The Star of Azazel - Azazelin Tähti

Smaragd wrote:As dogma or anykind of limitation can sieve out the essence of things or reveal a spirit of some sort in its bare bones, in its true individuality, so there seems to be some very potent source of oneness in the archetypes. Whether we look at ourselves or the archtypes it is a curious thing how individuality is remarked as something separate while it seems to be the opposite. Reminds me of the swastika turning and turning, which is not unlike the creativity the dogmatic tension creates.

I would describe the source of oneness that is the fountain of individuality as an ocean of infinit latency, an infinite source of self-sufficiency, that is drawn forth by the limitations. There might an endless ocean of latency, of known and unknown possibility, resting silently amidst us, and yet be as nothing. That anything at all manifests from such an ocean is a miracle. Such an ocean, even if we cannot put our fingers in it and see if they get wet, would be more real than all the fingers in the world, for it could swallow us and spit us out, and never be disturbed. And as both the limitation and the latency, as well as the dynamism between them are and are not the oneness, it would be mistake to think of oneness as a state of homogenity. Oneness, or rather, a state of nonduality would be, I think, a state where the latent and the manifest are undivided.

Red Bird wrote:

Smaragd wrote:As dogma or anykind of limitation can sieve out the essence of things or reveal a spirit of some sort in its bare bones, in its true individuality, so there seems to be some very potent source of oneness in the archetypes. Whether we look at ourselves or the archtypes it is a curious thing how individuality is remarked as something separate while it seems to be the opposite. Reminds me of the swastika turning and turning, which is not unlike the creativity the dogmatic tension creates.

Symbols and words are often re-defined in their meaning and used for some kind of ideology. Same thing happend with „individuality“ in some way. Somehow the acceptance of dogmas became a sign of weakness -> you follow a dogma because you are too weak for individuality. But that was one of those illusions people won't let go. Nobody noticed, that it is just another dogma replacing the old ones. Even the material values and the non-spirituality became dogmatic. I always keep in mind that my occult work would be stated as insane to most people because it does not fit in the current dogmas.

obnoxion wrote:

Red Bird wrote:

Smaragd wrote:As dogma or anykind of limitation can sieve out the essence of things or reveal a spirit of some sort in its bare bones, in its true individuality, so there seems to be some very potent source of oneness in the archetypes. Whether we look at ourselves or the archtypes it is a curious thing how individuality is remarked as something separate while it seems to be the opposite. Reminds me of the swastika turning and turning, which is not unlike the creativity the dogmatic tension creates.

Symbols and words are often re-defined in their meaning and used for some kind of ideology. Same thing happend with „individuality“ in some way. Somehow the acceptance of dogmas became a sign of weakness -> you follow a dogma because you are too weak for individuality. But that was one of those illusions people won't let go. Nobody noticed, that it is just another dogma replacing the old ones. Even the material values and the non-spirituality became dogmatic. I always keep in mind that my occult work would be stated as insane to most people because it does not fit in the current dogmas.

Yea, nowadays it is like "why can't you be an individual, just like everbody else!"...