College of Thelema: Thelemic Education

@Alrah said

"Well, it's certainly a very exciting time for math and physics Puck.

It remains to be seen what reaction the magical/occult world will have to it. Any predictions? "

93,

It'll have no bearing on the occult, other than us continuing to say that as science gets more stuff figured out it seems to be replicating the insights of occultism, to which they will reply with Frazer science is magick that is proven to work and magick is an attempt at science that fails. They will only acknowledge the parts of existence that fit into their boxes, while we will always be pushing the envelope and adding things to our ontologies.

Once we knew reason was just one of many tools for dealing with reality. Only some parts of our experience are susceptible to it, and we used to know that. Now we might give it lip-service, but we have gotten so excited with how well reason has worked in the realm where it works that we decided to act like nothing else exists. Hence literature, philosophy, the arts, relationships, spirituality, and love, since none of them are amenable to logic, have been devalued and generally degraded. Last night I had a colleague, an old and dear friend, try to complain that "romance just doesn't seem rational to me" (as if she were the only one) and try to engage in cost-benefit analysis of her love-life. And this is from an occultist and Thelemite!

As far as an increase in magickal understanding due to a UFT...most likely not, considering we already have one that includes the spiritual and physical...it's called the Qabalah.

93, 93/93

93,

I'm a math person and was studying mathematics before I got sucked into the philo dept. via formal logic. I understand much of it, and looked at it when it first surfaced a couple of years ago.

The basic formulation is one part analysis, one part mathematical proof, and one part prediction. It says that by mapping the observed recurrences of certain patterns at various topological scales onto an extremely broad ring (an algebra including addition and multiplication), you can both see and predict explicit symmetries.

The upside of this is that if it is true then a UFT is possible, which is one of those debatable issues. The topological symmetries will become apparent at each scale, presenting a meta-symmetry and allowing a single theory to describe all of them. The downside is that it is a bit tail-swallowing...in order to use the symmetries as the theory states we need to first find them at each scale, which is tantamount to finding the UFT in the first place because part of the problem is the Standard Model has blind spots...places it doesn't know how to look at or in principle can't look at. A UFT closes those blind spots.

It does, however, point out new places to look along with the predictions, so this might not be an issue. Already a new symmetry (Golden Ratio) was discovered on the quantum scale, so it looks promising. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107143909.htm

As far as I can tell, the math works. I was never into Lie algebras, really, but I knew about them and I was into topology.

93, 93/93

@Alrah said

"
@hepuck said
"93,

Drugs, in my experience, are windows, not doors. The Divine is not a molecule...or It's all molecules, plus some other stuff.

93, 93/83"

Sure, but if Aldous Huxley had written 'The Windows of Perception' then who would have bought tickets to see The Doors?

Have you read that btw? I love reading records of very earnest young men, (and if it's Victoriana all the better), and thier experiments with various substances imported from the far reaches of the British empire. They're so sweet! lol."

93,

Ah, we share this! Yes, I have read The Doors of Perception. The edition I owned had all these photographs of spiderwebs spun by spiders on acid. I too love the earnestness of that era...being blase is so boring.

93, 93/93

93,

Drugs, in my experience, are windows, not doors. The Divine is not a molecule...or It's all molecules, plus some other stuff.

93, 93/83

@Alrah said

One of the most interesting new additions to the mystical path is a plethora of tools, toys and generally new fangled inventions. In particular - the skill of remove viewing, applying as it does the scientific method to psychic experimentation. Remote viewing is a term for various techniques for the psychic evaluation of a target, performed blind, and subject to scientific verification after a session.

I found learning remote viewing techniques very helpful, especially when practising to disengage the ego from the work. They are also very demanding and require a student to develop thier resources. As one lady put it - 'after you've worked to be able to hit a target from a blind reference number, that is held on a computer, and encoded in a series of ones and noughts, then the astral is a doddle...

So - what I wanted to ask was... What useful new techniques have you found that aren't part of the traditional corpus of mystery lectures and hermetic unfolding?

93,

1. Viral use of sigils and words of power via social media.
2. Back in my IRC/(Z)Cluster days some of us used some routing techniques to cast a circle around the better part of the northern hemisphere. I don't recall why we wanted to do that, but it was pretty neat. We also did the same thing for virtual rituals...setting up particular servers we were connecting through for doing directional work, etc.
3. I once did the whole "Identify-Objectify-Banish" technique, and for the banishing part I made a texture out of the sigil of the spirit and made that texture into a skin for an Unreal Tournament bot. I played deathmatch with it as the banishing.
4. I have experimented a great deal with frequency and tone generators. The Temple of Set actually has some good material on that if you can stand sifting through their material to find it.
5. I have used random number generators as ways to train/test clairvoyance, as sort of an update of Crowley's system using the Tarot.
6. I have used table-top role-playing games as the basis of ritual work (can lead to too much crazy...abandoned).

I have a strong "mad scientist" streak which leads me to trying to figure out all sorts of things like this.

93, 93/93

@Alrah said

"
@hepuck said
"
@Alrah said
"Imagine a world where you plugged your free energy device into the wall socket instead of getting it from an industrial source...

I'm pondering the rest for the time being.

Cheers."

93,

But someone would still have to build and service those devices. So long as that was a private company, the problem remains...those who are favored and can pay get free energy, those who can't do not. "Free energy" won't be free because the technology to create/reap/whatever it won't be free.

93, 93/93"

They would be items that everyone wants, so according to the laws of supply and demand, once their market took off then the price of the tech wouldn't be much to buy and would be a one off fee. No different than any other mass produced piece of tech. Enought to subside plenty devices to africa and charitable donations to allieviate poverty. It's no different than computers, TV's. etc. There would be very few people who don't have one or the access to them. People would be paying for the labour and resource that went into making the devices, but the actual energy the devices produces would be free, and under the power and control of indviduals thereby loosening the hold of capitalist tyranny over thier lives.

People would still have to confront the problem of resources running out though Puck, but once energy was settled I doubt it would be an issue to spark a third world conflagration. That's the important thing here."

93,

Ah, I see, you are trying to address a specifically volatile problem. I was merely talking about the notion of wealth and the problems thereof. You are correct in this, in my opinion; a lack of dependence on oil would lead to at least the possibility of untangling the problems in the Middle East, or at least the problems caused by self-interested governments interfering in the Middle East. Some problems aren't about that, such as the Palestine/Israel affair, plus I also think that some of the cultural backlash within various radicalized political and/or religious elements is self-sustaining at this point...it got revved up too much to stop it that simply or quickly.

However, it seems your theory assumes that multiple companies would immediately have access to the technology, which would be unlikely, and that they would sell it in a portable form. What is far more likely, given the way things in the corporate, industrial, and technological markets work, is that one company would develop the technology, then license it to power plants to replace their generators. After that market was saturated through normal competition, then they would license to car manufacturers and public transportation firms. Those markets would take longer to saturate. Then the last thing would be licensing the tech to private firms who build new tech on it, which could then lead to portable, stand-alone generators. The shift off of fossil fuels would be slow and controlled, and the shift to the new technology would be in stepped stages to consolidate control by the firm in question.

Also, your supply/demand equilibrium assumes the validity of Smith's theories. Have you ever seen or heard of a true equilibrium ever really occurring? Does anything ever truly cost what it is worth, especially labor? The math works...if you assume things like perfect knowledge and rational players. But no on has perfect knowledge and no one is really a rational player. This means Smith's theories, as pleasant as they seem, are simply not made for the kind of creature humans happen to be.

In my opinion both Smith and Marx were trying to replace Christianity as the basis for culture. You've got an unseen, ineffable force guiding the process (the historical dialectic or the invisible hand, respectively), you've got something to have faith in (the wisdom of the state or the market, respectively), and you've got a new heaven and new earth (the communist utopia or the equilibrium where everything actually costs exactly what it is worth and all exchanges are perfectly efficient, respectively). Is it any wonder neither of them seem to work very well?

93, 93/93

@Arsihsis said

"While meditating on CCXX, III:12 early this morning I stumbled upon an interesting Qabalistic proof ...I thought I'd post it by chance that it might be of some interest to others.

"Sacrifice cattle, little and big: after a child." - Liber CCXX, III:12

cattle = Aleph; little (standard) Aleph = 1; big Aleph = 1000; 1 + 1000 = 1001 = JOY = "when all is equilibrated" (see The Dragon-Flies in Liber CCCXXXIII) ...in this light it is the aforementioned sacrifice that produces the child referenced at the end of the verse.

729"

93,

Bravo. Very nice. One of those gloriously simple and elegant qabalistic proofs.

93, 93/93

@Alrah said

"Imagine a world where you plugged your free energy device into the wall socket instead of getting it from an industrial source...

I'm pondering the rest for the time being.

Cheers."

93,

But someone would still have to build and service those devices. So long as that was a private company, the problem remains...those who are favored and can pay get free energy, those who can't do not. "Free energy" won't be free because the technology to create/reap/whatever it won't be free.

93, 93/93

@Alrah said

"
It seems as if we're wandering out the door from Thelema and way down the road to something rather more Star Trek. Thelema is such a great system, that there's a temptation to think that we can use Thelemic principles to engender a type of modern utopia of political science and economics - from some type of widespread investment into local and global mechanisms of direct democracy, or through experiments with workers democratics collectives (such as was seen shortly after the fall of the eastern block), and then there are some bartering systems that replaces skills for money, or the micro-economic innovations taking place in India. It's all very superficially exciting, although non of it looks like providing a foundation for a future trekky type society - not the individual carbon footprint idea, or the less popular science fiction theme of the information economy, and we have other rather more sinister concerns that take precidence right now...

Right where we are now - it looks like we are at the foothills of a resource war. If you examine the long term political trends and ignore the bs excuses the populace has been given for recent wars (that have allowed the west to reinvest in the army - the UK forces growing by 400% (for instance) by waging war on the cheap to maintain financial dominance) - you can see a clear correlation between preperations for a world war and the time that resources become ultra scarce. You can even see political adjustments occuring as new resources are found to be exploited. What the human race desperately needs is to work together in the same way that we collaborated on the human geonome project - wasting less resources playing prisoners dilema (or whatever - it's been ages since I studied the games) and getting every university and private/public research lab in the world working on developing a source of free energy.

Maybe when we've solved ww3, then we'll have time to focus on political and financial utopia, but not until energy as a resource is made an open system. If there was ever a time for people to get politicised over this issue it is now, and it's precisely for that reason that NOBODY is taking about it. It's a non issue, because the powers that be like nice easy to control sleeping sheep. Its not thier {shagging} planet however."

93,

Well, I am not so much talking about a Thelemic take on wealth, or even a utopian "star trek" one. Just one that addresses the issue of how the storing up and exchange of value in the form of wealth is inefficient and creates a structure for behaviors which is untenable.

Foucault was a modern continental philosopher who died in the 80s and said some very interesting things about power and security. Some of those things included theories about the relation of how value is stored up as wealth, and especially how that value is allowed to move and change forms through a society. He talked about how power never exists in a person or group; instead it exists in the relations between people and groups that allow possibilities for behavior. Some things are existentially unavailable to us as choices not because of who we are but how we are able to relate. A good analogy is that of chess: the pieces have no power or ability outside of the rules of the game and their arrangement on the board. So the secret, according to Foucault, to causing change is to change the modes of interaction, the structures of possible behaviors available to people.

While I agree with some of your direful observations, I don't think global cooperation on any issue is likely, nor do I think it is desirable. Any non-catastrophic "reform" of current structures will still carry the assumptions of the old structures with it. We can't expect that any model of the world that still has concepts like nations, corporations, employment relations, life predicated on economic considerations, etc, etc, etc. to really be any better, and I would argue that we don't even have the real ability to know what better would look like...we are just as defined by our position in the system as anyone else and our ability to see or conceive of things is similarly defined. The current tensions will most likely lead to more and more conflicts over resources, sure, but the problem is not conflict or the resources but how we, as a species, use and distribute our resources. Unless we abandon the modern cults of the dollar, whether the prophet be Marx, Smith, or Keynes, then whatever the root of the value stored up in wealth, it will create the exact same possibilities for behavior.

Let us say a technology for free energy is invented. Immediately there would be a refusal by whoever developed it to just give it away...governments, companies, etc would have to pay for the rights to use it. Whoever had the ability to pay would have limitless energy reserves, while those nations, companies, and individuals who did not would have to keep...well, burning things mostly. This would lead to new conflicts and yet more disparity in standard of living between the "haves" and "have-nots", in turn leading to empire, war, crime, and so on, at the various levels of interaction. So long as the underlying structure, the one built on the exchange of wealth in markets, remains, the problem remains that even given the best of technology and resources, people will then hoard, sell, rent, and fight over those resources.

So, in my opinion, the problem is not one of energy or technology. It's not one of the environment. It's one of seeing the world and the people in it as economic units, regardless of how your particular theory says those economic units should interact. The notion of wealth itself, as the storing up of value, needs to change to be made more efficient and to remove the notion of economic competition. As is, every exchange that is not barter is theft...someone gets more out of the exchange of wealth than they put into it. Just distributing this theft around doesn't help, because the very possibilities for behavior force an underclass, who is never collecting a "profit" for their exchanges of wealth (how much profit is the average minimum-wage worker making on their investment of time and energy? I would say they are taking a loss). So long as this underclass exists, the roots of conflict are built into the society.

Note I am not advocating communism or socialism, either. I am condemning, across the board, any and all views that cut up the units of society using economic principles. We made up the notion of wealth, we made up the notions of economics (regardless of school of thought), and thus they are inherently voluntary. It wasn't always like this and it doesn't have to stay like this. However, I don't think a reform is possible. There must be a collapse, a great "turning away" from the concepts of economics, before a new mode of existence can be conceived. People will need to come to revile the cutting up of society and people into economic units and dynamics, similarly to the response to artificial intelligence in the storyline of Dune...it must be seen that the human race made a mistake that led to its near extinction and that mistake must be enshrined as a great boogeyman. As the people in Dune had the commandment "thou shalt not make a machine in imitation of a human mind" the humans of the future must have a commandment of "thou shalt not make of thyself or thy fellows a commodity".

Thank you for your thoughts on the subject, I found them interesting.

93, 93/93

@JPF said

"As regards the above, that is an excellent training regimen for the super-sensitive. I've worked out something very similar myself, being prone to the thoughts/feeling of others.

The best thing I can recommend, like Jim, is a proper banishing. Nothing cleans up that old aura more than an LBRP done good and proper.

There is also the path of desensitization, which calls for reaching such a heightened state of sensitivity that one passes beyond sense as such. Self-flagellation comes to mind, or an overdose of LSD. But that is very "Pillar of Severity," however, and not for all. There is some risk of madness, but the results are quite permanent. The idea is to strengthen the mind against any sort of opposition.

Edit: it just struck me that Asana is a most excellent alternative to self-flagellation. Less risk of permanent scarring, blood loss, waking the neighbors, etc."

93,

Interesting idea...classic purification through pain. However, asana stops hurting after a while. Or at least it did for me. I always wonder how that works physiologically. Muscles ache from lack of movement over time and the sensation of a limb "going to sleep" comes from lack of circulation or nerves being blocked...both are very much physical things that it seems should not cease. But nonetheless, they did cease...do muscles move around and nerves and blood vessels reroute themselves? It could be hyper-attenuation, but then it would happen every time...it would hurt at first then fade. Instead, even at the beginning of practice, once it has stopped hurting it simply doesn't start hurting. The only way to get it to hurt again is stop practicing asana for a while, but even then the condition quickly returns upon resuming practice, with the pain fading after a few days. It just seems odd.

In any case, I don't find asana excitatory in the same way a hallucinogen or pain would be. It is, for me, an inhibitory (though energetic) state.

One wonders if Jugorum was meant to serve this kind of purpose in addition to the normal training regimen.

93, 93/93

@Alrah said

"
@hepuck said
"
Success in anything temporal is rooted in power and money."

Just a form of energy. Kept in one place it dissapates and stagnates. Dissapated it holds no force. So you might say that success in anything temporal is an appreciation of the balance between movement and inertia and the skillfull management of energy between these two states.

I think money and power sometimes have very different meanings to women and men."

93

Valid point. I actually argued something similar in a political philosophy paper a few years back. I would be interested in a little more of your thought on the notion of wealth as dynamic exchanges of energy. For example, all wealth, from a physical asset to an intellectual asset, is essentially "stored up" value; however, as you point out, this "storing up" seems to tend towards the dissipation of value at the most and diminishing returns on the invested energy versus the energy recoverable at the least...we are always putting more into wealth than we are getting out of it. However, as Foucault points out, this is because of how we deal with the notion of "security" and stems from some specific changes that happened as feudal societies gave way to merchant economies. This means, or at least I think it means (I am not a thinker of a class with Foucault) that this methodology of wealth is constructed and voluntary, which means we can change it. In what way do you think the notion could be changed to get a more efficient methodology of wealth?

I don't particularly care for money or power as a part of my personal goals. I'm primarily motivated by knowledge and art, and power over others usually leads to responsibility I would rather not have over the lives of others. I mean, c'mon, I studied philosophy in school and I am a writer...if I actually was worried about money I would have made some very different choices. However, without money many, many options aren't available for making choices, and the kind of power I seek is the ability to have and actualize more choices. Insofar as money can get me that, then I think I need it.

93, 93/93

@AvshalomBinyamin said

"@Puck

I wouldn't recommend that anyone choose as their motto: "What would Crowley do"...

He had many goals; some failed and some succeeded. It's not incumbent upon any of us to take up the mantle of any of them, unless it's part of our true will. Of course, had you known him personally, I'm sure he would have accepted your money and obedience whether or not it was your true will....

The problem I see, is that nascent religions usually start off with supreme goals of truth and personal development, but inevitably abandon these for more exoteric, tangible goals. In fact, the ability to do so is often the hallmark of a successful religion. The Catholic church has already been brought up in this thread. And I would be wary of any one who would see the Catholic church as an example of success. Because the success seems primarily rooted in power and money.

Of course, this cycle is repeated, and each new group seems to imagine that their "truth" is powerful enough to protect them from the fate of others. But this seems naive to me."

93,

Success in anything temporal is rooted in power and money.

As far as seeing the Roman Catholic Church as being an example of success...well, it depends on what you mean by success. Success as far as having shaped western civilization seems a check. Success as far as persisting as an institution and worldview for millennia seems a check, too. Sure, they have misused the fruits of their success again and again, from the Crusades to modern molestation issues, but their success as far as actually being able to accomplish what they wish cannot be contested.

If you aren't interested in organized Thelema, that's fine, to each their own.

As far as asking "what would Crowley do"...Crowley attained. He used specific methods to do so. Why would I not pay attention them if my goal is to attain? I pay attention to what all of those who have attained did and consider what they would have done. It's funny how this always seems to apply to magick and spirituality and not something like playing guitar or coding. I suppose this depends on your goals, though. I have no interest in reinventing wheels when not only have others invented perfectly functional ones but they have, in fact, progressed to jets. I wish to accomplish the Great Work, not feed my postmodern, oh-so-cool need to reject the very notion that other people may have known things I do not and that if I didn't invent it myself it is some sort of weakness or concession to weakness. In various other spiritual traditions we see gurus and chelas, masters and apprentices, etc, and in those traditions people actually attain. These oh-so-cool views, some of which stem from American individualism and some from the chaos magick current, simply don't produce the results, at least not for me (I did try, for many years).

93, 93/93

@Edward Mason said

"93,

When this topic comes up, I always detect a subtle desperation. It relates to the fear that somehow a particular Thelemic perspective will be imposed on us: we'll all have to memorize the same chapter of the same Holy Book, or agree on a given interpretation of RSPTOVAL etc. The thing that we need, then, is the realization that no-one but ourselves is going to limit us.

I do think if we view Thelema as an emerging *social *convention, there's a danger. I've always looked askance at people who exhibit a great need to propagate Thelemic philosophy, especially the kind that involves dogmatic libertarianism. That strikes me as the shortest road to the dead hand of imposed rule. I think of it as "The NRA model for social enlightenment," where you raise huge amounts of cash, and then intimidate all your opponents for not supporting total 'freedom.'

If, on the other hand, the goal is capital-E Enlightenment, the possibility of effective networks becomes much more likely.

93 93/93,

Edward"

93,

You probably would have spent a lot of time looking askance at Crowley then.

""O my Son, in the Promulgation of the Law lieth the Reward of our Chief Work, the making whole of Mankind from the Conscience of Sin which divideth him, and afflicteth his Spirit." -Aleister Crowley, Liber Aleph
"The open preaching of this Law, and the practice of these precepts, will arouse discussion and animosity, and thus place thee upon a rostrum whence thou mayst speak unto the people." -Aleister Crowley, "Liber CCC: Khabs Am Pehkt"
"Note also, pray thee, this word: "The Law is for all." Do not therefore "select suitable persons" in thy worldly wisdom; preach openly the Law to all men.' and 'All those who have accepted the Law should announce the same in daily intercourse. "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" shall be the invariable form of greeting. These words, especially in the case of strangers, should be pronounced in a clear, firm, and articulate voice, with the eyes frankly fixed upon the bearer." -Aleister Crowley, "Liber CCC: Khabs Am Pehkt"
"The special tracts written by Us, or authorized by Us, should be distributed to all persons with whom those who have accepted the Law may be in contact." -Aleister Crowley, "Liber CCC: Khabs Am Pehkt""

For more such quotes: ararita.org/content/promulgation-law-thelema

93, 93/93

I have considered doing a lolcat Liber AL, in the same vein as the lolcat Bible:

"Genesis 1:1 Boreded Ceiling Cat makinkgz Urf n stuffs

1 Oh hai. In teh beginnin Ceiling Cat maded teh skiez An da Urfs, but he did not eated dem.

2 Da Urfs no had shapez An haded dark face, An Ceiling Cat rode invisible bike over teh waterz.

3 At start, no has lyte. An Ceiling Cat sayz, i can haz lite? An lite wuz.4 An Ceiling Cat sawed teh lite, to seez stuffs, An splitted teh lite from dark but taht wuz ok cuz kittehs can see in teh dark An not tripz over nethin.5 An Ceiling Cat sayed light Day An dark no Day. It were FURST!!!1

6 An Ceiling Cat sayed, im in ur waterz makin a ceiling. But he no yet make a ur. An he maded a hole in teh Ceiling.7 An Ceiling Cat doed teh skiez with waterz down An waterz up. It happen.8 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has teh firmmint wich iz funny bibel naim 4 ceiling, so wuz teh twoth day.

9 An Ceiling Cat gotted all teh waterz in ur base, An Ceiling Cat hadz dry placez cuz kittehs DO NOT WANT get wet.10 An Ceiling Cat called no waterz urth and waters oshun. Iz good.

11 An Ceiling Cat sayed, DO WANT grass! so tehr wuz seedz An stufs, An fruitzors An vegbatels. An a Corm. It happen.12 An Ceiling Cat sawed that weedz ish good, so, letz there be weedz.13 An so teh threeth day jazzhands.

14 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has lightz in the skiez for splittin day An no day.15 It happen, lights everwear, like christmass, srsly.16 An Ceiling Cat doeth two grate lightz, teh most big for day, teh other for no day.17 An Ceiling Cat screw tehm on skiez, with big nails An stuff, to lite teh Urfs.18 An tehy rulez day An night. Ceiling Cat sawed. Iz good.19 An so teh furth day w00t.

20 An Ceiling Cat sayed, waterz bring me phishes, An burds, so kittehs can eat dem. But Ceiling Cat no eated dem.21 An Ceiling Cat maed big fishies An see monstrs, which wuz like big cows, except they no mood, An other stuffs dat mooves, An Ceiling Cat sawed iz good.22 An Ceiling Cat sed O hai, make bebehs kthx. An dont worry i wont watch u secksy, i not that kynd uf kitteh.23 An so teh...fith day. Ceiling Cat taek a wile 2 cawnt.

24 An Ceiling Cat sayed, i can has MOAR living stuff, mooes, An creepie tings, An otehr aminals. It happen so tehre.25 An Ceiling Cat doed moar living stuff, mooes, An creepies, An otehr animuls, An did not eated tehm.

26 An Ceiling Cat sayed, letz us do peeps like uz, becuz we ish teh qte, An let min p0wnz0r becuz tehy has can openers.

27 So Ceiling Cat createded teh peeps taht waz like him, can has can openers he maed tehm, min An womin wuz maeded, but he did not eated tehm.

28 An Ceiling Cat sed them O hai maek bebehs kthx, An p0wn teh waterz, no waterz An teh firmmint, An evry stufs.

29 An Ceiling Cat sayed, Beholdt, the Urfs, I has it, An I has not eated it.30 For evry createded stufs tehre are the fuudz, to the burdies, teh creepiez, An teh mooes, so tehre. It happen. Iz good.

31 An Ceiling Cat sayed, Beholdt, teh good enouf for releaze as version 0.8a. kthxbai. "

@Alrah said

"
@hepuck said
"
I read it a while back. I go through Sufi phases. It was very good, in my opinion."

This is my first 'sufi phase'.... can you recommend more please? "

Read the poets...Rumi and Omar Khayyam especially. Read them as holy books. Each poem is like the bud of a flower...contemplate them and let them unfold.

Skytoucher: I agree.

@Alrah said

"For some reason (or instinct) I've never read Idries Shah. I would see his name on the bookshelf, and his books just said to me 'read me later'. And it's been the same for all things Sufi, until today.

I was going swimming. I couldn't find a costume though, and I could hardly swim naked in the public pool. So I ambled about and wandered into a second hand book shop and picked up this little gem. First chapter - The Islanders, about the swimmers and the ship builders.

Ah, blessed synchronicities! I'm reading it and it's set a torch to my imagination in a way that nothing has done for a long time. I can't remember when I was last so excited about a book!

Have you read it, and how did you react to it? "

I read it a while back. I go through Sufi phases. It was very good, in my opinion.

@Jim Eshelman said

"
@hepuck said
"A little off-topic, but what are people's opinions of Jerry Cornelius period?

I don't ask to stir up any drama."

Your second sentence is contradicted by your first one.

Now, you personally don't strike me as as a troll, but I gave you the same answer I'd have given anyone else. Whatever your curiosity, how would you expect such a thread to develop other than in volatile personality terms?

Just a thought, really... not an administrator's tap."

Fair enough, you're right. I guess I was thinking people could just respond with some basic factual things, without drama, but in retrospect I think you're right...any drama is more drama, and no one needs more drama. It's just that my dad is in all my IRL occult social circles to some degree or another, and I was wanting to get an outsider perspective, avoid group-think, etc.

I apologize, I am not trying to troll.

A little off-topic, but what are people's opinions of Jerry Cornelius period?

I don't ask to stir up any drama. My dad is friends with him, but I have been loathe to plumb this particular resource because...well, frankly I don't like anything that even sniffs of nepotism or name-dropping. I didn't even ask my uncle who has a publishing company for help with my writing career for a long time, and even then it was only for leads, not actual work.

@JPF said

"
@Alrah said
"I used to have thousands of books... muse

I was very attached to them and I enjoyed both collecting them and reading them. Then I moved abroad and coundn't take the books with me, nor store them, and I had to give them away.

So these days I have thousands of books on my hard drive and I convert them when I want them so I can read them on my psp.

Have you ever lost your library Jim? It's very... unsettling, but it's probably on a par with getting a new name for a trasformative life change. "

My crazy Christian mother once threw out half my library while I was away travelling. She did it for "spiritual reasons." Jesus wouldn't want pagan literature in her home, you see.

I've never forgiven her. And yes, it was quite unsettling."

Ouch...

When I was 16 my girlfriend and I ran away together for four days. My grandparents, out of spite, tore down my father's drawings that I had up on my wall behind my altar (I have a thing for holy collage). They were on of a kind possessions, and at that time all I had of him. Now, I live near him and see him all the time (we are playing music together next saturday), but they were all I had then, and some of them were originals that he wishes he had access to now for business and personal reasons as well.

Still breaks my heart just to think about it. I can remember exactly how it felt to walk into my room after we came back and to them missing, torn to shreds, thrown in the trash.

I feel for you.

@A Shadow said

"Ah, that's more like what I was looking for. Thanks.

I appreciated:

"The reason for New and Full Moon versions is to acknowledge its cycle of change, just as the Dawn, Noon, Sunset, and Midnight Resh adorations follow the cycle of relational change with the sun."

I don't mean to over-intellectualize, but I myself find that if I don't structure my Magical theory I'm apt to get silly ideas or go off on a useless tangent.

I accept your theory. I wonder if a more Dionysian/'Artemisian' bent to lunar work might also be appropriate however."

I have considered that as well, and am not opposed to an Artemisian current. It seems to me, however, that the Dionysian current would be, because of the hermaphroditic and thus Mercurial aspect, would possibly conflict.