College of Thelema: Thelemic Education

^
"hilarious" joke didn't go over too well!

Thanks for your input, everyone. Googled a bit on the dangers and it's interesting. I suppose I shouldn't dive right into it.

I was just curious precisely for the reason that it really works and I was sort of thinking of cutting right to the chase and asking some Enochian angels about some things to see what they'd say. As much as I appreciate my current practices, it is not as if I have conversations with Padmasambhava. But, conversation seems fairly common with Enochian entities.

@Jim Eshelman said

"
@Redd Fezz said
"I really liked JIm's answer to my first post. I was hoping maybe he might have some ideas about my second post..."

Actually, I wrote a long answer to your second post, hit Submit... and it never showed up. Not sure what happened. But, unfortunately, I don't have time to rewrite it."

DOH! I see you indeed did reply to my first and second posts and I remember reading them, too. I guess I was thinking about my third post... lol, but you're probably bored of this already. I appreciate what you've given me already. Thanks, Jim. You are a kind soul... even when you're posting devil smiley heads.

@Iugum said

"I do have a diary entry, somewhere, from a few years back when working with the Aethyrs and I felt that one specific experience dealt with Dzogchen. I never studied Dzogchen at all but I remember this "being" spoke of the "Great Perfection" and was housed within a circular rainbow (a thigle?). I always check out my visions after they happen and I found that this one expressed itself with symbolism and ideas common to Dzogchen. I'm trying to find it but it could take awhile since these were written down so I can't CTRL+F and find my entries. I'll post it, along with my interpretation, when I find it."

That is correct. How did you feel about the Thigle? What did it mean, etc.? Who was the entity who gave you this symbol?

I don't mean to interrogate you, I am just curious. The symbols of Dzogchen are fairly easy to imagine almost happening by accident. The devil is in the details, etc. blah blah blah... I would be curious about what angels said if you straight-up asked them about Dzogchen. If they are like, "Huh?" then obviously they never heard of it.

@Asraiya said

"93!

“The fool doth think he is wise, but the wise man knows himself to be a fool” -Shakespeare

"if any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise” -I Corinthians 3:18

"Only a genius can play the fool
To madmen who deem themselves wise." -anonymous"

"...only on this now solid, granite foundation of ignorance could knowledge rise so far —the will to knowledge on the foundation of a far more powerful will: the will to ignorance, to the uncertain, to the untrue! Not as its opposite, but —as its refinement!" - Nietzsche

@redd fezz said

"
True, but this would not jibe with what I've read about the HGA from other sources. If the HGA isn't supposed to force you to do anything and here you are simply trying to drop your pen, but are being forced to write... well, that doesn't match up. I'm not saying it has to, of course. I'm sure plenty of people don't really care what other people say about the HGA
"

Was Crowley trying to drop the pen and stop writing? I have never read his commentary or confessions so I do not really have an answer to that.

Though, I would see it as important to question the "why" you would want to put the pen down (to use that particular example). There are times where you 'have' to do things that you might not want to do. Realizing what is keeping you back is the 'fear' of what might come out as a result.

@redd fezz said

"
But, if you take for granted that Aiwass is his HGA and so his True Will was to write that, I wonder, how then would you test the HGA for "truthiness". Typically, the idea that the HGA will not force you, flatter you, cajole you or make judgments is what separates the HGA from other spirits/archetypes/whatever. Without those signposts, I guess it would just boil down to a gut feeling or something?
"

I cannot say I am in contact with my HGA at all times, but...

There have been instances where for some reason I would feel a desperate urge or need to do something. Whether turn down a certain street, pick up a book... look in a particular direction. Then, further down the road it suddenly hits me : "When I did THAT, I was doing THIS", or "THAT lead to THIS"

Basically, as far as my knowledge goes it boils down to a "gut feeling." Not everyone communicates with their 'angel' is the same way. What comes to mind is Socrates and his damieon(sp?). Which, according to him never told him what to do but rather what NOT to do.

gmugmble, now that I am more into the book, I see your point!

he mentions 7 Guides... so, why he compares it to the HGA must be a matter of ignorance, I suppose (unless I'm ignorant about the HGA and there really are 7 of them!)

he does give a lot of "this is how it is" instruction. His advice makes sense (to me) and seems pretty sensible, but I can see how it might bug some people. If I try this method, I will definitely follow the advice here because it makes sense, imo.

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

@Law said

"I would think that its a proper inference to assume that since Crowley didnt always state his exact purpose, and that in the small instruction manual that comes with the deck it does say that the deck consists of white bordered cards, a OTO card giving the adress for contact and a WHITE BORDERED Unicursal hexigram card, that perhaps it is a real card and should be included in the deck, thats all I was trying to get at, Jared and his plaid pants excluded."

So... are you more interested in justifying that you thought through this correctly, or more interested in having correct information?

Yes, I can see why your thought patterns went down that particular road. But they lead to a wrong conclusion.

In part, this is because you had incomplete information. For example, you seem to think that Crowley added this card to the deck - he did not - and yo useem to think that all publishers have always had the card white-trimmed - they have not. You seem to think that the "small instructional booklet" was a Crowley creation or had some official standing - it does not, it's somethng that the publisher pulled together (and these booklets vary from printing to printing of the deck over the decades).

This was a printer's decision, pure and simple.

Hey Redd!

"Very interesting indeed! I'm not sure if I had taken the time to rewatch that movie I would've got all that, so I'm glad you took the time to explain it."

You are welcome. And as a disclaimer that is just one of many possible interpretations based on what I have seen and experienced in watching the movie. The metaphors seem apt.

"Now, I do want to watch it again! Last I saw it I was in my early teens and was watching it on regular tv so it was probably censored and edited and with the commercials, it just seemed unbearably long. When it was over, I just remember feeling bad, but that it was over my head because I knew it was supposed to be a great movie, but I didn't know why. It just seemed depressing.
"

I experienced that same thing, having watched it in my early teens and wondering is this really what Vietnam was like!? It was very violent and I had not yet acquired the time-tested tolerance of an adult regarding gory violence. [grin] So, I missed much of the storyline and is possible metaphorical references. It wasn't until my 9-10th time that the finer aspects start to gel. 😉

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Did Crowley ever give any indication whether or not he believed less-than-man could become man and thus "god?" Also, did he consider praeterhuman entities such as Aiwass to be greater, less than or equal to man?

@Jaivala said

"How does that Adeptus Minor perceive the objects. i.e. the world around him? I thought that he is the one, who perceives the the unity in the difference."

I could easily say yes or no to those words... I don't know what they mean to you. - I might personally pick words or phrases that say something very similar, so I suppose it's right enough (but I'm guessing!).

I would suggest reading Crowley's essay on the Beatific Vision in Little Essays....

No, no. 😉 Water: condensation, Fire: expansion. Makes a LOT of sense!

Thanks, that clarifies it.

"AC defines "pure will" as "the true expression of the Nature, the proper or inherent motion of the matter, concerned. It is unnatural to aim at any goal.""

This is difficult to put in words, but as an artist or a musician, for example, or even when working with computer programs, when I go into "doing mode," it is like I've heard other people describe it as "zen" or "jedi" or whatever semi-serious, inexact term to describe the strange state of focus that is almost "not-thinking" where the artist/musician/programmer becomes one (in a sense) with his object or intention. This is most likely a more mundane application of "will," but there is some overlay here of "pure will" and "lust of result". If you try to analyze why artists, musicians or whoever feel compelled to do what they're doing, some want fame or recognition, sure, but there are plenty of people just driven to do something because they have to or they feel they were born to or whatever. And what they are driven to do is intermingled with the result. When the result is finished, there is a satisfaction that is not dependent upon the result, but upon having done the thing, like creating a sand castle which you know will only bring a fleeting moment of "result satisfaction."

So, in the doing is the essence of the doer. In this way, I was considering the above Liber L entries. And if I remember correctly, Crowley has said similar things about True Will elsewhere in relation to the "doing".

In other words, the True Will is geared toward a specific "direction" which naturally produces certain results and, along the way of that direction, there would be a series of results-oriented strivings all directed by an inner compass. So, the will is unassuaged of purpose and is delivered (in the birthing sense) from lust of result. For, if results-oriented strivings are not undertaken, True Will will never be expressed ("delivered from"). And, paradoxically, True Will is freed from lust of result ("delivered from") because one's grander Purpose, once discovered, exists whether or not any results are achieved, so it is not dependent upon results. Whether you fail to act in accordance with your True Will, the True Will will always remain. This is why the term "discovered" is used rather than "decide." You discover your True Will, you don't decide what it is. So, it is not dependent upon anything, but it is not necessarily expressed, either (for example, if one does not discover it, he is not aware how to act in line with it).

Makes some sense, I hope. I think it's rather cool (and I don't think I've just made this up, so I'm not patting myself on the back).

93
Redd Fezz wrote:

"Just visiting the OTO in Queens requires one to sign a waiver that basically entitles them to do anything they want to you and protects them legally in case of your death."

In case you choke on your cake of light or drown in your cup of wine?!? 😆

If the same was asked of me when I first attended a Gnostic Mass (assuming that's what you attended) it definately would have FREAKED ME OUT a bit I think.. But only a verbal agreement to participate, followed by a thorough explanation of what is required in participation, was all they required. The deed always reminds me of being a "virgin" at the "Rocky Horror Picture Show" where rumor has it you will get publicly f*cked instead of just humiliated slightly...

Wow, thanks, Jim. That last bit is startling! He is absolutely right about the fact that you can't but help kill things accidentally, too. I wonder what he thought as he shot those animals? Maybe that he was doing them a favor.

I am also starting to see the True Will and "let her rip" statements above in a much clearer light. I had a horrific dream last night in which I found myself in the middle of "nothing." I know my thoughts and practices led me to this state and it was totally unpleasant. The first thing I started to do was panic. Then, I started yearning for God, for comfort, please let there be something else beside just my own isolation! When no answer came, I knew there was no God (so it felt). It was devastating. Next thing I know I'm dreaming normally. It was as if everything hid behind a curtain and said, "You want to know what your 'True Self' is? Here it is: you're nothing without everything." Then, when I basicaly screamed for God and thought no God responded, what really happened was the "world" came back (world of dreams, that is). So, it was kind more comprehensible to me how empty everything is and yet how full the Whole Unit (Universe) is. It made the "drop in the ocean" metaphor very real. And if people want to personify God, I say let 'em. That belief can be quite comforting I now realize! 😆

Thanks. I'm glad you're helping me out again, Jim. 😀

ya drug induced is not bad whatsoever, i do it with cannabis a bit, but you have to be aware and know yourself, no you dont have to been in complete contact with your HGA, what messes people up is that they do that () and have issues, or it brings something suppressed out(bad trip) and can screw your mental and emotinal faculties for a bit. properly a person who know thyself and uses intoxicants to iduce altered states of mind are "psychonauts" but its not an easy path, like i said you have to be aware for many reasons of yourself in a sense for one so you dont get addicted, psychologically of course, you have to be a stable person enough mentally and emotionally to do the () anyway."

After many years of acid trips, I recieved little expansion of mind, but unless ethnogens are used in their natural state, and preferably under a guide/sitter, I don't believe you will get much out of them. I mean your average acid hound isn't going to medtiate while tweeking, he/she's more likely to tweek out on the plystation or some other nearly worthless(but quite enjoyable) endevor. I prefered nature, and though you feel "more" its still of little use. Ethnogenic use should be seen as sacred, and used for that purpose. I caution any and all greatly! USE ANY AND ALL ETNOGENS WITH GREAT CAUTION! Start slow a little at a time, effects differ from person to person and potencies vary from plant to plant. I've a few friends who shall never be the same, one who almost ran a screwdriver through my chest over an Iron Maiden argument. Just a warning, but as always Do What Thou Wilt!
In Light and Love
Dominic
P.s. I removed the line where I said Which enogens I make use of. In high doses even these natural items can have undesired and possibly permenant changes for the "unexpierienced".

Marlene Cornelius' work on the history of the various editions of Liber L/Liber XXXI and Liber Al Vel Legis/Liber CCXX has been revised and expanded and is currently available in a paperback edition (a hardback edition is forthcoming):

Liber AL Vel Legis: The Book of the Law. An Examination of Liber XXXI & Liber CCXX.

www.weiserantiquarian.com/cgi-bin/wab455/45141.html

@RifRaf said

"I was wondering how you (Jim) came to the conclusion that the name ZAX = Leo, Taurus, Earth? Z = Leo, A = Taurus, and X = Earth? Assuming this is how you would put this together, how does the lettering match with the Zodiac/Elemental correspondences?"

This has been gone over in a couple of places, including a table I put in No. 1 of Black Pearl. 16 of the Enochian letters are traditionally related to the 16 geomantic figures, which in turn have astrological correspondences. Crowley attributed the elements to the remaining letters. These became the template of his visions: He would formulate his "contact image" or "seed image" for the visions from the sequence or composite of these three ideas.

"Or is there an Enochian Correspondence chart or something I haven't seen yet?"

Apparently you haven't 😀

"Basically I am just wondering how you came to that conclusion because it would be nice to construct the same for all Aethyrs, that is, sets of Trumps to meditate upon to get the "feeling" of an Aethyr."

Here's the table. (Note that Crowley did a few of the visions without his references with him, and he made a couple of accidental letter swaps.)

A Taurus
B Aries
C/K Fire
D Spirit
E Virgo
F Cauda Draconis
G Leo (Sun in N. Declination)
H Air
I/Y Sagittarius
L Cancer (Moon Waning)
M Aquarius
N Scorpio
O Libra
P Cancer (Moon Waxing)
Q Water
R Pisces
S Gemini
T Caput Draconis
U/V Capricorn
X Earth
Z Leo (Sun in S. Declination)

HEY! You just got me curious about something!

There are supposed to be 21 Taras, which is exactly the amount of Tarot Major Arcana minus Key 0, which would kind of make sense because the Buddhist deities are supposed to be manifestations of the One, but not The One. That's an interesting coincidence.

EDIT: Found this article on the Star Atu/Key which says, "Tara, one of the most ancient of all eastern Goddesses, is still revered today in both India and Tibet. The name Tara means Star. The Tibetans to this day practice meditations honoring the 21 Taras. Since the true origin of the tarot is not really known some believe that the Tarot and its 22 major arcana had some of its roots in the meditational practice of the twenty one Taras. This practice is visualized with Jetsun Dolma, (Green Tara ) at the center and her retinue of the 21 aspects of Tara surrounding her.

This same ancient Goddess is also known in Latin as Terra Mater and in Ireland as the beloved Tara, the Earth Goddess.

Traditionally, the Star card speaks to us of hope, alignment with our higher self. It represents generosity and creativity. It stands for peace and harmony. In a reading this card sheds its light as a beacon upon the questioner."
heartofferings.tripod.com/Byraylene/id14.html

Thanks for that helpful pointer, Edward!

@BlackSun9 said

"
@Redd Fezz said
"I have just discovered that Stephen Flowers is not a reliable source, his PhD is a sham, basically, and most of his ideas can only be traced back to about the 1800's Germany."

Not true. He earned his PhD for a study titled Runes and Magic from the Germanic Studies Department at the University of Texas at Austin, which was and is still one of the top Germanic Studies deparmtents in the US."

His work is not accepted by scholars and established experts in the field. You may find a copy of his study, but he has declined to publish his PhD. This is because, I've been told by a friend of his, when he obtained that PhD in "Germanic Philology" there were no experts. His professor awarded it on the "strength of its depth" alone. Not it's content (which he didn't understand).

@BlackSun9 said

"
"This includes his guessed at "proto-Germanic" preferred names of the Elder Futhark."

Those aren't his guesses but rather the common reconstruction used by Linguists for determining the hypothesised "Proto-Germanic" language from which all alter Germanic languages descend. "

First appeared in a 1930-something book and have no official authority other than it became common to use these names. Just because it's commonly accepted "knowledge", doesn't mean it's true, as the case of Paul Revere shows. 😉

@BlackSun9 said

"
To answer your original question, no Crowley never wrote on the topic of the Runes, either any of the three traditions or the late 19th Century syncratic Armanen tradition. His exposure to the Runes was likely minimal as he had no connections with the Ariosophic groups influences by Guido von List active in Germany during his life time nor was he much of a reader in German by his own admission.

There is no connection between Aiwass and the rune known as Eihwaz, either factually or magically. Speculation along those lines will yeild only subjective interpretations of little transpersonal value."

As the moderator of Thelema93-list said, when I mentioned "Eihwaz" was not "authentic,":

"like Hadit? exhibit 666? unedited scripture?"

He makes a good point. Have you bothered to speculate, meditate or anything else along these lines or might you be jumping the gun about "transpersonal value?"