New Seers and Old Seers

[Bob May]

Nu Lang wrote:
Ah, now we come to the question...what can sorcery be used for? Is it a 'negative' or is it neutral? Can one combine the mystic and the magician, use magic to move towards mystic expereinces?
As for myself I would say I did exactly that. My first expeiences beyond "normal" were after practicing the methods in the JTI book for a few years. To stop the world using sorcery practices is still stopping the world. It may not be a positive experience but it is an expanding of awareness from the known into the unknown.
The same can be said for magical practices. If you invoke an angel and it comes, you have expanded your awareness of this world we live in. 
But in my opinion these are the opening of doors. We, many times, end up in a very negative place at first but if the doors are never opened can we ever go on to higher realms?
Even the "Promised Land" in the bible had giants to contend with.
Neither the old seer or new seer is in any way shape or form, an average men. What separates the average men from the new seers of today?
Average men have not opened the doors or seen.
"The new seers are the legacy of Castaneda and use his insights and techniques to explore this vastness we call infinity."
I get the feeling that some in this thread may not agree with this definition of new seer.  If such is the case, then what is Castaneda's legacy supposed to help us do?
It probably depends on your definition of infinite. This "earth-plane " is infinite, in my opinion. there is no evidence that they can see to the ends of outer space or that they have found the smallest subatomic particles as yet. The next plane outside of this one ("lower astral light" or "the sorcerer's world?") must also be infinite in much the same way. And so on up through the various planes...
For me Castenedas legacy was to prove to myself that there is something beyond this visible world... A starting point.
And to point out that this too can be an illusion and a trap. So, in effect, it means that there are more realities beyond the sorcerer's world. Subsequent studies and practices have proven to me that both are true."I've mentioned to you that sorcery is something like entering a dead-end street," he replied. "What I meant was that sorcery practices have no intrinsic value. Their  worth is indirect, for their real function is to make the assemblage point shift by making the first attention release its control on that point.”
I've never seen an assemblage point but I have experienced the first attention fade to nothing in many various ways. Firstly by practicing the techniques in JTI and later by study and meditations. So I guess I would agree.
It seems to me the same things can be accomplished by moving your consciousness to various places within and around the body and remaining in those places while stopping all other thoughts.
So, if there is an assemblage point, these meditation techniques would be another way to move it.

[lex icon]

"If as you say Death is unknowable , then how can it become known?" Lex
"Death cannot be both unknowable and known, that just doesn't make sense."  Lex
How then do you explain those walking avatars in the Himalayas of India? Ninth
Ninth I was not speaking about death, which of course can be known, Jessicar was.
I was trying to point out that something that is unknowable cannot become known. It is the unknown that can become known.
Again DJ points out that the old seers were confused about this and did not know how to separate the unknowable from the unknown.

[Nu Lang]

Bob May...



I agree with everything you said

[Nu Lang]

btw, I consider meditation a 'form' of sorcery...and of course my definition is perhaps more expansive in this regard than most people assign to the word, sorcery. I rather like the word Its a positive for me, and see that as... any altering of 'normal' consciousness (fixed ap) is an act of sorcery.

[lex icon]

OK so now we are talking great! I will just take some of the CC quotes posted by RainbowDiamond Unicorn.
Sometimes this all gets a little confusing so we need to keep looking at this from different angles to actually see what is being said at different times.
"Those conquerors," he went on, "took over the Toltec world - they appropriated everything - but they never learned to see.
"Who were those conquerors, don Juan?"
"' Other Indians," he said. "When the Spaniards came, the old seers had been gone for centuries, but there was a new breed of seers who were starting to secure their place in a new cycle."
Now some might have thought that DJ was referring to Spaniards as the conquerors that CC has DJ saying elsewhere as the ones that “bashed in the old seers heads”, I know I did. But as we can see from this quote CC has DJ saying the conquerors were other indians and that the old seers were long gone. Then we get another reference to the new cycle this time being linked to the new  seers not the “modern seers”.
Sometimes DJ/CC says it was because of the interjection of the Tenant 1729 into the lineage that the new cycle began. Elsewhere DJ/CC says it began when the new seers made the distinction on the unknowable and started to separate from the unknown. Elsewhere DJ/CC says it has not yet began and if it is to come it must come of itself no one can assume the responsibility to try and make it happen.
You see we have to sift through this stuff carefully because the presentation shifts depending on what point CC or DJ is trying to make. Probably CC was confused about what DJ was saying.
“It was in his teachings for the left side that don Juan let on what he, don Genaro, and their companions were really doing to me, and who they were. They were not teaching me sorcery, but how to master three aspects of an ancient knowledge they possessed: awareness, stalking, and intent. And they were not sorcerers; they were seers. And don Juan was not only a seer, but also a nagual.”
So here CC says DJ and Genaro were teaching him three aspects of a knowledge they possessed, Awareness, stalking and intent. Now he did not mention dreaming among the three aspects. Dreaming of course was the prowess of the old seers. And this leads into yet another designation men of knowledge.
“Sorcerers have learned after generations of using power plants to account in their views for everything that is accountable about them. I would say that sorcerers, by using their will, have succeeded in enlarging their views of the world. My teacher and benefactor were the clearest examples of that. They were men of great power, but they were not men of knowledge. They never broke the bounds of their enormous views and thus they never arrived at the totality of themselves, yet they knew about it. It wasn’t that they lived aberrant lives, claiming things beyond their reach; they knew that they had missed the boat and that only at their death would the total mystery be revealed to them. Sorcery had given them only a glimpse but never the real means to get to that evasive totality of oneself.”
I would say that sorcerers, by using their will, have succeeded in enlarging their views of the world.
Isn’t this what all spiritualities strive for, whether or not through the use of power plants, to open and expand to new possibilities, increasing awareness and knowledge, expanding the known by exploring the unknown, so why would DJ have a problem with that?
My teacher and benefactor were the clearest examples of that. They were men of great power, but they were not men of knowledge. They never broke the bounds of their enormous views (massive edifices of speculation) and thus they never arrived at the totality of themselves.
So DJ teachers did not arrive at the “totality of themselves” even though they were master stalkers and dreamers. What was it about their “enormous views” that prevented that? And why was stalking and dreaming of no help to them in this regard?
Trying to understand DJ as presented by CC is not an easy task. IT was certainly difficult for CC who was right there conversing with him.

[lex icon]

I want to express my admiration and gratitude to a masterful teacher, H.Y.L. for helping me restore my energy, and for teaching me an alternate way to plenitude and well-being.  (CC)
This is a very obscure quote from an initial page of my copy of Fire From Within. Its there at the very beginning of the book. I do not know who CC is referring to. HYL?? But another teacher has shown him "an alternate way".
Nagual LoneWolf wrote:The old seers were more into achieving power both dark and light, they enlisted the inorganics and some even became tenants and found ways to "live forever". The new seers want to make the knowledge more mainstream and enlighten humanity with dreaming and shifts. The new seers are the legacy of Castaneda and use his insights and techniques to explore this vastness we call infinity.
Neither the old seer or new seer is in any way shape or form, an average men. What separates the average men from the new seers of today?
"The new seers are the legacy of Castaneda and use his insights and techniques to explore this vastness we call infinity."
I get the feeling that some in this thread may not agree with this definition of new seer.  If such is the case, then what is Castaneda's legacy supposed to help us do? Nu Lang.
Nu Lang what I have been trying to bring to attention is DJ’s view as presented by CC, concerning what he thought old and new seers were and how they differed. Judging by the repeated warnings surrounding this issue DJ deemed it very important, probably because DJ considered CC’s predilection similar to the ancient seers. “Modern seers” would rather focus of the difference between seers in general from “average men”, as you have done here, and overlook the finer distinctions DJ was painstakingly explaining.
"The new seers are the legacy of Castaneda and use his insights and techniques to explore this vastness we call infinity." LW
Well yes CC has handed down the teachings of DJ to us as best he could, but the new seers were around long before CC was. So some clarification from LW on this point would be helpful. To just take this statement of LW’s out of context could be misleading. Not trying to put words in your mouth LW.
This is how I see it. CC was an apprentice of DJ.  Nearly all his books are presenting the teachings of DJ not CC.  CC goes through the introductory phase, intensive training and then left to recover what he was taught in heightened awareness in the hopes of gaining his totality. Then after a few years (about 6 years??) of silence he is back in the public eye with a new book,
The Art of Dreaming. (TAOD)
Now when I first read TAOD I thought it was written by a different person not CC. But then I grew accustomed to it. CC was no longer the student he was now the teacher and had at least mastered dreaming.
Then as I read further I was shocked to see he had disregarded all of DJ’s warnings regarding the inorganics and seemed to have embarked upon the path of the old sorcerers, they also were master dreamers intimate with inorganics and their realm. The only mention of stalking that gets any attention in this book is in reference to the twin positions and that is being taught him by the Tenant. CC paid dearly for disregarding DJ’s advice about the inorganics and it nearly cost him his life. (BTW teachings about dreaming have been around for centuries in other traditions).
Now the Active Side of Infinity came out around this time and a little later Encounters With The Nagual, Armando Torres. Also the Tensegrity seminars were introduced with TAOD.
The term “Modern Seers” seems to have found traction amongst those who are partial to Dreaming and the information found in these later works.  Much of the teachings of the modern seers seems to revolve around dreaming and the foreign installation and how these later teachings of CC might “help” the world.
My on going questioning and inquiry is; do the later teachings of CC lend themselves to the teachings of DJ?
And concerning the case of a “Three Pronged Nagual” that might well be but the designs of intent are able to use such a being no matter their calibre, even in spite of themselves.

[Bob May]

Hi Lex,
Hope you had a nice trip.
My teacher and benefactor were the clearest examples of that. They were men of great power, but they were not men of knowledge. They never broke the bounds of their enormous views (massive edifices of speculation) and thus they never arrived at the totality of themselves.
So DJ teachers did not arrive at the “totality of themselves” even though they were master stalkers and dreamers. What was it about their “enormous views” that prevented that? And why was stalking and dreaming of no help to them in this regard?
Trying to understand DJ as presented by CC is not an easy task. IT was certainly difficult for CC who was right there conversing with him.
My opinion is this: Neither Don Juan's teacher nor Carlos ever got past the Sorcerer's world. As I said above, each plane is infinite in it's own way. Their "enormous views" were indeed enormous. But they were only exploring a plane or two beyond this earth plane.
Just as an astronomer's view of this physical universe is enormous compared to a layman's view, but puny compared to a sorcerer's view.
If they spent their lives exploring the soul realms they would have become very powerful in that context.
Just as a trader on Wall Street can become very powerful in the context of this world but never see, experience or maybe not even believe in anything beyond this world.
But to learn of the spiritual realms I think they may have had a problem with the spirit.
Force works in the body. Will works in the soul. Desire and belief work in the spirit.
Just my opinion.

[Bob May]

lex icon wrote:
Nu Lang what I have been trying to bring to attention is DJ’s view as presented by CC, concerning what he thought old and new seers were and how they differed. Judging by the repeated warnings surrounding this issue DJ deemed it very important, probably because DJ considered CC’s predilection similar to the ancient seers. “Modern seers” would rather focus of the difference between seers in general from “average men”, as you have done here, and overlook the finer distinctions DJ was painstakingly explaining.
This is how I see it. CC was an apprentice of DJ.  Nearly all his books are presenting the teachings of DJ not CC.  CC goes through the introductory phase, intensive training and then left to recover what he was taught in heightened awareness in the hopes of gaining his totality. Then after a few years (about 6 years??) of silence he is back in the public eye with a new book,
The Art of Dreaming. (TAOD)
Then as I read further I was shocked to see he had disregarded all of DJ’s warnings regarding the inorganics and seemed to have embarked upon the path of the old sorcerers, they also were master dreamers intimate with inorganics and their realm. The only mention of stalking that gets any attention in this book is in reference to the twin positions and that is being taught him by the Tenant. CC paid dearly for disregarding DJ’s advice about the inorganics and it nearly cost him his life. (BTW teachings about dreaming have been around for centuries in other traditions).
My on going questioning and inquiry is; do the later teachings of CC lend themselves to the teachings of DJ?
   I see it the same way as you do Lex.
I "lived" the first four Castaneda books. Left my home and family and a successful band. Moved 300 miles from everyone I knew. I walked for miles each day with my eyes crossed, practiced not doing and attempted turning off my internal dialog anytime I did not have to speak to people. For about a year and a half. I was completely obsessed with it. 
I "stopped the world" (which is a very real experience) and ended up in two worlds at once surrounded by inorganics and people who had demon's faces and constant reaffirmations etc., etc., This lasted for months. I know the methods work!!!
I was reading the books before the forth book was even published. After the first four books there are only pieces that are of much use. I think Carlos did exactly as you are implying. He got caught in the sorcerer's world instead of as, Don Juan told him, Realize that that world is only a description too. He was supposed to become a "man of knowledge" by slipping " between the worlds." I think that is how Don Juan put it.
By the way your description of Known, Unknown, and Unknowable is perfectly clear. I can see that known and unknown are linear but unknowable is just that Unknowable.

[Guest]

"If as you say Death is unknowable , then how can it become known?"





"Death cannot be both unknowable and known, that just doesn't make sense." Lex



--

One of the many paradoxes in the world of Sorcery

[lex icon]

and still certain other aspects of Death may be ultimately 'Unknowable'...RDU
Rainbow do you have anything upon which to base this speculation?

One of the many paradoxes in the world of Sorcery. Snowdreamer
SD the world of sorcery does have many paradoxes, however this is not one of them.
If we say something is unknowable then using our own definition it is unknowable as in cannot be known. Now if we mean something else then we should be more careful with our syntax and take the time to find the words that match our meaning. Again I point out that DJ said the old seers did not know how to distinguish between the unknowable and the unknown and that the "new cycle" depends upon this clear distinction. Seers will have a hard time getting to this if they do not correctly handle the first truth about awareness.  The implications of this first truth have the power to impact us in a way that changes everything.

[Guest]

lex icon wrote:

and still certain other aspects of Death may be ultimately 'Unknowable'...RDU
Rainbow do you have anything upon which to base this speculation?
You are looking for 'proof'?

[lex icon]

and still certain other aspects of Death may be ultimately 'Unknowable'...RDU
Rainbow do you have anything upon which to base this speculation? Lex
You are looking for 'proof'?SD
Is that a question or a statement? I will take it as a question, but loaded with judgmental intent, that seeks to marginalize me that I am too reason based. I get that all the time. My sobriety is unpalatable to guessing and speculation.
I am not looking for proof in this matter why would I. My statements about the unknowable and the unknown are obvious. RDU's statements about death are vague at best. If he is not speculating then I was giving him an opportunity to respond and clarify for everyone's edification.

[Guest]

lex icon wrote:
You are looking for 'proof'?SD
Is that a question or a statement? I will take it as a question, but loaded with judgmental intent, that seeks to marginalize me that I am too reason based. I get that all the time. My sobriety is unpalatable to guessing and speculation.
I am not looking for proof in this matter why would I. My statements about the unknowable and the unknown are obvious. RDU's statements about death are vague at best. If he is not speculating then I was giving him an opportunity to respond and clarify for everyone's edification.

It appears I touched a nerve, apologies!  I'm going to leave this alone (as you answered my question and then some) except to say that, your statements are not as obvious as you deem them to be, hence my question! Thanks for answering.

[lex icon]

SD The nerve is not as sensitive as you imagine. It has been pricked and prodded and trampled upon so many times it is almost numb.
But why would you "leave this alone"? Please do not be afraid of hurting my feelings, I get over such things almost instantly.
This is the obvious part to me, unknowable means unknowable.
Now what is unknowable is not that obvious to many even though it is right in front of our faces.  Perhaps that is what is obscure for you.

[lex icon]

Don Juan is a man of many depths. I find him utterly fascinating. I continually find fresh insight in his words as presented by CC.  He is also a very tactical man.
Before I had time to say anything at all, he stated that he was pitting what the old seers did against the accomplishments of the new seers, as a sort of counterpoint, with which he intended to give me a more inclusive view of the odds I was up against.  FFW.
This pitting is the part many of us miss. Which is a shame because it offers wonderful opportunity. Most don’t have the stomach for it. Which is why I have to chuckle at times because many of us here would run with our tail between our legs if we ever ran into DJ. But DJ’s intent was to introduce a “more inclusive view of what we are up against” if we are not too shaken up by his tactical approach of pitting.
I gave you enough of the sorcerer’s view without letting you get hooked by it. I said that only if one pits two views against each other can one weasel between them to arrive at the real world. I meant that one can arrive at the totality of oneself only when one fully understands that the world is merely a view, regardless of whether that view belongs to an ordinary man or a to a sorcerer. Tales Of Power
DJ did not want CC latching on to the sorcerer’s view. That would be just another “dead end street”.

[Nu Lang]

I get the feeling that some in this thread may not agree with this definition of new seer. If such is the case, then what is Castaneda's legacy supposed to help us do? Nu Lang.



Nu Lang what I have been trying to bring to attention is DJ’s view as presented by CC, concerning what he thought old and new seers were and how they differed. Judging by the repeated warnings surrounding this issue DJ deemed it very important, probably because DJ considered CC’s predilection similar to the ancient seers. “Modern seers” would rather focus of the difference between seers in general from “average men”, as you have done here, and overlook the finer distinctions DJ was painstakingly explaining. - Lex
Hi Lex, my question was a general question to the participants in this thread...just wanted that to be clear. I have read this thread from time to time and have a general impression, overall, that the focus is more on the theory of whats in the books, discussing what was meant, than an actual embracing of it. Almost like people want to sort it out so they can put it to rest and move in another direction...just my sense. So I wanted to know what that other direction was. The question didn't necessarily apply to you...I don't know if it does or not.



If one does not embrace sorcery, what will they be doing in the future? Because it through sorcery that we transcend the 'mundane', the fixed point of reference. So sorcery is a very important component in the experience and CC legacy as well. It cannot simply be discussed though, it must be learned and done.



I only made a brief statement about average men and that was to make clear that what they lack is sorcery, and what both the old and new seers had in common was ....sorcery.


"The new seers are the legacy of Castaneda and use his insights and techniques to explore this vastness we call infinity." LW



Well yes CC has handed down the teachings of DJ to us as best he could, but the new seers were around long before CC was. So some clarification from LW on this point would be helpful. To just take this statement of LW’s out of context could be misleading. Not trying to put words in your mouth LW. - Lex
I took that he meant it in reference to Ninth's question and what the new name of the forum was about...new seers, because, to be fair, I pulled this quote out of that section of naming the forum. So on Wolf's mind when he responded to Ninth I'm sure he was thinking of all of us, in reference to new seers. We are that legacy, we here.


This is how I see it. CC was an apprentice of DJ. Nearly all his books are presenting the teachings of DJ not CC. CC goes through the introductory phase, intensive training and then left to recover what he was taught in heightened awareness in the hopes of gaining his totality. Then after a few years (about 6 years??) of silence he is back in the public eye with a new book,

The Art of Dreaming. (TAOD)



Now when I first read TAOD I thought it was written by a different person not CC. But then I grew accustomed to it. CC was no longer the student he was now the teacher and had at least mastered dreaming.



Then as I read further I was shocked to see he had disregarded all of DJ’s warnings regarding the inorganics and seemed to have embarked upon the path of the old sorcerers, they also were master dreamers intimate with inorganics and their realm. The only mention of stalking that gets any attention in this book is in reference to the twin positions and that is being taught him by the Tenant. CC paid dearly for disregarding DJ’s advice about the inorganics and it nearly cost him his life. (BTW teachings about dreaming have been around for centuries in other traditions).



Now the Active Side of Infinity came out around this time and a little later Encounters With The Nagual, Armando Torres. Also the Tensegrity seminars were introduced with TAOD.



The term “Modern Seers” seems to have found traction amongst those who are partial to Dreaming and the information found in these later works. Much of the teachings of the modern seers seems to revolve around dreaming and the foreign installation and how these later teachings of CC might “help” the world.



My on going questioning and inquiry is; do the later teachings of CC lend themselves to the teachings of DJ? - Lex
You bring some interesting points to light. Such as differences between he and DJ. Art of Dreaming and Tensegrity. To be honest, I don't make everything from his books a focus. Some I have embraced more than others. Such as the AP, the flyer, burning from within...the most basic components I guess. The fact that CC branched off makes sense to me, its what we are doing too, expanding on DJ rather than mimicing him exactly. I'm not sure if I would follow CC. I did do Tensegrity for a while. Its hard for me to say what kind of impact it had on me, so at this point in time I'd rather just say I'm not sure...it could have shifted me in ways I don't know about...not sure.


And concerning the case of a “Three Pronged Nagual” that might well be but the designs of intent are able to use such a being no matter their calibre, even in spite of themselves.
Yeah, I don't have a particular opinion on this. To me, its about what we can do with the legacy now, in our daily life, the here and now, us.

[Nu Lang]

I wanted to comment about death as I had an interesting insight about it in another thread. Its known via life, only because of life is death given any shape, form, tangibility, otherwise its unknowable. IN fact, by experiencing it because of life, due to life, we still see that its intangible...because all we are apprehending of it is a reflection within life's framework, not death itself, becasue its...nothing at all.

[Guest]

Nu Lang wrote: I have read this thread from time
to time and have a general impression, overall, that the focus is more
on the theory of whats in the books, discussing what was meant, than an
actual embracing of it. Almost like people want to sort it out so they
can put it to rest and move in another direction...just my sense. So I
wanted to know what that other direction was. The question didn't
necessarily apply to you...I don't know if it does or not.





If one does not embrace sorcery, what will they be doing in the future?
I feel same as what you say above, Nu Lang. fwiw
Also, like what you say about death as it relates to life.

[Nu Lang]

Hey Snowdreamer, yes... your seeing is very clear to me You are very much a sorceress, embracing that path. I think the books are great, but there is so much more out there for us to experience

[lex icon]

Hi Lex, my question was a general question to the participants in this thread...just wanted that to be clear. I have read this thread from time to time and have a general impression, overall, that the focus is more on the theory of whats in the books, discussing what was meant, than an actual embracing of it. Almost like people want to sort it out so they can put it to rest and move in another direction...just my sense. So I wanted to know what that other direction was.
The question didn't necessarily apply to you...I don't know if it does or not. Nu lang
(I know the question was not directed just to me). I think it important to understand what it is we are practicing or what we might be considering as an option but do not confuse my seeing with theory.
“The new seers seem to have been very abstract,” I commented. “They sound like modern-day philosophers.” (That’s how we appeared to CC at that time, sort of echoing your “theory” comment.)
“No. The new seers were terribly practical men,” he replied “They weren’t involved in concocting rational theories.”
He said the ancient seers were the ones who were the abstract thinkers. They built monumental edifices of abstractions proper to them and their time. And just like the modern day philosophers they were not at all in control of their concatenations. The new seers, on the other hand, imbued with practicality, were able to see a flux of emanations and to see how man and other living beings utilize them to construct their perceivable world. FFW
This to me this sheds more light on how to approach this. Instead of trying to figure out who’s the new seers and who’s the old seers let’s focus instead on what each do. I for one don’t mind hanging out with “old seers” or new.
These edifices are interesting. Abstract comments are made all the time in any of the spiritual circles and traditions not just the sorcery tradition. And as I frequently see in this forum the wildest and craziest comments that border on nonesence are bandied about with an almost absolute sense of authority that too few will even bat an eye at, that it just leaves me gob-smacked, my mouth open and dangling in the wind. To some such comments do not seem outrageous at all. If it is a thread I am involved with you will often see me pose a question challenging or inquiring into the foundation of the rational or narrative behind the words. I am more than willing to dialogue. More often than not that narrative starts to crumble as it has no foundation in any reality and because such people are “not at all in control of their concatenations.” So for DJ and others it is pretty clear there is edifice building, wild speculating about things people know nothing  about  (this includes mastering the speculation of others) and there is the clear seeing how living beings construct their perceivable world.
For myself I had to choose one day. I had to fiercely resist the temptation to exaggerate. I ask myself one very important question....What exactly is it you think you know lex? I came to the conclusion it boils down to just a few things, which is really a relief. I was very very good at that sort of speculating. I could speak endlessly about the edifices I had created  and the edifices of others. I was drunk on it. Sobriety is key. And as DJ says,  “Seers have to be methodical, rational beings, paragons of sobriety....”FFW
Those that think my seeing too rational or theoretical must also think that I don’t dream or don’t have tales of power to share, they would be mistaken. But I don’t really want to make this about me and there are plenty of tales of power and dreaming going on in this forum. My tactic is different.

[Guest]

Nu Lang wrote:Hey Snowdreamer, yes... your seeing is very clear to me You are very much a sorceress, embracing that path. I think the books are great, but there is so much more out there for us to experience
Thank you and Agreed!

[Guest]

Useful distinctions.... but I don't know that they are written in stone, especially if we are using these descriptions as means to find out (or prove) if we are a new seer or not. I have a feeling, that as  new seers, we know who we are and can sense many others. 

“They weren’t involved in concocting rational theories.”
 The new seers, on the other hand,
imbued with practicality, were able to see a flux of emanations and to
see how man and other living beings utilize them to construct their
perceivable world.

[ninth octave]

lex icon wrote:

"If as you say Death is unknowable , then how can it become known?" Lex
"Death cannot be both unknowable and known, that just doesn't make sense."  Lex
How then do you explain those walking avatars in the Himalayas of India? Ninth
Ninth I was not speaking about death, which of course can be known, Jessicar was.
I was trying to point out that something that is unknowable cannot become known. It is the unknown that can become known.
Again DJ points out that the old seers were confused about this and did not know how to separate the unknowable from the unknown.

The thing that is unknowable is the world of inorganic beings. The IB' s  that swirl around us inviting us to be consumers of their food for thought processing. I don't know why the role of the IB's  can either be so debilitating as a tyrant or as a freeing allie. lol.The confusion in this world stems from the unseen IB's that can never be explained even after they are explored ( dead-end street ).  I believe CC went too far out in this unknowable reality. He wasn't as prepared as he thought ( will, intent) just as the old seers had overly indulged in deviation of syntax about the topic of all topics.  DJ had the knowledge forbearance and discernment on the topic of syntax and predation. The new seers will arrive also at this knowledge.

[Bob May]

Enchantra wrote:

Useful distinctions.... but I don't know that they are written in stone, especially if we are using these descriptions as means to find out (or prove) if we are a new seer or not. I have a feeling, that as  new seers, we know who we are and can sense many others. 

“They weren’t involved in concocting rational theories.”
 The new seers, on the other hand, imbued with practicality, were able to see a flux of emanations and to see how man and other living beings utilize them to construct their perceivable world.

Nu Lang wrote:
""I wanted to comment about death as I had an interesting insight about it in another thread. Its known via life, only because of life is death given any shape, form, tangibility, otherwise its unknowable. IN fact, by experiencing it because of life, due to life, we still see that its intangible...because all we are apprehending of it is a reflection within life's framework, not death itself, becasue its...nothing at all.""

 Knowledge,..real knowledge in the "biblical sense" of the word is "experiential knowledge." "Daath" in Hebrew and "Gnosis" in Greek. In the  English language there is not that distinction. 
Also, in the "biblical sense" WE are the dead in the sense that we are unaware of the higher planes of existence. So were the Old Seers. They had made a "latteral shift" of their assemblage points and experienced a becoming aware of something more than the average man's experience. What they experienced was opening their eyes to what is really going on in this world.
To lift that veil is to "stop the world." At that point a person becomes a "sorcerer." It is a necessary step but it is a first step, not the end game. It does not mean a person will continue on that path. It is an "initiation." A level of awareness that that person has reached.
The practicality of the New Seers was to organise what they had seen into an understandable whole. What that whole was is unclear to us because Carlos decided to remain a sorcerer. But there is enough in Don Juan's description of that "Whole" that we can see that a "New Seer" or "Man of Knowledge" had gone beyond both ordinary men and sorcerer's in what they had experienced.
Whether they had come to be "alive" is not clear.
What is clear is that, because of there experiences, they stood "outside of" both the normal man's realm and the sorcerer's realm. They saw where to place boundaries of both.
Unless you are outside of something you cannot know the boundaries of that thing.
As "normal" men and women we see ourselves as "alive" and everyone we meet agrees with us because they also see themselves in the same way. It is only by stepping outside of our condition can we contrast life with death.
Physical death is just losing the body. It is the awareness that continues. At the moment of death we will be separated from this physical body. That is a revalation to those who in this physical life never meditated or "dreamed." But not to those who have.
Is that all we will know? Maybe. Maybe as far as we have gotten in "this world" is where we will be at death. 
At what level is our consciousnes/ awareness? What has our consciousness/ awareness experienced before we die physically? If it has not touched on the realms Don Juan referred to as Man of Knowledge or New Seer then we might very well be still living the illusions of the "Normal" human being and/or "Sorcerer after we leave this physical body.

[Nu Lang]

Bob wrote (re:New Seers) What is clear is that, because of there experiences, they stood "outside of" both the normal man's realm and the sorcerer's realm. They saw where to place boundaries of both.

Unless you are outside of something you cannot know the boundaries of that thing.Yes, I agree. They had a most unique perspective of freedom. Still, their life goes on, their realizations are immense, but their life goes on.



In this thread and some others...there seems to be...something...saying or reaching towards an end. There is no end. We are merely approaching the beginning. Or then end of the beginning. To discover both the utilization of sorcery and also that perspective outside of it and to combine these two understandings makes a New Seer.