Notifications
Clear all

How to join the AA?  

Page 1 / 3
  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
16/05/2011 6:36 am  

Can anyone give me information on how to become a member of Astrum Argentum? I know how it works I just need to find a link to a site that will take me there. The only one I could find was based out of London. Is that the main headquarters? I live in North America. New Mexico to be exact. Is there a branch I can email in this area or do I have to write to the one in London? I'm a bit confused. I am reading the books on the recommended reading list and I have started practicing the steps in The One Year Manual by Israel Regardie. Any help would be of great service to me. Thanks.


Quote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
16/05/2011 6:46 am  

Oh no, not ANOTHER A.'.A.'. thread....there are quite a few lineages out there and if you do a search of the forums I'm sure you can find all the information you will need as there are quite a few threads on the A.'.A.'....


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 915
16/05/2011 10:13 am  

I hear the first step is admitting you have a problem.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
16/05/2011 10:40 am  

Actually, the first step is surrendering yourself to a higher power 😉


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
16/05/2011 11:35 am  

There are several threads about this already online and various arguments about lineages which I will avoid in my response.

In essence and very briefly, I assume the manifestation of A:.A:. that you are referring to is www.outercol.org because they have an address listed in London (BM Ankh). As a member I can confirm that they are not "based" out of London at all, this is just simply a PO Box address.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
16/05/2011 2:50 pm  
"S0MAF0UNTAIN" wrote:
I live in North America. New Mexico to be exact.

Well, I happen to live in your neighborhood (Los Lunas). If you'd like some direct conversation about these matters, just send me a PM (Private Message).


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
16/05/2011 3:16 pm  
"AEternitas" wrote:
Actually, the first step is surrendering yourself to a higher power 😉

Isn't this more appropriate to the "Fascism..." thread?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
16/05/2011 3:38 pm  
"AEternitas" wrote:
Actually, the first step is surrendering yourself to a higher power 😉

If one really surrenders to a higher power (self not government), that's the end of the path and there will be no further steps. Period.

However, if a person merely pretends to surrender, or formally declares his (her) intention to surrender, or in a moment of stress says "Oh, I dont know! I give up!", or believes he or she is surrendering, then the "surrender" is token or symbolic, and the numbered steps will ensue.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
17/05/2011 1:18 am  
"Shiva" wrote:
"AEternitas" wrote:
Actually, the first step is surrendering yourself to a higher power 😉

If one really surrenders to a higher power (self not government), that's the end of the path and there will be no further steps. Period.

But, I wanted to continue the aimless winging!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 4:29 am  

I don't know how you join the Argenteum Astrum but the A.'.A.'. is a different matter altogether. I don't know this Agrenteum Astrum you speak of...

On a more serious note, if you meet someone who claim to be A.'.A.'. and is calling it the Argenteum Astrum they are either lying or misled.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 5:14 am  

He who is fit is joined to the chain, perhaps often where he though least likely, and at a point of which he knew nothing himself.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib33.htm


ReplyQuote
AdoniaZanoni
(@adoniazanoni)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 72
17/05/2011 5:54 am  

While this may be a repeated post, there are always those that are new and need help.

From various sources, they have said there are various A A lineages.
It seems since the death of Crowley and Germer, there has been various branches of the A A manifesting. I think both of them wanted one unified AA linked by leaders in the OTO.

The link shown above can be found by clicking here http://oto-usa.org/aa.html

I wanted to list the major AA contenders in the United States.

1)The AA that associates with the OTO.

2)Then there is the Motta’s AA run by David Bersson http://www.castletower.org/. His website states: “Probationer of the A.A. and beyond must wait until April 8th, 2015 e.v.” It is under a five year period of Silence, I thought this applied only to Equinox Volume II. I know when Motta died his unified organizations broke into fractions among his followers such as William Barden in Australia. I am not sure how Ray Eales fits into this

3) Also there is Phyllis Seckler’s and Jane Wolfe’s AA .
http://www.thelema.org/aa/index.html
James A. Eshelman is associated with this AA and he has published some interesting books. I remember this AA disagreed with robes published in Equinox Volume IV series.

4)There is also Gerald E. Cornelius who claims his website is about Grady Louis McMurtry's branch of the ARGENTIUM ASTRUM. His website states he is not accepting new members. http://www.cornelius93.com/ The only curious question I have is in The Thoth Tarot, Astrology, & Other Selected Writings by Phyllis Seckler states she expelled McMurty from the AA and he never rose beyond a Probationer. I am confused on how McMurty could have led an AA branch.

I have listed the one that stand out in my mind. As an outsider, I just wanted to categorize them and see if there is any error on my part

I was curious if anybody knows who James Lee Musick is? He is mentioned in Motta’s Equinox of falsely representing the AA.

Another mystery question I have on the AA is Kenneth Grant’s status as an AA member. I believed he joined in the 1940’s. I wonder if Germer expelled him from the AA as he did from the OTO. Grant tends to be secretive about his AA status. I wonder if he was keeping his oath of secrecy also I wonder if was running his own AA lineage along with the Typhonian OTO.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 915
17/05/2011 6:00 am  
"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
... I wonder if was running his own AA lineage along with the Typhonian OTO.

As I understand it Grant attempted to combine the AA and OTO curriculum in the early days of New Isis Lodge but soon came to the conclusion this was not a successful combination.

You can find more info on Grant's A.'.A.'. work, including his exam, in" Remembering Aleister Crowley. "


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
17/05/2011 7:48 am  

93,

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
While this may be a repeated post, there are always those that are new and need help.

From various sources, they have said there are various A A lineages.
It seems since the death of Crowley and Germer, there has been various branches of the A A manifesting.

From One Star in Sight:

"8. The Grade of Adeptus Exemptus confers authority to govern the two lower Orders of R. C. and G. D.

The Adept must prepare and publish a thesis setting forth His knowledge of the Universe, and his proposals for its welfare and progress. He will thus be known as the leader of a school of thought.

(Eliphas Levi's Clef des Grands Mysteres, the works of Swedenborg, von Eckarshausen, Robert Fludd, Paracelsus, Newton, Bolyai, Hinton, Berkeley, Loyola, etc., etc., are examples of such essays.)

He will have attained all but the supreme summits of meditation, and should be already prepared to perceive that the only possible course for him is to devote himself utterly to helping his fellow creatures.

To attain the Grade of Magister Templi, he must perform two tasks; the emancipation from thought by putting each idea against its opposite, and refusing to prefer either; and the consecration of himself as a pure vehicle for the influence of the order to which he aspires.

He must then decide upon the critical adventure of our Order; the absolute abandonment of himself and his attainments. He cannot remain indefinitely an Exempt Adept; he is pushed onward by the irresistible momentum that he has generated.

Should he fail, by will or weakness, to make his self-annihilation absolute, he is none the less thrust forth into the Abyss; but instead of being received and reconstructed in the Third Order, as a Babe in the womb of our Lady BABALON, under the Night of Pan, to grow up to be Himself wholly and truly as He was not previously, he remains in the Abyss, secreting his elements round his Ego as if isolated from the Universe, and becomes what is called a "Black Brother". Such a being is gradually disintegrated from lack of nourishment and the slow but certain action of the attraction of the rest of the Universe, despite efforts to insulate and protect himself, and to aggrandise himself by predatory practices. He may indeed prosper for a while, but in the end he must perish, especially when with a new Aeon a new word is proclaimed which he cannot and will not hear, so that he is handicapped by trying to use an obsolete method of Magick, like a man with a boomerang in a battle where every one else has a rifle."

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
I think both of them wanted one unified AA linked by leaders in the OTO.

Reserved for further comment.

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
I wanted to list the major AA contenders in the United States.

1)The AA that associates with the OTO.

As far as I know, there are at least two, maybe three A:.A:. "claimants" that associate with the O.T.O., at least in part. This does not imply that the heads have joined the O.T.O., only that they associate. And, this is the Caliphate O.T.O., which does not include other versions of the O.T.O.

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
2)Then there is the Motta’s AA run by David Bersson http://www.castletower.org/. His website states: “Probationer of the A.A. and beyond must wait until April 8th, 2015 e.v.” It is under a five year period of Silence, I thought this applied only to Equinox Volume II. I know when Motta died his unified organizations broke into fractions among his followers such as William Barden in Australia. I am not sure how Ray Eales fits into this

As far as I know, David Bersson does run a "claimant group" of the A:.A:., but "Motta's A:.A:." is not run by David Bersson. In fact, there are at least 4 lines from Motta, and Bersson is only one of them.

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
3) Also there is Phyllis Seckler’s and Jane Wolfe’s AA .
http://www.thelema.org/aa/index.html
James A. Eshelman is associated with this AA and he has published some interesting books. I remember this AA disagreed with robes published in Equinox Volume IV series.

As far as I know, these two lines seem to have gone their own ways, making them two lines, derived from one.

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
4)There is also Gerald E. Cornelius who claims his website is about Grady Louis McMurtry's branch of the ARGENTIUM ASTRUM. His website states he is not accepting new members. http://www.cornelius93.com/ The only curious question I have is in The Thoth Tarot, Astrology, & Other Selected Writings by Phyllis Seckler states she expelled McMurty from the AA and he never rose beyond a Probationer. I am confused on how McMurty could have led an AA branch.

Yes, Cornelius runs one "claimant group".

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
I have listed the one that stand out in my mind. As an outsider, I just wanted to categorize them and see if there is any error on my part

As a not-so-outsider, perhaps I have been able to help a bit. Perhaps also I am mistaken in some parts, and someone will further correct me. And of course, the ones I listed are just some of the more "locally known", and English-speaking, groups.

"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
Another mystery question I have on the AA is Kenneth Grant’s status as an AA member. I believed he joined in the 1940’s. I wonder if Germer expelled him from the AA as he did from the OTO. Grant tends to be secretive about his AA status. I wonder if he was keeping his oath of secrecy also I wonder if was running his own AA lineage along with the Typhonian OTO.

There is one on these boards who may choose to answer this question. There are also quite a few lineage threads on the A:.A:. A simple forum search may provide some insight (though some of it may be dated).

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
17/05/2011 2:37 pm  
"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
Phyllis Seckler states she expelled McMurty from the AA and he never rose beyond a Probationer. I am confused on how McMurty could have led an AA branch.

The reason you are confused is because you confuse the A.'.A.'. with some outer organization run by people who think they can severe someone else's spiritual thread and expel them. Whatta bunch of crap.

Would YOU be concerned if the Pope excommunicated you? Would you be concerned if the Ayatollah ordered your assassination? (Well, maybe you should be worried about that!). Would you be concerned if Phyllis expelled YOU, even if it was due to romantic falling-out and physical plane arguements and personality conflicts, and especially if you had already been linked into the chain from other sources?

This A.'.A.'. lineage stuff on the physical plane is NOT like having a corporation or an army. People seem to want an office that they can walk into and sign up - knowing that they better be good or they'll get thrown out. Ha!

ANYONE who has seen The Primary Clear Light, even for an instant, is forever linked into the chain. Noby else can expel that connection. When A.'.A.'. is used on the physical plane, sometimes people do and say the funniest things.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
17/05/2011 2:40 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
Noby else can expel that connection. When A.'.A.'. is used on the physical plane, sometimes people do and say the funniest things.

Note: "Noby" = nobody (maybe the Master of the Temple?)
Sometimes people spell the funniest things


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 3:10 pm  
"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:
I was curious if anybody knows who James Lee Musick is? He is mentioned in Motta’s Equinox of falsely representing the AA.

I'm pretty sure it's Music, without a 'k'. Would you care to tell me what Motta exactly says in his Equinox about him? I'm very curious.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 3:51 pm  

Grady wasn't admitted to the A.'.A.'. by Crowley, he was admitted by Phyllis so he wasn't previously linked to the A.'.A.'. as you imply Shiva. Now I don't think anyone can be expelled from the A.'.A.'., just cut contact with by their Superior which in most cases does result in a sort of expulsion because it usually occurs early on and can make quite the psychological impact but if you persevere in the work you can continue to forge the link.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 3:55 pm  

Did Crowley ever "expel" anyone from the AA? It seems that generally, people lost interest in it or went insane.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 4:01 pm  

Yes, C.F. Russel was expelled. He's the person referenced on One Star In Sight


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 4:04 pm  

That seems rather harsh on second reading. Sorry.

My angle was, is - of all the exit-nodes for people leaving Crowley's AA, within the context of a discussion of why they left - the mode of their exit, eg. expulsion, loss of interest, insanity (whether "actual" or declared such by Crowley), death, or rejection on their part, disillusion, disappointment, etc. - of all these, I wonder what the proportions are, statistically speaking, amongst those whom Crowley "served" as sole supreme authority during his life.

That's a pie-chart I'd like to see.

Richard...?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 4:17 pm  
"wolf354" wrote:
93,
more interesting can be the expelling of Austin Osman Spare ... but I didn't arrive to that chapter yet (if there is one ... probably there is)
Best regards,

I don't believe Spare was ever expelled. He simply lost interest from what I can gather.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
17/05/2011 4:23 pm  

93,

"Noctifer" wrote:
That seems rather harsh on second reading. Sorry.

My angle was, is - of all the exit-nodes for people leaving Crowley's AA, within the context of a discussion of why they left - the mode of their exit, eg. expulsion, loss of interest, insanity (whether "actual" or declared such by Crowley), death, or rejection on their part, disillusion, disappointment, etc. - of all these, I wonder what the proportions are, statistically speaking, amongst those whom Crowley "served" as sole supreme authority during his life.

That's a pie-chart I'd like to see.

Richard...?

It should be noted that the middle pillar Grades in the Outer College - Probationer, Neophyte, Zelator, and even Dominus Liminus - may withdraw from the A:.A:. by simply notifying his/her Superior in the Order. I'm sure there have been many reasons for people to do this, especially Probationers.

I'm not going to go digging into their reasons, but that won't stop the news reporters.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 4:24 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
Note: "Noby" = nobody (maybe the Master of the Temple?)
Sometimes people spell the funniest things

"Noby" is the Visible Head of the order, poking through the outer coverings of the Old Man of the Mountain, his basilisk eye unblinking through the ages.

😉


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 6:15 pm  

http://www.theaa.co m"> http://www.theaa.com


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 7:40 pm  

Are you heading for a breakdown Oscilate? 😉


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 7:59 pm  
"S0MAF0UNTAIN" wrote:
Can anyone give me information on how to become a member of Astrum Argentum? I know how it works I just need to find a link to a site that will take me there. The only one I could find was based out of London. Is that the main headquarters? I live in North America. New Mexico to be exact. Is there a branch I can email in this area or do I have to write to the one in London? I'm a bit confused. I am reading the books on the recommended reading list and I have started practicing the steps in The One Year Manual by Israel Regardie. Any help would be of great service to me. Thanks.

IN THE SCHEME OF THINGS

1) Observe:

2) Confer:

There was an old magazine from the early 1900s. It had an eye in a pyramid within a red star on its cover. I think it was called “The Blue Equinox.” Therein could be found a special supplement towards the back as an appendix. It was on page 96 of that wherein a final line composed of three sentences running over to the next page could be read.

3) Reflect:

“Every man must overcome his own obstacles, expose his own illusions.”

This was from a short pronouncement on a group called the A.∙.A.∙. and found within the afore mentioned magazine on page 55


ReplyQuote
AdoniaZanoni
(@adoniazanoni)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 72
17/05/2011 9:46 pm  

As for James Lee Musick in response to FraterLucius, I will quote what Motta states in Equinox V Volume 2, “Mr. James Lee Musick(if that is the person’s real name, which we earnestly doubt): this individual, who is personally unknown to Us, has been stated to claim that he is an Adept of Our Holy Order. In fact, he is not even a Probationer, having never been admitted under any of Us; he has no authority, therefore no qualification to speak in the Name of the AA. It should be needless to add that he cannot be an OTO member: thieves are not admitted to the OTO, and should a member of that Order show any inclinations towards theft, he or she is immediately expelled.”

He is also mentioned by name only in this article by GM Kelly. See below. There is not any real information about him. I found his last name unique.

http://www.gmkelly.com/motmurt.html

Cut from Contact is a phase Motta uses for vanquished members of the AA. I guess there is difference between cut from contact and expelled, but it is still leads to the same result exclusion. If Crowley or Germer wanted someone gone from the AA, I would think they would not want them to make contact and forge a new link. Look at Frater Archad falling out with Crowley; he was Master of the Temple.

If a person quits or leaves the AA what happens to the students under him. Shouldn’t the AA have a way of tracking the students down to find a replacement and not rely on the ex-member to do this?

In response to Shiva, The Thoth Tarot, Astrology, & Other Selected Writings by Phyllis Seckler states “Grady has no right to say he was in the AA, after I threw him out. He had no right to intiate anybody because he never done the Probationer work. Never done it. You can’t have a student unless you’re a neophyte in the AA”
“Ten years later I threw him out of the AA. He has no AA background. None. However he went around pretending that he did have and telling people he was such-and such a Grade.”

While you may disagree and this account may not be accurate, the fact it is published and available to the general public will create questions and confusion.

Another AA that I omitted because it was from Switzerland under Herman Metzger(?). I noticed in the Falcon edition of Gems from Equinox, Regardie states “At one time I thought the AA and OTO had ceased to exist with Crowley’s demise in 1947; however, I am now informed otherwise. There is a very active branch of both orders in Switzerland under aggressive and wise leadership.”

Also stated by Regardie, “Currently I am not a member of any Order. But if any reader wishes to be put in contact with some of the branches mentioned above, a note addressed to me in care of the publisher will be duly forwarded.”

This was written March 31, 1970 and is conveniently omitted in the new Red edition of Gems From Equinox by Weiser.

I can say I think Crowley/Germer were not expecting the AA break out into different lineages, like the Golden Dawn, the Christian Church or Motta was not even expecting his order to fraction after his death. With all these lineages, I do not know if it will ever possible to ever publish a complete historical account of the AA due to the secrecy and mystery. That is why on my first post I asked the question about Kenneth Grant. I wonder how far he progressed in the AA and his status as a member. Will this remain a secret beyond the grave?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
17/05/2011 9:51 pm  
"RemeaviThantos" wrote:
Are you heading for a breakdown Oscilate? 😉

😀


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
18/05/2011 2:25 am  
"AdoniaZanoni" wrote:

Always funny when I read GM Kelly bad-mouthing Motta for bad-mouthing everyone else. 😉


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 915
18/05/2011 3:03 am  

I just going to interrupt this for a moment to ask if

Thelemic provocateur GM Kelly

is actually

Voudon Gnostic priest and general martial arts badass

Count Dante

you decide!

carry on...
[/img]


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
18/05/2011 3:39 am  

I was under the impression somehow, from somewhere in Crowley's writing but cannot remember where, that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only ne member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well. I'm not certain where I read this or if it is accurate, though I can see this schema branching off into different "trees" or lineages.
Personally it seems to me that their is enough published material out there, all one has to do iis find a more experienced practitioner that they resonate with and got to them for advice and criticism, tips and details in instruction only gained by experience.
Outside of that I think that today most would-be's are perhaps chasing a certain glamour.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
18/05/2011 4:01 am  

93,

"AEternitas" wrote:
I was under the impression somehow, from somewhere in Crowley's writing but cannot remember where, that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only ne member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well. I'm not certain where I read this or if it is accurate, though I can see this schema branching off into different "trees" or lineages.
Personally it seems to me that their is enough published material out there, all one has to do iis find a more experienced practitioner that they resonate with and got to them for advice and criticism, tips and details in instruction only gained by experience.
Outside of that I think that today most would-be's are perhaps chasing a certain glamour.

He also indicated that in certain cases a "Grand Neophyte" could be appointed to handle many Probationers.

There's no limit as to how many Aspirants are allowed to any one line. The entire point, in my opinion, of the advancement decree is in keeping with the Bodhisattva idea, in that one learns very early not to hoard his own accomplishments for personal gain.

Also along the Grand Neophyte lines, any person soever may take the Oath of the Magister Templi. While this is not recommended, it is surely another indication that there's more to it than just, "Hurry up and make your Pantacle, Mr. Neophyte. I need to get to Practicus."

It is also my understanding that, as I've asserted quite frequently, the Exempt Adept has a very particular type of mission/quest, hopefully culminating with an entry in the City of the Pyramids. The notion of the 7=4 thesis resulting in the Adept becoming a leader of a school of thought easily accounts for many of the lines in existence to this day.

Likewise, there is no monopoly on enlightenment. I think that 666 was quite clear on this by recognizing such figures as Madame Blavatsky as a Magister Templi, though there is no evidence or proof that she was ever in "Crowley's A:.A:.". And then of course we can go even further to the various Prophets as listed in "Heart of the Master" and elsewhere.

The A:.A:. System was designed with the intent to strip both Eastern and Western systems of enlightenment to their bare-bones, and present them in a manner that anyone should be able to understand, thus allowing them the opportunity to assist both Eastern and Western minded people in attaining enlightenment. As well, the A:.A:. System also has a bare-bones, which is a further stripping away of even the very basic elements that 666 included into the system. The stripping away of such skin affords a much clearer, in my opinion, idea of the overall Aspirant's Task while granting the flexibility to utilize any system in order to attain enlightenment.

I would go far enough to say there are many Masters of the Temple even to this day in various Hindu, Taoist, Buddhist, and other traditions.

Just because some guy with a paper trail doesn't believe in your attainment doesn't make it true, though it may help you sell more books.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
18/05/2011 5:24 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
The notion of the 7=4 thesis resulting in the Adept becoming a leader of a school of thought easily accounts for many of the lines in existence to this day.

This statement brings up a point of present interest. You know how, from time to time, we get an announcement of some new book or some lecture provided by "the most knowlegeable expert on magick presently in incarnation," or words to that effect - normally blamed on the marketing director. I am referring not to any one person, but to the fact that there are quite a few hotshots stepping into the publick limelight right now.

Some of these luminaries have many supporters and they are also subject to snide comments on forum threads. I have come to the conclusion that if these publick figures have really written THEIR OWN "theory of the universe and their proposal for its welfare," then I am willing to see them as Exempt Adepti and wish them well in their endeavors.

Of course, if their lectures or books involve An Elucidation of the Qabalah or Explaining Aleister to the Trogolodytes or Experiences Within a Known Secret Society (etc), and are merely a re-assembly of someone else's ideas? Well, then a closer look might be warranted. Are they an author as in "authority" (7=4), or an author as in "book-writer" ($=$)?

In any case, I am not available for research into the self-proclaimed authenticity of these fellows' works, so I hereby grant Free Adept status to all of them.

The aspiring candidate will simply have to look (themselves) very closely at any line, lineage, guru or god he or she is considering worthy to follow into eternity. It's really just a matter of How much Light are they radiating?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
19/05/2011 7:59 pm  

Do not concern yourself with seeking any "official" society. Simply obtain the original A:.A:. instructions and follow them.

Start here:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib9.ht m"> http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib9.htm

or PDF format:
http://www.ordoaa.org/pdf/l009.pd f"> http://www.ordoaa.org/pdf/l009.pdf

Follow the practices laid out in these instructions, and study the list of written works suggested. This will consist of your work as Probationer, which will last for a period of at least 1 year.

If you insist of finding a Master, or joining into any society, you'd do well to heed this advice:

During the whole of this elementary study and practice he will do wisely to seek out and attach himself to, a master, one competent to correct him and advise him. Nor should he be discouraged by the difficulty of finding such a person.

Let him further remember that he must in no wise rely upon, or believe in, that master. He must rely entirely upon himself, and credit nothing whatever but that which lies within his own knowledge and experience.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
19/05/2011 8:51 pm  
"LucemPortabo" wrote:
Do not concern yourself with seeking any "official" society.

... he will do wisely to seek out and attach himself to, a master, one competent to correct him and advise him. Nor should he be discouraged by the difficulty of finding such a person. Let him further remember that he must in no wise rely upon, or believe in, that master. He must rely entirely upon himself, and credit nothing whatever but that which lies within his own knowledge and experience.

I believe that sums it up very nicely.

One does the work and the link will appear.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
27/05/2011 9:04 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
[Are they an author as in "authority" (7=4), or an author as in "book-writer" ($=$)?

I would have saved myself much time and money if I would have asked this question earlier in my journey. Great stuff Shiva, you always hit the nail on the head!


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4942
27/05/2011 11:42 pm  
"AEternitas" wrote:
I was under the impression somehow ... that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only one member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well.

From the viewpoint of the Neophyte, and assuming all the spheres are filled in with incumbents, this would be true. Ten rungs on the ladder, nine people ahead of you in the "chain of command." Theoretically, all ten would take a step up together, the top dog stepping off into the void of ain soph aur and the Neophyte drawing a Probationer up into his vacuumed position.

This scenario only gets tiresome when we realize that many probationers may rise to neophyte in a single year (say for example, 13 worldwide in this year of 2011 ev), while a magus only comes along once every two thousand years, more or less, according to need - so there is a time problem; but then any man may make personal progress to this magus level, so the cosmic elevator can keeping running.

Note that the "stepping up a rung" on the ladder is theoretically simultaneous for all concerned, but actually initiated from the bottom; nobody can advance until his immediate inferior is suited to take his place. So the whole lineage rests heavily on the bottom man on the totem pole, and the strength of the whole chain is subject to its weakest link.

Actually, I never read that "ten limit" thing anywhere. Thank goodness, in reality, any grade member can have one or many more under him. Does not the magus stand as a pillar in the midst of 7 Magisters? Theoretically and symbolically, of course.

OTO used to require a member to introduce two members under him before advancing to the next degree. It's the pyramid structure, you see. Spreading the Law of Thelema and all that. I suppose they still do it that way, but I really wouldn't know.

Most AA lineages claim they are closed right now because all their available "teachers" have their hands full with a maximum student load; we don't know what that means in numbers for any given lineage, the bottom line being "there is no room in the Inn." So then people come to lashtal, crying in the wilderness: "Where is the AA office to be found? I want to enlist!" It may be the most often-asked question.

In real, real-time, reality (as an historical example), we found O.M. 7=4, taking over for OIVVIO's (0=0) or Achad's (1=10) "teacher" who dropped out. So the actual battlefield conditions are that when any two people get thrown together in the game of life and initiation, one will be the teacher and the other the student. Vast gaps (missing rungs) are obviously possible.

Thank goodness it gets easier when we really work with the "for there are therein but three grades" concept.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 12:08 am  

93's

The question of legitimate A:.A:. Membership has bothered me too. I have contacted two e-mail addresses recently for the A:.A:. One for Paul Roevelli and another for Ray Eales , does anyone know anything about these two ?

The research I have done has resulted in a mixed bag of responses and opinions, I would be interested in hearing others views and experiences with these two lineage's

93/93


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
28/05/2011 1:07 am  

93,

"Brother666" wrote:
93's

The question of legitimate A:.A:. Membership has bothered me too. I have contacted two e-mail addresses recently for the A:.A:. One for Paul Roevelli and another for Ray Eales , does anyone know anything about these two ?

The research I have done has resulted in a mixed bag of responses and opinions, I would be interested in hearing others views and experiences with these two lineage's

93/93

I don't know about Paul Roevelli, but you get a taste of Ray Eales' "philosophy" at H.O.O.R.

This isn't a vouch for or against Mr. Eales... simply presenting the information.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 2:49 am  

I once worked with Paul Rovelli and he is a very controversial figure in the Thelemic and A.'.A.'. circles. As a teacher he pushed me farther than any previous mentor but his controversial reactions to the events of 9/11 made him a Thelemic pariah. Is he nuts? No, he just experienced first hand, a very traumatic event and his reaction was justifiable but the aftermath for the man led to him being one of the hot potatoes in our movement. Think David Bersson or Marcelo Motta level. Both, good teachers if you can work with them, both teachers that will push you, piss you off and make you question if you made the right decisions. That is also Rovelli.

Ray Eales is also controversial but not on the same scale. he holds a lot of opinions that a lot of O.T.O. members would find difficult but they are not opinions on his teachings, but his stance on the O.T.O. That is what makes him controversial but at the same time, unlike the other three, Mr. Eales doesn't attack any O.T.O. group publicly and is quite friendly with some of the Thelemic orders out there, including some of the Typhonian leaning movements and former students of Motta that had experienced a falling out back in the day. Eales is also an excellent instructor, demanding in the right ways and challenging in the right ways and expects the best from his pupils and will call you out for not giving your best. Id say he is one of the best out there if you are serious about magick. He does practice the alternating periods of Speech and Silence much like Motta but in different cycles, having altered them to fit the 1907 year of Reformulation for the Order.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 915
28/05/2011 5:02 am  
"uranus" wrote:
...his controversial reactions to the events of 9/11 made him a Thelemic pariah.

Uranus, can you expand on what this reaction was? Google hasn't given me much info and I am curious what reaction would cause such a backlash.

Thanks
S


ReplyQuote
choronzonclub
(@choronzonclub)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 9
28/05/2011 5:18 am  
"uranus" wrote:
Yes, C.F. Russel was expelled. He's the person referenced on One Star In Sight

Really? That would be odd since Crowley wrote One Star in Sight over twenty years before he even met Russell and since no "expulsion" letter is extant. If you have one please quote and cite it instead of propagating false BS from the Gunther lineage, that has zero support in actual fact and is used because Motta and his descendants have no lineal transmission of initiation whereas the initiations of C. F. Russell are well documented.


ReplyQuote
choronzonclub
(@choronzonclub)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 9
28/05/2011 5:30 am  
"uranus" wrote:
Yes, C.F. Russel was expelled. He's the person referenced on One Star In Sight

Really? How could that be since Crowley wrote One Star in Sight decades before he ever met Russell. I know this BS is promulgated by the Gunther lineage, since Motta was never actually initiated into the A.'.A.'. and didn't in fact even know the word of the Neophyte, but if you are going to spew this false BS you might want to actually cite the documents or at least quote the so-called expulsion instead of just spreading lies.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 6:27 am  

Crowley wrote One Star in Sight in the 1920s... how is that decades before he met Russell who was present at the Abbey? In fact One Star in Sight was written at the Abbey.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 6:28 am  

And you had to reply 2x to the same thing in different ways? Really?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 6:36 am  

Magick, being Book 4 parts 1-4 page 498:

"Given from the Collegium ad Spiritum Sanctum, Cefalu, Sicily, in the Seventeenth Year of the Aeon of Horus, the sun being in 23 degrees Virgo and the Moon in 14 degrees Pisces"

That is the date cited at the end of EVERY published extant version of One Star in Sight. Russell was a participant in the Cephaloedium Working and acted like an absolute idiot while residing at the Abbey. The story of Russell at the Abbey is related in the COnfessions. Not being a part of the Gunther lineage (whatever that is) I would have no idea what "myths" they are perpetuating about Russell considering my primary sources aren't from the "Gunther" lineage.

As far as Motta not being in the A.'.A.'., pass some of that stuff you were smoking. Motta was demonstrably brought into the A.'.A.'. by Germer who ALSO had no idea of the Neophyte word but was accepted by Crowley as an 8=3. Germer also didn't know the OTO words and signs but is acknowledged as an OTO member by ALL parties and was recognized as the senior leader of the A.'.A.'. following Crowley's death. I'm sorry, straw men do not stand up well.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2964
28/05/2011 7:51 am  

93,

"uranus" wrote:
Not being a part of the Gunther lineage (whatever that is) I would have no idea what "myths" they are perpetuating about Russell considering my primary sources aren't from the "Gunther" lineage.

Is that meant to sound how it sounded?

Impartial here, of course.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 915
28/05/2011 8:35 am  

Uranus, just a link would do as well...


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
28/05/2011 2:43 pm  
"Azidonis" wrote:
93,

"uranus" wrote:
Not being a part of the Gunther lineage (whatever that is) I would have no idea what "myths" they are perpetuating about Russell considering my primary sources aren't from the "Gunther" lineage.

Is that meant to sound how it sounded?

Impartial here, of course.

93 93/93

I do not accept the idea of lineages.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 3
Share: