Satan ... key to the Great Work?
-
Okay, I didn't want to do talk about Satan so much, really. I was hoping to get some helpful tips privately off the main forums, but the "Service To Self, Service To Others" thread eventually turned into a discussion about Satan... and, well, I think we need to talk about Satan.
From Magick In Theory & Practice:
Digamma is the manifested Star. Iota is the secret Life .............. Serpent
--- Light ............. Lamp
--- Love .............. Wand
--- Liberty ........... Wings
--- Silence ........... Cloak
These symbols are all shewn in the Atu "The Hermit".
They are the powers of the Yod, whose extension is the Vau.
Yod is the Hand wherewith man does his Will. It is also
The Virgin; his essence is inviolate.
Alpha is the Babe "who has formulated his Father, and made fertile
his Mother" --- Harpocrates, etc., as before; but he develops
to
Omicron The exalted "Devil" (also the "other" secret Eye) by the
formula of the Initiation of Horus elsewhere described in detail.
This "Devil" is called Satan or Shaitan, and regarded with horror by people who are ignorant of his formula, and, imagining themselves to be evil, accuse Nature herself of their own phantasmal crime. Satan is Saturn, Set, Abrasax, Adad, Adonis, Attis, Adam, Adonai, etc. The most serious charge against him is that he is the Sun in the South. The Ancient Initiates, dwelling as they did in lands whose blood was the water of the Nile or the Euphrates, connected the South with life-withering heat, and cursed that quarter where the solar darts were deadliest. Even in the legend of Hiram, it is at high noon that he is stricken down and slain. Capricornus is moreover the sign which the sun enterers when he reaches his extreme Southern declination at the Winter Solstice, the season of the death of vegetation, for the folk of the Northern hemisphere. This gave them a second cause for cursing the south. A third; the tyranny of hot, dry, poisonous winds; the menace of deserts or oceans dreadful because mysterious and impassable; these also were connected in their minds with the South. But to us, aware of astronomical facts, this antagonism to the South is a silly superstition which the accidents of their local conditions suggested to our animistic ancestors. We see no enmity between Right and Left, Up and Down, and similar pairs of opposites. These antitheses are real only as a statement of relation; they are the conventions of an arbitrary device for representing our ideas in a pluralistic symbolism based on duality. "Good" must be defined in terms of human ideals and instincts. "East" has no meaning except with reference to the earth's internal affairs; as an absolute direction in space it changes a degree every four minutes. "Up" is the same for no two men, unless one chance to be in the line joining the other with the centre of the earth. "Hard" is the private opinion of our muscles. "True" is an utterly unintelligible epithet which has proved refractory to the analysis of our ablest philosophers.
We have therefore no scruple in restoring the "devil-worship" of such ideas as those which the laws of sound, and the phenomena of speech and hearing, compel us to connect with the group of "Gods" whose names are based upon Sht, or D, vocalized by the free breath A. For these Names imply the qualities of courage, frankness, energy, pride, power and triumph; they are the words which express the creative and paternal will.
Thus "the Devil" is Capricornus, the Goat who leaps upon the loftiest mountains, the Godhead which, if it become manifest in man, makes him Aegipan, the All.
The Sun enters this sign when he turns to renew the year in the North. He is also the vowel O, proper to roar, to boom, and to command, being a forcible breath controlled by the firm circle of the mouth.
He is the Open Eye of the exalted Sun, before whom all shadows flee away: also that Secret Eye which makes an image of its God, the Light, and gives it power to utter oracles, enlightening the mind.
Thus, he is Man made God, exalted, eager; he has come consciously to his full stature, and so is ready to set out on his journey to redeem the world. But he may not appear in this true form; the Vision of Pan would drive men mad with fear. He must conceal Himself in his original guise.
He therefore becomes apparently the man that he was at the beginning; he lives the life of a man; indeed, he is wholly man. But his initiation has made him master of the Event by giving him the understanding that whatever happens to him is the execution of this true will.
It appears Satan is linked with The Devil, Saturn and Shaitan, as I previously suggested. When Crowley refers to Aiwaz as that "god or devil of Sumer," it seems safe to say he is refering to Enki/Set/Shaitan/Satan, since it appears to me that, by the above description, "everyone's H.G.A. is Satan," as a prominent member of this board said recently. He had a qualifier after that statement, but I leave off the qualifier to make a point here, now...
Which is this:
People getting into magick are basically afraid of this one key idea: that magick is something "Satanic". It is typically described as "Devil worship" or "Satan worship" by Christians and the media which caters to a Christian audience. The "prominent member of this board" refered to earlier also said that he somewhat jokingly tells people, "I don't worship Satan. In fact, sometimes, Satan worships me!"
It seems to me that we are going to great lengths to deny what Christians rightly accuse us of. If Satan is the key to the Great Work, whose solar flame we unite with in Tiphareth, after which we call up the demons and the kings of demons and make them submit to us, how can we deny we are cavorting with the Devil himself? Of course, it makes sense now: Satan is the ruler of all the demons! After uniting with our H.G.A. ("Satan"), we call up the demons and demand their obedience. It is as if Satan got a new body and is letting his army know he must be obeyed in this form as a ruler of Earth - so get a good look!
Can anyone word this in such a way that this DOESN'T sound quite so Satanic? Because I know the above quote from Crowley was supposed to make it sound less "Satanic," but it doesn't. It just sounds like an explanation for being Satanic.
Thanks!
-
I would like to focus on this part briefly, perhaps as an explanation (?) that actually Unites "Satanism" and Christianity:
"Thus, he is Man made God, exalted, eager; he has come consciously to his full stature, and so is ready to set out on his journey to redeem the world. But he may not appear in this true form; the Vision of Pan would drive men mad with fear. He must conceal Himself in his original guise. "
666 is the number of a man, it is the number of the beast. It is also the number of the Messiah. In Revelations, this symbolism is found just prior to the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, who comes to "redeem the world."
Is there a connection here that can be made MORE OBVIOUS, please? I know that people generally put Jesus, Buddha and all the other avatars on Tiphareth, but perhaps this could be PROVEN to a greater degree by Scriptural analysis / Qabalah. And, if so, why doesn't someone do it and publish it? It seems to be about the most important thing that could be done right now for civilization.
-
Sheesh, I may have been wrong on that last assumption because these verses quite obviously seem to be saying something quite to the contrary!
Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
The references to "the light of the candle shining in thee" and "the voice of the bridegroom" sounds VERY MUCH like the Bible is saying "when Satan gets locked up, so do the great men of earth's HGA's, since the Holy Guardian Angel is described as "a light," "a flame" and "The Voice" and the magician "the Bridegroom." So, "the voice of the bridegroom" and "the light of the candle shining in thee" sound very obviously like a reference to the HGA.
-
@Redd Fezz said
"People getting into magick are basically afraid of this one key idea: that magick is something "Satanic"."
Or, alternately, people getting into magick are really hoping to hook up with Satan. I'm sure there are roughly as many of one kind as of the other. (And then there are a whole lot that are indifferent to it one way or the other.)
Your point, I think, is that some people getting into magick are basically afraid of that they're getting into something Satanic.
The really interesting question to me in all of this is: If one has this fear and really cares about the matter one way or the other, then why is one bothering to get into magick?
If one had a strong fear that eating an exotic fish for dinner would make one extremely sick, then probably he or she won't eat the fish. However, some people in that situation would eat the fish because of some particular purpose or agenda that they had.
I couldn't begin to enumerate what all of these possible ideas might be that people would have. Some people want extreme and sensational experiences. Some people like being scared (hence the success of the No. 1 and No. 2 movies this last weekend). One person I know felt betrayed when he learned that AC wasn'ta horribly wicked fiend because AC had always played that roll in his psyche, and now he had to own hisown dalliances into wickedness on his own. Others want to be persuaded that their fears are unfounded.
And so forth. As I said, I'm sure I can't think of all of the possibilities. But I do think it's the key question: If you're seriously scared of this thing, and seriously worried about it, why are you jumping into it?
Also, every reputable avenue of initiation I know will include in its instruction, someplace in the early stage, an instruction concerning fear.
"It seems to me that we are going to great lengths to deny what Christians rightly accuse us of."
Well, we wouldn't have to if you weren't going to great lengths to try to paint us with an unjustified and misleading brush.
"If Satan is the key to the Great Work,"
... Just one example of dozens of other ideas that express the same useful points. It doesn't have to be Satan. It could be Adonai. In the context you were describing, there isn't any particular difference. It could be the solar archetype called the Beast 666, or any of several images of the solar child or Divine Androgyne (including Levi's popular one that doubles as a devil-image), and so on. Part of the point is that it doesn't much matter what you call it as long as you call it for dinner - on a regular basis!
"Of course, it makes sense now: Satan is the ruler of all the demons!"
Or Lucifer is. Or one of the others. And these aren't all the same thing (except in that sense in which all gods are simply the god you personally know.) - Hence my continuing to razz you that you use "Satan" and "the Devil" pretty interchangeably. They're interchangeable only in the sense that they're also both interchanegeable with, say, Christ or Kali; but to the extent that they're differentiatable from Christ or Kali, they're also quite distinctive from each other.
"After uniting with our H.G.A. ("Satan"), we call up the demons and demand their obedience. It is as if Satan got a new body and is letting his army know he must be obeyed in this form as a ruler of Earth - so get a good look!"
Broadly, yes - you've got the idea! Technically (in the classic form, at least), Satan is merely one of four Princes that are summoned first, followed by eight Sub-Princes who are commanded by the Princes, followed by all the minions of those Sub-Princes and commanded by them. But - repeat! - you've got the idea. Yes!
"Can anyone word this in such a way that this DOESN'T sound quite so Satanic? Because I know the above quote from Crowley was supposed to make it sound less "Satanic," but it doesn't. It just sounds like an explanation for being Satanic."
Oh, he just like stirring people's impacted fecal holdings.
Try this (crude, fast try): There is something within each of us, known to us, sought by us - usually unconsciously at first, and increasingly consciously as we pursue our spiritual path - of the nature of the Sun and fire, of the substance of the reproductive energies, saturating subconsciousness and filling the atmosphere of the intellect and inherently the devouring and vivifying flame of superconsciousness. Every one of us comes to know it differently, based on our own natures, and - when our knowledged of it and openness to it and responsiveness to it hits a certain critical threshold, it unites with us in the most ecstatic fusion, an inner event that is more REAL-feeling than the entirety of the rest of our life before that time.
And, once that Truth of Self, that informing lover-teacher-flame has filled us and owned us - an event that nearly always will have (among other things) caused us tojourney into our own personal Hells along the way - we then have that most shining of lights to escort us into the depths of our deepest Hell where each thing found, one after another, is seen and known and named and pledged in its entirety to the service of this lover-teacher-fire-light, and to that Will, or Voice of the Angel, which is the whole momentum of our being.
Work?
-
@Redd Fezz said
"Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.
Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
The references to "the light of the candle shining in thee" and "the voice of the bridegroom" sounds VERY MUCH like the Bible is saying "when Satan gets locked up, so do the great men of earth's HGA's, since the Holy Guardian Angel is described as "a light," "a flame" and "The Voice" and the magician "the Bridegroom." So, "the voice of the bridegroom" and "the light of the candle shining in thee" sound very obviously like a reference to the HGA."
Yes - but this is a much later stage. The phenomena don't persist - no matter how spectacular and uplifting, they are ultimately phenomena produced by the psyche trying to cope with something deeper but in more familiar sensory terms. As the relationship deepens, those grosser phenomena fade.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Redd Fezz said
"Revelation 18:23 And the light of a candle shall shine no more at all in thee; and the voice of the bridegroom and of the bride shall be heard no more at all in thee: for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived.Revelation 20:2 And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, 3 And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.
The references to "the light of the candle shining in thee" and "the voice of the bridegroom" sounds VERY MUCH like the Bible is saying "when Satan gets locked up, so do the great men of earth's HGA's, since the Holy Guardian Angel is described as "a light," "a flame" and "The Voice" and the magician "the Bridegroom." So, "the voice of the bridegroom" and "the light of the candle shining in thee" sound very obviously like a reference to the HGA."
Yes - but this is a much later stage. The phenomena don't persist - no matter how spectacular and uplifting, they are ultimately phenomena produced by the psyche trying to cope with something deeper but in more familiar sensory terms. As the relationship deepens, those grosser phenomena fade."
But, does that have anything to do with the rest of the verses regardng "for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived" and the bit about Satan being cast into the bottomless pit?
Regarding your first response, it seems to have never occured to you that some people don't know what to believe, quite simply. And, it is not remotely similar to eating a possibly poisonous fish, unless of course the possibly poisoned fish had within it the keys to heaven and, if you examined closely enough, you could eventually determine if in fact it was poisonous or if in fact it was the fish-ticket to heaven.
Also, while what you suggest regarding the "Solar-We-Don't-Have-To-Call-It-Satan-But-We-Do-Anyway" does make some sense, I have found a very detailed back-and-forth analysis of Crowley's HGA that also makes some sense:
www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/shaitan/files/tokus/crwlysatn.tnThis link in fact makes a point which apparently I'm failing at, since you seem to take offense at the "stroke of my brush" I paint us with. So then, let me quote from the above link, which may do a better job:
"
If Crowley hadn't made a point of identifying with the Beast of Revelations
and taken/discovered as his number 666; if he hadn't written the above about
the very specific relationship between the Beast and Satan, making very
clear the parallel/identity between himself and Aiwaz, then I might think
you had a case to posit him as a 'mere monist' or some other of unitive and
syncretic mystic. I'm not denying that he had these motives and values, but
the evidence as you've presented it seems to indicate without question that
Crowley was a Satanist by most Satanist's standards, even his own...He used the term [Satan] in different ways assuredly. When we come to look at whether
Crowley was himself a Satanist it becomes more relevant what he said that his
relationship was to or with Satan than how he might have used the word
otherwise."And, so, it causes one to think and to wonder at the possibilities of experience one is not familiar with. You have framed the concept of the HGA one way, which seems to coincide with Crowley's. However, I have found this bit of information that is possibly crap or possibly something to be seriously concerned about:
"Direct relations/dealings with the Angels is only possibly through the senses: by visions and voices. Hence the Angels must take on a corporeal shape and make use of the human language. Vision and seeing, however, can also occur by means of internal comptemplative images and the excitation of fantasy.
How does one distinguish Angels from demons? Angels can only take on human form, whereas demons can also appear in as animals. "Satan disguises himself as an Angel of Lights" (2. Cor. 11;14).[42] There is however no certain sign to distinguish demon from Angel. Demons will trick all those who enter into a pact with them, for example, the memory of man is open to them, from which they can raise images of memory anew.[43]
In the true Mystic, God draws the Soul to Himself,[44] elevated it in extacy above the depths of sensuality, now silenced. The Angels and demons can in no more enter into the soul,[45] at most they can enter into the body, a state which expressed itself as possession.[46] To invite this consciously and expressly as a sort of balance-disorder between body and soul, points to a demonic delivery.[47] Unnecessary discussions with the demons are to be avoided.[48] The primary purpose of the demons is to work against the Holy Guardian Angel.[49] Mystical visions and speeches, appearances and revelations can be immitated. Even the unio mystica itself can be simulated.
In the same measure as Mercy, the Holy Guardian Angel falls back from the sinning Man and yields territory to the demons.[50] On the death-bed there is a battle between Guardian Angel and injurious demon, depending on the situation the hellish spirits are so closely ranked that they no longer allow the Gurdian Angel through. After the death there is a peculiar court, in which the Guardian angel and the injurious demon oppose each other as lawyer and prosecutor. Depending on the outcome the Guardian Angel guides his client to Heaven at which point the duty is discharged, and the Human is made party to the co-regent Angel, the joy of glory, and the blissful regard of the face of God. The connection with the injurious demon is torn once and for all.[51] It is also possible, that the Guardian Angel takes the soul to the punishments of purgatory, where the demons attend to its torture. But neither Angels nor demons are to be understood as the executors of punishment. If the soul goes to Hell, all connections with the Guardian Angel are broken.
In the Orthodox churches the worship of Angels was more pronounced than in the Roman-Catholic church;[52] the Angel cult was judged as idolatrous as early as 372 by the Synod of Laodicea. The Reformation later exterminated the worship and conjuration of Angels (John. 19;10 und 22;8-9).[53]
[42] Citation from the Scofield-Bible
[43] The remind distantly of the abuse theory, the proposes that „psychiatrists“ engender the so-called Multiple Personality Syndrome by the use of „regression“: Robert D. Hicks: "In Pursuit of Satan," New York 1991
[44] One should not yearn for private revelation, for God alone determines when such a mercy shall be bestowed
[45] "These beings are not able to rule over Man against his own Will, unless he has lost his full consciousness completely by his own fault.." Josef Dürr: "Experimental-Dämonologie" (1929) Reprint Berlin1983, 21
[46] "exorkizein" = conjure; from 300 AD (as the Christian charisma was ebbing away) the command of excorcism was taken on by the Roman Catholic church
[47] For this reason Abramelin rejects everything that leads to numbing or laming of the senses (Drugs, Trance, Yoga etc.), - in contrast to Aleister Crowley. In the course of my researches into the O.T.O. phenomenon I encountered a member of the Ordo Saturni and the German "Caliphate" (Thomas Schneider), who successfully „healed“ a possession with the assistance of Homeopathy
[48] Great Exorcism" (no. 14-15), eg Pblsh. by P. Adolf Rodewyk S.J.: "The Excorcism of the Catholic Church" (with permission to publish from the Church), Stein am Rhein
[49] F.W. Faber (died. 1863): "On the Threshold of Eternity," 1925, 13-15, 71-74
[50] Origenes, Hom. in Luc. XII (Migne PG. 13, 1828-1830), (ca. 230/3)
[51] Thomas of Aquino, I, qu. 113, a. 4
[52] Where it was celebrated on 2. October
[53] Egon Wenberg (Berlin); "Rehabilitierung der Engel," pblsh. by Emil Stejnar, Wien, 1984, 60-62. Stejnar, born in 1939, started the Abramelin-Operation, but soon turned to the teachings of Franz Bardon. He was befriended with many occultists, eg. Adolf Hemberger, Oscar R. Schlag etc. He sold protective amulets, the writings of Heinrich Tränker and claimed to be one of the last great Masters. More about him in the book version of "Abramelin & Co."
"
How do I know? How does anyone know? Proceed with caution, trust with faith and do your best? Here is the trap we discussed before, which is more than the fear of mere death, but the fear of eternal suffering!
Of course, on the other hand, Fraternatus Saturni gives just the opposite advice: be filled with the spirit of Lucifer or be damned at the end of the Aeons!
-
@Redd Fezz said
"But, does that have anything to do with the rest of the verses regardng "for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived" and the bit about Satan being cast into the bottomless pit?"
I just took what you gave there - don't have time to stop and do a full analysis of Rev. (This is, in any case, out of context of the whole book, and there's a LOT of context needed for this. I stopped working on my line-by-line commentary on the Apocalypse a couple of years ago until I have time to finish - the important thing to know is that it's a very exacting textbook in consciousness transformation via kundalini yoga.)
"Regarding your first response, it seems to have never occured to you that some people don't know what to believe, quite simply."
If that's the case, then there isn't fear. Fear only exists if there's a belief in place, right?
"And, it is not remotely similar to eating a possibly poisonous fish, unless of course the possibly poisoned fish had within it the keys to heaven and, if you examined closely enough, you could eventually determine if in fact it was poisonous or if in fact it was the fish-ticket to heaven."
There is a particular fish that the Japanese prepare that, if prepared well, promises to be the finest bite of food you've ever eaten. If prepared wrong, it will kill you on the spot, quite painfully.
"This link in fact makes a point which apparently I'm failing at, since you seem to take offense at the "stroke of my brush" I paint us with."
Not offense - just a sense that perhaps unnecessarily contentious ideas are being pushed in unnecessarily contentious ways.
"How does one distinguish Angels from demons? Angels can only take on human form, whereas demons can also appear in as animals."
Malarky. I know at least three people to whom their HGA routinely appears as a cat.
-
@Redd Fezz said
"
"Crowley was a Satanist by most Satanist's standards, even his own... "No, Crowley was a Thelemite. Did he recognize value in Satan? Sure. So do I. So do you, based on your analysis of the meaning of Satan. But even if Crowley did identify as a Satanist, it doesn't mean that Thelemites should. Thelemites should identity as Thelemites. Then again... The Temple of Set folk, surely Satanists if there ever were any, see what they do as a refinement of Thelema. So what do I know?
@Redd Fezz said
"Lest you think again I am painting with a mean brush, keep in mind that I am doing a service by offering up blatant arguments to be dealt with directly, to be examined and, hopefully, lay all fears to rest."
"What fears? Fear of being seen as Satanists? This seems to me like straight people being afraid of being seen as gay. You might not be a Satanist or gay, but who cares if people think you are? The people who see those things, and therefore you, as somehow bad, have the problem - not us. And protesting or laying fears to rest only supports the bigotry. Instead, I think we should support Satanists whenever they experience bigotry.
Hmmm.... I think I may have misunderstood what you meant by laying fears to rest.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Redd Fezz said
"But, does that have anything to do with the rest of the verses regardng "for thy merchants were the great men of the earth; for by thy sorceries were all nations deceived" and the bit about Satan being cast into the bottomless pit?"I just took what you gave there - don't have time to stop and do a full analysis of Rev. (This is, in any case, out of context of the whole book, and there's a LOT of context needed for this. I stopped working on my line-by-line commentary on the Apocalypse a couple of years ago until I have time to finish - the important thing to know is that it's a very exacting textbook in consciousness transformation via kundalini yoga.)"
Oh, how I wish I could read what you've finished so far!
"
"Regarding your first response, it seems to have never occured to you that some people don't know what to believe, quite simply."If that's the case, then there isn't fear. Fear only exists if there's a belief in place, right? "
Heck no, the fear of not knowing what to believe is how people are brainwashed. The mind is broken and latches onto the first beliefs it is presented with out of fear!
For me, any way I continue, I am taking a leap of faith. I have been faithfully leaping into the occult for several years and several layers of fear have been stripped off and fallen by the wayside. But, sometimes I do wonder if that's a good thing! Seriously doubting everything, any direction I move in causes a slight bit of fear. It is a slight fear that can generally be ignored, but is there nevertheless. I fear incubi, succubi, "dark man dreams," possession, even angels, even Jehovah. I fear because I have absolutely no way to judge my interaction with any of these beings other than how they treat me, which could be a trick.
These concerns may sound idiotic and naive to you, but these concerns are always at the back of my mind, which is why I try to discern so thoroughly.
"
"And, it is not remotely similar to eating a possibly poisonous fish, unless of course the possibly poisoned fish had within it the keys to heaven and, if you examined closely enough, you could eventually determine if in fact it was poisonous or if in fact it was the fish-ticket to heaven."There is a particular fish that the Japanese prepare that, if prepared well, promises to be the finest bite of food you've ever eaten. If prepared wrong, it will kill you on the spot, quite painfully."
I am familiar with that fish (blowfish?), but regardless of how "great" it might taste, it is not going to unveil the mysteries of life.
"
"This link in fact makes a point which apparently I'm failing at, since you seem to take offense at the "stroke of my brush" I paint us with."Not offense - just a sense that perhaps unnecessarily contentious ideas are being pushed in unnecessarily contentious ways."
I wouldn't bother just for a debate exercise. These ideas might seem unnecessarily contentious to you because you might not really care about them due to your personal experience which may have proven to your satisfaction that these ideas are unnecessarily contentious. You did say you gravitated toward Satanism as a young man, so perhaps you're just not particularly concerned about this issue, in general. I actually gravitated to Satanism in my teens as well, but with very vague ideas about life. I grew out of it. That does not mean my ideas about life are any less vague now, though.
"
"How does one distinguish Angels from demons? Angels can only take on human form, whereas demons can also appear in as animals."Malarky. I know at least three people to whom their HGA routinely appears as a cat."
I am aware that not everything in the above quote rings true, even to me, but you have not addressed the one part which I bolded to show importance regarding the ability of demons to trick you. Judging one statement by it's proximity to another distinct and separate statement is known as a "fallacious argument" (Ad Hominem-circumstantial) or "throwing the baby out with the bathwater." I understand that you may feel like, "bah, that guy doesn't know what he's talking about, so who cares what he says?" However, realize that, by the author's reasoning, your three friend's HGAs are not angels at all, but evil demons. Simply because you've said "malarky" does not disprove the author's claims. In fact, the author would probably just use circular logic on you: (1) author claims demons take the form of animals, (2) author claims demons trick people, (3) you claim three friends' HGAs routinely appear as cats, (4) author would probably say your friends have been tricked by demons. The author could completely disregard your opinion in the same way you have disregarded his, too! We just have two opinions. How does your "malarky" actually refute this claim? How do you know if you're being tricked? Do you judge your HGA simply by the fact that it acts like a friend? Feels like a friend?
-
@sasha said
"What fears? Fear of being seen as Satanists? "
My fears of possibly being duped. Of course, if Jim has Satan inside him, I suppose I'm a real dummy because I'd obviously be asking the wrong guy, huh?! Maybe this method of inquiry makes no sense, I don't know.
I should rephrase that. I don't know WHAT to be afraid of. I'm just trying to make sense of (A) the Qabalah and (B) the Bible, written by Qabalists.
-
@Redd Fezz said
"You did say you gravitated toward Satanism as a young man"
Not true. I spoke of the very positive effect LeVey's writings had on me. Big difference. Satanism has never been my religion. You have to be either a Christian or a Jew to be a Satanist.
"so perhaps you're just not particularly concerned about this issue"
I'm not - and my point was that unless one had some a priori basis for the issue, it's not clear how the issue could ever rise. One has to already have bought into some piece of the Christian post-mortem model and the existence of some sort of devil who has a place in that picture before there's a reason for any fear to arise about it.
"I am aware that not everything in the above quote rings true, even to me, but you have not addressed the one part which I bolded to show importance regarding the ability of demons to trick you."
I couldn't even bring myself to read most of it - especially given a busy day at work and only a few minutes to spare here and there. Mostly, though, it was going off into directions that would take hours to address because (IMO) the initial premises were so flawed and the whole superstructure built on top of it were just increasingly complex weavings of cotton candy.
Demons can't fool you unless you are fooling yourself. The specific training of the 1=10 Grade of A.'.A.'. - the same place that access to those worlds is pointedly given - trains one to know the difference. The core of what one needs to know is given in the first couple of sections of Liber O (to tip a hat to another thread going on here at the same time), but experience in the actual work provides the actual capacity - the growing truth sense - to progressively learn to discern the difference.
"Simply because you've said "malarky" does not disprove the author's claims."
Agreed. Nor do I have any need to prove anything. I'm not in this to debate, just to educate. When it enters debate, I'll usually just disappear.
"In fact, the author would probably just use circular logic on you"
Which would only have an effect on me if I entered into the game, of course.
"We just have two opinions. How does your "malarky" actually refute this claim?"
I'm not in this to debate, just to educate.
"How do you know if you're being tricked?"
That's been the core of my training for the last 30 years - knowing the difference.
"Do you judge your HGA simply by the fact that it acts like a friend? Feels like a friend?"
No - rather, by direct perception of truth. (In the early stages, there were some mind-boggling tests, but the very nature of the K&C of the HGA includes the characteristic of certainty-beyond-reason.)
-
OK, thanks Jim. I appreciate you sticking with me that far.
And with that, I will conclude my public doubting.
Someone sent me this link that just happened to make me feel better for some inexplicable reason.
I do suppose you're right, actually, about the fear thing. I'm not terribly concerned with being right or wrong muslim or buddhist ideas.
-
@Redd Fezz said
"I don't know WHAT to be afraid of. I'm just trying to make sense of (A) the Qabalah and (B) the Bible, written by Qabalists."
You know what it boils down to? I want to understand the Qabalist interpretation of the Bible. AC identified with 666 the Beast and Babalon and the Harlot and all that... clearly the Bible indicates this is the opposing side of God and the side that LOSES.
-
HA HA HA HA, WILL COINCIDENCES NEVER CEASE?!
(not that I'd like them to, mind you)
So, after work today, I get on the train and of course the first thing I read in "Anatomy of the Psyche" (where I had left off before I was so rudely interrupted by work today):
"Sulphur represents the active substance of the sun or, in the psychological language, the motive factor in consciousness: on the one hand the will, which can best be regarded as a dynamism subordinated to consciousness, and on the other hand compulsion, an involuntary motivation or impulse ranging from mere interest to possession proper. The unconscious dynamism would correspond to sulphur, for compulsion is the great mystery of human life. It is the thwarting of our conscious will and of our reason by an inflammable element within us, appearing now as a consuming fire and now as a life-giving warmth.
It is paradoxical. 'As the corrupter it has affinity with the devil, while on the other hand it appears as a parallel of Christ.'"
For whatever reason, after the compilation of information I received today from UNRELATED sources, opening up straight to this solidified these thoughts coherently and so completely 'coincidentally' as to be blatantly significant.
I know this is exactly what Jim was trying to tell me, but it wasn't clicking somehow.
EDIT: and this is my post #111, which apparently turns me into a stone of precious water.
EDIT #2: Welcome to bizarro land where just now I pulled ONE card from the Thoth deck, as I do once in a while, (still not ready to attempt a real reading) and plucked Atu VIII Adjustment. I'd say that's pretty relevent, wouldn't you? It was also the first time I realized the number replaces Strength in the BOTA Tarot, which shows a woman controlling the Red Lion, which refers on one level to "Satan" and "Christ" I do believe (serpent power?)... But, what I noticed about the significance of plucking Atu VIII at precisely THIS moment is that it is the counterpart of the Fool and AL, it is LA. Attention drawn to the fact that Strength has been replaced, not with Lust as I'd noted before, but with Adjustment. The female companion of the Fool. Nuit and Hadit? Naught or Not... Well, I don't know. I'm open to opinions.
-
@Redd Fezz said
"I want to understand the Qabalist interpretation of the Bible."
With great uncertainty...
I thought The Bible, both Old and New Testaments - but at least the Old, came out well before Qabalah.
I suppose it depends on what you mean by Qabalah. The classic Qabalistic, excuse me... Kabbalistic texts didn't appear until at least 1000 AD.
I can easily see that the writers of the Bible used gematria deliberately in their writing. According to Gershom Scholem's book on the history of Kabbalah, Jews probably learned Gematria from Babylonians during the captivity. But it seems that this use of gematria long predates Qabalah, perhaps by 1500 years.
-
JAE said, "Try this (crude, fast try): There is something within each of us, known to us, sought by us - usually unconsciously at first, and increasingly consciously as we pursue our spiritual path - of the nature of the Sun and fire, of the substance of the reproductive energies, saturating subconsciousness and filling the atmosphere of the intellect and inherently the devouring and vivifying flame of superconsciousness. Every one of us comes to know it differently, based on our own natures, and - when our knowledged of it and openness to it and responsiveness to it hits a certain critical threshold, it unites with us in the most ecstatic fusion, an inner event that is more REAL-feeling than the entirety of the rest of our life before that time.
And, once that Truth of Self, that informing lover-teacher-flame has filled us and owned us - an event that nearly always will have (among other things) caused us tojourney into our own personal Hells along the way - we then have that most shining of lights to escort us into the depths of our deepest Hell where each thing found, one after another, is seen and known and named and pledged in its entirety to the service of this lover-teacher-fire-light, and to that Will, or Voice of the Angel, which is the whole momentum of our being.
Work?"
Works for me. Beautifully written.
Can we read what you have written about Revaltions so far?
I know it is an imposition, but it will be valued.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
@Chris Hanlon said
"Can we read what you have written about Revaltions so far? I know it is an imposition, but it will be valued."
It would be a LOT of work to put it in a form suitable for this forum - and would amunt to a dozens of 8 1/2 x 11 small type pages. Since I'm working around the clock working on a project with an upcoming deadline, I really can't think of this AT LEAST for a couple of months. Sorry. (And it would only be an early draft, nothing polished.)
-
Sorry to continue this conversation at a lower grade than until now, but I'd like to get confirmed my personal view of the dilemma of Satan. Here it is:
The power presented by Satan is too strong for most to handle without hurting themselves so therefore it's important to learn how to handle it. Thusly it's been veiled in most theologies throughout the years under an evil symbolism so the profane will stay away.
I think like this mainly because of what Thelema seems like from my point of view (which is for its members to possess godhood themselves instead of worshipping something external) and secondly because of a theory I read about saying that the god presented in the first testament of the Bible is a mad god; the creator god whose universe is irrational and from whom we must be saved into rationality. The thing that got me with that theory is that symbolism is not designed to be materialized and the mad god I've interpreted as a materializing god, so thusly...Any of this have any bearing of correctness mayhap?
-
@Malaclypse said
"The power presented by Satan is too strong for most to handle without hurting themselves so therefore it's important to learn how to handle it. Thusly it's been veiled in most theologies throughout the years under an evil symbolism so the profane will stay away."
I think you're on to something - because this is close to my thoughts on it But I put a different spin on it.
It appears to me that the Four Great Princes of the Evil of the World (so-called) - Lucifer, Satan, Leviathan, and Belial - are the four Archangels of the Elements of a much earlier stage of the human race's evolution. They aren't "evil" so much as they are mismatched to the archetecture of our psyches. We can realign our psyches to respond to them, but that requires truly stepping back to an extremely primitive evolutionary state - which passes (rather reasonably) for "degeneration" etc.
In this sense, they truly are inimical to the normal human condition. But, having attained the K&C of the HGA, they become accessible on different terms, and consistent with a developmental state which appropriately and safely will begin exploring (among other things) its own distantly primitive roots (the Root Consciousness of Geburah, etc.).