Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Topics - Olive

Pages: [1]
1
Hey everyone. I was making a reply to a post over in the thread "Discussing Beliefs" - but I think there is enough here to actually open this up to a separate discussion. I'll quote the post I was responding to (From our lovely Co-Founder/Administrator Xepera maSet), and leave my reply unedited. I would greatly enjoy hearing thoughts/arguments about the different approaches I've briefly sketched out here, and I'll be back to answer questions/continue the discussion. Without further ado,


So I think I've FINALLY narrowed it down to one single, connected, provable argument to confirm the Prince of Darkness for anyone willing to accept the evidence.

1. Consciousness is not the same as Nature and can go against it.

2. So, there must be something outside of Nature that chose to give life consciousness.

3. An intelligence outside of Nature is a God. (Done, but wait)

4. Consciousness is inherently opposed to Nature.

5. So there must be a God inherently opposed to Nature.

6. This God is what has been described in every tradition as "The Prince(ess) of Darkness.

7. Therefore the Prince(ess) of Darkness Exists. Could be Set, Odin, Ishtar, Satan or Lucifer, Prometheus, Quetzalcoatl, or and of the thousands of others, but It exists.


It's me again.  ;)  I'm sorry to keep doing this Xepera - I'm not trying to pick on you or your arguments. But I do like when you lay them out point by point, because it makes it really easy to see where our intuitions differ, and I think this is great kindling for conversation.

I agree with all of your big points. I think you have firm footing in saying that Consciousness is apparently different from Nature, and even that it is actually inherently opposed to it. In fact that is the very touchstone of Gnostic thought, which I'm sure you know by now that I am rather fond of. Heck, just replace the words "Nature" with "Demiurgos" and "Consciousness" with "Spirit," and the similarities become obvious. Most Gnostics would probably follow you all the way through this argument.

But Metaphysically/Epistemologically speaking, I can't grant you 5 - and I definitely can't grant you 2. Making a statement like 2 is what I would call taking an "outside-in" approach, because you are saying that something must have come into Nature in order to oppose it, or to sow the seeds of its opposition, or more explicitly to create us. But there really isn't anything we can point to, or test, or conceive of that would even suggest the possibility of something like this happening in the physical universe - other than our own apparent improbable excellence. (Which of course, is necessary for any observation to have been made in the first place, or any discussion to be had about it.) That doesn't mean it couldn't have happened, but there is no reason to think that it did and it is simply not evident to us now.

Personally, I think the "inside-out" approach is a little more sophisticated. That is to say, that something happened within nature that would lead to the opposition we see today. It is even harder to disprove this and say it must have come from outside when we consider that there is no way to prove that the opposition of Consciousness is actually a strict opposition to the goals of Nature, and not also a Natural process. Especially when we see that the very workings of nature at almost every level are opposition, consuming itself, and overcoming itself. The aggressive and self-destructive nature of man could very well be the flowering of these tendencies. From this perspective, the opposition is only visible from the point of view of the individual, who is faced with pain, death, and annihilation on every side. But from the perspective of Nature/Demiurgos, all is going well. This method doesn't lead us to speculating about another world and our mystical origin from it, or the beings/forms that might reside there. This way of thinking would consider the "outside-in" school to be taking a mythological explanation literally instead of symbolically. We could still say that there is a God of Consciousness/Prince of Darkness - but not in the sense that he actually exists somewhere, even if that place is outside of space/time, but in the sense that the Platonic Forms are abstractions or pure Idea Forms of the manifestations of Nature. That is, the Prince of Darkness is manifested through us, and does not need a greater level of existence than that.

Before I wrap this up, I just want to stipulate that what I've said above does NOT indicate that Nature/Logos is something to be praised and fused with. I think the critique of existence is still possible, and maybe even stronger from the perspective that our individual beings/body-souls are a product of that Nature. It also does not mean that it is impossible to truly oppose Nature. But to do that, it might be worthwhile to take a look at our true mystical origin, our true Father and Mother, the place that we really did come from that is apart from Nature - and that is non-existence. Our conscious experience really did arise from nothingness, which is nowhere in Nature and has nothing to do with it. It is likely we will return there some day soon. Therefore an Anti-cosmic approach would be concerned with what the unmanifest is, and how to know it, rather than to try and take action in this world against Nature; which in truth would only empower its own self-contained machinations.

The perspective I have outlined for you here, is in its most basic form, Monistic Gnosticism. Those who oppose the course of Nature without admitting another Supernatural world as the source of this conflict, other than the non-world of nonexistence, from which we as individuals were born, but that Nature is forever removed from. I'm not saying this is the gospel truth, but an equivalent argument for the POD from this side might run something like this:


1. Consciousness/The Conscious Experience is inherently opposed by Nature.

2. Our Bodies and Minds are Products of that same Nature

3. But our Consciousness is not. It arose from Nonexistence, which Nature does not know.

4. The Prince of Darkness is a God inherently opposed to Nature, and is manifested as beings that are separate and opposed to that Nature.

5. We are manifested beings who are opposed to Nature, and are separate from it since our point of origin is beyond this world, and our consciousness of the world does not exist in the world.

6. Therefore the Prince(ess) of Darkness Exists. Could be Set, Odin, Ishtar, The Serpent, Lucifer, Prometheus, Quetzalcoatl, or and of the thousands of others, but It exists.


But of course, this formulation shows the POD hypothesis to be ancillary and sort of unnecessary, since the biggest ideas are in points 1-3. Once it is understood that POD is the Platonic Ideal that connects these manifested adversarial beings, then of course it exists- since we exist. We don't need it to 'exist' more than that. Someone more passionate about this point of view might feel it more useful to extend it otherwise, like so: (Remember, Demiurge/Demiurgos is Nature. It's not a being, though we may talk of it that way sometimes.)

1. Consciousness/The Conscious Experience is inherently opposed by Demiurgos.

2. Our Bodies and Minds are Products of that same Demiurgos

3. But our Consciousness is not. It arose from Nonexistence, which the Demiurge does not know.

4. Our Minds and Bodies prevent us from realizing this, as they are products of Demiurgos and are not concerned with/cannot comprehend that which is beyond its possibilities and those that it suggests.

5. Salvation from the hellish world of the Demiurge requires lessening attachment to it.

6. One who has broken his enchantment with Demiurgos can at last turn inwards to the infinite and timeless Origin, which was before and remains unblemished by, this fallen creation.

etc etc


2
General LHP Discussion / Strange Celestial Phenomena
« on: January 26, 2018, 06:17:12 am »
So, I've been having some weird experiences under the night sky over the last month. I've seen singular, out of place shooting stars 3 different times since the beginning of the year. (Yet when I stayed out to see a predicted meteor shower I didn't catch a single one - strange how that works.) But the last one of those three, the one I saw tonight, was very strange. I was having a fire with two friends, and we were all playing music together. I took a little break to admire the moon. Not long after I began, I saw something appear a good ways to the left of her. It was a single bright blue light. It looked just like a star but very large. It lingered there for about a quarter of a second, before firing off straight downwards in a streak that stayed visible until it was behind the canopied horizon. It stayed visible the entire time, and did not seem to fade at all in transit. This was quite a long distance to travel, from the apparent height of the moon to the horizon, spanning about 1/3 the radius of the sky. This movement happened in about the same time that it lingered, about 1/4 to 1/3 of a second. This was quite different than the other shooting stars I've come across in my days.

I'm not saying it was anything supernatural necessarily, but it was certainly very striking in the moment. And it happened so quickly I was the only one of my 3 friends to catch a glimpse of it because I happened to be moongazing. It felt significant to me.

Please share any of your stories about strange things in the sky and possible astrological/astronomical explanations. I am feeling some odd synchronicity that makes me want to learn more about this subject. These phenomena have been almost forcing themselves into my notice, and I swear I have never seen so many before. I would like to learn about some ancient interpretations of falling stars and their meanings. I'll be posting the information I uncover here.

3
General LHP Discussion / Lore on Lilith (Demon Goddess/Wife of Satan)
« on: December 11, 2017, 02:18:29 am »
Hello  everyone - I just joined the forum today after the recent Reddit AMA. I briefly spoke with a few of your members there, and I'm reading my way through the first newsletter as I write this. So far it seems that my philosophy/metaphysics are quite different than the average Setian, but our methods and goals overlap. It is refreshing to come across a focused spiritual/conscious community such as this.

My name is Olive. I'm a practicing witch and moon priestess. I'm most familiar with Hindu Realism, Buddhism, Materialism, Gnosticism, Hermeticism, and all things to do with spellcraft. I don't say any of these is the one truth, but I hold all of them as perspectives within myself. Each has its own wisdom to share.

Now that the introduction is out of the way, let's discuss this topic in earnest. These stories are from the Abrahamic tradition; you may consider them apocryphal if you only read the Bible, but this is clearly an ancient figure. She still retains one name drop in Isaiah, and many more in Jewish texts. She is even mentioned explicitly in the Dead Sea Scrolls.


Contrary to popular belief, Lilith was the first woman God created. He created her to be exactly equal with Adam. Both of them were male and female, fully self-satisfied, and androgynous. The only problem was that Lilith refused to be subservient to Adam as all other creatures were. There was a struggle for dominance during sex when he refused to submit to her as she had for him; Lilith decided to abandon Adam following this event - speaking "the ineffable name" as she did so.

Afterwards, other events may have transpired depending on which stories you believe. But eventually, God decided to make a new partner for Adam - one that would be incomplete without him and therefore appropriately subservient to him. He did this not by removing one rib, but his entire side. (I've heard Jewish rabbis argue this was the intent of the scripture, but we can get into that later if necessary.) He split Adam into two, one Man, one Woman. From this point on, they would always rely on one another.

So what happened with Lilith? She abandoned Eden and became the wife of Satan. She was immortal, having left the garden before the fall, and also the last 'complete' human. She is shown as female from the head to the waist, but below has male genitalia - representing her androgyny and sexual power.  (Interestingly, Satan is often depicted as both Male and Female as well; usually represented by giving him a pair of or just one breast.) Together they spawned all manner of demons. It was decided by god that 100 of her children would be put to death each day, and she made a deal with several archangels in exchange for her life. She agreed that any child who bore their names on an amulet would be protected from her.

There are many other stories that developed about her over time, and not all of them were unflattering. She is often credited as a protector of widows and single women, and the ultimate temptress for man. She is related to the Moon symbolically. She has also been used as a symbol for feminism. In the Qliphoth she appears prominently twice: once as Lilith the Younger, her traditional self, and once as Lilith the Elder, considered to be an anti-cherub - beautiful in appearance but putrefying in substance, and riding a strange beast.

I cannot imagine a more perfect bride for Satan.


I feel that many parts of this story have been made manifest in myself, both physically and psychically. (I'll elaborate on that when I get home and have a bit more time.) And her name and thoughtform hold much power. For these reasons I've begun to study her in more depth. I'll be posting my most interesting results here in this thread.


Discussion Topics
Discussion and interpretation of lore regarding Lilith.

Discussion of other gods and figures that fall under this archetype

Use of the names or symbols of Lilith in rituals and spells

Masculine and Feminine energies, their uses, balancing and extinguishing them.

Androgyny/Hermaphroditism

Self-sufficiency.

Pages: [1]