Concerning what sucks today, its nature and possible outcome
-
If it looks like a human being, and seems biologically a human being, I think we are obligated to regard it as a star.
I think most people are out of touch, blind, hiding... from experiences they still rests, or from an intentional choice of a king to choose his or her garment according to will. Still stars, though. Stars in straight jackets, stars in shut cocoons, stars in dark matter nebulae ... still stars.
-
I shudder to think what might happen (yet again) if people start going around deciding that some people are "stars" and others are not.
I shudder to think what might happen (yet again) if people decide that their discovered method for unveiling their own star nature is a great solution for everyone else.Improving the world, being idealistic, yearning for change are all nice tendencies that easily go horribly wrong when actually carried out. There are unintended consequences, atrocities justified for a "greater good", etc. And often it seems to me like the "change the world" mentality is a way of avoiding the necessary "change yourself" mentality.
I'm all for the approach of work-on-yourself-first, and try to do your best to pass on your finest qualities to your students, children, friends, and other people who will survive you. And I hope that people with political power have the wisdom to avoid that "us-vs-them" thinking or the kind hyper-idealism that would lead them to make tragic decisions for the sake of a Utopian pipe-dream.
-
I'm endlessly fascinated by the quirks of AL's grammar. If we drill down this phrase to its solid grammatical bedrock, it seems to be saying that a certain conglomerate thing ("every man and every woman") is equivalent to a certain other thing ("a star"). Read that way, it is the sum total of humanity that is "a star", not that each and every one of us are stars.
Then, to push it a bit further: Does this just mean every human man and every human woman? Does it mean every male consciousness and every female consciousness, whether human or otherwise? Does it mean every masculine and every feminine thing?
My mind wants to equate "a star" with Nuit either via Astar(te) or via Atu XVII (Show thy star-splendour, O Nuit!). Are we possibly meant to read that the combination of every man (+1) with every woman (-1) equals Atarte/Nuit (0)?
Or, more simply: Love.
This is not to say that there isn't much to be gained by the standard reading that each and every human is, metaphorically, a "star" (however you choose to define that term), and that we therefore all have some intrinsic self-worth whether we are aware of it or not. But I do find that any reading of AL that tries to find some literal manifestation in the physical universe to miss the greater point. And, as a side-effect, they always seem to gain a tinge of violence towards the "unworthy".
Turn inward.
-
@Aion said
"Honestly, I draw a very, very dark line between the opinions of Crowley, the man, and that which he wrote as official texts under his fraternal mottos. I draw two very, very dark lines between the latter and anyone else's opinion of what Crowley's opinion might be. Crowley the man had very strong opinions about how things should be. Crowley the Frater wrote with understanding that such opinions, including his own, are the accidents of a particular time, place, culture, and incarnation. Is the BBC of 2014 the same BBC it was in 1945? Such things matter. The current contrasts between MSNBC, CNN, FOX News, the BBC, and Al Jazeera come to mind."
I agree there is Crowley the man, and Crowley the frater... Same for me. Though, isnt an important point both should converge? Everything counts. Everything is magick. In the interview of Philippe, he points out(about at minute 20 or something) Crowley progressively went "out of the temple" as everything is the temple.
Its easy to a think one is advanced when performing rituals in a lodge with like minded people, with all 777 correspodnances put right, robes and so on, or in an eastern temple in the mountain meditating all day long . Its easy to love everypart of Nuit from such a perspective. Now try not make a separation and see what happens. I mean not a day, try for a couple of years. Talk to every people about your real opinions and see how you're welcome in this world. Be a good man and see what happens.
As for information media, from childhood i always felt intuitively its 99% shit. I couldnt believe my parents watched the crap. I watched that too though, later, as intuitively again i felt i had to know all parts of Nuit, even what i dont like . I lived as a normal man in society. Now i'm proud of having not watched TV nor listened radio for 10 years. Only thing i watch is quickly news on internet, like a brief 20 second look to see if there nothing worth investigating. Thats all. And i'm quickly reminded what crap it is always. I cant believe initiates dont get this. And thats why i'll reformulate my opinion. The problem is not about initiates vs profane. Nor real initiates vs second class. There is crap everywhere. The more advanced one is the less excuses.
@Jim Eshelman said
"If it looks like a human being, and seems biologically a human being, I think we are obligated to regard it as a star.
I think most people are out of touch, blind, hiding... from experiences they still rests, or from an intentional choice of a king to choose his or her garment according to will. Still stars, though. Stars in straight jackets, stars in shut cocoons, stars in dark matter nebulae ... still stars."For such a technical thing i'll just trust you and try to see how it fits.
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"I shudder to think what might happen (yet again) if people start going around deciding that some people are "stars" and others are not.
I shudder to think what might happen (yet again) if people decide that their discovered method for unveiling their own star nature is a great solution for everyone else.Improving the world, being idealistic, yearning for change are all nice tendencies that easily go horribly wrong when actually carried out. There are unintended consequences, atrocities justified for a "greater good", etc. And often it seems to me like the "change the world" mentality is a way of avoiding the necessary "change yourself" mentality.
I'm all for the approach of work-on-yourself-first, and try to do your best to pass on your finest qualities to your students, children, friends, and other people who will survive you. And I hope that people with political power have the wisdom to avoid that "us-vs-them" thinking or the kind hyper-idealism that would lead them to make tragic decisions for the sake of a Utopian pipe-dream."
Of course thats why i precised its just personal opinion and that i'm actually trying to see further as it doesnt satisfy me. If i dont change opinion i'll just go more and more hermit and keep my mouth shut, thats all. I precised also that beyond that everything is holy to me as a part of Nuit. Vermin is holy though its still vermin. Once i've aknwoledged its holy i'm not gonna stay there and befriend it. I have better things to do. Thats all.
@Gnosomai Emauton said
"
This is not to say that there isn't much to be gained by the standard reading that each and every human is, metaphorically, a "star" (however you choose to define that term), and that we therefore all have some intrinsic self-worth whether we are aware of it or not. But I do find that any reading of AL that tries to find some literal manifestation in the physical universe to miss the greater point. And, as a side-effect, they always seem to gain a tinge of violence towards the "unworthy".Turn inward."
True though like i said to Aion, the point is also to go out from the temple as everything is the temple. Everything is Magick.
Turning inwards is also a good mean to prevent people from thinking. In prisons they do meditate. I dont think its designed to make adepts nor happy people. Its just a cheap drug. I hate when idiots see meditation as such, though for many people its still true...! Many prisoners practice astral projection too. After years of doing nothing, powers appear. Though, without proper spirit training, it is of no positive use. Better to fight than meditate for most of them. Anger and seek for external change is legit in many cases.
@kasper81 said
"I think that this is a very silly post. Reminded me of some Third Reich propaganda, some people are mystically deemed to be sub-human etc. Drivel"
Projection, like many of your posts.
It reminds me when you adviced "dont end up like those people who get frustrated and angry(i dont remind the exact phrasing)because they do something which is "under" their capabilities."Thats all about power, and you take no consideration of others. And you identify firstly with the physical body and what people think about you in society. I'm way happier and ok with myself doing something wich sucks socially and being poor than doing something which i consider a knavery and hypocrite shit.
You are doing the propaganda, if anyone can be said of doing it. If you dont play the game you're out. Not dead, but out of society. Well, it doesnt make me angry nor frustrated if i'm out as long as i'm honest and true to myself and aknowledge holiness of everything the best i can. I'm not gonna follow what society thinks just because its easy.
You may achieve energy mastery or philosophical knowledge while keeping on practicing what you do though dont expect real mystical achievement. At best black bro maybe.
Also you are the one who talks about "sub"humans...! While i precised many times its not about that and that even vermin is holy. Honestly i dont like you, from the very begining i'm here, and i'd enjoy kicking your ass, though i dont hesitate to (try to ) help when i think i might be capable of, and i dont ask anything from you in return. Nor do i consider myself superior, nor because of that nor because of anything else. And i ve been doing this for years with every people in real life. Though it seems its not my true will to cointinue that way. Thus i try to find a way expressing my true will in a way which respects Nuit in all her parts. Thats what it is all about. -
@Aion said
"No, you deserve rudeness. You've earned it. There's a difference.
I'm fine with treating assholes like assholes."
I agree !
And i'd say self defense is not an eye for an eye.
It's both eyes for an eye... Thats justice in my opinion.
-
@Frater Horus said
"
@Aion said
"No, you deserve rudeness. You've earned it. There's a difference.I'm fine with treating assholes like assholes."
I agree !
And i'd say self defense is not an eye for an eye.
It's both eyes for an eye... Thats justice in my opinion."
I wouldn't go so far as to call that justice. But, yes, self defense is just. Just sayin'.
-
@Aion said
"
@Frater Horus said
"
@Aion said
"No, you deserve rudeness. You've earned it. There's a difference.I'm fine with treating assholes like assholes."
I agree !
And i'd say self defense is not an eye for an eye.
It's both eyes for an eye... Thats justice in my opinion."
I wouldn't go so far as to call that justice. But, yes, self defense is just. Just sayin'."
I agree actually, i'd rather call it "hard" justice.
Geburah justice ! 
-
@Frater Horus said
"True though like i said to Aion, the point is also to go out from the temple as everything is the temple. Everything is Magick.
Turning inwards is also a good mean to prevent people from thinking. In prisons they do meditate. I dont think its designed to make adepts nor happy people. Its just a cheap drug. I hate when idiots see meditation as such, though for many people its still true...! Many prisoners practice astral projection too. After years of doing nothing, powers appear. Though, without proper spirit training, it is of no positive use. Better to fight than meditate for most of them. Anger and seek for external change is legit in many cases."
It seems odd to me that you'd use the work of convicted felons (some but not all of whom I would guess you'd class in with the demons and the slime) as a legitimate contradiction to the work of an adept. It reads as though you're looking for an all-or-nothing black-or-white answer when one just does not exist. The world has always been awful. Life is a terrible horrible thing. From the genocides in Africa to the horrors of the dinosaurs, asteroid impacts, inquisitions, plagues, book-burnings, colony extinctions, world wars, typhoons and terrorist attacks, from viral infections to the 24/7 air time of the Kardashians, "All is Sorrow".
If you choose to look at it that way.
I choose to take the view of the Hindu-Buddhist-Gnostic-Mystical tradition that everything that we experience as "reality" is just a big game of Unity experiencing itself. Unity got bored with itself and fractured itself into multiplicity in order to experience duality. Duality isn't "nice". Duality is conflict. Every bit of experience, every bit of Maya, every bit of universe is part of that game. How we as individual points of consciousness (facets of that original Unity) choose to experience and interact with the rest of Universe defines our particular role in the game. It's a matter of perception.
We can't individually control all of existence (though, depending on how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go, it was each and every one of us in prior incarnations that set the gears in motion for the "s#!tty" world we've currently got). We can't change the idiots and the sheep; they are equally valid expressions of the All.
We can, however, follow the advice of Siva and the Buddha and focus on ourselves. We can attempt to remove ourselves from the wheel of karma by attaining enlightenment and then return to the world to guide other points of consciousness along the same path. This will take countless generations. The universe of early 21st century Earth is not magickally going to change into a paradise just because a few ceremonial magickians are running around in robes trying to manifest their Temple out in the world. But they will be setting different gears in motion for the future. Gears that, with a bit of luck, will guide more and more lost stars towards the realization of their inner starriness. Eventually, the balance will shift and consciousness as a whole will head back towards a state of Unity.
-
@Gnosomai Emauton said
"
@Frater Horus said
"True though like i said to Aion, the point is also to go out from the temple as everything is the temple. Everything is Magick.Turning inwards is also a good mean to prevent people from thinking. In prisons they do meditate. I dont think its designed to make adepts nor happy people. Its just a cheap drug. I hate when idiots see meditation as such, though for many people its still true...! Many prisoners practice astral projection too. After years of doing nothing, powers appear. Though, without proper spirit training, it is of no positive use. Better to fight than meditate for most of them. Anger and seek for external change is legit in many cases."
It seems odd to me that you'd use the work of convicted felons (some but not all of whom I would guess you'd class in with the demons and the slime) as a legitimate contradiction to the work of an adept. It reads as though you're looking for an all-or-nothing black-or-white answer when one just does not exist. The world has always been awful. Life is a terrible horrible thing. From the genocides in Africa to the horrors of the dinosaurs, asteroid impacts, inquisitions, plagues, book-burnings, colony extinctions, world wars, typhoons and terrorist attacks, from viral infections to the 24/7 air time of the Kardashians, "All is Sorrow".
If you choose to look at it that way.
I choose to take the view of the Hindu-Buddhist-Gnostic-Mystical tradition that everything that we experience as "reality" is just a big game of Unity experiencing itself. Unity got bored with itself and fractured itself into multiplicity in order to experience duality. Duality isn't "nice". Duality is conflict. Every bit of experience, every bit of Maya, every bit of universe is part of that game. How we as individual points of consciousness (facets of that original Unity) choose to experience and interact with the rest of Universe defines our particular role in the game. It's a matter of perception.
We can't individually control all of existence (though, depending on how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go, it was each and every one of us in prior incarnations that set the gears in motion for the "s#!tty" world we've currently got). We can't change the idiots and the sheep; they are equally valid expressions of the All.
We can, however, follow the advice of Siva and the Buddha and focus on ourselves. We can attempt to remove ourselves from the wheel of karma by attaining enlightenment and then return to the world to guide other points of consciousness along the same path. This will take countless generations. The universe of early 21st century Earth is not magically going to change into a paradise just because a few ceremonial magicians are running around in robes trying to manifest their Temple out in the world. But they will be setting different gears in motion for the future. Gears that, with a bit of luck, will guide more and more lost stars towards the realization of their inner starriness. Eventually, the balance will shift and consciousness as a whole will head back towards a state of Unity."
Thanks... Flawless in my opinion. Basics always work.
I think i had to aknowledge what sucks once again(new layer) and got a little bit excited...
-
@Aion said
"I know a guy for whom prison was a profound time of reading and education. He considers himself a Pagan now. Meditation did him a lot of good. He's got a great life now, prison tats and all. We hang out and talk when we can."
Yes of course it can be a great opportunity. For he who can probably the best thing. I mean, to use that time like this.
-
@Frater Horus said
"Thanks... Flawless in my opinion. Basics always work. "
Cheers
@Frater Horus said
"I think i had to aknowledge what sucks once again(new layer) and got a little bit excited..."
Yep, peeling back a new layer of onion always makes me cry a bit as well.
-
@Frater Horus said
"
@Aion said
"I know a guy for whom prison was a profound time of reading and education. He considers himself a Pagan now. Meditation did him a lot of good. He's got a great life now, prison tats and all. We hang out and talk when we can."Yes of course it can be a great opportunity. For he who can probably the best thing. I mean, to use that time like this."
I think the metaphor you're looking for is the difference The Book of the Law makes between a slave and a King. But all are Stars. I think that is the precise difference in description we are are given to meditate upon. We can realize where we are being slaves and make ourselves Kings based on the strength of coming to understand what we inherently are: Star. This is the given metaphor for all, both for slave and for King.
-
The ideas being dribbled out onto this thread are, of course, puerile in the extreme and hardly worth the time to critique. But here's a fragment of a post that can actually serve as a springboard to a much more interesting idea:
@Gnosomai Emauton said
"The world has always been awful. Life is a terrible horrible thing. From the genocides in Africa to the horrors of the dinosaurs, asteroid impacts, inquisitions, plagues, book-burnings, colony extinctions, world wars, typhoons and terrorist attacks, from viral infections to the 24/7 air time of the Kardashians, "All is Sorrow".
If you choose to look at it that way.
I choose to take the view of the Hindu-Buddhist-Gnostic-Mystical tradition that everything that we experience as "reality" is just a big game of Unity experiencing itself. Unity got bored with itself and fractured itself into multiplicity in order to experience duality. Duality isn't "nice". Duality is conflict. Every bit of experience, every bit of Maya, every bit of universe is part of that game. How we as individual points of consciousness (facets of that original Unity) choose to experience and interact with the rest of Universe defines our particular role in the game. It's a matter of perception."
When it's framed like this, we can read all of this "mysticism" stuff as a narrative designed to help the individual avoid having to confront unpleasant realities. If children starving in Africa makes you uncomfortable, never fear -- turns out the whole thing is just some kind of cosmic game. Oh, that crazy ol' "Unity," up to its old tricks as usual....Starving children! What a show! I wonder what wacky idea it'll roll out with next....
And best of all, this sort of narrative makes the individual the star -- as in "star of the show." All of this illusion...why, it's all for me of course. "Reality" is just a moving picture show in which my higher self is choosing to reveal its nature through the "illusion" of duality. All we have to do, apparently, is "choose" to think of it that way. How convenient, eh?
From this perspective, it's not hard to see why this sort of egotistical -- we should really say "egomaniacal" -- narrative appealed to the ever self-aggrandizing Aleister Crowley. It's also no surprise that Crowley lived during the tail end of the British empire because this kind of narrative is a sort of hyper-imperialism: it sets out to conquer the entire universe and make it mine.
It's the sort of philosophy that appeals to privileged first-worlders who have way too much time on their hands and a vested interest in pretending that suffering around the globe is some sort of illusory side show, a b-story in the cosmic me-me-me program.
It's downright creepy, actually. The only thing that might be creepier is the narrative that there's something wrong with suffering and that the "right thing" to do is to work to end it. This is, of course, just as much an illusion as pretending that the world is a picture-show for your entertainment or pretending that people you don't like are "demons" or "shells."
-
@Los said
"The ideas being dribbled out onto this thread are, of course, puerile in the extreme and hardly worth the time to critique."
But, then again, what would a Friday night be without Los coming in and pissing all over the free exchange of ideas? So let's see what he's got...
@Los said
"When it's framed like this, we can read all of this "mysticism" stuff as a narrative designed to help the individual avoid having to confront unpleasant realities. If children starving in Africa makes you uncomfortable, never fear -- turns out the whole thing is just some kind of cosmic game. Oh, that crazy ol' "Unity," up to its old tricks as usual....Starving children! What a show! I wonder what wacky idea it'll roll out with next...."
You can if you choose to. I don't
@Los said
"And best of all, this sort of narrative makes the individual the star -- as in "star of the show." All of this illusion...why, it's all for me of course. "Reality" is just a moving picture show in which my higher self is choosing to reveal its nature through the "illusion" of duality. All we have to do, apparently, is "choose" to think of it that way. How convenient, eh?"
I do think of myself as the star of my own story. Seems to me that anybody who doesn't isn't actually engaging with life. That doesn't mean I think of myself as the star of "The Story". That would imply that I think there is "a writer" and "a director" controlling all of the performances. I don't. Game theory, not mimesis.
@Los said
"From this perspective, it's not hard to see why this sort of egotistical -- we should really say "egomaniacal" -- narrative appealed to the ever self-aggrandizing Aleister Crowley. It's also no surprise that Crowley lived during the tail end of the British empire because this kind of narrative is a sort of hyper-imperialism: it sets out to conquer the entire universe and make it mine."
If you say so. I never met the guy. From what I've read of his writing, he wasn't too centrally focused on the Empire or his role as a Britisher. A decent amount of his poetry, in fact, downright excoriates the British character. To my eyes, his affinities tended eastwards. His near deification of Vivekenanda and his adoration of the Tao Te Ching and life-long obsession with the I Ching are enough for me but, if you want to define the guy by the generalized national character of the country of his birth, that's your prerogative.
@Los said
"It's the sort of philosophy that appeals to privileged first-worlders who have way too much time on their hands and a vested interest in pretending that suffering around the globe is some sort of illusory side show, a b-story in the cosmic me-me-me program."
Perhaps... but that's a critique that could be lobbed at the entirety of philosophy. From Prince Siddhartha to the Athenians to the medieval monks to the rationalists to the anarchists to the thinkers of today to the woman who became Mother Theresa, all have been first-worlders of their epoch. If you're going to start tossing around ad hominems based on the genetic lottery, you're going to be busy for awhile.
@Los said
"It's downright creepy, actually. The only thing that might be creepier is the narrative that there's something wrong with suffering and that the "right thing" to do is to work to end it. This is, of course, just as much an illusion as pretending that the world is a picture-show for your entertainment or pretending that people you don't like are "demons" or "shells.""
Where did this idea of picture show entertainment come from? I certainly didn't bring it up.
-
@Los said
"The ideas being dribbled out onto this thread are, of course, puerile in the extreme and hardly worth the time to critique."
So say britney spears fans when jazzmen mention they dont like britney spears and that it hurts their ears whenever they have to listen to it going to the supermarket.
I know its hard to believe jazz is music for the deaf. So it is to believe britney is for the non deaf.
Where you're right is it's a los of time mentioning it. One may better use this time playing jazz instead.
-
@Los said
"
From this perspective, it's not hard to see why this sort of egotistical -- we should really say "egomaniacal" -- narrative appealed to the ever self-aggrandizing Aleister Crowley. It's also no surprise that Crowley lived during the tail end of the British empire because this kind of narrative is a sort of hyper-imperialism: it sets out to conquer the entire universe and make it mine.
"Here LOS again demonstrates his ignorance of the man known as Aleister Crowley and his opinions. I quote Aleister Crowley directly:
"Why are we told that the Khabs is in the Khu, not the Khu in the Khabs? Did we then suppose the converse? I think that we are warned against the idea of the pleroma, a flame of which we are Sparks, and to which we return when we 'attain.' That would indeed be to make the whole curse of separate existence ridiculous, a senseless and inexcusable folly. It would throw us back on the dilemma of Manichaeism. The idea of incarnations 'perfecting' a thing originally perfect by definition is imbecile."
So... this idea of an infinite number of incarnations coming out of one (as opposed to an infinite number of incarnations coming out of themselves) was considered imbecile to Crowley... that is, it did not "appeal" to Crowley as Los claims. Nor does it appeal to me.
-
@Gnosomai Emauton said
"From what I've read of [Crowley's] writing, he wasn't too centrally focused on the Empire or his role as a Britisher. A decent amount of his poetry, in fact, downright excoriates the British character. To my eyes, his affinities tended eastwards. His near deification of Vivekenanda and his adoration of the Tao Te Ching and life-long obsession with the I Ching are enough for me but, if you want to define the guy by the generalized national character of the country of his birth, that's your prerogative."
I wasn't "defin* the guy by the generalized national character of the country of his birth." I was pointing out that he lived at a time when the British controlled a great deal of the world. It would have been taken for granted by someone who lived in that time and place that the British "owned" a lot of the world and are entitled to own it, so it's not all that surprising that he embraced a narrative that can be considered a kind of abstract imperialism (i.e. the idea that the whole universe is really just a dualistic representation of my self).
It's also unsurprising that Crowley would feel justified in freely appropriating the beliefs of other cultures, as you point out. He picked and chose from among world beliefs, much as the British would bring back artifacts and curiosities from the colonies.
His distaste for the puritanical attitudes of the British is well-known, but so is his support of his country politically along with his casual racism directed at people with darker skin. I'm not trying to say that any of that is "bad," but I'm pointing out that Crowley was influenced by the society in which he lived, and it's not exactly shocking that he espoused some of these ideas because they fit so neatly with the dominant narrative of his age.
"If you're going to start tossing around ad hominems"
Nothing I've said is an ad hominem. An ad hominem is a kind of argument where you attack the person instead of the argument and then pretend like you've attacked the argument. I haven't done that. In the first place, I'm not attacking people. I'm just explaining why people might be compelled to hold these beliefs.
And in the second place, I'm not attacking the arguments. Other than pointing out how these silly beliefs have no justification, it's too obvious a point to want to waste much time on it.