How would anyone re...
 
Notifications
Clear all

How would anyone recognize a Magister Templi?

Page 1 / 3

Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

http://www.lashtal.com/forum/index.php?topic=6958.120

In the above thread we were discussing how to recognize someone who claimed to be 8=3. The example of Erwin Hessle was brought in.  This is how it developed;

"Azidonis" wrote:
I find Erwin's claim to 8=3 way more humorous, to be quite honest.

and then............

"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Jamie Barter" wrote:
Erwin's 8=3 has been suggested by two people now.  Where would this claim be made, out of (mild) interest?

I recall reading it in the course of a visit to his website or blog, many years ago now. Given his views so insistently articulated over the years, I imagine it's humorous. Y'know - "thank god I wore my corset, because my sides have split", "the only reason I didn't laugh out loud was because if I did, my head would fall off", that sort of thing.

"belmurru" wrote:
Yes, just look up the name "erwin hessle" and you'll come across posts by "erwin hessle 8=3"

There even appears to have been an "erwin hessle 8=3" yahoo/google group -
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.magick/ys4GH3XEEdY%5B1-25-false%5D

and a ...................

"ignant666" wrote:
If Erwin is 8=3, this implies that there is a Magus 9=2 who has recognized his achievement- I wonder who that might be, and what his "Word" might be?
To recycle perhaps my best lashtal joke, this "Lifestyles of the Rich and Ipsissimous" stuff gives me a pain where i sit down.
According to a "baby-name meanings" site, this Frater's magical motto "Erwin Hessle" translates to "Bold Boar Friend", an interesting choice.

then a ............

"jamie barter" wrote:
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Jamie Barter" wrote:
Erwin's 8=3 has been suggested by two people now.  Where would this claim be made, out of (mild) interest?

I recall reading it in the course of a visit to his website or blog, many years ago now. Given his views so insistently articulated over the years, I imagine it's humorous. Y'know - "thank god I wore my corset, because my sides have split", "the only reason I didn't laugh out loud was because if I did, my head would fall off", that sort of thing.

Ah, ha - I see: a bit like Peter Carroll when he also called himself an “Ipsissimus”, you mean?  Or Grady McMutry with his 9=2?  Or ...

- So, nobody takes it remotely seriously, then?  (“Speak up”, if anyone does!)

This begs the question of where on earth would we all be without the universal balm of humorous irony…

... so far is posters disputing whether Erwin is 8=3 and someone even asking should we take the 8=3 claim seriously.  At this point imo a voice of reason stepped in pointing out that fixation and projection can ensue when someone nonchalantyl claims to be 8=3 ...........

"Los" wrote:
"belmurru" wrote:
There even appears to have been an "erwin hessle 8=3" yahoo/google group -
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.magick/ys4GH3XEEdY%5B1-25-false%5D

If I'm not mistaken, that's one -- of many -- threads on the old alt.magick usenet bulletin boards. You can even see that the OP of that thread is inquiring what the 8=3 title designates.

If you read through the alt.magick archives to the posts from nearly twenty years ago, Erwin makes an interesting observation in a few places: that even though he never makes a big deal out of his grade, lots of posters fixate on it. They project all kinds of their own issues  -- and their own (in many cases) bizarre assumptions about grades/attainments/orders/magick -- onto someone who merely puts a few numbers after his name.

It's an interesting exercise to reflect on how a title -- a few numbers, in this case -- can alter people's responses and perspectives so drastically, and stir up all kinds of issues for them. Their responses are their own responsibility -- and if they pay attention to their reactions, it will teach them something valuable.

To bring this all around to this very thread -- which has long since gone off the rails -- you can observe a similar but distinct phenomenon going on in these parts. Posters who are unable to address the substance of what I say abandon rational conversation and instead speculate about me, in some cases posting bizarre fantasies that reveal a lot more about themselves, their insecurities, and their desperation for attention.

It's in *this* sense that the "universe is a magical mirror," as some space cadets like to say: that your own responses and projections onto things say much, much more about you than about the things in question. Becoming aware of this and learning from this are what actually constitutes the lion's share of actual initiation.

And it's in *this* sense that observing the self in actual situations of interactions with others -- even on a message board -- is somewhere in the vicinity of a zillion times more useful for actual initiation than years of observing the self while pretending to have conversations with spacemen.

On the question of 8=3 specifically, there's an interesting piece on Erwin's blog here: http://www.erwinhessle.com/blog/?p=84

which (to my dismay?amazement? if I'm not mistaken) completely went over people's heads.  I f I may I'd like to ask you how would anyone recognize a Magister Templi anyway?  "By their works they shall be known"?  How do we identify an adept?  If someone publicly claimed to be adept at taming wild dogs then we could gather that evidence by taking a bunch of wild dogs and watching him do his thing expertly so. If the dogs were to remain wild then we know he's full of it.  Can we do the same with a Magister Templi?  At what point do we call it a day and reject that adept's self-appointed claim?


Quote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

What on earth is the evidence that Erwin is a Magister Templi?
If one is not in the habit of accepting claims without evidence, and there is no evidence even asserted that gives any basis for accepting a grandiose claim, that claim is likely (as here) to invite ridicule.
When the claim involves the additional claim that there is now, or recently has been, a Magus who has recognized that claim, it almost demands ridicule.
When the claim to advanced spiritual mastery is made by someone associated with promulgating ludicrous claims about Crowley/Thelema, we can eliminate the "almost"- thus the immediate cavalcade of derision from several posters on learning of this claim. By the standards you claim to follow, david, you should have joined that chorus. That Erwin embodies Love is a pretty self-refuting claim.
Or is Erwin simply asserting that he has claimed the grade by taking the oath, risking "the most terrific penalties by the presumption", as "[a]ny neophyte of the Order (or, as some say, any person soever) possesses the right to " do? I hope his pyramid doesn't get profaned.
Yes, i think we are entitled to see some wild dogs tamed when the grade is claimed, as OJ's lawyer did not say:

Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
(Matthew 7:16-17)

Since it has apparently been more than 20 years since Fr. Bold Boar-Friend assumed his 8=3 grade, presumably his garden of disciples have now caused the desert to bloom?
Where are the fruits, as opposed to the more apparent thorns and thistles?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 

Before I answer let me develop that adept dog-whisperer analogy.  He should be able to explain what it is he intends to do, how he does it and how and why we can learn to do the same as him.  We must also be given pointers as to any signs of any development we make within that process.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"ignant666" wrote:
What on earth is the evidence that Erwin is a Magister Templi?

or anyone else for that matter?  Wearing a certain coloured gown in a particular building with some other coloured gown wearers making certain gestures and intonations?

"ignant666" wrote:
If one is not in the habit of accepting claims without evidence, and there is no evidence even asserted that gives any basis for accepting a grandiose claim, that claim is likely (as here) to invite ridicule.

I see so you have specific and definite hallmarks outlined for how an M.T. behaves and this is how you recognize one?  Would you be so kind as to share that info please?

"ignant666" wrote:
When the claim involves the additional claim that there is now, or recently has been, a Magus who has recognized that claim, it almost demands ridicule.

You mean P.J.Carroll?

"ignant666" wrote:
When the claim to advanced spiritual mastery is made by someone associated with promulgating ludicrous claims about Crowley/Thelema,

What are those so-called ludicrous claims?

"ignant666" wrote:
Yes, i think we are entitled to see some wild dogs tamed when the grade is claimed,

I repeat: I see so you have specific and definite hallmarks outlined for how an M.T. behaves and this is how you recognize one?  Would you be so kind as to share that info please?


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473

ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
I f I may I'd like to ask you how would anyone recognize a Magister Templi anyway?

You don't. Only the individual in question can ever know.

At what point do we call it a day and reject that adept's self-appointed claim?

What need would there ever be to determine somebody else's "grade"? It seems to me that the people who tend to be interested in this sort of thing are the "order types" who seriously believe in magical "currents" and the idea that somebody else can "transmit" attainment and the like.

It's nonsense. All initiation is self-initiation. Since the work of initiation is the work of learning about your self and paying attention to your self, nobody can even help you do it in any direct way. The best that somebody else can do is kind of point you in the right direction for you to go off and do it yourself. The work is entirely individual.

Trying to figure out somebody else's "grade" is mostly a waste of time and usually a total distraction. Even if you could confirm that somebody was an 8=3, what would that do for you? It could tell you something about where the person is coming from, and I guess it might mean that the person could be worth listening to on some matters, but even then, what he says would still stand or fall on its own merits.


ReplyQuote
NKB
 NKB
(@nkb)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 71
 

Well said Los. You summed up my own thoughts on this nicely.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
If I may I'd like to ask you how would anyone recognize a Magister Templi anyway?

You don't. Only the individual in question can ever know.

Well said!

One Star says: "The Magister Templi is pre-eminently the Master of Mysticism, that is, His Understanding is entirely free from internal contradiction or external obscurity; His word is to comprehend the existing Universe in accordance with His own Mind.

At what point do we call it a day and reject that adept's self-appointed claim?

At any point you wish (Will). Go ahead, call it a day. But there's no need to reject another's "claim." Why are they making such a claim?

"A true server gathers around him those whom it is his duty to serve and aid by the force of his life and his spiritualised personality, and not by his claims or loud speaking."

"Each worker is responsible for himself and his service and for no one else. It is wise to gauge and approximate the evolutionary status, not upon claims made, but upon work accomplished and the love and wisdom shown."

- A Treatise on White Magic

Beginners merely need to (think that) they perceive someone who they hold (in their mind) as being "more advanced" than one's self, and then they can choose to accept that (more advanced) person as a teacher. One can usually tell if someone is (more or less) at their own level, and they can often tell if a person is more advanced, or less advanced, than themselves; but not how much more advanced.

The average anybody has no criteria for judging a "Master of Mysticism," so why bother trying? ???


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"Shiva" wrote:
Why are they making such a claim?

Why not? To a Master of the Temple, there's no reason to make the claim, but there's also no reason not to. Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

More generally, we might ask why people claim to have titles of any kind? Why do some people, for instance, publicly claim the title of "doctor"? Claiming it might give other people some information about the person, but even if one accepts the claim, one still has to judge everything the person says on the merits of what the person says. The title just might suggest that the person is worth paying attention to.

his spiritualised personality

A Master of the Temple doesn't have a "spiritualized personality." An MT lacks a personality, which is not the same thing as lacking the constituent pieces that formerly made up the personality. You seem to be suggesting that claiming the grade or speaking loudly in general are characteristics that are somehow incompatible with the attainment, and that strikes me as a shallow interpretation of the grade.

"It is wise to gauge and approximate the evolutionary status, not upon claims made, but upon work accomplished and the love and wisdom shown."

Flowery and nice sounding, but ultimately meaningless. I'll bet your definitions of "work," "love," and "wisdom" don't match other people's. For example, some people might think that kindly and patronizingly nodding at someone's wacky claims is a form of "love," and they might think that calling that person a dipshit who believes dumb nonsense is some kind of "hatred." In fact, they just might have their definitions backwards on that one.

Beginners merely need to (think that) they perceive someone who they hold (in their mind) as being "more advanced" than one's self, and then they can choose to accept that (more advanced) person as a teacher.

I'm going to disagree. What beginners need is an ability to tell good advice from bad advice. If they find a friend who tends to give more good advice than bad, then great, but setting up this friend as a "teacher" or (worse) a "master" of some kind is an atrociously stupid mistake. All advice stands or falls on its own merits, not based on who says it.

One can usually tell if someone is (more or less) at their own level, and they can often tell if a person is more advanced, or less advanced, than themselves; but not how much more advanced.

Disagree. I think one of the marks of the beginner is not yet being able to distinguish someone "more advanced" from someone who spouts a lot of flowery gibberish that the beginner thinks is profound because it's incomprehensible. A good rule of thumb: if a person can't explain a subject clearly, that person is probably talking out of his ass.

The average anybody has no criteria for judging a "Master of Mysticism"

The extraordinary anybody also has no criteria for judging a "Master of Mysticism." Luckily, it's completely irrelevant who is "really" a "Master of Mysticism."


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

Why do some people publicly claim the title "doctor"?
Um, because we've earned that title, by the sort of demonstrated evidence some are so fond of requiring in some contexts.
It's not a claim of authority, but of verifiable attainments.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"ignant666" wrote:
Why do some people publicly claim the title "doctor"?
Um, because we've earned that title, by the sort of demonstrated evidence some are so fond of requiring in some contexts.

Well, the titles "doctor" and "Master of the Temple" are different in the sense that, in the case of the former, there's evidence that allows other people to verify the claim, and, in the case of the latter, there's not.

But the question wasn't about *verifying* the titles -- the question was about *claiming* the titles. Why would someone *claim* the title publicly?

I contend that *claiming* a title -- in many cases, and definitely in the cases of these two titles -- is an act of giving information to other people about the individual. Whether people accept the claim or not, and what they do or do not do based on that acceptance -- those are entirely different questions.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
 

I would say that if you have the ask the question, then the answer is likely to be in the negative, as it's pretty obvious when someone has reached that level of attainment.

The whole idea of this [Master of the Temple ] grade is that one needs to be able to understand and account - in their own particular way - for the Universe. It simply isn't going to be possible to use someone else's thoughts for this purpose as they must effectively come from one's own being.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
it's pretty obvious when someone has reached that level of attainment.

Is it? What makes you say that?


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

In case some clot may claim (contrary to: a) Holy Writ, which says "Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them" [Matthew 7:16]; b) all common sense; c) skepticism; d) "skepticism"; e) repeated claims by any said clot to "evaluate claims" with "evidence"; and f) all AC wrote (see links I provided above)), that a magisteria is just some vague wishy-washy thing not clearly demonstrable at Will, I provide a "true testimonial" (hat-tip to all who get the reference) by St. Patti Smith, the Pope's favorite singer, and an indisputable Magistra Templi 8=3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VbyKLhaLTE
For any curious about what "BABALON" may refer to in the Thelemic literature, see above. For a superb account of the "Attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel", see her magnificent Just Kids. She is appropriately silent about later attainments therein, but all who view the linked video may see that she has brought forth "fruits".


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

Anyone who does not "accept" my "claim" to the title "Doctor of Philosophy", or St. Patti's attainment as an 8=3, has simply demonstrated that they do not understand the meaning of "attainment" in the respective cases.
What anyone else may "do or [...] not do based on that acceptance" is, I can assure you in one case, and I'm pretty sure in the other, a matter of great indifference.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"ignant666" wrote:
Why do some people publicly claim the title "doctor"?  ... It's not a claim of authority, but of verifiable attainments.

Yes, and if one claims that (doc) title, and he or she hasn't really earned it, there are usually civil penalties (in many jurisdictions). On the other hand, there is no civil penalty for claiming to be a Magister ... There are no laws against it, and no civil body to effect a punishment or to award/recognize the title.

Well, in ancient Rome, a Magister was a big deal, and one would not have been quick to make the claim unless appointed by the Emperor or whatever body was involved.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

Our esteemed Frater, and Doctor, is of course correct that there is no civil penalty, but there is that thing about one's pyramid being profaned and all:

And he called them unto him, and said unto them in parables, How can Satan cast out Satan?
And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand.
And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand.
And if Satan rise up against himself, and be divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end.
No man can enter into a strong man's house, and spoil his goods, except he will first bind the strong man; and then he will spoil his house.
Verily I say unto you, All sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme:
But he that shall blaspheme against the Holy Ghost hath never forgiveness, but is in danger of eternal damnation.
Because they said, He hath an unclean spirit
.
Mark 3: 23-30


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 

Meh, I prefer the LOLCat translation of Sacred Scripture, which expresses these ideas with the level of eloquence that they deserve:

"The Holy Bible, translated into LOLCat" wrote:
23 An Happy Cat was like "Hay guise, srsly, if I haz teh devilz in me how u think I can pwn maiself, r u nuts?"

24 An Happy Cat was like "K, srsly agen, if u guise cant agree on if i am a good kitteh or a devil kitteh u cant make a very gud kingdum can u?"

25 An tehn Happy Cat wuz like "An srsly yet agen, if all teh kittehs in one howse are lyke hay i want fish and teh other kittehs are lyke no i wan chickenz then their howse cannt stand cuz all teh kittehs will tere it down, srsly, don do taht, kthx."

26 An then Happy Cat wuz lyke "An if teh devilz like tryed to pwn himself he wud be ded, lolz."

27 "An so if ur a good kitteh and a bad kitteh tryes to com to ur hows and pwn you, teh bad kitteh has to tie u up furst cuz thats teh only wai u wud let teh bad bad kitteh pwn ur stuffz."

28 "An so herez teh thingz, if ur a bad bad kitteh to anothr kitteh an say bad thingz abowt teh kitteh u can stil be frendz wit me an Ceiling Cat, if ur vry vry sry."

29 "An but if ur lyke a bad bad kitteh an u say teh bad thingz about mai frend teh Hovr Cat (wooooooo, lolz i skared u, skaredy kitteh lolz), if u say teh bad thingz abowt teh Hovr Cat, u will be pwnd and pwnd and pwnd 4EVER, even if u say ur sry, so don be bad to teh Hovr Cat, kthx."
Mark 3:23-29


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

The displayed contempt for, and lack of familiarity with, the KJV is surely the hallmark of the serious Crowley scholar, given the trivial role that that text played in AC's life, and in his work, and the trivial textual connections of that (apparently very silly) text with Liber AL, although of course "The Bible" is included in the AA curriculum in section 2, and one would be pretty confused reading most of the non-Asian works in section 1 without a pretty thorough grounding in the Bible.
Of course, none if this matters if one is a "skeptic".


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"The Holy Bible, translated into LOLCat" wrote:
1 In teh beginz is teh meow, and teh meow sez "Oh hai Ceiling Cat" and teh meow iz teh Ceiling Cat. 2 Teh meow an teh Ceiling Cat iz teh bests frenz in teh begins.

Verily and Amen.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 

That was the beginning of John, obviously.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

Is a candle brought to be put under a bushel, or under a bed? and not to be set on a candlestick? For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. If any man have ears to hear, let him hear. Mark 4:21-23

Judgments are prepared for scorners, and stripes for the back of fools. Proverbs 19:29


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 

I may have missed something, but just as a point of information could you please just clarify, david - as OP - whether you personally accept Erwin Hessle's claim to be a 8=3? 

A simple "yes" or "no" would oblige, although if it is a "yes" you may provide some corroborating 'evidence' for your belief if you so wish... 😀

Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
I may have missed something, but just as a point of information could you please just clarify, david - as OP - whether you personally accept Erwin Hessle's claim to be a 8=3? 

A simple "yes" or "no" would oblige, although if it is a "yes" you may provide some corroborating 'evidence' for your belief if you so wish... 😀

Norma N Joy Conquest

Why are you asking me this?  I never claimed that Erwin is 8=3 did I?  I don't know.  What about Dar? She used to post here and talk about her taking the oath of the abyss?  She seemed to be at odds with most posters here also.  Who knows?  Erwin taking the oath of the abyss?  I don't know however is it possible that someone could attain that level without taking that oath?


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 
"david" wrote:
[...] I never claimed that Erwin is 8=3 did I? [...] Is it possible that someone could attain that level without taking that oath?

What "level of attainment" is that, david?

"david" wrote:
Who knows?

Apparently you, david, as you are able to discern that Hessle has a "level of attainment" that may require or implicitly entail "taking that [8=3] oath".
Alrah is certainly another, um, special case. I believe she is currently banned both here and at the "fruitcake factory", i think most recently here for foaming at the mouth about transgender performative-ness, though it is sometimes hard to tell exactly what she is talking about. I do miss her tales of how her uncle used to blow up things with loudspeakers while in the UK military and so on, as well as her loopy Qabalaism. If she has indeed claimed 8=3, perhaps she serves as an example of how it may be better to Keep Silent about such matters, and always interrogate each proposed soldier until his annihilating hunchback is found.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 
"david" wrote:
Dar ... taking the oath of the abyss?  Erwin taking the oath of the abyss?

We've been over this before. The Oath of the Abyss (technically) makes one a "Babe of the Abyss," and does NOT equate to the Oath of a Magister 8=3, which comes AFTER the Abyss. One could take the Oath of the Abyss and fail the task, and thus become a dreaded "black brother/sister" and never become 8=3.

... is it possible that someone could attain that level without taking that oath?

Of course it's possible. These oaths were drawn up by AC in the early 20th century. Before that, people were becoming "Masters of Mysticism" without knowing the word "Abyss" and/or "Magister Templi." We are talking about states or levels of consciousness and they can be obtained (attained) by various means in assorted cultures.

On the other hand, it is unlikely that anyone could become a "Master of Mysticism" (in any culture) without first surrendering all of their previous concepts and attachments. So, yes, in act, they "give up," but in fact, they don't have to "take" any specfic oath.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 

"The Master of the Temple is so far from the man in whom He manifests that all these matters are of no importance to Him."
- Book 4 - Part III

"The same remark applies to all queries with regard to V.V.V.V.V. (The motto of Fra. P. as a Magister Templi 8 = 3; He used it in His office of giving out the "Official Books of A.'.A.'." to the world in the Equinox.); with this addition, that in this case he condescends to argue and to instruct. "If I tell you," he once said to the present writer, "that V.V.V.V.V. is a Mr. Smith and lives at Clapham, you will at once go round and tell everybody that V.V.V.V.V. is a Mr. Smith of Clapham, which is not true. V.V.V.V.V. is the Light of the World itself, the sole Mediator between God and Man; and in your present frame of mind (that of a poopstick) you cannot see that the two statements may be identical for the Brothers of the A.'.A.'.!"
- Equinox of the Gods

Please research the terms Sole Mediator (the only one?), and poopstick. Which are you? Or are you both? 😉


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
is it possible that someone could attain that level without taking that oath?

I think describing 8=3 as something a person "attains" is somewhat misleading.

5=6 can definitely be considered an "attainment" in the sense of being something a person *works* at (though, from another point of view, it's not an "attainment" to something new, since it consists of working to uncover what was already there). But 8=3 is a different kettle of fish altogether. It might be better to describe 8=3 as something that *happens* to a person, rather than as something that a person *attains* by dint of work.

This perspective accords nicely with Crowley's own comments in One Star in Sight that the to-be Master of the Temple "is pushed onward by the irresistible momentum that he has generated." Note the passive construction: the force of the individual's will is what necessarily "pushes" him into the Abyss.

Even to the extent that we can consider entering the Abyss to be a "willed" action (such as a practice of Liber Os), I don't think we can view the actual "crossing" of the Abyss as a willed action. After all, Crowley describes Liber Os as a "purely intellectual method of entering the Abyss," not a method of getting back out of the Abyss. The way a person gets out is, essentially, to wait, in the same way that a child waits to be born (consult the N.O.X. signs). Again, it appears to be a passive process.

And once again, the word "attainment" is misleading because 8=3 is just a recognition of what is always happening, which is so difficult to recognize because we keep distracting ourselves from it.

So, in short, yes of course a person can be an 8=3 without ever taking the oath, joining the AA, hearing about Thelema, knowing what the label "8=3" is supposed to mean. Arguably, it's easier for this "attainment" to happen to someone whose mind isn't saturated with all of that crap in the first place.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid. Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven. Matthew 5:14-16

A scorner loveth not one that reproveth him: neither will he go unto the wise. Proverbs 15:12


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"The Holy Bible, translated into LOLCat" wrote:
Naughty kittehs dun liek u to tellum wut to do, so dey stayway frum da smrt kittehs. Proverbs 15:12

ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 3473
 

The tongue of the wise useth knowledge aright: but the mouth of fools poureth out foolishness. Proverbs 15:2

It's a pity some of the nuances of the King James Version may be lost in translating the above into language on a reading level that a "skeptic" can cope with.
Perhaps having to run AC's work through a "LOL-kitteh" translation-engine in order to read it may account for some of the very evident deficits in understanding here?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
I may have missed something, but just as a point of information could you please just clarify, david - as OP - whether you personally accept Erwin Hessle's claim to be a 8=3? 

A simple "yes" or "no" would oblige, although if it is a "yes" you may provide some corroborating 'evidence' for your belief if you so wish... 😀

Norma N Joy Conquest

Why are you asking me this?  I never claimed that Erwin is 8=3 did I?  I don't know.  What about Dar? She used to post here and talk about her taking the oath of the abyss?  She seemed to be at odds with most posters here also.  Who knows?  Erwin taking the oath of the abyss?  I don't know however is it possible that someone could attain that level without taking that oath?

As I said, a simple yes or no would oblige – in this case, a “no”, david.  There was no need to evacuate your pram.  The case of ‘Dar’, whoever (she?) may be is irrelevant here: you may not have directly “claimed” Erwin to be a 8=3, but your posts certainly list that grade in direct conjunction with that claim (as in, you state: “Erwin Hessle 8=3”).  Perhaps if you don't claim that, or believe it yourself, it might be an idea not to put that (8=3) at all, or at least to envelop it in the usual ironic quotation marks (as in: “According to Erwin Hessle “8=3” [...]”)

Yours helpfully,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
As I said, a simple yes or no would oblige – in this case, a “no”, david.  There was no need to evacuate your pram.  The case of ‘Dar’, whoever (she?) may be is irrelevant here: you may not have directly “claimed” Erwin to be a 8=3, but your posts certainly list that grade in direct conjunction with that claim (as in, you state: “Erwin Hessle 8=3”).  Perhaps if you don't claim that, or believe it yourself, it might be an idea not to put that (8=3) at all, or at least to envelop it in the usual ironic quotation marks (as in: “According to Erwin Hessle “8=3” [...]”)

Yours helpfully,
N Joy

It was a mere transmission of what Erwin himself claimed to be or what he appeared to claim to be.  I'm flattered that you want my personal view of Hessle I feel like a celeb with a journalistic mic stuck in my face being asked for an opinion.

On Erwin's blog concerning Thelemic Practice http://www.erwinhessle.com/writings/thelprac.php he discusses (in his opinion of course)  the necessary meditative work involved in discovering True Wil e.g. "Quiet Awareness."  This does not require excruciating yoga asanas therefore this seems to fly in the face of standard A A order practice.  What Erwin does therefore is divorce Crowley's yogic attainments from True Will discovery.  As you may know it could be argued that Crowley's grade system was entirely based on yogic progress from Liber E onwards to mastery of pratyahara and onwards to "Master of Samadhi" as described in One Star In Sight ;
Magister Templi. - (Master of the Temple):He is a Master of Samadhi.  Im surprised that the Hessle critics have not used this against him i.e how can someone become a "Master of Samadhi" if he doesn't even subscribe to practicing "proper" hour long asana contortions let alone the further pranayama work etc?  What is "Samadhi" anyway?  Are asanas and regular Liber E exercises necessary to achieve it?  Is it only accessible to yoga practitioners?  The word itself is not referenced in Liber Al.  "Ecstacy" is which probably means the same thing as "Samadhi" anyway. 

Crowley on pain (from  DE VOLUPTATE POENARUM.  Liber Aleph) ;
. Those who avoid Pain physical or mental remain little Men, and there is no Virtue in them.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 

I doubt, david, that anybody here is going to jump up and down in indignation at the thought that the methods developed by Hessle, Los and others are said by you to "divorce Crowley's yogic attainments from True Will discovery". That it involves "Quiet Awareness" is pretty much what I thought.

I've never considered "hour long asana contortions" and the like to be a prerequisite for Samadhi, so would not hold the lack of it against Hessle. There's a whole world of literature and practice outside that set out by Crowley.

You'll find Samadhi referred to in many places, both in Crowley and elsewhere. Try Book Four, part 1, for instance. Google is probably of use here.


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 316
 
"david" wrote:
On Erwin's blog concerning Thelemic Practice http://www.erwinhessle.com/writings/thelprac.php he discusses (in his opinion of course)  the necessary meditative work involved in discovering True Wil e.g. "Quiet Awareness."  This does not require excruciating yoga asanas therefore this seems to fly in the face of standard A A order practice.

This isn't all that surprising given that standard A.'.A.'. order practice isn't focused on discovering True Will but on achieving Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Tao" wrote:
"david" wrote:
On Erwin's blog concerning Thelemic Practice http://www.erwinhessle.com/writings/thelprac.php he discusses (in his opinion of course)  the necessary meditative work involved in discovering True Wil e.g. "Quiet Awareness."  This does not require excruciating yoga asanas therefore this seems to fly in the face of standard A A order practice.

This isn't all that surprising given that standard A.'.A.'. order practice isn't focused on discovering True Will but on achieving Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel.

Oh.  Is there a difference?  I take it that the HGA is an absurd term used to describe the true self or deep self or real self and as true will is the dynamic aspect of those things then hey I'm not with you.  See my present signature quote taken from Crowley published in the Equinox.  I think you're trying to wind me up but I'd rather not take this wonderful thread on a tangent.  If you want to start a "true will and KACOHGA; what's the diff" thread then please do so.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"david" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
As I said, a simple yes or no would oblige – in this case, a “no”, david.  There was no need to evacuate your pram.  The case of ‘Dar’, whoever (she?) may be is irrelevant here: you may not have directly “claimed” Erwin to be a 8=3, but your posts certainly list that grade in direct conjunction with that claim (as in, you state: “Erwin Hessle 8=3”).  Perhaps if you don't claim that, or believe it yourself, it might be an idea not to put that (8=3) at all, or at least to envelop it in the usual ironic quotation marks (as in: “According to Erwin Hessle “8=3” [...]”)

Yours helpfully,
N Joy

It was a mere transmission of what Erwin himself claimed to be or what he appeared to claim to be.  I'm flattered that you want my personal view of Hessle I feel like a celeb with a journalistic mic stuck in my face being asked for an opinion. [...]

Best not to get too much of a swollen head there, david – like I said, I was enquiring of you in an attempt to get a clarification of where you stood, in terms of your position as the OP.  It is always good for an OP to define their terms, and since the subject was about the recognition of a Magister Templi and you had stated (although maybe not ‘claimed’) that Erwin Hessle was one (in the sense of 8=3), it seemed a valid question to ask.

Incidentally, how come you didn’t do your usual necromantic practice of resurrecting a long-dormant thread, in this case specifically the “Joe Schmoe” one which you yourself started, and which covers very similar (if not the same) ground?  Joe could have easily been made to stand in for Erwin there, imho.

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 

JS=EH 8=3


ReplyQuote
Tao
 Tao
(@tao)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 316
 
"david" wrote:
I think you're trying to wind me up but I'd rather not take this wonderful thread on a tangent.

Not at all. It just seemed to me that, in a thread questioning how one would recognise someone claiming a certain technical title, one might want to make sure that one had all the terms of discussion defined correctly. There is a vast difference between the two most obviously demonstrated in that a person could very successfully discover and do her true will (as often occurs, I am told, in the O.T.O.) without ever experiencing the mind-bending samadhi that is K&CHGA (which isn't even on the O.T.O. menu)... but, proceed as you like.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
I take it that the HGA is an absurd term used to describe the true self or deep self or real self and [...] true will is the dynamic aspect of those things

One of the difficulties of having these kinds of conversations is that people tend to have different definitions of all of these things. For example, there are some people who think "Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel" essentially is the construction of an imaginary friend. They don't call it an imaginary friend, of course, but that's what it is, in the same way that "Jesus" is an imaginary friend of some Christians.

Other people use the term "KCHGA" as a metaphor for discovering the True Will. Others use it to describe the trance state that accompanies discovering the True Will. Others use it to designate different trance states, unrelated to the True Will.

One of the other problems with having these kinds of discussions is that a lot of people set these attainments up in their mind as so exalted as to be unattainable. This is, of course, a convenient device: if the attainment is in fact unattainable, then these people can spend their whole lives wishing for it, "working" toward it, and fetishizing the fantasy of the attainment as some super state that will take away all of their problems and make them gods on earth or something. They can hold on to the image of the attainment as an "if only": "if only I could attain, then everything would be great...Yeah, that's the ticket...."

Either these terms actually designate things that are specific and achievable, or they're a bunch of flowery, wishy-washy crap that people use to talk themselves into believing will make their lives all better.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
 
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
I take it that the HGA is an absurd term used to describe the true self or deep self or real self and [...] true will is the dynamic aspect of those things

For example, there are some people who think "Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel" essentially is the construction of an imaginary friend.

I'd say that that describes most of the occult community who are interested in such a concept.

"Los" wrote:
They don't call it an imaginary friend, of course, but that's what it is, in the same way that "Jesus" is an imaginary friend of some Christians.

Yes misunderstanding the "invoke often" advice is to blame for that.  Invoke what?  A god , angel or spirit?  Crowley says in Magick in Theory and Practice: “The mind is the great enemy; so, by invoking enthusiastically a person whom we know not to exist, we are rebuking that mind.”  This is a perfect example of Crowley outlining what I wrote above.  It's a method a tool to explore our deep self.  I can feel the encroachment of a, "but Crowley said Aiwaz was a distinctly independent entity etc etc " response.  It's wrong imo as the HGA is not a spirit- guide but is a noun that describes True Will which, in turn is a verb. 

HGA, Logos, Silent Observer, Real or Higher Self, God.....  it's all the same. Crowley said this also (see my Equinox signature quote).

"Los" wrote:
Other people use the term "KCHGA" as a metaphor for discovering the True Will. Others use it to describe the trance state that accompanies discovering the True Will. Others use it to designate different trance states, unrelated to the True Will.

I'd say any sort of self-strengthening trance state is indicative of moving towards discovery of True Will/HGA.  It depends imo if they grasp Crowley's writings (or grasp the concepts from some other source) and are actually applying that advice then yes those True Will (HGA union) trance states and a better way of being /living are very real.

I found clarifications on this subject here (in the replies part via a google search on the Crowley quote about invocation.

http://thelema-and-skepticism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-middle-pillar-ritual.html


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"david" wrote:
I'd say any sort of self-strengthening trance state is indicative of moving towards discovery of True Will/HGA.

Well, I don't know about that. The trance stuff is nice, but the bread and butter of KCHGA is the practical changes it allows you to work in your life -- to reorder your life so as to bring it into alignment with your True Will (hence, the "magical power" of 5=6). To put much weight on trances at all is to invite distraction.

I found clarifications on this subject here (in the replies part via a google search on the Crowley quote about invocation.

http://thelema-and-skepticism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-middle-pillar-ritual.html

Yeah, my replies on that one were pretty good, if I do say so myself.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 4119
 
"Los" wrote:

I found clarifications on this subject here (in the replies part via a google search on the Crowley quote about invocation.

http://thelema-and-skepticism.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/the-middle-pillar-ritual.html

Yeah, my replies on that one were pretty good, if I do say so myself.

Did you get your colossal level of self-regard from your practise of scepticism, do you think? Or has it always there?


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
 

Yeah, my replies on that one were pretty good, if I do say so myself.

Go ahead, it's never stopped you before  🙂


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Los" wrote:
Yeah, my replies on that one were pretty good, if I do say so myself.

Didn’t you forget to add “(The cheques in the post, david)” there, Los? ;D

The honeymoon period of this mutual admiration society ('evidentally' more on one side than the other, though) seems to be going into ‘injury time’ here (to mix up my metaphors).  Isn’t it about time you changed your belief system again, david?  When you first began posting, it wasn’t very long at all before you took up contrary stances to your original propositions.  It seems as if you’re not wanting to be skeptical about your current (pro-skeptical) position at the moment.  Can this be a sign of some sort of stability here?

"david" wrote:
I'd say any sort of self-strengthening trance state is indicative of moving towards discovery of True Will/HGA.  It depends imo if they grasp Crowley's writings (or grasp the concepts from some other source) and are actually applying that advice then yes those True Will (HGA union) trance states and a better way of being /living are very real.

Taking it that you consider yourself to be a Thelemite (please indicate if I am wrong here), would you say that you “grasp Crowley’s writings” and “apply his advice” in your own practice yourself?  And, again taking it that you approve here, would you mind explaining what self-strengthening trance states have you personally experienced which have helped you in the direction of discovering your True Will = HGA?

“Very real” – as distinct from “really real”, maybe?  😉

Still don’t quite understand why this thread couldn’t have continued on from the Joe Schmoe is your Master one; especially given your predilection for resurrection.

Do please say hello to Joe if you happen to bump into him on the higher planes,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
k4n3
 k4n3
(@k4n3)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 27
 

I think there is no guaranteed way to check if someone is 8=3, but at least what we can do, when someone claims to be a Magister as understood in the A.'.A.'. system, is to demand some kind of proof, preferably in a form of an account so we can judge it for ourselves.

Crowley wrote extensively about his experience, but after his death usually wanna-be masters just don't talk, and prefer, in the line of the famous saying, to "better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak up and remove all doubt". Some others have no idea what's this experience is about and usually try to substantiate their claim with some trite nonsense.

Moreover, I tend to believe, if they truly underwent the whole experience, which is said to be the most dramatic in the career of any man, they would perhaps prefer to leave some trace and assistance for others who might follow them in the future. Most likely, the fact that they keep silence is that they don't have anything to say since they acutally didn't experience what they claimed.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5703
 

One Star: "Any neophyte of the Order (or, as some say, any person soever) possesses the right to claim the Grade of Master of the Temple by taking the Oath of the Grade. It is hardly necessary to observe that to do so is the most sublime and awful responsibility which it is possible to assume, and an unworthy person who does so incurs the most terrific penalties by his presumption."

Well now, if anybody can simply claim the grade, then who is anybody else to "recognize" them? ... Yeah, I know, we're trying to tell who is the real deal, a "Master of Samadhi," as opposed to a mere usurper, a dildo who just says, "Oho! That's me! I am 8=3!"

By the way, if we look carefully into Thelemic history, we will find that most (all?) of them who have signed themselves 8=3 did so "attain" by claiming the grade from a position that was far below 7=4. Who amongst them could say (or demonstrate) that "I earned every degree from 0=0 up to 7=4 before I claimed 8=3?" Achad? Parsons? Brayton? McMurtry? Motta? No-no-no-none.

I was (used to be) under the impression that "the most terrific penalties" usually involved an unworthy claimant simply dying prematurely. Now I'm not so sure about that.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"Michael Staley" wrote:
Did you get your colossal level of self-regard from your practise of scepticism, do you think? Or has it always there?

It's interesting that you consider acknowledging one's work as good to be a "colossal level of self-regard."


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"k4n3" wrote:
I think there is no guaranteed way to check if someone is 8=3, but at least what we can do, when someone claims to be a Magister as understood in the A.'.A.'. system, is to demand some kind of proof, preferably in a form of an account so we can judge it for ourselves.

How can you say, in the same sentence, that there's no "guaranteed way to check" the claim but that you would still "demand proof"? What's the point of demanding proof if there's no way to "check" the proof?

Even that point aside, let's say that someone gives you an "account." How exactly do you intend to "judge" it? See whether it conforms to your prejudices about what the experience ought to be like?

This whole issue returns again and again to the question of what people understand the terms to mean -- and answering those questions says more about the answerer than about anyone claiming 8=3.

Some others have no idea what's this experience is about and usually try to substantiate their claim with some trite nonsense.

Again, this supposes that you have an "idea [of] what's this experience is about." Based on what? How would you distinguish a "real" account from "trite nonsense"?

Moreover, I tend to believe, if they truly underwent the whole experience, which is said to be the most dramatic in the career of any man, they would perhaps prefer to leave some trace and assistance for others who might follow them in the future.

Would they? If it's not actually possible to cross the Abyss intentionally, then whatever they have to say would probably not be very helpful to anyone.

Most likely, the fact that they keep silence is that they don't have anything to say since they acutally didn't experience what they claimed.

Is that most likely? One might equally argue that a Master of the Temple has no need to convince others and simply gets on with the work of watering the garden.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"Shiva" wrote:
Well now, if anybody can simply claim the grade, then who is anybody else to "recognize" them?

Indeed. According to One Star in Sight, absolutely anybody can immediately and legitimately jump to 8=3.

Since anyone can claim the grade at any time, this either makes the grade completely meaningless or it suggests that there's more going on than at first appears. Could it possibly be that many, if not most people who discuss the grade do not understand what it means?

we're trying to tell who is the real deal, a "Master of Samadhi," as opposed to a mere usurper, a dildo who just says, "Oho! That's me! I am 8=3!"

Are we? What do you suppose is the difference? Remember, the answers tell us more about the answerer than anything else.

By the way, if we look carefully into Thelemic history, we will find that most (all?) of them who have signed themselves 8=3 did so "attain" by claiming the grade from a position that was far below 7=4. Who amongst them could say (or demonstrate) that "I earned every degree from 0=0 up to 7=4 before I claimed 8=3?" Achad? Parsons? Brayton? McMurtry? Motta? No-no-no-none.

And the fact that the degree can be legitimately claimed by "jumping" right to it suggests that it may less be the culmination of the system of A.'.A.'. development than...something else entirely. Since the grade is located above the Abyss, this is almost necessarily so ("That which is above is not like that which is below").

I was (used to be) under the impression that "the most terrific penalties" usually involved an unworthy claimant simply dying prematurely. Now I'm not so sure about that.

You used to think that somebody might die just by reading a couple of words out loud? What an odd thing to think.

The fact is, the "oath" is meaningless. Saying words out loud doesn't make a person wise. Neither does claiming a title, whether publicly or privately, legitimately or illegitimately. Being wise makes a person wise. And some would say not even that.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 3
Share: