@Takamba said
"My thoughts worth sharing (???).
Not all "magick" involves Encochian, Hebrew, Wands, Swords, and the like. Some magick involves keyboards, guitars, and such. Some magick involves corporate labels. Some magick involves food. Some magick involves medicine. Some magicians look like janitors too. Part of the "problem" you may be seeing may be the problem of your limits of seeing.
And defining.
What is an Adept? Are we only defining that word under the Golden Dawn's umbrella? Well, then they all look like Golden Dawn styled adepts and not other! Of course! But if you say to yourself "Paul McCartney could be an Adept and what would we know of that?" Paul M may or may not ever given a Masonic grip or passkey, but he's responsible for a great deal of Thelemic impact on the world (not to mention the rest of the dog show, JohnGeorgeRingo). Or maybe it was John all along who was the true adept and mystic and Paul just followed along like George.
Maybe there are adepts out their in all sorts of fields making all sorts of harvest. Maybe psychology is filled with adepts and we just don't know because they stay in their field. Maybe NASA is working with a few adepts and "Adepts," and maybe they just don't think about oogy boogy stuff, just sciency stuff. I don't know.
Or according to one kind of reconning I've encountered, and am holding some stock in, if we go from the very beginning and we dare imagine measuring unto the very end, we will all become adepts and we will all become as one and we will all become. And it will be done.
What say you to that?"
Indeed, I haven't defined what being an Adept means. For now let's stick with the Golden Dawn kind of Adepts, i.e. those who were initiated in this or that magical order and reached what that order defines as Adepthood.
So as you mentioned, some people might have had the equivalent experiences of Adepts, and then just stayed in their field, without trying to get others into the neighborhood of the Adepts, so to speak.
But from your experience with magical orders, how many initiated Adepts weren't influenced by their Adepthood to the degree that it became the main subject of their creative work?
@seekinghga said
"
"being a wolf among sheep can feel nice sometimes, but then again, wolves should be traveling in packs, and so the wolf is trying to get others into wolfhood, so to speak."
This is an inaccurate way of seeing things, FY. "Pack of wolves" serves as a faulty metaphor. Adepthood, in the technical sense of the A:.A:. represents the burgeoning dawn of real selflessness. The HGA is One, “I am alone: there is no God where I am.”; the angles from which this is conceptualized and shared to others are the source of the apparent multiplicity of Adepts. This becomes more obvious as one unveils more of the "Path" or "Tree" (or wtf ever) “within” themselves.
OK, my previous paragraph is neither here nor there! The drive of any serious Adept shares partial analog to this. Yes, the Adept wants to help others as you say, as the naturally expanding selflessness encompassed by that state shifts focus by default. The methods of some "adepts" (i.e. "work and publications") are subject to scrutiny... One must question "why?" Books are helpful to an extent...
Solvitur ambulando."
You're right, sorry for the faulty metaphor.
So let me make sure I got it right: did you mean that Adepts' Adepthood-oriented-work is never a waste of their talents because the others who are still stuck in the cave are in such a bad situation, that the Adepts must do everything they can to get them out of there?
@Hermitas said
"I just figure you only hear from the ones who are teachers."
Interesting! This could lead to a statistical method of "banishing":
- Estimate how many Adepts lived in the last ~116 years
- Recall how many Adepthood-oriented-work creators you ever came across
- Divide the result of 2 by the result of 1 (assuming that the result of 1 is not 0)