The ON formula...
 
Notifications

The ON formula...  

  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/07/2009 7:59 pm  

I'm reposting this in reference to the ON formula. I believe both Buddhist positions can be roughly correlated to the formula, but I'd appreciate a wider perspective from other Thelemites, as there is much in Thelema that diverges from Buddhism.

Why both the yogachara and the madyamika positions are equally valid:

For each position relates to one of the 'Two Truths' of Buddhism.

For the Buddha said:
"By and large, Kaccayana, this world is supported by a polarity, that of existence and non-existence. But when one sees the origination of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'non-existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one. When one sees the cessation of the world as it actually is with right discernment, 'existence' with reference to the world does not occur to one." - [Kaccāyanagotta Sutta]

And Nagarjuna commented:
"The Buddha's teaching of the Dharma is based on two truths: a truth of worldly convention and an ultimate truth. Those who do not understand the distinction drawn between these two truths do not understand the Buddha's profound truth. Without a foundation in the conventional truth the significance of the ultimate cannot be taught. Without understanding the significance of the ultimate, liberation is not achieved." - [Mūlamadhyamakakārika 24:8-10]

And these two truths are summed up in the vow of the Bodhisattva:
"May I achieve awakening for the sake of all other beings, and may I understand that there is no awakening to achieve, no other being for me to have compassion on, and I myself do not exist."

Now – the relation of these two truths to each other can be seen as a process. This process can be seen in the Zen Tea ceremony. For the ordinary person, a bowl is a bowl and tea is tea. However when you start to study Zen, a bowl is no longer a bowl, and tea is no longer tea, as you come to understand the emptiness of each of these entities and indeed the emptiness of any category of ordinary experience, including the experience of yourself - but then when you are awakened and come back into the conventional reality of things, a bowl is a bowl, and tea is tea, but the drinker is fully present and awake, manifesting True Will or enlightened, liberated action.

Without that knowledge of the ultimate, as Nagarjuna says, liberation is not achieved, the true will is not manifest, the tea drinker is simply a tea drinker, the bowl is a bowl, and the tea is tea.


Quote
Palamedes
(@palamedes)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 452
09/07/2009 8:24 pm  

This looks kosher the way it is, but how do you correlate this to the ON formula? Would you care to elaborate?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
09/07/2009 8:52 pm  

I had a momentary flash from Annie the musical - tomorrow, tomorrow, I love ya, tomorrow, is only a day away;-)

So yes - tomorrow Iskandar. I've been looking after my grandmother who's had a minor stroke in the last 2 days, and I'm a bit washed out, and also - working at the level Mika requires, I need an early night. So - tomorrow. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Palamedes
(@palamedes)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 452
09/07/2009 10:00 pm  

Okidoki, no problemo.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/07/2009 3:44 am  

Noticing where the first and the last` Word appears on the Tree of life sheds light as to its true meaning and significance, Also notice how the majority of Chapter titles in liber Aleph are named. 😉


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 462
10/07/2009 4:00 pm  
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
Noticing where the first and the last` Word appears on the Tree of life sheds light as to its true meaning and significance, Also notice how the majority of Chapter titles in liber Aleph are named. 😉

93,

"De... Something or Other" ? Yes, the Latin can be translated to "On... This or That" but that is the work of a modern editor, not AC...

93 93/93
IAO131


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
10/07/2009 5:33 pm  
"IAO131" wrote:
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
Noticing where the first and the last` Word appears on the Tree of life sheds light as to its true meaning and significance, Also notice how the majority of Chapter titles in liber Aleph are named. 😉

93,

"De... Something or Other" ? Yes, the Latin can be translated to "On... This or That" but that is the work of a modern editor, not AC...

93 93/93
IAO131

It is also something that Grady McMurtry would draw peoples attention to.


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 462
10/07/2009 6:19 pm  
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
"IAO131" wrote:
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
Noticing where the first and the last` Word appears on the Tree of life sheds light as to its true meaning and significance, Also notice how the majority of Chapter titles in liber Aleph are named. 😉

93,

"De... Something or Other" ? Yes, the Latin can be translated to "On... This or That" but that is the work of a modern editor, not AC...

93 93/93
IAO131

It is also something that Grady McMurtry would draw peoples attention to.

93,

Because he didnt realize they were written as "De" in the original? Its a misunderstanding to think that "On" begins most chapters on Liber Aleph because that is an editorial choice, not Crowley's. Secondly, if you are familiar with any kind of old works, A LOT of them have these kind of titles, like Lucretius' De Rerum Natura...

Besides, who cares if its written a bunch? That doesnt mean anything at all... I am not sure why anyone would see the smallest sliver of significance in this, besides he rather explicitly announces the ON formula within the pages of Liber Aleph for those with rudimentary Qabalistic-correspondence knowledge.

IAO131


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 462
10/07/2009 6:21 pm  

93,

By the way I see absolutely no connection between the OP and the 'formula' of ON. Perhaps I missed it?...

93 93/93
IAO131


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2009 1:46 am  

I bow towards *yawn* the great *yawn* IAO131 *YYYAAAWWWNNN* all knowing *yawn* never wrong *yawn* Thelemite and Crowley scholar none can *yawn* compare.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2009 2:08 am  
"IAO131" wrote:
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
"IAO131" wrote:
"newneubergOuch" wrote:
Noticing where the first and the last` Word appears on the Tree of life sheds light as to its true meaning and significance, Also notice how the majority of Chapter titles in liber Aleph are named. 😉

93,

"De... Something or Other" ? Yes, the Latin can be translated to "On... This or That" but that is the work of a modern editor, not AC...

93 93/93
IAO131

It is also something that Grady McMurtry would draw peoples attention to.

93,

Because he didnt realize they were written as "De" in the original? Its a misunderstanding to think that "On" begins most chapters on Liber Aleph because that is an editorial choice, not Crowley's. Secondly, if you are familiar with any kind of old works, A LOT of them have these kind of titles, like Lucretius' De Rerum Natura...

Besides, who cares if its written a bunch? That doesnt mean anything at all... I am not sure why anyone would see the smallest sliver of significance in this, besides he rather explicitly announces the ON formula within the pages of Liber Aleph for those with rudimentary Qabalistic-correspondence knowledge.

IAO131

So your putting your knowledge and experience of Crowley above Grady McMurtry, interesting-you`ve never been this explicit before about your self image.

And yes, the chapters of ON are easy to find, and yes many old books have De in them................. 🙄 I guess you must be right when you suggest Crowley didn`t know what he was doing. 8)


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2009 5:37 pm  
"IAO131" wrote:
93,

By the way I see absolutely no connection between the OP and the 'formula' of ON. Perhaps I missed it?...

93 93/93
IAO131

There was a correlation that was clear to me at the time, but it's now at the bottom of the sea. I'll have to see if I can fish for it or wait for it float up again. Sorry. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Palamedes
(@palamedes)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 452
11/07/2009 6:19 pm  

Let me try with some thoughts, although I have to admit I have no clue what is OP formula. On the two truths of Buddhism then and the ON formula. As already suggested, when applied to the Tree of Life, but I would say, even more so when correlated with the Atus, Ayin + Nun, or the Devil and the Death, the ON formula may be seen to represent the dual (but not dualistic) nature of reality: the creation (the Devil as a Giant Phallus, Mahalingam, creative energy) and the destruction (or death). Crowley emphasized on several occasion the necessity to regard these two as the two aspects of the same continuum. This correlates then with "existence" and "non-existence" referred to by the Buddha in the quote from the Kaccāyanagotta Sutta, as well as with the 'two truths' of Nagarjuna. The worldly or conventional truth would be relative to the aspect of creation (O), and the absolute truth to the aspect of dissolution or death (N). At the level of the manifest or material existence, the personalities are distinct and their mode of action is metaphorically describable as 'war' which may also be a glyph for 'love.' In death, our mode of existence is the dissolution in the kisses of Nu, where one neither needs nor cares about another, we all being one in the ocean of unlimited, undivided, and non-differentiated union with Nuit (where 'we are one, nay, are none). One could also speculate that "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" (with the emphasis on doing one's will) is particularly oriented towards the aspect of manifestation, and that "Love is the law, love under will" is oriented towards the aspect of dissolution. There is striving (to do one's Will or to 'help' others in the Buddhist case) in the first level, and none of it in the other. Just some thoughts reflective of my current understanding.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2009 7:11 pm  

Thank you Iskandar. That sounds about right to me. I can't be sure because my head is unfit for mental gymnastics today - but I'm glad you're on the ball and you usually display good judgement. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Palamedes
(@palamedes)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 452
11/07/2009 7:22 pm  

Thanks Alrah. I would also like to add that there is a further beauty in the ON formula, which consists in the fact that both O and N contain their opposites in themselves. We may say that "O" stands for life (manifestation), but O is also a zero, nothing, emptiness. "N" stands for death, but it is also a symbol for life (admittedly only in the "snake" aspect of the composite symbol of Scorpio, which according to Crowley contains snake + scorpio + eagle). Thus there is a mutual codependence between these symbols.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2009 7:34 pm  

I agree Iskandar. I find the formula fascinating. There was some work done on 'The Sabbath of the Goat' that's available on the Cornlius93 site. I'll post a link in the chatbox, since I'm still unsure if posting links on the forums is against forum rules.


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1371
12/07/2009 7:12 pm  

There is nothing to gain
no one that attains
al
though
why?
not
the fool sets out.

the sticks and offerings,
attachments and delusions
become fuel to feed the flame
the fire cannot exist without the fuel

delusion itself is enlightenment

the practitioner prepares the place
for the honored guest to be received

thou art that


Yogacara - founder Asanga received transmissions from an extra terrestrial Buddha named maitreya residing in a devaloka from the future.

Created to balance the extreme of nagarjuna and the madhyamika school which favored wisdom and the potential danger of falling into the trap of reeling off list after list of categories where mere rational understanding could be mistaken for insight.

emphasis on meditation and trance.

doctrine "Mind-only" (Chittamatra) that the existence of phenomena is indistinguishable from perception.
mutual interconnection of all phenomena.
(Berkeley's "to be is to be perceived". The existence of an idea cannot be separated from its being perceived.)


Madhyamika - founder Nagarjuna received transmissions from the serpents of the deep called the Naga kings.

Doctrine of the ultimate truth (paramartha-satya) of universal absence (sunyata) and relative truth of convention (saṃvṛti-satya)

Reductio ad absurdum


sutra appealing to the imagination and intuition as method gandavyuha


what is the ON formula ?
is it Liber Aleph?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
12/07/2009 7:21 pm  

Moderator's Note: Post deleted as entirely Off Topic and unhelpful.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5313
13/07/2009 1:32 pm  
"alrah" wrote:
II'll post a link in the chatbox, since I'm still unsure if posting links on the forums is against forum rules.

It baffles me why you'd think that posting links in the Forums to relevant sites is "against the rules", especially to sites as interesting as Jerry's.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
13/07/2009 5:44 pm  

Ah well... *shuffles* I haven't actually read the rules. I've been meaning to get around to it... but I'm more of a 'pick things up as I go along' girl usually. And the members here seem very good about not cluttering up Lashtal with links, which are used in some other places by people who don't feel able to present a coherent chain of thought and use a link as a substitute. Since that was me the other day (I completely forgot what I meant by the first post until Iskandar figured it out) it was a bit dodgy. But yes - Jerrys site is extremely good and relevant. 🙂


ReplyQuote
Share: