| From the Galleries |
1703 pictures in 26 albums
Members' Creations
Kali
Last Updated Picture:
'Chinese Dragons' Automatic Drawing by Chris Anthony Wills
|
|
| Statistics |
Site visits since 30 September 2003:
21,500,882
Yesterday's visits:
27,865
Registrations:
Today: 1
Yesterday: 4
Overall: 5407
Newest Members:
|
|
| Review Submissions |
Attention authors, publishers and retailers! Are you trying to market a newly-released Thelemic product? This site is viewed daily up to 20,000 times by some of the most influential Thelemites. If you'd like to bring your product to their attention, contact us now to arrange for a review to be placed on lashtal.com.
|
|
| Random Quote |
|
Ah, but a man's reach should exceed his grasp / Or what's a heaven for?
-- Robert Browning
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
piscean93 |
|
Post subject: MIT&P ?
 Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 02:56 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 19, 2008
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
93,
Greetings! I have a question: Has anyone heard if there is going to be a release of Magick in Theory & Practice by itself any time soon, possibly from a non-OTO source? I ask because it is only available in the Big Blue Brick, and even then it is edited and censored by the OTO; sometimes with footnotes, and sometimes not.
Namaste,
93, |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
newneubergOuch |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 03:40 AM
|
|
Joined: Jul 19, 2007
Posts: 69
Status: Offline
|
|
| Censored?, I have an old MagickT&P and the Blue Brick(liberABA) and alot was left out in the earlier editions that has been restored by HB and COTO................................,If yr looking for secret/special stuff your looking in the wrong place, and not everything is avaliable in print/online either. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kuniggety |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 04:48 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 89
Location: Okinawa, JPN
Status: Offline
|
|
What in it is censored?
Anywho, the Caliphate OTO holds the copyrights... so I wouldn't hold my breath for publications from anyone else. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
childrenofptah |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 06:18 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 07, 2007
Posts: 7
Status: Offline
|
|
| By censored do you mean the Israel Regardie edit? I remember hearing on TCTC that Regardie really hacked the thing to pieces (I'm not really sure, because I've only read the edit). |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kuniggety |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 06:33 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 89
Location: Okinawa, JPN
Status: Offline
|
|
| Isn't it Magick Without Tears that people complain about Regardie's edition? Not MIT&P. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lashtal |
|
|
Post subject: Re: MIT&P ?
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 07:59 AM
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 2389
Location: Oxford, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
piscean93 wrote: › Greetings! I have a question: Has anyone heard if there is going to be a release of Magick in Theory & Practice by itself any time soon, possibly from a non-OTO source? I ask because it is only available in the Big Blue Brick, and even then it is edited and censored by the OTO; sometimes with footnotes, and sometimes not. There have been several non-OTO editions of Magick.
Yours is the first communication I've read suggesting that the OTO edition is in any way 'censored'. Quite the reverse, in fact.
Presumably you're saying this in an attempt to be controversial with your first post? |
_________________
Paul
Owner & Editor
LAShTAL.COM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
MichaelStaley |
|
|
Post subject: Re: MIT&P ?
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 08:16 AM
|
|
Joined: Apr 21, 2004
Posts: 794
Status: Offline
|
|
piscean93 wrote: › Has anyone heard if there is going to be a release of Magick in Theory & Practice by itself any time soon, possibly from a non-OTO source? I ask because it is only available in the Big Blue Brick
As Paul says, it is available in several other editions. The Castle edition, which looks like a facsimile of the 1929 edition, turns up on ebay frequently enough, and does not exactly cost an arm, a leg and a dingly-dangly bit. Also turning up frequently on the second-hand market is the Grant/Symonds edition of Magick, comprising Book Four Parts 1 and 2 as well as Magick in Theory and Practice.
I've never before heard suggestions that Breeze "censored" any of the text. Given the ready availability of other editions on the second-hand market, it would be an odd thing to do. |
_________________
"It's all in the egg".
Last edited by MichaelStaley on Jan 31, 2008 - 06:32 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
childrenofptah |
|
|
Post subject:
Posted: Jan 31, 2008 - 05:38 PM
|
|
Joined: Nov 07, 2007
Posts: 7
Status: Offline
|
|
kuniggety wrote: › Isn't it Magick Without Tears that people complain about Regardie's edition? Not MIT&P.
I believe you're correct. I apologize. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piscean93 |
|
|
Post subject: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discussion
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 04:47 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 19, 2008
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law,
93,
Paul, you are correct to a certain degree. This is meant to be a controversial post to get people thinking about what the law of Thelema truly is in a practical sense.
A friend of mine and I compared three editions of MIT&P, and came up with some insight. The first edition was the Castle edition (I think Castle did it) from the 60s era. The second edition was the IHO reprint from 1999, and the third was Liber ABA (in slang, the Big Blue Brick). The first thing we did was compare the Castle version to the IHO edition. The IHO edition was exactly like the Castle version. After we went through both thoroughly and randomly, we then put the IHO (due to availability. The Castle edition was only available for a short time) edition against Liber ABA (the Big Blue Brick). The results were interesting.
The first thing of note is that HB and the other editors were very thorough in their annotation of the texts involved. However, magickally speaking, things were different. In a lot of places, whenever wording was changed between IHO and the Brick, it wasn't always clarified as to why. Most of the times, more often than not, it was from letters and texts that Uncle AL wrote during different stages in his life, and that were used in the Brick as an update as well as clarification.
For brevity, I'm not going to go into all of the instances. I did select one to use as an example. On PP. 130 in the Brick, it is the introduction in which the theorems are given. In the middle of the paragraph beginning illustration:
This is printed (towards the middle of that paragraph): "He might also devote his whole energies to some one particular object, by resolving to do nothing at variance therewith, and to make every act turn somehow or other to the advantage of that object."
It differs from the IHO/Castle edition in that, in the Brick, the phrase somehow or other is not present. This discrepancy is not footnoted, where many, many others are.
The challenge is that Uncle Al did not right that. If he did later in life, it would be in a footnote. at the bottom of the page or in the back. This is a troublesome statement that it is not explained. Somehow or other implies that what the magician does, he may not know how something came to be. And that is okay. What this does to the reader, if the reader is not careful, is that it invokes a doubt of where[/i] manifestation comes from, or an incomplete understanding of the art.
Fear is a result of the doubt. And, to quote Uncle Al, Fear is failure.
Therefore, the Brick, in some instances, paints a very different picture of Uncle Al and his teachings as World Teacher. It is much more fear based.
We must never forget that this is, after all, The method of science, the aim of religion. That's not a very scientific idea to not know how something works. The goal is reproduceable results after all.
The above example was found 11 pages into the book. Only 11 pages in and already something alien to Al and his work has been introduced. Trust is eroded.
I was asking about a smaller version because it is easier to introduce students of the magickal arts to a $19.95 book than it is the $80 book. Plus, more bookstores will tend to stay away from tying up their inventory on an $80 Hardback magick book, but would give a $19.95 book a shot. Thus I asked the community here if anyone had heard anything. There's a lot of potential people out there that can become Thelemites.
93,
Love is the law, love under will |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Meritocracy |
|
|
Post subject: A thought on the matter
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 05:31 AM
|
|
Joined: Feb 01, 2008
Posts: 1
Status: Offline
|
|
93/418,
Is it totally out of the realm of possibility that perhaps there are some intentional edits? While I am not one to try and claim any degree of authority (and in my opinion, no Thelemite should claim authority on the subject of Magick) I have to admit that there seems to be at least some red tape between books by Crowley depending on who is responsible for editing them.
I'm not a member of the C.O.T.O. so I won't presume to understand the aim they had in that disparity. However it seems that some times the methods used imply an philisophical ownership (copyrights not withstanding) of Magick, Crowley, and Thelema. Perhaps Piscean93 is on to something, and in my opinion, deserves a closer look.
Love Is The Law, Love Under Will. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
kuniggety |
|
|
Post subject: RE: A thought on the matter
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 05:42 AM
|
|
Joined: Nov 27, 2006
Posts: 89
Location: Okinawa, JPN
Status: Offline
|
|
| You pointed out some grammatical edits... but where is the censorship? And what does reading MIT&P have to do with becoming a Thelemite? It's a book on magick, not how to be a Thelemite. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piscean93 |
|
|
Post subject: RE: A thought on the matter
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 06:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 19, 2008
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law
93,
Thanks for all the feedback on this topic. The use of the word censorship is slight and arguable. What is being censored here is that Uncle Al did not believe the way things manifest is ambiguous. He believed that through scientific inquiry into the study of magick one could reproduce results. "Somehow or other" implies something Uncle Al would consider a halfway statement. And, as all of us know, Uncle Al was not a halfway do anything kind of man.
93,
Love is the law, love under Will. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
enjoy93 |
|
 |
Post subject: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discussion
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 07:45 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 17, 2007
Posts: 30
Status: Offline
|
|
| Sorry, unintentional doubling, please delete |
Last edited by enjoy93 on Feb 01, 2008 - 05:08 PM; edited 1 time in total
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
enjoy93 |
|
|
Post subject: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discussion
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 07:49 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 17, 2007
Posts: 30
Status: Offline
|
|
piscean93 wrote: › The first thing of note is that HB and the other editors were very thorough in their annotation of the texts involved. However, magickally speaking, things were different. In a lot of places, whenever wording was changed between IHO and the Brick, it wasn't always clarified as to why. [/b]
93
1. It may be not their malicious intent. But I must admit I have a strong impression that most if not all COTO officers are versed in general knowledge, but incompetent in magick. It's quite obvious to me, especially by reading their own "comments", their own books and articles on more specific technical questions of magick, mysticism and practices - evidently they never did them really. Also I know certain cases of experience with Caliphate A.'.A.'. lineage that only confirm me in my opinion, maybe too pretentious, but valid to me.
2. In my experience as a translator and an editor I meet "strange corrections" in my published works very often - and most of them usually made by secondary technical editors or even clickers without any notifying. You wonder how many people on inferior jobs see themselves very intelligent to do so. The only way to avoid this thing - to explain them personally that such anonymous corrections are unacceptable, in coarse language if needed. So it's also may be the answer to your matter.
3. The last (but the first in value) related problem in my opinion (I'm not a native English speaker, so i'm biassed here) is that Crowley's grammar is odd and ambiguous, sometimes intentionally, and the books are full of misprints. There's nothing to do with them at all without some critical review while reading (I mean not "redaction" - one should be a Crowley's reincarnation to do this job well). Evidently, it requires some basic understanding - and in my opinion understanding in magick is not a question of any education at all, but a kind of mystical "karmic" issue. Personally I don't know how and where one can get it, and with time I see my own poor ability more clearly. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Te23 |
|
|
Post subject: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discussion
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 08:21 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 23
Location: British Columbia Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
enjoy93 wrote: ›
1. It may be not their malicious intent. But I must admit I have a strong impression that most if not all COTO officers are versed in general knowledge, but incompetent in magick. It's quite obvious to me, especially by reading their own "comments", their own books and articles on more specific technical questions of magick, mysticism and practices - evidently they never did them really. Also I know certain cases of experience with Caliphate A.'.A.'. lineage that only confirm me in my opinion, maybe too pretentious, but valid to me.
93.
Hmmmm... I am wondering what situation you found yourself in where you met almost all the officers of the OTO and they decided to tell you everything they know or don't know about magick?
Back to the topic at hand, I personally like the revised MTP. I think it is a better edition, more clear, easier to read and one can easily follow up on any number of references to the hearts content.
Before I had the small Dover copy and I always found it hard to sit down and read it. I found the print difficult to read for some reason and putting something so vast in such a small book made it very aesthetically unpleasing (the lack of index or table of contents was also problematic).
93 93/93
-Te23 |
_________________
"Barbarism is the natural state of mankind," the forester said, still staring somberly at the Cimmerian. "Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph."
-From Beyond the Black River, by Robert E. Howard
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Boris |
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discuss
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 09:34 AM
|
|
Joined: Dec 08, 2007
Posts: 53
Status: Offline
|
|
I don`t get your fear point. It seems extremely far fetched.
The two sentences reads in exactly the same way, the only difference is that one of the two is 3 words shorter than the other, i.e. more economical.
Perhaps you have better examples of what you call censorship available? |
_________________
I like to take I like to feel wanted.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
enjoy93 |
|
|
Post subject: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discussion
Posted: Feb 01, 2008 - 08:34 PM
|
|
Joined: Jan 17, 2007
Posts: 30
Status: Offline
|
|
Te23 wrote: › Hmmmm... I am wondering what situation you found yourself in where you met almost all the officers of the OTO and they decided to tell you everything they know or don't know about magick?
I have to apologize.  My thread was really irrelevant. I simply don't know any COTO officer or any member of Caliphate A.'.A.'. lineage whom I can call competent in my humble opinion. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piscean93 |
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discuss
Posted: Feb 08, 2008 - 06:25 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 19, 2008
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the law
93,
Yes I do have another example: On pp. 215 of Liber ABA, in the paragraph under the roman numeral two (the final paragraph on the page): The sentence reads"I refer to Christian Science, absurdly so-called, and the cognate doctrine......" The phrase "absurdly so-called" is not in the Castle/IHO edition. It has been added in Liber ABA. Once again, we do not have any footnotes explaining why. While it may be the viewpoint of the editor of Liber ABA, it certainly is NOT what uncle Al thought. Otherwise he would've put it in there. This is coloration of uncle Al by someone. If I am reading uncle Al's thoughts on magick, I really want what he had to say, and not someone else's intentional deception. If it was a change from uncle Al, it would be in the footnotes as to the source, as was demonstrated many detailed times.
93
Love is the law, love under Will. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Te23 |
|
|
Post subject: RE: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P discuss
Posted: Feb 08, 2008 - 07:44 AM
|
|
Joined: Jun 21, 2007
Posts: 23
Location: British Columbia Canada
Status: Offline
|
|
93.
Your nit-picking. The addition or subtracting of such a small amount of text is hardly a worthwhile criticism, nor is adequate proof to show your point. Plus because there is not a footnote included for this one instance doesn't prove anything. The only way that this would have any relevance would be if you had access to the original manuscript, even then it's very plausible (and probable) that the OTO has access to information you do not.
If you really that concerned about it, instead of making this comments on lashtal why don't you email the OTO and ask them about it.
93 93/93
-Te23 |
_________________
"Barbarism is the natural state of mankind," the forester said, still staring somberly at the Cimmerian. "Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph."
-From Beyond the Black River, by Robert E. Howard
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lashtal |
|
|
Post subject: Re: RE: Re: Clarification to further stimulate MIT&P dis
Posted: Feb 08, 2008 - 08:24 AM
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 2389
Location: Oxford, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
piscean93 wrote: › While it may be the viewpoint of the editor of Liber ABA, it certainly is NOT what uncle Al thought. Otherwise he would've put it in there. This is coloration of uncle Al by someone. If I am reading uncle Al's thoughts on magick, I really want what he had to say, and not someone else's intentional deception.
"Intentional deception"?
For someone so obsessed with detail and so ready to jump to criticism and judgement, you appear to have overlooked the simple explanation in 'Liber ABA' itself: "The first edition of Part III of Book 4 ... was seriously corrupted, as dozens of lines of text were dropped in successive retypings... In the first revised edition (1994) they were demarcated in the text by a system of markers, but in this edition they have been silently restored... The transitional 1994 edition with its markers remains useful as a scholarly reference..." (See 'Editor's Notes'.) |
_________________
Paul
Owner & Editor
LAShTAL.COM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
piscean93 |
|
|
Post subject: MIT&P ?
Posted: Feb 10, 2008 - 01:20 AM
|
|
Joined: Jan 19, 2008
Posts: 19
Status: Offline
|
|
Do what thou Wilt shall be the whole of the law
93,
Paul, thanks for the clarification on that. However, then the question becomes: Why isn't it marked that a restoration of corrupted text has occurred? That screams hiding things to me.
I am being very critical and nit-picking and I freely admit it. This is a hold over from karmic law: Make sure everything, no matter how small or incosequential it may seem gets done correctly. Crowley was familiar with the laws of karma, so when he wrote, those were some of the tools he was working with (along with the QBL, etc.). My criticalness is also a product of being a magician.
I will also freely admit that I have not e-mailed the Caliphate OTO about these things because when I've tried to contact them in the past about other questions, etc, they were ignored, so there's no reason to pursue correspondences.
I thank everyone for the input and I will especially send people to ebay and other web companies for copies of MIT&P.
On a side tangent, doesn't Uncle Al's work come up into public domain in a few years? I'm not clear on the current copyright laws, but I believe it does. Thanks once again for the clarification on MIT&P, and I would appreciate input on the public domain of Uncle Al's work.
93
Love is the law, love under Will. |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
lashtal |
|
|
Post subject: RE: MIT&P ?
Posted: Feb 10, 2008 - 02:30 AM
|
|
Site Admin
Joined: Sep 30, 2003
Posts: 2389
Location: Oxford, UK
Status: Offline
|
|
| The status of the Crowley copyrights has been discussed in enormous detail on LAShTAL.COM on many occasions and the facts are available by a simple search of this site: the essential details are clear and, I think it's safe to say, are not seriously disputed these days; at least not in the UK and US. |
_________________
Paul
Owner & Editor
LAShTAL.COM
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| | |
|
in 1° 
: 
in 16° 
: Anno IVxvi 
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
