[t93] Re: Aiwass and Liber AL
- View Source93,
> Another one of those puzzling inconsistencies that fundamentalistIs this Iraqi one Samuel Jacob, whose Hebrew name was SHMUEL Bar AIWAZ
> Thelemites have been trying rather vainly to harmonize. Crowley for
> awhile seems to have thought the Iraqi typesetter named Aiwass that
> he corresponded with while editor of The International may have been
> Aiwass in human form.
bie YACKOU de SHERABAD?
In any case can you direct me to materials that cover this topic?
En To Pan!
- View SourceDo what thou wilt
Shall be the whole of the Law.
>Like the book says: "ye even ye, shall not behold all the mysteriescontained herein", again, if the events in Cairo are not true and
the EQ of al is merely a random insertion or AC's deliberation. Then
what are we doing here, I ask again. If one cant accept that
metaphysical or supranatural phenomena, which are genuine, do occur,
then why would someone practice magick at all except for the same
reasons one might get into role playing games?
This is not in fact my point of contention, though in post modern culture
with its perceived dichotomy between fundamentalism and liberalism it is
sometimes hard to see synthetic solutions to this seeming antitheses:
A) Scripture is inspired and therefore the inerrant word of "god" (insert
your favorite euphemism for the divine)
B) All Scriptures are the product of mundane human authorship.
My assertion is that inspiration does occur (though its source unconscious
vs. external) can never be known with certainty, if such a distinction even
exists. But that real inspiration has a tendency to accrete mythology around
itself, created by its authors or by the followers of its message, usually
it would seem to give it an air of greater authority. As if the message
itself is insufficient to convey its metaphysical power. Hence we have the
myths about the Buddha's and Jesus' birth, the narrative that Luke & Matthew
constructed around their Q source, Ummayid political redaction of the Quran
Let us take for example one we know from Crowley. In the first publications
of the Vision and the Voice one could read the revelation of ZAX as if
Crowley was someplace else and that Neuberg was dealing with Choronzon as a
disincarnate entity that had taken sufficient material form to not only
menace him verbally but to actually toss sand. Now an examination of the
MS. and the most recent published text, shows that it was Crowley who was in
the triangle and thus not only badgering poor Victor verbally (note the
spector of illusions are parenthetical afterthoughts) but both tossing the
sand and jumping him. Now it is clear that Crowley edited this text to
create a particular mythology and that mythology is rather potent, much more
so than the simple assumption that Victor and Alice are having a rather high
brow lovers spat that the facts in the matter might first indicate. Even
Grant is taken in by the story.
Does Crowley mythologize? Clearly? Is he completely honest regarding the
facts in relating his mystical experiences? not exactly Does it matter? not
really As he points out
"You will readily understand that the genuineness of the claim matters no
whit, such literature being judged by itself, not by its reputed sources."
Either the content of the Book of the Law stands on its own or not. I
assume that at least to some degree Crowley is playing us here, to see who
is more impressed by the myth than the message. It does divided off the
fundamentalists incapable of real analysis for one thing. Not to mention
those who mistake shadow (like Crowley's description of Aiwass) for
Love is the
law, love under will.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
- View Source--- In email@example.com, "Tom Chaudoin" <taammuz@...>
> Of the various 'childs of thy bowels" the best candidates in my
> Jim Lees, Joel Love, and R. Leo Gillis. The amount of staggeringdata these
> men have unearthed in the last 30 years concerning an EnglishQaballah
> if it is examined beyond cursory dismissal by the orthodoxy etc.does
> lend great creedence to the idea that Crowley was not the author.These
> items are self-evident, and are in no wise referenced by Crowley atany time
> in his life. Nor is there any other evidence that he knew of them.Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
In response to this nomination, I will reply in the affirmative.
I am a Child of the Prophet; a magical heir of the Beast 666.
The Children of the Prophet are those who continue the work of their
Part of this work is the employment of the Trigrammaton Qabalah to
elucidate the mysteries of the Book of the Law. This Qabalah comes to
us directly from the prophet himself; it is not an invention of mine.
It is my position that Liber AL refers to the Prophet in this verse:
"Thou shalt obtain the order & value of the English Alphabet; thou
shalt find new symbols to attribute them unto."
In response to this directive found in AL 2:55, the Old (i.e.
original) Comment on this verse by the Prophet says quite
succinctly: "Done. See Liber Trigrammaton."
He is here referring to the English letter-attributions appended to
the Trigrams of Liber Trigrammaton, and published in the Equinox in
1912. This Holy Book was described by A.C. as "the foundation of the
highest theoretical qabalah."
The plain fact is that this verse has been fulfilled for over 93
years. All other attempts to do so have been done by those unaware
that the key had already been discovered.
Thelemites interested in this area have two choices; either one
accepts the prophet's word on the subject, as we are directed to do
in the Tunis Comment, or look elsewhere for the answer.
"All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my
writings, each for himself." The question of verse 2:55 is decided
by just such an appeal.
It is true that in the New Comment, A.C. expressed doubts about any
merit in the Trigrammaton Qabalah. But this was because he had not
ascertained the correct value for the Trigrams. This is not
surprising, since counting in a different number-base would not
likely have occurred to him; (it didn't occur to Norman Mudd or
So the Prophet did exactly as prophesied; "solve the first half of
the equation; leave the second unattacked." He solved the Order of
the alphabet, but he left the Value of the alphabet alone.
Past claimants to the position of `magical heir' have all used as
their bona fides some type of cipher devised by their own ingenium,
rather than going back to the source.
In my case, I have devised no gematria or literal qabalah of my own.
I have, rather, used the text left to us by the Prophet, and have
discovered therein the Key to the Law itself.
My discoveries and methodologies have all been built on this
foundation of Liber XXVII.
If the claim that Liber AL was written by a non-human intelligence
can be proven at all, the most likely method is the encoding of a
mathematical formula so precise, and yet so intricate, that it could
not have been devised by a human mind, least of all the Scribe's.
The Trigrammaton Qabalah provides exactly such a proof.
The mathematics involved in this proof are no more complicated than
basic arithmetic. This is not to say that there are no higher maths
involved in Liber AL, but that the core proofs are readily accessible
to a person of average intelligence.
I will not detail all these proofs here; they can be found in the
Holycram archives, in thumbnail form on Lashtal.com, in-depth at
Trigrammaton.net, and in the ongoing research published in the
LiveJournal of Threefold31.
In this forum I will only state the most obvious points.
The Book of the Law as published in English, and known as Liber AL
vel Legis sub figura CCXX, can be summed up using the Base 3 values
of the Trigrams attributed by the Prophet. This `global sum' is the
The numerical characteristics of this number are quite profound. One
of the most obvious is that it can be factored such that 267,696 = 11
x 156 x 156.
For the purposes here, there are 6 different ways this number can be
generated; four of them occur in the text of the Law itself, and two
of them occur in the Trigram sequence of Liber XXVIII independent of
any gematria values whatsoever.
The first 27 numerically-valued characters of Liber CCXX can generate
The 28 characters of the Cipher in AL 2:76 can generate this number.
The final verse of Liber AL can generate this number.
The number-words in verse AL 1:46 can generate this number.
The (non-linear) Trigram sequence of Liber XXVII can generate this
The sequence of Antigram-pairs in base 3 can also generate this
So far, no other gematria-value for the English Alphabet has
The prophet said that the Cipher of AL 2:76 appeared to be a
qabalistic test for any who claim to be his magical heir. But he did
not say if passing this test was necessary or merely sufficient. In
other words, anyone who solves the riddle may or may not be the heir,
but can one be the heir if they have not solved the riddle? And if
there is only one heir, is there is only one solution?
I have solved the Cipher and discovered the Key of it all, and on
that basis claim the status of a child of the prophet.
But there is more than one Child mentioned in Liber AL. And there is
the one to follow, and the one who cometh after, and the One who was
Achad, and all these should not be confused.
So there, I've said it in public.
Let the vitriol flow to my name.
Love is the law, love under will.
R. Leo Gillis
Lux Et Obscuritas 8'3'