Alchemy, Hermeticism & Forteanism

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#61
No apology necessary, but I appreciate the courtesy! AP and I wouldn't be having this discussion on a public forum if we weren't interested in others jumping in on it. :D Interesting stuff about the science behind literal alchemy and its economic implications--although I wouldn't have much at all to add to it myself.
I totally agree and concur. That goes for anyone else who wants to chime in. The more the merrier imo.

Well damn, preach it, homie! :thrash: I've intuited this approximately in my studies, but I genuinely appreciate you taking the time to make this distinction, I've never really heard it articulated as such and it makes perfect sense. I could always tell comparing symbols without a control-method of somekind (i.e. evolutionary psychology in this case) was dangerous and pseudo-intellectual, and that this is the ultimate downfall of the New Age--but like I said, you made the whole concept very scholastic, no intuition necessary. Great stuff
LOL, and here I was worried that it was all as clear as mud.

In my chapter on the Divination Arts i said this"...unless someone is looking for a traditional deck with widespread use for easier comprehension (such as the Rider-Waite Tarot deck, which is considered a classic), it is beneficial for an individual to acquire a tarot deck that is based on symbolism that they feel naturally inclined to. Tarot symbolism can be recognized in all occult philosophy whether history shows the literal cards in the culture or not, and as a result, tarot has been developed for essentially all surviving schools of genuine occult philosophy, whether they be Egyptian, Norse, or Tibetan, et cetera. The only thing needed for a logical creation of a new tarot deck that represents the classical methods would be: equivalencies between the new symbolism and the classical symbolism. Beyond this, nothing is theoretically stopping a tarot deck from being 'compatible'. "
I understand what you are suggesting here. If someone really likes a certain series of symbols then they might want to make a Tarot deck out of them using the principles of correspondence. On the other hand, I personally would always opt for the most true-to-tradition model available. For example, if I cast the I-ching, I would use yarrow stalks, not coin flips by preference. Then again I have a history/anthro/psych background, so historico-cultural authenticity is probably my preferred symbol set.

From an intuitive perspective, I could see how this could be possible when I wrote it. But after your words, I see now that this could be done accurately--theoretically--but room for error in such a detailed analysis is far too great and can become intellectually dangerous. Thankfully, I can say that I have been diligent about this differentiation throughout my research, but in the case of that quote, I think I'll be taking it out of the final printing. Many thank yous!
Glad to be of service. I have certainly found your insights worth learning from so I'm happy it is mutual.

Whoa hold on. Care to elaborate a bit more? This is a part of history that remains yet unexplored to me! I know of the psychoanalytic fascination with the I Ching but nothing about its relationship to binary number theory.
Okay, so the primary protagonist in the story is Gottfried Wilhelm Liebniz, who is an extrordinary intellect. Liebniz and Newton are famous rivals for having invented the Calculus (though it was actually Archimedes who did it first, but his work was subsequently lost and only showed up recently in the palimpset of a prayer book). Anyhow, Liebniz is, like many people, very interested in the Far East, but unlike most, as one of the foremost scholars of his day, he is taken seriously. He is receiving letters from Jesuit Missionaries in China. As a result, he gets a copy of the Book of Changes (I-ching) and does an early translation into German.

Of course this leads to a certain fascination in how an open or broken line, representing zero or one, can potentially be turned into longer and longer digits and numbers, and how any number can potentially be represented by a series of zeroes and ones. That is how binary numbers come to the Western World https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_number.

This in turn translates to machine logic, as when zero becomes "off" and one becomes "on" suddenly you can create very complex mathematically controlled sequences of machine processes. From this we create "programmes" for weaving looms where patterns can be embroidered onto cloth by switching threads on and off in controlled sequences. The same becomes true of automata with their use of cams (as distinct to cogs, incidentally, cams have an amusing history too). Computer memory thus starts as punched wooden slats, then turns into waxed paper reels, then punched cards, then becomes electronic as waves in mercury tubes, and then to magnetic tape and so on, until we have our present incarnation of multi terrabyte memory storages. Each one is essentially a way of storing ones and zeroes in complex sequences known as algorithms.

Now some people have said that the I-Ching was the source of the Binary number system and that it prefigured modern computing. This is wrong. The I-Ching was a system of divination that happened to use a system of binary numbers, but it didn't understand any of the implications of the binary number system. It was Liebniz who first understood what binary numbers could do, but he nearly took the whole thing down a fresh rabbit hole of irrelevance when he linked the numbers to theism (lol, number of gods... Theism=1, Atheism=0?) that would have confused the issue. In any case, the fact is that the use of binary numbers is certainly important to our present technology.

Well I guess this post is just gonna be a bunch of praise for you because your droppin gems on me right now. I hadn't yet thought of the self-fulfilling prophecy of the gods and gambling, but again it only makes sense. that is very Jungian of you.
I declare these truthes to be self evident, lol...

We certainly agree overall about Peterson. On climate change, I have been keeping an eye out for someone whose brain I can pick on this subject. Firstly, I am fairly uneducated on climate science. The extent of my knowledge comes ancient astronomy, the Procession of the Equinoxes, etc. Yuga cycles included. So it makes sense to me that the earth goes through natural climate fluctuations as its tilt towards the sun changes over time. This makes sense to me as an explanation for climate change, but I am uneducated beyond this. I would also agree that all the pollution across the board is disastrous to the ecosystem. From smog to Trash Island to Fukushima, shit is fucked up. But is the green-house-effect really causing the earth to get warmer? I would appreciate your insight after your lengthy research. I understand you probably can't lay it all out here, but an encapsulation perhaps
The argument is really complicated and I won't be able to do it justice in summary, as I have 2 huge folders of notes on the matter that may soon turn into 3 folders (they're bulging). You probably remember back in 1997 there was a huge meeting in the world to discuss the destructive effects of chloroflurocarbons and hydroflurocarbons on the ozone layer? It was ultimately a success story, as everyone could see the potentially disasterous effects, and so there have been an increasing number of treaties including the Montreal Protocol (1987), the Kyoto Protocol (1992), and in 2007 every nation committed to getting rid of the chemicals from use, and replaced them with better alternatives. It was a success story of global cooperation. Unsarcastic yay!

The problem is that the same meteorologists who discovered the depletion of the Ozone layer also discovered that the increases of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) in the atmosphere from various sources such as transport and industry and other human and even non-human sources (some CO2 seeps out from pockets underground, but not much in the scheme of things).

The double threat we faced with ozone depletion and CO2 increase was that the Ozone layers are weakest over the North and South poles, and that is exactly where the highest concentration of the microscopic plankton that turns CO2 into oxygen was, and they were being killed by the increased intensity of UV rays due to ozone depletion. The lungs of the world were effectively being burned. We stopped ozone depletion to a fair degree, and the ozone layer is slowly recuperating. What we haven't stopped is the CO2 production.

The great problem with CO2 is that it is very effective at trapping heat in our atmosphere, and that heat is just straight up energy looking for a release. That means that the heat generates high winds that become cyclones. Those cyclones also lash our landmasses increasing the rate of erosion (plus the billions of dollars worth of property damage).

The next thing to point out is that mostly the temperature differences are apparent at night. Nightime temperatures around the world are getting higher due to the effect of CO2. It is also worth pointing out that our cities generate walls of heat that affect the overall weather patterns in unusual ways, quite apart from CO2, i.e. just from being bare concrete reflecting sunlight... but the CO2 emissions help. All of this is leaving energy in the atmosphere. I could get into the effect on the poles, and how if they melt there will be a knock-on disaster with the patterns of the ocean, but that is increasingly speculative.

What we can say without doubt is that there is enough plastic in the ocean to cover the state of Texas to a depth of 1 foot, and that was all made by people, and it all generated CO2. Concrete is worse. Now the Earth does have the means of radiating heat into space, or storing it in the earth and oceans and controlling its temperature at a comparatively stable level, but increases of CO2 production sabotage that, as they reduce its efficiency of energy transfer. There is some hope in that as CO2 increases, plants will grow faster and larger, and plants store carbon, but we are chopping plants down faster than they can grow and using fossil fuels to do it.

Now don't take this as total gospel, for this is largely rattled off the top of my head from memory, and while I am not trying to be misleading, some information may be superceded by now. I have actually had a bit of a lesson on the issue by a ninety year old meteorologist who maintains that the issue has been common knowledge in his field since the 1950s, but swept under the rug, or ignored by business owners and politicians who wanted to maintain a status quo that was all about status and ultimately not about quo. Since then I have also done an intensive research period on the issue, as I often do on subjects that interest me or I feel I need to understand better.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#62
AP, I thought you'd like to know that in my time-zone your last post was at exatly 4:20 AM. you are on-point, my friend! lol

I totally agree and concur. That goes for anyone else who wants to chime in. The more the merrier imo.
The more the merrier, indeed! where you at, forteans :ptask:

On a different note, my late reply is on account of working my day job on top of prepping Chapter 7 for release on the Vagabond. sent it out to my editor today. it's not really close to the target audience the book is written for, but it is perfect for a BETA release, which is basically what this is. release the info for free, then beautify it just a bit more for print.

anyways, i'll have to send you the chapter when it is released in a week or so. it is about Lilith, Sleep paralysis, demonolology and mental illness, the qliphoth, the dark anima archetype, et cetera. it's probably some of the most personalized, unique aspects of my research--stuff that i have been developing for years now. some of the earlier chapters are about categorizing data, explaining concepts and setting the stage. this chapter onward is where the 'climax' starts to really build and i look into the psychic phantom limbs, spirits and theurgy. seeing as how its territory we have discussed and that you are already a bit familiar with, i'd love to hear your thoughts on it. i'm excited to release it.

Great bit about the I Ching, thanks for enlightening me. i'm surprised i had not yet come across the idea yet! its very reminiscent of chaos theory and even chaos magick. i look forward to researching it more.

I understand what you are suggesting here. If someone really likes a certain series of symbols then they might want to make a Tarot deck out of them using the principles of correspondence. On the other hand, I personally would always opt for the most true-to-tradition model available. For example, if I cast the I-ching, I would use yarrow stalks, not coin flips by preference. Then again I have a history/anthro/psych background, so historico-cultural authenticity is probably my preferred symbol set.
here we are also in agreement about being true to tradition. lol to your preferred symbol set, there's probably some truth to that but tradition certainly has a certain objective nature to it that is very useful. which i'm sure is why you like it to begin with! on the other hand, i am not afraid to override certain outdated dogmas if I see archetypal congruence with the simplication: ie the irreducible complexity concept.

What we can say without doubt is that there is enough plastic in the ocean to cover the state of Texas to a depth of 1 foot, and that was all made by people, and it all generated CO2. Concrete is worse. Now the Earth does have the means of radiating heat into space, or storing it in the earth and oceans and controlling its temperature at a comparatively stable level, but increases of CO2 production sabotage that, as they reduce its efficiency of energy transfer. There is some hope in that as CO2 increases, plants will grow faster and larger, and plants store carbon, but we are chopping plants down faster than they can grow and using fossil fuels to do it.
I appreciate you taking the time to type that out. You've certainly given me a nice little roadmap to look upon for whenever I do dive into it myself. I see what you are saying, and i also appreciate the attention to detail. my only question from here is this: what are your thoughts on a carbon tax? i'm not trying to turn this conversation into a discussion of conspiracy theories, but carbon taxes seem like a fix that creates more problems than it helps. but again, i am not educated on this subject. what do you think?

I'm going to have to cut this post a bit short for a change! I have to step out of the house. But rest assured I will open up plenty more cans of worms in the next post!

Cheers
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#63
AP, I thought you'd like to know that in my time-zone your last post was at exatly 4:20 AM. you are on-point, my friend! lol
LOL, yeah, personality is who we are in the night.

On a different note, my late reply is on account of working my day job on top of prepping Chapter 7 for release on the Vagabond. sent it out to my editor today. it's not really close to the target audience the book is written for, but it is perfect for a BETA release, which is basically what this is. release the info for free, then beautify it just a bit more for print. anyways, i'll have to send you the chapter when it is released in a week or so. it is about Lilith, Sleep paralysis, demonolology and mental illness, the qliphoth, the dark anima archetype, et cetera. it's probably some of the most personalized, unique aspects of my research--stuff that i have been developing for years now. some of the earlier chapters are about categorizing data, explaining concepts and setting the stage. this chapter onward is where the 'climax' starts to really build and i look into the psychic phantom limbs, spirits and theurgy. seeing as how its territory we have discussed and that you are already a bit familiar with, i'd love to hear your thoughts on it. i'm excited to release it.
You sound very busy and so much the better. I am quite interested to see what you produce in Chapter 7. I'm happy to have been a sounding- board for your ideas.

Great bit about the I Ching, thanks for enlightening me. i'm surprised i had not yet come across the idea yet! its very reminiscent of chaos theory and even chaos magick. i look forward to researching it more.
I would be inclined to describe it as an embarrasing one-night-stand between Maths and Taoism that produced Binary Numbers, who went on to breed with Electronics and produce the Computer (Don't ask about the Computer's reproductive habits).

here we are also in agreement about being true to tradition. lol to your preferred symbol set, there's probably some truth to that but tradition certainly has a certain objective nature to it that is very useful. which i'm sure is why you like it to begin with! on the other hand, i am not afraid to override certain outdated dogmas if I see archetypal congruence with the simplication: ie the irreducible complexity concept.
Yeah, it's a bit like Nasrudin showing up at the patent office with a magic wand and asking to patent it. The patent office doesn't care provided you can make another one. Half the time the patent office doesn't even care if it actually works (and given some practitioners in my acquantance, they would be utterly terrified if they got a result, I kid you not.)

I appreciate you taking the time to type that out. You've certainly given me a nice little roadmap to look upon for whenever I do dive into it myself. I see what you are saying, and i also appreciate the attention to detail. my only question from here is this: what are your thoughts on a carbon tax? i'm not trying to turn this conversation into a discussion of conspiracy theories, but carbon taxes seem like a fix that creates more problems than it helps. but again, i am not educated on this subject. what do you think?
I am very ambivalent about a Carbon Tax. Given that most politicians are next to scientifically illiterate, I simply don't think they have the wherewithall to make it work. What we need is an international treaty arrangement that can be used to enforce compliance by multinational corporations, who are far and away the main polluters. For the most part I think industry has understood that finding clean and reusable solutions to the future needs of our species are essential, and there are huge fortunes to be made in the patents that will make that happen. For this reason, if I owned a huge fossil fuel fortune I would be investing heavily in researching those answers rather than trying to convince the world that "to keep drinking my cool aid" is the answer. The Carbon Tax need not be a disaster, but much like getting governments to give an Environmental Protection Agency any teeth, they seem to lack the intestinal fortitude to make it happen, and probably don't know how.

I'm going to have to cut this post a bit short for a change! I have to step out of the house. But rest assured I will open up plenty more cans of worms in the next post! Cheers
Looking forwards to the diet of worms :dinner:
 
Last edited:

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#65
Alrighty Al,

Assuming that everything we have discussed thus far is considered well and good, let's dive into some fresh material.

What do you think about reincarnation? :reap::died:To my understanding, Hermeticism remains surprisingly ambivalent to the idea. it really neither confirms nor denies it in its core tenants, and it almost seems to imply that the idea of reincarnation is somewhat ancillary or even moot. Care to comment on this? I have always appreciated this sentiment, for the same reasons that I have always loved Taoism. The stoic ambivalence is strengthening. it almost seems that one of the "crutches" of Buddhism is its reincarnative spin. And what I mean by crutch is: nearly everything in Buddhism can be reasonably recognized as ancient psychology in a fairly overt sense. But the reincarnation thing doesn't fit any psychological reason beyond an unconscious one. It doesn't seem like the Buddha taught Buddhism as an allegory, it seems to be something taken very seriously.

Then there is of course the most timeless quote from Hamlet, "In that sleep of death, what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause." for me, it becomes all the more compelling to consider the allegory of each day being a life separated by "death."

I recall the opening lines from Lovecraft's, "Beyond the Walls of Sleep,"I have frequently wondered if the majority of mankind ever pause to reflect upon the occasionally titanic significance of dreams, and of the obscure world to which they belong… From my experience I cannot doubt but that man, when lost to terrestrial consciousness, is indeed sojourning in another and uncorporeal life of far different nature from the life we know; and of which only the slightest and most indistinct memories linger after waking. From those blurred and fragmentary memories we may infer much, yet prove little.” Fiction, but we both know that Lovecraft was a master of the meta-truth.

When we toss chaos theory into the mix, physics lends a hand where I would not have expected. The laws of thermodynamics, especially when considering their role in human development and physics, seems to provide some tangible food-for-thought as to how reincarnation might actually work if it does exist.

Have you ever seen this study? It is a peer reviewed scientific study analyzing recinarnation from a multi-perspective analysis. Anthropology, NDE reports, neurology, physics, etc. Its a great read, and its not pushy. It's just an open minded investigation into the subject. https://www.god-helmet.com/wp/rebirth.htm

Lastly, I'll give you some interesting ideas I have had in the past. Pure and total conjecture. What if reincarnation is the experience of you dying in your current multiversal location, and then restarting in the next sequential statistic life you would be living in the multiverse. You're the same person, just different statistics. Its chaos theory at its finest, and its also reminiscent of the superposition found in quantum physics. And its theoretically limitless. It is the Ultimate Groundhog Day and we are all Bill Murray. :joint:

Also, the more New Agey idea, what if the multiverse is really limitless, in the sense of extra-terrestrials, varied physical dimensions, spirits, any possible temporal form may be supposed, and perhaps we drift in and out of any given possible narrative as part of the Grand Meta Narrative?

If I were to put my money on anything, I would say it is something about reliving the same life over and over again in a different way each time. But i'm also open to nothing at all happening when we die, I don't fear such an idea, but I am genuinely not convinced that it is the case. I certainly don't think it is something akin to literal Buddhism, where karma could reincarnate a man as a mosquito and anything in between.

There has to be physics involved if it does indeed exist.

I'll shut up for now, because I could keep going. Lol.
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#67
What do you think about reincarnation? :reap::died:To my understanding, Hermeticism remains surprisingly ambivalent to the idea. it really neither confirms nor denies it in its core tenants, and it almost seems to imply that the idea of reincarnation is somewhat ancillary or even moot. Care to comment on this? I have always appreciated this sentiment, for the same reasons that I have always loved Taoism. The stoic ambivalence is strengthening. it almost seems that one of the "crutches" of Buddhism is its reincarnative spin. And what I mean by crutch is: nearly everything in Buddhism can be reasonably recognized as ancient psychology in a fairly overt sense. But the reincarnation thing doesn't fit any psychological reason beyond an unconscious one. It doesn't seem like the Buddha taught Buddhism as an allegory, it seems to be something taken very seriously.
Buddhism's spin on reincarnation is often misrepresented, especially by the Theosophists. The belief in reincarnation was quite common in the ancient world btw. The Celts used it as a propaganda tool for their warrior societies, for example (it doesn't matter if you die in battle, for you will simply come back in a fresh body). Buddhism inherits the belief in reincarnation from Hinduism (in its early form), and from Jainism. The Buddhists offer a very different spin on reincarnation however. The difference is that in Buddhism, it isn't the atman or the soul that reincarnates, as ego (self) is an illusion in Buddhism; instead it is the karma that reincarnates. This is how a ghost can have eyes; they have the karma of the eyes they knew when they were a person or animal, and those eyes may (or may not) allow them to see the living. That is perhaps part of why some ghosts interact with people, while others seem to be stuck in a fugue state brought on by the karma of their memories. One might even suggest that NDE is the real reincarnation, for we cannot properly know what happens after a prolonged period of death (as yet).

Then there is of course the most timeless quote from Hamlet, "In that sleep of death, what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause." for me, it becomes all the more compelling to consider the allegory of each day being a life separated by "death." I recall the opening lines from Lovecraft's, "Beyond the Walls of Sleep,"I have frequently wondered if the majority of mankind ever pause to reflect upon the occasionally titanic significance of dreams, and of the obscure world to which they belong… From my experience I cannot doubt but that man, when lost to terrestrial consciousness, is indeed sojourning in another and uncorporeal life of far different nature from the life we know; and of which only the slightest and most indistinct memories linger after waking. From those blurred and fragmentary memories we may infer much, yet prove little.” Fiction, but we both know that Lovecraft was a master of the meta-truth. When we toss chaos theory into the mix, physics lends a hand where I would not have expected. The laws of thermodynamics, especially when considering their role in human development and physics, seems to provide some tangible food-for-thought as to how reincarnation might actually work if it does exist. Have you ever seen this study? It is a peer reviewed scientific study analyzing recinarnation from a multi-perspective analysis. Anthropology, NDE reports, neurology, physics, etc. Its a great read, and its not pushy. It's just an open minded investigation into the subject. https://www.god-helmet.com/wp/rebirth.htm
The gates of Horn and Ivory are pretty important for all sorts of reasons within Hermeticism, not least of which, because the truth of divination was the crucial test of the separation between Daimon and Divinity. Then there is the issue of lucidity in dreams, which is often considered the basis for the most powerful forms of terrestrial magic, as a sufficiently lucid dreamer may discover that just as they can control their dream, with practice they can do the same thing in real life. As to the scope and imagination of the mind when it casts off, that is potentially amazing, and as Lovecraft frequently mentions, we cannot truly know the inner life of any other person, save what they choose to share.

I found the whole "Karma and Life Review" element of the "New Science of Darwinian Reincarnation" to be quite surprising and something of an eye-opener. Thanks for bringing it to my intention altered_boy, it was well worth the read and a good find. The notion of how karma perpetuates evolution away from enlightenment is both fascinating and disturbing. This is the first time I have encountered that idea and it is worth repeating I think. The treatment of karma as a cultural adaptive force, and the ramifications of that are also something I have heard discussed in Buddhist circles, but I hadn't thought about it in quite a while, and the article has put an interesting scientific spin on it.

As to hell states and their being queued by mental resistance, this could potentially have something to do with the use of the Will burning through one's reserves of psychic energy rapidly in a disembodied state, and driving the observer rapidly into a terrible energy debt, which is then given external form. Of course if we are following the algorithm model, perhaps soemthing else is going on?

Lastly, I'll give you some interesting ideas I have had in the past. Pure and total conjecture. What if reincarnation is the experience of you dying in your current multiversal location, and then restarting in the next sequential statistic life you would be living in the multiverse. You're the same person, just different statistics. Its chaos theory at its finest, and its also reminiscent of the superposition found in quantum physics. And its theoretically limitless. It is the Ultimate Groundhog Day and we are all Bill Murray.
:joint:
So, a bit like the character generation system of an RPG? Thou shalt return to the start screen o' world honored one. There shalt thou choose thy stats before re-entering the game with a different character. Choose wisely o' world honored one.

Still, the aim of groundhog day was to get out of being stuck in the loop, so, what you are describing is something of a gilded hell.:eek:
But then, I have been reading Thomas Ligotti this week...

I certainly don't think it is something akin to literal Buddhism, where karma could reincarnate a man as a mosquito and anything in between..
That's Jain reincarnation, not the Buddhist idea of it. Even Hindus are reluctant to take Jain ideas of reincarnation seriously, and it is far closer ot Hindu notions. Not even Mussolini would reincarnate as a mosquito in Buddhism, as he has the karma of a man, not a bug, and that means all the physical memories of being human that means he will return as a human. On the other hand, the life he lives will be very different, and it is unlikely that he will have immense good fortune and all the gifts of a fortunate rebirth. He may also have a backlog of violent deaths to get thru.

Cheers.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#68
I'm all for the idea of reincarnation, but the scientific method keeps us skeptical if we use it properly.

So, a bit like the character generation system of an RPG? Thou shalt return to the start screen o' world honored one. There shalt thou choose thy stats before re-entering the game with a different character. Choose wisely o' world honored one.

Still, the aim of groundhog day was to get out of being stuck in the loop, so, what you are describing is something of a gilded hell.:eek:
But then, I have been reading Thomas Ligotti this week...
Lol. Yeah, that's a pretty good way to put it. And I guess that could be interpreted as egocentric, "i'm gonna be me forever", but it's a stab in the dark. its what my rational mind makes of such an idea like the afterlife. but I have other ideas that I would rather be true

And yeah it is a somewhat hellish proposition but after all, the old allegory dictates that the life of the human is the conduit for heaven and hell through its daily existence. we choose whether or not we live in heaven or hell every day, perhaps in much more of a literal sense than some people would think. there's a strength in that.

The gates of Horn and Ivory are pretty important for all sorts of reasons within Hermeticism, not least of which, because the truth of divination was the crucial test of the separation between Daimon and Divinity. Then there is the issue of lucidity in dreams, which is often considered the basis for the most powerful forms of terrestrial magic, as a sufficiently lucid dreamer may discover that just as they can control their dream, with practice they can do the same thing in real life. As to the scope and imagination of the mind when it casts off, that is potentially amazing, and as Lovecraft frequently mentions, we cannot truly know the inner life of any other person, save what they choose to share.
I am certainly aware of the concept of "separating between Daimon and Divinity" but not in the nuanced context of the gates of Horn and ivory. if this were a professional setting, this would almost be a lil embarrassing, I just googled it haha. especially given the material of dreams, I should really be familiar with something like that. here is where my age shows a little bit though, there's only so much time in the day, man, I'm think I am well studied in what I know but there's always more shit to know. enlighten me pretty plz.

That's Jain reincarnation, not the Buddhist idea of it. Even Hindus are reluctant to take Jain ideas of reincarnation seriously, and it is far closer ot Hindu notions. Not even Mussolini would reincarnate as a mosquito in Buddhism, as he has the karma of a man, not a bug, and that means all the physical memories of being human that means he will return as a human. On the other hand, the life he lives will be very different, and it is unlikely that he will have immense good fortune and all the gifts of a fortunate rebirth. He may also have a backlog of violent deaths to get thru.
Well thank you for clarifying. It's easy to get them mixed up. Aside form Taoism, I haven't studied much eastern mysticism for a couple years. my mind has been in the west as of late. something I will actual explain as an aside at the end of this post. btw I've been playing with the I Ching a bit lately. yarrow stalks would be cool but I do like the feel of the pennies. i'll have to get some fancy I ching tokens one of these days.

I found the whole "Karma and Life Review" element of the "New Science of Darwinian Reincarnation" to be quite surprising and something of an eye-opener. Thanks for bringing it to my intention altered_boy, it was well worth the read and a good find. The notion of how karma perpetuates evolution away from enlightenment is both fascinating and disturbing. This is the first time I have encountered that idea and it is worth repeating I think. The treatment of karma as a cultural adaptive force, and the ramifications of that are also something I have heard discussed in Buddhist circles, but I hadn't thought about it in quite a while, and the article has put an interesting scientific spin on it.
do you know of Austin Osman Spare? old hermeticist from back in the day? he had an idea that was very much like Jung's but full-on esoteric, and he called it "atavistic resurgence", and as I remember it is essentially the same thing that they are laying out in that study. More or less. The whole idea that karma is a cultural adaptive force, stemming from the collective unconscious. it infers that each of us are something like a bucket from the infinite well of the unconscious--God's dream. and we're all building towards something. if i'm being a little candid, this is what I hope is real. the science is extremely interesting and solid, but we just don't have a firm grasp on the sciences it would take to verify such theories. for now it is extremely philosophical, albeit still scientific. maybe time will tell. but if this were the case, I see human adaptation as something building a "construct" to the heavens, this either being Solomon's Temple or the Tower of Babble. everything that we do individually and culturally is always building towards something. and that's also why I love Freemasonry so much.

BTW when you mentioned Hiram Abiff as being a derivative of the Christ archetype in the other forum thread--you were spot on. This is a core idea in Masonic philosophy, that Hiram is in a sense a more humanized Christ figure--not meant to override Christ but to provide a nuance that is not specifically Christian in its teaching.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#69
And this is the aside I said I would mention. One of the 32nd degree masons I have talked with in Anchorage dropped some serious nuggets on me when I showed him I knew the language and was asking the right questions. He told me about astrology, tarot, and numerology, but he also told me this idea about reincarnation that i'll share. I told him I was really interested in Buddhism and the east more so than the west. and he told me that was all well and good but that it was highly important for me to begin studying for the traditions of the culture I was raised in first. he emphasized the geography of it too. where you were raised, who raised you, and with what genetics are major factors in learning to sift through the muck of the mind to penetrate the unconscious reservoir. Then branch out, of course. But learn about what you have inherited first.

it is also implied here that this man was interested in all western divination, and considered the philosophies of astrology that where you were born and when can help you understand why. Taking astrology/reincarnation out of the equation, I think this is an undeniable scientific observation. learning about when and where you were born can absolutely help you understand your own Why. Really, this is the basic premise of evolutionary psychology. And because of that I began studying Freemasonry, Hermeticism, the mystery rites, etc and I saw what he was saying more and more. I just kept reading and reading and writing and eventually I glimpsed the evolutionary chain. Not a thing I'm bragging about, I know you've done the same Al, and I'm sure most of the people on this forum have. Just getting a glimpse of this unconscious well as you see it branch from thousands of years ago into today--clear and right out in the open. its as horrifying as it is beautiful. well worth the glimpse though.

anyways, when you take all this into the context of the "cultural adaptive force" of reincarnation, I think it all becomes extremely compelling, albeit still refutable. the alchemy of it all is learning how and why to build the Temple of Solomon as opposed to the Tower of Babel.

and all this could be the case, with the Groundhog Day still being an accurate model as well. lol.
 
Last edited:

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#70
I'm all for the idea of reincarnation, but the scientific method keeps us skeptical if we use it properly.
I won't ever say that skepticism is a bad thing, but I don't think it was the skeptics who discovered the use of fire. Surely skepticism would dictate avoiding the bright hurty stuff that makes things turn black and vanish. No good can come of it. :evillaugh:

Lol. Yeah, that's a pretty good way to put it. And I guess that could be interpreted as egocentric, "i'm gonna be me forever", but it's a stab in the dark. its what my rational mind makes of such an idea like the afterlife. but I have other ideas that I would rather be true
Yeah, the "you" that is reborn isn't really "you". I feel it is a shame that all those memories get lost in the process, and we only get some little vestigial recollections of past lives to play with. I have never heard about a proper procedure for recovering more info.

And yeah it is a somewhat hellish proposition but after all, the old allegory dictates that the life of the human is the conduit for heaven and hell through its daily existence. we choose whether or not we live in heaven or hell every day, perhaps in much more of a literal sense than some people would think. there's a strength in that.
LOL, and one person's heaven is another's hell (just to keep it interesting). To quote the Buddha "Nirvana isn't to everybody's liking".

I am certainly aware of the concept of "separating between Daimon and Divinity" but not in the nuanced context of the gates of Horn and ivory. if this were a professional setting, this would almost be a lil embarrassing, I just googled it haha. especially given the material of dreams, I should really be familiar with something like that. here is where my age shows a little bit though, there's only so much time in the day, man, I'm think I am well studied in what I know but there's always more shit to know. enlighten me pretty plz.
I don't pretend to be an expert. The easy thing to remember is that the Gate of Horn is the entry for true things, while the Gate of Ivory is the "Gate of Fake News". Similarly, Divinities can tell the future accurately, while Daimons cannot, which is why Divinities always win, as lasting outcomes are the only currency of reality. I was taught that the right hand side is the Gate of Horn and the Left is the Gate of Ivory. This may line up with the whole semi-mythological right side/left side of brain function, but remain please skeptical on that point.

Well thank you for clarifying. It's easy to get them mixed up. Aside form Taoism, I haven't studied much eastern mysticism for a couple years. my mind has been in the west as of late. something I will actual explain as an aside at the end of this post. btw I've been playing with the I Ching a bit lately. yarrow stalks would be cool but I do like the feel of the pennies. i'll have to get some fancy I ching tokens one of these days.
The Tao always tries to take the easier path. 3 pennies will do the trick. Why be more elaborate? The Tao doesn't take offense at humility. As for getting stuck into the western side of esoteric matters, absolutely. There is so much material to get stuck into. Just compiling a list of all the forms of western esoteric teachings is exhausting.

do you know of Austin Osman Spare? old hermeticist from back in the day? he had an idea that was very much like Jung's but full-on esoteric, and he called it "atavistic resurgence", and as I remember it is essentially the same thing that they are laying out in that study. More or less. The whole idea that karma is a cultural adaptive force, stemming from the collective unconscious. it infers that each of us are something like a bucket from the infinite well of the unconscious--God's dream. and we're all building towards something. if i'm being a little candid, this is what I hope is real. the science is extremely interesting and solid, but we just don't have a firm grasp on the sciences it would take to verify such theories. for now it is extremely philosophical, albeit still scientific. maybe time will tell. but if this were the case, I see human adaptation as something building a "construct" to the heavens, this either being Solomon's Temple or the Tower of Babble. everything that we do individually and culturally is always building towards something. and that's also why I love Freemasonry so much.
Yes I am familiar with Spare and his work, and atavistic resurgence as a concept (I haven't experienced it to my knowledge). As to there being a divine plan, well, provided it isn't awful and produces periodic golden ages, I can get behind the idea. I like to think that our society is hovering dangerously close to a post-scarcity economy, but the vested interests in the world live in stark terror of the loss of power this would mean for them, so they are doing everything to forestall the inevitable. It would be a comfort to think that society is progressing towards something other than an apocalypse. Sounds like the Alaskan Freemasonic scene is happening for you.

Certainly the sciences are moving in some very interesting directions, but we are also facing a narrowing of our opportunities as a species if we don't get off our planet soon and allow it to recuperate. I also wonder if we can overcome our thanatos?

BTW when you mentioned Hiram Abiff as being a derivative of the Christ archetype in the other forum thread--you were spot on. This is a core idea in Masonic philosophy, that Hiram is in a sense a more humanized Christ figure--not meant to override Christ but to provide a nuance that is not specifically Christian in its teaching.
Yeah, I can see that. I was looking at Hiram as being a neophyte, and his lack of a father being symbolic of him having no connection to God. In that sense, every new mason is Hiram. Perhaps I am reading too much into it?
 

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :)
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,523
Likes
8,546
Points
279
#71
I won't ever say that skepticism is a bad thing, but I don't think it was the skeptics who discovered the use of fire. Surely skepticism would dictate avoiding the bright hurty stuff that makes things turn black and vanish. No good can come of it. :evillaugh:
YES!!!!!!!
 

Coal

Polymath Renaissance Man, Italian Wiccan Anarchist
Joined
Jun 27, 2015
Messages
8,794
Likes
10,495
Points
279
#72
Or, it was a sceptic who said; "I don't care if you all think the bright hurty stuff that makes things turn black and vanish is dangerous I'm going to see if I can use it..."
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#74
Or, it was a sceptic who said; "I don't care if you all think the bright hurty stuff that makes things turn black and vanish is dangerous I'm going to see if I can use it..."
I have never known a skeptic who was a taker of chances, or who was eager to think laterally and challenge the known laws of science. Skepticism is about making the case for the negative. This is not to say that a skeptic cannot have an open mind. Demanding proof is essential to verifying claims, and no mind should be so open as to not demand proof. Similarly that "proof" must be cross examined in case it is a hoax. On the other hand, the French Academy were being good skeptics when they said "there are no rocks in the sky, ergo, no rocks can fall from the sky.", in response to observers witnessing meteorite falls. We know now that there are many billions of times more rocks in the sky than there ever could be on Earth, but because the occurrence of meteorite falls is not something that can be put under a bell-jar in a lab, science was all too eager to dismiss the claims. It is for this reason that we must be skeptical of skepticism, and be skeptical of being too skeptical of skepticism etc. It does beg the intrinsically Fortean question of "so how many other legitimate but rare phenomena is science unwilling to engage with because they presently have no explanation?"
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#75
Regarding skepticism I was going to say something similar to Coal. but Al after your last post, I'd say you've got me convinced. good points.

Yeah, I can see that. I was looking at Hiram as being a neophyte, and his lack of a father being symbolic of him having no connection to God. In that sense, every new mason is Hiram. Perhaps I am reading too much into it?
If anything I'd say your accurate deduction is a little reductionist. In the larger scope, I don't see a difference between Hiram the neophyte, separated from his father, as Christ. Hiram is a bit more of a universal archetype, whereas Christ as his own obvious connotations. But taken in the esoteric sense, I think it's accurate to call Christ a Son of the Widow. virgin birth--his father is god, a being that does not even exist on earth to raise him in any human way. in a sense, Christ's story is very much a sense of isolation in an unknown world, trying to complete his task so that he can go home to his father. see what I mean?

I don't pretend to be an expert. The easy thing to remember is that the Gate of Horn is the entry for true things, while the Gate of Ivory is the "Gate of Fake News". Similarly, Divinities can tell the future accurately, while Daimons cannot, which is why Divinities always win, as lasting outcomes are the only currency of reality. I was taught that the right hand side is the Gate of Horn and the Left is the Gate of Ivory. This may line up with the whole semi-mythological right side/left side of brain function, but remain please skeptical on that point.
LOL you were less enlightening than I anticipated, but I am glad to have been told of the idea. I am certainly going to be researching it a bit.

so what do you think, Al? you strike me as a person who feels comfortable with not knowing what will happen. I feel I am as well, but I certainly lean in one direction because of a gut feeling I do not understand. For fun, I provide another quote from Lovecraft's Beyond the Wall of Sleep, because I love that story, "I am an entity like that which you yourself become in the freedom of dreamless sleep. I am your brother of light and have floated with you in the effulgent valleys. It is not permitted me to tell your waking earth-self of your real self, but we are all roamers of vast spaces and travelers in many ages. Next year I may be dwelling in the dark Egypt which you call ancient, or in the cruel empire of Tsan-Chan which is to come three thousand years hence. You and I have drifted to the worlds that reel about the red Arcturus, and dwelt in the bodies of the insect-philosophers that crawl proudly over the fourth moon of Jupiter. How little does the earth-self know of life and its extent! How little, indeed, ought it to know for its own tranquillity!”
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#76
Regarding skepticism I was going to say something similar to Coal. but Al after your last post, I'd say you've got me convinced. good points.
Thanks, the territory is a little fraught, and I can see the immense value of skepticism when used in an non-stifling fashion.

If anything I'd say your accurate deduction is a little reductionist. In the larger scope, I don't see a difference between Hiram the neophyte, separated from his father, as Christ. Hiram is a bit more of a universal archetype, whereas Christ as his own obvious connotations. But taken in the esoteric sense, I think it's accurate to call Christ a Son of the Widow. virgin birth--his father is god, a being that does not even exist on earth to raise him in any human way. in a sense, Christ's story is very much a sense of isolation in an unknown world, trying to complete his task so that he can go home to his father. see what I mean?
Yes I do. So Hiram is an archetypal neophyte, but is Christ the archetypal master? BTW have you read about the various infancy gospels? Should the matter of Jesus' childhood interest you: https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-vOc...ospel+Of+The+Infancy+Of+Jesus+Christ_djvu.txt
The segue being "Jesus as neophyte".

LOL you were less enlightening than I anticipated, but I am glad to have been told of the idea. I am certainly going to be researching it a bit.
Look, on this point I could have nit-picked every classical quote regarding the Gates of Horn and Ivory for clues at a gramatical level in Greek or Latin, but I am just not sure that there is so much pay-dirt to be had in so doing. Dreams are fluid and flexible, and the gates of horn and ivory are figurative, in the sense that nobody actually sees the Gates in their dreams as far as I know. Some people think that one can only know which gate the dream came thru retrospectively, once you realize or do not realize your dream's outcome in reality. Season to taste.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#77
Sorry, when I wrote "what do you think? et cetera" I actually meant about reincarnation. That is my bad, I didn't distinguish what I was talking about very well, wrote it a bit hastily. Only ribbing you about being less enlightening--no one is a complete encyclopedia :hoff:

If you had to take a best guess, what do you think about the afterlife? I'm just curious, I've appreciated your insight thus far and I'm sure any ideas you have on the matter would not disappoint.

Yes I do. So Hiram is an archetypal neophyte, but is Christ the archetypal master? BTW have you read about the various infancy gospels? Should the matter of Jesus' childhood interest you: https://archive.org/stream/pdfy-vOc...ospel+Of+The+Infancy+Of+Jesus+Christ_djvu.txt
The segue being "Jesus as neophyte".
yeah. I almost look at it like a continuum. Hiram is like a master to the common neophyte, but Hiram is a neophyte to Christ, and Christ is in essence the neophyte of his father. I know this starts to get into technical theology at this point, but there is certainly some distinction between God and Christ himself although they get mishmashed pretty often, especially through the Trinity symbolism. anyways, you certainly get the idea quite well. I will certainly take a look at the link you have given me, although I haven't been able to yet.

I haven't read the infancy gospel of Thomas but I have read some of the Gnostic writings about Christ and I must say I have always appreciated it. Gnosticism is an esoteric wealth, and I think it is very telling that the Christian hierarchy of old hated them so much.

what do you think about the claims of Jesus traveling to the east? I've heard some people speculate that he went to India and/or Tibet. Seems unsubstantiated as far as I can tell, but its certainly a nice romantic take on the story. romantic in the classical sense of the word.
 
Last edited:

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#78
Sorry, when I wrote "what do you think? et cetera" I actually meant about reincarnation. That is my bad, I didn't distinguish what I was talking about very well, wrote it a bit hastily. Only ribbing you about being less enlightening--no one is a complete encyclopedia :hoff:
Well, the thing is, I have actually researched the subject, but try as I might, the information is sketchy. What a shame they burned the Great Library, huh?

If you had to take a best guess, what do you think about the afterlife? I'm just curious, I've appreciated your insight thus far and I'm sure any ideas you have on the matter would not disappoint.
Okay, assuming there is a real afterlife, I suspect that we actually interact with it quite regularly while we are alive. In fact I think that the afterlife probably feels very much like schizophrenia, in that, you would be in a clear and dreamscape, but physically present, and would have no body to serve as an anchor to draw you back. As far as I am aware, the term "reality" is a term derived from early Catharism, and means "the state to which we return", but I would be stretched to remember where I read that. Nonetheless I think it is pertinent, in that, when we are dead, we have no state to which we return.

As to reincarnation, I find elements of the argument persuasive, but I remain skeptical in that I think it is too easy to accept it without actually questioning what one has just accepted. I mean, reincarnation is an idea that needs to be examined. Most people's reincarnation experiences seem like experiencing someone else's memories as one's own. They get snapshots, but not whole extended episodes. Notably separate to this are the enlightened, who allegedly gain the ability to draw upon the memories of all their past lives, but we only have their word for it, and their word is normally someone else's word via scripture. Now I have had reincarnation remembering experiences, but what exactly do they reference? Memories from a person I used to be? A spirit sending me a telepathic memory? Long-cast deja vu? A remembered dream? There are lots of other answers that aren't explored due to cultural and religious blinkers, that anyone being analytical must question. Honestly, if I discover upon my death that the correct answer is reincarnation, it will be a little bit of a let-down for me. How's that for cynicism?

I can sympathize with the "one life, then death, then judgement" idea but only to a small degree. I mean, if one reincarnates and have precious few memories of the person one used to be, then really what exactly has reincarnated? Isn't it better to say "you live once". But then there is the corrolary that both heaven and damnation are eternal, and that is,frankly, unjust, both to the people in hell and the people in heaven.

On a more personal note, when on extended meditations, I have had visions of the Akashic library, long before I ever knew what the Akashic records were. My first experience was when I was around 8 years old. This is a very interesting archetypal experience, in that one normally views archetypes as being human-like. While I experienced the library as a very pure place of classical arches and immense galleries, lined with many different sorts of books on inumerable shelves, there was the distinct impression that behind the curtains (there were lots of curtains) that it was an immense super computer that was recording not only the lives of humans, but those of animals, and aliens, and AIs, and all the information in the universe. On the other hand, the library was not sentient as humans would understand sentience, and not even really an AI. It was a tool designed to allow people to obtain knowledge. The thing is, while you are there, you only get to answer one question in any detail, as far as I am aware. One question per visit. If I had to choose an afterlife, I think I would want to wander that library.

yeah. I almost look at it like a continuum. Hiram is like a master to the common neophyte, but Hiram is a neophyte to Christ, and Christ is in essence the neophyte of his father. I know this starts to get into technical theology at this point, but there is certainly some distinction between God and Christ himself although they get mishmashed pretty often, especially through the Trinity symbolism. anyways, you certainly get the idea quite well. I will certainly take a look at the link you have given me, although I haven't been able to yet.
The notion of Jesus being a neophyte god is an interesting one. Amusingly I think the Mormons say something a bit like that, which perhaps is unsurprising given the Freemasonic subtext of Mormonism, nevertheless, I am disinclined to feel happier for the connection, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day, no?

As for the stickiness of the theology around the trinity, according to the Catholics, it is a mystery, and any attempt to explain it is considered heresy. THAT is how feeble the theology around the issue is. None of this "you know how a hand has five fingers, well what if God is a bit like a hand with 3 fingers...", or it's straight to hell you go. LOL.

I haven't read the infancy gospel of Thomas but I have read some of the Gnostic writings about Christ and I must say I have always appreciated it. Gnosticism is an esoteric wealth, and I think it is very telling that the Christian hierarchy of old hated them so much.
It can't hurt to read it. As far as Christian documents go, I found it one of the more interesting ones, in that, Jesus is a "holy terror" as a kid with deity powers before deciding to be moral and compassionate.

what do you think about the claims of Jesus traveling to the east? I've heard some people speculate that he went to India and/or Tibet. Seems unsubstantiated as far as I can tell, but its certainly a nice romantic take on the story. romantic in the classical sense of the word.
It is a tantalyzing possibility, but I have strong doubts about the historicity of Jesus. Certainly Jesus cribs quite a few sermons and parables whole-cloth from the Buddha, and it is known that the Jews had ongoing trade into what is now Pakistan, which was then Buddhist/Hindu lands. I have also heard that in Pakistan, the holy Mullah Nasrudin (the fool) is buried over the body of Jesus in order to insure that no Muslim would ever defile the body of Jesus. Whether that is true or not remains conjectural.

What I can say with certainty is that there was a lot of traffic between India and the Roman Empire, and the Greeks before that, if you are interested. Greco-Buddhism.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#79
Well, the thing is, I have actually researched the subject, but try as I might, the information is sketchy. What a shame they burned the Great Library, huh?
Ahhh, I certainly see what you're getting at now. What a shame, indeed. Thanks again for turning me onto the subject.

Okay, assuming there is a real afterlife, I suspect that we actually interact with it quite regularly while we are alive. In fact I think that the afterlife probably feels very much like schizophrenia, in that, you would be in a clear and dreamscape, but physically present, and would have no body to serve as an anchor to draw you back. As far as I am aware, the term "reality" is a term derived from early Catharism, and means "the state to which we return", but I would be stretched to remember where I read that. Nonetheless I think it is pertinent, in that, when we are dead, we have no state to which we return.
Actually, now that you mention, I have always had a "suspicion" that intuition is the part of your psyche that is watching your life in the Life Review portion of the afterlife. like a quantum superposition. it is said that the Review makes you relive these things, having a different more transpersonal response to each moment in order to learn from it. doesn't intuition do the same thing, practically speaking? intuition is an anomalous circumambulation of the self that leads us towards self discovery, and that seems to be what the Life Review is as well. if it is real! these are just thoughts I have floating around in my head, haha. the idea is very Shakespearean, "in that sleep of death what dreams may come, when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause."

Honestly, if I discover upon my death that the correct answer is reincarnation, it will be a little bit of a let-down for me. How's that for cynicism?
This is delightful lol I've never heard anyone say such a thing! generally, even in psychology, its considered that an idea like reincarnation is something like a paragon ideal of natural law and human life--something that feels natural to wish was true but cannot be convinced. this is how I feel, I really would love it to be true, but I feel comfortable not knowing. Now I'm not saying that how you feel is unnatural, but how would a reincarnation be a let-down for you? Would it be the idea of being contained in some sort of continuous loop, perhaps?

Your story of the Akashic records is lovely, thanks for sharing. I'm not being patronizing or anything lol that sounds like a pleasant afterlife that I would enjoy as well. Stephen King once wrote in his book "On Writing" that he wouldn't be surprised if whatever you think happens will happen when you die. i know Richard Matheson wrote this concept in his novel, "What Dreams May Come".

Oh man, have you ever read that book, Al? The movie with Robin Williams is based on it, but the movie is nothing in comparison. I recommend you peruse it one day, its a beautiful modern day piece of literature that I put up there with Faust and the Divine Comedy. Its of course and homage to both, as well as comparative religion of archetypes in general. Matheson wrote the story I Am Legend and others, and he wrote this story after almost decade of research into the occult and esoteric. He said that "What Dreams May Come" was his best educated guess as to what an afterlife would be if there is such a thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Dreams_May_Come I must say it was something of an inspiration to be as a child.

I as well have had some illustrious past life visions. Jung and others, put flatly, consider these visions as made up of the same stuff as dreams and art--they are interpretations of the collective unconscious. so it is transpersonal, mystical, certainly, but straight-forward? not at at all. and all these past life regressions are done all wrong--you CANNOT hypnotize people into knowing their past lives, you just end up giving them a bunch of hypnotic suggestions that engage a dreamstate within them. It's pure pseudo-science, but I can tell you are already well aware.

perhaps, if I am being open-minded, some of these past life visions could theoretically be impressions of a past life--perhaps a patchwork of current stimulus in our current brains to give an imperfect impression that resembles something from a past-life? like a half-finished puzzle that we can guess the context of? but even if this is the case, I don't think that even the most astute past life vision could or should be taken literally.

The notion of Jesus being a neophyte god is an interesting one. Amusingly I think the Mormons say something a bit like that, which perhaps is unsurprising given the Freemasonic subtext of Mormonism, nevertheless, I am disinclined to feel happier for the connection, but even a stopped clock is right twice a day, no?

LOL, indeed a broken clock is right twice a day. While I wouldn't recommend Mormonism to anyone, I have a good friend/former boss that is a Mormon, and I get along with the guy really well. Joseph Smith was a total con, but Mormonism is sometimes a little more opened minded to talk of metaphysics as a study than the average Catholic. at least, from my encounters. so I give em props for that.

It is a tantalyzing possibility, but I have strong doubts about the historicity of Jesus.
What makes you think that Jesus was not a real person? Not rhetorical, I have heard many arguments for and against his historical reality. Even if he was real, the Jesus of the Bible has become something much different than the original man, I would imagine. Jesus the archetype is clearly a careful amalgamation of ancient esoteric symbolism.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#82
Oh wait, a sec, I know Joe Atwill! Never talked to him personally, but I've had a fair amount of correspondence with his colleague, Jan Irvin. Even interview him once, its somewhere on youtube. They talk a lot of CIA and psychedelics, done expose's on the 60's "counterculture". I have read about Atwill's take on Christ. I think there's a lot to be said for it, but from what I recall, it seemed a little too open-ended in certain places for my taste. but its been a least a couple years or so, i'll have to look into it again.
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#83
Ahhh, I certainly see what you're getting at now. What a shame, indeed. Thanks again for turning me onto the subject.
I also thought it was potentially fascinating, but info is just so thin on the ground. You will probably find more pseudo-lore in Niel Gaiman "Sandman" comics than actual lore in classical literature.

Actually, now that you mention, I have always had a "suspicion" that intuition is the part of your psyche that is watching your life in the Life Review portion of the afterlife. like a quantum superposition. it is said that the Review makes you relive these things, having a different more transpersonal response to each moment in order to learn from it. doesn't intuition do the same thing, practically speaking? intuition is an anomalous circumambulation of the self that leads us towards self discovery, and that seems to be what the Life Review is as well. if it is real! these are just thoughts I have floating around in my head, haha. the idea is very Shakespearean, "in that sleep of death what dreams may come, when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause."
Yeah, the whole life review issue is an interesting phenomenon. I have had it happen to me once in a near-miss car accident situation. I think I came within bare inches of being wiped out by a sliding truck that bounced over a portion of my car as I hit the brakes as hard as I could. That whole phenomenon seems really ambiguous and unlikely from an evolutionary standpoint. I mean, it seems like a last second "info-dump" like a game's "save point", and I can't imagine what possible value it might have for our species and its survival so that it would become an evolutionary feature of a near death experience.

This is delightful lol I've never heard anyone say such a thing! generally, even in psychology, its considered that an idea like reincarnation is something like a paragon ideal of natural law and human life--something that feels natural to wish was true but cannot be convinced. this is how I feel, I really would love it to be true, but I feel comfortable not knowing. Now I'm not saying that how you feel is unnatural, but how would a reincarnation be a let-down for you? Would it be the idea of being contained in some sort of continuous loop, perhaps?
Well, I would be disappointed because reincarnation is such an obvious answer and so central to the eastern religions that I am a bit over-informed about it, and I would actually like to face something a little less predicatable perhaps. I mean, death should be a mystery and an undiscovered country, not "oh, okay,a reincarnation scenario, fair enough".

Your story of the Akashic records is lovely, thanks for sharing. I'm not being patronizing or anything lol that sounds like a pleasant afterlife that I would enjoy as well. Stephen King once wrote in his book "On Writing" that he wouldn't be surprised if whatever you think happens will happen when you die. i know Richard Matheson wrote this concept in his novel, "What Dreams May Come".
Well, I had a vision involving a cosmic library. I never saw a sign on the front door that said "The Akashic Library", that is pure extrapolation from folklore, and Edgar Cayce specifically. Can a library be an archetype? I always thought archetypes were more "people-like". I sort of hope the King idea is the right one, as then we sort of get our just deserts.

Oh man, have you ever read that book, Al? The movie with Robin Williams is based on it, but the movie is nothing in comparison. I recommend you peruse it one day, its a beautiful modern day piece of literature that I put up there with Faust and the Divine Comedy. Its of course and homage to both, as well as comparative religion of archetypes in general. Matheson wrote the story I Am Legend and others, and he wrote this story after almost decade of research into the occult and esoteric. He said that "What Dreams May Come" was his best educated guess as to what an afterlife would be if there is such a thing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What_Dreams_May_Come I must say it was something of an inspiration to be as a child.
I have never read "What Dreams May Come" and was surprised back in the day when I saw it on DVD back in the dying days of Blockbuster Video. Books of that sort tend to be a lot more info-dense as media on this sort of subject, and I have been on the lookout for a copy of Matheson's book, but it hasn't drifted across my sights in any bookshops I frequent, mores the pity. Perhaps I will make a more concerted effort to find it (on your recomendation).

I as well have had some illustrious past life visions. Jung and others, put flatly, consider these visions as made up of the same stuff as dreams and art--they are interpretations of the collective unconscious. so it is transpersonal, mystical, certainly, but straight-forward? not at at all. and all these past life regressions are done all wrong--you CANNOT hypnotize people into knowing their past lives, you just end up giving them a bunch of hypnotic suggestions that engage a dreamstate within them. It's pure pseudo-science, but I can tell you are already well aware.
LOL. Guilty as charged. I remember hearing about a plumber in Milwaukee who was hypnotized in a stage show to become a blue pig and give a lecture on Hinduism or something. The issue of the "Storehouse Consciousness" LINK springs to mind as an alternative answer.

perhaps, if I am being open-minded, some of these past life visions could theoretically be impressions of a past life--perhaps a patchwork of current stimulus in our current brains to give an imperfect impression that resembles something from a past-life? like a half-finished puzzle that we can guess the context of? but even if this is the case, I don't think that even the most astute past life vision could or should be taken literally.
Yeah, the problem is confirmation bias LINK and priming LINK. While we have to be as open to the experience as we can be while it is happening, and remember as much as we can, it helps to review the info with a measure of skepticism when we "land" and need to assess what happened. The problem then is not to be too grounded, or too "floaty", or more importantly to be floaty when that is useful and grounded when that is useful.

LOL, indeed a broken clock is right twice a day. While I wouldn't recommend Mormonism to anyone, I have a good friend/former boss that is a Mormon, and I get along with the guy really well. Joseph Smith was a total con, but Mormonism is sometimes a little more opened minded to talk of metaphysics as a study than the average Catholic. at least, from my encounters. so I give em props for that.
I had a hairdresser girlfriend called Maxine for a while. She converted to mormonism a couple of years after we broke up. I could never see what drew her to it myself. I think she REALLY wanted to conform to her family's Christian expectation, but was too New Age to stay Presbyterian. I have nothing against Mormons other than the fact I think they're a bit gullible, and I didn't appreciate having to get them to officially not baptize me when I die LINK.

What makes you think that Jesus was not a real person? Not rhetorical, I have heard many arguments for and against his historical reality. Even if he was real, the Jesus of the Bible has become something much different than the original man, I would imagine. Jesus the archetype is clearly a careful amalgamation of ancient esoteric symbolism.
Primarily because the Docetist sect existed 150 years before Jesus. The sect derived from the worship of Serapis, the original "Christ", and says that Jesus is purely allegorical, and it would be a blasphemous travesty if he became flesh. A belief like that "couldn't be allowed to stand", so they were made heretics at the first Nicean Council. I have expounded at length on the issue on the religion forum.
 
Last edited:

Frideswide

Fortea Morgana :)
Staff member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
8,523
Likes
8,546
Points
279
#84
I mean, it seems like a last second "info-dump" like a game's "save point", and I can't imagine what possible value it might have for our species and its survival so that it would become an evolutionary feature of a near death experience.
Nice description!

To survive as a trait it doesn't need to have an evolutionary advantage, it just needs not to disadvantage.
 

AlchoPwn

Public Service is my Motto.
Joined
Nov 2, 2017
Messages
1,442
Likes
1,895
Points
154
#86
Nice description! To survive as a trait it doesn't need to have an evolutionary advantage, it just needs not to disadvantage.
Look, you're correct, but think we can agree that this isn't the whole story.

For an example, lets compare some other sorts of danger responses. I have been in a few bad situations where three of these (including life review) have kicked in, and I will include a fourth that I have never experienced as a point of reference. Please consider:

One time I was driving behind a truck on a hill that had a trailer full of large barrels, and suddenly my car and I had "teleported" into the lane next to the truck and trailer and it was spilling its barrels down the road behind us. This is an example of the amygdala saying "Danger" and kicking in our reactions before the conscious mind has the opportunity to have any involvement in the process and is well understood in neuroscience. This is known as an Amygdala Hijack LINK, and as a reaction to danger, it has obvious survival benefits.

There is another response where in extreme danger, the whole world appears to slow down called the "Matrix Effect" LINK, allowing the person experiencing it to react with alarming speed to events unfolding before them. For a long time this was believed to be an adrenaline based over-reaction to danger, but now neuroscience is not so certain. The fact is that you remain utterly conscious for the entire event, and you can move as fast as your pain threshold can tolerate i.e. you move so fast it physically hurts. I won't go into details as it will just sound like I am bragging, suffice to say it is a freaky mental state to be in, and it has an extremely obvious survival advantage.

Then we have a state I am not familiar with, which is the "massive endorphin dump". It has been reported as an example, that people who have been attacked by tigers have, on occasion, found it to be an immensely pleasurable experience. Their bodies realize that they are in the grip of a predator and they will inevitably die, and so the body simply releases loads of its anti-pain/pleasure hormones all at once and they flood the nervous system. While this doesn't help the victim survive, it does make dying less unpleasant. On the other hand, this is a trait that actually reduces the individuals' chance of survival on an evolutionary level, so it must be vestigial and "being evolved out". Pardon me that I couldn't put hands to a decent link for this one at short notice, as the exact terminology for it has slipped my mind as I write this.

One might suggest that the "life review" could be classed as a form of this latter sort of response, as while it doesn't help you survive, it may make dying less traumatic. On the other hand, it does seem to be an extremely common response for one for it to have no evolutionary value. Having one's life flash before one's eyes is a literary cliche it is so common. Think on that. If it were of no value, why is it so common? It should be being bred out, surely, as the people who are experiencing it are less likely to survive than those who have a matrix effect or an amygdala hijack experience. I would love to hear what an evolutionary biologist would make of this, as well as your own thoughts on the matter.
 
Last edited:

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#88
Hey, great points across the board. I'll have to save a thorough reply for after work, but I wanted to share my new chapter to this lil forum real quick. It's not very Fortean in a direct sense, so I don't think I could really justify posting to Announcements, but anyone looking around here and check it out! Even if you haven't read any other chapters, its got some good info you can pick up.

Dive Manual, Chaper 9: Prayer, Ceremony, & Ritual [Letters From Home] http://www.thelastamericanvagabond....LT3BrH1mEtGTRV8Ita9juW3G9kBq0WpFsnwcVfOIkHclI

this is very much getting into the motifs of the Gates of Horn and Ivory. (I think I shall try to mention the gates in the next chapter, but it sounds like history won't permit to be very thorough with that.) Details and outlines the basic hypnotic underpinnings, dreams, unconscious archetypal motifs, et cetera of the mystical experience. The chapter even explores some more of the ritual, ceremonial work of CG Jung, written in his memoire before passing.
 

altered_boy

your friendly neighborhood alchemist
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
78
Likes
119
Points
33
Location
USA
#89
I have always been fascinating with Gaiman's Sandman. Haven't read the entire thing because there is only so much time in the day, but I read a lot of it growing up. been meaning to go back to it. classic! likewise to What Dreams May Come. you'd like it for sure.
Well, I would be disappointed because reincarnation is such an obvious answer and so central to the eastern religions that I am a bit over-informed about it, and I would actually like to face something a little less predicatable perhaps. I mean, death should be a mystery and an undiscovered country, not "oh, okay,a reincarnation scenario, fair enough".
Hmm, your opinion is fair enough as well, but isn't one of the postulates of the reincarnation cycle that it has innate unpredictability? It's chaos theory after all, if it does indeed exist it is through chaos theory without question. and yeah just for the record and I am the Jungian mindset on it all, surprise surprise haha. I think something like a past life vision can be very useful, but it is kind of like a riddle. it is an archetypal codex, similar to a dream, except the question of the "past life" posed makes potential hypnotic suggestion all the more potent. for lack of better term, its an interesting thought experiment that can bring about anomalous and interesting results, but all in all it speaks to the collective unconscious, and provides no real evidence for a past life. it feels to me like thinking about a different life is a motivating factor for considering the ramifications of this life in a transpersonal sort of way. I think that has a lot of merit. I live life like there is indeed something to the reincarnation principle, but I'm not banking on it. I just think it does me good to keep such a concept in mind.

honestly, What Dreams May Come is a combination of Reincarnation and Stephen King's idea. Really Al you would love the story, I think that's what I hope the afterlife is in the broadest scope. Ya know if I'm fertilizer in the end then it really wouldn't bother me, but I like to dream.

Well, I had a vision involving a cosmic library. I never saw a sign on the front door that said "The Akashic Library", that is pure extrapolation from folklore, and Edgar Cayce specifically. Can a library be an archetype? I always thought archetypes were more "people-like". I sort of hope the King idea is the right one, as then we sort of get our just deserts.
Funny you should mention it, I just tend to use the Akashic Library as the archetype of a library. I think that anything people can perceive can be archetypal at least through the degree of separation relating to the person. and that counts for something. I think, for instance, there is something clearly and obviously archetypal about smoking plants--good and bad. why couldn't the same be said about a library?

Now, as to your consideration of the four near-death experience scenarios of endorphins, Matrix hijack, et cetera, I appreciate you taking some time to lay that out. nice summary with a good perspective. I will comment on the following

Then we have a state I am not familiar with, which is the "massive endorphin dump". It has been reported as an example, that people who have been attacked by tigers have, on occasion, found it to be an immensely pleasurable experience. Their bodies realize that they are in the grip of a predator and they will inevitably die, and so the body simply releases loads of its anti-pain/pleasure hormones all at once and they flood the nervous system. While this doesn't help the victim survive, it does make dying less unpleasant. On the other hand, this is a trait that actually reduces the individuals' chance of survival on an evolutionary level, so it must be vestigial and "being evolved out". Pardon me that I couldn't put hands to a decent link for this one at short notice, as the exact terminology for it has slipped my mind as I write this.

One might suggest that the "life review" could be classed as a form of this latter sort of response, as while it doesn't help you survive, it may make dying less traumatic. On the other hand, it does seem to be an extremely common response for one for it to have no evolutionary value. Having one's life flash before one's eyes is a literary cliche it is so common. Think on that. If it were of no value, why is it so common? It should be being bred out, surely, as the people who are experiencing it are less likely to survive than those who have a matrix effect or an amygdala hijack experience. I would love to hear what an evolutionary biologist would make of this, as well as your own thoughts on the matter.
First of all, in many cases the life review is said to have happened after you die. everything you said about it is 100% correct, it happens many times right before tragedy, but the Life Review in the grand scheme is more related to the Scales of Libra, divine judgement in the afterlife. in such a judgement, we are walked through each and every bit of our lives and shown the ways we should have acted instead of how we did. it seems to be a bit more involved, perhaps, than the one that happens right before a death. I believe this is touched out the New Science of Darwinian Reincarnation paper a bit.

all that in mind, I think this is playing on something much deeper than an "making death less traumatic" spectrum. the grand scheme of a belief in reincarnation and even a life review is really not to help with death, but to help with life. so the fact that humans through the millennia have consistently had these life reviews and endogenous psychedelic experiences (by way of DMT, theoretically), so much as to make it a literary cliché, then I wager there is a much deeper biological underpinning. Something that cannot be written out of the code because it represents something too crucial. Call this a hunch--I don't know exactly what this underpinning is, but I have some basic ideas. but they are abstract. these are ideas that are built over a lifetime and I've only been at it thoroughly for several years, lol.

but I think that there is a solid archetypal relationship to someone dead in a movie and someone being reincarnated. if not reincarnation, an afterlife of some kind. listening to a song from a dead musician is kind of like invoking their spirit, no? I don't take this literally, but it is a metaphorical truth as far as I am concerned. I think, perhaps, in the grand scheme, there are arguable biological benefits to being remembered by the culture that outlives you. i think there are similar benefits in simply believing that you will be remembered by that culture, even if this is grandeur. we could discuss that.

but in the grand scheme, being remembered after you die--creating a legacy that outlives you--is something like the best insurance policy you could give your friends and family, extending perhaps far beyond those people. if it is a good scenario, your legacy provides an adaptational advantage for those in the future, the way that we all get a good feeling from listening to an album made by dead guys. I think there is really something to be said for all that, and it is something that ancient humans venerated in many ways. they recognized the power of a human's cultural legacy, and how this lived as a life of its own in some way, even if it was small.

perhaps this is ultimately the evolutionary underpinning of reincarnation in the afterlife? my rational mind would be willing to bet money on something along those lines right there. and if that was the case--no real afterlife included, i'd be cool with that. I still find it eloquent all the same.

call me biased, but I really don't think that a belief in the afterlife or a life review scenario can be bread out of the gene pool. I just don't think it's possible, but like I said, that's all a hunch in the long run.
 
Top