Page 3 of 3 <123
Topic Options
#55863 - 06/14/11 11:35 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: The Zebu]
Morgan Offline
Princess of Hell
stalker


Registered: 08/29/07
Posts: 2956
Loc: New York City
Dee and Kelly worked at the whim of British royalty. I doubt they would admit publicly to any types of working that could get them locked up. My memory fails me, but they had to be involved in "things" before they got involved with the Enochian otherwise a sane unexposed man would think himself mad.

"In any case, I seriously doubt that their Enochian practices resembled Crowley's work in the slightest."

Since they were/are in the British Library, he could have had access to them, and used what he wanted as he wanted. At this point, I believe they are scanned online.

http://www.themagickalreview.org/enochian/

M
_________________________
Courage Conquering Fear
Fuck em if they can't take a joke
Don't Like What I Say, Kiss My Ass



Top
#55871 - 06/15/11 01:56 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
William Wright Offline
active member


Registered: 10/25/09
Posts: 860
Loc: Nashville
Dr. Aquino, when Tasman mentioned that he was interested in advanced workings and asked where to look to examine necromancy, you replied, “Trust me, you aren’t” and “be glad I’m not telling you.” Your response struck me as paternalistic and condescending. It reminded me of the story of Adam and Eve, when God punished them because they ate of the forbidden fruit and “their eyes were opened.”

I realize that there are times when information must be withheld from others. I’m just not convinced this is one of those times. The implication is that it is OK for you to examine advanced workings and necromancy; after all, you’re a trained professional. But dear young Tasman might use the information to bring harm to himself, others and perhaps even the 600 Club. The horror!

By the way, nobody needs to learn from the 600 Club how to dig up graves. All you need is a shovel.
_________________________
In Minecraft all chickens are spies.

Top
#55872 - 06/15/11 03:56 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: William Wright]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: William Wright
Dr. Aquino, when Tasman mentioned that he was interested in advanced workings and asked where to look to examine necromancy, you replied, “Trust me, you aren’t” and “be glad I’m not telling you.” Your response struck me as paternalistic and condescending. It reminded me of the story of Adam and Eve, when God punished them because they ate of the forbidden fruit and “their eyes were opened.”

I realize that there are times when information must be withheld from others. I’m just not convinced this is one of those times. The implication is that it is OK for you to examine advanced workings and necromancy; after all, you’re a trained professional. But dear young Tasman might use the information to bring harm to himself, others and perhaps even the 600 Club. The horror!

By the way, nobody needs to learn from the 600 Club how to dig up graves. All you need is a shovel.

You are perfectly welcome to learn this lesson the hard way too, but again not with my recommendation, encouragement, or assistance.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#55881 - 06/15/11 09:14 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Morgan]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
Since they were/are in the British Library, he could have had access to them, and used what he wanted as he wanted. At this point, I believe they are scanned online.


I do not mean that Crowley's methodology was completely blind; books such as "A True & Faithful Relation" had been available for quite some time, and even before him, Golden Dawn initiates had devoted much research and practice incorporating the calls and glyphs glimpsed from Dee's sourcework.

What I meant was that Crowley and most others who fancy themselves "Enochian Magicians" only culled words and images that were imposed onto their own unrelated system of magic. In this sense, the finished product bore little resemblance to the steps actually taken by Dee and Kelley, as outlined in thorough detail via "Mysteriorum Libri Quinque".

For instance, Crowley used invocations of the Aethyrs with a few symbols like the famous Sigillum Aemeth, but the rituals themselves were more or less identical to the Great Beast's usual trademark hodgepodge of Qabalah and psuedo-goetia. An analysis of Dee/Kelley's methodology was enormously different, being a largely experimental sequence of revelation and prayer involving little ceremonialism.

But following the historic sequences to the letter, as some modern "Traditionalist" practitioners have done, is not much more valuable. Overall, it is my opinion that "Enochian Magic" is mostly redundant, since Dee's workings were primarily personal experiments, never intended to be "grimoires" or followed by other people (Heptarchia excluded). Obeying the steps of "Mysteriorum" to the letter is only an exercise in hollow mimicry; without the "divine inspiration" that prompted Dee, one merely acts out an archaic role-playing game.

On the other hand, I see little problem with using the Keys and such for utilitarian ends, as LaVey and the Chaos Magicians did, provided that one admits to taking the material out of context.


Edited by The Zebu (06/15/11 09:18 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#55935 - 06/16/11 06:59 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: The Zebu]
Zophos Offline
member


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 115
Loc: U.S.A.
Dialectical:

 Quote:
I'm also aware of what you were doing. 1) I'm perceptive

As your few posts here thus far have contained nothing but New Age silliness, totalitarian drivel, and lamentation for the sale of something you don't believe exists, I remain highly skeptical.


 Quote:
Zophos, are you a strict materialist or do you believe that some rituals work and there are no developed models or theories to explain why? If the latter is true, I'm curious to what you find is "real magic."

For the purposes of this discussion, call me an evidentialist. If anyone can show beyond reasonable doubt that ritual magic is capable of producing effects which are (a) consistently similar to the magician's goals and (b) unexplainable without recourse to means which are not known to existing science, I will be the first to acknowledge it. Examples have not been forthcoming.

As to what in my view is "real magic," I will avoid redundancy by explaining and instead ask that you find and read The Zebu's posts on the subject. With very few exceptions, his expressed views and my held ones are strikingly similar, despite our independence in arriving at them.



The Zebu:

 Quote:
Yeah, reminds me of some of my more recent rants about the ONA's (mis)use of Latin.

I found those quite amusing.


 Quote:
Classical tongues are REAL LANGUAGES, not Enochian gobbledygook that means whatever you want it to. (*Waits to be assaulted by Dee fanboys insisting on the linguistic integrity of Enochian).

Alas, another ignorant soul. It is a widely-believed fact that the Enochian language contains a consistent grammar and syntax. Even Israel Regardie said so. Check your facts before showing us that you don't belong among the ranks of true wizards, man.


 Quote:
I'm just glad that somebody else is as anal about it as I am.

For what it's worth, count me a perpetual ally in the debunking of historical and linguistic bravado. The profound core of occultism is encased in more than enough delusion and rubbish without their unchallenged presence here.


 Quote:
Dee was undoubtedly familiar with necromancy and possessed numerous books and grimoires on the subject. But whether or not Dee actually practiced it or not, seems unlikely, as the man had a lofty, sanctimonious view of magic, always sure to follow the angel's instructions that he didn't dare use "evil arts". Overtly necromantic books that have been ascribed to him, such as the Libellus Veneri Nigro Sacer, are arguably psuedonymous.

Well said. All primary historical sources indicate without exception that John Dee was a pious and practicing Christian. While it is not impossible that a necromantic experiment might have taken place at some time in his life, there is neither positive nor circumstantial evidence to support this.

Since our responses were to the claim by Dr. Aquino that Dee and Kelley did practice necromancy, a word or two on that also seems in order. See below.


 Quote:
Kelly, on the other hand, may have, believably, practiced the dark arts, not being restrained by the piety of his one-time associate.

Whatever Kelley's level of honesty in his interactions with Dee, it bears mentioning that despite recent scholarship, much of Kelley's popular image today is colored by a long accretion of myth, speculation, fabrication, and questionable inference. At least some of the pedigree for the linkage of Kelley to necromancy, however, can be traced with good accuracy. I will mention only two important sources.

The first is Ebenezer Sibly's Astrology, A New and Complete Illustration of the Occult Sciences, an 1806 redaction of two earlier books, The Celestial Science of Astrology (1776) and the four-volume New and Complete Illustration of the Occult Sciences (1784). Sibly here recounts the tale of Edward Kelley's necromantic ritual with Paul Waring, allegedly performed with a corpse disinterred from a Lancashire graveyard. Perhaps even more well-known than this account itself is the plate that accompanies it, which in addition to being posted and seen on the Internet with no supporting context (thus spawning the false belief that John Dee is one of the men portrayed), also sustained the legend's tacit acceptance and continued proliferation, most famously (prior to the Internet) through A. E. Waite's Book of Ceremonial Magic, which even has the plate as its frontispiece.



The second and more significant is the source on which both Sibly's and Waite's accounts are based: Antient Funeral Monuments (1631) by John Weever, an early modern antiquarian. Given that Kelley died in 1597, Weever's book stands among the earliest sources which depict Kelley as a necromancer, and may in fact be the first. Whatever the case, it should be stressed that, as with many stories of famous alchemists (Roger Bacon, Albertus Magnus, etc.) and individuals falsely believed to be alchemists (Thomas Aquinas, Nicolas Flamel, etc.), the Kelley-Waring story may nevertheless be a simple aggregation of hearsay, folk belief, and/or bad press. If there is anything to Weever's account beyond this, positive evidence of its basis is highly unlikely to emerge. Still, it may be possible to use Funeral Monuments as a starting point for further historical investigation. An earlier source may well exist.

In sum, then, there appears to be no well-grounded reason to believe that John Dee and Edward Kelley were "extensively involved in necromancy" at any time, leastwise together. At best there is a dubious report that one of them practiced necromancy on a single occasion, but given the date of its authorship and the prevalence of similar accounts (more specifically, their frequent falsehood) throughout the Middle Ages and early modern period, only a smoking gun would be sufficient to verify it. Dr. Aquino is welcome to counter my conclusion if he wishes, but such evidence as I have seen and currently know of (including unpublished manuscripts) only reinforces my strong doubt that necromancy ever figured into the life of Dee or Kelley.

(I would be remiss, however, to leave a good story deflated without offering something to intrigue and delight: John Dee may not have been a necromancer, but he almost became Emperor of Canada!)


 Quote:
In any case, I seriously doubt that their Enochian practices resembled Crowley's work in the slightest.

Both Dee's manuscripts and reliable secondary literature agree.

John Dee's Natural Philosophy: Between Science and Religion

John Dee: Interdisciplinary Studies in English Renaissance Thought

As you noted, Crowley's version of the Enochian system is completely rooted in that used by the Golden Dawn. What few modifications he made were his own, and not based in John Dee's own methods.



Morgan:

 Quote:
Dee and Kelly worked at the whim of British royalty. I doubt they would admit publicly to any types of working that could get them locked up.

The fact that the manuscripts of Dee's scrying sessions were never intended for circulation, and moreover were hidden away even from the other (sometimes quite sinister) contents of his own library, is highly beneficial in this regard, since it is thus more probable that the world picture they provide reflects Dee's actual beliefs rather than lip service and smokescreens. A few modern occultists have bent over backwards to show that Dee's system was in some way fundamentally distinct from Christianity, whether as part of a separate tradition or as a unique revelation from some other source, but no such claim has been substantiated with even minimal evidence.


Z.
_________________________
Nihil sit tam infirmum aut instabile quam fama potentiae non sua vi nita.

Top
#55939 - 06/16/11 08:01 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Zophos]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
Alas, another ignorant soul. It is a widely-believed fact that the Enochian language contains a consistent grammar and syntax. Even Israel Regardie said so. Check your facts before showing us that you don't belong among the ranks of true wizards, man.


*grumbles*... Yeah, what I basically meant is that Enochian is nowhere near as complex as Latin. It is easy for a Chaos Magician to cut and paste around the Calls to form his own barbaric-sounding invocations, but other languages are not so forgiving for the mix-n-match occultist (as our recent guest from South Africa most surely attests).

 Quote:
Perhaps even more well-known than this account itself is the plate that accompanies it, which in addition to being posted and seen on the Internet with no supporting context (thus spawning the false belief that John Dee is one of the men portrayed)


I remember reading somewhere about the illustration being erroneously described as depicting Dee, but could not remember the source. Thanks for the reminder, and for picking up the slack on my academic sloth.

 Quote:
A few modern occultists have bent over backwards to show that Dee's system was in some way fundamentally distinct from Christianity, whether as part of a separate tradition or as a unique revelation from some other source, but no such claim has been substantiated with even minimal evidence.


While Tyson and others have pointed out that some of the mystical revelations from the Angels were not consistent to mainstream Protestantism, the Enochian workings are absolutely drenched in Christian eschatology so as to make the two inseparable. Ironically, I think this is why the Keys have become so popular, because they appeal to that sort of "apocalyptic mania" that Christianity has given to our cultural consciousness.


Edited by The Zebu (06/16/11 08:06 PM)
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#55982 - 06/17/11 07:53 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: The Zebu]
Zophos Offline
member


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 115
Loc: U.S.A.
The Zebu:

 Quote:
*grumbles*... Yeah, what I basically meant is that Enochian is nowhere near as complex as Latin, bearing more grammatical resemblance to English than to the typical romance language.

Please forgive my satire of the pompous Soter Kosmou and Arch-Magus of All Æons™, but occult humor is only funny when both parties really get it. I'll buy you a drink sometime for being a good sport.


 Quote:
Thanks for the reminder, and for picking up the slack on my academic sloth.

Happy to oblige on the first, and awaiting more of your own obscure gems on the second. Let me know should you ever find the source that debunks the misidentification of Paul Waring in the Sibly engraving; it would be a useful reference. For my part, I'll try to find the book or article that elaborates on Dee's near-lordship of Canada.

Two tangential notes:

(1.) Richard Kieckhefer published a book some years ago entitled Forbidden Rites: A Necromancer's Manual of the Fifteenth Century. Despite its enthusiastic reception by occultists with a penchant for the "dark side," this book is noteworthy (along with his other book, Magic in the Middle Ages) for its demonstration that the term "necromancy" very often did not mean in the Middle Ages what it means now. Have you by chance read either of these?

(2.) Given your interest in the occult, you may wish to consider joining Societas Magica, an academic organization developed for and by historians and scholars of magic. Full membership, which costs $35 annually, grants you an excellent quarterly newsletter and the Society's official journal, Magic, Ritual, and Witchcraft. The quality and breadth of their published output are excellent, and membership can be canceled simply by ceasing dues payments. Take a look, if you haven't.


 Quote:
While Tyson and others have pointed out that some of the mystical revelations from the Angels were not consistent to mainstream Protestantism, the Enochian workings are absolutely drenched in Christian eschatology so as to make the two inseparable.

Agreed. The development of novel interpretations of apocalyptic literature has never gone out of style, and I very much doubt that it every well. Courtesy of Dee, Nostradamus, Blake, Yeats, Crowley, and others, compounded by the aforementioned popular appeal of apocalyptic images and beliefs, it has become a fashionable badge of attainment among occultists to "prove" their claims by appeal to the emergence of a new world from the ashes of the previous one.

Unfortunately, if any of them are to be believed, the Secret Chiefs must be malevolent in nature, since they seem determined to replace the superstitions of bygone ages with new ones that are as or even more absurd.


Z.
_________________________
Nihil sit tam infirmum aut instabile quam fama potentiae non sua vi nita.

Top
#55983 - 06/17/11 08:32 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Zophos]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Zophos
Alas, another ignorant soul. It is a widely-believed fact that the Enochian language contains a consistent grammar and syntax. Even Israel Regardie said so. Check your facts before showing us that you don't belong among the ranks of true wizards, man.

Um, no. It's just a jargon. I was curious about Francis' [Regardie] comment, so asked him about it during one of my visits to him at his Hollywood home. He acknowledged that he had no independent or expert basis for the "grammar/syntax" comment, but had just echoed it from A.C., who obviously recognized it as a jargon and used it as such, and represented it as more than that just to impress others.

The most strenuous effort I've come across to substantiate Enochian as a language [and I haven't really looked more recently] is this:

 Originally Posted By: Temple of Set Reading List
11F. The Complete Enochian Dictionary by Donald C. Laycock. London: Askin Publishers, 1978. (TOS-4) MA: “In addition to containing a comprehensive English-Enochian and Enochian-English dictionary, this volume includes a scholarly history and analysis of Dee’s Enochian system and Laycock’s edited version of the Keys from Dee’s original manuscript. Comparison of Laycock’s version with the Temple of Set’s microfilm copies of the original Dee diaries, however, reveals that Laycock arbitrarily subdivided parts of the Enochian text and added English-based punctuation. [Setian Gregory Anderson notes the existence of an Enochian dictionary entitled GMICALZOMA! by Leo Vincy, available through some British outlets. ‘Leo Vincey’ - a hero in Haggard’s She novels - was a pseudonym occasionally employed by Aleister Crowley, who included some Enochian-jargon incantations in an edition of The Gœtia.] Until the appearance of #11H, the only verbatim printed copy of the original Dee Keys readily available to Setians was/is in ‘The Book of Coming Forth by Night: Analysis & Commentary’ together with the Word of Set translation.”

A good example of a jargon is the "Yuggothic language" that I invented for the "Ceremony of the Nine Angles" & "Call to Cthulhu" in the Satanic Rituals. Basically you invent all the nouns and verbs you need, then use them consistently with invented cases & conjugations for polish. The same with adjectives, adverbs, etc. It's easy and fun [I accented Yuggothic with hidden allusions & puns]. Once I worked it up for the C9A, and Anton wanted an additional "sea"-working as well, it was a simple matter to Yuggoth one up. ;\)

Another similar Enochian leg-pull, and a very clever one, was done by David Langford in this book:

 Originally Posted By: Temple of Set Reading List
7D. The Necronomicon by George Hay (Ed.). London: Neville Spearman, 1978. (TOS-3) MA: “The fame of HPL’s fictional Necronomicon inevitably inspired other authors to produce books purporting to actually be that terrible tome. Some are good-humored tributes; some appear to be deliberately fraudulent. This Hay version, which is both a collection of commentaries and a ‘translation’ of the Necronomicon, is both the most entertaining and the most scholarly of the good-humored types. Included are essays by Colin Wilson (#4A, #7E, etc.) and David Langford (#21D), with ‘translation’ by Robert Turner [from the ‘John Dee Edition’ - which was invented by Frank Belknap Long for one of his Cthulhu-mythos stories!].”

David put Enochian through a [fake/simulated] computer analysis, somewhat the way we work on codes at NSA, etc.; and gradually, and of course to his delicious horror, the Necronomicon began to emerge in all of its loathsome awfulness. Some choice excerpts were duly included in the book.
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#55984 - 06/17/11 10:13 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Michael A.Aquino]
Zophos Offline
member


Registered: 03/28/10
Posts: 115
Loc: U.S.A.
Michael A.Aquino:

 Quote:
Um, no. It's just a jargon.

Apparently my sarcasm wasn't as obvious to everyone else as it was to me. I was sure that the context, pompous tone, blind appeal to authority, and use of terms like "man," "true wizards," "ignorant soul," and "widely-believed fact" would be dead giveaways. (Granted, longtime exposure to the legions of occultists who actually write like that does tend to sharpen one's reflex to thwart and annihilate them.)

Even still, I did explicitly note in my last post that I was being satirical. A mirthful chap like you, of all people, should recognize a timely spot of humor!


Z.
_________________________
Nihil sit tam infirmum aut instabile quam fama potentiae non sua vi nita.

Top
#55986 - 06/17/11 11:34 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Morgan]
Michael A.Aquino Offline
stalker


Registered: 09/28/08
Posts: 2521
Loc: San Francisco, CA, USA
 Originally Posted By: Morgan
Dee and Kelly worked at the whim of British royalty. I doubt they would admit publicly to any types of working that could get them locked up. My memory fails me, but they had to be involved in "things" before they got involved with the Enochian otherwise a sane unexposed man would think himself mad.

Dee was a polished and professional international spy for Queen Elizabeth I, as is discussed in some detail in:

 Originally Posted By: Temple of Set Reading List
11A. John Dee by Richard Deacon. London: Frederick Muller Ltd, 1967. (TOS-3) MA: “While other biographical studies of Dee have been written, none compares with this one for insight, clarity, and readability. An excellent introductory work. The author is particularly sensitive to Dee’s linguistic skills and contributes many helpful research recommendations of his own.”

When I was spending some time on this subject matter, I sent a photocopy of the original Dee manuscripts to a cryptogeek friend of mine at NSA. These guys pick their teeth breaking codes, and I was curious to know whether Dee might have used Enochian as a cover for coded intelligence messages back to HM. He played around with it for awhile, but didn't find anything that jumped out at him. He mentioned that in Elizabethan days English was used significantly differently than today, so that might have thrown the NSA computers off; also, of course, a particular Enochian term or its placement or repetition in a text or document might simply stand for a prearranged intelligence confirmation by itself, without any sentence-structure being necessary. [For instance, if the name "Madimi" is mentioned twice on page #4, it means the King of Poland has the flu, etc.]

 Originally Posted By: Morgan
Since they were/are in the British Library, he could have had access to them, and used what he wanted as he wanted. At this point, I believe they are scanned online.

The most exhaustive literary attack on Dees's Enochian gig that I have encountered to date is this:

 Originally Posted By: Temple of Set Reading List
11H. The Enochian Evocation of Dr. John Dee by Geoffrey James (Ed./Trans.). Gillette, NJ: Heptangle Books, 1984. (TOS-4) MA: “At long last - The original Dee diary Keys assembled with a large selection of Dee’s related spells, all carefully footnoted and annotated to the original Sloane, Cotton, Bodeleian, Ashmolean, etc. documents. James is familiar with and critiques as appropriate the various approaches in such works as #11B/D/F. Since this is a book consisting solely of annotated magical text, it will not be readily intelligible to readers who have not obtained a biographical and exoteric understanding of Dee through other sources. A top-quality clothbound volume, well worth the $40 pricetag for serious students of Dee.”
_________________________
Michael A. Aquino

Top
#56001 - 06/18/11 12:42 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: Zophos]
The Zebu Offline
senior member


Registered: 08/08/08
Posts: 1640
Loc: Orlando, FL
 Quote:
Have you by chance read either of these?


I've read those works on the Munich Manual, but never got a chance to check out "Magic in the Middle Ages". I think I remember seeing it at the Uni's library, so I'll take a look the next time I'm down there.

Academically speaking, "necromancy" deals with the dead, but from my perspective, demons and other chthonic beings are closely associated with death and to spirits of the dead, so "nigromancy" and "necromancy" are closely intertwined-- therefore, it is no great error to use the two terms interchangeably.

I have recently become enchanted with Jake-Stratton-Kent's work on Goetia such as Geosophia and his edition of The True Grimoire. There's been a lot of writings coming out exploring the concurrences of grimoire magic with Afro-Carribean cults, which gives one lots of ideas of how to practice Goetia as a vibrant devotional tradition, as opposed to stumbling around dusty scribblings about exorcizing cows and curing measles.

Sometimes I have the mind to simply dismiss systematic esotericism altogether-- with its profaned mysteries, stale correspondences, and obsession with transcendence-- and just devote my entire practice to the wholesale worship of Death. The book club idea doesn't sound so bad either.
_________________________
«Recibe, ¡oh Lucifer! la sangre de esta víctima que sacrifico en tu honor.»

Top
#56030 - 06/18/11 07:37 PM Re: Necromancy [Re: The Zebu]
Hegesias Offline
active member


Registered: 02/16/11
Posts: 725
Welcome to the club The Zebu, I get confounded by abstraction and complexity, let alone the amount of book reading suggested around here. I do try to catch up on some different areas, but end up reading the few I have at home over again for some reason.

The I feel essence of death worship lies in the affirmation of death, not a worship of an afterlife as in the Christian death worship. The presence of death all around and the emergence of decay and dissolution in society, our lives, values, morality etc. is not as important as sobering affirmations of mortality.

To have experienced near death experiences, to have affirmed the endlessness of the dark alpha omega. I have unorthodox Gnostic beliefs. In a simple way, the worship of death for me is the affirmation of death, and as consequence, immediacy to live and direct the will by cerebrations of the black flame that knows not the lie of the creation, opposing the imposed rules of existence set by a foolish demiurge which is only the phenomenal form of it's idea, the hylic world by which this individual perceives. In a simple way, to laugh at the world in a certain way.

I am collecting a lore if you will, affirmations of death (universal heat death, ego death, la petite mort, or just garden variety macabrism), entropy, nihilism, near death experience, the Thanatos (death drive), but most of all to embrace fatalism and "The Way of Dying" and the Hagakure etc. The list goes on.

Now I don't profess any credentials or anything of the sort about philosophy but I do love to contemplate in my own way and spew my own or unbeknownst to me, quite possibly, rehashed ideas. Hegesias of Cyrene flipped "an unexamined life is not worth living" a Socratic maxim, on it's head, with, "For the fool life is advantageous; for the wise it is indifferent." Leaving aphoristic contemplations that life is worth living only if you are not yet affirmed to be wise. Possibly meaning that to affirm a fully examined life one has therefore lost interest in life, hence, all rationality points toward death being no more less desirable than life. Yet only if one is a victim of his own beliefs in assuming a fully examined life by affirming he is "all wise" or whatever. Only those who know they are fools will value further wisdom and therefore life. A possible conclusion of both philosophers. This is where active (positive) nihilism comes in handy. Why? I have and will explain more in other areas on this forum. I just think Hegesias is seriously funny unintentionally as he's misrepresented as a negative philosopher with all those people killing themselves being unable to hack his hardcore shit back in the day, maybe their Jungian Shadow's were impossible to look at? I can make positive life affirmations and perceive the blackest irony from the most abysmal epiphanies. Why? I'm all about Shadow Work.

"I love those who do not know how to live, except by going under, for they are those who cross over."— Nietzsche

Those of us who live in darkness are most effected by the light, the experience of the change is profound. A glimmer of light bears value where there was none before. We overcome the beliefs of the ego to emerge the superanthrope. At the darkest night of the soul, only that of it's own luminescence, shines.— Hegesias
_________________________


Top
Page 3 of 3 <123


Moderator:  SkaffenAmtiskaw, fakepropht, TV is God, Woland, Asmedious, Fist 
Hop to:

Generated in 0.033 seconds of which 0.006 seconds were spent on 25 queries. Zlib compression disabled.