Remnants of the Illuminati, page 11

Originally posted by EnlightenUp

...do we assume that there is a secret group of 'Illuminati'?

Why assume anything?

Because sometimes, if nothing else, it supplies a starting block. But, I can work, perhaps, without assumptions...

Likewise, it seems the Rosicrucian name is claimed by various groups even if there is no longer an 'original'.

Yes, just as there is no single form of Freemasonry, not really. To me, they're all just one Boy's Club after another, each with the intention, intially, of sharing illuminism (for want of another term). The difference, to my perception, is that in the case of Illuminati of Weishaupt we have not only a more secular approach but we also have a clear and present MO. And, an honesty in the need of secrets and stories to keep the initiates interested, the men that is. He had some notion of romanticising the stories more for the female initiates, giving them flower power or some such 18th century notion of feminine mystique. Either way, come one, come all, they are all selling a package designed to spread illuminism, just roses of different names. IMO of course.

Given? By whom?

Hmm...possibly a bad choice of words on my part, but it is more to do with the subjectivity of perception and possibly the desire to confirm by conformity.

I believe it is possible to convey certain information to another that could aid in their illumination, and that that person may feel that that is sufficient to consider themselves 'enlightened'. I also believe that you can use certain pointers to convince someone that what you present to them is 'enlightenment'. Is that clear? I'll try to find better expression if not. But there are various levels of 'reality' at play here.

I do not doubt it can be sought and attained independently of a group. The advantage of a group, as I see it, is having some guidance in matters. Not as a formula per se, but as a beacon of light on the mountain (to use the metaphor from your other post). One thing I would personally find helpful is to know if certain phenomena, body sensations, emotional states, epiphanies and thoughts are commonly experienced by those seeking attainment. For example, hearing "X is pretty typical, you've nothing to worry about" from someone experienced in the matter vs. wondering whether or not X means you're going insane can assist in proper focus.

Interesting. I think the wondering whether you're going insane is the fun part, I wouldn't want anyone to spoil the ending for me on that one.

There are groups. I don't think there's any doubt about it. If we're talking specifically about the Shards, who knows. We know Maban claimed to be part of a group that communicate with one another and ackowledge one anothers membership. What does claiming he is part of a group bring to his message if there is in fact no such group or he is not part of it? Is it merely an attempt to increase the appeal by authority and branding? As I see it, we are awash in that fallacy within the current system and those flames require no further fanning.

Well that was pretty much my argument with Maban from the beginning. We can all claim to be this, that and the other, who's going to check? Unless of course you claim to be a member of the Illuminati on a conspiracy website...oops...I agree though, it is/was unnecessary to the message and I can only assume, as we can neither prove nor disprove, that it all adds to the general mystique for those seeking secrets and stories. I at last seem to have exhausted the Maban topic in my own interest and don't think I have anymore to say about it unless the current state of play changes.

There are definitely those who work for materialistic and selfish goals. To some extent I work for materialistic and selfish goals but not exclusively. The key distinction is that I do not work for them in order to deny others fulfillment but to improve my own lot. Consequently, if my lot is better then I am in a better position to share that lot in order to help others. I do not believe that for me to have abundance, that another must not.

If we apply these principles to every aspect of our lives then we would be starting to really move in the right direction. Especially, who we bank with, who we buy shares in, the food that we eat and the clothes that we wear. It'd be a start at least.

There are at least two ways I can think of to destroy the dark side; counteract it by living life in an opposing polarity, encouraging and teaching others or give it everything it wants without resistance.

With the second way, I am going to be a little pedantic, should that perhaps be letting it 'take' rather than 'give'? I'm not sure, it makes better sense to me that way, if not, explain a little more what you mean.

Fully materialistic and selfish goals are in truth goals of self destruction. Some may believe otherwise because they are fooled while others know it and in fact struggle for self annihilation where the goal is to create suffering at any cost.

I agree, though I think often other factors are at play with the individual. I'm thinking specifically of groups like Skull and Bones which go through a humiliation ritual of some sort to create 'bond'. Also this can be seen, and I think Skull and Bones do a facsimilie, as a bastardised version of the shamanic death which brings upon an ecstatic vision. This bonding forms the basis of morality perception for those tied to it.

There was a program on T.V. about white supremacist groups in the prison system. The main thing I remember from it was from an iterview with, if I recall correctly, one of the guards about the change in the profile of violence in recent years. He said that the problem was no longer so much white supremacist violence against other groups in the prison, but violence against each other. If the account is true, it gives a clearer window into how the mind of hate really operates.

I should imagine it has much more to do with demographics than hate itself. The rats at the bottom of the pack will always turn on each other when it comes to food and sex. At the top those things are covered, so they only fight over position.

Absolutely. It isn't "Illuminati (tm)". What I find troubling is that each of these groups claim 'true' heritage and 'true' knowledge. I do not see their attitudes about one another as any different from the very ones espoused by the religions that have had a role in plaguing us with war and intolerance for millennia. Even if they succeed in expunging the widely held 'false' belief systems and current political systems, I feel that their rise to power in a vacuum could lead to more of the same. They won't truely have been put to the test until they are tempted to impose their ideals out in the open. I pray that there is more enlightenment present than is currently evident and that an exit plan exists for razing the walls between each other and society for general disbandment when the time is right. Note that I am referring to what we might call the "good guys". The others are already doing a bang-up job and have been for long enough.

Life's grand, innit?

A kaftan? Of all the things...

Don't knock it until you try it! I think all men should have at least one man-frock or skirt in their wardrobes (though I am yet to meet many men who agree with me).

Do you cook too?

I reckon so. I am especially in demand when it comes to frying things.

Ahh...hence the elasticated waistband clothing....

In her opinion, it's kind of like having a Tasmanian devil for a pet-- my simile, but I think that it adequately describes it.

So she counts her limbs rather than her blessings in case you got peckish.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by KilgoreTrout]