/lit/ - Literature

>>15716268

say more to that, i recall you (if i'm correct in assuming you are from a thread a couple weeks ago) mentioning a type of overarching project. what's the endgoal? what else would it need to reach fulfillment?

very interested, down to help as i can.

>>15334642

you're not familiar, and if you think i'm going to disclose a single shred of information more that will help familiarize you more, you're looney. not interested in going into any further detail about distributions, liquidities, etc. posted that as proof to enter a conversation of a different sort; you may engage in that conversation in some manner or are invited to move along.

>>14828220

The more you go on the path the more narrow the path becomes, so that you end up on the edge of a knife. It's pretty easy to fall on the wrong side.

The absolute form of mysticism seeks complete cessation pursuing God and God only. Some sufi mystics for example deem Paradise as an intermediary closeness to the Divine.

I'd say the idea of "going beyond" and all that can very easily turn into a spiritual trap. Early Church fathers would say that whatever negates life (in all it's aspects: here and there) is from the Devil.


Read Jad Hatem and on the concept of "Prelest"

>>14830407
I'd say religion is the whole framework of spirituality, including myth, beliefs and rites/rituals. Religion is like the symbolical topos which link humans to a Source; it's both a process and a narrative.

Spirituality is understood badly today, as some form of individual search for truth/connection, while religion is seen as external.; as if religion cannot be internalized.

Claiming Spirituality and Religion as divorced is a post-Enlightenment symptom, as people tend to rebuke old systems of belief in order to replace them with hybridized, more self-tailored frameworks.

I'd say spirituality as a whole is a general definition for any given world-view which accepts that reality is not bound by our material experiences, which is why most though movements today are by definition anti-spiritual.

The subject matter becomes even more difficult as you can argue anti-spirituality religions exist (Buddhism) or even anti-religious religions (Scientism). I know this sounds odd but this is in the vein of what Eliade said, that humans are "homo religiousus" in the sense that religion (it it's fullest sense, not the planking-term we perceive today) is the core of human nature, just as faith is the kernel of cognition (you must first believe in a given system of reference before you can enact judgments upon it).

>>14831470 this is also pretty good

>>14797162

What we call consciousness today is actually a ontological shortcircuit; the "voice" in your head is the Adversary, which in our modern world has a well established and "vital" place. You can see where that leads us.

This duplication of consciousness in a mirror-principle of negation is the main drive; "I think therefore I am" postulates the existence of a anomalous cognitive entity, known as the Serpent

So what we term as "pre-consciousness" is actually the original, more ample form of Consciousness; today we are more and more enraptured by what is not only a lesser aspect of our being, but also a death-trap we choose willingly.

I can expand on this in detail if someone wishes.

Otherwise you can listen to:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xN9MwZEX75c

While Faith/Belief will continue to be denied and replaced with lesser/corrupt teachings, no proper alignment will ever be possible again for humankind. Faith is the level 0 of consciousness, the primordial cognitive act upon which all other acts of thought and emotion lie internally. Not discerning between external and internal factors is the hymn of our failures.

>>14570726
It's a very good book. But please read this first:
https://thoughtsintrusive.wordpress.com/2013/08/26/for-we-are-not-ignorant-of-his-devices/

and take my warning: once you go up that road, it will be LIVING HELL if you deem to stop

learning about mysticism is not something you can do on a Sunday coffee and then move back to something else. the more you expose yourself to 'knowing' the more it will morph your being (or better said: your lack of being); and trying to 'broad your knowledge' will soon reveal itself as either ego-bounds or a thirst for God. if you call is not authentic within yourself, you will suffer.

if you're not sure I would recommend you read a book like Uzdavynis' Philosophy as a Rite of Rebirth so you better understand the base domain upon which Christian Mysticism furthers itself upon. Church Fathers have directly evolved Neoplatonism and earlier rites; and if you don't understand the stakes you can easily fall into traps

decide well

>>14329590
Sorry you got such a shitty thread, OP.

Here are some actual recommendations:

>Sources
Alchemy and Mysticism by Alexander Roob (collection of sources and manuscripts explained, get this above all)
Turba Philosophorum
Atalanta Fugiens
Aurora consurgens
Newton's manuscripts: http://www.newtonproject.ox.ac.uk/texts/newtons-works/alchemical

Also, Jung's Alchemical Studies, Coincidencia Oppositorum are a very good read.

But I strongly, very strongly recommend you read Patrick Harpur's Book "Mercurius"; it's much more than a novel, and while also well written, it is a great expose of what the Great Work can actually translate into and what it is not.

Good luck