Physics and Gnosis ...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Physics and Gnosis in Thelema


christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2855
Topic starter  

I thought I would start a thread as an imploring for if not data, then for some references in Crowley's writings I could be pointed to.  Also, please share your own thoughts.

If you believe in Bohm's (and Blake's and a lot of Vedanta) physics theories about the Implicate and Explicate Order, then we are all existing in a giant Now, there is no past or present or future just a now. Or to put it another way, all information and 'beings' , everything, is stored as a record in the Implicate Order, and becomes manifest in the Explicate Order.  

 

This data will always, has always, and is always existing, and always communicating with every other bit of data in existence.

All molecules are always communicating with all other molecules, regardless of type. For the Type is an illusion of separateness created by being only one 'purposely blind' part of the Whole.

 

How, if you take this idea a priori, can this relate to Thelema in your opinion, and what has Aleister Crowley said which reminds you of this idea or set of ideas? 


Quote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 5791
 
Posted by: @christibrany

we are all existing in a giant Now, there is no past or present or future just a now.

This is the "Eternal Now." It is a proper view, because the concept of time has been transcended. The problem comes in due to humans having a memory bank filled with past events, and a wishing bank filled with designs on the future. Both the memories and the designs influence consciousness in the Now. Either one is involved in these manipulations or they are non-involved (through wu-wei, or some similar heathen expression. There are even in-between states available, which are ideal, because they offer "the best of two worlds."

Posted by: @christibrany

what has Aleister Crowley said

Nothing comes immediately to (my) mind, but this sort of thing was dealt with in The Book of Lies, which Lies are mostly paradoxical. That's why they are called "mysteries," because they don't make rational sense.

But we know them to be true, don't we?

 


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2855
Topic starter  
Posted by: @shiva

But we know them to be true, don't we?

Who Gnoes? 


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2855
Topic starter  

@kidneyhawk

 

I happened to be reading your new book and a lot of it corresponded nicely with bits about the morphogenetic grid, quantum physics, and the like I was reading in another book. Synchronicitous. 

To coin a phrase. According to Microsoft. 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1820
 
Posted by: @christibrany

I thought I would start a thread as an imploring for if not data, then for some references in Crowley's writings I could be pointed to ... and what has Aleister Crowley said which reminds you of this idea or set of ideas:

This data will always, has always, and is always existing, and always communicating with every other bit of data in existence.

All molecules are always communicating with all other molecules, regardless of type. For the Type is an illusion of separateness created by being only one 'purposely blind' part of the Whole.

The "Star-Sponge Vision" (q.v.), for one?

Posted by: @christibrany

To coin a phrase. According to Microsoft. 

Opener of the Gates of Hell Bell Bill?

Gnotionally yours,

Gnorma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
apuleius
(@apuleius)
Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 32
 

Bohm is very interesting, an initiate, someone with a truly esoteric mindset among the greatest in his field. There is a whole academic thesis available in internet about his "esoteric imagination", quite recommended. "Thelemically", perhaps the latest stages of his work, briefed in the book "The wholeness and the implicate order", could qualify as an adeptus exemptus thesis of sorts. He does not only exposes the latest forms of a life-long scientific quest, but proposes a new whole way of thinking, looking at things, quite "holistic", that goes way beyond any particular field of science and encompasses basically all fields of thought, at any scale.

Someone also very interesting with a remarkable mindset was mathematician Alexander Grothendieck, in this line of stuff.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2855
Topic starter  

@apuleius

 

Thanks for the book recommendation, I shall have to give it a whirl.  Definitely a lot of spiritual knowledge needs to be implanted into science.  We need a new meta-physics. And get rid of the woowoo feeling behind that term.

 

Posted by: @jamiejbarter

The "Star-Sponge Vision" (q.v.), for one?

Thanks James. I will have to re-meditate on that passage. 

 

 


ReplyQuote
apuleius
(@apuleius)
Member
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 32
 

@christibrany

Thank you for this thread, maybe I wasn't clear, but I not only mentioned Bohm's book, but also a full thesis on his esoteric background easily available in internet, it's called "The esoteric imagination in David Bohm's interpretation of quantum mechanics", that one is also very good.


ReplyQuote
Share: