I meant failure sorry

-----Original Message-----
From: rikb000 [mailto:rikb@...]
Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 3:10 PM
To: thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [t93] Earth

93!

This is lazy of me, I admit, but I'm hoping someone can give me a
couple references to get me started. Where is it that Crowley
discusses at some length the difference between Earth in the New Aeon
and in the Aeon of Osiris? I remember one passage where he talks
about the color of the element earth being green rather than black,
and another passage where he discusses the implications of the earth
being a moving body rather than a fixed center. I had thought they
were in the Book of Thoth, but I can't find either of them there (a
brief mention in "The Universe," but that's it). There are a couple
of passing comments in "secret documents," but I'm not talking about
those -- these were published essays, I'm certain. Any pointers would
be appreciated.

93 93/93
RIKB





Yahoo! Groups Sponsor


<http://rd.yahoo.com/M=249982.3179269.4495679.1728375/D=egroupweb/S=1705
076612:HM/A=1524963/R=0/*http:/hits.411web.com/cgi-bin/autoredir?camp=55
6&lineid=3179269¢ç=egroupweb&pos=HM>


<http://us.adserver.yahoo.com/l?M=249982.3179269.4495679.1728375/D=egrou
pmail/S=:HM/A=1524963/rand=464048839>

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
thelema93-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
<http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>  Terms of Service.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

> This is lazy of me, I admit, but I'm hoping someone can give me a
> couple references to get me started. Where is it that Crowley
> discusses at some length the difference between Earth in the New Aeon
> and in the Aeon of Osiris? I remember one passage where he talks

I don't know if this is substantiated at all in crowley, but I have always
commonly thought of earth both as green (telluric, the bountiful earth,
etc), and black (black womb/saturn/etc.) I would say that BOTH of these are
contained within the mythic image of Osiris however... one, green, in his
aspect either before his dismemberment/after he has been 'returned', and of
course black in the 'dark night' before that resurrection.

Dunno if that is any help or not...

139
www.babalonband.com

As far as the traditional color of the earth being green--I recall that is a
footnote to some tables of correspndence, perhaps teh color scales.
As far as mentioniung the arth being a moving body, at leats one reference is in
the Book of Thoth, concerning the Ace of Disics, where he argues that he
specified wings on the disc to show that the earth spins. This is partly a
metaophor for suggesting that stability is change.
Benjamin


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>This is lazy of me, I admit, but I'm hoping someone can give me a
>couple references to get me started. Where is it that Crowley
>discusses at some length the difference between Earth in the New Aeon
>and in the Aeon of Osiris? I remember one passage where he talks
>about the color of the element earth being green rather than black,
>and another passage where he discusses the implications of the earth
>being a moving body rather than a fixed center. I had thought they
>were in the Book of Thoth, but I can't find either of them there (a
>brief mention in "The Universe," but that's it). There are a couple
>of passing comments in "secret documents," but I'm not talking about
>those -- these were published essays, I'm certain. Any pointers would
>be appreciated.

There's a paragraph in the section on the Ace of Disks.  He basically outlines
a move from a static conception of matter and nature to a dynamic one and
calls it "new" Aeon.

--
Cameron

93!

Thanks for all the tips -- I should be lazy more often.

93 93/93
RIKB

93

>This is lazy of me, I admit, but I'm hoping someone can give me a
>couple references to get me started. Where is it that Crowley
>discusses at some length the difference between Earth in the New Aeon
>and in the Aeon of Osiris? I remember one passage where he talks
>about the color of the element earth being green rather than black,

"The Pure Earth known to the Ancient Egyptians, during that Equinox of
the Gods over which Isis presided (i.e. The Pagan Era) was taken as
Green."

Footnote to column XV in 777, in which the colours of Malkuth are given
as citrine, olive, russet and black.

"I swoop down upon the black earth; and it gladdens into green at my
coming."

Liber Tzaddi.

>and another passage where he discusses the implications of the earth
>being a moving body rather than a fixed center.

"To master Earth, remember that the Disk is always spinning; fix this
idea, get rid of its solidity."

Magick without Tears, Chapter LXXIV.

93 93/93

Cav
--
Give me a woman who's taken her knocks,
Who's tasted both gutter and stars.
Give me a lady with holes in her socks.
Give me a princess with scars.

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, "gabalis2003" <gabalis2003@y...>
wrote:
> --- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, "David R. Jones" <drjones@u...>
> wrote:
> > 93
> >
> > > Have you seen this one?
> >
> > >"Squaring the Circle with Straight Edge and Compass"
> >
> > >http://www.meru.org/3220lecture/contents.html
> >
> > Actually I spent some time with Stan Tenen back in the late 80s
> early
> > 90s (we both lectured for Ralph Abraham's series on John Dee and
> Chaos
> > Math).  Smart guy with a fascinated geometrical approach to
> metaphysics.
> > I think he often has some real and practical insights into
problems
> that
> > have stumped mystics for centuries.  His solutions are always
> practical
> > on at least one level, which is valuable.  I think he stretches it
> a bit
> > on occasion, and this is one particularly grasping argument in my
> mind.
> > But he is amazing to watch, to see how he can layer his arguments
> into
> > an often elegant and complex edifice.  Sometimes his arguments, at
> least
> > to me, seem built like a house of cards though.
> >
> > Love Jones
>
> Wow! The 'squaring of the circle' solved, after all this time! It
> makes that guy who solved Fermat's Last Theorem a while back after
> three centuries of failed attempts look like a hapless loafer.
>
> I don't entirely see how the reference given is a foolproof
argument,
> or relevance to the solution to 'squaring the circle'. I have been
> seriously mystified by the discussion of this by various, until it
> gradually dawned on me that these seemingly had no awareness
> whatsoever that this was one of the most famous problems in
> mathematics, or of its relevance to the history of mathematics. This
> was one of the three classical problems of mathematics in Western
> antiquity, the others being the problem of the doubling of the cube
> and another I don't recall right now. It has also attracted more
> deluded quacks than probably any other problem in the history of
> mathematics (and so may be an example of someone's sense of humour);
> the philosopher Thomas Hobbes for instance, who had an amateur
> interest in mathematics, was completely convinced that he had solved
> this, and wouldn't be told otherwise by those of his day who
actually
> were mathematicians. The problem is insoluble because 'pi' is in
fact
> a transcendental number, as was shown in the 19th century.
>
> While here, this topic and its further relation to pi and
> transcendental numbers does however have relevance to many central
> questions in ancient and contemporary metaphysics. To digress
> slightly first consider not any particular line, but the completed
> (i.e. perfect) act of drawing any line. Any given line segment is
> theoretically divisible into an infinite number of intermediary
> points, as expressed in Zeno's paradoxes and those found in the
Chang
> Tzu compendium and attributed to Hui Shih. So the reference would be
> to the ancient question of infinite divisibility and the whole
> subject area of the infinite and the continuum. This relates for
> instance to the division in modern philosophy of mathematics into
the
> schools of Platonism and Constructivism (let's call them P. and C.)
-
> i.e. those who believe that it makes sense to speak of an 'actual'
> infinite and those who believe this - and numbers in general - are
> merely a construct of the human mind (exist only potentially - do
> objects of the imagination exist, or what is the meaning of the
> word 'exist' here?).  There are so many connections here - to get
> some idea of the relevance of the problem of the 'squaring of the
> circle' and interrelated problems of infinite divisibility, the
> creation of the calculus, the problems of transcendental and
> infinitesimal and transfinite numbers etc, see e.g. Morris Kline's
> history of mathematics and his "Mathematics: The Loss of Certainty".
> On the relation of 'squaring the circle' to sacred geometry and
stuff
> on the Golden Section etc see Robert Lawlor's "Sacred Geometry". On
> the relationship of P. and C. to the general schools of realism and
> anti-realism in philosophy, there are numerous recent textbooks on
> contemporary metaphysical epistemology describing the opposing
claims
> of these - probably now the central question discussed in
philosophy.
>
> To anyone who doesn't accept that pi is actually a transcendental
> number and hopes to solve the ancient problem of squaring the
circle,
> I wish you the very best of luck. You could however consider using
> your intellect on some still outstanding problems of mathematics,
> such as e.g. the question of whether there is a rule governing the
> distribution of prime numbers. Now that would be something!

thelema

Uh, no offence but the supposed 'connections' that you mention in your
third paragraph sound a trifle waffly to me. I'm not sure either
that the problem of the average distribution of prime numbers
hasn't been more or less solved. But whatever makes you happy.

The third classical problem was the 'trisection of the angle': Wilbur
Knorr's 'The Ancient Tradition of Geometric Problems' deals with these
three problems. There is in fact only a passing mention of the
'squaring of the circle' in Kline's history of mathematics, though
this and his other books are very good for those who such as myself
aren't mathematicians but wish some idea of the general concepts. In
my opinion works such as these or Laurence Hogben's, which treat of
mathematics from the point of view of its social and historical
development in response to specific practical problems, such as e.g.
the relationship between the development in painting of perspective
and the creation of projective geometry, are of far greater value in
general education than the 'new mathematics' that has been taught
since the Sixties. But then the concept of education as the general
'training of the mind' is now deeply unfashionable. Ho hum.

agape

>
> Uh, no offence but the supposed 'connections' that you mention in
your
> third paragraph sound a trifle waffly to me. I'm not sure either
> that the problem of the average distribution of prime numbers
> hasn't been more or less solved. But whatever makes you happy.
>
> The third classical problem was the 'trisection of the angle':
Wilbur
> Knorr's 'The Ancient Tradition of Geometric Problems' deals with
these
> three problems. There is in fact only a passing mention of the
> 'squaring of the circle' in Kline's history of mathematics, though
> this and his other books are very good for those who such as myself
> aren't mathematicians but wish some idea of the general concepts.
In
> my opinion works such as these or Laurence Hogben's, which treat of
> mathematics from the point of view of its social and historical
> development in response to specific practical problems, such as
e.g.
> the relationship between the development in painting of perspective
> and the creation of projective geometry, are of far greater value
in
> general education than the 'new mathematics' that has been taught
> since the Sixties. But then the concept of education as the general
> 'training of the mind' is now deeply unfashionable. Ho hum.
>
> agape


Sorry, Lancelot Hogben. I'm always doing that, for some no doubt
Lacanian reason. Don't let Hogben's socialistic idealism put you off,
we're all young once. At least he's not one of those relativistic
free-thinking post-modernist types.

Does anyone have any information on Hitler's connection to Thelema, other
than what can be found in in Magick Without Tears?  Does anyone know if
there even is a documented connection outside of it?  Maybe documents from
Soror I.W.E.?

--
Cameron

93-Jonathan,
Very Comprehensive,Study on the Daily
ritual,use.I never thought as you stated That
Liber 25-Th Star Ruby,and Liber 36-
The Star Sapphire,of course,I know alot
of other Thelemite's,would say this to.
But it would be more benefical,for
the more Elaborate Ritual's.I will
definently keep your list of The
Daily Rituals as you stated in your
context on a EMail post File.Thank's.

                                 93-Brian Tweed

aleisterion wrote:

> YOU:  "The more extraordinary your claim, the greater level of
> evidence will be needed to support said claim"
> ME:  My Frater (or Soror), the level of work-related documentation I
> have is exhaustive.  Daddy would be proud.

This is the center of the fun.
Let's see:

> YOU:  "Perhaps you can offer something more substantial"
> ME:  Give me time.  I'm young yet.  Just a child.
> ME AGAIN:  "Crowley's scripture is of Aiwass and oppose Him with all
> your might you cannot avail."
> YOU:  "Got a way to test that?"
> ME:  Sure do.  Take a microscopic look at my life and work and YOU
> WILL AGREE.
> YOU:  "Do you have any evidence that any prophecy made by you or your
> master has proven demonstrably true over time?"
> ME:  Yes.

Look there.

-- Do you have evidence?
-- Yes!
...
-- Where is it?
...

> ME:  If you kept silent I would go away.  You permit me to advertise,
> for which I thank you, not for myself but FOR MY MESSAGE.  I want to
> make this clear: If I ever accept money from anyone for furthering my
> cause, for any reason, so long as I live, I invalidate myself.  You
> have it on record.  *Therefore I have nothing to gain from my
> extravagant efforts.* [emphasis added]

The criticism of the members of this group tries to explain to you just
how wrong you are here. Perhaps this lack of culture comes from the
fact you've had no human help, no human transmission.
You say you want no money, ERGO, you have nothing to gain. Look into
"vampire" and you'll see how "gain" can be had on planes other than the
material (planes I'm sure you are aware of, being Higher).

Love,
93, 93/93

--
Fra. Tahuti

Quoting cameron <cbailes@...>:

> Does anyone have any information on Hitler's connection to Thelema,
> other
> than what can be found in in Magick Without Tears?

     although i haven't read "Magick Without Tears", and i can't recall exactly
where the information came from, i think there is more of a connection to
theosophy, per se. i seem to have it in my head that hitler was a fan of
blavatsky.
    if no one replies with more definite onfo soon, i'll pass it around the b.n.
study group and see what pops up.




*love is a verb. not what one may feel, but what one does*

> Quoting cameron <cbailes@s...>:
> > Does anyone have any information on Hitler's connection to
Thelema,
> > other
> > than what can be found in in Magick Without Tears?

No, there were no real connection between A.C. and Hitler.  There
isn't even any evidencefor any contact between Hitler and Kuentzel.
The correspondence between A.C. and Kuentzel reveals that she sent
Hitler a copy of the Book of the Law, but it is unlikely that this
ever reached the eyes of Hitler, and it was sent long after Hitler
had worked out the basics in his program. So in short it is unlikely
that A.C. ever had any effect or received any warm welcome in the
halls of Hitler.

Hitler however did receive applause for some of his ideas with A.C.,
which is witnessed in his ecstatic annotations in his copy of Hitler
Speaks, which A.C. also refers to in MWT. There is however one
consistent criticism, which also A.C. raises in his correspondence
with Kuentzel, and that is Hitler's obsession with the race question.
A.C. often substitutes "the german people" with "thelemites" in his
annotated copy of Hitler Speaks, and constantly stresses the point
that the uebermensch so to speak is not tied to any race. In fact as
he stresses in his correspondence with Kuentzel, he believes the
german people to be vastly inferior to the jewish people.

What he does enthusiastically agree with however, is the culling
programs of the weak and how the strong shall rejuvenate the world
and culture.

All best,
K

93; K:
Crowley of course was invited by British Naval Intelligence back in
1939.( a Facsmile of the letter is printed in Susan Robert's Book,
"Magician of the Golden Dawn".  He was handled by Ian Fleming (the James
Bond Book Author) with MI 5 and provided Black Propaganda to the Allies
that targeted the Occult Lodges in Germany. More specifically, Crowley
helped influence Rudolph Hess than Hitler was becoming demented, and
would lose the war. The trap laid for Hess to come to England was set by
Fleming and Crowley, with Churchill's knowledge and approval. The Beast
also gave Winston the thumbs up and V sign, being of course the sign of
Apothis in opposition to the Swatiska. WWII was in many ways a magicial
war. When Grady McMurtry visited Crowley in preparation for D-Day,
Crowley told him the Nazis did not have the magicial power necessary to
sustain the war. (Hitler during this stage of the war was hopelessly
addicted to a variety of substances)

Fleming wanted Crowley to interview Hess after his capture, but this
request was denied by British Intelligence, most likely because Hess had
been subsituted for with a double during the war's duration. At
Nuremberg, it was fairly obvious that Rudolph was heavily drugged.
  Whether or not Hess was cognizant or not regarding Hitler's plans to
invade Russia; British Intelligence soon came to the conclusion Hess
would be of little use to them.

I agree that Hitler may not have read Liber Al vel Legis; but beyond the
question of race, there are several similarities Nazi doctrine has with
key phrases within the book.  It is imperative that History in this
regard be as accurate as possible, for if a link was to be discovered
regarding Liber Al and Hitler, it could pave the way for the persecution
of thelema today;

Love is the law, love under will
Frater Riotimus  93  93/93

pedicabo_ego wrote:

>>Quoting cameron <cbailes@s...>:
>>
>>
>>>Does anyone have any information on Hitler's connection to
>>>
>>>
>Thelema,
>
>
>>>other
>>>than what can be found in in Magick Without Tears?
>>>
>>>
>
>No, there were no real connection between A.C. and Hitler.  There
>isn't even any evidencefor any contact between Hitler and Kuentzel.
>The correspondence between A.C. and Kuentzel reveals that she sent
>Hitler a copy of the Book of the Law, but it is unlikely that this
>ever reached the eyes of Hitler, and it was sent long after Hitler
>had worked out the basics in his program. So in short it is unlikely
>that A.C. ever had any effect or received any warm welcome in the
>halls of Hitler.
>
>Hitler however did receive applause for some of his ideas with A.C.,
>which is witnessed in his ecstatic annotations in his copy of Hitler
>Speaks, which A.C. also refers to in MWT. There is however one
>consistent criticism, which also A.C. raises in his correspondence
>with Kuentzel, and that is Hitler's obsession with the race question.
>A.C. often substitutes "the german people" with "thelemites" in his
>annotated copy of Hitler Speaks, and constantly stresses the point
>that the uebermensch so to speak is not tied to any race. In fact as
>he stresses in his correspondence with Kuentzel, he believes the
>german people to be vastly inferior to the jewish people.
>
>What he does enthusiastically agree with however, is the culling
>programs of the weak and how the strong shall rejuvenate the world
>and culture.
>
>All best,
>K
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>thelema93-l-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
>Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>
>

--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Dear Rick,

I agree with you that history should be as accurate as possible,
which was why I pointed out that there were no real connection
between Hitler and A.C. even though A.C. agreed enthusiastically
with some of his tenets (excluding the race issue and other key
tenets of Hitler's doctrines).

A.C. of course before the outbreak of the war declared himself to be
a patriot and wrote to Kuentzel that G.B. would knock Germany out of
their socks, which was the last contact they ever shared.

Moreover your account is not entirely accurate.  While it is true
that A.C. through his friend Fleming offered his services to his
country during warfare this was declined by them.

The story that A.C. somehow influenced Hess to believe that Hitler
was demented is more facutal nonsense and mythmaking.  There exists
no proof of this, except A.C.'s offer, which was the idea of
Flemming, to be of help in questioning Hess, which again was
declined.

Re. The V sign.  Again we are going on a shaky note.  What is clear
is that A.C. did not give the sign to Churchil himself personally,
but insisted that he had given it to the journalist who gave it to
Churchil, A.C.'s involvement remaining secret because it would be
selfdefeating. Though again we have little evidence beyond A.C.'s
words on this, I am inclined to take him at face value on this
account, due to several reasons, one of them being A.C.'s continued
insistance and descriptions of this to his acolytes. What is sure
hwoever was that Churchill was not aware of A.C.'s involvement in
the V sign if there were any.

Facts not myths should inform us in the quest for a scholarly
evaluation of A.C. and thelema's contribution to the world history.

All best,

K

93!

On a more...hmmm...psychological note, it may be interesting to note
that a large portion of Crowley's references to Hitler in his diaries
(of which there are surprisingly few before, during, and after the
war) involve dreams. Crowley dreamed, for example, that Hitler had
asked him to run Germany for him, or that Hitler was asking him for
advice, that they were smoking cigars together, and that kind of
thing. I think it would be safe to say that Crowley admired Hitler
for his power and ability to influence people (his "manliness,"
his "force and fire"), but it's going too far to say that Crowley
ever supported "the Nazi program" as such. As Kjetil says, Crowley
often expressed patriotic sentiments during WWII, and wanted to offer
whatever services he could to help Great Britain defeat Germany.
Personally, I think Crowley had a fantasy that a Thelemic Napoleon
would arise -- someone like Hitler in some respects, but espousing
Thelema instead of National Socialism and racism.
      The idea of eugenics was very popular around the turn of the
century into the 30s, finding expression in the UK and US before it
took hold in Germany. For example, Reuss entusiastically endorsed a
eugenics program (sterilizing people judged unfit to reproduce such
as the congenitally ill and mentally retarded) that had been put into
place in the United States some time before 1916. Francis Galton, the
man who coined the term "eugenics" and advocated for its employment
("it must be introduced into the national consciousness as a new
religion"), was an Englishman. The Eugenics Society founded by Galton
was later taken over by one of Darwin's sons, who advocated locking
up anyone judged "defective" so that they couldn't breed!
      So if there is a eugenic tendency in Crowley -- as I think there
is at times -- we have to remember that this was not a Nazi idea per
se, nor a characteristically "German" one, nor even a very unpopular
one until the Nazi "experiment" demonstrated the kind of atrocities
to which it was likely to lead. In any case, interpreting Crowley's
statements as some kind of "pro-Nazi position" doesn't seem
warranted. It's still an idiotic position, of course, just like his
position that one could go to some kind of testing facility and have
one's true will determined by scientists through pencil and paper
testing.

93 93/93
RIKB

93

Have you read Pauwel's and Bergier's _Morning of the Magicians_, also
published under the alternate title _The Dawn of Magic_?

The authors compare the descriptions of Mathers' self-described encounters
with the Secret Chiefs, and some of Hitler's ravings about the "New Man". As
well, the mythology driving the Third Reich is gone into in length (some of
which certainly overlaps Die Goldene Dammerung) - the main point being that
such archetypal forces (ie. Ra Hoor Khuit) continue to boil just beneath the
surface of our supposed "civilization," and we've never really acknowledged
the role these forces  played in "the War to end all Wars" (snigger).

93/93

BNE1

--O Thou, the Apex of the Plane,
With Ibis Head and Phoenix Wand
And Wings of Night! Whose Serpents strain
Their Bodies, bounding the Beyond.
Thou in the Light and in the Night
Art One, above Their moving might.
-Liber Pyramidos

  The serpents who strain their bodies, bounding the beyond are the
veins of the penis. But not really the veins but the tubes and muscle
fibers that hold back the seminal fluid from ejaculation. The strain
is the retention practice that results in direct gnosis of the Beyond.
  The magus is holding his wand in this section of the rite. Standing
in the west at the base of the triangle, the head of his erect
phallus forms the apex of the plane; the nerve center at the head of
the penis is the Ibis Head of the Phoenix Wand.
  It is the towering consciousness, that lofty perception that is
really secreted here. That Self at the Apex of the Plane above the
moving might of the contraction and release of the seminal serpent
system. The trancendent unity that utters its word via the
undulations of the lignt and the night, building and releasing
ecstatic lightings of form creating urges.

Chris Titan

--O Thou, the Apex of the Plane,
With Ibis Head and Phoenix Wand
And Wings of Night! Whose Serpents strain
Their Bodies, bounding the Beyond.
Thou in the Light and in the Night
Art One, above Their moving might.
-Liber Pyramidos

The serpents who strain their bodies, bounding the beyond are the
veins of the male sex organ. But not really the veins but the tubes
and muscle fibers that hold back the seminal fluid from ejaculation.
The strain is the retention practice that results in direct gnosis of
the Beyond.
The magus is holding his wand in this section of the rite. Standing
in the west at the base of the triangle, the head of his erect
phallus forms the apex of the plane; the nerve center at the head of
the male sex organ is the Ibis Head of the Phoenix Wand.
It is the towering consciousness, that lofty perception that is
really secreted here. That Self at the Apex of the Plane above the
moving might of the contraction and release of the seminal serpent
system. The trancendent unity that utters its word via the
undulations of the lignt and the night, building and releasing
ecstatic lightings of form creating urges.

Chris Titan

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, cameron <cbailes@s...> wrote:
> Does anyone have any information on Hitler's connection to
Thelema, other
> than what can be found in in Magick Without Tears?  Does anyone
know if
> there even is a documented connection outside of it?  Maybe
documents from
> Soror I.W.E.?
>
> --
> Cameron

Lawrence Sutin's bio of Crowley deals with this.

From what I remember, Crowley attempted to get a copy of The Book of
the Law into Hitler's hands, but he didn't succeed.

Interestingly, I read a recent issue of The Atlantic Monthly that
had an article with an in-depth study of Hitler's library.

From that article, he was interested in mostly hack stuff, like
Nostradomus, militaristic Nordic cult revivals, etc (it seems most
of the inner circle of Hitler's leadership were members of Nordic
revival cults at one time or another).

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, 333 <nagasiva@l...> wrote:
> 50030421 VII om peace
> cementing the meanings of terms in one's magicoreligious lexicon
is
> a way to prop oneself up onto the shoulders of the divine, or
> construct for oneself a castle in the clouds with results
difficult
> to predict.

I suppose that's possible.


> I don't see the necessity of positing any kind of "Spirit" in the
machine.
> it seems to me that we're just talking about conscious perception,
which
> has mechanical supports for its manifestation and ultimately isn't
of a
> different calibre or class than physics (chemistry, biology, etc.).

Conscious perception isn't really any different from these
disciplines, but I admittedly have a hard time conceiving of a
purely materialist world.

>
> if we're looking at the aims of religion and the method of science,
> then adapting aims along the lines of method strikes me as risky,
but
> if there is consistent compatability between them, a helpful
pairing.

That latter is more what I'm going for, yes. But also the idea that
you can develop your theories in accordance with your experience,
that bit about gnostic insight, in other words.

This, I suppose, is what you are referring to as risky, more or less.

> the problem with prioritizing the method is that we are quite
likely
> to arrive at knowledge for which the method is particularly suited
> but which corrupts the aims away from their original orientation.

I'd need a practical example to see what you mean, here.

> sounds good to me, and it can be very convincing, subjectively,
> but at a remove ("he's got gnostic insight") I'm not sure it is
> any more convincing to hear theories from those who claim to have
> had such insight than those who've met up with random strangers and
> got the Secrets of the Universe from them. it would take a good
deal
> more exposure to the beauty and astounding synchronicity of their
> lives which demonstrates their Chosen status before I could begin
to
> treat them as authorities.

That sounds pretty reasonable, and I suppose the Sufis have that
partly in mind with their method of teaching.

At the same time, I'm not sure what one would expect a truly
advanced teacher would necessarily be like.



> unless one has had it, how can one be sure it consistently obtains?
> even if one thinks one *has* had it, how can one be sure one isn't
> oneself deluded? do all those with gnostic insight believe the
same
> things, some kind of theoretical litmus? are all those with gnostic
> insight certain, cemented to some kind of knowledge set?

From the point of view of their descriptions of gnostic insight
(keeping in mind any attempt to define it or interprate it's meaning
is hopeless), it seems to me they all experience things remarkably
similar.

And from my experience (including experience of myself), people who
have had gnostic experience are *very* certain (which some may
interprate as a vice, and of course it can be).


> speaking about "how it is meant" adds quite a bit of baggage to an
> already overloaded term. should we presume that you have some
insight
> already and that your notions of cosmology ought be regarded with
> greater authority (i.e. that the universe was designed, that the
> quality of gnostic insight was made possible by the Grand
Architect,
> of the Universe (Gm) and that it was intended for individuals to
> experience and coalesce)?

Actually, I ought to have been more clear there: I think gnostic
experience is not really possible to define for anyone who hasn't
had it. It's just an experience, your rational mind may interprate
it in one way, but all interpretations are necessarily going to
falsify it, and no *idea* you have about your experience ever seems
to match the experience itself. It's like you "lost something" in
translation, as it were.

To me, this seems to imply it is "meant" only for those who actually
have the experience itself. Anyone (theoretically; I'm a liberal so
why not?) can have the experience(s), but conveying your individual
experience to anyone else never works too well.

As such, there doesn't seem to be a question about "authority" at
all in the matter. You choose whoever has the interpretation of hir
experience that seems to work the best, is all.

> in any case we agree that if it is strictly an individual
experience,
> unless its procurement is made itself scientific, then the
knowledge
> which it conveys is subjective at least. if some way were be found
> which established a condition "gnostic insight" and all those who
> had it (individually) agreed as to the Truth (gm), then maybe some
> real science could be instituted from this fabulous epistemological
> panacea. until then, I'm inclined to regard it as a subject state
> inspiring intellectual collapse around single knowledge sets, maybe
> even those which support the incitement of the phenomena making it
> possible (i.e. something Gnostic, or Neognostic, or something).

"Truth is beyond words" conveys the essence of the experience
extraordinarily well to me.

The difference of religion/philosophy/what have you lies in the
ego's way of interprating the experience itself (assuming a
religion's founder actually had it in the first place). No two
people will be in agreement on what their experience means, but they
all describe the same (or similar) experience.

Take from that what you will.

> what would offer us such invalidation? destabilizing of their
lives?
> fighting against adversaries which are evidently more powerful?
> uttering gibberish whose very meaning we could not comprehend?
> all of these might be our misperception of the Great Work, no?
> opposing it on the basis of appearance might be foolish.

Invalidation is if it simply does not work.

It may be true that the essence of the mailman's leg is the same
essence of a porterhouse steak, and I may perceive this in some
gnostic experience. But that doesn't mean biting the mailman's leg
is the same as biting a porterhouse.


> why isn't it? if it isn't objective, or can't be confirmed using
> some kind of objective means, then why don't we cast that character
> of information into the "uncertain" bin and move on to real
science?

Because "real science" isn't anymore "real" than gnostic insight.

Doesn't really tell us anything about what we perceive, only about
how we perceive it (which doesn't negate its usefulness).

I believe the gnostic experience is ultimately the only truth their
is. The complete truth is that which we experience in gnosis.

The subjective truth is the way we interprate that experience.


> ah! your preferred metaphysics intrudes! ;>

*hehe* I'm a fan of Qabalah, 'tis true.

> > Does this qualify to you as said dogma?
>
> not really, since your description sounds ontologically unavoidable
> rather than inescapable by dint of cultish requirement.
>
> > ...interpretation is valid only below the Abyss ....
>
>>...now we're talking dogma!!!!

Hmm. I think it's ultimately a matter of awareness. "Cross the
Abyss" and get some picture of fully-integrated reality. No such
picture is useful below it, so it can only be interprated according
to a single point of view.

Yeah, I guess that's dogma.

I still agree with it. :D

>
> > ...I don't view Crowley as the end-all-be-all of Thelema, and I
> > question the validity of the "True Story (tm)" of it's being
> > written, as almost any thinking person would. I DO believe the
> > Book is genuine for my purposes, but I wonder about it being
> > truly dictated.
>
> then we're beginning to glean insight into your knowledge of the
> universe. Crowley's scripture is "genuine for your purposes,"
> and this tells us something (however little) more about what you
> have presupposed (or discovered through gnostic insight, whatever
> that may turn out to be :>).

I guess if I had to point out something I've discovered through
gnostic insight, it would be that objective truth is an infinite
source from which subjective reality comes.

All ideas are possible if they derive from the infinite objective
source, and all ideas have the same source--so all ideas convey the
objective in some way. The question is which way is most appropriate
to your temperment.

Being what I would call religious, my view of God is rather
complicated, but relates to the idea that all gods are different
manifestations of the one God which is, at present, unknowable.

So all gods are true. The only question is which one resonates with
you the most. Which path suits your needs the best?

As I said earlier, I'm not particularly advanced in any way, so this
is probably nothing that you or anyone else hasn't heard before, but
it does resonate with me.

> > I assumed you were referring to people in general who have such
a
> > feeling. I took exception primarily because I personally have
this
> > feeling as well.
>
> it pertains nonetheless. how can I distinguish someone
> who has genuine insight into the Truth or the Real (tm/rm)
> from someone whose delusions have got them blabbing all
> kinds of nonsense completely unfounded and valueless?

That's the value of the experience itself. You can think I'm
blabbering, for example, if you want to, or I could think the same
of you or anyone else.

Like I say, I don't claim to be advanced at all. I'm not the "Child
of Crowley", some prophet, I never received a book (though I wrote a
poem under ecstatic inspiration once, that doesn't seem quite the
same). I don't know the answers, and I don't claim to. Hence my idea
of finding a pardigm that more or less works for you.

> > If this is the case, we're agreed here too: the feeling of
inherent
> > power in the Book and the body of Thelema in general is
subjective
> > and not applicable to anyone who doesn't feel it already or come
to
> > it on their own.
>
> along with so many other religiomagical perceptions. I recall the
> "energy" of Newage and Neopagan metaphysics, for example, which
> amounted to the somatic tingling one may induce or experience as
> part of "magical activities". is it real? my experiments lead me
> to conclude it may be psychosomatic, accompanying psychological
> presupposition and action within a knowledge-set. those who speak
> of other subtle energy-systems like "chi and meridians" or "prana
> and chakras" run into similar scientific analyses by my ping.

That may well be true, but it also doesn't devalue those experiences.

> and while these metaphysical systems serve those who use them,
> I'm unsure that they transcend faith to somehow become knowledge.
> in objective realms, expressions of result in application of a
> hypothesis derived from the knowledge may be compared against
> perceivable data and the hypothesis confirmed or refined using
> the results to further entrench or undermine the knowledge-set.
> I don't usually see this kind of testing being done in magical
> communities, at least not in the same manner as in laboratories.

Such studies (or any study, to be fair) only create predetermined
results. Their outcomes are extensions of the dispositions of
whoever does them.

If success is our proof, such studies mean next to nothing.

> on the other hand, in discussion as we are currently engaging
> and in public forums where astounding claims (or merely those
> with entangled metaphysics unclear to the reader) are made, it
> is completely reasonable not only to subject the proclamation
> to rigorous tests of significance (is what the prophet is
> telling us meaningful? does it seem to bear up under scrutiny?)
> but also tests of application (how much will it stand up to an
> application within my life? is it something easy to test or
> something conveniently (for the prophet) difficult that few
> will undertake such that counter-proof won't ever arise?).

That seems to be more like a criticism of the mode of discussion,
not the ideas themselves.

Love is the law, love under will.

Firebrand93

93!

pedicabo_ego wrote:

> Hitler however did receive applause for some of his ideas with A.C.,
> which is witnessed in his ecstatic annotations in his copy of Hitler
> Speaks, which A.C. also refers to in MWT.

While 'Hitler Speaks' was widely believed in at the time, I understand
most modern historians regard that book as mostly a hoax.

> There is however one
> consistent criticism, which also A.C. raises in his correspondence
> with Kuentzel, and that is Hitler's obsession with the race question.
> A.C. often substitutes "the german people" with "thelemites" in his
> annotated copy of Hitler Speaks, and constantly stresses the point
> that the uebermensch so to speak is not tied to any race.

Indeed. Can anybody remember Crowley ever mentioning the 'Aryan race' in
his writings at all? Or obsessing about 'racial degeneration' and
'miscegenation'? Actual Ariosophical writings are devoted almost
entirely to those themes.

> In fact as
> he stresses in his correspondence with Kuentzel, he believes the
> german people to be vastly inferior to the jewish people.

Those letters are supposed to be in the next Magical Link.

93 93/93!

-- Julianus


“Nothing on the face of this earth -- and I do mean nothing --
is half so dangerous as a children’s story that happens to be
real, and you and I are wandering blindfolded through a myth
devised by a maniac.”
                                         -- Master Li Kao (T’ang Dynasty)

              *** John’s Creeping Homepage of Doom ***
               http://www.kiva.net/~julianus/main.html

>No, there were no real connection between A.C. and Hitler.  There
>isn't even any evidencefor any contact between Hitler and Kuentzel.
>The correspondence between A.C. and Kuentzel reveals that she sent
>Hitler a copy of the Book of the Law, but it is unlikely that this
>ever reached the eyes of Hitler, and it was sent long after Hitler
>had worked out the basics in his program. So in short it is unlikely
>that A.C. ever had any effect or received any warm welcome in the
>halls of Hitler.

Thanks.  I suppose the only thing MWT indicates is that Soror I.W.E. had at
least attempted to contact him.  Although Crowley's recomendation that he
adopt the proper balancing regime may imply that there was real activity
going on, or that he (and perhaps Soror I.W.E.) was lead to belive there was.
If there is even the remotest possible connection between Hitler and the
BOTL, I'd like to know, if only to know he may have been affected by it and
maybe add him to the list of failed magickal children.

--
Cameron

Sitat cameron <cbailes@...>:
> Thanks.  I suppose the only thing MWT indicates is that Soror I.W.E.
> had at least attempted to contact him.  Although Crowley's
> recomendation that he  adopt the proper balancing regime may imply that
> there was real activity  going on, or that he (and perhaps Soror
> I.W.E.) was lead to belive there was.

A.C.'s recommendation of a balancing regime was due to Hitler's obsession
with the race question, which A.C. showed no sympathy for in his
correspondence with Kuentzel.  A.C.'s correspondence shows abundant of
discussion of the flaws and merits of Adolf Hitler, but nothing in it
would indicate that there were any real connection beyond M.K.'s attempt
at sending Hitler a german copy of the Book of the Law and M.K. regarding
Hitler as her magical son.  A.C. seems for the most part negative towards
the idea, though he of course enthusiastically support those ideas Hitler
had inherited from the conservative revolution in and around germany in
the intermediate waryears. Those ideas agree surprisingly much with the
ideas A.C. would promulgate.

There has been a very interesting discussion on this movement at the
following place: <http://www.livejournal.com/users/keith418>.

> If there is even the remotest possible connection between Hitler and
> the  BOTL, I'd like to know, if only to know he may have been affected
> by it and  maybe add him to the list of failed magickal children.

A.C. did regard Hitler Speaks as evidence for Hitler having read and
misunderstood the Book of the Law. However there is little possibility
that the Book of the Law ever reached the eyes of Hitler.  The ideas he
espoused which agreed with the Book of the Law, have a much more
plausible origin in the conservative revolution.

As discussed in the Lawrence Sutin biography of A.C., and to some extent
commented upon bby RIKB as well, what A.C. seemed to admire in Hitler was
his manliness, i.e. his strong resolve and emphasis on will to power. He
admired Stalin for much the same reason.

All best,

K

On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 08:56:26AM +0200, Kjetil Fjell wrote:
> > If there is even the remotest possible connection between Hitler and
> > the  BOTL, I'd like to know, if only to know he may have been affected
> > by it and  maybe add him to the list of failed magickal children.
>
> A.C. did regard Hitler Speaks as evidence for Hitler having read and
> misunderstood the Book of the Law. However there is little possibility
> that the Book of the Law ever reached the eyes of Hitler.  The ideas he
> espoused which agreed with the Book of the Law, have a much more
> plausible origin in the conservative revolution.

I wouldn't doubt it.  I see ideas that agree with the Book of the Law
everywhere.  As to Hitler Speaks, the only info I have been able to find
on it being a hoax is from the Institute for Historical Review which is
devoted to historical revisionism.

> As discussed in the Lawrence Sutin biography of A.C., and to some extent
> commented upon bby RIKB as well, what A.C. seemed to admire in Hitler was
> his manliness, i.e. his strong resolve and emphasis on will to power. He
> admired Stalin for much the same reason.

Well, I think Crowley's disgust with Hitler is evident, but I certainly
don't think it is unusual of him to have an admiration for "noble" tyranny
(noble in appearence, at least.)  In fact it wouldn't surprise me in the
least if Crowley was politically oriented towards an imperium.  Apparently
Churchill had even said that if he were an Italian, he would be a Fascist.
Apparently even Wittgenstein was aligned with the radical right in Austria
and saw National Socialism as an illegitimate aberration of the
conservative forces there.

--
Cameron

Julianus wrote:
>
>  Can anybody remember Crowley ever mentioning the 'Aryan race' in
> his writings at all? Or obsessing about 'racial degeneration' and
> 'miscegenation'? Actual Ariosophical writings are devoted almost
> entirely to those themes.

Crowley believed Indian men should not be allowed to go to England for
schooling because they would then try to have sex with "white women."
He also said that the people of Egypt suffered from "admixture of
blood" -- that is, he believed that their multiracialism made them not
as nice as the "pure-blooded" people to whom he was comparing them.
Both of these examples would seem to indicate that he was against
races intermarrying, in the belief that the offspring would be
"inferior." In my opinion, these samples (and others) meet your
qualifications for "obsessing about 'racial degeneration' and 'miscegenation'."

Actual quotes from Crowley on race matters are cited at
      http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs/crowleyracistfaq.html

cat yronwode

Sitat cameron <cbailes@...>:
> I wouldn't doubt it.  I see ideas that agree with the Book of the Law
> everywhere.  As to Hitler Speaks, the only info I have been able to
> find on it being a hoax is from the Institute for Historical Review
> which is devoted to historical revisionism.

Well whatever is the truth about Hitler Speaks, it is clear that A.C. was
enthusiastic about the book.  His own copy of it is carefully annotated.

As an aside A.C. liked particularly the chapter on the antichrist ;)

> Well, I think Crowley's disgust with Hitler is evident, but I
> certainly don't think it is unusual of him to have an admiration
> for "noble" tyranny (noble in appearence, at least.)

I think A.C. admired the strongwilled man who managed to manifest his
will, hence his admiration for such diverse characters as Hitler and
Stalin.

As for Chuirchill and fascism, it wouldn't surprise me.  As an aside over
15 years later A.C. still had much positive to say about Mussolini. He
thought Mussolini went downhill when M. went into league with the
catholic church.  What happened then, or so A.C. thought, the Catholic
Church's insistance on the meek and the weak corrupted the reign of
Mussolini :)

All best,

K

93!

Catherine Yronwode wrote:

> Crowley believed Indian men should not be allowed to go to England for
> schooling because they would then try to have sex with "white women."

That remark was part of his suggestions for securing a permanent British
domination of India through maintaining native awe of the Colonial
administration.

> He also said that the people of Egypt suffered from "admixture of
> blood" -- that is, he believed that their multiracialism made them not
> as nice as the "pure-blooded" people to whom he was comparing them.
> Both of these examples would seem to indicate that he was against
> races intermarrying, in the belief that the offspring would be
> "inferior." In my opinion, these samples (and others) meet your
> qualifications for "obsessing about 'racial degeneration' and
'miscegenation'."

You forget to mention his fictionalised version of Ananda K.
Coomaraswami in one Simon Iff story.

>
> Actual quotes from Crowley on race matters are cited at
>      http://www.luckymojo.com/faqs/crowleyracistfaq.html

On the other hand, from Confessions, Cap. 54:

'I am not a snob or puritan, but Eurasians do get on my nerves. I do not
believe that their universally admitted baseness is due to a mixture of
blood or the presumable peculiarity of their parents; but that they
forced into vileness by the attitude of both their white and coloured neighbors.
[you quote *only* the following section of this paragraph on your racist
FAQ page:]  A similar case is presented by the Jew, who really does only
too often possess the bad qualities for which he is disliked; but they
are not proper to his race. [you then omit the following sentences:] No
people can show finer specimens of humanity. The Hebrew poets and
prophets are sublime. The Jewish soldier is courageous, the Jewish rich
man generous. The race possesses imagination, romance, loyalty, probity
and humanity to an exceptional degree.'

You also leave out the paragraph immediately following:

'But the Jew has been persecuted so relentlessly that his survival has
depended on the development of his worst qualities; avarice, servility,
falseness, cunning and the rest. Even the highest-class Eurasians such
as Ananda Koomaraswami suffer acutely from the shame of being considered
outcast. The irrationality and injustice of their neighbors heightens
the feeling and it breeds the very abominations which the snobbish
inhumanity of their fellow-men expects of them.'

In other words, Crowley regarded mixed-race people as victims of
prejudice from *both* sides, and that this warps their characters
accordingly. He repeats this argument in the very next chapter, where he
also praises Litton, the British Consul at Tengyueh, his Chinese wife
('an exceedingly beautiful woman with perfect manners,') and their five
'charming children.' Such sentiments would *never* be found in actual
Ariosophical texts, which emphasize the total primacy of heredity over
environment, and that *any* person of mixed blood is inherently warped
and inferior beyond any possible remedy. Ariosophy was (and is) almost
totally concerned with preserving the 'purity' of the 'Aryan race'
against any kind of mixture with 'inferior races.' That is what I mean
by 'obsessing about "racial degeneration" and "miscegenation".' It is
obvious that Crowley's views on race do not follow modern standards,
however it is only just to acknowledge that his views were nowhere
nearly as objectionable as some. Crowley's views are also rather more
complex than you yourself indicate.

93 93/93!

-- Julianus


“Nothing on the face of this earth -- and I do mean nothing --
is half so dangerous as a children’s story that happens to be
real, and you and I are wandering blindfolded through a myth
devised by a maniac.”
                                         -- Master Li Kao (T’ang Dynasty)

              *** John’s Creeping Homepage of Doom ***
               http://www.kiva.net/~julianus/main.html

Sitat Julianus <julianus@...>:
> Such sentiments would *never* be found in actual
> Ariosophical texts, which emphasize the total primacy of heredity over
> environment, and that *any* person of mixed blood is inherently warped
> and inferior beyond any possible remedy. Ariosophy was (and is) almost
> totally concerned with preserving the 'purity' of the 'Aryan race'
> against any kind of mixture with 'inferior races.'

Add to that the fact that A.C. wrote to Martha Kuentzel that Hitler's
whole obsession with the aryan race was his biggest flaw, even going so
far as to add that the jewish race was in many ways superior to the
german people (i.e. the aryans).

To claim A.C. was some sort of Ariosophists is as you point out missing
the point entirely.

I also wonder why noone has bothered to quote the passages from Simon Iff
where A.C. is racist against the scandinavians :)

Good post!

All best,

K

Sitat Kjetil Fjell <aba@...>:
> I also wonder why noone has bothered to quote the passages from Simon
> Iff  where A.C. is racist against the scandinavians :)

Small wonder as there are no passages in Simon Iff.  There are however in
Roger Bloxxam :)

Sorry for the flawed info.

K