From: tyagi@houseofkaos.abyss.com (nagasiva)
Newsgroups: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.pagan.magick,alt.magick.order,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.thelema
Subject: FrResh: Tradition, Experiment, Stars and Thelema
Date: 13 Sep 1997 03:00:30 -0700
Organization: Bay Junction Technology, Inc.
Lines: 129
Sender: tyagi@news.bjt.net
Message-ID: <5vdo7u$59l@bay1.bjt.net>
Reply-To: bry-guy@ix.netcom.com
X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV)
NNTP-Posting-Host: bay1.bjt.net
Path: bridge!not-for-mail
Xref: bridge alt.magick.tyagi:14896 alt.magick:118389 alt.pagan.magick:6458 talk.religion.misc:323851 talk.religion.newage:80020 alt.consciousness.mysticism:13103

[from thelema93-l@hollyfeld.org: bry-guy@IX.NETCOM.COM]

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

Hi [nigris],

On 08/24/97 12:17:04 [nigris] wrote:
>this is one of the thing I appreciate about the Chaos Magick culture,
>in that it doesn't have a fixation on 'tradition' and looks more to
>the individual to assess value rather than social emphasis. [snip]
>on the other hand, what constitutes 'mastery' to some is taking the old 
>standbys and reworking them to suit one's needs.  in this context I agree 
>that it is valuable to master them all.

It's certainly a positive thing.  For myself, I would rather go both routes.  
Steep myself in the time-tested methods of attainment first, so that I have 
some idea of what I am doing, and when I have a firm basis, experiment with 
my own personal proclivities.  I think the understanding of that which is 
beyond the ego (and why not use proven methods to do this?) will allow me to 
do something effective with my personal proclivities.

>'banishing' as a means of ridding oneself of spiritual entities is an
>outdated and oppressive means of doing what quiet sitting can accomplish
>in less violent a manner.  I would compare it to the Talisman of Jesus
>against being the target of a number of rivalling spirits during the time
>of the early church.  extreme means for extreme circumstances.
>the LBRP, for example, is probably one of the most detrimental and
>severely imbalanced rites which has become 'traditional' in Thelemic
>culture, especially when the lux-o-centrism of the Qabalistic Cross
>is taken into account.  

Perhaps here I will betray myself as a "believer", but that I will presently 
explain.  First there is this:  "Behold!  the rituals of the old time are 
black.  let the evil ones be cast away; let the good ones be purged by the 
prophet!  Then will knowledge go aright."  Liber 31, Chapter 2, verse 5.  
But also this:  "Abrogate ^ are all rituals, all ordeals, all words and 
signs."  Liber 31, Chapter 1, p. 13.  In the very least, the old rituals are 
black and abrogate.  This could lend to several interpretations, I suppose, 
especially when it comes to color interpretation.  However, abrogate is 
clearer: from the Latin ab-, away + rogare, propose: to abolish, repeal, or 
annul.  Crowley published the pentagram rituals as Liber O vel Manus et 
Sagittae sub figura VI.  This could be interpreted as the good ones purged 
by the prophet, indicating they have some use in the current aeon.  I think 
that's enough pestilence for now.

I suppose I could be considered a "believer" in the sense that it has been 
indicated to me by others, including Crowley in his writing, that his system 
works to free the individual.  No one has asked me to believe this, though.  
Crowley himself doesn't want believers, but his general attitude from what I 
have read is "try it and see for yourself."  Now, this certainly could be a 
big dupe, except that I know people who have applied his system and it has 
seemed to work for them.  If I try it and it works for me, then that's 
great, I don't need to indulge my ego.  If, however, I wind up orbiting the 
Master Therion like some blubbering zealot (not zealotor), hopefully I'll do 
better next incarnation or, if the damage is that bad, next aeon.

In another post I expounded my comments on the L.V.X. concept.

>#> I hope that, rather than causing any schism, one of the main ideas behind
>#> Thelema ...will prevail, and that is, "Every man and every woman is a 
>#> star" - each to his own path, and perhaps even major themes in ideas 
>#> will be able to co-exist in an order such as ours.  
>
>how does 'each to his own path' describe means of cooperation and
>critical analysis of comparison and contrast?  where can this be applied
>and how far can this star-metaphor (/metaphysic?) be taken?

Each Star moves in its own orbit.  By comparison with other Stars, you get a 
better sense of position (i.e., Navigation by the Stars).  On the other 
hand, you might might a quantum leap to experience the relativity of all 
stars (Star-Sponge vision?)  I'm not anywhere near doing anything like this 
so you can take everything I say as complete bullshit.


>#> ...I would go as far as encouraging healthy fighting (in the arena of 
>#> ideas, in this case), for how else will progress in ideas be achieved? 
>
>what constitutes 'healthy' fighting as compared to 'unhealthy'?  
>[snip} isn't all conflict a symptom of illness or disease?  if so, isn't 
'healthy fighting' an oxymoron?   what constitutes 'progress in ideas'?  
>refinement? proliferation and imagination?  along certain preferred or 
>aeonic lines?

That's an oxymoron you can't escape.  Crowley stated if all Stars were 
moving in their own particular orbits, there would be no conflict; however, 
all existence is pure joy taken literally means joy can be found in 
conflict.  The net value, plus or minus,  of any interaction is impossible 
to measure.  As a personal thing, a good healthy exchange of ideas that 
leads to the exercise of certain muscles (as you inferred elsewhere) has at 
least that benefit.  If my own ideas are sufficiently challenged, if someone 
has left me with something to think about, or perhaps causes a significant 
paradigm shift, I'll be happy.  I consider that an expansion of (one aspect 
of) Hadit.  Again, this is all in the arena of the intellect, and "fighting" 
(debate, in this case, as a specific example of fighting) does not have to 
be disrespectful to the viewpoints involved.  I personally have a problem 
representing my viewpoint without disrespect to the other side at times, so 
I consider it good for me to engage in debate.  Perhaps I'll eventually get 
over it.  On the other hand I have a tendency to overinflate my ego with my 
intellect and perhaps its not so good for me to do.  Unless I need to get 
over that, too.  If I'm being honest with myself when I say these things, 
that's even better.  What is my moral/ethical structure is the real 
question.

There I go again.  See what I mean?  My main aim is to avoid being consumed 
by my own neuroses, and it ain't easy.

>the conditions of the experiments are impossible to reproduce.  the methods 
>you might use (if these are the experiment) may be reproduceable, but their
>effects would obviously depend on the individual's character and experience
>in comparison with your own.  there is no 'control' involved, and thus it
>is only incompletely that this is called 'science' by modern terminology.

No conditions in any experiment can be precisely reproduced, but this 
doesn't stop water from seperating into hydrogen and oxygen when electricity 
is applied under most circumstances on earth.  The 'control' in magick has 
to be self-knowledge, so that change can be measured.  You have to be your 
own psychological camera to produce a "before" and "after" image.

L/L/L/L

Frater Resh

"Love is the law, love under will."

EOF
-- 
(emailed replies may be posted);join the AMT syncretism!!;call: 408/2-666-SLUG!
see http://www.abyss.com/tokus; "Clement of Rome taught that God rules the world
with a right and a left hand, the right being Christ, the left Satan." - CGJung