On the nature of the Black Flame

Kapalika · Jul 29, 2015

Specifically what I'm wondering is in Setian philosophy, is the Black Flame;

1. The process itself towards self-realization

2. The self realization itself

or

3. An actual independent object/spiritual thing within itself, that is involved with/helps with self realization?

Or is it something else entirely?

Also for the Setian, is it possible for the self realized to be more universal than personal, such as it is in Eastern religions (think realizing your smallness and inter-connection with nature)? Or does Setian belief necessarily dictate that each person/soul is truly it's own thing, separate from the Universe at large that should be exalted? Something totally different? Similar?

S_J · Jul 29, 2015

Mandi said:
Specifically what I'm wondering is in Setian philosophy, is the Black Flame;

1. The process itself towards self-realization

2. The self realization itself

or

3. An actual independent object/spiritual thing within itself, that is involved with/helps with self realization?

Or is it something else entirely?

I'd say none of the three, but rather that thing inside you, burning "like a flame", that makes you seek for self realization, and that thing inside you that resonates with those things in your universe that might help that process.
In other words: More the force that enables and drives the process than the process or it's "result" (self realization) themselves.

The colour doesn't make much sense actually, I'd rather say it just refers to the fact that "Holy Flame", "White Flame" or "Heavenly Flame" just don't support an atmosphere of feeling "evil" which followers of Western LHP need to be comfortable. So you add some phrase that makes it sound dangerous, negative and/or forbidden. That "Black" might refer to the kind of environment in which people would like that process to happen. But more that ain't mean.

Concerning the second part, maybe someone else wants to start with that one.

Adramelek · Jul 29, 2015

Mandi said:
Specifically what I'm wondering is in Setian philosophy, is the Black Flame;

1. The process itself towards self-realization

2. The self realization itself

or

3. An actual independent object/spiritual thing within itself, that is involved with/helps with self realization?

Or is it something else entirely?

Also for the Setian, is it possible for the self realized to be more universal than personal, such as it is in Eastern religions (think realizing your smallness and inter-connection with nature)? Or does Setian belief necessarily dictate that each person/soul is truly it's own thing, separate from the Universe at large that should be exalted? Something totally different? Similar?

In my understanding, the Black Flame is the Essence of Set within us, it is that which initiates and inspires the Will to self-realize or to Come Into Being. It is the energizing force of the Will to Magick, Self-Consciousness, and higher intellect; it is the very essence of being within all self-aware entities. All understanding of science and mathematics, independent thought, abstract, and creative thought such as inventiveness, philosophy, metaphysics, religion; all music and works of art; all expressions of the creative mind and will are spawns or manifestations of the Black Flame. It is that which gives us a higher sense of Self just like other animals have a more heightened sense of sight, smell, and sound. This is the nature of the Black Flame which, having become infused within our very DNA, is actually the so called "Sixth Sense".

Daelach · Jul 31, 2015

Mandi said:
Also for the Setian, is it possible for the self realized to be more universal than personal, such as it is in Eastern religions (think realizing your smallness and inter-connection with nature)? Or does Setian belief necessarily dictate that each person/soul is truly it's own thing, separate from the Universe at large that should be exalted? Something totally different? Similar?

I can only speak for myself, other Setians may differ. But expecting an individualistic way to be the same for all would be a contradiction in terms.

That said, the whole Western notion of LHP being about one's individuality can be traced back to Blavatsky who basically misunderstood what the Eastern LHP has been about; in the Eastern original ways, RHP and LHP differ in the means, but not in the aims. They don't struggle with each other, they complement each other. That's one point why I just don't buy into the isolation stuff.

The second is that tracer ammo works both ways: If you truly cut all ties with the universe, the universe cuts all ties with you, which in turn disables every kind of interaction, especially magic.

The third is that we are constructing reality by means of our egos anyway, there is no "objective universe". Everything depends on the perspective, something that even physicists have discovered in the first half of the previous century. Seer and seen are one, not two. The division between them is illusionary in nature, in a certain way. That is not embracing solipsism; in terms of epistemology, it boils down to constructivism, which is something quite different. The illusionary part of the deal is what's being called "Maya" in the Eastern ways.

Adramelek · Jul 31, 2015

Mandi said:
Or does Setian belief necessarily dictate that each person/soul is truly it's own thing, separate from the Universe at large that should be exalted? Something totally different? Similar?

The Setian Consciousness or psyche/soul, in my understanding, is indeed it's own thing, something different, separate, and distinct from the Cosmic Inertia. Ever moving and evolving in accordance with its own Will. This is also the very essence and nature of all Magick. The objective and subjective universes both exist. The individual subjective/metaphysical universe is how we as separate and distinct Black Flame enshrined entities perceive the objective/physical universe.

Kapalika · Aug 1, 2015

Daelach said:
I can only speak for myself, other Setians may differ. But expecting an individualistic way to be the same for all would be a contradiction in terms.

That said, the whole Western notion of LHP being about one's individuality can be traced back to Blavatsky who basically misunderstood what the Eastern LHP has been about; in the Eastern original ways, RHP and LHP differ in the means, but not in the aims. They don't struggle with each other, they complement each other. That's one point why I just don't buy into the isolation stuff.

The second is that tracer ammo works both ways: If you truly cut all ties with the universe, the universe cuts all ties with you, which in turn disables every kind of interaction, especially magic.

The third is that we are constructing reality by means of our egos anyway, there is no "objective universe". Everything depends on the perspective, something that even physicists have discovered in the first half of the previous century. Seer and seen are one, not two. The division between them is illusionary in nature, in a certain way. That is not embracing solipsism; in terms of epistemology, it boils down to constructivism, which is something quite different. The illusionary part of the deal is what's being called "Maya" in the Eastern ways.

That's a relatively thorough understanding of both the Western and Eastern LHP that I hadn't expected to find in here. I hadn't ever thought of the way you explained it as the act of isolation cutting off any act of magic... I suppose that would explain why those who go too far into the delusions of their egos just become crazy and not able to exert their will in any meaningful way. Actually... this is making me consider/realize an aspect of something else I've wondered about for a long time.. thank you again for the insight.

Adramelek · Aug 1, 2015

Daelach said:
That said, the whole Western notion of LHP being about one's individuality can be traced back to Blavatsky who basically misunderstood what the Eastern LHP has been about; in the Eastern original ways, RHP and LHP differ in the means, but not in the aims. They don't struggle with each other, they complement each other. That's one point why I just don't buy into the isolation stuff.

The second is that tracer ammo works both ways: If you truly cut all ties with the universe, the universe cuts all ties with you, which in turn disables every kind of interaction, especially magic.

Just my perspective as a Setian:

Set's name ultimately means "Separator" or "Isolator", "To Set Apart". The LHP is a "psyche-worshipping" religion, not a "nature-worshipping" one. The Left-Hand Path is a philosophy and religion which embraces and seeks to cultivate and nurture the independent, isolate psyche as something unique and distinct from the Order of the Cosmos (i.e. "God"). Black Magick at its basics is the Willful disruption of the cosmic inertia. Sure as human beings we are all linked to the natural order, we are creatures of nature, however, it is the very essence of Set, the Black Flame within us which sets us apart and distinguishes us as separate and independent beings; something more, something different, able to think and move in accordance with our own mind and Will and not only by natural instinct. Just as the LHP celebrates the myth of Adam and Eve, their rise through spiritual descent by eating the "forbidden" fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; they became separated from God, they acquired understanding, and became Aware of themselves - "they saw that they were naked".

Liu · Aug 9, 2015

Some things mentioned in this thread made me aware of the main thing I don't understand about Setianism.
I'm not a Setian, so I'll only ask questions; I hope me writing the following is okay here.

What I don't understand about Setianism is the way you make a distinction between psyche and nature. I would make sense to me if you'd say, consciousness is completely separate from nature. But the will and the mind? The will and mind are, as far as I know, pretty much dependent upon the biological circumstances, i.e. nature. You even said that us having this black flame is due to something in our DNA - how could it then be completely separate from the physical universe?

Or do you mean to say this black flame of our will is only that part of the will which is assumed to be acting independent of external influences, directly driven by the consciousness?

Adramelek · Aug 9, 2015

Liu said:
Some things mentioned in this thread made me aware of the main thing I don't understand about Setianism.
I'm not a Setian, so I'll only ask questions; I hope me writing the following is okay here.

What I don't understand about Setianism is the way you make a distinction between psyche and nature. I would make sense to me if you'd say, consciousness is completely separate from nature. But the will and the mind? The will and mind are, as far as I know, pretty much dependent upon the biological circumstances, i.e. nature. You even said that us having this black flame is due to something in our DNA - how could it then be completely separate from the physical universe?

Or do you mean to say this black flame of our will is only that part of the will which is assumed to be acting independent of external influences, directly driven by the consciousness?

Greetings Liu,

The mind and will are absolutely not dependent on just natural instinct alone, thanks to the gift of psyche centric Awareness, whose essence, the "Black Flame" was artificially infused within our DNA in aeons past so it could be passed on from generation to generation. Perhaps the greatest manifestation of Black Magick in the Universe to date. (Of course in cases of traumatic brain injury, the psyche can become fragmented.)

Setian philosophy is also a religion, a metaphysical philosophy, therefore, science (though useful) alone cannot give you a complete, well rounded understanding of its tenets or principles.

You touched upon something interesting in your last question. Yes, the Will to Magick and all that is created by it are direct manifestations of that Black Flame. However, I will leave the exploration of the mechanics and machinations of Magick up to your own interests.

Liu · Aug 10, 2015

Greetings and thank you for your reply.

Even though Setianism is a religion I still would like to understand the logic behind this worldview.
Will, no matter whether one says it's determined by biological/physical circumstances or independent of it, is based on reason and emotions. If it weren't, what would we base our decisions on instead? And reason and emotions can be seen to be dependent on the biological/physical circumstances: They reflect the reality we perceive and can even be changed by brain damage and the like.
That's why I think that the will is dependent on biological/physical circumstances. It of course is not only based on instinct, but the reason and emotions it's based on are something natural as well. Or why would you say they aren't? Because they were given to us by Set?
(I hope that didn't come over as preaching or arguing, but these arguments are necessary to clarify my question.)

Adramelek · Aug 10, 2015

Liu said:
Greetings and thank you for your reply.

Even though Setianism is a religion I still would like to understand the logic behind this worldview.
Will, no matter whether one says it's determined by biological/physical circumstances or independent of it, is based on reason and emotions. If it weren't, what would we base our decisions on instead? And reason and emotions can be seen to be dependent on the biological/physical circumstances: They reflect the reality we perceive and can even be changed by brain damage and the like.
That's why I think that the will is dependent on biological/physical circumstances. It of course is not only based on instinct, but the reason and emotions it's based on are something natural as well.

Indeed, the will is based upon reason and emotion, what some might call Shu and Tefnut. However, you seem to be missing some of my point. Yes we are creatures of nature but at the same time are much more than just the sum of our biological parts. We are both physical and metaphysical, kindred of the Two Lands. I think you and I are only differing in that you seek to focus on the natural, whereas, as a Setian I seek to also focus on exalting and nurturing That which enlightens the intellect and ignites the unique state of psyche-centric awareness.

Adramelek · Aug 11, 2015

Liu said:
Even though Setianism is a religion I still would like to understand the logic behind this worldview.

If one were to employ the Hegelian method; nature makes us what we are biologically, the Black Flame makes us who we are spiritually. Both do interact and mingle with one another which makes us that which we are as individual human beings.

Liu · Aug 11, 2015

Sorry but I have studied neither Egyptian mythology (nor its Crowleyan (?) interpretation) nor Hegel, and so your words rather confuse me.
But let me summarize what I assume you may mean: There is one part of existence which is the black flame, consisting of/giving rise to consciousness, and there is another part which is nature. And due to the structure of our DNA our brains get intelligent enough to somehow get in touch with the transcendental part of existence, which is why we have mind and will. As in, nature is the technical way in which we recognize certain wavelengths as being a certain color, whereas consciousness is why this color looks to us the way it does. Nature is the logical reasons why the neurons in our brains come to any conclusion, consciousness is to experience the resulting feeling of will.
Am I completely off?

Adramelek said:
I think you and I are only differing in that you seek to focus on the natural, whereas, as a Setian I seek to also focus on exalting and nurturing That which enlightens the intellect and ignites the unique state of psyche-centric awareness.

I wouldn't necessarily say so. I think the difference is that I consider everything one is aware of to be nature, and so also things you may call products of the black flame are a part of nature. There is no way to know (or rather, experience) something without having consciousness, so everything we could ever know we only know because we are aware of it. We cannot know any nature that is not filtered through our minds. Is that what you call nature the objective reality we can only assume exists?

Adramelek · Aug 12, 2015

Liu said:
Sorry but I have studied neither Egyptian mythology (nor its Crowleyan (?) interpretation) nor Hegel, and so your words rather confuse me.
But let me summarize what I assume you may mean: There is one part of existence which is the black flame, consisting of/giving rise to consciousness, and there is another part which is nature. And due to the structure of our DNA our brains get intelligent enough to somehow get in touch with the transcendental part of existence, which is why we have mind and will. As in, nature is the technical way in which we recognize certain wavelengths as being a certain color, whereas consciousness is why this color looks to us the way it does. Nature is the logical reasons why the neurons in our brains come to any conclusion, consciousness is to experience the resulting feeling of will.
Am I completely off?

I wouldn't necessarily say so. I think the difference is that I consider everything one is aware of to be nature, and so also things you may call products of the black flame are a part of nature. There is no way to know (or rather, experience) something without having consciousness, so everything we could ever know we only know because we are aware of it. We cannot know any nature that is not filtered through our minds. Is that what you call nature the objective reality we can only assume exists?

I don't think your completely off at all, though I tend to think logic is not natural but a product of the enlightened intellect. You seem to have a pretty good grasp of the difference between the objective and subjective universes, the later which is how we perceive the former. Our world views may differ slightly, yours is more widely accepted than mine it seems which is fine with me, after all we are not here to try to convince or convert.

Liu · Aug 13, 2015

Thank you, I think I kinda get the hang out of it now. Logic being not natural? If you assume this then your point of view makes sense, it seems to me. It'll take me a bit to wrap my mind around the implications of such an assumption, though.

And, do you mean to say that logic per se is not inherent in nature, or just that our concept/understanding of it is not?

By logic I'd understand such basic axioms as x = x and its derivation x ≠ ¬x. Nature does seem to follow those axioms pretty well - I have never seen a chair that simultaneously isn't a chair (using the same definition for "chair" and for "is" and for "see" etc.). I have heard people claiming that there are quantum phenomena which break this axiom but I'm not an expert on that, so I'll say that at least for quite a major part of what we can perceive of the natural universe, logic does apply. Maybe it only seems to us that way due to how our minds work, but, well, it's next to impossible to imagine a world where such logic doesn't apply.

But if it is inherent in nature and just our abstract understanding of it is not, then again the way our minds work is at least partly dependent on nature.

Adramelek · Aug 13, 2015

Liu said:
By logic I'd understand such basic axioms as x = x and its derivation x ≠ ¬x. Nature does seem to follow those axioms pretty well - I have never seen a chair that simultaneously isn't a chair (using the same definition for "chair" and for "is" and for "see" etc.). I have heard people claiming that there are quantum phenomena which break this axiom but I'm not an expert on that, so I'll say that at least for quite a major part of what we can perceive of the natural universe, logic does apply. Maybe it only seems to us that way due to how our minds work, but, well, it's next to impossible to imagine a world where such logic doesn't apply.

Lol! I am talking about the ability to think logically which is a product of the higher intellect, not of nature. It is through the higher intellect, itself a spawn of the Black Flame, that we are able to perceive and understand mathematics and conceive of abstract ideas such as quantum physics, etc., indeed your and my ability to engage in this dialogue.

Liu · Aug 13, 2015

I know I went a bit off the deep end with my last comment xD
So you do mean the concept, not the fact of logic. But as I mentioned, then logic and reason is inherent in nature and derived from it. You can still believe they aren't - as you said, we are not trying to convert anyone here. But I wouldn't then say that what the black flame brings is logical thinking, but only thinking per se. What makes thinking logically then is its application to reality.

Adramelek · Aug 13, 2015

Liu said:
I know I went a bit off the deep end with my last comment xD
So you do mean the concept, not the fact of logic. But as I mentioned, then logic and reason is inherent in nature and derived from it. You can still believe they aren't - as you said, we are not trying to convert anyone here. But I wouldn't then say that what the black flame brings is logical thinking, but only thinking per se. What makes thinking logically then is its application to reality.

I disagree on the one point. All animals can think, but to me it is via the Essence of Set or Black Flame that we humans are able to think logically and are aware that we are thinking logically.

Liu · Aug 13, 2015

I tend to believe that at least some other animals can think logically as well, and do have awareness as well.
In many cases they do just follow instinct, but I don't think everything can be explained as that.
I have read some texts by Aquino where he says that even if some apes can learn sign language and teach it to their children it's no proof for them having awareness, and this didn't convince me either.
It's mostly a matter of believe for me, though, I'm not a biologist.

So, I guess we don't differ much in what we consider the black flame to be, but rather in the rest of our cosmology.

Adramelek · Aug 13, 2015

Liu said:
I tend to believe that at least some other animals can think logically as well, and do have awareness as well.
In many cases they do just follow instinct, but I don't think everything can be explained as that.
I have read some texts by Aquino where he says that even if some apes can learn sign language and teach it to their children it's no proof for them having awareness, and this didn't convince me either.
It's mostly a matter of believe for me, though, I'm not a biologist.

So, I guess we don't differ much in what we consider the black flame to be, but rather in the rest of our cosmology.

I actually think that other animals do possess that unique essence, it would be rather arrogant of us humans to think that we are the only ones blessed with the Dark Gift.

The problem may be in their present ability to really communicate it and actualize it. Perhaps Evolution may eventually provide the means.

On the nature of the Black Flame

Well-Known Member

Member

Setian

Setian

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian

Well-Known Member

Setian