What is occultism?

[Fomalhaut]

Again, short and straightforward question: How would you express occultism? What is the meaning of occultism for you?

[Heith]

A seemingly straightforward and easy question to answer, but in truth, more difficult to formulate- at least for me. I'll approach this a little differently;

I don't consider myself an occultist. I merely dabble with arts that interest me and feel worth investigating. But, I have met one person in my life that, based on our conversations and his presence I am certain is a "true occultist". This person writes here on our forum.

I've met another that I suspect might be one as well. But we only spoke once face to face, briefly. Yet my instinct suggests that most probably, this person is a force.

In my opinion, an occultist is someone who has managed to gain a somewhat sound understanding of the workings of the universe and therefore the truth, that people at large don't have. The means to achieve this are many, I believe. Art, Science- pretty much any way can work. A farmer can have a much better grasp of the truth than someone who went to the university.

Hmmh, not a very intelligent post first thing in the morning. Apologies.
My greatest teachers so far have been individuals trotting on the shamanic paths, and if I ever grow up and graduate, in a figure of speech, I would certainly consider myself to be a witch. But it's probable I'll never get that far, or on that level. Still, worth the try and effort.

[Fomalhaut]

Hmmh, not a very intelligent post first thing in the morning. Apologies.

No need to apologies sor. Heith! In my opinion, there is no wrong or right way to answer this question.

I've met another that I suspect might be one as well. But we only spoke once face to face, briefly. Yet my instinct suggests that most probably, this person is a force.

I agree with everything you said in your answer, but I would like to ask, what did you mean by telling "this person is a force"? If you could please explain it a bit more, I would be very happy

[Heith]

I would like to ask, what did you mean by telling "this person is a force"? If you could please explain it a bit more, I would be very happy

The feeling or impression I got from this person is so strong, that I would think they are a force, rather than merely a person. Sometimes I've heard say that a certain Finnish shaman, who has the bear as her power animal is a force of nature rather than a person, as she's so powerful. I've not met this lady, but I can understand what people mean when they say this. I suspect that one of my teachers is like this as well, but we've not met in person. I've heard her voice though and it certainly impressed me. But it might be that she curses like a pirate and sounds a little like a angry cat that's been on a strict diet of whiskey for some twenty years. So I like that.

In short, this person I refer to- I would never mess with them, even if this person was friendly towards me and there was no reason for me to feel intimidated. I instantly respected them, as their presence felt strong and serious. There's no grovelling or anything like that in this, I just met a person whom I felt was the real deal, so to say. It's a gut instinct. And I listen to my tummy when it tells me things

[Fomalhaut]

Now I got what you meant more clearly! Thanks a lot sor. Heith!!!

[Heith]

No problem. Morning posts... Hrrmh

[Wyrmfang]

I don't consider myself an occultist. I merely dabble with arts that interest me and feel worth investigating. But, I have met one person in my life that, based on our conversations and his presence I am certain is a "true occultist". This person writes here on our forum.

I think it would be better to express what is occultism as some kind of concrete worldview. Because by admiring someone as an occultist you still assume the same principles as this someone, and these principles may be shared only by other occultists. By this formulation you merely express blind faith in authority (which is not to say that you do this as an actual person).

But by no means occultism is easy to define because there are many different kind of conceptions of occultism, and all of them are necessarily quite vague analytically taken. One good attempt at definition is offered by Antoine Faivre who summarizes occultism under 4 characteristics: correspondences, living nature, imagination and transmutation. Correspondences and living nature are probably clear to everyone here. Imagination refers to the importance of intuitive and symbolic thought. Transmutation refers to the idea of development; that one kind of being may within greater ot lesser time transmute into an "another level".

As a member of SoA I´m a "denominational" occultist, although an agnostic one. I think anyone who has studied modern epistemology seriously cannot claim that we can know the truths of occultism in the ordinary strict sense of the word knowing. I think we lack correct terms, but in another sense it is yet possible to speak about "moral knowledge" or "religious knowledge". Therefore occultism is not for me only "interesting" but a practical guide in life.

[Tulihenki]

For me occult repsesents that inner feeling and constant work, which in prayers manifests by words: for the sake of the world and not just for me. Occult is therefore reaching to Spirit and breaking limits that ties; liberation to vast sea of mysteries inside, which eventually leads to initiations and joining with one's inner occultist.

An occultist echoes in my soul as an Initiator, who has reached literally beyond stars in his/her conciousness; he/she is the magician, the high priestess and the lonely hermit whose home is nowhere and still it's everywhere, as his/her lantern shines through the darkness of ignorance.

Do I then keep myself as an occultist? Answer is no. I have realised that if I wanna achieve something or grasp even the smallest amount of knowledge within some subject I have to imagine and form ideals that shines far beyond my present ability to comprehend. I'm just trying to be a humble servant and do my best.

[Nefastos]

I can easily sympathize with Tulihenki here, although I think I'm not as humble in spirit. One of the most important things is to see how there are (human or ascended human) beings more advanced than we are, however. Thinking one's views and/or characteristics being already as perfect as they can get, because of any reason, is incredibly stunting. Even better if one can also see his or her guru to be only partial perfection.

force

I do know what you mean. While one treads the occult path, its struggles & challenges (& thus eventually, "initiations") change him or her in a very real way. How that happens certainly varies, but it is there. To ascend, to become a Power.

One good attempt at definition is offered by Antoine Faivre who summarizes occultism under 4 characteristics: correspondences, living nature, imagination and transmutation.

I too was studying Faivre about the same time you were writing this (and, as it happens, thinking about your views on synchronicity). It's easy to agree with him; concerning the concrete worldview, as you said, that is a valid presentation about the occult philosophy. Sor Heith, on the other hand, seems to stress the more practical way of how the occult worldview actually affects one's life.

Still, it's interesting that in occultism more so than in many other philosophies, these two are hard to separate totally. Because occultist believes in the power of those things you listed - like the power of one's mind & the possibility of ascension (transmutation) - it's hard for them not to change the supposedly theoretical occultist actually & energetically, too.

Again, short and straightforward question: How would you express occultism? What is the meaning of occultism for you?

I think that every one of the basic principles - force of magical presence; self-sacrificing devotion; philosophical ability... - needs to be cultivated, although one or other will always dominate. The one who becomes extremely talented in one or other area is already a cultural superman of sorts (a great artist, real philosopher, or even a magician) but it's not saying he's also an "adept" - i.e. occultist in the name's most demanding meaning. (Cf. Fosforos, footnote 244.)

In our culture especially I'd also say the work intensely focuses on one's own choice. Every possibility is open if a neophyte just knows what he wants - but that exactly often becomes the problem. "For many are called, but few are chosen." Today it's not that the doors are closed for anyone, but so many doors are open that it's extremely easy to become diverted, because today's culture gives so much emphasis on personal choice. There are less carnivorous beasts in this swamp of our cultural era, but even more will of wisps.

So, (s/)he who wants to be an occultist, IS. But it must be a very real wish, not something taken as the name for pretensions.

[Jiva]

Actually, Faivre had six points, the four already mentioned being necessary with the final two of concordance (essentially, comparative mythology) and transmission (the master disciple relationship) being optional. In my opinion I think concordance may as well be a fifth necessity.

I think Faivre's definition is good, but specifically intended for Western esotericism although it 'migrates' well. Additionally, a criticism by Arthur Versluis is that Faivre fails to emphasise the importance of gnosis; both what he terms cosmological gnosis (“knowledge of direct perception of hidden or esoteric aspects of the cosmos”) and metaphysical gnosis (“direct spiritual insight into complete transcendence”).