Who goes there?

[dwellersinthemirage]

Hi all!

robstanley1 wrote: As I also asked earlier; why?

I respond: In my initial post of this thread I stated: "After reading many posts on this erudite forum asking about the true nature of the celebrated NAP angels, I have been pondering what it is that we are actually dealing with here?"

Why does my enquiry seem to puzzle you so? Are you a thinker or a mere technician? Are you such a thrill-seeker that you prefer to hop in a magickal vehicle and mash the gas and burn rubber on a drunken joy-ride? Isn't it preferable to first draw back to gain perspective so as to acquaint yourself with the vehicle design and the rules of the road before you go lurching "half cocked" hurtling off hell-bent into the unknown?

.......

Pablo wrote: "And at this stage of the thread I remember Einstein quote "Make everything simple but not simpler" Why this desperate need to identify when things work within the given magical framework?"

I respond: Although "truth" itself is not invariably found in simplicity, do you understand my premise that MYRIAD seeming disparate spirits are only flimsy masques of the ONE Djinn, thereby checking the ever-expanding multiplicity and resulting confusion of things?

.......

7777774 wrote: For a big Crowley buff, you seem to have forgotten his entire thesis on the work with spirits.

I respond: Wrong again. I'm not an "Uncle Crowley" - groupie, albeit this Victorian-era sensationalist did at least introduce the newaeon ingress.

Regarding his iconoclastic spirit-hijinks, obviously, the deceptive Djinn with whom he palavered, wrecked his integrity until he eventually died a dissipated and broken man. [image] http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_eEdrWbeCQ64/S ... 0/1085.jpg

Also, Dweller, you're a bit of a long-winded one, eh? Short and sweet isn't that bad of a mantra sometimes.

I respond: Your apparent attention deficit disorder notwithstanding, a greater, prolonged effort is required to untangle a proverbial Gordian Knot than is needed to snarl it up in the first place, eh?

.......

I conclude my replies with this pertinent quote of Sir Thomas More from his: "Their Delight In Learning" section of "Utopia" - 1551AD:

"In their study of Nature's Secrets, they not only find wonderful pleasure for themselves, but they believe that they please the Author and Maker of Nature. For they think that in the manner of other Artificers, He has exposed this Machine of the Universe to man's view because man alone is able to contemplate it, and that therefore a careful observer and eager admirer of His Workmanship is dearer to Him than a dull and unmoved being who looks upon this Great Spectacle like an animal incapable of thought."

[raum215]

Crowley did not die a broken man.

[7777774]

Oh, I just may be ADD, but as jittery as I am, even I can tell you love the cadence of your own writing.

As far as Crowley goes, you should probably pull your head out of your own ass, go past Wikipedia, and do some actual research. Good ol' uncle Al died at peace, babbling his charming ostentatiousness on his death bed. Aspects such as his supposed inhibiting drug addiction were highly sensationalized upon his death.

All this talk makes you sound a wee bit of an armchair philosopher, methinks. You're so keen to diffuse information through your antiquated beliefs on the djinn, it's starting to get comical.

Your premise is faulty, and I for one refuse to start from it, or from any premise as a matter of fact. The fact is that this scientific method you're imposing upon your logic demands pragmatism.

As a magician, I leave belief at the door.

[robstanley1]

Said far better than I ever could

[dwellersinthemirage]

Oh, I just may be ADD, but as jittery as I am, even I can tell you love the cadence of your own writing.

As far as Crowley goes, you should probably pull your head out of your own ass, go past Wikipedia, and do some actual research. Good ol' uncle Al died at peace, babbling his charming ostentatiousness on his death bed. Aspects such as his supposed inhibiting drug addiction were highly sensationalized upon his death.

All this talk makes you sound a wee bit of an armchair philosopher, methinks. You're so keen to diffuse information through your antiquated beliefs on the djinn, it's starting to get comical.

Your premise is faulty, and I for one refuse to start from it, or from any premise as a matter of fact. The fact is that this scientific method you're imposing upon your logic demands pragmatism.

As a magician, I leave belief at the door.

I respond:

Negative Nancy, since you are unable to intelligently critique my Djinn=NAPS premise, you instead self-righteously attack my style??? It is clear to me that you are a typical narrow-minded bigot intent on mischief.

[Provenant]

I respond:

Negative Nancy, since you are unable to intelligently critique my Djinn=NAPS premise, you instead self-righteously attack my style??? It is clear to me that you are a typical narrow-minded bigot intent on mischief.

Wow D ... still at it?

Your "Djinn=NAPS premise" (sic) has been intelligently critiqued. You've even been asked for a more complete basis for that conclusion. Instead of intelligently replying, you threw a slew of word-salad quotes and linked to one of Coast to Coast AM George Noory's favorite bookseller shills. Then off you went on a non-sequitur Uncle Al tangent, quoting the most elementary of public slanders. Then when that was refuted, you hop back on your "All is Djinn" tack.

All the while playing a passive/agressive game of ad hominem sniping and wannabe-scholar posturing.

Yet still not a cogent thought of any substance to back up this assertion you keep pushing, that you obviously consider to be your one huge thought: that everything unseen is djinn.

The thing is, when a thread has gone on this long, and from the beginning every response to the OP has been met with junior-high style gamesmanship ... starts to smell a lot like a troll's in the house.

In any case if you want to actually have this conversation, ie you truly believe all unseen actors are djinn ... then converse. Put forward some rationale for your belief. It may get shot full of holes, but that's how peer review works. On the other hand, who knows? You may have some reasons that make us sit back and go "hmm."

So your djinn "idea" ... is this just some half-assed mental mirage, or do you have some train of thought that makes for an interesting theory, or are you just trollin'?

One of the three- you pick.

[7777774]

Nono, you have me all wrong, friend. I narrow-mindedly attacked your style AND your grade school logic.

As far as self-righteous goes, I'm a rogue. Sinful as they come. Unless, of course by "self-righteous bigot" you meant " I have no counterpoint so I must demonise this poster"?
If I'm coming off as an asshole, it's because I am.
I do, however, agree with provenant, though. You might not get out much, but most intellectual types like the magicians on this forum hate soap box preachers.

Never know, dweller, may do you some good to actually verbalize a legitimate argument for "the most pertinent topic in the occult world right now".

[FESU]

Dweller,

Why don't you start from the beginning and present in a clear way:
1. How do you define a Djinn?
2. How do you define a NAP entity?
3. What is the UNIQUE connection that you found between the two?

Because so far, if I'm not mistaken, you have connected Djinn and NAP entities in the premise that they both provide and fulfill wishes.
If I fulfill a wish of yours, does that make me a Djinn or NAP entity? I believe that you get my point.

[raum215]

The NAP spirits do not care what you think they are. They do not serve out of flattery.

I think the OP is trying to make a connection he can fathom and draw NAP into his own seriously elementary and hype-driven awareness of the "Djinn Phenomenon." Just like the Alien buffs who would try and approach Enochian as "alien technology."

It is because once you strip the real and original background out by removing all references to the religions of those who informed the models of these systems, you are left with a gaping void you can put any delusion... which if fine until you let it dominate your knowledge, interpretation, and use of the system. Then you just sound like a tool, and lose the ability to share ideas with peers.

As I said to a person who brought this up in a lecture on Enochian, "Do you really want the Spirits at the outer reaches of Da'ath to "take you to their leader?"

[robstanley1]

The NAP spirits do not care what you think they are. They do not serve out of flattery.

Thank you, Raum; this was all that needed saying (and more clearly than I managed, with my, 'why/what for?' Line of response to the OP!)

It really DOESN'T matter, one jot, what you feel about the NAP intelligences; assign whatever correspondences you wish to them (so long as doing so would not change their nature) - they will perform with, or without 'explanation' or 'identification'.


Dæmonicus