Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Every living being has a "soul" or consciousness. In Buddhism, they say there is no "soul" but what they really mean is that there is no permanent, fixed, single, ego identity that goes on forever. They aren't saying that the being doesn't have lifeforce energy or consciousness. I believe that just about every tradition believes in some kind of spirit that goes on after death. The real question to ask is how many OLD souls are there? For me, an "old soul" would be someone who has been human for many lifetimes.

Edited by BluLotus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Nungali said:

That would be VERY ironic  !   :D    ... I think that is a 'typo'  .

Okay first off!!! LOL

The card DAMMIT!!! The card!!! ;)

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

I am referring to the schema I outlined in my post on page 2  You must have read it as you 'thanked' it .

 

 Ah right, hmm....


 

Quote

 

.......... Uranus..........

 

Pluto...............Neptune

 

 

 

Saturn  |          |  Jupiter

 

..............  SUN ..............

 

 

 

..............Mercury.........

 

................MOON .........

 

Mars ........................Venus

 

 

Well from what I know of the planets, that makes little sense to me.

I guess you are trying to show some dynamic what should be going on, but to me it seems pretty random at this point.
I may not be familiar enough with all the nomenclature you use nor the planets themselves as placeholders.

Testing testing...

Quote

.......... Chokmah..........

 

Malkuth...............Kether

 

 

 

Binah  |          |  Chesed

 

..............  Tiferet ..............

 

 

 

..............Hod..............

 

................Yesod .........

 

Geburah ........................Netzach

 

Well okay, I guess I see certain patterns now.

Though I have forgotten what you where trying to say that I misunderstood.

 

Quote

I assume you are talking 'Jungian   'shadow  and that definition that includes the whole unconscious.  In that case, I find the suggestion of   dispelling it, or wanting to dispel it or even talking about dispelling it rather odd .   Perhaps what is meant is making a better working connection with it ?   That is why in my 'psychological astrological tree' the  Sun is linked to the Moon (surrounded by the three main drives and the 3 inner personal planets ) through Mercury  and why a central motif of hermetics is the Sun and Moon conjoined , in some way . 

 

Ah okay, perhaps, it makes sense that Mercury/Hod generates a shadow, as it is a big driver for action.

The Geburah <-> Netzach connection is interesting, and I guess I can see that.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Okay.   I think that function , lets call it 'the cover up'   can be conscious in some, semi in others and a full blown unconscious reaction in others . 

 

I also know that to casually reveal one's 'shadow' and strip of the ' mask of niceness'  is very socially confronting and perhaps ' socially inept'   :)  .... as I do that sometimes .  Which opens up another whole cans of worms  .....  why DO  that  ... when most do not .

 

Yeah.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Yes, individually and collectively  ( also in a short and long time frame * )   .  Hence Harpur's view on the changing metaphor of the experience; Goddess, Fairy Queen, Virgin Mary ,  Space Alien Woman .  He cites an experience related by 'people'  and then told to other groups, they all are certain what is described fulfils their definitions for   either the Goddess, fairy Queen, etc  .  Then the explanation is given from the people that told the story; they where certain they had been visited by 'their ancestors'.

 

And on an individual level also as we develop and change these interactions might take on different meanings and   'constructed .forms' of  'interaction'.   Jung himself had some pretty fantastic ones ! 

 

 

I read a great book once who  title eludes me .   The 'complex range' here was history and  how these  above 'interactions' have changed over time ( from ancestors  to Gods , to demons and angels through to good and bad aliens ... 'blues and grays' or whatever the division is )  according to developments in human technologies  and culture of the times .

 

So the rule set should not be formed from the projection, but by similarities throughout the projections  .

 

Well sure on a superficial manifestation level, one could sort similarities and such.

But when we have concepts like Sefirot that show the structures they jump out of.

It doesn't really matter to me what forms the cultural zeitgeist is spewing out at any given time.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Good question !  It just seems the propensity of some to enjoy that and for others to fear it.   Where does THAT come from? . I am tempted to answer ; 'because it feels so good afterwards '  :D    but that doesnt explain the impetus.  One of the higher imitations is 'Annihilation' (P.I.) ,  it comes after the degree that allows entry into the Lodge, so in the Lodge are 'the unannihilated'  and the 'annihilated'  and those 'beyond'.  The  P.I. are stripped of their rank, insignia, motto,  weapons tools, whatever. They have  a concealed (or no) identity. Their robe is all plain black and covers the face. They are , or try to emulate 'Mr Nobody' .   I felt very comfortable in that position, as did one of my 'brothers' .  Yet some fear ot so much they dont go near that and stop at the 'glorified' level before it. Even stranger, some go on through it and afterwards STILL maintain their magical ego identity ...   evidence that ritual and ceremony alone is  just a adjunct too change .

 

I also experienced the same dynamic when I was involved in practices of 'annihilation'  in Tibetan Buddhism  ( Kargu Karma  and their Chod meditations ) .  Perhaps one made the other more 'comfortable' ?   But no, as I go back I see a pattern .  I even remember my mother being very worried about me  and relaying a dream she had about me as a child ;  the family is out at a picnic or something, the shy darkens, a storm approaches, thunder rumbles , lighening all around, earthquakes, the earth heaves up and splits open revealing a huge chasm into the bowels of the earth. Mom and Dad usher the children to safety, running away to a sfer place but I break off from them, run towards the hole in the earth, turn, smile, turn back and jump in. ... Mother awakes from her 'nightmare' , very concerned about ' me ' - the type of person I am .  Now this mother was very straight, didnt even understand what the word psychology meant, VERY simple intellectually and a devout and practising catholic .  So, where did THAT dream come from ?

 

Can I have a propensity to 'annihilation'   ?  Or do I think my ego is so strong it will survive it ?    :D   

 

Maybe not, as I do not have a strong belief in 'life after death'.

 

People fake for all sorts of reason, usually because of status.

Once something becomes important in a group, because it is "higher",

then you can bet that half the members are trying to figure out ways to take shortcuts to the esteemed position.

 

Personally I don't care much for groups like that,

whenever the hierarchy gets too high and one have to jump through hoops,

I'm usually looking for the exits.

Sort of like the cat in animal farm, when the pigs take over.

I come back if things calm down though.

 

The dream of your mother makes sense, knowing what you have been up to.

 

Your ego seem fairly strong from this side of the internet.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Thats an interesting observation .  Fanatacism seems mostly an unbalanced outcome of the path of Bhakti Yoga, devotional practices, rituals of worship.

 

Might be so.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Nope .

 

Well I always assume people don't, as it is a rule of thumb that is right in a majority of cases.

Even when they don't admit it also.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Well, the Tower seems to encapsulate what you are inferring  to , if I read you right .

 

Yeah pretty much.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Depends on where you draw the 'mind's' boundary ... and definition of mind [ see level / circuit 8 of exo-psychology where 'consciousness is non-local' .  But generally, of course,  and in normal consciousness , no, it is not possible.

 

Okay, well yeah if one wants to drag in stuff like genes or collective unconscious,

then obviously there is no end to it in the personal conscious and personal unconscious.

Yet I don't really bother to pester myself with such concepts in this discussion of wholeness.

It is enough I think to be whole on ones own playground first.

To be one with everything, although arguably a higher and nobler ideal by some standards.

Strikes me as something that is beyond the spirit of our time.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

I dont think it WAS  useless .

 

Well you are welcome to your opinion.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

I think I would get bored if I had all the pieces of the puzzle .

 

Yeah, I guess I'm just tired of certain dynamics, and when I see similar patterns I just fire from the hip.

Compared to a lot of people who have an air of "enlightened BS" you are kind of okay.

Not that counts as a bridge in my eyes though. :P

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Yes. I see personal evolution (when it is working) as an ever rising widening spiral. We can get back to where we where before, but we should be changed by the 'revolution' .

 

There is always something new to take hold off to figure out.

It just depend how much time one has to sacrifice for it.

 

17 hours ago, Nungali said:

Yes, interesting .  Time has run away with me though ... gotta split to make a meeting .

 

Time waits for no one! :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Desmonddf said:

 

The truth is that I disdain the idea of angels, demons, kabbalah and the whole esoteric knowledge being a "metaphor" for "self-improvement".

 

For instance, the idea that Angels aren't "beings made by god which create the universe", but "ideas which relate to the supraconscious".

 

Just wait until I can "cast fireball". Then I'll get some of you guys and take you to see a real angel, not a metaphor. If you want, of course. Then maybe I'll feel less triggered by it.

 

Goddamit people, stop reducing the world to shadowork and psychophylosophy!

 

"Humans without soul" doesn't mean "humans without the will to live" or "humans with an ego/mind this or that way", means "humans without LITERAL souls"!

 

At least if you're talking Blavatsky or Crowley, which are the sources of this!

 

Yeah I get that you have a totally different stance on how stuff like this works than me.

Yet since I haven't walked in your shoes, I cannot really take on your frame.

 

For me, many of the things you say take on a level of impossibility.

This may be because I'm very much mired in the western frame of mind.

As Jung said about the problem.

 

Quote

In these matters one needs a great deal of psychology in order to make it palatable to the Western mind.

Carl Jung - The psychology of kundalini yoga

 

Maybe you are able to metabolize this information in another way,

and hence don't need psychology to make it accessible to you.

That is good for you, but for me, I'm too comfortable in an abstracted take on things.

I may never touch the matter as you do, but I derive great benefits regardless.

 

Even though I may not think about the Angels/Demons in the same way,

I do see the carnage they generate regardless, their imprint is just as much there for me to see.

I just chose to approach them from a different frame, so to speak.

As you yourself said, they don't really give a shit about us and our agendas,

so why should I care about how I approach them, if they don't give a damn either way?

I suffer just the same, if I go down one or another path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

.......... Uranus..........

 

Pluto...............Neptune

 

 

 

Saturn  |          |  Jupiter

 

..............  SUN ..............

 

 

 

..............Mercury.........

 

................MOON .........

 

Mars ........................Venus

 

2 hours ago, Integrated said:

 

Well from what I know of the planets, that makes little sense to me.

 

I guess you are trying to show some dynamic what should be going on, but to me it seems pretty random at this point.
I may not be familiar enough with all the nomenclature you use nor the planets themselves as placeholders.

 

 

I showed it to one astrologer that is into Kabbalah and  they said 'So what, that is your basic astrological set up' - everyone knows about that !  .   :D 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Nungali said:

 

 

.......... Uranus..........

 

Pluto...............Neptune

 

 

 

Saturn  |          |  Jupiter

 

..............  SUN ..............

 

 

 

..............Mercury.........

 

................MOON .........

 

Mars ........................Venus

 

 

I showed it to one astrologer that is into Kabbalah and  they said 'So what, that is your basic astrological set up' - everyone knows about that !  .   :D 

 

Yeah astrology was never my thing, so I put little stock in the planets.

Interesting to know that they have a basic setup like that.

Though my interest in it is still low, probably because I feel it is wrong on some level.

 

The though just hit me that the movement of the planets could be compared to the shuffling of the Tarot deck.

Then whatever tale the planets tell, would just be like a Tarot spread.

If that is indeed the way they do it, that would be funny, and would remove much of my skepticism.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Then, if you disdain that, why on earth do you  converse with 'angels' ?   :huh:

 

And why would they 'test' you ,  as you claimed,  if self improvement is not on the cards ?

 

 

Because there are plenty of ways of conversing with the real things ._.

 

Even judaism has its own ways.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

They DO relate to the ' conscious, rational, or logical '  ? In  communicating with them there is no ' state or fact of transcending normal human consciousness'  ?  

 

 They do not :v

 

They are beings beyond space and time, and one of them has self-proclaimed himself as the "King of Lies" which creates the "ultimate lie" which is the Universe itself. Think Maya from buddhism.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Please explain your idea of the soul then .... in a  literal  ('the  usual or most basic sense without metaphor or exaggeration' )  way .

 

The thing above the Mind.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Do you think ideas about things (especially like soul and angels )  can change over time according to the collective consciousness of that time  ? Or do you think the original idea of an angel (as in Zoroastrianism, where we inherited the idea from) was wrong,  Judaism was wrong about it ,  Christianity got it right  somehow , Islam wrong and Bahai wrong,  Jung wrong ? .  Or any variation depending on which religion you like, where born into or live in a culture still dominated by it . .

 

Ideas do not change, the same way natural laws don't change. We access different ideas. Think of our brains like satelittes accessing diferent channels. Every single concept of what an "angel" is is a different channel.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

So I dont know what  'all this' you are claiming is  that Blavatsky AND Crowley where both  the sources of  ?

 

The idea of "humans without souls" comes from Blavatsky's understanding of the theme of the Higher Self - as the thing beyond the Mind, the Higher Manas and above "bodies" of humans.

 

Here please mind that Blavatsky may have read a lot, but most of what she said contradicted or perverted the original authors' meanings. The same with Crowley. In their search for a way to "unite all knowledge" they merely produced a perverted knowledge which somewhat ressembles what can be obtained through some spiritual experiences, not effectively "uniting everything" - even because it would be impossible to.

 

Crowley himself was highly contradictive. However, his idea of elementals possessing human fetuses and therefore creating "imperfect humans" which lacked human "complete" souls is what I'm refeering here. Blavatsky also supported this idea as being something possible.

 

13 hours ago, Nungali said:

But if you want that, at the expense of self development  ... thats your call .   

 

What DO you do for self development, by the way ?

 

Actually, developing those has been a very important part of my own spiritual development.


The abbandoning of the beliefs and ego cristalizations which would make me insane if I was to see or produce physical effects has been a major point of self-improvement for me. Since I've been born in this day and age, they pervade most of my psyche and are a rich source of inner work.

 

Here's the thing which applied to the people of old and doesn't apply to us: They would use siddhis in a disordained manner and following formulas which they did not master.

 

However, through inner development it is impossible not to develop siddhis. Once you're manifesting your spirit, it will act as it will. And the impossibility of the ego accepting its actions as possible, as well as the following insanity, are the major barrier stopping people from progressing the very first step on initiation.

 

Once you're able to merely start commuting with spirit, see Ishvaha or talk to a God, physical effects WILL manifest. Matter and the physical plane cannot be separated from the manifestations of spirit, and they WILL affect it.

 

However, most people of our time will go insane if that happens.


So we rely on those old warnings of "don't seek siddhis!" as a scapegoat for not progressing in direction of inner improvement.

 

Except the inner improvement WILL request for outer improvement, and the inner empowering WILL affect your outer power.


All inner improvement beyond the most basic of basics requires for siddhis to manifest. You might not seek them, but they will come. And if they come, and you get insane because of that, the path stops there.

 

See why I'm angry? People use "don't seek for siddhis" as an EXCUSE not to progress on the spiritual path. As for me, I seek them as proof that I'm indeed having progress and not simply deluding myself.


And it is through this proof that I've been getting closer and closer to what was described as the true initiations, as well as the "powers" that come with it, and the realizations and inner achievements.

 

I've been gone through a lot of what people say are the "marks" on the path for an initiate. Depending on the interpretation, I might very well call myself an Ipissimus - as in metaphorical ways, I've already accessed the mysteries of this degree of development.

 

But not in literal and effective sense. And as I come closer to the very first landmarks of being a very, very young apprentice, more and more I see the inner transformations and changes in me becoming more and more literal as well.

 

Seek not siddhis for power, ego or other such things. But do use them as landmarks (as well as the inner changes related to every step of the way, of course) to evaluate your personal progress. If you do so, most of the so-called "initiates", "adepts" and so on will show themselves as people who are simply being delusional.

 

And as long as you don't believe siddhis by themselves are proof that you've advanced a step, but complementary aspects of doing so, your analysis becomes even more profound and reasonable.

 

This is what I'm angry about: People who evaluate themselves merely through inner transformation, when inner transformation is extremely flawed. Siddhis are flawed? Of course. But if you use both to evaluate yourself, then you'll get closer to a more grounded self-analysis.


It doesn't work this way for many things, but it does work this way for spiritual improvement. If your mind cannot stop seeking self-analysis and trying to know "where it is" (which is one of the steps on the way, in which your level doesn't matter but only experiencing things themselves), then at least do it with a little more rigour.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

They could  ?    Like these ?

 

Don't know about these history behind those photos, but something like this. Materialization and so on.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

It is an age old warning, the one against seeking siddhis .

 

Don't seek them, because seeking anything will take you away from your path. But if you can't stop seeking things, then don't ignore the need for them in order to avoid delusions. They are proof that you're doing something and has achieved something beyond imagination and self-trickery by itself.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Okay how about  'doing development' then ?

 

Also how does NON action come into it BEFORE   one's consciousness is disassociated with ego ?

 

Unless, here we are communicating with a consciousness that already has  in you ?  If that is your claim, well, errrmmmm   really ?

 

If not then you better start seeking development and develop, or you will never get to the place you would need to to do without it ... in the first place .

 

So what are you really saying here ?

 

Don't "do". Dissociating consciousness from the ego (on the level of discovering that non-action exists) isn't even in the first chamber of initiation.

 

It happens naturally for some, with help for others. But there is no development and initiation with an ego that hasn't dissociated.

 

All forms of "spiritual progress" which are based on any kind of mental progress (and here I include all forms of emotional intelligence) aren't spiritual progress. They are simply mental progress.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Errrrmmmm .... dude .... they already DO !

 

Beyond the realm of "coincidence" ?

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

And by the way ... I have yet to see ONE SINGLE GOD levitate  a pen .  Why on earth would I want to anyway , I just pick it up

 

Well, you haven't seen a god then. Let's see if someday I'm able to show that to you. This day seems to be drawing nearer. Then I'll call you to come here and see it.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

and not like those non delusional people that see angels,  talk to them LITERALY   levitate pens and believe in GOD  ... no personality disorders there .

 

Here's the thing though: One thing is to talk to angels literaly, other is to believe you're doing that beyond the realm of doubt.

 

I'm still seeking for what I've put as the ultimate proof: Physical effects. Which others can see as well, so it isn't simply a psychotic attack.

 

Until them, yes, I'm talking with literal angels and literal gods. Only can't prove that and may be wrong. It is simply deciding if you'll assume they are literal or not. Both assertives may be right, but I'm more prone into falling on the pit of "this is all from my mind so fuck it" and go back to my old habits than in the pit of "god commanded me!" and go on a killing spree.

 

So I've chosen the first. And get very upset when people make other choices and then come to me saying stuff like "you have obviously chosen to believe that they are not literal, right?"

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

If this isnt  for development , why do it at all ?  

 

Because I want to. Seems nice ._.

 

14 hours ago, Nungali said:

Okay ... and then what ?  

 

There's no "then what". Once I'm satisfyed with my proofs of the supernatural I'll do what they have been asking me to do all this time: Stop seeking things to do; Stop trying to decide what to do next ; Stop acting with plans, looking for meaning in my actions and so on.

 

Simply let the spirit manifest and enter non-action as best as I can, and then use mind tricks to stop my mind from trying to control things once I see myself again looking for reasons to do things. I won't do it with body and soul without having proof first, though. That's the limit of what has been imprinted on my ego.

 

"Non action might be a simple delusion" is the primeval doubt on my heart. "Letting go of all control and reason, planning and ideas is insanity" follows suit. And the reason for all of that is "because that's not how reality works".

 

Anything which conforms to all that reality is supposed to be, that is, physical, manifest, shared with others, etc, and can be used to go against these claims and show that indeed this is merely a foolish thought I have not to protect will suffice for me to abbandon it.

 

So I'm using siddhis as a means of abbandoning the mind. That's why I'm looking for them, being able to produce them and to rebuke the social mental attacks about the existence or not of magick with a fireball to the face.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Integrated said:

so why should I care about how I approach them, if they don't give a damn either way?

 

Fireball to the face will break your western frame of view quite quickly :P

 

That said, I myself am still waiting for it. The amount, frequence and impact of the evidence is pilling up. That gives me hope of achieving it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, idiot_stimpy said:

What type of siddhi's should one see when they spiritually advance?

 

You should see--quite vividly, with smells and sounds and the rush of hot wind against your face all accompanying your vision to prove that this is not mere phantasy--the butt of a man farting onto candle flame in very close proximity to your face. (Well, pretty much every time I sit to meditate I have visions like that, do you guys? No? Oh, huh. Yeah, actually me neither, was just thinking out loud, you know, about stuff I don't actually think about.)

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, idiot_stimpy said:

What type of siddhi's should one see when they spiritually advance?

 

Animals.  Every dog and every cat, squirrel, raccoon, possum, snake in your neighborhood wants to come up and say hi.  Hawks circle over your head.  White egrets and blue herons show up and gift you with their feathers.  Hummingbirds zip in and out of your path.  Dolphins, seals, and an occasional shark might join you if you go swimming.  Pelicans will land in close proximity, you can even stroke one.  You may spot a mountain lion, a coyote, or even the exceedingly rare ring-tailed cat (an animal that is not actually a cat but, rather, related to raccoons.)   

  

ringtail.jpg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/10/2019 at 8:05 AM, Integrated said:

 

Yeah astrology was never my thing, so I put little stock in the planets.

Interesting to know that they have a basic setup like that.

Though my interest in it is still low, probably because I feel it is wrong on some level.

 

The though just hit me that the movement of the planets could be compared to the shuffling of the Tarot deck.

Then whatever tale the planets tell, would just be like a Tarot spread.

If that is indeed the way they do it, that would be funny, and would remove much of my skepticism.

 

 

 

The planets are always 'shuffling'  .... any given moment is a 'spread'  and a 'reading' .   

 

The main difference is , with the planets, the arrangement isn't based on a random process.

 

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 09/10/2019 at 6:17 PM, idiot_stimpy said:

What type of siddhi's should one see when they spiritually advance?

 

d

 

 

 

 

 

 

48574001_303.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites