Do What Thou Wilt

[Earl Grey]

13 minutes ago, welkin said:

Yes, you are subject to this. You and your little gangsters.

 

 

subject to this - what is "this" you refer to?

 

Gangsters - throwing out terms and using them in a way that probably don't mean what you think they mean. 

 

15 minutes ago, welkin said:

The whole forum feels similarly, they just don't have a voice to speak, becuase you shut them all down

 

You apparently missed the memo that this isn't a public place, a democracy, or about "free speech": it is analogous to being a guest in someone's living room and being asked to leave if you're unwelcome. Those who were asked to leave were unpleasant, not just because of their opinions coming from the Alt-Right, but because they were genuine assholes who were a lot like you: saying a lot of nothing and enjoying the sound of your own voice while contributing absolutely zero value as you divert attention away from the discussion.

 

17 minutes ago, welkin said:

Wonder why they all left?

 

Some were banned, some were asked to leave, some didn't like the fact that they were being asked to behave once and for all. 

 

18 minutes ago, welkin said:

You guys are jesters.

 

And you are a joke. 

[Earl Grey]

7 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

I would  say there is a heap of practical difference  - the first being motivated by capitalism, seems to me from the above ,  somehow fake  in that  I dont think True Will was about convincing anyone that the work they are doing is their calling . Again, not knowing much about him, it SEEMS though  its more like ; if people are devoted they will perform better .  In short, I am curious or suspicious about what this NEED is that would be 'served well'. Is the need the fulfilment  and development of the individual combined with a better regulated and liberated society or is the need related to production rates and ultimately profit  ?

 

Campbell seems closer  as it seems more geared towards the fulfilment and development of the individual .  AS far as 'avoiding work' goes, one who is working at a job that IS the fulfilment of their True Will , it doesnt seem like work at all  ;  you get to do what you most love ... and get paid for doing it as well !  

 

  I think the True Will expression and the no work thing will evolve together, the more automation takes over jobs . otherwise what is one to do ?  Seek out your passion and work  or sit around doing nothing,  or triviality and consonantly getting out of it .

 

 

 

 

I suspected that Weber would be less inclined to be tied to it, but the reason I cite him is that he talks about will within the context of him saying capitalism is a natural phenomenon, compared to us who see it as merely a system and indoctrination. Absent capitalism, purpose and calling is there, but I agree that it doesn't mean that you will seek the job. 

 

As for Campbell, individual fulfillment is great, though referring to consequences of True Will (as far as I understand), when we have the Will of a populist like Erdogan, Trump, Xi, Duterte, or Putin, and they have their supporters, whose will is it really? Collective will? The will of the demagogue? The will of the people reflected by the demagogue? Or the shared will? And what about the Randian capitalist who does not care about the well-being of his workers if his will to profit is stronger?

[Nungali]

47 minutes ago, welkin said:

 

Yes, you are subject to this. You and your little gangsters.

 

The whole forum feels similarly, they just don't have a voice to speak, becuase you shut them all down. Wonder why they all left?

 

You guys are jesters.

 

 

You could always join them     

 

 

and live in your own little village where you all talk nonsense  to each other 

 

 

-----------

 

I said that in particular as it seems a valid solution , Crowley opted on it when musing on  one's right to express their individual will and the right for a collective to have a collective will .  What, for example, to do when an individual's will is at odds with the collective will ?

 

Well, either they should leave that collective, or if they do not and force is required they should be moved to another 'collective'  where their 'will' can  be 'magically enacted ' .  He gave the example of a thief . The collective will acknowledged the right for an individual to own their own individual property and goods that they validly earned  or owned . The thief, by  stealing that property (taking possession invalidly ) has magically asserted that they do not believe in personal valid ownership of property and goods and should be removed and placed in the correct environment where people do not have the right to own property and goods    (ie, prison ) .  

 

 

[welkin]

2 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

You could always join them     

 

 

and live in your own little village where you all talk nonsense  to each other 

 

 

-----------

 

I said that in particular as it seems a valid solution , Crowley opted on it when musing on  one's right to express their individual will and the right for a collective to have a collective will .  What, for example, to do when an individual's will is at odds with the collective will ?

 

Well, either they should leave that collective, or if they do not and force is required they should be moved to another 'collective'  where their 'will' can  be 'magically enacted ' .  He gave the example of a thief . The collective will acknowledged the right for an individual to own their own individual property and goods that they validly earned  or owned . The thief, by  stealing that property (taking possession invalidly ) has magically asserted that they do not believe in personal valid ownership of property and goods and should be removed and placed in the correct environment where people do not have the right to own property and goods    (ie, prison ) .  

 

 

 

Why is my village little when the only people who agree with you are but a few?

 

Want to bet in some time, your village will be left with close to none?

 

I'll take you up on the solution though. i finished what i needed to say here for all to see.

 

Bye bye

[Earl Grey]

8 minutes ago, welkin said:

Why is my village little when the only people who agree with you are but a few?

 

 

They are not but a few, and agreeing on established facts isn't a debate but a consensus, unless you wish to be iconoclastic much like the Flat Earth movement, people whose suspension of disbelief is egregiously absurd. Some of their most amusing arguments to maintain their collective denial of scientific consensus and facts allege that the country of Australia does not exist, and that whenever someone flies there, the population is comprised of Hollywood actors in an undisclosed location. No amount of Will can change the shape of the earth into something flat.

 

13 minutes ago, welkin said:

Want to bet in some time, your village will be left with close to none?

 

 

Your gambling habit of making bets and predictions have yet to demonstrate that it is a fruitful endeavor for you. But perhaps another village where the other members migrated to in a mass exodus seeking what they feel is the original dao in their minds may be more receptive to you. Or not. 

 

14 minutes ago, welkin said:

i finished what i needed to say here for all to see.

 

We suspect that you will find your way back here when that alchemical romance of your multiple neuroses and cannabis habit are further complicated by your piss-poor attempts at energetic and metaphysical work that you declare yourself to have more power and authority through your so-called "listening" skill--a skill you have yet to demonstrate you actually use based on your juvenile posts and lack of actual response to anything posited to you. 

 

17 minutes ago, welkin said:

Bye bye

 

Good riddance. 

[welkin]

Thank you for all the lessons you've taught me. i learned a lot

[Nungali]

1 hour ago, Earl Grey said:

 

I suspected that Weber would be less inclined to be tied to it, but the reason I cite him is that he talks about will within the context of him saying capitalism is a natural phenomenon, compared to us who see it as merely a system and indoctrination. Absent capitalism, purpose and calling is there, but I agree that it doesn't mean that you will seek the job. 

 

As for Campbell, individual fulfillment is great, though referring to consequences of True Will (as far as I understand), when we have the Will of a populist like Erdogan, Trump, Xi, Duterte, or Putin, and they have their supporters, whose will is it really? Collective will? The will of the demagogue? The will of the people reflected by the demagogue? Or the shared will? And what about the Randian capitalist who does not care about the well-being of his workers if his will to profit is stronger?

 

 

   I suppose you get anything from agreement  to  complacent acceptance all the way through to

 

 

[welkin]

"Then we will fight in the shade"

[Nungali]

41 minutes ago, welkin said:

 

Why is my village little when the only people who agree with you are but a few?

 

Because you are little .

 

41 minutes ago, welkin said:

 

Want to bet in some time, your village will be left with close to none?

 

 

Hope so. I live near a tourist town and Christmas (silly season ) approaches .  I hope the 'close to none'  population prediction also spreads to my local beach .

 

 

41 minutes ago, welkin said:

 

I'll take you up on the solution though. i finished what i needed to say here for all to see.

 

What was that again ?  

 

 

 

41 minutes ago, welkin said:

 

Bye bye

 

You anin't goin nowhere .

 

 

[Nungali]

3 minutes ago, welkin said:

"Then we will fight in the shade"

 

Knew you  HAD  to come back     

[ilumairen]

1 hour ago, welkin said:

"Then we will fight in the shade"

 

For anyone who missed the reference:

 

 

What? It's a good movie. 

[Earl Grey]

4 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

For anyone who missed the reference:

 

 

What? It's a good movie. 

 

And the constant need for attention reminds me specifically of Ephialtes. 

 

[Zork]

52 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

For anyone who missed the reference:

 

 

What? It's a good movie. 

It is a recorded historical quote. One of the few things that the movie gets right.

[Earl Grey]

1 hour ago, Zork said:

It is a recorded historical quote. One of the few things that the movie gets right.

My professor of Greek history in university said he liked it because it made no attempt to try to be historically accurate, and encouraged us to ask our Persian history teacher what his opinions were too!

[Zork]

1 hour ago, Earl Grey said:

My professor of Greek history in university said he liked it because it made no attempt to try to be historically accurate, and encouraged us to ask our Persian history teacher what his opinions were too!

Yes it is more fiction than fact. But using fact alone, i don't think it would make be a good story.

Furthermore i think that the quote is misplaced here. It was supposed to show indifference in the face of death. Hong Kong protests don't give me the impression that they are fights to the death. These people want to live a better life and will risk injury but not death.

Edited November 20, 2019 by Zork

[ilumairen]

6 hours ago, Zork said:

Yes it is more fiction than fact. But using fact alone, i don't think it would make be a good story.

 

It is based on a graphic novel which itself had taken great liberties with historical fact, and a visually stunning masterpiece (which has the potential to pique historical interest) imo.

 

[ralis]

4 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

It is based on a graphic novel which itself had taken great liberties with historical fact, and a visually stunning masterpiece (which has the potential to pique historical interest) imo.

 

 

Lots of ripped abs in 300.

[ilumairen]

In Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot author Lon Milo Duquette sets forth an understanding of the second Aeon as a shift from a nurturing earth/mother view to a supplying (my word)/sustaining Sun/father view with a focus on death/resurrection.

 

So, to generally follow the overall topic, how do the Spartans, and particularly the historically accurate quote "Then we will fight in the shade" (as an indicator pointing towards fearlessness of death) fit in this proposed understanding of the Aeons?

 

To be clear and open, I have my own theories and thoughts, but am presently more interested in hearing other's thoughts.

[Zork]

1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

It is based on a graphic novel which itself had taken great liberties with historical fact, and a visually stunning masterpiece (which has the potential to pique historical interest) imo.

 

I had friends in the 90s who loved Frank Miller.

 

Edited November 20, 2019 by Zork

[ilumairen]

16 minutes ago, Zork said:

I had friends in the 90s who loved Frank Miller.

 

 

Yeah, I was pretty sure you were aware of the source material, and just being conversational. Thanks for understating this and sharing a smile over memories of old friends. This is nice. 

[Nungali]

3 hours ago, ilumairen said:

In Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot author Lon Milo Duquette sets forth an understanding of the second Aeon as a shift from a nurturing earth/mother view to a supplying (my word)/sustaining Sun/father view with a focus on death/resurrection.

 

So, to generally follow the overall topic, how do the Spartans, and particularly the historically accurate quote "Then we will fight in the shade" (as an indicator pointing towards fearlessness of death) fit in this proposed understanding of the Aeons?

 

To be clear and open, I have my own theories and thoughts, but am presently more interested in hearing other's thoughts.

 

Not sure understand the question but it did make me think of this  ;

 

In Crowley's fav initiation system,  OTO ;  the first 3 degrees represent  birth life death. The ceremonies are based around this '2nd Aeon' concept of death and rebirth . Think of the old system where the dying and rebirth through seed of the local grain crop was revered ( wheat, corn, millet, etc )  and the passage of the Sun traversing the sky, setting / 'dying' and travelling through the underworld and being reborn at dawn . This was deemed analogous  to the life and death of Man, with an after life in the underworld ( 'below' the Earth ) and/or a  transmigration to the heavens  ( 'above' the Earth) .

 

But towards the end of this series of initiations one of the knowledge lectures  explains that, although 'the mysteries' are based on this cycle of the Sun  going around the Earth, we now know this is not the case .   The daily cycle of day and night is due to the relatively fixed  Sun with the Earth rotating on its axis and points on the Earths surface moving from sunlight into  'shade ' .

 

Two points are bought up in relation to this ;  1 )    Why do all that, and learn that stuff and enact it in initiation ceremony if it is (mostly) Old Aeon and part of the death / resurrection cycle, whose analogy with the Solar cycle is incorrect ?  It is becasue the world and most other people are still operating on this level, its mostly the environment / paradigm that we live in. And also, we need to know and understand where we came from/ are now so as to be able to navigate through the new .

 

2)  In light of this new information ( that the natural analogy of death isnt about the Sun 'dying' and travelling through the underworld to be reborn - the Sun 'never dies' , it us that 'turns' into the 'shade' ) the candidate is encouraged to take all the old principles they have learned and look at them in light of this 'new' information, how to re-interpret and apply it and what significance does it have and hw does it change the teachings . No solutions are offered, it is left up to the candidate to work on it themselves .

 

To me this signifies a great leap forward . People are not just being taught the old stuff - as most groups do  - but are encouraged to accept new findings and science and incorporate that into ...... what I call ' Neo-hermetics '.

 

So much of modern hermetics / magic / ritual / occultism is based on principles  that are a  few centuries out of date . That's why it doesn't make a lot of sense to some people .

[ilumairen]

20 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

Not sure understand the question but it did make me think of this  ;

 

The question was conversation, and an attempt to keep things circling around the general topic. It perhaps brought things together in odd (and difficult to follow) ways in the attempt. My apologies for this. 

 

Quote

In Crowley's fav initiation system,  OTO ;  the first 3 degrees represent  birth life death. The ceremonies are based around this '2nd Aeon' concept of death and rebirth . Think of the old system where the dying and rebirth through seed of the local grain crop was revered ( wheat, corn, millet, etc )  and the passage of the Sun traversing the sky, setting / 'dying' and travelling through the underworld and being reborn at dawn . This was deemed analogous  to the life and death of Man, with an after life in the underworld ( 'below' the Earth ) and/or a  transmigration to the heavens  ( 'above' the Earth) .

 

But towards the end of this series of initiations one of the knowledge lectures  explains that, although 'the mysteries' are based on this cycle of the Sun  going around the Earth, we now know this is not the case .   The daily cycle of day and night is due to the relatively fixed  Sun with the Earth rotating on its axis and points on the Earths surface moving from sunlight into  'shade ' .

 

Two points are bought up in relation to this ;  1 )    Why do all that, and learn that stuff and enact it in initiation ceremony if it is (mostly) Old Aeon and part of the death / resurrection cycle, whose analogy with the Solar cycle is incorrect ?  It is becasue the world and most other people are still operating on this level, its mostly the environment / paradigm that we live in. And also, we need to know and understand where we came from/ are now so as to be able to navigate through the new .

 

2)  In light of this new information ( that the natural analogy of death isnt about the Sun 'dying' and travelling through the underworld to be reborn - the Sun 'never dies' , it us that 'turns' into the 'shade' ) the candidate is encouraged to take all the old principles they have learned and look at them in light of this 'new' information, how to re-interpret and apply it and what significance does it have and hw does it change the teachings . No solutions are offered, it is left up to the candidate to work on it themselves .

 

To me this signifies a great leap forward . People are not just being taught the old stuff - as most groups do  - but are encouraged to accept new findings and science and incorporate that into ...... what I call ' Neo-hermetics '.

 

So much of modern hermetics / magic / ritual / occultism is based on principles  that are a  few centuries out of date . That's why it doesn't make a lot of sense to some people .

 

This is amazingly on point! The author referenced has some title in OTO, but the book shares what he refers to as a little bit of information about the things needed to (more deeply) understand the Thoth tarot - without bogging the reader down with an overwhelming amount of information.

 

What you shared provides more depth to the little bits shared regarding the Aeons in the book, and refines my own contemplation. Thank you!

 

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by ilumairen

[Nungali]

One interesting way to compare the views  of   old aeon /new aeon is to look at the card changes in the deck .

 

The main ones  that stand out are ;

 

'Justice'   to 'Adjustment ' , 'Strength' to 'Lust' ,  'Temperance ' to 'Art'    'The Last Judgement'  to 'The Aeon' ,     &   'The World'  to 'The Universe' .

[ilumairen]

20 hours ago, Nungali said:

One interesting way to compare the views  of   old aeon /new aeon is to look at the card changes in the deck .

 

The main ones  that stand out are ;

 

'Justice'   to 'Adjustment ' , 'Strength' to 'Lust' ,  'Temperance ' to 'Art'    'The Last Judgement'  to 'The Aeon' ,     &   'The World'  to 'The Universe' .

 

The movement of the Star in the Thoth deck, and how this movement is actually related to a passage in the Book of the Law was interesting to me as well.

 

Today, I'm contemplating the old and new Fool (with the visual reference being the Rider and Thoth cards). What is presently standing out is the potentiality presented in Thoth, compared with the clear precariousness in the Rider version. 

[Earl Grey]

Nungali, which Fool card do you tend to use when doing Thoth readings? Or do you keep all three at once?