism as a modern pop-culture interest in it had grown and my major at the time was anthropology. I hadn't studied the aboriginals specifically at this time; the fact of the matter is that my anthropology focus was "subcultures in America" and that's what I like to observe. Anyway, so due to the fact that either this guy thought he was a great story teller, or due to him being concerned that some of us he was guiding along his vision quest weren't ever experienced at it before, he'd often take more time than I was interested in in describing what he was doing as well as doing what he was doing and describing things in our active imagination that I was already clearly seeing and personally knew that these were not the things I had come looking for. I wanted what the brochure promised! I wanted to go to the Library of Time (or whatever it was called), I wanted to go to that place that was described as the deposit of all imagination in history (as imagination is half of what you see in reality, believe me or not, it is so), a place where I would be able to go to any time I wished and research any event that ever occurred from an esoteric perspective, any invention that ever manifested, from yet one more perspective. We walked, he talked, we meandered - I wasn't my most patient of self at this age of early twenties.
I RAN. I ran ahead of the whole crowd. I ran down this path we were already clearly on. I ran beside this river that was so clearly described. I ran into a tunnel that the path I was on went into.
WHERE DID THAT COME FROM?
I stopped. I gathered the awareness of my ears to me again to listen for his voice. Had he described a tunnel? They're still meandering back there, well - as far as killing time tonight, we're certainly getting our money's worth on that. He's talking about the trees and the sky and the river some more. "And ahead several meters away you notice that the path is entering a tunnel...."
WHAT? DID HE JUST FINALLY CATCH UP TO ME? I'M IN THE TUNNEL!
So I slowed down my movement forward for a few moments until I knew that the group was in the tunnel. I had an experience at this time that gave me more conviction that what the brochure promised was actually going to happen, that I was going to go somewhere in what I'd call active imagination that was an actually real place built up throughout history, with observable and objective features to it, a place that independent viewers allegedly claimed to exist and each allegedly described it the same, and so the author of this lecture and accompanying book (you can purchase as you exit if you wish) decided to study. And at this point in the journey, when the group began to come inside the tunnel where I was already mentally existing, I actually began to feel their presence with me again. The experience of this was very real to me. I noticed a significant difference in my awareness of events, of my awareness of presence so to speak, that gave me a personal kind of evidence (gnosis) that this experience was genuine. (Let me put another way: When we were in the room together listening to the man, I felt the presence and heard the various murmurings of human existence around me. When we began the journey, I felt the presence and heard the murmurings of bodily things began to calm a little. As we were journeying a little in, I began to sense the presences around me each going hither tither to and fro in exploration, as I too was doing. As I ran, I left the presence behind me. As I reached the tunnel, I was clearly alone. When I let my ear seek the speaker's voice, it was clearly a distance away and slowly came closer. When they were in the tunnel, I was aware it was now a crowded space.)
I ran ahead to the end of the tunnel because I knew there had to be an end of the tunnel. I got there and this path I was on continued ahead. I noticed this side of the tunnel looked exactly the same as the other side of the tunnel with one exception: For some reason, I put a riverboat in the river this time. As the voice behind me began to get closer, I decided not to run but walk a little further ahead, keeping myself within earshot for a while, just to be sure I didn't get lost and waste the price of a ticket. I was sort of just walking slowly as I waited for the guide to announce he was reaching the end of the tunnel.
I wasn't worried about things. I had a little pocket recorder in my jacket's vest pocket (I was a sports jacket wearing kind of guy back then) that my ex-wife and I intended to listen to after. If there were any hypnotic tricks involved, any leading phrases that would invalidate the claim that I was supposed to come to an "objective" place, we would find out later. The group "behind me" exited the tunnel. The guide described it as I saw it, INCLUDING THE RIVERBOAT!
WTF???? I was ecstatic at this point.
I knew that the end of the journey was supposed to be a building, so I decided to walk ahead, again ignoring the voice of the guide, all I wanted was the building - not this river and path where of course there were supposed to be interesting things to find. I wanted the Library, not the park. So I found the building. It had two big pillars in front of the door and the door was huge. I decided to wait for the group again so the guide could open the door for us. The group arrived, and no longer surprised by these things, I listened to him describe the building as I was already seeing it - pillars, door, and even its blue color.
I was impressed. He told us the door would open for us. I went inside. I saw a long hallway with many doors on either side, and a large door at the end of the hall. Above this door was an arch (he wouldn't describe this arch in his guidance as would be later known by listening to the tape recording, but I knew this meant this is where I came to find). I went to that door and then listened to his guidance an little more as he described (behind my experience, just to remind you) the appearance of the hall, the "Hall of Time" he called it, with its many doors, each taking anyone who would want to explore them to a different "epoch of time" as the explorer saw fit - "but this isn't what you came to find today, you can always come back and explore this hall later when you wish, at the end of the hall is another door bigger than the rest, there you will find the Library of Time I promised you." I opened the door and went in.
I saw in my mind's eye an expected grand library of sorts. Rows and rows of books on shelves. Peopled by all sorts of explorers from all times and races and cultures, it also had globes on tables, scientific devices from all places, paintings and everything you'd expect. I explored its tiled floors and made notes in my mind of things I'd like to come here and "research" in the future. The guide stayed in silence for a time as he let us explore on our own. Then came the part where he said we should all leave our exploring, and it was now he described the library to us, its features, its tiled floor, the various globes and inventions, the people that were in it (specific types he mentioned), all in a manner that at the time were already past tense for me (and I assume the rest of the group as well) because he said it like such, "It's time now to re-shelve any books you are looking at. Time to gather again at the door as we will be leaving this Library of Time, filled with .....(insert description here) and begin our journey back home."
So slowly we exited the entire journey, walking back through the world we'd come into the same way we'd come into it, noting the various landmarks, including the riverboat, the tunnel, and other aspects until we came back to the place of the beginning and he brought us back to earth.
Now suffice it to say that it was all imagination. I never left the conference room of the four-star hotel that this all took place in, I never left the city I was living in, but in the journey I went to a place that my experience tells me was actually real, a place that I'm told people of many cultures throughout time do really go to, a place that was described to me, in my experience, after the fact of me seeing it, and the description and my experience matched.
So I'm convinced. Other than that, I can't imagine how to convince someone like you who has learned to become HAD by pure materialism.
