College of Thelema: Thelemic Education

I learned that you get "psychically" linked to an argument and its voices.. "Center of Pestilence"? Maybe.

Whatever that means, I got really tired of it.

@Uni_Verse said

"I found, the sound of the Rede "to be" delightful

Until :

@seekinghga said

"A mystic is anyone who meditates to experience the altered states of awareness that come about by suppressing the attention of the mind to a single thing, until the outgoing tendencies of that mind desist and there is left only the awareness of pure being, experiencing itself alone; time, space and causality are placed back into their folder of Conveniences For Linear Mental Comprehension"

This arrested me.
Planted doubt - is this all a lie ?

That is an issue, I perceive, regarding Mysticism.
Moment you go Prose-Ey , the rose becomes a Pose-Ey!"

“Is this all a lie?”

It certainly seems to hurt, and that’s probably more relevant than whether or not it’s “real.”

What do either of you make of it?

Nuptials?

Goodness, I’ve been away. I didn’t know we were to the proposals already.

Yeah, I had an incredible acceleration of learning after my first formal initiation.

It wasn’t immediate.

It was experiential.

It wasn’t through the A.’.A.’. though.

Universal military draft? Or, what’s the intent there?

Mmmm....

I say..

There's no way to express what you imagine without scandalizing someone.

Let it challenge. Make people think.

But that's me.

"nor take the State in vein." - Nice.

"There is only one verse,
sung in infinite ways.

"Here!"
I come or came?
I sung!
To seeD the Way

God sings,
WE experience:
THE UNIVERSE! "

I’m so glad you came back.

Here's a related conversation. It doesn't answer your specific question, but there are some interesting things things there about the relationship of the aeons to the astrological ages.

<!-- l --><a class="postlink-local" href="http://www.heruraha.net/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13582&p=91855">viewtopic.php?f=4&t=13582&p=91855</a><!-- l -->

I don't personally have an answer for your actual question.

@FiatYod said

"
I’m not so sure myself"

Same

"Though I'm not sure that a violent resistance would be advisable (I guess it would just cause further, worse restriction)."

Excellent point. Whatever “army” would be first to suffer the illness - and possibly repeatedly for all we currently know for certain.

Maybe.

I read it as kind of indignant and incredulous - sarcastic.

Tone can be really tricky in this format.

Ehh...

I’m no expert.

I’m good with what we’re doing, but I can work from home with a relatively stable job even in recessions. Me doing my will usually involves me writing back and forth with people over the Internet anyway.

I do realize that both recovery from illness and maintaining financial security are both survival-level needs.

I’d like to be a good “ruler,” though, as I play my part in the American system.

I look to the human body as an analogy for society. When we get sick, the body shuts down. My body healing itself is a more fundamental priority than me achieving self-actualization.

But we are individuals. So that’s the other side.

That’s my opinion, but I’m willing to change my mind. Remember, I was re-opening the conversation for other perspectives. That’s the part quoted.

The brother here seems to have a passionate opinion, but he won’t come out and state it. I’m interested in it.

So far, I can only assume that it’s going to be something like, “We just need to get on with our business and let a whole bunch of people die.” But I’m waiting to find out.

Otherwise, he’s just griping about other peoples’ opinions without having the courage to state his own - to put his own ideas out there for criticism.

Also, why are you taking up for everybody all of a sudden? These aren’t babies. They came to play. Let them.

@FiatYod said

"
@Hermitas said
"People aren't going to have what they need to survive if things don't change before too long.

Change anybody's answer?"

So we have to wait and see "if things don't change before too long" in order to make up our minds (and then possibly regret not making up our minds earlier)...
"

You mad, bro?

Quit asking questions and speak your mind.

What’s your solution? Any tool can poke holes.

Back to the OP...

You know, all the protests to "reopen the economy" are making me rethink this a little.

It's certainly within one's will to do the necessary things to survive. Am I wrong? And it could be argued further that in our age, making money is how you do that.

The government money didn't actually go to small businesses. They let the banks decide who to give it to, and people like dentists and other truly small businesses got nothing. They don't make the banks as much money, so they didn't get anything. And in the U.S., the $1200 stimulus checks are barely anything if you've got rent and a car note. Things could get hairy.

People aren't going to have what they need to survive if things don't change before too long.

Change anybody's answer?

I think this is a really interesting psychoanalysis of the New Aeon.

Only instead of the qualityless Abraxas, we have a trinity that may be reduced to personification and even nothing at all.

Dear reader, please manage your instinctive hatred of all things Christ for five minutes to see what is actually written here. This reflects Jung's personal spiritual journey, not yours.

But if I am to truly understand Christ, I must realize how Christ actually lived only his own life, and imitated no one. He did not emulate any model.

If I thus truly imitate Christ, I do not imitate anyone, I emulate no one, but go my own way, and I will also no longer call myself a Christian. Initially, I wanted to emulate and imitate Christ by living my life, while observing his precepts. A voice in me protested against this and wanted to remind me that my time also had its prophets who struggle against the yoke with which the past burdens us. I did not succeed in uniting Christ with the prophets of this time. The one demands bearing, the other discarding; the one commands submission, the other the will. How should I think of this contradiction without doing injustice to the either? What I could not conjoin in my mind probably lends itself to living one after the other.

Carl Jung. The Red Book: A Reader's Edition. p. 332.

Two things:

1. He seems to describe his idea of "imitating Christ" in a thoroughly Thelemic fashion.

2. His description of not being able to "conjoin" Christ with the prophets of his time (read: Nietzsche) but having instead to "[live] one after the other," seems to express, imperfectly, the concept of walking in one's True Will - alternating back and forth between the expression of Chesed and Geburah according to one's Will in the moment.

Thoughts?

Expected vitriol?

TL;DR: Jung had some interesting visions in which a character named "Philemon" preached to the unfulfilled, wandering dead. Some of the things Philemon explained to Jung seem to reflect the arrival of the New Aeon, at least in cause if not perfectly in substance. This was in 1916.

Some background on the text: gnosis.org/library/7Sermons.htm

When all the clamor had passed, I turned to Philemon and exclaimed:

"Pity us, wisest one! You take from men the Gods to whom they could pray. You take alms from the beggar, bread from the hungry, fire from the freezing."

Philemon answered and said, "My son, these dead have had to reject the belief of the Christians and therefore they can pray to no God. So should I teach them a God in whom they can believe and to whom they can pray? That is precisely what they have rejected. Why did they reject it? They had to reject it because they could not do otherwise. And why did they have no other choice? Because the world, without these men knowing it, entered into that month of the great year where one should believe only what one knows.

That is difficult enough, but it is also a remedy for the long sickness that arose from the fact that one believed what one did not know. I teach them the God whom both I and they know of without being aware of him, a God in whom one does not believe and to whom one does not pray, but of whom one knows."

. . . .

"It appears," I replied, "as if you teach a terrible and dreadful God beyond measure, to whom good and evil and human suffering and joy are nothing."

"My son," said Philemon, "did you not see that these dead had a God of love and rejected him? Should I teach them a loving God? They had to reject him after already having long since rejected the evil God whom they call the devil. Therefore they must know a God to whom everything created is as nothing, because he himself is the creator, and everything created, and the destruction of everything created.

Have they not rejected a God who is a father, a lover, good and beautiful? One whom they thought to have particular qualities and a particular being? Therefore I must teach a God to whom nothing can be attributed, who has all qualities and therefore none, because only I and they can know such a God."

Carl Jung. The Red Book: A Reader's Edition. pp. 518-519.

Two things:

1. It seems to me that Philemon characterizes the New Aeon very well as humanity entering "into that month of the great year where one should believe only what one knows." Your thoughts?

2. In context, Philemon is describing the gnostic supreme deity "Abraxas," whom Jung described elsewhere by saying, "...Abraxas, a made-up name meaning three hundred and sixty five . . . He was a time god." To me, Abraxas would seem to be the symbol needed if the three Thelemic deities were united into one deity, representing all... and nothing. Maybe some points of discussion there - a way of saying that in a more precisely Thelemic way. Your thoughts?

Anyway, it's a fascinating read. I woke up early this morning and was perusing my underlined sections over coffee. There are passages in it that floor me.

@LD330 said

"I want agon to stop."

Then everything stagnates and dies.

Don’t let the door knob hit you in the ass on the way out.

Lon Milo Duquette is reading a chapter from his book My Life With the Spirits everyday at 10AM Pacific on Facebook.

The "Evocation of Orobas" is Chapter 15.

He's currently on Chapter 18, "Israel Regardie and the Exorcism of Garkon."

You can go back and listen to any chapter you miss.

I read the book a long time ago. I forgot how interesting it was.

" Well, when you were trying to imagine such a Will, did you assume that everybody has Internet access?"

I’ll tell you my actual thoughts..

We’re free to learn.

True Will, freed from the lust of result... I see no reason why it could not adapt to the current, relatively temporary demands - IF it was free of the lust of result. As such, it could adapt or be patient.

But regardless, we are free. We can claim our rights as long as we are willing to accept the karma and learn from it. But I would see it as involving the lust of result - as well as probably someone who didn’t truly yet understand their will.

As I said, we are free to learn.

Those are really all of my thoughts.