From: rmr[at]acsu[dot]buffalo[dot]edu (Richard M. Romanowski)
Subject: Re: Magick, Power, Depression, and the 13 Black Adepts
Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1993 20:25:39 GMT
<< We might note that some don’t even do mundane tasks well unless there is some element of danger — routine, mundane junk is too easy to warrant their concentration. >>
Tyagi@cup.portal.com (Tyagi Mordred Nagasiva) writes:
<< Then they are not accustomed to discipline, for discipline is born from continuous, routine, repetition. >>
Is repetition the only means of attaining discipline? If I do the same meditation every day for a year and it seems different every time, does it mean that I’m undisciplined, or just perceptive?
I can listen to the same Bach fugue thousands of times and get something different out of it each time. It never becomes routine… it never gets boring…
<< No matter what the task. No matter what the goal. Discipline is the will to continue regardless of the reasons to stop. Regardless of the competing activities. Regardless of who says we are insane. Discipline is the will to continue. There is no stopping the one who is disciplined. >>
Possibly. I’ve seen an awful lot of tightly-controlled persons stop dead at about forty of a heart attack, but you could counter by defining them as something other than disciplined. Self-destructive behaviour is often represented to me as ‘discipline’ but I expect that is not what you’re referring to. Or is it?
Discipline can also get one into a groove, and the only difference between a groove and a grave is the depth.
Also we’re using different definitions of ‘danger’…
<< Most who don’t do ‘mundane’ tasks well can’t concentrate anyway. >>
I note that whenever I concentrate, the world ceases to be mundane… but how can we measure concentration, and so tell who concentrates better than whom?
<< Thus some occultists might be labelled thrill-seekers or adrenalin junkies. >>
<< Is the person who goes to an amusement park a ‘mystic’? I think not. >>
I’m certain that some mystics go to amusement parks … but I was referring to that Zen moment of spontaneous concentration that comes with danger. Certainly many mystics have led lives filled with danger. (Of course, we probably have very different ideas of what constitutes danger…) Ignatius of Loyola comes to mind, and who was that Nazorean chap who liked to taunt the priests and then turn him invisible just as they were picking up rocks to throw at him…? Not to mention all those Zen samurai, whacking away with katanas…
<< Occultism may not offer any positive effects, but anyone can point to a good number of folks who have royally screwed up their mundane lives by dint of occultism. >>
My point here was that anything that is useful can be used for good or ill. As usual, my dilatory subtlety has pushed the patience of the long-suffering reader to the limit…
…I finally manage to make the point explicitly…
<< Occultism can definitely screw up your life — and Hermes Trismegistus might say that anything that can be used for evil can also be used for good. >>
<< Evil and good are the snakes which entwine themselves about the Sacred Caduceus.
Someone turned up your walkman too loud. >>
What saaaay? Speak *up*!