The way in which fan fiction operates may serve as a case study for understanding the way in which the klippot can function, specifically as the klippot of a specific operation that can take place under the auspices of the sefirot Yesod. Let me see if I can walk you through my reasoning.
[This is the first of the pages being fed back into the blog. It’s a bit heady, but it has some bearing on the matter of correspondences which I will be talking about in the near future.]
I picked up the idea of the virtual from Gilles Deleuze and it is a concept that has much utility as we set out to discuss what it means to talk about the spiritual world. On this page, I am going to provide a brief introduction to the concept and its applications to occult philosophy. To get at this Deleuzian approach to the virtual I will need to do four things:
- distinguish this use of the term from another popular use of the term.
- define this term.
- detail the relationship between the two uses of the term which partially justifies the same word being applied to both.
- highlight how all of this can inform occult thinking.
Because tell me that isn’t what Jessica Jones is. Well, okay, it is a bit redundant to use ‘neognostic’ and ‘noire,’ but in this case I think the intensifier is necessary. Moreso than a standard noire piece, Jessica Jones (the character) plays the role of a the soul navigating the fallen world. Her discovery of agency in the midst of her sinful nature, her momentary liberation, and her failed effort to express that liberation within the confines of the sinful world, make Jessica Jones (season 1, at least) nothing less than a gnostic parable.
This is an odd thought, but what happens if we attempt to understand Calvinism as a particularly rigid and unforgiving mode of ‘Gnosticism’? What if part of its success relies on its ability to give voice to a fundamentally gnostic experience of the sacred? I am no fan of Calvinism, but what if its problem lies not so much in its theological intuitions as its practical and rigid disciplining of them?
So, yeah, I do jabber on around spiritualist and gnostic practice. I circle in words and concepts without often zooming in to deal with the practical day-to-day matters that constitute my work. I don’t talk an awful lot about prayer or ritual, for example. That’s mostly because I am not sure about the value of such talk in this medium; it seems too fast and shallow.
If that sounds negative, I don’t mean it to. It just seems like the time in which ritual work unfolds and the time in which internet-use unfolds are quite different.
This brings me to something I want to talk about regarding practice and ideas of practice—time.
When Ibn al’Arabi talks about the imagination, he places it in the category of things that makes us a proper image of the divine. When we engage our imagination fully, we imitate the creative act through which God created the world. This mirroring is one of the reasons that we can even begin to make sense of what would otherwise be the utter ineffability of God, though it is also the source of a lot of our misunderstandings, too. Our imagination is concrete and specific, motivated by, and concerned with, other concrete and specific things. God’s creative power is total, which is something we don’t have the chops to grasp.