Various II:76 Ciphe...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Various II:76 Cipher solutions...  

Page 12 / 21
  RSS

Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3879
17/02/2020 11:38 am  
Posted by: @kidneyhawk

Perhaps many participants here will disagree with me but I feel this is the best thread on Lashtal.com in a good long time. 

I certainly disagree with you. I find Cole's strutting, sneering, provacative demeanour repellant.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2399
17/02/2020 12:02 pm  

My count is 12 (times RTC has said the GPS coordinates "of a location central to this mystery" that he posted "aren't GPS coordinates"); got tired of counting those other things.

Cat still got your tongue on the "Why, 'precisely', do we 'rotate' widdershins?" question, @therealrtc?

And so many other questions too, of course. But, of course, they'll all be resolved soon.


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 12:24 pm  

@the_real_simon_iffFirst: he did not insist on including it always. Just in the beginning. – That’s exactly what I said.

Oooh, if only Crowley / Aiwass had not blown their time ensuring that the absolutely critically important to the whole of Thelema lack of a space between two pairs of two digits (the alleged proof marks), there'd maybe have been a few spare seconds to tidy-up the insignificant triviality of Crowley's comprehensive and spectacular buggering-up of the Title Page... (sorry) folder.

Interesting also, in connection with diary entries from 18 April 1906 (first mention of Liber Legis typescript) and 20 April 1906 (discusses formation of a new order with Jones). 29 July 1906 is the pivot point. Crowley writes “discuss a new O [mystical Order]. D.D.S. wants Authority.”  At this point, Crowley’s original scheme is down the toilet. He is compelled to change his plan, and the transition leaves jagged edges, of which the Title Page... (sorry) folder is one.  The cipher is another.  There are many others.

@kidneyhawk  – I feel this is the best thread on Lashtal.com in a good long time. and @newneubergouch2i agree – Yes, ‘For sale & Wanted’ has never had it so good!

@herupakraathbased on the translation of the Stele of Revealing provided to Crowley by the Egyptian Museum; – Indeed, and as I recall, the process of allegedly seeing the stele for the first time, to receiving a translated hard copy from the museum, took around four working days! Wow, that’s a fast service. Do you think Aiwass lent a praeter-human hand (tentacle) to speed proceeding?

@herupakraath – Still await your insightful explanation... Or, anyone else care to take a stab at Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments? 🤣 

 


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3879
17/02/2020 1:39 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

Or, anyone else care to take a stab at Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments?

Pales besides your mind-bendingly nonsensical comments.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1815
17/02/2020 1:46 pm  
Posted by: @kidneyhawk
Posted by: @kidneyhawk

Perhaps many participants here will disagree with me but I feel this is the best thread on Lashtal.com in a good long time. 

I certainly disagree with you. I find Cole's strutting, sneering, provacative demeanour repellant.

I will add that, although RTC's forthcoming book is rather dominating the talks here, the thread is composed of all contributions. The topic as a whole and many of the angels approaching it I find very intriguing and even suggestive beyond the solving of a historical or literary mystery. It is unfortunate that a good deal of mud-slinging has been involved.


ptoner and APOSTATES liked
ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 1:48 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff – Just three words expose the scam.  On, 29 July 1906, Crowley wrote “DDS wants Authority.”  I ask, why? What possible reason has Jones for suggesting he should run Crowley’s New World Religion?  As per the official line (i.e Crowley’s EOTG fable) Jones’ suggestion is absurd and Crowley should have quickly bitch-slapped his lardy-ass back to a kennel.  Rather inexplicably, he didn’t.  Conversely, if at this time Crowley was touting Liber Legis as a general revelation (of the Golden Dawn type) based on documents derived from the Egyptian equivalent of Fra. Spangles (as per my Greater Heresy), then Jones (as Crowley’s  occult superior) had every right to demand superiority over the mere delivery-boy.  Care to explain that one, @michael-staley?

@michael-staleyI find Cole's strutting, sneering, provacative demeanour repellent.– Is your MANIO playing-up again?  Do you remember the last time you were happy? Pales besides your mind-bendingly nonsensical comments. – I’ll take that as a ‘No, I can’t explain Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments’. 😖 

@kidneyhawk - "the thread is composed of all contributions. The topic as a whole and many of the angels approaching"  Clarification appreciated.  I fear Mr Staley has become fixated. 😩 

 


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1815
17/02/2020 1:58 pm  

@kidneyhawk - "the thread is composed of all contributions. The topic as a whole and many of the angels approaching"  Clarification appreciated.

Well, the "angels" should be angles, for starters.

 


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 2:00 pm  

@kidneyhawk - You just lost the praeter-human contingent... 😎 

 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 413
17/02/2020 2:07 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

Indeed, and as I recall, the process of allegedly seeing the stele for the first time, to receiving a translated hard copy from the museum, took around four working days! Wow, that’s a fast service. Do you think Aiwass lent a praeter-human hand (tentacle) to speed proceeding?

You have no means for determining when Crowley received the stele translation; four days is just another baseless speculation on your part.

Posted by: @therealrtc

Still await your insightful explanation... Or, anyone else care to take a stab at Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments?

Title Page

As shown above, you insist on ignoring the statement that states when the text was received in 1904, which is written in large print, in favor of a line that was obviously added at a later date that refers to Crowley losing the manuscript, and finding it in his attic in 1906. How many times does someone have to explain this to you? You're like a dog with an imaginary bone.

I have not only completed my book that proves the opposite of what you have been attempting to do for years--proving the Cairo Working is a hoax--I have also penned a separate document that details the most convincing solution to the II:76 puzzle conceived. Just to give you fair warning, you're wasting your time. The question is, when should I post my solution? March 31st perhaps... 😀 

 

 

 


lashtal liked
ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 2:25 pm  

@herupakraath - "You have no means for determining when Crowley received the stele translation" - Erm... Crowley gives the date of his alleged visit to the Boulaq and the first day of the... uhem, Reception. (albeit he seems distinctly confused and vague on both fronts).  Can you subtract one from another?

"and finding it in his attic in 1906." - Erm, actually on 28 June 1909.... and Jones' claim to superiority?  I hope your universal solution is more convincing that you explanation of Crowley's mental meltdown. 😖  

 


ReplyQuote
hadgigegenraum
(@hadgigegenraum)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 71
17/02/2020 2:59 pm  

@herupakraath

How about March 16th!

Likewise @RTC should have a proof copy delivered to a third party, at the same date, such that revisions relative to your challenge, be open for subsequent inspection.

Of course even at that date people getting your work might not be until after even the First of April unless this was all done electronically that people might read yours first, then RTC's promised.

@therealrtc

HG

 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 413
17/02/2020 3:12 pm  

@hadgigegenraum

My document is a free pdf. I'm locked and loaded.

 

 


ReplyQuote
hadgigegenraum
(@hadgigegenraum)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 71
17/02/2020 3:30 pm  
Posted by: @herupakraath

@hadgigegenraum

My document is a free pdf. I'm locked and loaded.

 

 

Excellent, and said like a professional soldier willing to fight!

....May the great battle of Thelema begin!

HG

 

 


ReplyQuote
ccx
 ccx
(@ccx)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 11
17/02/2020 4:39 pm  

“DDS wants Authority” did not mean he wanted to be in charge. Didn’t you make this same claim in Bogus? It meant only that DDS wanted apparent sanction from “The Secret Chiefs” or whatever.

You set up these interesting things and then, like Hellfire Club Books apparently, do not deliver. Pity.

I think the one thing that can be said with certainty is that Aleister was a jackass and we’re all still paying for his various shenanigans due to the leverage it provides to lunatics.


mal liked
ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 4:58 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

Just three words expose the scam.  On, 29 July 1906, Crowley wrote “DDS wants Authority.”  I ask, why? What possible reason has Jones for suggesting he should run Crowley’s New World Religion? 

93!

Well, this is actually wrong in my opinion. Because the next sentence is "Perfect the lightning-conductor and the flash will come!" So what Jones actually asked for was some - GD-like - link to the Gods (or something like that) before founding a new order and Crowley opined that the new rituals will eventually take care of that. Obviously Liber L wasn't involved then, which would have been the "authority" Jones asked for. It could also be that Jones then unintentionally gave Crowley the idea to revisit this strange manuscript that he created through automatic writing two years earlier and become "its master". I think the fact that AC and Jones were discussing the Augeoides Rituals and NOT Liber L doesn't really support your theory that AC showed him Liber L and said "Let's found a new order based on that" while Jones answered "only if I am boss". Frankly that makes no sense at all to me.

Love=Law

Lutz

 

P.S. I just see ccx wrote the same.


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 5:20 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff - "So what Jones actually asked for was some - GD-like - link to the Gods (or something like that) before founding a new order" - So why didn't Crowley say that! If you and I were discussing the formation of a new badminton team and I said that 'I want authority.' what would you naturally, and correctly assume I meant? Similar with the Title Page... (sorry) folder comments... Why some are willing to morph Crowley's words to an absurd degree, rather than accept what he said at face value (and work from there), I find bewildering.

In both Title Page and proofs Crowley states that he received the documents (or MS) from another.  On this point he could not be clearer.  Later he claimed that he received the text directly from Aiwass.  One of these claims is false. It's merely a question of which lie you prefer.  

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 5:29 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

So why didn't Crowley say that!

93!

But he said it! If you add the next sentence it makes sense. Never mentioning Liber L and Jones together on the other hand makes no sense to prove that AC had to alter Liber L to be the bigger guy.

Love=Law

Lutz

 


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 346
17/02/2020 5:31 pm  

I am inclined to the idea that his appeal for authority was in fact an appeal for permission from the Secret Chiefs to carry out such a task. Don't underestimate their indulgence in acting out in accordance to Theosophy theories, especially at this point in their careers.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 5:34 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

In both Title Page and proofs Crowley states that he received the documents (or MS) from another.  On this point he could not be clearer.  Later he claimed that he received the text directly from Aiwass.  One of these claims is false. It's merely a question of which lie you prefer.  

93!

Hm, he claims on the title page that he received it from Aiwass ("given from the mouth of Aiwass to the ear of The Beast on April 8, 9, & 10, 1904") and later "that he received the text directly from Aiwass". Apart from the fact that he regarded it as automatic writing (which could be the same as dictation) both claims are the same. And only one is false? I don't get it.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 346
17/02/2020 5:40 pm  
Posted by: @hadgigegenraum
Posted by: @herupakraath

@hadgigegenraum

My document is a free pdf. I'm locked and loaded.

 

 

Excellent, and said like a professional soldier willing to fight!

....May the great battle of Thelema begin!

HG

 

 

I have a novel stewing in my head about Thelemite guerrillas, don't get me started or I might just get working on it.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 5:42 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff  - "Because the next sentence is "Perfect the lightning-conductor and the flash will come!" So what Jones actually asked for was some - GD-like - link to the Gods (or something like that) before founding a new order" - You missed a bit. The exact quote is "I should write [to Jones] and say..." Crowley is stalling for time.

Did they found a new order based on the Augeoides Rituals, or Liber Legis?  


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 5:45 pm  

Richard, 93!

I hope your solution for the riddle doesn't depend on YOUR understanding of what happened on July 27, 1906.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 5:47 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff - Did they found a new order based on the Augeoides Rituals, or Liber Legis? 

 

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
17/02/2020 5:49 pm  
Posted by: @the_real_simon_iff

In fact, if we end up here discussing if automatic writing is coming from within or without, it would be quite boring.

Oh, let's bypass the boredom and see which universal principle applies here ...

Anybody who thinks their
auto-writing
comes from out there
is simply not taking responsibility
for themselves and
the mess they create.

Posted by: @michael-staley

Crowley was delighted with the paper and the Key, and changed the name from Liber L vel Legis to Liber AL vel Legis.

This us the tale as I've already read it many times. I accept this version.

On the other hand, maybe I'll write a book about how Achad-Jones and Crowley conspired to make themselves important and to get more money.

Posted by: @runelogix

The open question I have is whether AC was correct to do so or not.

Close the question
just shut the door,
the yama/niyama perusal
matters no more.

Posted by: @runelogix

Our Council of Nicaea has yet to happen!

You are sitting in the Council chamber right now.

Posted by: @ignant666

@shiva - So much counting! But fine, as long as i don't have to count evasions, coy non-answers, subterfuges, and instances of jiggery-pokery!

I am terribly sorry and genuflective, but all deviations must be accounted for, categorized, and interpreted. The Witch-Burning Grand Tribunal will need the tiniest evasions to hand when they (we) convene in, say, mid-April? You know, after the reviews come in and formal charges are filed.

Either that ... or we'll have to join the E.'.E.'. (Excrement Eaters).

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 5:54 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

The exact quote is "I should write [to Jones] and say..." Crowley is stalling for time.

93!

Maybe he is stalling for time, but still none of the diary shows any mentioning of Liber L to Jones. It's all about Augeoides. And through all those months he only mentions once the discussion of a possible new order.

More interesting would be to know what happened on December 31, when he added "Very true; but there need not be hesitation any more." to the diary entry. Unfortunately the diary ends on December 23 with lots of Augeoides talk.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 5:59 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

Did they found a new order based on the Augeoides Rituals, or Liber Legis? 

93!

Yep, THREE YEARS LATER!!!! Do you really think it makes sense that Jones wanted to be boss of the Liber L based order because AC was only the "delivery boy" and three years later he buys into a totally new story? Makes no sense to me at least.

What is obvious is that both wanted to supersede the Golden Dawn with something new.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 6:16 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff - "Yep, THREE YEARS LATER!!!! " - At last! So, they found an order based on Liber Legis, and Jones wants Authority.  Needless to say, Crowley is non-too happy, so changes the nature of Liber Legis to circumvent Jones' desire and keep himself at the helm.  What's so difficult about that?

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 6:37 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

@the_real_simon_iff - "Yep, THREE YEARS LATER!!!! " - At last! So, they found an order based on Liber Legis, and Jones wants Authority.  Needless to say, Crowley is non-too happy, so changes the nature of Liber Legis to circumvent Jones' desire and keep himself at the helm.  What's so difficult about that?

93!

Well, your solution will clear this all up as promised, won't it? But still: Jones accepts a new reception story? Really? There is no evidence that Jones heard of Liber L when they were discussing a new order. But he might have given AC the idea to reassess that strange MS "received" in 1904.

And while you are at it demanding answers from me: where again is the difference between title page's claim of ""given from the mouth of Aiwass to the ear of The Beast on April 8, 9, & 10, 1904" and later claims that Aiwass dictated the stuff? I mean, if you use the title page as part of your evidence, then why not use what's most prominent on that title page. (I wanted to write "said title page" to invoke WRWB, why is he so silent? It's his territory, isn't it?)

As I said, if your solution depends on accepting your take on July 27, 1906, it will be a non-starter... I sincerely hope not, because your theory has something. But if your solution will only deliver a meeting point or the location of the Stele I am afraid that Crowley's ship will not sink at all, maybe even float smoother than ever...

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
17/02/2020 6:59 pm  
Posted by: @michael-staley

I find Cole's strutting, sneering, provacative demeanour repellant.

Well, yeah but ... the Persona Posing (P.'.P.'.) is rather loud, but here's where I have trouble and wish to file a complaint (Richard T., please note) ...

RTC does not use the "text quote" function, which doo-dad allows us simpler-endowed (en doubt?) readers to understand WTF is going on.

RTC uses copy and paste, and for some reason the paste portion shrinks the font. Then the RTC replies often start right on the same line as the posted paste, so it's hard to tell who's typing.

This post is being transmitted to the Grand Tribunal Repository of Pending Evidence. If you, RTC, repent and separate the quote from the post with at least a Tiger Carriage Return, this portion of the charges may be dismissed, pending payment of the Altercation-Fiddling fee.

Posted by: @kidneyhawk

It is unfortunate that a good deal of mud-slinging has been involved.

"My Adepts stand with their heads above the highest heavens, and their fit feet below the lowest mud."

I hope I quoted that properly (which I didn't), but either version allows better access to the wet dirt when one kicks it at the intended slingee.

Posted by: @therealrtc

DDS wants Authority.”  I ask, why? What possible reason has Jones for suggesting he should run Crowley’s New World Religion?

Perdurabo laid his work at the feet of DDS, who patted Perdurabo on the head, saying, "Good Work, lad!  Now, as the most senior Adeptus Exemptus who will talk to you or offer you tea, it is obvious that I will be in charge."

I am always suspicious of Exempt Adepts, 7=4, who stall at Chesed and do not move on to 8=3. After all, "the pull of the Abyss" is supposed to be overwhelming. The Exemptus is supposed to be drawn, kicking and screaming, or maybe blissfully silent, into his or her annihilation.

Perdurabo obviously gave DDS the "authority," as DDS 7=4 is listed as Praemonstrator in the earlier Equinox Imprimaturs ...

image

 

It is interesting that DDS granted Perdurabo 7=4 status (in line after DDS, apparently), but then he soon drifts off into obscurity. After that "drifting off," we see V.V.V.V.V. 8=3, or Nemo, or N., either listed as top dog, or the sole "issuing authority."

Of course, this changes with the arising of 666.

Posted by: @therealrtc

‘No, I can’t explain Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments’. 😖 

Nobody can ... sometimes. It's best to just do the work listed in the Libers and avoid pontificating, anal-izing, and solving pizzles.

Posted by: @ccx

I think the one thing that can be said with certainty is that Aleister was a jackass and we’re all still paying for his various shenanigans due to the leverage it provides to lunatics.

Well put.

Posted by: @runelogix

I have a novel stewing in my head about Thelemite guerrillas, don't get me started or I might just get working on it.

Oh, please, restrain your overactive Geburah.

Do you practice martial arts, or just blow hot air?

 

 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 413
17/02/2020 7:21 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

 Erm... Crowley gives the date of his alleged visit to the Boulaq and the first day of the... uhem, Reception. (albeit he seems distinctly confused and vague on both fronts).  Can you subtract one from another?

You inferred it took four days; it could have taken as many as 17.

Posted by: @therealrtc

"and finding it in his attic in 1906." - Erm, actually on 28 June 1909.... and Jones' claim to superiority?

Irrelevant in light of my findings.

 


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 8:05 pm  

@herupakraath - "Irrelevant in light of my findings." Of course... So, with that one gone, can you have a revised attempt at explaining those pesky Title Page comments?  How about Jones' claim to superiority? Anything? 

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 8:21 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

How about Jones' claim to superiority? Anything? 

93!

I would really welcome to get back to facts again. Jones did not "claim superiority", he "wanted authority". What this means is open to debate, but I would say - not without evidence - he is looking for something that makes a new order real, and not aiming to be the big boss. So long as it is not decided I will not accept it as a fact and wouldn't answer. When have you stopped beating your wife?

I would argue nothing in the known diaries or the title page strengthens your case so I am hoping to see the solution doing just that. It does that, right?

Love=Law

Lutz

 

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 8:27 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

explaining those pesky Title Page comments?

93!

 

title page says:

given from the mouth of Aiwass to the ear of The Beast on April 8, 9, & 10, 1904.

"(which came into my possession in July 1906) (i.e. I meant I would be its master from that date on. c. Oct '09) 

"This MS. is a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing. Though I am in no way responsible for any of these documents except the translations of the scription, I publish them among my works, because I believe that their intelligent study may be interesting and helpful. AC"

 

None of this makes AC's case weaker than yours. In my humble opinion.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1293
17/02/2020 8:57 pm  
Posted by: @the_real_simon_iff

I would really welcome to get back to facts again. Jones did not "claim superiority", he "wanted authority". What this means is open to debate, but I would say - not without evidence

However, this isn't "facts" either!  I agree though, at present either one of these interpretations - Jones wanted superiority versus verification from those evasive "Secret Chiefs" - is possible, and neither can or should be dismissed out of hand without further of that there, er, "evidence".  So, where is it then?...

N Joy


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 9:03 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff - So, Crowley says "Though I am in no way responsible for any of these documents" and "which came into my possession in July 1906" and you don't think this is questionable? 😆 

@jamiejbarter - Jim-Jam, do you have any pearls of wisdom on this subject to cast before us swines?

 

 

 


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 9:03 pm  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

neither can or should be dismissed out of hand without further of that there, er, "evidence".  So, where is it then?...

93!

As I understand the state of things the solution to the riddle will deliver it.

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 9:10 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

@the_real_simon_iff - So, Crowley says "Though I am in no way responsible for any of these documents" and "which came into my possession in July 1906" and you don't think this is questionable? 😆 

93!

So far not. I translate that as "I did not consciously write that" and (going with the title page) "I mastered it in July 1906". Somehow strange, but "questionable"?

Love=Law

Lutz


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1293
17/02/2020 9:29 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

Jim-Jam, do you have any pearls of wisdom on this subject to cast before us swines?

This little piggy went to the market,
This little piggy stayed at home,
This little piggy had roast beef,
This little piggy had none,
And this little piggy cried wee wee wee - all the way home!...

Yours in deep profundity,

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 4092
17/02/2020 9:50 pm  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

wee wee wee

Urinary incontinence is sometimes treatable with herbs and proper diet.

 


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 9:53 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff - "I translate that as "I did not consciously write that" - WHY do you feel a need to "translate" a statement already phrased in the clearest terms? "I am in no way responsible for any of these documents." Seriously... could he be any clearer?  Yet, on the converse, you happily accept the patently absurd Reception fable at face value and with no need for "translation." Where do you draw the line at what is OK, as is, and what needs translating to better fit your bias?

@jamiejbarter - Read anything puzzling, recently?

 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1293
17/02/2020 9:54 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

Urinary incontinence is sometimes treatable with herbs and proper diet.

Thank you, doctor!

Posted by: @therealrtc

Read anything puzzling, recently?

Purlenty!

N Joy


RTC liked
ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 10:44 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

"I am in no way responsible for any of these documents."  

93!

Well, it could be

1) it was just dictated

2) you tell me. Where is the problem? Are we talking about "automatic writing" or "Aiwass is the author" or are we talking about "The solution to the riddle will bring down Crowley's ship because he made it all up?"

3) I really have no bias, we are just talking "common sense" here. I don't accept the reception fable but so far you have brought nothing new to the table. You said the solution to the riddle will make this all clear, but if it depends on what you think might be the real thing instead of being the real thing, Crowley's story just don't seems any more improbable than yours, and that's not what I expected.

4) Please tell me again the difference between "Aiwass dictated it" and "Aiwass dictated it". I just don't get it.

5) And just because I am so slow: he had to change the story because of Jones desiring to be the big boss, but nobody had seen the manuscript so far? But the typescript was there and Jones knew of it? And if Jones knew of it, he had no problem with the reception changes made?

I just hope that the SOLUTION TO THE RIDDLE WILL MAKE IT ALL CLEAR. Because frankly, this would be like pre-bogus bullshit. Sorry. As I said, I would so much love to see a solution to all the inconsistencies. But not by reverse engineering alone. There is just too much straightforward engineering already there.

Love=Law

Lutz

 


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 10:59 pm  

@the_real_simon_iff – “you tell me. Where is the problem?” – The problem is... Crowley unequivocally stating that he is not in any way responsible for any of these documents vs Crowley unequivocally stating they were dictated to him by a praeter-human entity.  To me, personally, that’s quite a problematic contradiction. 😖  

 


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2399
17/02/2020 11:08 pm  

Since all this appears to be the same old crap you've been selling since Liber Bogus, with no new material, it seems unlocking the cipher has provided you with little new insight into the origins of AL, or are you saving all that stuff for your new publication?


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 266
17/02/2020 11:17 pm  

@ignant666 -  Yup.  You got it, in GPS, DMS, HD and surround sound... after all it's not easy.  Banging your head against some mad buggers' wall... 😩   TTFN... LOL.

 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1293
17/02/2020 11:23 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

In fact, the various Reception components do not rate a single word in HR and BP proofs – In both of which (plus the hand-written Title Page) Crowley unequivocally states that he received Liber L from a terrestrial source, NOT a praeter-human entity.

Could you just remind me what HR and BP stands for?  I'll probably kick myself but just can't puzzle this little puzzler out for the moment, and there's quite enough of them around already!

Also, leaving aside Jones for the moment, is it known whether Mathers (himself) was cognisant to any of these regime-changing doings around LL (Liber Legis) at the time, and what he thought of them?

Posted by: @kidneyhawk

We're all getting launched.

Looking for my boarding pass & papers,

N Joy


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1728
17/02/2020 11:28 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

@the_real_simon_iff – “you tell me. Where is the problem?” – The problem is... Crowley unequivocally stating that he is not in any way responsible for any of these documents vs Crowley unequivocally stating they were dictated to him by a praeter-human entity.  To me, personally, that’s quite a problematic contradiction. 😖  

 

93!

A: Crowley unequivocally stating that he is not in any way responsible for any of these documents

B: Crowley unequivocally stating they were dictated to him by a praeter-human entity

I don't see any contradiction. A secretary taking a dictation isn't responsible for the contents, no matter if the one dictating is human or praeter-human. This might sound wrong to you, "personally", but I would guess to nobody else.

Anyhow, this is about the riddle, isn't it? The solution will clear this up, won't it? Or do we first have to accept your theory about AC faking it all, and THEN the solution makes sense? This would be REALLY disappointing...

Waiting for my ebay win...

Love=Law

Lutz


ptoner liked
ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1293
17/02/2020 11:53 pm  
Posted by: @the_real_simon_iff

A secretary taking a dictation isn't responsible for the contents, no matter if the one dictating is human or praeter-human

But a secretary would be responsible for making sure the contents were taken down by them correctly though, wouldn't they?  

And what about Rose?  She went even further, and stepped in to amend & make corrections to the contents of the "draft"/MS [manuscript] itself.  (So far as is known, anyway.  NB: On a historical note, no tippex would have been available to be employed then.)

N Joy


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 346
18/02/2020 12:41 am  

@jamiejbarter As far as I know only Oliver St. John has written about Rose as a/the medium of the Book of the Law. Definitely an underappreciated aspect of the Thelemic exegesis. 

 

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1815
18/02/2020 1:10 am  

I am just about done with my first read of RTC's book. I would very much like to re-read and write a decent review. But I also feel that once the regulars here get a hold of it and continue discussion, that will be a review in and of itself. Still, I will likely share my personal perspective just the same.

 

I wish to add this precursor to whatever I may write: RTC weaves this very discussion and contributions from a variety of members into his narrative. His book has the feel of a “treasure hunt.” But here is a point I would like to make at this time: he feels much less abrasive and mocking in the pages of his book. He even confesses to being “goady” with some of his words and expresses his motivation. He is really wanting to stir the pot of the Lashtal Think-Tank and possibly evoke an independent confirmation of his discoveries.

 

I realize I am commenting here as one who has read the book, including the solution to the riddle. From my perspective, I would say Richard is giving a short window of opportunity to solve it for yourself. He is, most assuredly, going to release the book but once his solution becomes Exhibit A(L), the opportunity to independently research along the same lines will be gone.

 

Herupakraath claims to have “penned a separate document that details the most convincing solution to the II:76 puzzle conceived.” I am looking forward to reading his pdf.

 

I am also looking forward to Paul's assessment of RTC's book.

 

I am also very interested in those who have expressed their own doubts pertaining to the Reception story as presented by Crowley. I believe there have been a few such expressions while dismissing RTC's words as unconvincing. So, you are not swayed by Cole's suggestions and feel he is proving nothing-but still feel that things are not as Crowley conveyed. Why do you have that doubt? What is the basis for it?

 

I'll save more words for later. And were I to “leak” the content of Richard's book (which I would not, although I have already received a request), I feel I would be doing you all a disservice. Ignant SHOULD continue the countdown. There is an Indiana Jones and National Treasure feel about this puzzle.

 

Looking forward to where this conversation goes from here!


ReplyQuote
Page 12 / 21
Share: