Jump to content
IGNORED

The Esoteric Thread


Recommended Posts

seems to me that this thread is asking how to believe in God and not to believe in God at the same time... good luck with that

  On 12/27/2023 at 3:04 PM, xox said:

seems to me that this thread is asking how to believe in God and not to believe in God at the same time... good luck with that

I don't get how do you arrieve to that polarized perception,  none pure theistic nor atheistic stuff on this thread, and things are not white or black in that notion nor shouldn't be, because it is a matter of a spectrum of conciousness, and depending on how much of it you are aweare off the views on the meaning of god could trasform. Esotericism strives in the exploration of conciousness in unorthodox ways, and what could be done with it in this human machine rather than the obvious survival, physiological or reactional emotional mode

Speaking of conciousness I read somehting cool about it some weeks ago:

Taken from the book "Deeper Man" - written by J.G. Bennet
(page 42 to 44)
Chapter 2: Energies (Material, Living and Cosmic energies) ->

Cosmic Energies (E4 Concious Energy, E3 Creative Energy, E2 Unitive Energy, E1 Trascendental Energy):


- E4 Conscious Energy:

In ordinary speech, "conciousness" means the state of being aware of things going on, produced by the sensitive energy. What we mean by conciousness is something of a higher order that can be described crudely as an "awareness of our ordinary awareness". if we want to undrestand trasformation in man, it is necessary to understand the distinction between sensitivity and conciousness. It is easy to believe that we can "observe ourselves". Most people even take it for granted that they know what is going on in themselves and what their states are, but most so called "self-observation" is simply the observaton by one center of another. For example, we can think of our body and the way in which it is moving or feel the thoughts that are coursing through our minds. All this is just the observation by one center of the functioning of another center. In it we do not see ourselves; it is the parts of ourselves that are seeing each other. Real self-observation requires what is called the "separation of oneself from oneself". This means a separation from all the functioning of thought, feeling, and the body. Our functioning is then still a part of "us" but "we" are no longer just a part of it. Once we have had this experience, the taste is unmistikable when it comes to us again. But when it is not there, we can easily decieve ourselves that it is.

It is because concious energy is a cosmic energy that we cannot make ourselves concious. It does not come directly from efforts, as sensitivity does. As we learn more about the trasaformation of energies, we will come to undrestand that there is always a spontaneous component in the arising of conciousness.That is why the act of voluntary attention, which awakens conciousness, is essentially creative.
Conciousness can also be liberated by shocks, such as intense emotional impacts. This makes possible a whole series of transformations. The concious energy can blend with the automatic energy in us (automatic nergy is the energy habit, mechanic actions), and the result is energy of an intermediate level, that is, sensitivity. Gurdjieff formulated this kind of transformation as "the higher blends with the lower to actualize the middle, which is higher for the preceding lower and lower for the succeding higher". This spells out what happens very exactly. The sensitive energy that is liberated is then available for blending with the energy above conciousness, the creative energy (the energy that is is above this one described in the post and it is characterized as E3 Creative Energy in the book's diagram). The result is more conciousness. it is possible for us to look at things in a new way, to think and feel in a new way. but we are at risk because of the conditioning inherent in our sensitivity, where we keep our self image, our assumptions, our attitudes, and our dreams. thses bring into play a disorganized force. We "cannot bear" the contradictions in us, the combination of yes and no that is made possible by the concentration of concious energy. Very quickly "we go back to sleep". The world looks too different from we have assumed it to be.

So, although it is not right to say that we can make ourselves concious, we can prepare for conciousness by giving our sensitivity experience of the combination of "yes" and "no", and also of "inner" and "outer". This was Ouspensky's way of preparing people for the experience of "self-remembering", which he said we could only pretend to bring about in ourselves, because we are not able to summon enough emotional energy. To bring about a "shock" in oneself is a very great thing and a rare ability. We should also add that bringing about shocks in other people, even with the intention of doing them good, is highly undesirable because the result of this is dependance and lack of spontaneity.

When conciousness is in us, we see that our ordinary state of awareness is like sleep, or like "flatland". We see that in this ordinary state we believe ourselves to be some being that is there, whereas in reality there is no such thing. Only with a sufficient concentration of concious energy is this clear. In our ordinary state, there is usually so little that at best all we can have is some nagging suspicion that "things are not as they seem to be". Even this little give us some freedom to work. It is said that it is always possible for us to "remember ourselves" even if it is only for a fraction of a second. It is very important that we do what we can do with the amount of concious energy that we have. People working together under certain conditions can concentrate enough concious energy for at least some of them to "wake up" and see something, and this will be of the benefit of them all.

it takes a long time for us to become accustomed to the separation of conciousness and sensitivity in us. Nothing of this is cultivated through the ordinary processes of education. We have to learn how to recognize perceptions and actions of a higher order, and we have to train ourselves in the way of "struggle with ourselves", the bringing about the struggle between "yes" and "no", by which the soil is prepared for the sowing of concious seeds.

When conciousness comes, it is more true to say that it has us than that we have it. We have the ridiculous phrase, "i am concious", which we use in the same way as "I am hot". it would be better to say, "I am concioused". it is our sensitivity which pesruade us that we "have" an "I". Conciousness is not personalized and it is not localized. It is everywhere. When we claim it as our own, this is as silly as claiming that the atmosphere is ours because we can take a breath. We are so concerned with external things that we are not aware that conciosness is inside everything. It is differntly concentrated in different things, and has very different effects. When we catch a glimpse of the reality of conciousness in nature, it is a great and wonderful thing. Then we really begin to understand that conciousness is not a human prerogative.

One of the most striking effects of conciousness in us is that kind of experience in which we are aware that as we look at something, we are being seen (damn Nietzche realized this point in the phrase "if thou gaze long into an abyss, the abyss will also gazes into thee). This is such a reversal to our ordinary way of experiencing that it is quite unmistikably something of a higher order.

Though conciousness is not something we can control, as we can switch on or off a light, we can learn to put ourselves in the way of the concous experience. It is conciousness that makes us aware of what we are and it enables us to think what we wish to think, feel what we wish to feel, and move our bodies as we intend. it is conciousness that enables us to experience all of our centers simultaneously.

if we go back to our picture of the land and the sea, entering into concious experience is like plunging into the water. We need to learn how to swim. We cannot act upon the world of conciousness but we can learn to participate in it, and take part in the energy transformations which sustain it. Man has the role of linking together the world of life and the world of cosmic energies. The liberation of conciousness in us is a cosmic obligation.

Many parctices which have come down to us from ancient times are to do with the liberation of conciousness. One that is specially informative is the "stilling of the mind", or in yogic terms, "constraint of the fluctuations of the mind-stuff". Through this we do become an "object of conciousness", but we do not become by this alone a "being in our own right". For this, higher order of energies are needed, for conciousness itself must be transformed.

Nice that you’re putting the effort into cracking the code of life but you just proved exactly what Im saying; you’re avoiding to mention god but at the same time writing about ancient times as if they were smarter than us for some reasons, especially reasons unrelated to god 

consciousness; like we know anything practical about it beyond modern hardcore psychology … the above text is nothing more than a high school level psychology mixed with fantasy vague nonsense 

imo

p.s. my initial remark was about the thread in general

Edited by xox
  On 12/27/2023 at 3:04 PM, xox said:

seems to me that this thread is asking how to believe in God and not to believe in God at the same time... good luck with that

they're not mutually exclusive!

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited by cruising for burgers
  On 12/28/2023 at 12:05 AM, xox said:

Nice that you’re putting the effort into cracking the code of life but you just proved exactly what Im saying; you’re avoiding to mention god but at the same time writing about ancient times as if they were smarter than us for some reasons, especially reasons unrelated to god 

consciousness; like we know anything practical about it beyond modern hardcore psychology … the above text is nothing more than a high school level psychology mixed with fantasy vague nonsense 

imo

p.s. my initial remark was about the thread in general

Expand  

whatever bruh

Neither I avoided to mention god (I mentioned it in that last post) nor esotericism has to do with a thing of the past (it is still existing today) or people of the past being smarter or dumber  for mmm-> "especially for reasons unrelated to god".. what ? lol ... most of them had a lot less scientific data or knowledge than an average man of today obviously. Did I said otherwise? No. Does it matter? No, because we do not know many things and why very few people of the past (not whole societies) had the "esoteric" knowledge they had, specially related to psychology and mysticism, conciousness, etc

And as for your opinion of that text really do not care much, you  haven't put any argument with weight against it, just subjective bias, and yes, some hard mechanicist psychologists and positivists would call it fantasy, because they can't trace conciousness, like I care. They are becoming stagnant and obsolete. Been studying these ideas and others from esoteric cristianity, judaism, fourth way, sufism, rosicrucians for many years and they have pretty strong links in meaning between them. The likes of Bernardo Kastrup, Peter Kingsley, Ken Wilber, Richard Tarnas, Rupert Spira, etc (for putting some random examples xD) would support many core esoteric and methaphysical things of these traditions. Read that book of JG Bennet before if you want to say something constructive about it, not a short irrelevant subjective view about something you most likely do not have much idea of

Edited by Milwaukeeeee

this guy has a lot of esoteric stuff on his channel called esoterica. wide range of things

 

Releases

Sample LIbraries

instagram

Cascade Data 

Mastodon

  Reveal hidden contents

 

^^ that channel is excellent and so are all the other channels he mentions frequently (Let's Talk Religion, Seekers of Unity, Angela's Symposium, Religion For Breakfast, The Modern Hermeticist, etc)

GHOST: have you killed Claudius yet
HAMLET: no
GHOST: why
HAMLET: fuck you is why
im going to the cemetery to touch skulls

[planet of dinosaurs - the album [bc] [archive]]

  On 1/8/2024 at 6:10 AM, luke viia said:

^^ that channel is excellent and so are all the other channels he mentions frequently (Let's Talk Religion, Seekers of Unity, Angela's Symposium, Religion For Breakfast, The Modern Hermeticist, etc)

have found my way to a few of those as well. the algorithm seems to bump them all if you watch a few from any one channel. 

Releases

Sample LIbraries

instagram

Cascade Data 

Mastodon

  Reveal hidden contents

 

that makes sense, they all do collaborations and occasionally travel together. Let's Talk Religion / Filip Holm is a particularly great lecturer imo

GHOST: have you killed Claudius yet
HAMLET: no
GHOST: why
HAMLET: fuck you is why
im going to the cemetery to touch skulls

[planet of dinosaurs - the album [bc] [archive]]

  • 2 weeks later...
  On 12/10/2023 at 10:08 PM, cruising for burgers said:

I'm nothing

and

everything

and

anything

inbetween

Expand  

very Brahman.

백호야~~~항상에 사랑할거예요.나의 아들.

 

Shout outs to the saracens, musulmen and celestials.

 

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

this is weird shit

 

Releases

Sample LIbraries

instagram

Cascade Data 

Mastodon

  Reveal hidden contents

 

 
  Reveal hidden contents

 

Edited by perunamuusi
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   1 Member

×
×