God doesn't exist
-
@xfilesalbania said
"
I have comed to the same conclusion myself, i perfectly agree with you.
I just have to add that acording to my belief, the purpose of creation is to become nothing as you said, but in the other extremis of nothing, that is infinite. For infinite and 0 are but the same thing, two faces of the same coin, and we are traveling toward the infinite , to unite with God, the Nothing. I really have to think more about it, but the main idea is this."The only problem I have with this sort of thinking is that it glorifies the illusion of God. In the Book of Lies and elswhere, Crowley has repeatedly pointed out that God is an illusion or a delusion just like anything else in relative reality ("they imagine themselves to exist"). It is the not-god which we want to experience in order to understand our own delusion, and our projected God we create ourselves from our relative perspectives. Isn't this part of the key to Liber Al? What about Liber418 the 10th Aether? The Book of Thoth description of the High Priestess? Or the "water of water" description of the Queen of Cups (which not only applies to a personality type, but the condition of water of water itself)?
The wording of "traveling toward the infinite , to unite with God" implies that this is a deliberate set-up from the beginning to evolve, when in fact spiritual transformation goes up or down, not just upward, and always has since beginningless time. Realization does not involve a journey toward the infinite, since it is available here now in the present. Infinite or finite are only concepts. The realization is nonconceptual.
Other similar lines of thought that always stick in my craw are: "God is playing hide-and-seek with himself because it's fun!" or some such crap. We are not aware of our real nature due to the collective clinging and delusion of the essential elements of space, which over enough time produce the illusion of Self. These elements are part of the Nature of Mind which is the real, invisible, Nothing "substance" of awareness. As soon as the "winds" of the Nature of Mind begin to twist around the elusive sense of differentiation, we are on our way to heavier and heavier forms of distinction, separation and conditioning until we get to the point we are totally deluded about the nature of reality, an aggregation of elemental conditioning consumed by dualistic considerations. It is not like "the wise old man created everything and then rolled over and went to sleep" we repeatedly hear from people like Lon Milo DuQuette, etc. This sort of simplistic mythologizing is part of the problem, in my opinion. It creates a real obstacle to learning when everything becomes a personification.
Crowley is talking about escaping God concepts, even escaping the known Universe, which is in a "desert"... in other words, life as we know it is a spiritual desert, empty, harsh and dying:
DUST-DEVILS
In the wind of the mind arises the turbulence called I. It breaks; down shower the barren thoughts. All life is choked. This desert is the Abyss wherein the Universe. The Stars are but thistles in that waste. Yet this desert is but one spot accursed in a world of bliss. Now and again Travellers cross the desert; they come from the Great Sea, and to the Great Sea they go. As they go they spill water; one day they will irrigate the desert, till it flower. See! five footprints of a Camel! V.V.V.V.V.(High Priestess!)
WHEEL AND--WOA!
The Great Wheel of Samsara. The Wheel of the Law [Dhamma]. The Wheel of the Taro. The Wheel of the Heavens. The Wheel of Life. All these Wheels be one; yet of all these the Wheel of the TARO alone avails thee consciously. Meditate long and broad and deep, O man, upon this Wheel, revolving it in thy mind Be this thy task, to see how each card springs necessarily from each other card, even in due order from The Fool unto The Ten of Coins. Then, when thou know'st the Wheel of Destiny complete, mayst thou perceive THAT Will which moved it first. [There is no first or last.} And lo! thou art past through the Abyss. -
you really make good points, and i agree with you to a certain point.
By the way, i really haven't read yet the book of lies, or the other "liber" series. In fact i don't know much, i just see Crowley as an example to follow and find much inspiration in him.
But you shouldn't have problems when dealing with different points of view. Absolute truth does not exist at all, and the significance of existence, god, etc varies from person to person, none of us is right, but also , none of us is wrong.
Existence and life itself is a paradox, so everything is true and false at the same time. -
Definitely read Book Of Lies. I was flipping through it last night after my posts and there are quite a few chapters about this... in fact, the whole book is about this, I think.
Everything is true and not true, as you say, to a certain extent, but that is only because our magickal essence makes it so. We differentiate with the power of the word and project our essence into that label or container to make it true. So, Gods are beliefs come to life which are conceptual personifications of energy. Who conceptualizes and personifies? If self is an illusion, then these creations are temporal phantoms proceeding from Nothing. The magickal power to create is inherent in the Nothing from whence the idea of Self emanates. As Crowley stated, God does not exist until Tiphareth and Man not until Malkuth. They each are the result of potentialities and tendencies created by that potentiality from the original radiant source, which is always there waiting to be rediscovered. If not, nobody cares. No God is up there waiting for you to wake up or wake him up. In fact, the Universe is designed to kill you, since everything is only temporary. Crowley reverses the typical thinking of "life is a meaningless fight" to "fighting is a good enough reason to live." His aim was to teach worthy people to find their essence and beat death at its own game by seeing it from the other side. This is won by confronting fear and limitation and going beyond it, which includes God.
-
topics like this seem a good waste of breath. No offense, I see where you are coming from, but when you start talking about the negative in the positive....speech just seems to cancel out any progress you are trying to make. Maybe this is why buddha was always silent when students asked him about God. Silence seems the best answer.
-
"Buddha was only silent to certain people. In his lifetime, he taught totally different things. If Crowley was silent, I wouldn't be here now."
Ditto! So sayeth the Bornless-Headless One in the Speechless Speech!
-
93
I say numbers and math is a waste of breath sure to cause a headache but philosophical debate is the foundation of change! Then just to contradict myself in the name of freewill IF 2=0 THEN 3=1 thus the only proof of the existence of God as well as only numerical equation that actually makes sense to me...
-
Very late reply on this one, but going back to one of the basic books of a beginning student, the Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage, it is quite clear that he warns to fear "God." There's an eternal mystery that no one will ever know. As Abramelin records, it shouldn't even be questioned. Because when one one tries to state vehemenly that there is no "God" (and I don't mean an old man with a white beard -- although I could mean that
) what of Kether? The Qabalah? And the Ain Soph? There's a place where we reach the unknowable in all things. If we're lucky. Is the book of lies a book of lies? (Or isn't it?) -
@Nudor said
"Very late reply on this one, but going back to one of the basic books of a beginning student, the Sacred Magic of Abramelin the Mage, it is quite clear that he warns to fear "God.""
Otto's mysterium tremendens et fascinans
"There's an eternal mystery that no one will ever know."
How do you know there is an eternal mystery then? What about all those mystics back in the day who wrote those books?
"As Abramelin records, it shouldn't even be questioned. Because when one one tries to state vehemenly that there is no "God" (and I don't mean an old man with a white beard -- although I could mean that
) what of Kether? The Qabalah? And the Ain Soph?"You ARE aware these are Jewish Kabbalah terms, right? These presuppose a system where there is a God.
The phrase "I am alone, there is no god where I am" refers to the unity that comes in attainment where there cannot BE 'another' or some 'other' like 'god.' You either declare "This is all ME" or "This is all God." At this point, labels don't really matter.
"There's a place where we reach the unknowable in all things. If we're lucky."
I didn't know luck had much to do with it...
"Is the book of lies a book of lies? (Or isn't it?)"
Falsely so-called
IAO131
-
lies fall short of the truth, the truth is silence.
The highest Truth has no expression and no manifestation, thus all words, expressions and manifestation fall short of the TRUTH this they are lies.
Thus what we is the world call truth or reality are lies.
The book of lies, are those expressions which aim at truth, but veer off skew-wise.
The book of lies is number 333 which is Choronzon. The noise which both veils the truth and reveals it by contra-distinction.
A signal can only exist in distinction to noise, yet noise can also drawn the signal.
The Magus creates the signal, the Master hears it clearly. but bellow the abyss, all is garbled with noise.
The book of lies is about filtering out the noise from the signal.
-
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."
What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?
-
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!
-
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131
-
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?
-
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?"
Bhagavad Gita has some good parts on Bhakti. Ramakrishna talks about Bhakti all the time. Rumi is pretty much Bhakti but from the point of Sufism/Arab world. Even Song of Solomon could be considered Bhakti...
IAO131
-
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?"
Bhagavad Gita has some good parts on Bhakti. Ramakrishna talks about Bhakti all the time. Rumi is pretty much Bhakti but from the point of Sufism/Arab world. Even Song of Solomon could be considered Bhakti...
IAO131"
Swami Vivekananda wrote a book called "Bhakti Yoga". I haven't read that one, but I've read his books "Raja Yoga" and "Karma Yoga" and found them to be quite good.
-
@bryan said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?"
Bhagavad Gita has some good parts on Bhakti. Ramakrishna talks about Bhakti all the time. Rumi is pretty much Bhakti but from the point of Sufism/Arab world. Even Song of Solomon could be considered Bhakti...
IAO131"
Swami Vivekananda wrote a book called "Bhakti Yoga". I haven't read that one, but I've read his books "Raja Yoga" and "Karma Yoga" and found them to be quite good."
Raja Yoga is his best work by far in my opinion.
IAO131
-
@Aum418 said
"
@bryan said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?"
Bhagavad Gita has some good parts on Bhakti. Ramakrishna talks about Bhakti all the time. Rumi is pretty much Bhakti but from the point of Sufism/Arab world. Even Song of Solomon could be considered Bhakti...
IAO131"
Swami Vivekananda wrote a book called "Bhakti Yoga". I haven't read that one, but I've read his books "Raja Yoga" and "Karma Yoga" and found them to be quite good."
Raja Yoga is his best work by far in my opinion.
IAO131"
Oh yeah? Interesting.
I'm just replying because this quote box thing we've got going on is getting pretty awesome. -
@bryan said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@bryan said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Aum418 said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Frater Pantha said
"
@Froclown said
"Crowley's method is to fully merge with life, be it pleasure or pain, hedonistic or ascetic, the key is in doing what you repulses or intrigues you, until it no longer does either. The ultimate goal is the same as the Buddhist, release from ego attachments. Perfect control over the repulsions and inclinations of the body and mind, by transcending them via burnout, rather than use it or lose it methods of Buddhism."What Crowley book(s) most focus on this method? What Bhakti Yoga books are suggested that focus on the like method?"
I thought there would actually be a lot of quick responses to this one... I guess I was wrong!"
Liber Astarte? Liber Cheth?
IAO131"
Any classic Bhakti Yoga texts that could be suggested? Are there any good translations of the texts that you would recommend?"
Bhagavad Gita has some good parts on Bhakti. Ramakrishna talks about Bhakti all the time. Rumi is pretty much Bhakti but from the point of Sufism/Arab world. Even Song of Solomon could be considered Bhakti...
IAO131"
Swami Vivekananda wrote a book called "Bhakti Yoga". I haven't read that one, but I've read his books "Raja Yoga" and "Karma Yoga" and found them to be quite good."
Raja Yoga is his best work by far in my opinion.
IAO131"
Oh yeah? Interesting.
I'm just replying because this quote box thing we've got going on is getting pretty awesome.""Thank God I'm an Atheist!"
-
@Metzareph said
"Basically, God cannot exist, because God is essentially nothing. It does not exist, and by not existing it can be anything and be anywhere."
An absorbing discussion.
At the present state of my evolution I have the perspective of a pantheist; I see “God” as identical with the totality of the universe; the essence of existence of all beings that are. It therefore makes no sense to me to say “God does not exist”. I exist*, so even if everything else exists only in my mind then something exists, therefore God exists.
*Cogitat ergo est. To avoid presuming the ego to begin with, Crowley suggested “cogitatur” (it is thunk); which, he pointed out, compels the question “by whom is it thunk?” To avoid that difficulty, I prefer “cogitat” it is thinking” (in the kind of impersonal sense that “it is raining”). Thought is clearly going on; ergo "est" - or “sunt” (something is/are, and it seems to be at least me). Being is going on; ergo God is.
Doesn’t Crowley say somewhere (I thought I bookmarked it...) that you first find the essence of the divine in yourself (which for me is my own existence) and then apply the law of “as below, so above”? Knowledge of the microcosm leads on to knowledge of the macrocosm.
Do you fully know your microcosm – that of God in you, as the Quakers put it? (I like the Quakers; they spend a lot of time being quiet; to be highly recommended).
But again, that’s the way I read it at my stage of evolution – which may well be less advanced than yours.
I like Jim’s perspective of reality emerging out of difference. One of the places where post-modern philosophers seem to have much in common with a Thelemic point of view; things are only “real” because they differ from other things (differance, Jacques Derrida called it, making the point that writing can express a difference that does not emerge in speech). And why does A differ from B? Because A differs from C in a different way from that in which B differs from C [Barthes, I think]. And the sequence runs down to some ultimate “ground” of total emptiness which is nonetheless real and the basis (matrix/ mother?) for everything else.
X= make-empty-string();
Y = append(a,X)Computer people are well used to empty things which are nonetheless real and are brought into existence by a pure verb (Fiat!) Then we pile stuff on top of the no-thing – and it works.
Or you can link the sense of limited reality up in the opposite direction to total fullness – but fullness of an infinitesimal size. Which is, paradoxically, described as a Black Hole.
Then there is the increasing consciousness, in modern physics, that the observer is necessary to reality.
Existence is established by relationships. Reality is a network. [Star-sponge vision?] (What is a net? runs an old joke. It’s a lot of holes knotted together.) Tie a [k]not in a [w]hole and see whether you can make something of it.
If we start from nothing, every knot is reflected by a knot that’s tied the opposite way and we can unknot them all (without letting go of the ends). It was therefore, overall, not a knot at all, but just a tangle. So what’s happened to all the anti-matter? It’s around here somewhere.
Metzareph makes the valid point that you can never totally define God because it would require you to define everything. I agree. This is the temporal aspect of “differance”, called “deferance”; the ultimate definition of the reality of anything is endlessly deferred. So it is with defining God.
Western Christianity, it seems to me, approaches fullness of definition through devices such as litanies “O Holy God;. O Holy strong one; O Holy immortal one; Lord of Hosts; Almighty, Omniscient….” And in the East they go the other way, toward emptiness “God is not this, not that…” Not even the latter process can conclude that God Is Not; because the process never terminates.
Best we can do, with God as with everything, is to arrive at the best approximation; the idea of reality that “works” for practical purposes. For me, that has to include some idea of the “ground of all being”. You may differ. Differance is good.
OP