Welcome to The Beast Bay General Thelema Science Art Scholarship The Beast Bay website
 up a level
 search
 main


  Compassion is the Vice of Kings
General Thelema Posted by GM on June 28, 2001 @ 12:13 PM
from the cream-of-the-joust dept.

Whether or not Thelemites are chivalrous is a loaded question. Thelema does not need for its adherents to be chivalrous. Thelema is already, by nature, quite chivalrous with its own warrior code. The issue is whether or not Thelema deserves to be presented in the best possible way, to create an example of how that code manifests in true Thelemites. We believe the answer is a resounding "yes."

Medieval Chivalry was mostly concerned with horseback soldering. Webster defines it as a subject dealing with mounted men-at-arms. And so it was, during those days. But there are more than a few moderns, who insist that chivalry is out of the question without a horse, as though virtue is magically bestowed upon the rider by his beast.

It is interesting to note that so-called "Orders of chivalry" did not debut until late in the 14th century and did not take hold until well into the 15th. This is very important, because is shows that the chivalric orders were created in response to the decline of soldierly virtue which came with the discovery of gunpowder. Man began to slip back into the same barbarianism that had followed the Roman Empire rule so many hundreds of years before. There was an alarming shortage of qualified noblemen taking knighthood. Several efforts were made, similar to the modern military draft of today, to force the knighthood on people with adequate income, but this worked as badly then as it does today. The "Chivalric Orders" glamorized the knighthood, making it more appealing to the nobles that wouldn't cooperate otherwise. The assimilation of lesser nobles into the Order of the Garder in 1344 was no oversight: it was done out of need.

In everyday modern life, chivalry manifests in simple deeds, such as the acts of generosity, charity, kindness, martial valor, skill with ones weapons, bravery, and good manners. Certainly, the spirit and tradition inherent in the medieval knighthood are just as applicable, useful and desirable today as they were yesterday: Chivalry is a mark of honor, integrity, and courtesy. It complements martial distinction by romanticizing virtue and applauding courtesy.

The Chivalric Codes have helped to shape the ethical code that makes our Western society work. These will continue to serve us to evolve throughout the new aeon. One need not look too deeply into the human condition to see where these principles can be applied to solve current social issues.

Loyalty: To ones God, family, and friends. In the battlefield this meant trusting your comrades word that he or she will watch your back. Some times, a person's life can depend on loyalty. This is something that one does in service to ones family, tribe, Order and country.

Generosity: Not necessarily pertaining to things or money. It can be work. It can be giving some one the benefit of the doubt. Generosity is when we say to some one: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" or "Si Vales, Valeo" and really mean it. It is when you see the potential in some one by assist it to bloom like a beautiful flower by defending their rights and providing them with the encouragement to be who they are without compromise.

Manners: Having the knowledge that every action is a reflection upon ones personal deity, and having the pride and respect to manifest the glory of that internal creature to the outside world as a product of Thelemic work.

Honor: The warrior is obsessed with his or her death because that moment will define his or her life. But more important is to live rightly. Chivalry always has been concerned with right action in the face of difficulty. The very thoughts, words and deeds of a chivalrous person are, by definition, honorable. One must never bring shame to their name, for this name is the very legacy that one passes on to ones sons and daughters. It is your reputation and how people will know and think about you.

Chivalry is something which must be supported by action. Actions speak louder than words, and that is why no one takes self-proclaimed knighthoods seriously when initiations and teachings are little more than metaphors for individuals with a desire to play or further enforce their own weaknesses. In order to be chivalrous, one must display chivalry. Noble titles do not make one chivalrous. It is an egregore with the benefit of hundred of years: it is no longer a child.

A trained soldier without tolerance, compassion or understanding would be cruel, destructive and without self-control. If a person cannot have compassion for his or her brethren, then how or in what way would he love his or her God? For it has already been said that there is no god but man. Generosity and charity are marks of the greatest character, for the Prophet has also said that only Kings can afford the virtue and vice of compassion.

One only needs to look at the successes of the feudal orders to understand people's fascination with their mysteries. One is entitled of making some very phenomenal claims about the Templar Order, for example. They did, after all, exist for about 170 years; built most all Christian defenses worth mentioning; held property and interest in many European businesses, as well as producing a complex, global banking scheme which continues today. It was the Templars that pioneered checking. Those practical virtues are worth magically aligning ones self with. Nature abhors a vacuum: If a group of people become a vessel for these ideas, then the vessel becomes full.

But with the Knighthoods, there are also the legends of bravery, integrity and great martial prowess. These virtues help people to grow into better, happier human beings, and can be adopted as ones own by aligning ones self with the egregore of that military order.

History tends to repeat itself, and like the priests from the past, we have witnessed a return to barbarianism that is often justified by making reference to the Law of Thelema without bothering to explore the complexity of its message. This hurts everyone who truly considers themselves adherents of The Law. The Order of Thelemic Knights is dedicated to the intelligent promulgation of the Law of Thelema. Thelemites are Kings and Queens of the earth: we are the elite members of a Priestly and Martial class; we are ambassadors and our interaction in the real world will help to determine whether or not we are perceived as soldiers that fight, or soldiers that play.

<  |  >

 

  Related Links
  • Articles on General Thelema
  • Also by GM
  • Contact author
  • The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @01:19PM
    >Medieval Chivalry was mostly concerned with horseback soldering.

    Wow! that must have been quite impressive, using a soldering iron while riding along. Was it at a gallop? or just cantering?

    >the same barbarianism that had followed the Roman Empire

    Some would see the use of the term "barbarianism" as an example of barbarism.

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by nexist on Thursday June 28, @01:26PM
      Wow Mordecai, what an impressive rebuttal. Two grammatical errors in a very large document. He must be wrong. Normally, this would be considered humor -- save for the somewhat aggressive manner in which you reacted to the prior article from the OTK.


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @01:37PM
        Sorry, my earlier comments have left you humor-challenged. If you'd like a rebuttal of the actual points in the article I'll have to spend a lot of time showing how historically incorrect some of GM's presentation is, and I only have the time right now for snippy comments like this :-) Once again, my apologies.


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by nexist on Thursday June 28, @03:57PM
          C'est la vie.

          Actual commentary would be better than sniping, and correction of historical data would be interesting.

          However, that still wouldn't address the points of the article.


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by nexist on Thursday June 28, @03:58PM
            Sorry, it is a pet peeve of mine when people ignore any and all points of an article & instead focs ona grammatical error or mispelling. I encountered it far to many times on fuzzy neo-pagan and New Age lists.


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by Tim Maroney on Thursday June 28, @04:03PM
              I think you meant to say "focus on a grammatical error or misspelling. I encountered it far too many times on fuzzy Neo-Pagan and New Age lists."


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @04:54PM
                Yeah, but what do you think of what he was trying to say?

                No, no, don't answer, I'm being ironically rhetorical. :-)


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                  by Tim Maroney on Thursday June 28, @05:20PM
                  Your second sentence is a run-on sentence. It attempts to link independent clauses using a comma. Either a full stop or a semicolon should have been employed instead.


                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                    by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @06:29PM
                    I would say that unemployment is on the rise, but that would be "free association drivel". So I won't.


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by Nexist on Thursday June 28, @10:23PM
                I think you have identified why it is a pet peeve...

                I suppose it is too late to convince you that I did it on purpose as a humorous aside?


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @11:41PM
    OK, so Nekial is unamused by fun poked at grammatical errors, and he doesn’t seem to think that how someone tells their history is relevant. So I guess I’ll have to actually address GM’s "ideas". Well let’s see, he wants Thelema "to be presented in the best possible way", that is, his way, which happens to be the way of romanticizing a feudalism that never existed (which is ironic considering that the whole 14th/15th century chivalry boom was a romanticization of their past at the time, but apparently that’s irrelevant). Then he goes on to describe a "Chivalric Code" suitable for modern times (in fact, entirely of modern times, as grounded in medieval reality as the way Tony Curtis plays "Ivanhoe"). He mentions four virtues, Loyalty, Generosity, Manners, and Honor. Each of these is quite wonderful of course, but like any virtue, too much is a bad thing. Loyalty oaths, honor killings, mannered Greeks bearing gifts, are all things to beware. He then goes on to say that "Actions speak louder than words, and that is why no one takes self-proclaimed knighthoods seriously", which to me is what makes the action of proclaiming oneself a knight so damned funny! Finally he says "History tends to repeat itself, and like the priests from the past, we have witnessed a return to barbarianism[sic] that is often justified by making reference to the Law of Thelema without bothering to explore the complexity of its message. This hurts everyone who truly considers themselves adherents of The Law." To me this sounds like an attempt to justify taking action against those without the proper "complexity" because they’re a threat to us ‘mainstream’ Thelemites. All in all, I find the whole thing laughable, even if lip service is being paid to a few vague priinciples that almost no one would fail to endorse. I certainly hope it makes the world a better place. :-)

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by Mordecai on Thursday June 28, @11:45PM
      Nekial? I think I meant nExist!


    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by GM on Friday June 29, @01:28AM
      Dear Mordecai:

      Si Vales, Valeo

      You wrote: Well let's see, he wants Thelema "to be presented in the best possible way", that is, his way...

      That is not exactly fair is it? We have never said that we have the only way to do this, but we appear to be the only ones that are bothering to try. Perhaps you have a better way, and maybe the reason you don't write about it is that someone will make similar accusations? Let's not put words in each other's mouths, okay?

      You:"... which happens to be the way of romanticizing a feudalism that never existed...

      Note that the article is not a history lecture. I wont entertain the idea that you see no value in
      adhering to specific paradigms in order accomplish some ideal. Maybe you can clarify your stance against this, or why you think it is worthless. Does the OTO adhere to paradigms? Is history mythologized in those initiations, or do all of them play out history as it occurred? Maybe I misunderstand your point.

      You: "Then he goes on to describe a "Chivalric Code" suitable for modern times (in fact, entirely of modern times, as grounded in medieval reality as the way Tony Curtis plays "Ivanhoe")."

      Sorry you disapprove. Maybe you could concentrate a little more on what you mean, and a little less on insults, eh?

      You: "Each of these is quite wonderful of course, but like any virtue, too much is a bad
      thing. Loyalty oaths, honor killings...


      What is your point? That we should disregard them altogether because one might apply to much of a good thing and become cruel? This sounds like a projection. Is this what happened to you?

      You: "He then goes on to say that "Actions speak louder than words, and that is why no one takes self-proclaimed knighthoods seriously", which to me is what makes the action of proclaiming oneself a knight so damned funny!"

      If it quacks like a duck, it must be a duck. All people are judged based on their actions. Is this the best criticism you can come up with Mordicai? You must be having an off night. I would be insulting you if I bothered explaining this one to you. You are a smart guy and already know, you are only taking cheap shots.

      You: "Finally he says "History tends to repeat itself, and like the priests from the past, we have witnessed a return to barbarianism [sic] that is often justified by making reference to the Law of Thelema without bothering to explore the complexity of its message. This hurts everyone who truly considers themselves adherents of The Law." To me this sounds like an attempt to justify taking action against those without the proper "complexity" because they're a threat to us ‘mainstream’ Thelemites.

      I am sorry that is how you interpret that, but it isn't surprising. I wonder how vocal you are about being a Thelemite. Does everyone at your workplace know you are? Do your family members and all your friends? Are you proud to let the entire world you are a Thelemite? If there is one person you hide it from it is because you are ashamed of it.

      Many people who have first hand experience of Thelemites on one level or another will want nothing to do with them. The more intelligent ones laugh in amusement and avoid us. Thelema deserves better representation. If you don't like our way, do it your way. But please try not to use the same demeanor you use on this rebutal, if you can call it that.

      You: "All in all, I find the whole thing laughable, even if lip service is being paid to a few vague principles that almost no one would fail to endorse."

      So now you are saying that those virtues are truths? Make up your mind.

      Anyway, thank you for the 30 seconds you must have spent on your thoughtful reply. Frankly, if I had taken such a bullshit tone with one of your posts, I would expect my post to be in "the shells" area.

      Pax Profundus,
      GM


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Mordecai on Friday June 29, @09:27AM
        I've said my piece and if you don't care for it, that's fine. I won't waste my time arguing with you. Let the readers draw their own judgments about our respective opinions.


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Xnoubis on Friday June 29, @10:15AM
        [In the Shells.]


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by King Knave on Friday June 29, @09:46PM
        Huzzah!

        and cheerio!


    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by GM on Friday June 29, @02:06PM
      Dear Mordecai:

      Si Vales, Valeo

      I forgot to comment in one area of your reply.

      You: "He then goes on to say that "Actions speak louder than words, and that is why no one takes self-proclaimed knighthoods seriously", which to me is what makes the action of proclaiming oneself a knight so damned funny!

      Me: http://www.thelemicknights.org/work.html

      Quack! Quack!

      Pax Profundus,
      GM


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Mordecai on Friday June 29, @02:16PM
        Great works! If you need the chivalric pretenses in order to motivate yourself, more power to you. I suppose it would be indelicate to point out that all the wonderful works of Catholic Charities doesn't make one any more amenable to the Pope's abominable dogmas.


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by GM on Friday June 29, @05:50PM
          Dear Mordecai,

          Si Vales, Valeo

          There is a problem with you logic.

          You: "I suppose it would be indelicate to point out that all the wonderful works of Catholic Charities doesn't make one any more amenable to the Pope's abominable dogmas."

          Are you saying that because since Catholics are charitable, that anyone who indulges in charity is endorsing the Catholic Pope's dogma?

          or even worse

          Charity is a Xtian virtue, therefore Thelemites ought not endorse it?

          Isn't that a lot like throwing the baby out with the bathwater?

          *Some* Catholics are charitable, or think that charity is important. That does not mean that all people who are charitable are Catholics.

          *Some* Thelemites lack social skills, cannot be counted on to keep their word and are generally unworthy of trust. This does not mean that all Thelemites are that way. Just the loud ones.

          Imagine how the world would view us if people began to use the same logic to identify Thelemites.

          Pax Profundus,
          GM


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by Mordecai on Friday June 29, @06:21PM
            I had truly intended to spare everyone, especially Michael, this debate, but I'm so flabbergasted by the remarkable misconstruction you've put on my words that I feel I should respond.

            >>"I suppose it would be indelicate to point out
            >>that all the wonderful works of Catholic
            >>Charities doesn't make one any more amenable to
            >>the Pope's abominable dogmas."
            >
            >Are you saying that because since Catholics are
            >charitable, that anyone who indulges in charity is
            >endorsing the Catholic Pope's dogma?

            It seems quite obvious to me that I'm not saying anything of the sort, and I appeal to other readers to offer their opinions of what I meant; I'd especially like to know if there is anyone else who shares your take on my words. If there are then I need to work on my writing! What I was saying, in other words (and please let me know what you think they mean), is that just because one endorses the charity of Mother Theresa it doesn't mean one is endorsing the superstitious beliefs that motivate her. I salute your hair drives, AIDS awareness, shoe drives, etc., but I also think your "Chivalric" trip is severely silly and inanely annoying. It's just my opinion. I wonder why so many people are bothered by it?


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by Xnoubis on Saturday June 30, @12:20PM
              > I wonder why so many people are bothered by it?

              For me, it's this: I see GM as painting a picture with broad strokes, based on his perception of matters of principle. It may be true that he is not always a careful writer. This suggests to me that he might be accustomed to sharing his ideas in a supportive environment, which sounds like a novel and appealing idea to me.

              I don't want to hamper constructive criticism. But some of this criticism seems surprisingly non-constructive to me, as if wanting to prolong disagreements rather than resolve them. I'd like to see discussion about matters of principle encouraged, myself.


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @08:03AM
          If you need the chivalric pretenses in order to motivate yourself

          What is your problem with Chivalry? Chivalry is -- in its essence -- the care and concern for your fellow human beings, & the associated protocols of human interaction designed to facillitate co-existence.

          What is so horrible about holding forth an ideal & striving to acheive it in both word & deed?


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @12:10PM
            Your definition of chivalry doesn't conform to any I found in any dictionary. You can use it, but don't expect others to "get it". Here's a standard definition: "The knightly system of feudal times with its code, usages, and practices, social, moral, and religious; especially the system as marked by the championship of woman and of knightly honor, protection of the weak, and mercy to defeated foes." I find this socially regressive and incompatible with Thelemic principles. If you don't, fine. I never called it horrible; that is your characterization (and Michael, please excuse this sickening diatribe).


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @12:40PM
              Hmm, perhaps you should get another dictionary, perhaps a standard (in America) such as Webster's. They are even online (http://www.m-w.com). Anyway, that is one definition, but not a relevent one, as this is not "feudal times". This is a historical definition. Now in Webster's, this definition of Chivalry would correspond to definition #4. Number 5 is "the qualities of the ideal knight : chivalrous conduct". Clicking on Chivalrous gives several definitions, #3 being the obviously relevent option "marked by honor, generosity, and courtesy" and "marked by gracious courtesy and high-minded consideration especially to women".

              So, the only people I expect to not get it, are those who stand against these principles in some fashion. Thus again, what is your issue with "Honor, Generosity and Courtesy"?


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @01:03PM
                >Thus again, what is your issue with "Honor, Generosity and Courtesy"?

                The only issue is in your mind. I never criticized these virtues, only warned against such zealous practice that they become vicious (something you apparently aren't on guard against). BTW, GM referred to "Manners" not courtesy and you neglected to mention "Loyalty", but I mention it only for accuracy's sake, not as a criticism.


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                  by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @01:24PM
                  I know. Perhaps you should actually read what I wrote. Those three traits are listed in the dictionary in the definition of Chivalrous, hence their use in this message.

                  Btw, Manners is a form of Courtesy, & Loyalty is a trait of Honor.


                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                    by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @02:08PM
                    >Btw, Manners is a form of Courtesy, & Loyalty is a trait of Honor.

                    Duh, gee, thanks for pointing out to me what I was saying to you. Perhaps you should actually read what I wrote.


                    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                      by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @02:43PM
                      I did. If that is what you meant to write, perhaps a course in English composition would be helpful.


                      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                        by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @02:49PM
                        And I could recommend a course in reading comprehension for you, but that would merely perpetuate this tiresome exchange, so I won't :-)


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by Xnoubis on Tuesday July 03, @09:35PM
              > please excuse this sickening diatribe

              For one thing, I find this post considerably less inflammatory than this or this. But this whole chain of events has made it clearer to me as a moderator that there's a difference between exchanges on this site that I dislike (and I disliked these a lot, obviously) and exchanges that I should do something about (which I now see that these weren't). Accordingly, I've Shell'ed myself, and offer my apologies for the unwarranted interference.



        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @01:01PM
          I don't know about "indelicate", but irrelevent might be apropos.

          I will say that no matter what the OTK does, it will not make anyone more ameniable to drug abuse or prickish behavior -- those foibles of the Prophet are all too readily promulgated and exagerated.

          That isn't a very good analogy, but I'll go ahead & let it stand -- try to extrapolate will you... ;)


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by me on Friday June 29, @02:38PM
        Did someone say "Hair drive"! OI! Locks of love shall be the quack of the hall.


    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by nexist on Friday July 06, @03:25PM
      I just noticed this:

      Loyalty oaths, honor killings, mannered Greeks bearing gifts, are all things to beware.

      So, your oaths of Loyalty to the Order are meaningless? I don't understand how you can be a part of the OTO & despise 'Loyalty Oaths'.

      If you aren't a member of the OTO, then I am confusing you with someone else, & my apologies.


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Sunday July 01, @01:23AM
    Oh generation of babblers, lost in the false godhead of knowledge.

    If you're living by a code then you're not a Thelemite. Even if you're living by a "Thelemic" code.
    A Thelemite does not live by a "Thelemic code", a Thelemite lives by the "law" of his own true nature which is wordless and indefinable and continually unfolding and can not be stopped and defined and circumscribed which is why - she (nuit) shall be known but I (Hadit) never.

    You're still in Chesed and you're never going to break through Daath like that, avoiding the real work.

    A true Thelemite is not even a Thelemite.
    People who call themselves Thelemites and follow this and that are only doubling and simulating someone else's word. Apes of Thoth.

    If you understood anything of Liber Al then you wouldn't have this endless need to discuss it and dissect it. You're in the pit of because, and the dogs of reason are having a great feast, and you're living on the astral plane of Merrie England and do you see the mad fool locked up in the top of the tower yet?

    Welcome to "Schizophrenia Central" as I put it in one of a series of wonderous Speedpussy songs.

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by Anthony on Sunday July 01, @01:27AM
      My advice to those who want to grow genuinely - and please do forgive Ra-hoor-khuit boiling up inside me - is........

      Burn the book of the law
      Go out and live your own life on your own terms
      MAKE MISTAKES
      Be silly, be weak, be what you really are
      Then after a while you might come to find your true self and your true will.

      And don't forget the one, or rather the 0, who is beyond the word.

      If you can't get beyond the law, and then if you can't get beyond the Word, you are not Thelemites you are the dupes of Thelema.

      Fair enough you are doing Crowley's dirty work and he's no doubt on some plane laughing at you and having a great time but me - I want to be free, I am free, that's what it's all about.

      Then go back to the book of the law and it will be all those things he say, don't expect me to quote, wonderous and splendid, and you're not reading it any more, you're reading the energy in yourself, and even then you got to distinguish yourself from that energy otherwise you'll go totally off it.

      Don't forget that we are beyond the Law itself, we are behind it, we are 0.

      Aspire to be 0.
      Forget Liber Al for a bit and if you must study something, study Crowley's translation of the Tao Teh King.

      And then do it - and dump it!
      It's a rollercoaster alright!


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Anthony on Sunday July 01, @01:38AM
        To cross the abyss you have to surrender everything, every last thing.

        Do you not ever think that the attatchment to Thelema is a part of this? That Thelema also IMPEDES your growth?

        Could a plant in your garden grow if you went up to it and pulled its leaves out here, and bent its stalk there, and tried to make it fit a shape that you have in *mind*?

        All you are doing is being dupes to Choronzon, you are interpreting and re-interpreting Liber Al dependent on how you feel at the moment, making it fit an image, like merrie england, and then when it doesn't fit any more, trying to find another one.

        Self-image is crap and the antithesis of growth and the favourite device of Choronzon.

        I am only saying this cause I genuinely would like to help people and no doubt there's a lot of genuine growth there, but everyone's gardening skills always need updating.

        I expect you'll all think I'm full of it, and it doesn't matter to me. Anyone who finds any benefit in the things I say, feel free to email me but I will probably go back to my policy of silence on the board but I do enjoy a lot of the posts indeed and say so, but they're usually deleted in the class of "inane comment" I guess lol.


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by Anthony on Sunday July 01, @01:40AM
          If I can help anyone out, if you don't all know better than me which you might cause I know nothing.........

          I'm not out to parade grades cause that's meaningless and nor would I want any kind of money, I'm not selling anything and I'm not buying anyone, but I am willing to assist life on every level and you can get me by email, but death threats or anything aren't really very welcome and are quite impotent anyway.


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by GM on Sunday July 01, @01:49AM
            Sir:

            Si Vales, Valeo

            But you are selling something. You are trying to pass yourself off as some one that has crossed the Abyss. That would make you a Magister Templi, would it not?

            A person with such a prepostrous ego could not possibly understand the entire nature of the Abyss, or how to get to the other side. If they did, they would not be claiming to know how to get people to the other side.

            Sorry to sound harsh. You may be sincere, but you are young and seem to have skipped much of the work your claims seem to indicate you have accomplished. No sale.

            No disrespect intended.

            Pax Profundus,
            GM


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by Aleph on Sunday July 01, @09:26PM
              GM (exactly what does that stand for?),

              93,

              You know, some people actually do cross the abyss. I don't know Anthony, but I see nothing in the words that he has written which would indicate for certain that he has not.

              It seems to me that it takes just as much ego to claim to be able to judge just who is and who is not M.T. - wouldn't one have to be a Magus to make that determination reliably?

              Appearance of ego is not sufficient grounds for dismissal - we'd be forced to dismiss Crowley's claim on that issue.

              93/696
              Aleph


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by GM on Sunday July 01, @09:47PM
                Dear Aleph:

                Si Vales, Valeo

                You: You know, some people actually do cross the abyss. I don't know Anthony, but I see nothing in the words that he has written which would indicate for certain that he has not.

                He makes claims that the Law is to be transcended, but then does not explain how one can transcends ones Will. For one.

                He says we are victims of Choronzon for attempting to interpret the Book of The Law according to our own capacity to understand while he interprets a line or two from the same book.

                He claims not to bee selling anything, but sets himself up as someone who can help people get across.

                You: "It seems to me that it takes just as much ego to claim to be able to judge just who is and who is not M.T. - wouldn't one have to be a Magus to make that determination reliably?

                A Magus, or one who is well read. There are lists of qualities for people who have achieved a level of enlightenment left to us by people who know so that we would not be dupped by every Tom, Dick or Harry with outrageous claims. One does not have to be enlightened to see when some one is not.

                You: "Appearance of ego is not sufficient grounds for dismissal - we'd be forced to dismiss Crowley's claim on that issue.

                I cannot draw any similarities between Crowley's claims and Anthony's. One must always be on guard against the ever present danger of confusing the message with the messenger or visa versa. Isn't this what the Christians have done?

                We must also take care not to confuse any traumatic or uncomfortable drug induced experience as a crossing of the Abyss. It is my experience, based on my observation and conversations that when people say they have crossed the Abyss, they have suffered through some life changing drama, and by association to the Abyss, they are able to give it some sort of meaning.

                I am not going out of my way here to hurt anyones feelings. Anthony sounds like a nice person... and he sounds sincere. I am perfectly willing to be completely wrong about Anthony. Perhaps he has crossed the Abyss. If he has, I congratulate him.

                Pax Profundus,
                GM

                P.S. I have been to your web site. Very nice work.


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                  by Mordecai on Sunday July 01, @11:48PM
                  >One does not have to be enlightened to see when some one is not.

                  In fact one cannot be enlightened to see that someone is not. When one is enlightened such distinctions are meaningless.


                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                    by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @08:55AM
                    In fact one cannot be enlightened to see that someone is not. When one is enlightened such distinctions are meaningless

                    How so? Duality is an inherent quality of manifestation, now the enlightened mind would recognize the Duality as a tool, as a quality. However they would still need to make use of it in order to communicate with others.

                    Is not the vow of the Boddhisatva to stay until all become enlightened? If the Boddhisatva cannot make the distinction, then his vow is meaningless.


                    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                      by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @09:07AM
                      >then his vow is meaningless

                      Quite so.


                      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                        by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @09:30AM
                        Since I doubt you are agreeing with my critique of your position, I can only assume that you are rejecting the concept of the Bodhisattva.

                        If this is true, then I can only assume you reject Buddhism, which is tied to the concept of the Boddhisatva.

                        I find this borderline Blasphemey (as per L30:21) as disturbing than your apparant inability to embrace compassion, kindness, politeness & other aspects of chivalry.


                        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                          by Tim Maroney on Tuesday July 03, @09:40AM
                          I believe what Mordecai was trying to say is that from the perspective of the Bodhisattva, the paradoxical nature of the vow -- to wait until all beings attain a state which they have already attained -- is by no means an impediment.

                          Tim


                          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                            by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @09:47AM
                            Wouldn't that be different than "meaningless"? To recognize the Paradox would not be to remove meaning from the statement.


                            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                              by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @12:14PM
                              It is rather paradoxical that meaninglessness has meaning for those who impose meaning upon it. There are different flavors of Buddhism indeed, but at least some of them will tell you that the concept of Bodhisattva is "ultimately" meaningless, as is every concept.


                              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @12:43PM
                                True, but why do you think they are correct? If I have two wise men, one saying yes, another saying no, why should I side with one over the other -- except on personal preference?


                                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                  by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @01:06PM
                                  Substitute "experience" for "preference" and you might begin to understand.


                                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                    by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @01:45PM
                                    Sounding pretty high falutin' there. Perhaps if you spoke slowerer, my poor impoverished intellect would understand.

                                    Vague, evasive & smug replies are hardly an answer.

                                    My only recourse is to assume your ignorance on the matter move on.


                                    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                      by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @02:10PM
                                      You have other recourses. If you choose not to take them, don't blame it on me.


                                      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                        by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @02:40PM
                                        I won't blame you. Blame only works when the target is capable of acknowledging error. Acknowledging Error requires Honor. You have consistenetly poo-poo'ed the idea of Honor & of being Honorable.


                                        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                          by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @02:52PM
                                          >You have consistenetly poo-poo'ed the idea of Honor & of being Honorable.

                                          Could you provide a single quote where I "poo-poo" the idea of honor, much less "consistenetly" which would require at least two examples?


                                          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                            by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @03:03PM
                                            First, I quote from the dictionary, to be chivalrous is to be "marked by honor, generosity, and courtesy". On the question of Chivalry and Honor you have said (& this is only on this thread & not counting the prior Thelemic Knights article):

                                            "I find this socially regressive and incompatible with Thelemic principles"

                                            "If you need the chivalric pretenses in order to motivate yourself"

                                            "All in all, I find the whole thing laughable, even if lip service is being paid to a few vague priinciples that almost no one would fail to endorse"

                                            Three would count, by your definition, as "consistently".


                                            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                              by Mordecai on Wednesday July 04, @04:22PM
                                              Your quote from your dictionary was hardly "First" in all this. My references to the historical connections had already been stated and called "irrelevant". I guess that's the crux of the issue between us. I really believe that the historical associations of the symbols and myths that we employ are important. That, at the Crusader capture of Jerusalem, the greatest of knight's enterprises, in 1099, they rode in the blood of the civilian populace "up to the knees of their horses", still means something. So does the fact that the Burgundian courts at which the cult of 'chivalry' was most highly cultivated in the 14th & 15th centuries were those of archetypal Renaissance princes, Machiavellian, crafty and warlike. That 'chivalry' was an ideological underpinning of their regime, but one can't mistake the "championing" of women for Women's Lib. Just as in our own era Nixon/Kissinger & co. proclaimed "Peace with Honor", were "loyal" to South Vietnam, gave "generous" aid to Pinochet, and "respectfully disagreed" with the Ambassador from the Soviet Union. That's because platitudes are like that. Take Honor. You probably mean by it an adherence to honesty and fairness. That's commendable as far as it goes, but how far is that? Even leaving aside the fact that those qualities, especially fairness, are at least in part subjective whenever it comes to actual situations, you must take into consideration all the other perfectly valid definitions of the word. A great many if not most people see honor as primarily a matter of being respected, of preserving your own and your family's (your country's, your church's, etc.) reputation and social standing. And, to me, that can be either good or bad, serious or silly, depending upon the circumstances. For instance, take this current exchange. If you can't take seeing 'chivalry' called inane you should probably stick to linking your website instead of posting public statements on 'free' discussion boards. Certainly, your response to my critique might be true to your personal Loyalties, concept of Honor, and code of Manners, but Generous? I for one don't think so.


                                              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                                by Nexist on Wednesday July 04, @05:38PM
                                                Here we get to reading comprehension again. "First" was utilized do designate an ordering of the thoughts and ideas present. Note the comma. It was not meant to question your prior claim to having supposedly referenced the dictionary.

                                                The historical aspect of the definition is not "irrelevent" your attempting to use its origins in a feudal society is. We are not in a feudal society, so standard logic would presume one of two options: 1) We are attempting to re-establish feudal society; or 2) We are pulling forth the applicable elements and applying them in a modern context.

                                                Since I have a BBQ to go to, let me wrap this up by saying that only an idiot would choose the first option. It is also considered stupid to throw out the Baby with the bathwater.

                                                Finally, it is considered boorish and uncultured to criticize others for holding ideals higher than one is willing to reach.

                                                If I find anything of worth in the rest of your ramblings I will respond again, but then again I don't generally waste time on people without a concept of honor & who are opposed to my having one.


                                              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                                                by nexist on Friday July 06, @11:48AM
                                                The more I read your post, the less impressed I become. Since we are running out of column space, I will make this brief.

                                                Your argument is flawed. It is based on the preposterous assumption that since Chivalry grew out of a Feudalistic Society, then none of its principles could be relevent in a non-Feudalistic Society.

                                                Words fail me, this is stupid.

                                                Are civil rights irrelevent now that Slavery is abolished? Are Feminists outdated because of Suffrage?

                                                The 60's are over dude, should any activism which derives from the 60's be relegated to quaint anachronisms?

                                                Debate normally requires that both sides have a tenable position. As far as I can tell, you do not.


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                  by Aleph on Tuesday July 03, @10:20AM
                  P.S. I have been to your web site. Very nice work.

                  Hey, thanks!


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by GM on Sunday July 01, @02:06AM
          Sir:

          Si Vales, Valeo

          You: "To cross the abyss you have to surrender everything, every last thing."

          Including the ego. The persona. The very thing that causes you to think you are better than any one of us.

          You: "Do you not ever think that the attatchment to Thelema is a part of this? That Thelema also IMPEDES your growth?"

          It does indeed. But for some of us lesser life forms that have not transcended "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" it will have to do for now.

          It is a young Aeon, my friend. How quickly you have transcended the Law!

          You: Could a plant in your garden grow if you went up to it and pulled its leaves out here, and bent its stalk there, and tried to make it fit a shape that you have in *mind*?

          That would be a Bonzai. And the exercise of making one illustrates the dominance of ones mind over the plant by understanding the plant and its will to be transformed. A good gardner understands this.

          You: All you are doing is being dupes to Choronzon, you are interpreting and re-interpreting Liber Al dependent on how you feel at the moment

          Wait. Didn't you also do that in the following post when you tried to explain why Nuit shall be known and Hadit never? Choronzon is one crafty criter. Better be careful you don't assume you are beyond its grasp.

          You: "Self-image is crap and the antithesis of growth and the favourite device of Choronzon."

          You may be right. I think I can agree here. But we are what we are. And a true Magister knows it so well he does not need to tell anyone about it. he is unable to tell, because he has destroyed the man. He is NEMO.

          Anyway, I understand what you are getting at, and actually agree with much of it, but that guru complex is doing nothing to further your crossing the Abyss arguments.

          Pax Profundus,
          GM


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by me on Sunday July 01, @07:54AM
            Jealous.


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by Aleph on Sunday July 01, @09:41PM
            Anthony: "Self-image is crap and the antithesis of growth and the favourite device of Choronzon."

            GM: You may be right. I think I can agree here. But we are what we are. And a true Magister knows it so well he does not need to tell anyone about it. he is unable to tell, because he has destroyed the man. He is NEMO.

            93,

            I don't know whether what A. say is true. But I do know that what GM says is false. Crowley was a true Magister, and he both needed to tell and did tell. A few choice quotes from Liber B vel Magi would appear to be in order.

            1. In the beginning doth the Magus speak Truth, and send forth Illusion and Falsehood to enslave the soul. Yet therein is the Mystery of Redemption.

            5. By a Magus is this writing made known through the mind of a Magister. The one uttereth clearly, and the other Understandeth; yet the Word is falsehood, and the Understanding darkness. And this saying is Of All Truth.

            14. Let Him beware of abstinence from action. For the curse of His grade is that he must speak Truth, that the Falsehood thereof may enslave the souls of men. Let Him then utter that without Fear, that the Law may be fulfilled. And according to His Original Nature will that law be shapen, so that one may declare gentleness and quietness, being an Hindu; and another fierceness and servility, being a Jew; and yet another ardour and manliness, being an Arab. Yet this matter toucheth the mystery of Incarnation, and is not here to be declared.

            19. And woe, woe, woe, yea woe, and again woe, woe, woe, unto seven times be His that preacheth not His law to men!

            20. And woe also be unto Him that refuseth the curse of the grade of a Magus, and the burden of the Attainment thereof.

            21. And in the word CHAOS let the book be sealed, yea, let the Book be sealed.

            Perhaps your understanding of the work of a Magus could use some revision?

            93/696
            Aleph


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by GM on Sunday July 01, @10:44PM
              Dear Aleph:

              Si Vales, Valeo

              You: I don't know whether what A. say is true. But I do know that what GM says is false. Crowley was a true Magister,...

              And please tell me what you base this on. Crowley?

              Crowley was a Magister, a Magus, and an all around nice guy. Just ask him. He'll tell you. ;)

              You: and he both needed to tell and did tell. A few choice quotes from Liber B vel Magi would appear to be in order.

              Crowley needed to tell for reasons that are obvious. What are Anthony's reasons for telling? Will he be telling us he is a Magus next?

              The Abyss is becoming a busy place. Maybe Starbucks will be setting up shop there to service the hundreds of twenty-something wannabe Therions. :)

              You: Perhaps your understanding of the work of a Magus could use some revision?

              Magus? We were talking about Magisters, but you seem to be insinuating that Anthony is a Magus? I don't remember him saying that exactly.

              In any case, I would recommend widening your horizons. Crowley didn't have the answer to everything, nor was he exactly forthcoming in all areas.

              Pax Profundus,
              GM


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by the Reverend Rob on Monday July 02, @01:18AM
                I don't see what's any more ludicrous in declaring yourself a 'knight' by self-proclaimed virtue than in claiming to be a Master of the Temple.

                Since I don't see much more than a web site on behalf of your organization, and a couple 'charity events' which might be perpetuated by a small group of friends, I'm forced to judge your claims on the same level you judge Anthony's here.

                Neither of you is coming out of this looking very good.


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by Aleph on Monday July 02, @09:53PM
                Let me fill in the blanks...

                Magisters become Magi. Sure, they are not going to utter the Word of an Aeon. Perhaps only a subaeon.
                BUT, THEY MUST UTTER THEIR WORD. That is their distinguishing feature. Perhaps that is what you are doing, though you realize it not. Perhaps that is what Anthony is doing, perhaps not.

                But... if there were a Magus among us, it not being the start of a New Aeon, His Word would not apply to all of us. Why then should those who are not attracted to another's word revile it?

                For none of us can know for sure the Word of a Magus, for it appears as falsehood to the many. Giving the other the benefit of the doubt would seem to be the chivalric way. It's called manners? No doubt you have heard of them...

                93/696
                Aleph


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                by l.l.l.l. on Tuesday July 03, @11:45AM
                you are all using terms like MAGUS and MAGISTER TEMPLI..

                i think that someone that has truly ascended wouldnt see the need for labels.

                plain and simple.

                :)

                freedom be thine and mine
                l.l.l.l.


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                  by Aleph on Tuesday July 03, @01:26PM
                  And you are using a term like 'terms'.

                  I think that someone that has truly mastered language wouldn't see the need for 'terms'. ;-)

                  Seriously now, the terms 'Magister' and 'Magus' are labels for talking about particular states of consciousness. Surely you are not saying that we should dispose of all terms which refer to higher states of consciousness because if you've attained them, you no longer need to refer to them in communication.

                  And in fact, you will see that this is the case here. No one has claimed either of the Grades. The labels are being used to talk about attainment and its nature. So what exactly is your beef?

                  93/696
                  Aleph


                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                    by l.l.l.l. on Tuesday July 03, @10:18PM
                    Aleph writes:

                    "I think that someone that has truly mastered language wouldn't see the need for 'terms'."

                    I never spoke of mastering anything.

                    He goes on to say,

                    "Seriously now, the terms 'Magister' and 'Magus' are labels for talking about particular states of consciousness. Surely you are not saying that we should dispose of all terms which refer to higher states of consciousness because if you've attained them, you no longer need to refer to them in communication."

                    Thats just it.. why is there a need to refer to them in conversation?

                    -Freedom be thine and mine,

                    l.l.l.l.


                    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                      by Aleph on Thursday July 05, @10:15AM
                      93,

                      Simply because it is our Will to do so. You are displaying exactly the kind of behaviour which I find distressing among 'Thelemites'. One 'Thelemite' telling another that his speech or writing should be restricted in some way. Makes it look like you have nothing constructive to add to the conversation, so instead complain about what is being said. What's it to you anyway?

                      93 93/93
                      Aleph


                      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                        by l.l.l.l. on Thursday July 05, @03:35PM
                        Care Aleph,

                        You wrote:

                        "You are displaying exactly the kind of behaviour which I find distressing among 'Thelemites'. One 'Thelemite' telling another that his speech or writing should be restricted in some way."

                        Maybe you should take your own advice.

                        I simply asked a question.

                        I asked, "Thats just it.. why is there a need to refer to them in conversation?"

                        To clarify what I meant was what is the need in labeling something of this nature?

                        To what end? What purpose does it serve to say "I AM A MAGUS, YOU ARE A NEOPHYTE?"

                        Do you still care to answer the question?

                        l.l.l.l.


                        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                          by Aleph on Thursday July 05, @04:53PM
                          93,

                          I did answer the question.

                          why is there a need to refer to them in conversation?

                          Simply because it is our Will to do so.

                          What purpose does it serve to say "I AM A MAGUS, YOU ARE A NEOPHYTE?"

                          Since neither of the parties to the conversation claimed any Grades, nor made any such statement, I fail to see how this is pertinent.

                          Feel free to go on to give us your point of view in detail. However, you are implying that those who use the terms shouldn't be doing so. I don't agree with any limits upon speech for any reason. Therefore I see no need to get into a discussion of the finer details of your position with you.

                          Enough of because, be he damned for a dog.

                          93/696
                          Aleph


                          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                            by l.l.l.l. on Friday July 06, @12:04AM
                            "why is there a need to refer to them in conversation?"

                            Simply because it is our Will to do so--

                            anyone who knows anything will not argue with another mans will.

                            OH SHIT! ILL TAKE THE HINT!!

                            --I'll step off and walk away..

                            heheh

                            l.l.l.l.


                            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                              by l.l.l.l. on Friday July 06, @04:13PM
                              Aleph,

                              Just so you know.. I wasn't implying anything i was just sincerely asking a question.

                              I'm actually a very direct person and I try to not use things like implications if at all possible. If I have something to say I tend to say it straight out.

                              I understand a lot of people do imply things with vague wording so I dont't take offense that you thought I did that.

                              However, I still don't understand why we should use the terms/grades.

                              What are the benefits?

                              Anyone?

                              I really am looking for answers and not being sarcastic or judgemental here.

                              I have seen a lot of people using the terms in a way that they become a form of repression in of themsleves! Kind of like a pin on the lapel of a suit they are wearing.. (magus in gold letters.. heheh) but to cross the abyss are we not unclothed?

                              Maybe we could pin it to our sandels.. heheheh

                              I would hate to think we are all exchanging one set of chains for another that are disguised as freedom.

                              Sorry you misunderstood my motives, I would never want to repress another human being in any way. Honestly. In fact that is the opposite of all I stand for.

                              Please reply
                              l.l.l.l.


                              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                                by Aleph on Friday July 06, @07:02PM
                                93 Sister,

                                I am sorry that I misinterpreted you. Thank you for not taking offense. As a linguist, I couldn't imagine that you were actually asking what use language is (from my pov, this is how I interpret the question).

                                However, I still don't understand why we should use the terms/grades.

                                What are the benefits?

                                What are the benefits of a map? Do you also think that we should not discuss (or have words for) dharana, dhyana, and samadhi? If we did not have these words, how would anyone know that the states they refer to exist and are attainable through dedicated effort?

                                To me, the Grades are the only terms we have to refer to the development of the Magickal as opposed to the Mystical side of our development. They do not measure ones worth, but rather ones insight and ability to teach. While progress in dharana, dhyana, and samadhi go hand in hand with working through the Grades, they do not by themselves confer what we would call Magickal ability, nor do they imply anything about ones ability to teach.

                                I was confused by your question, because it seemed that you wished to call into question the very ideas of definition and measurement. To me, that is the primary function of the Grades, much as we can examine the frequency of reflected light and determine that grass is green, or measure the distance to the moon.

                                I have seen a lot of people using the terms in a way that they become a form of repression in of themsleves! Kind of like a pin on the lapel of a suit they are wearing.. (magus in gold letters.. heheh) but to cross the abyss are we not unclothed?

                                I am not very concerned over the fact that people apply these labels to themselves. In fact, I think more people should honestly evaluate their state and give themselves credit for their actual accomplishments. Everyone seems to think that it is so difficult to attain the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel that almost no one bothers to attempt to attain it.

                                So, I'd rather see people claim the 'Grade' of Adeptus Minor if they have attained K&C, regardless of whether they are even members of A.'.A.'. I am much more concerned about two things: 1) the obession with finding and belonging to the 'real' A.'.A.'., and 2) the use of the terms to put down others, e.g. when GM responded so condescendingly to Anthony's statement that he was crossing the abyss. To me, it is much more harmful for someone to respond "WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, A MASTER OF THE TEMPLE?" than for someone to claim a Grade for themselves.

                                Why? Because in such an environment, those who HAVE attained something will remain silent, perpetuating the myth that the accomplishment is so hard and so difficult that no one around us has achieved it. I'd much rather have false Magi strutting around claiming greatness. It would at least teach people discernment!

                                Maybe we could pin it to our sandels.. heheheh

                                Back to the International Order of Naths. In this tradition, there is purposefully ONE and ONLY ONE initiation. And that is received naked, so that one has no robe (or sandals) to pin symbols of rank on. As for the result, that is the result of the work - the initiation is merely 'permission' to begin.

                                I would hate to think we are all exchanging one set of chains for another that are disguised as freedom.

                                I fear that that is the case. Not so much in A.'.A.'., were it functioning as designed. But certainly in OTO. Advancement without attainment is doomed to the failure of the blind leading the blind. However, since the Order has turned its back on its responsibility to teach, advancement has more to do with politics and toeing the party line than with attainment. And if ones superiors have not attained, then service is merely slavery.

                                93/696
                                Aleph


                                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                                  by l.l.l.l. on Friday July 06, @07:51PM
                                  hey aleph.

                                  thanks for the quick response.

                                  >As a linguist, I couldn't imagine that you were >actually asking what use language is (from my >pov, this is how I interpret the question).

                                  I love words too but I have been noticing the danger of them lately.. not the words in themselves but the way they put everything into little compartments.

                                  (heres where i visualize the great sword cutting everything up into bits)

                                  Compartmentalization has its uses of course, but when applied to work in which the nature is union, I start to wonder if it isn't perhaps self-defeating.

                                  these questions are of course all personal but might relate to another person who has a similar view.

                                  If it is hard for me to progress using labels then should I just discard them? Are the dangers of not having a set map too perilous to risk it?

                                  Lacking a map, would you not know what way to go with attention and awareness and prudence?

                                  This is what I am trying to figure out.

                                  Should I even care if I have an experience to try and label it? Does it benefit me to label it? etc..

                                  >What are the benefits of a map?

                                  that's what I am thinking over.

                                  >Do you also think that we should not discuss (or >have words for) dharana, dhyana, and samadhi? If >we did not have these words, how would anyone >know that the states they refer to exist and are >attainable through dedicated effort?

                                  If you did not know the word sex and you got laid, would it make a difference?

                                  It was still experienced. If you like it, I guess you go back for more.

                                  Sure you couldn't tell anyone about it..

                                  >To me, the Grades are the only terms we have to >refer to the development of the Magickal as >opposed to the Mystical side of our development. >They do not measure ones worth, but rather ones >insight and ability to teach.

                                  Do you think that once something has attained something that this gaurentees a person to teach forever?

                                  Being in a position to teach might change daily.. or rapidly depending on the situation from the teacher or students needs.

                                  >I was confused by your question, because it >seemed that you wished to call into question the >very ideas of definition and measurement.

                                  Yes that is my aim. Calling into question the ideas and purposes and uses of definition and measurement. What is to define but to compare one thing to another?

                                  >To me, that is the primary function of the >Grades, much as we can examine the frequency of >reflected light and determine that grass is >green, or measure the distance to the moon.

                                  I would agree.

                                  >I am not very concerned over the fact that >people apply these labels to themselves. In >fact, I think more people should honestly >evaluate their state and give themselves credit >for their actual accomplishments.

                                  Well perhaps the deffinitions are somewhat unclear and not so universal. For instance is a buddhist able to say that their attainment would qualify themselves as a 5=6?

                                  Surely you don't deny their attainment altogether.

                                  >Everyone seems to think that it is so difficult >to attain the Knowledge and Conversation of the >Holy Guardian Angel that almost no one bothers >to attempt to attain it.

                                  The deffinition of the K&C is loose at times.

                                  >So, I'd rather see people claim the 'Grade' of >Adeptus Minor if they have attained K&C, >regardless of whether they are even members of >A.'.A.'. I am much more concerned about two >things: 1) the obession with finding and >belonging to the 'real' A.'.A.'., and 2) the use >of the terms to put down others, e.g. when GM >responded so condescendingly to Anthony's >statement that he was crossing the abyss. To me, >it is much more harmful for someone to >respond "WHO DO YOU THINK YOU ARE, A MASTER OF >THE TEMPLE?" than for someone to claim a Grade >for themselves.

                                  Yes that type of behaviour saddens me as well. Thats one of the dangers of the use of terms and grades.

                                  >Advancement without attainment is doomed to the >failure of the blind leading the blind.

                                  That is why .. if there are no tests.. then why is anyone LEADING anyone else?

                                  Did not the role of the heirophant change with the onset of the new aeon?

                                  Could I not be a beginner and more advanced than someone who has gone through all the initiations? And they are in charge of me?

                                  Thats scary for sure.


                                  >And if ones superiors have not attained, then >service is merely slavery.

                                  Yes. DEFFINETLY agreed.

                                  Regards,

                                  l.l.l.l.

                                  *
                                  I,37: Also the mantras and spells; the obeah and the wanga; the work of the wand and the work of the sword; these he shall learn and teach.
                                  *


                                  • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                                    by Aleph on Saturday July 07, @07:37AM
                                    93 Soror,

                                    I love words too but I have been noticing the danger of them lately.. not the words in themselves but the way they put everything into little compartments.

                                    (heres where i visualize the great sword cutting everything up into bits)

                                    Compartmentalization has its uses of course, but when applied to work in which the nature is union, I start to wonder if it isn't perhaps self-defeating.


                                    I understand your concern. However, what you have described is the very nature of the Ruach. The only way around or beyond this is to cross the abyss. The nature of the Neschamah is quite different.

                                    Dare I attempt to say anything about what it is like after one crosses the abyss? Imagine that word thought is gone. There is still consciousness, and understanding without words (not to be confused with knowledge). Does the expression thought without words make any sense to you? I'm not talking about just during periods of meditation, but during day to day life. The incessant mental chatter with which we are all familiar is simply gone.

                                    Of course, one must still use words to communicate with others. So while the mental background is a previously described, words are formulated by Will within this space. When one does think in words for this purpose, one is definitely doing the thinking, rather than the more usual state of having the mind rambling along on its own.

                                    If your current work is crossing the abyss, then dwelling on words, labels, and terms might indeed be self-defeating. IMO, this in no way invalidates their use in general.

                                    If it is hard for me to progress using labels then should I just discard them? Are the dangers of not having a set map too perilous to risk it?

                                    Lacking a map, would you not know what way to go with attention and awareness and prudence?

                                    This is what I am trying to figure out.

                                    Should I even care if I have an experience to try and label it? Does it benefit me to label it? etc..


                                    I would would make a distinction between discarding the words, and discarding the map. Imagine that the whole point of the A.'.A.'. system is to create a continuous chain through consciousness, so that the Ruach is prepared as a channel for Wisdom and Understanding. Though study, a map is created in the Ruach. Even though the Ruach must be transcended, it can't just be discarded. And the subtle map of which the words of the Ruach are but a crude approximation is expressed in the very structure of the brain and nervous system.

                                    It does benefit the Ruach to label. The Ruach can't be discarded, and will continue to operate. If the labels/terms did not exist, the Ruach would coin new ones. It may indeed be that the labels do not help ones attainment in the least at this point, except as a means of communication with others (both more and less advanced) about where one is. Also, it is helpful in being able to determine where on the path with respect to you someone else is.

                                    Well perhaps the deffinitions are somewhat unclear and not so universal. For instance is a buddhist able to say that their attainment would qualify
                                    themselves as a 5=6?


                                    I think the definitions are clear enough. The first Magister Templi I encountered in real life was a Chinese Buddhist master. It was quite valuable for me to realize that I had a label for his level of attainment. I don't particularly care that he was not M.T. within the A.'.A.'. lineage, since I use the labels for identification of ability rather than membership.

                                    Buddhism is a little bit different in the details, but the stages are the same. Rather than the concept of the HGA, Buddhists (at least the Tibetan tantric Buddhists) have a concept known as Yidam (literally 'mind bond') or tutelary deity. A individual's Yidam might be a specific Buddha, Deva, or Dakini, but the attainment of "union" with the Yidam is precisely equivalent to the attainment of K&C of the HGA. It is said that while the forms differ, the essential nature of all the different Yidam is the same. So I would have no problem labelling a Buddhist of this level of attainment an 'Adeptus Minor'.

                                    The deffinition of the K&C is loose at times.

                                    I disagree. If you have attained it, you will *know*. That is the only definition I know of.


                                    That is why .. if there are no tests.. then why is anyone LEADING anyone else?


                                    If you are talking about OTO, I believe this is merely an accident of history. Crowley inherited (or stole) an Old Aeon order. He was still so attached to the type of structure that it had, that he did not sufficiently restructure it for the New Aeon. An Old Aeon order is still an Old Aeon order, regardless of whether it has 'accepted' the Book of the Law.

                                    Did not the role of the heirophant change with the onset of the new aeon?

                                    I don't know. Did it? How? I would think that the New Aeon would do away with the idea of Pope (ideological dictator), but that role still seems to be alive and kicking in the EGC.


                                    Could I not be a beginner and more advanced than someone who has gone through all the initiations? And they are in charge of me?

                                    Yes.

                                    Thats scary for sure.

                                    Yes. What's even scarier is watching the usual political phenomena where those of inferior attainment gain superior positions. Once this happens, autocracy is worse than democracy, and for the very reasons for which the autocrats denounce democracy. Those of inferior attainment feel threatened by their more attained brethren, and the latter do not get invited into the invitational levels of the Order. Slowly but surely, the upper degrees get packed with politically correct yes men, and the true aspirant suffers. Those with any real insight quit playing the game, and go do something else ;-)

                                    93/696
                                    Aleph


                                    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                                      by l.l.l.l. on Saturday July 07, @09:25AM
                                      aleph, thankyou.

                                      l.l.l.l.


                                      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings--using terms
                                        by Aleph on Saturday July 07, @10:19AM
                                        You're welcome.


    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by nexist on Tuesday July 03, @08:52AM
      If you're living by a code then you're not a Thelemite

      Please, tell me more on how to be a proper Thelemite.

      After all, you obviously know the paths of every Star in the body of our Lady Nuit -- otherwise common sense would inhibit you from such absolutist statements about the proper behavior for a Thelemite.

      Of course I am unconvinced of the correctness of your One True Way -- having been there & done that, I recognize the interconnectedness of the human experience.

      Anyway, lest I ramble too far...


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Monday July 02, @01:07AM
    Erm, I will post to this.
    I am in the process of crossing the abyss and at times I think I've crossed it and then I flip out into another set of complexes that need resolving - you were absolutely right about the guru complex, it has been a bug and a burden to me - and since I have not resolved every complex yet, though I have in a sense annihilated the ego and do periodically reconnect with the formless, in that full sense I will confess that I have not yet fully crossed the abyss.

    I have a certain number of flaws in my nature that re-appear and I have, largely thru making a dick of myself here, been able to get control enough to break their stranglehold.

    But I stand by much of what I said if not all.
    So then - sorry and kinda not :)
    And I am a nice and genuine person, yeah.
    Thanks.

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by Anthony on Monday July 02, @01:12AM
      I am not going thru a major life crisis and projecting the abyss upon it. My life is silent and calm enough in most areas, and going ahead in the areas I want it to.

      I have seen a lot over a lot of years, though I'm still a young dude, but have worked a lot of time with unfaltering devotion and one hell of a good teacher, who will no doubt be nowhere near as lenient as you've been, but knows I'm gonna make it.

      I think, the MoT is trying to reconnect with his satellites and some of them are in dodgy condition.

      I overcame the inflated hierophantic thing by admitting problems I have on a basic emotional level in my life right now.

      There are reasons I won't explain why the "inflated hierophantic" thing was absolutely necessary for me to do, (but not on this board) but new stuff... it's sometimes a bug getting out of it again.

      And a large part of my Purpose is to do ra-hoor-khuit blitzes in rock'n'roll basically.

      I am essentially playing with and refining a lot of my "tools" and some of those tools just get a bit unruly still. Where-ever I am, even if it's the grade of hopeless schizophrenic, I'm still a novice at it.


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Monday July 02, @01:35AM
    I don't know my Thelema as well as you but I do know the territory quite a bit.
    Erm - I will not say that I'm a magus, but I will say that I understand a bit about that grade, and a part of my work is yes the work on uplifting the curse of the grade.

    And my mentor puts that as - the ultimate act of magick is to affect nothing.

    For reasons justified or not I broke with that deal and got the rewards and suffered the consequences and learned a lot about some still unresolved complexes. Stuff for me seems fluid. It doesn't necessarily always have to stick with one grade as a solid chunk.

    For now I leave the subject but later when my own understanding or rather misunderstanding has clarified, I'll stick around and be willing to speak if anyone wants me to.



    You: "To cross the abyss you have to surrender everything, every last thing."

    Including the ego. The persona. The very thing that causes you to think you are better than any one of us.


    Me again: I really don't think I'm better than anyone else. If it appears like that then perhaps I was playing with an appearance - a "tool" for a specific purpose - ie catalytic.
    How can I think I'm better than anyone when just about any issue that people are undergoing or suffering with, I have undergone and suffered at some point - (except extreme examples such as physical disability etc) - and I am bound to service of my fellows.

    Perhaps this wasn't the best thing to do here.
    I thought I might at least liven things up a bit and prompt people to ask questions, I didn't come here really to dump on people, how could I do that, we're all Thelemites.

    I can see where some are and I can see how some might advance but the lesson my mentor keeps trying to teach me is to let people alone with their own processes & I'm still finding it hard to restrain the desire to jump in, and it's futile anyway.
    My mistake.

    You: "Do you not ever think that the attatchment to Thelema is a part of this? That Thelema also IMPEDES your growth?"

    It does indeed. But for some of us lesser life forms that have not transcended "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" it will have to do for now.

    I absolutely agree with you, I could not ever have done without it, I was not negating it really, I was just trying to point out ways. I did it in rather a ranting kinda form which is inexcusable really but if you want the truth, I haven't had a good rant for so long because a large part of my work was controlling that fire.
    But force and fire are of us, certainly.
    Yes, ok, I apologise for that.

    It is a young Aeon, my friend. How quickly you have transcended the Law!

    I haven't transcended the Law, I just know better than to let ra-hoor-khuit run my life like he did a few years ago, I went all the way with that one and bang! What a ride! Do what thou wilt stands obviously. I just really meant to say - but I expressed it wrong cause I'm still writing as I think and not taking time, which is the result of a lack of time in my life......... I meant to say - master the energies described in the book of the law, particularly Hadit & Ra-hoor-khuit. Don't think that they are going to be totally benevolent to you, even if they feel good.

    I meant - feel it, but don't get posessed by the archetypes, and if you do.... get out of there again. Similarly with "love" and "service" which can cause problems. There are pitfalls in everything. I only learned because I made every conceivable mistake and even then it took a long time to learn, some mistakes I made again just for bully.


    You: Could a plant in your garden grow if you went up to it and pulled its leaves out here, and bent its stalk there, and tried to make it fit a shape that you have in *mind*?

    That would be a Bonzai. And the exercise of making one illustrates the dominance of ones mind over the plant by understanding the plant and its will to be transformed. A good gardner understands this.

    Now genuinely thank you for this because you have helped me with a phase of my work I wasn't sure about. I have been bending myself into wrong forms though and that's created great moments of "aargggghh!" but they all dissolve again anyway. That is the other side of naturalness and simplicity which is where I feel now, but yes, I agree with you, and I am making progress along these lines and the reason why I fail in it is instances of my own remaining cowardice.

    You: All you are doing is being dupes to Choronzon, you are interpreting and re-interpreting Liber Al dependent on how you feel at the moment

    Wait. Didn't you also do that in the following post when you tried to explain why Nuit shall be known and Hadit never? Choronzon is one crafty criter. Better be careful you don't assume you are beyond its grasp.

    Yeah I'm not quite done with Choronzon.
    Current form - hands are the paws of a beast and there is a black hood on my back, and periodically I *see* the Medussa inwardly.


    You: "Self-image is crap and the antithesis of growth and the favourite device of Choronzon."

    You may be right. I think I can agree here. But we are what we are. And a true Magister knows it so well he does not need to tell anyone about it. he is unable to tell, because he has destroyed the man. He is NEMO.

    I have destroyed the man certainly and I seem to be trying to recreate something and it's like AC says.. there is an impulse to create.. but (the offpsring are abortions... or something?) - somthing's going wrong so in that circumstance I do nothing. Yes I am full of confusion I happily admit it. I am not sure whether I should be trying to create something or not. I created a god a few days ago and that had to go really.

    Anyway, I understand what you are getting at, and actually agree with much of it, but that guru complex is doing nothing to further your crossing the Abyss arguments.

    Well I hope the fact that I have drawn attention to me still slooping around the primordial sludge overcomes the guru complex!

    (It's difficult for me because I still don't fully understand the fuller implications of my work in the world but more is coming to me, and it is something of a weird - and hopefully very useful - destiny)

    Thanks again.
    Anthony.

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by Anthony on Monday July 02, @01:53AM
      I didn't really come to here to try to parade grades. Personally I don't think that's very impressive. I might have done it for a bit of a lark though.

      Though I don't think I'll be able to beat "Frater Superior Of The Entire Universe" as a title.
      I think I'll just call myself "Scrappy Doo" or something.

      Nah, what it is.... I had the deal years ago, but some aspects of energies, particularly those of Book III, I did go all the way but it scared me to touch them again and lately I've had to otherwise my work in the world will be paralysed and there is a danger of "going in retrograde" as I call it, which seems a really really nefarious Choronzon trick which I won't explain.

      Reminds me of some Twin Peaks imagery, bizarre.

      I essentially incarnated for a few days a a form "the mystical hawk-headed lord" and that was quite cool indeed and I saw some interesting things indeed but I felt I had to get out of it, and maybe I didn't.

      If anything at the moment I think I am looking for my Khu. All I know is when I gave that Khu up, it was back to like formless chaos so maybe I should have stayed there, a hawk on a little perch in the blackness of infinity.. sometimes... and then it kinda closed off from the infinity and became something more like a human form.

      But I still have confusions about whether I'm "allowed" to have a Khu or whether I'm not.
      I was scared to identify with it too much but I think I'm too sensible to do it.

      You see, I don't know zip and the books won't help me any more, I have to do this on my own terms, purely and simply, and in an honest-all inclusive way, without trying to suppress things and to suppress the human.

      The confusions in me appear because a part of me *thinks* that this self-recreation which is like ultimate tidiness....... could be secreting one's elements around one's ego and being a black brother, hence I let the whole thing go.. and another part of me thinks it's a lot better than the alternative, though the flips and trips are much much diminished now (I figured out how, of course :) -

      I let go of that image cause it was a god, really was, had silence and dominion and beauty and detatchment and seemed fit to do the work I have to do, so might have been a good one.

      I let that slide and that's when I was laying awake one morning and something "said" - the black brothers are going to make a play for you, and since then it's been bedlam but I got thru it and here I am, I'm nothing again, it always works out like that, but exactly what I'm supposed to do here, if I'm supposed to do anything, I will confess I don't have a clue and sometimes I feel like dying but next morning I wake up and I feel ok.


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Anthony on Monday July 02, @02:01AM
        The mystical hawk headed lord, so called, I thought was the form closest to the one I've always had anyway since my very first initation, which was a very big one.

        I think I am going to go back to that.
        It has lost all of its force thank ? -

        It's just I have misunderstandings of concepts on a lot of matters and no matter how much I juggle them they don't seem to make any more sense sometimes.

        I thought I had to go back to being in the infinite and that being in any form is black brotherhood so that's what I dumped it.
        I thought it might be a temptation and a deception.

        It did get me out of the state of being lost in the infinite, and I equally thought - maybe that was a bad thing.

        I think a problem is sometimes I'm just waiting for stuff to happen when I need to act.

        I did *see* that form not during a mirror gazing exercise, but internally, it was just after "the destruction of the universe" (again) and the full opening of the eye in the triangle, and if I can carry on like this, I went on immediately to tame the eagle, then I saw the hawk, then I did this, and from thereon it's been confusion city.

        You see I've really been thru a lot of this several times now but never really got my act together to do my will afterwards and hence accumulated all the old crap again.

        But anyway I'll leave this now, you probably all think I need a psychiatrist.


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by Anthony on Tuesday July 03, @01:14AM
          Sorted now, sorry again, back to the RHP and hope I can be of service sometime & learn from you also.

          And maybe some of you might want to visit

          www.lifeawakening.com
          (not my site)


          • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
            by 0 on Tuesday July 03, @02:08AM
            Silence!


            • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
              by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @01:08PM
              Could you say that a little louder?


              • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                by me on Tuesday July 03, @02:24PM
                I think the tone of this forum has sunk below that of alt.magick and thelema93-list. You can all now pat yourselves on the back for making complete asses out of yourselves.


                • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
                  by Mordecai on Tuesday July 03, @02:32PM
                  Do you consider your contributions (i.e. "jealous") to be of a higher order?


        • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
          by Aleph on Tuesday July 03, @10:43AM
          But anyway I'll leave this now, you probably all think I need a psychiatrist.

          Nah, just a little balance. It's hard crossing the abyss b/c there is no place to set your feet. It's all illusion. But then, your feet are illusion too!

          I personally would do some serious invocation of Ma'at were I in that particular place where you appear to be.

          Have you read Liber Pennae Praenumbra?

          93/696
          Aleph


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Tuesday July 03, @03:11PM
    I haven't but I'm really doing this on my own terms and doing well, and "Silence" is the very best advice there is and is working wonders literally.

    I'll disappear for a bit and see you later.

    • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
      by Anthony on Tuesday July 03, @03:12PM
      I will read that, thanks, though it's moved on now and the challenge is something different from the abovementioned gibberish.


      • Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
        by Anthony on Tuesday July 03, @03:26PM
        "The less and less One grows, the more and more Pra- NU may manifest."

        I've only skimmed this for lack of time at present, will look at it tomorrow, I understand it.

        This track above I've been working on for a long while but periodically fell back and now of course it's the only way and is working.

        The challenge is to temper the pride that mastery can bring (the Superman complex) all will be well. I will and am plumbing the depths and the lead and taming the Beast ever more.

        Anyway, thanks Aleph, I do have a great guide, and I know and *feel* that you are genuine and have attained, and so shall I.

        More than this I shall not say and should not have really, there we go, done now, speak soon.

        Anthony, major Ineptus.


    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Wednesday July 04, @12:15AM
    I saw.. in meditation last night.. yes, I'm an illusion that I'm meditating. And the key of it is to stop manifesting-creating the dark self of ego, then you become in the "white self" of spirit, which is to do with the Priestess and the Fool (I guess Zain the lovers of course) and you kinda see how kinda silly it all is.... was...your life.

    Keep workin' on it.
    I was kinda getting there but this practice helps me stick to it, very very much appreciative, the drinks are on me sometime.

    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Anthony on Wednesday July 04, @09:44AM
    Got it.
    Thanks, can't tell you how much I appreciate that.

    Love
    Anth.

    Re: Compassion is the Vice of Kings
    by Samekh on Thursday August 02, @11:25AM
    Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

    Thelema is not a product to be presented to the public. Point fingers, correct grammer, use basic sarcasm, I really do not give a rat's bum because it is in my nature to be a Thelemite. Thelema is a solitary concept with possibilites of universal application, not the other way around.

    Love is the Law, Love under Will.

    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


        "As St. Paul says, 'Without shedding of blood there is no remission,' and who are we to argue with St. Paul?" -- Aleister Crowley
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster.
    [ home | search ]