2 June - (Air) Liber LXV, 2:50-51
-
From Crowley, Confessions, ch 58
"But the Cabbala did not leave me in despair; it asserted the existence of a faculty such as that suggested by Tyndall, by the use of which I could appreciate truth directly. I may here refer to the historic claim of mystics that their truth is incomprehensible to human reason and inexpressible in human language. The arrogance of the proposition was less repugnant to me than its confession of incompetence and its denial of the continuity of nature. I have devoted countless days and nights to forcing myself to formulate the intuitions of trance in intelligible ideas, and conveying those ideas by means of well defined symbols and terms. At the period I am describing, such an effort would have been bricks without straw. My truly mystical experiences were extremely few. I have subsequently developed a complete system, based on the Cabbala, by which any expression may be rendered cognizable through the language of intellect, exactly as mathematicians have done: exactly, too, as they have been obliged to recognize the existence of a new logic. I found it necessary to create a new code of the laws of thought."
-
From Liber Samekh
"The main purpose of the Ritual is to establish the relation of the subconscious self with the Angel in such a way that the Adept is aware that his Angel is the Unity which expresses the sum of the Elements of that Self, that his normal consciousness contains alien enemies introduced by the accidents of environment, and that his Knowledge and Conversation of His Holy Guardian Angel destroys all doubts and delusions, confers all blessings, teaches all truth, and contains all delights. But it is important that the Adept should not rest in mere inexpressible realization of his rapture, but rouse himself to make the relation submit to analysis, to render it in rational terms, and thereby enlighten his mind and heart in a sense as superior to fanatical enthusiasm as Beethoven's music is to West African war-drums."
-
@RobertAllen said
"
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"Isn't calling something inexpressible still trying to express it?"Ah, a dangling question!
Now, If you were to clarify what you think is being expressed that is supposed to be inexpressible by pointing to a textual example so we are all on the same page I think I could answer the question. "
It wasn't a challenge to anything stated, just rather a comment on the irony of lamenting the limits of language, in the middle of a discussion.
"I don't think the inexpressible is being expressed. "
By definition, I would think that the inexpressible could not be expressed. And the Tao that can be named is not the Tao.
However, even calling something "inexpressible" is an oblique reference to something, attempting to define it at least in terms of process of elimination.
In the bigger picture, it's interesting that the subjects that rouse the most impassioned discussion, and challenge us to find new ways of communicating, are the ones that are the most difficult to discuss. It may not be the dew that freezes on the mountain top, but one way or another it will melt and trickle it's way down to my glass. And sooner or later, we drink a glass of water that sends shivers up our spine, and the pipes that carried the water no longer matter.
-
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"
@RobertAllen said
"
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"Isn't calling something inexpressible still trying to express it?"Ah, a dangling question!
Now, If you were to clarify what you think is being expressed that is supposed to be inexpressible by pointing to a textual example so we are all on the same page I think I could answer the question. "
It wasn't a challenge to anything stated, just rather a comment on the irony of lamenting the limits of language, in the middle of a discussion.
"I don't think the inexpressible is being expressed. "
By definition, I would think that the inexpressible could not be expressed. And the Tao that can be named is not the Tao.
However, even calling something "inexpressible" is an oblique reference to something, attempting to define it at least in terms of process of elimination.
In the bigger picture, it's interesting that the subjects that rouse the most impassioned discussion, and challenge us to find new ways of communicating, are the ones that are the most difficult to discuss. It may not be the dew that freezes on the mountain top, but one way or another it will melt and trickle it's way down to my glass. And sooner or later, we drink a glass of water that sends shivers up our spine, and the pipes that carried the water no longer matter."
Fair enough.
Love and Will
-
Tinman, this is how I relate to the Crowley quotes:
Opinions expressed by Crowley are provided as ‘proofs’ for the ability of an argument, or rather, an expression to give faithful shape to transcendental mystical experiences. Maybe this is the intent of his words, maybe not. I’m not going to dissect them too much because they cannot stand in for my own struggle to come to terms with the text of Liber LXV.
In fact, I will not offer other, competing quotes of counter-proof because this kind of argument strikes me as too pat. Still, he mentions the Qabalah.
But hey, I still have to register an objection because no matter how gnarly a Qabalistic formula one might provide, it will still mean nothing to me unless I have already had the experience it is attempting to describe! More so, my belief that I somehow understand this exalted trance when I haven’t had the experience is problematic because of its smugness. It assumes that there is an adequate explanation, well written and clever, that is somehow enough for me when I haven’t had my own Gnosis yet. It’s ass-backwards.
After the said actual realization I suppose it can be argued one should make every effort to enlighten ones own mind with that understanding, as Crowley indicates, but this is a purely academic discussion until that time arrives. And until it does, it can just as easily be argued that any arguments that attempt to circumvent this necessary realization can do just as much harm as good, being a source of illusion.
What I have, until I see god face to face for myself, are things, which are false in their very natures, but still useful as tools. Nevertheless, for all their usefulness, it is my considered opinion that they cannot shadow forth the experience; they can’t because I haven’t had the experience yet so there is no relational possibility.
Love and Will
-
@Tinman said
"From Liber Samekh
"The main purpose of the Ritual is to establish the relation of the subconscious self with the Angel in such a way that the Adept is aware that his Angel is the Unity which expresses the sum of the Elements of that Self, that his normal consciousness contains alien enemies introduced by the accidents of environment, and that his Knowledge and Conversation of His Holy Guardian Angel destroys all doubts and delusions, confers all blessings, teaches all truth, and contains all delights. But it is important that the Adept should not rest in mere inexpressible realization of his rapture, but rouse himself to make the relation submit to analysis, to render it in rational terms, and thereby enlighten his mind and heart in a sense as superior to fanatical enthusiasm as Beethoven's music is to West African war-drums."
"thanks for this quote, Tinman!
it...focuses us (the discussion) back to the inside, instead of straying around... -
Here is another bit of commentary from AC on LXV:II-65 that seems applicable:
"Union with his Angel is not the sole goal of the Adept. There is “an end,” a Purpose proper to his individuality.
The Angel therefore bids him withdraw from the Trance of Union. He is to assume the form of Hermes (runner — Word-bearer) and deliver the Word entrusted to him to the “Mighty cities.” This may mean “to the greatest minds of the world.”"
Again the point AC seems to be making is to try your best to "express the inexpressible".
RoberAllen's point that it is "impossible" holds water, as I've agreed to continuously, but it's clear from my vantage point that one must try even though it's false/a shadow/etc...
From Liber I:
"By a Magus is this writing made known through the mind of a Magister. The one uttereth clearly, and the other Understandeth; yet the Word is falsehood, and the Understanding darkness. And this saying is Of All Truth."
But to return to the passage we are meditating on; I'm currently seeing a dichotomy setup by Crowley that isn't exactly masturbation vs sex in the physical sense, but seems a useful metaphor for what he's saying in the spiritual sense.
-
@Liber LXV said
"**50. I was alone in a great park, and by a certain hillock was a ring of deep enamelled grass wherein green-clad ones, most beautiful, played.
- In their play I came even unto the land of Fairy Sleep. All my thoughts were clad in green; most beautiful were they.**"
... Adept now sees the Beauty of nature, and love that moves all; and specifically, he recognizes it as underlaying force behind thoughts/rational consciousness...
-
@Tinman said
"Again the point AC seems to be making is to try your best to "express the inexpressible"."
And my only comment worth repeating at this juncture is that I don't think this text is expressing the inexpressible. It's just my opinion at this point. By contrast, it feels like the text is changing me as I read it—so I see it as more functional than informative. I try to force it into the shape I want it to take, but in the end all I have done is ruined the shape, which I throw away in frustration.
I know the tone of today's text is pleasant, but for myself, I relate the park, hillock, ring of deep enamelled grass, and the green-clad ones, most beautiful to my inadequate shapes!
**
...but Thou art the morning, O my darling, my serpent that twinest Thee about this heart.**And this morning makes me happy, while at the same time the idea of it mocks me.
Edit: I keep coming back to the notion that Crowley was not the author, and while this generates a certain amount of troublesome expectation on my part, it also helps me to stay focused on my own process.
Love and Will
-
When I was a child I believed in fairies and elves. I even created a ceremony that I learned later in life was a drawing down ceremony. I this ceremony I imagined fairies circling all around me and filling me with light. When I see “Green- clad ones”, I think about elves dancing and calling the fairies down so that the fairies could take him to “fairy sleep” which I consider a great magical land.
All though I still believe in fairies and elves, I have never seen them unless it was with the magical eyes of imagination. So I see the serpent that twineth the heart as the naysayers who promote the idea that there is no real elves and no real fairies and they become the serpent that “twinest about this heart” and never letting it have the joy of believing in magick. The naysayers twinest further about the heart by creating rules that help them create the illusion that there is no illusion and try to maintain control over my illusion.
