|
Post by pseudosherlock on Mar 4, 2011 20:19:00 GMT -6
Yeah, I would have to agree. Your focus is clearly reason and logic, and mine is not. I won't offer you anything that you would call proof or justification. Because I'm not looking for that myself.
I would suggest that the ideal of Buddhism is not hiding from "negative emotions", but transcending them to be able to be within them without being negatively affected by them. So either those people were going at it in a non-Buddhist way, or your perspective is a little off of the purpose.
There are a lot of things I can concede. But the one that I can say for absolute, 100% sure, is that anger and aggression do not equal health. In fact, it would be the opposite. The more aggressive one gets the lower the health of their body.
And again, I would suggest with less vigor that happiness is not dependent on anger and aggression, either. I think what you're referring to it accumulating physical things and being able to afford the best band-aids that western medicine can offer. That's not health or happiness and not real wealth.
But then again, if you are only focused on the physical, I guess that is health, wealth, and happiness for you. I do wish you luck with it.
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 5, 2011 11:51:30 GMT -6
No, that's not all. Esotericism is more than liberation from negative emotions, but I also conclude that that is a possible benchmark for success.
I also agree that a counter-balancing maxim should be implemented or even institutionalized for the Cthulhu Cult's benefit. Belief is reality has its uses, but it's not the end all, be all. Something akin to "the proof is in the pudding"? Hahaha. That's terrible, but I'll come up with something... unless someone wishes to suggest a phrase?
Let me divide up the word aggression. Like most things, there is a negative and positive side to aggression... at least as it enters my mind. On the negative side, there is angry, violent aggression which is unnecessary and mechanical. On the positive side, there is aggression which takes the initiative; it is an emotion of action, confrontation, and energy which can be used Consciously.
I would, as you will probably predict, promote the latter.
As for evaluating Man Number 1 through Man Number 7, we must look at his understanding. Easier said than done, yes? How does he use his knowledge, what is his level of being in comparison to others, what kind of vibrational fruits does he attract/manifest? Without looking solely at material gain, I personally measure wakefulness by overall happiness broken down into the 7 areas of incremental progression explained here:
www.cultofcthulhu.net/2010/08/dark-pursuits-bathed-in-fire-the-observable-current-of-the-left-hand-path/
Furthermore, I also agree that simple avoidance of negative emotions solves very little. Transcendence is what we're after. Overcoming negativity which sucks us back into the delusion of life, feeding upon us in a predatory manner. Observing and then not expressing poisonous feelings is different than running away from them. They must be dealt with, conquered!
This brings up something I'm going to discuss elsewhere in greater detail, the burden of compromise. Those looking to change this religion must do so by making slight alterations, tweaking things here and there. And this is not possible without a gesture of goodwill, a nod towards concession, an expression of acknowledgement which informs us that he who seeks to make changes also realizes that the fundamental principles of the Cthulhu Cult are sacred. In essence, the burden of compromise must fall to the outsider first of all.
It is a difficult but rewarding thing to shape mankind's destiny. Rushing at it like a bull in a crystal gallery serves no one. I offer gratitude to those who assist us... not in their ivory towers but the trenches alongside brothers-in-arms.
Let me also offer an apology to anyone who I may have recently injured in this thread or any other, as that was not my intent. I continually make efforts towards not drawing first blood, as well as, fostering a peaceful atmosphere. Sometimes, in my haste to protect the group I wound the individual. Apologies.
Kaizen!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by darkprism on Mar 5, 2011 16:05:43 GMT -6
This is the distinction and I totally agree, Brother Satanis. On the negative side, the person tends to be out of control and under the influence of the passions. One can't just snap out of this state so easily. Anger and rage drive the machine to do irrational and stupid things that are usually regretted in hindsight.
On the plus side, these emotions utilized positively can be channeled into action in a conscious way to deal with the problem or disturbance at hand with a boost of emotional energy. This is indeed a powerful tool when under conscious control in regards to problem solving, confronting irrational and contemptuous people and turning it inwards on one's own laziness and complacency to push through it and kick one's ass into action.
Once a goal or resolving of a problem has been achieved by utilizing aggression in a positive way, in my personal experience, it follows by feelings of calm dignity and increased self-esteem. You know that the power is there to channel again in this way which leads to a level of greater confidence or trust in oneself.
On the flip side, I have noticed that the uncontrolled expression of aggression usually leads to feeling drained afterward and a mental state of justification and delusion. Being unable to see the matter clearly from the residual negative emotions and lack of control that took place. This manifestation of aggression in my opinion = sleep.
I suppose the key here is that when the emotion of aggression does rear it's head, the choice can be made at this point whether or not to identify completely with it. There may be a legitimate reason why it has arisen, but for it to be utilized in the positive way, enough space for rational thought and willed suppression, then direction must remain to be able to then utilize the emotion into positive action. A kind of mental guage of sorts must remain working to let off the steam(emotion) in a controlled manner at the right time and in the right direction. Otherwise the madman takes over and lets the steam out all at once, which can lead to regretted actions.
Awake!
Dark Prism
|
|
|
Post by Apsara Kamalli on Mar 5, 2011 21:49:50 GMT -6
As to this... nobody, to my knowledge, has yet substantiated the array as related to progress, and i have adequately deconstructed it as a spectrum such that, without such support, those who have more than a faith-based approach ought to prop it up now with something realistic or abandon it as a badge-gaining projection scheme. "I'm the Ipsissimus!" "NO! I'm the Ipsissimus!", etc. And this... I've been around enough New Agers and Buddhists who 'avoided being dragged into negative emotions' that i eventually concluded that they were hiding and weak. I thought that they were right to avoid the ravages of what they dualistically demonized (rage, hatred, anger, fear, jealousy, envy). yet the supposition that avoidance might be a successful strategy didn't seem rational to me, so when i began to hear about Re-evaluation Counseling and Co-counseling practices, and knew those who appreciated the virtues of both Satanism and Buddhism exploring them, i sought to attend to their interests and see what it was about.
I discovered that the 'emotional body' (or repertoire of consciousness surrounding emotional experience) has a skillset and a gradation of expertise not ordinarily addressed or appreciated by conventional ascetic cults. instead, these latter tend to glorify the diminishment of familiarity to emotions based on the demonizing of their immature grapplings and outcomes. understandably, i thought, they dislike the damaging repercussion or result of expressed rage, hatred, anger, for example, and yet they refuse to admit that it lay behind some of the most important achievements of human beings. this dynamic, this outright ignorance, serves not their proclaimed interest in personal development and maturation (which i link solidly to mysticism). quite to the contrary, the stultification of emotional familiarity and exercise maims and so perturbs human development of consciousness as to render it inhumane, useless, and alien(ated) from ordinary experience.
thus, whenever i see these ascetic virtues propped up, 'negative emotions' (well-named, but for practical advantage in setting boundaries, rather than because it is a negative thing to have such emotions) stipulated as worthy of avoiding, i am suspicious and critical of the maturity of said ideological platform. in this case, Gurdjieff's foundation as i barely understand it stems precisely from ascetic motive (yoga, monk, fakir) and so we can expect whatever pitfalls or limitations may accompany these avenues of spirituality.
instead, what i suggest to you is that quite alike the pains associated with exercise when one is out of shape, or the irritations which arise when one is unused to meditation, AVOIDING the activity bringing them on is precisely the wrong road to select and amounts to an abandonment of the mystical route. I am not here attempting to glorify these symptoms, which is sometimes the reply by those afeared of them. as a training coach i am not saying that one should seek out pain in exercise, or seek out the distraction so as to magnify either, and thereby, for example, choose to get angry, afraid, jealous and envious over and over and over again, but that these emotions should not be avoided because they inspire an important wisdom in us of deftly separating from community, breaking social bonds, and setting restrictions on our own behaviours in discipline. they are a personal barometer of immense importance, especially as they are accorded their proper role in subjective disciplines and enjoyments, and demonizing them is akin to shooting the messenger.
with regard to the Work, and this description of avoiding being dragged into negative emotions, i can affirm the value of being (emotionally) healthy enough and strong enough not to be subjected to the proverbial aches and pains from avoiding regular workouts, which i am equating to avoiding conflict, adversity, or emotional grappling with those who are strong and enthusiastic. I can affirm the wisdom of not surmising simplistically that what rages is what wins, that who is angry is she who is victorious or superior, and that aggression and predatory skill are, ultimately, the delineator of wealth, health and happiness.
should you see any value in my potentially confusing maelstrom of words here in comparison to the wisdoms of your chosen instructors you have quoted, i hope to hear about this, as well as the contrast you may perceive in our expressions. I think that what you have quoted leads in to a very helpful evaluative framework of mysticism and human awareness (something wonderfully compatible with that which i was constructing out of Maslow and set to an array of perfectable skills), but not insofar as it necessarily stratifies to a ladder, or becomes festooned with superordinary abilities. instead, such awareness and development ought to be plugged into notions of 'the Renaissance Man' (if you prefer a masculine generalization) or 'Wholesome Worldly Individual'. there are very clear and concise means of recognizing and evaluating such people, down to the social and personal skills they should be able to demonstrate if they have success in their disciplines.
Where I think there is a break in communication, nyrlthtp, is that you are participating in a forum where the members have already established that the Work, as stated by Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, is worth examining and experimenting for our each individual Self. It is one of the three aspects, dare I say the greatest of the three aspects, that brings us together. Many of us here are Working diligently to understand, evaluate, and apply the foundations that Gurdjieff and Ouspensky have laid out. We already "buy into" the system they have developed. You, well... I'm not exactly sure why you are here, nyrlthtp, and why you are asking us to explain Gurdjieff's Work to you without you showing an interest in figuring it out on your own. You have admitted that your understanding of the System and the Work is limited to the information you pick up from us, and while I appreciate your interactions and your outside opinions, it is only up to a point. You focus on picking apart nearly every aspect of presented philosophical ideas, but I don't understand what your end goal is. Are you reading Gurdjieff's writings, or those of his students? Are you considering becoming an official member of the CoC, beyond the honorary title? Are you fine-tuning your philosophical knowledge? Or are you here merely to be the adversarial current, challenging the ideas being discussed, and if so, how does that help you to achieve your aims? When the stars are right? Apsara Kamalli Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 6, 2011 14:58:43 GMT -6
This is the distinction and I totally agree, Brother Satanis. On the negative side, the person tends to be out of control and under the influence of the passions. One can't just snap out of this state so easily. Anger and rage drive the machine to do irrational and stupid things that are usually regretted in hindsight. On the plus side, these emotions utilized positively can be channeled into action in a conscious way to deal with the problem or disturbance at hand with a boost of emotional energy. This is indeed a powerful tool when under conscious control in regards to problem solving, confronting irrational and contemptuous people and turning it inwards on one's own laziness and complacency to push through it and kick one's ass into action. Once a goal or resolving of a problem has been achieved by utilizing aggression in a positive way, in my personal experience, it follows by feelings of calm dignity and increased self-esteem. You know that the power is there to channel again in this way which leads to a level of greater confidence or trust in oneself. On the flip side, I have noticed that the uncontrolled expression of aggression usually leads to feeling drained afterward and a mental state of justification and delusion. Being unable to see the matter clearly from the residual negative emotions and lack of control that took place. This manifestation of aggression in my opinion = sleep. I suppose the key here is that when the emotion of aggression does rear it's head, the choice can be made at this point whether or not to identify completely with it. There may be a legitimate reason why it has arisen, but for it to be utilized in the positive way, enough space for rational thought and willed suppression, then direction must remain to be able to then utilize the emotion into positive action. A kind of mental guage of sorts must remain working to let off the steam(emotion) in a controlled manner at the right time and in the right direction. Otherwise the madman takes over and lets the steam out all at once, which can lead to regretted actions. Awake! Dark Prism Gurdjieff specifically discusses the difference between feeling the emotion internally, and expressing the emotion when it is necessary. I'll be going into much more detail on Sunday, but here are some excerpt from Gurdjieff's " Views from the Real World": "We have two lives, inner and outer life, and so we also have two kinds of considering. We constantly consider.
"When she looks at me, I feel inside a dislike of her, I am cross with her, but externally I am polite because I must be very polite since I need her. Internally I am what I am, but externally I am different. This is external considering. Now she says that I am a fool. This angers me. The fact that I am angered is the result, but what takes place in me is internal considering.
"This internal and external considering are different. We must learn to be able to control separately both kinds of considering: the internal and the external. We want to change not only inside but also outside.
"Yesterday, when she gave me an unfriendly look, I was cross. But today I understand that perhaps the reason why she looked at me like that is that she is a fool; or perhaps she had learned or heard something about me. And today I want to remain calm. She is a slave and I should not be angry with her inwardly. From today onward I want to be calm inside.
"Outwardly I want today to be polite, but if necessary I can appear angry. Outwardly it must be what is best for her and for me. I must consider. Internal and external considering must be different. In an ordinary man the external attitude is the result of the internal. If she is polite, I am also polite. But these attitudes should be separated.
Internally one should be free from considering, but externally one should do more than one has been doing so far. An ordinary man lives as he is dictated to from inside." More is posted in my Crawling Chaos blog. I will post the link this Sunday. While different than a discussion on the usefulness of aggression, I appreciate the Gurdjieff quotes.
By the way, here's the elaboration I promised: cthulhu-cult.com/?p=294
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by jasonsorrell on Mar 7, 2011 18:39:37 GMT -6
namaste Apsara, I love your questions and the manner in which you bring them to me. thanks. ...Where I think there is a break in communication ...is that you are participating in a forum where the members have already established that the Work, as stated by Gurdjieff and Ouspensky, is worth examining and experimenting for our each individual Self. examining: correct. experimenting: agreed, and of course by advocation of that same system, testing it and refining it. I see no break in communication at all in these levels. where i see the break is between my ideation and reception by participants here. this is not unusual. I am unconcerned. my role is established. perhaps incidentally, i have no faith in Selves. I regard them as useful fictions. were it not of interest to me, i would not comment upon it, attempt to take it seriously amongst you, or attempt to refine it for your interests. mysticism is consistently compelling to me, especially as it combines with either the Satanic or the Lovecraftian. more on that below. it is into this which i seek to tap, naturally, when questioning what evaluation and understanding is carried into application. to an extent, the most rigorous of those applying scientistic strains of the Crazy Wisdom masters have no ability to do more than harken back to the originators of that which is now being employed, in a rarefied and self-configured format, within their own processes. a certain amount of challenging and testing is advised by these same masters, and my engagement is, by my reckoning, a basic for all who may observe it. if this is understood and incorporates or brings forward challenges which have no comfortable response, then the challenge was misplaced (too rudimentary), is for some reason of no import (poor apprehension of the system(s) as standing), or the audience is unfamiliar with the Work itself at this level. practically and technically i arrived here in response to a request by one of the (former) Priests of R'lyeh (Beast Xeno aka T.C. Downey). he asked me to examine and reply to one of his essays contained within the CoC forums or blogs. motivationally, i have a longstanding interest in Lovecraftian mythos and Satanism which sustains my interest in the CoC. my interests in Gurdjieff and Crazy Wisdom masters has waned through time, though initially i found their ideologies and systems compelling enough to study on my own. I predicted the rise of the Cult of Cthulhu or its like in my Manifesto Satanika, and have been following the activities of Master Satanis since i became aware of him in the aftermath of his expulsion from the Church of Satan. since i have been issued an honorary knighting by Master Satanis for my efforts, and since i have such admiration for the style and content of his expressions, and my understanding as to the potential that i have seen within such expositions as by Speeth, it gives me reason to poke my head in here where it appears due and render challenges, thoughts, etc. it is in no way an attempt to disrupt or undermine, as i hope you will see clearly through time. I'm sorry if for some reason i provided you with this rather uncomplimentary and disrespectful attitude. I find the expressions of the Crazy Wisdom masters to be too vague and imprecise so as to render a consistent theoretic, and i do not as yet, even after having examined Speeth and the sources you mention in occasional detail, find reason to presume i will arrive at similar ideas to others in their evaluation. for this reason i must register your understanding of that to which you make reference before i can claim to understand it. not only has it been quite a while since i attempted to assimilate the rudiments and basics of the Fourth Way and the Work so called, but i have as a result of myself following it out by some of its recommendations moved far beyond these sources. some of what they taught seems to me of value, some of it seems dross (i may have misunderstood it), some of it seems completely erroneous. I am humble enough to err on the side of caution and ask for the basis of support citing your preferred master. I've noticed this style within lineages of repute, contexts of rational discourse, and arrived with the supposition that this would be welcomed and desired here as a consistent refinement (of which the Work is). as i find no ends, i find no end goals, other than to serve and love my God. I surveyed them early on in an approach to Rumi and Sufi poets, Islamic religion and mysticism as a whole in variety, found what i thought was coherent within them and attempted to get the gist as well as to understand the criticism of their detractors. occasionally in response to Ipsissimus Satanis, Beast, or Jason i have delved into portions of the works of these men, yes. that their grasp of the English language leaves something to be desired, their use of cultspeak confuses matters rather than opening them to clarification, and that they are demonstrably shifty and deceptive in others does not recommened them to me or persistently demonstrate to me that they are of lasting value alone. my impression is that to what they point (mysticism) is of value, especially as it may be taken up by intelligent aspirants with critical scrutiny. I will not ever become a member of the Cult of Cthulhu. I never considered it, would not have involved myself here had i not been engaged by its priesthood (because this is a private forum and i minimize my involvement with private forums which cannot be found online via google). please understand that my actions are in part intuitively-oriented, out of dedication to my God, and will not necessarily be rationally-founded. I am often reactionary in my involvements, almost Hegelian (prone to dialectics, dialogue, debate) and i learn by engaging others in this manner. the other day in audience-chat of The Ooze i expressed conclusions i had been arriving at for years without understanding them, but in response to specific questions, and in contrast of other ideas they arose for me to view, as it were. what surfaces here in the CoC is not unusual or personally-intended. I am fully capable of responding politely to moderating direction where it is requested or withdrawing from where i am no longer wanted. my presentation here is absolutely transparent to my interests, my chosen pseudonym and Viridian adornments properly disclose my actuality. if you want to understand me more thoroughly you will examine the rigours and characeteristic engagements of the philosopher after whom my God named me: Nagarjuna, one of the founders of the Middle Way School of the Great Vehicle of Buddhism (Madhyamika of the Mahayana). were you to do this you would conclude that this style of undermining refinement may be deemed cathartic and preservative toward pragmatic ends, filtering toward justification as to rational support, and only apparently nihilistic as it seems to have no values. as such, 'my philosophical knowledge' is not being informed or fine-tuned within the CoC primarily because it is rudimentary to me and my path. my engagement here is social, not philosophical. your text below about the adversarial quality is therefore more proper. Or are you here merely to be the adversarial current, challenging the ideas being discussed, and if so, how does that help you to achieve your aims? what a glorious manner and tact of inquiry. I would remove 'merely' from the above and emphasize the adversarial, scientific, scrutinizing aspect of Gurdjieff and those who come after him, at least by proclamation. it is this which i have enjoyed about the man's writing which i could understand, and persistently i wanted to hold him and those who exalted his text to this standard of challenge and evaluation. more confusingly for your understanding of me, i will now disclose for you as many of the disqualifications behind my interests keeping me participating but failing to align. Lovecraft: if you examine my text "Kathulu Majik..." you will see that i regard those who solely embrace the chaotic or wrathful aspects of deities/demons as suspect and thrillseekers, that my understanding of magic appied toward mystical aims requires a certain balance of qualitative engagements, and that i assess that the Lords of Order and the Scions of Ckaos are best played against one another to purpose and not relied upon as panacea. Satanism: my primary dedication is to my God and not to Satan per se, but compassion provides me with incentive to reach out and serve Satan and Satanists within a demonizing Christian culture into which i have been born. as such, neither the cult nor the demonic may rely upon me unendingly as a firm ally. Gurdjieff: even less certain is my endorsement of questionable mystical authorities, though i have tried to make it my business to come to understand what i could about the entirety of the field. I have already commented at length in the above about my interests and limitations where Gurdjieff is concerned, but would be happy to entertain discussion on his ideas, particularly in reference to particulars of his expression or those of his students. my aims are holistically-derived and locally played out. this will require that those such as the Church of Satan will hold up their hands to keep me at bay, the S.I.N.ful or Blackwoodian will eject me from their midst as unsuited for their standards, that i will apparently give cause to have the same done to me by others (such as 600club) thence rescinded by petition to their elder authorities, whilst others will beg me to become their Grand Poobah. I cannot predict the trajectory of my social participation in any context excepting as i come to know my 'proper' role by intuitive direction in communion with my God and as those involved take their stands. in this way, for example, i find my way to YouTube with a proper costuming, gradually subject the gathering of the many friends and family i had heretofore left in my wake to my Satanic sermons, and provide as i am able a satisfying service to those interested in myriad vectors of Satanic expression. I'm unsure that 'Sermon on Belief is Reality' is the proper venue for a continued analysis of my doings and motivations, and i am content to shift any further queries to a more pertinent (even introductory) thread, but rest assured that i am available to you in particular and those of your character and manner to delve into any avenue of my involvement soever. I have a high regard for you as a person and appreciate your reflection on events, dynamics, and facts. thank you for your time and attention. Respectfuly, it sounds to me like the short-version of your rambling answer would be: "I play the role of the fool, and I don't know why I play it. Anyone who engages me must suffer the fool, and they themselves risk being played." And, I mean this in the sense of the long tradition of fools; the court jesters who existed to point out through their often inane outbursts the distinction between what is rational and what is nonsensical. Occasionally, the fool would be a source of wisdom... if he is tolerated long enough to stumble over it. But, what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by Apsara Kamalli on Mar 7, 2011 19:49:16 GMT -6
nyrlthtp,
Thank you for taking the time to respond with such depth (although, I admit that I expected no less). I appreciate your presence within this group, and I hope that you don't think my line of questioning inferred otherwise. Your ability to focus in on all aspects of what people present, analyze each part individually from a perspective that I am unfamiliar with, and then respond with your own conclusions/questions, I find extremely interesting. I don't always agree with you, but I doubt two individuals ever agree on everything presented between them.
I have read some of Speeth's material, and I don't think she is a great representation of Gurdjieff's work. In my opinion, some of her theories are lacking in depth, so I can see where you may have been... disappointed...from her interpretations. I would encourage you to continue your questioning and analysis until a time where you've decided either, "I get it; I agree" or "This just isn't for me."
The mystical side of Gurdjieff's Work, I also question. I have to ask myself, "If the Fourth Way is for the 'sly man', then is it possible Gurdjieff was just a great con artist, and all of this is really just crap." However, the results I have witnessed in myself and Jason seem to be worth the Work, regardless of it it "truly" means anything or not.
To sum it up, thanks again, nyrlthtp. I intend on checking out some of the information you presented that represents your foundational beliefs, and I look forward to our future interactions.
Awake!
Apsara Kamalli Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by darkknight on Mar 7, 2011 23:21:32 GMT -6
Jason, I don't think it's working out. You've made your sales pitch. You've conveniently explained your understanding to us by simply leading by example. You've repeatedly disregarded my perspective without any evidence to support those claims. You've made it clear that you don't want to work with the Cult of Cthulhu; nor do you want to be taught by me. Where exactly does that leave us, brother?
As much as I've enjoyed the opportunity to re-phrase my knowledge to everyone watching this thread, your being here serves no further purpose, save distraction. I think it's best if you leave our discussion boards... assuming you keep marching along this road.
Herbert, I'm not sure what your deal is, but at the moment you strike me as another Jason puppet.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
I do not see Jason's comments as a distraction, but worthy of further exploration. Especially if what he is aying is noteworthy. I have been involved in Fourth Way studies for over a decade. Famous Fourth Way writer Maurice Nicoll once said: "Remember that the Work is not by addition to what you are, but by transformationof what you are."Always keep that in mind Lord Satanis Awake Warlock Asylum
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 8, 2011 13:34:57 GMT -6
Jason, I don't think it's working out. You've made your sales pitch. You've conveniently explained your understanding to us by simply leading by example. You've repeatedly disregarded my perspective without any evidence to support those claims. You've made it clear that you don't want to work with the Cult of Cthulhu; nor do you want to be taught by me. Where exactly does that leave us, brother?
As much as I've enjoyed the opportunity to re-phrase my knowledge to everyone watching this thread, your being here serves no further purpose, save distraction. I think it's best if you leave our discussion boards... assuming you keep marching along this road.
Herbert, I'm not sure what your deal is, but at the moment you strike me as another Jason puppet.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
I do not see Jason's comments as a distraction, but worthy of further exploration. Especially if what he is aying is noteworthy. I have been involved in Fourth Way studies for over a decade. Famous Fourth Way writer Maurice Nicoll once said: "Remember that the Work is not by addition to what you are, but by transformationof what you are."Always keep that in mind Lord Satanis Awake Warlock Asylum I will keep that in mind, Warlock Asylum. If you notice the date of the material you quoted, it was over a week ago. In that time, things have changed. You might notice later in the thread when I issued an apology to any I might have injured.
I frequently speak my mind, including possible outcomes which I cannot predict with certainty. If Jason can share his views without becoming intolerably disruptive, then I'm glad to have him here. And that goes for everyone with an interest in the Cult of Cthulhu.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 8, 2011 14:41:50 GMT -6
Jason, the Court Jester presumably has a sense of humour, jabs and pokes at people playfully, and mocks everyone including hirself. these qualities i do not think that i really share. if i fulfill the role otherwise, so be it. since i actually engage practically the disciplines of mysticism and study the philosophies being considered, amongst many others, i don't think your summary fits what i was trying to say. my artifices are Satanic, not comedic, by my understanding (i am identifying with a Satan being, adversarially engaging to cause, formatting contra-ordinary reading style, all with precise intention). all of the focus on me seems to me a distraction from the important topic, which is mysticism, how belief factors into and may be usefully employed within it, etc.
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Jan 17, 2012 13:45:23 GMT -6
I was going through some older 4th Way threads and found this one. It's a doozy. Thought I would make it sticky for awhile... see what happens. Might be instructive...
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by sin on Jan 17, 2012 19:39:22 GMT -6
Perhaps you might elaborate a bit, it appears the thread was reduced to Jason's overall demeanor and role as disruptor to The Work.
Distractions and disruptors are many, I feel as though that if Jason can disrupt and distract a person from their Work, then they aren't Working but merely pretending. Not to say, that we don't each have back-slides but there seems to be a larger focus on the distractions than one would imagine if they were practicing vs. talking about practicing. This juxtaposed with the amount of time focused on the naysayers and ridiculing topics which troll to the point of derailing focus...Much of the same.
This in itself can be instructive, but I'm curious to know what of this thread you would like to draw attention to. Or, did you intend to evaluate what each of us would focus on?
CS
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Jan 18, 2012 14:21:39 GMT -6
Perhaps you might elaborate a bit, it appears the thread was reduced to Jason's overall demeanor and role as disruptor to The Work.
Distractions and disruptors are many, I feel as though that if Jason can disrupt and distract a person from their Work, then they aren't Working but merely pretending. Not to say, that we don't each have back-slides but there seems to be a larger focus on the distractions than one would imagine if they were practicing vs. talking about practicing. This juxtaposed with the amount of time focused on the naysayers and ridiculing topics which troll to the point of derailing focus...Much of the same.
This in itself can be instructive, but I'm curious to know what of this thread you would like to draw attention to. Or, did you intend to evaluate what each of us would focus on?
CS There wasn't one thing in particular, but I think it's instructive to see widely divergent view points of the Work (Work-points?). Analyze them, try to understand what motivates an individual's system of beliefs, etc. Why does a person influence their conception of the 4th Way? Is it because of an opposing force? Something going on in their lives?
Some of the things I wrote in that thread came about because I could react to what Jason was saying. This idea goes back to something I said just yesterday on the CoC social network - it's difficult to teach in a vacuum. Students need to speak their mind so that the teaching dynamic or tri-namic can happen.
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by sin on Mar 24, 2012 7:33:45 GMT -6
[/b][/color] [/quote]
*nods*, Leadership.
There is a level of input from the student that is detrimental to leading; however there is also a reason that one is recognized as a Leader.
CS
|
|
|
Post by sin on Mar 24, 2012 7:34:59 GMT -6
|
|