From sarkis@luna.cas.usf.edu Sun Oct 23 14:43:30 1994 Date: Sat, 16 Jul 1994 15:16:12 -0400 (EDT) From: "Marianne Sarkis (ANT)" To: Thelema93-l Subject: IrcLog 7/13/94 Letters 3-4 Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. The following is a Log from the Thelema class which took place in the Divination WebII on Wednesday 7/13/94 and which dealt with letters 3 and 4 from Magick Without Tears by Aliester Crowley. If you need directions on how to get to the WEB please email me and I will let you know. Enjoy the lesson :> And people said it couldn't be done.....hah! ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hsi.Wang.Mu begins recording now. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Chapter 3" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Lays the foundation for the usage of symbols, it seems, and the necessary structure of lingual communications." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Excellent general preparation for the elaboration of QBLH in Ch. 4." FraterNOX says, "I think that this is very important as it also points to an idea that is useful in every course of study, including magick. That is that words just denote idea.... but don't mean anything unto themselves.... it is always important to asse rtian what someone means when they use certain technical words as they can be different for different people." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Oh yes, there is an entire philosophical system devoted to this field. (semantics?)" FraterNOX says, "yup.... Umberto Eco does a lot with it..... semiotics" Hsi.Wang.Mu recommends _Philosophy in a New Key_, by Susan Langer, for a nice over/preview. Satori says, "Words...connotations as well as denotations." Hsi.Wang.Mu isn't yet familiar with tf. mudslayer ping!s amidst you, quite surprised! Hsi.Wang.Mu enjoyed: "...we are justified by experience, by the empirical success in communicating though which has attended, and continues to attend, our endeavors." Hsi.Wang.Mu changes 'though' to 'thought' in the above. Hsi.Wang.Mu nods, continuing her review of the Tearful tome. Bantik ping!s amidst you, quite surprised! Hsi.Wang.Mu notes that Crowley here (in Ch. 3) begins an epistemological argument for his students. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "E6!" Hsi.Wang.Mu nods. Hsi.Wang.Mu emphasizes this beginning of Crowley: "...our original problem; what we want is Truth; we want an even closer approach to Reality; and we want to discover and discuss the proper means of achieving this object." Hsi.Wang.Mu notes that Crowley here speaks of more detail on a 'point-event', which was in letter C and which we had asked about previously. FraterNOX says, "wait.... I want to go back to the quote you gave a second ago... the one about truth..." Hsi.Wang.Mu nods, following the Frater. FraterNOX says, "er Truth...." li'ir ping!s amidst you, quite surprised! Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "...our original problem; what we want is Truth; we want an even closer approach to Reality; and we want to discover and discuss the proper means of achieving this object." FraterNOX says, "but I think he should also mention that this tends to be a different process for everyone" FraterNOX says, "I.e. each person will find different ways to express Truth...... and that language is therfore one of the magicians strongest tools" Satori recalls the use of Dialectic as Truth-finder for the Greeks. Bantik says, "I think that what Crowley meant. He is justifying using elaborate symbolism and 'difficult language' by saying that words in ordinary language have such wide, personal interpretations t o begin with, that a new language is required." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Indeed, and that the same tool which may facilitate our movement toward Truth (I'd say 'an experience of Truth') may at some point also pose as a BARRIER between us and that Truth." mudslayer ping!s amidst you, quite surprised! Hsi.Wang.Mu nods, agreeing with Bantik. li'ir says, "mystic language is crap too" Wednesday shrugs. Not all crap is bad. mudslayer agrees. mudslayer looks about.. Hsi.Wang.Mu thinks that 'mystic language' is technical subjective-speak. "If you consider that 'crap', so be it. mudslayer has left. li'ir says, "'truth' is less the notions of language than the notions contained in that language" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Indeed, the 'Moon' toward which the 'finger' points." Wednesday nods, agreementifying. Though some is and some is not, in her yeah-right-ya-wish-it-were-humble opinitude. Hsi.Wang.Mu thinks that sometimes one may point at the language itself, and thus it becomes an essential element of 'reality'. Hsi.Wang.Mu says,You say, "As we are currently doing, perhaps." li'ir says, "new age language crap isn't crappy because of the language, but of the content." Hsi.Wang.Mu thnks that Crowley's mention of point-events is very important to his thesis. Satori expounds on the capabilities of language and words. Hsi.Wang.Mu notes we are discussing _Magick Without Tears_, Letter 3. Bantik says, "The link between language and reality is an age-old idea. As African shaman see it, knowing something's 'name' is having power over it. The same idea goes with Egyptian magic. " FraterNOX says, "I think the example of the mu* can be extended to most of our lives.... we only perceive what our mind can put words to..... (excluding mystic states)" Wednesday has read some FINE NewAge language-crap, and would disagree on that point. Some is, some is not, we can't all and some of us don't. Hsi.Wang.Mu giggles, appreciating the diversity of perspective present. Bantik says, "With his talk of point-events AND language, perhaps he is saying that were one to identify the symbol that best corresponds to a point-event, that point-event could be recalled/called in to existence again?" FraterNOX says, "thus you can control people by controlling their language.... an idea brought up in 1984 among other places." Bantik nods. Wednesday says, "The recovery movement." Hsi.Wang.Mu nods, 'newspeak' Wednesday says, "*Primo* example." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Like so many tools, language can be a hindrance or an aid." FraterNOX says, "This is why I think it is a powerful tool for the magician.... because if someone can feel free to manipulate the meanings of their personal language.... they will not be limited by it." FraterNOX wonders what would happen if the English language were decreased to about 1000 words Hsi.Wang.Mu notes that Crowley identifies Reality with the 'point-event'. li'ir wonders if communication is the topic of conversation or if it got side tracked. not a li'ir minds this distraction, but he has no idea if contributing to the actual topic. Wednesday remembers the a.m.chaos discussions of defining chaos, and deciding that the definition was death, famine, and potato. Bantik notes that Crowley says that the point-event does not exist. Hsi.Wang.Mu thinks that the REF demonstrates that there was no decision, Wednesday. FraterNOX thinks it is definitely a potato Wednesday recalls -her- deciding. Clarification. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Bantik, 'doesn't exist'? Where so?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Ah yes, the *memory* is all that currently exists." Bantik says, "All that really exists is a memory of the point event." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "The point-event itself is bypassed already, like a twig on a stream." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "The comparison between 'being' and 'becoming'." Bantik says, "Thus the only thing that exists is memory. Reality lives in memory, as the universe lives in God." Hsi.Wang.Mu recognizes the extemist subjectism, yes. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Yet, something must *have* that memory." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Thus there is more to it." Satori says, "Why?" Bantik does not believe that Reality is objective. FraterNOX says, "Why must something have that memory?" Hsi.Wang.Mu doesn't either, but tihnks that radical subjectivism is just as ludicrous. Bantik says, "Radical subjectivism forms the ESSENCE of magick in my opinion." Hsi.Wang.Mu points to Crowley's mention of 'the seer' and 'the seen'. Satori says, "The idea that all realities consist of objects possessing certain properties is a legacy of classical western thought." li'ir says, "isn't saying that memory exist a deception? what is memory then?" FraterNOX says, "I think it is equally possible that the memory is one of the many things that go into the momentary identity of something.... but like everythng else... these memories eventuall change or are lost" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "'memory' is meaningless without 'rememberer'." Wednesday would disagree on that count. Fade, frequently. Wednesday says, "Change, sometimes, often. Are lost, seldom." FraterNOX says, "hsi: I agree..... though I think that both only exist in the same way for a point-event.... after that they are both completely changed" Satori says, "The alternative (or one of them) to the subject/predicate form can be seen in Chinese and other similar Eastern thought..." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Fr, my response was in regards Bantik's claim that 'only memory exits'." Bantik notes that identity is a function of memory... so how can there be a separate oservr? Bantik says, "Observer." FraterNOX says, "oops sorry" FraterNOX says, "bantik: I don't understand how memory can exist anymore (or less) then the rememberer" Hsi.Wang.Mu thnks it is a function of language to divide the point-event. Bantik notes that memory is a construct. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Subject/object. Pointing to one or the other as 'Reality' is something that Crowley appears to be avoiding here." FraterNOX says, "Li'ir a point-event is a single instant/place in space-time" Wednesday divides her attention, and notices the Kung Fu-TLC flashback playing. A piece on observation and memory. li'ir says, "ah. like now?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, the unity of 'seer' and 'seen'. To use Crowley's example." li'ir says, "sounds zen" Hsi.Wang.Mu nods, thinking that it is the foundation for very many mystical systems, and Crowley will, in Ch. 4, use it as the basis from which to support Qabalah/QBLH. li'ir begs pardon, but what is the topic of this teaching? Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "His student asks: 'why use all this symbolic jargon?'" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "_Magick Without Tears_, CH. 3." FraterNOX says, "This chapter is on language as heiroglyphs" li'ir says, "ah..." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Crowley appears to say: 'Because one can use it as a tool to approach the experience of hte point-event." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "At least that is my take." Bantik says, "An excellent summary, actually." Hsi.Wang.Mu had expected argument from Bantik and is surprised. FraterNOX says, "sounds good to me too" FraterNOX says, "shall we move on to chapter 4, or do people want to have more discussion." Wednesday doesn't care, do as ya will. Hsi.Wang.Mu wants to bring up a prior reference. FraterNOX says, "ok" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "In Letter C, Crowley mentions the 'uniting of opposites in love' and speaks of the 'point-event' in relation to it." li'ir says, "love here is agape?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "We'd bypassed that, not comprehending (or remembering) how he meant the phrase 'point-event'." Wednesday decides to make her flight. Page me if ya like. Ta... Wednesday has left. Hsi.Wang.Mu nods. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "...the method in every case is love (unquote)" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Do you think it is as simple as 'the uniting of opposites in love' referring to the 'opposites' of the point-event composite?" Bantik thinks that it is necessary to forge a CONSCIOUS link between point-events, u (er, using) a construct like Qabala to formally systemize and categorize one's experiences. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "I.e. 'seer' and 'seen'?" FraterNOX says, "I always thought of love as the union of any two things.... opposites or not" Bantik says, "Point-event to point-event, not seer-seen. What is seen, is transitory." FraterNOX says, "One could argue that yoga is about the union of human and Divine.... I don't see the two as opposites though" FraterNOX says, "li'ir: what do you mean? To what are you referring?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Crowley: 'Any reaction whatever, any phenomenon, is a phenomenon of "love", as you will understand when I come to explain to you the meaning of the word "point-event"." li'ir says, "bantik said something about foring a concious link between point-events" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, not necessary, useful, especially if lost within experience." Bantik was talking about his own experience, not any sort of doctrine. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Bantik, see Crowley's words above and explain what he means in relating 'point-event' and 'love', please." Bantik says, "One comes to identify phenomenon with one" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Why does he say that 'any reaction whatever' is a phenomenon of love?" Bantik says, "One comes to identify phenomenon with oneself in each point-event." Hsi.Wang.Mu considers this carefully. Bantik says, "Taking something as part of oneself, is agape, no?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Or as wholly oneself, I'd say, sure." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Fusion" Bantik says, "The two most important constructs we maintain, are Self and Reality." li'ir says, "sound like the removal of the i and not-i barrier?" FraterNOX says, "curious.... I would say that one interpretation is that any reaction is a function of you and how you perceive it.... but I think he probably means something much more specific then that." Hsi.Wang.Mu thnks of putting on glasses that help us to see the unity of two images. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, I'm not sure that that barrier has any substance except as weve imagined it." Bantik agrees with Hsi. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Presuming otherwise DOES affect our experience of Reality, howeverr." Bantik notes that that could be interpreted as radical subjectivism, though. Hehehe. li'ir says, "but is crowley 'saying' that?" FraterNOX would argue that reality is implied in the construct of self..... if you understand the idea of no-self, then all of reality would similarily lose its concreteness Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, Crwoley is using this theoretic to justify the use of of symbol-systems." li'ir says, "ah..." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "It allows us to approach an experience of Reality." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Which he equates with the point-event, if I remember arightly (she puns on memory)." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "My own reaction is that approach can vary tremendously." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Crowley is attempting to justify Qabalah." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Fr., if 'considering oneself' anything in particular at all." li'ir says, "in the acheivement of zen-stuff there is not subject or object" li'ir says, "how do loving point-events justify qabalah?" FraterNOX says, "hsi: good point.... I should rephrase that to existing as the union of two opposites" Hsi.Wang.Mu thnks it is damn hard to put into language by virtue of the diversifying structure of expression. Bantik says, "li'ir: not loving point-events, he is saying that experiencing point evens is love of a sort." li'ir blinks li'ir is really having a problem separating zen thought and crowley thought (not something he usually does) li'ir says, "crowley seems to be saying things akin to zen, but i'm not sure..." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "B/li, the value of symbolic jargon is that it enables us to approach an experience of Reality. Qabalah is one example of a system of symbolic jargon that we can use for this object." li'ir says, "!" Bantik will return in a few minutes. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Crowley's student wants justification for having to learn all of this jargon, understandably. Crowley points out (as best as he's able) what the focus of the discipline he is instructing shall be." li'ir nods Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, Crwoley, from my experience, tends to explain things according to the capacity of understanding by the student." li'ir says, "ah!" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Looking at the way in which he is addressing this particular student, she asks 'why' alot." Hsi.Wang.Mu shrugs, "So he provides explanation. li'ir nods li'ir says, "okay" Hsi.Wang.Mu notes that this is one reason it is good to have read ahead. She smiles. Hsi.Wang.Mu hugs li'ir, glad of his attendance. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Have we lost everyone? Or ?" li'ir just popped in 'cuz someone told him too FraterNOX says, "sorry.... I had to go explain to a friend how to reply to a message on vax without using the stupid windows.... but I'm back now" li'ir was trying to generate the 'correct' contect Bantik has returned. FraterNOX says, "should we move on to chap 4 then?" Hsi.Wang.Mu would like to mentionone more thing. FraterNOX says, "ok" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Near the end, Crowley points out the very important meaning he gives to 'Qabalah'." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "He discusses the variability of meaning in language." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "And the difficulty of aligning meanings in order to communicate." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Then he says:" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, ""But it doesn't stop there. When we try to convey thought by writing, we are bound to sit down solidly..." popetwo says, "'lo, all!" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "..., and construct a holy Qabalah out of nothing...." FraterNOX says, "popetwo: nice to see you" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "...And all these arbitrary symbolic letters are combined by just as symbolic and arbitrary devices..." ending says, "hullo" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "...to take on conventional meanings, these words again combined into phrases by no less high-handed a procedures." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, ""And then folk wonder how it is that there should be error and misunderstanding in the transmission of thought from one person to another!"" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "(unquote)" li'ir likes that Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "As with other places, Crowley indicates that 'a holy Qabalah' is not a static impersonal thing." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Often in this book he mentions that it is best that 'we create our own Qabalah'." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Even encouraging his student to do this so as not to simply use his (Crowley's) worn and possibly useless tool." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Just as in _Book Four_, where he advices that it is often most expedient to construct one's own magical tools." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "So he applies it to the tool of the QBLH." Bantik says, "This harmonizes with the theme of Chapter 4." FraterNOX says, "Hsi: I don't know if you were on #thelema a couple of days ago some guy named raw came on. He was a philosophy major and decided that all religions are for peopeople with weak minds because they all require a belief in obj ectivity. When we tried to tell him that most religions in fact do not, he said we were all wrong and that we difine religion wrong" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Kind of like creating one's own computer program rather than merely using another's. When that program is designed to 'undo oneself' (thanks Alli), then this may be the only means to assure 'success'." FraterNOX says, "Then he kept saying that he himself held no objective beliefs...." li'ir says, "so crowley posits that the qabalah (qabalah-like things) are created by the use of symbol to carry content?" Hsi.Wang.Mu laughs at the Frater's story. FraterNOX says, "I thuink this stuff says a lot to people like that who hold some weird definition as TRUTH and expect everyone to act accordingly" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Li, the Qabalah is like 'the Tarot' in that it is perhaps most fruitfully designed by the mage. There are traditions of construct, of course (which is what 'QBLH' signifies)." Hsi.Wang.Mu compares 'QBLH' with 'tradition' and notes that there are times and people who require creating their own entire tradition rather hthan attempting to utilize somebody else's. li'ir says, "okay tradition" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, yes, symbolic association of every object to number and vice-versa, a web of symbolic meaning." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "through language." Bantik says, "And mathematics, too, Hsi. Gematria." Hsi.Wang.Mu notes that this forms the basis of ceremonial magick either white or black. She giggles after that one. ;> li'ir says, "so beyond the issue of saying that one creates a qblh when one frames any notion as language. (perhaps this is the same as saying ideas don't exist in a void.) crowley advocates the conscious acknowledgement and shaping of this procress of qblh creation?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Yes, and mathematics." FraterNOX says, "Language is interestiong because of the power it holds for some people..... for example..... could any of you go to anyway and change the definition of a word you are used to in order to understand the way others at this new place are usi ng the word?" Bantik thinks that Li'ir appraisal is accurate. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, yes, he is instructing such to his student. I doubt that he'd say it was the best tool for everyone." Bantik says, "Frater, that would be an interesting exercise." FraterNOX says, "It is not something that many people seem able (or maybe willing) to do, and thus let themselves be a slave to the words" ending says, "I have a question about the general opinion of the nature of thelema" Hsi.Wang.Mu would rather stick to text, but will follow the will of the group. ending says, "do you think someone exploring it would be incomplete without the maigckal aspects of it?" ending says, "I don't mean to take up a lot fo time, yes or no for now" FraterNOX says, "you would have to define thelema first....... I agree with Hsi though, lets stick with the text for now" ending says, "okie" Hsi.Wang.Mu would be happy to discuss in email (or in the Thelema93-L). FraterNOX likes the idea of such a discussion on thelema93-l Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Time for moving to Ch 4? 2 hours 5-7?/7-9? (i.e. is this study group formally drawing to a close?)" Bantik is easy. Wednesday shruggles cutely. FraterNOX says, "I'm for contuinuing" li'ir wishes to listen more Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "4 is long in any case. I'm content to continue also." Bantik says, "We've really been talking abot chapter 4 anyway." Hsi.Wang.Mu nods. Wednesday needs to get back to work for a bit, though, so will dart back in a bit. FraterNOX says, "later wed" Wednesday has left. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "The Title addresses li's questions. "4 - The Qabalah: The Best Training for Memory"" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Maybe that's why he said 'all that really exists is the memory' earlier (in 3)." FraterNOX says, "Crowley even suggests that the student makes a sepher sephiroth of her own.... something I think is very useful" ending has got to go work on something for a newsgroup, see you all later :> ending enters the coffin and the world. ending has left. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Perhaps Crowley is, like so very many ceremonial mages, a bias toward the use and development of the memory as a vital aspect of magical training." Hsi.Wang.Mu substitutes 'is' for 'has' in the above. Hsi.Wang.Mu has noticed this in most masonic tradition. FraterNOX says, "qyote: "No doubt a Really Great Teacher would have said: "Beware!" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Fr, yes, I liked that he said that to his student." Bantik notes that point-events from the past OR the future can be recalled by symbols. This is the essence of ritual, no? FraterNOX says, "Use my dictionary and mine alone...." FraterNOX says, "All others are spurious! But I'm not as RGT of that kind." FraterNOX says, "unquote" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "yet Crowley does appear to suggest that 'using a dictionary' (i.e. constructing a QBLH) is somehow best or better than other methods, no?" Hsi.Wang.Mu likes to argue against this perspective with ceremonials, so brings it up. FraterNOX says, "I've always liked that..... I think it is something that every student should think about when looking for a teacher.... the best teacher is one who makes you do everything on your own" li'ir says, "wot's the counter positin hsi.wang.mu?" Hsi.Wang.Mu agrees with Nox. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, the counter is that the memory is but one aspect of personal experience and that many others (intellect put to other use, emotions, etc.) are just as viable." FraterNOX says, "I'm confused.... what position?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Nox, the possible position that Crwoley may be taking here: constructing a Dictionary (one's own or one's teachers) is the best or a better maethod to approach REality." Bantik says, "Of course it is." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "BAntik, please elaborate." FraterNOX says, "Hsi: I guess Crowley would argue that all those other things (emotions, thoughts, etc. ) are truely just memory since you can never be aware of what is happening immediately.... so training the memory somehow is the best basis for work on all of these."" Hsi.Wang.Mu laughs. Bantik says, "Subscrining to a system of reality other than your own is ludicrous. Things mean different things to different people." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Bantik, but what about the promotion of the use of memory-system-QBLH as the superior tool?" li'ir says, "bantik: so it's not possible to create a dictionary other than your own?" FraterNOX says, "I don't think QBL is the only way.... just a way, and one that Crowley likes a lot." Bantik says, "Li'ir: that's what I think." Hsi.Wang.Mu wonders too if Crowley gives such emphasis to inspire his student, given that he argues on so many different sides of issues of 'appropriateness' and 'best tools'. FraterNOX says, "Hsi: I think its important to see how Crowley is defining memory here since he sees it as the basis for all experience." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Bantik, the chapter heading: 'The Qabalah: The Best Training for Memory'. Did Crowley write this? OR did Regardie in editing?" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Bantik, also, my question was whether Crwoley had a bias." Bantik grunts. FraterNOX says, "I think Crowley might have.... but knowing Regardie, we'll probably never know unless we see an original" Bantik wishes he could scroll back... Hsi.Wang.Mu tends to think very highly of Crowley and usually defends him against having such a bias. Hsi.Wang.Mu does not believe that her perspective is the correct one. "I don't identify with one perspective in any case." Bantik wonders what alternatives to Qabala Crowley suggests, then. And also notes that (coreybantik) does not consider this bias a black mark against anyone. li'ir says, "why is it important whether or not crowley promotes qblh above other tools?" FraterNOX says, "We'll we know from MiTaP that he found Yi Ching more useful to him then QBL, so I really don't think that he has a definite bias" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "li, it says something about his integrity and composure." li'ir says, "but does that change the content of his message?" Wednesday has disconnected. Bantik notes that in the Book of Thoth, Crowley finds a link between Qabala and the I'Ching. FraterNOX says, "At least he says that at one point in MiTaP if I remember correctly" popetwo notes that in 777, Crowley finds a link between Qabala and everygoshdurnedthing. Hsi.Wang.Mu doesn't think it changes it, li, except to put it in perspective. Bantik says, "Necessarily so, popetwo!" li'ir says, "okay" Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "xpope, that is the function of the discipline." Hsi.Wang.Mu remembers the Oath of the AByss, to treat all phenomena as direct dealings with one's individual person. Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "(by God/the divine/whatever)." Hsi.Wang.Mu says, "Having a numerical association with everything allows a 'Communication' of sorts." FraterNOX wonders if Satori can elaborate Hsi.Wang.Mu thinks this ties in with 'the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel', but that is a rather complex and wide-ranging subject. Wednesday has connected. Wednesday thinks call wainitng is more of an objective reality than she'd like. Satori says, "Frater: In the fourth (spacial) dimension, what is thought of as "time" in the third dimension becomes a spacial property..." Satori says, "And if one sees one's three-dimensional existence as but a part of one's four-dimensional (all-inslusive from a 3d point of view) self, identification with phenomena, and the third dimension at large, can be facilitated." Satori says, "(inclusive, even.)" FraterNOX says, "I was told by a physics friend of mine that time is a whole spearate entity unto itself and is diffined by entropy..... and that is why the term space-time is used... because the two can not be combined" FraterNOX wonders where Ghoxox! is when I need him Satori says, "Ouspensky notes in his "Tertium Organum" that what for us is the third dimension, spacially, exists for a two-dimensional being (say, an animal of another order) as time." FraterNOX says, "hmmm.... it appears that he and the physists are using different definitions then..... I wonder how he diffines time" Hsi.Wang.Mu looks through the chapter and thinks that most of it has already been discussed, but is happy to continue listening to Satori and others. Satori says, "In the same way, he suggests, what from a third-dimensional perspective is seen as time, from a fourth-dimensional perspective would be perceived spacially." popetwo wrinkles her brows. "I have a hard time grokking that one, Satori." Satori says, "And well you should, as the fourth dimension in this sense is incomprehensible for the most part to our three-d intellect." popetwo grins. FraterNOX realizes that he has been having a hard time spelling "defining" :> li'ir pages, "bleah. i wanted to hear more about uncle al" to you. Satori says, "As incomprehensible, for example, as our world must be to a snail." Bantik says, "d-e-f-i-n-i-n-g"" Bantik grins. Satori says, "(Or a cat or dog, more appropriately.)" Wednesday says, "Oh, but why limit ourself to that narrowly defined spelling? :)" Bantik LOL Bantik says, "Is that the best spelling? Or just one of many useful spellings?" popetwo says, "But how does one equate a third spacial dimension with *time* to a 2-d being?" FraterNOX says, "deephinnenngah" popetwo spins with the possibilities. popetwo scratches her head, recalling Flatland. FraterNOX says, "How does Ouspensky define time.... he appears to be difining it differentl;y then physists" Bantik remembers a dream in which the dimensions were stripped away, one by one. Wednesday says, "The question is, does it communicate the basic concept without difficulty? That would be the judge of alternate spellings...." Bantik says, "Use my dictionary, and mine alone!" Hsi.Wang.Mu giggles at Bantik's joke. Bantik grins wickedly. Wednesday says, "Ah, but why not the Wickedary?" Hsi.Wang.Mu closes the log. END OF LOG...