THE |
|
a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects. |
From: nagasivaNewsgroups: alt.consciousness.mysticism,alt.magick.tantra,alt.magick.tyagi Subject: Mysticism's Origin (was Re: AUM symbol) Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 20:26:21 GMT 50010611 VI! om Hail Satan! "Osmium Glow" : >> Were not talking about thecosmogenesis, buddy, just the >> origination of Tantra, and Taoism. Whether you like it >> or not, cultural systems for "spiritual" sciences have a >> beginning, and end. (They aren't the void, duh) "Greg White" : > ...your box is too small, tantra and the tao began with the > first being, and ends with the last being, and I cannot see either > of these horizons. looking at mysticism in general and assessing origins is somewhat like looking at life in general and doing likewise. where did you begin and where will you end? these questions are rather difficult to answer, especially in any kind of absolute way. the way that mystical systems are located in time is through identifying them by name, just like for human beings ('you' came into being when the form that is identified as 'you' rather consistently was first seen and, soon afterward, named). history is to a certain extent the analysis of remnants from the phenomena of study, whatever the age of the focal subject. if we wished to analyze the history of a given individual we might check records near where and when they were said to be born, where they lived, and where they died. we might examine whatever strata of human culture they may have influenced, and examine what role they played in its development, and identify their particular quirks and unique peculiarities. the situation is the similar with respect to Tantra and Taoism. the historical record for each of these is researchable, and we have only the additional dimension of linguistic translation (because "Tantra" and "Taoism" aren't the exact manner in which these phenomenon first appeared identified as such). this is the point which Osmium Glow appears to have been making above. at the same time, the substance which forms the essentials of each of these sociocultural phenomena was, in many cases, part of human experience (and to some mystics, part of the cosmos itself) long before what was *identified* by these cultural traditions appeared in records that may be analyzed historically. this appears to have been Greg White's point. one's perspective and experience will play into which of these points takes precedence in an examination of the subjects. as a beginner or someone unfamiliar with anything but objective expressions *about* a mystical tradition, all that can be known of the tradition's history is where it leaves recoverable traces that survive to modern times. however, as a mystic *involved* in either of these traditions, one might develop a sensitivity to or belief in subtle aspects of human being or the fabric of the cosmos itself such that the description of 'when it started' begins to integrate the entire story of the human (or even all living) species, or indeed some kind of cosmogenetic event. this is where refinement of query becomes important to the researcher and practical dedicant. instead of asking 'when did it start?' the question would need to be revised to 'when did historical records first indicate mystical traditions by this name?' if we ask Greg White the latter question his answer *might* be much different than the below. I will attempt to respond more forcefully to his mystical comments, even though I see their truth and value. > Creation and civilization extend well beyond some small > pieces of written text, and what the humans currently > remember. None of you are looking back far enough, you > are all wrong. a rather sweeping generalization, quite possibly what we are attempting to describe is ineffable or incapable of being known. > And besides the Buddhist pedants say that the dharma of > the buddhas predates both tantra and the tao.... no doubt worshippers of the any Creator God will tell us that it predates all of these (perhaps emphemeral) things. whether any of these claims are important becomes, at some point, a matter of faith and experience. original from Greg White: >>> Any master of the void, would state, 'That which is without >>> thought or form pre-dates all'. All paths are but a >>> reflection of this. And as such have no beginning or end. >>> Try to tell one who travels realities, that your system of >>> mantra predates others. There is an order of beings that >>> are termed the self created. They have always appeared >>> bearing beneficial knowledge and abilities. There is a word >>> which everybody should study, it is 'AXIOM'. studying the word 'axiom' does not yield a resolution to the claims you have made above. it does yield a clue about how different people can wind up believing different things. without faith (and perhaps experience) to support what you are saying above, those interested in coming to understand the relative age of social traditions will not benefit from your exposition excepting through counter-example. >>> I have mastered the Buddhist system of mantra. And the >>> pedantic Buddhists say that their system of tantra >>> predates all others. But mantra is a tool, and a master >>> of the void no longer uses tools, except when onlookers >>> can only understand what is happening in terms of 'tools'. >>> I do not put mantra down, it is an excellent aid along >>> the way. But it is quite fruitless to turn the wheel of >>> 'which came first? The chicken or egg'. Because this wheel >>> gives the illusion of actually going somewhere, but in >>> fact it just goes around and around, until everybody gets >>> fed up. And then they all walk away and keep their own >>> opinions anyway. this has certainly been my experience of the fervent faith and attempted conversion borne by the religious whose inability to remove themselves from their tradition and its axiomatic primacy made them incapable of rational discussion. however, not all of us are either A) religiously-biased or B) so blindered by our instructors that we feel we must hold fast to the myths of the past. it is certainly true that the question of 'when did it start?' has its limitations of value, but to maintain it is fruitless is simply an exaggeration excepting for certain individuals. >>> A law of reality - >>> "Any perception is based on your plane of reference". this seems more a law of perspective than of reality. blessed beast! nagasiva
The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist: tyaginator@arcane-archive.org. |
Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site. |
The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories, each dealing with a different branch of religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge. Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit: |
|
interdisciplinary:
geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc. |
SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):
OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST
Southern
Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo,
including slave narratives & interviews
|