| From the Galleries |
1703 pictures in 26 albums
Jimmy Page
Last Updated Picture:
'Chinese Dragons' Automatic Drawing by Chris Anthony Wills
|
|
| Statistics |
Site visits since 30 September 2003:
21,499,941
Yesterday's visits:
27,865
Registrations:
Today: 1
Yesterday: 4
Overall: 5407
Newest Members:
|
|
| Review Submissions |
Attention authors, publishers and retailers! Are you trying to market a newly-released Thelemic product? This site is viewed daily up to 20,000 times by some of the most influential Thelemites. If you'd like to bring your product to their attention, contact us now to arrange for a review to be placed on lashtal.com.
|
|
| Random Quote |
|
New Age is merely softened down and tarted up Christianity; an outmoded religion once adhered to by primitive mammalian primates based upon ludicrous notions of sin and guilt. Under Christianity, perfectly natural desires were called ‘sinful’. Under New Age, you still have to be guilty as sin for the same, for the words and phrases are ‘unspiritual’ - whatever that may mean - or ‘not virtuous’. Whatever words are used, people still end up feeling guilty over perfectly natural and honourable feelings like love, hate, lust, anger et al.
-- Gerald Suster
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
zain |
|
Post subject:
 Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 02:26 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 155
Status: Offline
|
|
Patriarch156 you have sort of proved my point by your use of the term "aggressive promulgation". Is that not what Christian missionaries were doing in Africa/South America in a misguided atempt to "save their souls"? And why does it need to be aggressive? Theres no point having a go at me when, i raise a legitimate point over how misguided people, repeating the mistakes of the past, while you are quite content to follow the words of Crowley for justification and use those said words has a reason to "sell" & evangelise a specific interpretation of Crowley's Thelema. Patriarch156 would you like to explain the difference between someone in an organsiation aggressively promulgating Thelema , and a christian missionary or evangelical "converting" people to christ? Is there a difference?
I accept some of your points but i see this idea of selling/pushing Thelema on to people (or aggressive promulgation as you insist) as repeating the mistakes of the past and religions-traditions who thought that they were doing right but ended up making things much worse. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
Patriarch156 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 02:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 03, 2005
Posts: 149
Status: Offline
|
|
By aggressive I meant that it would be the chief point of Crowley's and by extension of that his plans for his "temporal Order"'s public relations after this. I.e. he wanted the Law, again in accordance with what he saw as the commands of the Secret Chiefs to him, to be declared to everyone. I did not mean it as in the sense of torturing people or threatening them if they did not accept the Law of Thelema. I suggest you reread Liber CCC where A.C. discusses his plans about promulgation, including how he solves the "convert not" command in AL.
zain wrote: › Theres no point having a go at me when, i raise a legitimate point over how misguided people, repeating the mistakes of the past, while you are quite content to follow the words of Crowley for justification and use those said words has a reason to "sell" & evangelise a specific interpretation of Crowley's Thelema.
You misunderstand me, I am having a go at your misunderstandings and appeals to authority when it can have no such authority over other Thelemites.
Quote: › I accept some of your points but i see this idea of selling/pushing Thelema on to people (or aggressive promulgation as you insist) as repeating the mistakes of the past and religions-traditions who thought that they were doing right but ended up making things much worse.
That is fine, but I don't understand why you want to bring an appeal to the Law of Thelema into it. Particularly when you don't give us anything but your own muddled take on it to settle the question.
I also want to note that in this thread as far as promulgation is concerned I have merely written what Crowley thought. Your issues is with the scribe of the Book of the Law, not me. While I do agree with Crowley, that is not what I have discussed in this thread. I have merely wanted to clarify what Crowley thought on the subject matter. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Camlion |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 03:27 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 535
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: ›
In the context of me only changing minor words in Walterfive's statement here i have shown that in principle he is no different from the christian missionaries who went over to Africa to destroy alternative ideas and beliefs and to sell and convert people to a foreign way of belief that was at odds with their own experience.
One of the things about being a Thelemite is accepting a person's good points AND their bad points. Accepting people for being themselves. Not seeing someone who needs to be "changed" or "cured" with the "panacea" that is supposedly Thelema. If the ideas of Thelema imply that allowing people to find their own way is better than bullying and brainwashing them like Christian missionaries, how come even now, some supposed self proclaimed Thelemites cant see that.
Zain, you are missing the point quite clumsily.
The point is the difference between the message of Thelema and that of the Christian missionaries in your illustration. The message of Thelema bids us to be our true selves and to behave accordingly, in keeping with our natures. The message of the Christian missionaries is the antithesis of this, that we should be true to other than our true selves, our being 'sinners' by nature, and should act otherwise, in accordance with artificial guidelines set forth in unnatural dogma, thus delivering us from our 'sinful' nature.
The one, Thelemic, celebrates our true nature, the other, Christian, condemns it.
The fact that each party to your analogy happens to be delivering a message is not relevant. The messages themselves are what is important, and the differences in the messages could not be any greater or more obvious.
I find it ridiculous that you criticize the very practice of message delivery itself, on the grounds that the process has been abused in the past, without any consideration for the obvious differences in the messages in question.
Other than the general practice of message delivery, you present no valid analogy of Thelema to the Christian missionaries. "Accepting people for being themselves," as you put it, is exactly what is being advocated by the Law of Thelema. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Walterfive |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 03:59 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Posts: 211
Location: 13th Floor Elevator, Enron Hubbard Bldg. Houston, Texxas
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Just as a little experiment i am going to take one of walterfive's posts and rephrase some minor words and use christian terms , but still keeping the context of his his argumment.
You could have done it with Communism and painted me red, too. It still wouldn't have proved your point.
zain wrote: › I give you Walterfive the Christian missionary:
*snip*
In the context of me only changing minor words in Walterfive's statement here i have shown that in principle he is no different from the christian missionaries who went over to Africa to destroy alternative ideas and beliefs and to sell and convert people to a foreign way of belief that was at odds with their own experience.
Except I didn't go Africa to do it, and I'm not Christian, you mean? Or that the people I speak of are hardly of 'alternative ideas and beliefs', vis a vis, as members of the Pagan and/or Magickal Community they're actually of *complimentary* ideas and beliefs? Allow me speculate that the construction of logical syllogisms may not exactly be your 'Strong Suite.'
(Excuse me Moderator, but do I have to suffer this sort of Ad Hominem attack without any sort of aggressive or pointed defense?)
zain wrote: › One of the things about being a Thelemite is accepting a person's good points AND their bad points.
No, Zain, that's "one of the things" about being an enlightened and tolerant being. It transcends all religion and philosophy. You ought to try it some time.
zain wrote: › Accepting people for being themselves. Not seeing someone who needs to be "changed" or "cured" with the "panacea" that is supposedly Thelema. If the ideas of Thelema imply that allowing people to find their own way is better than bullying and brainwashing them like Christian missionaries, how come even now, some supposed self proclaimed Thelemites cant see that.
Oh, I'm a "supposed self-proclaimed Thelemite" now? "Bullying and brainwashing"? Zain, what *I* have done over the last 18 years in the great State of Texas is to help build a larger, more organized and cohesive magickal community wherein Thelemites are respected as equals, a situation that is need of remedy in many other parts of the United States and the World. In doing so I have set an example that others have found worthy of respect and emulation. I realize that things like recieving respect from others, or having them emulate what they percieve as your finer qualities *are* probably alien concepts to you, but that's your loss, in my opinion. Personally, I find them of value. And still, "it is the Law to give." I have planted the seeds, and I have watched them grow, and I enjoy the company of those who have found their way to "our Law" through the works I have achieved, and the example I have set. Children that I knew when they were pre-teens ask me to sponsor them for membership in the O.T.O. Others have known me as "Priest" for all of their young lives, and come to me for advice and opinions.
Tell me, Zain: what have *you* done to promote and promulgate "our Law, and the joy of the world"?
As Patriarch156 properly notes, your *real* issues are with the Scribe of the Holy Books of Thelema. I suggest you take them up with him. |
Last edited by Walterfive on Jul 23, 2008 - 04:44 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lashtal |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 04:27 PM
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 2389
Location: Oxford, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Walterfive wrote: › Excuse me Moderator, but do I have to suffer this sort of Ad Hominem attack without any sort of aggressive or pointed defense?
What sort of "aggressive defense" were you seeking from me? In relation to what "Ad Hominem" attack exactly? |
_________________
Paul
Owner & Editor
LAShTAL.COM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
zain |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 04:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 155
Status: Offline
|
|
| Walterfive i dont believe i have attacked you,. what i was attempting to do was show the similarities of a group that seeks to "promote" Thelema and similar practices of christian evangelical groups who engaged in promulgation of a similar nature. Again this comes back to whether aggressive promulgation or "spreading the word" is a positive tool to be used. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
IAO131 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 04:45 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 09, 2007
Posts: 265
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Patriarch156 you have sort of proved my point by your use of the term "aggressive promulgation". Is that not what Christian missionaries were doing in Africa/South America in a misguided atempt to "save their souls"? And why does it need to be aggressive? Theres no point having a go at me when, i raise a legitimate point over how misguided people, repeating the mistakes of the past, while you are quite content to follow the words of Crowley for justification and use those said words has a reason to "sell" & evangelise a specific interpretation of Crowley's Thelema. Patriarch156 would you like to explain the difference between someone in an organsiation aggressively promulgating Thelema , and a christian missionary or evangelical "converting" people to christ? Is there a difference?
I accept some of your points but i see this idea of selling/pushing Thelema on to people (or aggressive promulgation as you insist) as repeating the mistakes of the past and religions-traditions who thought that they were doing right but ended up making things much worse.
You know, sometimes its best to admit you are wrong or at least stay quiet on the subject otherwise you just dig yourself in deeper, thinking you are doing right but ending up making things much worse.
IAO131 |
_________________
* Journal of Thelemic Studies *
.: http://iao131.cjb.net :.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
zain |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 04:49 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 155
Status: Offline
|
|
Picking up on Patriarch156 's point of "authority". Yes he is quite right, that i dont have the authority to sell , promote, and "educate" on Thelema. But neither does Patriarch156. Or anyone for that matter, due to the subjective nature of Thelema and its various forms and interpretations. And i dont accept Crowley's word being used in "creative" ways to justify or push a particular agenda. In one sentence Crowley says "aggressively promulgate" Thelema. And in another breath we get "convert ye not". So using Crowley's sometimes contradictory writing doesnt help and can cause even more confusion. Again another reason why "spreading the word" is not helpful.
Patriarch156, can you explain in you own opinion what "aggressively promulgate" Thelema means in practical terms. And is it actually neccessary or needed at all in the 21st century? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Camlion |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 04:56 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 535
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › what i was attempting to do was show the similarities of a group that seeks to "promote" Thelema and similar practices of christian evangelical groups who engaged in promulgation of a similar nature.
You have failed to show any such thing, as per my post above. A reply would be appreciated. Thanks. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Walterfive |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 05:02 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Posts: 211
Location: 13th Floor Elevator, Enron Hubbard Bldg. Houston, Texxas
Status: Offline
|
|
lashtal wrote: › Walterfive wrote: › Excuse me Moderator, but do I have to suffer this sort of Ad Hominem attack without any sort of aggressive or pointed defense?
What sort of "aggressive defense" were you seeking from me? In relation to what "Ad Hominem" attack exactly?
Oh, I wasn't seeking any from *you*. What I was seeking was either permission to exchange in kind or at least acknowlegement of the attack, as you've had issue with those sort of exchanges elsewhere. Why I, or anyone else should suffer fools at all, let alone gladly, is more to the point. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Walterfive |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 05:13 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 08, 2005
Posts: 211
Location: 13th Floor Elevator, Enron Hubbard Bldg. Houston, Texxas
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Walterfive i dont believe i have attacked you,. what i was attempting to do was show the similarities of a group that seeks to "promote" Thelema and similar practices of christian evangelical groups who engaged in promulgation of a similar nature.
And it has been categorically explained to you that your supposition was flawed from the inception. The practices are in no way similar, neither are we speaking of a "group", nor do the philosophies in question bear any similarities. This has been presented to you by Camlion, by Patriarch156, and by my own hand, yet our efforts have yet to breach the bastion of your stubborness and permit you to recognize the fallacies of your premisses have failed through fault of our own. You are wrong. This is not a matter of opinion. It is a matter of elementary Formal Logic. It has been presented in a manner that any reasonable person would understand. Therefore, I can only conclude that you are not a reasonable person, and have no place in polite conversation or discussion--i.e. a Troll.  |
Last edited by Walterfive on Jul 25, 2008 - 04:52 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Patriarch156 |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 06:40 PM
|
|
Joined: Jun 03, 2005
Posts: 149
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Picking up on Patriarch156 's point of "authority". Yes he is quite right, that i dont have the authority to sell , promote, and "educate" on Thelema.
When have I ever claimed that you don't have the authority to sell, promote and "educate" on Thelema? I believe my point was that by appealing to the authority of Thelema and only referencing your own idiosyncratic take on it you naively mistake your own authority for having any relevance for other Thelemites as far as settling this discussion goes. As I pointed out, if you want that to happen you have to a. show which principle of the Law it violates and b. how it violates it. So far all you have done is demonstrate your ignorance about the very principles you appealed to.
Quote: › But neither does Patriarch156. Or anyone for that matter, due to the subjective nature of Thelema and its various forms and interpretations.
Please do not conflate your own points with the points I was trying to make. I believe I was making the opposite point of what you were making as far as Crowley's Law of Thelema were concerned after his attainment of the grade of Magus.
[quote]And i dont accept Crowley's word being used in "creative" ways to justify or push a particular agenda. In one sentence Crowley says "aggressively promulgate" Thelema. And in another breath we get "convert ye not".[Quote]
Show me where I have creatively used Crowley's word to push a particular agenda. As I have pointed out my concern was historical truth not agenda. In my initial post I even pointed out how modern Thelemites might even disagree with this, something I reiterated in my reply to you and I was fine with that. My only point was that it is rather clear what Crowley thought about the subject and any amount of real creative quoting of the Book of the Law erroneously won't change that. If so you need to demonstrate how A.C. does not mean what he does in the letters I quoted or at least justify how A.C. interpreted the Book of the Law in opposition to that, when in fact as I noted he addresses the convert not quote in Liber CCC.
Quote: › So using Crowley's sometimes contradictory writing doesnt help and can cause even more confusion.
It only cause more confusion when people like you don't like being shown that your own take is not justified by reference to Aleister Crowley and because of this has to engage in various creative misrepresentations of his thoughts on the subject matter.
I suggest you familiarize yourself a bit with the subject matter, since the answer to your question is given in the quotes I gave and in Liber CCC which I already refered you to.
Quote: › Again another reason why "spreading the word" is not helpful.
Considering the erroneous notions you are spreading and even demanding that other Thelemites accept, I think spreading the word is healthy if it curtails petty tyrants such as you trying to hijack the agenda of the Law of Thelema for the rest of us. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lashtal |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 07:15 PM
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 2389
Location: Oxford, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
Walterfive wrote: › Oh, I wasn't seeking any from *you*. What I was seeking was either permission to exchange in kind...
There's nothing in the Guidelines to mitigate against you providing a robust defence of your position, especially when attacked. Judging by the responses Zain has generated here, he/she hasn't exactly impressed, in any case! |
_________________
Paul
Owner & Editor
LAShTAL.COM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Camlion |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 07:22 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 535
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Camilon i dont have a bias against the Caliphate OTO per say, but i have a bias against persons or groups which seek to put a one sided view or a distorted view of Thelema.
People with an irrational contempt for all things OTO are often the same people that incorrectly assume that the promulgation of the Law of Thelema is of interest only to the OTO. Hence, they identify the one with the other, and condemn the practice. In the absence of any rational evidence to the contrary, I can only assume that this is an example of that. A stupid waste of everyone's time, since the OTO is not the topic of this thread. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
zain |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 08:08 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 04, 2007
Posts: 155
Status: Offline
|
|
Another way to approach this thread is to ask, is that in a 21st century society that allows people to learn , explore, and develop without obstruction , i put it that the need to "aggressively promulgate" Thelema is not needed. Even if this was the case, no organisation or person would have that "authority" ( historical or otherwise to do so). I put forward, that if any person wants to understand Thelema then only they can do so themself. In my own opinon, any group or person who thinks they can evangelise or "teach" Thelema to the world is misguided and borders on the mistakes made by evangelicals and missionaries who thought they were doing "good".
So going back to the orignal post of alick and his point of "spreading the word", in hindsight maybe he meant well, but that its flawed in its application.
I would still be curious to know what Patriarch156's opinion on what "aggressively promulgate" Thelema, is in a open 21st century society in practice and action. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Camlion |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 08:35 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 535
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › Another way to approach this thread is to ask, is that in a 21st century society that allows people to learn , explore, and develop without obstruction , i put it that the need to "aggressively promulgate" Thelema is not needed. Even if this was the case, no organisation or person would have that "authority" ( historical or otherwise to do so). I put forward, that if any person wants to understand Thelema then only they can do so themself. In my own opinon, any group or person who thinks they can evangelise or "teach" Thelema to the world is misguided and borders on the mistakes made by evangelicals and missionaries who thought they were doing "good".
So going back to the orignal post of alick and his point of "spreading the word", in hindsight maybe he meant well, but that its flawed in its application.
I would still be curious to know what Patriarch156's opinion on what "aggressively promulgate" Thelema, is in a open 21st century society in practice and action.
As Erwin wondered earlier, how are people to come into contact with Thelema initially? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Erwin |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 08:42 PM
|
|
Joined: Feb 15, 2007
Posts: 314
Status: Offline
|
|
zain wrote: › I put forward, that if any person wants to understand Thelema then only they can do so themself. In my own opinon, any group or person who thinks they can evangelise or "teach" Thelema to the world is misguided
Whilst teachers can present information in various ways, they cannot simply transplant understanding from one head into another, so all this talk about "understanding Thelema for themselves" is a complete red herring, because all understanding ultimately has to be "done by oneself" for this reason. You appear to have this peculiar idea that if anybody so much as tells another person what they think Thelema is then that person will be forever barred from understanding it properly, but that they will be able to understand it if all the information on the subject in the world is withheld from them. It's an utterly bizarre and nonsensical notion.
Erwin |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Camlion |
|
|
Post subject: Re: Spreading the Thelemic Word?
Posted: Jul 23, 2008 - 09:24 PM
|
|
Joined: Apr 23, 2004
Posts: 535
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Status: Offline
|
|
In the face of zero rebuttal, I will concede two points, just to help poor zain out: 
1. Too extensive an introduction to the message of Thelema runs the risk of bias and inaccuracy on the part of the presenter.
2. Progress toward full and complete understanding depends upon the individual's own degree of experience.
Now, zain, how is the initial contact with the subject to occur? |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
amadan-De |
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: Spreading the Thelemic Word?
| | | | |
|
in 1° 
: 
in 16° 
: Anno IVxvi 
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
