Liber 71 and thought metamorphis
-
In liber 71, it is statded that for adepts, single thougnts can be hindrances to advancement in meditation, with the magician experiencing samadhi by a thought that has run its course through a mind trained in psychedelics and/or meditation.
Could someone with a lot of experience please explain to me why samadhi of an original thought can hinder progress? Is it because the magician would pay too much attention to the thought and its full course, to end up in samadhi of the thought, when he could have had samadhi with no thoughts, that highef samadhi that is concerned with the 7th and 8th circuits of the brain?
Thanks in advance!
The word “indifferent” here implies “able to shut out.” The Rajah referred to is in that spot whence thoughts spring. He turns out ultimately to be Mayan, the great Magician described in the 3rd Æthyr. 2 Let the Student notice that in his early meditations, all his thoughts will be under the tamas-guna, the principle of Inertia and Darkness. When he has destroyed all those, he will be under the dominion of an entirely new set of the type of rajas-guna, the principle of Activity, and so on. To the advanced Student a simple ordinary thought, which seems little or nothing to the beginner, becomes a great and terrible fountain of iniquity, and the higher he goes, up to a certain point, the point of definitive victory, the more that is the case. The beginner can think, “it is ten o’clock,” and dismiss the thought. To the mind of the adept this sentence will awaken all its possible correspondences, all the reflections he has ever made on time, as also accidental sympathetics like Mr. Whistler’s essay; and if he is sufficiently far advanced, all these thoughts in their hundreds and thousands diverging from the one thought, will again converge, and become the resultant of all those thoughts. He will get samadhi upon that original thought, and this will be a terrible enemy to his progress. -
I think they key parts of the passage are "iniquity", "victory", and the last sentence, "He will get samadhi upon that original thought, and this will be a terrible enemy to his progress."
The iniquity in his mind, his current disparity with the universe, is both the motivating force for his concentration and the enemy. If he can pass this, up to the threshold, he will attain victory, Netzach.
If he doesn't attain victory, the iniquity will throw him back to the samadhi of the original thought. He will be back where he started: A dull "That's why" implying because and reason, which he is trying to move beyond.
He attained samadhi on the original thought, but the iniquity and the victory are still in disparity. As he is trying to progress, the samadhi of the original thought is not his goal, and the thought was (literally) a hindrance to his progress.
-
Thats what I am understanding it as, but I needed someone to english it out for me to read and grasp fully.
Thanks! -
OK. Crowley says that "To the advanced Student a simple ordinary thought, which seems little or nothing to the beginner, becomes a great and terrible fountain of iniquity". That is a fair point. The continuous bombardment of internal dialogue and thought that goes under the radar of the average person will seem like the feedback of a thousand electric guitars to a sufficiently advanced yogi. However, his point about it spiraling out of control should only apply to those who either need more practice or are ignorant to what their aim is. Persistent one-pointed focus is what is aimed at. Samadhi is... No, samadhi is... Here, let it be said best:
So she answered him, bending down, a lambent flame of blue, all-touching, all penetrant, her lovely hands upon the black earth, & her lithe body arched for love, and her soft feet not hurting the little flowers
-
@seekinghga said
"So she answered him, bending down, a lambent flame of blue, all-touching, all penetrant, her lovely hands upon the black earth, & her lithe body arched for love, and her soft feet not hurting the little flowers"
That verse can be summed up in one word: perfection.
The Perfect and the Perfect are one Perfect and not two; nay, are none!
Samadhi is when the difference between subject and object goes away. That difference (i.e. imperfection) is a statement or function of the mind. In dreamless sleep what has ever been encountered that is imperfect? Such state of sleep is a condition where the mind is temporarily subdued and silenced. Samadhi is a state where the mind is temporarily subdued and silenced, yet in the case of samadhi it is "under will" rather than from exhaustion.
Love, in the Thelemic sense, that is not "under will," is tantamount to spiritism, as opposed to the discipline exercised in ceremonial magic. This comparison is not equivalent but has the same principles guiding. Rather than Willfully combining the elements of "self" and "other" and thereby weakening separation/restriction, one places oneself at the mercy of the forces in their environment. Indeed, this is what occurs when our Love isn't "under will."