50060416 ix om

HornedGod93@...:
# An interesting summery of what might be called
# the "nagasiva school," reflective of that
# online body of work.

a clever way of avoiding an actual response to
that poster's missive -- paint hir with a wide
brush within the confines of some other person's
"school" who similarly is critical of your writ
and the aggrandizements of English blowhards.

you did something similar in your response to me
when you took out everything but something to
which you might react as if I was more extreme.

this minimizing perspective allows you to give
the *impression* of reducing your correspondent
to someone who might fit into a 'school', but
ultimately it fails as it disallows coherent and
respectful response outside that artificiality.

# It does, unintentionally, recapture the sense
# of Crowley as the modern esoteric anti-hero
# that has such broad appeal today.

I don't find Crowley's 'anti-hero' stance to fit
very long. within such stylized characters he is
more often a better fit for (Maugham's?) villain,
and for fake-o fraudulent mystic (after HPB). you
have failed, as most who adore the man, to provide
any scrap of believable support for his 'wisdom'
or indeed his 'spiritual condition'.

your reference must be to the 'Crazy Wisdom' style
of mystic impersonators and neuvoyogis, after such
illustrious individuals as Maharishi Mahesh Yogi, or
better, Swami Muktananda, or Gurdjieff or Rajneesh.

that you believe that this anti-hero has 'broad
appeal' may be more a matter of their broadening
base of support from miscreants and misanthropes
who, with the advent of the glut of human genetic
proliferation, are receiving far more than their due
share of attention based primarily on deception.

# Each time that the narrative threatens to teeter
# toward emotional imbalance, the pendulum is
# thrust in the opposite direction, such as with
# the etymological exposition upon the word 'Aeon.'
# Of course, the readers of this forum will be
# familiar with the ongoing analysis of "Crowley's
# flawed aeonics."

few have taken the time to analyse to profit or
prophet how and why Crowley's notion of time was
in error, and how and why his heralding wasn't in
actual tune either to astronomical or cosmic rhythms.
that he was attempting to compete with *astrological*
'ages' that have age-old reputation but little to no
actual use for him seems obvious enough now. that
his egyptomania occluded his ability to present
meaningfully may be a factor in both his lingering
popularity *and* his eventual outdatedness (along
the lines of "Sam the Sham and the Pharoahs,
cf.  this proseic and wonderous cover:
http://www.denslow.com/graphics/albums/samthesham.jpg ).

# Suffice it to say that the word 'Aeon' has taken
# on an additional definition today,

it had many more than one previously, and some cults
have attempted to usurp and control this so as to
emphasize their particular cult leader's authority.
when did these word usages begin? do you know?

# that of a measured stage of human spiritual
# evolution,

where did this notion start? did Crowley invent it?
he doesn't seem to have invented much that is
attributed to him, and because of his lack of
transparency (not uncommon for occultists) didn't
identify either those upon whom he built *or* those
from whom he stole without proper credit for his
occult expositions (e.g. PBRandolph, others).

# and that Crowley probably had it only partially
# figured out, due to the limited historical data
# available during his lifetime, as well as his
# lack of perspective on his own role therein.

full of glorified implication and glitzy inference.
Crowley's mixture of ignorance and awareness is a
conglomeration it can take some years to figure out,
and his inherence to egyptomania and fabrications
inside the Budgean paradigm (Hadit) seem unique.
that Crowley was blinded by substance-abuse and
insufficient scientific education seems apparent
(as any who encounters Crowley's outmoded notions
reproduction and its masculine-focus can see).

# Both perfectly understandable.

you forgive too much while rushing to worship.

# The writer's own frustration is certainly evident,

that frustration might be with the promise what does
exist in the occult world if only its cultism and
debilitating clinging to outmoded imagery and
standards (more conducive to the liberation of post-
Christian character than to those without this
religious hang-up than to more mature newcomers)
can be discarded. Crowleyans usually can't escape.

# and he seems genuinely haunted by the growing
# popularity of Aleister Crowley, but the reader
# is left with one eyebrow raised, and is thus
# unsympathetic to his plight.

your projection of 'the growing popularity of
Aleister Crowley' is stuck in the 80s, methinks. ;)
what with the proliferation of the internet, such
characteristics as his heinous treatment of women,
children, and 'dark races' marks this 'Beast' and
some of his contemporaneous frauds like HPB as
both behind the times as well as imperialist scum
attempting to hide within the Old AEon character
of the perveyor of orientalist mystik wisdom (akin
to de Laurence and his 'Hindoo' books he revised
after initial turban-wearing became controversial).

you've mistaken the glorification of Crowleyan
cultists with the growing popularity of the Beast,
when in fact his edges are fraying all around him,
and he is becoming more and more often known for
his faults in his actual (rather than any imagined
and white-cotton-shielded and ignorant) context.

false assertions about the lack of illuminated men
of his background and time and a willingness to
excuse his manner of crude, hostile, and backwards
ethics straight out of his class and culture are
liable to tell us far more about the people who
become his acolytes and worshippers than anyone
about whom they are promoting and praising.

333
    nagasiva@...

taterdono <taterdono@...>:
<snip>
> Yet, I know nothing it seems and often give up on the whole subject
> of Magick/Crowley/Thelema.
>
> In my life I have met NO ONE who has read Crowley or has even heard
> of Thelema. I don't even know the proper pronunciation of "Thelema"
> (long -e or short -e?).
>
> I hope this indicates how isolated a lone "student" can be.
> Ah well. I've all but given up. I don't know that I'm truly inclined
> toward "Magick," but I KNOW that Thelema is the spiritual and
> philosophical basis of a "New Aeon" (an idea in which I fully
>  believe).
>
> This is some of the difficulty for me: I believe in a New Aeon; I'm
> convinced of the Truth of Thelema; yet, I have no practical
> understanding and all the things that seem to comprise it (yogic
> practice, "astral" exercises, Qabalah, etc.) are not of vital
> interest to me.
<snip>

==================================== quoted material ends here

93
   I'm sorry I don't feel bad for you.
    I did a search on how to say thelema and got this right off the bat Crowley's
word was Thelema (The Crowleian pronunciation is Theh-LEE-mah, the accent
bewatching on the vowel of the second syllable, Greek speakers ay the ...
www.cix.co.uk/~mandrake/crowley.htm - 19k - Cached - Similar pages.
    Try reading Lon Milo Duquette's book the magick of thelema. You do not need
to belong to a group to be a thelemite or preform thelemic magick. Stay away
from the OTO they have very little to offer. If you can find an AA contact that
is great but it is not a must you can work the system through reading the
materials and each grade is only a seal of your achievevments that are out lined
in the coursework.

   93/93
   FR.LoGoS

[Moderator: Top-Posted; insufficient identification of quoted material;
reformatted and marked up quoted material; future
posts from this individual will not be reworked.]

"wayne_illustrator" <wayne_illustrator@...>:
> ...I'm learning qabala correspondences and
cosmology but
> can't seem to rationalise how the Thelemic cosmology fits into the tree of
life. Whilst in the
> tree we see the threefold Ain focused through the single point of Kether
(represented by
> Amun-Ra or Ptah) to be translated by Chokmah (Tahuti) and passed, through
union, to
> Binah (Isis) who births the lower tree into existance. In Thelema we have
Nuit (Infinite Time
> and Space) and Hadit (Energy) communing to become Horus (Consciousness). I
just
> wondered if there's a good way to resolve this apparent clash as there
doesn't seem to be
> anything written that addresses this.

Well, Ive thought for a long time that the traditional Kaballah is largely
unreconcilable with Thelemic Cosmology, however, the New Aeon English
Qaballah system fits quite rationally into the framework apparent in AL.

Some disagree with this vehemently, on one hand saying such a system can
neither be needed nor valid. Others have purported their own Qaballistic
solutions to AL, these ranging from the sublimely inspired to the outright
silly.

However many magicians in the Thelemic community have been working with NAEQ
for several decades, mainly out of the alchemical order of the QBLH, in
later years many OTO regs have picked up on it as well and a great deal of
data has been compiled.

A few members of this list double up on the English Qaballah list and there
is a wealth of data on this and other 'neo-qaballahs' which address the
cosmological puzzles of AL from a specifically native context.

My own homepage for the NOT ( New Order of Thelema) has a great deal of
telling data pertaining to NAEQ from its historical background to research
endemic to our order and our spin on Thelema.

One is advised to take a look for oneself and decide these matters:
www.neworder.20m.com

93,

T.

[Moderator: top-posted, reformatted; badly breaking, left as is; future posts
from this individual may not be reworked]

50060419 ix om

thanks for your excellent query and intro, taterdono.

taterdono <taterdono@...>:
#> Yet, I know nothing it seems and often give up on

you've come to the right place. many who read and
post to this forum are sure that they are correct
and properly informed as to the nature of Thelema
and that which surrounds Crowley and Magick, so
you're likely to get many very strongly-stated
opinions masquerading as vaunted/hallowed wisdom.
below I offer some of the same. ymmv :)


#> the whole subject of Magick/Crowley/Thelema.

Magick <== Crowley's variation on 'magic'; mystical,
            defined in stages within Crowley's text;
	    Crowley appears to have been a writer and
	    indisciplined mystic for the most part,
	    with slight to no success in his practice;
	    of limited utility to Thelemites outside
	    cults surrounding Crowley.

Crowley <== English writer fomenting notoriety and
	     controversy, plus a cult in his wake;
	     attention-sink and enslavement-corpus;
	     beware as this may distract easily.

Thelema <== philosophy, religion, occult path; these
	     three are overlapping and interweaving,
	     but sharply diverge at points which have
	     more to do with personalities than hard
	     and fast rules:
	 SOLO:
		 philosophy: applicable by an
		  individual and comprehendable
		  in principle and depth to a
		  degree dependent upon logic,
		  analysis, and experience;
		  some less popular orgs are
		  interested in promoting this.

	 INTERMEDIARY:
		 occult path: more diffuse, these
		  tend to be promoted by orders or
		  occultists as of more and less
		  reliability or effectiveness
		  along 'thematic' lines suggested
		  or detailed by 'age' or 'aeon'
		  description (e.g. "Horusian",
		  "Maat Magick", etc.); a 'fit' may
		  be imperative to proper usage but
		  unrecognized by specialists promoting
		  theirs as superior; that volition
		  is an essential aspect of magic
		  is undoubted; intention and its
		  extension into symbolism seem
		  to be the common components.

	 ORG-RELATED:
		 religion: coordinated and,
		  despite an ordinary resistance
		  to proliferation based on set
		  hierarchies, flowing into lines
		  of rite and liturgy; watch for
		  worship and conventional rites.


#> In my life I have met NO ONE who has read Crowley

not imperative if your interests are general magic.
his religiomagical morass is heavy on the Flesh but
light on any actual Bones of occultism. his practice
descriptions are GD-related or constructed by him,
and are therefore probably best for those of his
general class and character (white, post-Christian,
inherited-money-squanderer, psychoactive-lover, etc.).

some spell it 'magick' when they think that there
was some interest in discerning between 'occult
activities' and 'stage magic'. any survey of the
field will disclose a common boundary for these
(cf. "Net of Magic" as regards India and mystics),
and this has been supplemented by certain
publishers (e.g. Llewellyn, Weiser) who sought
to use this distinction also. some will attempt
to prop up their false assertions about all of
this by projecting upon Crowley a rational
motivation that never existed (i.e. 'Crowley said
that his "magick" was supposed to be occult magic
and distinguished from stage magic'). in fact the
man's editor (Soror Virakam) explained that he was
attempting to easily market and identify his writ
in comparison with his contemporaries such as HPB,
to whom he referred as 'counterfeits'.

#> or has even heard of Thelema.

certain cults are fomenting its popularity, what
they call 'promulgating the Law of Thelema', and
sometimes they are turning this toward an occult
path or a religion, or a combination of these.

#> I don't even know the proper pronunciation of
#> "Thelema" (long -e or short -e?).

pronounce it as thy will shall be the whole of the Law.

#> ...I don't know that I'm truly inclined toward
#> "Magick," but I KNOW that Thelema is the spiritual
#> and philosophical basis of a "New Aeon" (an idea
#> in which I fully believe).

then your alliance is belief-based and your aeonic
assertions indicate that you may be more at home
in the camps of philosophers and religious than
occultists. if you like "The Book of the Law",
then you may be headed for some revelation.

#> ...I believe in a New Aeon;

what is it? what do you believe in here? why?

#> I'm convinced of the Truth of Thelema;

what is it that is true, here? what is Thelema that
it might be 'True' or have a 'Truth'? by what method
did you become convinced of this Truth?

#> yet, I have no practical understanding and all
#> the things that seem to comprise it (yogic
#> practice, "astral" exercises, Qabalah, etc.)
#> are not of vital interest to me.

yoga: this was Crowley's theft from India.

qabalah: this was a hermetic theft from Jews
	  and entered into post-Christian
	  occultism playing with Satanism.

astral: this was apparently inherited from
         spiritualists after Orphics fostered
	 the belief in a body-spirit split
	 and may be found in many contexts;
	 its activity is ancient, but the way
	 in which it is seen may not be.

what you appear to be focussing on here as 'not
of vital interest to you' are the occult and
religious aspects primarily -- ones which are
provided with applomb but which are seldom if
ever 'confirmed' in any real sense as to their
effectiveness (orgs and orders tend to suppose
their members 'advanced' based on ladder-climbing
integrity to the cult, just like in most religions).

philosophical application of the principles that
may be identified as 'Thelema' may be of greater
interest to you overall, especially as you have
mentioned your relative solitary status and
aversion to rite/disciplines. experimenting
with these and matching them up with the actual
application to success in the world may be of
some help in studies beyond the examination of
will-based philosophies such as are sometimes
mentioned here and in other enlightened contexts.


Granville Savidge <vavvavsix@...>:
# I did a search on how to say thelema and got this right off
# the bat Crowley's word was Thelema (The Crowleian
# pronunciation is Theh-LEE-mah, the accent bewatching on
# the vowel of the second syllable, Greek speakers ay the ...
# www.cix.co.uk/~mandrake/crowley.htm

pronounce it how you like shall be the whole of the Law.

# Try reading Lon Milo Duquette's book the magick of thelema.

Lon Milo Duquette is one of the most popularly-known living
members of the OTO at this time, from what I can see. he's
heavily involved with a Southern CA OTO body as I recall.
publishing books seems still a very important way to drive
attention and demand remuneration and veneration from humans.
the internet is still low on the totem pole despite its
comparably-efficient communication-technik.

# You do not need to belong to a group to be a thelemite or
# [perform] thelemic magick. Stay away from the OTO they have
# very little to offer.

interesting combination of suggestions here, given that you
both recommend books *by* OTO members and warn against it.

# If you can find an AA contact

what is the AA? how does one find such a contact? does it
require a blood sacrifice? is the AA more than a farce
that attempts to draw off attention from the real 3rd Order?
do you think that it is connected to or in some way runs
itself the same way as did the Great White Brotherhood of
von Eckhartshausen?

# that is great but it is not a must you can work the system

is there only one system of the AA? is it the one which was
created by Crowley and George Cecil Jones, or was it created
by others in their names or after their instructions/advice?

what happens when one 'works the system'? is there supposed
to be some kind of light-body developed? will this help one
to survive bodily death and not go off into the dungheap of
the cosmos but instead be reborn somewhere special or to
hang around indefinitely and try to steal a body for fun?

# through reading the materials and each grade is only
# a seal of your achievevments that are out lined
# in the coursework.

conventional AA advice after Liber L or whatever,
it sounds. does it matter that there is more than one
AA associated with the OTO (and the TOT! and the CoT!)?
does it matter that at times within the OTO there is
an attempt to drive people toward favoured AAs?

333
	 nagasiva@...

taterdono <taterdono@...>:
>> Yet, I know nothing it seems and often give up on

333 <nagasiva@...> wrote:
> you've come to the right place. many who read and
> post to this forum are sure that they are correct
> and properly informed as to the nature of Thelema
> and that which surrounds Crowley and Magick, so
> you're likely to get many very strongly-stated
> opinions masquerading as vaunted/hallowed wisdom.
> below I offer some of the same. ymmv :)

   Here are some examples of pre-Crowleyan western philosophy with similar
themes:

   1. "The nature of God is a circle of which the center is everywhere and the
circumference is nowhere."
-Empedocles

   ("In the sphere I am everywhere the centre, as she, the circumference, is
nowhere found. -Ch.2 V. 3 Liber Al)


   2. "A tyrant must put on the appearance of uncommon devotion to religion.
Subjects are less apprehensive of illegal treatment from a ruler whom they
consider god-fearing and pious. On the other hand, they do less easily move
against him, believing that he has the gods on his side."
-Aristotle

   (Also, check out Aristotle's "entelecheia" or "entelechy".)


   3. "All things will be produced in superior quantity and quality, and with
greater ease, when each man works at a single occupation, in accordance with his
natural gifts, and at the right moment, without meddling with anything else."
-Plato

   *"When any one, being healthfully and temperately disposed
towards himself, turns to sleep, having stirred the reasonable
part of him with a feast of fair thoughts and high problems,
being come to full consciousness, himself with himself; and
has, on the other hand, committed the element of desire neither
to appetite, nor to surfeiting, to the end that this may slumber
well, and, by its pain or pleasure, cause no trouble to that
part which is best in him, but may suffer it, alone by itself,
in its pure essence, to behold and aspire towards some object,
and apprehend what it knows not—some event, of the past, it may
be, or something that now is, or will be hereafter; and in like
manner has soothed hostile impulse, so that, falling to no angry
thoughts against any, he goes not to rest with a troubled spirit,
but with those two parts at peace within, and with that third
part, wherein reason is engendered, on the move:—you know, I
think, that in sleep of this sort he lays special hold on truth,
and then least of all is there lawlessness in the visions of his
dreams."  -Plato, Republic, 571.


4. "Opposition brings concord. Out of discord comes the fairest harmony."
   -Heraclitus


5. There are also quite a lot of similarities in the theurgy of Iamblichus.


6. The Marriage of Heaven and Hell by William Blake


   These are just a few of the things I've come across that remind me that this
spiritual current is really nothing new. Perhaps it is really important because
great people keep expressing it. It would be a limitation, in my opinion, to
only think of it as a cult invented in the last century.

   best regards and 93!,


   Jim

when the earth was a young man
he was lightning-struck
by the beautiful bosom of Night
and Her hidden hips....
www.mysticmarriage.com

[Moderator clarified quotation for readability.]

50060419 ix om        5006 06 06 looms near

AEon of the Adversary Confirms

	 *** 666 action upcoming ***

when did the temporal wave of 666 originate?

perhaps its solar (6x6) correlate synchopates
with European correspondences in kamea (as
planetary magic square talismans). or due
to my power as a Magus the initiation of my
Pact Day energized a momentum of Satanic
proportion, adding precisely to anti-Jesusian
and pro-cthonic reverberations, exquisite
and harmonized to the Adversarial AEon!

'War on Easter'? 'The God Who Was Not There'?

finally the New Age is alive and well! ;)

----- Forwarded message from newsletter@... -----

Subject: The War On Easter
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 20:19:22 +0200
To: boboroshi SOD of the CoE! <boboroshi@...>

Dear boboroshi,

We thought you might be interested in a provocative
new campaign being launched by Beyond Belief Media
tomorrow. You can find out about it here:

	 http://www.waroneaster.org/

The first 666 participants will win a free DVD.

Best Regards,
Beyond Belief Media
_________________________________________________________________________
You are receiving this bulletin as a registered subscriber to the Beyond Belief
Media newsletter.

To subscribe:
http://thebeastmovie.com/newsletter/form.html

To unsubscribe:
http://thebeastmovie.com/tinc?key=YOsMVv5t&MailID=00000000052A7E930004955199F173\
C1
----- End forwarded message -----

cute, huh? they're very serious. :)
it's also my initiation day in OTO.

333
	 nagasiva@...

Hello,

This email message is a notification to let you know that
a file has been uploaded to the Files area of the thelema93-l
group.

   File        : /T93-L/Monthly Moderation Minder (m.'.m.'.m.'.)
   Uploaded by : nigris333 <nagasiva@...>
   Description : the means by which posts are vetted for posting.

You can access this file at the URL:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thelema93-l/files/T93-L/Monthly%20Moderation%20Min\
der%20%28m.%27.m.%27.m.%27.%29

To learn more about file sharing for your group, please visit:
http://help.yahoo.com/help/us/groups/files

Regards,

nigris333 <nagasiva@...>

93 Nigris,

An interesting post. I also reviewed some of your past posts on the internet.
There is certainly a recurring theme. I do have several questions, if I may?

In a message dated 4/19/2006 2:24:07 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nagasiva@... writes:
>
> #> the whole subject of Magick/Crowley/Thelema.
>
> Magick <== Crowley's variation on 'magic'; mystical,
>       defined in stages within Crowley's text;
>     Crowley appears to have been a writer and
>     indisciplined mystic for the most part,
>     with slight to no success in his practice;
>     of limited utility to Thelemites outside
>     cults surrounding Crowley.

Please, can you elaborate, with examples, upon your opinion that Crowley's
practice as a mystic (as he outlined it in his Book Four, part one, for example)
was undisciplined and lacking in success?

Are you not inclined to differentiate at all between his possible success in
areas such as practical mysticism and his possible lack of success as a human
being in general? (As one might be inclined to do with other fields of
self-development, such as physical training of any sort. The accomplished
athlete who
was otherwise a complete ass, for example?)

How do we measure the success of another in practical mysticism, in any case?

How would you compare your own success with practical mysticism to that of
Aleister Crowley?

>
> Crowley <== English writer fomenting notoriety and
>     controversy, plus a cult in his wake;
>     attention-sink and enslavement-corpus;
>     beware as this may distract easily.

Would you consider it inappropriate for a writer (of any nationality) to seek
to attract attention to hirself?

How would you compare your own success in writing to that of Aleister
Crowley?

Please define "cult" and explain the negative connotation of the term as you
use it? (I assume that the subsequent terms "attention-sink,"
"enslavement-corpus" and "may distract easily" denote a negative connotation?)

Is a "cult," by your definition, simply two or more individuals sharing a
common interest?

Does a common interest, being actively shared, always limit the ability of
each participant from fully benefiting from the experience?

>
> Thelema <== philosophy, religion, occult path; these
>     three are overlapping and interweaving,
>     but sharply diverge at points which have
>     more to do with personalities than hard
>     and fast rules:
>   SOLO:
>     philosophy: applicable by an
>     individual and comprehendable
>     in principle and depth to a
>     degree dependent upon logic,
>     analysis, and experience;
>     some less popular orgs are
>     interested in promoting this.

Would you say that there was any limit to the apprehension of a subject by
way of logic and analysis, or a limit to the faculties of reason in general?

Might personal experience ever transcend the scope of reason, while remaining
a viable consideration?

>
>   INTERMEDIARY:
>     occult path: more diffuse, these
>     tend to be promoted by orders or
>     occultists as of more and less
>     reliability or effectiveness
>     along 'thematic' lines suggested
>     or detailed by 'age' or 'aeon'
>     description (e.g. "Horusian",
>     "Maat Magick", etc.); a 'fit' may
>     be imperative to proper usage but
>     unrecognized by specialists promoting
>     theirs as superior; that volition
>     is an essential aspect of magic
>     is undoubted; intention and its
>     extension into symbolism seem
>     to be the common components.

Do you recognize "innate inclination" as a passive but equal form of the
active terms "volition," or "intention," as these apply to defining Thelema?

>
>   ORG-RELATED:
>     religion: coordinated and,
>     despite an ordinary resistance
>     to proliferation based on set
>     hierarchies, flowing into lines
>     of rite and liturgy; watch for
>     worship and conventional rites.

Do you acknowledge that some people actually *need* these trappings for
purposes of psychological or spiritual transition, and thus seek them out or
re-create them after older models?

Do you consider these trappings to be "crutches," or as implying weakness or
other deficiency in such individuals?

>
>
> #> In my life I have met NO ONE who has read Crowley
>
> not imperative if your interests are general magic.
> his religiomagical morass is heavy on the Flesh but
> light on any actual Bones of occultism.
>

Which "actual Bones of occultism" are lacking? Please elaborate on the
deficiencies of Crowley's occult systems, within their stated intent?


his practice
> descriptions are GD-related or constructed by him,

> and are therefore probably best for those of his
> general class and character (white, post-Christian,
> inherited-money-squanderer, psychoactive-lover, etc.).

Should he not make a very poor candidate for adoration, or even admiration,
today, with his appeal being so very limited? How do you account for his
popularity?

Do you see any value in working with psychoactives?

>
> some spell it 'magick' when they think that there
> was some interest in discerning between 'occult
> activities' and 'stage magic'. any survey of the
> field will disclose a common boundary for these
> (cf. "Net of Magic" as regards India and mystics),
> and this has been supplemented by certain
> publishers (e.g. Llewellyn, Weiser) who sought
> to use this distinction also. some will attempt
> to prop up their false assertions about all of
> this by projecting upon Crowley a rational
> motivation that never existed (i.e. 'Crowley said
> that his "magick" was supposed to be occult magic
> and distinguished from stage magic'). in fact the
> man's editor (Soror Virakam) explained that he was
> attempting to easily market and identify his writ
> in comparison with his contemporaries such as HPB,
> to whom he referred as 'counterfeits'.

Would you consider it inappropriate for a writer to seek to distinguish
hirself from others?

>
> #> or has even heard of Thelema.
>
> certain cults are fomenting its popularity, what
> they call 'promulgating the Law of Thelema', and
> sometimes they are turning this toward an occult
> path or a religion, or a combination of these.

What do you foresee for the popularity or practice of 'Thelema', with and
without Crowley, and on what projected timelines?

>
> #> I don't even know the proper pronunciation of
> #> "Thelema" (long -e or short -e?).
>
> pronounce it as thy will shall be the whole of the Law.
>
> #> ...I don't know that I'm truly inclined toward
> #> "Magick," but I KNOW that Thelema is the spiritual
> #> and philosophical basis of a "New Aeon" (an idea
> #> in which I fully believe).
>
> then your alliance is belief-based and your aeonic
> assertions indicate that you may be more at home
> in the camps of philosophers and religious than
> occultists. if you like "The Book of the Law",
> then you may be headed for some revelation.

Do you recall Crowley ever urging *certainty over faith* or encouraging doubt
and skepticism at all in his writings?

>
> #> ...I believe in a New Aeon;
>
> what is it? what do you believe in here? why?
>
> #> I'm convinced of the Truth of Thelema;
>
> what is it that is true, here? what is Thelema that
> it might be 'True' or have a 'Truth'? by what method
> did you become convinced of this Truth?

Can 'Truth' ever be anything beyond a subjective sense of certainty?

>
> #> yet, I have no practical understanding and all
> #> the things that seem to comprise it (yogic
> #> practice, "astral" exercises, Qabalah, etc.)
> #> are not of vital interest to me.
>
> yoga: this was Crowley's theft from India.

Why theft? Because Crowley was not Indian?

Did Crowley claim to have invented Yoga by his re-introducing it beyond its
previous sphere of influence or modifying it to suit a broader or different
field of interest and application?

>
> qabalah: this was a hermetic theft from Jews
>   and entered into post-Christian
>   occultism playing with Satanism.

Again, why theft?

>
> astral: this was apparently inherited from
>     spiritualists after Orphics fostered
>   the belief in a body-spirit split
>   and may be found in many contexts;
>   its activity is ancient, but the way
>   in which it is seen may not be.
>
> what you appear to be focussing on here as 'not
> of vital interest to you' are the occult and
> religious aspects primarily -- ones which are
> provided with applomb but which are seldom if
> ever 'confirmed' in any real sense as to their
> effectiveness (orgs and orders tend to suppose
> their members 'advanced' based on ladder-climbing
> integrity to the cult, just like in most religions).

Are you attempting, in general, to correct what you feel to be the
inappropriate attribution of certain esoteric theories and disciplines to
Aleister
Crowley?

Do you feel that Crowley's audience today is generally ill-informed, naive,
unintelligent or being successfully deceived by others?

>
> philosophical application of the principles that
> may be identified as 'Thelema' may be of greater
> interest to you overall, especially as you have
> mentioned your relative solitary status and
> aversion to rite/disciplines. experimenting
> with these and matching them up with the actual
> application to success in the world may be of
> some help in studies beyond the examination of
> will-based philosophies such as are sometimes
> mentioned here and in other enlightened contexts.

Would you be pleased to see more practical applications of Thelema, as
opposed to the purely theoretical? How would you characterize such *applied*
Thelema? Can you give examples?

Would Thelema have applications to social concerns? Economic concerns?
Political concerns? Heath concerns? Educational concerns? Legal and law
enforcement
concerns? Others?

>
>
> Granville Savidge <vavvavsix@...>:
> # I did a search on how to say thelema and got this right off
> # the bat Crowley's word was Thelema (The Crowleian
> # pronunciation is Theh-LEE-mah, the accent bewatching on
> # the vowel of the second syllable, Greek speakers ay the ...
> # www.cix.co.uk/~mandrake/crowley.htm
>
> pronounce it how you like shall be the whole of the Law.
>
> # Try reading Lon Milo Duquette's book the magick of thelema.
>
> Lon Milo Duquette is one of the most popularly-known living
> members of the OTO at this time, from what I can see. he's
> heavily involved with a Southern CA OTO body as I recall.
> publishing books seems still a very important way to drive
> attention and demand remuneration and veneration from humans.
> the internet is still low on the totem pole despite its
> comparably-efficient communication-technik.

Books are also still an important way to educate, inform and entertain, yes?
Have you ever written a book?

Do you think that a substantial amount of money is available in esoteric book
writing and publishing?

What do you see as the accomplishments of your own extensive writings on the
internet, besides attracting my attention, of course? ;)

>
> # You do not need to belong to a group to be a thelemite or
> # [perform] thelemic magick. Stay away from the OTO they have
> # very little to offer.
>
> interesting combination of suggestions here, given that you
> both recommend books *by* OTO members and warn against it.

Are you not a member of OTO yourself, Nigris?

>
> # If you can find an AA contact
>
> what is the AA? how does one find such a contact? does it
> require a blood sacrifice? is the AA more than a farce
> that attempts to draw off attention from the real 3rd Order?
> do you think that it is connected to or in some way runs
> itself the same way as did the Great White Brotherhood of
> von Eckhartshausen?
>
> # that is great but it is not a must you can work the system
>
> is there only one system of the AA? is it the one which was
> created by Crowley and George Cecil Jones, or was it created
> by others in their names or after their instructions/advice?
>
> what happens when one 'works the system'? is there supposed
> to be some kind of light-body developed? will this help one
> to survive bodily death and not go off into the dungheap of
> the cosmos but instead be reborn somewhere special or to
> hang around indefinitely and try to steal a body for fun?
>
> # through reading the materials and each grade is only
> # a seal of your achievevments that are out lined
> # in the coursework.
>
> conventional AA advice after Liber L or whatever,
> it sounds. does it matter that there is more than one
> AA associated with the OTO (and the TOT! and the CoT!)?
> does it matter that at times within the OTO there is
> an attempt to drive people toward favoured AAs?

Have you ever practiced the system of (mostly self-) initiation known as the
(Crowley/Jones) A.'.A.'.?

>
> 333
>   nagasiva@...
>
>

Thank you for the opportunity to ask these questions.

93 93/93
HG


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

=====================================================
    ADMIN: Monthly Moderation Minder
-------------------------------------

Do as you please.

Thank you for your participation in Thelema93-L Yahoogroup. From
time to time our subscribers need a reminder of what has proven to
be a valuable and effective style of posting in order to preserve
the integrity and enjoyment of this forum. What follows is a brief
list of stylistic guidelines we strongly recommend:

PLEASE

try to limit the number and length of your posts, avoid short
personal notes (like "me too!" and "I agree!" or "hi!"),
taking those to private email, and generally referencing URLs
for longer textfiles rather than posting them unless you
know there is widespread interest. those with insufficient
new contributions will be deleted without comment!

_____________________________________________________________________

  VVVVVVVVV--- hey you! important! look at the note below ---VVVVVVVV
_____________________________________________________________________


DO THIS
AND SAVE YOURSELF
NEEDLESS HASSLE
WAITING FOR POSTS

    *  format your post so that your material appears after quoted
         material which is prepended with carats like this:

             "(ANGRY THELEMITE'S NAME)" wrote:
    	     > **QUOTED MATERIAL ABOUT THELEMA**
             > **MORE QUOTED MATERIAL ABOUT**

             YOUR NEW TEXT

         if this format isn't followed we may reformat it for you,
         or simply delete your contribution to the forum;
         or we may explain briefly what we'd approve;

                                                EVERYBODY'S DOING IT!!
                                                       REALLY! HOW CAN
                                              IT REALLY BE DANGEROUS?!
                                                          TO CONFORM??
_____________________________________________________________________

  ^^^^^^^^^^^^        IMPORTANT NOTE:  LOOK ABOVE         ^^^^^^^^^^^
_____________________________________________________________________

METADISCUSSION????  (really! look above, what it says about formats!)


If you have feedback about the quality of T93-L's content or
policies, please feel free to send email to one or more of the
list-owners/moderators at

			 thelema93-l-owner@yahoogroups.com

Please do not respond to this text in the email list.

Fay ce que vouldras. ;)

thelema93-l-owner@yahoogroups.com
=================================

REV 4-19-06 M.'.M.'.M.'.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/thelema93-l/files/T93-L/t93-lmmm.txt
EOF

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

I trust everyone had a wonderful Holy Days celebration.  If not, get
over it!  :)

>taterdono wrote:
>> Years later I purchased "The Book of the Law," a small and
>> inscrutable red book.

>arhiar replied:
>Why do you say inscrutable?  There are a few Qabalah puzzles in it,
>but in general it is written pretty straightforwardly,

Boy Oh Boy!!!  I must be really stupid, then.  LOL  Since practicing
Mysticism and Magick since I was six years old, I've still studied
Liber AL (Indeed - I dare!) for over twenty years now and STILL find
new MIND-BLOWING items in it, with every new reading!

Since "it is written pretty straightforwardly" for you, can you
explain EVERYTHING in the Book for me?  I would just love to finally
understand all the nuances.  So far, I've only discovered
approximately four or five of the meanings of each verse!!  :)
WOW!  I am in awe, dude!  LOL  LOL

>taterdono continued:
>> I've read countless online articles and gone to
>> organizational websites related to "Thelema."
>> Yet, I know nothing it seems and often give up on the whole
>> subject of Magick/Crowley/Thelema.

You too?  Welcome!  666 was constantly giving up the entire
practice, that is until Aiwas dragged Him back to work.  The more I
study Liber AL, the more amazed I become.  I think Norman Mudd was
looking too deep without first having the spiritual basis to be able
to stand the absolute mind-f**k of the Mathematics in Liber AL.

My advice:  Avoid ALL the Thelemic organizations!  (Destroy them
all)  Have Crowley's works explain Crowley's thoughts, nobody else's
except your own.  666 left us so many useful signposts some of which
took me years just to learn how to read the sign.  For
666's 'admirable qualities', start with The Holy Books - Equinox
Vol. III No. 9.  Unfortunately I don't think you can purchase this
without supporting COTO in some indirect way, . . . YET!  >:) LOL

>later, arhiar questions:
>In Greek the word AEON is composed to two roots AE and ON.  AE sig-
>fies "EVER" and "ON" signifies "BEING" - so in a strict and literal
>sense AEON signifies "EVER BEING".  Can a being which is ever being
>ever be a new ever being?

Daily.  :)

>Another question:  Can that type of being
>which is EVER BEING ever be in a new ever being?

MUST ALWAYS BE.

>Or in more prosaic
>terms:  can or will that which ever is change in its essence so that
>the foundation of its existence ( its being ) - the foundation of
>that in / of its being which ever is - ever ever ever is - ever be
>a new ever being?

That which ever is, must exist through constant change ever.  (cf.
Gnostic 'Chaos')

>If yes, how does the who or what of an ever being
>( is there more than one ever being or only one ever being ? )

Two, and None.  :)

>be
>a new ever being?

By embracing the changeability within itself so that it can
understand the stability in change itself.  'Plus ce change, plus
c'est la meme chose' (The more that things change, the more they
stay the same.)

>How does AEON - EVER BEING - BE NEW AEON - BE NEW
>EVER BEING?  Are you EVER BEING?  Are you an EVER BEING?

"let not one know well the other!"  AL I.50  :)  LOL

>Ought one
>ever to be an Ever Being?  What exactly is an EVER BEING or EVER
>BEING?

I think a type of ground sloth, or some cryptozoological beastie or
other.  :)  ROFLMAO

>arhiar continues:
>Does stating that doubts engendered by hostility are dispelled
>by study of the text make it true that such doubts are actually
>dispelled by such study?

Certainly.  Through earnest, honest, and unbiased study.

>One would have to demonstrate how it
>is that such doubts are dispelled, and this is exactly what the
>author does not do, and indeed can not do.

Can you logically demonstrate every statement you make for my
limited intellect's sake?  LOL

>then quotes 666:
>>"no forger could have prepared so complex a set of numerical and
>>literal puzzles as to leave himself
>>
>>(a) devoted to the solution for years after,"
>
>arhiar returns with:
>Says he.  Is it not the case that he could forge a "complex"
>set of "numerical and literal puzzles" and then pretend to "leave
>himself" devoted to (a)  What are these complex puzzles so dif-
>ficult to resolve, and what exactly are they proof of?

Start with 'Goedel's Proof' years before Goedel, the
existence/nature of Ultraviolet spectrum, as well as another section
which seems to be a weird system of stellar classification, seems to
replace the current system currently in use by modern
astrophysicists, etc.

>What
>does the book solve Riemann's Hypothesis or unify Quantum Field
>Theory and General Relativity?  That is just human intelligence,
>even if it is divine.  Show me praeter-human baby boy.

>Show me one single shred of evidence that the book contains any
>knowledge that is not human knowledge.

Maybe "I am the warrior Lord of the Forties : the Eighties cower
before me, & are abased." (AL III.46)?  Remember this was dictated
to 666 in 1904!  :)

>>arhiar continues to quote 666:
>"(b) baffled by a simplicity which when desclosed leaves one gasping
>at its profundity,"
>
>then continues the commentary:
>Was he perhaps baffled by a simplicity and gasping at its profundity
>each time he measured his next shot of heroin, and shot it into
>his arm?  How exactly is one baffled by simplicity?

If you don't know this . . . :)  Columbus' eggs abound throughout
the book; some might even say are being bred by it.  :)  LOL

>Who are all these men who got enlightened by Its light?  I know
>of no one who attained to the "loftiest summits of initiation".

Perhaps you're not yet able to recognize any.  :)

>666 again:
>"even when the course of
>events on the planet, war, revolution, and the collapse of the
>social and religious systems of civilization, proved plainly to him
>that whether he liked it or no, Ra Hoor Khuit was indeed Lord of the
>Aeon, the Crowned and Conquering Child whose innocence meant no more
>than inhuman cruelty and wantonly senseless destructiveness as he
>avenged Isis our mother the Earth and the Heaven for the murder and
>mutilation of Osiris, Man, her son. The War of 1914-18 and its
>sequels have proved even to the dullest statesmen, beyond wit of
>even the most subtly sophistical theologians to gloze, that death is
>not an unmixed benefit either to the individual or the community :
>that force and fire of leaping manhood are more useful to a nation
>than cringing respectability and emasculate servility; that genius
>goes with courage, and the sense of shame and guilt
>with "Defeatism.""

>arhiar again:
>Yeah, well humanity has been killing itself for a long time Mister
>Crowley, and the Book of the Law is no proof of a "new aeon" just
>cause it "prophecizes" what has always been a fact of human history.
>The whole concept of purging and renewing the race through slaughter
>is not original.  In fact it was all the rage in the decades leading
>up to the writing of the "Book of the Law" as any cursory study of
>history will teach.  Far from anyone concluding that either WWI or
>WWII was some use to the nations of the Earth, the general consensus
>is the best and brightest of several generations were slaughtered in
>the fields of ignorance and savagery, and it set back the species,
>although you will find apologists touting technological advancement
>of humanity as the absolute true fruit of these wars - as if the
>race were so dull witted that the only way it could ever conceive
>of investing in education and technology is through the desperation
>of realizing that if you do not you will be destroyed.

Such confidence in the people you have!  LOL  I know many 'whom
kindness moveth not; only stripes' and they're not even soldiers
(nor hunchbacks).  LOL  :)

>666 again:
>"For these reasons and many more I am certain, I the Beast, whose
>number is Six Hundred and Sixty Six, that this Third Chapter of the
>Book of the Law is nothing less than the authentic Word, the Word of
>the Aeon, the Truth about Nature at this time and on this planet. I
>wrote it, hating it and sneering at it, secretly glad that I could
>use it to revolt against this Task most terrible that the Gods have
>thrust remorselessly upon my shoulders, their Cross of burning steel
>that I must carry even to my Calvary, the place of a skull, there to
>be eased of its weight only that I be crucified thereon."

and the nails are still being hammered, especially in this group.
(sigh!)  :)

>arhiar some more:
>'well, I reckon its time for another orgasm, actually, I think
>I'll have a shot of whiskey instead.  All these stars in my
>skull are burning a little to fierce, its time to throw a
>little alcohol on the star dust.  Oops!  Why is the gasoline
>setting the world on flame?

BECAUSE too many people want to buy the latest, biggest gas-
guzzlers!  That's WHY!  :)  ROFLMAO

>"that death is not an unmixed benefit either to the individual or
>the community"
>
>Hell, and there I was thinking that the teaching of the Book is
>the actual transcendence of Death.  Let us all burn Jews in the
>Oven, Americans in Twin Towers, Iraqi Children in Baghdad, and
>savour the unmixed benefits to the Individuals who died, and
>the Community of whom they were members.

. . . And savour the delicious incense of their burning corpses?
:-O  YUM!  ROFLMAO

>666 once more:
>"But, being
>lifted up, I will draw the whole world unto me; and men shall
>worship me the Beast, Six Hundred and Three-score and Six,
>celebrating to Me their Midnight Mass every time soever when they do
>that they will, and on Mine altar slaying to Me that victim I most
>relish, their Selves; when Love designs and Will executes the Rite
>whereby (an they know it or not) their God in man is offered to me
>The Beast, their God, the Rite whose virtue, making their God of
>their throned Beast, leaves nothing, howso bestial, undivine."

(sigh)  :)  Who is like unto the Beast?  (sigh)

Liber AL is a rose, that slowly unfolds its fragrant beauty with the
water and sunlight of Wisdom and Understanding upon the Golden Cross
of your Self.  :)

* * *   * * * * *   * * *

>many posts later, nagasiva adds:
>Crowley's mixture of ignorance and awareness is a
>conglomeration it can take some years to figure out,
>and his inherence to egyptomania and fabrications
>inside the Budgean paradigm (Hadit) seem unique.
>that Crowley was blinded by substance-abuse and
>insufficient scientific education seems apparent
>(as any who encounters Crowley's outmoded notions
>reproduction and its masculine-focus can see).

Actually, 666 had one of the most profound understandings of modern
mathematics and physics, especially for a non-scientifically-trained
philosophy major.  Even I'm still "gasping at [His] profundity".
Although sometimes I think I might be gasping at His projectiles.
8P  ROFLMAO

>and yet again:
>your projection of 'the growing popularity of
>Aleister Crowley' is stuck in the 80s, methinks. ;)
>what with the proliferation of the internet, such
>characteristics as his heinous treatment of women,
>children, and 'dark races' marks this 'Beast' and
>some of his contemporaneous frauds like HPB as
>both behind the times as well as imperialist scum
>attempting to hide within the Old AEon character
>of the perveyor of orientalist mystik wisdom (akin
>to de Laurence and his 'Hindoo' books he revised
>after initial turban-wearing became controversial).

Apparently the ONLY new forms of politics formed within this New
Aeon have been Apartheid and Naziism, since all
Democracy/Socialism/Communism/Republicanism have their origins back
in the Old Aeon.  :)  Indeed these new forms (Apartheid/Naziism) are
MUCH more harmonious with the nature of Ra-Hoor-Khu (being a solar
god of religious intollerance and warfare - cf. How Ra-Hru-khite got
his name, slaying all the Set-worshippers from one horizon to the
other until nothing remained but corpses!)

* * *   * * * * *   * * *

>in a later posting, Granville Savidge advises:
>Stay away
>from the OTO they have very little to offer.

Unfortunately this is not true.  The COTO have plenty to offer, just
a dire lack of competent governance and initiators, most of which
(with a RARE few exceptions) are unaware themselves of what the COTO
has to offer.  I understand that 666 became quite concerned with
COTO in His final years.  Does anyone have any sources where I can
study 666's thoughts and ideas on this?  My advice is if it has a
draw for you, follow your Self, just be prepared for a
disappointment and try not to waste too many decades with them.  :)

* * *   * * * * *   * * *

>nagasiva then rears back his hood again, exclaiming:
>certain cults are fomenting [Thelema's] popularity, what
>they call 'promulgating the Law of Thelema', and
>sometimes they are turning this toward an occult
>path or a religion, or a combination of these.

Indeed one cult in particular feels 'creating mortal enemies'
means 'conflict resolution'!!!  :)

>then later when discussing 666, accuses:
>yoga: this was Crowley's theft from India.
>
>qabalah: this was a hermetic theft from Jews
>  and entered into post-Christian
>  occultism playing with Satanism.
>
>astral: this was apparently inherited from
>        spiritualists after Orphics fostered
> the belief in a body-spirit split
> and may be found in many contexts;
> its activity is ancient, but the way
> in which it is seen may not be.

I guess if any who practice yoga and teach it are thieves, we're
among a den, then.  You seem to be unaware of just how unique was
666's scientific approach to yoga.  Most Hindus could never imagine
yoga that can more or less dispense entirely with Yama and Niyama
(in the traditional sense), yet still be an efficient working
spiritual aide to the achievement of Higher Yogic trance-states.  I
feel when people stop attacking the messenger and listen to the
message, we could have a world where Samadhi by age Sixteen becomes
commonplace.  :)

>and later adds parenthetically:
>(orgs and orders tend to suppose
>their members 'advanced' based on ladder-climbing
>integrity to the cult, just like in most religions).

SO TRUE  SO TRUE

>and again asks:
>do you think that it is connected to or in some way runs
>itself the same way as did the Great White Brotherhood of
>von Eckhartshausen?

NONE of them do.  :)



Love is the law, love under will.
Aryobrand

P.S.  Malgwyn is not a communist!

93


> 93 Nigris,
>
> An interesting post. I also reviewed some of your past posts on the
> internet.
> There is certainly a recurring theme. I do have several questions,
> if I may?



i would like to add a question as well. Curious after reading your
very passionate
posts, i went to your site: http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html
and read through
a handful of items you posted there. If i didn't know any better i
would have sworn
that you were fond of Crowley.

Did you become disenchanted with his systems between when you wrote
the posts
and now? If so, could you give some of the contributing reasons.

i finished reading the Tunisian diaries last week. I must admit that
if i hadnt read
many of Crowley's magickal and mystical writing first and found them
very suited to my
way of  looking at the world, his diaries would have put me off. He
was constantly
hopped up on Ether, Heroin and Coke. He constantly had diarrhea and
was always
looking for ways to get his inner circle to scam money from people
they knew and give
it to him. It was fairly amusing when he tried to pay his hotel bill
by designing the hotel
a new Golf Course ... but ..

On one hand it reaffirms my dislike of certain writings i have run
into, and on the other
affirms my sense that he was curiously able to transcend his own
imperfections for others
and write highly useful, evocative and powerful material.



93 93/93

k

thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com wrote:
   <snip>

93

   I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning these messages with "do
as please"  I am not sure why ythis is bing typed but if it it is being used as
an Thelemic greeting it is highly offensive to the Thelemic community Do what
thou whilt is the whole of the law and means the exact opposite to do what you
want. I just wanted to let you know because if you wanted to send an Thelemic
greeting 93 is oppriate Althought is  even an apperation that many do not like
but  for T93 its ok.
   93/93


[Moderator: topic repaired (left as an ADMIN post);
  top-posted, complete with entirety of original;
  removed quoted ADMIN material, reformatted; now
  that 'MMM' is posted, top-posting may be deleted!]

93,

In a message dated 4/24/2006 9:27:21 AM Pacific Standard Time,
destroy_the_oto@... writes:

> I guess if any who practice yoga and teach it are thieves, we're
> among a den, then.  You seem to be unaware of just how unique was
> 666's scientific approach to yoga.  Most Hindus could never imagine
> yoga that can more or less dispense entirely with Yama and Niyama
> (in the traditional sense), yet still be an efficient working
> spiritual aide to the achievement of Higher Yogic trance-states.  I
> feel when people stop attacking the messenger and listen to the
> message, we could have a world where Samadhi by age Sixteen becomes
> commonplace.  :)
>

Exactly true. This was Crowley's stated goal with regard to yoga, and that
goal is being realized still today, to an ever-increasing extent. In Magick
(*with* the K), the stuff of Liber E *preceeds* the stuff of Liber O.

In a message dated 4/24/2006 9:29:50 AM Pacific Standard Time,
stout@... writes:

> i finished reading the Tunisian diaries last week. I must admit that
> if i hadnt read
> many of Crowley's magickal and mystical writing first and found them
> very suited to my
> way of  looking at the world, his diaries would have put me off. He
> was constantly
> hopped up on Ether, Heroin and Coke. He constantly had diarrhea and
> was always
> looking for ways to get his inner circle to scam money from people
> they knew and give
> it to him. It was fairly amusing when he tried to pay his hotel bill
> by designing the hotel
> a new Golf Course ... but ..
>
> On one hand it reaffirms my dislike of certain writings i have run
> into, and on the other
> affirms my sense that he was curiously able to transcend his own
> imperfections for others
> and write highly useful, evocative and powerful material.
>

Valuable lessons left behind, even in Crowley's failures, failures that he
made no real attempt to conceal, but recorded faithfully:

In one's financial affairs, appropriate care and planning must be taken in
order to insure ease of circumstance throughout one's life, without cause for
desperation as one grows older. Crowley's inherited fortune could have been
managed and sustained.

In one's adjuvant affairs, be it drink or drug or merely chocolate, these
things must remain *strange* to us and not be allowed to become too familiar.
Moderation is the key.

93 93/93
HG


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

50060424 ix om

"Aryobrand" <destroy_the_oto@...>:
# Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

The word of Sin is Restriction.

# I trust everyone had a wonderful Holy Days
# celebration. If not, get over it!  :)

:) arguably the better time for Holy Days for those
of volition is the Summer Solstice. suspending the
call to cultism by the Master and his Rose herald,
what is the most symbolic of holy days possible for
Thelema? why bow to the whim or will of any Beast?


taterdono:
#># Years later I purchased "The Book of the Law,"
#># a small and inscrutable red book.

arhiar replied:
#> Why do you say inscrutable?  There are a few
#> Qabalah puzzles in it, but in general it
#> is written pretty straightforwardly,

for those unfamiliar with the contents of the mind
of this Englishman, trying to parse the expressions
of Crowley may become a challenge, puzzle-like. we
might wonder whether it is worth the effort. those
of Thelemic cults proclaim that it is. how many
can inform us as to why and support it somehow?


# ...I would just love to finally understand all
# the nuances.  So far, I've only discovered
# approximately four or five of the meanings
# of each verse!!  :) ....

you sound better informed than a number who are
smitten with the Master and are sure that they
(alone?) have the One True Holy Book Interpretation
(if they be but illuminated!). those Thelemites who
accept not the Beast's tarbaby and instead see him
for what he was do not place said bauble upon the
altar of their god outside a participation in his
cultic institutions built upon clay foundations.


taterdono:
#># I've read countless online articles and gone to
#># organizational websites related to "Thelema."
#># Yet, I know nothing it seems and often give up
#># on the whole subject of Magick/Crowley/Thelema.

'Those who know do not speak.
  Those who speak do not know.' -- the Old Boy.

# ...The more I study Liber AL, the more amazed I
# become....

hm, perhaps it is your holy book too, then. no harm
in that. one might also take other texts with far
greater conundrums as one's Kiblah in the East (is
the East the fomenter of all revelation yet still?).

# ...the absolute mind-f**k of the Mathematics in Liber AL.

elaborate as to this please.

# My advice:  Avoid ALL the Thelemic organizations!

identifying them would be the first difficulty.
apparently you refer to those flying under the banner,
which I'd be the first admit are mired in slave-god
rhetoric and misplaced values, worshipping inferiors.

# ...Have Crowley's works explain Crowley's thoughts....

so the Beast says should be done. ignore Crowley and
what do you think you'll have left? by the vision of
the Beast's wake, nothing remains but his successors.

# ...For 666's 'admirable qualities', start with The
# Holy Books - Equinox Vol. III No. 9....

agreed that these are important selections from the
man's works, especially to the religious after him.


<snip metaphysics and Beast-figuring>


arhiar:
#> Does stating that doubts engendered by hostility
#> are dispelled by study of the text make it true
#> that such doubts are actually dispelled by such
#> study?

to those enslaved to the suggestion of the author
and Master, to those receptive and suggestible, to
those with an aim to fashion themselves after the
'Wickedest Man in the World', perhaps so. generally
this is not the way that the Cookie crumbles, no.

# Certainly.  Through earnest, honest, and unbiased
# study.

faith runs strong in the wake of the Master.

#> One would have to demonstrate how it is that such
#> doubts are dispelled,

in order to be convincing, yes. this is not done.

#> and this is exactly what the author does not do,
#> and indeed can not do.

not now, not evermore. what would another need to do
in his stead so as to convince you? you've set up a
chip upon your shoulder, but will you allow someone
to try to knock it off?


arhiar:
#> ...(a)  What are these complex puzzles so difficult
#> to resolve,

axiomatic foundations to the religion of Crowley called
Thelema include descriptions and glorifications in many
respects of the man's, Crowley's, position with respect
to the cosmos. the ambiguity of statement and ciphered
quality of the riddles/puzzles posed makes the solution
multiplex and the authoritative endorsement of any one
solution impossible. absent a Beast to affirm them, or
indeed to render further assessment, nothing convinces.

#> and what exactly are they proof of?

they are proof of nothing except what is fabricated in
the minds of those who regard them as something of value.
some maintain further that they are proof that the man,
claiming to be the writer only and not originator of his
scripture, had an interest in certain text and puzzles
to ensnare the minds of those who would later be told
of the importance of this work, however he might later
describe his variable perspective on it. good writers
tend to have interest in generating exciting storylines,
and this is the case for all proposed religious heros
and superheros (nowadays the latter fading and tattered).

#> Show me one single shred of evidence that the book
#> contains any knowledge that is not human knowledge.

as usual, the problem of evidence and proof is that they
are consensually-arranged. in order to show you evidence
we would need you to specify what would qualify, lest in
your interest to retain the superior challenging posture
you mere deny that everything presented qualifies.


arhiar quotes Crowley, commenting:
#> Was he perhaps baffled by a simplicity and gasping at
#> its profundity each time he measured his next shot of
#> heroin, and shot it into his arm?  How exactly is one
#> baffled by simplicity?

now you're hitting 6s. Crowley's compromise of his mind
through repeated intoxications in strength make his
foundation of assessment too variable to be meaningful,
and his self-insight to spotty to be reliable.

#> Who are all these men who got enlightened by Its
#> light?

religions the world 'round proclaim this of their
fantastic and highly-regarded scripture, the wisdom of
their prophets, and the important character of their
'receptions'. from where they have been received and
how the received ties into the cosmos is overlooked or
interpreted in such a way as to glorify the prophet,
often without critical analysis or clear-sightedness.
this is no different with the prophet Crowley, and we
might wonder whether he knew that this would occur.

#> I know of no one who attained to the "loftiest
#> summits of initiation".
#
# Perhaps you're not yet able to recognize any.  :)

perhaps. the Buddhists have lists of "signs" of such
attainments. do you know of any within the Thelemic
community that could be brought to bear in exam? I'd
suggest that the whole Crowleyan cultus is deceived
by 'Crazy Wisdom Master' rhetoric into ignoring what
might be observed at this late a date of the prophet,
and is far more interested in reifying his virtue.
his glory and horror grow with each new disclosure.

at best, the Thelema of religion which the Beast
initiated and into which he placed energy of variable
intensity is a farce and a shell generated so as to
collapse in upon itself and disclose the futile use of
the method of religion in pursuit of scientific aim.
at worst, it is the recapitulation of countless aeons,
concretizing ridiculous fantasies and abstruse symbols
into a brainwashing and whitewashing extravaganza the
likes of which have rarely been revealed to the mass.


arhiar:
#> ...humanity has been killing itself for a long time
#> Mister Crowley, and the Book of the Law is no proof
#> of a "new aeon" just cause it "prophecizes" what has
#> always been a fact of human history.

prophecy must somehow come to fruition, either by means
of the falsification of the record -- generating novel
'fulfilling' stories to accomodate what came before and
'prove them true' (cf. Christian treatment of Jewish
scripture and the Jesus Christ character's 'fulfillment'
of so many previous Jewish prophecies, thereby 'proving'
not his existence which is presumed without question
OR evidence, but his awesome condition and role) -- or
by means of ambiguity (as with Nostradamus; the man
slipping past in poetry what might be assembled
haphazard) to contrive 'amazing and incredibly
accurate results'.

note that Crowley is struggling with temporal symbolism
in his rigidification and promotion of aeonics. there
is no astronomical 'affirmation' of his attainment or
receipt as we might say the character Jesus receives
(Bethelehem star, trigons of Jupiter, as you like),
instituting 'The Age of Pisces' we have largely ignored,
but depends upon the REPORT OF THE PROPHET, and suspect.

arhiar:
#> The whole concept of purging and renewing the race
#> through slaughter is not original. In fact it was
#> all the rage in the decades leading up to the
#> writing of the "Book of the Law" as any cursory
#> study of history will teach....

few study, let alone study history. expect not that any
Thelemite, in whitewash or greyface, will provide for us
an exposition of the faulty foundation of Father Crowley.
compare the treatment of "prophets and saints" of old
by the religions extant. all are corrupted in deceit,
and only the method of science can rescue us from it,
were we but to properly understand and apply it. while
the Crowleyan cults mouth the slogan of solution

    "Our method is science and our aim is religion."

they have lost the Keys to actually applying these
to purpose and are completely befuddled by the
Beast's scripture and prophetics, losing willpower.


Crowley is quoted:
#>$ For these reasons and many more I am certain, I the Beast, whose
#>$ number is Six Hundred and Sixty Six, that this Third Chapter of the
#>$ Book of the Law is nothing less than the authentic Word, the Word of
#>$ the Aeon, the Truth about Nature at this time and on this planet. I
#>$ wrote it, hating it and sneering at it, secretly glad that I could
#>$ use it to revolt against this Task most terrible that the Gods have
#>$ thrust remorselessly upon my shoulders, their Cross of burning steel
#>$ that I must carry even to my Calvary, the place of a skull, there to
#>$ be eased of its weight only that I be crucified thereon."

arhiar:
# and the nails are still being hammered, especially in
# this group. (sigh!)  :)

the anti-Christian Crowley used pseudo-Egyptianism to foment
an obvious tool with which to struggle against his ancestors
and his culture. he wasn't *secretly glad*, but instead very
likely constructed his scripture for this purpose, inserting
into it numerous references and texts from people the writer
knew. metaphysics and empiricism complicate here, as "automatic
writing" may be said to require the knowledge-base and pool
through which the alien intelligence may be said to express.

the scholarly reading Crowley will understand that his claim
to be 'the Beast, whose number is Six Hundred and Sixty Six'
is a falsity of anti-Christian standards which Crowley seeks
to legitimize by explaining his mother bequeathed him the
title. that he was a misogynist makes his acceptance of
this maternally-derived epithet all the more poignant, and
his wrestling match with religion all the more strange when
we consider the fact of his interest in fomenting his cults.

in fact, those who understand the original context and words
from which Crowley lifts and which he uses to frighten
Christians in his Revelations-fetish (a book which the
Brethren integrated with quasi-rationalist explication;
cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Brethren ; compare
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plymouth_Brethren#Characteristics
and the instructions and ecclesiology of Darby, 1800-1882,
with Crowleyan religious wake for similarities and progress)
reject his claim as fatuous and alike to donning a King
Kong or Satan mask and making sport with cousins. the Beast
and the man whose number is 666 relate to the time of their
original penning, not to some latter 40s occult star.


Crowley:
#>$ that death is not an unmixed benefit either
#>$ to the individual or the community

arhiar:
#> Hell, and there I was thinking that the teaching of
#> the Book is the actual transcendence of Death.  Let
#> us all burn Jews in the Oven, Americans in Twin Towers,
#> Iraqi Children in Baghdad, and savour the unmixed
#> benefits to the Individuals who died, and the
#> Community of whom they were members.

if the gods enjoin numerous perspectives and opinions
through the course of a paltry scripture what does it
truly matter? surely every main perspective which any
Thelemite (so called) may seek to promote will find a
sure foundation for proof-texting inside this
scripture with the name of a Masonic variable.


Crowley quoted:
#>$ But, being lifted up, I will draw the whole world
#>$ unto me; and men shall worship me the Beast,
#>$ Six Hundred and Three-score and Six, celebrating
#>$ to Me their Midnight Mass every time soever when
#>$ they do that they will, and on Mine altar slaying
#>$ to Me that victim I most relish, their Selves;
#>$ when Love designs and Will executes the Rite
#>$ whereby (an they know it or not) their God in man
#>$ is offered to me The Beast, their God, the Rite
#>$ whose virtue, making their God of their throned
#>$ Beast, leaves nothing, howso bestial, undivine."
#
# (sigh)  :)  Who is like unto the Beast?  (sigh)

'blessed beast' features prominently in my universe,
but it doesn't twist from a strident Rousseauan
natural savage icon toward some perverse Christian
diatribe against Rome and its 7 Horns and gematric
666-valued-Nero. instead, it is more Neopagan in
its valence, revering that from which the ignorant
cultists tend to separate (the "Creation" or what
is better known as "That wonder from which we have
grown to maturity and into which we die.", mat(t)er)).

# Liber AL is a rose, that slowly unfolds its
# fragrant beauty with the water and sunlight
# of Wisdom and Understanding upon the
# Golden Cross of your Self.  :)

even after the Beast informs us that a religion
shall be created of frailty and deception, the
Golden Calf yet again dragged out for inordinate
applomb, we shall find resurrectors of the Special
Authority of the Malignant and Corrupted enshrined.


333:
#> Crowley's mixture of ignorance and awareness is a
#> conglomeration it can take some years to figure out,
#> and his inherence to egyptomania and fabrications
#> inside the Budgean paradigm (Hadit) seem unique.
#> that Crowley was blinded by substance-abuse and
#> insufficient scientific education seems apparent
#> (as any who encounters Crowley's outmoded notions
#> reproduction and its masculine-focus can see).
#
# Actually, 666 had one of the most profound
# understandings of modern mathematics and physics,

the only exposition of which I know as to his
knowledge on mathematics was in his geometry as
presented in his final book ("The Book of Thoth"),
though it may have appeared elsewhere prior. as I
have examined in university through in grade to
that of Analytic Geometry and Calculus, I find no
particular profundity in what I've read of Crowey
on mathematics, though I have watched for it a bit.

what he may have known about physics isn't entire
plain to my eyes. please underscore this by quoting
a bit and adding a little argument in support.


# especially for a non-scientifically-trained
# philosophy major....

through poetry and ambiguity, all things are made,
in proof-text, out to be genius and astoundingness.


# ...I understand that 666 became quite concerned
# with COTO in His final years.  Does anyone have
# any sources where I can study 666's thoughts and
# ideas on this?

some in "Magick Without Tears", being letters of
instruction to students in his later years. other
than this, probably quite a bit is held and then
occasionally distributed where helpful by this org.
the most complimentary probably occurs in such text
as "Equinix III:10".

333:
#> certain cults are fomenting [Thelema's] popularity,
#> what they call 'promulgating the Law of Thelema',
#> and sometimes they are turning this toward an occult
#> path or a religion, or a combination of these.
#
# Indeed one cult in particular feels 'creating mortal
# enemies' means 'conflict resolution'!!!  :)

conflict resolution appears a skill lacking in cults
which emphasize and enshrine independence, autonomy,
and the importance of individual will. one may find
this contentious quality within all the para-
and completely-Satanic sub-cultures. Crowley
gained notoriety, but could not manipulate
the media the way that LaVey later achieved.
it turned against him and painted him as
the reprobate he truly was.

333:
#> yoga: this was Crowley's theft from India.
#>
#> qabalah: this was a hermetic theft from Jews
#> 	 and entered into post-Christian
#> 	 occultism playing with Satanism.
#>
#> astral: this was apparently inherited from
#>         spiritualists after Orphics fostered
#>  the belief in a body-spirit split
#>  and may be found in many contexts;
#>  its activity is ancient, but the way
#>  in which it is seen may not be.
#
# I guess if any who practice yoga and teach it
# are thieves, we're among a den, then.

having met with or travelled through an area
with a yogi in it, then read from Patanjali,
this is no call to bill oneself as its master.

# You seem to be unaware of just how unique was
# 666's scientific approach to yoga....

a pity, then, that he could not use it to reform.

# ...when people stop attacking the messenger
# and listen to the message, we could have a
# world where Samadhi by age Sixteen becomes
# commonplace.  :)

when the writ becomes the Message, all manner of
deceiving scoundrel poses as an authority on that
of which they have only interest in derailing
honest interest and attention. get me the yogi
proper and see hir withstand the scrutiny of hir
peers, and then maybe we'll be talking turkey.


333:
#> (orgs and orders tend to suppose their members
#> 'advanced' based on ladder-climbing integrity
#> to the cult, just like in most religions).
#
# SO TRUE  SO TRUE

the Beast was no different, and worse.


333:
#> do you think that it is connected to or in some
#> way runs itself the same way as did the Great
#> White Brotherhood of von Eckhartshausen?
#
# NONE of them do.  :)

why not?

# Love is the law, love under will.

"Do what you please!"
	 -- Rabelais

"Will reigns Omnipotent; Love lieth at the Foundation"
	 -- PBRandolph, "Mysteries of Eulis," 1874.

333
	 nagasiva@...

93,

In a message dated 4/24/2006 9:52:36 AM Pacific Standard Time,
vavvavsix@... writes:

>
> 93
>
>  I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning these messages with
> "do as please"  I am not sure why ythis is bing typed but if it it is being
> used as an Thelemic greeting it is highly offensive to the Thelemic community
> Do what thou whilt is the whole of the law and means the exact opposite to do
> what you want. I just wanted to let you know because if you wanted to send
> an Thelemic greeting 93 is oppriate Althought is  even an apperation that many
> do not like but  for T93 its ok.
>  93/93
>

Yes, this was the essence of my question last week to Nigris, (reply pending
and eagerly awaited), when I wrote:

In a message dated 4/21/2006 6:23:21 PM Pacific Standard Time,
HornedGod93@... writes:

> Do you recognize "innate inclination" as a passive but equal form of the
> active terms "volition," or "intention," as these apply to defining Thelema?
>
>

It may come down to this: There is 'thelema' and then there is 'Thelema.'

93 93/93
HG


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

50060424 ix om Haeil Shaitans!

hi Brother Savidge! great to have you!

Granville Savidge <vavvavsix@...>:
# I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning
# these messages with "do as [you] please"

that would be me, but there have surely been others.
well met!

# I am not sure why this is [being] typed

it precedes Crowley (in Rabelais, at least).

# but if it it is being used as an Thelemic greeting

cf. Crowley's text on 'Thelemic Greetings' in his
"Magick Without Tears" (Chapter 19?), in which he
makes it plain that these are not set into stone.
the enthusiastically-dedicated to the cult will of
course do what the New Masters proclaim is Correct.

# it is highly offensive to the Thelemic community

if so, then that community needs to wake up a bit.
why is a thing considered 'offensive' and what is
its original connotation? too quick to take up arms.

# Do what thou [wilt] is the whole of the law
# and means the exact opposite to do what you want.

this is the cultic disapproval to slavery, yes. now
I suggest that you determine where you obtained this
faulty understanding or determine whether you are in
fact illuminated, such that you might know how best
to intepret its ambiguity. the Master could not, and
informed us that it might even mean that we should
do what Ateh the God tells us to do, like slaves.
so much for his LiberTarianism.

# I just wanted to let you know because if you
# wanted to send an Thelemic greeting 93 is
# [appropriate] Althought is even an
# apperation [appearance?] that many
# do not like but for T93 its ok.

it is very kind of you to so advise me. were I but
new to the Thelemic cult and culture then perhaps
I would find authority in your tone and content.
however, since I'm now more aware of the actuality
of the underpinnings of Crowleyanity, I can set the
charges and merely allow you to run aground them.

look to the Master's commentary on "Do what thou
wilt" and follow them to the letter if you worship
the Beast. in fact, '93' and '93/93' as you have
used them here are insufficient to indicate that
the faithful Slave has completely accepted the
constraining doctrine by which hir mind might
be completely over-ridden in the Herd-program.

instead, you should switch to something far more
convincing in your letter-writing and greetings,
such as:

opening:
"93!" -- to the corrupted and enslaved, this is
          supposed to substitute for:

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

and the final "Law" is usually, by the terminally
ignorant, lost in favour of incredible shackles of
mundanity by which we will never fathom its meaning.


closing:
"93, 93/93!" -- to those knowledgeable in the ways of
                 gematria and transient numerolinguistic
                 this is supposed to substitute for:

     "Love is the law, love under will."

and these letters are often provided with emphasis
and pseudo-insight through first-letter capitalizing
and the complete abandonment of senses. Pooh rejoices.


what did the Master use in *his* letters? was his
"profound mathematics" behind this 93/93 ratio?
did the spirit of Paschal Beverly Randolph inform him?
likely right after Blavatsky ripped from it her motto. ;)

333
        nagasiva@...

Do what Thou wilt shall be the whole of the lAW, y'all

> 50060424 ix om Haeil Shaitans!
> Granville Savidge :> # I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning
> # these messages with "do as [you] please"  > > that would be me, but there
have surely been others.> well met!
<SNIP>

My favorite thing about the "thelemic community" is the contradictory natures of
its participants.

Example, Frater Granville, who says that messing with "do what thou
wilt shall be the whole of the law" equals blasphemy.  The other
example is 333 (or nagasiva, whomever) those people who do whatever
they can do discount pretty much everything crowley said and the orders
that he started, etc. etc.

Personally, I think you're both nuts.  Frater G, there's no real
absolute dogma to thelema.  Do what thou wilt, sure, but read liber OZ
again.  From that, re-assess that key sentence.  It's all about you,
the individual.  Your will is YOU.  I know, do what thou Thou is kinda
clumsy, but the word Will is a good way to mean your actions, your
thoughts, your essence and being, your HGA if you must.  Crowley was a
prophet, not a god.  His word is not final, nor should you really take
much stock in it except for how it relates to you.  Assess it for
yourself.  As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for authority (in
occultism)".  Those words pretty much supercede anything anyone else
says.

Frater 333, eh, I really think people like you cause more harm than
good.  You're the hermit folk, who just talk shit about the orders, the
philosophy, etc, makes me wonder, as I pointed out to someone else in
another forum, what are you doing here?  If you think all thelemites
(or everyone who takes Do what Thou wilt to heart) is a "crowley
worshipping slave", then your line of thinking is exactly the same way
as the crowley worshipping slave.  It's the main problem I have with
some schools of Satanism as a philosophy.  When you define your dogma
in opposition to anothers, both are equally valid (and invalid,
natch). 

As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.  Love is the Law, Love
under Will, yo.  Agape is brotherhood (or sisterhood), and you'll get a
perspective that maybe you never thought of.  Being in the OTO, while
we're primarily Thelemic, I've learned a lot that has absolutely
NOTHING to do with Thelema, magick, or anything occult at all.  I have
fun.  I enjoy the company of like minded people. I've gotten trashed
and belly danced during feasts, talked shit about rock stars I've never
slept with, and experienced some great magick.  Love it, don't know why
I didn't do it sooner.  Of course, I'm low low, and don't have to deal
with the politics.  My advice, join the OTO, and never get past PI. 

Love is the Law, Love under Will
YZBL

93 93/93


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

On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 erinnicole@... wrote:

> again.  From that, re-assess that key sentence. 
>It's all about you, the individual.  Your will is YOU.  I know, do what
> thou Thou is kinda clumsy, but the word Will is a good way to mean your
> actions, your  thoughts, your essence and being, your HGA if you must. 

The problem is you're redefining terms without explaining why.  Within
Crowley's works, Will has a very specific meaning and intent.  It's a
singular purpose, not random actions, random thoughts, etc.

>Crowley was a prophet, not a god. 

He was both.  We're all gods within the system.

> His word is not final, nor should you really take
> much stock in it except for how it relates to you. 

The problem here is that to understand the system as presented, and to
move away from it in a cogent manner, you have to know from whence it came
and what it meant.  It's fine and good to throw the baby out with the
bathwater and be all postmodern in analysis, but the truth is that there
is little analysis in doing so - merely a co-opting of terms and a
movement to achieve a particular end, which with what's listed elsewhere
in your post, appears to be drinking and having a good time.  There's
nothing wrong with that, but it's not the essence of occultism for many
practitioners.

> Assess it for
> yourself.  As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for authority (in
> occultism)".  Those words pretty much supercede anything anyone else
> says.

There is no room for non-authority or wishy-washy modern
pseudo-scholarship either.

> Frater 333, eh, I really think people like you cause more harm than
> good.  You're the hermit folk, who just talk shit about the orders, the
> philosophy, etc, makes me wonder, as I pointed out to someone else in
> another forum, what are you doing here? 

He's one of the two listowners.  If you are so reactionary towards him,
he's doing his job.  He serves as a foil to deflate the balloon of those
who cannot adequately release the built up ThelemaGas hiding in their
bowels.

If you don't understand that, you don't understand much.

> If you think all thelemites
> (or everyone who takes Do what Thou wilt to heart) is a "crowley
> worshipping slave", then your line of thinking is exactly the same way
> as the crowley worshipping slave. 

Nope.  He's a reaction to the observation, the line that forms from the
points.  Again, you don't get Tyagi.

> It's the main problem I have with
> some schools of Satanism as a philosophy.  When you define your dogma
> in opposition to anothers, both are equally valid (and invalid,
> natch). 

Tyagi's dogma has nothing to do with his opposition to Crowleyanity in my
expeirence.  You mistake the mask for the performer underneath.

> As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.  Love is the Law, Love
> under Will, yo.  Agape is brotherhood (or sisterhood), and you'll get a
> perspective that maybe you never thought of.  Being in the OTO, while
> we're primarily Thelemic, I've learned a lot that has absolutely
> NOTHING to do with Thelema, magick, or anything occult at all.  I have
> fun.  I enjoy the company of like minded people. I've gotten trashed
> and belly danced during feasts, talked shit about rock stars I've never
> slept with, and experienced some great magick.  Love it, don't know why
> I didn't do it sooner.  Of course, I'm low low, and don't have to deal
> with the politics.  My advice, join the OTO, and never get past PI. 

If that's what makes you happy, go for it.

If I want to get drunk and philosophize with the masses, I don't have to
join an mystical brotherhood to do so.

"Work out your own salvation."

Howdy:

Granville Savidge wrote:

  >I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning these messages with "do
as please"  I am >not sure why ythis is bing typed but if it it is being used as
an Thelemic greeting it is highly >offensive to the Thelemic community Do what
thou whilt is the whole of the law and means the >exact opposite to do what you
want. I just wanted to let you know because if you wanted to send >an Thelemic
greeting 93 is oppriate Althought is  even an apperation that many do not like
but  for >T93 its ok.

This is some funny stuff. I consider myself to be, abstractly speaking, a
denizen of the "thelemic community" ...referring to a vague but general
discourse. Yet, I do not find any well meant or playful greeting to be offensive
or out of sorts with the spirit of Thelema itself ...and I have looked but close
into the word. So you are not speaking for "the Thelemic Community," but only
yourself, as am I.
Still, the above brings to mind a couple of questions. First, why should one not
do what pleases them? How is this contrary to "doin' yor will"? ...Shake your
groove thing, shake your groove thing yeah, yeah.... Why should my doing my Will
be 'unpleasant'? (What would Wilhelm Reich think about such a thing?)
  There seems to be some enormous misperception that one's pleasure ...Spending
one's life doing things that bring them pleasure is somehow 'undesirable' in
"thelemic culture." If so, "thelemic culture" isn't worth a wipe of Pantagruel's
'goose.' What?... Should one find guilt in that which pleases them? If there is
guilt, how can it be real pleasure? Could it be that what pleases one distracts
you from your true will, or that the true will is without the pleasure of "A
Love Supreme"? Could it be that doing one's pleasure and one's will are contrary
things? If so, then the will is divided for love's sake ...for the chance of
union. (Seems "pleasing" to me.)

"The strong brown reaper swept his swathe and rejoiced. The wise man counted his
muscles, and pondered, and understood not, and was sad. Reap thou, and rejoice!"

You don't have to look too far or too deep. Go read some Rabelais (not just the
chapters describing the establishment of the Abbey, but the events leading up to
it, and the further mystery of TRINC) ..read some Eliphas Levi (much better in
the French as Waite seemed to have substituted Levi's brilliant sense of humor
and levity with a bunch of dry psuedo-academic prose, and me thinks something
was lost in the exchange.) Also, if one follows the roots of the word back to
the New Testament, one will see that it actually does mean pleasure, desire,
preference. These people who were mining "Thelema," what they found and how they
influenced culture, thought, life  ...don't just disappear because you're only
content to stand their with a crowd and look at one statue in a museum.

  2. How is it furthering my doing my true will to 'conform' to some social
expectation, and some most convoluted 'logic' ...If I should say, for instance,
"Do what you want and want what you do" ...and I write that from the depths of
my heart and mean it with every enflamed fiber of my being... Isn't this more
honest than some stiff repetition that I couldn't possibly mean and used it only
to reaffirm some status quo interpretation of 'the edge' or the crossroads
between dimensions?

There are a number of people who flirt with these forums ,,,thelemic
subba-cultuah... who aren't gonna just leave it with Crowley ..."Vote for me.
I'm King Minos. I'm not goin' away." ...who can appreciate AND depreciate some
things Aleister Crowley wrote without being hooked on one seriously
misunderstood collection of thoughts, and using that collection to justify just
about anything under the sun. I need no such justification. I'm just as capable
as anyone of failing all on my own!
Crowley's little Thelemic barrel-raft is just one small bump on one tiny wave in
a mighty big ocean. The description on this forum expresses an acknowledgement
of this by encouraging discussion about Thelema other than Crowley. Those who
are aware of this are not so likely going to worry about making some cheap-ass,
social faux pas ...by modifying "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the
Law." as it pleases them at a given moment. ...Besides, that phrase is only
meaningful among those who are ready to do what pleases them, take pleasure in
what they do, and know the intimate beauty of the fleetingness of this mystery
called life... Anyone else who uses it without knowing that their life is but a
fleeting moment, and the pleasures therein even more fleeting, makes it a
meaningless phrase to identify a clique of cads. It certainly has no real
'authority'. (author -ity)
  Anybody that actually has the time to get offended by the "improper" but
well-meant greeting needs to get the pentagram out of their arse ...and 93/93 is
even worse than meaningless. It is the herd's accepted variation of the
"invariable greeting." ...Invariable ...interesting word. As soon as one says
that one variation is 'ok' ..then any variation is equally ok ...every number is
infinite... There is division hither homeward, so take it easy.

Bliss:
Alamantra





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

93 Rob,

In a message dated 4/24/2006 7:55:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
reverendrob@... writes:

> >Frater 333, eh, I really think people like you cause more harm than
> >good.  You're the hermit folk, who just talk shit about the orders, the
> >philosophy, etc, makes me wonder, as I pointed out to someone else in
> >another forum, what are you doing here?
>
> He's one of the two listowners.  If you are so reactionary towards him,
> he's doing his job.  He serves as a foil to deflate the balloon of those
> who cannot adequately release the built up ThelemaGas hiding in their
> bowels.
>
> If you don't understand that, you don't understand much.
>
> >If you think all thelemites
> >(or everyone who takes Do what Thou wilt to heart) is a "crowley
> >worshipping slave", then your line of thinking is exactly the same way
> >as the crowley worshipping slave.
>
> Nope.  He's a reaction to the observation, the line that forms from the
> points.  Again, you don't get Tyagi.
>
> >It's the main problem I have with
> >some schools of Satanism as a philosophy.  When you define your dogma
> >in opposition to anothers, both are equally valid (and invalid,
> >natch).
>
> Tyagi's dogma has nothing to do with his opposition to Crowleyanity in my
> expeirence.  You mistake the mask for the performer underneath.
>

Good to read you again. Used to read you long ago on another ISP. You should
contribute much more often here, and I respectfully disagree with your opinion
of the benignity of Tyagi's contribution. Of course, I may be wrong, and have
inquired further of him recently. Anyway, cheers!

93 93/93
HG


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

Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law

Robert Furtkamp wrote:

>>again.  From that, re-assess that key sentence.
>>It's all about you, the individual.  Your will is YOU.  I know, do what
>>thou Thou is kinda clumsy, but the word Will is a good way to mean your
>>actions, your  thoughts, your essence and being, your HGA if you must.
>
>The problem is you're redefining terms without explaining why.  Within
>Crowley's works, Will has a very specific meaning and intent.  It's a
>singular purpose, not random actions, random thoughts, etc.

Who said random?  Within Thelema, YOU are the god (see below), the sum
of existance, the point of being.  Those actions, thoughts, and WILL are
what make you what you are.  I'm not redefining anything, just
clarifying what "will" is for those who may have this "greater
purpose/answer to all of life's questions" idea in their heads.

>>Crowley was a prophet, not a god.
>
>He was both.  We're all gods within the system.

"certain vast 'stars' (or aggregates of experience) may be described as
gods." - from the intro to Liber AL (centennial edition, 2004ev),
crowley's own words.  I didn't think I'd need to explain that particular
statement.  hmmmm...  maybe a capital G would help?

>>His word is not final, nor should you really take
>>much stock in it except for how it relates to you.
>
>The problem here is that to understand the system as presented, and to
>move away from it in a cogent manner, you have to know from whence it came
>and what it meant.  It's fine and good to throw the baby out with the
>bathwater and be all postmodern in analysis, but the truth is that there
>is little analysis in doing so - merely a co-opting of terms and a
>movement to achieve a particular end, which with what's listed elsewhere
>in your post, appears to be drinking and having a good time.  There's
>nothing wrong with that, but it's not the essence of occultism for many
>practitioners.

w00t, I'm a party girl!  Excuse me for expressing some critical
thinking, and putting a little fun in it.  Wonder twin activate, form of
a STOIC.

>>Assess it for
>>yourself.  As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for authority (in
>>occultism)".  Those words pretty much supercede anything anyone else
>>says.
>
>There is no room for non-authority or wishy-washy modern
>pseudo-scholarship either.

Oh jeez, don't bait me.  You're contradicting yourself, with your
statement about gods (small g, this time).  I express myself in small
words because, as the epitome of taoist expression, I like consider
myself as smart as a bag of rocks.  In reality, I could word my
statement quite differently, but it doesn't matter in the long run, and
as such it's not worth spending more than 10 minutes of my break.   It's
not like I'm getting paid for it, nor with it get me kether.  My will is
to put it in terms that anyone can understand.  Is it right?  yeah, it's
pretty dead on, if you understand the meaning.

>>Frater 333, eh, I really think people like you cause more harm than
>>good.  You're the hermit folk, who just talk shit about the orders, the
>>philosophy, etc, makes me wonder, as I pointed out to someone else in
>>another forum, what are you doing here?
>
>He's one of the two listowners.  If you are so reactionary towards him,
>he's doing his job.  He serves as a foil to deflate the balloon of those
>who cannot adequately release the built up ThelemaGas hiding in their
>bowels.

Good cop bad cop?  or bad cop bad cop?  another AC incarnate?

>If you don't understand that, you don't understand much.

hmmm... again with the baiting.  shall I call you a nazi now so you can
officially win the flame war before it begins?  yes, I understand, that
makes him God (big G) of the listserv.  Not that it means much.  I'm
sure Frater G will be crying in his pillow tonight.

>>If you think all thelemites
>>(or everyone who takes Do what Thou wilt to heart) is a "crowley
>>worshipping slave", then your line of thinking is exactly the same way
>>as the crowley worshipping slave.
>>
>>
>Nope.  He's a reaction to the observation, the line that forms from the
>points.  Again, you don't get Tyagi.

Nor do I care, really.

>>It's the main problem I have with
>>some schools of Satanism as a philosophy.  When you define your dogma
>>in opposition to anothers, both are equally valid (and invalid,
>>natch).
>
>Tyagi's dogma has nothing to do with his opposition to Crowleyanity in my
>expeirence.  You mistake the mask for the performer underneath.

If I "misunderstand tyagi's dogma", that's his fault for
misrepresenting.  Perhaps I mistook a king for a beggar, but again, it
doesn't matter.  I stand by the fortune quote above.  In one's
individual spirtual journey, another persons opinion is worth less than
a ticket to a Collective Soul reunion concert.

>>As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.  Love is the Law, Love
>>under Will, yo.  Agape is brotherhood (or sisterhood), and you'll get a
>>perspective that maybe you never thought of.  Being in the OTO, while
>>we're primarily Thelemic, I've learned a lot that has absolutely
>>NOTHING to do with Thelema, magick, or anything occult at all.  I have
>>fun.  I enjoy the company of like minded people. I've gotten trashed
>>and belly danced during feasts, talked shit about rock stars I've never
>>slept with, and experienced some great magick.  Love it, don't know why
>>I didn't do it sooner.  Of course, I'm low low, and don't have to deal
>>with the politics.  My advice, join the OTO, and never get past PI.
>
>If that's what makes you happy, go for it.
>
>If I want to get drunk and philosophize with the masses, I don't have to
>join an mystical brotherhood to do so.

Yeah, they'll just look at you like you're insane.  On a human level,
most of us crave a connection with like minded people.  I'm sure you
have some friends you do magick or talk philosophy with, or exchange
ideas, or even belonging to this group...  guess what?  you just formed
a mystical brotherhood.  You just don't have to pay dues.

Love is the Law, Love under Will.

Aryobrand <destroy_the_oto@...> wrote:

   Maybe "I am the warrior Lord of the Forties : the Eighties cower
before me, & are abased." (AL III.46)?  Remember this was dictated
to 666 in 1904!  :)



   Jim: I'd be interested in reading your interpretation of this. What (and why)
does this prove? Sometimes people refer to the end of world war II (and the
atomic bombs) regarding "the Forties" but what do you think "the Eighties"
refers to? I'm not familiar with A.C.'s interpretation of that verse.

   I suppose that we could try to find some historical significance such as
Reagan's stand-off with the former Soviet Union but...is it necessarily a
historical reference? Maybe it is another numerological puzzle for people with
lots of spare time. When the price of gas (or cigarettes) is $4.18 (U.S.) per
unit sold, shall we find intrinsic meaning there also? Maybe it means someone is
addicted or hypnotized.


   Agape,

   Jim











when the earth was a young man
he was lightning-struck
by the beautiful bosom of Night
and Her hidden hips....
www.mysticmarriage.com

---------------------------------
How low will we go? Check out Yahoo! Messenger’s low  PC-to-Phone call rates.

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

Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the Law

Jim wrote:
>  I suppose that we could try to find some historical
> significance such as Reagan's stand-off with the former Soviet
> Union but...is it necessarily a historical reference? Maybe it
> is another numerological puzzle for people with lots of spare
> time. When the price of gas (or cigarettes) is $4.18 (U.S.) per
> unit sold, shall we find intrinsic meaning there also? Maybe it
> means someone is addicted or hypnotized.

the 80's cower before me could mean the cold war in general, yeah.  But that was
going on for a while.  Maybe it's the fall of the berlin wall in 89.  But it
also may be read as the rivalry between poison and guns and roses.  In other
words, it can mean anything, it's like a Nostradamus quatrain.  And if
cigarettes were 4.18, I'd jump for joy.  They're 5 bucks here on the Island, and
7.50 in the city.  4.18 gas is coming though.  I do have a prediction for that,
although it's not related to Liber AL at all.  I predict... well, more
complacent grumbling amongst consumers.Love is the Law, Love under Will

93 93/93

[Moderator: difficult to discern quoted from new material, reformatted]

50060425 ix om Haeil Shaitans!

hi Erin!

erinnicole@...
# Do what Thou wilt shall be the whole of the lAW, y'all

The word of Sin is Restriction, d00d!

Granville Savidge:
#># I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning
#># these messages with "do as [you] please"

333 to Frater G(randville):
#> that would be me, but there have surely been others.
#> well met!

# My favorite thing about the "thelemic community"
# is the contradictory natures of its participants.
# Example, Frater Granville, who says that messing with
# "do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law"
# equals blasphemy. 

it does, to the conservative. that's in part why I like it.
one may remain conservative while providing the *apparel*
of the libertine, such as the followup provided above,
or in the waxing more artistic upon the actuality
(as you seem to, after the Beast and others).

# The other example is 333 ...those people who do whatever
# they can do discount pretty much everything crowley said
# and the orders that he started, etc. etc.

what a generalization! a wide brush you paint with. ;)

# ...Frater G, there's no real absolute dogma to thelema.
# Do what thou wilt, sure, but read liber OZ again.

why do you like Liber OZ? do you think it workable?
do you think that the Thelemic communities that
you are part of use it fruitfully in some way?

# From that, re-assess that key sentence. It's all
# about you, the individual. Your will is YOU.

the Master says to refer to his commentary.
why don't either of you begin to do this?

# I know, do what thou Thou is kinda clumsy, but the word
# Will is a good way to mean your actions, your thoughts,
# your essence and being, your HGA if you must.

'do what thou Thou' seems nonsensical to me.

# Crowley was a prophet, not a god. His word is not final,

once one starts taking his scripture as one's own, then
the Comment begins to rear its ugly head. will we accept
that the Revealer of this hoary wisdom is the standard
by which we should evaluate any meaning of its content?
should we be burning the copies after we read them?

# nor should you really take much stock in it except
# for how it relates to you. Assess it for yourself.
# As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for
# authority (in occultism)".

any sourcing, title, page number, on that quote?
nobody I found in a Google search seemed to know it.
I have some of her books, though I don't want to
begin sifting through them to confirm this.

# Those words pretty much supercede anything
# anyone else says.

why should we take Dion Fortune as our Final Word?
because it allows all of us to become equally
authorities when all other experiences are
discounted? why not eliminate libraries?
might as well consider lobotomies next.


Erin to 333:
# I really think people like you cause more harm than
# good. You're the hermit folk, who just talk shit about
# the orders, the philosophy, etc, makes me wonder,
# as I pointed out to someone else in another forum,
# what are you doing here? 

interesting. I found the corpus of Crowley wrt to will
compelling, his writ on magick slightly less so, and
followed up an intriguing study of them inclusive of
the Harris-Crowley Thoth deck (which I love and have
been using for more than a couple of decades) with an
engagement of the cults aggregating in his wake,
initiating to those I could discern were Thelemic in
actuality, as compared merely to expressed allegiance.

later, when a call was put out for workers moderating
a large email list combining Thelemites from two
different original forums, I volunteered to assist
with it. that was years ago and I'm the only one who
is left of the original moderators. Thelema (and
other will-based philosophies) constituted my
interest at the time, and this has continued to be
the case, even beyond the rudiments of Crowley and
his cults. I maintain my initiated status within
Thelemic orders as disciplines and tend to enjoy
many Thelemites that I meet online and off.

# If you think all thelemites (or everyone
# who takes Do what Thou wilt to heart)
# is a "crowley worshipping slave",

that'd be extending my assertions too far, btw.

firstly, 'thelemites' are a composited crew,
so generalizing across the entirety as to their
conditions and interests would be foolhardy.
far better to attribute what you can actually
read in a person's text to them, rather than
to make up things that are uncomplimentary.

secondly, 'taking do what thou wilt to heart'
might be done by those who aren't associated
or associating in any way with Crowley. that
was, in part, what I was attempting to get to.

# then your line of thinking is exactly the
# same way as the crowley worshipping slave.

yah, it would be, were it true, simplistic.

# It's the main problem I have with some
# schools of Satanism as a philosophy.
# When you define your dogma in opposition
# to anothers, both are equally valid
# (and invalid, natch).

I agree strongly. the one complements the
other, and they act to fortify that to which
they are opposed through that opposition.
were my opposition arguments set in stone or
so simplistic as you have portrayed them,
then of course I would conclude as you have.

# As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.

you like what you've found so far, yes.

# Love is the Law, Love under Will, yo. Agape
# is brotherhood (or sisterhood), and you'll
# get a perspective that maybe you never
# thought of. Being in the OTO, while we're
# primarily Thelemic, I've learned a lot that
# has absolutely NOTHING to do with Thelema,
# magick, or anything occult at all. I have fun.
# I enjoy the company of like minded people.
# I've gotten trashed and belly danced during
# feasts, talked shit about rock stars I've
# never slept with, and experienced some great
# magick. Love it, don't know why I didn't do
# it sooner.

excellent. always good to have a community to
engage and learn from. :) it sounds as though
you haven't encountered some of the problems
about which we've occasionally heard complaints
within this and other public forums. beautiful.

# Of course, I'm low low, and don't have to
# deal with the politics. My advice, join
# the OTO, and never get past PI.

you offer this advice because....? are you at
all familiar with other Thelemic organizations?
do you know how they compare? i.e. is your
advice based on your extensive experience in
comparing and contrasting Thelemic orgs/orders
or knowledge of what might be *found* in the
Thelemic subculture, or is it limited to the
perception you have that your experience has
been excellent and you therefore recommend it?

Invoke me under my stars!

# Love is the Law, Love under Will

333

50060425 ix om Haeil Shaitans!

hey Rev Rob!

Robert Furtkamp <reverendrob@...>:
# ...Within Crowley's works, Will has a very specific
# meaning and intent.  It's a singular purpose, not
# random actions, random thoughts, etc.

could you elaborate here? isn't there some kind of
"orbit" described in association with wills and
Wills where the Beast is writing? where does that
come from? is Crowley's expression really
completely coherent on the topic? might you point
out some which is definitive on this point?

# ...merely a co-opting of terms and a movement
# to achieve a particular end, which with what's
# listed elsewhere in your post, appears to be
# drinking and having a good time.  There's
# nothing wrong with that, but it's not the
# essence of occultism for many practitioners.

it does sound like willful revelry, however. I've
known a number of Thelemites who sought this out.
some associate debauch or intoxication with the
religion or philosophy of Thelema also, and they
sometimes may refer to the Lawbook to justify it
("...wine and strange drugs...." etc.).

# There is no room for non-authority or
# wishy-washy modern pseudo-scholarship either.

dunno, Crowley seems to have fomented that in
the general perpetuation of occult standards
to and throughout his time. few bother with
any kind of scholarship. Crowley at least
gave a reading list for his AA that was quite
helpful, were one familiar with the documents,
in determining from what they were drawing.

# If you are so reactionary towards him, he's
# doing his job.  He serves as a foil to deflate
# the balloon of those who cannot adequately
# release the built up ThelemaGas hiding in
# their bowels.

lol! glad you think I'm on the ball, Rev Rob. :)

# ...a reaction to the observation, the line
# that forms from the points....

that sounds like: inference toward projection,
with a reaction to that projected. what would
need doing at that point were one to care to
proceed would be to explain how the projection
was faulty (somewhat in the manner of the way
that I have done in response to Sr. Erin and
that I expect she will reply in coming days).

# If I want to get drunk and philosophize with
# the masses, I don't have to join an mystical
# brotherhood to do so.

that makes you more liberated, maybe. ;)

333

All numbers are infinite, there is no difference,
333 wrote:

>hi Erin!
>
>
93 d00d!

>it does, to the conservative. that's in part why I like it.
>one may remain conservative while providing the *apparel*
>of the libertine, such as the followup provided above,
>or in the waxing more artistic upon the actuality
>(as you seem to, after the Beast and others).
>
>
I'm of the firm believe that one makes their own path.  I call thelema
and the OTO a cult, but considering that most thelemites and OTO
initiates I've met have their own free wills, then it's a far cry from
the raellians and heaven's gate folk.  Plus most OTO folk I know try to
scam their way out of paying dues, so the whole "all your cash to the
religion" thing is thrown out the window.  Our vow of poverty is because
we can't hold down jobs.  No promises of eternal salvation either, just
a vague whisper of some higher state of being that isn't guaranteed in
this or any other lifetime.

># The other example is 333 ...those people who do whatever
># they can do discount pretty much everything crowley said
># and the orders that he started, etc. etc.
>
>what a generalization! a wide brush you paint with. ;)
>
>
Fresh off a flame war.  I think I got the other guy banned, I dunno.
He's been silent for a while.

> # ...Frater G, there's no real absolute dogma to thelema.
># Do what thou wilt, sure, but read liber OZ again.
>
>why do you like Liber OZ? do you think it workable?
>do you think that the Thelemic communities that
>you are part of use it fruitfully in some way?
>
>
Oh no, no one actually *follows* Liber Oz.  It's just the idea that we
can.  It's a nice paragon.  I think the only people who truly follow it
are people with nothing to lose.  There aren't many of us in today's
society.

># From that, re-assess that key sentence. It's all
># about you, the individual. Your will is YOU.
>
>the Master says to refer to his commentary.
>why don't either of you begin to do this?
>
>
I always thought it was refer to the comment?  Can you cite this, I may
just be confused.  There's an "each for himself" thingie in the comment
that supports my original statement.

># I know, do what thou Thou is kinda clumsy, but the word
># Will is a good way to mean your actions, your thoughts,
># your essence and being, your HGA if you must.
>
>'do what thou Thou' seems nonsensical to me.
>
>
Doesn't roll off the tongue very well, does it?

># Crowley was a prophet, not a god. His word is not final,
>
>once one starts taking his scripture as one's own, then
>the Comment begins to rear its ugly head. will we accept
>that the Revealer of this hoary wisdom is the standard
>by which we should evaluate any meaning of its content?
>should we be burning the copies after we read them?
>
>
Sure, why not.  Comment does say each for himself when it talks about
appeals to crowley's writings.  And while I do take parts of the comment
in place, I know why it was written.  I disregard it at my own risk and
peril.

># nor should you really take much stock in it except
># for how it relates to you. Assess it for yourself.
># As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for
># authority (in occultism)".
>
>any sourcing, title, page number, on that quote?
>nobody I found in a Google search seemed to know it.
>I have some of her books, though I don't want to
>begin sifting through them to confirm this.
>
>
Ya know, I don't have a citation for that, although I've been looking
for quite some time.  I'd probably have to consult a book that cites
it.  It's a pretty famous quote.  It may not even be something she wrote
down.

># Those words pretty much supercede anything
># anyone else says.
>
>why should we take Dion Fortune as our Final Word?
>because it allows all of us to become equally
>authorities when all other experiences are
>discounted? why not eliminate libraries?
>might as well consider lobotomies next.
>
>
The statement doesn't mean "everyone else is a liar".  It's a warning
against self-proclaimed gurus.

><snip>
>Thelemic orders as disciplines and tend to enjoy
>many Thelemites that I meet online and off.
>
>
Good answer.  Last guy I said that to said "to piss you off".

>firstly, 'thelemites' are a composited crew,
>so generalizing across the entirety as to their
>conditions and interests would be foolhardy.
>far better to attribute what you can actually
>read in a person's text to them, rather than
>to make up things that are uncomplimentary.
>
>
For that I apologize.  I got a bit ahead of myself, from the earlier
flame war.

>secondly, 'taking do what thou wilt to heart'
>might be done by those who aren't associated
>or associating in any way with Crowley. that
>was, in part, what I was attempting to get to.
>
>
Good idea.  Most thelemites have never heard the term.

># As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.
>
>you like what you've found so far, yes.
>
>
So far.  I'm in a decent body.

>excellent. always good to have a community to
>engage and learn from. :) it sounds as though
>you haven't encountered some of the problems
>about which we've occasionally heard complaints
>within this and other public forums. beautiful.
>
>
Nor do I care to.  My experiences are pretty drama free, lot of down to
earth people.  I know some OTO bodies have problems, and I'm sure we've
had some in the past , but right now it's pretty stable.  At least from
the perspective of ms. n00b.

># Of course, I'm low low, and don't have to
># deal with the politics. My advice, join
># the OTO, and never get past PI.
>
>you offer this advice because....? are you at
>all familiar with other Thelemic organizations?
>do you know how they compare? i.e. is your
>advice based on your extensive experience in
>comparing and contrasting Thelemic orgs/orders
>or knowledge of what might be *found* in the
>Thelemic subculture, or is it limited to the
>perception you have that your experience has
>been excellent and you therefore recommend it?
>
>
I'm familiar, although I've never joined any others.  I did a lot of
research on the AA a few years back, and if magick's your thing, then
you'd learn a lot more there.  Almost joined a thelemic golden dawn
order a few years back, but the people I knew were way too flaky for my
blood.  I have a major allergy to crazy people.

>Invoke me under my stars!
>
>
But ye, o my people, rise up & awake!

50060426 ix om Haeil Shaitans!

Erin <erinnicole@...>
# 93 d00d!

E6!

#> it does, to the conservative. that's in part why I like it.
#> one may remain conservative while providing the *apparel*
#> of the libertine, such as the followup provided above,
#> or in the waxing more artistic upon the actuality
#> (as you seem to, after the Beast and others).
#>
#
# I'm of the firm [belief] that one makes their own path.

"Convictions cause convicts." -- Robert Anton Wilson(?)

# I call thelema and the OTO a cult,

that's strange. OTO I can see, because it has a church
sitting on top of it calling its proverbial shots (EGC),
but thelema isn't necessarily either a single group or
necessariy religious (which is what I generally mean
by 'cult' in this thread -- a religious group). are
Raelians and Heaven's Gate folks religions? yes.
interpose Scientology and maybe some Radionic
Theosophists, and ya got yourself a mess of cults.

# but considering that most thelemites and OTO initiates
# I've met have their own free wills, then it's a far
# cry from the raellians and heaven's gate folk.

I think I see your point. it's not a Jim Jones thing.
Hymenaeus Beta isn't having any kool-aid parties any
time soon, or having us clone our children for the
New Age of White Supremacy. :) not generally dangerous.

# Plus most OTO folk I know try to scam their way out
# of paying dues, so the whole "all your cash to the
# religion" thing is thrown out the window.

we do? jeez, they should go on Bad Report! ;)

# Our vow of poverty is because we can't hold down jobs.

that's hilarious!!!
first I heard it was the Knight-Monks of Thelema
and vows inclusive of poverty. admirable, I thought.

# No promises of eternal salvation either, just a vague
# whisper of some higher state of being that isn't
# guaranteed in this or any other lifetime.

precisely.

# Fresh off a flame war.  I think I got the other
# guy banned, I dunno. He's been silent for a while.

:)

#> why do you like Liber OZ? do you think it workable?
#> do you think that the Thelemic communities that
#> you are part of use it fruitfully in some way?
#
# Oh no, no one actually *follows* Liber Oz.

LOL!

# It's just the idea that we can.  It's a nice paragon.
# I think the only people who truly follow it are
# people with nothing to lose.  There aren't many
# of us in today's society.

there was an 'OZ Haus' in my memory of the OTO and its
lodges and post-lodge circumstances. some seem to see
in it a kind of map for New AEon rights bills. coming
to *apply* the map and navigate is described in blurry
and haphazard ways, at times, and some with great
individual integrity.

#># From that, re-assess that key sentence. It's all
#># about you, the individual. Your will is YOU.
#>
#> the Master says to refer to his commentary.
#> why don't either of you begin to do this?
#
# I always thought it was refer to the comment?
# Can you cite this, I may just be confused.

TC-AC{ "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
TC-AC{ "The study of this Book is forbidden. It is wise
TC-AC{  to destroy this copy after the first reading.
TC-AC{ "Whosoever disregards this does so at his own
TC-AC{  risk and peril. These are most dire.
TC-AC{ "Those who discuss the contents of this Book
TC-AC{  are to be shunned by all, as centres of pestilence.
TC-AC{ "All questions of the Law are to be decided only
TC-AC{  by appeal to my writings, each for himself.
TC-AC{ "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.
TC-AC{ "Love is the law, love under will."
TC{
TC{    --Class A Comment
from http://www.magusbooks.com/OGA/cop/class-a.htm

confusion is quite acceptable. the maze is complex.

# There's an "each for himself" thingie in the
# comment that supports my original statement.

oh no! it's far more efficient and restrictive
than that! the Comment does include this part:

TC-AC{ "All questions of the Law are to be decided only
TC-AC{  by appeal to my writings, each for himself.

but this makes of the reader a dependent upon the Master.
so 'my writings' become relevant as well as does 'the Law'
as to their individual meanings. most conventionally
identify the Law as somehow inherent to or expressed
within "Liber Al vel Legis" aka "The Book of the Law"
and Crowley's writings *about* this in "Magical and
Philosophical Commentaries on The Book of the Law", the
latter of which is in fact different than 'The Comment'.
some portion of the commenTARIES are online (in threads
of discussion, for example).

#> ...will we accept that the Revealer of this hoary
#> wisdom is the standard by which we should evaluate
#> any meaning of its content? should we be burning
#> the copies after we read them?
#
# Sure, why not.  Comment does say each for himself
# when it talks about appeals to crowley's writings.

"... only by appeal to my writings, each for himself."

you're pointing to the last portion but not the first.

# And while I do take parts of the comment in place,
# I know why it was written.  I disregard it at my
# own risk and peril.

that appears to be about burning the read copy.
I like to make a yearly habit of it.

#># nor should you really take much stock in it except
#># for how it relates to you. Assess it for yourself.
#># As Dion Fortune said "there is no room for
#># authority (in occultism)".
#>#
#># Those words pretty much supercede anything
#># anyone else says.
#>
#> why should we take Dion Fortune as our Final Word?
#> because it allows all of us to become equally
#> authorities when all other experiences are
#> discounted? why not eliminate libraries?
#> might as well consider lobotomies next.
#
# The statement doesn't mean "everyone else is a liar".

agreed, it means that it is too subjective or somehow
unscientific an endeavour (occultism is) to lead to a
reliable system or hierarchy of authority within it.
effectively it makes anyone possibly an authority
and everyone likely not one. by this method no source
of information may be said reliable about the occult.

# It's a warning against self-proclaimed gurus.

by a guru? self-proclaimed? was Dion Fortune aka
Violent Mary Firth part of a vetting society
which you recognize as having proclaimed her?
this is to rest upon *her* authority?
how paradoxical!

# Good answer.  Last guy I said that to said
# "to piss you off".

thank you kindly. my aims aren't really personal.

# For that I apologize.  I got a bit ahead of
# myself, from the earlier flame war.

apology accepted. I'm familiar with flame wars
and their fallout. ;)

#># As for organizations and fraternities, DO IT.
#>
#> you like what you've found so far, yes.
#
# So far.  I'm in a decent body.

which one?

# ...I did a lot of research on the AA a few years back,

which one? share anything you recall of it?

# and if magick's your thing, then you'd learn a lot more there.

indeed.

# Almost joined a thelemic golden dawn order a few years
# back, but the people I knew were way too flaky for my
# blood.  I have a major allergy to crazy people.

yeh. certain regions at certain times are quite radical,
whilst others wrap themselves into conservative panaceas.
do as you please.

333

do as please, or else - it's wholly lawful and awful.

"the time has come
to break all my promises
tear apart all chains
and cast away all advice"
	 Jalal ed-Din Rumi, Ghazal 1591
	 tr. Nader Khalili

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, Granville Savidge
<vavvavsix@...> wrote:
>   I am hoping this email will reach whoever is beginning these
>messages with "do as please"  I am not sure why ythis is bing typed
>but if it it is being used as an Thelemic greeting it is highly
>offensive to the Thelemic community

>Do what thou whilt is the whole of the law

(sic) Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.  (AL I.40)

>and means the exact opposite to do what you want. I just wanted to
>let you know because if you wanted to send an Thelemic greeting 93
>is oppriate Althought is  even an apperation that many do not like
>but  for T93 its ok.
>   93/93

"don't you know my heresy
is the essence of spirituality"
	 Jalal ed-Din Rumi, Ghazal 2508
	 tr. Nader Khalili

If you're going to be a purist, these Thelemic greetings ARE verses
from Liber AL to be changed "not as much as the style of a letter"
(AL I.54).  I could take someone seriously with this 'purist'
argument IF they were as brilliant as I am and quoted AL I.40
correctly.  However, (and I think here is as good a place as any to
begin radiating pestilence from my centre), referring to the next
phrase of AL I.54 gives us "for behold! thou, o prophet, shalt not
behold all these mysteries hidden therein."  This could be
interpreted (in this context) in two separate ways.

To wit:

"for behold!"  Here the reason given to 666 for the non-editing
warning of Liber AL is directly related to another verse which (one
of its possible meanings) states "There is a word to say about the
Hierophantic task.  Behold!" (AL I.50)  As students of the Seven
Dinosaurs (cf. Liber Aleph) should notice, this word "Behold!" can
also be translated into it's Arabic counterpart "Aqra!" which as
students of the Q'uran should know was the first directive to
Mahmmud (May Allah bless His Soul) (since He was illiterate before
His visions).  Plugging this quantity back into the original would
then render "Change not . . . for Behold! (Aqra!)"  That THE "word
to say about the Hierophanttic task." is also given as the reason
("ALL's a lie, although Divine") for not editing the book.

A second meaning that fits here disregards the second verse's (AL
I.50) meaning and would then be:

"for behold! thou, o prophet, shalt not behold all these mysteries
hidden therein." (AL I.54)  One (among many) of the interpretations
of this phrasing ("The stops as thou wilt;" AL II.54) would be that
666 (or anyone else for that matter) might alter a Mystery without
being aware of the fact, thus destroying meaning which they were
unfit to behold.

IMO the proper long form is THE only appropriate version since
93/93=1 as most elementary schoolkids could tell you!  :)  ("if ye
confound the space-marks saying: They are one; . . . then expect the
direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!" (AL I.52))
:O

Two of the reasons that 666 gave for using this particular verse
from Liber AL were that by repetition the Law would then work its
way into the subconscious of the Magickian, thus being much more
easily recalled to mind at those crucial moments. . .

Otherwise the Thelemic greetings are to be used in ALL of your
communications, whether to the Butcher, the Baker, or the Bobby that
makes 'er.  Since most troglodytes haven't got a clue as to
what "93" means, saying this to them is useless at best, absurd at
its worst.  LOL  :)

Hope this added more confusion to the debate ... er ... uh ... I
mean, hope this helps!  :)  ROFLMMFAO  I have indeed trampled all
under my feet, being pure innocence.  ;)

"When the sinners congregate and chain together
Baal lay naked revelling in their distress
Only sky is sky that will go on forever
Formed a blanket for his naked breast."
	 Bertolt Brecht, "Baal"

Love'n it, yep Love'n it, love the Law-man, man!
Aryobrand
(hearing the computer viruses and flaming pentagrams leaving their
launch-pads and heading towards my abodes  :)  LOL  LOL)

93 Nigris and Rob,

In a message dated 4/25/2006 6:16:17 PM Pacific Standard Time,
nagasiva@... writes:

> Robert Furtkamp <reverendrob@...>:
> # ...Within Crowley's works, Will has a very specific
> # meaning and intent.  It's a singular purpose, not
> # random actions, random thoughts, etc.
>
> could you elaborate here? isn't there some kind of
> "orbit" described in association with wills and
> Wills where the Beast is writing? where does that
> come from? is Crowley's expression really
> completely coherent on the topic? might you point
> out some which is definitive on this point?
>
>

Here is one that might work for a start, Nigris:

"The first step of the Aspirant toward the Gate of Initiation tells him that
purity --- unity of purpose --- is essential above all else. "Do what thou
Wilt" strikes on him, a ray of fierce white flame consuming all that is not
utterly God. Very soon he is aware that he cannot consciously contradict
himself.
He develops a subtle sense which warns him that two trains of thought which he
had never conceived as connected are incompatible. Yet deeper drives "Do what
thou wilt"; subconscious oppositions are evoked to visible appearance. The
secret sanctuaries of the soul are cleansed. "Do What thou Wilt" purges his
every
part. He has become One, one only. His Will is consequently released from the
interference of internal opposition, and he is a Master of Magick. But for
that very reason he is now utterly impotent to achieve anything that is not in
absolute accordance with his Original Oath, with his True Will, by virtue
whereof he incarnated as a man." -Liber IV,III:xvi

Nigris, we read in this forum over the years your references to your own
definition of Thelema, as expressed in terms such as "will-based philosophy,"
"intent or volition" and so on, seemingly conveying ideas such as 'willpower,'
'determination' and 'perseverance.' Does your definition of Thelema extend to
include a relationship between these ideas and the 'innate inclination,' of the
individual, referred to by Crowley above as the "True Will," as opposed to more
superficial or transitory 'will,' 'desire' or 'want?'

Rob, as co-owner of this forum, I would also be very interested in your
thoughts.

93 93/93
HG


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

Thelema All,

333 writes:
"that's strange. OTO I can see, because it has a church
sitting on top of it calling its proverbial shots (EGC),
but thelema isn't necessarily either a single group or
necessariy religious (which is what I generally mean
by 'cult' in this thread -- a religious group). are
Raelians and Heaven's Gate folks religions? yes.
interpose Scientology and maybe some Radionic
Theosophists, and ya got yourself a mess of cults."

I'd call Thelema a cult, even if it is a cult of one.  All you need
for a cult is a form of worship. And Liber Al itself gives
instructions to do just that. So as long as you are following and
interpretating Liber Al for yourself, you're in a cult, even if it
is just you.

Worship then the Khabs, and behold my light shed over you!

To worship me take wine and strange drugs whereof I will tell my
prophet, & be drunk thereof!

They shall worship thy name, foursquare, mystic, wonderful, the
number of the man; and the name of thy house 418.

Lurk! Withdraw! Upon them! this is the Law of the Battle of
Conquest: thus shall my worship be about my secret house.

Will
  Love
   ALWays

Scarlet

etc etc.