The Lineages of the A.'.A.'.

Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 812 Status: Offline

_________________
.: http://iao131.cjb.net :.

-~: The Journal of Thelemic Studies :~-

Joined: Nov 28, 2006 Posts: 22 Status: Offline

Joined: Jul 10, 2007 Posts: 45 Status: Offline

Joined: Apr 21, 2004 Posts: 793 Status: Offline

_________________
"It's all in the egg".

Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 812 Status: Offline

_________________
.: http://iao131.cjb.net :.

-~: The Journal of Thelemic Studies :~-

_________________

* * * * *
Honi soit qui mal y pense.

Joined: Jun 02, 2006 Posts: 1139 Status: Offline

Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 812 Status: Offline

_________________
.: http://iao131.cjb.net :.

-~: The Journal of Thelemic Studies :~-

_________________
The colours are many, but the light is one.

www.flickr.com/photos/jpaul23/
www.flickr.com/groups/the_solar_lodge/
www.the-alembic.co.uk

Joined: Apr 21, 2004 Posts: 793 Status: Offline

_________________
"It's all in the egg".

Joined: Jun 02, 2006 Posts: 1139 Status: Offline

Joined: Oct 01, 2006 Posts: 812 Status: Offline

BlueKephra wrote: ›

kuniggety wrote: ›

jtm wrote: ›
Being slapped is by no means _necessarily_ a reason to slap someone back,

Yes it is and it's not being compassionate by not hitting someone back, it's called being a pussy. I don't mean that in the way of saving face but rather having the back bone to stand up for yourself. No person has a right to hit you. Your body is your temple.

Aum isn't the only one who interprets Liber AL the way he does. Anyone who is literate interprets those lines the same way.

And if I slap you for being an arse to me, maybe your backbone should come into play by your being "manly" enough to admit you deserved it, and to learn something from that.

If they cant admit they deserved it (if they actually did), then yes, I agree with you.

Baccus93 wrote: ›

kuniggety wrote: › Yes it is and it's not being compassionate by not hitting someone back, it's called being a pussy. I don't mean that in the way of saving face but rather having the back bone to stand up for yourself. No person has a right to hit you. Your body is your temple.

To me, the question always comes down to Will - which should be an act consciously decided and not done on the basis of "reason" (which itself has proven itself false).

"30. If Will stops and cries Why, invoking Because, then Will stops & does naught. "

What about the multiple commentaries where Crowley says it should be subconscious. Did you even bother reading the commentaries for the very line you quoted? "There is no 'reason' why a Star should continue in its orbit. Let her rip! Every time the conscious acts, it interferes with the Subconscious, which is Hadit. It is the voice of Man, and not of a God. Any man who 'listens to reason' ceases to be a revolutionary. The newspapers are Past Masters in the Lodge of Sophistry Number 333. They can always prove to you that it is necessary, and patriotic, and all the rest of it, that you should suffer intolerable wrongs." That almost seems to be a direct refutation of your post.

MichaelStaley wrote: ›

kuniggety wrote: › Aum isn't the only one who interprets Liber AL the way he does. Anyone who is literate interprets those lines the same way.

No they don't. To be literate is to have the ability to read the lines; that's different from interpreting them, which arises from predeliction and experience amongst other things. You might choose to interpret those lines in a literal fashion; others might interpret them differently; yet others might pay little heed to them. Liber AL encompasses a diversity of threads, some of which seem to be at odds with others. There's no need to swallow the lot wholesale.

I thin kthe point was that anyone who can understand the most basic meaning of things would interpret the lines that way, as does Crowley if you read the plethora of commentaries and other texts like Liber XC. You can nitpick and say 'being literate doesnt mean you can interpret things' but you obviously get the idea - this literal meaning is so clear that you would have to be illiterate not to see it.

kidneyhawk wrote: › This topic of why Compassion is such a dispicable vice should probably have its own thread, although I suspect it would be filled with cut and past quotes, "beat 'em down" sentiments and very quickly sweep into "you're an idiot" type posts, counterbalanced, of course, by "no, YOU'RE an idiot" type posts.

For some reason, taht seems to be how most threads are, not just for 'compassion.' Im glad you have such high expectations of the posters here....

Quote: › Although "666 supporting these ideas" is hardly justification for our own necessary acceptance of them, the quote given by AUM above is really interesting.

Quote: ›
To “suffer with” some other being is clearly to cease to be oneself

Right. Like a doctor who takes no precaution against being infected by his disease ridden patients and thus becomes of no use to them-or himself-as he joins them in their disabling and terminal condition. But it still may very well be the Will of said doctor to be in that profession for a host of reasons which benefit both himself and his world. His nature may lead him to kindness and service and energy poured out to helping others but he has sharp lines drawn as to what exactly that involvement is.

Or money. I would say the majority of doctors are not i nthat profession out of compassion, but rather out of intellectual enjoyment, or more commonly, the fact that they get a lot of money.

Quote: › Aum, I think, without clarification, the language of Al, Crowley and possibly yourself may come across as a promotion of CRUELTY as some sort of Thelemic virtue by casting its shadow and this is what I see jtm and others reacting against.

Thelemic virtue? I cringe at that phrase. I dont care if people view actions as cruel or beneficient. As I quoted thrice before from Herman Hesse, "People with courage and character always seem sinister to the rest." One doing their Will has no care if it seems cruel or not. Something that is cruel from one perspective is compassion from another (I refer specifically to Crowley's discourse of how one person would want to kill Nero and the Master of the Temple would know that Nero's slaughtering is a necessary and fundamental part of the universe, etc.) The idea that is connected to this 'Thelemic compassion,' if you wish to call it such, is that a King is immortal/eternal, so this cruelty is just a 'jostle' along the way, as is any 'suffering,' which are but as shadows. From the viewpoint of the infinite, or even from a few millenia, these 'cruelties' are laughable and often lead to much 'progress' in humanity - would the League of Nations/UN be created if there weren't world wars? Would there be any care about others if we didnt see suffering around us? etc...

Quote: › The idea that what is being extolled is a "virtue" of being an asshole and a harmful element in society. When the weak get in your way, crush 'em! But what defines weakness? The unfitness of the agent to the For example, as a social worker, many hours of my day are spent working with and assisting disabled adults. Does a body in a wheelchair imply some physical weakness which is better fed into a furnace than assisted? Does a baby born with a cognitive or physical disability deserve the bloody chopping block of Aiwass? ("Sorry, kid-this world's for the strong..." Butcher knife misses the umbilical cord. Thunk.)

People who kill cripples will have to suffer the consequences - i.e. much jail time, or if you kill enough, be deemed a war hero (yes, that is a cynical joke).

Quote: › I

I think jtm has made it clear that he'd just as soon live in a world where people are nice to each other and everybody wins and can pursue their bliss. Of course, that's not the state of affairs we're in. So we MUST deal with this discord.

Exactly. The desire for a perfect harmonious Kingdom of perfect justice is a childish fantasy.

Quote: › Turning the other cheek IS ineffectual and jtm seems to have said several times that if he's bitten, he'll bite back. But he'd rather be dealing with other things. As I think most of us would. If your Will is to be in the lab, working hard on developing a new vaccine-or in the studio, cutting new forms into stone, or in the garden, tending vegetation, having bullets shot your way is going to be a hindrance and not some glorious war-world.

No, but bullets ARE shot peoples ways, no matter what they are doing - pretending like this doesnt happen is simply silly.

Quote: ›