Esoteric, (Hidden,) Knowledge

Knowledge is being shared you can't stop it coming out don't be afraid or you will feel no one likes you even though they do.

 

You're not, I've dabbled.. I was essentially raised by my much older pagan brother, in tandem with my selectively Catholic mother. Which philosophy sounds cooler to a kid entranced by fantasy.. eternal damnation or spells and awesome looking athames?
During a recent existential crisis I revisited all that shit with a little more maturity, and it's just essentially holy communion on your own terms. Symbolic.. when I said placebo is real, I mean putting a bit of stale bread in your mouth isn't actually eating the body of Christ, but I had a friend whose mother was brought to tears every time she took communion. She was devoted to the moment by focusing her intent on communing with her experience of "God".. and she was rewarded.

Magick is the same, using props to focus intention towards a concept. It's a fancy prayer.. an entrance into karmic nature, setting expectations.. not necessarily a good or a bad thing, but a thing none the less so life is not recognised in its simplest form.

Enter breath. You are the prop! How convenient

 

Nowas ark
deciphers to
know air=known through the breath.
we speak into existence our right view of life, no one can tell you at all and would then be ignorant that you don't see what you see.
What you see is what you call into being for yourself through the power of the breath that comes into the body from the holy principality for the purpose of informing our universe. You have been in deed accomplishing your will with all the power that is possibly available. consider it is the reason the world is in the condition it is The word condition means to speak with con-diciere. No ritual sacrifice is required but the finest speech is. I can teach you how to speak by showing you how to behold the world and it will inform your speech
Let those who choose to claim their place among the lights of this universe hear what I am saying
Speak joy into the our experience. It belongs among the stars. Say only what you feel
be your heart and your heart will be ministered to by the universe which in itself is every bit informed. Do Not Be Afraid. You know me as an historical figure. Know that it is your history pass present and future from the beginning. Hello friends.

 

Noahs ark deciphers to no ah= not breath=built in cubits
Cubits are thrice counted
the three properties of matter, absorption, reflection, and polarity
the holy trinity
no confusion of elements
no to denigrating adjective qualifications of self
we are all made of matter
we need be in communion in order to see clearly

in this holy estate, state of conscious and caring attention

we cannot succeed unless we cooperate

Every one of us is made from information and we grow through information and become informed

unless we are willing to devote our lives to each other we will perpetually be lost to ourselves

Use your voice to lend mercy to an ailing world then we will have no need of metaphysics to overcome what

we had simply not known, that we can change the world in an instant through our own invocations, if that is what you will. I will and it becomes and comes to me

The quality of our experience depends on investing our eager attention, your will




who are my mother my sister or my brother


those who do their will

 

Esoteric modern interpretation

 

caught you in triangulation my friend time stamp 333

 

I just read a paper from Sheldrake based on the book. I think the book I saw at the library was another response book from a different author called The Dawkins Delusion. I think Sheldrake's book was renamed here.

The paper is interesting, although I feel my argument I made to you when we first discussed consciousness, regarding ethics preventing research, is applicable to some of Sheldrake's claims regarding mainstream science having problems studying consciousness.

The paper didn't really go more in depth then the TED talk regarding being looked at from behind phenomena.

I didn't follow his issues regarding materialists suggesting consciousness as an emergent property of the brain as well as an epiphenomenon, (he says something like materialists want it both ways) then later on in the paper says most of our mental process are unconscious.

To me that's like saying, eyes are an emergent property which helps us see, but sometimes we close them when we sleep therefore it can't benefit us... Yet most of the time they are open.

A good amount of the paper had more of a philosophy vibe about it rather than science, I'm sure he goes more in depth with the various issues such as whether we can actually suggest electrons "feel" or is that purely metaphor, in the book. I also think he raises a good point about whether materialists are using good metaphors such as when they describe the mind as a "computer." I've heard Dan Dennet refer to neurons as "tiny robots", I'm pretty sure I ascribe to materialist notions of the mind but I also know that the brain is a dynamic process which has this quality of ebbs and flows, increased dendritic connections allowing for a flowering of consciousness followed by pruning connections providing more focused reasoning, plasticity, etc. which makes me feel "tiny robots" is not the most appropriate metaphor.

I might be interested in Sheldrake's book focused on morphic resonance, he briefly touched on that and that seemed pretty trippy and interesting.

I'm reading The God Delusion as well right now, pretty good. It's definitely written with a more stylistic approach and not as much reliance on the science as Blind Watchmaker but Dawkins Dawkins certainly writes in a passionate and convincing manner on many issues.

 

Emergent property is not a distinct way to examine the feature. Reality wouldn't be emergent since it is here in a stable enough fashion to look back on the history of the earth for millions of years in a facile fashion. since we are real, we ourselves are not an emerging property but a fixed property in a constant stated of becoming. our fixed property is matter.The three characteristics of matter absorption, reflection,and polarity account for every relational aspect in our known experience.

I think sheldrake is in that very long movie I posted if you haven't seen it. It is the most comprehensive primer on the nature of our existence and the psychedelic experience. It is worth the time if even in segments as it is presented in parts that you can break completely from and return to without loosing continuity. in addition that feature adds considerable depth to what is being considered here.

 

'A New Science of Life' is the book where Sheldrake lays out his theory of morphic fields and morphic resonance. It's a theory I find interesting.

I liked 'The Science Delusion' -'Science Set Free' is the US title.

I have mixed feelings about Dawkins. He's certainly articulate, and I agree with a lot of what he says about western religions. However, he's not above engaging in polemics when he does TV, which I feel tends to trivialize the issues a little bit. Also it's easy to find religious nut cases and expose them as idiots - something he does with great aplomb.

 

Ant hills are not ants, cities are not people.

Emergent properties are distinct ways to examine features.

How did these characteristics come about? Were they present in the singularity of the Big Bang, present before the Higgs field? Did God arbitrarily give matter these qualities?

I assume you have a relation with God, it should exhibit these qualities as well then correct? Without resorting to quaint metaphors, where is God?

Maybe Dawkins just brings out the nut case in the religious. In Blind Watchmaker he addresses some of the more sophisticated theological arguments for God such as: Paley's Watchmaker argument, Boeing 747 scrapyard argument and intelligent design in general.

I agree sometimes he does come off as condescending, but he does see religion as granted particular privilege in society and he sees no inherent reasons that that should be, particularly when people are using irrational beliefs to justify it.

 

chinacat, i am a scientist with an open mind. i am genuinely interested in hearing about, from YOU, "what is magick?" "what is magick useful for??"

my mind is open to the possibility of magick's existence, it's just that i have never seen (or even heard about) ANY evidence for it.

if i started a thread about evolution, and you asked me to provide evidence for it...i would be happy to.
yet you seem to refuse to provide any solid evidence for magick, because it's not your job.

what was the point of this thread if you are not interested in a discussion?


there is a lot that science hasn't explained. if magick was shown to be real...science would make attempts to explain how it works. if this is what you mean by magick becoming a part of science in this post-2012 era, then someone is FIRST going to have to demonstrate magick!


i think that a positive outlook and "good vibes" actually can make a difference in someone's life. but what you have described as magick so far, just sounds like taking a positive outlook and mixing it together with a bunch of symbolism and rituals which really don't bring any value to the table. why not just have your positive intent and call that good enough? what more does magick accomplish?

please try to answer these questions. i am asking for a simple discussion. i'm not being disrespectful or mean. i don't think magick is real, but i am open to the possibility. i would be delighted if you could teach me something real about magick. thanks.

 

Magick is open to the idea that symbols can be a means of charging and focusing your intent. The reason that Alchemy and Psychology meet (Jung started that) is because of Symbols. Magick tries to harness the power of a symbol and the effect that it can have on your subconscious. It's already a fact that commercials have used quick images or symbols in order to send something to the subconscious of the viewer. I would say that if Science wanted to study its existence, it would perhaps need to start there: by studying the effect that symbols can have on one's subconscious.

The premise of Magick is that with different symbols you are sort of lodging a vibration into your subconscious. At least that's how I understand it. A ritual is also a simple form of an energetic routine as well. I would say it's a simple means of directing your overall energy towards something. Every amount of intent matters towards something. Meditation serves a purpose on your energetic state of being. So does Yoga. So does exercising. They all have an effect on your endorphins and different chemicals within you. Some can activate a theta-brain frequency or whatever it is. So who's to say that a ritual doesn't do the same thing? A ritual can focus your internal energy and it's always your internal energy which is directing every external action in your life.

Everything you do or don't accomplish has to do with your internal energy and vibration, which will or will not provide the necessary motivation needed to do something. But I'm also a believer in Synchronicity (another Jung concept), and feel that Magick greatly assists in increasing Synchronicity in one's life.

 

There have been studies done on the effects which commercials or symbols have on people.

Look at this following pic up close and far away... Is this a simple illusion due to the limitations of our sense or is something magickal happening?

 

That image has nothing to do with focusing your intent, though. And what have been the findings of these studies on the commercials I am curious?

 

Your response exemplifies one of the reasons why it's so difficult to coherently grasp your arguments. It's like you have some sort of dissonance in your mind, whereby someone simply asking a question puts you in a defensive mode.

With that said, what I can glean from your response is that the picture is not magick. I don't even know why I should bother asking the following question but for Shits and giggles...

How is looking at a picture at different distances not focusing your intent?

Different aspects have been studied, you can search psychology + commercials or psychology + advertisement and get several different articles/studies.

I wanted to post an episode of Brain Games here in response but I couldn't find it. Anyways in the episode, they show a "food stylist." This is a person who literally styles food to prepare for commercials to look more appetizing. For a burger, they fluff the bread a certain way, cook the meat a certain way and use camera angles which would all be different then it actually appears, when you go to eat it at the restaurant.

 

how do you equate that with a defensive response? I simply gave my opinion on the matter. You can use any image or symbol to focus your internal intentions.

 

i think that most people in the thread can agree with me that this is one of your best posts as far as communicating your ideas about Magick.

i agree with the reasoning up until the bold part... i don't believe there is sufficient evidence for anyone to make claims about "everything you do or don't accomplish" in an entire lifetime. maybe it's chance, maybe it's "fate" or free-will...maybe it's your magickal internal energy vibrations, but i don't think the statement in bold is verifiable.

i think it's the type of statements in bold that lead people to attack your whole line of reasoning. some of your claims go above and beyond. and with fantastic claims come requests for fantastic evidence. at least in science (which according to you was created by magickians, so deserves some respect).

i believe that is simply focusing your eyes.

 

It can be expected that we would be skeptical on these issues considering our daily concerns. Examples of the evidence you seek is being provided at this moment but it is not being seen in relation to every ones specific interest in any one persons conversation.
Here i will give yet one more hard example from my own flesh, i developed this stigmata on my right hand only about three years ago, I am exceedingly right handed functioning. I had no idea what it represented until the emergence of these subjects on the public scene,

it appears to me that these kind of things exist simply to produce the temporary suspension of doubt in exactly the same form as before in the story of doubting thomas where wounds are offered as identifying marks.

 

You just stated that the image has nothing to do with focusing your intent, how can any image be used for focusing intent then?

You are defensive because you deflect straightforward questions.

Looking at a picture and utilizing visuospatial awareness requires intent.

 

I gave you an esoteric spell that you haven't sufficiently given your attention to.
Everyone in this thread can decipher that esoteric spelling in moments except for you. Its phonetic components are impossible to go unrecognized if you apply yourself just slightly.
You my friend have to defend yourself perpetually because you don't have any adult virility. You are blow softy