Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Topics - vobanack

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Main Hall / Church leadership
« on: January 11, 2015, 12:41:17 PM »
Oikos of Apollo is a pagan hermetic church seeking an individual interested in a role among our church leadership, we're currently seeking a Kriophoros (similar to an ordained priest) and a Kyrios (similar to a high priest). The Kriophoros would be responsible for the daily operations of a church, including sermons, solemnizing marriages, various rites/rituals, confessions, and retention and expansion of the congregation, among other responsibilities. The Kyrios would be responsible for the maintenance and acquisition of church property, training and ordaining new Kriophoros, along with continually training ordained Kriophoros, among other responsibilities.

There are only two prerequisites: 1. Complete an expedited course of study/internship to receive ordination . 2. A genuine interest in our faith.

Since the course is expedited the fees will be waived for the first five aspiring Kriophoros.

Magick / The Kybalion
« on: January 02, 2015, 09:19:09 PM »
Just some quick notes after reading the kybalion for the first time in a few years, lol.

Chapter 1

The Hermetic Philosophy

“The lips of wisdom are closed, except to the ears of understanding.” - The Kybalion.

This among other quotes is repeated a fair amount of times within the kybalion, and the majority of them break down to the same thing. You can think, read, or talk about a thing; but if you’re not ready to understand it, then you won’t. Even the most objective approach is bound to the limits of our subjective minds. This is more or less a matter of perspective, because we see what we want to see. However, this subjectivity is not without it’s uses; as we may work around our blind spots by exploring further into ourselves. In this sense a single thing may teach us any number of lessons offering newer and hopefully better understandings each time.

In the kybalion it is also mentioned that their ancient teachers warned against turning their philosophy into a creed, and stated this as a cause behind the fall of other ancient beliefs. The reasoning behind this being again that we are bound to the limitations of subjectivity, and because of this we each would claim that our understanding is the only understanding. These claims would then turn to closed mindedness, followed by attempts to overshadow the understanding of others until ours stood alone. In other words, this approach leads only to a path of self delusion and destruction, as we cling to what we think we know and block out any opposing view.

For example: The sky is blue, and yet it is not. In the first sense of color, it is just a word; and words mean only what we intend them to. I could say that the sky is purple and still be correct in that I intend the word purple to relate the same color as what we perceive blue to be. In the second sense of perception, the sky is only blue from the surface of our planet, yet eventually turns to the color of space as we go further out. To sum up, it only matters to us in so far as our understanding of what is intended; but there remains so much more beyond our original understanding to be discovered. This is why they warned against forming their philosophy into a creed, because it excludes other possibilities, which in turn prevents us from learning further.

Chapter 2

The Seven Hermetic Principles

1.The principle of mentalism states that all is mind, and introduces the concept of the All. It describes the All as spirit, unknowable, and undefinable. It then goes on to state that the universe is a mental creation of the all, subject to the laws of created things. This statement further supports our notion of perspective or the bounds of subjectivity, as life is a mental experience and takes its meaning from our ability to remember. We can choose to live a good or bad life regardless of the things that happen to us based on how we choose to respond to those things. This involves altering our perspective to be more accommodating towards either a positive outcome or a negative outcome, doing so would in effect give you the power to determine the way in which your life plays out by projecting and pursuing a mental creation of your future.

(Note: We learn how to react in different situations by perceiving the way in which others react to that same situation, this creates a reactive perspective in which we have no power over our lives. Therefore, the objective of occult practitioners in a quest for power would first need to be establishing an active perspective. This is done by simulating a situation and enforcing the desired reaction, thereby creating a fluctuating aspect in your life that may take hold and form a mindset, which may then expand into your perspective, followed by your perception. All of this resulting in a personality change and an increase in power over your personal life.)

Theories, Articles, and Philosophy / Banana Bandit
« on: January 24, 2014, 11:29:08 PM »
When we think of gods, deities, egregores, ect... we as philosophers often imagine a divine entity with a will of its own, where a scientist often sees only simple cause and effect.

A ritual to bring about rain would include the sacrificing of animals to be burned as a gift to the gods of rain, in the hope of a blessing. The spiritualist sees this as a holy act in which gods are being appeased, where a scientist sees this as a natural occurrence. (I remember a day when still in school and we discussed how fires were good for forests in that they not only cleared dead wood, ect... but also caused rain and other effects to regrow new life.) The point to all of this is not to prove or disprove one side or the other, but rather to accept both aspects as representing the same idea.

Anyone who remembers me may recall something about the pillars or the dream theater. This is the essence of that idea, to take two opposing views and make them a whole. First by travelling to one side, then to the other side, and finally coming to a rest within the middle. This middle ground is the origin from which all possibilities are created and to understand a middle ground provides us with the opportunity to forge our own realities.

It is my goal in life to reinvent the wheel, because I would like to enjoy a great challenge. I have many aspirations and as a human can only achieve so much in the short time that life sees fit to bestow upon me, as such this requires help from like minded individuals. A few of these aspirations include establishing businesses and schools, crafting a new language and culture, founding a new nation, ect... If you feel any of these things stand out as a worthy challenge to you, then please don't hesitate to message me. You will be treated equally and with the respect deserved regardless of whether you're new to the occult or a veteran, as I place value on your potential (which is limitless in all of us) and not your past achievements.

Oh, and banana bandit is the name of my future pet monkey... Which reminds me, if you have any aspirations of your own it would be my pleasure to assist :)

Main Hall / New Nation
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:46:11 PM »
I have a burning desire to establish a new nation and as we all most likely know that's very hard to do by yourself, so I was wondering if anyone else shares this interest? Feel free to pm me  :)

Magick / Dream Theater
« on: August 14, 2012, 08:32:58 PM »
The dream theater has been an interest of mine for awhile now, never really understood it, and still don't, but pieces have begun to fall in place. Like the seven virtues, and the seven vices. These correspond (one each (as in a pair (1 vice + 1 virtue = 1 pillar) to one of seven pillars. The idea is to focus yourself on one aspect of a single pillar at a time, meaning ya fall to a vice, then rise to its virtue. However, this is not meant to trap you in the virtue, it's meant to free you from both. The way in which it frees you is by giving ya a double perspective on a single issue, causing your finite mind to be slightly less finite - expanding your consciousness. Using that example you begin to gain multiple perspectives on a single issue, allowing insight into "the workings of the universe." On the flip side in focusing yourself fully on only the vice, then only on the virtue, the lesson is learned that you must narrow down this perception in order to actually accomplish your goals. Otherwise you are left floating in endless perspectives - lacking proper direction (no water to guide the fire, I suppose, lol.)

Theories, Articles, and Philosophy / Yargy
« on: August 10, 2012, 05:00:18 PM »
The idea that something can be natural has led to many misunderstandings throughout the course of history, yet this idea is important for understanding things. Go left first, then go right, lol. YAR!

Theories, Articles, and Philosophy / Thoughts
« on: May 06, 2012, 07:49:50 AM »
(Posted this on another forum, figured I'd put it here to)

The occult is at its core a form of psychology, religion is at its core a method of thought, and philosophy is at its core a method of understanding. "From nothing comes something" is a philosophical tool meant to inspire religious thought for occult use. When used alongside "Truth, Justice, and Goodness" it enables each practitioner to think independently while remaining both respectful and conscious of the independent thought of others. This allows for "Unity through individuality."

NOTE: The difference between method of thought and method of understanding is that thought is a set or defined (preexisting) condition, where understanding is a broadening or learning experience.

From nothing comes something has no inherent meaning, it is an example of how you learn from the world around you. (A further example, a rock has no inherent meaning to you, however through reflection this same rock will take on many different meanings for you.)

Truth is anything that falls within the perspective, Justice is any act that remains true while not imposing on the perspective of another, Goodness is any act inspired by true purpose.

Unity through individuality is straightforward.

The Cafeteria / Annoyed
« on: April 29, 2012, 08:13:19 PM »

First according to Christianity homosexuality is unnatural therefore immoral, however morality itself is not a naturally existing concept, therefore it is unnatural and so morality itself is immoral.

To say that one "unnatural" concept is acceptable, while saying that another "unnatural" concept is not acceptable is to engage in opinion, meaning they are being hypocritical.

Second according to Christianity homosexuality is unnatural, however nature is incapable of producing unnatural results, this is the very nature of nature (nature = nature.) Another example, two squirrels can not reproduce and give birth to a duck.

Put more simply: 1 + 1 = 2, 1 + 1 does not = 3 (1 representing nature, 2 representing natural, and 3 representing unnatural.)

The thought of something being unnatural is pure opinion.

This is my original response on another forum,

My usual policy is to remain accepting of other perspectives, but this makes me angry, lol.

The reasoning behind the animal homosexuality theory can be summed up as follows:

- Homosexual behavior is observable in animals.
- Animal behavior is determined by their instincts.
- Nature requires animals to follow their instincts.
- Therefore, homosexuality is in accordance with animal nature.
- Since man is also animal, homosexuality must also be in accordance with human nature.

This line of reasoning is unsustainable. If seemingly "homosexual" acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature?

First to answer their question, yes filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature. If it were not human nature then it would not have occurred at any time within our history. The Russians killed then ate their children during harsh times, both examples occurring at the same time within history.

Their argument would then be that the Russians were being irrational during that time due to stressed conditions. My response being - Yes they were being irrational, because rational thought is supposed to be a uniquely human trait, therefore the Russians were acting on pure animal instinct within that time and their line of reasoning then becomes unsustainable.

Second, the fact that an animals behavior is abnormal does not remove its status as natural, the very fact that it occurs as a result of natural processes means it is natural, this aside - "normal" animal behavior is nothing more than a term used to describe the most practiced acts of a species, it is not a term to describe what is or is not natural.

Example - the normal height of a male in america would be around 6 foot, this does not imply that the normal height of a male in america is 6 foot, only that it is the average height.

(*Note - Man made objects are regarded as being unnatural, however these objects are made from natural objects manipulated by Man (a natural species), The idea that something is either natural or unnatural is purely human concept - belief, opinion, ect...

In simpler terms 1 + 1 = 2, 1 + 1 does not = 3 - where 1 represents nature, 2 represents natural things, 3 representing unnatural things.)

In opposition to this line of reasoning, this article sustains that:

There is no "homosexual instinct" in animals,
It is poor science to "read" human motivations and sentiments into animal behavior, and
Irrational animal behavior is not a yardstick to determine what is morally acceptable behavior for rational man.

Morality is a human concept, therefore unnatural in their eyes, being unnatural they must accept that morality is not acceptable, otherwise they contradict their argument in that homosexuality is unnatural therefore unacceptable. If they do not accept this then they are picking and choosing what is or is not acceptable, meaning they are engaging in opinion and not fact, they are being hypocritical.

If they agree that morality is not acceptable then they are idiotic for wasting everyone's time talking about things that they neither care about or need to express.

In summary, the homosexual movement's attempt to establish that homosexuality is in accordance with human nature, by proving its animal homosexuality theory, is based more on mythological beliefs and erroneous philosophical tenets than on science.

I have a feeling that goes both ways, the fact that they are being hypocritical immediately brings to light that they are not remaining scientific and are being influenced by "belief" and "philosophical tenets" (Example - "morally acceptable behavior")

*NOTE - I neither support or reject the idea of homosexuality being rational/natural/normal, I don't give a fuck either way, I only made this post because I believed the article to be written by a complete moron that needs to get a life and stop wasting peoples time.


It Is Unscientific To "Read" Human Motivation
And Sentiment Into Animal Behavior

It is a frequent error for people to contrast human and animal behaviors, as if the two were homogenous. .... The laws ruling human behavior are of a different nature and they should be sought where God inscribed them, namely, in human nature.[19]

The fact that man has a body and sensitive life in common with animals does not mean he is strictly an animal. Nor does it mean that he is a half-animal. Man's rationality pervades the wholeness of his nature so that his sensations, instincts and impulses are not purely animal but have that seal of rationality which characterizes them as human.

Thus, man is characterized not by what he has in common with animals, but by what differentiates him from them. This differentiation is fundamental, not accidental. Man is a rational animal. Man's rationality is what makes human nature unique and fundamentally distinct from animal nature.

Fucking hypocrite, the entire article is human motivation and sentiment with a couple of facts thrown in to validate their ego. Nature acting upon nature can only result in nature, not only is it unscientific to claim nature + nature = unnatural it is illogical, irrational, irresponsible, and so on.Human nature is nothing more than evolved animal nature (at most), to say anything else is beyond the realm of scientific thought.

This is pretty much for my own ego, lol,

Since animals lack reason, their means of expressing their affective states (fear, pleasure, pain, desire, etc.) are limited. Animals lack the rich resources at man's disposal to express his sentiments. Man can adapt his way of talking, writing, gazing, gesturing in untold ways. Animals cannot. Consequently, animals often express their affective states ambiguously. They "borrow," so to speak, the manifestations of the instinct of reproduction to manifest the instincts of dominance, aggressiveness, fear, gregariousness and so on.

They are arguing against them self with this statement, meaning they are saying the nature of humanity is not so restricted as that of an animal, should they prove that homosexuality is not instinctive in animals they would do nothing against the argument for it being natural in humans that they have just now made.

Spirituality / Enlil and Ninlil
« on: April 26, 2012, 10:12:29 PM »
I've read a couple different versions of the story but each one seems to imply that it was Ninlil who tempted Enlil (By going to the very place she was told not to go), for which he was banished, but then she goes and sleeps with three other guys as she follows him, it seems like everyone says Enlil was those three guys, but I think the story only implies that he acted through them, meaning he had them do that, and wasn't himself doing it, and because she was found to be "loose" he was forgiven.

Magick / A Better World
« on: April 08, 2012, 10:46:52 PM »
We could make a better world if we wanted to, yes change starts with the self, but no change will occur if it is just random chaotic change. We practice the occult/magic/psionics/ect... in order to learn how to affect change, yet we use it for our own ends trusting that higher powers will guide us to safety - when we are those higher powers as a collective. We're trusting in chaos to bring us order. If we wanted to then we could take charge of our fate and guide humanity towards a more prosperous goal, yet no one would ever do this no matter how badly they wanted to, not even me.

The orders and systems of practice or belief have all tried to bring order to the chaos yet they only make more chaos all because of opinion, that one inescapable thing that haunts us all and dooms us to fail at every turn. Why do we give such power to something so unimportant? because we think it matters, we think it makes us special. Our opinion is what separates us and makes us who we are, it gives us form and direction to burn through life.

Why doesn't someone just create a system that includes all opinion? They don't because it takes away their power to control those who practice their system. Masters play on the sin of their students in order to teach them, but no master has ever been great enough to play on the sin of the world. That master would be the one to bring about a better world.

I got locked out of my phone and can't text anybody so I wrote all that purely out of boredom.

Magick / Vampires
« on: February 18, 2012, 09:24:34 PM »
I've been reading Dracula by Bram Stoker and thought about some of the ideas behind a vampire, basically a vampire can be seen as an individual who is without a perspective (soul), meaning they are then able to alter their appearance, ect... to influence others - Having no personal attachment to life they latch on to the attachments of others who then find them agreeable and are more likely to trust them because they are so similar, their weakness to light is pretty straightforward - if you are found out as only reflecting someones perspective they will likely cut off ties with you (shining light on darkness, reveal the truth, ect...) and drinking blood would be that you are using their energy for your own ends, manipulating them without regard for how it affects them, ect...

I would appreciate someone helping me to make the leaps from this basic understanding of a vampire to an understanding of the occult, in the current state it says that magic is really nothing more than a person who intelligently applies their understanding of life, I don't understand how this "transmutes" into supernatural abilities (telekinesis, ect...) - I can see how something like the clair abilities can exist, but not the other stuff.

Main Hall / Question
« on: February 18, 2012, 12:07:01 AM »
I am working on a project and was wondering if anyone here has a background in education?

Magick / Question
« on: February 15, 2012, 09:39:09 PM »
My idea of what magic is involves creating something from nothing - I got this idea from studying the relationships between Mut (Nothing), Amun (Something), and Khonsu (The created object/Individual aspect of something). - Which led me to the understanding that thought (nothing) can be condensed into reality (something) (reason for supernatural powers) - Example: Sit and visualize a world then inhabit a visualized body with your consciousness (The longer you stay here the more condensed it becomes and the less you are aware of your "real" body, theoretically this can be a potential method for focusing your soul into being born in a new body (Visualize being born and condense that until it happens), this would most likely sever all awareness from the previous body (death) - Either way what I'm trying to ask is if occult abilities are used by condensing the thought of using those abilities (and not by simply doing these things)?

Magick / Political
« on: October 18, 2011, 08:51:03 PM »
I'm just curious about whether or not there are any occult political parties, I read something about the rosicrucians wanting like 3 philosophical leaders or whatever and wanted to know if anyone was actually trying to achieve that?

Magick / Question
« on: October 16, 2011, 12:41:57 PM »
Would mimicry be considered a form of empath?

Pages: [1] 2 3 4