PDA

View Full Version : Those the Gods wish to destroy......



Axismundi000
06-25-2017, 12:09 PM
The adage: those that the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad. Looking at Wikipedia this saying has a provenance going back to Sophocles. Looking at the behaviour of various political and religious extremists on YouTube a lot of mad behaviour is shown and also a lot of fanatical beliefs. Fanaticism is in my opinion a form of mania. You get Facists marching around and fighting, the opposing neo-Marxist 'Libtards' doing pretty much the same.

I wonder if the reason they are all going mad is the lack of belief and respect for a pantheon of Deities and that this lack of paganism is the reason they go so crazy and violent. As a Pantheist (the view that there is an overall Spiritual principal with various Deities expressing aspects of this in a more accesable way), I find monotheism and the brutal conflicts over heresies another madness which has gripped Europe many times over centuries. So again a lack of the Gods just one supreme God leading to mass violent insanity. Looking at the saying and how it has evolved the earlier versions seem to suggest that a person needs 'the Gods' to stay balanced personally and in their life. So monotheism and atheism if this is true lead inevitably towards mania and ruination. In as far as most historical literature on Alchemy tends to have a monotheistic spiritual view when one is present: Does it follow that Alchemists were generally mad?

Awani
06-25-2017, 01:06 PM
Somewhat related. Many people have tried, but it is impossible to post this link on Facebook: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_hysteria

http://i60.photobucket.com/albums/h18/deviadah/forum/f428b2ff-cb2a-4b81-acc0-db8ab05e0ffe_zpsu8q9exii.jpg

As for your comment on God/Gods. Since I think we and God/Gods are one and the same, a lack of respect and a lack of the sacred in life is - in the end - a lack of respect for the self.

I still think we are dealing with monotheism. Hinduism is monotheism even though they have many different gods, but these are just different "avatars (http://forum.alchemyforums.com/showthread.php?5237-Avatars)" of the same god. Pantheism (as I am a "follower" of as well) is in a sense monotheism, without elitism or hierarchy. The problem is WORDS... and that is why the story of the Tower of Babel is so important. When we talk in a visual language (telepathy, psychedelics, meditation, music etc.) then there are way less conflict.

I used to be an atheist, boy was I stupid. LOL.

:p

Axismundi000
06-25-2017, 10:44 PM
Does this mean then that because most European Alchemists were either Christian or monotheist that the Gods were driving them mad. Perhaps only the pagan ones were OK?

Kiorionis
06-25-2017, 11:49 PM
Depends on whether you dwell in Unity or Duality, I think. Unity, the monotheism and unmanifest potential, necessarily includes every variable, every option, always available. Duality likes to pick and choose and limit things.

If that's correct, then I would think duality is "sane" while unity is "stark-raving mad"

:)

Axismundi000
06-26-2017, 04:56 PM
I think that existence contains numerous dualities so aspiring to a pure absolute monotheism or a pure absolute atheism in a life filled with polarity and duality may well be the problem. The aphorism: Those the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad is I think true. The spiritual reductionism of effectively ignoring duality in favour of a singular solution leads to ever increasing brutal mania and insanity amongst extreme left wing types (usually atheist) and extreme right wing types (usually monotheist). So if many historical Alchemists were also monotheist were they perhaps not entirely sane?

This is very broad I know. Essentially if a singular perspective is unhealthy and many Alchemists had a singular view were they adopting a flawed approach?

Schmuldvich
06-26-2017, 06:42 PM
I think that existence contains numerous dualities

What is the difference between 'multiple possibilities' and 'multiple dualities"?

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 12:37 AM
The nature of reality is a very broad question. My enquiry is: does belief purely in a singular absolute imply the Gods have decided to drive you mad then destroy you. Did this happen to some Alchemists?

Schmuldvich
06-27-2017, 12:52 AM
You specifically used the phrase 'multiple dualities' though... Does this, in your opinion, different at all from 'multiple realities'?

I don't give the slightest care about what any "gods" have 'decided' :rolleyes:

Awani
06-27-2017, 04:57 AM
...does belief purely in a singular absolute imply the Gods have decided to drive you mad then destroy you. Did this happen to some Alchemists?

I would say no. Most past, present and future alchemist go mad because of mercury and other substances... or the greed for gold.

:p

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 11:25 AM
You specifically used the phrase 'multiple dualities' though... Does this, in your opinion, different at all from 'multiple realities'?

I don't give the slightest care about what any "gods" have 'decided' :rolleyes:

It seems you are not interested at in the question but prefer to start one of your own may I suggest initiating a fresh thread were I would participate.

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 11:27 AM
I would say no. Most past, present and future alchemist go mad because of mercury and other substances... or the greed for gold.

:p


Could it be argued that the greed for gold is the beginnings of a certain kind of madness. One which grips the whole world in suffering and environmental destruction currently ( Rampant capitalism).

Schmuldvich
06-27-2017, 01:41 PM
You specifically used the phrase 'multiple dualities' though... Does this, in your opinion, different at all from 'multiple realities'?

I don't give the slightest care about what any "gods" have 'decided' :rolleyes:


It seems you are not interested at in the question but prefer to start one of your own may I suggest initiating a fresh thread were I would participate.

You guys are so funny/childish here about starting new threads. It cracks me up! :p

I moderate a message board with more members (also more active members) than Alchemy Forums and we never have any issues like you guys seem to think you have.

It took you more effort, time, and energy to reply with your 'start a new thread' response than it did to answer my question outright :p

If you go back and re-read my initial reply to your thread, you will see that I did answer the question you presented in the OP.


"I don't give the slightest care about what any "gods" have 'decided'"

I'll throw you a bone and give you a more detailed response since that is obviously what you are looking for and apparently needing in your life right now...

The gods do not wish to destroy anything. The phrase is bullshit and based on nothing provable or reliable in this world. Fanaticism, like those wishing to start so many new threads so often, comes in many shapes and sizes as you already know. Remember, before all these new 'Christian Alchemists' were doing their thing in the 1500's and after, countless other Arab Alchemists and other religious belief Alchemists were doing their thing looong before and doing just fine. They didn't give a shit about what the 'gods' had "decided" and they didn't need to because it is unaffectedly irrelevant, just the same as it is today.

Can you post any references to Alchemists going mad prior to the 1400's?

No one "needs 'the Gods' to stay balanced personally and in their life" which exactly explains why these Alchemists your present in your original post "went mad". They concerned themselves with something completely irrelevant and unimportant.

So, I still ask... What to you, Axis, is the difference between 'numerous dualities' and 'numerous realities' with regard to the gods wishing to destroy?

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 06:33 PM
Shmuldvich you criticism and bluntness, hostility even along with the attempt to shift topic are interesting and feed into the basic idea here. Earlier versions of the saying seem to be about the human need to have Gods and how things can go awry if the Gods are ignored. The more contemporary versions are suggesting that the Gods will first cause insanity in a person whom they wish to destroy.

Your response Shmuldvich is to say you don't care about the Gods and then seek to change the discussion to a what is the nature of reality type debate. This could be regarded as aggressive then changing the subject to avoid, or maybe just coincidence. Keeping in the Spirit of the initial idea I mischievously ask: is this the beginning phase of the Gods starting to drive you mad?

JDP
06-27-2017, 07:00 PM
Shmuldvich you criticism and bluntness, hostility even along with the attempt to shift topic are interesting and feed into the basic idea here. Earlier versions of the saying seem to be about the human need to have Gods and how things can go awry if the Gods are ignored. The more contemporary versions are suggesting that the Gods will first cause insanity in a person whom they wish to destroy.

Your response Shmuldvich is to say you don't care about the Gods and then seek to change the discussion to a what is the nature of reality type debate. This could be regarded as aggressive then changing the subject to avoid, or maybe just coincidence. Keeping in the Spirit of the initial idea I mischievously ask: is this the beginning phase of the Gods starting to drive you mad?

All these questions and ruminations are useless simply because no one has any proof whatsoever that any "Gods" really exist (or do not exist, for that matter; it goes both ways.) Therefore it is hardly surprising if people with more pragmatic mindsets simply do not want to waste time delving into such things that will very likely never be answered and move on to things that can actually potentially be proven to be real or false.

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 08:10 PM
Perhaps you are right JDP. Seeing as I was asked what I think earlier I would say that the Gods do drive people mad as part of the process of destroying them. Furthermore any hubris - specifically dis-belief in the Gods is to potentially invite such attention and bring about insanity and ultimately nemesis.

This is merely my personal opinion which I cannot empirically prove.

Schmuldvich
06-27-2017, 08:45 PM
Your response Shmuldvich is to say you don't care about the Gods and then seek to change the discussion to a what is the nature of reality type debate.

...Except that is/was not at all my motive or intent. You raised an interesting point with your wording and I was wondering if you chose those words deliberately. Ya know, continuing discussion of this thought-provoking topic you started. I am not sure if English is your native language and that was just the word(s) you happened to use, or if that particular choice of words ('numerous dualities') was chosen deliberately. Not everything is some big conspiracy to change topic...far from it. I was simply partaking in the discussion you poised, just like JDP's *oh god* off-topic yet relevant reply above.


I am not sure if you glazed over it or didn't see it, but I asked you two questions above. The first question I asked was:


What is the difference between 'numerous dualities' and 'numerous realities' with regard to the gods wishing to destroy?


The second question I asked was:


Can you post any references to Alchemists going mad prior to the 1400's?

Axismundi000
06-27-2017, 09:19 PM
The answers to the two questions you pose.

1. No real idea what you are asking

2. Don't know if any pre 1400AD Alchemists went mad or not.

Your first question goes beyond the basic moral and political philosophy I studied at University decades ago in my first undergraduate year. Also the intricacies to which Kabbalah can lend itself in such a discussion well.... I kind of lost interest in that some time ago excepting as a method of Gnana yoga switching off the mind type thing.

To properly research your second question I don't think on-line searches Wikipedia etc would cut it. Classical Latin and Greek would be needed plus a readers card for e.g the British library would probably be needed. My wife can read Greek and Hebrew but I am not going to bother her with what should be a light hearted on-line debate.

Personally I genuinely respect the Gods and looking at the Catholic vs Protestant atrocities over the centuries (monotheism), the crusades (monotheism), and the bitter conflicts between extreme right and left (monotheism vs atheism). Personally I think a little pantheism or even just basic paganism might be beneficial.

Just looking through YouTube at the motley crew of diverse nutters I do think the Gods drive mad those they wish to destroy.

I don't know if monotheist Alchemists went mad in days gone by but I do wonder if they could have.

Kiorionis
06-27-2017, 09:54 PM
I think that existence contains numerous dualities so aspiring to a pure absolute monotheism or a pure absolute atheism in a life filled with polarity and duality may well be the problem. The aphorism: Those the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad is I think true.

I'd agree with that. But through my own person bout with insanity, I would rephrase the argument as:

Those the Gods wish to raise, are first destroyed.

Consider the mythology of Herclues and every other Hero character who first made a decent into Hell. They're strengthened there.


So if many historical Alchemists were also monotheist were they perhaps not entirely sane?

This is very broad I know. Essentially if a singular perspective is unhealthy and many Alchemists had a singular view were they adopting a flawed approach?

In the beginning God created heaven and hell.

Axismundi000
06-28-2017, 10:40 AM
I know, that I hung on the windy tree all the nights of nine,
Wounded by spear and given to Odhinn; myself to myself,
on that tree, which no man knows, from what roots it rises.
They dealt me no bread nor drinking horn, I looked down,
I took up the runes I took them screaming,
I fell back from there.

I would suggest there is a difference between spiritual initiation/crisis and the Gods driving you mad as part of the process of destroying you. To the outsider they may initially appear identical but as the situation unfolds a difference becomes gradually discernible.

Awani
06-28-2017, 12:20 PM
In as far as most historical literature on Alchemy tends to have a monotheistic spiritual view when one is present: Does it follow that Alchemists were generally mad?

I think this goes back to my own view that alchemy is an offspring of shamanism, lacking in one important aspect which is the pantheistic understanding of the cosmos. I think the lack of this in alchemy is perhaps because alchemy sprung up in a society dominated by monotheism.

Although it could be argued that alchemy is not that monotheistic really, considering the chaotic multitude and diversity of phrases, words, planets, minerals, metals and pantheon of characters they all refer to that reach mythological status over time (Hermes, Paracelsus, Bacon etc.).

When an alchemist write God in singular it is - to me - just "his" way of writing Gaia. You don't write Gaia in plural. So there is a monotheism in the beginning and in the end... but not in the middle. Like I said before, in Hindusim the diversity of Gods are simply different manifestations of the same One.

I am not certin I yet understand why you ask about alchemists being mad?

“In an insane world a sane man must appear insane.” - C. William King

:p

Axismundi000
06-28-2017, 09:40 PM
If the Gods punish hubris in the (classical sense) with madness and finally nemesis and most medieval Alchemists were monotheist. Did they receive madness and death rather than the stone I wonder. This is just a rhetorical question, as a magician i have experienced things that some would consider supernatural and frightening, it is important to check carefully. Now I am doing more Alchemy rather than Spagyrics the same care and attention is applied as I give to the art of evocation.

Awani
06-28-2017, 09:52 PM
Madness is contentment for the profane, empty and plastic. Madness is apathy for suffering. Madness is greed over love. Madness is fear.

This is madness to me... and it seems most people are somewhat mad. Society is extremly mad.

An alchemist lost in the chase for the Stone to make gold is, IMO, utterly mad.

But to all these mad people I would be considered mad for my own outlook on what is mad.

------------------------------------------------------------------

If you are asking because you are feeling "mad" or that you are "dying", then I think it would be healthy to stop whatever you are doing and look at it unbiased, if possible, because what is mad to some, is sane to others. If that is not what you are asking then your guess is as good as mine. :)

:p

Axismundi000
06-28-2017, 10:44 PM
I'm not mad or dying, aphorisms can be a heritage of wisdom. I'm not shitposting here.

I have seen several examples of the Gods slowly destroying a person in the magic and sorcery fields due to hubris. I'm wondering if this happens in Alchemy or do they just poison themselves instead

Ghislain
06-29-2017, 01:44 PM
Does one look at madness from a subjective view, internally towards oneself or in an objective way comparing oneself to others and what may be considered the norm?

What is my humanity compared to the humanity of the whole world population?

Brownian motion (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownian_motion) comes to mind here. Look at a snow globe and try to watch one particular piece of artificial snow as it travels around the globe...

This is what it is like trying to personalise one's own sanity, it matters little as it is soaked up in the whole.

Ghislain

Amon
06-29-2017, 08:47 PM
Reality as it is, is too complex for us to grasp and understand it. So we do tend to simply a lot of things simplify because we have to. Now if you go about living in this world as an atheist, i believe its fair to compare that as simply floating in the ocean. You have no idea which way is the correct way or if there even is such a thing, you have no clue whats below you, whats lurking etc. in short, you are a lose screw in what appears to be an infinite cruel universe of randomness, with no Central Authority so to speak. Thus you will fall prey to ideologies that ultimately lead to the "destruction" of your psyche from my point of view, should you look at them logically. Natural selection is one of them. Morality doesn't exist other than as a deal between people of a certain society. There is no reason not to give into your passions or your animal instincts. We all walk in this life with certain beliefs, all of which arise from certain axioms we chose to live by. However, living by the axiom that leads to a "satanic" view of the world, a cruel, materialistic, survival of the fittest game thats simply a random effect of a meaningless universe, and you are nothing but a tiny spec of dust within an indifferent cosmos, and your actions and life itself are also meaningless is so cruel that its impossible for our being to bare. Thus we are lead to madness eventually, and i believe that to be the reason we don't act on logic 24/7.

Schmuldvich
06-29-2017, 11:42 PM
Reality as it is, is too complex for us to grasp and understand it. So we do tend to simply a lot of things simplify because we have to. Now if you go about living in this world as an atheist, i believe its fair to compare that as simply floating in the ocean. You have no idea which way is the correct way or if there even is such a thing, you have no clue whats below you, whats lurking etc. in short, you are a lose screw in what appears to be an infinite cruel universe of randomness, with no Central Authority so to speak. Thus you will fall prey to ideologies that ultimately lead to the "destruction" of your psyche from my point of view, should you look at them logically. Natural selection is one of them. Morality doesn't exist other than as a deal between people of a certain society. There is no reason not to give into your passions or your animal instincts. We all walk in this life with certain beliefs, all of which arise from certain axioms we chose to live by. However, living by the axiom that leads to a "satanic" view of the world, a cruel, materialistic, survival of the fittest game thats simply a random effect of a meaningless universe, and you are nothing but a tiny spec of dust within an indifferent cosmos, and your actions and life itself are also meaningless is so cruel that its impossible for our being to bare. Thus we are lead to madness eventually, and i believe that to be the reason we don't act on logic 24/7.

While I do not necessarily agree 100% with this, this is a nicely written musing that makes a lot of sense to me. Thanks for sharing, Amon!

Axismundi000
06-30-2017, 08:23 AM
Reality as it is, is too complex for us to grasp and understand it. So we do tend to simply a lot of things simplify because we have to. Now if you go about living in this world as an atheist, i believe its fair to compare that as simply floating in the ocean. You have no idea which way is the correct way or if there even is such a thing, you have no clue whats below you, whats lurking etc. in short, you are a lose screw in what appears to be an infinite cruel universe of randomness, with no Central Authority so to speak. Thus you will fall prey to ideologies that ultimately lead to the "destruction" of your psyche from my point of view, should you look at them logically. Natural selection is one of them. Morality doesn't exist other than as a deal between people of a certain society. There is no reason not to give into your passions or your animal instincts. We all walk in this life with certain beliefs, all of which arise from certain axioms we chose to live by. However, living by the axiom that leads to a "satanic" view of the world, a cruel, materialistic, survival of the fittest game thats simply a random effect of a meaningless universe, and you are nothing but a tiny spec of dust within an indifferent cosmos, and your actions and life itself are also meaningless is so cruel that its impossible for our being to bare. Thus we are lead to madness eventually, and i believe that to be the reason we don't act on logic 24/7.

Post modernism fits fairly well into the above so this provides a good criticism of the type of extreme behaviour lampooned by the online meme of KEK:

https://youtu.be/cruRyoo2xiE

This I feel is just part of one duality and there are many such dualities. In this instance the Christian fundamentalist right wing, a large component of what has become the Alt-Right. Anti-abortion, go to hell if the nicene creed is not accepted, homosexuals will go to hell and various other reprehensible values etc etc. In my view also daft and gradually being sent mad by the Gods.

And yet the KEK meme relates to a frog Diety from ancient Egypt which has analogies I think with the Greek god of witches Hecate. Perhaps an aspect of the alt-right thinking they are doing an online campaign are actualy being given the chance to return to having contact with the Gods.

Awani
06-30-2017, 08:53 AM
Yes I too think Pepe could be an avatar of an ancient God of Egypt. We must remember that SJW sprung up because of conservative ideas that has now been understood to be irrelevant. But as SJW grew in power it is only natural that it will create Alt-Right to make sure it does not go too far (this wave-like nature of conscious evolution has been going on for a long time). The cosmos likes balance, and when something is in perfect harmony, the perfect musical note will be heard.

That is why SJW and Alt-Right should join hands and look up at the stars.

I love Trump btw, because I prefer an obvious moron to a well-spoken murdering scumbag like Obama. It does not matter who is President. They all suck, but at least now we have somone most people can agree is a moron. Humanity thrives from danger (always have), and humantiy missed the Bush years.

Atheism, veganism and such things are similar to fundamentalism. And religions with ONE god tend to be more fundamentalistic. What works in Nature is diversity. The game is survival of the most fit to co-operate. That's the way towards sanity IMO. It is also the way indigenous cultures have lived for thousands of years (diversity/co-operation/pantheon of gods - all part of the One).

We got to go tribal in any way, shape or form.

:p

Schmuldvich
06-30-2017, 09:16 PM
I think that existence contains numerous dualities.


What is the difference between 'multiple possibilities' and 'multiple dualities"?


It seems you are not interested at in the question but prefer to start one of your own may I suggest initiating a fresh thread were I would participate.


You guys are so funny/childish here about starting new threads. It cracks me up! :p

It took you more effort, time, and energy to reply with your 'start a new thread' response than it did to answer my question outright :p



What is the difference between 'numerous dualities' and 'numerous realities' with regard to the gods wishing to destroy?


...No real idea what you are asking.


This I feel is just part of one duality and there are many such dualities.

Axis, for "not understanding" and being as intelligent as you are, you sure do use the word 'dualities' a lot...


What, in your opinion, is the difference between 'many such dualities' and 'many such realities'?

Schmuldvich
06-30-2017, 09:59 PM
Reality as it is, is too complex for us to grasp and understand it. So we do tend to simply a lot of things simplify because we have to. Now if you go about living in this world as an atheist, i believe its fair to compare that as simply floating in the ocean. You have no idea which way is the correct way or if there even is such a thing, you have no clue whats below you, whats lurking etc. in short, you are a lose screw in what appears to be an infinite cruel universe of randomness, with no Central Authority so to speak. Thus you will fall prey to ideologies that ultimately lead to the "destruction" of your psyche from my point of view, should you look at them logically. Natural selection is one of them. Morality doesn't exist other than as a deal between people of a certain society. There is no reason not to give into your passions or your animal instincts. We all walk in this life with certain beliefs, all of which arise from certain axioms we chose to live by. However, living by the axiom that leads to a "satanic" view of the world, a cruel, materialistic, survival of the fittest game thats simply a random effect of a meaningless universe, and you are nothing but a tiny spec of dust within an indifferent cosmos, and your actions and life itself are also meaningless is so cruel that its impossible for our being to bare. Thus we are lead to madness eventually, and i believe that to be the reason we don't act on logic 24/7.


Post modernism fits fairly well into the above so this provides a good criticism of the type of extreme behaviour lampooned by the online meme of KEK.

And yet the KEK meme relates to a frog Diety from ancient Egypt which has analogies I think with the Greek god of witches Hecate. Perhaps an aspect of the alt-right thinking they are doing an online campaign are actualy being given the chance to return to having contact with the Gods.

While your input here is certainly (as always) appreciated, you are well...completely wrong

KEK is derived from a misspelling of the popular acronym LOL, meaning to "Laugh Out Loud".

See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/kek if you would like to see a complete and accurate history of the acronym KEK.




“Kek” is a translation of the acronym “LOL” (laugh out loud) when reading text written by members of the Horde faction as an Alliance player in the online multiplayer game World of Warcraft (WoW). “Kek” is also associated with the unrelated Turkish snack food Topkek, which is often discussed on the /s4s/ (Shit 4chan Says) board on 4chan.


The term has its origins in the Korean language, as the onomatopoeia ㅋㅋㅋ, in which ㅋ stands for the “k” sounds, like in raspy, stifled laughter. In the real-time strategy game Starcraft, because the game originally did not support the Korean language, the onomatopoeia was written as “Kekeke” which can be translated to “Hahaha” in English.
In the online multiplayer role-playing game WoW, released on November 23rd, 2004, players can choose to play on either the Alliance or Horde factions, which are considered enemies within the game’s universe. Players of separate factions are unable to communicate with one-another, as their typed text is run through an in-game translator. For players of the Horde faction, typing the letters “LOL” results in members of the Alliance faction reading “KEK”.

On March 22nd, 2005, Urban Dictionary user drat submitted an entry for the word “kek,” defining it as “’lol’ in Orcish.” On June 19th, 2007, Yahoo Answers member Mr. Questionair submitted a question about cross-faction communication, to which user ArcadianStormcrow replied that when Horde players speak the word “lol,” it shows up as “kek” for Alliance players. On April 4th, 2008, a thread was submitted to the Gamespot Forums which included mentions of “kek” and “lol” among other faction translations. On June 24th, 2009, Wow Insider published an article on communicating with enemies, noting that saying “kek” as an Alliance player will not translate as “lol” to a Horde player. On February 16th, 2010, Wowhead Forums member sistereinstein submitted a thread asking if “kek” was a new slang term for “LOL.” On September 2nd, 2011, an entry for “kek” was submitted to the slang website Internet Slang, defining it as “LOL in WOW.”


Also, the "frog Diety from ancient Egypt" (Lolwtf!) that you refer to has nothing to do with ancient Egypt, nor is he a "frog Deity". Pepe The Frog is a meme. See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/pepe-the-frog




Pepe the Frog is an anthropomorphic frog character from the comic series Boy’s Club by Matt Furie. On 4chan, various illustrations of the frog creature have been used as reaction faces, including Feels Good Man, Sad Frog, Angry Pepe, Smug Frog and Well Meme’d.

In 2005, artist Matt Furie created the comic series Boy’s Club, which stars the teenage monster characters Pepe, Brett, Andy and Landwolf.

In early 2008, a comic in which Pepe pulls his pants down to his ankles in order to urinate was popularized on 4chan’s /b/, (random) board, along with the expression “Feels good man.”

Throughout 2008, Pepe was mostly associated with the “Feels Good Man” reaction image. In 2009, an edited version featuring a distraught-looking Pepe with the caption “Feels bad man” began circulating as a reaction image on 4chan and the Body Building Forums. On January 25th, 2011, an interview with Furie was published on Know Your Meme, in which he discussed the origins of Pepe the Frog. On June 13th, 2014, the PepeTheFrogBlog Tumblr blog was launched. On July 23rd, the Pepe the Frog Instagram feed was created. On October 25th, the /r/pepethefrog subreddit was launched for content featuring the frog character. On December 7th, a Facebook page for “Pepe the Frog” was created. On December 18th, the PepeTheFrogNet Tumblr[ blog was launched.


learn2internetbro

Axismundi000
07-01-2017, 08:10 AM
While your input here is certainly (as always) appreciated, you are well...completely wrong

KEK is derived from a misspelling of the popular acronym LOL, meaning to "Laugh Out Loud".

See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/kek if you would like to see a complete and accurate history of the acronym KEK.




“Kek” is a translation of the acronym “LOL” (laugh out loud) when reading text written by members of the Horde faction as an Alliance player in the online multiplayer game World of Warcraft (WoW). “Kek” is also associated with the unrelated Turkish snack food Topkek, which is often discussed on the /s4s/ (Shit 4chan Says) board on 4chan.


The term has its origins in the Korean language, as the onomatopoeia ㅋㅋㅋ, in which ㅋ stands for the “k” sounds, like in raspy, stifled laughter. In the real-time strategy game Starcraft, because the game originally did not support the Korean language, the onomatopoeia was written as “Kekeke” which can be translated to “Hahaha” in English.
In the online multiplayer role-playing game WoW, released on November 23rd, 2004, players can choose to play on either the Alliance or Horde factions, which are considered enemies within the game’s universe. Players of separate factions are unable to communicate with one-another, as their typed text is run through an in-game translator. For players of the Horde faction, typing the letters “LOL” results in members of the Alliance faction reading “KEK”.

On March 22nd, 2005, Urban Dictionary user drat submitted an entry for the word “kek,” defining it as “’lol’ in Orcish.” On June 19th, 2007, Yahoo Answers member Mr. Questionair submitted a question about cross-faction communication, to which user ArcadianStormcrow replied that when Horde players speak the word “lol,” it shows up as “kek” for Alliance players. On April 4th, 2008, a thread was submitted to the Gamespot Forums which included mentions of “kek” and “lol” among other faction translations. On June 24th, 2009, Wow Insider published an article on communicating with enemies, noting that saying “kek” as an Alliance player will not translate as “lol” to a Horde player. On February 16th, 2010, Wowhead Forums member sistereinstein submitted a thread asking if “kek” was a new slang term for “LOL.” On September 2nd, 2011, an entry for “kek” was submitted to the slang website Internet Slang, defining it as “LOL in WOW.”


Also, the "frog Diety from ancient Egypt" (Lolwtf!) that you refer to has nothing to do with ancient Egypt, nor is he a "frog Deity". Pepe The Frog is a meme. See http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/pepe-the-frog




Pepe the Frog is an anthropomorphic frog character from the comic series Boy’s Club by Matt Furie. On 4chan, various illustrations of the frog creature have been used as reaction faces, including Feels Good Man, Sad Frog, Angry Pepe, Smug Frog and Well Meme’d.

In 2005, artist Matt Furie created the comic series Boy’s Club, which stars the teenage monster characters Pepe, Brett, Andy and Landwolf.

In early 2008, a comic in which Pepe pulls his pants down to his ankles in order to urinate was popularized on 4chan’s /b/, (random) board, along with the expression “Feels good man.”

Throughout 2008, Pepe was mostly associated with the “Feels Good Man” reaction image. In 2009, an edited version featuring a distraught-looking Pepe with the caption “Feels bad man” began circulating as a reaction image on 4chan and the Body Building Forums. On January 25th, 2011, an interview with Furie was published on Know Your Meme, in which he discussed the origins of Pepe the Frog. On June 13th, 2014, the PepeTheFrogBlog Tumblr blog was launched. On July 23rd, the Pepe the Frog Instagram feed was created. On October 25th, the /r/pepethefrog subreddit was launched for content featuring the frog character. On December 7th, a Facebook page for “Pepe the Frog” was created. On December 18th, the PepeTheFrogNet Tumblr[ blog was launched.


learn2internetbro

Thanks for this information. You never fail to disappoint, the generally patronising tone of your posts are a small price to pay for the interesting things you post Schmuldvich. I'm sure what you outline is perfectly valid. It is the essential nature of memes that is not fully understood here, that is they mutate and evolve due to environmental pressures so whilst the provenance is as you outline a simple look at online material will show how the KEK meme has mutated to incorporate the ancient Egyptian frog God.

In 1990 as part of my Psychology degree I was directed to read The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins and I would sincerely recommend this small paperback to you. To oversimplify it outlined how psychological behaviours can evolve due to environmental changes in a similar way to physical characteristics as Darwin outlined. Dawkins then went on to argue that information in the social environment also shows these characteristics and this impacts psychological behaviours. He called these evolving information 'packets' memes. This of course was before the internet had really started to develop and memes were not really well known. Bearing in mind how the whole meme idea has taken off and the time when the Blind Watchmaker was written I would recommend this book as a very useful read. So to return to your observation Schmuldvich the provenance of what you post may be correct but you fail to understand the essential nature of memes. They change and evolve through varying environmental conditions as do psychological behaviours and physical characteristics. It is only rate of change over time which differentiates these.

Ghislain
07-01-2017, 10:54 AM
I think Dawkins is a complete, self opinionated arse, but I have read some of his books and, in his field, he is an amazing writer.

I have read, "Climbing Mount Improbable", and, "The Selfish Gene", but, although having had his book, "The Blind Watchmaker", on my shelf for a few years now, I still have not got around to reading it, however, I will read it now; synchronicity!

Mad is as mad does ;)

Ghislain

Axismundi000
07-01-2017, 11:20 AM
Watching Dawkins interviews on TV I personally find him faintly annoying. His defence of The Blind Watchmaker many years ago on UK channel 4 was that it is deliberately simplified and merely a starting point. The fact that he basically invented memes is not common knowledge which does make me smile.

Ghislain
07-01-2017, 05:28 PM
Its is when he tries to give opinions that are not in his field of expertise that gets me riled.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jsf2uQD--U&feature=youtu.be

Ghislain

Kiorionis
07-01-2017, 05:40 PM
I know, that I hung on the windy tree all the nights of nine,
Wounded by spear and given to Odhinn; myself to myself,
on that tree, which no man knows, from what roots it rises.
They dealt me no bread nor drinking horn, I looked down,
I took up the runes I took them screaming,
I fell back from there.

I would suggest there is a difference between spiritual initiation/crisis and the Gods driving you mad as part of the process of destroying you. To the outsider they may initially appear identical but as the situation unfolds a difference becomes gradually discernible.

I would say true. The discernable difference is the loss of coherence between self and Self, the loss of coherence between Self and Nature, and the loss coherence as the Self projects onto Itself. But I think only the outsider who is not very familiar with madness or themselves would go on unknowingly.

Alchemists, who are on this path, either complete the initiation of Separation and Coagulation, or they go mad on account of the Mercury they imbibe during the separation process (the burning off of dross and false belief)

In my opinion.

Edit: there is also the phrase: rendum tormentum, growth through torment.

Axismundi000
07-01-2017, 06:44 PM
Its is when he tries to give opinions that are not in his field of expertise that gets me riled.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Jsf2uQD--U&feature=youtu.be

Ghislain

I hadn't seen this I agree he is more than just slightly annoying, he is f**king annoying. From Dawkins perspective I think such ideas as personal autonomy and therefore Liberty, Democracy etc are much more limited in importance. If we look at his writings they tend towards well not genetic determinism but a gradient of probability towards genetics dictating long term outcomes. From such a view democracy, personal autonomy that kind of thing are of very limited importance, they are superficialities almost. So the fact that the EU seeks to reduce democratic accountability is not as important because those with superior knowledge and expertise (like him) should make the decisions. That I think is the view.

Awani
07-01-2017, 08:05 PM
While your input here is certainly (as always) appreciated, you are well...completely wrong...

Actually I think you misunderstood his point (which I agree with). I know the meme-history of Pepe (I'm sure Axid does as well). But a deity can incarnate as anything, and what better as a meme that has become a symbol for a counter-culture, that is against another counter-culture (SJW)... which has been cursed to become the main-culture.

Bring down whomever is in charge. Chaos must reign.

Frog deity (from Wiki (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kek_(mythology))): "Kek... is the deification of the concept of primordial darkness in the Ancient Egyptian Ogdoad cosmogony. As a concept, Kek was viewed as androgynous, his female form being known as Keket (also Kekuit). Kek and Keket in some aspects also represent night and day, and were called "raiser up of the light" and the "raiser up of the night", respectively."

:p

Axismundi000
07-01-2017, 09:34 PM
At about 3 minutes is the stuff about Dawkins and memes but I like the whole presentation because of it mischievousness.

https://youtu.be/NdEq5Y-e_iM


Those the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad!

Totally unrelated but I... just...can't .....help it.... must paste

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZbM6WbUw7Bs&feature=share

Kiorionis
07-01-2017, 11:04 PM
Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahah....

Now I understand "trump"

Kiorionis
07-01-2017, 11:47 PM
As a concept, Kek was viewed as androgynous, his female form being known as Keket (also Kekuit). Kek and Keket in some aspects also represent night and day, and were called "raiser up of the light" and the "raiser up of the night", respectively."

:p

And therefore we arrive at al-keketimie

Haha awesome

Axismundi000
07-02-2017, 07:31 AM
I would say true. The discernable difference is the loss of coherence between self and Self, the loss of coherence between Self and Nature, and the loss coherence as the Self projects onto Itself. But I think only the outsider who is not very familiar with madness or themselves would go on unknowingly.

Alchemists, who are on this path, either complete the initiation of Separation and Coagulation, or they go mad on account of the Mercury they imbibe during the separation process (the burning off of dross and false belief)

In my opinion.

Edit: there is also the phrase: rendum tormentum, growth through torment.

You offer an alternative explanation where the processes of Alchemy can cause madness rather than a lack of contact with the Gods. My personal view is that a more Pantheistic view by the Alchemist would reduce this problem and considerably ease the torment. This is my personal experience were I have done Magickal work with a deity to balance out when my progress has caused a temporary excess. For example an Enochian Aethyr has a particular masculine characteristic so before simply going on to explore the next Aethyr do devotional work with Brede/Ashtarte. I'm sure something similar could be done to help balance the changes in the Alchemist. My approach is perhaps not what many Alchemists would consider but it is easily adapted. A bit of Divination to identify types of energies that need processing and then just pure devotional stuff no 'magic' as such.

Axismundi000
07-02-2017, 05:19 PM
Did mighty KEK bring this about?

https://youtu.be/5csmmjO4lzU

The most powerful man in the world actually posted this!

Awani
07-02-2017, 06:37 PM
The most powerful man in the world actually posted this!

No it is the "secretary" to the most powerful man.

:p

Amon
07-02-2017, 11:12 PM
Regarding Dawkins, i will agree with the rest of the comments. He tends to get mildy irritating. He might be smart, but he sure as hell ain't wise in my eyes. Whenever someone attempts to downgrade theism by calling the One God "a man in the cloud" has no idea of what he is talking about. And those who comment on things they know not, most of the time are proven to be fools. At worst.

Kiorionis
07-03-2017, 12:47 PM
You offer an alternative explanation where the processes of Alchemy can cause madness rather than a lack of contact with the Gods.

Quit different. I'm saying that it's the contact with the Gods which catalyze the Separation process, I was just expressing it in the language of alchemy.

But don't get me wrong, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Edit: I'm also curious who and what you include in your concept of "the Gods"?

Loki Morningstar
07-03-2017, 02:00 PM
Hi Axis,

I completely agree. I've become obsessed with this idea of late. I feel since the formation of the Monotheistic Abrahamic religions, people have lost the plot more and more, and seem to be attempting to wipe out all traces of past religions. In fact, I recently had a chat with a Sikh chap who explained the origin story of his religion:

"Muslims were attacking Hindus; who appear to have a similar belief system to the Norse, Egyptians, and Greek polytheistic religions; the Muslims went too far, killing and dishonouring a venerated Hindu leader, who had sacrificed himself to save his people, by leaving his body unburied. The son of this leader collected the body and ceremonially buried it. The son founded the Sikh religion due to feeling that the Abrahamic religions could not be stopped from destroying the relatively peaceful Hindu religion without fighting fire with fire."

This has happened many time; the Monotheist Abrahamic religion destroying and demonising polytheistic faith, [Awani: I understand they're not polytheistic, it's the only way I have to explain them, I'll come back to this later.] and this appears to lead to a kind of insanity. Which I call 'unipolar-binary thinking', similar to the duality you talk of. One creates a false dichotomy, then state that one pole is good, the other is bad. For what reason they wish to get rid of polytheistic faith? I do not know. Likely some kind of warped Zionist ideal.

Schmuldvich; the difference between 'duality' and 'reality'. IMO, there are not multiple realities, unless we talk multiverse theory, at which point there would still only be ultimately one reality, therefore observed dualities are part of the whole/reality. Left-Right, Hot-Cold, Rough-Smooth, are dualities although not separate 'realities'. One may make one pole 'good', and one 'bad', one may say the person has created a subjective 'reality' inside their head, but that is not a reality, just a delusion, and creates a right mess.

Awani, getting back to your point, I do agree that most polytheistic faiths are not truly polytheist, their many 'Gods' usually describe principles of the whole. In the same way I have said above, God of hot, God of cold, God of Left, God of Right, etc. Seems to me many religions start with a kind of Zoroastrian base; a single god, splitting into 2, or 3, usually creation, maintenance, destruction, etc, and then splitting into further variations, ad infinitum.

Personally I feel that polytheism, as I have explained it to be, is a very important concept. Allowing one to observe and internalise both poles of a duality as objectively as possible, preferably not as subjectively 'good' or 'bad', and hopefully over time use logic to add more definition to the grammar/story.

I have loads more to say on this topic, and could continue, as I say I have become quite obsessed, but this seems to have gotten quite long already, so I will stop.

Here's a song I like, that seems to fit, just for funzies... :D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjOb-PK8KPI

P.S. I WELCOME THE RETURN OF THE OLD GODS! HAIL KEK! :P

Axismundi000
07-03-2017, 11:41 PM
Quit different. I'm saying that it's the contact with the Gods which catalyze the Separation process, I was just expressing it in the language of alchemy.

But don't get me wrong, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

Edit: I'm also curious who and what you include in your concept of "the Gods"?

I would say the 'Gods' are Divine principles expressed by a certain form. They embody and represent a facet of creation. As a pantheist i am of the view that the overall Divine Providence from which all emerges is not directly knowable. However the Gods are a partial aspect of this and we can more readily interact with the Gods. I accept and am totally content with other people having an entirely different view on these things.

Kiorionis
07-03-2017, 11:53 PM
This makes more sense then. You're saying, I think, that if someone -- an alchemist for example --begins operating outside of Divine Providence, then the God's will destroy him. The process is then madness. I'd say the saying is true.

Axismundi000
07-04-2017, 07:00 AM
I am also suggesting the Gods act as a menstruum between Divine Providence and the person. Without the Gods the Alchemist may find their sanity tested more severely.

@ Loki Morningstar, may your dank memes be found worthy by KEK.

Loki Morningstar
07-04-2017, 08:49 AM
Great stuff, enjoying this thread. Seems we're all on similar wavelengths. Jung explians this concept (god archetypes) well, just getting through his 'Psychology and Alchemy', it's a good read.

'Divine providence', interesting concept, more consice than how I explained it, and very much what I attempted to convey. Equally interesting is 'The Trivium': 'Grammar, Logic, Rhetoric = Truth'.

Could word the analogy, "Logic: menstrum between Grammar/ Gods/ Objectivity, and Rhetoric/ Person/ Subjectivity; many distillation cycles reveal Truth/ Prima Materia. Not perfect, just discovered 'The Trivium'.

http://www.triviumeducation.com

@ Axis, Praise be to KEK in his infinite dankness.

Axismundi000
07-05-2017, 12:30 AM
Thanks for the info.

The term Divine Providence comes from the writings of Franz Bardon in my view means the same thing as the corpus hermeticum outlines and the general view that the ultimate creative principal is not directly knowable in the way that the various pantheons of Dieties can be known. The Egyptian Deity that has become today's KEK was originally a fertility and pregnancy Diety. I wonder what the Pepe/KEK meme will eventually give birth to, I think I will just keep larping with this and surf the wave, see were it goes.

Loki Morningstar
07-05-2017, 09:27 AM
I find the best way to internalise information is to share it, glad it's of some use to you. Thanks for sharing Franz Bardon, I would like to look him up. I like the Hermetic work, grasp the basics, always attempting deeper understanding. Is there a particular piece of Bardon's work I could read to understand 'divine providence' in context?

Perhaps the 'ultimate creative principle' is not directly knowable, IMHO, as there is no such thing. All that will exist, already exists; in a potential way. Therefore, things are discovered, not created. Things may be transfigured into new forms, but is the new form truly created? Perhaps a discussion for another thread?

As for KEK being a fertility god and being pregnant. I recently read the V for Vendetta graphic novel, serendipitously these quotes fit rather well:


Anarchy wears two faces, both creator and destroyer. Thus destroyers topple empires; make a canvas of clean rubble where creators then can build another world. Rubble, once achieved, makes further ruins' means irrelevant. Away with our explosives, then! Away with our destroyers! They have no place within our better world. But let us raise a toast to all our bombers, all our bastards, most unlovely and most unforgivable. Let's drink their health... then meet with them no more.


Anarchy means "without leaders", not "without order". With anarchy comes an age or ordnung, of true order, which is to say voluntary order... this age of ordung will begin when the mad and incoherent cycle of verwirrung that these bulletins reveal has run its course... This is not anarchy, Eve. This is chaos.

Another quote that I have heard thrown about a lot recently, yet I don't know it's source, is:


From order, chaos; from chaos, order.

An additional piece of the puzzle for me is also 'Liminal States', well worth looking up, along with 'Liminal Beings'. I believe global society is in a worldwide liminal state. It is very interesting, and luckily I identify as a liminal being so this makes this kind of state fun for me.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liminality
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liminal_being

Perhaps KEK is a Chaos God that will give birth to Order? :D

Awani
07-05-2017, 12:27 PM
Anarchy. Now you're talking. Yes, that is the way. Anarchy is sanity, order and real freedom. Ironically most modern anarchists are atheists, but that is because they do not understand shamanism (the source of all religions).

What God could Anarchy have? How about all Gods? Yes, everyone is invited.

What Prophet could Anarchy have? How about Jesus or Buddha? Real anarchists.

Chaos simply means the Void or the Abyss. It is just how "god" appears in the moment of meeting, that's all.

Disorder is a human invention, not chaos. Chaos is divine.

:p

Axismundi000
07-05-2017, 08:07 PM
I agree there is a chaotic component to this.

The saying those the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad I think relates to the CNN news organisation presently and the KEK meme of the great meme war that has started against CNN in the last 24 hours.

https://youtu.be/4vL4qmEnUTA

In most of the anti CNN memes Trump is portrayed as allied with KEK but if as I think KEK has a dark chaotic aspect this could go awry for Trump also at a later date. However I note that on the night of Trump winning the election the acceptance speech was almost pharaonic with Trump's son like Horus the child on one side and the Vice President like uncle Set on the other of the 'Osirified' president elect. Does Trump have an understanding of how to harness these things or is it just me reading too much into a coincidental arrangement.

Axismundi000
07-08-2017, 11:33 AM
If this one breaks forum rules delete it, hopefully it doesn't.

https://youtu.be/tg2-96AnquQ

The thing I like about it apart from it's complete rulebreaking mischieviousness is that it shows Trump as just one squabbling child amongst many. They all face the wrath of the merciless KEK.

Loki Morningstar
07-08-2017, 05:59 PM
Definitely the dankest KEK vid I have ever seen. Thanks for sharing. ����

Shadilay. ����

Loki Morningstar
07-08-2017, 06:37 PM
Awani,

I would have to agree a variant of anarchy would be pleasing to me. Although important to remember that is must be balanced with some form of order too. Don't want to end up all speaking different languages. To be honest, I sometimes wonder if the world would be a better place if there was just one language? But I would like to see someone try to get a global agreement on which one.

As for which God. I agree, all the Gods, all information is good information I always say. But then again, I do wonder if some of the archetypes are the same archetype repeated, although due to language sound different. I wonder if there is more utility in this, or more utility to combine the similar archetypes into one, to make it easier to see the bigger picture as such? But then I am generally all questions and no answers lol. But that's just me.

Loki Morningstar
07-09-2017, 06:34 PM
Just reading 'The Island ' by Aldous Huxley, thought this piece reflected our conversation well.


No body needs to go anywhere else. We are all here, if we only knew it, already there.

If I only knew who in fact I am, I should cease to behave as what I think I am; and if I stopped behaving as what I think I am, I should know who I am.

What in fact I am, if only the Manichee I think I am would allow me to know it, is the reconciliation of yes and no lived out in total acceptance and the blessed experience of Not-Two.

In religion all words are dirty words. Anybody who gets eloquent about Buddha, or God, or Christ, ought to have his mouth washed out with carbolic soap.

Because his aspirations to perpetuate only the 'yes' in every pair of opposites can never, in the nature of things, be realised, the insulated Manichee I think I am condemns himself to endlessly repeated frustration, endlessly repeating conflicts with other aspiring and frustrated Manichees.

Conflicts and frustrations - the theme of all history and almost all biography. "I show you sorrow", said the Buddha realistically. But he also showed the ending of sorrow - self knowledge, total accpetance, the blessed experience of Not-Two."

Loki Morningstar
07-09-2017, 06:55 PM
Oh... wow... and just by chance, it also quotes 'Erewhon', "Providence was on my side". I love Huxley, never fails to amaze me.

Loki Morningstar
07-09-2017, 08:43 PM
Ok... this is too strange... feel like someone is playing a trick on me. XD


And then what about the society you're supposed to be adjusted to? Is it mad society or a sane one? And even if it's pretty sane, is it right the anybody should be completely adjusted to it?

With another of his twinkling smiles, "Those whom God would destroy," said the Ambassador, "He first makes mad. Or alternatively, and perhaps even more effectively, He makes them sane."

Seriously is this just serendipity/synchronicity, or is someone playing a trick here?

Kiorionis
07-09-2017, 09:17 PM
Maybe it's Synchronisity playing tricks on you ;)

Schmuldvich
07-09-2017, 10:14 PM
Simply serendipitous synchronicity superfluously staging synthetic synthesis maybe?

Axismundi000
07-10-2017, 08:43 AM
Simply serendipitous synchronicity superfluously staging synthetic synthesis maybe?

Sardonic solipsism and pseudo psychobabble to disguise butthurt?

Loki Morningstar
07-10-2017, 10:29 AM
Genuinely though Axis, where did you get the inspiration for this post?

Loki Morningstar
07-10-2017, 11:18 AM
I mean, I believe in synchronicity, and feel I have had many in my life. Some were really strange, more than enough for me to know there is much I don't know, and to learn to trust my instinct. Yet, if I talk to people about them, they're often seen as pleasant anecdotes that can be brushed off as coincidence. Yet this time, this one is so clear, and with proof to boot.

Axismundi000
07-10-2017, 04:55 PM
I am not consciously doing anything Loki Morningstar. Perhaps what seems a little impulsive and mischievous to me (this thread) can have useful coincidences.

Schmuldvich
07-10-2017, 06:10 PM
I mean, I believe in synchronicity, and feel I have had many in my life. Some were really strange, more than enough for me to know there is much I don't know, and to learn to trust my instinct. Yet, if I talk to people about them, they're often seen as pleasant anecdotes that can be brushed off as coincidence. Yet this time, this one is so clear, and with proof to boot.

Stuff like this seems to happen regularly in my life as well. I am sure it happens to quite a number of other people too. In my eyes, and in my experience, it seems that when I am in a state of higher vibration "walking the right path" these remarkable synchronicities happen more regularly and more often than when I am dicking off being a fuckhead. In a way I see it as the Divine ("Gods" in the context of this thread) reassuring me that I am on the "correct path" and doing the "right thing"...

Everything happens for a reason.

Loki Morningstar
07-12-2017, 04:25 PM
Hey Axis,

Sorry, I have likely miscommunicated. I was only joking when I asked if someone was doing it intentionally. But I was genuinely interested in what inspired you to write the post. I just wondered if you could recall where you saw the quote and what inspired you to write about it? No worries if you can't remember though, it was just on the off chance.

Loki Morningstar
07-12-2017, 04:29 PM
Hey Schmuldvich,

Yes I agree, I am meeting more and more people who feel this way. I met an interesting woman recently that has written a book documenting some of her synchs. I think you could be right regarding "walking the right path" I like to think of it a bit like Taoism. It does leave me questioning how these things work though, higher power, collective unconscious, higher self, I suppose I am going to have to keep seeking answers. I must agree with you though, it tends to be when I am seeking and trusting my instincts that it happens more, and it definitely makes me feel reassured.

Axismundi000
07-13-2017, 08:18 AM
Hey Axis,

Sorry, I have likely miscommunicated. I was only joking when I asked if someone was doing it intentionally. But I was genuinely interested in what inspired you to write the post. I just wondered if you could recall where you saw the quote and what inspired you to write about it? No worries if you can't remember though, it was just on the off chance.

The reason I put forward the aphorism is that a little over10 years I ago I broke contact with an occult/pagan scene and repeatedly rejected overtures from different people and groups associated about once a year since then. About 5 years ago a lot of these people clearly became mad, bad and dangerous to know and this has gradually increased. Now various maladies seem to be emerging for example gradual blindness in one, lameness and respiratory issues in another, alcoholism I could list extensively. I know for a fact I have done nothing occult against them so I search for an explanation to explain this gradual creeping ill fortune and calamity. I think the aphorism those the Gods wish to destroy they first send mad seems to fit. Whether I am correct or wrong this is a matter between them and the Gods I suppose It could just be Karma, I merely speculate.