![[tmbchr]™](/journal/popocculture-blog-logo.jpg){kind=logo}
Nothing Is True…
If you travel long enough in occult circles, you’re bound to sooner or later hear the saying “Nothing is true; everything is permitted.” Generally attributed to leader of the Assassin order, Hassan-i Sabbah (although that claim is dubious at best), I tend to see this phrase popping up especially among people who are heavy into chaos magick and the like.
I have to be honest – I’ve always been a little perplexed at the popularity of it. I guess the point of it is to mentally level the playing field, dusting out the cobwebs from ideology, religion and belief. But it’s just never sat right with me. And I’m not a hundred percent sure why. I think it has to do with the negativity of this way of thinking, and this whole thing about “permissiveness” just rubs me the wrong way. Who is permitting what and why? I guess there’s a kind of poetic feeling of desperation for me in this saying – almost like it evokes imagery of a grocery store being looted during a blackout. Or rifling through your mom’s pocketbook for money when she isn’t looking. Maybe that’s exciting for some people or maybe there’s some kind of esoteric level of this saying I just don’t perceive, but it doesn’t necessarily to much for me on my own mystical/mythical level.
At the risk of seeming “uncool” to people who cherish it, I’d like to formally christen an updated/personalized version of this classic dictum with something which I personally find a bit more positive and useful. Instead of nothing being true and everything being permitted, I’d like to put forward the possibility that:
“Everything is true; nothing is missing.”
- Prev: Fighting Sea Monsters
- Next: Ravenous Squirrels Kill Dog
December 1st, 2005 at 7:04 pm
That’s fine and dandy with me. The saying itself is marvelous, but not for the reasons people use it. It’s more often than not a rationale for people to be selfish. Not everyone who exhorts this proclamation is self-serving, of course, but I hear it often from people who want all the security of belonging to a church without having to do things like sing hymns and tithe…
A while back in the Comments section of another post, I re-wrote the original quote as: “Nothing is secret; everything is out in the open”… for me, that maxim rings a bit more truthfully. But I get what your rewrite is trying to say: the same thing as the original, only with an inverse emphasis, sort of a reverse psychology to it.
December 1st, 2005 at 8:34 pm
This is very interesting. If someone believes in a heaven, God, and eternal soul is it true? I am beginning to think all this search for meaning is hard-wired into the brain to help us cope. Beliefs I believe are fundamental falsehoods and none withhold the test of time. I say everything 99% outside of us is unquanifiable.
December 1st, 2005 at 10:11 pm
I think it fits more along the lines of, “There is no absolute truth; everything is possible”, and thus, “There is no ‘God’; everyone is a god”.
That’s just my take though.
December 1st, 2005 at 10:20 pm
Who says there isn’t any absolute truth though? Why can’t everything be an absolute truth?
December 1st, 2005 at 11:04 pm
I think that the neo-conservatives will prove that where there is a will there is a way.
December 1st, 2005 at 11:11 pm
Uh, who was talking about neo-conservatives?
December 2nd, 2005 at 12:03 am
I like your bit about being permitted, Tim - ‘by whom’ indeed. The best critique I ever heard of this was - being permitted is not the same as being free. Not at all. I do think that ‘everything is possible’ can be a variant of ‘everything is permitted,’ except for the implication of ‘permit’ - like there’s some Reality Bureaucracy to rubber stamp us. Or some Reality Parent to pat us on the head and graciously allow us our way.
Not that there isn’t such an agency. Just that it isn’t intergalactic fishers-of-men license system.
I like the takes given here more than the original phrase. More hope to it, especially the last half.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:16 am
[…] /a> December 2nd, 2005 Tim Boucher has blogged about the phrase “Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted”, so I thought I would give some […]
December 2nd, 2005 at 3:34 am
Never had a problem with the saying… quite like it actually… but I really like when you said
Though if everything is an absolute truth, doesn’t that mean that nothing is?
So then the snake eats itself and nothing is “true” again.
Which really just shows the inability of the linguistic symbol system and logic to sometimes capture the experiential, imho.
December 2nd, 2005 at 4:03 am
Exactly Rob! Linguistics are derived from logic (some more logical than others) which is created in the left-brain, and experience isn’t limited to just the left brain. Now, I wonder if insted of creating language in the left-brain, if we created language in the third-eye (Pineal Gland, Corpus Callosum, whatever)? Would it be a telepathic language?
Interesting to consider:
Linguistics, logic - Left brain
Language production and recognition/understanding - Left brain (Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area)
Also, Charlie’s Horse, is “permitted” used in terms of put through checks and balances (ie. the “permit” you discussed) or is it used in synonymously with allowed? I interpreted it to be “allowed”, but then again, that could have been my “inability of my linguistic symbol system”, lol.
December 2nd, 2005 at 8:16 am
I think that the phrase “everything is permitted” is supposed to suggest the idea of somebody “permitting” this or that. But if you realize that there is no absolute reality (or at least a dominating one) then you realize there can be no such being, and thus no “permission”. So in some respects the saying is something like a koan, if used correctly meant to lead to some kind of ephiphany.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:16 pm
No, I don’t think that necessarily follows at all. That’s like saying: “I stepped into the room that was pitch black, and therefore it was filled with light.” And even if it does logically follow that your statement is true, I personally dont find that saying nothing is true is at all a useful starting point. It leaves me feeling that there is no point or purpose or worth to anything that I do, so why do anything?
Slomo, I get where you’re going and thats one of the better explanations perhaps. But again, it’s a matter of what sparks a fire for me, and for whatever reason, this saying does not.
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:26 pm
“Nothing is true; everything is permitted.”
I don’t think I see much meaning here, unless the phrase is in some context which explains what is meant by “everything”, “nothing”, “permitted”, and most of all, “true”.
As Tim mentioned, “permitted by who?”.
Is “everything” every potential act, every idea, every desire?
Does “nothing” exactly negate the “everything” above? Does it negate perceived phenomena? Is “nothing” a hole that is “true”, rather than the phrase being a rejection of the “truth” of all members of the class in question?
And what does “true” mean in this context? Does it refer to the accuracy of an idea’s correspondance to some ultimate reality? Does the speaker beleive that there IS an external reality, or that it is knowable? (As for me, I am a William Jamesian Pragmatist, and consider ideas to be more like recipies than maps: what it true is what works. Ideas that are maps are maps of a place that may or may not exist, where we can never go - we know reality only as ideas built on sensory phenomena. But some ideas lead to actions that result in desired phenomena, and that’s good enough for me.)
Does “nothing is true” just mean that whoever is doing the permitting is a liar?
December 2nd, 2005 at 1:27 pm
I like, “everything is true and everything is permitted.” This opens up vast vistas of possibilities, from which you may choose the most true/appropriate/beautiful/fulfilling/exciting one.
December 2nd, 2005 at 2:55 pm
Something that just occured to me, doesn’t the whole phrase, Nothing is True, Everything is Permitted sound a bunch like all the contradicting sayings within The Thunder, Perfect Mind?
To me, the saying could almost be an opening to allow one into “The Thunder, Perfect Mind”, and could almost be rewritten to:
Nothing is Absolute; Everything is Absolute. Kinda like Tesla’s EM theories about infinite energy inside a vacuum (Everything in Nothing).
Just a few thoughts…
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:03 pm
(sorry if any of this is redundant, I haven’t really read all the comments)
“Nothing is true; everything is permitted.” Generally attributed to leader of the Assassin order, Hassan-i Sabbah (although that claim is dubious at best)
He’s as good as anyone to attribute it to, given the very nature of the quote.
“Nothing is true; everything is permitted.”
The entire phrase, to me, evokes a vast desert of possibility. Like your world, when abolished of all inherent truth is just a vast field for you to wrest your territory. This is very fitting considering the very physical environment of the middle east. I’m also reminded of King David, and even the modern day state of Israel.
Struggle and survival, for nothing, if not just your own personal truth. Winning and losing doesn’t matter–pick a side and fight.
Permitted by who? BY NO ONE! The whole point is to get rid of that vague sense that there is some ultimate authority. It’s a terrible thing, to know that EVERYTHING IS PERMITTED and it truly is.
We are all we have.
Kylark’s “everything is true and everything is permitted” seems more like an abundant tropical forest. Where things are just there, ripe for the picking. Not quite as much my style…
“Everything is true; nothing is missing” I don’t find particularly resonant; I don’t dispute its mystical truth, but there’s no visceral feeling for me. It reminds me too much of those depressing “everything is perfect”, “all is in its place”, type axioms you hear from Buddhists, and the like. It doesn’t astonish or horrify me; I don’t picture myself diving into an abyss or kneeling in horror of the utter vastness of the living universe.
Ah… It’s a very personal thing.
December 2nd, 2005 at 7:28 pm
I don’t have much interest in all that I guess. As I said originally, the reformulation I did of it was for *me*… everyone else is welcome to explore their own hang-ups.
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:02 pm
I don’t have much interest in all that I guess. As I said originally, the reformulation I did of it was for *me*… everyone else is welcome to explore their own hang-ups.
Right, that was for *me* too.
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:39 pm
it is cool how everyone goes right into thier own “hang-ups” in reaction to comments. my “hang-up” in analysis. can`t stop……………..
=o
December 2nd, 2005 at 9:51 pm
“Believe nothing, dare all: on Earth there is no reckoning” has been offered as a more poetic equivalent to the final words of Hassan-i-Sabbah. Such digressions aside, the statement “Nothing is true; everything is permitted” could do with a break down.
“Nothing is true,” suggesting that there is a lack of thing- anything, something. There is nothing, and nothing is true. So long as there is nothing, “everything is permitted” (or possible, if you’d rather). Once nothing ceases to be true, or something is true, then everything is no longer permissible.
I think Schrödinger’s cat is meowling at me.
“Everything is true; nothing is missing” might also be broken down using the same sort of logic. “Everything is true,” suggesting that everything is true- everything exists. The result of this is that “nothing is missing,” or nothing is negated by existence.
Hmm. This (poorly considered) logic exercise is taking the poetry out of the statements.
December 2nd, 2005 at 10:31 pm
You can analyze it up and down, but the majority of people (pagan or otherwise) use it as a justification for their selfishness. Same with “Do as thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”
I recall the first time I heard the Hassan quote– it was the ad slogan for David Cronenberg’s film version of Naked Lunch. I didn’t know about Hassan’s allegiance with the Hashishen until later on, when I started smoking pot.
The only hang-up I can see in connection with the phrase in question is the need to re-organize the language of it so that it sounds less sinister. This reminds me of high school Satanists who came for the music but stayed for the blasphemy: after the thrill of hanging out with brain-dead Black Sabbath fans waned, there was still Crowley and Lovecraft and La Vey to reckon with.
What does the phrase mean to me personally? It means “So far all of my gut instincts have been right, so let’s see what else there is to learn about the world I think I know so well…”
December 3rd, 2005 at 5:48 am
i see the logic in “Nothing is true; everything is permitted”
but not everything is logical.
ive always disliked the phrase.
its definitly a nice way out for people who want to avoid personal responsibility for things….
weak IMO…
one
human?
December 3rd, 2005 at 10:45 am
There seems to be a “hangup” here about the moral dimension of everything being permitted. I know it’s not popular to talk about karma on this site… But that is the flip side of “Everything is permitted”. I.e., “Everything is permitted but everything has consequences”.
I’m not talking about the silly “Law of Three” or post-Catholic reinterpretations of karma as another form of the sin/punishment dynamic. But, clearly every action has consequences, and a wise mage takes into account as many of the possible consequences as he or she can.
Somebody once said on this site (can’t remember who): “Sure, you can unleash 10000 demons on your boss… But do you really want to live in a universe where 10000 demons exist and they all have your home address?”
A more mundane example: Many years ago I did a very intense form of affirmation/mantra to get the job I have today. It served me well in the short term, but it is becoming increasingly problematic, so much so that I wonder if I made a huge mistake. As I’m interviewing for new jobs, I’m tempted once again to conduct a new ritual (and I still may), but I’m a little wiser and attentive to the saying “careful what you wish for…”
December 3rd, 2005 at 1:35 pm
I’ve always taken it as a modern day koan, especially when added with the second line that is most often dropped: “Nothing is true, everything is permitted; Everything is true, nothing is permitted”.
I’ve taken the lesson to mean that absolute Truth is a self-imposed quest for humanity that is essentially meaningless since we can only know our truths.
December 3rd, 2005 at 1:49 pm
Maybe thats why buddhists focus on calming the pond, rather than throwing rocks in different places, slomo.
December 3rd, 2005 at 3:08 pm
The most interesting thing about the statement is that it can be taken so many ways, but no one interpretation is any more valid than the others because of the very nature of the wording. “Nothing is true” indeed.
December 3rd, 2005 at 3:53 pm
Wow, how simplistic, yet how true Brenden.
December 3rd, 2005 at 4:05 pm
Au contraire! Mine is the most valid!
December 3rd, 2005 at 4:35 pm
I certainly cannot argue with you, because, as you said yourself, mine is the most valid.
December 5th, 2005 at 2:28 pm
“Believe nothing, dare all”
Similar, but entirely different. This one solves a lot of the awkwardness of the other.
“Beleive nothing” is gloriously liberating - it doesn’t just reject the domination of accepting what others push on you, it rejects the pride of thinking you have the answer. It makes no claim as to falseness or the possibility of truth. It is more global - it does not imply a field in which there is no truth, it covers all that falls into view. My own version is “Don’t beleive, look”.
“Dare all” - completely different from “all is permitted”. Doesn’t look for permission, doesn’t grant some unnamed other the right to permit or not.
But most of all, “Believe nothing, dare all” is active. The other describes a situation, this tells you what to do. You can “Believe nothing, dare all” no matter what universe you live in, no matter who or what is trying to control you. “Nothing is true, all is permitted” accepts that there is an authority that you ought to beleive and from which you ought to seek permission, and tells you to go against it.
December 5th, 2005 at 3:14 pm
But very much mine.
Why do so many men thrive on conflict? They can have their vast deserts and their fights. I’d prefer to explore the forest, hear the different birdsongs, taste the different fruits. (Not to tar all men with the same brush, but love of conflict does seem to be a very masculine trait. It is, of course, present in both genders.)
The problem is that, once the conflict-lovers are done fighting each other in the desert, they make war on the forest.
Oh, for a planet where the forests are safe.
December 5th, 2005 at 3:21 pm
I dig the difference Error 404 is describing above between the two phrases!
March 12th, 2006 at 6:05 pm
[…] nd Life hasn’t lost yet. For a similar discussion held on this site, check out this old post of mine.
Read Similar Articles:
Gnos […]
October 10th, 2008 at 12:02 am
[…] Thanks to the internet, you can say anything. And anything you have to say, you can look up and find other people who are either (A) saying basically the same thing or are (B) interested in the thing you’re saying. There’s a market niche demographic slice-a-mahoozy for whatever happens to be your bag. Because the unthinkable becomes suddenly articulable - if not socially acceptable or practical maybe so much outside of the confines of the web - you’re suddenly free to access perceptual states and you have the data to fill them out and make them seem real. But somehow, because of that near-universal accessibility of information, that ability to find someone else talking about something you’re into, it has a way of backfiring. That both nothing is sacred and nothing is off-limits, in a certain sense, has a weird way of leveling everything out. […]