Truth vs. Presentation

[Nefastos]

Interestingly, discussion abouth the role of the imagined and the role of presentation have in near future seem to have been the keynote of our forum.

I think it might be a good idea to start a new topic along these lines.

In this thread fra Omoksha wrote:

Grey comes so close to things that I would resonate with, but always returns to this fanatic chauvinism in way of presentation, which makes me question the sincerity and conviction behind them. Profound and poignant understandings descend into an excuse to profess ‘how art better than thou’. [...] He also at times presents a sense of balance between paths which comes something close to that of the brotherhood’s, but for me at least, this and all of the above are let down by the brash statements he often makes, which seem to come from nowhere, are presented arrogantly and almost aggressively and are not explored even almost enough to engage with.

And in another, fra Insanus mentioned that:

The late Romantic or Decadent era was the last time people believed in truth. 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.

I underlined the sentence which might suggest a key point.

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?

[Insanus]

I think that the creation of personally satisfying narrative is absolutely necessary for a healthy relationship with the world, and aesthetic understanding is required in the quest for truth.

Old metaphysics are dead intellectually & intuitive approach is necessary to appreciate the old relationship to the spirit that was felt. Call it metaphysical intuition.
This sort of "emotivism" is often times mocked as irrational, but on the other hand also the rational ideal of enlightenment has been perfected in 1) the fact that we are NOT rational after all and 2) the physical findings in quantum physics which suggest some randomness in nature. Also Gödel's almost humorous proof that logic is never going to prove itself comes to mind.

It seems to me that Truth has to be understood as some kind of narrative. One could say that Truth must be expressed via hiding some of it's parts, but as a satanist I prefer to say that particular truths are just pieces of jewelry on Maya or perhaps even better way to put it is: even the destructive attitude towards truth is like throwing a prayer at this goddess and personal thoughts and narratives are it's reflections. Did I just associate maya with spiritual truth? must be correct.

Long story short, I think all the capitalized Truths, Loves and Beauties are imaginary and the realization of a specific truth is a subject to certain way of using imagination. Truths are subjects to intuitions without outer form.

[Nefastos]

I agree with your first sentence.

[Benemal]

Truth is hard. If you can find and not run away in terror, you own it, kind of. I'm more sceptical now, because along with everyone else, I've been soaked in the waters of a metaphysical ocean, that's around, encomppassing the planet. Piranha's are always waiting for the fish of truth, that's dumb enough, to stray out of it's nice little coral reef.

[Yinlong]

I was thinking should I continue to eidetic vision thread or here and decided to write here now. Will continue later there.

First of all, thank you for posting this entry, frater Nefastos, very good opening and I too somehow feel this is important especially now and currently.

I tend also to agree and find myself thinking similar patterns as frater Insanus above.

My further thoughts so far:

If we continue with the pearl strings: I believe the kind of normal / previous structure of the drama has been generally broken (enough). It is about individual happenings, which are not necessarily tied to the same space and time (as one normally would try to follow), this can also mean different physical places too, that can be far apart from each other and the connection needs to be just sensed - and if one is capable enough, it can be of course understood - and possibly used for the good intentions.

I don't believe truth was never approached with truly hostile fashion. It is more like an old friend you sometimes need to spar and wrestle with.

So, this makes me think that you have a basket of separate pearls and pearls in strings with you. You keep them with you while you travel both physically and mentally. All the time one needs to try the fitting and it changes and evolves like a living sculpture. Balance and strength, I believe, is needed a lot for this balancing dance that happens simultaneously on many levels. One can think to be like an ancient avatar with omnipresence to make it happen and work. Humility is probably in the other end of the spectrum, since the dancer needs to dance more for gods than to somebody particular. Sometimes one might need to fiddle or adjust the past. In frater Nefastos recent posts there has been also talk about understanding time beyond it's linear aspect. One can approach this, in my opinion, from multiple angles, since multiple angles are needed. This means both current physics, psychology, occultism, art etc.

If one is building houses and rooms, like spaces in a doll house, it needs to be ensured that the house is free to move from different locations and times. Can the house resist time too? What about flood or a tornado?

[obnoxion]

I, too, adore Symbolist art, especially in the contect of continuation of Romanticism. The so-called literary Satanism is for me the most important of the Western forms of Satanism. The Romantic idea of the artist as a priest, and the following aim of Symbolism to substitute waning religiosity are for me perhaps the most admirable forms of the Western LHP individualism. I am a bit less interested in the Decadence, but I do see it as a necessary step of turning inward. I see the fundamental function of Decadence in tending the wounds of the Soul. But I do abhor the tendency to abandon one's soul to artificial paradises.

The most important symbolist art, I think, is the most implicit. I think that the world is to a large degree a construct of our minds, and thus implicit symbolic fibers run through it. This implicit dimension is the proper area of focus in Symbolist art. This aspect is stresed, for example, in the method of painting landscapes from memory, so as to invite the symbolic structures. So unlike in emblematic or allegoric representations, Symbolic representation is about intimacy with the representations of the truth. It is the sincerity of a soul that feels lost, a sort of confesion of spiritual poverty with a child-like wish to be healed.

Such a way of inspectin the world as a symbolic representation takes one back to the Vedic times, when the world was seen as a poetic riddle; being bonded with nonbeing; nature was an interpretative challenge; and the great beyond above concepts was shown interest in by active imagining. I think it is interesting how the Symbolic art in her attempt to fill the void of religiosity, so spontaniously seaked back to a sort of Vedic mindset.

As for Traditionalism, I think one of her many virtues is the attempt to keep and cherish pure religious forms, with a sincere aim of a sort of universal ecumenism. But the politics of pessimism so common to Traditionalist thought can be quite opressive. LHP is intimate from the very beginning, and in a way its religious forms arise - not conpletely unlike the Symbolistic landscapes - from within, behind closed eyes. To be faithful witness of these representations, one needs to cultivate absolute sincerity.

[Yinlong]

Such a way of inspectin the world as a symbolic representation takes one back to the Vedic times, when the world was seen as a poetic riddle; being bonded with nonbeing; nature was an interpretative challenge; and the great beyond above concepts was shown interest in by active imagining. I think it is interesting how the Symbolic art in her attempt to fill the void of religiosity, so spontaniously seaked back to a sort of Vedic mindset.

(Apart from active imagining) Maybe it is then fitting that the most inspiration I have gotten recently is Bhagavad Gita and poems of Háfez. The (more modern) master of this in music is in my opinion Manu Chao, who lamentably is a bit misunderstood as creative and intellectual personality in Finland. I also have been currently thinking what would it to be a modern "gypsy" or "vagabundo". Somehow the idea is to be not too tied to things, but still carry enough with one.

[Mimesis]

I think that generally speaking, this is a sign of the occult work largely becoming a mirror of the time within which it currently finds itself. Where everything is stripped of meaning, and seems to only fulfill the function of temporary pleasure and consumerism. It saddens me to see this in so much of the ‘occult world’, so to speak, as it saddens me to see it in the world as a whole.

If I have understood correctly, then this relates to something I recently read Georges Bataille as having written. It is written of poetry, but in this instance can relate to anything, with poetry as mere metaphor.

“....by the sacrifice of words, of images, and by virtue of the misery of this sacrifice (in this respect the same is true of poetry as of any sacrifice whatsoever), it causes a slipping from the impotent sacrifice of objects to that of the subject.”

He continues to speak of this particularly in regard to the French poet, Arthur Rimbaud, and identifies that what Rimbaud ‘sacrificed’ in his work was not only poetry as object, but the poet as subject (Rimbaud himself, in this case).

I think what he is saying here, discounting Bataille, Rimbaud and poetry altogether as singular, is very similar to the role of the imagined and the role of the presentation.
The object being that which Bataille sees as insincere, and the subject being that which Bataille sees as sincere and the sign of someone whom is true to, and living their art/spirituality/word(etc) as an embodiment of it.

[Nefastos]

I am glad to see that my necessarily (?) hazy opening for the topic yet received so many intelligent responses from several different approaches. Thank you!

Like Omoksha said, this is something that is in the world as a whole, and as such I see it as exoterical & profane. Esotericism naturally uses tools of time, just like Rosicrucian brethren vowed to use the garb of any country they visited, not to draw superficial interest in any unimportant differences. Yet it is essentially & fundamentally about Truth with the capital letter, and that cannot change... ever. How "Truth" is understood in culture necessarily changes according to era, but that precisely is occultism's point, and its field of work; to go through the ages as the red thread (actually, in the form the golden chain of Hermes) like through the pearls & gems that Yinlong mentioned. Esotericism is that uniting principle who alone can say that "he that gathereth not with me scattereth". For this scattering is not the scattering of dogmas, but the scattering of the very idea of truth.

How the contemporary rhetorics have changed into something that blatantly seeks one's own empowerment (both "magically" and socially) is anti-occultism. As opposed to building of the temple, it is taking the temple's stones to build a powerhouse for one's own selfish needs. This has gone to the point that insolence and arrogance are seen as positive features, characteristics that indicate power and self-confidence. "Narrative" is weaved not as a sacred mythology, forgetting personal names as unimportant, but as calculated lies. In occultism, the problem is not the denying of the so called facts, but that we deny the very quest for truth. If the quest for truth is preserved, then no narrative is unimportant and no serious question unnecessary, and even personalities can become like stars.

[Yinlong]

As opposed to building of the temple, it is taking the temple's stones to build a powerhouse for one's own selfish needs. This has gone to the point that insolence and arrogance are seen as positive features, characteristics that indicate power and self-confidence.

Yes, I would say this is the reason for my anger both in China and Finland - and actually most places I've lived this far. I try to deal with this anger creatively, of course. However, sometimes I still find myself losing my temper. A young entrepreneur and developer asked my advice yesterday how to build a proper enterprise. I advised to progressively devote and donate (sacrifice) to gods (art, concepts which might not fly but are necessary etc.) - while maintaining the dynamics of different people, and of course - as any accountant would add to this: healthy cash flow. I think he kinda got my point - and one industry veteran smiled widely and warmly to my stories and talks.

Point of telling this is because it's still on my mind - I was a bit surprised to be asked for such advice. Also, my reply in a sense surprised me a bit. But I kinda liked my response now that I think it one day later. I kinda would like to watch also did it have any real effect, so I might check in a year how he is doing or so.