I am on a mobile phone so can't write much.
After the enlightenment, mass education of the poeple (Western at that stage) and the fall of established religion and morality many poeple worried about how mankind is to find its way. For example the moral compass had broken, then morality will become 'relative' and truth will be 'subjective'.
The big debate started with Immanuel kant, then to George Hegel, Fitche, Schelling, Nietszche and finalised by AC. With moral guidelines being relative we where free to express a moral free political Ideology that answered the cry of the slaves 'oh the poor victims'. And of Course your mate stood up to the task. His works based on atheism has repetitively failed and caused untold harm, pain, suffering and millions of deaths. We really need a new moral compass.
Thelema is designed to STOP this sort of thing and give us a moral compass.....given it is abstract.
Please study Kants moral system. Metaphysics of morals.
Please ask yourself why you persist in this stillbirth of the enlightenment. Your morals are.....questionable. Ask yourself..why do I have an attraction for Marxism and when you can answer that you WILL EFFECT REAL CHANGE.
The search for Truth started with Kant. But it was Hegel who proposed the ABSOLUTE as the ultimate truth. A truth that no rational mind could deny and EVERY PERSON IS AN EQUAL MEMBER.
(Notably. The absolute is a bachaluan feast where nobody is not drunk. Who can relate that?)
The other truth is a verb. Schelling hwrote of it but Nietszche nailed it. BECOMING. You changing yourself. Each individual works his own way to truth and contributes to the whole (Fitch wrote this).
Hegel was first to touch on the Ontology of change. With AC developed into IAO AND LASHTAL.
Now I must go to sleep so I must end this.
Capitalism has the ontological format of Thelema..every person is economically autonomous. Your perceived injustice is nothing but your lack of perception and the weeping heart of a slave.
Thelema celebrates the unique differences in each person and refuses to FORCE ANYONE do grow better but each does their own. Even if it is stupid.
David. It is the poeple who think with their bleeding hearts that are destroying mankind. THINK WITH YOU HEAD. True morality is found through looking deep and rectifying yourself through life pain. Not by bleeding ya heart out for 'the so called oppressed ' or victims. That thinking is for slaves.
I am proud of Western mankind's achievements, sure we regret some bits. However, we gave you more freedom than anywhere ever. More wealth, knowledge, opportunity and education. I don't waste energy on those who refuse to appreciate it.
These poeple have not found anything sacred inside themselves.
Think about that.
Let's see it like this.
Materialists want to change the world by effecting physical change. He seeks answers through Materialistic means and has not truth.
The mystic/Thelemite changes himself and thus aids mankind for the better. He looks deep and changes himself to conform to universal will. He contributes to the whole by way of love ( unity of the whole . Plato deserves esoteric love in this way). Knowledge unites via rational thought.
Materialists are 'dogs of reason'.
Ask yourself why do I react like that? I know this is very very difficult. That's why slaves take the easy path..they borrow moral superiority off some cause..a cheap moral high....whole political theories or causes are followed by these poeple.
Good night all. Phew.
Phew
Phew indeed.
Thank you so much for your contributions, and i hope you are not too fatigued from all that Deep Thought.
David. It is the poeple who think with their bleeding hearts that are destroying mankind.
Destroying mankind. Are you talking about The Right Wing political parties and their scorched earth policy?
THINK WITH YOU HEAD.
Great advice there, love it!
True morality is found through looking deep and rectifying yourself through life pain.
I don't get your point fully, could you give us a few personal examples from your own past experiences where you looked deep and rectiified yourself via pain?
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
150 odd years ago Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and Nietszche predicted that without religion many would turn to Socialism. IMO they are correct.
Western Society is suffering a self hatred movement, a Shadow our shadow that may destroy us. Nihilism, pessimistic existentialism. This is a danger to Western man and our will.
The extreme left with a violent revolutionary rhetoric is very dominant today. They just just their methods as they lost the economic debate.
Marxism grew rapidly after the Frankfurt five went to America. Herbert Marcuse to name a few. Critical theory and more.
Political correctness (PC)is their weapon to tear Society down. Victim mentality is a sickness.
Example....Their so 'unscientific ' they actually think a man can turn into a woman...fir real.
I don't understand the 'scored earth' words. PC is driven by hard far left theory. The far left is what I am talking about.
Reading Immanuel kant should be compulsory for all here. The metaphysics of morals is what one should read too. Also Hegels classic.
Please read Kant first. I will return after my sleep.
150 odd years ago Dostoevsky, Tolstoy and Nietszche predicted that without religion many would turn to Socialism. IMO they are correct.
Dostoevsky and Tolstoy were realist zeitgeist story-tellers who employed (unhinged) characters that expressed then modern ideas, I'm not so sure they were 'prophets'. Subsequently (unhinged) virginal tough-guy prose-writer Nietzsche would've gotten off on them.
Friedrich Nietzsche and Aleister Crowley – Thelema – LAShTAL.COM Forum
By the way I hear that materialism is nothing new, it first reared it's head amongst the human species with the advent of a very powerful man, Akhenaten - Wikipedia tenth ruler of the Eighteenth Dynasty reigning c. 1353–1336[3] or 1351–1334 BC. He tried to steer stae religion (polytheism) towards the worship of The Sun as a phsyical disk with himself as head priest.. Some see him as a manifestation of the evil God Set. He is said to appear on earth in 'Sothic Cycles' 1,460 years long so we have;
1321 B.C + 1,460 = 139 A.D. The advent of European Christian Church which would paved the way for scientific materialism .....and....
139 A.D. + 1,460 = 1599 A.D. The advent of Newton and the Age of Reason and advanced technological (ozone destroying) civilization.
FWIW, I took an M.A. (Joint Hons) in American History and American Literature - this was over four years as an undergraduate at Edinburgh University.
Did that involve studying Chandler?
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
I am on a mobile phone so can't write much.
To start a post with a false premise is not auspicious. I have advised everyone to destroy these units, and in this case, it is a matter of do as I do, regardless of what I say.
Note: You cranked out a rather long post, so the estimation of your abilities is somewhat deficient. You must be a skilled manipulator of those tiny screens and peckers.
Thelema is designed to STOP this sort of thing and give us a moral compass.....given it is abstract.
This statement is a bit wishee-washy. I agree completely with the capitalized STOP, which is emphatic, but falls short of the True End Goal. We have been advised to make up our own moral code, based on what will disturb our minds the least, or preferably not at all. This should end any other concepts.
The morals of AL are pretty cool up to a certain point, and one may easily fit them into one's personal yama-niyama, but Ch 3 goes overboard. ("Drag down their souls to torment"). As a martial artist, I find this vicious inclination towards revenge or slaughter introduces us to The Beast, who is the Id. The higher martial grades transcend this - except where somebody who is psychologically damaged gets a high grade, and it's not based on his abilty to transcend.
Whenever we take action based on our "morals," said morals are no longer "abstract." If our morals are correct and true <haha>, then we meet no resistance; if they are twisted or weird, we suffer.
Hegel who proposed the ABSOLUTE as the ultimate truth. A truth that no rational mind could deny and EVERY PERSON IS AN EQUAL MEMBER.
But this is a false statement. The absolute truth is that everybody does not really exist, nor does anything else. Anyone can prove this, to themselves, by STOPping their linear mind.
This is the goal of all systems.
The other truth is a verb. Schelling hwrote of it but Nietszche nailed it.
Excuse me for p0ointing this out, but you are citing, quoting, or translating other people. Since Philosophy is the Enemy of Magick, why are you boring us with this stuff, actually asking us to read certain books and ask ourselves certain questions ?? Are you a guru, a philosopher, or what ? Or are you simply running your mental processes and favorite dead authors, while trying to engage others in your struggle ?
could you give us a few personal examples
Careful ! You are bringing him into a point, which could be explosive. I guess you are wishing (and I was thinking) with the hole of you (me) head that the poster would give proper living examples, rather than quoting the old guys, which would be based on personal experience. Citing too many other people gives the impression that one is a thumper (of Bibles, ALs, Korans, Torahs, Chings, etc).
Please read Kant first. I will return after my sleep.
The traveling salesman who wants you to study his material prior to further dialog. This is Autumn It is not Spring. The seasons are altering with the varying magnetic field. Perhaps some birds visit here on the return journey back towards the Equatorial ?
The extreme left with a violent revolutionary rhetoric is very dominant today. They just just their methods as they lost the economic debate.
Marxism grew rapidly after the Frankfurt five went to America. Herbert Marcuse to name a few. Critical theory and more.
We now have a rule against political posting, that for some reason is not getting enforced against certain recent right-wing posters. This leaves me in a poor position to refute such posts, since i try to obey the rules around here.
However, some stuff is just so moronic, so dead wrong, so much the opposite of true, that i have to risk violating that rule. This nonsense political fantasy material goes a long way in justifying the recent ban on political posting. If this poster has ever read Kant or Hegel or Marx, i am confident it was with someone to help him with the big words.
So, as a lefty with multiple social science grad degrees, i had to google "Frankfurt five". This is obviously some kind of reference to members of the "Frankfurt School", aka the "Institute for Social Research", a group of about a dozen German post-Marxist social scientists (with zero actual "Marxists"), several of whom moved to the US during WW II to avoid Nazi persecution and murder. Almost all of them moved back to Germany, with only Herbert Marcuse remaining in the US permanently.
Herbert Marcuse, who has been dead for 44 years BTW, was 1 (one) person. Naming him alone thus is not naming "a few" members of this sinister School. Few today are familiar with the Frankfurt School's work, even among academics, and their influence, while large in the 1960s, is pretty minute today. However, on the US far right, their imaginary influence is immense, as reflected in @Q789's deranged and fact-free post.
I can't find any evidence that any five of them in particular stayed in the US, or that any five of them have ever been grouped together as a "Frankfurt five", even in the fever swamps of the far-right imaginarium. There is, however, a group of 19th century German musicians known as the "Frankfurt Five", who needless to say have absolutely nothing to do with some social scientists operating in the same city 50 years later.
The US "extreme left" is essentially nonexistent as an actual political force, and is certainly much smaller and less powerful than the left in most other rich countries. True, the US Democratic Party has moved considerably to the left since Bill Clinton, to where it is now possible to characterize it, in international terms, as a "center-right" party.
This US "extreme left", with its "violent revolutionary rhetoric", is entirely an imaginary thing, a monster under the bed in the unhinged minds of American right wingers. The purpose of this political fantasy material is to justify the emotional attraction of members of the Trumpismo cult towards Fascism, political violence, and making the US a white-supremacist dictatorship led by a very senile failed real-estate speculator and career criminal.
i have to risk violating that rule.
I will back you up. It is not a Rule. It is a Please Do Not, which involves the 51 shades of gray, and faulty postings must be neutralized (to reality, not death). I do not jump in tho neutralize wacky politics, but it's hard to stay away when morals (which are overridden at 6=5, The Geburah Steel Mill) or states (consciousness, not financial or where one lives) are brought up.
Did you ever notice that by adding a "c" to faulty, it can become faculty.
But this is a false statement. The absolute truth is that everybody does not really exist, nor does anything else. Anyone can prove this, to themselves, by STOPping their linear mind.
This is the goal of all systems.
Ain't that a fact.
Herbert Marcuse , who has been dead for 44 years BTW, was 1 (one) person
The grammar in the statement you're commenting on was a little confusing -I'm not sure how Marcuse is a "few" people 😉
I read his Eros and Civilization after seeing parts of it quoted in an essay on Sex Magick by David Lee. It was an interesting read, though the quoted parts had more value for me than the rest of the book.
i had to google "Frankfurt five". This is obviously some kind of reference to members of the "Frankfurt School", aka the "Institute for Social Research"
I was wondering that too when I read it. The School I'm at least a little familiar with, but I've never seen any other reference to a Frankfurt Five.
This US "extreme left"
At this point, "extreme left" seems to mean "does not think that LGBT folks, POC, the poor, and women being hunted for sport is a good idea" and anything to the left of that idea.
confusing -I'm not sure how Marcuse is a "few" people
If the author-editor was using, say, English as a Second Lingo, the end users may choose to mentally flip into "one of ... a few"
I believe this designation, which is on the same line in 777 as the word, "esoteric," may be directly applied to every poster in these Halls, and potentially to a number of non-posting readers.
Ain't that a fact.
It will be a factual fact when somebody compiles a reference containing alol known systems, then demonstrating (somehow) how each system begins and ends at nothing, or zero - that sort of emptiness (where, for once, it is peaceful).
However, I have an important (oh, no!) concept to introduce, on-topic for this thread ...
In the Beginning, there was the dark void ... then, much later, Baphomet[R] came along and described his Outer Order (dues/money/degrees based) as Aristocratic Communism. Okay, we all know that (quote), but - today, after 57 years in the IX*, with the obvious paradigm dangling in the air, or aethyr, I can firmly state that Aristocratic Communism is ...
"Member of the ninth degree are co-equal owners of the Order." They get into this position by giving up everything to the Order. These are the Aristocrats who equally own the whole commune, and they can go stay at any "house" in that conglomerate. Note: This never worked out at all, except for Agape Lodge, where other people made it sort-of work ... until the police came).
ALL other degrees, going downhill from VIII to 0 (plus Associate), are hierarchical and non-communal. It is true that members of the V to VIII get to sojourn as the professed homes for limited times, so they get to hang out in heaven for a while, and this of course inspires them to reach the next higher degree, by paying the fee, but
They are Not co-owners of Anything
This Revelation <haha> is based on the original configuration of the Order, wherein the IXs voted to elect a Gr.'. Mast.'., who administered things. This is the Communism part.
By the time Reuss and Baphomet got ahold of the lineage, a new mysterious entity was introduced - The Outer Head of the Order ("Outer," in this case, meaning way-out-there and not up-front-in-the-Outer-Order), and He appointed various Grand Masters X, who ruled over the IXs and everybody else. This is the Aristocratic part.
It started out like the A.'.A.'., fighting (then meeting) the Saracen on the physical plane. The Poor Knights of the Temple of Solomon ... and it led to an absolute dictatorship - on paper and in person.
Then there was the shift to being a corporation (under McM), and that led to new Board members who further made alterations and added an ecumenical (religious) arm. Von Eckhatshausen [sic?] described the process. The Inner Society withdraws.
Just clearing up some old loose ends which I typed out earlier and which then vanished and which I forgot about.
My point is, and surely you realize this, but we must lay it out for the younger pilgrims - It depends on what/which degree one earns, as to what kind, and how many, doors get opened. [...] There is a difference hither homeward between taking courses one is interested in and courses that open doors.
Definitely. But this was at a time when further education was free and it was possible to have a career as a Lecturer in academe (or as my tutor candidly pointed out to me at the time, like "being paid to wank") - which I was very nearly tempted to do and so decided I would if I got a Double First, of which they awarded 7 out of 193 passes the year I graduated. I later found out I was number eight. Perhaps I should have made an exception?!
Incidentally one of my peers whom I shared this tutor with was the crime writer Ian Rankine - possibly you may have come across him, he seems to have done rather well for himself but nothing directly attributable to his getting his American Lit degree, even though unlike myself he did actually put himself down for a PhooD.
There was a time when a degree - any degree - could open up doors. That's no longer the case once the currency has become devalued. Now they're ten a penny.
Seems like senior members of the Agape Lodge might have thought so too?
@shiva: Is that so? Please name these heretics.
I was going by the "my friends in America" comment - I'm not aware that A.C. had many acquaintances or friends in the U.S. who weren't in the O.T.O., so it's an assumption on my part these friends would have been the senior members (who were the ones in communication with him). That's why I also put a '?' at the end, as like you I wasn't certain of this correlation either way.
[FDR] chose the banking system, which is now crumbing in our pockets
Well that's because it's no longer based on gold but thin air. The Federal Reserve, which controls the banking system, started twenty years before FDR passed the executive order/ state of emergency declaration which has never been rescinded (so sayeth RAW anyway & he should kno)..
The term was either semi-Thelemic, or Thelemic-like. Obviously, it was not Thelema per se, the speakers were obviosly hedging their words, and I can only guess that it was Masonry or some sem- or like- it.
It sounds like they might only have been half-way doing their true will! (I wonder how one can do that? with one-pointedness, I mean...)
Presently, 10D (Kether) is being assembled. Since 10D sums up the entire Series from 3D (Malkuth) to 9D (you know), it (10D) will also be published as a full-color, expensive, hardback edition that few will buy
Is this compatible with the Master Codex? Does it cover the same ground or is one more all-encompassing than the other? Is it necessary to read one before the other? I ask because if someone (like me) was thinking of laying out for one or the other, which one would you recommend?
I would say, Don't waste your time [reading Rand]
As I said I quite enjoyed reading it (Fountainhead) at the time. But I don't know if I would now also read Atlas Shrugged, it might be a bit/ even more heavy going!
@ david: Some twat (whether landowner, capitalist or worker) strikes you hard and low and you don't bitch about the sting too much? Yes? That makes you 'a King.' If not then that makes you a slave.
Christ said likewise.
@jamie: Where did he say that? Didn't he say, "turn the other cheek" & "the meek shall inherit" [=prevail]" somewhere?
What do you think makes you 'a King' - not "bitch[ing] too much"?
@david: That sort of thing yes. You have constitution and King. Circuit Five i sat the centre of the constitution.
Sorry David but I am having difficulty following your differential between the haves and have-nots/ upper and lowers/ Kings and slaves here: You think Kingly behaviour comes down to sort of, like not bitching too much if you're struck - in other words, for the kingly/queenly one to bitch just enough? (Could it be a subset of "talk not overmuch", I wonder?)
Nothing though about retaliating back in an appropriate manner, or having a zen-like 'middle way' taoistic insouciance? (hence my contrasting comparison to the sermonising on the Mount, albeit ironically done)
But where does the constitution suddenly come into the proceedings? Unlike the U.S. of A (which certainly doesn't have a King any more), I thought the U.K. didn't have a written Constitution (or Bill of Rights) either?
Ditto re Circuit Five (suddenly coming into proceedings, that is).
Where did he say that? Didn't he say, "turn the other cheek" & "the meek shall inherit" [=prevail]" somewhere?
@david: Inherit the earth yes, like a King or Queen inherits what they inherit.
Like, it is what it is, yes. Sort of A=A, you mean? The monarchs shall be as they are, and not other. Sort of thing...
[A]n M.A. (Joint Hons) in American History and American Literature...
@david: Did that involve studying Chandler?
No, not Chandler I'm afraid. From the 'moderns', Steinbeck was on offer, although I didn't do him myself (ditto Faulkner, Hemingway). I did study Fitzgerald, Pynchon, Heller, Morrison, Sanchez and Kesey (Not just Cuckoo, but Sometimes a Great Notion - much better!). My actual MA Hons dissertation was on Kurt Vonnegut and his perception of 'the nightmare of history' (= mainly American but essentially global).
(Incidentally please anyone let me know if I have inadvertently omitted to answer their point(s) or query/ies - on whatever thread. Unlike some most, I do try to be diligent and reply to these wherever possible.)
Back to dialectical materialism David?
N Joy
I later found out I was number eight.
In cycles, numbers, phases, and the very simple QBL of Nine (1-9, only), the shift from 7 to 8 is pronounced. That is, everything usually manifests in 7 (raining bow colors), but 8 is still a number (+9). 8 usually indicates "prosperity" or "blooming." Did you prosper/bloom after they cut you off at the finish line ? Or shall I just send QBL 9 to the dump with the other QBLs ?
There was a time when a degree - any degree - could open up doors. That's no longer the case
We are behind the timeline out here in the Wilder-ness, but the local Walgreens cabal drug store monopoly, where I buy my medications, has an entry-level requirement to be a manager: Any bachelor's degree.
Sorry David but I am having difficulty following your differential between the haves and have-nots/ upper and lowers/ Kings and slaves here: You think Kingly behaviour comes down to sort of, like not bitching too much if you're struck - in other words, for the kingly/queenly one to bitch just enough? (Could it be a subset of "talk not overmuch", I wonder?)
Nothing though about retaliating back in an appropriate manner, or having a zen-like 'middle way' taoistic insouciance? (hence my contrasting comparison to the sermonising on the Mount, albeit ironically done)
But where does the constitution suddenly come into the proceedings? Unlike the U.S. of A (which certainly doesn't have a King any more), I thought the U.K. didn't have a written Constitution (or Bill of Rights) either?
Ditto re Circuit Five (suddenly coming into proceedings, that is).
It's not about actual Kings and slaves or constitutional democracies as such..., it's metaphorical.
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
8 usually indicates ... Did you prosper/bloom after they cut you off at the finish line ?
No, I didn't. Something must have gone wrong with the reality generator. (May be a HorusToyTM would have helped?)
an entry-level requirement to be a manager: Any bachelor's degree.
Just so. As it was. No longer. Not now.
Why so shy on the relative merits of 10D v. The Master Codex, by the way? (see above) - are you feeling alright, comrade - it's not like you not to want to, um, tootle your own trumpet here?! <insert smiley emoji>
It's not about actual Kings and slaves or constitutional democracies as such..., it's metaphorical.
Which bit wasn't - or could you mean all of it? Wouldn't everything be metaphorical in that case, or else why not? I still remain perplexed confused (increasingly so in fact!)
N Joy
Which bit wasn't - or could you mean all of it? Wouldn't everything be metaphorical in that case, or else why not? I still remain perplexed confused (increasingly so in fact!)
N Joy
Haven't you noticed that Christ's teachings seem to be warnings?
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
Weren't we discussing AL, not "Christ's teachings", or have I missed something here?
Weren't we discussing AL, not "Christ's teachings", or have I missed something here?
Like they're not related.
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
Gotcha.
Care to expound on what you mean by this, perhaps with particular attention as to explaining how the Sermon on the Mount on the one hand, and AL chapter III on the other, are the same thing really, if you squint and hold your head just right?
If i did not know you to claim to be a strict Nancy Reagan-style "Just Say 'No' To Drugs!" type cat, i would suspect you had just smoked your first fat one.
Gotcha.
Care to expound on what you mean by this, perhaps with particular attention as to explaining how the Sermon on the Mount on the one hand, and AL chapter III on the other, are the same thing really, if you squint and hold your head just right?
That's right they being the two subjects at hand.... are related y'know they way the subjects of Faraday and Tesla....are related or e.g. likewise with Lincoln and FDR. I mean I was going to add that Crowley, having an open mind and all, referred to Christ as 'The Master'.
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
You are high on drugs right now, aren't you, david?
Congratulations on losing that particular cherry finally. Maybe quit posting til you're not quite so "It's all one, maaan!"?
Why so shy on the relative merits of 10D v. The Master Codex, by the way? (see above) - are you feeling alright, comrade - it's not like you not to want to, um, tootle your own trumpet here?! <insert smiley emoji>
What a long string of pointed points ...
Why so shy on the relative merits of 10D ... (?)
10D is Kether, the Point that has no dimensions and therefore cannot be seen, even in the mind's eye, and so there is nothing to toot.
... are you feeling alright ... (?)
It depends on the day and probably the hour. I run the realm of nausea, vertigo, rhinitis, lumbar ache [etc] ... to total non-attachment with regular chunks of time stolen by praeterhuman entities. Otherwise, things are fine.
it's not like you not to want to, um, tootle your own trumpet here
The tooting is no longer required. I do not toot here to sell books. Nobody here buys my books (maybe an exception or two). Everybody's read Solar Lodge. Everybody got a free (pdf) copy of Outside Solar Lodge, as well as The Outer Vehicle. The other books I write are handled by my distributors over at Amazing Amazon.
Thank you for requesting a toot. This allowed me to introduced the final concept (in the Intro, which has one blank page to go - send your photo, please). So here are the first six pages, just to get your mind running in the tenth dimension (which is impossible, but you can imagine it ..
So, somebody was discussing The Marx Brothers and Thelema. As stated previously by me, equal ownership resides ideally at the IX, but everything has changed, with OHOs being able to depose King Xs, and ex-spell IXs.
Weren't we discussing AL, not "Christ's teachings", or have I missed something here?
You have missed the Jesus Bus to Jeru-Salem, which will be a big load off your back.
You are high on drugs right now, aren't you, david?
Congratulations on losing that particular cherry finally. Maybe quit posting til you're not quite so "It's all one, maaan!"?
Don't want to discuss something so resort to your 'You’re on drugs, right?' response. What are you missing? If you think I've made a wacky statement then how about elucidating?
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
Yes, i think you have made several "wacky statements", including how "Christ's teachings" are "warnings", and how Thelema and those teachings are "related y'know they way the subjects of Faraday and Tesla....are related",
I have pointed out one particularly acute tension: the Sermon on the Mount, and AL chapter III, which appear to advocate such very different things that it would be tough to reconcile them.
You would appear to be the one who doesn't want to discuss something, or you might perhaps want to elucidate what on earth you are talking about, in a new thread, of course, since this thread is not about "Is there a place for Jesus in Thelema?"
you might perhaps want to elucidate what on earth you are talking about
Everything is fiddling riddles, these days. People are beginning to speak in "tongues," which includes anything not easily decipherable at first glance.
The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the Wind
without any context at all
These are signs of The End Times, wherein everything breaks down. Marxism, Thelema, Theosophy, Masonry, they all break down, and all that is left is pure anarchy. Saladin asks:n "In all cases of danger or difficulty, in whom do you place your trust?" In Masonry, the answer is: "In God."
Saladin will not accept the Mason's crutch.
Saladin asks:n "In all cases of danger or difficulty, in whom do you place your trust?" In Masonry, the answer is: "In God."
Saladin will not accept the Mason's crutch.
Just bringing us back to "do" ("do" in the case being Marxism/Thelema), while "In myself" is a very good answer, an even better answer is "In myself, and in my comrades who have come through in cases of danger or difficulty in the past".
[ignant begins loudly singing a old Wobbly song:]
They have taken untold millions that they never toiled to earn,
But without our brain and muscle not a single wheel can turn.
We can break their haughty power, gain our freedom when we learn
That the union makes us strong!Solidarity forever! Solidarity forever! Solidarity forever!
For the union makes us strong!
Full lyrics & history here, sung by U. Utah Philips here.
"In myself, and in my comrades who have come through in cases of danger or difficulty in the past".
Sure. But you refer to a group function. The initiatory process will assuredly see one, at some point, stripped of all external resources and assistance. They say No Man is an Island, but No Man (Nemo) has chosen an island ... There's nobody else there - at the point of realizing self-reliance.
Agreed, as to work on that plane where Nemo is/isn't. Of course, "There's nobody else there - at the point of realizing self-reliance" precedes the even shorter "There's nobody there".
But when we are working in Malkuth, and trying to fill our bellies, and avoid being overwhelmed by The Enemy, that's when we want comrades.
What a long string of pointed points ...
Well not really, come on now - there was only the one main central one, which despite a relatively lengthy response you still didn't answer, namely: if one was to choose to buy either your 10D or The Master Codex, which one would you recommend (and why)?
If I have to answer this myself, which it looks like I may have to, I would plump for the Codex simply because, all other factors being equal, it was chronologically the first. So funds allowing, and unless I discover there is some more compelling reason to select the other, I may choose to do that when I get around to it, being sometimes quite phenomenally lazy & subject to procrastination, as you might possibly have realized by now.
it's not like you not to want to, um, tootle your own trumpet here
The tooting is no longer required. I do not toot here to sell books. ...
Thank you for requesting a toot.
I don't think I was ever suggesting there was/is anything wrong, or indeed unthelemic, about tootling your own flute, or trumpet, or great big tuba come to that... and if anything, there is much in AL to suggest the reverse and that it is a "good thing" sort of thing to do. Is there any disagreement with this, from anywhere/one?
Everybody's read Solar Lodge.
Well I haven't yet, although am much looking forward to doing so one fine day and learning more about the history of those days when the Solar Lodge seemed to be the only significant A.'.A.'./O.T.O. type of thing going on. However apart from when it came out, I haven't seen it in bookshops very much for a while and I tend to buy there rather than online on the whole.
I presume that you were being hyperbolic rather than literal with your language lingo there (a prominent feature in the world of advertising, of course).
On the other hand, with this enquiry of mine I was being quite literal. No hidden meanings or ulterior motives to concern one about; in the words of that much under-rated but excellent Mamas and the Papas song, I was just being a "Straight Shooter"... the one exception where I asked:
... are you feeling alright ... (?)
and where I assumed you were in fact feeling quite dandy & fine but I was being very sllghtly sarky in suggesting that you normally almost always like to respond to posts regarding your own artistic an/or literary creations. You, funnily enough though, appeared to be taking my asking quite literally with that remark there! Such is life... Sigh! I knew perhaps I shouldn't have tried to apply my misplaced humour with you with this since it might fail, but there are worse things at sea (so they say)...
"Tootle ON!",
И ∫ºλ
Well I haven't yet [read Soplar Lodge]
I sent you the 40-pg abridged copy. pdf format, so you know the basic story.
I haven't seen it in bookshops very much for a while
It is Rolling Thunder on Amazon, where I have at least three patron bookstores who distribute used copies or sell nne copies by sending the order to Lulu and pocketing about $20 in profit for a book they never saw.
I have pointed out one particularly acute tension: the Sermon on the Mount, and AL chapter III, which appear to advocate such very different things that it would be tough to reconcile them.
.,..much like Thelema and Marxism?
I asked you why advocate Marxism, maybe in this long thread I can't remember, you cited the fact that your son's friend has to go get charity food provision or something. Man, one of Crowley's mantras was 'To pity a man is to insult him' and I could bring in Liber Tzaddi on that also. Do you agree?
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
Man, one of Crowley's mantras was 'To pity a man is to insult him' [. . .] Do you agree?
Whilst waiting for dawn to break in ignant666's neck of the woods, I'm happy to stick my oar in: in my opinion it's one of Crowley's more idiotic utterances. Quite often I come across homeless people and, not having had an empathy bypass, I feel pity for them; the idea that I am thereby insulting them is, quite frankly, laughable.
Whilst waiting for dawn to break in ignant666's neck of the woods,
Don't you mean David? And being a fellow Brit, his dawning would be at about the same time as ours (no knowing when he logs in, though).
in my opinion it's one of Crowley's more idiotic utterances. Quite often I come across homeless people and, not having had an empathy bypass, I feel pity for them; the idea that I am thereby insulting them is, quite frankly, laughable.
I disagree. I think that to feel pity for somebody is to immediately assume a superior position and by feeling sorry for them, look down on their apparent misfortune in comparison with one's own. They in turn would resent this because being basically human animals, they would instinctively be made aware to feel that they are lower down in the pecking order of the pack than the person smugly (as they would perceive it on some level) expressing pity towards them. Furthermore it should be noted that The Book of the Law cautions against feeling and expressing pity in four different places.
This is not to say one cannot feel compassion (which after all is the vice of kings) or empathy (the word which you also use but which is emphatically not the same thing), which words do not contain this same emotional charge or taint within them.
N Joy
in my opinion it's one of Crowley's more idiotic utterances.
There is an entirely open book to be read on compassion, the vice of kings and normal people, too.
I have chosen to not go into it, due to accelerating time and chopping water, but the short-form post goes like this: There are two versions of this topic.
I disagree. I think that to feel pity for somebody is to immediately assume a superior position and by feeling sorry for them, look down on their apparent misfortune in comparison with one's own.
I would agree that this is/was AC's point-of-view (as I have always understood it). There being a division hither homeward, I wish to introduce the idea that pity and compassion are not the same thing, although they are related ...
Don't you mean David? And being a fellow Brit, his dawning would be at about the same time as ours (no knowing when he logs in, though).
No, I don't mean David, and I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. He was responding to a remark by ignant666, to which ignant666 may well reply. In the meantime, I responded to David's post with my own thoughts on the matter.
I disagree. I think that to feel pity for somebody is to immediately assume a superior position and by feeling sorry for them, look down on their apparent misfortune in comparison with one's own. They in turn would resent this because being basically human animals, they would instinctively be made aware to feel that they are lower down in the pecking order of the pack than the person smugly (as they would perceive it on some level) expressing pity towards them. Furthermore it should be noted that The Book of the Law cautions against feeling and expressing pity in four different places.
This is not to say one cannot feel compassion (which after all is the vice of kings) or empathy (the word which you also use but which is emphatically not the same thing), which words do not contain this same emotional charge or taint within them.
When I give money to a homeless person, I don't notice any resentment on their part; on the contrary, they seem grateful. I expect I should leave them to die in their misery so that they might have the opportunity to reincarnate as a rich person. Neither am I aware of feeling smug when handing them dosh; clearly you know me better than I know myself, so thanks for putting me right.
Similarly, I don't regard compassion as the "vice of kings", notwithstanding the incision on the Tablets of Stone which comprise for some The Book of the Law, but then clearly I haven't thought it through; again, thanks.
I don't regard compassion as the "vice of kings"
The other side of this coin involves the idea that a king is free to indulge in the vice of compassion. After all, this "king" stuff implies someone who is involved in doing the divine Will (wu-wei, Tao, lost to himself in the charioting, samadhi [at least dhyana] - that sort of nomenclature).
Ignant and I discussed this very topic, face-to-face, under the influence, and we came to a bright agreement. I say "bright" because I stated the first sentence of the above paragraph, perhaps paraphrased, and he said, "Exactly!" We both lit up at the realization that we both understood this "vice" line in the opposite manner of almost everyone else.
When I give money to a homeless person, I don't notice any resentment on their part; on the contrary, they seem grateful.
The beggars who sit on the walkway bridges (going from Mexico to the USA) sometimes appear to be bored or in neutral, and I never saw one express overwhelming gratitude, I also never saw resent. There is something in AC's attitude (altitude) that seems reminiscent of the Lord of the Manor who might kick his servants on occasion.
notwithstanding the incision on the Tablets of Stone which comprise for some The Book of the Law, but then clearly I haven't thought it through
I have. The clay/stone/titanium tablets have been engraved. The interpretation thereof may vary. Why, AC himself, gave out various interpretations of his own tablet(s) (3) in assorted Comments and Commentaries.
Anyone operating in the war zone of Ch 3 (tablet) is expected to be in samadhi (the dynamic version - not sitting still). Anyone in this state will be perceiving the low man, slave, servant, enemy, wretch as a part of themselves. Now what are you goin' to do ? It is for this reason that I recommend Aikido as the supreme martial arts - not for killing, but for defeating an opponent without hurting them.
Neither am I aware of feeling smug when handing them dosh; clearly you know me better than I know myself, so thanks for putting me right.
At the time of writing this somewhat pompous riposte, @jamiejbarter, I hadn't realised that you weren't accusing me of being smug, but speculating that those whose palms I crossed with silver were likely thinking that. So my apologies, Jamie, for the prepubescent and laboured sarcasm scattered your way.
We both lit up at the realization that we both understood this "vice" line in the opposite manner of almost everyone else.
AC never met a vice he did not enthusiastically pursue.
AC never met a vice he did not enthusiastically pursue.
Yes, I was going to mention that, but it evaporated in the heat of posting. However, compassion was not necessarily a vice that he was known for spending.b When one imagines they are upper-class, even after they were broke, one tends to retain the class distinction.
Well, he did say that Ch 3 insulted his sensitivities as a Buddhist.
Whilst waiting for dawn to break in ignant666's neck of the woods, I'm happy to stick my oar in: in my opinion it's one of Crowley's more idiotic utterances. Quite often I come across homeless people and, not having had an empathy bypass, I feel pity for them; the idea that I am thereby insulting them is, quite frankly, laughable.
Pity is patronizing, egoic and rigid. That doesn't describe you, right? Compassion is not pity. Now, if AC meant that to be compassionate is to insult others then I agree that that would be BS. Ok, you got me, if compassion drives Marxism then right on but not all capitalists are devoid of compassion.
https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline
Pity is patronizing, egoic and rigid.
That's your opinion, nothing more, which you are stating as fact. I think your opinion is rubbish, but that's just my opinion.
Ok, you got me, if compassion drives Marxism then right on but not all capitalists are devoid of compassion.
Where have I said or even suggested that compassion drives Marxism? You seem to be under the impression that I'm a Marxist – I'm not.
That's exactly as I read it from the beginning. How can one even think about one-ness without compassion?
Well, being a Secret Chief from childhood, of course you understood it in this way. I believe most folks, and even trolls, understand it as weakness. In the heat of battle (Ch3 - slay some beetles) it's usually Mercy be let off.
It has become obvious to me, during the past 2b months or so, that Aiwass was/is a Malevolent Deity. This does not mean evil, it means these type of guys are the guardians of the lineage, like pit bulls, and they also serve as guides and guardians for some pilgrims.
Compassion is not pity
This is correct. Take it to the bank or the bar (pub).
"Pity not the fallen." Yeah, I agree. It's just better to eliminate them from your mind. I refer not to fallen in battle dudes or dames, but to the individual aspirants who have given up getting out and turn to getting as much out of the system as they can (so they can take it with them).
At the time of writing this somewhat pompous riposte, I hadn't realised that you weren't accusing me of being smug, but speculating that those whose palms I crossed with silver were likely thinking that.
No, I don't mean David, and I'm sorry if that wasn't clear. He was responding to a remark by ignant666, to which ignant666 may well reply. In the meantime, I responded to David's post with my own thoughts on the matter.
When I give money to a homeless person, I don't notice any resentment on their part; on the contrary, they seem grateful.
What I omitted to mention before was that the vast majority of this stuff is subconscious and done as a reflex action automatically. This is all mammalian rather than spiritual behaviour, and a hangover from tens of thousands of years of evolution as hunter-gatherers and struggling for survival in the wild. They may "seem grateful", but that's not to say on a deeper level they may not also feel a bit resentful about the fact that you may be "better off" than they are for no apparent good reason.
As Shiva also put it,
I believe most folks ... understand it as weakness
This is the same thing as somebody perceiving it to be an act of making them 'weaker' by demoting them further down the 'pecking order', as I put it myself earlier.
Neither am I aware of feeling smug when handing them dosh; clearly you know me better than I know myself
Originally I wasn't even going to put the bit in brackets after "smugly" [i.e.: "(as they would perceive it on some level)"], but thought I had better do so in order to try to minimise your possible misinterpreting it as a specific reference to you personally rather than to somebody in that situation. Looks like that was effort rather wasted on my part, as it turns out. But hey if the shoe fits, of course! (nb that was meant as another joke there, Mick)
Similarly, I don't regard compassion as the "vice of kings"
So you don't think it would only be Kings or Queens that would be able to feel compassion? In fact it's only Kings or Queens who are not only capable of being sensitive enough to the misfortunes of others but who in their altruism/ charity may actually give to them against their own best interests and judgement (e.g. in their generosity give away a bit more than they can really afford or sacrifice more than they should, hence the reason for it being a "vice").
notwithstanding the incision on the Tablets of Stone which comprise for some The Book of the Law
You seem to infer that I'm some sort of a Thelemic Fundamentalist but this is far from the case, I have too much of a basic taoist frame of mind and disposition for that (although some have equated Thelema as being Taosim in action of course).
Compassion is not pity
@shiva : This is correct.
I was trying to say this from the beginning. It's clearly a simple case of differing semantics here, Mick: it would appear your interpretation of 'pity' is more in line with your way of viewing compassion and the sense of 'empathy' you feel, but I did try in my previous post to outline the differences between them - with rather limited success, it seems. But this was also where Crowley was coming from with his remarks on the subject as well.
clearly I haven't thought it through; again, thanks.
You're most welcome!
I sent you the 40-pg abridged copy. pdf format, so you know the basic story.
You mean the 2015 "Abridged Version", and for which I thank you most kindly Shiva. But "the basic story" is not quite the same thing as "the full monty", is it?!
Aiwass was/is a Malevolent Deity. This does not mean evil, it means these type of guys are the guardians of the lineage,
Do you equate Aiwass being the "minister" of HPK with his also being a "Deity"? And which "lineage" would it be to which you are referring here?
As it was, I was surprised & did think you seemed to have rather overdone the sarcasm under the circumstances! I wasn't "having a go" personally and it seemed uncharacteristically narrow minded of you - also considering the length of time we've known each other - to assume that I was. I thought we were just debating the issue whereas you seem to have been taking it as a personal criticism
Yes. Unfortunately, there are times when I cannot see a top without feeling the urge to go over it. It's an interesting case of how easy it is to "read" something into a text that is not there.
Clearly you didn't have any sort of condescending "attitude" when you did it and your motives were done with a clear heart and conscience.What I omitted to mention before was that the vast majority of this stuff is subconscious and done as a reflex action automatically. This is all mammalian rather than spiritual behaviour, and a hangover from tens of thousands of years of evolution as hunter-gatherers and struggling for survival in the wild. They may "seem grateful", but that's not to say on a deeper level they may not also feel a bit resentful about the fact that you may be "better off" than they are for no apparent good reason.
I understand what you are driving at here, Jamie, but I'm much given to introspection and I haven't detected it thus far. So far as the receiver is concerned, yes I can see that there will be resentment at being in the position where they have to beg; after all, few people want to be in such a position. I haven't noticed resentment on the part of the recipient when I give them change; on the contrary, they seem grateful that someone has stopped and acknowledged their presence.
I have too much of a basic taoist frame of mind and disposition for that (although some have equated Thelema as being Taosim in action of course).
I'm with you there. I regard Crowley's rearrangement of Legge's work – undertaken with the help of Amalantrah during the Magical Retirement at Oesopus Island – as being one of his most interesting works.
Oesopus Island
I know you are just copying AC's spelling here, but it is really Esopus Island, here in what AC calls "Dachers" [Dutchess] County.
Crowley's pseudo-Greekified spelling does not seem to reflect any knowledge of the Esopus Indian tribe after whom the island was named.
I know you are just copying AC's spelling here, but it is really Esopus Island, here in what AC calls "Dachers" [Dutchess] County.
Crowley's pseudo-Greekified spelling does not seem to reflect any knowledge of the Esopus Indian Tribe after whom the island was named.
Interesting; many thanks for pointing that out.
Do you equate Aiwass being the "minister" of HPK with his also being a "Deity"?
The Minister was Aiwass the traffic director, who directed with his mouth inside P.'.s head. It was at a trisection, with roads pointing North (Nuit), South (Hadit), East (Ra-Hoor-K, sitting on the Eastern Seat), West (the scribe, detached from the gods, but scribbling fast).
So this tria was introduced by Aiwass, but then his voice changed and he was channeling Nuit, Hadit, RHK, and they spoke directly. Aiwass, as the mouthpiece and switchboard operator, is the HGA laying down the Law. The Law was delivered from Kether to the mind of P.'. (at Tiphareth). These are all functions of inner brain circuitry. That is why no objective "proof" ever get produced (I do not consider letters & numbers on paper to be proof of praeterhuman contact). In fact, how can there be "praeterhuman entities" when human meditators and magicians contact them, become one with them, and the move into The Great Perfection, which is pre-praeterpaternal ?
And which "lineage" would it be to which you are referring here?
Any lineage. The term "Benevolent" (uplifting) and Malevolent (Guarding) Deities" comes from Tibetan Buddhism. But any culture or system who has a pantheon always has troublemakers. Set caused storms, but the defended the disk of Ra from ingestion by Apep the wiggler, in the Tuat.
That said, all the gods were invented by human people who needed personalities to explain natural forces.