93!

I've tried posting this a couple times from my account, but something
odd is going on with my mail delivery and posts aren't coming through.
I'm posting this through the website, so hopefully it will work better.

Alamantra wrote:
>
> RIKB wrote:
>
> >You could be saying that the Book of the Law is bogus because it
> >supports a historically inaccurate theory of the Tarot's origin that
> >places it in ancient Egypt.
>
> ...However, the line in your previous response
> that I kept tending to focus on was the possible implication that my
angle
> was to suggest a proof that the "Book of the Law is bogus."
> I've been told that this is what I think by some, but that is not what I
> think at all.
>

I have to apologize for using the word "bogus" - I know at this point
after years of reading your work that you don't think it's bogus; that
was a poor choice of words. I admit, it's a rhetorical habit of mine
to dramatize and polarize language in discourse to help bring out
distinctions. It's a really funny thing, but if you want to get
someone to explain himself, you get to the point a lot faster if you
say "so you believe x?" (when you suspect or know damn well x is not
quite right) than if you just ask "what do you believe?"

>
> In your previous post, I noticed you treated "Nuit" as an anthromorphic
> goddess in that you assigned to her the value of being able to possess:
> "I'm inclined to let her claim it." ...And I don't have a problem
with any
> of that, ...I'm not interested in making it a point of contention
... it's
> just something I notice as being of a different shade than my own, and
> that's wonderful.
>

I can take any number of perspectives on that before breakfast - Nuit
is a literary character, a philosophical concept, a metaphor, a force
of nature, etc. etc. These parsings all engage the intellect in
various interesting ways, and that's the standard approach in modern
Western thought. It wasn't always the case, though, which is a good
thing, or we wouldn't have a Tarot to discuss! The trumps are (mostly)
personifications, and personification is an approach that tends to be
quite difficult for modern Western people. It's certainly difficult
for me, but I approach it as a praxis. It's always tempting for
someone who keeps a copy of the OED by his desk to flatten the
personification to the point that it appears unnecessary - if you know
what the personification "symbolizes" and can write a paragraph about
its "meaning" you don't need the image, you lose the person.

It's kind of ironic, but I highly recommend taking a look (if you
haven't before) at James Hillman's book "Re-Visioning Psychology,"
especially the first chapter. Hillman isn't much of a psychologist,
but he's an excellent polytheist theologian :-) Just to give you a
taste: "Personifying not only aids discrimination; it also offers
another avenue of loving, of imagining things in a personal form so
that we can find access to them with our hearts...Loving is a way of
knowing, and for loving to know, it must personify...In this
perspective personifying is not a lesser, primitive mode of
apprehending but a finer one. It represents in psychological theory
the attempt to integrate heart into method and to return abstract
thoughts and dead matter to their human shapes." This was intuitively
obvious to the makers of the Tarot, as it was to the makers of
Egyptian the temples. Perhaps the Tarot is Nuit's book because the
mode of knowing her is love, and the mode of expression in the Tarot
is personification.

>
> The bit you mentioned on another thread about Hadit being a word for
light
> or radiant one, ...I found to be quite interesting. I was hoping you
might
> hook us up with your source(s) for that.
>

My only source on that is a Middle Egyptian dictionary. I would give
you a bibliographic reference, but I'm using an Excel spreadsheet
version I downloaded ages ago, so I'm not sure where it was originally
published. In any case, the word is usually transliterated as "hedj"
as in "hedjet," the white crown of upper Egypt (of course, the vowels
are arbitrary). The "dj" phoneme apparently became interchangeable
with the "d" phoneme fairly early, by the Middle Egyptian period
certainly, so transliterating it as Had or Hadit isn't at all out of
order. Another interesting one is that Nu or Nuit can mean "time." Nu
can also be a verb meaning "to hunt," which is the meaning of the root
of the word Tzaddi (TzD means "hunt" in modern Hebrew, TzDI is the
name of the letter).

>
> Moving back to our original subject which is the issue of Tzaddi and the
> Star and the development of The Book of Thoth, itself. ...Well, for one
> thing it still appears to me that it is problematic for those who would
> believe in some literally "real" reincarnated or channeled Egyptian
> something or other ...that "Her" Book is "The Book of Thoth"
...since the
> Tarot appears, not to have come from Egypt, as many of the various
mystical
> schools of the Fin de Siecle preferred to believe ...but came from
Europe.
>

I see how it can be considered a problem, but I think the most we can
say definitively is that there is a relationship to the myth of Tarot
origins and import popular in occult circles around the turn of the
century. Whether that is a problem for anyone - whether it needs an
explanation or solution or apology - is another matter. If the gods
have a message for humanity that they wish to express through me, they
have to embody it somehow in a language I will understand, or at least
in a language compelling enough to demand interest and study and
dissemination. One could hardly find a better language than the mythic
imagery of Egypt - whether historically accurate or not - to get an
occultist of the early 1900s to sit up and take notice. (Of course,
this is one particular perspective, chosen to show that it's entirely
possible for what you point out as a problem to be a benefit or
"feature" for someone else.) This fetishization of Egypt by Europeans
goes all the way back to Herodotus and beyond, so it was a good
branding decision :-)

> (Just to be clear: In my own view, I don't have a problem with this
being
> that my Nuit is a French word and the Tarot probably originated in
France
> ...or Italy. Actually I think its rather cool. I simply think that very
> little of Liber Al "walks like an Egyptian" ...and its not particularly
> necessary for me that it does. )
>

It's not necessary for me that it does, either, and I agree with you
that its meaning and import does not rest on correctly understanding
Egyptian religion or culture. Of course, I wouldn't go so far as to
say the Egyptian context is irrelevant, or that there aren't keys to
be found in investigating that context. (i.e. the particular gods used
as dramatis personae, words like 'khu' and 'khabs,' etc.)

>  The old school in me still
> likes my first Marseilles deck as I plugged into it on a very primal
> symbolic level. The one I've used well above and beyond any other,
though,
> is The Book of Thoth by Harris/Crowley ...Finally, I also like the
> archetypal power that can be tapped with Sally Glassman's images on
the New
> Orleans Voodoo Tarot. My least favorites is a toss up between The
> Rider-Waite and The Golden Dawn ...which I gave away.
>

It's my favorite Tarot too. I was very happy to receive a copy of the
New Orleans Voodoo Tarot (purchased from Sally at her botanica in New
Orleans no less) as a gift for the Winter Solstice this year. Tarot
has been something I've been very focused on this past year, as I'm
designing my own version with completely revised attributions (which
will be completed sometime in the year 2525).

> ...The real message ...and its not
> unique to Thelema, but rather is truly Catholic.. is that everything is
> connected...intimately and in a trans-temporal fashion. ...the
> consciousness of the continuity of existence ...just like the book says.
>

Which is why Aldous Huxley called it "the perennial philosophy." But I
think it has a good deal more to say than this, but it's a good start :-)

93 93/93
RIKB

Recently I completed my (second) crossing of the Abyss. The first was
over a decade ago and was so traumatic I voluntarily went back asleep.
However, I have reclaimed myself. Through experimentation, here are
the new rules that underpin my magical "operating system". The
intellectual understanding was easy, but the emotional understanding
took a bit longer...

1. The Law of Sovereignty: The Magus is the sovereign of his or
her own person. As such, he or she carries the burden of
responsibility for their actions, magical or mundane, whether
consciously intended or not.
2. The Law of Isolation: The Magus was formerly of the Objective
universe. The Magus is no longer part of the Objective universe. The
Magus is above the Objective universe, over it, beyond it. While able
to interact with the Objective universe and even partake in the
gestalt thereof, the Magus now resides in the Subjective universe of
his or her own making. This Subjective universe may or may not
interact with similar universes of other enlightened Magi at the sole
discretion and acceptance of both Magi, but is complete in and of itself.
3. The Law of the Primordial: The Magus may enact change in his or
her Subjective universe by the application of Will, and by the magical
dictum of "As Above, So Below" may enact change in the Objective
universe. It is the task of the Magus to reconcile and understand the
transcended nature of Microcosm and Macrocosm.

Thoughts?

93 Alamantra,

In a message dated 4/19/2008 9:04:31 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
alamantra@... writes:

> Camilion wrote:
>
> >>...The real message ...and its not
> >>unique to Thelema, but rather is truly Catholic.. is that everything is
> >>connected...intimately and in a trans-temporal fashion. ...the
> >>consciousness of the continuity of existence ...just like the book says.
> >>
> >>Bliss:
> >>Alamantra
>
> >On the contrary, I think that 'everything' is, for a time, appropriately
> >disconnected. That 'Bliss' is divided against herself, for the chance of
> >(re)union. This is a time when things seem askew and disjointed, and
> >deliberately so.
> >That's okay, I've a feeling that it all comes together right in the end.
> >That
> >includes historical continuity. It is all a matter of emphasis suiting the
> >moment.
>
> >Again, excellent post, and sorry for butting in.
>
> Hi:
>
> I'm glad you enjoyed it and I don't consider it to be butting in being as we
>
> are on a public discussion forum.
> The minor distinction between our perspectives is that you said it is "for
> a time appropriately disconnected" ...I said that the connection was
> trans-temporal.
> You said that "things SEEM askew and disjointed" ...which is a suggestion,
> at least to me, that this is acknowledgement that this is in appearance only
>
> ...in other words an illusion. I rather see things like a parade. Each float
>
> is separate and makes its own statement, yet each one is connected to the
> other through the times and the event itself. I like some of the floats
> better than the others, but in any event I'm here for the whole parade.
> As to my use of "Bliss" for several years, it is sort of a joke or at
> least a double entendre. "Ignorance is Bliss." ...so I always sign off with
> an acknowledgement that my own opinions must inevitably be limited by my
> ignorance and I feel that it is true that the more I learn, the less I know.
>
> I used to feel so "certain" about my opinions, but that certainty kept being
>
> challenged until I found it was better to pursue, rather Ataraxia. (in both
> the Epicurian and the Pyrrhonian sense) "Bliss" is followed by my
> 'nom-de-internet': Alamantra ...which itself came about as a typographical
> error. The upshot is that my opinions can be further enlightened or
> persuaded (not forced) to change to something more aesthetically beneficial
> and even be put to a use. Even though one of my magical instructors once
> informed me that "hope is a false prophet," I none-the-less remain hopeful
> that this is not absolutely true. Perhaps "hope" was never meant to be a
> prophet in the first place.
> Have a great weekend!
>
> Bliss:
> Alamantra
>

Yes, I was writing in haste, but my intention was most definitely with
emphasis on "SEEM," and things are seldom as they seem, or so my own teacher
used to
say. :)

93 93/93
Cam




**************
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car
listings at AOL Autos.

(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)


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

93 Michael,

In a message dated 4/21/2008 11:31:36 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
michael@... writes:

> 1. The Law of Sovereignty: The Magus is the sovereign of his or
> her own person. As such, he or she carries the burden of
> responsibility for their actions, magical or mundane, whether
> consciously intended or not.
> 2. The Law of Isolation: The Magus was formerly of the Objective
> universe. The Magus is no longer part of the Objective universe. The
> Magus is above the Objective universe, over it, beyond it. While able
> to interact with the Objective universe and even partake in the
> gestalt thereof, the Magus now resides in the Subjective universe of
> his or her own making. This Subjective universe may or may not
> interact with similar universes of other enlightened Magi at the sole
> discretion and acceptance of both Magi, but is complete in and of itself.
> 3. The Law of the Primordial: The Magus may enact change in his or
> her Subjective universe by the application of Will, and by the magical
> dictum of "As Above, So Below" may enact change in the Objective
> universe. It is the task of the Magus to reconcile and understand the
> transcended nature of Microcosm and Macrocosm.
>
> Thoughts?
>

The same could be said of any man or any woman. What you are describing seems
close akin to the sort of conditional 'enlightened solipsism' which I
sometimes attribute to the Thelemic perspective.

93 93/93
Camlion


**************
Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S.
used car listings at AOL Autos.

(http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)


[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.


Saturday, May 10th, 2008 e.v.


DR. TRUEWILL, or: HOW I LEARNED TO STOP WORRYING, GET OFF MY ARMCHAIR,
and DO THE GREAT WORK!


OPEN EVENT:  2:00 pm
Directions: RSVP tahutilodge(at)tahutilodge(dot)org


An Open Symposium on the works of Robert Anton Wilson, Christopher
Hyatt, Israel Regardie, and others, and how they relate and inform the
Works of Aleister Crowley.

Much will be discussed in how the efforts of Buckminster Fuller,
Alfred Korzybski, James Joyce and many others can be used to break
through to an ACTIVE role in one's own personal Magick; Everything
from the Templars and Assassins to the Discordians is grist for Our Mill.

Individuals curious to how Umberto Eco, Monty Python, and the miller
known as Alan are related and relevant to the Work, and if they
possess True Grit, may Will to attend.

But beware, here there be Tigers!
Then again, what's Life without some Danger.


++++++++++++++++++


For information and directions to Tahuti Lodge, please contact
tahutilodge(at)tahutilodge(dot)org.
Tahutilodge @ tahutilodge.org

Also, visit our website at http://tahutilodge.org for information on
Tahuti Lodge, our events, and the O.T.O.


Love is the law. Love under will.

I don't remember what I dreamt two nights ago but I heard the name
Metatron or some kind of trasliteration just before waking up. I
investigated and discovered that according to hebrew tradition he is
supposed to be the most important of all angels and his name means "the
closest to the throne."

http://sandman333.blogspot.com/

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, camlion@... wrote:
>
> 93 Biship and Tom,
>
> Sometimes I wonder if inquires into EQ (any and all schools) might
be best
> categorized as with inquires into the best recipe for Cakes of
Light. Sometimes
> it just seems peripheral to, and distracting from, the promulgation
of Law of
> Thelema, the Law which is for all.
>
> Just a recurring thought of mine. What do you think?

Thelema Camlion,

  just rejoined the list for no particular reason and found this post.
Can't seem to find a response so...

re: 'Inquiries': what really matters is whether a qaballistic system
works for a given individual, not whether it is the one and only true
key. To that extent discussion of relative merits is a waste of time,
(for example I have no doubt the Trigrammaton key is a system of great
value, depth and vitality, but for various reasons it doesn't suit me,
so I applaud it's exponents and keep on using EQ-11) It would make
more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
prophecies?).

re: the Law of Thelema, if thelemites would let others do their will
instead of attempting to convert them to or save them from some other
faction we'd have more time to discuss magick, qaballa and other
interesting matters. ;-)

So the answer to your question is this, thelemites enjoy factional
disputes, nit-picking and mud-slinging; disputes over English
qaballistic systems is just one aspect of that. The problem, if there
is one, is not in EQ or sacramental cookery but in the habits of
thelemites in general.

PS Those who want to discuss English Qaballistic systems, preferably
in a non-partisan manner, will find a suitable venue at:

eq-list@yahoogroups.com

ALWays

Jake

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, "Jake Stratton-Kent"
<jakestrattonkent@...> wrote:
>
> --- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, camlion@ wrote:
> >
> > 93 Biship and Tom,
> >
> > Sometimes I wonder if inquires into EQ (any and all schools) might
> be best
> > categorized as with inquires into the best recipe for Cakes of
> Light. Sometimes
> > it just seems peripheral to, and distracting from, the
promulgation
> of Law of
> > Thelema, the Law which is for all.
> >
> > Just a recurring thought of mine. What do you think?
>
> Thelema Camlion,
>
>  just rejoined the list for no particular reason and found this
post.
> Can't seem to find a response so...
>
> re: 'Inquiries': what really matters is whether a qaballistic system
> works for a given individual, not whether it is the one and only
true
> key. To that extent discussion of relative merits is a waste of
time,
> (for example I have no doubt the Trigrammaton key is a system of
great
> value, depth and vitality, but for various reasons it doesn't suit
me,
> so I applaud it's exponents and keep on using EQ-11) It would make
> more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
> it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
> universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
> prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
> prophecies?).
>
> re: the Law of Thelema, if thelemites would let others do their will
> instead of attempting to convert them to or save them from some
other
> faction we'd have more time to discuss magick, qaballa and other
> interesting matters. ;-)
>
> So the answer to your question is this, thelemites enjoy factional
> disputes, nit-picking and mud-slinging; disputes over English
> qaballistic systems is just one aspect of that. The problem, if
there
> is one, is not in EQ or sacramental cookery but in the habits of
> thelemites in general.
>
> PS Those who want to discuss English Qaballistic systems, preferably
> in a non-partisan manner, will find a suitable venue at:
>
> eq-list@yahoogroups.com
>
> ALWays
>
> Jake
>


Dwtw

I must say that I agree with Jake wholeheartedly on this.
Particularly when it comes to Trigrammaton, it's the system that
works for me, (and I for it), but that doesn't devalue the important
work done with EQ-11, some of whose techniques I've adopted in my own
explorations.

What I find most valuable in a qabalah of any stripe is the more
generalized characteristics. For example, the Tree of Life is a great
model, but I'm sure I use it much differently that someone following
Regardie or the Zohar closely. To say that my Tree is superior would
miss the whole point of using one in the first place.

That's not to say we shouldn't explore new options and expand the
universe of discourse. Some models and methodologies work better than
others. Witness the trash heap of history, piled high with outmoded
cosmological theories. But what remains? The idea of cosmology itself.

Litlluw
RLG

2008/5/10 Jake Stratton-Kent <jakestrattonkent@...>:
>
> PS Those who want to discuss English Qaballistic systems, preferably
> in a non-partisan manner, will find a suitable venue at:
>
> eq-list@yahoogroups.com
>

;-) trust my rampant technofeebia not to provide a more helpful link!

Maybe this is more useful:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eq-list/

ALWays

Jake

Háils !!!

The Video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rmN8HMxGs2w

is a form of divulgation of Engidudu Project.

In resumed terms, the objectives of the Engidudu, are the
destruction of causes of the secular insults and planetary
degradation, using the rituals and practices of polytheism and not
monotheistic forms of magick, in the eight annual celebrations of
the Paganism.

We can observe the curious situation.

The conduct that had produced the ecological degradation, is exactly
sustained in monotheistic and dogmatic ideology, which is contrary
at the polytheism, and exactly the polytheists was murdered and
defamed for the monotheistic religions (Islamic, Judaic and
catholic), for example: Hipácia of Alexandria.

Grimmwotan.

Interestingly enough, Metatron's sigil(as found on the Golden Dawn's Rose-Cross)
is also used on the more widely known version of the dread Necronomicon.


---------------------------------
Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.

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

2008/5/11 threefold31 <threefold31@...>:
> I must say that I agree with Jake wholeheartedly on this.
> Particularly when it comes to Trigrammaton, it's the system that
> works for me, (and I for it), but that doesn't devalue the important
> work done with EQ-11, some of whose techniques I've adopted in my own
> explorations.

cheers RLG, my qaballistic likes and dislikes are extensive, they're
unlkely to be the same as even others using EQ-11. Fr'instance I like
some of the old Greek schools, and among Hebrew schools prefer
Abulafia to Luria, and have little time for the GD/AC generic variant.
Might even list Austin Spare as qaballistic by my lights, while others
wouldn't even see qaballa in his work.

> What I find most valuable in a qabalah of any stripe is the more
> generalized characteristics. For example, the Tree of Life is a great
> model, but I'm sure I use it much differently that someone following
> Regardie or the Zohar closely. To say that my Tree is superior would
> miss the whole point of using one in the first place.

agreed, what we might call 'high EQ-11' involves a model of the ToL
distinct from any other school, folks can either use it or ignore it.

> That's not to say we shouldn't explore new options and expand the
> universe of discourse. Some models and methodologies work better than
> others. Witness the trash heap of history, piled high with outmoded
> cosmological theories. But what remains? The idea of cosmology itself.

outmoded or plain neglected, while others are over-emphasised. But as
for whether arguments about their relative merits are a distraction
from the real message of Thelema, thelemites will argue about
sex-techniques, musical preferences and goddette knows what else. So
be warned, when I get to be Lord High muckamuck of the One True Order
I'm gonna purge all those so called thelemites who don't dig the
Ramones! ;-)

ALWays

Jake

Jake Stratton-Kent:
>> great
> > value, depth and vitality, but for various reasons it doesn't suit
> me,
> > so I applaud it's exponents and keep on using EQ-11) It would make
> > more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
> > it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
> > universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
> > prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
> > prophecies?).
> >
> > re: the Law of Thelema, if thelemites would let others do their will
> > instead of attempting to convert them to or save them from some
> other
> > faction we'd have more time to discuss magick, qaballa and other
> > interesting matters. ;-)
> >
> > So the answer to your question is this, thelemites enjoy factional
> > disputes, nit-picking and mud-slinging; disputes over English
> > qaballistic systems is just one aspect of that. The problem, if
> there
> > is one, is not in EQ or sacramental cookery but in the habits of
> > thelemites in general.
> >
> > PS Those who want to discuss English Qaballistic systems, preferably
> > in a non-partisan manner, will find a suitable venue at:
> >
> > eq-list@yahoogroups.com


R. Leo Gillis:
> I must say that I agree with Jake wholeheartedly on this.
> Particularly when it comes to Trigrammaton, it's the system that
> works for me, (and I for it), but that doesn't devalue the important
> work done with EQ-11, some of whose techniques I've adopted in my own
> explorations.
>
> What I find most valuable in a qabalah of any stripe is the more
> generalized characteristics. For example, the Tree of Life is a great
> model, but I'm sure I use it much differently that someone following
> Regardie or the Zohar closely. To say that my Tree is superior would
> miss the whole point of using one in the first place.
>
> That's not to say we shouldn't explore new options and expand the
> universe of discourse. Some models and methodologies work better than
> others. Witness the trash heap of history, piled high with outmoded
> cosmological theories. But what remains? The idea of cosmology itself.

I AM VERY NEW TO THIS GROUP BUT WHEN I LOOK IN TO IT NOW AND THAN I
KNOW OR THINK I HAVE A LOT TO LEARN i GO TO A ORDO.T.O  HERE WHERE  I
LIVE HAVE NOT BEEN TREATED THE BEST THERE BUT AM NEW SOME SAY THEY ARE
TESTING ME I SEE A LOT OF FEAR RUNNING AROUND THERE BUT I NEED THEM
MAYBE NOT THE MASS ANY MORE BUT THE DISCUSSION GROUP YES WHY AM I
TYPING AND I AM SORRY IF I POSTED OR REPLIED IN THE WRONG COMPUTER
FASHION THIS IS NEW FOR ME THIS THING IS HAND CRANKED THEY YELL MORE
RAM -A GUY WALKS IN A BAR WITH GURDJIEFF AND P.D.
OUSPENSKY-JAZZ)))*))93IT INSPIRED FOR SOME REASON WHEN I WAS READING
IT



[MODERATOR reformatted and applied source identification; top-posted!
  please see our MMM document posted monthly to this forum; generally
  all CAPS text is interpreted as "yelling" in cyberspace, and future
  posts of this type from this poster may be deleted without comment
  or re-typed if the content is particularly desired herein.]

> for whether arguments about their relative merits are a distraction
> from the real message of Thelema, thelemites will argue about
> sex-techniques, musical preferences and goddette knows what else. So
> be warned, when I get to be Lord High muckamuck of the One True Order
> I'm gonna purge all those so called thelemites who don't dig the
> Ramones! ;-)
>
> ALWays
>
> Jake

The master has spoken, we must inflame ourselves with glue and pick up
the baseball bat to battle the infidel!

ps appropriate "tribute" in the post ;-)
>

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

2008/5/11 threefold31 <threefold31@...>:
# > I must say that I agree with Jake wholeheartedly on this.
# > Particularly when it comes to Trigrammaton, it's the system that
# > works for me, (and I for it), but that doesn't devalue the important
# > work done with EQ-11, some of whose techniques I've adopted in my own
# > explorations.

"Jake Stratton-Kent" <jakestrattonkent@...>:
# cheers RLG, my qaballistic likes and dislikes are extensive, they're
# unlkely to be the same as even others using EQ-11. Fr'instance I like
# some of the old Greek schools, and among Hebrew schools prefer
# Abulafia to Luria, and have little time for the GD/AC generic variant.

I have little time for the variants by GD or AC folks, but that's
mostly because i want to use plebeian norms to confirm mystico-
linguistics (no fancy ciphers). when they are discussed i tend
to focus on general principles and see where the systems coincide.

# Might even list Austin Spare as qaballistic by my lights, while others
# wouldn't even see qaballa in his work.

the term 'qabalah/cabala/kabbalah' is splayed in GD/AC circles
into a divinatory system rather, than the Jewish mystical
community and context with which it tends to try to compete.

# > What I find most valuable in a qabalah of any stripe is the more
# > generalized characteristics. For example, the Tree of Life is a great
# > model,

many more than one Tree, though this is seldom detailed for newbies.

# > but I'm sure I use it much differently that someone following
# > Regardie or the Zohar closely. To say that my Tree is superior would
# > miss the whole point of using one in the first place.

it might be meaningful to say it is perfectly suited for you. to each
their own Tree, so to speak. the Yoni-form tetraktys which i have
constructed suits me best, it seems, with my Great Black Chaotic Goddess.

# agreed, what we might call 'high EQ-11' involves a model of the ToL
# distinct from any other school, folks can either use it or ignore it.

universal tools, or highly adapted tools? this is a question few seem
to understand forms their whole expression and integrity. "the best"
is fairly meaningless until we attach it to a task or condition. the
individual mage is that condition and the application of their will
is the task manifesting.

# > That's not to say we shouldn't explore new options and expand the
# > universe of discourse. Some models and methodologies work better than
# > others.

without a user and a task i think this is an over-estimation. how will
you confirm that any single model "works best" across the board?

# > Witness the trash heap of history, piled high with outmoded
# > cosmological theories. But what remains? The idea of cosmology itself.

depends on their use. for magic we're talking quite a bit of slop possible.
Crowley used outmoded biological models for his secret instructions
(e.g. the homunculus), and seems at times to have enshrined hierarchical
gender notions about souls which puts either males or females at a
disadvantage (you figure out which). if we were to try to apply them
to sociopolitics they were already outmoded when HE employed them,
but now they're complete has-beens. will they "work" for magical
applications? possibly. as cognitive tools they may suit people
who have these kinds of predispositions or as a complement to
those who do not and are too reactionary to them. maybe they have
an important 'tack' which makes certain applications better.

# outmoded or plain neglected, while others are over-emphasised. But as
# for whether arguments about their relative merits are a distraction
# from the real message of Thelema,

Thelema has a "real message"?  those who promulgate think this is so.

# thelemites will argue about
# sex-techniques, musical preferences and goddette knows what else. So
# be warned, when I get to be Lord High muckamuck of the One True Order
# I'm gonna purge all those so called thelemites who don't dig the
# Ramones! ;-)

(:   the diversity which exists amongst nuveaureligious is essential
to a demonstration of their New AEonic character (that being the
AEon of the Adversary, requiring admission of individual sovereignty).
let the willful argue. the wise will brainstorm and compare their
techniques without attempting to codify and universalize ranks.

Invoke me under my stars.

blessed beast!
__________________________________________________________________________
(333) nagasiva@...; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html

Do what thou wilt

"Jake Stratton-Kent" <jakestrattonkent@...>:
#> camlion@...:
#> Sometimes I wonder if inquires into EQ (any and all schools)
#> might be best categorized as with inquires into the best
#> recipe for Cakes of Light.

divinatory methods are different, category, than offerings.
the former seeks to reflect a condition, whilst the latter
seeks to please the gods in a means conducive to the Work.

#> Sometimes it just seems peripheral to, and distracting
#> from, the promulgation of Law of Thelema,

that's the particular interest of the OTO.

#> the Law which is for all.

it can hardly help be, since it is a principle of human
volition. too often people understand it to be something
that has be "accepted" by the cult, like Crowley's scripture.
if they accept that, that's quaint, but like the other cults
sporting their fanciful ideas and silly texts, they all are
fairly irrevant to me and my scripture (gospel-of-satan.com),
but i don't require them to be. the universalizing aspects
(often despotic) of these cultural strands should not be
overlooked. they are arguably helpful toward certain societal
and community-forming aims, but are eroding of artistic and
personal standards.

# re: 'Inquiries': what really matters is whether a qaballistic system
# works for a given individual, not whether it is the one and only true
# key.

well, from the original kabbalistic context that seems to be slightly
inaccurate. the supposition that the Hebrew alephbeth is primary is
a bone which even modern Hermetics won't let go of any time soon,
despite how it severely skews (/distorts?) their results and form.
is the implied embedded Creationist, monotheist premise valuable?
probably for many post-Christians this is the case. one might ask
about the Planetary-Shell-plus-Sublunar model of the cosmos. it's
plainly non-astronomical. why might it 'work' for mages to keep it?
what might be problematic about sustaining its usage for magic?

# To that extent discussion of relative merits is a waste of time,
# (for example I have no doubt the Trigrammaton key is a system of great
# value, depth and vitality, but for various reasons it doesn't suit me,
# so I applaud it's exponents and keep on using EQ-11) It would make
# more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
# it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
# universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
# prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
# prophecies?).

yah, all that prophecy and Crowley scripture stuff is secondary to a
good number of us (some thelemites). what does any particular system
help any particular mage to do? how does this reflect magical
principles as compared to unique pecadillos? this is far from
agreed in modern occultism, few understand the argument in depth.
if you are obsessed about a specific scripture explain to me why
it is thelemic (because Crowley says so??). otherwise understand
that it will seem to me like mine will seem to you (peculiar,
probably not suited for those outside of its parameters).

# re: the Law of Thelema, if thelemites would let others do their will
# instead of attempting to convert them to or save them from some other
# faction we'd have more time to discuss magick, qaballa and other
# interesting matters. ;-)

lol. the difficulty with that, of course, is that "what is their will"
is disputed, even at times by their own contentions and actions.
the tack of interest also varies. those with an abiding interest in
magic may find Magick a bit restricted, those without any kind of
post-Jewish or post-Christian religiomystical lattice influence may
have little to discuss except with scholars of Sanskrit or Lovecraft.

# So the answer to your question is this, thelemites enjoy factional
# disputes, nit-picking and mud-slinging; disputes over English
# qaballistic systems is just one aspect of that.

you're quite right, and some of them are capable of both arguing
the points and maintaining a simple respect of other conversants.
those will be the most enduring here i'll wager.

# The problem, if there is one, is not in EQ or sacramental
# cookery but in the habits of thelemites in general.

the long of tooth sometimes bite the flesh is all. in cyberspace,
nobody can really see you bleed. I'm up for any of it, having
looked closely at the Beast's scripture behemoth and peered an
amused eye into the tangled skein of EQ. they will catch on.

Invoke me under my stars.

333 <nagasiva@...>

Do what the fuck you wanna, they shant say nay.

I like examinations of magic principles and how these square with
whatever are perceived to be universal norms, or thelemic style.
thanks for thinkig on it and contributing it here. another set i
found valuable are those by Isaac Bonewits (that anti-Satanist
and anti-cultism mongerer), whose "Real Magic" is a favourite
intro to the subject -- he got a degree in magic from UCBerkeley!).
I think that those from his text are online and e could consider
them here, evaluating them in asociation with those below or at
least with respect to whatever Thelemic standards there may be.

michael@...:
# > 1. The Law of Sovereignty: The Magus is the sovereign of his or
# > her own person. As such, he or she carries the burden of
# > responsibility for their actions, magical or mundane, whether
# > consciously intended or not.

this looks conflicted. persons intersect and jostle one another.
the Sovereignty of the Will seems to presuppose either that no
contradiction of 'universal' energies is likely or that wrestling
is perfectly fine and part of the process ("as brothers...."?).
your projection and hope that the Magus will carry the burden of
responsibility for their actions is neat, but i don't think there
is much supporting it. occultists who style themselves Magus (you
figure it out if they are one) often leave wakes of wreckage. in
their insulated minds they aren't "responsible" for the havoc which
they have wreaked. if they wreak havoc are they "not Magi"? if
they avoid the responsibility for the social crap they stir up,
are they counterfeits, or just partly-skilled officers? was it a
sign that the societies they are disrupting "needed" disruption?

not strictly necessary for magic.

# > 2. The Law of Isolation: The Magus was formerly of the Objective
# > universe. The Magus is no longer part of the Objective universe. The
# > Magus is above the Objective universe, over it, beyond it. While able
# > to interact with the Objective universe and even partake in the
# > gestalt thereof, the Magus now resides in the Subjective universe of
# > his or her own making. This Subjective universe may or may not
# > interact with similar universes of other enlightened Magi at the sole
# > discretion and acceptance of both Magi, but is complete in and of itself.

there is a great deal of helpful function in this principle. it informs
the notions of Solipsism and the (Evil?) Genius. the Macrocosm and
Microcosm are identified, mingled, and lost to the grasp of those who
somehow transcend them and their categorical association of being. is
this strictly conceptual? possibly. if the connection is symbolic and
ideational, perhaps that's all that is necessary for the Magical Link?

the idea of the cosmic officer is used by Rosicrucians of varying merit.
I think Paschal Beverly Randolph (an occultist known as 'The Rosicrucian'
to whom Crowley and many other occultists are indebted, and from whom
Crowley got his scriptural slogans: "Will reigns Omnipotent; Love lieth
at the Foundation" ("Mysteries of Eulis," 1874; before Crowley was born))
should be credited with the thelemic propagation long prior to Crowley.

not strictly necessary for magic.

# > 3. The Law of the Primordial: The Magus may enact change in his or
# > her Subjective universe by the application of Will, and by the magical
# > dictum of "As Above, So Below" may enact change in the Objective
# > universe. It is the task of the Magus to reconcile and understand the
# > transcended nature of Microcosm and Macrocosm.

I'd disagree that this is rational. the Magus by virtue of their
condition already transcends that distinction and employs the
re-mingled or pre-mixed cosmic fluff to their advantage. are
Magi all monists?

again, not strictly necessary for magic, but helpful.

camlion@...:
# The same could be said of any man or any woman. What you are
# describing seems close akin to the sort of conditional
# 'enlightened solipsism' which I sometimes attribute to
# the Thelemic perspective.

perspective can make a huge difference, agreed. mystics talk
about ways of seeing and how these might be employed to achieve
what they think of as important ends (arguable). when linkage
amongst the world's 'stuff' becomes imperative, then being able
to release absolute perceptual discreteness modifiers seems
like a desirable skill.

Invoke me under my stars.

333

----- Original Message -----
From: 333
To: thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, May 20, 2008 12:26 PM
Subject: [t93] Re: Roman Numerals & English Qaballa (General, EQ)


Hey 333 and All:

I was enjoying some of your commentary and thought I throw this into the pot.

Yesterday, I was listening to a tape given to me by a friend. This is a
recording of Philip K. Dick talking about various things and there is a section
on it where he speaks
of the I Ching as a device in his story, VALIS. I found it interesting because
some of his comments on it reflect some of my own attitudes on the QBLH. In
describing the I Ching he refers to it as a 'transducer system', which one could
also apply to QBLH. ...At least I have.  I've always taken the meaning of QBLH
at its face value ...to receive, or that which is received. To my rough-shod
mind this is more about creating an open, receptive state for instructive
communication than the imposition of a specific system. In fact, I have long
considered that forcing material to adhere to such an imposition may actually
block the reception of instructive transmission. By insisting on such an
imposition, one is projecting an expectation which would seem prohibitive to
being in a receptive state. Here is a rough transcript of the P.K. Dick tape
excerpt:

"The NSDAP authorities have taken away all of his copies of the I Ching which he
used for plotting his books. Their purpose being to keep him from writing. What
this results in, however, is his encountering the animating force behind the I
Ching. ...The I Ching essentially being a transducer of our construct like a
mechanical computer. What the Chinese call the Spirits of the Ancestors. The I
Ching is 3000 years old. We need an updated transducer system or Logos. The I
Ching is an early form of the Logos ...and its printout is a limited vocabulary,
probably limited in many other ways. In any case, limited. And, being in touch
with the spirits themselves, there's a transcendental mystery. Who are the
spirits? What are they? What do they consist of? They're plural... the Elohim in
Hebrew. They're our ancestors. If healing is needed, a healing ancestor spirit
surfaces such as Asclepius. ...He's working out his superior transduction system
...The transcendental mystery is the nature of these spirits: Who? What? Where?
When? and so on.  And as it develops they have a purpose of their own. No matter
what questions you ask the I Ching it begins to shape you along certain lines.
Lines which they really want you shaped along. Likewise, no matter what
transduction system is used there is a shaping, an educating. It is a tutorial
thing. It is a teaching instrument. What it does to you is develop you along the
lines best for you. It has a grand social purpose. One of the great plots in the
novel Valis is the I Ching. The spirits that have animated it are going to
overthrow the Nazi tyranny because they overthrow tyranny...They are not only
educating individuals and improving them, they are educating society and
improving in a way that is a slow, gentle persistent activity against oppression
and tyranny. The transduction system is divided into two halves. One half is
your question and the other half is the book or the lines. ...It's a kind of
code then. One half is in your head and the other is in the book. You can see
one half. Unless you see the other half, you have nothing. You can sit right in
front of your oppressor and use it. He can't tell what you're obtaining.
Obviously this transduction system is built from two halves. One in his head,
one outside.
  The one outside is all the Logos that comes to him and all the written things
...every piece of written thing, on TV, magazines, newspapers, books ...anything
written down ...literally written, I guess oral too, but really, written.
They're only half. You could go over them forever. I mean, no matchbook cover is
going to spell out a message from the Elohim. Its' going to spell out what it
spells out. "Close first before striking." Some of the integers in the external
Logos is really a linkup with something inside him. Now, how does he arrive at
the things inside of him? ...which is the equivalent of the questions that one
ask the I Ching. This all works by a coupling of parts ..each fragment of which
appears as a whole  ...Like "Eat whole wheat bread." That's a complete sentence.
It never occurs to you that it might be a portion of another message ...a
portion that when added to another thing is a complete message."


Bliss:
Alamantra

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

2008/5/20 333 <nagasiva@...>:
>
> "Jake Stratton-Kent" <jakestrattonkent@...>:

> #> camlion@...:
> #> Sometimes I wonder if inquires into EQ (any and all schools)
> #> might be best categorized as with inquires into the best
> #> recipe for Cakes of Light.
> #> Sometimes it just seems peripheral to, and distracting
> #> from, the promulgation of Law of Thelema,
>
333> that's the particular interest of the OTO.

aye, and of no particular interest to me (if the Law is for all, let
'em find it for themselves).

> #> the Law which is for all.
>
333> it can hardly help be, since it is a principle of human
> volition. too often people understand it to be something
> that has be "accepted" by the cult, like Crowley's scripture.

Crowley, Crowley? The name rings a bell but can't place him.

Oh I remember now, nineteenth century libertine wasn't he -
contributed bugger all to the study of goetia despite claiming to be
the big bad black magician and whinging when folks believed it.;-)

> if they accept that, that's quaint, but like the other cults
> sporting their fanciful ideas and silly texts, they all are
> fairly irrevant to me and my scripture (gospel-of-satan.com),

How fortunate modern gnostics are that no-one knows who wrote the Nag
Hammadi library. For me thelemic 'scripture' combined with the
exegetical method I prefer left Crowley behind some time back.

Chances are it may also leave thelemic scripture behind, but shall
avoid exile for now.

> but i don't require them to be. the universalizing aspects
> (often despotic) of these cultural strands should not be
> overlooked. they are arguably helpful toward certain societal
> and community-forming aims, but are eroding of artistic and
> personal standards.

which of course true gnosticism was not, it was virtually expected
that the student eventualy founded their own system, rather than
slavishly promoting that of their mentor. Anything less was seen as
failure.

> # re: 'Inquiries': what really matters is whether a qaballistic system
> # works for a given individual, not whether it is the one and only true
> # key.
>
333> well, from the original kabbalistic context that seems to be slightly
> inaccurate. the supposition that the Hebrew alephbeth is primary is
> a bone which even modern Hermetics won't let go of any time soon,
> despite how it severely skews (/distorts?) their results and form.

their problem...

> is the implied embedded Creationist, monotheist premise valuable?
> probably for many post-Christians this is the case. one might ask
> about the Planetary-Shell-plus-Sublunar model of the cosmos. it's
> plainly non-astronomical. why might it 'work' for mages to keep it?
> what might be problematic about sustaining its usage for magic?

their problem...

Jake:It would make
> # more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
> # it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
> # universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
> # prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
> # prophecies?).
>
> yah, all that prophecy and Crowley scripture stuff is secondary to a
> good number of us (some thelemites).

Crowley? Lost me again. ;-)

Seriosuly though, prophecy means different things to different folks,
and the connection of a text with a dead bloke who died near the end
of the last half of the previous century is largely irrelevant. As for
thelemites, well, they may be irrelevant too. What AL says is 'who
calls us thelemites...etc.' it never says 'we should call ourselves
this'.

333 what does any particular system
> help any particular mage to do?

seems the more we know about wha Crowley thought it all meant, the
less creative it becomes. When it was more fragmentary, and other
occult interests ran in tandem with less effort, thelema was more
something I could readily identify with. Now it seems like an
orthodoxy to resist or ignore (more the latter nowadays, must be part
of getting old!)

333> how does this reflect magical
> principles as compared to unique pecadillos?

aye, good systems converge in practice and experience, not in detail.

this is far from
> agreed in modern occultism, few understand the argument in depth.

me for one, no degree in philosophy, just experience, instinct and a
sense of humour. Which permits me to make the comment above, and that
below.

'When two wise men meet, they laugh' - that's LAUGH, not argue about
their systems.

> if you are obsessed about a specific scripture explain to me why
> it is thelemic (because Crowley says so??).

couldn't give a toss if my interpretation is thelemic, or care whether
Crowley wrote it. If either is the case, it doesn't matter to me. My
relationship with AL matters to me, although even that may diminish
with time. Irregular Freemasonry and Sunday Mass on the other hand
never have and never will.

otherwise understand
> that it will seem to me like mine will seem to you (peculiar,
> probably not suited for those outside of its parameters).

well, that may be true of a rigidly orthodox and insecure type.

Far better to take a leaf from Miyamoto Mushashi, 'learn from anyone
who does what they do well' - not 'stick with folks who do what you do
badly'. So if your approach works, someone who is really getting
somewhere with another approach should see the value in it, in the
results it brings you.

> # re: the Law of Thelema, if thelemites would let others do their will
> # instead of attempting to convert them to or save them from some other
> # faction we'd have more time to discuss magick, qaballa and other
> # interesting matters. ;-)
>
> lol. the difficulty with that, of course, is that "what is their will"
> is disputed, even at times by their own contentions and actions.

well that's allowed, 'consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds' ;-)

> the tack of interest also varies. those with an abiding interest in
> magic may find Magick a bit restricted,

aye, yours truly for one.

>those without any kind of
> post-Jewish or post-Christian religiomystical lattice influence may
> have little to discuss except with scholars of Sanskrit or Lovecraft.

As recently said elsewhere, there are essentially two kinds of
religion, Natural and Revealed. Besides those distinctions date is
comparatively insignificant. Fact is that while many thelemites have a
problem with other organised religions, theirs is of the same class as
those with which they are acquainted.

Whereas I couldn't give a monkey's what's been handed down from high,
I'm much more interested in what can be worked out from the ground up.

Revealed Religion never created magic, only adapted and distorted it
to conform to its own models. Consequently Crowley is just another
author trying to understand magic from the wrong perspective. He had
occasional insights and ideas, but is no more important than many
authors, and a good deal less so than some whose names we will never
know.

Jake> # So the answer to your question is this, thelemites enjoy factional
> # disputes, nit-picking and mud-slinging; disputes over English
> # qaballistic systems is just one aspect of that.
>
333> you're quite right, and some of them are capable of both arguing
> the points and maintaining a simple respect of other conversants.
> those will be the most enduring here i'll wager.

seems likely, if I haven't alienated those who can't I'm obviously off
my stroke today ;-)

> # The problem, if there is one, is not in EQ or sacramental
> # cookery but in the habits of thelemites in general.
>
> the long of tooth sometimes bite the flesh is all. in cyberspace,
> nobody can really see you bleed. I'm up for any of it, having
> looked closely at the Beast's scripture behemoth and peered an
> amused eye into the tangled skein of EQ. they will catch on.

Really? Seems to me Thelema has been vanishing up it's own behind for
some time, and EQ has never been interested in converts, and has
shrugged off a good few passengers.

333> Invoke me under my stars.

statements like that are more in tune with what EQ is really about
that some may appreciate. ;-)

ALWays

Jake

Thelema,

I was looking at the Class A texts online and noted the OTO version of
Liber Stellæ Rubeæ has question marks in place of five of the
planetary sigils. Is this just a formatting error on the webpage, or
is there some doubt that these are planetary sigils? I note in the OTO
book, Holy Books of Thelema, they are certainly planetary sigils.

Will
Love
ALWays

Scarlet

This topic shall be an exanimation of and parial explination of my
personal history as it relatet to thelema and its religious themes.
Its purpose is to draw similarities on the philisiphical process by
which the thelemic theological system may be/has been constructed.

soon after I had been introduced into the world of religion, I began
to speculate upon its oragins, lagitimacy, and purpose within its
relationship with man. and on the other side I had been long familiar
with the materialistic qualities of science, its purpose to explain
phisical reality and the relationships of the universe as a whole.
this led me to draw similarities between the two, for I saw that each
side reached toward the same end, and yet used two different ways to
explain and reason one ultimate goal, often contradicting each other
and causing more harm then good. I began to see the that niether
could acuretely define the relationship of the human body and all its
feelings an thoughts to the phisical universe in which it interacted
in, and influinced. thuss I sought to marrige the two to complete a
single system upon which the entire macrocosm of the phisical world,
and the microcosm of the human consciousness could express each
other.

As a basis opon this system I needed something important to support
worship, through my understanding of the subject of such i chose a
single object upon whigh all importance must be held. thuss I chose
the entire universe seeing that it was the most important thing i
could think of, being the everything. I did not chose a spirit or
representation of something as most religions because I saw its flaw
within most religions as being inadiquately importance, and its
questionability within existance.
Secondly as the basis of explaining the object of worship I chose
science and philosophy as the undenyable glue which would hold the
entire system together. thuss I threw out mere speculation as a basis
of explaining the object of worship, and instead used the one thing
that could realisticly support these religios belefes, which were
based in the phisical universe and not the imagination of the
speculative ignorant.
Now that I had devised a simplistic and undyniable system upon which
a person could spiritually relate himself to the rest of the universe
without the hinderence and questionability of its existance, I began
to develope the complex levels and themes opon which to support the
base theology.

I needed a way for the deity to express itself, as is in every
religion, but to express itself had to be scientifically explainable,
with reserch into paticle phisics and consciousness, I saw that in
deed the universe could express itself an so using theories developed
by others I integraded universal consciousness into the system, and
with consciousness brought into the picture I completed the
relationship of the human to the rest of the universe as a way to
link the emotional mind to the material world. And so I gave my deity
a name "Animus" which in latin means Consciousness, but more
acurately its theme was the worship of the universal consciousness
and the universe it self.

Now here is where the similarities between thelema an my newly
created system of Science/religion become more like each other. Note
that all of this was created before I had even heard of thelema or
its maker Aliester Crowley. all of this was merely a compilation of
my observations of the phisical universe in relation to the human
mind as a way of spiritual expression.

I also began to integrate symbols to express my system. i used the
circle and its center point to represent the universe. little did i
know that that crowly before me had also used this as "the winged
globe"
for a long time i was satisfied with my newly created religion, but
soon I found that it lacked something. I had left out a key element
that makes most religions so appealing to the masses, something that
without, my religion would never be accepted within culture. This i
deduced was mythological symbolism, and this is where I found
thelema. Crowley had solved this problem, and withought the mythology
I beleve thelema would have never been able to integrate with people
as it did. This was my moment of relevation, my entire religous
system i had constructed had already been acheved through thelema,
esentially they were exactly the same, a reflection of each other.
And so i decided to join thelema seeing it as the very thing i had
esesenialy developed. and even its base philosophy of "do what thou
wilt' had already been an integral part of my belief as it expressed
what is, instead of 'what should" a person do, or essentially "does"
in reality, whis is whatever they want to do regerdless of moral
belefes of others, this I saw was a reality of the universe.

On conclusion the purpose of this essay was to explain how I came to
posesss thelema as a way to express religious and scientific
explination of the universe in relation to the human consciousness. I
find that thelema does so perfectly and I therefore no longer need to
continue my construction of a seperate religion. One could say all
the work had already been done for me.

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

"Jake Stratton-Kent" <jakestrattonkent@...>:
# 333 <nagasiva@...>:
#> "Jake Stratton-Kent" <jakestrattonkent@...>:
#>#> camlion@...:

#>#> Sometimes I wonder if inquires into EQ (any and all schools)
#>#> might be best categorized as with inquires into the best
#>#> recipe for Cakes of Light.
#>#> Sometimes it just seems peripheral to, and distracting
#>#> from, the promulgation of Law of Thelema,
#
# 333> that's the particular interest of the OTO.
#
# aye, and of no particular interest to me (if the Law
# is for all, let 'em find it for themselves).

once one seizes upon some miniscule expressed law as the Law,
it is assigned to the few in the cult to propagandize it.
we might expect this from any number of religious orgs
("You must accept the Law by accepting this book.").

#>#> the Law which is for all.
#>
# 333> it can hardly help be, since it is a principle of human
#> volition. too often people understand it to be something
#> that has be "accepted" by the cult, like Crowley's scripture.

# Crowley, Crowley? The name rings a bell but can't place him.
# Oh I remember now, nineteenth century libertine wasn't he -
# contributed bugger all to the study of goetia despite claiming to be
# the big bad black magician and whinging when folks believed it.;-)

come on, didn't he publish a fairly intact version of the Lemegeton
after AEWaite tried to foist off a "Black Magic and Pacts" blinded
version of the grimoires? didn't AC "fix" Waite's hamstrung problem?
didn't he put forward bits of Shaw and Swinburne or other poets with
whom he was not competing? wasn't some portion of his periodicals
peddled by his students who were in some cases his best ghostwriters
(Soror Virakam comes to mind)?

#> if they accept that, that's quaint, but like the other cults
#> sporting their fanciful ideas and silly texts, they all are
#> fairly irrevant to me and my scripture (gospel-of-satan.com),
#
# How fortunate modern gnostics are that no-one knows who wrote the
# Nag Hammadi library.

you think it makes a difference? I like knowing that i wrote my own
scripture. it throws an interesting monkey wrench into the whole
magic and religion stew. most religious don't know who wrote their
scripture. knowing who wrote it allows so much more depth to the
whole exegetical action and source analysis. I'm setting about that
analysis for my own scripture (minute in comparison to some ancient
varieties/masses) and doing and assembling it is quite fun. imagine
if the sources of people's favourite scripture copped to the fact
that they had only intended certain significances of the text when
they wrote it, or didn't have any idea what it might mean, and all
these made-up bits about anti-christs or raptures, or fallen
angels, were just other people's fantasies, projected there!

# For me thelemic 'scripture' combined with the
# exegetical method I prefer left Crowley behind some time back.

I can imagine. when the Scribe is just used as a vessel tool, it
quickly becomes unimportant what that Scribe says or thinks or
what condition she was in at the time of the Great Work. that's
why i wanted to get a 'Booklet of the Law' made that removed all
the admitted Beast-insertions that complicated and confused the
message of the gods otherwise there contained. Crowley did a good
job of explaining where he was having interactions intrude into
the reception. the mapping has been adequately made for an edit.
I don't think my job was the most cautious or complete, however.
criticism of it would be valuable!

    Librette Al vel Legis (Booklet of the Law)
    http://www.luckymojo.com/avidyana/gnostik/librette.tn.txt

# Chances are it may also leave thelemic scripture behind,
# but shall avoid exile for now.

we might want to analyze what *constitutes* 'thelemic scripture'.
will it be predictable in relation to its content or form? will
its "thelemic' character be something inspirational rather than
constraining or confining? does this mean it might take any form?

#> but i don't require them to be. the universalizing aspects
#> (often despotic) of these cultural strands should not be
#> overlooked. they are arguably helpful toward certain societal
#> and community-forming aims, but are eroding of artistic and
#> personal standards.
#
# which of course true gnosticism was not, it was virtually expected
# that the student eventualy founded their own system, rather than
# slavishly promoting that of their mentor. Anything less was seen as
# failure.

I like that style, but i don't like the world-hating aspects of
the Gnostic corpus (arguably the ascetic aspects of Gnosticism).
any idea what drove those or for what applications they are best
suited? is it akin to the Saivite sadhus twisting their body parts
into pretzels?

#># re: 'Inquiries': what really matters is whether a qaballistic system
#># works for a given individual, not whether it is the one and only true
#># key.
#>
# 333> well, from the original kabbalistic context that seems to be slightly
#> inaccurate. the supposition that the Hebrew alephbeth is primary is
#> a bone which even modern Hermetics won't let go of any time soon,
#> despite how it severely skews (/distorts?) their results and form.
#
# their problem...

you're willing to run with the 'not one and only true key' hypothesis.
I find context sufficiently drives ideology where these are concerned
and that predicament may determine cognitive tool form. if Jews or
Thelemites want to believe predestination or apocalyptic fantasies
and it helps them optimize their experience (mysticism), then more
power to them. they should not expect me to agree with them, though,
and the promotion of one cult's fantasies over another seems rude.

#> is the implied embedded Creationist, monotheist premise valuable?
#> probably for many post-Christians this is the case. one might ask
#> about the Planetary-Shell-plus-Sublunar model of the cosmos. it's
#> plainly non-astronomical. why might it 'work' for mages to keep it?
#> what might be problematic about sustaining its usage for magic?
#
# their problem...

or advantage. holding onto old symbol systems enables their re-use.

# Jake:It would make
#># more sense to admit that such and such a system exists, and explore
#># it's techniques (as our beloved Moderator once suggested, to near
#># universal indifference), than argue whether or not it is the system
#># prophesied in the Book of the Law (hasn't anyone heard of perpetual
#># prophecies?).
#>
#> yah, all that prophecy and Crowley scripture stuff is secondary to a
#> good number of us (some thelemites).
#
# Crowley? Lost me again. ;-)

yah he's associated with the Book of the Law.
but NOT so much with the Booklet of the Law. ;)

# Seriously though, prophecy means different things to different folks,

detail some of the variations?

# and the connection of a text with a dead bloke who died near the end
# of the last half of the previous century is largely irrelevant.

1875-1947

# As for thelemites, well, they may be irrelevant too. What AL says
# is 'who calls us thelemites...etc.' it never says 'we should call
# ourselves this'.

quite so. it has been turned into a self-styling Badge (cf. LaVey).

# 333 what does any particular system
#> help any particular mage to do?
#
# seems the more we know about wha Crowley thought it all meant, the
# less creative it becomes. When it was more fragmentary, and other
# occult interests ran in tandem with less effort, thelema was more
# something I could readily identify with.

in part at least that seems to be a function of fabricationalism.
it was all so much more romantic when we didn't know very much
about the history of the Tarocchi playing cards and how this was
fashioned through imaginative artifice by Court de Gebelin in the
late 1700s (1781?) with the publication of Monde primitif
("Primitive (as in Prototypical or Primary) World", projecting
back to 'the Start') for the French King into an ancient occult
bauble with so much esoteric knowledge behind it (not!).

role-playing systems might inspire the modern mage. whereas the
'grimoires' of the past commanded attention due to their key
terms and the romance of their construction (post-Jewish
"Solomonic" magic, cast out of synagogues and churches), their
truly poor quality for what they might be used elsewise is a
goad to the rest of us to replace them as quickly as possible.
or maybe not. maybe someone prefers that old Marsailles game
deck for their cobbled esoteric Thothbook. perhaps they'll
participate in the Great Work in precisely their harmonic.

# Now it seems like an orthodoxy to resist or ignore (more
# the latter nowadays, must be part of getting old!)

Currents rush and bunch and eddy and retrace and plunge under.
where we are during the time of its action and what our skill
set includes will determine our best mode of operation. you're
likely the vanguard of independents who operate amongst those
who are trying to establish orthodoxies. are they helpful for
the lost or benighted? do the masses, does the Herd need their
leadership? or examples of us being individual geniuses?

# 333> how does this reflect magical
#> principles as compared to unique pecadillos?
#
# aye, good systems converge in practice and experience,
# not in detail.

that explains a somewhat different motive than previous
generations have expressed regarding One True Knowledge
they were offering up in simplified form (whether simply
metaphysical, like about gods, or cosmological, such as
on astronomy). Crowley's disenchantment with the 777
data didn't stop others from trying to 'complete it'.
we should be comparing and contrasting these systems,
seeing how they differ and of what they are composed.
I recently reviewed one by a Stephen Skinner. I know
there's a couple others, or comparable table-like sets.

#> this is far from
#> agreed in modern occultism, few understand the argument in depth.
#
# me for one, no degree in philosophy,

degrees are one thing. typical courses of instruction in
philosophy don't bother with modern occultism, which is
drowning in fabricationalism and "romancing" (lies), and
generally devoid of serious considerations regarding
conventional philosophic topics (ethics, epistemology,
and the like). in most cases the minds entertaining the
occultism simply are not up to the task of philosophy
too -- they're too tied up in navigating the fantasies.

# just experience, instinct and a sense of humour.

that makes things more fun.

# Which permits me to make the comment above,
# and that below.

that and more.

# 'When two wise men meet, they laugh' - that's LAUGH,
# not argue about their systems.

so there are few wise men about, perhaps. maybe we
can work on developing our patience with fools.

#> if you are obsessed about a specific scripture explain to me why
#> it is thelemic (because Crowley says so??).
#
# couldn't give a toss if my interpretation is thelemic, or care whether
# Crowley wrote it. If either is the case, it doesn't matter to me. My
# relationship with AL matters to me, although even that may diminish
# with time.

what about it drives you to continue to want to nourish it?

# Irregular Freemasonry and Sunday Mass on the other hand
# never have and never will.

post-Jewish and post-Catholic interests are all the rage in
some zones. I'll try to make room for their strangeness (to
me), but i think that i am done giving them a center stage.
my relation to them is back and forth, at times accepting
aspects completely and at others inverting them or opposing
them with completely unresolvable imagery/forms.

# otherwise understand
#> that it will seem to me like mine will seem to you (peculiar,
#> probably not suited for those outside of its parameters).
#
# well, that may be true of a rigidly orthodox and insecure type.
#
# Far better to take a leaf from Miyamoto Mushashi, 'learn from anyone
# who does what they do well'

expansive learning skills are absolutely helpful to the
cultivation of knowledge. I *love* The Five Rings.

# - not 'stick with folks who do what you do badly'.

that's the religious aim thing coming to the fore. it seems that
the puddling and loyalty issues come up when people feel that
their interests aren't being represented by visible leadership.

# So if your approach works, someone who is really getting
# somewhere with another approach should see the value in it, in the
# results it brings you.

where such result-evaluation is understood at all. what with the
shoddy thought that passes for analysis in the occult community,
we're lucky if people can discern fantasies from realities. when
dreams of results pass for the actuality, who is "really getting
somewhere" quickly passes into unobserved status. focus on fake
fluids, mysterious but fictional masters, evaporating essences,
and super-duper religiomagical power supplies takes up most of
what little scrutiny occultists can muster exercizing. the bulk
are just finished shrugging off their faith-based lessons and
hoping for some new True Answers to occupy the void of
certitude their selection of occultism seemed to promise.

#> ...those with an abiding interest in
#> magic may find Magick a bit restricted,
#
# aye, yours truly for one.

me too, though i like to keep track of who espouses what.

#>those without any kind of
#> post-Jewish or post-Christian religiomystical lattice influence may
#> have little to discuss except with scholars of Sanskrit or Lovecraft.
#
# As recently said elsewhere, there are essentially two kinds of
# religion, Natural and Revealed.

that emphasizes "revealed" religion, probably another name for
"prophetic" religion. these "two-flavour" models usually give
us the parameters of where certain cults want to dwell, but
they are a poor substitute for a general study of religion.
I think it was Schopenhauer who sought to merely see what
associated itself with religion before examining it.

# Besides those distinctions date is
# comparatively insignificant. Fact is that while many thelemites have a
# problem with other organised religions, theirs is of the same class as
# those with which they are acquainted.

revealed?

# Whereas I couldn't give a monkey's what's been handed down from high,
# I'm much more interested in what can be worked out from the ground up.

how do you work that out? is it a solitary or group endeavour?

# Revealed Religion never created magic, only adapted and
# distorted it to conform to its own models.

neat assertion. I'll try to come up with exceptions. where will we
be able to draw the line between revealed and natural? are there
'natural revelations' 'revealed nature'?? is the criterion somehow
the source of the data being touted as revealed? if we ignore it
and there is no perceivable difference in our experience or the
universe, does this mean that the revelation was insignificant
and/or false? how do we winnow through these "revelations"?

# Consequently Crowley is just another
# author trying to understand magic from the wrong perspective. He had
# occasional insights and ideas, but is no more important than many
# authors, and a good deal less so than some whose names we will never
# know.

that seems fitting. his primary interest and skill was as an author.
we have no reports that he was successful with his mysticism or with
his conventional magical activities (like to raise money).

#># The problem, if there is one, is not in EQ or sacramental
#># cookery but in the habits of thelemites in general.
#>
#> the long of tooth sometimes bite the flesh is all. in cyberspace,
#> nobody can really see you bleed. I'm up for any of it, having
#> looked closely at the Beast's scripture behemoth and peered an
#> amused eye into the tangled skein of EQ. they will catch on.
#
# Really? Seems to me Thelema has been vanishing up it's own
# behind for some time,

there's a certain insularism that pervades secret cults. left to
their own devices, vanishing acts may be their Perfect Resolution.
no doubt at some future time they will come once again out of
their withdrawal.

# and EQ has never been interested in converts, and has
# shrugged off a good few passengers.

what holds attention may be what is suitable to the minds of
those who are encountering the object of attention. popularity
is not usually the mark of either the real or of the truth,
though either may become popularly entertained.

Invoke me under my stars.

# statements like that are more in tune with what EQ is
# really about that some may appreciate. ;-)

my signature is a combination of geometric forms:

	 signature
	 http://www.luckymojo.com/signature.gif

	 cosmogram and signature
	 http://www.luckymojo.com/cosmogram.jpg

the statement is from the Book of the Law and was an
intention to match quotations from that text since
what *precedes* "Love is the law, love under will."
within it is "Invoke me under my stars."

in combination they make it possible to understand
that i might be evocable or invocable given the
correct ritualizing. ;)

Love is the law, love under will.
.
333 <nagasiva@...>

"lucy_fyre" <lucyfyre@...> wrote:
> I was looking at the Class A texts online and noted the OTO version of
> Liber Stellæ Rubeæ has question marks in place of five of the
> planetary sigils. Is this just a formatting error on the webpage, or
> is there some doubt that these are planetary sigils? I note in the OTO
> book, Holy Books of Thelema, they are certainly planetary sigils.

Hi Scarlet,

That is simply because for the online version to show the sigils you
must have the proper font installed on your computer. That's all. I
have no idea what that particular font is but that is why.

93 93/93

MaaSaAset


[MODERATOR reformatted; top-posted! see our MMM document!]

Been reading most of these posts and wow some I feel you need a uni degree
to understand or is it just me and the dumbening has taken over.



Can someone please explain in simple terms to say one is a thelemite what
does that actually mean?



And here's one more for you, Do you have to be a thelemic to join the OTO or
just accept The Book of Law. Accepting this book doesn't make you a thelemic
does it or am I wrong.



Remember I have no uni degree so in language I understand please.



Jack



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

Hail Satan and welcome.


"PaganBorn" <jaysonbowe@...>:
# Been reading most of these posts and wow some I feel you
# need a uni degree to understand or is it just me and the
# dumbening has taken over.

there's a variety of contributor.

# Can someone please explain in simple terms to say one
# is a thelemite what does that actually mean?

the meaning will depend upon the person saying it.
words don't have inherent meanings. you'll never be
able to say what a thing "actually means" except as
you inquire of the person saying it.

# ...Do you have to be a thelemic to join the OTO

no.

# or just accept The Book of Law.

no. the phrase "accept the Book of the Law" isn't as
obvious in its meaning as some might wish it to be.
there is ritual including this kind of "acceptance"
of the Lawbook, but its meaning is not entirely plain.

# Accepting this book doesn't make you a thelemic

some think that accepting the Book of the Law as your
scripture is the means by which you become a Thelemite.
others think of the manifest universe as the Book of
the Law (accepting this is like accepting what is real).

# does it or am I wrong.

it does in some circles. the point is that there is no
universal knowledge set from which to answer your queries.

a thelemite is a willful and deliberate individual,
cognizant of hir own boundaries and those of others,
who, in maturity, sets forth a stylish and masterful
display of volition for the universe to appreciate.

333

Háils Brothiro´s Gudam Ansjus jah Wanus.
Set Nakt
In the name of Domnu
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=rmN8HMxGs2w



I had analysis with diligence the Text about F.O.G.C and Others
Documents about paganism and Occultism, and I observe that there is
exists many fantasy created with the objective of make a situation
linked with the Evil (for example, the demons and the humans
sacrifices, describes in the Text).

I´s semblance to the questionable interests, for the people that
make the Works of F.O.G.C, to generating Terror up others people
that dispose yourselves to realize the magic act, for the use of
the magic for Important Objectives, causing the transcendence the
social and personal weackness, causing for themselves the hate for
the Iniciatic Orders, and  that altogether are and were Older and
Falic Solar or Monoteistic Traditions.

I see that the semblance among the Baphometh Order and the F.O.G.C.
( the 99 degree and the J-Allah of the F.O.G.C. linked with the
Yallah of the Baphometh Order), and too the equals purposes of the
Temple of Vampir, Ordo Temple Orientis, O.T.O. Antiqua (similarly
the Draconian and Tiphonian O.T.O., and the Thelemic Golden Down,
and many others). And We need observe int this contest the Odin
Brotherhood, because your Methodologies are many similarities for
the Order previously  introduced .

This similarity, show us that the all Orders up are linked for Tree
of Life and methodologies of Internal Works.

And the many others forms of  Ancient Traditions (Nordic,Celtic,
Slavic, Mayan, Sumerian, and many others) demonstrate for every
students of Occultism, yours links and mutual knowledge (For
example: Lam, Amalamtra, Surtur, Svarog, Shaitan – the Yeside Black
Serpent and Peacock God born of the fusion of Set and Annu  and
Aiwass – the Gothic word for Eternity – Set and the Sumerian Annu).

And the more interesting in all details, is a Mutual and Usual
Problem:



Exists a persecution and continuous form of the public humiliation,
of all Traditions up Introduced, principally  when this Traditions
fight against the ignorance, fanaticism and corruption and the
planetary destruction. And more, this Traditions have search and
find this seakness and madness in all forms of Monotheistic
Religions (see the Presbyterian, Catholic and others forms of
Inquisition, or the Murder of Hipatia of Alexandria and the
destruction of the Library of Alexandria), and the ministers,
padres, imãs and rabi of this Monotheistics Religions, have make
your friendships oppress, murder and persecutes all the woman and
man that have free mentality.

We learn that the gnostics know and fight against the effects of
Saclas about the human consciences.


We learn that the Satanists fight against the arrest of the soul and
brain of the humanity.

We learn that the Thelemites oppose yourselves against all forms of
chains describe up.

We know that the Kaos Magic fight for make a change in the
Unconscious Collective, causing the development of the
practitioners, in freedom, and opposing themselves against all forms
of mental limitations.

We learn that the Setians fight agaisnt all form of mental
arresting, and that come directly of the Asar Un Nepher Egyptian
Adulterations, that make born the Oziris Cult,  and the Phallic
Solar religion of the despotic Akhenaton.

We know that existis forms of Witchcrafit and Paganism, altogether
They  are beyond of dogmatisms of the fanaticism monotheistic, and
that fight for the your expressions and the freedom of yours
Partners and yours Brotherhoods.

All society in the World is infected with the virus of monotheistic
religion, and the humiliations and murders of the pagans, free
thinkers, philosophers, not monotheistic occultists (for example
Jack Parsons, the scientist and occultist thelemite), had been
executed in total impunity for the madness fanaticism and dogmatism.

Think everybody, because now is the moment for the Leaders and
Practitioners  of the Groups and Brotherhoods, of the Orders and
Traditions up introduced, and many others,  join your interests but
safeguard your hierarchies, creating an Counsel or a Pact of
Gentleman and Ladies, and using the 8 Sacred Ceremony or Sacred
Fests,  awakening the Hate and the Severity of the Earth and the
Goddess and the Gods, causing the Correct Punition over the causes
of putrefaction of the humanity and the Earth!!!

This is the time for the honor, courage and sword in the name of a
better fate for ourselves, because if We don´t act, We don´t have a
future, or planet. We have just a dogmatic book and chains,
dictating Who live or death, exactly likewise that in the
Medievalist Age, in a true Christian Taliban (or a Taliban in
yourself, in the regions where the Islamic dogmatism exist; or
worse, likewise a Sionistic society).

Thanks for your attention.


Frater Oxi Ziredo-Grimmwotan.

Lover is the Law. Lover under Will.
In the name of Domnu.
Set nakt.
Witubini jah Mahts

333 wrote:

"a thelemite is a willful and deliberate individual,
cognizant of hir own boundaries and those of others,
who, in maturity, sets forth a stylish and masterful
display of volition for the universe to appreciate."

or not. it may be that one's will (thelema) is not to be willful and/or
deliberate at all, much less to give a rat's ass whether or not the
universe or anything else appreciates anything they do or do not do,
masterful and/or stylish or not!

ad nox

noxcipher

333:
>> a thelemite is a willful and deliberate individual,
>> cognizant of hir own boundaries and those of others,
>> who, in maturity, sets forth a stylish and masterful
>> display of volition for the universe to appreciate.

noxcipher:
> or not.

not really. there is no 'or not' about it. that's one of
the legitimate referents for the term. if the person does
not qualify, then they aren't a thelemite, by definition.
please understand that this is not a self-styling.

> it may be that one's will (thelema) is not to be willful

this brings in the ideology of predestination or some kind
of transcendental Master Plan by which some kind of magical
envelope of activity is presumed by the theorist, called
"one's will". there is no evidence for this superordinary
and transcendental cosmic feature. this is a cognitive tool
to help people working with will to strive and succeed, and
little more. if you know to the contrary, please point out
some kind of supportive data on this evasive object/fluid.

the term is used as an applied reference to ANOTHER. the
means by which it is applied is through observation of the
actions of ANOTHER. without those observed actions, there is
no way to be sure that another *is* a thelemite -- they may
simply be one of the slavering hordes who are unconsidered.

> and/or deliberate at all,

again, if they do not appear to enjoy a deliberate (or
willful) life, then they cannot be identified as a
thelemite. ;)  there is no essentialist superheroism
in Thelemasville.

> much less to give a rat's ass whether or not the
> universe or anything else appreciates anything
> they do or do not do,

the reflection on whether or not they pay attention to what
or who observes their willful or deliberate character is
completely unimportant. we're talking about to whom the
attribute "thelemite" is *properly* applied. your assessment
incorporates conjecture without basis, to my knowledge, and
while it may be pleasant or efficient to use this ideology,
as far as i know it has no basis in fact, whatever support
it may have been given by "august masters".

> masterful and/or stylish or not!

that is the character of the mature thelemite, yes. whether
they care about its character is completely irrelevant. one
may "discover" or "recognize" thelemites by coming to locate
and identify those whose life is deliberate and who are very
obviously willful. all of the rest may well be lying or just
figments of an over-active imagination, however inspiring.


one of the things about creeping cultism is that it attempts
to fantasize superordinary qualities and characters overtop
legitimate and pragmatic alternatives, allowing those who are
involved to use their imagination to self-propel or self-
support. the whole "one's will" notion is in the aftermath
of the collapse of the Christian "Will of God" by which so
many of the faithful previously operated and with which one
was supposed to act in accordance if one wished success.

333

--- In thelema93-l@yahoogroups.com, "Maa-Sa-Aset" <golgotha777@...> wrote:
>
> "lucy_fyre" <lucyfyre@> wrote:
> > I was looking at the Class A texts online and noted the OTO version of
> > Liber Stellæ Rubeæ has question marks in place of five of the
> > planetary sigils. Is this just a formatting error on the webpage, or
> > is there some doubt that these are planetary sigils? I note in the OTO
> > book, Holy Books of Thelema, they are certainly planetary sigils.
>
> Hi Scarlet,
>
> That is simply because for the online version to show the sigils you
> must have the proper font installed on your computer. That's all. I
> have no idea what that particular font is but that is why.
>
> 93 93/93
>
> MaaSaAset
>
Thelema MaaSaAset,

Thank you...installed a Unicode font (http://www.code2000.net/) and up
popped the symbols, once I set my browser to use code2000 as default.

Still, bit of a bugger, I was using the Times New Roman because it
does polytonic Greek...but I guess it only shows Mars and Venus
because of they're Male and Female sigils.

Thanks again

Will
  Love
   ALWays

Scarlet