# My Musical Qabalah.

**URL:** https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/my-musical-qabalah/47263
**Category:** Religion and Spirituality
**Created:** [November 17, 2020, 9:00am UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/my-musical-qabalah/47263 "2020-11-17T09:00:06Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 69

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Zeroeth\_Nature](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/user_avatar/www.ilovephilosophy.com/zeroeth_nature/32/20746_2.png) [@Zeroeth\_Nature](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/u/Zeroeth_Nature)
#### Post date: [April 9, 2023, 5:48am UTC](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/my-musical-qabalah/47263/69 "2023-04-09T05:48:05Z")

</div>

> [@Zeroeth Nature](#):
>
> “This Sephira [Yesod] is the seat of the great crystallization of Energy. But it takes place very far down the Tree [of Life…]. There is little help from low, unbalanced spheres like Netzach and Hod. What saves Yesod is the direct ray from Tiphareth [the sphere of the sun]; this Sephira is in the direct line of succession.” (Crowley, The Book of Thoth.)

I have a new signature! Not that I necessarily agree with the distinction between natural and voluntary; but one has to rend them asunder before one can bind them together… All natural beings are will, but not free will; in other words, not will, but eros that’s not under will… But, far from undercutting what Mahdi suggests—the necessary connection between willing voluntary intelligible notions into existence and knowledge or theoretical understanding of these notions—, Athelema means one must desire and decide to bring any being into existence if one is to understand it! As I wrote in my ‘Dionysos the Bodhisattva? Nietzsche’s Ariadne as the Target of the “Buddha of Europe”’ (not ‘Dionysos the Bodhisattva. A study in Nietzschean religious philosophy’—let alone ‘Dionysus the Bodhisattva’…),

‘Strauss starts from the premise that reality is will to power and nothing besides. But Nietzsche did not start from that premise. It’s not some kind of axiom. If you want to start from the object of knowledge, not from the subject, you may start as follows: “Knowledge in itself in a world of becoming is impossible; so how is knowledge possible? As error concerning oneself, as will to power, as will to deception.” (WP 617, Kaufmann trans.) So you start with the (Heraclitean) observation that the world is a world of becoming. You then infer from that that all knowledge must be will to power. But if all knowledge is will to power, the only way there can be a harmony between the knowing and the known is if the known, too, is will to power. More precisely, the knower must will the known to be will to power, for that is the only way he can “know” it, relate to it,—exegete it.—If all exegesis is eisegesis, the only way it may still be considered exegesis is if the exegeted is itself eisegeted to be eisegesis.—And this act can only be directed toward the future: we can only will the past to be will to power by willing it to recur, in the future, as will to power.’

In fact, I have yet to correct an error I soon discerned. You don’t start with an observation, for that would still be a kind of knowledge in itself. Rather, it’s as Picht says:

“Nietzsche does not say, as would have to be said from the standpoint of metaphysics: The will to truth is the will to knowledge of the steadfast, the true, the permanent; he rather says: ‘The will to truth is a making steadfast, a making true/permanent’, a reinterpretation of show [Schein] into Being [Sein]. When one first makes what is to be known as true oneself, when one gains Being only thereby that one reinterprets show into Being, then the will which accomplishes that cannot avoid eventually discovering that what it must first make steadfast is not yet steadfast by itself, and that the permanence which it must first create is not already given in advance. As Nietzsche puts the concept ‘will to truth’ in place of knowledge of the truth, he has thus carried out the great inversion.” (Georg Picht, Nietzsche, page 281, my translation.)

---

_[View the full topic](https://www.ilovephilosophy.com/t/my-musical-qabalah/47263)._