Whats Your Views/advice On Joining A Temple Or Similar Group? Options

I want to join a temple or group to help further myself. I am not aware of any officially magic groups since I live in central Ohio, in a medium sized town. However there is a very large free mason temple in my town. But I don't think this is what I am looking for, I met on of the guys that was higher up and spoke to him about it and quite frankly I thought he was an idiot. He knew everything, and seriously I mean everything this man must have obsessive interests in trivial pursuit games and jeopardy ect., however he seemed sort of socially awkward and I stopped taking him seriously once he brought up "star trek" on his own. He also said he was a 33 degree mason which I think he wasn't supposed to say because he leaned in and whispered it to me when I asked. But if anyone has had any positive experiences I would like to know.
There are various Golden Dawn sort of groups that let you join online with "astral initiation" but I am skeptical. So what are your experiences and advice? I would like to join a serious group with similar interests.

This post has been edited by ☞Tomber☜: Aug 13 2010, 06:17 PM

My advice would be to go to any local occult shops you can find and see if they know of any groups; if not, then get to know the people who run the shops, and other people in your area of similar interests, you'll be surprised how much you can learn from them even if their beliefs and practises aren't exactly the same as yours. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif)

Good luck!

(IMG:style_emoticons/default/egypt1.gif)

I want to join a temple or group to help further myself. I am not aware of any officially magic groups since I live in central Ohio, in a medium sized town. However there is a very large free mason temple in my town. But I don't think this is what I am looking for, I met on of the guys that was higher up and spoke to him about it and quite frankly I thought he was an idiot.

Yeah, I'm from central Ohio. Not an easy place to find others with similar interests. If not for the abundant lack thereof, then it's also the age gap you find when pursuing these things when you're 19 and everyone else is 30+. I'm running into less problems because of that now at 25, but it still sux.

I think the bigger question is...do you have a specific interest? You mentioned the Golden Dawn? Is this really your interest, or is it Crowley? Wicca? Drinking merlot with Satan? Or are you wanting to learn and willing to try anything and everything once, and looking for a group to help you out?

This post has been edited by monkman418: Aug 14 2010, 10:51 PM

Along the same lines...what are you looking for in a group?

Some Golden Dawn and other groups operate on a long-distance basis, where you're assigned a mentor and otherwise work independently. Some of these groups do "astral" initiations, others require you to go to a temple initiation, or to even come to temple once every X number of months.

Other groups actually "get together" and do rituals, or work on projects together. Sometimes there's an assigned mentor in these groups (some Wiccan covens I know of). In others, advanced members will help you, but there's less formal instruction aside from group work (initiations, et cetera), yet a good opportunity for networking with others with like interests.

This post has been edited by monkman418: Aug 14 2010, 10:58 PM

^ yes true. I didn't want to put my real age here so people would focus on what I say instead of my age but that didn't seem very honest. I'll just have to deal with it. But I plan on checking that out, I'll post back here when I check into it more

Why would you require a group? My take is that, given that you've found your way here, which is a place of fairly diverse opinions, you have quite a lot of walls to bounce off of. For spiritual development, what exactly would a organized system provide?

My impression of organized religion is each system is not for everybody, yet, due to sometimes, geographical/logistical constraints or something akin to that, they may often just go to the most convenient system. Why can't somebody just seriously practice on their own, without others harassing and badgering, with some nice, distant critique from the internet, pretty much devoid of most obnoxious coven-drama

My impression of organized religion is each system is not for everybody, yet, due to sometimes, geographical/logistical constraints or something akin to that, they may often just go to the most convenient system. Why can't somebody just seriously practice on their own, without others harassing and badgering, with some nice, distant critique from the internet, pretty much devoid of most obnoxious coven-drama

To play devil's advocate (he pays me in Merlot for doing so...)...

I really do think you need to have a "system" of magick/occultism (or some such); otherwise, you're just "making it up," and I challenge you to find a SINGLE system that wasn't built on previous systems of religion/magic/spirituality.

Some systems don't require you to participate with other people, others do. More importantly (perhaps) is whether or not a certain system is feasible to attempt by oneself without other people.

Can you learn boxing without a partner? Probably not. Can you learn to break a board without a partner? Probably.

I've heard some discussion on the "importance" (or irrelevance) of having a teacher or guide. I think a book can be a teacher, if the book is good enough. But a book isn't going to call you on your mistakes, either.

So it's a tough call. If the system allows you to work it on your own, then you might be alright. In the end, the dangers of confusing oneself are probably equal the the dangers of being deluded by a group.

Not sure if I earned that glass of Merlot...

^ yes true. I didn't want to put my real age here so people would focus on what I say instead of my age but that didn't seem very honest. I'll just have to deal with it. But I plan on checking that out, I'll post back here when I check into it more

That's fine. You'll obviously know what limitations and perks you'll have because of (whatever age you are) then.

Aside from researching systems, about the only way you'll really know is to try one (or a few) out. You can experiment a bit on your own, play with the G.D. materials or whatever. Since you can quit anything you start, and try something else, there's really no harm in trying a bunch of things and finding what you like.

Most occult groups have a way for "newbies" to get involved with the group without formally committing, others don't. Obviously, the former are probably a good way of getting involved without taking irrevocable steps (unless you're really sure what you want).

This post has been edited by monkman418: Aug 15 2010, 03:36 PM

Ohh this is a fascinating topic. I think that it'll start raining bottles of that stuff once we get this started

I really do think you need to have a "system" of magick/occultism (or some such); otherwise, you're just "making it up," and I challenge you to find a SINGLE system that wasn't built on previous systems of religion/magic/spirituality.

I definitely agree with the latter here, and I don't dispute that.

But, every single 'system' is basically made up upon the times we sit down, either get high, or think that we're being touched by angels, and we make up stuff. If I ever actually use ceremonial, all of my tools, the extra slaves, and everything else is completely energetic. I think that hypothetically that's not supposed to be okay? (according to the paradigm?), but it sure as hell works far better than the physical for me.

Lovecraft made up his stuff. Sure, he borrowed plenty of mythological lore, but Harry Potter did too. As did any book that ever mentions stuff. What's wrong with making stuff up?

I've heard some discussion on the "importance" (or irrelevance) of having a teacher or guide. I think a book can be a teacher, if the book is good enough. But a book isn't going to call you on your mistakes, either.

I am confiscating a bottle of Merlot from Satan. There's been a grave miscommunication. Or I think I didn't say something, something along the lines of that. I have a series of handlers that float about teaching me stuff. They more or less facepalmed and groaned when I figured out the solid definition of what magic"K" was.

Most people have the connection to a guide or something, I'm guessing, so I still don't get why would you want a human buffer when you can go straight to the source?

But, every single 'system' is basically made up upon the times we sit down, either get high, or think that we're being touched by angels, and we make up stuff. If I ever actually use ceremonial, all of my tools, the extra slaves, and everything else is completely energetic. I think that hypothetically that's not supposed to be okay? (according to the paradigm?), but it sure as hell works far better than the physical for me.

Lovecraft made up his stuff. Sure, he borrowed plenty of mythological lore, but Harry Potter did too. As did any book that ever mentions stuff. What's wrong with making stuff up?

(takes a swig of Merlot)

I'd like to make a distinction between having a personal experience within and without a context. In both cases, it's your own experience, and it's often a new and creative experience.

In the first case, you have a means and a method to understand the experience. You understand that you encountered the Greek myths when you read about them, and you understand the human cultural source of the Greek myths.

In the second case you also have a context, but you don't understand that you have a context. Instead of being able to work within a framework, to criticize and augment that framework, you're working within a field of givens and assumptions. At some point in your life you might have heard that the Ouija board is "evil," and so that becomes part of your system; this negates the fact that various Christian movements have strongly condemned the Ouija board, saying it leads to demonic possession (et cetera). In short, it denies the context from which you derived the idea that the Ouija board was evil.

So let me clarify, by "making stuff up," I mean putting together ideas and systems without understanding what they are or where they came from. By "making stuff up," I mean making confused and generalized conclusions based on ideas that we don't even know we have.

I don't know much about Lovecraft, but if you get very seriously into an author, reading the books that author read, reading about the history that surrounded the cultural context of that author's life, you start to see how their "immensely creative" ideas came FROM somewhere, how their ideas were built on the ideas of others. Harry Potter uses a cerberus dog, and the cerberus dog came FROM Greek Mythology; and I'm sure J.K. Rowling knew where the cerberus dog came from, and how the cerberus often serves as a guardian. When the idea was written, other people understood the concept the same way, and so the idea took on a new form based on a common root.

We tend to think that a person gets their ideas because they're "a genius"; this is a huge misunderstanding of what human intelligence even is first of all, because it denies the context of how human intelligence was developed as a scientific concept (and also denies how, in mainstream culture, one's IQ is seen as an EGOTISTICAL way of saying "I'm so superior because I can do XYZ.") True, we can manipulate our experience based on the assets and limitations of our mind/body, but we're not JUST our cognitive capacity. We tend to equate scientific discoveries to the work of a single genius, but things don't work that way; it might take genius to shift the dominate paradime, but here the paradime is being shifted...it's not a "new paradime" being "made up."

"Making stuff up" is VERY different than what I'd call genuine human progress, which is "using ideas and methods in a new and creative way"...this without misunderstanding, distorting, or denying where we came from.

...

I think "making stuff up" is the default position we humans find ourselves in. Without understanding what we come from, we might be able to manipulate ideas, but we can't critically evaluate them or even use them effectively.

I'm not saying that there aren't new ideas, but new ideas evolve from old ideas. "Making up stuff" is like trying to write a novel on the human condition without being able to speak the language of the persons you're writing about; you might write a good novel about sitting and drinking merlot, but it won't be about the human condition.

...

This post has been edited by monkman418: Aug 15 2010, 05:14 PM

I am confiscating a bottle of Merlot from Satan. There's been a grave miscommunication. Or I think I didn't say something, something along the lines of that. I have a series of handlers that float about teaching me stuff. They more or less facepalmed and groaned when I figured out the solid definition of what magic"K" was.

Most people have the connection to a guide or something, I'm guessing, so I still don't get why would you want a human buffer when you can go straight to the source?

Get thy Merlot behind my glass, Satan!

Ok, I'm hesitating to reply to this because I'm not wanting to say anything stupid.

Never mind, this is going to be stupid, so here goes (swigs more merlot)...

(continues a bit drunkenly)

Given: All initiation is self initiation.

If so, what can a teacher possibly do to help?

General cultural quote (horribly butchered due to drunkenness): The teacher sees more than the student.

What is it the teacher is seeing? If I write on the board "1 + 1 = 3", then it's pretty obvious where I'm going wrong.

If magick is all made up, then there's nothing to criticize. But magick isn't made up. Magick has a source and a history, and different systems have been developed based on that history. There is a "way" of doing something.

I'm not saying there isn't creativity within a system. To be clear, I'm by no means encouraging dogmatism, which I'll define as perfectly using and assimilating a system without being able to see it, use it, and work from WITHIN it. I am saying that, within a system, there ARE definite ways to do and not do something.

This post has been edited by monkman418: Aug 15 2010, 05:28 PM

Alone yet never alone.

Have come to terms with being a solitary over the years, obvious that there is no correct or better way of practicing although I personally tend toward Kabooms initial post... basically, I don't mind politics in everyday life, thats normal, but don't mix it with my Merlot... spirituality and personal politics are far from kith and kin in my opinion and the crass egotism I've seen amongst groups is more than enough to reassure my assumption. There are flaws within each that pretty much even it but out to balance the thread...

You learn humility in a group in a way you don't as a solitary which can often lead to moments of egotism, at times the very basis for practicing alone can be egotistical, wanting to make it on your own merit and carve your own path, personal power, success being seen as your own with no one else to credit for it.

Theres a promotion of a sense of purpose within a group, in working together its often suggested that you work for others, be they initiates or otherwise, this can often become a community of practitioners respected amongst a wider community, teaching and other such roles become an option, your achievements better known and put in the correct context.

It is possible to loose your sense of self within a group and become part of its collective whole.... this is something I've observed within myself and is, in my opinion, why most solitary minded people dislike the idea of joining a group... that you may loose your identity in doing so, all of your past experiences become reinterpreted, taken from what they once meant to you and forged into the cultural understanding of the group through this you are stripped bare until the you you once were becomes the you you once knew... this can be abhorrent to the solitary who has interpreted their own experiences and has already formed an occult personality or career path.

Working with others also gives you a more rounded perspective of the system you're in.. suppose the above all boils down to egotism, the spoiler of the rich, the coveting aspect whos deadly tentacles lay in wait for the unweary yet weary solitary.

(Apologies, had this post figured out but am in a rush trying to post this at work.)

Peace
.M.

However there is a very large free mason temple in my town.

Out of virtually any group I can think of, I wouldn't go anywhere near the Masons, personally. I also wouldn't really recommend structured groups in general. Worst case scenario, the group you will join will be a cult, which will simply fleece you of your money, and expose you to various forms of abuse. Best case, even if they are legitimate, what you're essentially looking at is surrendering the direction of your own development to the agenda of somebody else. Is that really something that you want to do?

If direction is what you need, get a copy of this:- http://www.amazon.com/Self-Initiation-Into...83367486&sr=8-2 and then study it on your own. If you have questions, ask some of the people here. If you want to meet people with similar interests, you could maybe try looking for some pagan or spiritual meetup groups in your area on Meetup.com.

Don't join an order, though. That is simply looking for trouble.

EDIT:- Fio Praeter Humanus and other skilled individuals offer online classes in this subforum, as well:- http://www.sacred-magick.org/index.php?showforum=84

This post has been edited by Petrus: Sep 1 2010, 01:08 PM

Out of virtually any group I can think of, I wouldn't go anywhere near the Masons, personally. I also wouldn't really recommend structured groups in general. Worst case scenario, the group you will join will be a cult, which will simply fleece you of your money, and expose you to various forms of abuse. Best case, even if they are legitimate, what you're essentially looking at is surrendering the direction of your own development to the agenda of somebody else. Is that really something that you want to do?

If direction is what you need, get a copy of this:- http://www.amazon.com/Self-Initiation-Into...83367486&sr=8-2 and then study it on your own. If you have questions, ask some of the people here. If you want to meet people with similar interests, you could maybe try looking for some pagan or spiritual meetup groups in your area on Meetup.com.

Don't join an order, though. That is simply looking for trouble.

EDIT:- Fio Praeter Humanus and other skilled individuals offer online classes in this subforum, as well:- http://www.sacred-magick.org/index.php?showforum=84

Wow, I disagree with almost everything you're saying here! And that's a rare feat for me to find here. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/bigwink.gif) Hope you don't mind if I call out where I'm not seeing eye to eye with you...

What do you have against the Masons? I'm not a Mason, but I know a number of persons who have affiliated with them and they're good people. I'd prefer to at least know why you have something against this group instead of hearing an ominous and vague dismissal of them.

Yes, obviously it's a good idea to be very careful when joining a group. This involves mainstream organized religion as well as "occult" groups. As I've mentioned before, the majority of groups that actually qualify as "cults" aren't what we'd call "pagan" or new age, but are rather tightly-knit Christian organizations. (I really need to find the book to cite that, but hopefully you can take my word for it until I do.) Even very reputable groups that aren't cults (I'm thinking of some protestant churches I know of, and some zen groups) will often want money and will sometimes have screwed up political hierarchies...but how is that different than any other human organization?

Best case, even if they're legitimate, you're surrendering everything you are to someone else's agenda? I really don't understand this point, and it seems a bit paranoid...like a group is about trying to "control" your progress. If you absolutely don't want to take part in a system, fine. But I see nothing wrong with participating in a group if you like what that group is doing. Want to sit zazen, do walking meditation, and make bows to the Buddha? Join a local zen center. Want to take part in the Golden Dawn system of magic? Then join a reputable G.D. organization. Yes, Buddha has an agenda...and so did the founders of the Golden Dawn...and what's wrong with aligning with that? You make it sound like the illuminati are behind the scenes and looking to brainwash! lol

I think you're making the mistake of assuming that any group you're with will discourage and forbid you from participating in any other ideas or systems, and I really don't think this is true. I've met Buddhists who also attend Christian organizations. I've met Masons who are affiliated with multiple occult groups...and still manage to hang out at orthodox churches! I've met persons who are members of both O.T.O. and wicca covens. Yes, you'll find the dogmatic Buddhist or Mason or Thelemite who will condemn other traditions and look down on people who stray from the established doctrine, but they've got some learning to do and (unless they're in charge) it won't matter. And yes, the G.D. might not give you extra credit for doing walking meditation elsewhere, but what's the point of finding fault with this?

I wish you wouldn't dismiss all orders and organizations as either cults or otherwise "trying to control your direction." There's already enough prejudice against this field, and I don't think it's fair to make universal dismissals of all groups when there's plenty of wholesome activities going on out there.

This post has been edited by monkman418: Sep 1 2010, 02:41 PM

Wow, I disagree with almost everything you're saying here! And that's a rare feat for me to find here. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/bigwink.gif) Hope you don't mind if I call out where I'm not seeing eye to eye with you...

No, that's fine. I know my opinions can seem a bit extreme.

What do you have against the Masons? I'm not a Mason, but I know a number of persons who have affiliated with them and they're good people. I'd prefer to at least know why you have something against this group instead of hearing an ominous and vague dismissal of them.

I do not like the level of secrecy; and then there's the fairly consistent rumour that beyond the 33rd degree, they're Luciferians, but that people below said degree generally do not know that. From everything I've ever heard, they are also not a group which you can simply enter and later leave, either. Even if the first two points weren't enough to keep me away from them, the third point is. As far as having anything against them is concerned, there's no vendetta, as such. I simply wouldn't join myself.

If I receive different information, that might change, but it would probably be difficult for me to meet a sufficiently high grade Mason who could credibly deny the Luciferian claim; and even if they did deny it, their level of secrecy means that there is no way that I can verify whether or not they are telling the truth. The secrecy does create a very serious trust issue for me. I've been in entirely transparent groups before, that proved themselves extremely untrustworthy; and that being the case, I am far less likely to trust a group as secretive as the Masons. Some people might feel that that level of secrecy is fine, and if so, that is their perogative. I am not comfortable with it. I do not want even the possibility of being affiliated with a Luciferian group, either; again, that's an individual preference.

Your Masonic friends very possibly are genuinely good people. I'm not denying that. The issue is whether or not said virtue is consistent with (at least the ideology of) the organisation as a whole, and I have no way of being able to verify that before joining. I'm not going to insert my hand into an otherwise sealed box when the person who is inviting me to do so, says that they are not going to tell me what is inside it until after I have done so. For all I know, it could contain a bear trap; and logically, the degree of secrecy causes me to at least be strongly suspicious that something negative *is* involved. Otherwise, why hide it?

Yes, obviously it's a good idea to be very careful when joining a group. This involves mainstream organized religion as well as "occult" groups. As I've mentioned before, the majority of groups that actually qualify as "cults" aren't what we'd call "pagan" or new age, but are rather tightly-knit Christian organizations. (I really need to find the book to cite that, but hopefully you can take my word for it until I do.) Even very reputable groups that aren't cults (I'm thinking of some protestant churches I know of, and some zen groups) will often want money and will sometimes have screwed up political hierarchies...but how is that different than any other human organization?

I've had bad experiences with churches. Truthfully I've had enough negative social experiences with humanity in general, in groups or otherwise, that I am extremely selective about who I will interact with, at this point. It's going to be a long time before I go to another church, and it is going to be even longer before I trust another human being to act as a mentor to me.

Best case, even if they're legitimate, you're surrendering everything you are to someone else's agenda? I really don't understand this point, and it seems a bit paranoid...like a group is about trying to "control" your progress.

The last time I had any sort of close, offline relationship with someone who did not try and do this, was during my teens. As an adult, everyone who I have interacted with on more than a very peripheral basis has done so.

But I see nothing wrong with participating in a group if you like what that group is doing.

If that is all it is, I don't either. I could probably go to something as basic as a cookery or ceramics class, by all means; because in that type of scenario, I'm not going to be repeatedly told that I am going to Hell (or the related equivalent) if I express my own opinions.

Want to take part in the Golden Dawn system of magic? Then join a reputable G.D. organization. Yes, Buddha has an agenda...and so did the founders of the Golden Dawn...and what's wrong with aligning with that? You make it sound like the illuminati are behind the scenes and looking to brainwash! lol

The agenda itself is not the problem. Social dynamics are. If I can join a group and do what I'm there to do, and then leave, that isn't a problem. However, if there is any scenario where I interact with people on anything other than that basis, I tend to find that problems develop very quickly. It isn't all their fault, and I'm not saying that; I've engaged in behaviour patterns at times that were a real problem myself, as well. I just find life a lot less potentially stressful for all concerned, if I limit my interactions with people.

I think you're making the mistake of assuming that any group you're with will discourage and forbid you from participating in any other ideas or systems, and I really don't think this is true.

It is possible that things have changed. It is true that I haven't tried to do it for a while.

I wish you wouldn't dismiss all orders and organizations as either cults or otherwise "trying to control your direction." There's already enough prejudice against this field, and I don't think it's fair to make universal dismissals of all groups when there's plenty of wholesome activities going on out there.

It might have been wrong of me to advocate my own position to someone else, perhaps, given the unusually consistent nature of my own experiences. I also apologise for issuing a universal condemnation of *all* groups. I would not, however, join a group that wanted me to live with them, even on a short term basis, and I would also be hesitant (although not necessarily completely dismissive) about joining a group which insisted on any form of interaction outside the group's formal activities; but that is my preference only, and it is based on the experience I've had.

there's the fairly consistent rumour that beyond the 33rd degree, they're Luciferians, but that people below said degree generally do not know that. From everything I've ever heard, they are also not a group which you can simply enter and later leave, either.

As far as I can tell, the Luciferian rumor comes from a line in Pike's famous book, the Morals and Dogma of Masonry. I was a bit shocked when I read it in Pike's book, but there's a very good explanation of it here: http://www.masonicinfo.com/lucifer.htm

Also an explanation of what it means to be a 33 degree Mason, a degree that is rumored to be made up of the rich and powerful but more likely seems to be meant as an honorary designation: http://www.masonicinfo.com/33rdsrule.htm

I'd be worried if one couldn't easily leave the Masons after joining. I'm very critical of Scientology on this count for some of the news articles I've read on this kind of abuse. I can't help but think this is a bit paranoid in the case of Masonry though-- how could they compel you to stay? Plus, it seems that there are formal ways of resigning: http://www.masonicinfo.com/faq.htm#quitting

Other sites indicate the same procedure for quitting, that one simply writes a formal letter of resignation or stops paying dues, just like resigning from one's gym membership. I'll have to ask my Masonic friends about this one and get back to you; seems like they'd be able to answer this kind of a procedural question.

I think the links I'm giving you here are reputable, and hopefully the content speaks for itself.

but it would probably be difficult for me to meet a sufficiently high grade Mason who could credibly deny the Luciferian claim; and even if they did deny it, their level of secrecy means that there is no way that I can verify whether or not they are telling the truth. The secrecy does create a very serious trust issue for me. I've been in entirely transparent groups before, that proved themselves extremely untrustworthy; and that being the case, I am far less likely to trust a group as secretive as the Masons. Some people might feel that that level of secrecy is fine, and if so, that is their perogative. I am not comfortable with it. I do not want even the possibility of being affiliated with a Luciferian group, either; again, that's an individual preference.

If this is the measure by which we're going to evaluate these claims of luciferian worship, et cetera, it's going to be nearly impossible to refute them. I very much hope that the above links are helpful in at least giving you some rational basis for doubting these claims, even if that trust is not forthcoming on an emotional level.

On a personal level, this argument reminds me a bit of what people say about Crowley's organizations. No matter how well it is explained by various leaders of these groups, he's still branded a Satanist and said to have concocted Satanic rituals you'll never hear about until you're initiated. This bothers me because nothing I say can overturn these accusations; to follow you're argument, I'm either not highly initiated enough or not telling the truth. I know you're not extending your line of thought to my case, but that's my personal reaction. And I imagine that many Masons would feel similarly a bit bothered that they would be disqualified from representing their own organization.

I understand that you're not comfortable with secrecy. I can't represent having gone through a Masonic initiation...though having gone through "secret" initiations elsewhere-- if only you could believe that much of the fear surrounding the secrecy was such a joke! The best way I can explain the reason for the secrecy is to make a Star Wars analogy: you wouldn't want to know that Vader was Luke's father before you saw the Empire Strikes Back, otherwise it wouldn't have such a powerful effect, it would ruin the revelation. In every other way, Masons seem pretty open about posting when they're having initiations and social banquets on their local Web sites.

Your Masonic friends very possibly are genuinely good people. I'm not denying that. The issue is whether or not said virtue is consistent with (at least the ideology of) the organisation as a whole, and I have no way of being able to verify that before joining. I'm not going to insert my hand into an otherwise sealed box when the person who is inviting me to do so, says that they are not going to tell me what is inside it until after I have done so. For all I know, it could contain a bear trap; and logically, the degree of secrecy causes me to at least be strongly suspicious that something negative *is* involved. Otherwise, why hide it?

I'm not sure how the people that make up an organization are any different than the organization itself. Why would there be any inconsistency between them?

The rituals of Masonry have all been published at this point. I'd recommend reading them-- very interesting materials, better than Shakespeare. No bear traps, unless all of the various publications of these rituals have been disseminated as a huge conspiracy to cover up the fact that you have to sacrifice a goat to Satan when you join. Possible, but I think very far fetched.

I've had bad experiences with churches. Truthfully I've had enough negative social experiences with humanity in general, in groups or otherwise, that I am extremely selective about who I will interact with, at this point. It's going to be a long time before I go to another church, and it is going to be even longer before I trust another human being to act as a mentor to me.

I'm very sorry to hear that you've been soured from your encounters with spiritual groups and mentors that have no right to pose or offer their services as such. I'm even more sorry that you feel like the majority of human interactions have turned out so negatively. With this background, I can understand why you'd want to vigorously defend your right follow your own path.

If that is all it is, I don't either. I could probably go to something as basic as a cookery or ceramics class, by all means; because in that type of scenario, I'm not going to be repeatedly told that I am going to Hell (or the related equivalent) if I express my own opinions.

Sounds like you were in some truly awful groups. I'd be the first to leave a group that tried to squash what I thought, or that tried to limit what other occult/spiritual interests I had.

The agenda itself is not the problem. Social dynamics are. If I can join a group and do what I'm there to do, and then leave, that isn't a problem. However, if there is any scenario where I interact with people on anything other than that basis, I tend to find that problems develop very quickly. It isn't all their fault, and I'm not saying that; I've engaged in behaviour patterns at times that were a real problem myself, as well. I just find life a lot less potentially stressful for all concerned, if I limit my interactions with people.
It is possible that things have changed. It is true that I haven't tried to do it for a while.

Hard to tell what's actually going on here without dissecting it a little more, which I'd understand you'd probably not want to share in a public forum.

It might have been wrong of me to advocate my own position to someone else, perhaps, given the unusually consistent nature of my own experiences. I also apologise for issuing a universal condemnation of *all* groups. I would not, however, join a group that wanted me to live with them, even on a short term basis, and I would also be hesitant (although not necessarily completely dismissive) about joining a group which insisted on any form of interaction outside the group's formal activities; but that is my preference only, and it is based on the experience I've had.

Living with groups? Yeah, that sounds like a very bad sign, though I can't think of any groups offhand that do this...except some really dysfunctional eastern-based groups, and some cult-like martial arts dojos.

Were you involved in a group that limited your social contact elsewhere, or that demanded constant social contact? Because that sounds like a big warning sign to me as well.

This post has been edited by monkman418: Sep 1 2010, 07:21 PM