You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The Eye is Really You and I: An Illuminating Look At The All-Seeing Eye
A few years ago I drove around listening to ALL of Mark Passio's podcasts, and I remember him using those terms. It has been a few years, I had to look up solipsism and Thelema to see what you meant!
I've had quite a few arguments with Passio-fanbois regarding just solipsism, hehe. :-)
I can't say what he's working for... unification or controlled opposition for "divide et impera", what I do know is that I've never bothered myself with his supposed "deoccultism", for esoterism is verily the sole path to self-mastery.
Until, of course, that which is whispered in the shadows become public knowhow.
"100th monkey effect" etc, just gotta keep swimming... sigh
I had to look the words up, and now I can't remember if Passio was a fan of solipsism, or if he denied that philosophy. I'm not a good fanboi! I do understand his notion of 'deoccultism', in that he takes the 'occult' out of this knowledge, making it more visible to 99 more 'monkeys' ;)
I'm still not sure that I totally understand solipsism, I tend to see us all as consciousness sharing the same mind, but that may be messed up. I'm still working on it!
He most assuredly opposed the concept, but as such is expected, for he must derive great strength, or perhaps rather potency, from operating so within the herd dynamics.
You simply cannot make the esoteric within any plane of existence exoteric. You can teach the arts, define them as you wish occult/alchemical/metaphysical/spiritual/psychonautical/magickal/introspective etc et al, that, at best, make you into a bodhisattva in denial, at worst, controlled opposition.
As soon as the supposed esoteric has been made exoteric, the existence plane change, and there's just a new level of esoteric knowhow, ad infinitum.
"Sharing of one consciousness" or to only ever have access to but one mind. They're not mutually exclusive, but there is verily only one, with infinite potentialities to perceive through. 🙏
That is interesting, that he would oppose such a philosophy, and may explain why I didn't understand solipsism as Passio described it. It was one of the things that he talked about that always eluded me. I'm glad to talk with someone who is familiar with his work, you've given me new things to ponder now.
I didn't listen to his stuff myself, but I was rather affected by the waves of his followers, and thus did I find out his stance on the subject in question.
Eye am glad I could oblige, may you find pleasure in your contemplations. 🙏