Submitted by Conflict on
Printer-friendly version

I've never heard of this man before. I skimped through the book he wrote here on this site and came across some scary and odd things.

Around the time I had my mental break down in regards to sex and sexual orientation, I was getting deep into Klippothic Magic and had a special affinity for Lilith, even wanting to get her image tattooed on me.

The way he says that people under the psychological grasp of her have an almost contempt for "normal" and "conventional" sexual practices is odd. During cyber sex, I always came across as the "do anything" kinky guy. I mean, I do dislike conventional society which is why I guess I am drawn towards the darker side of things...but deep inside, I really don't think I am bisexual. I also don't really agree with his views on Lilith, although some aspects are true. Maybe it's just not what I want to believe

Maybe I am over thinking it. I don't even know what I am saying.

I wish I could

not be attracted to the darkness. But maybe that's part of my journey. What we think of as 'darkness' is only dark because of guilt. It's a value judgement. Animals don't see blindly following instinct and desire as dark. But humans (usually) do. I for one am interested in the issues mentioned above.

But looking at it logically...Love as a force makes the world safer for beings, whereas selfishness does not. So living for the fulfilment of personal desire would appear to be a lower path. Love sustains the universe, self-centeredness undermines it. It has been proven that nurturing touch is as vital as milk for human babies; that without some love we cannot even grow properly. Even birds look after their offspring with a level of care and concern.

I am also confused about my duty in this life, but my present intuition is that like everyone else, I am a being of light, part of the splendour of conscious awareness that IS, and that I got myself deluded on purpose so that I could find my way out again. Unless there is a world to be enlightened from, there can be no enlightenment. So I covered my mind with the dross of delusion, so that this process of letting go could be undertaken. Let's take something back to the Infinite. The Infinite can only know limitation (and the Path to freedom) by our efforts here. It's all beautiful and as it should be.

I know

you guys will figure it out. And that you have a lot of help that you aren't fully aware of yet. Keep asking for help. It will arrive.

I don't

Mind being "attracted" to the dark side. I'd rather use the term relate. Every religion and mythology has it's dark side and I think some are born with a natural leaning towards the light and others are drawn to the dark. You can view the light of Lucifer as something that burns you, or something that illuminates.

It's a complex subject and I rather keep my beliefs to myself.

Both and neither

It is true that every religion and mythology has a dark side, and it is an essential element in life. But note that the idea of lucifer being the bringer of light that can illuminate or burn, isn't necessarily one or the other. Lucifer as a mythological archetype, is an angel of God. As the story goes, God gave human's free will. In order to increases the chances that people will be able to find their way back 'home' again, they were given a little help.

The first was in our own mind, in the form of feelings - those feelings that create a sense of peace and harmony, remind us of what 'home' or God, feels like, and motivate us to seek and do more things that deepen and prolong that feeling. Those feelings that create a sense of restlessness, anxiety, or disharmony, or disconnection from ourself/others, remind us of what it feels like to be separate from God. To be on our own.

The second was in the form of angels, which help to guard and guide humans by assisting and enabling opportunities that are consistent with our needs and also our desires. When we want things that move us closer to experiencing God, we feel more balanced, peaceful, and connected to God - we feel Godliness. This is enabled by the types of angels that we normally think of as angels.

When we want things that move us further away from God, we are assisted by a different type of angel, which we normally think of as demons, because they represent the polar extremes of the face of God, the balanced, loving, nurturing parent. Lucifer can only tempt us when we have not yet cultivated the state of harmony and connection to God, and learned to differentiate between pleasure and joy, or between excitement and inspiration. Or between love and lust. Or omnipotence and power/control. Lucifer serves to enlighten us, by tempting us, as a test, to see whether we have learned what we need to learn. When lucifer tempts us, we feel pleasure and excitement, because we feel anxiety. The joy that we experience as we become closer to God, becomes adulterated by anxiety, because we feel separate from God. Pleasure and excitement are ways that we learn to feel like we have some control of this anxiety, or separateness, so that we don't feel as vulnerable. But the more we allow ourselves to be tempted by lucifer, the more lucifer enlightens us by reducing the amount of joy we experience as a response, and increasing the anxiety and sense of disconnectedness. Hence lucifer leads us into a state of emotional 'hell'.

The idea of lucifer as an essential and benevolent angel, isn't that we should indulge in temptation or the dark side of life. It is that if we refuse to learn from, seek or be motivated by feeling joy and connection to God, and reject the assistance of the other angels, then we will need lucifer to help to enlighten us, by feeding our sufferring. The hope is that eventually, we will realise that the only escape from our sufferring is to realise that we are the ones with the freewill to change our circumstances. We are the ones able to take steps that allow us to reconnect to God, and to create a sense of internal harmony again.

Lucifer provides one way for us to learn and become more illuminated - but he is not the only source of light. Lucifer provides the light in the darkness. We can choose to learn from other ways too. We can choose to live closer to the light of God.

I do like talking in metaphor :o)


First, scientists can't find what they're not looking for. And since Kinsey's time (and seriously distorted it turns out, bless his heart) they have been persuaded that orgasm is harmless, in any quantity or intensity...and have ignored what little attention *has* arise to contradict that assumption.

Second, scientists don't *create* truth, although many of them seem to assume that they do. They just discover little bits of it, and form theories about it. That's a useful exercise.

But if you read Bill Bryson's "A Short History of Everything," you will be struck by the constant pattern of "new idea --> arrogant, condescending denial from current scientists --> realization that new idea was largely right," and then a repeat of the same pattern. You'd think they would stop being so arrogant, after having seen this pattern over and over, but many never do. Smile


I haven't read Bryson's book, but have read Thomas Kuhn's academic treatise called "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" in which he essentially points out the same pattern when it comes to the accumulation of what we refer to as our current body of knowledge and how it evolves over time through a cycle of paradigms being established, challenged, destroyed, and rebuilt. Scientists have to make certain assumptions in order to form a foundation for developing further knowledge. You can't learn, experiment, test etc. if you can't make some assumptions about what is true and what is not true. And this is completely legitimate, given that science is a tool for discovering and ordering truth and knowledge.

As a spiritual person I've always had trouble with the arrogance of some scientists, particularly popular ones like Richard Dawkins and Carl Sagan, who make audacious materialist claims like "The universe is all that was, is, and ever shall be." That's about as unscientific a statement as one could ever make.

If that is what passes nowdays for scholarship and academic rigour, then no wonder the scientific community is slow to acknowledge what members here are acknowledging from experience.

Musings on Gnosticism sexual corruption & Patriarchal Logic

Patriarchy as misconceived protestantism (Weors Gnostism and the Corruption of the Temples)..
{Just sharing some thoughts after reading "The Sacred Matrimony and other Weor books--I-P}

the patriarchy of axial age religions is a legacy from a older reaction to the corruption of the temples and what the Gnostics Samael Weor calls the Perfect Matrimony (white Tantra) practiced in them...

the reaction seems typified by the relation between the Jewish and Egyptian religions
If Weor is right the temples in which the priests and priestesses had practiced white tantra as the main sacrament and means of coevolution, degerated (probably under the pressure of war but perhaps also internally) and the sexuality degenerated in to the prostitution (“fornication”) and other abuses against which the patriarchy rebelled (without fully understanding)
This corruption of the temples need more going into, however...what could have been the cause of the degeneration of what must at some point have been a successful and healthy coevolutionary culture?

Was it that a sick culture invaded?
Are we to go back to Weors Thule, Lemoria, and Atlantis for an answer?

At any rate the weird degenerate dynamic that all of this implies, in which “sincere-but-wrong” protestants revolt against the “corrupt-but-less-wrong” priesthood needs contemplation: Can the ignorant really be usefully distinguished from the corrupt in a case like this? Are not the corrupt also ignorant if only because a kind of amnesia? And don't we all know and intuit the whole Truth deep in our souls, so that the “righteous ignorant” are not really ignorant but “ignoring”, being just seduced away from conscience by the pleasures of the righteous ego?
At any rate an example one religions misdiagnosis of the sickness of the religions it is reacting against seems to be the relation between the Jews and the Egyptians and Babylonians...

I am not sure Weor and and the Gnostics would agree but its clear to me that the interpretation of the corruption of Egyptian and Babylonian temple culture in terms that symbolically feminize it (the whore of babylon, the flesh pots of egypt) is symbolically carried over into the biblical blaming of Eve for the fall. This is a complex thing but it seems that even given the symbolic meaning attibuted to genesis by the Gnostics, in which Eve is the body (Ida) and Adam is the brain and (Pingala) the blaming of eve is a blaming yin rather than yang (or yang rather than yin) for something when the two can never be really separated and blamed for anything separately .

Entering into the symbolism of Genesis one might ask where was Adam and What was he doing when Eve listened to the snake and ate the apple? How did he allow himself to get so estranged from her that she would do such a thing without consulting him? What was He listening to that distracted him so from the intuition that must have been screaming at him that something was wrong? In other words, when yin/yang get out of balance they get out of balance simultaneously as part of the same phenomenon...imbalance is intrinsically shared...
More importantly; blame (and the onesided and dymutual and Unbalanced logic and cosmologic that it imples) is itself a Legacy of the Fall, a legacy which guards the gate back to Eden as effectively as any other “angel”...

Thus the patriarchs were using “Fallen Logic” to critique a fallen world and so misunderstood the reasons for the fall.

The Rampant prostitution and degeneracy of the cities of the older cultures must have seemed intrinsically feminine to the outsiders and nomads that wrote the bible, and even if Moses and the other Prophets who had themselves used the Sacred Matrimony to coevolve with their adept spouses, understood the and encoded a fundamentally different kind of Logic (something more like Coinferential and Paradoxical Life-Logic) into their texts (and I am not sure that this is so) its easy to see how such a sophisticated relatively non-causal way of thinking would be lost not long after they passed on, or how the initiatory mysteries through which it was to be transmitted would be themselves corrupted.

The issue to be cleared up is whether the founder of the reforming religion “Moses” Abraham (Buddha, Jesus, Mohamed), truly revived the fire and “charisma” of the Living Truth which just turned out to be too bright and hot for the followers to keep alive or understand, or whether the fire itself was growing dimmer and dimmer in each “leader”?

Presumably the Living Truth, being that which transcends as well as includes time, would be able to keep up with the increasing cultural degeneracy of those in time who are to receive it...hopefully anyway...

At anyrate, the reasons for the fall must be understood in terms of Shared Sick Culture, of the intrinsically Shared-Ego if an intrinsically shared Healing and Coevolution is to take place between the so-called Genders, and between beings in general. This means a return to the unfallen Logic of primary Coidentity (rather than Aristotles Laws of Identity) and primary Mutuality rather than Causality. A Logic which delegitimizes the factional identity uniforms of gender altogether and the logic of blame and reaction that keeps us wearing them...

More about this Later...