The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whoever posted them.
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Monday October 30, @04:33PM
|
...misunderstood?...my whom?...'there is death for the dogs'!!!...improve what?...IT!
but what is IT?...'die daily'...
what does it mean to be conscious?
is the plunge into the collective
unconscious been exhausted?!
everyday i conjer the bowl of copper suns
in the buddhas belly...
everyday i was, i will be, i is
the pheniox rises from the ashes
of what was, what becomes, and
as above so below
look into the mirror of chaos
when you see the infinity of i's
annihilate yourself
this is the consciousness
pure, without any thought
without religion, or magick
now the universe can begin
now the supersensonic sound current
can unleash the bull roarers
the conch shell of pure consciousness
a thousand gongs of golden thunder
the lotus in a thousand jewels...
besides the antichrist already
did his thang...
meanwhile back at the OTO ranch...*^*
when you see Osiris on the road
leave him the fuck alone+++++++++++++++
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Tau Aleph on Tuesday January 23, @10:40AM
|
By the way, there is an OTO ranch.
|
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Tuesday October 31, @08:52AM
|
On reflection, I should have called this "Designing the Exoteric." One of the differences between Christianity and Buddhism could be that the Buddha may have himself designed his teachings with a popular layer as well as the inner meaning. Not everyone may understand enlightenment immediately, but the Eight-fold path can be taught to everyone.
Christianity, on the other hand, may have had an inner meaning known to Christ, but the popular layer was initially designed by Paul, and fine-tuned by the Roman Empire, by which time it became the shell that we know today. (The inner teaching can be found in Christianity, sure, but it seems to be there in spite of Christianity rather than because of it.)
It can be said for Thelema that Crowley surely designed it to be taken at varying levels of understanding. On one hand, there are elements that are familiar to those steeped in the Western religious tradition: a sacred book, a mass, a prophet. On the other hand, his meaning is so distributed through his writings that it takes at least a year of concerted study to get a feel for what he's saying. And this is a Good Thing.
The downside, I think, is that exoteric Thelema can so easily become unbalanced. And then most of the unbalanced portions lash out against all the other unbalanced portions . . .
What can be done about it? Encouraging tolerance can help, I think. And in some way cultivating the values of the heart, instead of values based on mental interpretations of the writings of a dead Englishman.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Nexist on Wednesday November 01, @07:36AM
|
Fortunately, or unfortunately, Crowley died prior to implementing a popular layer to Thelema. His (rumored) work with Gardner & Parsons towards implementing a 'vulgar' Thelema met with failure. Then we have the rewritting of the Comment on Liber AL, which has finally seen the light of day with the new Law is for All, which I see as a last ditch attempt to promote some form that is understandable to "the common man", rather than the small portion whose will it is to be Magi or Mystics.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Wednesday November 01, @12:41PM
|
> Fortunately, or unfortunately, Crowley died
> prior to implementing a popular layer to
> Thelema.
Do you really think so? I see that he could have implemented an even more accessible layer than he did, but it seems to me that he had his eye on popularization from the beginning. Why summarize Liber AL with "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law," and "Love is the law, love under will"? Why come up with the practice of saying "Will" before meals? Why create a Gnostic Mass? These are so much more accessible than the idea of Scientific Illuminism, for instance, or of the nuances in Liber Aleph and The Vision and the Voice. It could be argued that the design of OTO is steeped in the idea of popularization, with a small but increasing esoteric component as one steps through the grades.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Wednesday November 01, @02:49PM
|
...as a person that performed the Gnostic Mass
repeatedly, i would like to say that even though
it was done before the public, and therefore perhaps one could imply that it was made for mass consumsion, and somehow that makes it tacky, however in my experiance, and in my lack of advanced Enochian technical knowhow, for instance,
that nevertheless; the mass was and is a powerful vehical to channel the 93 current...and by that i mean a ritual ceremony that brings through a more
intense rate of vibration or highly charged psychic opening for bringing through the values
of Thelema...that in my experiance, since i was performing the mass with my wife,( my soul mate)
was a source for estatic transformation, and spiritual growth, of course when we actually brought through the energy, other people around us at the grand lodge started attacking us for lifting the vibration, it's a lot more involved
then that, but that is the nut shell version...i also would like to add that just because somebody knows how to evoke demons, that does not necessarly mean they are the best source for Thelemic evolution...and even if some one has
an abundance of technical knowhow and is seeped
in lore, it still begs the question; what really does it mean to be a Thelemite?!
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Thursday November 02, @10:46AM
|
> ...as a person that performed the Gnostic Mass
> repeatedly, i would like to say that even though
> it was done before the public, and therefore
> perhaps one could imply that it was made for
> mass consumsion, and somehow that makes it tacky
Wow! I certainly never intended to imply that the Mass was tacky, or that popularization is tacky. In my opinion, Crowley is to be applauded for developing a system with different levels of understanding in mind. Also, I don't mean to say that something can't be profound just because it is also accessible.
As another counter-example, I might mention Whitehead's process philosophy: one of the least accessible attempts at spiritual expression ever devised. That's not so bad in itself, but it meant that the task of making it accessible was left to theologians, who impressed it with more of a traditional Christian agenda than Whitehead probably would have wanted.
With Thelema, one might have a glimpse of one's innate godhead the first time one reads The Book of the Law. But then, if one's relationship to Thelema became routine, one might operate for a while from the trappings of Thelemic cult: the Mass, Liber Resh, a photo of the Stele on one's desk, etc. But all of these things help to remind one of the inner essence that Thelema is really about, and this, I think, is as Crowley designed it. The epiphany can be self-renewing.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Nexist on Monday November 06, @12:53PM
|
I agree that he tried, & I even feel that it was his goal, but Crowley had the slight disability of being unable to relate with the "common man" which is why he worked with collaborators on various projects. Hell, Liber ABA was edited by two others to "bring it down" to its current level, which Crowley thought was comprehensible by the common mind.
I also agree that the purpose of the OTO is to apply the Law of Thelema to the Socio-political paradigm -- rather than teach Magick/Mysticism (this I feel is secondary, & in service to the primary goal).
|
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Tuesday October 31, @03:32PM
|
...back in my OTO days, when i was living in ye old Berkeley, i went into this small book store
off Shattuck, and the owner showed me this copy of
Comentaries with the blue cover and the golden
Stele of Revealing on the cover, in it was a hand written note by A.C.: it said something to the effect that to whom he was giving this copy that
they should get together and he(A.C.) would cook
them a "good hot curry", and it was signed with his characteristic phallic signature...i rather like to think of that dead Englishman as the person that is going to cook me that 'HOT' curry,
and share some whopper stories over wines that foam..world without end...Amon
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Maozim on Thursday November 02, @02:13PM
|
Aren't we speaking simply but of CHAOS and meaning? Whosoever draws menaing from the Law draws his breath but of Nu, and of nothing. Can this source degrade? No, only the reciever can degrade. And he that doth speak of the the words of degredation is none other than the Beast himself. Crowley was Thelema, schismed and real. What are we speaking of then when we speak of Thelema as a religion if not schismed malconstructions?
If we take meaning that Thelema is about the reflection of Nu, being the unadulterated expression of any thing, then how can this system degrade.
Yet There does seem to be some deviation between the image of Thelema portrayed by our Law and the image of Thelema portrayed by the relational rapport.
Thelema is mimetically impure. (Mimetics is the science of how information, or memes, infects a host and transmits its identity). I contend that the system was inherently befouled because it was raised by its father, rather than its scarlet mother.
Simply put, Thelema is suffering an identiy crises as it has no female role to identify with.
To clense Thelema requires an abandonment from the "Id ne perdurabo" of Aliestar to the "Non finem perdurabo" of the scarlet bitch.
I also contend that the host of the beast was an unfit vessal. It was impure. This can be observed most clearly in the original text of the Law, as observed by not only the handwriting, but the variety of mistakes from diction. Each schism of the goat brain was manifest as a deviation from the original text. His manifest imperfections caused the flavor of the law to become deviant. (It is still the Law, though).
I further contend that Aliestar was an imperfect vessal from the start, and, rather than being filled with continuous light, segmented his mind into infinite "rooms". Rather than filling the cup of Babalon with his blood, he filled it with Aliestar's.
I iterate further than his early success in achieving 8-3 was maya, and that, while he fully understood the intellectual ramifications of the attainment, he did not truely attain it, having too keen of an understanding and desire.
The desire to attain said insight is the key to its impossibility. In desiring selflessness, the only selflesss choice is self. By dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one become the Master of the Sinister Path.
And so I declare that Aliestar was not only a Master of the Left Hand path, but that the whole of the Law is simply the application of the Puritan nature he grew up with.
The Puritan movement was to clense the popery of the Church so that each might serve G-d with his whole being regardless of the meaningless ritual then associated. Crowley purified the Puritans into Thelemites.
And if anyone still thinks that the Thelemic current ain't degraded, I shall, nay, will, continue to talk.
Woo-hoo, praise be to Set.
156
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Mordecai Shapiro on Thursday November 02, @07:35PM
|
>Mimetics is the science of how information, or memes, infects a host and transmits its identity
Actually, what you are talking about is memetics. Mimetic is a word, however, an adjective meaning "characterized by, exhibiting, or of the nature of mimicry". You can look it up.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Maozim on Friday November 03, @06:05AM
|
Forgive the typo. I am prone still to imperfection. I am corrected.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Thursday November 02, @10:47PM
|
She saunters forth
through the greatest hoodwink
of all time...the greatest story never
told, this insolent world that believes
in God, going down in flames of gloom
in the lost distance the decompostions
of life, recriminations war of the image
the anecdote to the universe of knowing
like the specter of newspapers flapping
on the breeze, the dirty little secrets
the dilema is the paradox, the cause the
curse, we become irreconciled to
the mirror reflects two ways
the inherent contradiction
intertwined in subterfuge
the ingression of suppression
the sweep of subversion all before it
the last judgement like the mass
hallusination, perhaps you see beyond
the kind destruction
the mindless abstractions
the negitive transformations
the trite transitions that regardless
are in transition, for hell's sake
perhaps you see beyond the hysterical
idoliters of authority
that, nevertheless cannot see beyond
thier beastly noses, that cannot see that
everything is about the stability of change
i deconstruct the holy unholy images like
a day golw plastic jesus vibrater
the good and evil smoke curles around my
head of chemicals and chimeras
i enter the maze of forbidden words
i become a crow of concoction, slinking
along the arcane alleyways
it could change into anything, my own anti-self
my set of tunnels that i go down only to avoid
the white light at the end of ends...the beginning
on my own damnation of chance, my own flood of ink
blood that i gush forth into the cracked cup
like pleasure like pain that is P with an AIN
the fall of man the element of the demonic
glinting through the glass darkley
like the devil of language itself
the darkest to the brightest
it's tongue flickering down the hall of endless mirrors, shattered into a fragment of reflections
into a dime bag moon above the prostituted streets
turning into snakes of illusion of infinities
with holes of fire of infernoish spectacles
nothingness and spells of night she walks she
talks incessantly of primitave spiritual power
to the awakened ones of magickal utterance to end all words once and for liberato AL
the word is like dust in our mouths of crushed
poppy, the word rots before it can speak
the dust is like Calcutta ash that we hasten
to smuge our forheads with with an X for zero
the ash falls off as we nod in our nirvanas
of a thousand paradises and disolution
the morning star is niether here or there
so it makes the night malinger like a cheap whore
after the desert of revelation opens it's hidden door, the serpent of wisdom enters and exits
through a secret passage of whispers, what it
wants, it's final transformation, the nostalgic
object of worship becomes anything it wants
after the strange sun becomes black and comes
back again, after the crusified tears
of words go by in the terquoise sky
and it was raining dark birds
and holy yod glyphs
this the lapis event
this last circus of suppers
like the fallen angel goes down
the blazing hexagram in the impossible void of itself, vults opening in the lovecraftian landscape, dreaming the most blasphemous tales
witches and wizards line the eschatological path
as pan pipes play through the quantum woods
we identify the marks of the Beast
the occult swastikas or wheels of fiery light
we remove the succubus of the rock of ages
we line up for pure blood cakes of light at
the end of history, and remove the false pope
of pop thelema in our minds, the idiot's idiot
the religious propaganda like bad dope in a collapsed vein of ignorance, nothing is sacred
and only nothing, everything is suspect
like the rotten fruit of death masks
with phallic extensions grossly distorted
the terrible truth naked as fire reflecting
an upsidedown cathedril, the 'father of terrors'
is really the mother of horrors, is the noughty
rose deflowered in the torch lit alter of midnight
always the virgin of our thoughts, always
she rises the sibalant going of her shape
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Friday November 03, @09:56AM
|
> Crowley was Thelema, schismed and real.
If you mean that Thelema tends to mirror Crowley's characteristics, I agree. But I think that it is essential for Thelema to distinguish itself from its founder. Self-aware humanity is Thelema.
> What are we speaking of then when we speak of
> Thelema as a religion if not schismed
> malconstructions?
Is that a reflection of your feelings about Thelema or of religion? I ask because for some people, Thelema goes astray to the extent that it is a religion. But you sound as if you have made up your mind to put Thelema behind you altogether. Which is okay, but it means that you will use the word differently from those of us who have the intention to work with Thelema.
> If we take meaning that Thelema is about the
> reflection of Nu, being the unadulterated
> expression of any thing, then how can this
> system degrade. Yet There does seem to be some
> deviation between the image of Thelema
> portrayed by our Law and the image of Thelema
> portrayed by the relational rapport.
I think that is because you seem to want to say that Thelema is about the Absolute (Nu) only, whereas it seems clear to me that Thelema is about both the Absolute and the Relative (or relational).
> I contend that the system was inherently
> befouled because it was raised by its father,
> rather than its scarlet mother. Simply put,
> Thelema is suffering an identiy crises as it
> has no female role to identify with.
Of course it has female roles. But you're right in that they need to be brought out more into the foreground. And it's not too late to do this.
> I also contend that the host of the beast was
> an unfit vessal. It was impure.
Is there such a thing as a pure vessal within the relational world? One of Thelema's advantages, I think, is that there is no pretense as to Crowley's purity.
I do find, however, that every time I think that I've assessed the extent of Crowley's understanding, I'm confronted with evidence of his depths that I had not expected. Many of his shortcomings can be plainly seen, and it is to our benefit to discuss them. But I wouldn't prematurely foreclose an estimation of his value.
> I iterate further than his early success in
> achieving 8-3 was maya
I think I see what you mean here. Obviously, he had unresolved personality conflicts that manifested as partial understanding. And yet, I suspect that one doesn't necessarily have to get one's Yetziratic house in order before attaining the supernals. His subsequent life might serve as an object lesson in the desirability of doing so, however.
> The desire to attain said insight is the key to
> its impossibility. In desiring selflessness,
> the only selflesss choice is self. By
> dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one become
> the Master of the Sinister Path.
Um, you're from the Temple of Set, right?
> The Puritan movement was to clense the popery
> of the Church so that each might serve G-d with
> his whole being regardless of the meaningless
> ritual then associated. Crowley purified the
> Puritans into Thelemites.
Now, that's a workable formulation.
> And if anyone still thinks that the Thelemic
> current ain't degraded, I shall, nay, will,
> continue to talk.
I'll listen if you will.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Maozim on Friday November 03, @11:20AM
|
Let me first begin by stating that I am not affiliated with the temple of Set, but rather the manifestation of the child the raping of Set by Artemis, the curruption of Innocence.
I don't believe in *a* Thelemic movement any more than I believe in *an* universe, for the same reasons. If we construct an universe, then it is by definition everything that is, and so is a closed system, only possible of entropy. To name the Thelemic movement an *a* movement does the same thing. Rather the universe is too big to exists. Although it does have a visible boundary, I contend that the amount of space simply overrides any relation of matter to itself, in the large. It is not a closed system, as the union of infinite open systems can not yeild a closed one. It is purely a poetic invention to declare that there is an universe, and it is less grounded in fact to state that there is a Thelemic religion. Rather we have a complex of open systems that can only be subjected to true entropy (in the permenent sense), if they are to be considered to be unified.
<If you mean that Thelema tends to mirror Crowley's characteristics, I agree. But I think that it is essential for Thelema to distinguish itself from its founder. Self-aware humanity is Thelema. >
I agree, but isn't that tendancy to mirror Crowley about as contrary to the Law as can be? I myself am, of course, guilty of this.
<Is there such a thing as a pure vessal within the relational world? One of Thelema's advantages, I think, is that there is no pretense as to Crowley's purity. >
Thelema isn't about the relational world. Thelema is about manifesting an absolute, and destroying any comprimise. I disagree strongly about the pretense of purity, although it is a different kind of purity. Although it certainly isn't ever stated that he is perfect, can we honestly believe that the Thelemic religion (which is the original thread) doesn't truely act as if he were the Christ child, raised rather by a harlot than the virgin? The specific qualities of his purity in this regarg are his flaws. Which I think is the problem. We model ourselves after his role.
I have often pondered the nature of his "unresolved personality conflicts" and the reincarnation of those traits within the Thelemic body. His mind was so compartmentalized it is hard to deal with him as a whole, like the universe analogy prior. I contend that any interpretation of the Thelemic religion, good or ill, probably was first manifest within him, as such each Thelemite is the reincarnation of a splinter of thought. His water spilled, and froze, and born were we, and magnified, each upon his nature.
So what then our future? Is there ascendance?
<> The desire to attain said insight is the key to
> its impossibility. In desiring selflessness,
> the only selflesss choice is self. By
> dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one become
> the Master of the Sinister Path.
Um, you're from the Temple of Set, right? >
One can not be selfless if one does not exist. What could the Boddhisatvas be but Master of the Left Hand path, for they are, and are not.
The degree of Magus is traditionally only thought to be attainible by the knowledge of the Word.
And there's only one word an Aeon. So if one attains the grade (what a silly sentance) of magus, one must either speak the word of the Aeon, or reject it, causing a new Word to be formed. This can not be done selflessly. If one truely did spill out all of one's blood, one could hope only (another silly sentance) to be the re-manifestation of the prior Magus. Spill a drop of blood a day for three score and ten years, and you will spill far more blood into Babalon's cup than spilling all thy blood at once. I am not suggesting that one reserve one's blood, save but for that last drop. By the time the choice is "offered", it will be the most impossible thing to save that drop, it is the truely selfless choice. For how can the dogs be trained if not in the kennel?
>> I iterate further than his early success in
>> achieving 8-3 was maya
>I think I see what you mean here. Obviously, he had unresolved personality conflicts that manifested as partial understanding. And yet, I suspect that one doesn't necessarily have to get one's Yetziratic house in order before attaining the supernals. His subsequent life might serve as an object lesson in the desirability of doing so, however.<
I also point to Achad here as another object lesson (his magus/ippisimus revelations are actually prior to Chokmah).
One doen't need to clean house before attainment, and, I actually think that one shouldn't. But it must be done at some point. I reccomend attaining the unbiased veiw point bfore fixing everything, as you really need it. One must confront not only the issues one has, but all the issues one has ever had. I'll get a little biographical here.
After attaining Knowledge and Conversion, I ritually ingested a combination of psilocybin and ketamine, the latter I had never consumed, and have not repeated yet, if ever. I came from that glory. As the ketamine forced dissasociation, the more modern points my brain were turned off. I was brought back to the brain of my childhood, infancy really, as those programs were still existant, just inactive. My spirit was filtered through impure means, and I was unabe to cope with the state of being I was in. And I fell from Heaven to Hell, and was broke, and died weeping.
This is something that my current brain would not have done, but my unstructured infant mind was unable to comprehend the beauty of what I saw.
I believe that even the Magus could be reduced to Hell is he suffered specific brain injury, and had unresolved issues, even if they are no longer part of him. We must ascend not only in who we are, but in who we are not. Of course, I am being a little strong here, but any piece of perfection (which is every Thelemites goal, I think, tell me if I'm wrong) must be perfect in and of itslef.
>> The Puritan movement was to clense the popery
> of the Church so that each might serve G-d with
> his whole being regardless of the meaningless
> ritual then associated. Crowley purified the
> Puritans into Thelemites.
>Now, that's a workable formulation.
So, who wants to start the Puritan Thelemic Church? And what would it be? The Gnostic Mass without any Poppery?
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Saturday November 04, @06:02AM
|
if i could say nothing
i would
if i could speak emptyness
i would say that too
if i was not who i am
i would not be who i was
if i did not love
i would not love
if laws were not made
to be broken, they
would not need to exist
rather a thousand lifetimes
are needed to fulfill this one
ah the word is blind but it sees
darkness, just like it is light
the word is soft spoken like a song
sung between meaning and what does
not mean anything, shall i say
we are made of will or rime
shall i stand back and tell lies
that i even know how to lie
or shall i tooth the truth
that is broken in the mouth
as if it had been bestowed upon me
nothing could be further from the truth
nay i say nay nay nay, only that which
i manage to utter in a gutter sun
only that which is stolen in the moment
like a poor chrushed flower in the road
like spontanious conscious seeing the fire
of a thousand ashen angels between the legs
of the most innocent whore of circumstance
ah what an image could be more pure and yet
befouled, this the holy moly of pure reflection
this scarlet wonder of bornless conceptions
child and yet all innocence is dashed on the shore
like a wave of ill lit green lamps of mysteriousness, itself about to crash on the
unsuspecting awareness of the mass mentality
who are we to dream when dreams have been replaced
with hells of words written across the cosmos
of 'what we are told to believe' and at the same
time are told that it is a total mistake to fake
what is real and what is unknown, who we are
to question what it is that is already madness
the most apparent component of the human equasion
we shall make mighty visions to hold to the stars
if i could say nothing i would, and you would be
the wiser for it my scarlet shadow...
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Sunday November 05, @10:14AM
|
> By dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one
> become the Master of the Sinister Path.
The reason I suspected you of being in the ToS is that you seem to turn the Thelemic account of the Crossing of the Abyss on its head (although not exactly in the same way that they do). Perhaps this hinges on what you mean by the Sinister Path.
> I don't believe in *a* Thelemic movement any
> more than I believe in *an* universe, for the
> same reasons.
I suppose that's consistent with your stance that Thelema isn't about the relational world. I once commented to a friend that Alan Watts only seemed to write the same book, over and over. She said, "I guess that if you're Alan Watts, you only have One Thing to say!"
But I'm interested in working with something that relates to our fulfillment as living, inter-related beings. If that's not Thelema, Thelema can go glisten in its eternal perfection and we can talk about something else.
> isn't that tendancy to mirror Crowley about as
> contrary to the Law as can be?
Good point. I think that's another area where Thelema needs work. It's true of most teachings that they effect their students in certain characteristic ways, but Thelema is heavier than most in this respect.
> Thelema is about manifesting an absolute
This seems to me to be a contradiction in terms.
> can we honestly believe that the Thelemic
> religion (which is the original thread) doesn't
> truely act as if he were the Christ child,
> raised rather by a harlot than the virgin?
Crowley sometimes acted as if he were, but I've only rarely met a Thelemic practitioner who felt that way about Crowley. Around here, we refer to such practitioners by their technical name: "creepy."
> We model ourselves after his role.
Again, I think that it's possible to overstate this. If you look at some Thelemic mailing lists, you might get the overview that everybody's being grandiose and insulting to one another in Crowley's style. But live gatherings of Thelemites aren't so much like that. Newbies sometimes go through a heavy metal "in your face" style of Thelema, but they generally get kicked in the ankles under the table until they settle down.
But it's there to some extent, yes. It's hard to find a Thelemite anywhere who doesn't have a taste for blasphemous humor, for example.
> The degree of Magus is traditionally only
> thought to be attainible by the knowledge of the
> Word. And there's only one word an Aeon.
I'm not sure that I buy that anymore. Crowley wanted to express the importance of his achievement, but his doctrine of the Magus downplays the importance of everybody else. His achievements are substantial enough that they don't require placing limitations on what is possible elsewhere.
> So, who wants to start the Puritan Thelemic
> Church? And what would it be? The Gnostic Mass
> without any Poppery?
Being a Karl Popper fan myself, I'm tempted to insist on keeping the Poppery in the Mass. But I know what you mean. For a non-Papist Gnostic church (that is still somewhat Poppery to my eye), you might look up EGnU. Best not to call them "Puritan," though.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Sunday November 05, @08:06PM
|
what does that make me a renagade Gnostic priest
or a pop out...?!
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Mordecai Shapiro on Monday November 06, @12:06AM
|
Frater Saturnus was a pop sickle :?)
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Tuesday November 07, @01:21AM
|
p.o.p...pan on pipes!:)
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Maozim on Tuesday November 07, @03:35PM
|
How about an inverted Crowleyan?
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Tuesday November 07, @07:39PM
|
how about it?:)
i am kind of an intravert
...but i will reveal this
once again...Crowley came to
me in a dream...he said to me:
"all prophecy means nothing"
kinda like Mister Natural:
" Don't mean shit"
well that is the inverted meaning!
jinnanta 217
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Maozim on Tuesday November 07, @01:12PM
|
>> By dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one
>> become the Master of the Sinister Path.
>The reason I suspected you of being in the ToS >is that you seem to turn the Thelemic account of >the Crossing of the Abyss on its head (although >not exactly in the same way that they do). >Perhaps this hinges on what you mean by the >Sinister Path.
> Thelema is about manifesting an absolute
>This seems to me to be a contradiction in terms.
I do love turning things upside down . . . but what can be gained without such inversion? The nature of Thelema (not that I'll admit this if pressed . . .consistincy is the doorway to restriction) is to my the expressing of an essence in every way, contrary and complimentary, but always beautiful, even if horrible, and full of boldness and lust and desire . . . my Word is Desire. For example, I find the 0=2 formula to be horrible, logically, mathematically, etc. Yet the same equation is possible to be formualted as the square root of -1 . . .not nothing, not something, both yet none.
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Xnoubis on Sunday November 05, @10:14AM
> By dissolving into the cup of BABALON, one
> become the Master of the Sinister Path.
The reason I suspected you of being in the ToS is that you seem to turn the Thelemic account of the Crossing of the Abyss on its head (although not exactly in the same way that they do). Perhaps this hinges on what you mean by the Sinister Path.
>> I don't believe in *a* Thelemic movement any
>> more than I believe in *an* universe, for the
>> same reasons. >
>I suppose that's consistent with your stance >that Thelema isn't about the relational world. I >once commented to a friend that Alan Watts only >seemed to write the same book, over and over. >She said, "I guess that if you're Alan Watts, >you only have One Thing to say!"
>But I'm interested in working with something >that relates to our fulfillment as living, inter->related beings. If that's not Thelema, Thelema >can go glisten in its eternal perfection and we >can talk about something else.
Thelema is absolute, and therefore unmanifest, but isn't that what the Great Work is all about? the manifestation of impossible perfections ?
>>Crowley sometimes acted as if he were, but I've >only rarely met a Thelemic practitioner who felt >that way about Crowley. Around here, we refer to >such practitioners by their technical >name: "creepy."
(LOL) I suppose I spend too much time online, where creepy is sheik, and not enough time hugging real life Thelemites . . . sigh . . .me and my damned will . . . Honestly Ive never even met a Thelemite I didn't birth.
>> The degree of Magus is traditionally only
>> thought to be attainible by the knowledge of the
>> Word. And there's only one word an Aeon.
>I'm not sure that I buy that anymore. Crowley >wanted to express the importance of his >achievement, but his doctrine of the Magus >downplays the importance of everybody else. His >achievements are substantial enough that they >don't require placing limitations on what is >possible elsewhere.
Usually I'd agree, but in this case I feel that there's a hidden truth for the wise, one of those thunderous ephinies . . .
>> So, who wants to start the Puritan Thelemic
>> Church? And what would it be? The Gnostic Mass
>> without any Poppery?
>Being a Karl Popper fan myself, I'm tempted to >insist on keeping the Poppery in the Mass. But I >know what you mean. For a non-Papist Gnostic >church (that is still somewhat Poppery to my >eye), you might look up EGnU. Best not to call >them "Puritan," though.
I haven't checked this link, but I was thinking more of a Protestant Church where we all sit around and don't do ritual magick, or much of anything, but symbolically restrict ourselves so as to not be outdone by the Gnostics . . .we'd randomly declare rules, and find all sorts of intellectual interpretaions about their purity, and how they were our will, sweet Jesus.
|
|
Re: The Potential for Misunderstanding
by Craig on Wednesday November 08, @04:11AM
|
we are at the tomb of cities
its mouth of ashes
or dry leaves
it rises its cheap idol
speaking of the dead
passing in the darkness
its fire casting biblicaly
perportioned shadows on the
far wall of the world
the night sky turns around
into the nothingness again
in the dead of night
there is truely only nothingness
and the stars
the master spell
takes hold of the past
rivers of charms and bees
birds and trees of eternity
the universe is just that
a poetic creation
the spin of dreams unfolds
its serpentine arms
the mind vanishes like a great ancient
and like an unknown image returns
madly dreams the nu perception
the initial spark where we came from
the deepest mystery comes
out the hieroglpyh, transformed
like a perpetual scarob
an amusement to itself
before the pyrimid
before the sphinx
the secret of Egypt
becomes transparent
beyond dead languages
at the thresholds of the invisable
the opening way of future seeing
down the Aeons, unconscious
recognition crosses over
feather of the heart
the intolerable image passes
through the subterranean corridors
a phenomenal snake object
always just beyond our reach
the serpent flame dances
on its wicked wick, the lit holy nihil
the vast memory at the beginning
from the past into the future
revolves, exalts merging into the other
always dreamed of or undreamed of
the robed scarlet shadows hover
we have entered the last maze end of time
and endless interconnected moment lingers
everything is sacred of nothing is sacred
|
|
|
The Fine Print: The following
comments are owned by whoever posted them.
|
|
