|
Post by tentaclednephilim on Nov 1, 2010 11:27:04 GMT -6
I have a few questions.
Are there any specific requirements a cultist must meet when they are being considered for invitation? If so, will they be disclosed?
Is there any physical meeting place planned or would it be more effective to keep it online?
Is this grotto going to have its own website?
Since all members of the grotto are equal, does this mean the sole leader of any grotto is High Priest Satanis? Or is there going to be one main organizer for any given grotto?
ia ia Cthulhu fhatgn!
|
|
|
Post by lucofthelight on Nov 1, 2010 21:41:10 GMT -6
I know exactly what you mean. Sometimes it's that exact paranoia and over reading of what people are saying that can get me to the point of anger with myself that I can use the energy the anger brings to snap myself out of it and think "fuck this" and come back to the moment of the party 'I' and enjoy the socializing.
I think this is a good example of having one 'I' in control when another would be far more suitable.
This passage from The Fourth Way is useful to understand:
In regards to the party dilemma, one 'I' has made the decision to go to the party and another opposing 'I' who wants to do something else at that time has to carry out the decision and deal with it. These two 'I's have not met, yet they are somehow supposed to act in accordance with each other?
Precisely, well said! There are so many variable that come into play that we are not conscious of. The amount of alcohol one has consumed, the appreciation or disdain of the music being played, the surroundings being agreeable or not to our particular standards, the compatibility and common ground between the guests in attendance and so on. And that is only one aspect. Perhaps one has worked a long day and is tired, energy levels are depleted or other obligations are weighing on one's mind. These can all add up to an overwhelming level of things to be conscious of.
Sounds like you were the perfect host and there wasn't any conflict between your 'I's. This external consideration you were displaying towards your guests seems to be a principal characteristic of being in the moment. This corresponds to, in my mind, the state of being that Eckhart Tolle extols in his book The Power of Now. Excellent!
When the Stars are Right!
K'ara Kaiul Esoteric Wizard of the Terrible Darkness Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Nov 2, 2010 0:09:33 GMT -6
Please, let us dispense with any charade or parlor game. Why don't we put all of our cards on the table so we can see what is what and who is who? I want to know what all this is really about?
As this thread, and indeed the actions leading up to it, have all the hallmarks of a bloodless revolution or coup d'état, I have no choice except to abolish this Grotto, as well as, any further attempt to depose me, the Cult of Cthulhu, and our multi-dimensional, inclusive paradigm. I will not stand idly by and watch anyone derail, obstruct, or steal what I have worked so hard to build.
If you, Jason, desire to operate outside of our religion, then so be it. I wish you well. But if you choose to remain a member and officer of the Cthulhu Cult, then you must work with me; not against me. I welcome your influence; however, I will not tolerate your contemptuous dissent. I'm sure there are some who prefer your way of doing things. To those Cultists I say, "so long, you will be missed."
On the other hand, if I've misjudged you and your Heretics of Cthulhu Grotto, then please speak up.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis High Priest Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by egodiabolus on Nov 2, 2010 10:15:00 GMT -6
It appears that as a Priest of R'lyeh, I have been defrocked. My administrative privileges have been removed.
I am not certain why I am being singled out, or why you see me as a threat, High Priest Satanis. I hope that I am incorrect in this observation.
My understanding of the Cult of Cthulhu is that its foundation consists of three planks; exploration Satanism and the Left Hand Path, the development of greater awareness through application of the Work, and encouraging reality-engineering through perspective-altering symbolism via the Cthulhu Mythos. TC and I recognized a need within the forum to focus and re-invigorate the discussion on these three points, but we also recognize that not every member of the Cult of Cthulhu is interested in these pursuits. This Grotto serves the interest of those members who are seeking a greater focus on the core identity of the Cult of Cthulhu.
It also serves to further the Cult of Cthulhu. Not only will it forward the discussion and influence of the three foundational principles listed above, but by each member being selected by the merits of their efforts and being treated as an equal, we hope to foster a greater sense of fellowship. By taking the conversation more directly to the members of this forum, we hope to make the discourse more personal and individually applicable. By making membership open to individuals outside the Cult of Cthulhu, we hope to draw more attention to the CoC and increase the depth of the discourse related to these founding principles. The Heretics of Cthulhu will be results-driven, and those results will be publicly celebrated.
You have misjudged the Heretics of Cthulhu. It has manifested to carry forth the ideals of the Cult of Cthulhu.
I have stated, repeatedly, that one of the great things about the CoC is that anyone can disagree with the boss, and that we all remain our own persons. I have made these statements in the face of those observers and former members who have suggested that our High Priest is an ego-maniac, bi-polar, mis-interprets Gurdjieff, is apathetic and easily distracted, and feels no real obligation to his organization and its members. Regardless of the "facts" and documented incidents presented to me in an effort to convince me that my investment of time and energy was being squandered, I have continued to publicly champion this organization and the ideals of its founder.
I have done so because what I have experienced from this organization and its High Priest has not been as described by its detractors.
Even if I am not a Priest of R'lyeh, I will continue to celebrate the founding principles of this organization. If being a Heretic of Cthulhu is to literally be my lot, rather than a tongue-in-cheek statement, then I will continue to work with anyone who is inspired by the three founding principles of advancing Satanism and the Left Hand Path, developing greater personal Awareness through the Work, and using the Cthulhu Mythos to re-shape reality, even, and especially, the High Priest of this organization.
The way I see it, a Heretic of Cthulhu is not simply a concept for a Grotto, but an individual frame-of-mind. If you feel that a Grotto will not serve your needs, so be it, but I will remain true to my "heretical" ideals.
Given that my administrative priveleges have been stripped, and that we seem to be oddly at cross-purposes which may result in the removal of my rank, it would be inappropriate of me to continue to act as Editor of the Green Trapezoid. Should my defrocking stand, and I remain a Renegade and Heretical Priest of R'lyeh in your eyes, then another should step forward of Wizard of Terrible Darkness Rank or above to take over the Green Trapezoid duties. Have them PM me, and I will send them the log-in and password information.
-J
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Nov 2, 2010 12:05:09 GMT -6
You don't want to admit that you were planning a subtle and gradually takeover of the Cthulhu Cult? That's fine. Call me paranoid, crazy, an ego-maniac and whatever else. Your betrayal does not come as a surprise. How clever you were to undermine me here, to gather support there, to create an unofficial grotto that seems more like an egalitarian Church of Satan than anything having to do with the Cult of Cthulhu, telling others how you intend to misdirect my vision, your woman setting herself up as head of the Wizards' Council... to defy and bash me in the name of individualism. Hahaha, so ingenious I almost never saw it. And it seems you had a few loyal Cultists fooled as well. Impressive. Or it would be if such an underhanded move hadn't irreparably sealed the fate of your immortal soul.
At this point, I don't know the fate of Beast Xeno, but from what I've gathered from his text messages, he has decided to go down with your failed coup. BX is the one who has thoroughly studied Sun Tzu, not I. And he has all but confirmed the ugliness of your betrayal. You have been ex-communicated, Jason Sorrell. The fate of T.C. Downey (BX) will be decided in just under 12 hours... midnight tonight.
Of course, every conceivable angle of ideology will remain within the Cult of Cthulhu. There are still heretics, as well as, heretical viewpoints within our ranks, but I am the highest authority. I am the Great Old Ones' instrument on earth. I Am The Way. Go ahead and start your own group, although I have no idea why you'd want anything more to do with Lovecraft. Why don't you start the New Modern Collective of Applied Satanism or something like that? Sounds right up your alley.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis High Priest Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by beastx on Nov 2, 2010 15:44:36 GMT -6
Reading through all this, I'm not even sure what has transpired here. I had an idea or a vision, which in my mind would manifest a new dynamic for the CoC. A birth of something that would further the design of the CoC. Somehow MY Idea was the evil plan of Jason Sorrell, to "gradually takeover of the Cthulhu Cult"? Really?
Ask any Satanist who has been familiar Jason Sorrell,(for a few years or more) about him and you will find a few facts about him.
1. Jason, prior to coming to the CoC, only joined groups to promote his endeavors and lightly engaged in topics that peeked his interest.
2. Jason never sought advancement or accepted it when offered. He prided himself on being Independent.
3. Jason's vantage is/and always has been "mutually" benefical.
The first funny thing here is.. What would he really gain by "gradually taking over of the Cthulhu Cult"? A horde of followers? Is that what you (Venger) think of "YOUR" CoC? No. I think not. The folks here would not "follow blindly", at least I hope not. Seems to me, he has only offered a best effort here. I'm very sure it hasn't increased his personal business any. Time spent here takes away from precious promotional time and internet sales are driven by promotional time. In fact doesn't he have 3 almost 400 posts here? I've got 129 and I know how much effort I put into posts.
So I'm calling bullshit here, Venger!
Jason Sorrell is guilty of nothing but helping Me manifest my vision.
Also Venger, that you would even ask me to choose one Brother over the other; makes me wonder. You of all people, should know giving me an ultimatum would seal the events coming. I finally understand what you've been working toward. A little spring cleaning in the old hierarchy...eh?
Since I know what is coming next. Don't bother banning me, I won't be back.
Have fun this org just got really fat!
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Nov 2, 2010 17:01:48 GMT -6
There's always that small chance that I made a mistake. But if so, then where was the running stuff past me beforehand, the keeping in touch, the planning, the cooperation, the teamwork? Where was the brotherhood? How come there wasn't so much as an email or phone call from either R'lyehian Priest after they realized I was disturbed by the whole situation?
During our text conversation this morning, T.C., I told you that this went beyond friendship, "this is the fate of the world and your very soul." And you scoffed with derision. When I asked if you had lost the faith, you said that I was scaring you. As if you hadn't believed in the Cthulhu Cult, our paradigm, or in me at all. Had never truly believed! There was precious little reassurance in those texts. It's almost like you were too afraid to come out and tell me what you really thought, what you really wanted to do. So instead, you blew me off like a smug adolescent who has grown too old and too wise for his Father.
The last couple months especially, you changed. No longer desirous of being the wand in my hand, you already had one foot out the door. I brought the subject up many times, and instead you decided to blame the "ignorant and lazy" forum members.
T.C., do you remember the first thing you told me about Jason Sorrell when you wanted to recruit him for the CoC? You told me that we should feed his ego because at his core, Jason was an ego-maniac... he would eat up the power, attention, and flattering title. I went along with it because Jason was a smart, talented, well-spoken guy and your friend. Guess down deep, you were more than right about him.
Whatever role I play in our religion comes not from ego, but from the need to preserve the antediluvian fragments of gnostic Devil-lore which mankind is too fragile and forgetful to command. That is my lot in life, my duty, my cross to bear. If I wanted an easier life, more money, or control over people's lives, there are far better ways to go about it. No, I want to change the world starting with myself. That is why I am the founder and leader of this religion.
You might remember our conversation a couple weeks ago. The one where I mentioned that I was taking the degree of Ipsissimus while allowing you and Jason to take over as High Priests! Remember that? Why would I have reluctantly told you of my future plans, offering both of you unparalleled power and responsibility in 2011 only to cut you off at the knees a fortnight later? Because I somehow felt threatened?!?
I had fervently hoped that you would not go down this path, but since you have, my tentacles are tied. I ex-communicate you T.C. Downey. As heartbreaking as this has been for me, I shall carry on just as I did before you entered our emerald fold.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis High Priest Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by Apsara Kamalli on Nov 2, 2010 20:51:44 GMT -6
As I’m sure you can imagine, I come into this thread with a heavy heart. I have watched in silence as this has all happened, and I’m still trying to understand what and why.
I have no idea what High Priest Satanis is going to require of me, whether or not I will be welcome to stay or asked to leave; whether I, too, will be shunned because of affiliation and/or whether the projects I have been working on in good “faith” of the CoC and its leadership will discarded. Since I do not know at this point if this will be my last post or not, let me just say what I feel is right. Then, Master Satanis can judge for himself my place within the CoC, if one still exists.
When my Master Diabolus first came to me with news of his membership within the Cult of Cthulhu, I was not impressed. I didn’t understand how one could take a dark, slimy, fictional character and create a whole religion around it. I had little understanding of the Cthulhu mythos, after only reading a small handful of Lovecraft short stories with no desire to read any further. Jason began to explain to me how the Cthulhu mythos was for the symbolism; how the dark and mysterious nature of the Old Gods was attractive to members of the LHP community. This included himself. Then, he began to explain to me about this philosophy that the religion was founded on, The Fourth Way. He discussed with me some of the aspects that he was starting to grasp. Again, I was not impressed. I just didn’t understand how this guy, this hard-core Satanist, that I have grown to know and love could even be considering something as far out there as the Cult of Cthulhu when he had rejected so many other LHP/Satanic organizations. Why this? Why now? But, I blew it off, figuring he would lose interest and move on to other things.
Months went by. He was involved, very involved. Hundreds of posts (most of which were very long-winded), hundreds of discussions, and even several very heated, angry debates occurred between us. Then, his behavior began to change. I began to notice subtle changes in how he handled himself, how he reacted to situations, and the intensity of his interest in our relationship. He had finished The Fourth Way by Ouspensky, and it had made a major impact in his life. He came to me with this systematic approach his was beginning to implement on his path to awakening, and he expressed his gratefulness to TC (Beast Xeno) for showing him the way to this organization founded on a philosophy he could utilize by a guy he could respect. He even declared a desire to help people (not like my Satanic boyfriend at all) that were interested in learning more about the philosophy. He began to talk of an actual Fourth Way school, and the impact it could have on other Satanists’ lives if they embraced the ideas. He was promoted to Priest of R’lyeh.
I had to get involved. He was changing before my very eyes, every day. Something new and profound had taken a hold of him, and it was directly related to his involvement within this Cult of Cthulhu religion. So, I joined the forum…anonymously…even (and especially) to Jason. I spent a great deal of time just looking, reading, researching, and trying to figure out what the draw was. I read some really great information, but struggled with the idea that it was in a LHP community, as I have always considered myself to be of the RHP. I waited a bit, but then decided to start participating, specifically challenging Jason’s posted ideas. For quite awhile, he was unaware that it was me he was debating within the forum until one day when it just made sense to let him know.
When he found out, he called TC immediately to let him know so that neither he, nor High Priest Satanis, thought that he was up to anything since some of our posts had come from the same IP address. He asked me why I hadn’t told him, and I answered letting him know that I didn’t want him to be biased with his responses. At the beginning of my participation, I came to question some of High Priest Satanis’ preachings, and I respectfully took it off of the forum so as not to publicly come across as a villain in any way. In doing so, I formally introduced myself as Apsara Kamalli, Priest of R’lyeh Ego Diabolus’ long-time girlfriend. I explained my reasoning for joining the organization and asked that he treat me fairly as he would with any new member, regardless of my intimacy with Jason. He replied that he would.
I continued my participation within the forum, and before long, I was approached by High Priest Satanis about becoming a Wizard of the Terrible Darkness. I explained to him my RHP, pagan background, my disinterest in HP Lovecraft, and my newness to The Fourth Way philosophy, but he assured me that experience and maturity within the forum would be beneficial, especially when coming from the rare female perspective. I explained to him that my loyalty was now, and would always remain so, to my own Master Diabolus, but he understood this and accepted it. So, I agreed, explaining to him that I would be honored to receive the ascension, as long as we were both aware of what I had to bring to the table. I read The Fourth Way; I continued to participate. I wrote up an artistic essay for the ascension to Wizard of the Terrible Darkness. High Priest Satanis rejected it.
I continued to participate. All of the while, Jason and I debated (as usual) the philosophy. We discussed the direction of the CoC as he saw it, and I expressed my concern to him about the lack of structure within the organization. He said that the Priesthood had had several discussions about it, but it just wasn’t the right time. Me being me, I wouldn’t accept that answer. I declared to Jason at that time that if promoted to Wizard of the Terrible Darkness, I would take it upon myself to come up with a more defined outline for the requirements of a Wizard of the Terrible Darkness and the Council of Wizards and approach Master Satanis with it.
I continued to participate. I pulled a different piece of writing from my personal journal and submitted it to High Priest Satanis for the Wizard of the Terrible Darkness ascension. He replied that he thought it was awesome and announced my ascension shortly after. I was excited. I was proud. I was still trying to figure out what the hell I was doing promoting a LHP community. But for some reason, the philosophies jived with me. The energy within the forum intrigued me. And I felt like we were all Working towards taking this somewhere down that spiritual path that I wanted to go. To me, it was well worth it.
Shortly after my ascension, I organized a face-to-face meeting with CoC members in the Texas area, providing them with the opportunity to meet Jason and get to know him better. Not because he was planning on taking over the Cthulhu Cult! But because it was an opportunity to get to know how members would interact in real life, and it would give me the opportunity to possibly pursue the idea of a Texas-based live grotto. I interviewed Jason for an article, one of the questions being his thoughts on the CoC organization. His response? “ The Cult of Cthulhu has more potential for survival and longevity than any other Satanic or LHP organization I’ve ever encountered.” Does this sound like someone that is trying to compete or swipe away the organization or its members? It didn’t to me.
During the middle of all of this, I had submitted my WoTD requirements and Council of Wizards proposal to the Priesthood. TC approved; Jason approved, so I began working with Wizard of the Terrible Darkness Vanessa and High Priest Satanis on finalizing it. I thought it was going well. A day or so ago, I received a revision proposal from High Priest Satanis. One of the requirements he was proposing was that “Every Wizard of the Terrible Darkness must swear his or her undying personal loyalty to the highest authority within the Cthulhu Cult, Ipsissimus Venger As’Nas Satanis.” I admit, I was taken aback by this. This requirement came across to me as counterproductive to my understanding of awakening and individualism and aligned it more with the RHP philosophies I though the CoC was avoiding. I began to question my level of understanding for the organization that I had begun to promote and realized that maybe I had been mistaken about the philosophies he was endorsing. I voiced my concern to High Priest Satanis. He responded with great annoyance to my questioning, and before I had the opportunity to respond to him, here we are.
Here I am.
At no time during my short stay within this organization did I have the intention of anything other than the success of the organization and the individual members within it. I so rarely speak for him, but I will do so here since he has been banned, and say neither did Jason.
Now what? I find myself out on this limb, discovering that High Priest Satanis considers my participation no more than a mere pawn in Jason’s game of Cthulhu chess. He, like his has done with other leaders in the organization, degraded my participation publicly, and questions my motives for promoting the idea of a structure for the members in the organization. High Priest Satanis, I don’t care if I am the high magistrate of the Council of Wizards or not, so long as there is one and the proposal goes forward. You want to appoint one? Please do so. I took the lead because I’m the one that completed the foundational Work, and I was the one committed to the requirements proposed.
And as for pledging my undying personal loyalty to you? I say to you now the same thing that I said to you in the very beginning. My loyalty is to Master Diabolus and my own awakening. Does that mean I don’t want success for the organization? Quite the contrary.
Should this be my unintentional resignation letter, I want to express my gratitude to the Cultists within this community for the opportunity to pursue awakening with you. And to you, High Priest Satanis… thank you for your guidance and providing me with the opportunity to explore your philosophies. May your undying loyalty to the success of the Cult of Cthulhu and your will provide you with a paradigm shift that is meaningful.
Remember yourself, for the Emerald Kingdom is at hand!
Apsara Kamalli Esoteric Wizard of the Terrible Darkness Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by ragnafa on Nov 6, 2010 20:55:57 GMT -6
All traces in history concerning the idea that man can transform himself indicate the existence of something to be found within the heart of man, something of incalculable value, a treasure that cannot be estimated, through inner work on himself.
At some level, many sense that there must be some place, some society, and some beings who live without criticism, hatred, violence, inhumanity, and war. For those of us who can think, we know that man is not living as he could. The Fourth Way is for people who are not satisfied with what they see in life with its indifference, strife, poverty and hunger, the devastation of the planet, and its religious, racial and political wars. It is clear that neither world government, nor man's religions, nor the scientists have found an answer to the crisis we are facing in the modern world.
Man is at war within himself, as well as collectively. How are we to end this inner warring within ourselves and with each other? For the most part, we do not live up to the potential that our religions speak of. If we can imagine the Kingdom of Heaven being within, peace on earth, and being our brothers keeper, surely these visions must have some basis in reality. But, where is that reality to be found?
The Fourth Way is based on a system of inner development found in Psychological Commentaries on the Teachings of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky by Dr. Maurice Nicoll. It is based on the premise that through personal work on oneself a man can undergo a radical inner transformation of his psyche by which there is an ending of the inner battle waging within himself, and consequently, an ending to the outer battle we are waging against each other at the local, community and global levels. "The Work," as it is referred to, says that man contains within himself the "seed of true essence," or "Real I". However, Real I is imprisoned by what G. I. Gurdjieff calls "False Personality", which develops through the influence and conditioning of culture, society, religion and one's life-experiences. Man, thus becomes "hypnotized" by life, believing that his False Personality is who he really is. By living life through False Personality a man is not in touch with his true self or "essence," that is, who he really is. Through uncritical observation of our False Personality we discover the root causes of our inner disharmony, our indifference, our criticism, our hatred, our violence, our inhumanity, and our war.
However, when one discovers ones true essence, or "Real I" as the Work calls it, there is an ending of the battles waging war within the inner man. Were the vast majoritiy of mankind living and acting through Real I, what would this mean outwardly, that is, in what we could experience in the world instead of its strife, poverty, sickness and wars?
The Work says, "If a man were to suddenly realize that he is mechanical, that is, that he is not free, he could not endure the realization." If you could see clearly the life that you yourself lead, with its passions and jealousies, meanness, dislikes and hatreds, it would appear utterly ridiculous. One would wonder, in fact, "What on earth have I been doing all my life? Have I been insane?" In the deep sleep we live in, and in the light of the reality of the Kingdom of Heaven, we are all utterly insane and do not know what we are doing.
The Fourth Way is about waking up from the hypnotism of life. The teachings found in Psychological Commentaries on the Teachings of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky are something that was long ago taught about man and his inner possibilities of transformation. The teachings are about transforming yourself in relation to all that happens to you every day in life. It is said in the Work, "what we seek, above all things, is light." And, light means consciousness. We seek to live more consciously. We live in darkness owing to lack of light—the light of consciousness—and we seek, in this Work, light in ourselves. Everything in this Work has, as its supreme aim, to make a man more conscious, to let light dawn in him. To awaken, that is the object of The Work. The Work teaches you what to do.
A man or woman has to die in some specific and definite way to himself, to certain sides of him or herself. And if he or she dies in the right way, one is "born again" as a new man or woman, called in this Work, "conscious man". It is a very strange thing, this light. It is first to become more conscious of oneself and then to become more conscious of others. When you do this Work, you begin to remember something, the meaning of which is so great, so deep, so eternal, that even if you can catch a mere glimpse of it, your emotions will awaken and you will see in a flash what is meant by "evaluation of The Work", and what is meant by "greater mind", and what is meant by the "sleep of humanity".
If this Work has no meaning to you, no change is possible, and you will only know life—emotions and remain in the "circle of mechanical life", in the circle of confusion and strife, quarrels and disappointments, complaints and war.
Awake... Dreaming Wizard of the Terrible Darkness Izratan'Sharaz...
|
|
|
Post by darkprism on Dec 6, 2010 14:45:11 GMT -6
I see self separation as a necessary practice to begin on the road to objective consciousness. To see oneself from the outside and the interactions of the human organism within one's surroundings and interactions, preferably unbiased, is also a step to greater self awareness. Self remembering is a also a very important part of this.
What is the best way to do this?
Try viewing your body, mind and emotions as just that. A body, mind and emotion. Not necessarily you, but a thing you can experience. This should allow a sense of separation to occur. De-identification, although some might say is anti-human, has the value of viewing the experience as an outsider, to view what's happening with more clarity, rather than being enmeshed in the experience, therefore a separation requiring self remembering can enable this experience without losing oneself.
Another way is to view your organism from the outside is from an aerial view. This can be as simple as looking down on yourself from a higher vantage point like a building, seeing yourself walking along a road and seeing your connection to the surroundings, or perhaps further up on a planetary scale or a view from outside the atmosphere of planet earth.
The latter one will also enable you to see how insignificant a single persons negative emotion would be on a larger scale. From such a high vantage point, do the things we really worry about have any cosmic significance? Isn't the only way forward from that view to begin to behave in a way that benefits ourselves and others? As being viewed, like we would ants, only efforts and Work to do something profound and beneficial would hold any significance.
This can also be a way of justifying behaviors of a negative nature as holding no real cosmic significance, as to indulge in them more frequently, so care should be taken to hold on to some kind of ethical ideal and beneficial rational self interest.
Yes, I have tried this, High Priest Satanis.
I could go into more detail but this is short analysis regarding your questions. Awesome questions they are.
By his Loathsome Tentacles!
Dark Prism
|
|
|
Post by darkknight on Dec 14, 2010 19:00:28 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2010 15:24:40 GMT -6
I read in "in search of the miraculous" that everything that exist is material, including knowledge, and so a limited amount of knowledge is available for men.
Gurdjieff explain that it's because many men are not interested that a little few are able to gather precious knowledge and to be wise.
Comments on this ?
Don't worry. Be happy. Make efforts.
|
|
|
Post by Cain Da'arnesh on Dec 29, 2010 15:02:28 GMT -6
Well it's not rocket surgery or brain science brother. To void meditate, it's best that you find a safe, quiet, comfortable spot. While it is traditionally done in the lotus position, I prefer to do it while lying down. To do it, you just close your eyes and think of nothing. Believe me brother when I say that this is easier said than done. Once you're thinking of nothing, just keep doing that and focusing on nothing. That is why it is called void meditation. As Michael Ford instructed me, just do this daily for about 15 minutes and increase the time as you get better at it. I'm up to about half an hour regularly right now. You can learn more about it at this link! www.666blacksun.com/Satanic_Void_Meditation.html
|
|
|
Post by Ikaros on Jan 2, 2011 15:11:02 GMT -6
I am new to Fourth Way theory and philosophy. I had heard of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky only as footnotes in other research in the occult and as the original creators of the enneagram. I am familiar with the enneagram as an outline for personality, but I am unfamiliar with this symbol's occult meaning. I have recently acquired some works by these gentlemen, particularly a copy of In Search of the Miraculous. So I hope to disabuse myself of this ignorance soon. However, I'm interested to hear other's explanations and interpretations of this fascinating symbol. As a further thought, does this symbol have any special significance in the Cult at large, or is it merely a part of the Fourth Way theory in general? Thanks, Brothers! That which was promised shall be delivered! Ikaros
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Jan 5, 2011 11:50:10 GMT -6
Those who come to the work do so without will, without the ability to do anything, to be anything. After tedious months of self-observation, it is possible to create a Magnetic Center. This is a collection of 'I's that wish to work, to struggle against that which is mechanical within us.
Down the road, we can talk about will. Those who have been correctly utilizing the Cthulhu Cult for any length of time might be able to recognize the difference between Magnetic Center and True Will. Whatever True Will they've been able to generate through Self-Remembering, taking in positive Impressions, not expressing negative emotions, and Intentional Suffering (among other things) can be harassed for the purpose of Awakening!
There is no contradiction. We are only alive when we are Awake, and we are only Awake when thinking consciously and feeling conscientiously. That means when we identify with something... perhaps the feeling that someone owes us or a commercial break on TV, we are asleep and not really existing at all.
Yes. Although, one should participate in a Fourth Way school in some fashion until our death. Awakening is a life-long process. When a student has learned enough, then he must begin to teach. Higher Forces shall compel him.
No. This is a Fourth Way school right here. We stay in contact via the internet and it is not expensive.
I realize that you've been away, talking with other Fourth Way students and teachers unconnected with the CoC. It is a well-known fact that one 4th Way school is not the same as another. You would think that learning from two different schools would be more beneficial than simply learning from one. However, that is not the case. Things easily become confused. A student of two schools will eventually come to a point where he must choose one or the other. Hopefully, that student shall become a Master and teach his own students.
After quickly acknowledging the sad predicament of other people, we will be better served focusing upon the horror of our own situation.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Jan 8, 2011 23:23:06 GMT -6
In plain english I see this as if anybody atempts to teach the FOURTH WAY not via my way, then that person is automactically a fake.
It is also been amusing how other FOURTH WAY SCHOOL uses this also to defend themselves against other FOURTH WAY SCHOOLS they consider inferior etc. when I fact GURDJIEFF was referring to them aslo.
I find FOURTH WAY SCHOOLS and PEOPLE who use this tactic to be hypocrates!!! My way or the high way!!!
On the one hand they go REMEMBER YOURSELF and then on the other hand they spend so much wasted energy on debunking other schools and arguing why their FOURTH WAY SCHOOL is the best.
So I tend to avoid them like a plague.
I am not attacking the COC, so plese don't write back accusing me of doing so, I am just expressing my frustration and annoyance regarding other (mainstream) FOURTH WAY SCHOOLS and PEOPLE.
THE COC suits my style regarding learning about the FOURTH WAY.
Belief Is Reality Loki Dreaming
|
|
|
Post by darkprism on Jan 28, 2011 16:44:11 GMT -6
Being outside the moment as you have illustrated in your fine essay High Priest Satanis, is key to being both mindful of your current state and situation, yet from an outer perspective, giving a more external, encompassing perspective on your position in objective reality or the overlapping of subjective realities.
Books like the Power of Now teach a person to be present within their bodies and mindful of inner occurrences such as emotions, thoughts, feelings, pains, etc, with the basic premise that these are things, and not the real 'you'. These teachings are great in that they ground a person and the person can learn to accept what is happening 'now', instead of being 'always on the run', and unmindful and caught up in identification with 'things'.
One point I'd like to bring up is the element of imagination in 'being outside the moment'.
There has to be a kind of imagination or suspension of disbelief in action to begin the practice of being outside of the moment. It's not easy to view yourself outside yourself so it must begin with imagining yourself outside yourself and how it might look. As a person gets more use to this practice, more details can be included of the surroundings one finds themselves.
Would you agree that it has to begin in this way? Even though imagination is an obstacle to Awakening, this is more a useful kind of imagination which can lead to the objective consciousness that has been spoken of.
Also, I would also like to add or infer that these two levels of consciousness would be in a state of flux as it is very difficult to keep this sense of being 'outside the moment' in place as it requires great mental energy. Perhaps an alternating of the Power of Now sense of being in the Now and a practice of being outside the moment would work very well hand in hand. I'd even go as far as to say one builds on the other like the four states of consciousness Ouspensky refers to.
One probably should start with the Power of Now sense of being present in the moment(self remembering) and progress into practicing imagining(not in the negative sense of the word)the outside perspective of being outside the moment and try to sustain this state with as much detail as possible and as long as possible. Then inevitably one will fall back into the Power of Now sense and of course back to the second state, but that is our struggle to keep trying.
Also, this sense of imagining ourselves outside of the moment has parallels with the practice of Astral Projection. Could these two practices be linked with the same mental mechanisms?
Awake!
Dark Prism
|
|
|
Post by jakeblack on Jan 29, 2011 14:33:18 GMT -6
This duality has been a very important theme in my life, especially recently. This is a bit of a ramble but it has an ultimate point; be ready to go through some mental hurdles because I don't think you can skim the following and actually get what I'm saying.
For a long time my perspective on LHP religion (specifically satanism) was the idea that, rather than being pulled into abstractions "outside of life," we should live life continually in touch with our desires, and while thinking is alright, and life can be complex, I sought to be a sort of anti-Hamlet. Hamlet being the character in Shakespeare who is quite intelligent but always stopping himself short of action by overthinking things. This was one phase during which I sought to be in-the-moment.
However over time I came to realize that for thinking animals such as ourselves, things like thinking, abstraction, and sometimes being outside-the-moment is part of our lives necessarily. I came to see the problem not as "being too philosophical," but rather a problem of philosophical lack of clarity and wussy philosophies. One can logically say "I simply embrace my desires" and come out with a logical plan to execute them. Rather than being crippled by a million doubts and questions, you can say "The ends justify the means, and I am acting appropriately according with the information that I have, which is probably imperfect, but it's the best I can do." In this way I think I had being and consciousness, in-the-moment and outside-the-moment, working in tandem and well-synthesized.
Over time I came to embrace a philosophy that involves a concept known as "totality." Basically it's the idea that everything is interrelated and connected, if in subtle and indirect ways. As a leftist I've always seen people's actions as influenced by their economic position -- I tend to blame the situation that led to crime rather than the criminal, especially in things like theft or drug-dealing. However I learned that this philosophy of interconnectedness could be extended to literally everything. For example, my very essence as an individual contains a great deal of the rest of the world in it/me. I am a great collection of everything that has ever influenced me, which carries the touches of everything that has ever influenced my influences. In turn, the world simply would not be the world that it is without my presence in it, and without the presence of each particular one of us.
I got sort of lost in the cloud of totality. While it's supposed to be a philosophy which embraces and synthesizes Self and World, it's very easy to get lost in the World part and place it before Self. I became *totally outside the moment at all times,* thinking more about the world economy and geopolitics and philosophy than my own life (though arguably these things are very much a part of our own lives, whether we acknowledge it or not). Another problem is that, if everything is interconnected, then it's easy to fall into thinking that everything must be embraced, a mistake I did definitely fall into. While the "unity of opposites" is nice, and possible, and even common, the fact is that there are parts of the totality which are actually destructive to the whole (while at the same time helping define it). For example, rather than trying to embrace and help self-destructive people and institutions, maybe I should just cut them off, or even undermine them. I was trying to avoid choices, or trying to "choose everything." However, I found the best way to "choose everything" is often to embrace *the part which contains the universal.* If you want to embrace all society, you side with the people trying to improve it. If you want to embrace all philosophy, you pick a specific philosophy that clarifies them all rather than actually trying to simultaneously believe contradictory philosophies.
This is actually very relevant -- attempting to "choose everything" ended up with me avoiding genuine choices, just trying to live in a contemplative-and-not-active embrace of All, which was an utterly outside-the-moment thing to do in my opinion, having had experienced it.
Another part of this process was blocking out pain and negative emotions. I don't really know exactly why I fell into this habit. I think I did it rather unconsciously. However, it's enough to say that my actual conscious philosophies believe in embracing and using pain rather than shutting it out. Blocking disappointment requires blocking enthusiasm and anticipation -- essentially blocking all passion. I did this, and in this way too, I have been living utterly outside-the-moment.
So yeah, I essentially became an emotionless Buddhist intellectual robot without even meaning to do so. I am recently recovering from this huge mistake.
The recovery process involves occasionally embracing sheer impulsiveness and selfishness. There is certainly more to life, but this is part of life too and I think I dropped it way more than is healthy. I'm taking my pain back, and allowing myself to get excited about things again and dream a little, even if this leads to being disappointed.
Was I really ever outside the moment, though? Perhaps by being conscious of other things, even grand vast things, I was actually living life to the fullest in-the-moment. Perhaps the whole time I was merely being a thinking animal, and being in-the-moment by thinking. So I'm going to continue embracing cognition as part of my life, but not a kind which represses emotions, but rather a kind of cognition which is full of emotion, which flows from emotions and is motivated by emotions and in-the-moment-ness.
What I am now embracing and advocating is the idea that the starting-point and the ending-point is the Self, but it substantiates itself through passing through the World and interacting with the World. In this way I think I am re-establishing the Self-World synthesis in my life.
I guess I disagree ultimately with the thesis that being outside-the-moment is the clearly more productive one. Perhaps I am biased; I was totally imbalanced in the direction of being outside-the-moment. Yes it was "productive" in that I learned a lot, but productive for what? If you never revel in the raw in-the-moment experience of life, I don't see the point in doing all the outside-the-moment work.
____________________________
On a less autobiographical, more directly philosophical note:
There is a difference between immediate appearances, and the process of change which we observe around ourselves and remember. Both are part of the truth, and play a specific role in it. For example, we often see the outside of an apple. Is the outer skin of an apple its true essence? Well, it's part of it. We can cut an apple open and behold its inner flesh. Perhaps this inside of the apple is its true essence? Well, again, it's part of it. But we must also remember that when we are beholding the inside of an apple, after cutting it open, the inside of the apple is also an immediate appearance, although a different one. Being in-the-moment here means looking at the apple as it appears to you. Being outside-the-moment here means taking actions to attain the greater truth of the apple, such as cutting it, or thinking about and recognizing how the apple has both an outer skin, and inner flesh, and the truth of the apple is neither of these, but both of them at the same time -- even though both states can only exist simultaneously in your mind!
Thus the truth comes neither from being in-the-moment alone, nor being-outside-the-moment alone, but a jacob's ladder process of feedback between the two. Image and reality, rather than being opposites, just have a complicated way of being related. You can't have one without the other.
Likewise, I am re-embracing my subjectivity. Objectivity is nice, but even objectivity must acknowledge that your perspective is that of a subjective person *who may have at the same time attained objectivity.* Again, the two must necessarily go together, because an objective description of the world includes the fact that the world contains subjective individuals, and that objectivity, even when attained, is described and experienced by your subjective self.
By the way, I can't post anything today without saying GO MIDDLE EAST BRING DOWN THE DICTATORS.
|
|
|
Post by Apsara Kamalli on Feb 27, 2011 14:24:25 GMT -6
My response that I posted on your blog: "Brilliant. The struggle to refine and/or eliminate our mechanical filters is no easy task and can trigger emotional responses that are difficult to wade through. Most people turn back, or fall back to sleep, at this point, for it is too against what we have been programmed into. They "feel better" about themselves, which is then verified by the sleepers around them, when they allow the filter to determine the reality that they indulge in, failing to recognize they have just fallen back to sleep. Trying to conform your reality based off of your beliefs only perpetuates our egotistical false personality. This does not lead to awakening, but rather, it satisfies our ego. In doing so, we have missed the point entirely. You are correct, Jason..."self-development and Awakening requires that we break through the filters of belief toward a perspective that is more objectively aligned with that which is perceived... the real." I submit for examination and speculation that Man Number 7's behavior, actions, and results might be so far out of line with ordinary perceptions of reality that it could resemble insanity or nonsense [hello there, Azathoth]. If this is the case, then it will not provide any sort of proof to the masses that a Type 7 Man lives in their midst.
I suppose this argument all comes down to the word convince. How can a person, let alone a large group, be convinced of something if they can't understand it? Wouldn't that be like one dimensional people trying to appreciate a seven dimensional object... assuming that one dimensional people lived in their self-created one dimensional reality?
to put it a simpler way, how could a rocket scientist make a tribe of apes understand that he was above them consciously? The apes, being lower animals, can't grasp the heights of our hypothetical rocket scientist.
Lord Satanis, I see where you are coming from, and there may be validity in what you saying in regards to the masses. However, I can only speak from my own experiences, and I don't think what you are claiming necessarily applies to other Fourth Way students. In the local Gurdjieff Foundation study group that Jason and I have been attending, there are several attendees that have been studying with the Foundation for 30+ years. They have studied with students that were taught by Gurdjieff and Ouspensky themselves. In their experiences and diligent study, and with accolades from the Foundation, they admit to still finding themselves struggling with some of the same daily obstacles to awakening that I do with only a year of study under my belt. Where, then, do these people with years of experience, knowledge, application, dedication, and understanding of the Fourth Way fall on the scale? And if these individuals with 30+ years of study aren't more than a Man 4, maybe (probably not) a Man 5, then how would anyone else convince me that they are something higher than these Gurdjieff Foundation members, especially when they have several years less of experience and have never attended a Fourth Way School? In my opinion, the only way I would be convinced that someone is even close to a Man 6, let alone a Man 7, is from the overall "feeling" I get from the person...their energy field...their aura...whatever you want to call it. It would be obviously different, and even if I couldn't understand why or how, I would be able to recognize the shift in my paradigm from their mere presence in my immediate vicinity. Awake! Apsara Kamalli Esoteric Herald of the Old Gods Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Feb 27, 2011 21:00:52 GMT -6
RE: The Process: Belief is Reality?I take this thread VERY seriously. it is, to me, the most important one i have yet seen in this site, perhaps seconded by like topics. for this reason i am giving it a great deal of consideration and waxing by volume as i am convinced of its imperative character in relation to the Great Work. Reality and the perception of reality are two very different things.... this is the weakest ground upon which the Wayfarers are attempting to construct an edifice. while there may be pragmatic virtues in allowing it to remain unprepared as a foundation, the lack of attention to it and the persistent slogan 'Belief is reality!' serves to potentially strand the cult in a heinous quagmire of self-delusion. one of the problems with this effectively solipsistic vs. cartesian disputation is that 'reality' is holistic, whilst 'perception of reality' is always partial and, more importantly in evaluation of the above text, subsidiary. perceptions make up part of what is real. you wrote well here of much of this relationship. I hope that Mr. Hartnell also has this notion firmly fixed before him. I suspect that he does. ...One way to negotiate {the gap between reality and our perception of it} is to operate under the assumption that beyond the gap there is no reality, and that our perception, that which we believe (and create in our own minds), is all that can be relied upon. Under this concept, we work to shape our experience to conform to our beliefs. this first is not a negotiation of the gap. this is an ignoring of the gap and the reality that lies 'beyond' it (in a transcendant sense). computer equipment facilitates the operation of the program/application. mammalian consciousness is precisely parallel to this mechanism, viewable from the inside by us as well as the outside (the inside called 'subjectivity' and 'experience', the outside 'objectivity' and 'organism', with no overarching reason to prefer one over the other, despite materialism's dogmas). Another way to negotiate this gap is to operate under the assumption that reality exists, and that our perception of that reality is flawed. Under this concept, we work to perfect our perception so that what we perceive as reality is a more objective representation of that which is real. all the while labouring under the assumptive character of FAILURE (carried forward by the premise stated in the first sentence above: "...our perception ... is flawed."). We understand that as we accumulate these desires we come closer to discovering and developing our potentials and living what we view as more productive and satisfying lives. too often this is the case: that progress is axiomatic. no methodology for assessment of this advancement is provided, accounted for, or even acknowledged. the Crazy Wisdom houses pit one aspirant against another in an hierarchic array both for competition and conspiration and, without exception i have observed, fall in upon themselves. just as the first gap/reality is ignored and allows experience to rest on an idealistic cloud, so in this instance is advancement allowed to rest upon a cloud without support of any grounded standard of evaluation. It is therefore a matter of determining which operating concept will be most effective in achieving our desires. note the focus here on achieving desires, and this can have strictly short-term and perceptual character. it sets the stage for, sows the seed of, self-delusion. this is why no masters ever seem to come from the Crazy Wisdom streams (they don't embrace science well enough). they are isthmuses of fantasy, self-aggrandizing at the onset and more often than not propping up the prior masters as glories. the Way of Religion persists, sullying their overall output. to your credit, you now seek to construct some method of success evaluation (cudos!). to do this you use symbolic logic for brevity. I would restate what you have as follows: 1: given reality, R, and 2: given perception of a variable object 'x', P(x), we may deduce that this perception is itself real R(P(x)).
3: supposing the attempt to refine P(x) to a correlate reflection of R(x), either
4F: P(x) != R(x) {the perception of x contains discernable flaws in comparison to the real x; need of personal development demonstrated}, or
4T: P(x) = R(x) {the perception of x approximates the real x; need for personal development currently on hold}.
I see no ontological relationship (i.e. that "our perception defines a thing" or "that a thing does not exist without our perception of it"). this is merely a conceptual aggrandizement of the perceiving organism to the status of a cosmocrator (entering into the error of solipsism). you seem to speak of the same thing when you write: To choose the delusion is a mechanical response, a sleepers denial of the effort required to perceive that which is real. It is a result of False Personality creating opinions, beliefs, delusions, and the chemical responses of our emotions that urges us to take the easy road. ... where 'False Personality' is the 'aggrandized perceiving organism' i mention. and if this is so, then we substantially agree as to the character of evaluation to this point. however.... The Work, our Process, is working to understand reality as objectively as possible. this may be a very clear example of what i have characterized as 'axiomatic assertion' insofar as i see no reason underlying it, and as i identify it with the Crazy Wisdom masters (including Gurdjieff) perhaps it proceeds from their contentions. there is, within a certain period of materialistic science, lofty hankering for 'objectivity' which also seems to obsess the followers of Ayn Rand. if all that you are describing here is that you seek to make P(x) = R(x), then i agree. your suppositions about the refinement process now take on doctrinal apparel that i will seek to rebut by alternative presentation. I understand this may be offensive to the devotees of the masters, but i cannot avoid this. Awareness includes our understanding of reality. The Work of Gurdjieff describes 7 different types of men, each with a different type or refinement of Awareness. Our Process explores these 7 types of Awareness. this far i follow you. from here i will re-interpret, for purpose of assistance to the cult, what i regard as a flawed and deluded schema (i assume, by Gurdjieff). the premise, akin to contentions from early anthropologists such as Lowie during a time of headiness and hubris, supposes it a linear progression rather than a spectrum within which any specific development might be refined. I will attempt to restate these here in a manner that explains why 'as objectively as possible' is misguided and each of these modalities (awareness types) contains its own pragmatic virtue. from the standpoint of something akin to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, which i enjoy greatly, what amounts to the greater portion and foundation of human endeavour and priority is not 'lesser' in its maturity. instead, it is considered rudimentary and, alike to the organism without which experience itself would not exist, so too these first proceed from basic frameworks of value. ignoring or omitting them would be futile, and restricting oneself to any single is not 'inferior' in an overarching sense, just 'different' and/or 'preliminary'. a single organism may emphasize or underscore for purpose of optimizing any of these 'levels' of understandings without error or backsliding so called. illustration of the comparison of modes rather than maturation levels here would be an interest in conducting a ritual or watching a movie. these require different modalities of experience to be 'effective' or 'successful' than would rote mechanics, as if attending to the repair of a clock or automobile, or the orchestration of a composition on piano or in the kitchen in fusing the modalities, as described below. I leave your descriptions of the first three to stand as is, while pointing out weighted and biased language such as 'wallowing', 'distorted', 'better', and 'no value attachments'. there are instances where we will benefit from each of these levels or types of awareness, and residing solely within any of them or their fusion will lead us to problems. "Type 4 Awareness" might benefit from a comparison with synesthesia, or analysis with the aim of synthesis. "Type 5 Awareness" begins an incorporation of an 'ideology of the Self' featuring all manner of fantasy success. it appears to at best refer to someone of humble composure retaining a grounding 'in the moment' and establishing a one-to-one correspondence between P(x) and R(x) as evaluated within their process (you call this "A is A" which confuses identity relations from mathematics and philosophy with cognitive and epistemological issues i have winnowed out here in my revision). "Type 6 Awareness" further elaborates a now mystical identity between P(x) and R(x) such that P(R(x)). there is no explanation of how this comes about, though i could provide input from the field of mysticism and psychology of consciousness to lend it support. its duration and functionality are left undescribed. "Type 7 Awareness" escalates beyond conceptualization to the condition of convincement and 'knowledge', protracting an 'ideology of the Real' which might benefit from Platonic or Pythagorean underpinnings (each of which i regard as fantasies). whatever zealous position one arrives at from within this modality is self-justified by this ideology as stated. no doubt this is why Ipsissimus Satanis comments about its communicability. even if imbued with an exalted air of advancement, if it were set about with an ineffable glamour, contention about it might be avoided. Reality can only be perceived. It cannot be conceived. What we conceive in our minds can be brought into reality with effort and investment on our part, and only through the manipulation of that which is to make it so. Reality cannot be made to conform to belief. ... generally agreed, with minor exceptions. the principles of the natural world may be known via deductive abstraction. within this computation and imaginative conclusion we may conceive of the real. perhaps with you i join in evaluating belief as over-rated. ...some experiences are undeniably real, no matter what the mind wishes to believe. .... alongside the ability to relegate any commentary or observation by oneself or others to 'dream', so also may any experience be denied as 'unreal'. a sad state of affairs, and yet one which allows for hyperbole, conjecture, role-playing, and entertainments. Reality itself is therefore reality, as A is A. It is only in our sleeping, mechanical, delusional minds that belief can be substituted for reality. A that is not A is only possible through a flawed understanding of A. For all intents and purposes, belief is reality as we perceive it, but self-development and Awakening requires that we break through the filters of belief toward a perspective that is more objectively aligned with that which is perceived... the real. "First there is a mountain, Then there is no mountain, Then there is." Man Number 7's behavior, actions, and results might be so far out of line with ordinary perceptions of reality that it could resemble insanity or nonsense.... If this is the case, then it will not provide any sort of proof to the masses that a Type 7 Man lives in their midst. there does appear to be some kind of motive to "prove" this. I'm not convinced this motive is of lasting value, however. I suppose this argument all comes down to the word convince. How can a person, let alone a large group, be convinced of something if they can't understand it? Wouldn't that be like one dimensional people trying to appreciate a seven dimensional object... assuming that one dimensional people lived in their self-created one dimensional reality? ...how could a rocket scientist make a tribe of apes understand that he was above them consciously? The apes, being lower animals, can't grasp the heights of our hypothetical rocket scientist. the error of hubris slays any emergent life in the form of a master. this simplistic ladder of development both gives the dreamers something with which to self-delude and removes the emphasis of value at any level. far better to cut the legs out from under these supposed supermen and instead remunerate those who provide from any capacity. let the rocket scientist fend for himself, negotiating his salary and due compensation from the culture that glorifies him.
|
|
|
Post by pseudosherlock on Mar 1, 2011 19:27:47 GMT -6
You'll forgive me if I don't quote a string of replies at this point.
For the benefit of Jason and Herbert I'll say right off the bat that I'm not affiliated with the Cult of Cthulhu beyond a curiousness right now.
I believe (please note the term) that your original Sermon, Jason, is limited in that it repeatedly assumes that each person is a seperate individual within a larger world. So at best your description of higher awareness would mean being unencumbered by the first three series of senses you mentioned. And then seeing the objective world unburdened by them.
The logical rebuttal to that might be to suggest that if our three sense tools you mention are the things giving us our view of the world, what's to say it exists at all without them and isn't completely a fabrication of them and there is nothing to see without them?
Which is my belief. I believe what your Sermon leaves out is the sense (that has been mentioned) that everyone is interconnected. And once you add this element in, you add an understanding that these hard and fast rules you mentioned (like drowning) are then only subconsciously agreed upon rules that could be broken if a person can divorce themselves far enough from the ego and its three sense tools.
Awaking beyond that agreed upon experience, or prison as the CoC has it, seems a worthwhile pursuit (or Work) to me. Certainly at least as worthwhile as playing basketball all your life or treating our imaginary physical bodies as a western medical doctor.
Further, I believe the suggestion that a "level 7" man could show up and wow everyone is problematic for a couple reasons.
First off, if a person wholly believes that this physical world is all there is and that is their reality, then anything (no matter how "truthful") that is displayed would still be fake in their reality. Or, as was also suggested, "insane" in their reality. So all of us could have come across all kinds of enlightened people and situations and dismissed them as mistakes or lunacy and never thought twice. In other words, people who don't want to believe, won't. To suggest otherwise is to say there is one truth and you can force that on other people for them to see, but then that goes against saying that belief is reality.
The second issue I see is that if a person becomes so aware and enlightened that they fully understand that they are not truly a disconnected individual and that the physical world means nothing, then why would they desire anymore to act on that physical world directly through the physical to "force" other people who aren't really seperate from them to see the same perspective?
I've thought about this a good deal because it seems so problematic to me. In other words, once fully enlightened, why or how would you go back to wallow in ego again?
Truly, the only way a human being ever wants to help other people is to satisfy their own ego and to feel good about themselves. So only people still attached to their ego would bother.
I am starting to believe that these entities who have enlightened are really only available to help by us reaching out to them through the physical, or them reaching in beyond our senses to nudge, not force. They would be our gods. And in the end it's up to us to find our own way up there. At best we can group together to help each other, but no one can do it for you because you would never be able to take that kind of help from the low level you sit at now.
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 2, 2011 12:43:45 GMT -6
{The essay/blog to which the OP refers and written by Jason Sorrell (hereafter merely 'the OP'} repeatedly assumes that each person is a {separate} individual within a larger world. So at best your description of higher awareness would mean being unencumbered by the first three series of senses you mentioned. And then seeing the objective world unburdened by them. unbiased by them. these first three senses aren't evaded, dropped, or left behind except as an encapsulating and definitive experiential qualifier. ... if our three sense tools you mention are the things giving us our view of the world, what's to say it exists at all without them and isn't completely a fabrication of them and there is nothing to see without them? tools require some entity to use them, even if they are naturally arising. establishing what uses the tools predicates upon what they are used. two views being contrasted here are 1) material, animal organisms with complex nervous systems are using the tools of sensation facilitated by these systems to perceive and interpret the world beyond them; and 2) unknown, unperceived entities are somehow using the 'tools' of sensation to project what is perceived and interpreted. the former is well-founded and logical, the latter is unfounded, irrational, and self-deluded; a manipulation of those who mask the real with fantasies without basis (mired in solipsistic Subjectivism). {The OP} leaves out ... the sense (that has been mentioned) that everyone is interconnected. And once you add this element in, you add an understanding that these hard and fast rules you mentioned (like drowning) are then only subconsciously agreed upon rules that could be broken if a person can divorce themselves far enough from the ego and its three sense tools. connection at a distance (affectingness, influence) is perceivable. the 'sense' otherwise that you mention here is imagination without basis. it imagines a fantasy 'coextensive interrelationship' that is undemonstrated by any logical framework or set of evidence with repeatable and enduring consistency. 'drowning' is a good example of the finite limitations of organisms, their basis in the physical world, and their precarious existence, dependent upon breathing, and other processes and conditions, made possible within the terran environ within which they have evolved from more primitive life forms. suspension of observable natural principles and general rational constraints on these conditions of life as 'mere fictions' by inverting what is imagined as a sourcepoint for these quite real physical and underlying processes is the precise type of delusion from which 'enlightenment' systems ought to wake one. if they do not, if they instead disorient one into thinking that these imagined realities are somehow more real, then 'The Work' is a waste of time and unreliable. one might as well repeatedly watch 'The Matrix', 'Dark City', The Truman Show', and study the meaning of 'nihilism' in Buddhism interminably. Awaking beyond that agreed upon experience, or prison as the CoC has it, seems a worthwhile pursuit (or Work) to me. ... as you characterize it, you are equating 'awakening' with becoming supremely disoriented and self-deluded, lost in an internal fantasy without warrant, foundation, or logic for its supposition. you are equating the 'prison' of artificial constraint within an ordinary context with a 'prison' of what lies beyond the capacity of some fantasy liberation (completely without foundation). as such, and without varying from this approach, nothing can save you. Further, I believe the suggestion that a "level 7" man could show up and wow everyone is problematic for a couple reasons. ...if a person wholly believes that this physical world is all there is and that is their reality, then anything (no matter how "truthful") that is displayed would still be fake {or "insane"} in their reality. So all of us could have come across all kinds of enlightened people and situations and dismissed them as mistakes or lunacy and never thought twice. In other words, people who don't want to believe, won't. To suggest otherwise is to say there is one truth and you can force that on other people for them to see, but then that goes against saying that belief is reality. without a reliable method to identify or evaluate "enlightened people" other than that they agree with your delusions, there's no basis to conclude in any direction (effectively producing nihilism). the basis for rudimentary knowledge is consistent results within predicted or desired parameters. ignoring these, so also will all knowledge, progress, and 'enlightenment' of any consequence also be ignored. the problem with the stratification of 'Man Level 7' is that no methodology of evaluation is agreed such that any obvious individuals over a certain awareness level may be located or isolated as examples. this makes only the lower levels of any value to those using the system, the rest being pointed to obliquely as fantasy superheros without basis or the tool of claimsmaking for the leading of cultists. ascertain a method to identify any single individual as having any single level, then apply this method to observe their process by which they arrived at their state. doctrines elsewise will only confuse matters and distract from the phenomena apparent to the individual. absent such a procedure, tentatively presume that these superordinaries are fictions without reality and see where this gets you. the first thing it tends to do is to cut off the Herd leaders propping up fake delusions at the knees. ...if a person becomes so aware and enlightened that they fully understand that they are not truly a disconnected individual and that the physical world means nothing, then why would they desire anymore to act on that physical world directly through the physical to "force" other people who aren't really seperate from them to see the same perspective? ...once fully enlightened, why or how would you go back to wallow in ego again? transcendentalist anti-materialists and radical subjectivists are the very worst source of delusion. not only do they undermine all empirical methodology, but they provide nothing rational as a substitute, disorienting by their rhetoric all who hear and try to base their experience in a fantasy projection. again, if The Work (in whatever valence you prefer to give it - be that some doctrinal set from Gurdjieff or his students, some alchemical or quasi-gnostic process you observe in your experience, or some interactive or observable phenomenon beyond these) cannot lead to the discernment of fantasy from reality, if it has no basis to decide between organisms making experience possible and fourth-dimensional "souls" manifesting the physical and its experience, then we ought to seriously doubt its value overall as a system of waking up. the whole notion of 'waking up' then becomes dubious and the spectre of nihilism has once more reared its ugly head (that being the impossibility of arriving at any kind of knowledge soever due to the axioms presupposed, the methodology for obtaining it which is endorsed, and/or the lack of any method of success other than obsequious brown-nosing).
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 2, 2011 17:17:38 GMT -6
Awaking beyond that agreed upon experience, or prison as the CoC has it, seems a worthwhile pursuit (or Work) to me. ... as you characterize it, you are equating 'awakening' with becoming supremely disoriented and self-deluded, lost in an internal fantasy without warrant, foundation, or logic for its supposition. you are equating the 'prison' of artificial constraint within an ordinary context with a 'prison' of what lies beyond the capacity of some fantasy liberation (completely without foundation). as such, and without varying from this approach, nothing can save you. Your recent preoccupation with the delusional aspects of The Great Work (i.e. belief, reality, the 4th Way, etc.) is arbitrary and, in itself, nihilistic. I don't know what you mean by 'preoccupation' in a thread focussing on belief and reality (stemming from Jason Sorrell's excellent focus on a self-deluding slogan and the problems to which it may lead). it is instead a proper focus upon the topic in question. the interest in separating from delusion, self-delusion, etc., is precisely what waking up has to do with. the two are integrally entwined. without being able to identify delusions, to recognize them for what they are, recognize the condition of being deluded, etc., then procedures or systems of waking up are ballastless and unworkable toward anything reliable. therefore it is anything but arbitrary. this is why i think this thread is essential for the cult, rather than tangental or a distraction. it brings up all the important questions about knowledge for consideration, those which i've tried to point out, and emphasize, in this thread. I cannot be sure what you mean in your mention of nihilism, but perhaps you are referring to what should be called ' existential nihilism'. whereas, i am (possibly unclearly) referring instead to what should be called ' epistemological nihilism' and i will attempt to address both below. I am preferring to emphasize science and what endures in the construction of reliable knowledge. this scientific interest focusses upon repeatability, peer review, and the identification of natural principles. its knowledge is easily demonstrated in the extension of applied use of these principles by construction of technology such as the computers we are now using. by methodology as i have outlined it here, we have a repeatable, confirmable platform atop which to construct value, inclusive of that pertaining to human life. if you are attempting to prop up an ideology of extreme Subjectivism before this, then the challenge with which you will be faced in order to remain rational is to construct some methodology of evaluating knowledge and awareness beyond a mere litmus for conformity with words. I have been criticizing the lack of such a methodology as inherent to much mysticism, and Workers as i encounter them. the proper response to this is to explain the methodology that you would use, not to characterize my criticism as either unfair or meaningless. I am not proclaiming that you have to remain rational, nor am i requiring you to set up a methodology of evaluation so as to arrive at the mapping very plainly put forward by Gurdjieff and referred to by you and others ("Man #" 1-7). to me, it stands to reason that if you have no description of the way to get to these states, and have no way to evaluate who is at them, then all your efforts will amount to a babble of claimsmaking and hierarchic competition. this is why Jason Sorrell's observations in his sermon are so important, and why i sought to underscore them, even to improve upon the system which you and he plainly enjoy. I gather, based on this response, that you don't recognize or appreciate that improvement. in response to your query about (existential) nihilism, no, a scientific modality of knowledge-derivation can fruitfully result in spiritual values and aims. this is why i sought to identify Maslow's hierarchy of needs as an overarching parameter set within which this might be discussed. in response to the possibility that you might have been referring to my mention of (epistemological) nihilism (with which i associate Buddhist nihilism), there is no reason that a scientific modality of knowledge-derivation (even acknowledging the primacy of the material) need lead us to deny the possibility of knowledge, and in fact the idea is of course absurd (science is all about gaining knowledge). What would your perception leave us with? A reduction of the sublime to base materialism? I don't think that i've begun to speak of my perception here. I am merely reasoning about the knowledge that has been constructed which is testable and questioning how the stratification put forward might be workably used by you or others. you may be able to proclaim your ipsissimusitude, but i am not seeing how you are suggesting that any of the rest of us either confirm your claim or make similar self-evaluations and come to comparable conclusions locally about ourselves or others. my only text in this entire thread which pertains specifically to my perception(s) might be: that is, my claim here is entirely ordinary. every other instance of my mention of perception is a generalization of theory, epistemology primarily, and not so much about my perception as about my reason. if you struggle with my reason, please question it. if you don't understand my text, ask for clarification or elaboration. to address your question as to my methodology of knowledge (scientific) and what this would leave us with, it would leave us with the development of refinement techniques for the improvement of our fragile, temporary, human experiences as material animals facilitating complex consciousness and the facets of this which are truly extant. this is what real spirituality is rather than some afterlife pie-in-the-sky-when-you-die, or a religious or sci-fi transcendental puppet-master deriving its origins from some unknown plane. the sublime is precisely the ordinary provided its proper value given this fragility and temporary configuration. materialism isn't 'base' unless you restrict your knowledge of it to superficial processes and the acquisition of capital. optimizing real animal experience (Epicureanism, Hedonism, etc., properly understood not as extremes but as concertos of experiential art) is the best that might be achieved during our finite lives. all else which is called 'spiritual' or 'mystical' is a waste, foundationless and irrational. RE: 'esotericism': {Wikipedia:} ..."pertaining to the more inward". please see the beginning of that page where my assertion is bolstered. you presented the notion that esotericism was 'all about change', but as you can see the link to which you referred me (one i do not myself find very reliable, but i'm content to let your citation stand as my justification for now), it reads: "In terms of formal definition, "Esoterism" signifies the holding of esoteric opinions or beliefs, that is, ideas preserved or understood by a small group or those specially initiated, or of rare or unusual interest.". that Wikipedia page refers not only to more than one instance of using 'esoteric' or its variations to refer to things (often ideologies) internal which don't necessarily have to do with changing anything, but even the occult or arcane disciplines/arts to which you may be referring aren't always about changing things. some of them are about coming to an insight (e.g. astrology). ...Why focus on the inner or hidden aspects of something unless desirous of making alterations? in order to evaluate or refer to it in relation to something else (e.g. against 'the exoteric'). my comment was that your over-generalized usage was erroneous. I understand that it can be used to refer to mysticism, magic, and things which are intended to catalyze or effect change.
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 4, 2011 11:37:50 GMT -6
thank you for your continued candour and friendliness, Ipsissimus Satanis. ...there's a lot of misunderstanding in this thread, nyrlthtp. Don't take it personally. I try to acknowledge your posts when directed to me or the Cult of Cthulhu... which at times can be considered one and the same. I will presume continuously that there will be misunderstanding amongst all involved and point it out where i can see it, doing my best to avoid and remove it while preserving my resources as i can. I shall not take it personally. I understand that the best will come of the exchange regardless even if nobody seems to be getting anywhere initially. I appreciate your forebearance and counsel here. Should there be some form of transparency between inner development and willed manifestations{?} On that matter, I agree with those who propose such an idea. However, it's not so easy to judge another's progress. We must judge ourselves with as much objectivity as possible.... my focus has been on any method of judgement (arriving at evidence and knowledge) by any person pertaining to the Work. I gathered there was a ladder described onto which individuals might be mapped ("Man 1" through "Man 7"). I did not understand if there was a described methodology for discerning how this mapping would take place, whoever might be doing it. if the Ipsissimus does it, then a description from you about how you do it would be helpful to me. if you cannot describe it, then that's fine too. the whole revolves not just around individuals and their awareness state, but also on the character of knowledge in general and how it might be established, particularly if an axiom such as 'Belief is reality!' is seriously entertained. while this may be a helpful cognitive tool for the flourishing of personal consciousness, this strikes me as destabilizing if provided too great a placement in the overall schema of operations as a mechanism of waking up. I am approaching this in more than one way within the cult, as i think i mentioned above in this thread. I am asking in another thread what limitations there might be given the truth of that dictum, how it might influence one's trajectory or accomplishments, how beliefs which clash might be reconciled, and all manner of epistemological problems that would arise the moment we provide to doctrines, such as the New Age 'Create Your Own Reality', a heavy emphasis as to truth value. Here are two passages from Volume 4 of Psychological Commentaries on the Teaching of Gurdjieff and Ouspensky ... thank you, i'll provide my feedback and commentary on it here: The whole conception of Esotericism, its whole meaning, is concerning this development of a New Man in oneself. literally nonsense, though metaphorically and mystically potentially valuable. metaphorically this could be the referent to 'being born again' in conventional Christianity. mystically this could relate to analogues such as that from within Taoist alchemy wherein one's internal 'replacement' might be born within and grow so as to replace the individual. its reprogramming and maturation implications are plain. ...The whole idea of the Work and the whole idea of esoteric teaching as far back as known history goes, is about your being a self-developing organism and consciously working against the circumstances of your life so that nothing can drag you into negative emotions. [/i][/quote] that's all? avoiding negative emotions, or their experience ever again? that sounds pretty simplistic. perhaps the idea is that, failing to have such negative emotions arise means that one has achieved a particular success. 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.[/right]
|
|
|
Post by darkprism on Mar 4, 2011 21:07:51 GMT -6
Greetings,
I just found this quote by Gurdjieff on a website for The Gurdjieff Society of Australia.
"Believe nothing, not even yourself. I believe only if I have statistical proof; that is, only if I have obtained the same result over and over again. I study, I work for guidance, not for belief."
- G.I. Gurdjieff, Views From The Real World
I thought this was interesting and pertinent to the topic at hand.
Awake!
Dark Prism
|
|
|
Post by jasonsorrell on Mar 5, 2011 17:00:56 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.
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 7, 2011 18:26:07 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. It is one of the three aspects... that brings us together. 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. Many of us here are Working diligently to understand, evaluate, and apply the foundations that Gurdjieff and Ouspensky have laid out. it is into this which i seek to tap, naturally, when questioning what evaluation and understanding is carried into application. We already "buy into" the system they have developed. 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. ...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. 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. Are you reading Gurdjieff's writings, or those of his students? 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. Are you considering becoming an official member of the CoC, beyond the honorary title? 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. Are you fine-tuning your philosophical knowledge? 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.
|
|
|
Post by nyrlthtp on Mar 8, 2011 15:01:22 GMT -6
Apsara, thank you for your reflections. ...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. on the contrary, i found her exposition refreshingly clear and unburdened by the obfuscatory rhetoric and, what seemed to me, unnecessary deceptive qualities and ramblings i otherwise encountered. if she is lacking in depth, could you suggest to me someone who is as clear in hir writing and presentation who is deeper in content as you can identify it? 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." the fact that he misrepresents the 3 Ways to which his 4th is an alternative is an old sales ploy engaged by Crowley and LaVey and countless other pitchers. most people i meet who are sold on it don't catch this aspect of his presentation and i do not see that Ouspensky understood it either. this doesn't mean that one cannot take the fiction put forward as the disappointing prerequisite for what it is and evaluate the alternative in its own right. I find most religious and mystics have this quality to them but only some of them seek a contrasting negative characterization of what came before. 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. there we go. that's precisely what i am attempting to emphasize: the results, evaluating them in the light of peer review and rational tools at our disposal, and optimizing them for our purposes. my God once suggested to me that systems don't matter as long as one's enthusiasm and dedication to the aim are sound and enduring. I kept that in the back of my mind as i encountered the varieties and i'm not sure how accurate it is. as such, it does underscore the importance of your continued dedication and enthusiasm and that i do not serve as a force to undermine them. I hope to soften whatever averse tendency that i may bring in my contribution with a buffer of words and complexity. while i believe as little as possible, i do pay very close attention to symbols, themes, and the advice of women. I appreciate your attention and time and will consider your suggestions carefully. much obliged,
|
|
|
Post by hartnell on Apr 2, 2011 22:19:50 GMT -6
"There's been quite a bit of debate about which is the 'authentic' or 'true' Satanism. Is it a religion for practical atheists? Theists? Is it, by tradition, a form of reverse Christianity or devil worship? Is it something personal that can only be known by individual Satanists? Is it a ghetto?" cultofcthulhu.wall.fm/blogs/post/4
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Apr 4, 2011 10:59:08 GMT -6
Traditionally in the Fourth Way, a magnetic center is formed by interaction with B influences which are found entirely by sheer luck, at least at first. The interaction with B influences affects a number of "I's" to create a new interest within you. This sort of thing happens when you've read or seen a movie which makes a profound impression on you and makes you think. The interested "I's" that are a result of this process attract you to similar B influences. In other words, you're interested in a B influence more than something else whenever the law of accident presents you with the choice. You are not making the choice at this stage, the interested "I's" are. By sheer luck you find more B influences and more I's are recruited into the set of I's that are already interested. It begins to transition into a node which is active more often by more things. This is the beginning of a magnetic center. It functions to set a direction of your life -- unconsciously -- towards more B influences and hopefully a school. At most you know at this stage is that you are interested in some area of knowledge or you like some category of art, or things which give you a certain kind of feeling. It's important to consider the direction of the magnetic center. Magnetic centers can form which are directed to something other than the Work, and that person can, through the unconscious influence of the magnetic center, become great in an area -- but not self aware. The magnetic center must lead to the Work to lead to self-awareness. Venger As'Nas Satanis's answer presupposes self-awareness and an 'I' which is in control often enough to do work consciously on himself. At this point, the magnetic center has served most of it's purpose. By saying that, am I saying that Venger As'Nas Satanis is more self-aware than most? Yup. But I also think that he doesn't understand how he got there, at least, when he posted the answer. I didn't get it either until I started seriously studying the Work. I can see how your understanding and description of Magnetic Center neatly dovetails the idea of accessibility nodes as 'I's. More discussion would probably help me recall exactly how I got there... turned Magnetic Center into Crystallization.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|