Function of Gratitude in Magick
-
@Legis said
"
But for you, Takamba, you accused me of preaching compassion to suffering humanity. "I accused you not. el oh el (that means "god my god"). I quoted Crowley for you to read. That is all. All else that you've built upon this "theme" of me "accusing you of suffering humanity" is a phantasm of your own fearful thinking.
Rebuild everything else you "doubly" (el oh el) accuse me of.
-
@Takamba said
"
@Legis said
"Takamba, I said nothing of suffering humanity.
To hell with them all. I will master this love.""Do unto others (for their sake) as you would have them do unto you" is "Suffering humanity." So yes, you said. And I was only quoting Crowley in his most human examination of the Liber Legis."
There it is right there: "So yes, you said" - an accusation made on projection instead of fact. Your addition of words as well the unnecessary association of "suffering humanity" that you've unreflectively allowed Crowley to drive into your head became an unexamined projection and, through that, a false accusation.
It stands.
To the contrary, "suffering humanity" is only necessarily associated with "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you" to the exact degree with which an individual would personally show themselves compassion. That is an integral part of the meditation, for the one who understands the pitfalls of compassion has no business "woulding" others to offer it to them. Or, if they "would" such compassion for themselves, let them perform it for others for a while, observe the results, and reconsider whether they really "would" it for themselves based on fact instead of principle.
Then again, compassion is the vice of kings.
What a mixed bag of words Crowley gave us. I believe they are given to ponder, not to parrot.
But beside the point of whether *I *was preaching "suffering humanity," ponder this (along with the supposed consistency with which Crowley spoke on such matters):
"Liber Porta Lucis*":2padhira]First, there are many and diverse conditions of life upon this earth. In all of these is some seed of sorrow. Who can escape from sickness and from old age and from death?
We are come to save our fellows from these things."Interesting, no? ..."to save" from the "sorrow" of "sickness," "old age," and "death."
Why? For love of others? For self-pleasure alone?
Or for what I actually am trying to describe, the combination of both that I understand as True Will?
And now, I *will *be silent for a while.
-
The fact that you call it an accusation is taking it out of context. But good on you, have your way with yourself - but as a man who knows many a masochist, to tell them to do unto me as they would have me do unto them is silly. I'm not saying don't be who you are or be generous as you wish, but don't make it a rule for me to follow and be judged by.
Words. Good luck with Understanding.
-
Takamba, you accused me of being nothing more than a troll, you accused me of "missing the mark," you accused me of saying things I didn't say... all because of your own projections on what I was actually saying.
If you don't want to be accused, don't accuse, for like attracts like, which is simply another, different application of "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." I have tried present the concept not as a moral standard, but rather as a reflection on True Will as* loving *action. But the distinction is refused.
The principle itself is so simple, yet so broad in its possible application, that the repeated parroting of Crowley's singular, limited, puerile interpretation of it disgusts me.
"Understanding" is inhibited by the making of differences, thus my goal in removing some of that illusion.
And with that response to the endless accusations from you, I will once again return to my intention to be silent. Indeed, there is no longer a point. Congratulations, you have derailed what you could not stand to hear.
-
@Legis said
"I concede that "do unto others..." as a reflection upon past action may be too easily misused as a standard that may inhibit free action. However, in the end, this may be said to be true of any consideration of love whatsoever, in fact of* any reflective consideration on one's actions whatsoever. It may even be said of, "How was what I just did my True Will?" If such a thought is placed before *action, Will is hindered.
"If Will stops and cries Why, invoking Because, then Will stops & does nought." -* Liber Legis*
But does this mean that there should never be any reflection upon one's actions as to how they may be said to have arisen from True Will?"
It means that the process of discovering the Will requires you to shift your attention away from these thoughts and onto your actual inclinations. The question "How was what I just did my True Will?" -- just like the question "Does this feel like love?" and all questions that you ask yourself whatsoever -- is a creation of the mind.
You can't find your True Will by paying attention to those thoughts because the True Will isn't a thought.
Just try shutting off these thoughts (or, rather, shifting your attention from them) and pay attention to what's underneath them. Focus on your inclinations, without trying to judge them or analyze them. That's your Will in this particular moment.
"And the Will to reflection should be no less hindered than the Will to action; indeed, reflection is action, the important thing is the Will to such action."
It may very well be your authentic inclination (i.e. True Will) to spend some time reflecting for a bit. But you can't discover that through the act of reflecting: you can only discover that by paying attention to your inclinations.
"However, the fact that Will is Love, I will not concede."
Will and Love -- again, using the way that they are defined by Thelema -- contain each other. Will is the direction of motion toward objects, while Love is the drive toward those objects inspired by them. You can't have one without the other.
But once again, "love" in Thelema doesn't mean the emotion, even if that emotion is involved some of the time in Thelemic Love.
If you don't believe me, read what Crowley says on the subject:
@Liber II said
" Lo, while in The Book of the Law is much of Love, there is no word of Sentimentality. Hate itself is almost like Love! “As brothers fight ye!”"
-
93,
"Has anybody heard of the Law of Attraction movement? I went to a meeting and it reminded of this thread. Love is the Law (of attraction) in the universe. You can believe it or not but it still works just as you can disbelieve in gravity but that still works.
"I have, I also believe a myriad of books have been written on the subject and I also don't believe I would buy one......simply because they aren't uncovering anything new. I believe the most famous book is called 'The Secret' by Rhonda Byrne? I read half of it years ago after finding it in the library......she could have summed the whole thing up in the length of an essay, but that wouldn't have made money.
Donald Michael Kraig in his book 'Modern Magick' covers the same material in a sub-chapter I believe and also gives an example of putting it to good use via the use of affirmation and visualisation. Personally I believe for the law of attraction to work it must be in accordance with your true will, which you may or may not know. For example if it is my true will to remain wealthy enough to be comfortable, but not to be rich, then no matter how hard I try that lottery ticket isn't going to be a winner......
I have never linked it to love under will before- the union of yourself with your goal via visualisation and affirmation.....makes sense.
93, 93/93.
-
The feeling of gratitude opens the heart. It's worth inducing forf practical reasons,
-
93,
I honestly can't see why people would need a practice to feel gratitude. Sure we all have our bad days, but on most days I would like to think most people are happy. I am thankful for the fact I have a roof over my head, I am gaining an education in an area I love, I have friends and family who care about me and I them......I'm grateful for finding magick which means I am also grateful for the bad times which lead me to those sorts of practice.
I don't think it good to practice for magick, it is good to practice just anyway. Life is what you make of it and personally I'd rather not sit around feeling miserable all the time thinking I have nothing, I've been there, done that and didn't get a T-shirt. But I will say I don't think magick or yoga had anything to do with my change in view point it was an inner psychological process. (I suppose it could be magick if we use AC's definiton.)
One thing which the secret and law of attraction states is that if you sit around feeling miserable and have bad thoughts, that is what you are going to attract to yourself. Even if you don't want to have a magickal explanation- if you choose to view the world as a horrible place and your life as bad, you will perceive every event which happens in your life as bad. You will act differently and society and people will react differently because of this. Not to mention that feeling miserable can lead to all sorts of illnesses created by the mind. If it leads to prolonged stress you're already screwed because that leads to all sorts of things.
If you perceive things as good, you will feel good. People like happy people and they will be different around happy people. I'm not a fluffy 'rainbows and unicorns' person, we all have bad days, but the majority of the time I would like to think that most human beings are happy. Of course they must be doing what they want to do, what they enjoy doing, which is probably in accordance with their true will....if they aren't doing that or aren't listening to their own body and mind when it tries to tell them something is wrong, they are in a situation they can't get out of.
93, 93/93.
-
I personally think one of the greatest contributions to psychology is Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, it is by far the most widely used, and the most effective form of therapy out there for those who are thinking negative thoughts all the time.
It is therefore my opinion that one of the best contributions to the occult field is David Shoemacher's book chapter and podcast on the importance of CBT and how it can benefit everyone......of course some people will need to see a professional to help them walk through bigger problems etc. But for those who just wish to apply something to everyday life in which we have no problems, yet there is room for improvement, I think everyone should read/listen to his thoughts.
I've never practiced Jugorum, I don't like the thought of cutting myself. But the second practice (I think) where one endeavours to control thought must have some effect on the vigilance of thoughts and give some degree of control over the mind....I think the practice is there for a reason other than just not thinking about pronouns.....
-
93,
"Maybe Liber Legis should be introduced in these LOA seminars? Dost thou fail? Art thou sorry? Is fear in thine heart? Where I am these are not. Pity not the fallen! I never knew them. I am not for them or "stamp down the wretched and the weak" or "ecstacy and joy of earth" and so on. I'm being facetious (towards LOA folk) in a friendly way."
I agree in a way.....a lot of people read these books chant affirmations for a winning lottery ticket and give up two months later. I also don't like the thought of people thinking they can get what they want, I would like to think a Thelemite would want to get what they need in order to accomplish their will.
"Jugorum in the new aeon is not about slicing our skin. We've discussed this a lot around these parts. You just need to diarize your breaks."
I will give it a try one day, but I will probably use the rubber band trick or Wilson's biting the thumb trick, I believe that pain and negative reinforcement will have an effect on the mind rather than just writing down.
As for ascribing the distortions to the sephiroth, I would find it hard. For one the supernal triad are very abstract I feel it would be hard to map these things on to them, some are a little easier...but ultimately my brain is too tired to think at the minute.
93, 93/93.