Re: Feminine / Masculine Balance

["JoePass" <jcanslim@...>]

Tim...thanks for your response, but maybe I should clarify....I'm 
interested in knowing how I should deal with the presuppositions that 
have taken up residence in me because of my upbringing (I am a 
Baptist minister's son) and the modifications of these "assumptions" 
that I have accepted along the way. What is taboo in some religious 
disciplines is standard fare in others. 

I have difficulty believing that "what is true for me is true." If I 
am to ascertain "negative" and "positive" traits in soul mirror work, 
how do I deal with these presuppositions?

Thanks.....John


--- In BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com, "Tim" <timentwistle@h...> wrote:
> Dear RM and all
> 
> I like the question you posed, and it's one I considered myself in 
> years gone by before begining to working through IIH in earnest. 
> Though I have only been a Bardon practicioner for five months I 
feel 
> I have had the issue answered for me.
> 
> During the five years since I began to call myself a magician I 
went 
> headlong and fearlessly (stupidly?)into all manner of practices 
> stopping short of direct evocation of 'demonic' entities - stuff 
that 
> would fall under the 'masculine' heading I guess. At times I have 
> felt that my sanity/life was on the line (especially whilst going 
> through some Enochian aethyrs, for example), but nevertheless I 
would 
> do it all again considering the results I obtained. 
> 
> However, ever since reading Bardon, everything I accomplished 
seemed 
> a little like cheating, since I was doing things on the back of 
> formulas (like the Middle Pillar formula, Lightning Flash, powerful 
> mantras, theurgy and so forth). These, in my opinion raise the self 
> to the necessary level for performing a task, but temporarily. And 
I 
> felt after operations that I had only got a 'slice' or taster of 
what 
> was there to experience.
> 
> What I like about Bardon's method is that he begins with IIH - a 
> carefully set out program that if practiced in order and to the 
> letter enables the practicioner to accomplish magic by producing 
> everything needed from 'within' themselves at will any time any 
> place, and in a more comprehensive way than anything else I have 
ever 
> tried so far.
> Personally, I find the practices from the start - 'controling' 
> thoughts, accumulation and balancing elements etc. to be quite 
active 
> or 'masculine' in their nature - and quite a buzz too.
> 
> However, I still enjoy doing the 'bang-crash-wallop' stuff I have 
> always done too, and personally have no problem mixing the two. I 
> guess in conclusion, I must agree that the former does feel more 
> masculine to me too. But in reality it is only such at face value - 
> Bardon is equally 'active', but without the ceremony, at least to 
> begin with.
> 
> So I hope I had added my pennies-worth in at least a fairly 
coherent 
> (if general) way - and hope others will add to or challenge this 
> perspective.
> 
> T.
> 
> --- In BardonPraxis@yahoogroups.com, "Regulus Magus" 
> <RegulusMagus@h...> wrote:
> > Good afternoon dear colleagues.
> > 
> > For some time I have been thinking about the Feminine / Masculine 
> > axis of polarity and about Balance. I have hesitated to bring 
this 
> up 
> > for fear of causing offense where none is intended. Nevertheless 
a 
> > question not asked is wisdom forgone. So . . .
> > 
> > It seems to me that Hermetics as described in IIH and as 
discussed 
> in 
> > this list is a little skewed towards the Feminine pole. Much of 
the 
> > emphasis is on meditation, passive observation of inner states, 
and 
> > learning "to be" in a higher sense of the concept. Although 
Bardon 
> > describes the actual doing of magick it doesn't seem to get as 
much 
> > emphasis as the more receptive exercises. Certainly on this list 
I 
> > don't read much about summoning power, casting spells, and making 
> > things happen out in the world - in other words, I don't hear 
much 
> > about the Masculine aspects of Hermetics.
> > 
> > Is the focus of our discussions out of balance or (perhaps) is 
the 
> > focus deliberately skewed towards the Feminine to compensate for 
a 
> > culture that favors the Masculine?
> > 
> > Sincerely, /RM/
> > 
> > P.S. Please note that I am talking about Feminine / Masculine in 
> the 
> > esoteric sense - I'm not referring to specific traits of female / 
> > male members of the human species.