Secret Chiefs and attainment
-
@Frater Horus said
"
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"But there is common sense data that we can let guide us in place of this nonsense about the supernals, right?"Let who "guide" us? HGA?
Why "nonsense"?"
It was a tongue in cheek comment about denying the supernals, and making a false crown out of Da'ath.
-
@danica said
"http://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_09.html"
Re-reading that, I have nothing to add. Including to Los: You'll find your answer to the question you asked me in there.
Also, the secrecy of the Ipsissimus grade, plus what Crowley has to say about OIVZ in there, plus your (Los') discussion about the contradiction between OIVZ being his HGA and a sumerian man, resolves the contradiction, does it not.
Regards
Simon
-
@Simon Iff said
"
@danica said
"http://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_09.html"Re-reading that, I have nothing to add. Including to Los: You'll find your answer to the question you asked me in there.
Also, the secrecy of the Ipsissimus grade, plus what Crowley has to say about OIVZ in there, plus your (Los') discussion about the contradiction between OIVZ being his HGA and a sumerian man, resolves the contradiction, does it not.
Regards
Simon"
I'm quite sure that Los will merely point out that this is part of the 33 or 50 percent of "it" Crowley got wrong. It's the simplest argument.
-
@Simon Iff said
"Re-reading that, I have nothing to add. Including to Los: You'll find your answer to the question you asked me in there."
No, I won't. I asked you what convinced you that the so-called "Secret Chiefs" actually exist. I can't learn what convinced you from reading what Crowley had to say. Now sure, maybe Crowley was convinced by something that also convinced you, or maybe it was reading Crowley itself that convinced you, but I can't learn that just by reading Crowley. You have to tell me if you want me to know.
Just to be super clear, I suspect that you've been convinced for really crappy reasons, but I'm willing to change my mind. Of course, I can't change my mind if you won't answer me, which of course you haven't done so far.
-
@Takamba said
"I'm quite sure that Los will merely point out that this is part of the 33 or 50 percent of "it" Crowley got wrong. It's the simplest argument."
Assuming that you're referring to Crowley's ramblings about invisible magic men guiding him, the optimist in me holds out the possibility that he was just deliberately making up those stories to flatter his own vanity and to impress the supremely gullible. 'Course, it's always possible that he was just simply wrong and not consciously faking. Or perhaps he was "losing it" at the end of his life.
I think it's unlikely we'll ever know for sure, but we can be reasonably sure that invisible goblins aren't directing the events of the world, allowing "Frater Superiors" to discover annotated books at just the right time, or delivering daydreams (oh, excuse me, "communications") that appoint people grand poobahs of the Elk Lodge.
-
@Los said
"Assuming that you're referring to Crowley's ramblings about invisible magic men guiding him, the optimist in me holds out the possibility that he was just deliberately making up those stories to flatter his own vanity and to impress the supremely gullible. 'Course, it's always possible that he was just simply wrong and not consciously faking. Or perhaps he was "losing it" at the end of his life.
I think it's unlikely we'll ever know for sure, but we can be reasonably sure that invisible goblins aren't directing the events of the world, allowing "Frater Superiors" to discover annotated books at just the right time, or delivering daydreams (oh, excuse me, "communications") that appoint people grand poobahs of the Elk Lodge."
LOL @ LOS
False, deluded, wrong, mistaken.
Simply put, "he got it wrong."
Thought so. Simple enough. Answers every thing.
-
@Los said
"Assuming that you're referring to Crowley's ramblings about invisible magic men guiding him, the optimist in me holds out the possibility that he was just deliberately making up those stories to flatter his own vanity and to impress the supremely gullible. 'Course, it's always possible that he was just simply wrong and not consciously faking. Or perhaps he was "losing it" at the end of his life."
Why do you feel the need to be optimistic?
You should open your self up, stop assuming or hoping -
Allow the Universe to speak to you.
Its Word is more powerful than childish theories and dreams.@Takamba said
"LOL @ LOSFalse, deluded, wrong, mistaken.Simply put, "he got it wrong."Thought so. Simple enough. Answers every thing."
I do not think his reply was that simple.
-
@Frater Horus said
"
@Simon Iff said
"Curious about Mr. Eshelman's position on this, too.The way I understand it the highest triad of AA grades are evolutionary agents for the whole of mankind.
Masters of the Temple can found organisations like the AA.
Magi initiate a whole planet, kickstarting new 2000-year-paradigms or supporting or facilitating those paradigms if they are not the kickstarter.
Ipsissimi swear an oath "to retreat into their human person and stay silent about this attainment".So, the grade of Ipsissimus is the most senior grade formulated (a chief) and secret too.
The Secret Chiefs are, in the AA measuring scale, of the grade of Ipisissimus. They initiate those who found things like the AA and initiate whole planets.
And Los: These people are out there. But you won't find them if you are not looking."
Nice...
How do you understand "retreat into their human person"? doesnt it sound contradictory to the atainment itself?! what is supposed to happen doin so?"
From what I have read that someone who reaches the grade of Ipsissimus is required to remain silent about their attainment, or at least it's insisted upon.
I'm not sure WHY exactly that is, but I could imagine it has something to do with the nature of the grade and the idea of silence and the sound of breath. -
@milkBoxx said
" From what I have read that someone who reaches the grade of Ipsissimus is required to remain silent about their attainment, or at least it's insisted upon. I'm not sure WHY exactly that is, but I could imagine it has something to do with the nature of the grade and the idea of silence and the sound of breath."
One only gains a gleaming upon crossing The Abyss - even then it is conjecture until Union.
-
@kasper81 said
"It's plain wack. I mean the very name itself, "secret chief" is hilarious isn't it?"
It is. Plus the fact that, as far as I can tell, the concept of "Secret Chiefs" was just made up out of the blue in the eighteenth century.
But facts have never stopped wackadoos from claiming "contact" with all sorts of exalted spiritual forces.
-
@kasper81 said
"
@Frater Horus said
"I was wondering how is supposed to be related general attainment to communication with the Secret Chiefs. If there's a step where it is likely? Strong? Is there union with them?Also, is it considered possible to become a Secret Chief?
And what is their "power"(or position in the tree)? More than Magus? Ipsissimus?"
as a teenager this seemed all so mysterious and freaky and awesome. Now, as an adult, I cannot believe that Crowley was at all serious about this. It's plain wack. I mean the very name itself, "secret chief" is hilarious isn't it?
Then again maybe it is for the teenagers only
To see what you are veering into here I suggest you watch some youtube films on channellers switching on their possession by aliens. It's great stuff watching these fraudsters getting away with it"
I can honestly say, that given what I have seen and witnessed since things have really started for myself, the idea of "Secret Chiefs" does not seem out of
the realm of possibility. In fact, I would say in my view that it's more than possible, that it's fact. I wont claim to have contact with these beings, because I have yet to have anything like that happen. But, I have seen enough to know that this world is not what we think it is and when you see something that changes you forever you wont doubt the possibility that what we call "Secret Chiefs" could certainly be another phrase for something we cannot explain, and yet (Some of us) experience it anyway. As far as fraudsters are concerned, there certainly are many of them. However, simply because fraudsters exist does not negate the possibility of something genuine existing as well. It's like if I go to buy a car, simply because I have a negative experience does not mean EVERYONE is going to have a negative experience at some shitty dealership. Some people may go to a great dealer and have a positive experience, does not mean I should simply write off the idea that this is HOW IT IS. I certainly would never claim that I know for a fact something does not exist or that it's silly, I keep an open mind with just about everything. I still maintain doubt, but a little humility about this world we live in can go a long way. -
@kasper81 said
"as a teenager this seemed all so mysterious and freaky and awesome. Now, as an adult, I cannot believe that Crowley was at all serious about this. It's plain wack. I mean the very name itself, "secret chief" is hilarious isn't it?"
There are "Secret Chiefs," various personages of wealth and power, pulling the strings of government -
Is it so far fetched to propose there are exceptionally spiritual beings effecting the evolution of mankind?Perhaps the reality of the situation does not live up to the legend, they may be just "normal people" who only think they are in control of world events (though invariably have some effect).
@Los said
"It is. Plus the fact that, as far as I can tell, the concept of "Secret Chiefs" was just made up out of the blue in the eighteenth century."
An entirely inaccurate statement.
The idea of Secret Chiefs and Hidden Masters has been the foundation of various Orders [and traditions] going back thousands of years. -
@milkBoxx said
"I can honestly say, that given what I have seen and witnessed since things have really started for myself, the idea of "Secret Chiefs" does not seem out of
the realm of possibility. In fact, I would say in my view that it's more than possible, that it's fact."So I'll ask you the same question that Simon ran away from: what convinced you that these "Secret Chiefs" actually exist?
As was the case with Simon, I suspect that you've been convinced for crappy reasons, but I'm willing to be shown otherwise.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"There are "Secret Chiefs," various personages of wealth and power, pulling the strings of government -
Is it so far fetched to propose there are exceptionally spiritual beings effecting the evolution of mankind?"Yes. As Kasper pointed out, the claim that there are some people with more pull than others in the government isn't in the same ballpark as the claim that there are spirits who flitter around unseen, sending "messages" to random weirdos.
"The idea of Secret Chiefs and Hidden Masters has been the foundation of various Orders [and traditions] going back thousands of years."
There have long been ideas of invisible magic men running the universe -- usually called "gods" -- but as far as I'm aware, the specific term "Secret Chiefs," especially as heads of so-called "magical orders," dates back to the eighteenth century.
If you have evidence of the term being used before then, I'd be interested to hear it.
-
@Los said
"
@milkBoxx said
"I can honestly say, that given what I have seen and witnessed since things have really started for myself, the idea of "Secret Chiefs" does not seem out of
the realm of possibility. In fact, I would say in my view that it's more than possible, that it's fact."So I'll ask you the same question that Simon ran away from: what convinced you that these "Secret Chiefs" actually exist?
As was the case with Simon, I suspect that you've been convinced for crappy reasons, but I'm willing to be shown otherwise."
I don't really feel it's necessary to spill out my reasons from my magical record. What I'm saying is, is that I have seen things that cannot be explainedby our consensus reality and what modern science can evaluate therefrom. I have not seen "Secret Chiefs", but generally only high ranking initiate's have
encounters with these beings from what I have been told. So, while they may not exist, I cannot say that I know this to a certainty. I've never been to France,
but I wouldn't say it does not exist. So, I'm not going to suppose they do not exist, and given what I have seen in my time so far, I would say it's more than possible.
All I can really say as far as my experiences go is that I have seen things that should be impossible, occur right before my eyes (With a witness who can corroborate).Frankly, the whole thing is very strange to me because I feel these things have to be kept to myself even from initiates (When I first started speaking to other initiates I was hoping they had experiences like myself) but I found many did not. This frightened me, because everything "Started" when initiation began and seemed to coincide with events pertaining to paths on the tree itself. All I can really say is that you can take my word for these experiences or not, really makes no difference to me because I saw these things regardless. While I would even have a tough time believing this if I hadn't first experienced it, especially from someone whom I don't know personally. I can tell you that, while I have not seen "Secret Chiefs" I have seen enough to know that this concept is not far fetched by any means. All I'm saying is to keep an open mind, you may have not seen anything bizarre but I believe that what I have seen may start becoming more commonly seen by others. BTW, it's not aliens and it's not even something I can describe nor have I ever heard of someone seeing something like this in (What we know as) physical reality. Believe me when I say, even as I saw these events before my very eyes with a witness I still could not believe it. In a way I still have yet to accept what I have seen, but I can say that it was there and I saw it. -
You've been convinced for awful reasons, exactly as I thought.
@milkBoxx said
" I have seen things that cannot be explained
by our consensus reality and what modern science can evaluate therefrom."So what? Everyone has experienced things they don't have explanations for.
What you're doing here is called an "argument from ignorance." You're saying that since you don't know what X was, therefore you're justified in claiming that Y is true. But you can't use "I don't know" as evidence for anyting.
I heard a noise last night, and I didn't know what it was. Does that mean I'm justified in thinking it was pixies?
" I have not seen "Secret Chiefs", but generally only high ranking initiate's have
encounters with these beings from what I have been told."And, obviously, you have no good reason to think that this is true, just 'cause some (probably wacked out) people claim it.
"So, while they may not exist, I cannot say that I know this to a certainty."
Well, duh. You can't know anything for "certain." No one knows anything for "certain." When we talk about knowledge, we're talking about likelihood.
I don't know for certain that leprechauns don't live under my house, but that's no reason for me to believe that it's true or even believe that it's anywhere near likely to be true.
"I've never been to France,
but I wouldn't say it does not exist."But you do have tons of evidence that it exists, including the fact that you can go to google earth right this second and look at it through a satellite.
You don't have any evidence -- not even a shred of it -- that these "Secret Chiefs" or any other gods or goblins or monsters actually exist. Except, I guess, "something happened, and I don't know what it was!"
Don't you see how weak that is?
"All I can really say as far as my experiences go is that I have seen things that should be impossible, occur right before my eyes (With a witness who can corroborate)."
And I saw an elephant disappear into thin air one time. That David Copperfield must be a high-ranking initiate, eh?
I don't doubt that you had this experience, but I question your interpretation of this experience (and your witness' interpretation of this experience).
" All I can really say is that you can take my word for these experiences or not, really makes no difference to me because I saw these things regardless."
You saw something, maybe. What was it, though? I don't know, and neither do you, but whatever it was, your ignorance about what you saw is no basis for making any claims at all.
-
@Takamba said
"Los wants everyone to do his will. Nuff said."
No, I don't. I'm pointing out errors in drawing conclusions about the world. Conclusions aren't directed by the Will.
If you were in a math class, and the teacher showed that you were making mistakes in doing a problem, you wouldn't say, "Oh! This teacher wants this whole class to do his will!" You would understand that he's just showing you factual mistakes that you were making.
In the same way, I'm just pointing out glaring errors in thought, including arguments from ignorance.
To confuse that with Will is to demonstrate that you don't have a solid grasp on what "Will" means to begin with.