Interesting article; well worth a read.

An extraordinary number of errors in such a short article, including, but by no means limited to:

'... Liber Al Vegis ...'
'... a Cairo hotel room ...'
'... a human priest who is directing fire ...'
'... Finally on the 9th in part 3 it is Horus whose voice is heard ...'
'... Ankh-F-N-Khonsu which translates as ‘a priest of the moon who reflects the rays of the sun’ ...'
'... ‘Do what Thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law’ ...'
'... for many years feared that the event had been some kind of trick perpetuated by his wife ...'
'... a praetor human intelligence ...'

And the point of all this?

'... DO WHAT THOU (thou being a combination of the low, middle and high selves. A creature of silence) WILT (whenever the growth/return of Thou is stunted by mundane thought/habitual action it wilts without nourishment and causes effects in doing so) SHALL BE (future imperative. The be or ‘bee’ is, in Egyptian lore, the soul’s companion on its travel through the land of the dead) THE WHOLE (hole – an exit and entrance point) OF THE (thee) LAW (restricted area with finite conditions and also a contact point for the Loa – star beings or spiritual companions) ...'

Um, quite.

... Liber Al Vegis ...

that's the meat free variant...

🙂

OK, I'll "fess up" (I believe that's what you young people say) as to why I found it interesting.

For the London conference in 2004 to mark the 100th anniversary of the transmission of The Book of the Law, my wife read out a short paper supplied for the occasion by Kenneth Grant. In the paper, Grant referred to patterns that underlay the text of the book, and referred to it as a time-traveller's log. I never had the opportunity of discussing this with Kenneth, but it could of course have been a reference to ankh-f-n-khonsu.

At the time, I had not seen this reference anywhere else. Now, however, I realise that for several years Kenneth was preoccupied with the idea that the surface text of the book was of the nature of a palimpsest overlaying deeper layers of meaning. It was his intention to develop and consolidate this work once the final volume of the trilogies was published in 2002, but this never came to fruition.

Hence my description of the article as interesting; sorry to have led people astray.

no apologies necessary Mick - despite the author's inaccuracies, i did catch his drift with regard to the 'Chrononaut'. 

As I'm sure most readers of this will be aware, the reverse of the stela includes eleven 'lines' of hieroglyphs from The Book Of The Dead, including an extract from Chapter 2. According to Egyptologist Abd el Hamid Zayed, this extract was intended as a spell 'to allow the astral form of the deceased to revisit the earth at will.'

Astonishing stuff that suggests, perhaps, that Crowley's 'selection' of the stele was less spontaneous than he would have us believe. (And, yes, I did notice the 'Hamid' there, the name of the servant, or 'waiter', whose participation is a 'ritual of sex' with AC and Rose was an essential part of the Cairo Working...)

And on this theme, I have once again made available the PowerPoint presentation I prepared for three lectures in London on this subject. See elsewhere in the Forums for details of how to download it.

Astonishing stuff that suggests, perhaps, that Crowley's 'selection' of the stele was less spontaneous than he would have us believe.

or suggest that the

spell 'to allow the astral form of the deceased to revisit the earth at will.'

actually did what it said on the tin!

No, you're right. And I accept either as a hypothesis.

Mickalaus, as I call my friend at work, do you have a transcript or recording of that talk you guys did? It sounds really fascinating.

What a fascinating article! Yes, if there is any record of that talk it would be most interesting!

😀

Starfire Vol 2 No 3 included some of the papers from the 2004 conference. I can extract from the print production files the PDF of Kenneth Grant's paper if anyone would like to see it.

I actually seem to remember being at said conference. Was very interesting - despite an announcement of some fairly embarrassing personal details relating to KG made by a rather ''over enthusiastic'' speaker - it would be nice to see something organized on a bi or tri annual basis.

I seem to remember being at said conference too, but cannot seem to recall offhand this actual said announcement.  Maybe I’d just gone to consult a chap regarding some canine during the few minutes when this may have happened … or could you may be referring to Mary Hedger’s remarks about her apparently spicy correspondence with KG, which seemed to have riled some folk (unless I’m getting my conferences mixed up?)!  (This is the only thing I can think of which might remotely fit the bill, as I don’t recollect [m]any over enthusiastic and/or embarrassing speakers being present (– perhaps more’s the pity!? ;D)

Could a little bit more information possibly be supplied & especially for the benefit of those who were not able to attend said conference or have been present in the room at the apparently embarrassing moment in question?

Thanks in advance
Norma N Joy Conquest

or could you may be referring to Mary Hedger’s remarks about her apparently spicy correspondence with KG, which seemed to have riled some folk (unless I’m getting my conferences mixed up?)!

That sounds about right. Although I've given up tittle-tattle, I'd say no more than the details were of a rather personal nature, announced in a rather disrespectful and cavalier way.

Yes, Michaelclarke18, I was there, too. I stand by my broadly very positive review of the event - written eleven years ago - which is online here: http://www.lashtal.com/portal/resources/reviews/172-171-old-news.html

Mary Hedger's participation was the lowest point of the day and I was puzzled by her presence:

'Mary Hedger read two very lengthy extracts from her new novel – available, of course, from the book stalls at the back of the Hall. Focusing on Crowley at Cefalu, this sort of stuff has been done before and been done better by the likes of Susan Roberts and Snoo Wilson. Again, why was this sort of stuff included in a conference about “Thelema Beyond Crowley”, unless to increase sales? At the end of her reading, Ms Hedger bizarrely shouted an expletive, apparently as a misguided attempt at achieving comic effect. One has to assume it was for the same reason that she made some staggeringly disrespectful and indiscreet remarks to the whole audience regarding Kenneth Grant and the contents of some letters sent by him to her. Her explicit and ill-advised remarks about Grant, combined with her enthusiasm for talking about her own past as a Greenham Common “Peace” Woman and supporter of “Psychic Questing”, cheapened what was already a deeply unimpressive presentation.'

Thanks for the additional information, Paul and Michael.  Possibly my recall of the day is faulty - I don't personally recollect any shouted expletives - which was partly why I requested further clarification on the matter, and/ as I (and perhaps others) would still be interested in reading a transcript of her talk to enable one to impartially evaluate the matter at “first hand” as it were a decade down the line.  If such a transcript actually exists.

N Joy

my broadly very positive review

geez, Paul - if that's 'very positive' i'd hate to see negative 😉

that being said, it would be something if transcripts of the worthwhile presentations were available. Unlike jamie I'm interested in more than just the naughty bits…

Some of the papers were published in Starfire Volume Two Number Three, William. There were some talks which weren't published, because they were more or less spontaneous.

Kenneth Grant's 2004 e.v. Statement is a short, yet fascinating document, including that tantalising description of considering Liber AL as being "the log of a time-traveller".  Sometime ago, I seem to recall that it was suggested that it should be republished here on LASHTAL.COM.

I appreciate where Michael is going with this observation, but am I not correct in thinking that a palimpsest is a parchment, or document, from which the original script has been erased and then reused for a subsequent purpose and piece of writing ?

I would very much like to see this Michael.  I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Spent quite a while last night locating the probable source of that 'palimpsest' observation by Michael.  As I had thought, what I had in mind was in 'The Ninth Arch' - not the easiest of Kenneth Grant's books to work with.

The text of Liber OKBISh declares:  514. "Who will unravel this mystery..." 515. "this palimpsest scrawled upon the delicate membrane rent by the talons of the raven, whippoorwill, or vulture?"

KG's commentary, on page 340, begins:  "It is a "palimpsest" because, held against the light, against the window-pane, the leaf of the Grimoire reveals a picture that differs from the sigils that appear on its surface."

So KG is talking about the 'Grimoire of the Grants' here, in reference to his novella 'Against the Light'.  Let he who has understanding, etcetera !

As for Grant's 2004 statement "Looking Forward!" it is the last paragraph that commences with "The Book of the Law" constitutes, in effect, the Log of a Time Traveller;" containing the symbols and signs of encoded information necessary for the next Step of Humanity, if I may paraphrase the rest.

I think this is rather unfair comment and not in the least bit justified since I am interested in far more than “just the naughty bits” and “tittle-tattle”, as I hope would be plainly evident from the serious content of my previous posts, threads, blogs, etc. 

It would in fact be useful for people to be able to read a transcript of Mary Hedger’s talk not only to ascertain just how “naughty” it actually turned out to be in retrospect (as distinct from what has now become its semi-mythical presentation), but also precisely just how much there may have been in it of substance and value, it being hard to recall this for certain and especially a decade down the line.  I seem to recall there being a little more to it than just reading out large chunks from her novels in that she also quoted excerpts from some of the letters between herself and Kenneth Grant.  The fact that he maintained a regular and to all appearances serious correspondence with Ms Hedger over a period of time would tend to suggest that he himself considered what she had to say to be at least of some merit, regardless of what may have been her poor and sub-standard presentation on the actual day of the conference itself.   

For much the same reasons (in terms of ascertaining its substance and value) I like others would also be interested in reading a pdf of the full contents of KG’s paper, which may perhaps have been shortened and edited as it came to be presented on the day because of the usual time considerations of fitting everybody in, etc.

N Joy

I think this is rather unfair comment and not in the least bit justified since I am interested in far more than “just the naughty bits” and “tittle-tattle”, as I hope would be plainly evident from the serious content of my previous posts, threads, blogs, etc.

by the way, i have some 'French' postcards you might be interested in... nudge, nudge, wink, wink 😉

There's no transscript of Mary Hedger's talk. The "talk" consisted simply of her reading from one or two of her books, much to my disappointment. Secondly, what you heard on the day was KG's paper in full. It was brief - just a couple of sides of A4. There was no editing, no abridgement, no time constraints. It's there in Starfire.

I would have thought that the organisers of the conference (presumably yourself there as one of them, Michael) would have been aware in advance of at least (some of) the content of the talks of the speakers booked, and of the relevance of their subject matter to the conference at hand itself, but maybe not.  As mentioned, I thought there was also something relevant read from the Grant-Hedger correspondence, if I can call it that, but perhaps I may be mistaken as I did not take notes at the time and over ten years have since elapsed.

OK, but in that case I am not sure what the reference in your Reply #12 refers to:

It wasn't altogether clear if there is in fact any more from the "paper" there or not.  Can we now take it and assume that there isn't (?)

Très amusant, William.  Please put me down for a dozen – strictly on a sale or return basis of course. 😛

Fnarr fnarr,
N Joy

Jamie, the paper by KG was printed in its entirety in the issue of Starfire. There's no more.