staffs
Administrator
Staffs
Posts: 3,295
|
Post by staffs on Jan 29, 2005 14:31:16 GMT
Thegnostic wrote :
1) Mentalism - All is mind. All creation is in the mind of God. 2) Correspondance - As Above -So Below, from this principle comes astrology but also the appreciation of similarites between different orders of being - mineral, vegtable, animal and human. It is the basis of symbolism and sympathetic magic. 3) Vibration - Nothing rests, everything moves. Thus the difference between different manifestations of matter, such as energy, mind and even spirit is one of vibration. 4) Polarity - Everything is dual; everthing has poles. Opposites are identical in nature, but different in degree as indicated by hot & cold, light & darkness, love & hate. 5) Rhythm - Everything flows out & in. The pendulum swing manifests in everything, eberything is compensated. Sieze by the tide. 6) Cause and Effect - There is cause for every effect and an effect from every cause. There is no such thing as chance. We should seek to understand the causation of the higher planes and work with those. 7) Gender - Gender is everything. The masculine and femine principles are ever at work. On the physical plane this is the sex. It works in the principle of generation, regeneration, reintergration and creation. Every male has a female element and every female a male element. So can we deduce from this that the perfect being must be Androgynous ie Unity/Totality, just a thought?
Just my thoughts seekers. What are yours?
|
|
|
Post by foxcole on Jan 30, 2005 3:18:50 GMT
During my life, I arrived at conclusions 2, 3, and 4 thanks to education and a some ability to think inwardly. 7 is still under consideration--because logically it seems to me there would be no need for gender at the Source... and yet, I had a dream and later a vision about which I wrote a poem, dealing poetically with the instant and Source of creation and it does entail a duality--not polarity, but fully interwoven duet.
Because of the subject matter, I'm afraid it might be offensive to some (and, it's not finished; I'm not sure it describes the Source effectively enough, and the ending is weak). If you're interested, I'd be happy to email it as a .txt file. Please just let me know.
|
|
|
Post by whistler on Jan 30, 2005 4:41:24 GMT
Where does one start 1) I like the thought that we are all in the dream of the Creator - what happens when the creator wakes up/ 2) yes/No/ maybe - this assumes that there is an up and down 3) Vibration - 100% yes everything on every level is moving 4) Polarity produces absolutes Love / Hate, Hot and cold, where do we fit in warm and cool, Like and dislike. thinking about it we can keep carving up until we get to atom level - so yes I guess 5) Rhythm - may be undulates everything flows but does it always return to its starting point. 6) Cause and Effect 100% agree in all aspects of everything. 7) the perfect being will contain everything so Androgynous . Just my Truths which I reserve the right to review and change if I learn anything different -- New truth ;D
|
|
Agent J
Member
On a Mission from God...
Posts: 127
|
Post by Agent J on Feb 2, 2005 9:24:05 GMT
I haven't read the book, but I seem to recall that these are the 7 Hermetic Principles of Hermes Trismegistus. I've got a sneaky suspicion that there is more than a little reference to this in the Craft as The Seven Liberal Arts and Sciences
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Feb 3, 2005 10:12:09 GMT
Staffs
The Kybalion is well regarded esoterically.
My only comment is that just as humans often are offended if we regard them as having mind as the highest faculty - many have discovered the Heart and some the Spiritual Will - in the same way the Creator may feel a little put down if we say that S/He cannot rise above mind on the divine plane.
Cheers
Russell
|
|
|
Post by bevan on Feb 3, 2005 10:39:50 GMT
If Paul Foster Case is to be considered as one of the Three Initiates then who are the other two? Sepharial (aka Walter Gorn Old)? Yogi Ramacharaka (aka William Walker Atkinson)? Seth (aka Jane Roberts)? ;D
|
|
mercurius
New Member
FC, Le droit Humain, Snt John's Lodge
Posts: 4
|
Post by mercurius on Feb 3, 2005 12:58:38 GMT
All deeply interesting thoughts but No 6 is one which has had me facinated me at different times. Ponderings into cause, and effect, and cause, and so ad infinatum... kind of lead back into the nature of reality itself. There is a part of me which feels strongly that chance is only an inability to clearly see all the influences in a given moment. But if influences are emanating from other planes as well as this physical plane then it's probably impossible to understand all those influences. If things are going well in my life then I find I tend to think that there is no such thing as chance...that it's all happening as it should. But if my life is running ragged then I'm more likely to want to believe in chance and random acts. I don't want to believe that my bad choices or influences have placed me in a bad place/time in my life! Karma comes down to making good choices in our lives today. We do know right from wrong, even if we don't know all the intricate influences acting in any moment on this plane. So no matter where we find ourselves, we have the chance to make good choices from here on in. Sounds reasonable and positive to me anyway. (Correspondences facinate me too. I suppose the way things correspond is evidence of connections and influence beyond the visible). Mercurius
|
|
|
Post by hollandr on Feb 6, 2005 9:08:39 GMT
Mercurius
Choice is important - particularly the choice of whether we will support the human race in its unfoldment.
That of course is a somewhat passive situation in that we see ourselves as helpers with the primary direction already set.
There is a next level and that is Intent. As we proceed in the Masonic Science, we may come to the point where we are invited to use our intent in establishing milestones for the unfoldment of the race.
This role could be called Co-Creator.
Note that the concept of co-creator emerged into the new age and spiritual cultures of the West with no debate. I know of no authority who introduced the concept. It was smuggled in and it seemed obvious to most people.
Free will is in a similar situation. As far as I know there is no spiritual authority for the concept and yet it is very widely accepted as obvious.
Cheers
Russell
|
|