"Reincarnation...
 
Notifications
Clear all

"Reincarnation" yea or nay  

  RSS

christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
24/07/2013 2:52 pm  

Enjoy 😀 Results will show after you have voted.


Quote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1000
24/07/2013 3:21 pm  

No, not at all.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
24/07/2013 5:41 pm  

Hi Chris. I see you adopted my "Shiva-antic?"  🙂
Well then, we'll just see what the spread is - not that it will explain anything, except for people's beliefs.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
24/07/2013 8:10 pm  

No, not at all.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
26/07/2013 2:29 pm  

1 vote for irrelevant (it won't reflect on the poll).

...so I voted for "shut up", just so I can see the vote tally. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Candide
(@candide)
Member
Joined: 7 years ago
Posts: 49
26/07/2013 2:36 pm  

I voted shut up because what I actually think wasn't an option. As a younger man I would have said no, but the more I get into things the more I veer into "maybe, but probably not in the popular sense of an individual migrating between bodies".

Something more akin to "The consciousness of the continuity of existence".


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 351
26/07/2013 3:32 pm  

I've gone for the 'Maybe' option on the grounds of certain vivid 'reveries' during Dharana and other practices; the fact that AC hedges his bets in Ch.37 "Reincarnation" in Magick Without Tears; and because of the text of Liber AL, Ch.I - a point just noted by Candide.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
26/07/2013 3:34 pm  

As of right now, about 29% (5 personas) "believe": Yes, definitely!

I wonder how they can be "definitely yes?"

Well, of course they're referring to their beliefs, not the actually proven concept.


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1503
26/07/2013 3:54 pm  

Adolescents often think they know everything about life and the worlds they inhabit.
There is still a lot we don't know about life and even less about death.
a blessing might be a curse don't get too distracted.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
26/07/2013 5:03 pm  

I pass on this one (blank vote), since I haven't had any experiences myself which suggest the possibility of reincarnation as a possibility. It would simply be empty belief (superstition), although I find experiences like regressive hypnosis interesting (after taken accounts of others in consideration (which I don't doubt are real; but not necessary a result of reincarnation) and what one could gain from such experiences).


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 525
26/07/2013 10:18 pm  

Oh boy!~ the treachery inherent in Subject vs. Object, & how we define this term: "Reincarnation". I voted "Yes, definitely" quite simply because I know of too many accounts of this phenomenon, & religions constructed around this concept taking flesh, to have the tenacity to dismiss it entirely. It seems to me an Objective standpoint to consider it with an open mind.


ReplyQuote
obscurus
(@obscuruspaintus)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 315
27/07/2013 4:07 am  

  93

You know me?...of course I do.

93/93


ReplyQuote
chuck
(@chuck)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 52
27/07/2013 4:56 pm  

93

I voted NO, but next time I believe I'll vote YES.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
27/07/2013 5:31 pm  
"chuck" wrote:
I voted NO, but next time I believe I'll vote YES.

There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
27/07/2013 5:59 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"chuck" wrote:
I voted NO, but next time I believe I'll vote YES.

There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Maybe you can rescind your vote, chuck?  It seems a shame to be so compromised, I'm sure in the interests of your immortal soul maybe Paul could adjust it for you so that you can vote YES this time and NO the next.  At the moment, I’m inclined towards “MAY BE” (ever the safe option)…

But still fundamentally undecided & disliking the wording & the 4 Options (apart from the 4th),
Norma N. Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
27/07/2013 6:07 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Surely that's only true, Shiva, if reincarnation occurs along a linear time-stream. Is there any reason why we cannot enjoy a myriad incarnations simultaneously? Some might consider that we're all transient incarnations of Brahma.

Just saying.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
27/07/2013 8:12 pm  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Surely that's only true, Shiva, if reincarnation occurs along a linear time-stream.

"Next" -- which the word chuck used -- implies linear time.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
27/07/2013 8:40 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"chuck" wrote:
I voted NO, but next time I believe I'll vote YES.

There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

LOL nice one shiva 😀


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
27/07/2013 8:42 pm  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Surely that's only true, Shiva, if reincarnation occurs along a linear time-stream. Is there any reason why we cannot enjoy a myriad incarnations simultaneously? Some might consider that we're all transient incarnations of Brahma.

Just saying.

This is actually something I believe is occurring. If one buys into astral concepts, esp. astral projection, one knows (quote unquote) that time is a dimension one can transcend, and thus all incarnations are happening at the same time.  This is where the concept of the Higher Self and HGA come from, as this is 'you' in a different more evolved incarnation coming back to help you in a lower incarnation.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
28/07/2013 12:42 am  
"Los" wrote:
"Next" -- which the word chuck used -- implies linear time.

Well, knock me sideways with a pink kipper!

Where would we be without brainboxes like you to keep us on track, eh?

What's this "word chuck", by the way? Eating dictionaries until we vomit?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
28/07/2013 2:01 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Is there any reason why we cannot enjoy a myriad incarnations simultaneously?

No reason at all. At one time, this was my way of thinking - my belief system, as it were.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
28/07/2013 6:51 am  

Double post. Disregard.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
28/07/2013 6:53 am  
"christibrany" wrote:
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Surely that's only true, Shiva, if reincarnation occurs along a linear time-stream. Is there any reason why we cannot enjoy a myriad incarnations simultaneously? Some might consider that we're all transient incarnations of Brahma.

Just saying.

This is actually something I believe is occurring. If one buys into astral concepts, esp. astral projection, one knows (quote unquote) that time is a dimension one can transcend, and thus all incarnations are happening at the same time.  This is where the concept of the Higher Self and HGA come from, as this is 'you' in a different more evolved incarnation coming back to help you in a lower incarnation.

And why do you believe this?


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
28/07/2013 8:25 am  

Los, because to me it seems to be a logical answer to a number of metaphysical questions , or in other words it fits into what makes sense to me as to how the universe works, speculatively, as if I were to make a universe it seems like something that would make the system work well in regards to self-sufficiency or efficiency without me, God, having to stick my nose in all the time....let the puppets dance.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
28/07/2013 8:49 am  
"christibrany" wrote:
Los, because to me it seems to be a logical answer to a number of metaphysical questions , or in other words it fits into what makes sense to me as to how the universe works, speculatively, as if I were to make a universe it seems like something that would make the system work well in regards to self-sufficiency or efficiency without me, God, having to stick my nose in all the time....let the puppets dance.

So you believe it because it's consistent (in that you think it doesn't contradict any observed facts), because it satisfies questions you have, and because it's the kind of thing you would have created if you were God.

Do I have that right?

Assuming that I do have that right, a more important question comes to mind: do you think that these are good reasons for a person to accept claims about the world? After all, these same reasons could be given by people to justify thinking that the Christian God is real (and is going to send you, Chris, to hell for practicing magick) or could be given by people to justify thinking that Islam is correct (and that you, Chris, are going to hell for practicing magick) or could be given by people to justify thinking that Scientology is correct (and that you, Chris, will be tormented by the spirits of aliens after death, or whatever nutty thing they believe) or could be given by thousands of other believers to justify thousands of different afterlife claims.

It seems that your methodology for evaluating claims isn't very good -- since it can be used to draw lots of different conclusions that obviously can't all be true at once -- but I'd be interested in hearing you explain why you think it's good. Obviously, you're under no obligation to explain yourself, but I think it would make an interesting discussion.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
28/07/2013 3:32 pm  

Its because i'm not interested in evaluating any claims.  😀 perhaps thats a weakness, perhaps I will change later on, but for now I am happy to let people believe what they want as long as it doesn't negatively directly affect me 🙂


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
28/07/2013 11:04 pm  
"christibrany" wrote:
Its because i'm not interested in evaluating any claims.

Well, no, you are, but you're selective about it. For example, if a doctor diagnosed you with an injury or disease, I'm willing to bet that you'd be interested in evaluating whether the diagnosis is correct and in evaluating claims about the best way you can recover. And I'm also willing to bet that you'd be using much more precise methods to evaluate those claims than you are to evaluate claims about reincarnation.

What's different when we're talking about reincarnation is that this metaphysical stuff isn't a matter of life and death -- it's a matter of entertainment for you. You find these claims fun, which is why you relax your standards of evaluation for them.

Now, you're being inconsistent, but that's ok. There's no rule that says you have to be consistent, and there's certainly nothing wrong with a little entertainment. But it does make it kind of a joke to suggest, as you have in the past, that you're interested in any kind of truth in these matters. If the purpose of "spirituality" or "self-development" (or whatever we category we want to place Thelema in) is to discover truth, then it's pretty counter-productive to just run around accepting a handful of claims, using relaxed standards of evaluation, simply because it makes you feel good.

Thelema is about dispelling the comforting illusions we've built for ourselves, not constructing more elaborate illusions to entertain and reassure us.


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1088
29/07/2013 7:39 am  

well, actually Reincarnation IS a matter of Life & Death by definition 😉


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3951
29/07/2013 10:24 am  
"WilliamThirteen" wrote:
well, actually Reincarnation IS a matter of Life & Death by definition 😉

Perhaps Los will be a comedian in his next incarnation.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
29/07/2013 12:22 pm  

If it’s true there can be ‘no truth’ – as Crowley maintains in The Book of Lies and elsewhere – below the Abyss (if you will pardon me duplicating such ‘unscientific’ terminology), since primarily  ‘because’ it is subject to the laws of duality/ polarity, therefore the opposite, positive corollary to it must also then apply.  That is, there must also be “all truth” below the Abyss also in some manner, hence my using the illustrative metaphor of chronsynclastic infundibula (or rather, Kurt Vonnegut’s conception of the same) in the other discussion which, like many things suggested in fun{nel}, can itself contain the essence of the real and fulfils its purpose, I find.  Does anyone disagree?  Try as I have, I cannot find an 'absolute, objective' hole in it, crazy idea though it is!  We do not know all the twists and turns of time – but it is most certainly not linear.  In fact I synchronistically came across an excellent book over the weekend, “Physics As Metaphor”, which extruded itself into my attention field but which, although written 30 years, ago has not aged and is as relevant now as when it came out.  It’s by (the late) Roger S. Jones, a Professor of Physics at the University of Minnesota who also seems to have had a very enlightened zen grasp of things and, even more rarely for westerners, a refreshing gift for ‘exactly’ expressing them, showing that (pace Watts, Grant) it can be done!

I append below is his comments on time as it may relate to the issue under discussion of reincarnation:

Indeed, if we had the Hopi intuition of time in which acceleration is recognised as qualitatively different from uniform motion, the whole Newtonian revolution might not have been necessary.  Newton and Galileo carefully distinguished between uniform motion (at constant speed in a straight line) and accelerated motion (at varying speed and/or in a changing direction).  And it is this distinction along with the spatialization of time that lies at the heart of classical physics and of our conventional modern concept of time and motion.  Acceleration need not be thought of in motional terms at all.

All this has now been changed by Albert Einstein (at least the physical theory has, if not our concepts).  In general relativity, the need to distinguish between accelerated and uniform motion is eliminated.  All motion is seen as uniform in Einstein’s curved spacetime.  The seemingly irregular motion of objects is explained, not in terms of forces acting across space, but simply by the geometrical properties of the non-Euclidian spacetime we live in.  Not only is all motion relative, it is uniform; it is space that is curved and nonuniform.  Modern thought severs the notion of acceleration from its temporal matrix and grafts it to the Hopi metaphor of accumulation and growth.

The experience of repetition leading to accumulation, growth, fruition, rather than our more usual feeling of a meaningless unvarying recurrence, is not at all foreign to us as an alternative metaphor to linear sequential time.  This alternative is illustrated by astrology, music, ritual celebration, cyclic or seasonal experience, and by Ouspensky’s spatial metaphors.  Many other examples occur in cultures and times different from our own.  One that is particularly difficult for the modern Westerner to understand and accept is the concept of reincarnation, a belief that pervades Hindu philosophy but which can also be found in early Greek thought and many so-called primitive cultures.  Trying to conceive of reincarnation in linear time presents problems for us.  Yet if we were able to think with an organic cumulative view of time, we might see reincarnation differently, as the soul’s growth towards perfection, or at a deeper level, as the total potentiality of each soul.  Rather than suggesting an iterated series of lives stretched throughout history, the idea of reincarnation may really hint at something more like a perfect jewel, each of whose many facets can reflect only a part of its harmonious brilliance. …

Jones then goes on to say that any attempt to treat this truly unfathomable mystery, the connection between the primal act of creation and rhythm, is extremely difficult, but that fortunately our understanding is enlightened by Sri Krishna Prem in a very penetrating discussion of the Rig-Veda:

“There was not non-existent nor existent;
There was no realm of air, no sky beyond it.
What covered this, and where? And what gave it shelter?
Was water there, unfathomed depth of water?

Death was not there, nor was there aught immortal:
No sign was there, the day’s and night’s divider.
That One Thing, breathless, breathed by its own nature:
Apart from It was nothing whatsoever.”

(The Rig-Veda Stanzas 1 and 2)

And that in the course of his discussion, Prem makes the following comments on it:

“…in the One… there is a certain rhythmic process symbolized as breathing.  Within the One exist in potentiality the two poles of Subject and Object… We may conceive that “breath” is a rhythmic alternation of polarity between these two.  When the pendulum swing has attained a certain amplitude we may conceive something analogous to what takes place in ourselves when mental processes that have been going on below the threshold of consciousness rise into the light and emerge as “I am experiencing such-and-such.”

(Sri Krishna Prem)

What then follows in his points 1-4 is nothing less than the scientific (and musical) exposition of the principles governing the 3 supernals in cabbalistic theory (Magmus, you may be interested in reading this, I will send you the full context):

 
1.  An original state of undifferentiated chaos.
2.  The original state either transforms itself into or is newly perceived (which implies a subject/object dichotomy) as one having extension and duration.
3.  The sheer uniform continuity is qualified and takes on a variable periodic structure (a wave).
4.  The extremes [i.e. peaks and troughs] of the wave pattern are isolated, articulated, and separated as distinct entities with individual identity(beats in a rhythmic pattern)

It seems remarkable that the two cornerstones of modern science, the theory of evolution and the quantum theory, have managed the incredible feat of basing a system of order and reason on a notion of randomness. …There is something very ironic in all of this, for if causality is the temporal ordering mechanism that secures us against chaos, it has also given to them its relentlessness and inevitability so that we feel ourselves being dragged kicking and screaming towards inescapable death.  Our lineal, sequential, causal time is like a narrow one-way road to doom.  For the primitive mind with its cyclic, spontaneous, cumulative sense of time, the voyage of life seemed more multi-dimensioned, more like a ship cruising the seas than a train one one-dimensional track. …

At the beginning of this section, I said that relativity makes room for synchronicity.  This metaphor is more than casual, for there is a vast region of spacteime, consisting of events that have only spacelike or noncausal separations from the immediate here and now.  To understand this, one must first recognize that the term spacetime means exactly what it says.  It is a conception of space and time together as a common medium [and] is usually imagined as a four-dimensional space in which time is the added dimension on a perfectly equal footing with the three ordinary spatial dimensions. [etc, etc - I quote sparingly in the interests of copyright observation.]

From Tiger in Reply #8 on: July 24, 2013, 03:54:04 pm:

Adolescents often think they know everything about life and the worlds they inhabit. ...

I am reminded of the following most perceptive wise quote by Thomas Pynchon (which may come from his excellent The Crying Of Lot 49, but I don’t have a copy to hand at the moment to check):

“The trouble with many of us is that at the earlier stages of life we think we know everything - or to put it more usefully, we are unaware of the scope and structure of our ignorance."

N. Joy


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
29/07/2013 4:36 pm  

I meant to also add the following passage earlier, which sheds further light upon the debate but this time from the ‘idea’ or ‘belief’ that there is not actually any here and Now in spacetime to base any judgements from… (apologies to those already familiar with the concept):

The sun which exists at this very instant of time, radiating its brilliance into space, is not the sun that I see or that I can know.  The sun that I see is but an image of an event that occurred 8⅓ minutes ago, for that is how long it takes for light to cross 93 million miles that separate sun from earth.  If the light of the sun were to be extinguished, I would know nothing of it for 8⅓ minutes.  The stars I see in the night sky are not the stars as they presently exist, assuming that they still do exist.  They are images of events (emissions of star light) that occurred hundreds or thousands of years ago, depending on their distances from me.  The people and objects I see and feel around me are mere shadows of some “real” existence or events that occurred at some time infinitesimally earlier, but earlier nonetheless…

I have no thought, perception, or experience that is not the hollow afterimage of a former reality.  We sit here on our little planet seeing nothing but a historical movie.  Nothing is real; nothing is present.  There is no present.  All information is just ephermeral impressions of presumed past events…

(Roger S. Jones, Physics As Metaphor (1982), pp.109-10)[/align:1obmqib6]

N. Joy


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
30/07/2013 5:01 pm  

Voted 'yes' as its always something I've felt within myself. Its great to hear alternative views though.

"christibrany" wrote:
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"Shiva" wrote:
There won't be a "next time" because you ruined your chances by voting NO.

Surely that's only true, Shiva, if reincarnation occurs along a linear time-stream. Is there any reason why we cannot enjoy a myriad incarnations simultaneously? Some might consider that we're all transient incarnations of Brahma.

Just saying.

This is actually something I believe is occurring. If one buys into astral concepts, esp. astral projection, one knows (quote unquote) that time is a dimension one can transcend, and thus all incarnations are happening at the same time.  This is where the concept of the Higher Self and HGA come from, as this is 'you' in a different more evolved incarnation coming back to help you in a lower incarnation.

Interestingly put. I haven't thought of it like that, I do think time can be transcended so I could accept that.


ReplyQuote
obscurus
(@obscuruspaintus)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 315
31/07/2013 12:00 am  

  93

To deny reincarnation is a kin to denying the very cycles which occur around you and which you exist. The constant state of flux, of ebb and flow, the very motion of existence itself. Why deny it on the basis that you cannot recognize it yourself?

This past April my father passed from his life in this world. I held his hand and looked into his eyes as he took his last breath....and the channel was open. On a damp, grey day in the spring of 1956 I shed the coat of flesh of life...and the channel was open. I returned in less than a solar cycle on the winter solstice of 1956 at a time which, thankfully, precluded me from repeating the mistakes of the past. As my father is on his way back now I can only wish him the same. These are the things that are pointless to argue. The faint ache of the last dying moment manifest themselves in this. I still taste the blood in my mouth of the death two lives ago, again pointless to argue. The memories are so clear I could write a book, but why bother? I spent a good part of this life in search of a certain Remington Rolling Block rifle with my name carved into the stock to no avail. So what? It is out there somewhere, unless time and rust have taken their toll, but what does it really matter? It is what it is. I know in my heart what is true.

There are certain words, when placed together just right, help to trigger those lost memories. Don't look for them from me as I'm no writer. But they are out there.

93/93


ReplyQuote
Markus
(@markus)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 251
31/07/2013 8:44 am  
"obscuruspaintus" wrote:
  93

To deny reincarnation is a kin to denying the very cycles which occur around you and which you exist. The constant state of flux, of ebb and flow, the very motion of existence itself. Why deny it on the basis that you cannot recognize it yourself?

You can only deny that which you know to be true. I refute the idea of reincarnation for all, and thus cannot deny it.

Markus


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
31/07/2013 1:18 pm  
"Zac" wrote:
"christibrany" wrote:
... If one buys into astral concepts, esp. astral projection, one knows (quote unquote) that time is a dimension one can transcend, and thus all incarnations are happening at the same time.  This is where the concept of the Higher Self and HGA come from, as this is 'you' in a different more evolved incarnation coming back to help you in a lower incarnation.

Interestingly put. I haven't thought of it like that, I do think time can be transcended so I could accept that.

Yes, and this is where the belief behind the Maatian concept of Niaton also comes from: a ‘future-time’ evolved composite group/ hive mind gestalt of homo sapiens (or more precisely the next mutation along) – a multiple mental consciousness of which, say, Lashtal might now reflect a lower and more embryonic analogue - which has a reverberation backwards in the continuum of spacetime (hence the ‘foreshadowing’ of the quill/ Maat Current and by corollary all of the future/ past Æons).  It is very likely possible, I feel, that Aiwass ‘himself’ is also part of this same type of phenomenon.

"Born under punches",
N. Joy


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2380
31/07/2013 10:14 pm  

Question would be then Jamie, is Aiwass only AC's HGA or is he a completely separate being and thus more helpful to all? 😉


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
01/08/2013 3:22 am  
"christibrany" wrote:
Question would be then Jamie, is Aiwass only AC's HGA or is he a completely separate being and thus more helpful to all? 😉

You mean "only an HGA" is NOT a completely separate being? Or is the HGA only a mental image of a certain aspect of each person's consciousness?

You surely know, that by asking such questions, you are stirring the pot of concepts that have been virtually endlessly debated. Like reincarnation, free will, predestination, and the famous f/k controversy, the objective and subjective nature of the HGA is highly volatile in different people's expression and in their belief system. It seems like more and more magicians are coming around to the "mental image of a certain aspect" point-of-view, but this "coming around" might only be an illusion.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
01/08/2013 12:46 pm  
"christibrany" wrote:
Question would be then Jamie, is Aiwass only AC's HGA or is he a completely separate being and thus more helpful to all? 😉

Are you putting me on the spot?!  Not that my opinion counts for a hill of beans, but I would have to plump for the latter given a life-or-death choice between the two…

"Shiva" wrote:
... You surely know, that by asking such questions, you are stirring the pot of concepts that have been virtually endlessly debated....

I did actually raise this matter myself in my own Introduction, somewhere also.  But yes, it is the sort of debate that can go on and on…!

N. Joy


ReplyQuote
Thoki
(@thoki)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 45
02/08/2013 1:11 am  

How can you reincarnate something that was never born?


ReplyQuote
Thoki
(@thoki)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 45
02/08/2013 1:19 am  

.


ReplyQuote
William Thirteen
(@williamthirteen)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1088
02/08/2013 12:22 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
It seems like more and more magicians are coming around to the "mental image of a certain aspect" point-of-view, but this "coming around" might only be an illusion.

...what comes around, goes around...


ReplyQuote
HG
 HG
(@hg)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 96
02/08/2013 2:51 pm  
"obscuruspaintus" wrote:
To deny reincarnation is a kin to denying the very cycles which occur around you and which you exist. The constant state of flux, of ebb and flow, the very motion of existence itself. Why deny it on the basis that you cannot recognize it yourself?

No, it isn't.

Before this day, there have been countless days.  And after the sun sets and this day has gone, there will be another day.  And another.  And another, and another, and another...

But this particular day, August 2nd 2013, has never existed before, and will never exist again.

And that is how cycles don't imply reincarnation.  Mankind is immortal, man is not.

To quote Crowley (Book of Lies, chapter 18):

                          DEWDROPS

    Verily, love is death, and death is life to come.
    Man returneth not again; the stream floweth not
      uphill; the old life is no more; there is a new life
      that is not his.
    Yet that life is of his very essence; it is more He
      than all that he calls He.
    In the silence of a dewdrop is every tendency of his
      soul, and of his mind, and of his body; it is the
      Quintessence and the Elixir of his being.  Therein
      are the forces that made him and his father and his
      father's father before him.
    This is the Dew of Immortality.
    Let this go free, even as It will; thou art not its
      master, but the vehicle of It.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
02/08/2013 5:44 pm  

It strikes me that is conceivable that the Dewdrops of Immortality may possibly refer to the (action of the) double helix dna, which was unknown and undreamt of at the time of A.C.'s writing of it & not discovered until forty years afterwards?

N. Joy


ReplyQuote
obscurus
(@obscuruspaintus)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 315
03/08/2013 4:33 am  

93 HG.

An interesting post and I enjoyed reading it. I agree that we can never be in the same place and time again, but that doesn't necessarily eliminate returning cycles. At least to me anyway. The beauty of it all lies in the fact that there is no supreme authority other than our selves. The whole point of view thing? As I said, there is nothing to argue as we know our own truth. Words continually fail me and my pictures do not fair much better. This one though, has been a key for me:

I have found that quiet contemplation of it has opened doors. I place it so that the rising and setting sun reflects its light back to me. It acts as a kind of lens aiding in my focus. I see a great many things in it. I doubt it would have the same effect for others that it has for me...so for what it is worth? I do still have a few of the prints left which I will paint and guild should anyone want one? These are on vellum and each one is slightly different. I give them away. If anyone should want one, pm me with where you would like it shipped. I only have a week to get it out as I will be on the road for the next few months and out of touch.

There's not much else to say, by me anyway.

93/93


ReplyQuote
HG
 HG
(@hg)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 96
03/08/2013 3:18 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
It strikes me that is conceivable that the Dewdrops of Immortality may possibly refer to the (action of the) double helix dna, which was unknown and undreamt of at the time of A.C.'s writing of it & not discovered until forty years afterwards?

More likely sperm, which was very well known in AC's time.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4503
03/08/2013 3:50 pm  

Quoted from "Coruscatio - The Magical Cactus Voice":

"The Hindu version of the elixir of life, Amrita, is described in the Hindu holy books. It is said that anyone who consumes even a tiny drop will be granted immortality. To this day, yogis and yoginis (yoga practitioners) pay attention to this ancient instruction:

'While controlling the breath and performing mental concentration, your tongue should plug the heavenly pool in the palate. In time, Amrita, the sweet dew that tastes like honey, will [normally] enter the conception vessel in the throat and go down until it reaches the abdominal cavity, where it changes into negative generative force, which then descends to the testicles or ovaries where it creates spermatozoa or ova.'

"The idea here is to plug the hole in the palate in order to redirect the elixir toward consciousness, thus preventing, as much as possible, the descent of the dew into physical plane, reproductive energy. The "hole in the palate" can easily be found in the midline, near the junction of the hard palate and the soft palate. The location of this small opening is about two inches below the pituitary gland, fueling speculation as to which exotic hormone(s) may be contained within the "sweet dew." The term "elixir" comes from the Arabic, Al-Ikseer, and it means "mixture." In Greek mythology, ambrosia was the drink of the gods, depicted as conferring ageless immortality upon whomever consumed it."

... and ...

"Amrita is naturally secreted in everyone and it is pooled above the palate, from which it normally drips into the throat, eventually descending to the reproductive organs where it produces sperm cells or eggs. The synthetic preparation of such an universal medicine does indeed gather and harness the power of Amrita, but the final product is a synthesis of two, already-highly-modified streams of the original dew. This product, when used in certain esoteric ways, can be potent indeed in causing change to occur in accordance with Will. But it is not the Amrita of Hindu lore, even if some have chosen to call it so in honor of the singular, internal, primordial elixir of immortality."


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
03/08/2013 5:12 pm  
"HG" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
It strikes me that is conceivable that the Dewdrops of Immortality may possibly refer to the (action of the) double helix dna, which was unknown and undreamt of at the time of A.C.'s writing of it & not discovered until forty years afterwards?

More likely sperm, which was very well known in AC's time.

Indeed, quite so.

I meant to add the following addendum to my previous posting Reply #42; can someone tell me where the “Idiot’s Guide” to Editing and Posting (Links) on Lashtal might be revealed? 

The final paragraph from Crowley’s commentary to this Chapter is also germane:

In the penultimate paragraph, Vindu is identified with Amrita, and in the last paragraph the disciple is charged to let it have its own way.  It has a will of its own, which is much more in accordance with the Cosmic Will, than that of the man who is its guardian and servant.

Also if one assumes the two-word sentence in AL III.47 – “And Abrahadabra” to be similarly reversed (as often things are in the Book), one would see dna in direction connection with the Word of Power.  It is also interesting that it occurs six times in the Book of Lies Chapter, and five in the main paragraph alone:

To quote Crowley (Book of Lies, chapter 18):

                          DEWDROPS

    ... In the silence of a dewdrop is every tendency of his
      soul, and of his mind, and of his body; it is the
      Quintessence and the Elixir of his being.  Therein
      are the forces that made him and his father and his
      father's father before him.
...
   

Also, if one breaks down DNA into its constituent letters, one finds:

D[aleth] + N[un] + A[yin], which by the Trumps comes to 31 (III + XIII + XV) and 124 by numeration (4 + 50 + 70), which of course is the sum of adding 31 with 93.

Increasingly in the manner of a Chinese interlocking puzzle, if one also takes the final Ayin to be Aleph, the total then comes to 55.  (“Divide, add, multiply” and then, by using the Kenneth Grant “plus one or minus one for Unity” system of cabbala, subtract the missing element to arrive at 56-1 = 55, which is the intermediary number between the Star (Pentagram =5) and what is described in The Book of Lies Chapter 56 as Hadit spelled in full, 555, as well as being in itself “Malkuth, the Bride.”)

The above is possibly of passing interest, but maybe ultimately signifying nothing…

The following additional extracts from Magick Without Tears may also be of some relevance:

You are within your rights when you insist on knowing if I believe in Reincarnation; and, if so, why; and how do I feel about it. …
Do I believe in it?
Yes.
Why?
1.  Because I remember a dozen or so of my previous lives on earth. (see Magick, Chapter VI.)
2.  Because no other theory satisfies my feeling for justesse, for equilibrium, for Newton’s Third Law of Motion.
3.  Because every religion asserts, or at least implies, it in some sense or other. …

What is it that reincarnates?  We have had this before, in another connection: it is the Supernal Triad of Jechidah, Chiah, and Neschamah that clothes the original Hadit or Point-of-View, with as much of the Ruach as the Human Consciousness, Tiphareth, has been able during a given life to attach to itself by dint of persistent Application.  If there is not enough Ruach to ensure an adequate quota of Memories, one could never become conscious of the continuity between one life and the next. …

Most of this is the merest speculation, useless and possibly harmful; but I don’t mind relaxing occasionally to that extent.
What is important is the Oath.
One who is vowed to the A.’. A.’.’s Mission for Mankind, one who takes it dead seriously, and who will be neither frightened nor bored from Its majestic purpose, may at any time bind himself by an Oath to reject the rewards of Devachan, and reincarnate immediately again and again.  By “immediately” is meant about 6 months before the birth of the new Adept, about 3 months after his last death.  It depends to some extent, no doubt, on whether he can find a suitable vehicle.  Presumably, he will make some sort of preparation while still alive.  It seems that I personally must have taken this Oath quite a long while ago; for the Incarnations which I actually remember leaven very few gaps to be filled in the last dozen centuries or so.
Now dear sister, I don’t like this letter at all, and I am sorry I had to write it.  For most of these statements are insusceptible of proof.  And yet I feel their truth more strongly than I have ventured to express.  How many times have I warned you against “feelings”?

(from Chapter 47, “Reincarnation”, in Magick Without Tears)[/align:1n9dd4qm]

P.P.P.P.S.  “But the A.’. A.’. oath; aren’t you – we – all out to improve the race, not counting the cost to ourselves?”
Pure selfishness, child, with foresight!  I want a decent place to live in next time I come back.  And a longer choice if first rate vehicles for my Work.

(from Chapter 46, “Selfishness”, in Magick Without Tears)[/align:1n9dd4qm]

Incidentally, spirals are what cycles are, moved to another level.

"HG" wrote:
Before this day, there have been countless days.  And after the sun sets and this day has gone, there will be another day.  And another.  And another, and another, and another...

But this particular day, August 2nd 2013, has never existed before, and will never exist again.

“Many days go by Once in a Lifetime”
N. Joy

PS  Nice painting, obscuruspaintus!


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
10/09/2013 5:09 pm  

I have just noticed that the following, from A.C.’s Simon Iff story “What’s In A Name?” is of some relevance here:

“It is not safe to insult ghosts. …”

The joke about ghosts is again on two levels.  In one, ghosts do not exist, and to fear them is superstitious idiocy.
In the other, the genetic seed of any individual who ever existed, or who may exist, is carried in any single cell of our bodies, and if these individuals’ work still influences our lives, they are what the ancient Chinese called “ancestors”, and may help or hinder when we least expect, as parts of our consciousness, or brain cell groups, should you prefer.

The following is also (of slightly more tangential relevance):

“A magician is a superstitious idiot.”

This joke occurs on two levels.  In one, a magician is a superstitious idiot – the other name for wisdom is folly.  In the other sense, the behaviour of a magician – a hard working one, that is – differs very little in appearance, if at all, from the behaviour of an extremely superstitious person.”

Both from page 245, “The Equinox” Vol. 5 No. 3: The Chinese Texts of Magick and Mysticism, ed. and commented by Marcelo Motta (1980; not reprinted).

N. Joy


ReplyQuote
Share: