Talk:Thelema
(Difference between revisions)
Revision as of 04:14, 25 Feb 2005 Paradoxosalpha (Talk | contribs) different views |
Current revision Ash (Talk | contribs) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
- | == Disambiguation == | + | ''Clearing page. Last version, 12 Jun 2005, [http://www.thelemapedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Thelema&oldid=4302 archived here].'' |
- | + | ||
- | I think this should be split into several different articles to disambiguate usage. I'd suggest: | + | |
- | + | ||
- | *[[Thelema]] - overview article | + | |
- | *[[Thelema (formula)]] | + | |
- | *[[Thelema (system)]] (the practical system) | + | |
- | *[[Thelema & Religion|Thelema (religion)]] (the religious aspect) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I would add [[Thelema (history)]], but that should simply redirect to [[History]]. | + | |
- | + | ||
- | [[User:Adityanath|Adityanath]] | + | |
- | + | ||
- | :I don't think it needs to be a full disambiguation page...a section on "See Also" should suffice if someone wants to write more detailed articles. —[[User:Ash|Ash]] | + | |
- | + | ||
- | :: Done, wrt Religion. I'm unconvinced that Thelema has a ''single'' "practical system": the systems of A.'.A.'. and OTO differ in important respects, and other systems are possible (and extant) under the general aegis of Thelema. To the extent that an overview of Thelemic practices (systematized or not) is useful and possible, the "Practices" subsection of the current article goes a long way in that direction. --[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 16:36, 22 Feb 2005 (CST) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | == Other Personalities in Liber Legis, edits == | + | |
- | + | ||
- | I edited the '''Hrumachis''' summary, because it reflected an inaccurate reading of Liber AL. Hrumachis ''is'' RHK, who will "arise" (i.e. vacate the Throne of the Aeon) at the future Equinox of the Gods. "The double-wanded one" is Thmaist (Maat), who is '''not''' Hrumachis. But see how quickly this sort of thing gets pestilential? | + | |
- | + | ||
- | :Thanks for the technical corrections. [[User:Ash|Fr. Ash]] | + | |
- | + | ||
- | :I'm not sure this is correct. Doesn't Hru-machis mean "Horus of the Star" while RHK means "Horus of the Two Horizons"? I have always thought that they are two different forms of Horus. What you say about ''arise'' is ''attractive'', but not convincing unless there is something that shows that the Egyptians considered the two identical. Neither the old nor new comment mentions this identity... [[User:Aleph|Aleph]] | + | |
- | + | ||
- | ::"Two different forms of Horus" is fine. I wasn't trying to establish any more precise equivalence than that. In the Extenuation ("New Comment," so-called by Regardie), Crowley takes a somewhat different tack, vaguely identifiying Hrumachis with "any new course of events." Still it was expressly as "Harmachis" (among others) that Crowley invoked Horus--who then revealed himself as the Lord of the Aeon--in the Cairo working; see the Great Invocation, section Beta II Beth. | + | |
- | ::Also, I am in turn skeptical of your implied assertion that Egyptological data are final arbiters regarding the "personalities" (as the present article has it) who wear their names and attributes in Thelemic literature and doctrine.--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 21:46, 24 Feb 2005 (CST) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | Also, how did '''Chaos''' get into this list? Where does that name appear in Liber Legis? --[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 16:36, 22 Feb 2005 (CST) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | :RIght you are. However, the list was intended to reflect "dieties" that are promenant in Thelema, not just Liber AL. Perhaps the header should change to include all Thelemic holy books? [[User:Ash|Fr. Ash]] | + | |
- | ::I certainly prefer the present "personalities" to "deities," in terms of avoiding metaphysical recklessness. As it stands, every entry on the list can be found in Liber Legis ''except'' for Chaos. If you open it up to all the Holy Books, it's a real can of worms: Adonai from Liber LXV? Iacchus and Al A'ain the Priest from Liber VII? All 44 spirits from CCXXXII?--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 21:46, 24 Feb 2005 (CST) | + | |
- | + | ||
- | == Different Views of Thelema == | + | |
- | + | ||
- | It's silly to make a big deal out of the insistence of some professed Thelemites that Thelema is not a religion. This issue does not pertain specifically to Thelema, but rather to '''religion''' generally. It is very common (as Google will show) to find Christians who say that Christianity is not a religion ("It's a personal relationship with Jesus!"), Muslims who say that Islam is not a religion ("It's a way of life!"), Jews who say that Judaism is not religion ("It's a heritage!"), etc. etc. In virtually all cases, this rhetorical trope appears to be an attempt to priviledge the "non-religion" of the adherent above all of the other mere religions. As an aspiring source of "academic" information on Thelema, Thelemapedia shouldn't capitulate to such gambits. If we must take note of them, we should properly contextualize them as a feature of ''religious discourse'' that transcends creed and tradition. [http://www.islamfortoday.com/islamisareligion.htm Here] is a fairly articulate essay on this topic from the perpective of an American convert to Islam.--[[User:Paradoxosalpha|Paradoxosalpha]] 22:14, 24 Feb 2005 (CST) | + |
Current revision
Clearing page. Last version, 12 Jun 2005, archived here (http://www.thelemapedia.org/index.php?title=Talk:Thelema&oldid=4302).