ravenest
I'm sure the resurrected Jesus would agree with you.
Ah, right .....
I was wondering how we got started on this?
The Book of The Law Study Group 3.62
Ah, right .....
I was wondering how we got started on this?
Aeon418
Or upon attaining Tiphareth.
From the point of view of the sun all this "dying god" stuff is a defect of perception. Tribulation of ordeal? From R.H.K.'s seat things look a bit different.
Zephyros
I once read a theory Joseph was a Christ-prototype, suffering symbolic death by being thrown into a pit at the hands of his eleven brothers.
In any case, what about Lazarus? He, too, was resurrected, although not at the price of pain (except for the obvious death). God is eternal, death and resurrection have no meaning, but Lazerus's rising from the grave seems to me to be a far more powerful symbol, but the religion isn't called Lazaranity.
In any case, what about Lazarus? He, too, was resurrected, although not at the price of pain (except for the obvious death). God is eternal, death and resurrection have no meaning, but Lazerus's rising from the grave seems to me to be a far more powerful symbol, but the religion isn't called Lazaranity.
Aeon418
To me Lazarus is the candidate for initiation who "sleepeth and is dead" in mundane life. He waits in the tomb(of body/mind) for the call of the Angel.
John 11:11 said:
Liber LXV 1:1 said:
Zephyros
But is suffering always bad? I'm not talking about the ritual suffering of the Christian mystic, but of the Hero Quest of Theseus, the trials of Hercules, Moses' journeys in the wilderness, the testing of the Children of Israel for 40 years... the list of spiritual tests is endless, and most not of Christian invention. All could be interpreted as symbolic death.
My point is, every fairy-tale knight rescuing the princess is a potential Christ-figure. How are fairy-tales told in the new Aeon?
My point is, every fairy-tale knight rescuing the princess is a potential Christ-figure. How are fairy-tales told in the new Aeon?
ravenest
YES! I knew if I dropped the J word (in my post #18) I would get a good response from you
That cannot be denied! (In context.) I was taught Lazarus was raised from the dead. Why oh why didn't I think of that before? I had a reputation at junior high school (catholic ... I eventually got kicked out :happydance: and got sent to the public school ; multiple interesting sports, aside from boring old cricket and rugby - karate after school in the gym, Asian social studies, a science lab where we could do experiments and .... girls ... GIRLS!!! ... everywhere .... right next to you
) ... ahem! anyway; where was I? Yes, I had a reputation for firing off questions in refute of dogma (In science once the teaching 'brother' said; "There are three states of matter - solid, liquid and gas" I asked, “What about the flames in fire, what state are they in?" He got confused and came back the next day and said "I read up on that last night and apparently they used to think there were four; fire, water, air and earth." - And hence 'Brother Kevin' (gosh! I still remember his name) stimulated me towards a lifelong interest in Hermetics ( ... and magick and 'paganism' and ....) But I could have yelled out "What about Lazarus?"
If I was going to get all theologically Christian about it I might conclude that JC did that to show that the FIRST concern was the individual human being, 'God' raised an ordinary man first as a demo of how we were all going to be raised and then did it himself on himself later.
Well, it’s no more crazy or convoluted than some of the stuff they tried to teach me.
ravenest
No it isn’t. But focus on it misses the point, some examples;
In the Samurai tradition there is readiness and awareness to accept death at the instant at hand. To die a good death, which should be a form of art, wether to be killed by another or the self. That puts one into a state of ecstatic appreciation of the moment, existence, the gift of life, nature, etc. - that’s the ecstasy part of the formula.
[Which some say, myself included, is the original, natural, humanistic (in the modern sense of the term, as opposed to the modern opposite - dehumanisation) and desirable state.].
That is the purpose, not to be focused on the death or the pain or the 'mortification' of the sepuku, not to endure suffering to PUT YOU INTO a heightened state, you should be in that heightened state all the time, regardless of any activity you do (although the training may seem harsh and suffering).
This is similar to the real concept in Japanese Zen of empty mind. It is not to have an empty mind, or a mind befuddled by riddles and koans, it is to enable the mind to work properly. Not to be vacant nor non-understanding or offering confused gymnastics as in the style of 'western' or Suzuki type Zen.
In traditional Australian aboriginal cultures pain and 'suffering' were an important component of culture, for many reasons. A release of pent up energy (e.g. one may deeply slash oneself as an expression of mourning), a process of initiation (and yes, here we do have the factor of pain as a way of entering altered states but also one had to be tough to survive in many of those cultures that lived in a harsh environment and those that didn’t survive their initiation, physically and literally, would no longer be a hindrance to the group or clan when hard times hit).
There was (and still is) punishment for breaking law (spearing, stone axe in the top of the head) - but these are targeted to specific parts of the body (for a reason ... see Liber Abba section on sacrifice for the magical explanation) with a specific 'magical' or traditional weapon.
( less serious infractions you might get to dance instead of just standing there i.e. present a moving target, or smaller still, they might deliberately miss, or you will just be shown the weapon - like the Samurai warning of showing two inches of blade by slightly drawing the sword). That’s why some of these people don’t like to see these ceremonial weapons.
In one instance in Australian history the Governor wanted to show the aboriginal people that whites were bound by the white law as aboriginals were now claimed to be. Some white 'criminals' were used for the demonstration, they were tied to a frame and flogged, and the aboriginals were horrified for two reasons; the cruelty and the inappropriate use of pain and suffering. Even in my era the consciousness still exists; years ago a touring Mexican showman who threw knives and axes as part of his act visited LA Perouse (near Sydney) an area with a significant aboriginal population which included weekend displays of boomerang and spear throwing and culture. After observing the local show The Mexican offered to demonstate his own and put his back board up, positioned his woman assistant against it and started outlining her with thrown tomahawks. When the aboriginals were asked what they thought of the show they commented that although the man's 'wife' must have been unfaithful, either the thing she did wasn’t that bad or the man really loved her and just did it to 'save face'.
Yes, I agree. But I believe the 'point of focus' is lost by many ... it is not for the sake of the suffering to be released from the present word as it is considered evil, bad or 'fallen' but, to whatever extent, to be used as a tool, not an end in itself, to get to an ongoing state of natural ecstasy and appreciation of life and the 'moment'. [See Crowleys 'Postcards for Probationers'.]
Every princess that needs saving has a dragon in there somewhere and every dragon that is slayed (in western culture - in eastern culture dragon is 'lucky') has a Princess in distress or tied to a post in the background ... know what I mean
By Tom Cruise? Star Wars? Or perhaps by realising it is all about process within the self and by following a relevent (within context of the New Aeon) system of initiation. Or if your cluey enough to do it yourself (tricky) ... again 'Postcards to Probationers.'
ravenest
ravenest
Exactly! A DEFECT OF PERCEPTION.
To paraphrase the way one magical genius put it in a certain rite of initiation;
The 'infernal' rite of the dying god, is centred on the observed 'tragedy' of the Sun's 'fall' as observed through winter and its rise culminating in summer, which ignorant minds fear. But the philosopher understands it is a natural process to do with the orbit of the earth around the sun and the tilt of the earth’s axis. The Sun stays where it is, as it does during the day/night cycle, it is us that pass through our own shadow. The wise men of the past saw a similar process in the life of man, a cycle of the Sun's death and rebirth. Maybe now we should reconsider that the life of man is still a reflection of the life of the Sun but that the idea of the solar tragedy and the dying god is due to a misperception due to our position of observation and that perhaps we need to reconsider, in light of our new understanding, a new perception of the human journey.
Or as Swinburne put it wryly [i.e.; seemingly in reverse
]Night, the shadow of light,
And life, the shadow of death.
Aeon418
Why all this focus on the payoff at the end? Very Osirian.I meant when we finally get to the end of this thread.
It's like having kids in the back of a car going: "Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"
The Ruach-mind is exactly the same. And that's what the IAO-dying(Ruach)god formula maps. But is the Ruach's perception an accurate one? Nope! R.H.K.'s commentary of IAO might be this line from Liber Tzaddi.
Let the Ruach chew on that one!
In fact Liber Tzaddi itself makes a good commentary on this verse. It's always been one of my fave libers.
http://hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib90.html
