Sign in to follow this  
Mskied

Greatings from the White Brotherhood

Recommended Posts

30 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I have responded to every question put forward on this thread

 

Do you know the difference between responding and reacting?

 

31 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I don't see why it is your place to tell me how and what to post here, isn't that the job of the admin, who doesn't seem to mind what I do

 

There you go again taking it as a power play! I'm suggesting or recommending for your own good that your processing and ranting doesn't sound like it is inviting dialogue at all, on top of spreading misinformation. You're already confused as it is, but confusing others further is dangerous for their sake, not yours.

 

32 minutes ago, Mskied said:

You are taking issue with how I present my ideas, but you don't even bother to consider what my ideas are, or ask me how to use them.

 

I did ask you the very first time, and then the cycle began from that point! You've been dismissive since the very first time when I didn't mind you at all to when you suddenly became defensive! I even pointed out Nungali wasn't attacking you, he was educated and qualified to point out that you have no understanding of Crowley or the sources you cite, yet you're arguing that your self-initiation and your opinion is sacred. 

 

34 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I am putting forth a fundamental process with which a person can come to contemplation on their own, and from there, will be able to consider the wisdom of the various traditions

 

In other words, if you rant on and on, someone might just feel the same way about processing aloud and saying things that are completely incorrect about the sources you criticize and claim to derive your understanding from here.

 

35 minutes ago, Mskied said:

You don't understand this method because you do not use it, and that is acceptable to me, do you see me raving at how you process?

 

I've seen others use it and I tried using it in high school. If it works for you, I don't know how effective it is given that you don't demonstrate an adequate understanding of the material

 

(do you see a pattern by the way with what I am repeating?)

 

37 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Why don't you just shut up

 

Speak for yourself! :lol:

 

37 minutes ago, Mskied said:

go rattle someone else that cares about your point of view, and let people that understand mine come to discuss what I am doing here

 

Aha! So you really don't want dialogue or to be scrutinized and challenged! I have had others challenge me when I didn't know anything and when I did know something, and can back it up with skill and application. What you are doing is showing that you want to voice your uninformed opinions ad nauseam

 

39 minutes ago, Mskied said:

As I said, the Law is for all, and we are all the authority

 

In the literal sense, I have lived in many lawless countries where people declared themselves the authority on it and those are known as failed states. In the esoteric sense, you are basically avoiding certification or qualification by giving yourself authority and credibility. This is the same as a guy who takes the time to found his own institution for the sole purpose of accrediting himself when he can't get into any credible place due to his rejection of the ideals he bizarrely believes he knows more about. 

 

True story: Beurin "University" is not an accredited body, but the founder accredited himself by creating his own organization to offer accreditation for institutions because his pseudoscience courses only show how much of a sham they are, on the level of Trump University.

 

45 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I explained how the Book of the Law is supposed to be read and do not need to validate how I interpreted it and what my interpretations are.

 

Supposed to be read. You're elevating your own authority here!

 

45 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I am not Crowley, and neither are you or Nungali, and for any of you to say you "know" what he intended is just as false as me saying I know, or true, depending upon if we live in a state that can speculate and consider these things, which, last time I checked, is where we are

 

Gee, and I thought college kids were know-it-alls on the first day of class before reading a syllabus. 

 

46 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Now shut up, sit down, go pout, and stop cluttering up my thread with your crap.

 

My crap isn't dangerous, and it's only contrary to the harmful shit that's coming from your end (no pun intended!).

Share this post


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

 

Which God are you referring to?

Does it matter?  Which one is real?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Earl Grey said:

 

Do you know the difference between responding and reacting?

 

 

There you go again taking it as a power play! I'm suggesting or recommending for your own good that your processing and ranting doesn't sound like it is inviting dialogue at all, on top of spreading misinformation. You're already confused as it is, but confusing others further is dangerous for their sake, not yours.

 

 

I did ask you the very first time, and then the cycle began from that point! You've been dismissive since the very first time when I didn't mind you at all to when you suddenly became defensive! I even pointed out Nungali wasn't attacking you, he was educated and qualified to point out that you have no understanding of Crowley or the sources you cite, yet you're arguing that your self-initiation and your opinion is sacred. 

 

 

In other words, if you rant on and on, someone might just feel the same way about processing aloud and saying things that are completely incorrect about the sources you criticize and claim to derive your understanding from here.

 

 

I've seen others use it and I tried using it in high school. If it works for you, I don't know how effective it is given that you don't demonstrate an adequate understanding of the material

 

(do you see a pattern by the way with what I am repeating?)

 

 

Speak for yourself! :lol:

 

 

Aha! So you really don't want dialogue or to be scrutinized and challenged! I have had others challenge me when I didn't know anything and when I did know something, and can back it up with skill and application. What you are doing is showing that you want to voice your uninformed opinions ad nauseam

 

 

In the literal sense, I have lived in many lawless countries where people declared themselves the authority on it and those are known as failed states. In the esoteric sense, you are basically avoiding certification or qualification by giving yourself authority and credibility. This is the same as a guy who takes the time to found his own institution for the sole purpose of accrediting himself when he can't get into any credible place due to his rejection of the ideals he bizarrely believes he knows more about. 

 

True story: Beurin "University" is not an accredited body, but the founder accredited himself by creating his own organization to offer accreditation for institutions because his pseudoscience courses only show how much of a sham they are, on the level of Trump University.

 

 

Supposed to be read. You're elevating your own authority here!

 

 

Gee, and I thought college kids were know-it-alls on the first day of class before reading a syllabus. 

 

 

My crap isn't dangerous, and it's only contrary to the harmful shit that's coming from your end (no pun intended!).

If you hadn't noticed, Im actually not referencing any translation of this Law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mskied said:

Does it matter?  Which one is real?

 

Answering a question with a question in the majority of cases is not apropos to the discussion. You stated "God" which I assume is a monotheistic entity, Judeo Christian and Islam. Why not fess up to your beliefs instead of playing mind games!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mskied said:

If you hadn't noticed, Im actually not referencing any translation of this Law

 

Ah, so you're appropriating terminology and concepts from other systems and practices to make them your own! Too bad your appropriation still doesn't follow any logic or rationale other than a self-serving one. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Its monism, and that belongs to all great thinkers, not just Judaism.

 

All great thinkers which include yourself? I cited three which are all monotheistic, not just Judaism. Further, I would take exception to a sweeping generalization that all great thinkers are in agreement with your belief. You are proceeding from an incorrect conclusion or a non sequitur. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds like you too are simply filling in the blanks you want.  Monism belongs to all thinkers, not just the great ones.  Islam and Christianity is essentially Judaism, and that is why I lump them together.

Edited by Mskied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

7 minutes ago, Mskied said:

Islam and Christianity is essentially Judaism, and that is why I lump them together.

 

No fundamentalist from any of those religions would agree with this assertion.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

No fundamentalist from any of those religions would agree with this assertion.

 

Well said! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

No fundamentalist from any of those religions would agree with this assertion.

I don't represent those religions.  I study Magick

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I don't represent those religions.  I study Magick

 

Then could you try not to misrepresent them?

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the past I used to drink and post stuff that would be torn apart or wondered at by it's dramatic nonsense with a hint of wisdom here and there.  It was mostly garbage, but there were a few gems in the mud.  Reading this thread reminds of how people reacted to me back then.  What and why I wrote what I wrote was different but the pattern of response is similar.

 

I must say I am impressed by the general civility of the people on this forum it is refreshing to see.  Mskied seems  to be defending his right to portray his belief system as he sees fit,  and several of you point out the  flaws in his efforts.

 

I may sound like a sesame street episode, but would it not be prudent to find the commonalities shared and go from there?  Mskied may be in error in the nature of his communication, but it seems to be the only way he can do so.  To constantly parse his words does not seem to be helping with clarification.  It might be better to focus on the underlying theme of his words rather than the errors within them.  Even though it might be more enjoyable for you all to do the later.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mskied said:

I don't represent those religions.  I study Magick

 

Explain this.

 

Quote

I will answer this with a  question:  Why does God allow Chaos?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TheCove said:

It might be better to focus on the underlying theme of his words rather than the errors within them.  Even though it might be more enjoyable for you all to do the later.

 

As stated earlier, misinformation, misrepresentation, self-initiation and self-aggrandization while refusing to have dialogue and being defensive is not a signal that he is open to communication, in addition to that misinformation being dangerous to others looking to understand what he refers to using terms associated with that but not actually understanding it at all. In an earlier thread, he was receptive to a sycophantic fan of his who went on to attack me and others in that thread. So it's not like we haven't tried before. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed, I already presumed this was the case.

 

The underlying motivation becomes all the more important.  Even if it is dreadfully simple.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, TheCove said:

The underlying motivation becomes all the more important.  Even if it is dreadfully simple.

 

Trying to get that motivation has been the Sisyphian task for all of us so far! :lol:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, TheCove said:

In the past I used to drink and post stuff that would be torn apart or wondered at by it's dramatic nonsense with a hint of wisdom here and there.  It was mostly garbage, but there were a few gems in the mud.  Reading this thread reminds of how people reacted to me back then.  What and why I wrote what I wrote was different but the pattern of response is similar.

 

I must say I am impressed by the general civility of the people on this forum it is refreshing to see.  Mskied seems  to be defending his right to portray his belief system as he sees fit,  and several of you point out the  flaws in his efforts.

 

I may sound like a sesame street episode, but would it not be prudent to find the commonalities shared and go from there?  Mskied may be in error in the nature of his communication, but it seems to be the only way he can do so.  To constantly parse his words does not seem to be helping with clarification.  It might be better to focus on the underlying theme of his words rather than the errors within them.  Even though it might be more enjoyable for you all to do the later.

 

The problem I have with so called "True Will" is that according to Crowley et al., the "True Will" is revealed by the conversation with ones Holy Guardian Angel (HGA) which is an arduous task of peeling away psychic conditioning and so forth. The idea put forth by the OP is that the matter is simple with no work required at all. Point being is that when any serious work of this nature is conducted, psychic forces are unleashed and the ensuing result for most is the inability to handle such forces. This is not kiddie play!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sycophantic,  Sisyphian...

 

You use great words, had to look up Sisyphian.  Wish sycophantic meant something else, would like to call myself a Sycophant.  Hm, maybe I am...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, ilumairen said:

 

Then could you try not to misrepresent them?

to be fair aren't most fundamentalists misrepresenting their own religions anyways?

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ralis said:

 

The problem I have with so called "True Will" is that according to Crowley et al., the "True Will" is revealed by the conversation with ones Holy Guardian Angel (HGA) which is an arduous task of peeling away psychic conditioning and so forth. The idea put forth by the OP is that the matter is simple with no work required at all. Point being is that when any serious work of this nature is conducted, psychic forces are unleashed and the ensuing result for most is the inability to handle such forces. This is not kiddie play!!

 

Yes, have read about that.  Hardcore stuff, I have done some spiritual mountain climbing but not of that nature.  Is it similar to the Enochian one?  By Abramelin  the Mage?  Sorry for my clumsy citation.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ilumairen said:

 

 

No fundamentalist from any of those religions would agree with this assertion.

I also don't reckon they would agree that the sky is blue if scripture said that it was pink, doesn't make the sky less blue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, TheCove said:

 

Yes, have read about that.  Hardcore stuff, I have done some spiritual mountain climbing but not of that nature.  Is it similar to the Enochian one?  By Abramelin  the Mage?  Sorry for my clumsy citation.

 

I know a little regarding the two mentioned, but am unable to comment on it.

 

What I do know is that I have read is that kundalini awakening is part of most of these systems. What I absolutely know is that when the serpent is awakened it will bite. Been there done that and I don't recommend it! Happened to me in a spontaneously way back in 1993 and I am still paying the price for that event. It never stops!

Edited by ralis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, ralis said:

 

The problem I have with so called "True Will" is that according to Crowley et al., the "True Will" is revealed by the conversation with ones Holy Guardian Angel (HGA) which is an arduous task of peeling away psychic conditioning and so forth. The idea put forth by the OP is that the matter is simple with no work required at all. Point being is that when any serious work of this nature is conducted, psychic forces are unleashed and the ensuing result for most is the inability to handle such forces. This is not kiddie play!!

And because you are not being playful about it, you create resistance within your own being, that causes you to experience your own true energy as destructive. Because you take it seriously, you experience your own energy from the perspective of vulnerability, and so you flow your own true nature through you in contradiction with it/yourself and the result is you feel negative emotion, and if negative emotion isn't enough, then the secondary manifestational indicators of negative conditions.

 

So again, you can always feel your energy motional relativity to your own true will as your valuable emotional guidance system. So you always are being fully revealed to your own true will. That is what your emotional guidance system is all about. To feel your energy motional relativity between who you now allow yourself to be in relationship to all that you truely are being and becoming evermore joyously here and now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, TheCove said:

Sycophantic,  Sisyphian...

 

You use great words, had to look up Sisyphian.  Wish sycophantic meant something else, would like to call myself a Sycophant.  Hm, maybe I am...


Ha, just be open, ask questions, and be careful about the disinformation and misinformation out there, even in this forum.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this