A Question for the Cs (and the rest of the forum)

I get where you are coming from Medhavi, but I also understand the position of the others. As to this:

Medhavi said:
I am certainly involved in my work on an emotional level too.

But not to such an extent that I can’t see beyond myself, otherwise I wouldn’t have admitted my own inadequacies and even agreed with everyone, including anart.
Subjectivity really cannot be eliminated because it is a function of the self, osit. What can be done though I think, is align subjectivity towards objectivity, this is a process. Seeing beyond oneself is a part of the process of aligning towards objectivity, but, as it is a movement, the force must be continually applied in that direction, and as I am learning, words reflect that movement largely accurately.

We are all really aliens, we come here with nothing but a sack of vulnerable flesh, and have to first survive, then maybe explore and learn. Many traits such as cultural programming, etc are acquired that at a certain juncture, cease to be useful if we have chosen exploration and learning, but this can only occur if we have even survived, psychopathology is essential in increasing the odds of survival in this realm.

In one sense, yes this forum is limited, but limitation is a function of ignorance, and this forum is a place that seeks and encourages learning. There most likely are other places where objective knowledge both specific & general is still being transmitted, I do not discount that.

There is much material to ponder that has been produced by this discussion, and if we are willing to learn we shall, because we are all blind to varying degrees until we SEE.
 
medhavi said:
Ok, the most sensible thing left then is go back to reading and applying exactly as it is outlined here in order to get better understanding since I am not communicating my point very well.


You are communicating your point quite well, Medhavi. We all hear you loud and clear. That is not the line of force of the issue here. This implies that we do not understand what YOU are saying, when the exact opposite is true. It is you that does not understand what is being said to you. Anything worth having is not handed on a silver platter. One must connect the dots themselves.


Before you decide to come back at anyone here and argue again, can you consider that more reading and study may be a better option? Perhaps start with doing a search for right man syndrome here on the forum, as SeekinTruth has pointed out to you.
 
[quote author=Medhavi]which make it hard to have any sensible debate[/quote]

[quote author=Medhavi]Ok, the most sensible thing left then is go back to reading and applying exactly as it is outlined here in order to get better understanding since I am not communicating my point very well. I hope I'll better understand where you are coming from.[/quote]

Hi Medhavi,

You may find it helpful to focus on the fact that this forum has an aim (as stated in the forum guidelines) whenever a topic appears to be open for debate, or seems problematic for a particular aim you may have.

Outside of this, any insistence is evidence that a particular view (however attained) may be an identification, which can’t be set aside even temporarily. It becomes all about you or what you're feeling, rather than what’s best for the aim of the group. - fwiw
 
Medhavi said:
Ok, the most sensible thing left then is go back to reading and applying exactly as it is outlined here in order to get better understanding since I am not communicating my point very well. I hope I'll better understand where you are coming from.

Besides, if you are not interested in esoteric understanding then why are you digging in fourth way teachings?
I didn't say I wasn't interested in that. I said that some things that have been said in these topics could be discussed without resorting to esoteric understandings, which make it hard to have any sensible debate without prior initation into the same level of understanding. If I don't have it, and I obviously don't have it yet as this discussion shows, I have to do things on your terms before anything useful can come out of this. I was just hoping for an even dialogue where you could not only search for patterns in my writings but also see if you had participated in fields other than your own enough to not make generalising statements, which was the initial point.

Any debate on esoteric matters will turn fruitless and frustrating without the proper work on ourselves where our own steps and position on the way meet the demanded discussion at hand. While we don't walk the path we are unable to understand the motivation and veracity of any teaching or teacher and no amount of academic discussion will give you this.

For that you need to study yourself and the feedback you received can help you do that, this is not a defeat is just the beginning if you really want to reach the heart of things and not only engage in superficial discussions.
 
Medhavi, ask and you shall receive:
Medhavi said:
Have you gone beyond detecting psychological patterns and researching within a Western framework alone? What is your experiential and conceptual knowledge in the areas discussed for you to be able to make factual assertions pointed out in the quote above? Have you gotten "down in the dirt" to look whether or not these hypotheses are true or not? If I and others in my area can't pretend to be thoroughly knowledgeable, where are you pulling authority from?

Medhavi said:
Ok, the most sensible thing left then is go back to reading and applying exactly as it is outlined here in order to get better understanding since I am not communicating my point very well. I hope I'll better understand where you are coming from.

[...]

I was just hoping for an even dialogue where you could not only search for patterns in my writings but also see if you had participated in fields other than your own enough to not make generalising statements, which was the initial point.
You have asked, and much has been given, the patterns in your writing have been picked out by others. Take a breather to examine what the others have reported about the patterns they see from you.
 
Medhavi said:
I didn't say I wasn't interested in that. I said that some things that have been said in these topics could be discussed without resorting to esoteric understandings, which make it hard to have any sensible debate without prior initation into the same level of understanding. If I don't have it, and I obviously don't have it yet as this discussion shows, I have to do things on your terms before anything useful can come out of this. I was just hoping for an even dialogue where you could not only search for patterns in my writings but also see if you had participated in fields other than your own enough to not make generalising statements, which was the initial point.

I'm a big fan of generalizing statements. For example: Humanity is asleep. Eastern, Western, it doesn't make a difference. I think that's the gist of anart's quote that you're taking such an issue with. Do you really grok this statement? Humanity is ASLEEP. It doesn't matter if they're 911 truthers, meditators, expert Buddhist practitioners, Hindu sages, or multi-PhDs. They are ASLEEP. Can you see how your academic quibbles don't really mean much when looked at with this fact in mind?
 
Medhavi, in those quotes from Anart you posted asking where is the humility you didn't notice how she prefaces her statements with 'I think'. Interesting that you missed that.

You are (I think!) engaging in classic 'Yes, but...' behavior described by Gurdjieff. As in "yes, I agree with what she said, but... The tone was wrong or there was no formulaic softening with humble phrases." So what? It's what G described as 'scratching'.

I think if you stick around (and I hope you do) and reread your posts a year later what everyone is trying to say to you will be clear as a bell.
 
Medhavi, you are trying to point the gun at Anart with pathological persistence while at the same time writing stuff like

[quote author=Medhavi]
I have responded to what she pointed out about me, which I agree with.
.......
Anart, normally I deepy respect your work here.
.........
I am not looking for academic arguments
...........
I am not in position to judge herself
...........
I can feel that you (Anart) all have the best of intentions
...............
I do not want to waste anyone's time with worthless intellectual debates
...............
[/quote]

You raised a point about Anart's humility. Contrary to what you believe about yourself, you have shown none. You are in no position to judge her; her work here speaks for itself. Real humility is a pretty big deal - long before that one needs to learn about sincerity and work on it. When you write this

[quote author=Medhavi]
I am aware of the defamations and claims against the so-called “Cult” of the C’s here. You give them fodder through such absolutist (“there can be no other way”, avoidance of relativist terms) claims, which fall apart through academic inquiry. If one retreats to esoteric understanding, then this can be interpreted as sectarian behavior. And I don’t think you want to appear as that to the public. So which way can you take?
[/quote]

you reveal some of what lies beneath the facade of superficial enquiry. You are blaming the victims of a vicious pathological agenda for bringing it onto themselves.

[quote author=Medhavi]
Ok, the most sensible thing left then is go back to reading and applying exactly as it is outlined here in order to get better understanding since I am not communicating my point very well. I hope I'll better understand where you are coming from.
[/quote]

You have said that before but have failed at applying it.

You have belabored the point that this forum has little knowledge of eastern ways. Yes being a native may not mean much - but as a native I am concerned that people with so little control of themselves - forget esoteric matters - are acting like spokespersons for some of those traditions in the west. I am making this personal observation as an Asian native, not as a moderator of this forum. Unless you put some sincere effort to learn about yourself, you are doing a disservice to whatever esoteric research that you wish to undertake or tradition you wish to represent. OSIT
 
Wu Wei Wu said:
Hi Wu Wei Wu. I spent most of my available time the last two days looking into some stuff so I could participate on your thread. This doesn't mean I have anything useful to offer, necessarily, so take this with whatever amount of salt seems conducive to good health. :)

I very much appreciate you putting the time and effort to research the topic. I'm sure we'll all benefit from your input.

And from your input too, hopefully.

Wu Wei Wu said:
...it is risky to equate and form of Theurgy with Porphyry particularily because of his dislike with the concept. I believe that is the reason he and Iamblichus split ways, and "On the Mysteries of Egypt" is Iamblichus's response to his concerns. The use of either of them is therefore not all that useful when considering Iamblichus the Theurgist.

Noted, and thanks for the feedback. It seems your information is more extensive than mine. Essentially my research, which also could include this discussion, is motivated by discovering how this Theurgy version you know about compares to those individual's definitions on Wikipedia's page and whether there are fruits of the praxis that can be attributed to other than a fantastic self-indulgence. After all, we already know that intuitions--spiritual or otherwise--can be wrong, and hallucinations can attend a practice as simple as too much caffeine intake which can induce excessive dopamine production.
 
Medhavi said:
It is often mentioned that, broadly speaking, there is left hemisphere training to be found here and right hemisphere ones in the East. Well, no, I wish it was this easy, Buddy. It is not sitting down, forgetting your thoughts and chanting OM. The equivalence of the medieval alchemical traditions in the West demand the same rigorous training in both hemispheres and detecting such things as green language/twilight language within Prakrit/Classical Sanskrit/Classical Chinese for example. As Fulcanelli said, you can’t learn this from a book. I just have the feeling that this general cliché might be somewhat right in its essence because the experiential part has been explored more in the “East”. If you discount “hidden history in the West”, that is, which is only now re-emerging, partly thanks to you. But it is foolish to speak for all from even the most educated position.

I suspect we give each other too much credit. My intention was only to make a simple comparison based on something like "as without, so within" and vice versa. I had assumed you might understand a certain relevant Buddhist koan:

One day, Manjushri stood outside the gate when Buddha called to him. "Manjushri, Manjushri, why do you not enter?"
"I do not see a thing outside the gate. Why should I enter?" Manjushri replied.

Where is the gate? Are you inside or outside the gate?

But you didn't understand what those two individuals who accused you of projecting your subjectivity on them were trying to teach you, and you don't understand anart's observations, which are very similar. So at this point, I suspect mere intellectual dramatizing of the two issues that seem to bother you most. Unless I'm wrong, of course.

If there is still something to be learned here then perhaps there is another helpful angle of approach?

An AI Koan:

In the days when Sussman was a novice, Minsky once came to him as he sat hacking at the PDP-6.
“What are you doing?”, asked Minsky.
“I am training a randomly wired neural net to play Tic-Tac-Toe” Sussman replied.
“Why is the net wired randomly?”, asked Minsky.
“I do not want it to have any preconceptions of how to play”, Sussman said.
Minsky then shut his eyes.
“Why do you close your eyes?”, Sussman asked his teacher.
“So that the room will be empty.”
At that moment, Sussman was enlightened.


Aside:

For others who may not know about Koans, they are often referred as Zen illustrations used to bring attention to the insufficiency of verbal communication, and to show the dissonance between language and the real world. IOW, such 'stories' often are designed to evoke satori (enlightenment), or, the realization that all words are like grass.

To put it more bluntly, Koans can point out foolish conceits of those of us who imagine boundaries where Nature doesn't put them. In this Work, it seems to me that a refusal to let ourselves experience what might be painfully obvious to others, may as well be as deliberately self-deluding as closing one's eyes to make a room go away.
 
I have delved into the website of divine science and I read all there is to have in public access. My main conclusion is: I think this group cannot be considered as a 4Th Way activity.

It appears to be a mystery school fully entrenched in Gnosticism that aims at training Gnostics to become mystics in the classical sense of that word. They claim a lineage that started some 3700 years ago but don't specify or substantiate that claim, nevertheless it might be related to Babylon which is mentioned. Their main core materials stem from ancient Egypt and Greece, including the cosmology and worldview of that period (ca. 500 BCE - 500 CE). This might indicate Alexandria as a main influence and/or a further point of origin, but such is not specified.

From: http://cassiopedia.org/glossary/Gnosticism :
The 4Th Way in general is not regarded as a Gnostic movement, although it agrees with Gnostic ideas in certain areas. For example the world being a prison which man may escape through hard work and spiritual development is one point of agreement. However the 4Th Way does not regard the material world as intrinsically repugnant or a mistake. IT rather is simply the task set before man. Even contrary forces such as the General Law are seen as needful and justified, even required for man's possible evolution.

The existence of a control system run by non-human forces, the Moon, Matrix, 4Th density STS or control system, however one will call it, is another area of agreement between Gnosticism and the 4Th Way.

The 4Th Way is not dualistic in the Gnostic sense. It is clear that different spiritual forces are at work in the universe. Instead of being seen as inherently twisted or evil, the universe, including its material levels is seen as an evolving living system. Being such, it has a food chain, predators and so forth but this is not a sadistic mistake.

Of the three traditional Ways explicated by Gurdjieff, Gnosticism would come closest to the Way of the Yogi, although there may be some aspects of the Way of the Monk. The Way of the Fakir has nothing to do with Gnosticism, since the Gnostics see the body as sort of a necessary temporary evil and place no great stress on its exercise. Still, the emphasis on knowledge acquired by contemplation lends Gnosticism an intellectual flavor.

The key difference of Gnosticism and the 4Th Way is the former's rejection of the world. While the 4Th Way sees this very world as the necessary source of shocks and challenges, the Gnostics would rather withdraw from it.

The two main writers of the publicly accessable material go by the (pen?)names of Ramose Daskalodos and Veos respectively but I didn't identify any input of the latter. A few articles are not signed though, so those could have been written by him/her. The website is copyrighted from 2010 onward but the school activities seem to have predated the webpresence, although it is nowhere stated for how long or where. The webpresence exists mainly as a store front for recruitment purposes but the site itself sustains a fully developed community with internetclasses for up to 30 students at a time, a forum, studypages, weblogs, testimonials and the like -- none of which are accessable without enrollment. They have shown intent to becoming able in the near future to found and build a real school and a temple, including a retreat resort with guesthouses, somewhere in the Appalachian Mountains and they claim that fees and donations are solicited for that specific goal.

The core of activities is named Theurgy and can be considered to be mainly a set of practices in stead of a doctrine, although there is frequent mention of an unspecified corpus of sacred texts which embed the practices into a coherent worldview. Very few works are specified, but quite a few authors are named such as Homer, Pythagoras, Empedocles, Plato, Aristotle, Plotinus, Iamblichus, Porphyry, Julian the Chaldean and Julian the Theurgist.

This is how they describe what it's all about:

Theurgy is viewed by its followers as the Science of Divinity or the Magic of Light, as many orders romanticize it. So many are its names, though, as are so many are who fraudulently assign those titles to their own systems and whimsical ideologies, that we must look further to see if what we are studying is actually Theurgy. The primary four characteristics shall be here provided, [...]:

1.) Theurgy is always beneficent in nature. Be it the spiritual evolution of the individual, the exaltation of the soul or Godhead, the transmutation of the gross into the fine, or the protection of the quality of life throughout the human race, the work and aim of Theurgy is firstly beneficial to the magician, through whom others may come to be benefited. The nature of the proposed “selfishness” of the mystics as issued from the mouths of critics of the art shall be dealt with slightly later.

2.) Theurgy shares characteristics with Egyptian theological sciences and practices. Organizationally this includes a priesthood and a class system of sorts, seen throughout most hermetic orders. Ideologically this includes the belief in multiple layers of existence and therein several bodies composing the human persona, faith in an afterlife, and a devout study of how the natural world and the actions of the supposed gods interact.

3.) Theurgy contains components of the ancient teachings of the Pythagorean, Eleusinian, Orphic, and Platonic Mystery Schools, particularly the evolution of the universe and all components therein expressed via number, the geometrical fixation of stars and the proper composition of key symbolic figures. Further than these we draw upon the philosophies of such scholars as Iamblichus, who resolved the Egyptian teachings with the Greek teachings.

4.) Theurgy is at once a polytheism and monotheism, believing in the existence of every supposed entity said to exist, giving each its due of respect and reverence, and yet believing also in a monad.
Source: _https://thedivinescience.org/origin-and-nature-of-theurgy

From their account of daily practices it can be inferred that they are also worshippers of the sun, in its fourfold appearance: sunrise (east), zenith (south), sunset (west) and nadir (black sun, north). From what I've gathered I think they consider their rituals and magical practices --which are never specified-- as being some sort of neutral toolkit available to the initiated and consequently they seem to believe that the difference between white magic and black magic is fully due to the intent and purpose of the magician who is using these technicalities. They themselves appear to lean strongly towards what is commonly known as white magic, love and light, light workers or soldiers of light.

I found this quote to summarize their stand:

We believe, as did the ancients, that many magical powers will develop on their own as the student advances naturally on the path towards God. They will make themselves known as the student becomes mature enough to handle them responsibly. In our tradition, these powers are not vehemently denied or demonized once they appear. Instead, the initiate recognizes them but remains inwardly indifferent to their presence. They are put away into his internal arsenal of tools at the disposal of God, should the initiate ever be given a task which requires their use.

It could be said that in this tradition the mystic develops power, nor powers. The aspirant will gradually develop power over the elemental and planetary forces which influence him, in order to master and subsequently rise above them. As a side effect certain powers may develop of their own accord, but this is seen as ultimately inconsequential to the goal of self realization. There are, however, certain “abilities” that are purposely developed to serve as aides in the student’s progress. In our system these are, principally:

- The three main cognitive psychic faculties: clairvoyance, clairaudience, and clairsentience. These are required in order for the student to be absolutely certain that he is operating objectively, and not merely deluded by imagination. It also allows for the clearer communication of ideas between the teachers and the students, since the interaction will take place on an astral and mental level, not just a material one.

- Astral projection. A safe and complete method for astral projection is taught towards the end of the outer level training, since some of the higher training takes place in spiritual worlds and astral temples. The experience of astral travel also completely eliminates all fear and uncertainty about death and the afterlife, which we believe is necessary for the psychology of the student.

- Lucid dreaming. This comes hand-in-hand with astral training, since many students use lucid dreaming as a platform for mental and astral travel. However, it also gives our students the important ability to do their spiritual practices while they sleep, in order to produce faster progress.
Source: _https://thedivinescience.org/what-is-this-school’s-teaching-in-regards-to-the-development-of-magical-powers

The only author they would recommend to the layman is Franz Bardon, especially his book “Initiation into Hermetics.”
More info about that here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Franz_Bardon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initiation_Into_Hermetics
http://www.amazon.com/Initiation-into-Hermetics-Franz-Bardon/dp/1885928068/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1337290917&sr=8-1-fkmr0

Finalizing this rather concise summary, I would say this school certainly looks genuine in its own right and will be a source of at least solid B influences, with the possibility of C influences not discarded beforehand. But it's not a 4Th Way school.
 
Palinurus said:
Finalizing this rather concise summary, I would say this school certainly looks genuine in its own right and will be a source of at least solid B influences, with the possibility of C influences not discarded beforehand. But it's not a 4Th Way school.


Someone please correct me if I am wrong, but this is in no way any indication of a solid B influence. In following your wiki links, I find cause and effect, not infinite potential, and I find stage magic, and other magical practices that seem to amount to little more than wishful thinking and mental masturbation. A "B" influence needs to be conscious. So, unless we are going to argue that STS can put out B influences that are consciously subjective in nature vs consciously objective, then I do not see how this could in any way be a B influence. Can you tell me where your thought process lies in this claim?


There also seems to be a lot of emphasis on distractions such as astral travel and powers.
 
Hi Daenerys,

The problem with this kind of a summary is that my final appreciation is founded on the overall nature of all the things I've encountered on said website and the cross references I've done while reading those materials - most of which is left out here. So I think you might be jumping onto something a bit too soon now. But I will grant you that the wiki material as such on its own could certainly justify your misgivings, which I understand and somewhat share as well. So, I'd better wrote could be, in stead of will be. Sorry about that. My bad.
 
Palinurus said:

Hi Daenerys,

The problem with this kind of a summary is that my final appreciation is founded on the overall nature of all the things I've encountered on said website and the cross references I've done while reading those materials - most of which is left out here. So I think you might be jumping onto something a bit too soon now. But I will grant you that the wiki material as such on its own could certainly justify your misgivings, which I understand and somewhat share as well. So, I'd better wrote could be, in stead of will be. Sorry about that. My bad.


Based on everything I am reading and putting into context, I do not think it could be a B influence proper, as it is an act of commanding, not asking at its root, which can been seen subtly all throughout the text in reference to power,magic, taking essences into the self, etc. It is my opinion that it is STS masked very well for the more intelligent individuals to fall into its trap, as there is a lot of truth, but subtle lies and twists.


http://cassiopaea.org/2012/05/12/truth-or-lies-part-3/


It was in this period that we find the practice of calling on the god to appear “in a particular mood.” This was supposed to minimize the possible danger to the supplicant. Historically speaking, when gods had appeared in the myths, rather often, their power and glory was such that the unfortunate mortal was unable to support the event.But clearly, personal apparitions were desired, and people began to wear carefully made amulets engraved with scenes and legends which ensured that a particular god would come in the mood for a “good encounter.” These features of prayer led to sorcery and the spiritual “magicians” that we know from the early Christian texts. When we consider that much, if not most, of Jewish and Christian practices are predicated on invoking god in a particular mood, we see how the link is formed between magic and religion in terms of magic’s claim to techniques of compulsion. Religions – especially Judaism and Christianity – use such techniques openly.

By the middle of the second century AD, the competing art of theurgy came along and promoted itself as able to “summon” the gods by symbols which they (that is, the gods themselves) had revealed. The practitioners made it clear that this was in no way “black magic,” because it required spiritual and moral excellence from its practitioners. Lists of gods and demons appeared with exact distinctions so that the practitioner might not be deceived were produced.
 
I also think that this article may be relavent to this discussion:

http://cassiopaea.crystunix.com/qfs/qfs_ritual.htm


Here is a snip:

What is magick really?

Now we will touch on the larger aspect of magick. Let me begin this part by quoting from Israel Regardie, a student of Aleister Crowley and Golden Dawn member, in his essay "The Art and Meaning of Magic" his definition of magick:"But I maintain, as a primal definition, that Magic[k], whether of the eastern or western variety, is essentially a divine process - Theurgy, a mode of spiritual culture or development. From the psychological viewpoint, it may be interpreted as a series of techniques having as their object the withdrawal of energy from objective and subjective objects so that, in the renewal of consciousness by a re-emergent libido, the jewel of a transformed life with new creative possibilities and with spontaneity may be found. It comprises various technical methods, some simple in nature, others highly complex and most difficult to perform, for purifying the personality, and into that cleansed organism, freed of pathogenic strain, invoking the higher self."With this in mind, then, a good many of the apparently unrelated items of Magic[k], some of its invocations and visualizing practices, take on a new and added significance. They are important psychological steps whereby to repair, improve or elevate consciousness so that eventually it may prove a worthy vehicle of the Divine Light. [...] This conception is likewise the point of view of our magical system. The technical forms of Magic[k] described in the The Golden Dawn, such as Pentagram and other rituals, astral assumption of God-forms, evocations [...] of elemental and planetary spirits, skrying in the spirit vision, and the invocation of the Holy Guardian Angel, are all performed with that single objective held ever before one."

Notice right away the hook, a promise of "spiritual culture and development". An uninformed but serious seeker might stumble upon this definition and give more credence to this system than is justified because of the stated goal of magick, nothing less than making the aspirant a "worthy vehicle of Divine Light". Sounds pretty good, huh? Mr. Regardie also gives us a basic explanation for how the "techniques" of magick bring about the promised change in the seeker. Let us examine the system of techniques in detail to see what we might see.


Added: this was referenced in part from a forum thread already prior in this thread. I also note that on the website in question in this thread there is a reference to The Golden Dawn Groups:



Is this another Golden Dawn Group? ( FAQ)


We are asked this question often. Being recipients of true and valid initiation, and a part of an antique but living tradition, our teachers have no need to refer to the teachings of modern schools or sects. Still, we recognize that there are many systems based on that provided by the Golden Dawn today. The overpopulation of schools based on those teachings is, we believe, caused by two factors. Firstly, many people avail themselves of the publications of Israel Regardie or similar authors, and on book knowledge alone they attempt to open a mystery school. Secondly, many aspirants break away from Golden Dawn temples to start their own lineages. Both of these actions we must necessarily oppose, for the right to initiate must be passed down directly from a master, not garnered from reading or philosophical speculation. We are also directly opposed to break-away societies and groups, who usurp the authorities of their designated hierophants for the sake of vain personal glory and imaginary titles. A true initiate always seeks peace and harmony, not discord and division.

The number of valid Golden Dawn groups today is likely few, but to those that are sanctioned or were begun with permission, and can draw a direct initiatic line back to Samuel MacGregor Mathers, we have nothing but the greatest regard. It is a beautiful and intelligent system, and being based on a number of ancient theurgic principles, even shares some commonalities with our own system.


added:

Here is another red flag from the wiki on theurgy:

Esoteric Christian Theurgy is seen as the opposite of Goetia, even though many argue that they overlap each other. Some organizations, such as The Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn claim to teach a type of theurgy that would help one ascend spiritually as well as understand the true nature of the self and its relation to the Divine and the Universe, and has quite a historical following and influence; while it is known that theurgists historically are usually solitary practitioners and seek the divine light alone through ritual and inner spiritual and psychological equilibration
The STO concept is missing entirely, as others are not included, and ritual ,yet again, is mentioned.
 
Back
Top Bottom