|
|
Post by enkur on Mar 8, 2011 11:55:56 GMT -5
Enenuru being a forum where both scholars and sorcerers discuss, I would like to turn an attention to something eccentric which could be of some interest: In his book "Liber Kaos", the father of the so called "chaos magic" Peter Carroll offers an interesting model which tries to explain the development and interaction of three basic human approaches to the mystery of existence: the magic approach, the religious approach, and the scientific approach. Some basic regularities in this model are: Each time one of the three attains to its climax, the other two are in opposition. For example, when the religious world-view attains to its historic climax in the monotheism, both magic and science are in opposition, anathemized and persecuted as heresies. Or, when the scientific world-view attains to its climax in the materialist atheism, both magic and religion are stigmatized as superstitions. We do not know what was the case when the magic world-view was dominating but the very fact that humanity is far older than its history should speak something to us - it was both religion and science which need writing system, so we have history just from Sumer henceforth because the writing started there, yet magic was there and anywhere from long ago. Probably when the magic world-view will ascend again to its climax both religion and science will be denied as emotionally suppressing  Another regularity observed in this model is that there is a point where the descending paradigm and the ascending paradigm coincide, so there arises some temporal hybrid world-view combining the natures of both paradigms. For example, certain avant-gardist sciences today rediscover sorcery in their own terms. On the other hand, certain occult systems like those of Crowley and Mr Carroll himself are in some allegiance with the scientific experience. Of course as any human model this one is also with a limited scope and cannot explain everything ;D Its original description could be read here: www.chaosmatrix.org/library/chaos/texts/phmota.html Attachments:
|
|
|
|
Post by enkur on Aug 31, 2011 8:23:07 GMT -5
Some Thoughts of mine about the Scholars and the Occultists I do still believe that enenuru is an unique forum for both scholars and occultists wherein each side accepts the approaches of the other. On the other hand, since almost one year of membership in enenuru I've come to know we speak different languages. Now what makes me insecure here is that while I'm aware of that fact, I'm not quite sure if the other side is aware of it - does it at least recognize the other language as such, or just thinks it's beneath its dignity to communicate with those who don't speak their own language? Since according to the above-described psychohistory model the science is presently the dominant paradigm with magic and religion in opposition, by occultists I mean both sorcerers like me who bend the traditions to their own service, and the neo-paganists who believe they reconstruct the ancient worship nowadays and thus also bend the fragmentary ancient traditions to their own agenda. Bending the ancient traditions to one's present needs is an inevitable and natural process as far as occultism is concerned, so the scholars should take it into account when communicating with occultists instead of hurrying to condemn them - if the gap between the science and the occult is to be bridged at all. Of course, the criticism is necessary anyway. One shouldn't leave "authors" like Michael Ford to claim any authenticity as well as one shouldn't leave certain academics to project their early childhood's religious imprint onto the subject of their research. The scholars who are open-minded to the occult should know that unlike them the occultists work with emotive energy when dealing with the ancient traditions and their archetypes. Without that affective medium no magic is possible - if the scholars recognize its reality at all. Getting possessed is a dangerous thing and it may lead to lasting mental damages if one's psyche is unstable. That's why the sorcerers - at least those of my own tradition, seek after developing emotional/affective intelligence instead of suppressing their emotionality by discipline and drill. The development of emotional/affective intelligence was my master thesis in the theatrical academy I was graduated. Of course, it was treated in the context of theatre only but it could be applied entirely to the reality of magic. There are still academics who deny the theatre any scientific methodology at all, as if there were never scholars like Stanislavski. Anyway, by not recognizing the reality of each other the communication between the scholars and the occultists becomes irrelevant. If the open-mindedness of the scholar is reduced to being tolerant to the occultist's beliefs only, s/he shouldn't feel offended if his/her interpretations of the archaeologic facts are regarded as beliefs as well. No real communication is possible while the one is classified as reality and the other as beliefs. There is a great ignorance and negligence in the occult circles about the facts of archaeology and history - it's a sad fact indeed. It's partly due to the natural tendency of certain occultists to get bored by the dry scholar interpretations, and it's partly due to the inaccessiveness of the factologic data which are at the scholars's disposal. Yet the occult experience cannot be denied and the psychology is inadequate to explain it. After all, there are also occultists who do not need any ancient sanction for their magic - it works despite of having no traditional fundamental. Moreover for some of them "Satan" is an archetype of the future, who is to be summoned from the future, not from the past, so all the human slavish past will be destroyed, and all the slavish experience forgotten forever. New and proud individuals of occult power will rule the world creating a new cosmic civilization which will be extended beyond the borders of the Solar system. And lo! we have the Anunnaki returned from the future, not from the past. Those of humanity who are not able to recognize the numinous in themselves shall remain slaves (as they have ever been) but unlike now they will not occupy institutions anymore. Yet there are such like me who are still fond of the past, of the antiquity. The good old goggle-eyed dwarves both pious and inventive, worshiped great gods able of creating both order and chaos. They created a civilization combining both the numinous and the mundane, a paradox not well understood nowadays. Neither is the scholars's haughtiness, nor is the occultists's negligence justified when investigating together an epoch where humanity, however cognate by some features today, had yet another way of perception, different than ours - not just because of not knowing the things we know today but because of having different senses than ours. By different senses I mean their focus of awareness was different than ours so they were able to sense things we aren't able to sense now. |
|
|
|
Post by nininimzue on Sept 1, 2011 10:34:44 GMT -5
Ah, I was suspecting that you got your idea about a psychohistoric model from Pope Pete. Glad to see I was right in that regard. Without wanting to add significant comment at the moment because I am on painkillers and should not write long, rambling replies: I am what you would call an occultist myself. I happen to also be a sumerologist/archaeologist/whatever. And whilst I would be quite the armchair occultist (which I assure you I am not) if I would deny 'the occult experience' any basis in "reality" (you're speaking about consensus reality I take it...?). CMT is a fine example, when not considering its mathematical shortcomings (I have discussed the formulae quite extensively with a mathematician and two physicists a few years back, and it was quite enlightening), for a theoretical background for uniting old traditions with modern magickal practice. However, occultists also use a language that archaeologists/philologists do not understand fully. We are each caught in our respective sociolect, and not many are fluent in both. What angers me, though, is when occultists (whose side I am practically on) ignore archaeological or philological evidence because the evil archaeologists/philologists (on whose side I am also practically on) do not believe what occultists say when they first say it. Stupid flaming on both sides often ensues. That said, I of course welcome discussions about the more occult aspects of Mesopotamia. I just wouldn't say much  |
|
|
|
Post by us4-he2-gal2 on Sept 2, 2011 0:02:57 GMT -5
Dear Enkur and N. / A. - readers in general:
As there is considerable "feather ruffling" as Andrea states during a related discussion on another thread, perhaps I might inspect the situation and make some determinations - in so doing I would hope to guide these issues to a conclusive understanding.
I am already informed that my "generalization" of a conflict occurring between occult and academic is not quite correct - in fact all parties currently concerned have now explained their dual interest in both of these approaches, making the situation more complicated. People are complicated.. god knows women are complicated 0_0 (no offense women). But it's evident that the gears are grinding, so to speak, and so I suspect that whatever trimmings one chooses to apply, the issue is in fact one of a deeply fundamental nature.
I think I know what that is. Now you know I wouldn't let you come under irrational or unbalanced attack Enkur (referring to attacks of a few months ago) , but friends deserve the benefit of rational explanation - and the board deserves to have some direction so that order and harmony may exist:
Therefore, let me say that we have been guided by a fixed charter, sometimes it is spoken outloud, more often it exists in the way things are done and approached. It has been the quest of the unlearned toward learning, the unrefined toward refinement, of the layman toward the academic - in truth it has been like a shadow of the steps I am taking in real life and the vice versa. It sounds egotistical, but it's not unintentional. The fundamental charter of the group is academic development.
I have encouraged occultists to find what they can here - I have been and am encouraging of your own efforts. But the essential here is and has been academic development for all comers, which can be occultists if they so choose to learn and try - this is really not a place to develop ones occult abilities; it's different to say I accept your occult approach, I tolerate your occult input and on the other hand to say this is equally about occult. Is it a tolerant board - yes. Is it a 50/50 board? Well, really, no. Discussing occult sources on an equal footing with academic is missing the point. Discussing occult sources as being over and above the academic is so out of harmony with the spirit of this group that you incur all sorts of stifled hostility - that is plain enough on a day like today.
To say that the academic view is a modern trap of a sort under which we wear blinders of a sort is, I think, perhaps true in a sense. I can see that point sure - but it doesn't matter. That trap is the stated orientation of this board. Academic development and determination is the long held charter here, the 'numinous value' behind it all. It is a place where those who need help with this goal can come - or just those who understand this drive. It is a small group but it is as rare as owls teeth and so valuable. We can't accept a change to 50% academic 50% occult balance and still stay the same resource and spirit we have been - and so we shouldn't. I'm sure someone as diplomatic and flexible in mind as you are can understand this, and maybe also agree, that the basic charter should not be subjected to change, even if some of us may wish it with honest and true intentions.
Best Regards - and this does not mean posts should not refer to occult views at all. There is obviously a balance that can be struck and usually is.
|
|
|
|
Post by enkur on Sept 2, 2011 5:16:29 GMT -5
(This post was sent by me prior to read us4-he2-gal2's above post, so my answer to it is in my post below.)us4-he2-gal2, your answers are welcome whenever they come ; nininimzue, nice to hear you're a polyglot - I've always suspected you are  Now Pete Carroll's psyhohistory model is a plausible example of how three basically different paradigms interact with each other along the historic time. Its weak point is the linear time it's based on and I suppose Mr. Carroll is aware of it. Yet this model is a product of the contemporary Western occult thought which tend to neglect certain vital aeonic factors like the human races - a topic dangerous enough to discuss nowadays. For me it matters little how clever are the intellectual arguments of the other side when behind them I feel a basic animal instinct to be bitten. That's the most frequent problem I meet when communicating with persons who know much and feel little. Their inner animal feels territorially threatened by my emotive expression and it reacts unconsciously to provoke their mind to undertake a well or not so well argumented intellectual offensive against me. I'm aware of the fact that there are nowadays people in the West who are able of combining their occult experience with their scientific research which I find as very nice but I do not share this reality since I'm not a representative of the Western civilization's values. I'm from a post-totalitarian country wherein the value systems are in war with each other and everything tends to get polarized. Call it a low form of life if you want but it's a reality shared by millions. Two words about my background of which the Westerners have a little notion: I'm from a country which was of the nationalist-fascist type before the WW2 and which embraced the other extreme after the WW2. Now under the hypocrite cover of democracy there is still a great ethnic, social, and inter-personal hatred in almost all spheres of life. With little exceptions the academic and the scientific circles in my country are still much like what the Victorian scholarship was once in Europe, so the comparison with the oppressive monotheism is quite actual. On the other hand, those of alternative views tend to embrace some self-denial mystic doctrines I also despise. When in the 1990-ties I tried to emigrate in certain Western countries, my anti-totalitarian statements there were classified in the worst case as "totalitarian" too, or in the best case as "exaggerated" by the positive-thinking Western intellectuals, especially in the artistic circles. The Germans, in particular, with their conformist "political correctness" tend to see the ghost of Hitler behind any more emotive expression of thoughts and could prove unconsciously more hateful than the very haters who honestly show their hatred towards certain things. There was a time I seriously thought about the danger of turning into what I hated but when I saw how the Westerners treated with tolerance the former communist cut-throats and cooperated economically with them instead of organizing new Nurenberg trials against them, I did realize the whole demagogy of the Western civilization and my own inadequacy (as well as that of many like me) to belong to it. So, in the name of our further discussions, except seening me as being on the occult side, you will do better if you regard me as a barbarian as well, as a contemporary barbarian sorcerer who draws inspiration directly from the Bronze Age when the rulers acted not unlike the prescriptions to the kings in Crowley's "The Book of the Law" and who refuses to get civilized in any "political correct" way adopted by the conventional science and the conventional art. Anyway, I will never neglect the evidences of the archaeology and philology but I will ever doubt in their interpretations which don't fit my feeling and intuition, so I'm a scholar of my own and do not feel ashamed to be an amateur in the eyes of those with specialized education. As for my amateurship in the field of the occult, hmm, I tend to accept challenges in real life rather than online 
|
|
|
|
Post by nininimzue on Sept 2, 2011 6:44:52 GMT -5
What about an extra board about magickal ideas and concepts? That way, people who have absolutely no interest in the subject can stay out of it, and those who want to participate can delve right in. Which would be more proper, I think, than occultism intruding on the discussion of, say, Samarra type ceramic ware... *smirks*
|
|
|
|
Post by enkur on Sept 2, 2011 9:56:27 GMT -5
us4-he2-gal2, I do understand the idea behind this board, yet I don't think this thread about the psychohistory model was at odds with the board spirit - it rather helps in understanding the differences between the worldviews of magic, religion and science, and it gives priority to neither of them despite of the author's belonging to the one of them. As for the academic spirit I'm afraid I lack any respect to it, though I do respect your idealism about it. I'm also of academic education but I'm not proud of it at all. 95% of the academics I know are haughty snobs boasting with their scientific tittles who know much and feel little. They suffer any kind of diseases due to their chronic constipation being not able to feel even their own bodies they rarely dwell in. I think knowledge shouldn't make one physically ugly. I can't respect any intellectual work however dedicated if it's at the expense of empathy. Here some Christians are right when they say that knowledge is vanity. The academics I know were all adherents of the scientific atheism supported by the former political regimen and now they are all on their way to believe in "God" - some of them have already become even fervent East-Orthodox Christians. After all, it was because of my investigation in the ritual as a predecessor of theatre that I was fallen from grace in my academy. It was a wonder that I graduated despite of all hindrances. I've written to you privately about the "competence" of certain important cultural institutions as regards the Mesopotamian inheritance. I do realize that I may project my negative academic experience from my post-totalitarian country onto the foreign academics but considering my real life contacts with certain academic and art circles abroad the situation seems to me desperating. Alsmost the same haughtiness but with better manners. No, Bill, be quiet, I won't spoil this board but sometimes in real life I do really need to kick some intellectual ass-hole. nininimzue, "occultism intruding on the discussion of, say, Samarra type ceramic ware..."  No, I haven't seen such an intrusion in enenuru yet. The problem, however, is that when I try to speak the language of scholarship I'm met mostly by haughty replies if any - with a very few exceptions. Why is that haughtiness? The learnt factology won't save anybody the grave after all. I'm afraid that it's the occultists who will sooner or later start to speak the language of scholarship rather than the academics to get even interested in the occult. They will rather believe in "God". True, there are a few persons who are really predestined to be scholars. As there are a few occultists. I don't know about an extra board but sooner or later I intend to write an essay on the aeonics of the Bronze Age based on imagery mainly. After all I'm interested in communcating with individuals who are able to combine scholarship with occultism and that's why I'm in enenuru - if I speak too much about my own views it's because I'm looking for contacts with fellow-minded individuals since there ARE NOT such here where I am. There are either those boring above-mentioned academics, or those still more boring ass-holes of the "white-light" only. Or, some most boring combination of both. Unfortunatelly the Western goers on the Left-handed Path I once used to know came out to satisfy with cheap speculations on history and not able of any profound research. |
|
|
|
Post by enkur on Sept 2, 2011 13:35:53 GMT -5
nininimzue,
If us4-he2-gal2 don't mind it, I find your idea about an extra board for magickal ideas and concepts as excellent anyway, but why not call it "contemporary magickal ideas and concepts based on the ancient Mesopotamian traditions" ?
|
|
|
|
Post by enkur on Sept 2, 2011 13:51:11 GMT -5
|
|
No, I haven't seen such an intrusion in enenuru yet.