Darwiniana

History, Evolution, and The Darwin Debate

Darwiniana header image 2

Secular buddhism, and…secular crowleyanity???

June 4th, 2011 · No Comments

I invite Stephen Batchelor to complete his ‘neutralization’ of traditionist teachings by doing to Crowleyanity what he did with Buddhism: produce a ‘secular Crowleyanity’, in which the element of ‘will’ is rejected as outdated, and the practice of magic or ‘magick’ (in reality a cloak for black magic) is turned into a secular humanist practice… But how????? A non-sequitur here!
You see the joke: the ‘secular buddhist’/ and/or ‘secular magickian’ should indulge in one way disarmament because it contradicts the dogmas of science.
The latter statement is not quite coherent, but the point is clear. The secular buddhist is propounding a devout desire to be a sitting duck and forget that he is in the middle of a battlefield and just take his chances with (occult) whizzing bullets, which don’t exist because he can’t see them.
No thanks. The advice to be stupid should not be taken.
Btw, I do not endorse Crowleyanity. And it is not a traditionalist teaching, being some kind of derivative of modern occultism, itself a quagmire of hopeless confusion. It is an obscure mystery, better bypassed, but the real history of Buddhism shows a group animated by such a hidden occultism, and agenda. The real critique of buddhism should be that it is or can be a deadly occultism, able to destroy as much as to enlighten. Its hypocrisy is stupefying, its legacy being an overwhelming success, at producing some shady characters as a side effect. This hidden side can’t be factored out in a bullshit scenario of ‘secular buddhism’. What is this fool Batchelor thinking?

It is worth noting that the ‘secular’ left has travelled this route, and their rejection of the occult was total, until the Bolsheviks came into power, and learned the hard way what was going on. Hidden research into the occult was swiftly forthcoming (without much of a result, ditto for the CIA). So much for so-called ‘secular’ scientism.
Real buddhism is totally the opposite of the degenerate confusions of the likes of Crowley, but I cite because it is just as modern or secular to be involved in the occult as not. I think real Buddhism is a refuge from the gangsgter world of the Crowley gangs rife in the samsaric field. It is ridiculous to reduce that veiled insight to nothing in some misguided embrace of science.

I raise this issue because Crowley, however misguided, was another joker trying to ‘modernize’ ancient teachings, by making them very toxic. He knew perfectly well that modern occultism was out of control and tried to deal with that by embracing it, once the protection provided by the ancient religions was torn away.
I can think of no faster way to reduce society to the level of a penitentiary or Hobbesian gangwar that Crowley’s.

Tags: General

0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment