Ultimate god of thelema
-
@Archaeus said
"To the OP: I could be wrong here but I get the distinct impression that you are looking for something analogous to the Judeo/Christian God that you can pray to......You might want to get that looked at?
Personally I find the idea of praying repulsive, but then that's just me; I cant abide the idea of relying on some kind of sky-daddy to grant wishes, enlighten me or save me from something.
Feel free to kick me if I got the wrong impression
"performs ura mawashi, Van Damme style
damn you blocked it 
are you into the martial arts or something? (divination mode on)Basically everything i say is from hermetic point of vue, even if i dont always apply it nor phrase it nor understand it... i feel, think, believe, interpret that way.
So when i say "praying", i could just say "meditating on it". That's what i mean. Yoga.
If it is for magick, i dont ask "help" to a "cosmic dad"
, but try to "align" and do yoga with the highest reality both macrocosmic and microcosmic, to align both, and then "to walk down the tree"(thus the HGA between both ends) to materialize.That's what i mean.
But you might be right to some extent, that may not be a coincidence if i dont phrase it better(foreign langage is no excuse
). Unconscious need for "cosmic dad" might still be there. I will check it. 
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Nuit is credited with saying, "there is no other God than me, and my lord Hadit."
I believe the emphasis should be on the word "and" and the fact that "God" is singular."
Not just the plural/singular play, it's also very interesting that Nuit is referring to herself as a "God" and not a "Goddess." Perhaps because of the interplay involving Hadit?
I also wonder, if this means that a Thelemic worldview would be compatible with something like Pantheism.
-
@Ansuz Aleph said
"Not just the plural/singular play, it's also very interesting that Nuit is referring to herself as a "God" and not a "Goddess." Perhaps because of the interplay involving Hadit?[/quote}
"God" is an ungendered term (unless one is specifically polarizing the genders and needs a separate word). Similarly, waiter, actor, steward, etc. are ungendered and don't need an -ess to make them apply to a female."I also wonder, if this means that a Thelemic worldview would be compatible with something like Pantheism."
"Of course.
But then (of course) I see monotheism, polytheism, pantheism, etc. as all saying the same thing from a different angle.
-
@Horus Amin said
"
@Archaeus said
"To the OP: I could be wrong here but I get the distinct impression that you are looking for something analogous to the Judeo/Christian God that you can pray to......You might want to get that looked at?Personally I find the idea of praying repulsive, but then that's just me; I cant abide the idea of relying on some kind of sky-daddy to grant wishes, enlighten me or save me from something.
Feel free to kick me if I got the wrong impression
"performs ura mawashi, Van Damme style
damn you blocked it are you into the martial arts or something? (divination mode on)Basically everything i say is from hermetic point of vue, even if i dont always apply it nor phrase it nor understand it... i feel, think, believe, interpret that way.
So when i say "praying", i could just say "meditating on it". That's what i mean. Yoga.
If it is for magick, i dont ask "help" to a "cosmic dad"
, but try to "align" and do yoga with the highest reality both macrocosmic and microcosmic, to align both, and then "to walk down the tree"(thus the HGA between both ends) to materialize.That's what i mean.
But you might be right to some extent, that may not be a coincidence if i dont phrase it better(foreign langage is no excuse
). Unconscious need for "cosmic dad" might still be there. I will check it. "Well you took that in good humor
I should probably just shut up and let you get on with it Yes as it happens, I do a bit of martial arts, you probably read it in one of my previous posts or something
-
@Jim Eshelman said
""God" is an ungendered term (unless one is specifically polarizing the genders and needs a separate word). Similarly, waiter, actor, steward, etc. are ungendered and don't need an -ess to make them apply to a female."
That was sort of what I was getting at. In this instance, Nuit didn't feel the need to polarize. Hence, she showed no distinction in the choice of words.
But if we really get down to technicalities of polarization in language, the English language has a lot of dual aspects. For instance, there's no need to polarize subject from verb, and yet, every sentence in the English language requires both (even if the subject is simply understood, it's still implied).
I mentioned Pantheism in particular because of the nature of Nuit/Hadit. Correct me if I'm going off course here, but I understood those two as Infinite Space and the ever-present point. This is to say, the full range of possibilities of what could be and the totality of what is. If Nuit is declaring the two to be "God", then that seemed to fit the definition of Pantheism. Perhaps I'm reading too much into definitions there..
-
@Archaeus said
"Well you took that in good humor
I should probably just shut up and let you get on with it Yes as it happens, I do a bit of martial arts, you probably read it in one of my previous posts or something
"Haha ! It will be more difficult than expected... Los has become my new cosmic daddy.
The guy has an answer for everything. Not only that... SIMPLE answers. He makes it SIMPLE.
No ! I saw it by watching astrally....
...your previous posts
-
@Horus Amin said
"
@Archaeus said
"Well you took that in good humor I should probably just shut up and let you get on with it Yes as it happens, I do a bit of martial arts, you probably read it in one of my previous posts or something
"Haha ! It will be more difficult than expected... Los has become my new cosmic daddy.
The guy has an answer for everything. Not only that... SIMPLE answers. He makes it SIMPLE.
"Simple huh? I wouldn't know because I don't bother to read his long-winded posts, they make my brain fall asleep
"No ! I saw it by watching astrally....
...your previous posts"Thought as much
-
@Ansuz Aleph said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"Nuit is credited with saying, "there is no other God than me, and my lord Hadit."I believe the emphasis should be on the word "and" and the fact that "God" is singular."
Not just the plural/singular play, it's also very interesting that Nuit is referring to herself as a "God" and not a "Goddess." Perhaps because of the interplay involving Hadit?
I also wonder, if this means that a Thelemic worldview would be compatible with something like Pantheism."
to me - both become 'God' because Nuit would represent the order of an infinite number of hadits. The collection of sentient intelligence through eternity and it's harmony into love and will is the only thing 'God' can be, the union of all.
-
Well, being a pretty well not well versed student of this Path, through all of the readings of this post I still come with only one answer which to me seems efficacious. The only worthy words in the bible- and I admit to paraphrasing to the point of inserting my own word; ..."Behold- Humanity has become As One Of Us..." from this I would move on to a quote by AC, of which I do not have it exactly or a referance, but I read it a couple days ago, it goes something like this ..."After one has examined all of the gods and systems one realises they they have only found theirself..." So I find that rather than fretting over addressing a particular deity, I focus on the fact that at some point, I may see only faintlythe aspects of the diety which I wish to see. And ultimately in focusing in these beings- their fullness only represents my ultimate goal of Ipsissmus. praying and devotional service to myself? Blasphemy? Heresy? Maybe- but it appears to me that if these beings have achieved the status we seek in them- they would far and away rather Associate with Fellows and Co-Equals; than groveling serfs who cannot see themselves free from the SlaveGods. Therefore "Do what thou wilt" becomes something far differant from the Libertine foolishness which hints that any foolish action is in the future unaccountable- but that our actions should mimic the highest valors in purpose of those dieties whose alliance we seek. Jesus, for what it is worth stated"...Ye are Gods..." which clearly insinuates, we already have the innate powers within us as Co_Creators, therefore Act like it. (please don't hurt me)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"As best I can tell, this is the answer to your question:
Nuit is credited with saying, "there is no other God than me, and my lord Hadit."
I believe the emphasis should be on the word "and" and the fact that "God" is singular."
Both Nuit and Hadit are one and the same. They are Elohim and His Image (=Elohim). Elohim is female, oxygen and represented by Pisces, a water sign. When we first encounter Elohim in Genesis His face is over the waters. Pisces is the last sign of the zodiac. The Image of Elohim is male, hydrogen and represented by Aries, a fire sign. Aries is the first sign of the zodiac. Elohim is both beginning and end and being hydrogen and oxygen is represented through water hence the flood, ocean references, fish, river of life, baptism etc. After the fifth day Elohim says "Let us create man in our Image". He uses the plural to convey the duality. After the creation of man in Genesis 1:27 Elohim becomes known as "Lord God" in the King James Version, contrasting with just "God" in the first chapter. It is to distinguish between man created in "his own Image" (and therefore can take the title "Lord") which is singular, and Elohim (Lord God) who is plural.
Nuit = Hadit = Elohim. "There is no other God than me" is the first commandment.
-
@justin said
"After the creation of man in Genesis 1:27 Elohim becomes known as "Lord God" in the King James Version, contrasting with just "God" in the first chapter. It is to distinguish between man created in "his own Image" (and therefore can take the title "Lord") which is singular, and Elohim (Lord God) who is plural."
Actually, it is generally thought in the biblical scholarly community that this is because the two creation stories are from two different traditions, one in which God was known as El (of which Elohim is an unusual plural form) and one in which it was known as YHVH. The King James translators, following Jewish interpretation, simply rendered these as two titles of God (God and Lord God), but more recent scholarship (late 19th century to the present) has pretty definitively split the Torah into four major, and a few minor, sources which were amalgamated together in order to unify a number of disparate nomadic tribes into one people: the Israelites.