name538 and Erwin: ...
 
Notifications
Clear all

name538 and Erwin: A rebuttal  

  RSS

Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 1:18 am  

93,

I have collected the writings of name538 in the How can one practice magic without it mucking up your life? thread, and answered them up to the latter part of Page 7 of that thread. For those interested in reading or responding, I don't ask that you please wait until I have been able to post the entire thing, as it is quite extensive. (It spans 23 pages on Microsoft Word).

93 93/93


Quote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 1:21 am  

Name538,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Since you have decided to ignore my two questions, I am going to assume A) that English is indeed your primary language, and B) you meant exactly what you said in your very first statements in this thread. As such, it is useful to point out that while posting on this Site, the quotation feature works wonders. Otherwise, it appears that you are just dashing off words at haphazard that aren’t merely directed in replay to any one person’s thoughts or ideas. That said, I’ve taken the liberty to copy and paste everything you have written in this thread into Microsoft Word, which spans 12 pages at 11 point Calibri Font. Follow me so far? Good, enjoy.

"name538" wrote:
Hessel may be kind of a jerk sometimes and he may be a bit confused between loosening of self image from it's habitual patterns and the totally annihilation of self/conscious awareness in the highest Samadhi.

Here you say “loosening of self image from it’s habitual patterns” and “the totally annihilation of self/consciousness awareness in the highest Samadhi”. Please note why I questioned English as your primary language. I won’t badger you about it, but it may confuse some readers.

But aside from these minor misunderstandings in the vague occult terminology and their abstract and subjective states.

You called confusion of “loosening the self image” and “total annihilation” a minor misunderstanding… debatable point number one. In my opinion, this is more than just a minor confusion.

I find little flaw in his methods and conclusions. Further I find the only actual harm that practicing Magick does in one's life is that other people make fun of you, or try to call you out as a devil worshiper of some kind.

If getting made fun of and being called a devil worshipper are the only harm that you have found with Magick, then you have either done very many things absolutely correct all of the time, or you haven’t done very much at all in this regard. Certainly, those are not the only two ways to become harmed by performing Magick.

The dangers of Magick are like the dangers of taking psychodelic drugs or psychotherapy, it breaks down your defense mechanism and makes you deal with your deepest fears. Magick however is more not as drastic as drugs, it is subtle exposing the deep mind a little at a time. And unlike psychotherapy magick is self directed, so there is less chance of being lead astray by the suggestions of the therapist.

Seeing this statement and the one above it, I find it hard to believe that you have spent very much time practicing Magick at all. I personally happen to have found that practicing Magick can have even more drastic effects that taking drugs, so I don’t see where you get this sentiment. Perhaps it is merely a symptom of being laughed at.

If there is any real danger in Magick it is than once you strip away your social conditioning, the TRUE WILL may express itself in ways that the people around you find strange, confusing, or hostile. Like Marla in fight club your freedom may draw attention to their own fears and inhibitions and this might frighten others.

Usually we just capitalize the first letter in words such as True Will. It sound more like you have some sense, and less like you are yelling at people, trying to force ideas down their throat, but whatever works for you. I must disagree on one point here though. While I agree with what you say about the Will affecting others (partially), I do not agree that it is the only real danger. Again, you seem more like someone coming up with intellectual theories at this point, obviously based on things you have read, and do not seem to be speaking from practical experience yet, at all.

There have been studies than when apes are given LSD, later when the drug has worn off, the other apes act strange around them, as if they are outsiders. Since they no longer fallow the social behaviors of the tribe, the others get confused by them.

This may be true for apes, but humans don’t necessarily change deviate from commonly accepted social behaviors after they take LSD… okay, maybe for a week or two. Overall, it can have various degrees of effects on the user’s mind, and I daresay most of those are easily controllable in a decent mind. Yes, this is a voice of a experience from one who has taken LSD in multiple cases and under multiple conditions, not someone reading about a monkey test that someone else performed in a lab located in a far off land.

well, perhaps some are under the belief that the HGA is a literal Angel that lives in some other dimension the 6th heaven or something, and that this angle is impressed by the rote performance of the ritual, and one the Angel feels enough praise, perhaps the ritual is a postal code to send this angel mind-vibrations than it feeds upon and becomes strong enough to penetrate the veils with his powers of mind, and telepathically communicate with the aspirant, who by doing the ritual tunes into the right channel, to hear the telepathic voice of the angel.

LOL Is this what you thought initially? It seems here that you have projected your own initial thoughts about the Angel into a statement beginning with “some are under the belief”. Either that or you are regurgitating a viewpoint expressed by someone with possibly more experience in the matter. It is also quite possible that you are attempting to single out a certain group of people who, to be honest, do not really post frequently on these Forums.

(As far as all the evidence is concerned this is all total bullshit, but perhaps some people believe that if they invest enough emotion in bullshit it becomes real for them, as they obviously deny the existence of an umbrella of reality that in TRUE because it is TRUE in itself, in favor of the absurdity that Truth is a construction of the mind)

I agree that most of what you have said so far is indeed, bullshit.

Those of us with brains, realize that every thing about that story is false.

Why would you post 3 full Microsoft Word pages of falsity? Have you pre-written this all down somewhere and began to slowly copy and paste your writings in responses to posters as they see fit? Sheesh, I could have saved myself some typing. Get to the “truth” please.

That the HGA is a material aspect of the brain and the brains interaction with the external environment.

Great hypothesis! However, any statement such as this, especially ones claimed to be true, must be supported by actual evidence. Therefore, I am hoping to find proof in your statement quoted here with what you have said below. Let’s see…

That Truth is what it is, and not what we make it to be, that we discover truths by harmonizing our minds to the REALITY that is unchanging beyond our minds.

Reality never changes for you? Perhaps you should try LSD. Still searching for truth…

That mind is the operation of the brain which is as much an unchanging reality as and part and parcel of the physical world, which is the one and only world far everyone.

Since you have went into psychology, I happen to see that your ramblings here have met with direct conflict to what is taught in even the beginning classes in collegiate psychology, being that they don’t exactly know what the mind “is” yet. I would appreciate you directing us to where we can find hard evidence that “the mind is an operation of the brain”, as you claim it to be. Also, you again go with this very static model of unchanging reality that you haven’t even dared try and explain, and have even added that the “physical world” (I’m assuming you mean Plane, as in O’lam Assiah[sp]), is the only world, or Plane whatsoever. Again, such claims need to be proven by hard evidence, otherwise you are just continuing to talk out of your ass.

That the HGA is discovered by harmonizing the contents of the mind to the interests of the whole-organism-in-it's-environment as opposed to the various parts of the brain each striving against one another to fulfill it's various obsessions that contradict.

Again with the broken English… Basically you are just saying “the HGA is discovered by harmonizing the contents of the mind”. So much for the Adeptus Minor (within), I suppose. What about the Adeptus Minor (without)?

The HGA is that higher self, that creates the lower selves, the Ego which is mutable and changing but since it is the seat of awareness we are not normally aware that our ego self changes, it is merely a complex of thoughts, emotions, instincts, beliefs and behaviors that are working together contextually for the moment. There is a higher self that designs and choses which Ego to use in which life situation and context. That higher principle than forms the Ego and works to organize the rogue passions is the HGA.

This is why you should pay attention in English class. You just said, in paraphrased quotation form, that “the HGA is that higher self that creates lower selves. It either is or creates (your lack of English is hard to follow on that one) the Ego which is the seat of awareness. We are normally not aware that our ego self changes, as it is just a complex of thought, emotions, instincts, beliefs, and behavior work together contextually at any given moment. There are multiple Egos which the higher self chooses from, and uses one or the other accordingly. The HGA is what makes these choice of which Ego to use.”
Basically you just said that your HGA picks and chooses how you use your various Egos. This statement of yours could really use some clarification if you plan on having it make sense to anyone with an average education or experience in Magick and Mysticism. This is another case where you have said something, much like your original statement, that is intellectual at best, and you have not provided a clear enough pronunciation of your viewpoint for the reader to discern whether or not you are just rambling again, or actually have something to say.

If you do liber Samek a billion times, expecting an actual angel to burst forth from some parallel universe and speak to you, You will be out of luck. That is not what the HGA is.

You are speaking, again, like you have some sort of empirical evidence of this in order to back up your claim. If you do, please provide it to the lovely readers here at Lashtal. If not, then your statement is merely subjective, and most certainly not the “truth” you claim to be dripping onto these virtual pages.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 1:22 am  

So unless you have some understanding what you are trying to do, to experiences with the Ritual, the repeating of the words and signs until you pass out in exhaustion will NEVER achieve the result.

Would you mind equating this with how Sir Isaac Newton discovered the Law of Gravitation please? Or even in a Thelemic context, explain how this relates to Crowley sitting on a train with Rose Kelley only to have her give the famous message, “he’s waiting for your” (or whatever it was she said to rouse his interest).

Especially if you are taking the ritual literally. In which case the most you will attain in to make your self delusional and re-enforce your belief in supernatural angels (Or rather to increase your word of mouth and claim that you believe in angels, because you would hate to have wasted so much time in ritual and never seen an angel, so you will tell everyone that you did see an angle, until you start to believe it yourself. Much like Christians do with Christ)

You are assuming that people who undertake Liber Samekh do so without the fundamental knowledge required to perform it. In short, you are sitting here on Lashtal insulting any real Adepts that happen to be present. Please keep this in mind.

See again you do not understand than TRUTH is how it is, Hessel did not create the truth, he only conveys it.

You just said that Erwin Hessel conveys the truth. That was your sentence. Such a sentence, in standard English, implies the caveat “all of the time”. Thus, you have made yourself into a liar if Erwin fails to convey the truth even once in his life. I hope you are beginning to see how important knowing this language really is.

The product is just as good no matter who sells it to you.

This statement is a very debatable thing. What you are saying is that there are never any quality issues, ever. In an analogy, whether I get cable internet service from Comcast or Quest doesn’t matter, as I will be getting cable internet, and it is just as good with either company. You sir, are lying.

If he pours it for you politely and is nice, or if an angry jerk holds your mouth open and forces you to drink. It is the same milk, and if the milk is fresh or sour has nothing to do with presentation

This is a matter of packaging, and for once I partially agree with you that the packaging has nothing to do with the quality of the product… unless of course it is the packaging which draws you to the product in the first place, and then the packaging is being used to lure you in one way or another to a specified product. Many companies are well known for their beautiful packaging, while their products are notorious for being absolute crap. After a while, the packaging and the product become synonymous with each other. When you see a logo, such as the Macintosh Apple, do you not automatically think of the various Macs or other electronic equipment made by Macintosh?
There is also a thing called consumer loyalty. People will find a brand of products they like (Kraft cheese, for instance), and they will stick to that product no matter what. Now, when you bring someone like Erwin Hessel into such a discussion, you are already agreeing that the packaging sucks, which means that the quality of the product must be far superior to other products in order to get people to actually want to buy it. That said, there are many people on this Site alone who will dispute the quality of that product, and there always will be. Where personal growth an evolution is concerned, such discussions may be either based on facts supported with evidence, or simple opinions. It’s like saying, “Yes, I know the iPods works effectively and they are cool, but I prefer the Zoon,” or saying, “iPods don’t work well at all, even with all of their snazzy promotions”. These are all simple marketing skills, and in the case of Erwin Hessel and the product he is marketing in some form or another, it is important to remember the caveat “Buyer Beware”.

The problem with "Crowley's system" is than Crowley does not have a single system, sometimes Crowley wrote about his experiences what they seemed like to him, sometimes he tried to explain them using his knowledge of Freudian psychology, some times he spoke in terms of physics, some times in terms of biology and brain science, some times as an animist some times as a theist other times as a Buddhist, at other times he was a fatalist and others he spoke of free will. Some times he was literal other times he was metaphorical, some time he spoke plain other times he spoke in verse.

Crowley does have a single system, outlined in the Curriculum of the A:.A:. If you think that any system of personal growth and evolution should follow completely rigid lines without any deviation whatsoever (as in saying Thelemites should not study Buddhism), then you are completely mistaken. For examples of how this “rigid format” has been adhered to, simply look at the history of the Catholic Church, for example. I would say they could learn a thing or two from Buddha. Also, you seemingly do not understand what an analogy is. For Crowley to deviate into an example of chemistry or fencing doesn’t necessarily mean that he is saying to become a professional fencer. The very idea of Thelema is that it is a way for each of us to discover our own True Wills, regardless of our individual dispositions. For further reference of analogy see this very thread in which Los and I equated learning chemistry, becoming a millionaire, and building a house with obtaining the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. It does not necessarily mean that attaining the K&C will make use renown chemists, millionaires, or architects, nor do we have to become either to attain the K&C.

it fact Crowley was so broad studied and the different perspectives of his age were so diverse an unsettled that I do not believe he ever settled the issue of metaphysics himself, thus was his advice about not questioning the hows and wherefores and just do the works.

The keywords in this area are, “I do not believe”. Again, Google the word “analogy”. If anything, Crowley’s ability to equate various things by use of analogy actually demonstrated his Mastery instead of his charlatanism, as you say.

The metaphysics and philosophy he employed changed depending on who's book he had most recently been impressed by.

I suppose you don’t think Ebert and Roper are very good movie critics then.

Works like the soldier and the hunchback show his interest in trying to hold these seemingly incompatible views at the same time, to find a transcendent truth that is beyond rational expression which includes all possible variation. (The achievement of this ends marks the attainment of the Magister Templi, while the various forms all fight and oppose and confuse the magician, this is the fight with Choronzon in the abyss).

I believe you are confusing the Master of the Temple with the Adeptus Exemptus. As it is written in One Star in Sight, part of the Task of the Adeupts Exemptus is, “To attain the Grade of Magister Templi, he must perform two tasks; the emancipation from thought by putting each idea against its opposite, and refusing to prefer either; and the consecration of himself as a pure vehicle for the influence of the order to which he aspires.” If you actually read and understood anything written by Crowley on this subject, you would have learned that the Adept has to have the opposites united before the Oath of the Abyss, otherwise the confusion caused will certainly destroy him.

Crowley never settled on a single explanation, he tried to match hes explanation to the student, which is why his account of the HGA differs in his instructions in MWT from his earlier writings. Not only does his "system" differ from student to student and from which ever books are on his mind at the time, the foundation of each of his orders, A.'.A.'. and O.T.O. are different, also presumably the lesson of each initiation in a total change and possibly reversal of ones previously held beliefs.

When you talk about say, an orange, how many ways can you describe it? You can describe the color, the texture of the outside, the texture of the inside, the natural wedges, the taste, the juice, etc. I’m not sure why you are unable to see such things in Crowley’s work, but is quite obvious to me that you do not understand Crowley’s work, provided you’ve even given it half of the study and dedication you think you have.

The Society of Thelemites, which Crowley had proposed when he feared he might lose control over the OTO, would have been set up as a purely materialist order, concerned with things like industry, banking, farming, food distribution, school teaching, and political policy. With no mention of anything occult, Kabbalah, strange God's etc, it was to be a pure practical application of the law of Thelema to solve the problems of Labor, Ethics, and Economics.

Please provide us with evidence of this, which I’m almost certain you can, and then be so kind as to explain how it even fits into whatever else you have been rambling about.

Views are either correct or incorrect.

This statement is incorrect. It’s fallacy is proven by the infamous “glass of water experiment”, wherein some see the glass as half empty, and some see it as half full.

If you don't like his view, show with evidence that it is false.

I just did.

If it is not in agreement with your opinion, the tough. Whoever told you to have an opinion anyway
We want FACTS not opinions, you have no RIGHT to hold as true what is not TRUE. Thus no You do not have the right to hold Opinions, you have only a duty to make sure that you know facts and not illusions.

Again, you are counteracting yourself, making yourself sound like both a liar and a hypocrite.

If Erwin makes a statement, you can't say he is wrong because you disagree, he is not wrong because he was mean to you. He is wrong if and ONLY IF you can show that what he said is not actually the case. That is irregardless of what views you or he hold or anyone holds. TRUTH IS TRUTH it is not a matter of personal opinion.

Actually, you can say he is wrong if you disagree, unless he has provided empirical proof of his claim. In your fanaticism you are forgetting the scientific method.
If Erwin makes a statement, you can't say he is wrong because you disagree, he is not wrong because he was mean to you. He is wrong if and ONLY IF you can show that what he said is not actually the case. That is irregardless of what views you or he hold or anyone holds. TRUTH IS TRUTH it is not a matter of personal opinion.

Actually, you can say he is wrong if you disagree, unless he has provided empirical proof of his claim. In your fanaticism you are forgetting the scientific method.

To drive this point further.

Not one person here has taken any specific statement that Erwin made, and refuted it with any kind of evidence.

That is something I haven’t personally got into the middle of yet, and I really don’t want to, because as I said before, judging from what Erwin has said on this website, I really don’t want to go to his and read what else he has to say. In an analogy, the packaging and quality of the sample product he has delivered here at Lashtal is simply not sufficient enough to make me want to visit his store. If you cannot understand that view, then you are simply lost in the woods at night without a flashlight. I apologize for yet another analogy.

Instead you make generalizations about ERWIN or ERWINISM and express your emotional reactions to this. If you want to refute Erwin, you can't. You may make a refutation against something specific than he said, and you can't just say, I don't like it, or it's mean, or I don't believe him.

Again, this is something I haven’t gotten into yet, and will try my best not to. I do not what he has brought to this Site, and thus I refuse to go to his website. That is my opinion, and as a human being I have every right to hold that opinion whether you like it or not. I don’t have to provide you with empirical evidence why I hold the opinion. Now, if I begin talking about “how wrong Erwin is” or antying of that nature, then sure I will have to provide evidence. However, you have come into the Lashtal Forums quite late, my friend. Many of the posters here have been posting here for a very long time, and have had much more exposure to Erwin than they would like to admit. Many of these wonderful ladies and gentlemen have spent endless days arguing with him on many various points, and thus they have earned their right to have various assertions about him. For you to continually say they need to go re-read their old arguments and such with him in order to provide proof to you about how they came by their opinions is just nonsense. If you want to know why they feel a certain way, then why don’t you scour the boards and find what makes people cringe at the sight of the name Erwin Hessel.

You can show evidence from nature, ie from observation, from science that is from your own journal of a repeatable experiment, and you could even refute him on some issues by showing that Crowley specifically indicates the opposite of what he claims Crowley means.

This again is provided that people are willing to discuss Erwin’s writings or claims, which many have addressed that they do not want to do. In some cases, you are merely a bug trying to open an old wound that people have been trying to let heal. No, I’m not calling you a bug, it’s an analogy. By the way, some of you guys need to create an Erwin thread, that way you can discuss him there instead of just popping into random threads like the Jehovah’s Witnesses who show up to people’s doors quite randomly.

I do not care what anyone likes or does not like nor does the Universe, what you like does not effect truth.

For someone who doesn’t care about other’s opinions you sure have a lot of your own. Perhaps you should Google “perception” while you are learning what an analogy is.

The adept magician no longer Likes or Dislikes anything, his emotional attractions and repulsions do not interfere with his perceptions nor with his WILL. He truly makes no difference between anything and any other thing. A kiss and a slap in the face are equal to the advanced practitioner, an orgasm and the last sigh of the death gasp are equal to him.

Yes… and no. While a kiss or a slap may be viewed from the “make no difference” standpoint, I can guarantee you that one’s reactions to each will be different. Well, maybe not. If you kissed me or slapped me I’m probably knock you out. If my wife did it, on the other hand, the reaction would be quite different.
While you can sit inside of your own brain and think to yourself, “anything done to your face is just something done to your face, there is no difference”, I can guarantee that a branding iron will alter many different perceptions than a kiss will. If you do not see this let me know, and I will give you even more analogies. I hardly believe that any Adept will say that “walking across the street is just walking across the street, whether there are moving cars present or not”. This is the assertion you appear to have made.
In addition, some someone who claims to “make no difference” you surely were quick to make many differences about Crowley’s use of analogy in his writings. Again, this is making you appear as a liar and a hypocrite.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 1:24 am  

"Composite things are like dreams. Fantasies. Bubbles. Thoughts. Like a dewdrop and a flash of lightning. A new dress and a burning tire. Waves of sand and sinking ships. The shadow of a statue, and an entry in a diary. A brain tumor and an ice cream sundae. They are thus to be regarded." (Aeon Flux)

it's not a view or an opinion it is a fact, and your opinion has no bearing on facts.

I love the resort to quoting TV shows that sound cool. Try practicing that, please. Also, opinions do have a bearing on facts. No, opinions cannot change facts, but they change the reaction to facts, and those reactions are unique to each individual. I surmise that in your “make no difference” web you forgot to interject that “every man and every woman is a star”.

Why would it be that to annihilate the SELF would leave some one this all loving, sympathetic non-confrontational sort of numinous master out to be gentle and bring peace and love to the world.

What? English please.

Let us look at things which have little or no ego. A wolf has little self image, can not recognize itself in a mirror and though she shows gentleness to her pups, she will savagely tear out the throats of an intruder and break the necks of her prey.

A wolf is an animal. It’s functions are animalistic and strongly instinctual. Thus, comparing the human brain to the animal brain is haphazard, at best.

And a hurricane which has no ego at all, which none the less has a WILL, it has an inertia that pushes it beyond ego, and yet a hurricane is not a kind and gentle master, the hurricane will brutally obliterate anything that gets in it's way, without hesitation or remorse.

Hurricanes do not have free will. You are trying to interchange the word Will with inertia and they are not the same.

Why should we think less of the MT, who has annihilated his Ego completely so than there is no Hesitation or Remorse in no preference for survival over death, for peace over war, for Truth over lies, All that is left is the FULL force and inertia of the WILL to manifest itself in ANY WAY that it can, without preference to conditions, without concern for the feelings and well being of ones material vessel other than as a necessity to use it to achieve the WILL, and no concern for the feelings or well being of those who get in the way of that WILL either.

It would be advantageous if you would first point out that a real Master has already aligned his or her life so that her Will is unimpeded. It might make your argument a bit stronger. As it is, you have given off the scent of one who has taken the Oath of a Master of the Temple without any clue whatsoever as to what it actually entails, and why those things are so.
If you have not taken the Oath, and lay no claim to the Grade, and this goes for everyone here, then how on Earth can you even speak about how something that is commonly accepted to be un-viewable from below the Abyss? It’s simple heresy, and shows a complete lack of respect for the actual Masters that do exist in this world, in any time period.

The sage (like the Tao) treats all things as straw dolls, which is to say as if their only use and value is to be sacrificed to his WILL.

And you know this… how? Are you calling yourself a sage? Again, how in the world can you speak how a sage treats things if you are not a sage? That would be like me trying to tell you how President Obama is approaching his plans for this country. It is merely speculation, as the only one who really knows how he is approaching it is Obama himself.
The day the sheep speak for the sage entirely is the day the sage becomes the sheep, which is completely impossible given the tenets of sagehood.

NO
TRUTH IS NOT A RESULT OF BEHAVIOR

You are the result of your behavior (and other things). How do you like that?

Thus it does not matter if Erwin is a complete and total jack ass, it does not matter if he murdered 50 people in cold blood and raped the pope, what he says is True or false not ANYTHING to do with what he does or how he acts.

Yes it does. If he says that murder is wrong and then kills 50 people, then his words are inevitably false considering the definition of the word wrong.

2+2=4 not be cause the I am a nice swell guy who is polite to everyone, 2+2=4 is true for jerks, killers, sociopaths. It is TRUE if Hitler says it and it is true if Mother Teresa says it

I hardly believe this sort of truth can be found in totality when observing the research of anyone, ever, on the subject of the human mind. Again, what you are purporting it looking very badly for Erwin, as it makes any single thing he says that isn’t true into… a human being, which is one thing you apparently are not prepared to call him. For all of the “de-demonizing” you have done with the HGA in your words so far, perhaps you should go apply the same thing to Erwin.

TRUTH just is TRUE and it was true before erwin was born and it will be true long after he his dead, and it is true for you and me, to dogs plants and to GOD.

And now you are equating Erwin with God? I’m not even sure I should read or respond to the rest of this, but let’s continue.

IT JUST IS TRUE, how can you not understand that!!!

You forgot the !!!!1111!!!! thing in your nerdrage outburst.

When I say hey read this quote from Erwin, where he proves that 2+2=4.
Then you say 2+2 does not equal 4, I reuse to read anything Ewin writes because he is a mean guy, he will his just a no good fink and I refuse to read or believe anything he says.

Erwin is not busy trying to prove 2+2=4 though, which is what you do not seem to understand. Also, see my reference above about the people who have locked wits with Erwin in the years past.

Well the argument is Does 2+2=4 or does it not =4

Crowley once stated that one can mathematically prove that it is impossible to hit a golf ball. Whether or not I agree or believe that statement depends on whether I believe Crowley. If I believe Crowley, then I will look for this proof. If I think Crowley is just a tool, I won’t.
You are telling people who think Erwin is just a tool to look for the proof in his words. Not only is such a notion counterproductive, it is imbecile, and it’s very suggestion borders on the parapets of fanaticism My guess is that you have put a lot of stock into Erwin and his writings being true, so they absolutely must be true, or else you have invested all of your stock for naught. Thus, you are either motivated by the fanatic warcry of a blind follower, or by the simple fear that you sir, just might be wrong.

the argument in not about If you find Erwin to be a nice guy or not.

If anyone ever said that without actual experiences with Erwin, then I can see your point. However, many of the people who have said these things have had multiple direct experiences with him.
A very wise man once told me, “A Magickian does not dine with someone he does not respect.” How much more inclined would someone have to be then, to go over to his house and discuss all of his furniture or his job with him!

IT has not one god damned thing to do with how the math works, how much of an ass you believe the mathematician to be.

Yes it does. You are saying that if Crowley’s methods work (ie. Are true), then every single person on this planet should use Crowley’s methods. Again, you are speaking about workings of the human condition that cannot be empirically proven by science at this time. The very nature of the human condition is that each individual is unique. On top of that, each one of us has free Will. Some are more attracted to the angel, and others are more attracted to the demon. In any case, man is free to make his own choices. This is true whether Erwin is a modern day Krishna (incarnation of God) or not.

Dr. Theodore Kaczynski AKA the Unabomber is a brilliant mathematician who has written several essays. Not to mention his disposition "Industrial society and it's future" which is a brilliant political, sociological and psychological assessment of modern society and the problems than threaten the collapse of the old aeon social system as well as the beginnings of the new aeon system.

Who gives a shit? Not trying to sound rude, but that is something you are having a hard time with here. People have such an attitude towards Erwin’s writings, whether you like it or not. It is the same with the Unabomber. The dude decided to kill multiple people for no damned reason. Perhaps I should reiterate that Crowley once said that a man who kills another man is quite possibly at odds with his own “will to live”, which is a very specific function of the Will of all living things. So explain to me then how someone like the Unabomber, who is obviously a psychopath, is doing his Will? Even considering the possibility that he realized all of the stuff he did, and put it into a book or two, and it drove him crazy, I still do not want to read his books. The man lost control of himself. Enough said.
[quote
The truth or his math and his politics, is not changed by the fact of his being a terrorist whose bombing campaign killed 3 innocent people.

Yes it does. Hitler thought that his ideas were “true”, and you see where it got him. You should probably read Liber OZ.

I fail to see any problems in this essay.
It is a clear explanation of what the HGA is and the process of attaining to it.
It clears up the mystical language and removes all unnecessary supernaturalism.
It does a very good job of translating Crowleyese into clear language of Science and Psychology.

I didn’t and won’t read the essay. The previous statement is true. No further comments.

I do not accept Erwin's claim of 8=3 either.

LOL Really, man? For someone who speaks so highly of this Erwin fellow, you would think he had to attained mastery at least over you. In that case, why are you claiming that someone who isn’t even a Master by the proper definition only speaks truth? Do you have no idea what the Abyss even is?

from his writing on what that entails, it sounds more like he is describing the loosening of the personality elements, which is the effect of passing the cross between Temperance and the Tower.

Art(Temperance), Path 25, Samekh; and the Tower, Path 27, Peh. If I recall correctly, balancing the paths of Samekh and Peh are performed by the Dominus Liminus, but maybe I should look it up. At any rate, it confirms neither the Grade of Adeptus Minor nor Magister Templi.

So, if he has fully completed the work he describes as the state of the 8=3 Ego. Then I would place him at 5=6. But, ultimately it is based on his subjective experiences, and I can't know his experience other than by what he claims.

Sir, by all of your previews writings thus far, I do not think you are entitled to “place” anyone.

Apparently you never read Christopher Hyatt especially the Psychopath's bible. Where the nature of the MT is clearly expressed.

Um, lol? Damn, I don’t read Hyatt much either.

""White is white" is the lash of the overseer: "white is black" is the watchword of the slave.The Master takes no heed"

"The ruler asserts facts as they are; the slave has there-fore no option but to deny them passionately, in order to express his discontent"

Random quotes. I’m not here to debate what someone else has said, at the moment.

It is obvious that you resent power the real world has over you, ie you are not omnipotent, and as such you deny the facts of reality to express your resentment and to claim a power over fantasy that you fail to achieve in reality. Thus you delve into supernaturalism and into the megalomaniac's delusion than you create your own reality. This slave mentality that is exhibited by many here is the sure road to the black brotherhood. The denial of objective reality is the hallmark of the sorcerer. The magician and scientist works with the objective world, the natural world.

This sounds like heavy projecting.

As Bacon says and is echoed in the work of Rand, "Nature to be commanded, must be obeyed".

Another quote.

Read the theorems of magick in MTP. This is almost an identical set of axioms to physical science, only the aim is to achieve WILLed results rather than mere observation of truths.

What’s your point?

Magician, I do not know what is going on it china, so I tune into the radio, I talk to people who were in china, I read books and papers from china, I speak to chinese people, or I get on a plane to go see china myself.

Um, okay?

Sorcerer, China is an illusion, it's a creation of my mind, I can create china by my WILL and by ritual and prayer I can make china in my own image, so than when I arrive in Chine everyone well praise me and give me a free palace to stay in and bring me free food. I shall Will a China which does my bidding, I will create the illusion I want, using the strange and mystical powers of my mind, I will summon up angels than will carve my reality to my WILL.

I must have missed a post of yours or something, but all of this labeling from someone who was so emphatic about “make no difference” is almost appalling.

liber CCCXXXIII ch 27

A Sorcerer by the power of his magick had subdued
all things to himself.
Would he travel? He could fly through space more
swiftly than the stars.
Would he eat, drink, and take his pleasure? there
was none that did not instantly obey his bidding.
In the whole system of ten million times ten million
spheres upon the two and twenty million planes he
had his desire.
And with all this he was but himself.
Alas!

No comment.

(It is easy to be a God in your own mind, but what does it really get you?)

It’s apparently easy for Erwin to be a God in your mind, but what has it gotten you?


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 1:25 am  

Though it is a fact that our awareness is a model of reality and this it is "all in your head".

Please tell us, in your own words, what you think this means.

But, that is not Reality, the model has to be tested against actual reality. There are no angels, gods, other planes etc in actual reality, Those are just poetic ways to represent emotions and abstractions in the mind's models.

Prove it.

If you can't distinguish between literal and figurative aspects of the mind, such that you believe Reality is a creation of your mind, then you will ruin your life.

Again, prove it. Statements such as these can either be proven or disproven. I didn’t make the statement, you did. So if you cannot prove it, then you are essentially a liar once again.

The sorcerer, is some one who has total power to shape his mind and distorts his beliefs and mental model to support his own ego. Where as the Magician accepts reality as it is, and changes his self image and ego, to fit the facts of the world.

More labeling…

If you think you can change the world to fit what you think it should be, that the world is a projection of your mind (WILL) then you are a sorcerer.

I can tell you imagine this world as an Erwinian utopia, where everyone agrees that he I always right, and I can see you working to try and make that change occur. Does that not fit your definition? Are you not defining yourself as a “sorcerer”?

If you change your self image, if you accept reality in spite of your ego, if you realize the TRUE WILL is a part of the world and not something your mind imposes on the world. Then you are a Magician.

Examples, please… in your own words.

What I meant was that he seems a bit confused about the difference between the state of 5=6 and that of 8=3.

Who knows? What you described is certainly no further than Dominus Liminus. Even so, where have you ever even given us a glimpse that you have the right to confer either Grade, Adeptus Minor or Magister Templi?

When he expresses that the 8=3 still has all the elements that make up his personality rather he does not identify them as himself. Erwin identifies the MT as some in whom the elements of personality exist but are not unified as a single conception of self or EGO. Yet he still identifies the WILL as an agent than actively selects which of his personality elements will be expressed in context at each point in time.

Erwin says… jump.

Now what Erwin describes here, I would argues is true of the 5=6 state of mind. The Zelator in Yesod has associated with the foundation of the self, has dissociated from the physical body as a mere vessel in which those fundamental thoughts, beliefs, attractions and repulsions, and other elements that make up ones idea of who one is, what preferences make up one's psychological foundation. That is the Zelator. Then one moving up from yesod to Tiphereth, must balance out Netzatch with Hod. This means the path attributed to temperance which crosses the path associated to the tower. (Some times this is called piercing the veil of Paroketh). In any event, this is experiences as the breaking apart of the foundation of the self, ones stability of existential self image is broken apart, Yesod is dissolved into it's constituent parts, there is no central self, since the parts that make it up became disconnected.

First and foremost, how can you argue that Erwin is speaking from the state of mind of an Adeptus Minor, when earlier you stated that you feel he is more along the line of a Dominus Liminus? Do you not see the problem here? Obviously, you have not worked the A:.A:. System.

It is when one re-formulates the self in Tiphereth, that the deeper self, the HGA is known and the HGA organized the loose elements of traits, beliefs, emotions etc into the ego self. Which no longer appears like a solid unchanging self, but becomes like a mask.

Give examples, please.

Thus is Yesod truly under stood as the moon, the phase changing and unstable image or reflection of the SUN which is the higher or deeper self or the HGA in Tiphereth.

English please.

This is what Erwin's 8=3 description sounds like to me.

To you.

Where as the TRUE crossing of the abyss, is the total annihilation of the SELF in every way so that the MT is merely is a hollow reed that draws down the fire of heaven, is merely an inert substance through which the vibration of the universal continuum is mediated, ie the WILL of the impersonal ALL moves the MT without any personal conscious interference.

Is this what a Magister Templi is? And you know this, how?

If Erwin has experienced what he claims is the experience of attaining 8=3, I believe he has actually attained 5=6 that is Knowledge and Conversation of the HGA. If not fully he has atleast been introduced to the grade of adeptus minor.

Make up my mind, please. Dominus Liminus, Adeptus Minor, what? And again, where do you get the idea that you even have the right to “place” anyone in any particular Grade?

What exactly is wrong with interpreting occultism as actions and studies than effect the brain. Just like a poem or a movie triggers the brain to create emotions, and with those emotions you might have visions and fantasies than explain those emotions.

Get to the point. Are you saying that interpreting occultism is subjective?

The ritual is merely a play, a poem is just hearing and a movie is hearing and seeing, but a ritual has sight, smell, hearing, taste, intoxication, textile feeling, and movement in space. All working together to create visions, that play out in the conscious part of the mind. But in a way sort of like lucid dreaming, where the internal content of the mind reacts to the external events of the ritual, it creates a feed back or communication. Especially, in the case of evocations.

This I don’t necessarily disagree with, but I do believe you can do a better job of explaining it, especially if you have the ability to confer A:.A:. Grades upon people.

There is no need to propose anything super natural.

There is no need to propose anything not super natural as well.

there is nothing wrong with these occult rituals and practices, which I am sure is not what Erwin is complaining about. What he is complaining about is than the rituals are explained and believed in an the supernaturalist notions that gods, spirits, other worlds, etc exist.

Many would, and will, argue that this is merely Erwin’s own perception.

If people want to perform the occult ritual under strict scientific controls and study the effects they have on the brain. Not taking literally the visions and hallucinations that are caused by the rituals, but rather exploring the psychological content of those visions as indication of processes occurring in one's brain concerning self image, beliefs, and emotional values. Then there is no harm in occultism. The harm is than occultists believe in non-real things based only on hallucinations triggered by the rituals.

Please tell us what or who you think Aiwass to be.

Most often the rituals induce Temporal lobe seizures, which cause intense hallucinations, The nature of these can be shaped by the context created by the theme of the rituals.

Prove it.

look, I could advocate free speech and still beat my dog for barking.

That would make you a hypocrite.

I can advocate on clearly and logically explain the evils of slaver, and in my own life abuse my servants.

Again, a hypocrite.

When you read what Erwin wrights, you should not even think, about erwin as the author, You should always judge statements as if they fell from the sky or were dug up from antiquity without an author. The life of the Author has nothing to do with the truth of the statements.

Emphatically, no. Unless Erwin is stating something that is a commonly accepted scientific fact, such as 2+2=4, then you should always take into account who Erwin is as a person, as his writings are his perceptions. If his writings are indeed provable scientifically under various tests, then and only then might one be able to argue that what he says is not effected in any way by his own perceptions. This is true for all people, and is a prime example why one should not “believe everything one hears or reads”.

Maybe Erwin simply does not follow what he preaches, it would not be the first time.

Which would make him… a hypocrite.

Further no one ever said that some one who does his true will, will not be mass murderer, Crowley concluded in at least one writing that it was Napoleon's TRUE WILL to conquer Europe, which includes all the killing necessary in the war.

War is a slightly different type of event than simply running around killing people for the hell of it.

Like I said before once the Abyss is crossed and the SELF annihilated, there is no control valve to stop the WILL from manifesting as a force of nature, which in not concerned with the Ethics of it's actions. A Magus whose WILL is to bring about a orld, must destroy the wold world and thus his WILL may manifest like a forest fire, cleaning the world of millions of people and crushing whole societies to ruin.

Again, you have the authority to say this, how? I’ll say it again. It is a huge problem with people in occultism to run around talking about Masters like they have complete knowledge of what Mastery entails without actually being Masters themselves. Not only is it an absolute fallacy of one’s own mind, it is completely disrespect to the real Masters.

In the Anime Urotsukidoji, before the Overfiend can be born to restore and unify the 3 worlds, a mighty demon must destroy all 3 worlds completely, and the redeemer is only born afterwards from the fires of destruction.

More cartoons.

You can not claim than because an MT or Magus is acting destructive or in any way that you don't like, that he is not an MT. There is not some specific way in which he will act, the way he acts is a result of his incarnation, as it is explained in Liber B.

Sigh… again, how is it that you claim to know so much about a Magister Templi, and even a Magus?

Simple Partial Seizures (SPS)
involve small areas of the temporal lobe such as the amygdala or the hippocampus. The term "simple" means that consciousness is not altered. In temporal lobe epilepsy SPS usually only cause sensations. These sensations may be mnestic such as déjà vu (a feeling of familiarity), jamais vu (a feeling of unfamiliarity), a specific single or set of memories, or amnesia. The sensations may be auditory such as a sound or tune, gustatory such as a taste, or olfactory such as a smell that is not physically present. Sensations can also be visual, involve feelings on the skin or in the internal organs. The latter feelings may seem to move over the body. Psychic sensations can occur such as an out-of-body feeling. Dysphoric or euphoric feelings, fear, anger, and other sensations can also occur during SPS. Often, it is hard for persons with SPS of TLE to describe the feeling. SPS are often called "auras" by lay persons who mistake them for a warning sign of a subsequent seizure. In fact, they are indeed seizures. Persons experiencing only SPS may not recognize what they are or seek medical advice about them.

Now you are saying that déjà vu, feelings of unfamiliarity, premonitions, amnesia, auditory sensations, psychic sensations, OBE’s, euphoria, fear, anger, and the sensing of auras can all be caused by these Simple Partial Seizures of the brain. Here’s one… do you claim they are all caused by these SPS’s all of the time, some of the time, or do you claim that the events mentioned above simply trigger these SPS’s?

Technically, when you forget where you put your keys, thats amnesia, just like when you wake up and can't remember your dreams.

Oh, right. I should look up dream amnesia. Now you are saying that people only remember certain dreams due to various seizures that are occurring in the brain. I suppose for some these seizures occur quite often. Do tell me, what are the medical effects of a seizure such as this on the brain, especially over and extended period of time?

The amnesia in TLS is generally fuzzy recollection of the visuals one saw during, or not knowing what happened around you while you were in a dreamy state. Sleep deprivation causes amnesia too, after 3 days without sleep I would forget where I was and not know how I got there.

Yes, it’s all amnesia…
_____
Finally, I’m done with this. It has taken some time, but I’ve tried to address everything. See you all in the responses.

Love is the law, love under will.

Az


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/04/2010 2:31 am  

You infer a great many things that are not implied in what I have written.
First of all I never said Everything Erwin says is true, I have only read a small portion of what he has written.
What I said is than you can't claim that everything he says is false just because you don't like his personality, because his personality has nothing to do with the truth or false hood of Physical brain states and what may or may not trigger them. His personality and has nothing to do with his describing the characteristics of attaining any grade. He may not have attained the grade or not, but he can still relate what that state would be like if he had, based on the writings and experience of others.

Anything that he says, has to be individually judged based as if it had no author and is merely a statement about reality, and is to be tested by repeating the experiment and observing if indeed his results are similar to the results than you observe. You can not simply dismiss any statement based on your feelings about the personality of the writer.

Nor am I saying you have to dig though 800 pages or nonsense to look for the diamond in the rough. I am saying that if some one indicates a particular statement or paragraph made by Erwin as evidence of an example of what they are trying to express or explain, you can't just say, "NO, if Erwin wrote it, then it has to be false so nya nya I will not read it, Erwin sucks and so do you".

It is not reasonably to assume that not only is everything Erwin says false, without even reading it, but to also disbelieve the original poster simply because he quotes Erwin.

I have clearly shown that I believe Erwin was incorrect on what he describes as the state of attaining 8=3 and that what he actually is describing in the as you say the work of the Dominus Liminus, which if he completed it, would be by the capstone of knowledge and conversation of the HGA which is the attainment of Adeptus minor.

I did not confer any grade on him, I do not know if he has actually had any of those experiences, I only know the description than he gave of what he believes it means to attain 8=3. I compare that with my own experiences and with Crowley's descriptions.

I already covered this but let me explain again.
There is one reality the physical reality, and the brain creates a model of reality that we call the mind, the self is also modeled in a complex was in the brain. This model is the subjective conscious perception. There is a real physical world out there, which the brain is also physical and the whole world of perception and thoughts is a small part of the brain's activity. Magick alters the way the brain works and changes the way the brain models the self. It is by changing the way the self relates to the contents of the mind, that you advance in your grade. By bringing generally autonomic processes than create the brains model of the self into conscious awareness, one is able to break the conditioned self image and re-imprint new ones. See Robert Anton Wilson's 8 circuit model of consciousness, the 6th circuit.

Also see Programming and meta-programming the human bio-computer by Dr. John Lilly.

Ok, so I make some typo's and am my sentence structures get off track when I change what I mean to say mid sentence, it's not that hard to follow.


ReplyQuote
Proteus
(@proteus)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 243
19/04/2010 3:25 am  

93

I have clearly shown that I believe Erwin was incorrect on what he describes as the state of attaining 8=3

by 'incorrect' do you mean 'an embarrassement'?

93 93/93

John


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 3:29 am  
"name538" wrote:
You infer a great many things that are not implied in what I have written.

93,

This, of course, is why I asked my two initial questions to you, which received no response. Also, exactly what have I inferred? I simply took what you said at face value. If you meant otherwise, perhaps you should trying explaining those things instead of simply saying, "no no, you misunderstood me".

First of all I never said Everything Erwin says is true, I have only read a small portion of what he has written.
What I said is than you can't claim that everything he says is false just because you don't like his personality, because his personality has nothing to do with the truth or false hood of Physical brain states and what may or may not trigger them. His personality and has nothing to do with his describing the characteristics of attaining any grade. He may not have attained the grade or not, but he can still relate what that state would be like if he had, based on the writings and experience of others.

I take it this is one of the things I "misunderstood." If you read your own words, constantly clamoring on about how Erwin only speaks truth and what-not, then possibly you will see how ridiculous you sounded, like some Evangelist or other such monstrosity of man. If this is not how you intended to sound, it may befit you to further clarify yourself on a few issues.

Anything that he says, has to be individually judged based as if it had no author and is merely a statement about reality, and is to be tested by repeating the experiment and observing if indeed his results are similar to the results than you observe. You can not simply dismiss any statement based on your feelings about the personality of the writer.

Unless one's writing is indeed and provable fact, it can verily be dismissed at any time. One's writing can and have been dismissed since the beginnings of mankind's history based on the words and deeds of the writer.

Facts are facts, and they can be proven. There are very many things people would point out as "facts" which are merely collective agreements. These sort of things are not facts, and should not be purported as facts, by anyone, as to do so is dishonorable and misleading.

For a further example, if a man walks into my house and urinates on my carpet, do you really think I give a damn if he proves 2+2=4? Granted this example is crude, but as I said many times above, you are telling people who have had direct experience with someone and dislike him that they need to stop dismissing his works before they read them. Such statements towards those people is disrespectful and intrusive.

Nor am I saying you have to dig though 800 pages or nonsense to look for the diamond in the rough. I am saying that if some one indicates a particular statement or paragraph made by Erwin as evidence of an example of what they are trying to express or explain, you can't just say, "NO, if Erwin wrote it, then it has to be false so nya nya I will not read it, Erwin sucks and so do you".

I agree with this, and I'm pretty sure I didn't disagree with you about this above. However, you have to understand that people develop aversions, whether they like it or not.

You made an example about smoking. A friend of mine quit smoking, and about two months after he developed a horrible aversion to the habit. He didn't want to be around it, at all, period. Over time he has relaxed about it, but during that time it would completely pain him to be around a smoker.

It is the same thing. People have developed aversions to Erwin's writing. However, you have to understand that in some cases, this isn't a bandwagon sentiment, it is an aversion developed through actual experience with Erwin and his writings. As such, those people do not feel the need or the desire to dig up those memories. Granted, they may not say directly what I am saying, so I can see how that can invoke some misunderstandings, but it is imperative for people (Magickians especially) to be able to take a step back and look at the larger picture.

It is not reasonably to assume that not only is everything Erwin says false, without even reading it, but to also disbelieve the original poster simply because he quotes Erwin.

If you had an aversion to Scientology, and a Scientologist frequented these boards, and every single thing he said was in reference to something L. Ron Hubbard wrote, would you not being to automatically dismiss that person? It is a natural human response to such things. Granted, resistance can be handled and dealt with in a myriad number of ways, but what you are experiencing with some of these posters is simple aversion, my friend. As such, they just don't want to hear it. Not only that, but you aren't dealing with people who just decided to blow it off in most cases. You are dealing with people who are wise enough to consider the benefits and drawbacks to having an aversion toward Erwin and his works, and have decided that the benefits of having the aversion are higher than the drawbacks. Where you are meeting with such resistance is that people continually bring the subject up, and do not give it time to die down.

Quite frankly, Erwin should have his own message board on his website.

I have clearly shown that I believe Erwin was incorrect on what he describes as the state of attaining 8=3 and that what he actually is describing in the as you say the work of the Dominus Liminus, which if he completed it, would be by the capstone of knowledge and conversation of the HGA which is the attainment of Adeptus minor.

You did just say, "if he completed it". Success is your proof. I'm sure if he wanted us to have such information about him he would provide it. As such, he is probably just getting a kick out of watching people speculate. Plus, such speculation about another is really not healthy in most cases, as it usually involves comparison the successes or failures of oneself with those of another, which is dangerous at best.

I did not confer any grade on him, I do not know if he has actually had any of those experiences, I only know the description than he gave of what he believes it means to attain 8=3. I compare that with my own experiences and with Crowley's descriptions.

Thanks for clarifying that.

I already covered this but let me explain again.
There is one reality the physical reality, and the brain creates a model of reality that we call the mind, the self is also modeled in a complex was in the brain. This model is the subjective conscious perception. There is a real physical world out there, which the brain is also physical and the whole world of perception and thoughts is a small part of the brain's activity.

I respectfully disagree.

Magick alters the way the brain works and changes the way the brain models the self.

I can see where you are coming from on this, but in my opinion it is incomplete.

It is by changing the way the self relates to the contents of the mind, that you advance in your grade.

I see it as a bit more than that, but in a nutshell, I suppose so.

By bringing generally autonomic processes than create the brains model of the self into conscious awareness, one is able to break the conditioned self image and re-imprint new ones. See Robert Anton Wilson's 8 circuit model of consciousness, the 6th circuit.

Again, this seems like a partial explanation rather than an inclusive one.

Also see Programming and meta-programming the human bio-computer by Dr. John Lilly.

No thank you.

Ok, so I make some typo's and am my sentence structures get off track when I change what I mean to say mid sentence, it's not that hard to follow.

When you change what you mean to say mid-sentence, you might want to consider re-writing that sentence. Simply saying, "Oh whatever, you still know what I mean" gives you little lee-way in the context of the first sentence in your post which you say, "You infer a great many things that are not implied in what I have written."

If you want to be understood by your reader, and you want the reader to respect what you say, it might assist your efforts to be clear and concise in what you say, so as to avoid misunderstandings. Just a little constructive criticism...

93 93/93

Edit: quote format


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/04/2010 3:44 am  

I assumed he was describing it from personal experience, and since both are intense changes in the sense of self and both can be rather intense and traumatic. Since there is not anything else in one's direct experience to compare these experineces to, other than anecdotes and aphorisms that attempt to explain changes in psyche in terms of words and symbols, either as interactions with certain beings or going on journey's or in analogy to body dismorphic illusions, etc.

So it is an honest mistake to believe that the piercing of Paroketh is actually the crossing of the Great Abyss. A midget who sees a normal size man for the first time may go home to his midget family and proclaim, I have seen a giant! He may like his whole like believing that day he had met a giant. Then one day when he is say 40 years old, he visits a circus and meets a True Giant a man of great stature 8 foot tall or more. Then this midget shall speak to his heart, I have been mistaken all my life, and Now finally I have truly seen a Giant. Then if he be truly wise, he shall say, I say a tall man in my youth and now I see a taller man, but perhaps there exists Giants who are even taller yet, and so perhaps I have never actually men a true Giant. I do not know if I have met a giant or not, but I have met tall men.

It is scarcely an embarrassment to be mistaken in such a way, but the wise do not insist the know that the have attained.
I have had experiences, which maybe I crossed the abyss, maybe it was only paroketh, maybe it was only the glimmer on the crest of the pentacle in Malkuth. I can not say for sure, as Unless I know I have not yet experienced, how can I frame the context of what I have experienced.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/04/2010 4:02 am  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mthDxnFXs9k

This is a long video, but it is Thomas Metzinger, explaining how the Ego/self is constructed in the brain from a neuro-biology standpoint.

Also, I do not care how much you FEEL an aversion to Erwin, your feelings don't make any difference. Maybe he is a crackpot who in wrong 99% of the time but if some one quotes the ONE and only ONE statement he has ever made that is true, then that statement deserves the same credit as the a statement made by a brilliant genius who never speaks a false or insulting word.

John Nash is a very dislikable character, yet his contributions to Game theory such as the Nash Equilibrium are used in biology, economics, weather prediction, and many other fields, that effect positively impact your life every day. What if people just decided, not to use the Nash equilibrium just because they have an Aversion to John Nash.

What if the cure for cancer was invented by a neo-nazi who burned a cross in some black families lawns. Should we allow thousands of people to die or Cancer, since obviously nothing invented by such a no good SOB could actually be worth even looking into.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
19/04/2010 4:36 am  

Azidonis, a minor philosophical point, if I may. Although I very much agree with you that name538's assertion that a statement is only either correct or incorrect, is an incorrect statement, the glass-half-empty/full does not prove the point. The glass is both half empty and half full, so both statements are true, and aren't mutually exclusive, thanks to the qualifier/adjective "half". Saying they are both is correct. Saying they are only one, or neither, is incorrect.

My own objection to the assertion is that the intrinsic vagaries of language and human consciousness/perception in relation to our idea of truth or reality sometimes allows for disqualification of the statement. Absolutism of any kind is meaningless in reality.

Thus, "this leaf is green" is true for me, but not for a colourblind person. Similarly, the fact that I see it as green means that "green" is the one colour which it isn't: that frequency of light is the one which the surface of the object repels away, drinking in all others. The leaf therefore has only a negative relationship with the colour green. The leaf is green to me, but not as far as it is concerned as a thing-in-itself.

If you believe in "leaves", that is. 😯


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 7:51 am  
"Noctifer" wrote:
Azidonis, a minor philosophical point, if I may. Although I very much agree with you that name538's assertion that a statement is only either correct or incorrect, is an incorrect statement, the glass-half-empty/full does not prove the point. The glass is both half empty and half full, so both statements are true, and aren't mutually exclusive, thanks to the qualifier/adjective "half". Saying they are both is correct. Saying they are only one, or neither, is incorrect.

My own objection to the assertion is that the intrinsic vagaries of language and human consciousness/perception in relation to our idea of truth or reality sometimes allows for disqualification of the statement. Absolutism of any kind is meaningless in reality.

Thus, "this leaf is green" is true for me, but not for a colourblind person. Similarly, the fact that I see it as green means that "green" is the one colour which it isn't: that frequency of light is the one which the surface of the object repels away, drinking in all others. The leaf therefore has only a negative relationship with the colour green. The leaf is green to me, but not as far as it is concerned as a thing-in-itself.

If you believe in "leaves", that is. 😯

93,

Leaves exist? Omg, I'm tellin'! 🙂

Thanks for the input and the clarity. To be quite honest, that's what I was getting at: the person that says the glass is only half full, or half empty, and failing to recognize both conditions, as is the case with some extremist viewpoints.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 7:59 am  
"name538" wrote:
I assumed he was describing it from personal experience, and since both are intense changes in the sense of self and both can be rather intense and traumatic. Since there is not anything else in one's direct experience to compare these experineces to, other than anecdotes and aphorisms that attempt to explain changes in psyche in terms of words and symbols, either as interactions with certain beings or going on journey's or in analogy to body dismorphic illusions, etc.

So it is an honest mistake to believe that the piercing of Paroketh is actually the crossing of the Great Abyss. A midget who sees a normal size man for the first time may go home to his midget family and proclaim, I have seen a giant! He may like his whole like believing that day he had met a giant. Then one day when he is say 40 years old, he visits a circus and meets a True Giant a man of great stature 8 foot tall or more. Then this midget shall speak to his heart, I have been mistaken all my life, and Now finally I have truly seen a Giant. Then if he be truly wise, he shall say, I say a tall man in my youth and now I see a taller man, but perhaps there exists Giants who are even taller yet, and so perhaps I have never actually men a true Giant. I do not know if I have met a giant or not, but I have met tall men.

It is scarcely an embarrassment to be mistaken in such a way, but the wise do not insist the know that the have attained.
I have had experiences, which maybe I crossed the abyss, maybe it was only paroketh, maybe it was only the glimmer on the crest of the pentacle in Malkuth. I can not say for sure, as Unless I know I have not yet experienced, how can I frame the context of what I have experienced.

93,

I do enjoy reading your words when they are your words. 🙂

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
19/04/2010 8:06 am  
"name538" wrote:
Also, I do not care how much you FEEL an aversion to Erwin, your feelings don't make any difference. Maybe he is a crackpot who in wrong 99% of the time but if some one quotes the ONE and only ONE statement he has ever made that is true, then that statement deserves the same credit as the a statement made by a brilliant genius who never speaks a false or insulting word.

I agree that it deserves the same credit. I do appreciate that you recognized the difference between one true statement and every statement being true.

As for this aversion thing. When I explained this aversion thing, I was attempting to point out that one doesn't handle aversion with hostility. In the case of the forums, insistence and "forcible words" basically carry the form of trying to push something down someone's throat. It was an effort to explain why you were meeting up with so much resistance in your pursuits.

John Nash is a very dislikable character, yet his contributions to Game theory such as the Nash Equilibrium are used in biology, economics, weather prediction, and many other fields, that effect positively impact your life every day. What if people just decided, not to use the Nash equilibrium just because they have an Aversion to John Nash.

And what if people decided not to become Thelemites when they learned that some Aethyrs of the Vision and the Voice were "scryed" using mescaline?

They might become Buddhists, which works just as well. "It is no odds."

What if the cure for cancer was invented by a neo-nazi who burned a cross in some black families lawns. Should we allow thousands of people to die or Cancer, since obviously nothing invented by such a no good SOB could actually be worth even looking into.

I don't enjoy answering questions with questions, but which package sells better... Hello Kitty, or the Swastika?

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5304
19/04/2010 11:02 am  

Moderator's Note

Azidonis and name538: Please take this conversation away from the Forums to Private Messages or emails.

This thread is locked.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Share: