Question

[feranaja]

HI everyone,

Today as I peruse the forums I realized I'm not sure where many of my own pressing questions/interests fit, exactly. For me, the absolute foundation of all occult knowledge is self awareness, and that can be a daunting task, one which, imo, should take place on several levels -first, simple self examination and discussion - but if you just keep the evaluations to yourself, you risk a lot of delusion, potentially.In sharing with a community you can receive feedback that will prevent the going in circles i see in a lot of other places. If we are to grow, we need to be ruthlessly honest in a supportive yet equally forthcoming community? (If I sound like an old hippie turned New Ager, you're only half right, lol). So I'm looking for a Human Potential, Psychology, Creative Spirituality place where issues such as gratitude, anger, self discovery would fit. For me, they overlap with but do not need to be exclusively defined as one thing or the other - for example, some people would prefer to talk about their struggle on a path of the Tree, while others find it easier to simply say, I am torn between anger and acceptance.

I know that many of us are working on internal issues, and my experience has been that tackling problems multidimensionally gets the best results. I might ask for or design a ritual for self forgiveness after making a cosmic error, but I know I'd also like to talk to others about how to handle the self reproach on a practical, daily basis.

Soo... For those of us who like to use both vocabularies, I'd like to see a forum set up that is not strictly occult, but - much like the health topics - is more than peripherally relevant and related.

Any thoughts? Do these topics fit in somewhere here already and I'm just too daft to see it?
fera

[m1thr0s]

The Mortar & Pestle Forum was originally intended for that kind of discussion fera...although it is possible that the kinds of posts that are there right now may have been misleading in some way. Is there some reason your stuff would not fit there? They were not intended to be exclusively *occult* per se...

m1thr0s

[feranaja]

hhmm... I see diet/nutrition, yoga/meditation and science/technology. I guess I'm looking for a "personal development" or explicitly psychological sub-forum? Does that make sense?

[m1thr0s]

The sub-forums are in some ways just conversation queues...we have a New Age Philosophy and Mortar & Pestle forums, either of which would seem to meet the description you have outlined...

"personal development" is what this whole site is committed to really so I am hesitant to carve out a sub-forum for it...maybe if you just start posting we can see what develops...it may be easier to ascertain what you are after that way. Right now, I sort of feel like the structure already accomodates it.

edit: I'd be happy to discuss this further but maybe it should go to PM. It's possible that I am just not understanding what you are looking for that isn't already there...

m1thr0s

[Ðanisty]

hhmm... I see diet/nutrition, yoga/meditation and science/technology. I guess I'm looking for a "personal development" or explicitly psychological sub-forum? Does that make sense?Fera, you can post directly in the Mortar and Pestle forum. You don't have to use one of the sub-forums within it.

[feranaja]

Right - ok Dainsty, that makes a lot more sense to me then, I wasn't aware of this. I had thought the three sub-forums constituted the entirety.

m1thr0s, I kind of balk at the perennial philosophy being labelled New Age, lol, just because it's been co-opted by many...but that's just me being a curmudgeon. Will use it and M and P for my periodic ramblings, if that's ok.
Thanks guys...fera

[m1thr0s]

m1thr0s, I kind of balk at the perennial philosophy being labelled New AgeI understand...I'm not real keen on it myself. I may rename it if I can sort out what name to give it...I actually was not familiar with the term "perennial philosophy" as pertaining to so-called "new age" ideas. What makes these any more "perennial" than say, Alchemy, for instance?

m1thr0s

[feranaja]

YOu know, I've been mulling this over the past few days, and maybe the best way to get the ball rolling is to post a few links that define the perennial philosophy, for those who aren't familiar with the term...or would you like to do this in a separate thread? Here is one I found interesting/worthwhile:

http://mythosandlogos.com/perennial.html

The basic tenets seem to me to be well described thus:

First: the phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness--the world of things and animals and men and even gods--is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.

Second: human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.

Third: man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.

Fourth: man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

In other words, mysticism, pure and simple.


Now the way I see it is, the so-called New Age has simply co-opted these ideas and put them to the service of ego gratification, which obviously is at cross purposes with the true goal. The Shadow of the New Age is that it denies Shadow, and one can't hope to cross the barriers between psyche and spirit withour encountering a lot of fear and trembling. SO the New Age takes ideas such as these and makes the into some sort of pseudo-mystical feel good package, whereby individuals take refuge from the world and from their inner demons in a prettified land of soothing sounds, incense and high priced yoga classes.And there's nothing worng with this per se, it's just a mistake to think that immersing oneslef in things of beauty to calm the mind is the same as following a mystical path to enlightenment.


So for me, there is a huge gap between the New Age and the philosophy it draws upon - the perennial philosophy, and thinsg like the Seth books, which come to the conclusion that"we create our own reality" - an idea which is central to NewAge thinking, but in a shallow, egocentric, goal-oriented way.

I don't know for sure where Alchemy fits - if it's as I understand it, a metaphor for self tramsformation, then it would seem to me to be a part of the perennial tradition, IF one believes in the four foundational pronciples that is...
Did any of that make sense?

Not sure where we're going with this but..the topic seems worhwhile to me...
fera

[m1thr0s]

thanks fera, and I think here is just fine. see...this is where it gets confusing because by this definition (which I like btw), virtually ALL mystical and tantric traditions would also have to be classed as PP tradition...as would hermeticism and nearly all syncretic traditions...

and yet...there does still seem to be a certain something setting it apart...I just can't quite sort out what it is exactly...possibly the lack of any particular commitment to any particular path in specific...

m1thr0s

[feranaja]

thanks fera, and I think here is just fine. see...this is where it gets confusing because by this definition (which I like btw), virtually ALL mystical and tantric traditions would also have to be classed as PP tradition...as would hermeticism and nearly all syncretic traditions...

and yet...there does still seem to be a certain something setting it apart...I just can't quite sort out what it is exactly...possibly the lack of any particular commitment to any particular path in specific...

m1thr0s

Yes..exactly..and this is both a strength and a weakness as I see it. The lack of commitment makes it vulnerable to anyone's interpretation and since we humans are inclined to delude oursleves a great deal!? this is where the NEw Age fallacy comes in, that anyone can be a mystic in 3 easy lessons (for 199.95 with the DVD).

DOn't get me wrong, I've been an eclectic too and there's nothing I loathe more than elitism and fundamentalist attitudes withn Paganism and the occult. Many ecelectics are spiritually advanced and mature people which is not necessarily the case with everyone in an organized religion, now is it...the issue here for me is one of a lack of defining principles with regard to technique. You can't buy your way to enlghtenment and you can't use religion to avoid the harsh realities of life and then call yourself a msytic. PP demands that we keep bringing ourselves back to it's tenets again and again - and we're allowed to try on various methodologies I think - what matters is that we that we DO keep striving for unity.
I do think all of this must involve some sort of a guidebook?

fera

[m1thr0s]

well this is interesting as we are sort of defining a kind of ramp or springboard philosophy/metaphysics committed to commitment but not necessarily going any further than that. This may be a necessary distinction in the endgame...a sort of "lobby" area to the deeper mystery schools...

fascinating really...

m1thr0s

[Phoenix]

The basic tenets seem to me to be well described thus:

First: the phenomenal world of matter and of individualized consciousness--the world of things and animals and men and even gods--is the manifestation of a Divine Ground within which all partial realities have their being, and apart from which they would be non-existent.

Second: human beings are capable not merely of knowing about the Divine Ground by inference; they can also realize its existence by a direct intuition, superior to discursive reasoning. This immediate knowledge unites the knower with that which is known.

Third: man possesses a double nature, a phenomenal ego and an eternal Self, which is the inner man, the spirit, the spark of divinity within the soul. It is possible for a man, if he so desires, to identify himself with the spirit and therefore with the Divine Ground, which is of the same or like nature with the spirit.

Fourth: man’s life on earth has only one end and purpose: to identify himself with his eternal Self and so to come to unitive knowledge of the Divine Ground.

In other words, mysticism, pure and simple.


Now the way I see it is, the so-called New Age has simply co-opted these ideas and put them to the service of ego gratification, which obviously is at cross purposes with the true goal. The Shadow of the New Age is that it denies Shadow, and one can't hope to cross the barriers between psyche and spirit withour encountering a lot of fear and trembling. SO the New Age takes ideas such as these and makes the into some sort of pseudo-mystical feel good package, whereby individuals take refuge from the world and from their inner demons in a prettified land of soothing sounds, incense and high priced yoga classes.And there's nothing worng with this per se, it's just a mistake to think that immersing oneslef in things of beauty to calm the mind is the same as following a mystical path to enlightenment.


So for me, there is a huge gap between the New Age and the philosophy it draws upon - the perennial philosophy, and thinsg like the Seth books, which come to the conclusion that"we create our own reality" - an idea which is central to NewAge thinking, but in a shallow, egocentric, goal-oriented way.

I don't know for sure where Alchemy fits - if it's as I understand it, a metaphor for self tramsformation, then it would seem to me to be a part of the perennial tradition, IF one believes in the four foundational pronciples that is...
Did any of that make sense?

Not sure where we're going with this but..the topic seems worhwhile to me...
fera


feranaja, finally someone that understand´s THE point of view im trying to uphold

feranaja if you want to exchange ideas im at your disposal, here´s the question ( the first of many )

When you refere Divine ground, is it the basic principle of colective mind or the basis of the cult of the godess?

[feranaja]

feranaja, finally someone that understand´s THE point of view im trying to uphold

feranaja if you want to exchange ideas im at your disposal, here´s the question ( the first of many )

When you refere Divine ground, is it the basic principle of colective mind or the basis of the cult of the godess?


hhmmm...well I appreciate the dialogue and although I don't know if I can answer questions per se, I'm always happy to discuss.

For me there is on right answer to this question. If I had to pick between those two I'd say the Collective Mind, because I would see any cult, any personalized deity as fractional, important but not the whole, it's still a splinter image. For me, the Ground of Being is not something easily described - it includes, but is not limited to the human mind, it would be something more like the One Essence in which all life has it's essence. Mind, psyche, consciousness is all a fragmentary part of the One Life...

Probably not a coherent answer, but then I don't know if there is one. How do YOU see the Ground of Being?
fera

[Phoenix]

Probably not a coherent answer, but then I don't know if there is one. How do YOU see the Ground of Being?
fera

This way, my litle private bealif :rolleyes:

I agree, that was a great answer

I think that the baiscs are energy, everything is energy, including ourselfs.
IWell let me try to explain the basics:

THE DEITY CONCEPT
( A DIFFERENT APPROACH ):
First of all: Do not judge poorly this concept, it is not NEW AGE
It is in part Uphold by the gaia theory itself:


I will now attempt to decribe in metaphysical terms the Deity Concept, and its relevance to us as individual lifestreams, rather than our present lives. The idea of life being repeated millions of times by the units of consciousness is central to metaphysical thought in this context and which I admit is akin to repetition of the preceding texts, and yet to quote a psychological maxim "A bit of reinforcement is always beneficial". Actually, the Deity Concept is really very simple, it is so simple it defies analysis and rational interpretation. Those who have preceded us in evolution have stated "God is very simple, it is only Maya which is complex", Maya being an ancient term for Manifest Objectivity. The whole idea is expressed as "Oneness", and is the essence of Monism as opposed to Dualism which is a secondary feature preceding manifestation, the which process is to be accepted as occurring simultaneously before time began. I have tried to elucidate the Creation as a sequence of stages using the symbols of Pythagoras.This is the only way of getting a glimpse of what happened in an instant, our minds being limited to a sequential mode of thought.We have to assume that this interpretation was true then as it is now, and always was, and always will be.You can see already that the rational mind has difficulty dealing with these ideas, which are ancient beyond reckoning.


We will pass over the formation of the Triune Aspects and the corresponding Tetraktys which produces the basic Septenates of the metaphysical cosmos.From such Primordial Elements derive those Entities which are the Intelligences and Powers we tend to associate with more tangible Gods.
To return to the concept of the "Monad" which at the founding of the creative impulse issued forth countless "monads",each a miniature replica of Itself. This was "The Monadic Diaspora". Every lifestream has at the core of its being a divine spark which is a" monad".It is the function of the monad to gain the experience of innumerable existences enabling the said lifestream to find its way back to its source as a Conscious God requiring cycles of eternities with little more than consciousness and a vague identification of genus ,or group of species - as precedes the human phase The other two of the triune aspects of life, "mind" and "soul" are in a virtual state of potential only after eons of time and repeated cycles does the" manas factor",(which is mind ) become sufficiently developed to bring some feeling of individuality. In some cases this is brought about by more highly evolved beings some millions of years in seniority, who take it upon themselves to mingle with the subject race in order to imbue this particular faculty, as in our case of terrestrial humanity, and which is included in one of our myths. And so, having been permitted to realise individuality we will continue to experience the battle within ourselves until having reached that next level of evolution which will be on the threshold of an ever increasing Group Consciousness, according to The Law of Synthesis, one of the Seven Laws within the framework of The Law of Karma. This Law permits such increasing absorption into ever larger groups that the whole can subsequently become a Planetary Logos and ulitmately into the unimagineable power of a Solar Logos. Throughout those high levels the feeling of individuality tends to be submerged in significance into what is analogous to our subconsciousness, but whereas we are unable to access our subconsiousness, at the higher levels the sense of individuality remains accessible together with all memory of total existence.

I have digressed somewhat from the theme of The Deity Concept, in order to shed some light on the reationship between humanity and That which is God. In the creation of matter and the drive towards remote perfection of Life, there remained an aspect of Inertial Resistance and yet at the same time intelligent and motivated in terms of chaos. How this operates in the highest realms is beyond conjectureand and as far as we are concerned has no power in our higher realms, but we do know that it is very active and powerful in the world on which we live and its lower astral levels .How this aspect of chaos affects our world and hinders our development is an intriguing subject and is also bound up in Karmic Law and occult knowledge. And so once again the question arises as to what is God?

and again I can only repeat ,"The answer lies deeply embedded in ourselves".This poor and inadequate discourse only achieves a vague appreciation in an intellectual sense.

To actually KNOW requires many lives of dedication and service, and involves raising the kundalini power and the achievement of that higher level of consciousness which is associated with Soul Consciousness and Cosmic Consciousness. All this seems very cold and impersonal to those of us who have been indoctrinated in the principal that "God is Love".For a Personal God we are firstof all exhorted to"Know Thyself" and refers to the indwelling monad. Outside of this our highest aspect of Deity is The Solar Logos on which the whole solar system on all levels, depends for energy, life and mind. The Sun is the Material Manifestation of That which is even greater than The Logos Itself and is known as Brahma, Jehovah or Allah depending on local tradition.The Love is real enough but is not the sentimental emotion normally associated, but is a Power running through and behind every movement in the evolutionary scheme. It is the Feminine Aspect of Brahma, Intelligent Activity, and is caring but in an impersonal way, but there are methods of invoking this power to be uplifting and inspiring, and involves certain aspects of Yoga and Dynamic Prayer. One of the biggest errors of the Christian Churches has been to teach that Jesus was God, whereas he was a Cosmic Master in his Fourth Aspect, knowingly sacrificing himself to produce a particular Karmic "dispensation" for us at that precise time,- the teaching was an added bonus. Because of the elevated status of Jesus there is some basis for associating Him with the Force of The 2nd. Logos and using His Name when invoking assistance on The Path. Whatever the criticisms levelled at the Jesuits, their founder had the correct notion of recommending the repetition of the Name "Jesus" as often as possible throughout the day for spiritual enlightenment .

http://www.users.bigpond.com/phdaley/images/absolute%20monad.gif

Only one thing, i do not bealive in God in the termo of allmighty ruller of the universe, "god" is energy counscious in itself but uncounscious of everything else.
I know that it looks confused but it is hard to explain, i try to view matter´s throught other bealifs EyE, to be impartial therefore i based this article on that thought (i gess it becomes simpler to understand for others)

THE SOUL CONCEPT
"The Gods themselves are Facets of the Soul requiring attention."(Marcilio-Ficino).
Esoteric philosophy reconciles all religions.

"There is no scientific evidence of its existence. We can only rely on the information from the fore-runners of the human race such as : Adepts, Masters of Yoga, Saints and Mystics. Ancient sacred texts which in turn were handed down orally from generation to generation before being committed to writing are often referred to, and as they are attributed to Avatars such as Patanjali, Krishna and more recently Jesus who mentions the "soul" from time to time in the gospels..." http://www.users.bigpond.com/phdaley/soul_concept.htm - This explains it better than i, the esoteric concept, now let´s get cientific,

Gaia hypothesis
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg/200px-The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg) http://en.wikipedia.org/skins-1.5/common/images/magnify-clip.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:The_Earth_seen_from_Apollo_17.jpg)
Understanding planetary habitability is partly an extrapolation of the Earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth)'s conditions, as it is the only planet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet) currently known to harbor life (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life). The release of this image had an effect in leading to the proposition that the Earth was alive.




"The Gaia hypothesis is an ecological (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecology) theory that proposes that the living matter of planet Earth functions like a single organism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organism). An early recognition of some of the core assumptions of the Gaia hypothesis was given in the book Lives of a Cell (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lives_of_a_Cell) by Lewis Thomas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_Thomas). It was first scientifically formulated in the 1960s by the independent research scientist James Lovelock (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Lovelock), as a consequence of his work for NASA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA) on methods of detecting life on Mars. He wrote an article in the science journal Nature (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_%28journal%29), before publishing the concept in the 1979 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979) book Gaia: A new look at life on Earth. He named this self-regulating living system after the Greek (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_mythology) goddess (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goddess) Gaia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_%28mythology%29), using a suggestion from the novelist William Golding (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Golding). The Gaia Hypothesis has since been supported by a number of scientific experiments and provided a number of useful predictions so is properly referred to as the Gaia Theory..." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaia_hypothesis,

Do you understand my point of view, it´s all about energy, magick, chi, pyrochenices, telechenices, ghosts, monsters, spirits it all comes down to one thing, NRG, pure and simple,http://www.trans4mind.com/psychotechnics/energyfield.html

One last thing dont take this for granted, deny it, prove otherwise but explore the possibility :confused:

Your friend

Phoenix