Michael Sternbach

It is said that uncle Al was not exactly enthusiastic about those among his followers who took the guiding principle he shared as a free pass to follow their every whim. Read properly, it presumes to KNOW one's TRUE WILL in the first place. And this is something that goes far deeper than any egotistic "do as you please". It requires you to reconnect to that most profound level of self referred to as Buddha-nature, the Inner Christ - or one's Holy Guardian Angel in the tradition of Magick that constituted Crowley's primary foundations. Others may call it the 'divine spark'... Regardless of terminology, following THAT is seen as following God's Will - as expressed in and through you. And that can be rather challenging a task!

In reply to the OP: There is also an occidental tradition that regards our so-called weaknesses as nothing but opportunities for growth. The question is if you look at yours as 'stumbling stones' or as 'stepping stones'. Let's take the example of someone prone to anger. By the same token, such an individual tends to be strong-willed and assertive. So their 'weakness' may manifest itself constructively too - perhaps in the form of leadership qualities. But a good leader needs to be sensitive to the needs of those entrusted to them as well as of those they encounter outside their own group. So they need to possess (or develop) empathy and compassion too - qualities that lay right at the other end of the scale. It would seem then that in all things, a well balanced attitude is key.

Yes, and I very much agree to your non-sectarian view of those ancient traditions. You might as well add Western Occultism (aka 'Hermetism', for simplicity's sake) to them. All of them are valid approaches to experiencing and relating to the One reality that lies beyond them and that therefore no tradition and recognized master can lay claim to exclusively. That reality just transgresses all boundaries of lineage, culture, space and time... Thus, it makes sense to cross reference various metaphysical systems. In fact, they sometimes elucidate each other by providing an external frame of reference. Yet we should appreciate their unique characteristics and distinctions as well. It's just like in martial arts: We generally look at them as more or less individual fields of study, although some practitioners are well aware of there being a 'formless stage' at which - in essence - they all blend into one. However, it goes without saying that that is a level of expression rarely attained! So things being the way they are, I feel a place such as this forum will do well to maintain a certain structure for reasons of practicality. Now that I mentioned it - what do you guys think about having a distinct section for martial arts? We have quite a lot of MA topics that would be hard to classify as either Buddhist or Daoist, and 'general discussion' doesn't seem to be such a good match either.

- - -

This is a reproduction of a scheme uncle Al shared in his famous Book of Thoth.

I am all for mutual exchange across systems and traditions - as far as it goes. However, besides the requested separate forum for Daoist discussion, I do think our section for Western occultist traditions should be retained as is as well. Throwing it all in one pot would be quite confusing, IMO. The distinction worked rather well so far. Occasional cross-pollination has occurred previously and should perhaps more expressedly be welcome and acknowledged as potentially conducive to the discussion overall than hitherto may have been the case. And yet different sections can remain dedicated to specific (broad) traditions as their respective main focus. One of the changes I definitely welcome is merging "off grid" and "the rabbit hole".

Y not MMD?

Kir Royal https://ibb.co/FHTYq0P

The perceived connection of Trump to the alchemical Mercurius in some form is interesting insofar he is a Gemini Sun, and that sign is intimately connected to the planet Mercury according to astrological lore!

Childlike Empress

Splash

Have you ever heard of a planet with the shape of a doughnut? Or a moon that comes with a moon of its own? http://top10platform.com/2018/11/17/10-weird-things-that-could-exist-in-space/ At least some of these peculiar objects will most likely one day be confirmed to actually exist somewhere out there in the vastness of space. Enjoy! And feel free to discuss any of these thought-provoking possibilities. Hey, Marbles... This topic is for you!

Lofty

Welcome back, Taomeow! 😺

While red giant star Betelgeuse is still one of the most awesome stellar objects to behold in the night sky, we know today that it has some considerably larger mates out there in the galaxy. The current record holder is UY Scuti, a star that baffles scientists not only due to its enormous size, but (in conjunction with that) also by some of its other traits - that truly make it a cosmic oddity. The following video includes an exciting outlook at UY Scuti's probable future. Enjoy!

The reference to nuclear weapons finally clarifies what Jeff means when he's talking about "going light". "Combatant Commands are now at JEFFCON 1!"

Chakra

Ground control

Reading the header, I first thought: OMG, another political topic! In reply to your question: That looks like the Kung Fu style Choy Li Fut to me.

First off, for the sake of interested third-party readers, this summarizes what Sahul is all about: https://www.thoughtco.com/sahul-pleistocene-continent-172704 As Sundaland and Sahul were really close to each other, I suppose our Lemurian seafarers wouldn't have found it too daunting a task to cross over the Wallace line and travel the 90 kilometres or so that separated the two continents. The supposedly rather expansive civilization of Lemuria may well have straddled both landmasses. Furthermore, as the Lemurians are believed to have reached South America at some stage, this may explain the presence of an Australasian genetic signal in tribes indigenous to the Amazonas area which Apech mentioned before.

Moreover, speculation should be allowed plenty of leeway first. Sorting out what parts of it might qualify as hypotheses comes at a later stage, followed by the gathering evidence in support or contradiction to the latter. On this occasion, I would like to remind participants in my threads that they are primarily intended to stimulate the reader's imagination, not to stifle it. Few definitive claims are made. Wow, that's pretty awesome: A fruit indigenous to South America on a 1st century BCE Roman fruit plate! Maybe so. That's a pineapple in the floor mosaic above anyway.

Exactly. And any ideology that deserves to be called one is expected to be bought as a whole. It goes without saying that religions in general belong into this category. By contrast, a true spiritual way will guide you to discover your own truths. This process is what C.G. Jung called individuation. Relatively few people are ready for that. There have been occasions when I was expected to provide exact guidelines, while I considered it more appropriate to throw the ball at the inquirer, so to speak, in order to let them figure out what works for them. However, this resulted in miscommunications, and I found that my efforts were not being appreciated, overall. This is true. Only indoctrination with ideologies can be imposed by force of one sort or another, ranging from family and peer pressure to the outright threat of violence ("become a Christian or we kill you!").

Yeah. Or that might support alternative views still in line with the gist of the thread, at any rate. I do appreciate that kind of contribution that leads to the exploration of various what-if scenarios, rather than to an artificial and tedious 'academic view vs. Theosophical view' kind of stalemate, mate. The pool of objective data unearthed by those sciences is one thing, its interpretation quite another. There is a widely shared agreement that things get dodgy and speculation prevails especially when it comes to questions that involve evidence from archaeology. I have no problem imagining an Egyptian priest from overseas and a local Mayan priest getting high on tobacco and cocaine together and chatting about their cults. Egyptian dude: "For quite some time already, we've had this really cool arrangement of three huge pyramids in a line, with one of them a bit set off to the side. You know, arranged just like the belt stars in Orion... The kids really dig the place!" Mayan dude: "Wow, that rocks, man! I'm gonna have a word with my chief engineer, let's see if he can come up with something similar... " And the Mayan priest would get all the exact plans of the site in exchange for more tobacco and cocaine... Yes, I am aware of depictions of elephants found in various parts of South America, including Panama and Bolivia, but I intended to keep the focus on Mexico. Quite mysterious, really, because as I said, any elephant-like mammals had already vanished from the Americas long before all these cultures allegedly started existing. So this seems to indicate either some cultural exchange between those Native Americans and another culture that knew about them or that their culture is itself much older than believed. Interestingly, Plato is rather explicit regarding elephants in Atlantis: "There were a great number of elephants in the island; for as there was provision for all other sorts of animals, both for those which live in lakes and marshes and rivers, and also for those which live in mountains and on plains, so there was for the animal which is the largest and most voracious of all." Sounds like a great idea to me! No, I said something to the effect that I was going to demonstrate the plausibility of my inner vision to the reader. Neither did I use the word 'prove' nor did I mention Cayce there. Thanks, but I'd prefer MacGregor Mather's Golden Dawn Magus outfit. Interesting. We will get back to Sunda shortly.

A really cool compilation of some true 'cosmic oddities' - reminding us that there is still SO much to learn out there! https://listverse.com/2012/12/05/top-10-unexplained-mysteries-of-the-stars/ The human adventure has just begun.

I'd be interested to learn the OP's definition of these terms. I occasionally find myself agreeing both to statements expressed by left wingers and right wingers. However, I am not sure if that means I am 'mixing ideologies'. I simply have my own belief system, that I try to keep more or less coherent. Identifying it with either left or right perspectives doesn't seem to work for me. I once talked about that with Marblehead (RIP). He was of the opinion that Daoists in general and Chuangtzu in particular were rather conservative and therefore politically on the right side. Personally, I see Daoism as essentially anarchistic and therefore not inherently supportive of any existing kind of political system. A truly Daoist system would actually be a 'non-system' as outlined in various chapters of the DDJ. The only kind of 'revolution' that could help to truly establish it would be dissociation with national interests altogether on the level of the individual and identification with the cosmos at large. In other words, it would be a revolution in consciousness. However, things being the way they are, it is safe to say that we can't do without political systems per se. Even though it should be remembered that any such system will simply be expressing the collective views of a majority of people. A majority that constantly lives in a state of delusion or 'maya', as all spiritual traditions assure us.