|
Post by I AM the Way on Feb 28, 2012 9:22:36 GMT -6
" man is so caught up in the toils of mechanical life that he has neither time to stop nor the power of attention needed to turn his mental vision upon himself" I definitely agree in part, with Boris's thinking. Yes man is caught up in the tools of mechanical life... but i belief man have the time to stop and power of attention needed to make change, if not what am i doing here? Mouravieff is speaking generally here. Obviously, ordinary man is easy prey for the universe, and extraordinary men have the potential to become predators. If that were not the case, then why write a book about an impossible teaching?
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Feb 29, 2012 11:14:37 GMT -6
Happy leap day, Cultists! I've always liked the idea of leap day because it's like an extra 24 hours that we weren't supposed to have, a gift. Use this day to do something extraordinary. Just imagine that you were High Priest of the Cthulhu Cult today. What would you work on, struggle with?
Before I comment any more on previous posts, I'm going to wait for others to chime in. Give us your thoughts and feelings about Gnosis and what has already been said about this book.
Additionally, read up to page 53 by Friday so we can begin discussing these new pages over the weekend.
Awake!
VS
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2012 5:05:48 GMT -6
page xx : "the Tradition is One"... "presented in multiple forms, each meticulously adapted to the mentality and spirit of the human group to which its words is addressed"
This is the christian version, adapted to the christian mentality.
We have to keep this in mind, and that the Tradition is much older than Christ.
Of course romance existed before, and women had almost equality among the nordic peoples. The most ancient code of laws we know (in Babylon I think) allowed women to separate from their husband. To consider woman as a merchandise was only typical to the semitic people.
But when addressing many christians you have to agree that his religion is the only source of love and true civilization else they will not listen... Tradition had to adapt christian mentality. Else it would had been persecuted instead of being allowed to continue its teaching, and thanks to this wise move we have the opportunity to read the entire "Gnosis".
page xviii, the concept of mechanical man is attacked as anti-christian.
Now, back to the Tradition itself !
Awake !
|
|
|
Post by Sarak G'hash on Mar 1, 2012 6:55:01 GMT -6
Semetic? Ok, now I have a name for my ex husband instead of overbearing bully!..lol
|
|
|
Post by Sarak G'hash on Mar 1, 2012 6:59:42 GMT -6
"Yet it is an aberration to believe that Science by its very nature is opposed to Tradition, and it must also be firmly stressed that Tradition does not include any tendency opposed to Science. On the contrary, the Apostles foresaw the prodigious developments of science." page xxiv That reminds me of a line from John Carpenter's Prince of Darkness...The container was buried somewhere in the Middle East eons ago by, it gets a little wild here, the father of Satan – a God who once walked the earth before man but was somehow banished to the dark side...
Now, later on here, Christ comes to warn us. He was of extra-terrestrial ancestry, but a human-like race.
...his disciples keep the secret and hide it from civilisation until man could develop a science sophisticated enough to prove what Christ was saying. Where exactly? I just re-read that page, and I don't see anything more than an explanation of why science and faith are not mutually exclusive.Keep in mind that the teaching of esotericism is to be taken in a different or new way - figuratively, metaphorically... in abstract. It's the same thing with the Cult of Cthulhu using Lovecraft's Mythos to provide context and color and narrative gravitas which allows knowledge to sink deeper into us. It's important to establish not only an intellectual connection to knowledge but an emotional one.
We don't have to take all 4th Way claims literally, yet, at the same time, disciples must have some kind of faith in the Work, as well as, the Teacher.I'm not sure I understand your question. Following the description, do you see the master as somewhere else or are you suggesting there might not be a master? Are you referring to the division of centers? I'm not sure what you mean by hypnosis... can you explain?
Awake!
VS
"We don't have to take all 4th Way claims literally, yet, at the same time, disciples must have some kind of faith in the Work, as well as, the Teacher." The Teacher is the embodiment of the Work, isn't he? If so, then you have succeeded! There is so much to be learned from that movie "Prince of Darkness" if only you open your eyes and mind. When The Stars Are Right
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 1, 2012 10:43:23 GMT -6
page xx : "the Tradition is One"... "presented in multiple forms, each meticulously adapted to the mentality and spirit of the human group to which its words is addressed"
This is the christian version, adapted to the christian mentality.
We have to keep this in mind, and that the Tradition is much older than Christ.
Of course romance existed before, and women had almost equality among the nordic peoples. The most ancient code of laws we know (in Babylon I think) allowed women to separate from their husband. To consider woman as a merchandise was only typical to the semitic people.
But when addressing many christians you have to agree that his religion is the only source of love and true civilization else they will not listen... Tradition had to adapt christian mentality. Else it would had been persecuted instead of being allowed to continue its teaching, and thanks to this wise move we have the opportunity to read the entire "Gnosis".
page xviii, the concept of mechanical man is attacked as anti-christian.
Now, back to the Tradition itself !
Awake ! Didn't ancient Rome view women as property? I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule - such as ancient Babylon and Greece, but for the most part, women are conceptualized by men as valuable resources... even today.
Perhaps Mouravieff felt the need to Christianize the Work for his audience so it would be more palatable. As we get into the book, I think we'll find that it develops into its own thing, divorced from Christianity - save for the Gospel's teachings of Christ. In fact, I'm surprised how closely volume I of Gnosis follows the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky model.
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Mar 1, 2012 18:39:28 GMT -6
I second or is it third the motion of watching THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS...as it is matrix like in its informativeness and it ages like a fine wine as the years go by.
Loki Dreaming
ps:-THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS is a must watch film as the MATRIX is a must watch film for its informativeness.
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 4, 2012 22:41:54 GMT -6
Paragraph 9 on page 53 is disturbingly short, with only two contentful sentences: "What guarantee can man have that he will not dupe himself and that he will not fall into the latter situation [of having a magnetic centre that is connected to deceived or self-deceived persons]? ... The purity of the magnetic centre must be scrupulously maintained from the start and all through his evolution." No concrete advice is given about how to do this. This seems especially relevant given that this website is about worshipping a known-to-be-fictional deity.
Any tips on how to do this, or should we just read on and hope Mouravieff addresses the issue in more depth later?
I am surprised Mouravieff did not quote scripture here, Matthew 7:15-16: "Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?" (If you go read this in context, Matthew rambles on a bit afterward, belaboring his point. Sigh, I guess being an apostle is different from being a good writer.)
Is this quote relevant? If so, what fruit should we be looking for here?
The Acceptance and Commitment Therapy people claim connection with good outcomes in psychotherapy, and their idea of a person's value system seems similar to the Fourth Way idea of a real 'I' . Granted, getting from broken to working is a different problem from getting from working to extraordinary, but you have to say that being able to get from broken to working is a worthwhile fruit. Do we have something better?
Hmm, the answer might already be here. I'll go read the section of the forum titled "The Calling: Ascension, personal transformations and demonstrations of our power".
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 5, 2012 12:08:06 GMT -6
Yes, and within a known-to-be-fictional world, too. Or do you still believe that generally accepted reality is real?
Certainly, we should read on. There's a reason Gnosis is in three volumes.
However, we should also be able to come up with tips on how to keep Magnetic Center pure. Mouravieff makes a distinction between A influences and B influences. The symbol depicted in figure 20 (page 51) shows the former as black arrows going in all sorts of different directions while the latter are shown as white arrows going in the same direction. These white arrows, which represent influences called 'B', are esoteric guides emanating from Higher Forces or the Conscious Circle of Humanity. So, that begs the question... how can we be influenced in a more Conscious manner - not by life, but by the Work? Is this an expression of our True Will?
I find it helpful to have the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky background of the Fourth Way. It gives an initial platform upon which Mouravieff's teaching is built. Yet, it can be mildly unsettling when familiar concepts are couched in an entirely new way (where are C influences?). For those who are coming into Gnosis without any kind of esoteric background, I'm sure that some of his ideas are a bit confusing. That's why this study group was created. Continue to ask questions and provide the framework for your current understanding.
I'll wait a couple days before addressing the rest of your post. Hopefully, I won't have to because others will engage those topics. Jump into this discussion, gnostics!
Read up to page 82. Don't be afraid to bring up points from the first few chapters. And if you've just started the book, then it's perfectly fine to be slightly behind the majority. Do what you can, participate when possible.
Awake!
VS
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 7, 2012 4:38:38 GMT -6
p. 27 : "But since the fall of Adam, the real 'I', in its aspect as the inmost heart,3 has been relegated to the background of consciousness, dominated by the mental2 'I' of the Personality. The latter, who commands by default, so to speak, lacks unity. Changing, floating, multiple, he can only act in a disorderly manner. Thus the 'I' of the body, who should normally obey the mental2 'I', frequently imposes his own purposes upon the latter. The usual example of such domination is that of adultery, due to sexual attraction without any spiritual ties."
This is related to what I'm currently experiencing; I work in an university, and of course I daily see attractive girls among the students. As a normal and healthy man, I felt the sexual attraction and my imagination worked, but Now that my real "I" is taking his true place, although I can still notice and admire their body I do not want them any more. I'm not making efforts, they are nothing to me, I would want them only in case of spiritual ties. I don't think I'm getting old, I think Mouravieff is true.
p. 36-37 : I like the concept of partial crystallization, it's making sense and correspond to my experience, too.
p 56 to 61, the diagrams are very interesting, the magnetic center is well explained.
Awake.
|
|
|
Post by mattsaturnaeon on Mar 8, 2012 18:46:13 GMT -6
Heyo, formerly Dude Tyson here but my old email was locked. Always down for serious discussion.
Haven't even started reading but it's going to be one of my priorities, will post as I get through it.
One thing that jumped out at me though, just from skimming this discussion, is that the idea of "Adam" and "The Fall" in 4th Way terms are very resonant with me. I used to have tremendous will and single-minded focus, and I lost it (getting it back over time) -- there were various factors in this but Social Media and the Internet were definitely major factors. So getting back to the underlying Adam, restoring myself from the Fall, are very good analogies for me personally -- despite the fact that I usually had an opposite, satanic reading of the Eden myth, that eating the fruit was a good thing.
I'm not gonna be the hyper-poster I used to be (it would contradict my Work) but glad to see there's serious Work discussion here, Eastern Orthodox especially.
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 8, 2012 23:13:57 GMT -6
There is so much to be learned from that movie "Prince of Darkness" if only you open your eyes and mind. Agreed. I just finished it now. Various things in the movie are clearly recognizable as steps in the Fourth Way story about human evolution. The movie is presented from the viewpoint of a temporary "I", so of course the outcomes that the movie implies are valuable are the opposite of the outcomes presented as valuable in the Fourth Way. The swirly thing in the box apparently represents a C influence. In the movie, the C influence is able to organize simple things like bugs and (according to the movie) homeless people for its own purposes. Is there something analogous in the Fourth Way?
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 9, 2012 10:26:53 GMT -6
Talking about "Prince of Darkness": The swirly thing in the box apparently represents a C influence. In the movie, the C influence is able to organize simple things like bugs and (according to the movie) homeless people for its own purposes. Is there something analogous in the Fourth Way? I got it now. The function of the homeless people is to keep the protagonists in the church, so it represents a decision made to refrain from certain behaviors. Perhaps we're telling a story about someone who sat down to meditate and decided not to move. "Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit" (1 Corinthians 6:19). The bugs represent intentional suffering, since they were chosen by the higher mind and are an irritation for the protagonists in the church.
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 9, 2012 10:49:22 GMT -6
Yes, and within a known-to-be-fictional world, too. Or do you still believe that generally accepted reality is real?
Well, I can't prove it's real, but it seems like a different sort of thing from Cthulhu. For Cthulhu, we have a general consensus and reliable written records saying who made it up and when. For this world I'm living in, there is no comparably clear evidence of its fictionality. If you have such evidence, please present it. Brains are made of meat and are therefore unreliable, so irreproducible subjective experience doesn't give you a reliable guide to the truth. [/b][/quote] The A influences aren't random when you look at them at a small scale. For example, I grew up in the southeastern US, where nearly everyone was Christian, and I'm pretty sure that the details of their religious beliefs were mostly an A influence. If I had grown up someplace else the people around me would have been Hindu. So the question here is how to tell the color of the arrow, not how to check them for being locally consistent. In contrast, the idea that it is useful to develop self-control and awareness does seem to be an example of a white arrow. I wish it were clear to me how to generalize from these examples. Will do.
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 9, 2012 12:54:31 GMT -6
You're correct. There is no clear evidence of the world's fictionality. But then again, there is no clear evidence of its objective reality, either. Why can't Yog-Sothoth flow in and out of what's "real"? Just because a mailbox exists in time and space - we can see it, touch it, and measure it scientifically - does that mean it is "real" for everybody and to the same degree? As you said, "Brains are made of meat and are therefore unreliable, so irreproducible subjective experience doesn't give you a reliable guide to the truth."
All we have upon which to base our assumptions about this world is our own unreliable subjective experience. Everything changes. Perhaps that should be the definition of what's real. If it decays in some way, then it exists.
We are part of reality, as well as, its observers. At least the prose of Lovecraft gives us a starting point, something definite to work with. HPL was influenced by dreams, other weird tale authors, and his own creative impulses. Who's to say that the Great Old Ones didn't call to him as they did Henry Anthony Wilcox? Personally, there is little difference betwixt that which I choose to believe and that which others assume I should, except to say that the former is more powerful.
I'm glad you noticed that. From a small or lesser scale, A influences are virtually indistinguishable from B or any other kind of influence. That is why we should develop a larger or greater scale, a more objective view of things. Many aspects of our life looks like it was destined, put there for a specific reason - as if Christianity, Hinduism, the fact that we are right handed, or our birth state is Wisconsin are beyond the Law of Accident. All things considered, those details are relatively meaningless.
We can tell an arrow's color by one or more of the following: 1) Where it comes from. 2) It's own nature and meaning. 3) The yielded results.
For example, being aware (at first) and then struggling against the expression of negative emotions comes to us from Fourth Way Masters who received it from ancient teaching which emanated from Higher Forces. Why does stopping negative emotions from being expressed benefit us? Because it is self-Work (the necessity of work on oneself is self-evident), and negativity in our emotional center is poisonous. Lastly, those who have expunged negative emotions from their day to day life claim to be happier, more successful individuals.
What do you think would be an example of a white arrow?
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 10, 2012 10:40:01 GMT -6
...Many aspects of our life looks like it was destined, put there for a specific reason - as if Christianity, Hinduism, the fact that we are right handed, or our birth state is Wisconsin are beyond the Law of Accident. All things considered, those details are relatively meaningless. So we seem to have agreement -- if something varies from place to place, it's an A influence, even if it's consistent for one person's entire lifetime (like being born in Wisconsin) or thousands of people living together (like Protestantism in the southeast US 4 decades ago). I agree that the idea that it is useful to stop expression of negative emotions is a B influence. We can't use their origin to recognize them in general because in general we don't know the origin. For example, I assume we agree that the Law of Three (as described in the latest Gnosis reading) is a B influence. It's something useful that I consistently get wrong if I don't pay attention it. What do we know about it's origin? The available evidence is consistent with it being invented by Gurdjieff. We don't have mention of it except from people who heard it from him. (If someone has a pointer to an independent source of the Law of Three, please speak up!) Is the Law of Three a B influence even if Gurdjieff made it up? Recognizing them by their "own nature and meaning" doesn't help much because it's essentially the problem we started with. I agree that recognizing them by their results is essential. Here's my best guess at the criteria for recognizing something close enough to a "B" influence: - The idea has to be universally true. (Not "People are born in Wisconsin.")
- It has to be something that people aren't likely to figure out on their own. (Not "Breathing is useful.")
- It has to be something that's communicable between humans. (Even if Gurdjieff's general approach to life worked really well, it's not a B influence if you can't communicate it.)
- Agreeing with VS's "yielded results" above, it has to help you live your life the way you want. (Not "Helium is a noble gas.")
Yes, let's make a list of the ones we have on hand: - Self-control and awareness are useful.
- Law of Three.
- It's best to avoid expressing negative emotions.
If we're agreed that being able to trace the origin back to Higher Forces is not necessary, here are some other candidates on my mind that are not commonly discussed on forums like this: - From Solomonoff, Levin, and company: the best you can do to infer reasonable guesses about the truth from observation is to do Bayesian inference with the Universal Prior.
- In the Arbinger Insitute's "Anatomy of Peace", there's a fairly concise enumeration of common styles of human self-deception. Being able to recognize these helps a lot.
So, do readers of this have more candidate B influences to add, or different criteria to suggest for recognizing them?
|
|
|
Post by mattsaturnaeon on Mar 12, 2012 0:20:40 GMT -6
“In Western civilization the interior life of the individual, with all its richness, finds itself relegated to a minor role in existence. Man is so caught up in the toils of mechanical life that he has neither time to stop nor the power of attention needed to turn his mental vision upon himself. Man thus passes his days absorbed by external circumstances. The great machine that drags him along turns without stopping, and forbids him to stop under penalty of being crushed. Today like yesterday, and tomorrow like today, he quickly exhausts himself in the frantic race, impelled in a direction which in the end leads nowhere. Life passes away from him almost unseen, swift as a ray of light, and man falls engulfed and still absent from himself.” Compare to Marx’s short essay “Alienated Labor” www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/labour.htm“When we ask someone who lives under this constant pressure of contemporary life to turn his mental vision towards himself, he generally answers that he has not enough time left to undertake such practices.” What’s funny is, most of the challenge of Awakening to me is simply fighting uphill to budget time for focusing on it. I feel like both halves of the equation are important – it’s true that we are hideously enslaved to a totally unnecessary 40+-hour workweek (if we are employed at all – the only thing worse than being exploited is not being exploited). However at the same time, we will never defeat any situation we are in if we do not forge the willpower to do what we can, regardless of what circumstances we are in. So part of me can’t blame people who are ruined by their situation, but part of me says, everything depends on the inner force so get in life’s face. “Introspection carried out relentlessly results in enhanced internal sensibility…As a result, shocks that previously were not noticed will now provoke vivid reactions.” This reminds me of 1984 and George Orwell’s concept of “doublethink,” that it is possible for a human being to hold two completely contradictory ideas in their head. But the more you assert active consciousness, the more the contradictions collapse. This applies not simply to hypocritical totalitarian ideologies like in 1984, but also to a life lived passively and unconsciously – you realize that everything you’ve been doing is at cross-purposes, and it only flares up when you’re paying attention.
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 12, 2012 11:04:04 GMT -6
Yes, contradictions collapse. That's an important notion in the Cult of Cthulhu - one that is key to answering pocketguy's other recent thread about how Cultists perceive Dread Cthulhu. Similarly, the collapse of contradictions due to active or higher consciousness is a B Influence (or C Influence if we're talking about the Gurdjieff/Ouspensky model).
Perhaps the manifestation of B Influences define white arrows? When it stops being theoretical knowledge and materializes into real life problems to be negotiated... white arrows manifest like children from B Influence parents.
Nothing regarding B Influences can be properly understood by the uninitiated. Even by your new standards, ordinary people won't be able to recognize A Influences from B. For instance, how can an ordinary person ever universally know anything?
A single instance of the "law of three" predating Gurdjieff and those who taught him is early Christianity. The holy trinity is a perfect example of this Work idea, as well as, being a fundamental principle of that religion. And where did Christianity come by it? I wouldn't be surprised to read the "law of three" being older than the Ancient Greeks... perhaps hundreds of thousands of years ago.
Indeed, I believe that's why occultists of the past were more likely to be either aristocratic nobles, inheritors of wealth, or were able to somehow link their passion with an occupation. We don't read too much about factory worker seers or Walmart assistant manager magicians, do we? Certainly, an occultist might start there, but eventually, if he is to get anywhere at all, he must leave his unremarkable cubicle for something eminently more suitable.
The Great Work takes time, energy, dedication, discipline, and will. Have all those, and it doesn't matter where you are or what your current situation is - you will eventually fathom the universe's secrets.
Awake!
Venger As'Nas Satanis Ipsissimus Cult of Cthulhu
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 13, 2012 12:18:29 GMT -6
Read to page 103 by Friday. I also want everyone who hasn't posted a comment in the last week to do so before Friday.
I'll be out of town until Thursday night. Hope everyone is productive in my absence. ^(;,^
Awake!
VS
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Mar 13, 2012 13:22:49 GMT -6
Master Satanis,
103 pages by Friday is gonna be a hurdle for so I am asking for a time extension until Sunday your time please
Loki Dreaming
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 13, 2012 21:43:36 GMT -6
At about the same time when I started reading Gnosis, I figured out a problem with my time management -- I either spend all my time doing, and no time planning, or all my time planning and no time doing, without any reasonable balance. So I made a spreadsheet to track my time and was for a while doing 75% doing and 25% planning and things were okay.
Then I got to the part in Gnosis about the Law of Three, and that was great! This is making sense, there's this synchronicity between me starting the spreadsheet and reading the principle behind it, and all was good. There are three things -- planning, doing, and the balance between them, and you need the balance to get decent results, and for me the spreadsheet implements the balance.
Then I found a fourth thing: learning to do better. I tend to have the same lack of balance between improving my abilities and everything else. So the spreadsheet got another column today, and now I'm trying 65% doing, 10% improving, and 25% planning. I don't know yet how that will work out.
So what do we have here? A Law of Four? Two applications of the Law of Three with one spreadsheet neutralizing two different triads? Guaranteed failure because there's the wrong number of things?
I'm really unclear about how to apply these laws. Do people really use this stuff? Can anyone post other examples?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 14, 2012 1:36:33 GMT -6
At about the same time when I started reading Gnosis, I figured out a problem with my time management -- I either spend all my time doing, and no time planning, or all my time planning and no time doing, without any reasonable balance. So I made a spreadsheet to track my time and was for a while doing 75% doing and 25% planning and things were okay. Then I got to the part in Gnosis about the Law of Three, and that was great! This is making sense, there's this synchronicity between me starting the spreadsheet and reading the principle behind it, and all was good. There are three things -- planning, doing, and the balance between them, and you need the balance to get decent results, and for me the spreadsheet implements the balance. Then I found a fourth thing: learning to do better. I tend to have the same lack of balance between improving my abilities and everything else. So the spreadsheet got another column today, and now I'm trying 65% doing, 10% improving, and 25% planning. I don't know yet how that will work out. So what do we have here? A Law of Four? Two applications of the Law of Three with one spreadsheet neutralizing two different triads? Guaranteed failure because there's the wrong number of things? I'm really unclear about how to apply these laws. Do people really use this stuff? Can anyone post other examples? Very interesting post !
In the law of three, the first force is the impulsion, the second force inertia who oppose the first, and the third force resolving the conflict and making a compromise.
In my view, in your example the first force is planning, the second force is all what prevent you to do (lack of time, of energy, of will... inertia as a whole) and the third force results in what you really do.
Improving is an other thing you plan to do. Then again you plan to improve, the second force oppose it, and you succeed to improve something thanks to the third force.
Now is the moment of Awakening
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Mar 14, 2012 13:54:10 GMT -6
Mouravieff Book 1 Pages 1-18/293 or Pages i-xxi First of all,
Read 150 pages by ______, is that 150/293 or i-xxvi plus 150 pages?
Secondly, this is a big ask for someone new to the group to read who has still got the traditional sense of good vs evil and Satanism is opposed to Christianity.
Are you fine with people flocking away from the COC due to reading material like this or converting to Christianity and such due to reading material like this?
Lastly
Managed to read the Translator notes and not nod off as I normally do at the stages of books like these.
For me books like this I struggle at the beginning as I am getting use to the author’s mental patterns (no pun intended; due to the French definition of mental in the beginning), writing style and patterns of getting that author’s point across, by the 100th page I am getting the general vibe of the book and the direction the book will end nicely as they tend to stop explaining themselves so much by then and just get on with it (what they are trying to get across), which also reflects their growing maturity, understanding and comprehension of the subject matters (plus a lot of editing).
So I am going to struggle along with it myself.
*Positive science? I wonder if John Carpenter read this book i.e., his film The Prince of Darkness and where did the term Positive science originate from? ; must research.
“When translators have translated complex and elaborate literary or philosophical works into other languages, they often make excuses for not giving their readers the original with all its shades of meaning, its subtleties and intonations. The translators of scientific works never do this, as they are certain they have been able to translate the complete content.”
LMFAO; finding this tickling my funny bone, as am I well versed with Frances Yates Bruno and The Hermetic Tradition which explains very well this dilemma in that book and also have got The Big Bang Theory in my head as an analogy for the last statement of inserted quote and the squabbles over String Theory stuck in my head and others. “Because of this precision, I have sometimes found it necessary to translate the French text word for word, sacrificing elegance in favour of precision”.
Translating texts like this is a project and experience I recommend one does at least once in their lifetimes. I myself have tried my hand at this with one of the Eddas.
A related personal experience is reading English subtitles and hearing my own native tongue in the movies I i.e. Cantonese e.g., Jackie Chan movies is a very frustrating, annoying and angry experience at times, as you are screaming at the screen, that is the wrong translation, how the BEEP did you get that out of that, it totally is unrelated you lazy beeping bastards.
“The only exceptions to this consistency, says the author, are in old translations made by enlightened men.”
Giggling at this one as I find this kind of statements in books like this a lot which I find amusing and in turn statements like this signals their scholarly know how and proficiency at times.
I wonder if this book is going to be filled by a lot of explanations of terminology which at times can take a huge amount of pages in some books; however the repeativeness of this process, especially book after book on the same subject by different authors and their perspectives makes it easier to absorb and retain.
However two questions still remain in my mind.
Why not make the readers dig themselves?
Isn’t all this explaining making the reader complacent and lazy?
I love short pages of dedications and indexes at the beginning of books as it speeds up the process of reading it, I also love it when books I read have loads of illustrations in it as I can use those illustrations as short cuts to getting certain amount of pages read in a certain time.
Do people still use words like imponderable these days? Yes, of course; Sheldon!!!
“I myself had stressed strongly the danger of fragmentary disclosure, and uncertainties in the exposition of certain essential points.”
Being a writer myself I struggle with this frequently and am wondering when my book will finally be published, if at all.
“…even though Christ categorically affirmed that entry into the Kingdom of God is closed to those who have not been born anew…”
Like the Phoenix rising out if its own ashes, correct.
Like the journeys of Scrooge, correct.
Like the film of My Own Private Idaho, wrong.
Like baptised Christians sinning and then being born again Christians, mostly wrong, but a few do get this born anew right.
There is a lot more work to do after one is born anew, so to assume you are given automatic rights after one is born anew is erroneous.
“all fragmentary knowledge is a source of danger”
Bump x umpteenth times However, I would say all fragmentary knowledge is also beneficial; the trick is to know when to pull back and correct oneself i.e., my lack of understanding in some terminology is an example of this, but I have learnt to use this as a positive until the time is right for correction.
“ It is incomparably easier for him to begin his studies starting from this environment, rather than to adapt to the spirit of an environment different from his own. Transplantation is not without danger, and generally gives hybrid products.”
If are not Germanic of origin BEEP off as are not a HEATHEN If you are not Northern European or descendent of them BEEP off as you are not Asatru.
My humours side coming out again.
Loki Dreaming
|
|
|
Post by patience on Mar 14, 2012 22:28:53 GMT -6
I don’t have a heavy science or math background, though I have been trying to fill-in the gaps with self study, I don’t feel I know enough to be critical or fully accepting. So some parts of this book have been an obstacle but I have been looking up things as I read through it. These are some parts that I was drawn to in the reading: ‘In studying Time, we must never lose sight of the subjectivity of our senses. We cannot reach the objective except through the medium of the subjective. This is the underlying reason for esoteric studies: they allow the exterior man to give objective validity to his subjective mentality.’ - When I am lost in forgetting and become ‘drunk’ with the monetary rapture or fear in my hyper sensitive state I loose touch with objective calm. Often enough it is what I find draws me to try again when I fail. Pg 115 ‘Henceforth in life, that man will no longer be isolated. He will certainly continue to live as before under the action of the 'A' influences, which for along time will continue to exercise their power over him; yet little by little, thanks to the effect of the influence of the chain 'B'-'C'-'D'-'E', his magnetic center will develop. To the measure of its growth, the man will escape the dominion of the Law of Chance and enter the domain of Consciousness. Pg 52 - This is something I keep coming back to; how can I stop victimizing myself by being lost in a drift. I spent a great deal of time, aimless not even wanting to take responsibility for many things; it has been a lot of hard lessons one after another. ‘The seeker must learn how to master these influences, especially those which become factors in the film of his personal life. He will achieve this by drawing a complement of energy from the source of the 'B' influences, which he must utilize in his 'life' in strict obedience to the demands of the Law of Seven. For that, he must make himself recognize all the gamuts— at least all the principal ones — of which he is either agent or victim, and in the midst of which he finds himself at every moment. This is the first part of his work, which corresponds in principle to knowledge.’ Pg 1oo I have been working hard on figuring out what are the right influences…that will counter the chaotic influences I allowed into my life. I wanted to understand many things…I followed any trail, tried many things, and I found myself exhausted and consumed by bitterness mostly from not getting approval or ‘respect’ by those around me. Something I guess I craved for sometime. I like all the discussions of love. I like the idea of cage, or building a shelter with in yourself. I also like the part about working on not lying to yourself, cornering these thoughts. After a time of failure, when I start again to begin working on myself; I start first with the lies that I have been telling myself. It’s a lot of work. There are so many layers and sometimes I get so disgusted. I stop and retreat and give up…creating more lies that I latter have to work through. I keep coming back to the task of stripping away the lies. So far I like this book, even though I am not well versed in the law of sevens. I am attracted to the octaves…. frequencies and it gave my husband and I something to talk about which was great to get his input. I also liked the 3 forces of active, passive and neutralizing. As well as the three centers in us: intellect, emotional, and motor. I feel like I should start thinking more identifying these things as I review my day in my journal and hope to be able to incorporate this into my in-the-moment thoughts. I think it would help me focus less on my necrotic/negative emotions, and more on the systems and the order of things. lokidreaming - 'Like the film of My Own Private Idaho, wrong.' when reading that i did laugh out loud. Don't worry. Be happy. Make efforts.
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 18, 2012 19:37:13 GMT -6
I'm skipping pp 104-140. It's estoeric cosmology.
One might blame the material for this. Mouravieff is spending a lot of time on claims that have no obvious empirical content or relevance to work on self. Picking a claim at random, I choose this from page 136: "The law is exact: with time, growing elements [of a political regime] develop, and, after reaching the peak of this development, they start to decline, degenerating and sliding towards total decay." If things are growing so far, then that's consistent with the law -- the decay didn't start yet. If things are failing, that's consistent with the law. If things are cycling, maybe one cycle is a different political regime from the next. There is no set of observations that is inconsistent with the alleged law. I can't see a way to apply this to work on self either.
One might also blame me for this. I lack faith, I am impatient to get to working on myself , I'm working from narrow-minded empiricism, etc. Guilty as charged.
I'll check back occasionally. If you guys get through the esoteric cosmology part and are looking at any page past 140, that's great, I'll join you then. If you can't persist through it either, that's unfortunate; perhaps people like me who can't or won't should make calendar entries to check back here every week or two to see if we got to page 141 yet. Our Ipsissimus is within his rights to suggest that the group skip forward.
Perhaps the relevance of the cosmology will become clear later. If someone has read ahead and can confirm this, please do.
|
|
|
Post by lokidreaming on Mar 18, 2012 20:13:48 GMT -6
I'm skipping pp 104-140. It's estoeric cosmology. One might blame the material for this. Mouravieff is spending a lot of time on claims that have no obvious empirical content or relevance to work on self. Picking a claim at random, I choose this from page 136: "The law is exact: with time, growing elements [of a political regime] develop, and, after reaching the peak of this development, they start to decline, degenerating and sliding towards total decay." If things are growing so far, then that's consistent with the law -- the decay didn't start yet. If things are failing, that's consistent with the law. If things are cycling, maybe one cycle is a different political regime from the next. There is no set of observations that is inconsistent with the alleged law. I can't see a way to apply this to work on self either. One might also blame me for this. I lack faith, I am impatient to get to working on myself , I'm working from narrow-minded empiricism, etc. Guilty as charged. I'll check back occasionally. If you guys get through the esoteric cosmology part and are looking at any page past 140, that's great, I'll join you then. If you can't persist through it either, that's unfortunate; perhaps people like me who can't or won't should make calendar entries to check back here every week or two to see if we got to page 141 yet. Our Ipsissimus is within his rights to suggest that the group skip forward. Perhaps the relevance of the cosmology will become clear later. If someone has read ahead and can confirm this, please do. Pocketguy, I refer you to The Fourth Way and In Search of The Miraculous books for more in depth explanation (you can also download it in pdf form). I would say, most including me when reaching that stuff for the first time skips that part in protest. I would advice you to persist and let it sink in slowly as I have been there myself and still struggling with it. Belief IS Reality Loki Dreaming
|
|
|
Post by pocketguy on Mar 18, 2012 21:44:50 GMT -6
Pocketguy, ... I would say, most including me when reaching that stuff for the first time skips that part in protest. I would advice you to persist [with reading about esoteric cosmology in Gnosis I pp 104-140] and let it sink in slowly as I have been there myself and still struggling with it. Can you or anyone else give sample use of esoteric cosmology that makes it seem to be worth reading? It doesn't have to be the exact stuff I'm skipping in Gnosis I; I would be happy to read sample use of any similar material in Gurdjieff's or Ouspensky's books too.
|
|
|
Post by I AM the Way on Mar 19, 2012 10:07:02 GMT -6
I'm skipping pp 104-140. It's estoeric cosmology. One might blame the material for this. Mouravieff is spending a lot of time on claims that have no obvious empirical content or relevance to work on self. Picking a claim at random, I choose this from page 136: "The law is exact: with time, growing elements [of a political regime] develop, and, after reaching the peak of this development, they start to decline, degenerating and sliding towards total decay." If things are growing so far, then that's consistent with the law -- the decay didn't start yet. If things are failing, that's consistent with the law. If things are cycling, maybe one cycle is a different political regime from the next. There is no set of observations that is inconsistent with the alleged law. I can't see a way to apply this to work on self either. One might also blame me for this. I lack faith, I am impatient to get to working on myself , I'm working from narrow-minded empiricism, etc. Guilty as charged. I'll check back occasionally. If you guys get through the esoteric cosmology part and are looking at any page past 140, that's great, I'll join you then. If you can't persist through it either, that's unfortunate; perhaps people like me who can't or won't should make calendar entries to check back here every week or two to see if we got to page 141 yet. Our Ipsissimus is within his rights to suggest that the group skip forward. Perhaps the relevance of the cosmology will become clear later. If someone has read ahead and can confirm this, please do. That section is certainly more scale than you absolutely need. Those pages are about the Ray of Creation... that which is above. So, it is applicable since what is above mirrors that which is below. If you really want to skip it, then I don't have a problem. Although, you'll probably miss a fruitful tidbit or two. The Law of Seven, just like the Law of Three, is extremely important. If all you want is self-help chased with diet mysticism, then there's always The Secret or The Power of Now. However, if you want something much deeper and all-encompassing, then I hope you read Gnosis and all the 4th Way books, which the Cult of Cthulhu recommends, from cover to cover.
As Yrreiht mentioned, the Law of Three can be witnessed in your own life as the desire to do something, the obstacles which prevent you from doing something, and any mitigating factors become the third force - such as esoteric teaching, magical will, your chief feature, the girlfriend texting that she's pregnant, or some guy on a social network calling you fat. Don't go by quantity (strictly by the numbers), but by categories. Forces one and two are what they are. Third force is neutralizing, reconciling, and can tip the balance.
Regarding the Law of Seven, most people involved in this study group will begin just fine. Then, they'll reach an interval between the 2nd and 3rd note or rung on the ladder, or level of an Octave. This will derail some readers. A bit of inner force is needed to stay on track. Later, there is another interval. This is the universe forcing a straight line to curve, imagine a banana curving as it grows. That is life. However, recognizing the nature of Octaves and the Law of Seven can remind us that yet another shock is needed to bridge the interval and keep on the righteous path. This is esotericism.
Skipping a couple chapters is probably your second interval, pocketguy. If you just can't stand reading about a system of comoses etc., then what are you going to do when encountering even crazier material? The important thing is getting to the end, finishing the book with an open mind.
Read up to section 3 by tomorrow night. I'm a chapter and a half into it already, and can safely tell you that Gnosis gets even better! I'm ordering volumes II and III from amazon tonight. Keep discussing the book - stuff you like, don't like, resonate with, and have trouble conceptualizing.
Am I worried about Cultists flocking to Christianity after being exposed to Mouravieff's teaching? No, not at all, Lokidreaming. The reconciliation between Satanism and Christianity will be jarring for most, but that is as it should be. This Work is about disengaging our buffers. Soon, all will taste the key lime cheesecake of He Who Must Not Be Named!
By His loathsome tentacles,
VS
|
|
|
Post by mattsaturnaeon on Mar 19, 2012 16:38:47 GMT -6
We don't read too much about factory worker seers or Walmart assistant manager magicians, do we? Haha, maybe that's exactly what we need! I'm kind of with Pocketguy on preferring to focus on internal advice that I directly experience rather than cosmological schemas which don't have much to do with my actual practice. But that shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone. Pretty much I just acknowledge that my inner spark may be an emanation or of the same substance as higher forces, open myself to them, and that does the trick in that department.
|
|
|
Post by mattsaturnaeon on Mar 19, 2012 16:53:14 GMT -6
Can sort of be boiled down to, "Don't make excuses for yourself." That's what I'm seeing more and more of religion as -- just a hardcore sort of existentialism that demands you drop all pretension and live by what's in your soul.
|
|