Well you know, I wrote thank Lucifer as opposed to thank God, but a question for you, did you achieve Ego death?
1 Like
Dissolution, the polarity of Formation - “death of the ego” is a misnomer, in order to die it would leave a gap of some kind, an absence.
2 Likes
So you have not achieved Ego death?
A while ago I bookmarked this thread, also gave a thought about following the same routine, at least what is feasible for me… a possible result is reaching the same conclusion, since I’m still not sure about what path to follow, or even a “mix”.
On the other hand, today I did consider that magick and LHP are indeed for me since I intend to influence the outside world, and I was attracted to the demonic since a preteen (only exception being that, theoretically, also Jewish/Christian and Hindu celestial forces may “help” with some things).
1 Like
Can you tell more about the prophecy, like some deadline for the ascension? Is there a possibility it would work the other way around - that is, the planet would survive but humans would not?
Your question misses the mark, my friend.
The ego is a theoretical constuct of a guy named Sigmund Freud:
He created it to describe aspects of the self - it is not and never has been a part of Hindu teaching that you have “an ego” and it has to “die.”
Also, the ego is not the only boundary of the self, nor the only part of the self which wishes to exert its individuality.
Freud’s system also teaches that you have an id (animalistic/instinctive urges, DEFINITELY part of what this path teaches you to master) and a super-ego, which is the part of you which can judge the actions you take, and the thoughts and feelings you have, and induce guilt, shame, and a desire to do better in some situations.
Let me repeat: these are not bit-players, the id & super-ego, these are equally part of the same theoretical model created in the first part of the last century by one man.
So “the ego” is NOT an absolute, not interchangeable for the concept of being an individuated self, and in no way means “everything about a person that might not be divine in nature” - or whatever.
You egoic pride may discourage you from some petty criminal act because it doesn’t see that as fitting your identity, to give an example (and using Freud’s theoretical model there).
Furthermore, if someone were to combine Freud and this tradition of merger and “kill” their ego (somehow, which since it’s arguably an emergent property, is probably not even possible) they would be left with the Titans of the super-ego and the id - out of control in following their urges, and then neurotically guilty at the exact same time, without the dear old ego there to keep the balance, and form the identity that tells them “steady on”!
So asking if I “killed” an unkillable theoretical construct from the 1920’s invented by one man who was arguably pottier than any of his patients, and rating your own and other people’ spirituality against this, misses the mark completely - when you merge, EVERYTHING dissolves, including super-ego, and id.
To focus on ego is like looking at herd of wild horses, and only wondering if they’re wearing a specific type of bridle.
The horses exist as an absolute, outside the mind of man - the bridle is a created thing, not even the only one of its kind, and not an innate part of the phenomenon of “horses.”
This is the same relationship between the merger of the small self to the larger Self, and all the work that leads to that, the experience of it, etc - and the construct of the ego, which was conceptualised recently, to try to explain human psychology.
So, to re-cap, the ego is a human construct, from books written in the 1920’s by one man, and unrelated to this.
Total dissolution includes the ego, id, and super-ego.
And “death” hardly describes the process - merging into the Source, there can be no death, since death is an absence of life, and nothing can be absent from the All. Death is an ending - Source is timeless. Etc. 
5 Likes
Hey Eva, did you write about after the entering Lhp ? I couldn’t see about it
Indeed, about a point of view better than “ego death” I just finished to read a novel by an Italian hermeticist, but also in other 2 books he talks about a mercurial balance, where the individual accepts his/her duplicity.
(This author has a RHP slant, so it would be a good/angel-bad/devil duplicity but, even in his perspective, he’s of that acceptance opinion)
1 Like