Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomPost by 104KPost by TomOne good reason why Crowley added the -k was to avoid that
confusion of meanings.
However, since the lore of occultism is largely based upon
confusion of one kind or another, it's not at all surprising that
this particular confusion persists.
And why do you believe occultism is largely based on confusion Tom?
Well, for one thing, the bulk of occultism treats symbols as if they
were the objects, states, or conditions they represent and, vice
versa, that the thing represented by a symbol is the symbol. Thus,
by manipulating the symbol, occultists believe that you manipulate
the thing itself. It's essentially a confusion of the symbol with
its meaning.
I think you are confused into believing what you think the "bulk of
occultism" does or does not do.
Or perhaps you're confused about that yourself.
Perhaps, but also perhaps your response is a signal that you are not
prepared to to entertain you may be confused.
Post by TomPost by 104KCan you provide a couple of examples
where Occultism (rather than individual occultists) confuses symbols for
what they represent or that this is what Occultism teaches in general?
Do a Google search on "thoughts are things".
I don't need to if you're talking about that guy (can't remember his
name atm) who supposedly channeled the Universe. How does this prove
your assertion that Occultism is about confusion? If I have your
attributation of the phrase wrong then please do clarify, I'm not going
to do the work for you.
Post by TomOr "Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel".
Post by 104KAre you saying this confusion is what magick is about also?
Do a Google Groups search for the key word "confusion" in alt.magick posts
by Tom.
I don't need to do that either, as far as I remember you claim this
confusion is key to magick as well as occultism. So how do you
discriminate between occultism and magick?
Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomPost by 104KIs it because your skeptic approach finds that answer more
desirable?
No, it's not. See above.
Well, this is what you claim, but
But, of course, *you* know what I'm thinking and won't be deterred by
anything I might say that does not agree with that.
Aha! You don't like me doing what *you* do to others? Something to think
about perhaps?
"what if your skeptic approach is
ruling your thinking without you realizing? "
Why did you snip this part?
Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomPost by 104KOperations such as the KCHGA and experiences of Samadhi involve
immense moments of clarity, not confusion.
Except that hardly anyone agrees on what the KCHGA actually is. The
definition of that term is quite unclear.
Well, to be clearer then, I will say that the KCHGA involves making the
two as one, which is a gnostic term.
A neat bit of confusion there. "making the two as one".
Why do you think that is confusing? Do you think everyone must find it
confusing because you do? Are you basing your ideas on magick and
occultism on your own confusions Tom?
Post by TomPost by 104KGoT 106. Jesus said, "When you make the two into one, you will become
children of Adam, and when you say, 'Mountain, move from here!' it will
move."
Well nothing confused there, right? We are all, according to the bible
children of Adam, but here we must make two into one before we can become
what we already are. And then the mountains will move at our command.
Oooookay. Totally without any ambiguity or contradiction, I suppose.
It is called Esoteric Wisdom, and your response only goes to show that
the greatest Truths can be stated openly and be safe from the profane.
Post by TomPost by 104KAnd I suppose if I say these statements about these experiences are only
unclear (or confusing) to those that have not experienced them your
skeptic approach will accuse me of what?
The confusion is deliberate.
The moving beyond confusion is deliberate. Anything else claiming to be
magick is just Black Magick, like Archie's current.
Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomAs for "experiences of samadhi",
we should clarify that, too. A more accurate description would be
"claims of experiences of samadhi".
Experiences of Samadhi or Union, are unmistakable,
But totally subjective.
Well, duh, talk of stating the aobvious Tom.
Any claim that anyone makes about their
Post by Tom"experiences of samadhi" are unverifiable.
Well, duh, talk of stating the aobvious Tom.
Post by TomPost by 104KBut that confusion is what occultism is about,
Yes, it is.
Post by 104Kit is the banishing, or moving beyond, such confusions which is the goal
of the Great Work.
Magicians work in a world filled with paradoxes and conundrums, deliberate
obfuscations, blinds, and half-truths, hints and unsupported allegations,
ambiguities and ineffabilities.
And the Initiated Know this, no confusion about it at all.
You don't "move beyond" them. You just
Post by Tomfill yourself up with them until
Nonsense, hombre. Even your amigo Erwin agrees with this point I am
making that the KCHGA is about clearing away all the dross/confusions.
you haven't got any clear notion of what's
Post by Tomgoing on, so that you can then easily believe whatever silly shit you like.
Like believing you can move mountains by counting to two wrong.
What you are describing is not True Will, boyo, you're stuck thinking
that one way of entering altered states of consciousness is what magick
is all about because obviously that is all you Know about. Are you
prepared to entertain your idea on confusions may be wrong? I guess that
depends how able you are of letting go of pet theories. Especially when
you appear to be putting so much energy behind it, clingy.
Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomAny person's claim to have
experienced samadhi as a result of occultism is quite unverifiable.
Of course it is, and you're being extremely pedantic here.
The important thing you said here is "Of course it is".
Er, it was just obvious.
Post by TomPost by 104KPost by TomPost by 104KI think you are concentrating on what is not real and thinking that
is all there is, which is a form of confusion. So maybe you are
projecting?
You speculate that I'm thinking that what's not real is all that is.
That certainly would be a confused thing to think.
Well, let me clear that up, I do not think that what is not real is
all there is.
No, let me clear this up for you, you *claim" to not think what is not
real is all there is. It is possible you are confused about that.
That's the most confused thing you've said yet, outside of that bizarre
gnostic babble, of course.
Perhaps you are just confused about what I was saying?
Post by TomPost by 104KI,04: Every number is infinite; there is no difference.
This tag line is another good example of what I mean. It's a deliberate
paradox that's intended to breed and maintain a state of confusion.
LOL! Is that so eh Tom? You don't think that it just might be you don't
know or understand what the saying means?
--
I,04: Every number is infinite; there is no difference.