Truth vs. Presentation

Putting together ones life with the modern world.
User avatar
Smaragd
Frater
Posts: 450
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2014 5:27 am

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Smaragd » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:34 pm

Nefastos wrote:
Insanus wrote:After that the symbolist relationship to truth as a god(dess) disappeared and was replaced with relativism, dada, nihilism, postmodernism and so on, movements which are hostile towards the idea of truth. I believe the next step is going to be the realization that falsehood (creative imagination beyond limit) is more fundamental to everything real than truth.


For a century we have had creation of narratives rather than interest in actual spiritual Truth, I am afraid. But what do you think? Maybe all this is a beginning for something even better?
Trying to see the positive in this and maintain the basic ideas of occultism I'd say these are the slow movements of evolution working in the culture that has come to the teenage years and are rebelling against the parents. It might look uggly from further away, but for the whole culture to evolve these steps are necessary. Why then is this great puberty appearing now? We're talking about the western society and movements happening or that has happened in this context, so the christian institutions might be seen as the body of the parents that are being rebelled against. Behind the body is Christ and the turning point from the old school to the new, which the christian institutions ”failed” to conceive. They actually succeeded to give the seed in the ongoing destruction of the church and making the culture evolve into the rebel phase and on to more clearly towards the new school of occultism in the future, where the idea of Truth can be perceived with mature (or newborn) eyes. On an individual level many might have witnessed the very same ideological puberty happening when stepping towards the LHP and simultaneously turning against the RHP, rather than trying to join the hands from the start.

Concluding I'm shifting from desperation towards embracing — from a safe distance ofcourse — these movements, these people working creatively to make the change actualized.
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1766
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby obnoxion » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:50 pm

Smaragd wrote: They actually succeeded to give the seed in the ongoing destruction of the church and making the culture evolve into the rebel phase and on to more clearly towards the new school of occultism in the future, where the idea of Truth can be perceived with mature (or newborn) eyes.
The view of the world as combination of narratives could be, in a way, a quite faithful view to a fragmented world. I think that a surface must correspond to the depth, and my first glance of man shows him in a the middle of flying shards from broken mirrors. Wherever he puts his gaze, there is a variety of wildly shimmering little worlds, constantly changing, and certainly real enough to cut his flesh. And behind this dance of broken glass, so far only a darkness is visible. Thus clinging to the narratives could be an accurate view to the surface of the situation man finds himself in - that is, to "the ongoing destruction" mentioned by fra Smaragd above.
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3431
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Nefastos » Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:29 pm

Smaragd wrote:Trying to see the positive in this and maintain the basic ideas of occultism I'd say these are the slow movements of evolution working in the culture that has come to the teenage years and are rebelling against the parents.


This is very good way to put it, I think. Processes of disintegration are important as instruments in critical moments, and whereas an individual's critical moment should not last indefinitely – unless there's a trauma that keeps in a moment in order to have it solved – in cultural ages such "moments" can be hundreds of years long.

obnoxion wrote:Wherever he puts his gaze, there is a variety of wildly shimmering little worlds, constantly changing, and certainly real enough to cut his flesh. And behind this dance of broken glass, so far only a darkness is visible. Thus clinging to the narratives could be an accurate view to the surface of the situation man finds himself in - that is, to "the ongoing destruction" mentioned by fra Smaragd above.


Very beautifully put.

I think that this situation I presented as a problem can become an asset equally, if we as human beings do not start to take such disintegration (ongoing destruction?) as something that resembles end in itself, or life (truth) itself.

As long as we can indeed take narratives as narratives, we are quite safe; for necessarily – I claim – there always remains a "meta-narrative" which is one's true cosmology. Usually people do not verbalize it, or consciously realize it to be there; they simply think that it is the "truth". Instead, it is an amalgam of karma & dharma, one's subtlest energetical impressions demanding events to be confirmed or challenged (= karma), and one's Work to be done with himself & with "God", the world, and the great Other (= dharma).

Occultist is both blessed and cursed by the fact that he consciously seeks to mould his "meta-narrative" cosmology in a way that it would unite more & more with the so-called "Divine Plan" or the archetypical, actual Truth. And thus confusing these three – narrative, metanarrative, and mythological narrative of God – has become like a great guardian of our time's threshold. We "teenagers" have awoken to see the multidimensionality of our "truths" in form of the billion Others, but the uniting principle beyond reflections – buddhi – has not risen in our hearts yet; the new manger is ready, but the infant yet waits to be born.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1766
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby obnoxion » Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:21 pm

Yes, I think that in this time one must to a degree tolerate multiple paradigmas, and sometimes shift between discourses to understand and to be understood. But this must be set apart from intentionally fabulated narratives or manipulations. It does seem to boil down to the sincerety of intention, doesn't it.

I've been reading the Isvara-Gita, which could be described as aiming to make Pashupata Shaivism a more jovial companion to its neighbouring traditions, and which to me is a beautiful aim. In chapter seven, called "The Master of Beasts", the Lord describes what he is like in context of myriads of categories. In a beautiful verse the Lord makes a special connection between himself and truthfulness, that pertains, I feel, to our dharma quite well:

Among mountains I am Meru,
and among heavenly bodies, the moon.
Among weapons I am the thunderbolt,
and among vows, truthfulness.

-Isvara-Gita 7:8-
Andrew J. Nicholson: "Lord Siva's Song"
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1766
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby obnoxion » Tue Dec 05, 2017 5:49 pm

I have been thinking, how would the second main principle of Jainism, anekantavada or "non-absolutism", relate to this issue of truth and representation. I must warn you that I am relying on the English wikipedia.

In a nut shell, truth is understood to be complex and multi-aspected thing, and cannot be expressed by language, although it can be experienced directly. Thus all expressions of truth are partial representations, correct in one sense, and false in another sense.

So one supposes that just like the answer to all Vedic riddles is "Brahman", the only answer a Jain can give is "perhaps". The profit of this non-absolutist stance is consider to be its universalist, non-sectarian influence on Jainist exoterism.
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
User avatar
Insanus
Frater
Posts: 924
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 7:06 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Insanus » Wed Dec 06, 2017 6:30 am

obnoxion wrote:I have been thinking, how would the second main principle of Jainism, anekantavada or "non-absolutism", relate to this issue of truth and representation. I must warn you that I am relying on the English wikipedia.

In a nut shell, truth is understood to be complex and multi-aspected thing, and cannot be expressed by language, although it can be experienced directly. Thus all expressions of truth are partial representations, correct in one sense, and false in another sense.

So one supposes that just like the answer to all Vedic riddles is "Brahman", the only answer a Jain can give is "perhaps". The profit of this non-absolutist stance is consider to be its universalist, non-sectarian influence on Jainist exoterism.
I tend to think that the sense of meaning, notion of unity and so on is a result of mind's synchronizing process in between meta-narratives and the absolute. An archetype or a god is a mode of this synchronicity, a symbolic representation of the relation between the object of devotion (which remains unknown) and the devotee. In this sense, had the cards been dealt differently, I could be a part of the hare krishnas interpreting the name "Krishna" to mean something "that pleases everyone". So every other god would be a representation of Krishna and Krishna would be like god-ness or ananda.
But this is too dangerous and could actually lead to very intensive sectarianism, because your gods would be representations of my god, and therefore your acts of worship would be less than mine unless I actually saw Krishna in every possible act of worship - and therefore the whole concept of Krishna would become fragmented and chaotic.
Maybe this would be a kind of confusion between the personal, sectarian narrative and the perceived metaphysical idea it tried to represent (act out!), but if Krishna too is accepted as a "presentation of" there's no energy anymore because the relationship to the unknown wouldn't be pure. God as god is presentation and illumination, god as presentation is just a thought. The game of interpreting does not end just because someone realizes it's happening.

The idea that "all expressions of truth are partial representations, correct in one sense and false in another" was tried to be taken to it's extreme by Crowley in his Book of Lies. The book's whole title is "The book of lies which is falsely called breaks, the wanderings or falsifications of the one thought of frater perdurabo which thought is in itself untrue". This reminds me of deconstruction. Wiki says:
Deconstruction is philosopher Jacques Derrida's critique of the relationship between text and meaning. Derrida's approach consists in conducting readings of texts with an ear to what runs counter to the structural unity or intended sense of a particular text. The purpose is to expose that the object of language, and that which any text is founded upon, is irreducibly complex, unstable, or impossible.

This leads me to think that maybe truth is presentation. The action of truth is to show, to present and it is what it shows. The potential, hidden, "perhaps-natured" or "latent" truth is not truth in any actual sense. It might be, but it isn't. I'm wary of the notion that truth could be experienced though, that is a dangerous idea especially cause the statement can be only partly true.

Maybe a Jainist could say that the "beyond-ness" of absolute can be understood from realizing mind's limitations and therefore the world is made out of the relations of our limitations?
Myrkky sattuu siihen jolla on haava.
obnoxion
Sodalis
Posts: 1766
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 7:59 pm

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby obnoxion » Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:12 pm

Insanus wrote:
obnoxion wrote: Maybe a Jainist could say that the "beyond-ness" of absolute can be understood from realizing mind's limitations and therefore the world is made out of the relations of our limitations?
I have little understanding of Jain doctrines, except they seem terribly lofty. But I think that they teach there is a truth and it can be experienced, but it cannot be expressed with words. So there is a truth in the taste of a fruit, but one cannot transmit this taste by any words, except partly.

So, although many words get in the way, one can get the taste of truth in one's mouth. But you cannot taste on behalf of your brother.

I am quite convinced that one of the functions of the preliminary ascetic practices that most spiritual doctrines have demanded before the entrance into their mysteries, is to cultivate uninstrumental experience. That is how one can get the taste - the "rasa" - of truth in ones mouth. Because, although one cannot describe the taste of banana to the uninitiated, two banana-eaters can together find a thousand ways to describe its sweet flavour, so that the orher one can realize "yes, that too is like the taste of banana!".
One day of Brahma has 14 Indras; his life has 54 000 Indras. One day of Vishnu is the lifetime of Brahma. The lifetime of Vishnu is one day of Shiva.
User avatar
Jiva
Frater
Posts: 515
Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2013 2:13 am

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Jiva » Tue Dec 12, 2017 4:13 pm

Nefastos wrote:For it really seems that in the 20th & 21st century occultism the meaning of "seeking for Truth itself" – as the most important thing, and ultimately the only thing with permanent importance – has been much lessened, and replaced by the postmodern and later relativity, & presentation as a creation of pleasurable narrative. This is something that I personally see as anti-occultism when it is in a lead position and not in a role of a court jester (whom we, I admit, would definitely need to invent – like God – if we wouldn't have one already).

It seems to be the way of our day to first create beautifully worded intellectual constructs which are empty themselves, and then used as houses for completely different (not intellectual nor beautiful) kind of ideas. Traditionalism is, I think, the easiest example of such method, where extremely intelligent philosophy is often used to present brutal and, to use the word Omoksha already mentioned, chauvinistic ideas. Real humility is so extremely rare in the Left Hand Path circles that it almost becomes sacred only because of that alone. For a century we have had creation of narratives rather than interest in actual spiritual Truth, I am afraid. But what do you think? Maybe all this is a beginning for something even better?
I’m somewhat confused by the alignment of postmodernism with the grand narratives of traditionalism. From my perspective, traditionalism/perennialism typically promotes one grand narrative as the only truth while often seeking to conform any subsequent discoveries to this preconceived narrative. On the other hand, postmodernism unceasingly seeks to reveal and dismantle any underlying assumptions we may have – conscious or otherwise – that cloud our interpretive faculties.

Michel Foucault is probably my favourite postmodern theorist who, particularly towards the end of career, published some fascinating analyses. Most relevant here is his lecture series on parrhesia: the act of fearlessly speaking what one considers the truth to oneself or others. I feel slightly charlatanic here because – to my sorrow – I haven’t come close to finishing this lecture series, so I’ll simply link the relevant wiki page. However, this brief description coupled with the limited amount of the lectures I’ve read seems to lead itself well to various esoteric, psychological, etc. interactions between an authority and an accuser (God and Satan), for example – and in the most general way – the nigredo stage of Jungian psychology (the Ego and Shadow).
'Oh Krishna, restless and overpowering, this mind is overwhelmingly strong; I think we might as easily gain control over the wind as over this.'
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3431
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Nefastos » Tue Dec 12, 2017 6:56 pm

Jiva wrote:I’m somewhat confused by the alignment of postmodernism with the grand narratives of traditionalism. From my perspective, traditionalism/perennialism typically promotes one grand narrative as the only truth while often seeking to conform any subsequent discoveries to this preconceived narrative. On the other hand, postmodernism unceasingly seeks to reveal and dismantle any underlying assumptions we may have – conscious or otherwise – that cloud our interpretive faculties.


Recently, in a thread that sodalis Obnoxion started about sectarianism, I said that in a way Satanism can also be interpreted as a sect of Christianity. In the opening of this thread I made a somewhat similar claim concerning Traditionalism's relationship with our culture which is so heavily (dis)coloured with postmodern thinking. The both (Satanism, Traditionalism) are oppositions, antitheses which can be seen also as symptoms of the same illness which they rise against.

Traditionalism wants to create, or let us say, follow The Narrative, one pure mythological apparatus. To be able to do that, it must practically deny other narratives. Should Traditionalists not have had a problem with this aspect of esotericism at whole, it wouldn't have been born at all, but remained in the wider (under- or above ground) river of occult study. Choosing of the narrative is its main thing, which separates it from the other forms of esotericism, usually quite synchretistic and universal. I take this to mean that Traditionalism is at least as obsessed with Narrative as are the other esoterical/semiesoterical movements of the last hundred years. I think many of us know from experience how regretfully common in the midst of Traditionalism-inspired occultists are ad absurdum emphasised narrative polar archetypes of Man, Power, Blood, &c. Thus Traditionalism has, in fact, become an easy narrative answer for many occultists, even though – and just because – it speaks in extremes.

This said, there is so much so great thinking in the Traditionalist school of thought that I understand very well the fascination that many people, fed up by our age's humongous problems, find in Traditionalist/Perennialist way of thinking.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"
User avatar
Nefastos
Frater
Posts: 3431
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 10:05 am
Location: Helsinki

Re: Truth vs. Presentation

Postby Nefastos » Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:45 pm

Jiva wrote:On the other hand, postmodernism unceasingly seeks to reveal and dismantle any underlying assumptions we may have – conscious or otherwise – that cloud our interpretive faculties.


Do you think it is possible that unlike in Perennialism, in the postmodern philosophy/culture of language, narrative has been penetrated or transcended in such a way that it seeks to actually approach the "Truth" in the word's occult sense of archetypical or divine, that is, with the capital letter? I've got a feeling that it is extremely sceptical about such an ideological axiom, and thus, builds even more upon "narrative" (as a mind's fundamental model of structuring) than Traditionalists, even though on the very different meaning of the word. Like, culturally constructed language being our golden cage hanging over a bottomless pit of semi-individual experience.

I am mostly ignorant of the postmodern thinking, but I have been in an understanding that the occult doctrine of transcendental & yet reachable Truth is mostly seen as an object of archeology rather than serious possibility. Isn't postmodernism quite proud of its despair, that building upon unfathomable abyss? In case there are post-narrativists who have actually merged their thought with transcendental, the occult approach to Truth, please let me know.
Faust: "Lo contempla. / Ei muove in tortuosa spire / e s'avvicina lento alla nostra volta. / Oh! se non erro, / orme di foco imprime al suol!"

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests