Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Apr 9, 2010 4:28:13 GMT
Well goes to show you that things happen. I never thought for an example I would run into a Buddhist who was vindictive and thrived on spite and hatred. I have since been proven wrong. The way of the world. Oh, don't kid yourself. Buddhism is a religion like any other. Can be quite beautiful in it's purest and most ideal form, but has its decrepit and corrupt side like any other. I've run into more than my share of egotistical, rude, and obnoxious Buddhists. And I'm not talking about Westerners who think they understand Buddhism and screw it up. I'm talking about true-dyed-in-the-wool Asian practitioners that grew up in the culture. Tibet, for example, used to be a theocracy in the purest sense of the word. Rich families would send their sons to serve in Lhasa, not to learn religion or become wise but to rise high in the bureaucracy and ensure the influence and dominance of their respective clans. Llamas would serve as landlords, using their students to gather rent and serve as enforcers. 'Punk monks' would roam about causing havoc, getting drunk, beating people up, stealing and generally misbehaving. Few tended to watch over or care about many of the activities of the monks, as they had to pay their way in the monasteries - so as long as they didn't break the rules too badly no-one had much reason to penalize them. Also the history between the many orders of Tibetan Buddhism are rather bloody and not the mild mannered disagreements you might imagine from such a passive and polite philosophy. One has to remember that it's Tibetan Buddhism, meaning that's there's an awful lot of local Tibetan 'paganism' caught up (and at times seemingly at odds with) the more Buddhist sides of the culture. Some have openly stated that the diaspora to India may have been one of the best things to happen to Vajrayana Buddhism, as only the serious and most spiritual of the monks and llamas followed the Dalai Lama out of Tibet. It also opened up their teaching to the rest of the world for the first time, really. I highly recommend ' The Sound of Two Hands Clapping' by Georges Dreyfus, one of the first Westerners (Swiss) ever to be trained in Vajrayana. It's a dense and scholarly tome (to be expected from a Geluk-pa Geshe!) but it's very eye opening as to the state of Buddhism in Tibet pre-diaspora.
|
|
|
Post by magusmasonica on Apr 9, 2010 5:38:11 GMT
Well goes to show you that things happen. I never thought for an example I would run into a Buddhist who was vindictive and thrived on spite and hatred. I have since been proven wrong. The way of the world. Oh, don't kid yourself. Buddhism is a religion like any other. Can be quite beautiful in it's purest and most ideal form, but has its decrepit and corrupt side like any other. I've run into more than my share of egotistical, rude, and obnoxious Buddhists. And I'm not talking about Westerners who think they understand Buddhism and screw it up. I'm talking about true-dyed-in-the-wool Asian practitioners that grew up in the culture. Tibet, for example, used to be a theocracy in the purest sense of the word. Rich families would send their sons to serve in Lhasa, not to learn religion or become wise but to rise high in the bureaucracy and ensure the influence and dominance of their respective clans. Llamas would serve as landlords, using their students to gather rent and serve as enforcers. 'Punk monks' would roam about causing havoc, getting drunk, beating people up, stealing and generally misbehaving. Few tended to watch over or care about many of the activities of the monks, as they had to pay their way in the monasteries - so as long as they didn't break the rules too badly no-one had much reason to penalize them. Also the history between the many orders of Tibetan Buddhism are rather bloody and not the mild mannered disagreements you might imagine from such a passive and polite philosophy. One has to remember that it's Tibetan Buddhism, meaning that's there's an awful lot of local Tibetan 'paganism' caught up (and at times seemingly at odds with) the more Buddhist sides of the culture. Some have openly stated that the diaspora to India may have been one of the best things to happen to Vajrayana Buddhism, as only the serious and most spiritual of the monks and llamas followed the Dalai Lama out of Tibet. It also opened up their teaching to the rest of the world for the first time, really. I highly recommend ' The Sound of Two Hands Clapping' by Georges Dreyfus, one of the first Westerners (Swiss) ever to be trained in Vajrayana. It's a dense and scholarly tome (to be expected from a Geluk-pa Geshe!) but it's very eye opening as to the state of Buddhism in Tibet pre-diaspora. Thanks for the post and the recommendation. ;D
|
|
|
Post by teddyballgame on Apr 9, 2010 11:54:53 GMT
Much of Freemasonry's teachings were cemented long before AC was even born. His influence on Freemasonry,IMHO, is nothing. Now, his influence on "fringe" occult groups, that change their purposes on a whim, I am sure were influenced. But UGLE, GOdF and their Rites have pretty much stayed the same for years. I really do not think we have a real clue as to what he was up to.... I do not think it would qualify as "freemasonry"
|
|
|
Post by hahya on Apr 9, 2010 13:39:49 GMT
I think Crowley has had no influence on Freemasonry at all.
I do think he had extensive knowledge, despite his adverse behavior.
Those who develop problems using any system seems to me to indicate that, at some point in the process, inherent weaknesses in the individuals psyche is magnified and can become a danger to them. This demonstrates the danger of the practice of any magical path without the benefit of an experienced mentor.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Apr 9, 2010 15:01:04 GMT
Yes, the ritual has changed little since before the early exposures and since long before that. There have been minor changes in form with P.W., yet not in function.
|
|
|
Post by aogop on Apr 9, 2010 20:39:24 GMT
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned that whole thing with Crowley and L. Ron Hubbard, that Hubbard denied but supposedly Crowley had evidence (?)
|
|
|
Post by letterorhalveit3 on Apr 10, 2010 1:59:41 GMT
I cant believe that you would say that L. Ron "These are not the droids youre looking for" Hubbard would ever have concealed anything.
|
|
|
Post by mattjtayl on Apr 19, 2010 16:22:54 GMT
I will admit I was fascinated by Crowley long before I became a mason. Some interests are better kept secret from past masters or other masons who might get a false impression about me so it is not something I openly tell people until I feel they can be trusted.
As a kid I often would listen to Ozzie Osbourne and his song "Mr. Crowley" with my skateboarding buddies. Unfortunately some people only go by first impressions, never looking beneath someone's appearance and tend to be judgmental. So adults would often pass unfair judgment on me as a kid just because of what I listened to and the fact most skateboarders loved to dress Goth with skull & crossbones stickers all over their skateboards. They did this despite the fact I had a flawless record; I was the perfect student never got in trouble with the law or with my teachers, the only exception being that I got a detention once for forgetting to put a book cover on my school books. It was extremely rare for anyone to hear me say a cuss or swear word as a kid and when I would my friends would make a big joke about it "Matt Swore! Unbelievable!".
So as an adult I learned to wear a cover because I got sick and tired of being falsely judged by my appearance. I stopped dressing the way I wanted to and instead dressed to leave a favorable impression; let people see what you want them to see.
I never will openly admit my interest in Crowley or esoteric knowledge unless I feel I can trust that mason. Masons talk about that stuff all the time, but in fear that people I can't trust might discover a little about me that I don't want them to see I will keep my trap shut. Churches will automatically label you and there are a lot of pious masons who got to church every Sunday in my lodge.
Only now after 4 years in the lodge am I starting to open up to other masons about that topic, but only after they have revealed their own interest in those topics. I sometimes feel maybe it was a mistake this year to start opening myself up because I prefer keeping my personal life and some hobbies hidden from people. I am a very quiet guy mainly because I know the less I talk the less people know information about me that could be used as a weapon to unfairly judge me; that makes me feel safe and secure.
So I would tell any mason to be extremely cautious telling masons in lodge that they have an interest in Crowley.
|
|
|
Post by rembrandt on May 9, 2010 5:49:50 GMT
Oh if the walls could talk. Membership in a lodge does not include dumping one's personal life onto the table to be examined by all. Live your life and enjoy your studies brother.
|
|
|
Post by offramp on Jun 3, 2010 7:20:03 GMT
People don't often mention Kenneth MacKenzie but he was almost as influential as Yarker & Crowley.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Aug 18, 2010 14:45:39 GMT
People don't often mention Kenneth MacKenzie but he was almost as influential as Yarker & Crowley. Do you have any books to recommend for MacKenzie? I'd like to look into him further.
|
|
|
Post by offramp on Aug 21, 2010 16:09:28 GMT
The only book I know by him that was published was the rather brilliant Masonic Cyclopaedia, which displays the vast range of his intellect.
I believe he designed one tarot card. Not much use to anyone, unless it was the Death card, which is the only tarot card ever seen on TV.
He was suspected for a while of writing the famous GD cipher manuscripts but I think someone else is now in the frame.
He was probably too secretive to ever have a proper biography.
|
|
KNOs1s
Member
I am inclined agree or disagree based on the quality and quantity of proffered information.
Posts: 1,330
|
Post by KNOs1s on Aug 21, 2010 16:23:41 GMT
Thank you. It's much appreciated.
|
|
|
Post by vajranagini on Oct 9, 2010 4:06:03 GMT
In my early days of involvement with the occult [in my late twenties],if anyone had told me I would someday discover that I was in fact part of the "93 current' and would even seek admittance to OTO, I would have SPIT ON THEIR SHOE. Yet, IT HAPPENED.
And as a result of this "connection", I was no longer "working blind"; after reading Crowley's "confessions" I was REASSURED that I was in fact on the legitimate Path, because I recognized Crowley as a "fellow sojourner on the Path" BECAUSE the experiences he described were exactly analogous to experiences I myself had had, and was having!
Once I had joined OTO, I also discovered personal and INDUBITABLE evidence of the working of the "93 current" in my life, dating back to when I was EXTREMELY HOSTILE to Crowley and his organization!
I now know that it was necessary that I gain admission to an "occult Lodge" and be "obligated"(in a very tokenish fashion, admittedly) in order to make further progress. Once I gained my Second Degree, I was "intercepted" by an astral Order and thus is was no longer necessary to "make use" of OTO; I never actually received my "Third degree" from OTO; it was, instead, given by the"new" Order., one calling itself the "Order of the Widow".
It is a curious fact that prior to taking my Second degree, I obtained the sword required by the Degree the DAY AFTER receiving a perfectly spontanteous Tantric initiation into the Mysteries of Red Tara, the "Lady of the Iron Hook", from a "tulku" lama of a BHUTANESE Kaula tradition...who I met by "Pure Chance" and who "just happened" to be the GRANDSON OF ALEISTER CROWLEY.
This was in the year 2000, in July of the year, sandwiched in between TEO solar eclipses, at a time when the Sun was at the hieight of its periodic sunspot activity, which you might recall, takes place every ELEVEN years ("My number is 11, as all their numbers who are of us" Liber Al vel Legis Ch, 1 v. 60 )
The whole event was surrounded by so many remarkable phenomena that an account of it would sound like something straight out of a FANTASY NOVEL. I would have been completely UNNERVED by all the phenomena surrounding these events, except that, thanks to my stint in OTO, I had read Crowley's accounts of his OWN experiences, and so was not at all flustered by its occurrence; I instead took it to mean that I was "on the right track".
So, to all of you who "blow off" Crowley's writings, I say to you: 'YOUR LOSS". There is DEFINITELY "Light" to be found there, just like gold and diamonds are found in a base matrix of mud and worthless stone. True, he was a SCUMBUCKET; he was also a VERY GREAT ADEPT. I have heard it said (and I completely AGREE) that Crowley is generaly truthful and accurate when he is NOT talking about his personal affairs!
|
|
|
Post by vajranagini on Oct 9, 2010 4:16:20 GMT
Well goes to show you that things happen. I never thought for an example I would run into a Buddhist who was vindictive and thrived on spite and hatred. I have since been proven wrong. The way of the world. Oh, don't kid yourself. Buddhism is a religion like any other. Actually Buddhism is NOT a 'religion"; like Qabalah, it's a METHOD . The purest form of Buddhism postulates no theories about the nature of the Divine, in fact it is very similar to the Hindu "Jnana" or "Direct communion with the Absolute beyond name or form". Seeing as Buddhism AROSE out of Hinduism, this is not surprising. The "religious" accretions arose LATER. As for the "peaceful and nonviolent" nature of Buddhism, well Crowley makes several references in his "Confessions", to Buddhist lamas who would make periodic "en masse" raids on the local villages, sweeping down from their monasteries in murderous hordes accompanied by ferocious dogs. This was in his account of his journey through China. This was in the EARLY 1900s, mind you!
|
|
Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Oct 9, 2010 7:06:53 GMT
Oh, don't kid yourself. Buddhism is a religion like any other. Actually Buddhism is NOT a 'religion"; like Qabalah, it's a METHOD . The purest form of Buddhism postulates no theories about the nature of the Divine, in fact it is very similar to the Hindu "Jnana" or "Direct communion with the Absolute beyond name or form". Seeing as Buddhism AROSE out of Hinduism, this is not surprising. The "religious" accretions arose LATER. As for the "peaceful and nonviolent" nature of Buddhism, well Crowley makes several references in his "Confessions", to Buddhist lamas who would make periodic "en masse" raids on the local villages, sweeping down from their monasteries in murderous hordes accompanied by ferocious dogs. This was in his account of his journey through China. This was in the EARLY 1900s, mind you! Technically correct, but totally out of context. We were discussing Buddhists and the actions of so-called Buddhists. My comment is about Buddhists being no different from anyone else in that they don't all follow the teachings of their religions or philosophies. You can say it's a 'method' all you like, and beyond the scope of my comment you quoted I'd agree, but that doesn't change the fact that it's a religion to many people. And being a religion to many they claim to follow philosophies and rules they don't always live up to. Thus in my many years of studying and practising Vajrayana Buddhism I've run into angry, vindictive, egotistical and downright rude people that claim to be Buddhists but don't seem to manage to act like one.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 9, 2010 11:49:16 GMT
You think this only applies to Buddhists ? Life is full of disappointments, it is how you the individual deal with those disappointments that marks who and what you are.
|
|
Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Oct 9, 2010 15:00:51 GMT
You think this only applies to Buddhists ? Life is full of disappointments, it is how you the individual deal with those disappointments that marks who and what you are. Of course not, in fact it seemed to me that my comment was all about how Buddhists are no different from any other religion or philosophy this way. So no, it hardly applies 'just to Buddhists' at all. It's a human problem that isn't confined to, or excluded from, any faith or practise whatsoever. If you'll look back in the thread you'll see that it was Masonica that was expressing surprise at poor behaviour from a Buddhist, not I.
|
|
|
Post by billmcelligott on Oct 9, 2010 22:24:46 GMT
au contraire Augur it was your post.
I was just having some fun, did not mean anything.
|
|
Augur
Member
Travelling salesman. Roamin' profit.
Posts: 184
|
Post by Augur on Oct 10, 2010 1:11:32 GMT
au contraire Augur it was your post. I was just having some fun, did not mean anything. Huh? Au contraire to what? If you'd read my post I think I've made it pretty clear that I don't think Buddhism is special in this regard. In fact, it's pretty crystal clear given that the quote is " Oh, don't kid yourself. Buddhism is a religion like any other." So have whatever fun you like, but I'm just confused as to where this spells out that I seem to think Buddhism is special in this regard when I've gone out of my way to state that it isn't. My whole original post was an attempt to show that Buddhism has a bloody history just like any other religion and that all sorts of stupidity, violence and atrocity has been committed in its name putting it in the same class as any other religion on the planet. Namely, abused and misunderstood for the most part. I went to the trouble, because I've found a great number of Westerners have quite a fanciful and idealized conception of Buddhism and have no direct or real experience with the religion or the cultures in which it has grown out of. I'm not personally insulted or too put out or anything, I just don't exactly feel like what I've written has been read or understood in the slightest. So I'm attempting to clarify as best I can.
|
|