Golden Dawn & 1...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Golden Dawn & 1999 Compared To The O. T. O. (also About Sumerian Magick)

Page 1 / 2

 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

93,

Bear with me here, I believe I have all or at least most of my info correct & understand this is a very confusing & deep subject.

I'm more familiar with the O.T.O. than I am with the Golden Dawn, as once I learned that Crowley started with the GD & eventually became the head of the O.T.O. & changing many of rituals to tailor to what he had learned & decoded himself I had just jumped to the O.T.O. and have begun to learn their ways of Magick.

But I have recently begun looking & reading about the GD & it's history, which is very very fascinating.

I originally thought the O.T.O would be more advanced since Crowley took the GD teachings to an entirely new level, but now after reading more about the GD & the Third Order, I'm not so sure about that assumption any longer.

Now my question is, even though Mathers himself initiated Crowley into the 2nd Order he was only in the 2nd Order a brief time before Crowley released their secrets. Was it really possible for him to know ALL of the 2nd Order's secrets that quickly that he could know all of their secrets? (Surely Crowley was a genius among genius' so he was able to learn & advance much faster than anyone else)

Clearly since Mathers was unable to finish the 3rd Order, there were still many many secrets & rituals left to be known. Including Sumerian Magick. So it seems Crowley opened his mouth before he was able to learn the highest levels of Magick?

Why did he double cross Mathers/GD when Mathers was the one who started the GD & allowed Crowley to initiate into the 2nd Order? I can understand being pissed at the rest of the GD for them not initiating you because of your sexuality (which must have been REALLY taboo back then) but why double cross your mentor & his life's work & creation?

Now Mathers original plan was to have 3 levels of degrees for the GD, but Crowley destroyed the 3rd Order by releasing the 2nd Order's secrets.

According to Griffin it seems as of 1999 the GD & A+O has decided to move all previously published secrets by Crowley & Regardie of the 2nd order, to the Outer Order in order to re-create the 2nd Order & finally create the 3rd Order. Griffin goes on to say that since 1999 they have reformulated the GD & have created new secret magickal rituals for the 2nd order AFTER they had received from Frater Lux et Tenebris with the teachings and esoteric corpus of the solar, direct mysteries, together with cipher manuscripts for the initiation rituals to comprise the Third Order of the Rosicrucian Order of A+O. Griffin says that this "Frater Lux et Tenebris," a representative of an extremely secretive and ancient European western mystery school. This most occult of all orders originated in Sumer, continued in Chaldea and in Egypt, and was brought to Europe by the Greek and Roman empires.

This is really where it gets interesting to me as it's the first mention of Sumerian Magick I've seen in relation to these groups.

If Regardie was never initiated into the 2nd Order, how was he able to initiate Cris Monnastre who was then able to initiate Griffin who has some how become an A+O with a direct lineage to the true, 1888 HOGD?

How could Griffin have that lineage if it was originally through Regardie who was never part of the 2nd Order himself & how did he have the authority to initiate into the 2nd Order? If he was never part of the 2nd Order, how did he know their secrets? Through Crowley's teaching & also documents he acquired later in his life from the Stella Matutina? But there still is the 3rd level of unknown magick & rituals that the secrets of were yet to be known.

Now I ask these questions because I am deeply interested in the Sumerian Magick & wondering how much, if any of these teaching Crowley was aware of & incorporated into his redesign of the O.T.O.?

Also does anyone have more info, details of materials used or photos of a GD Rosicrucian Vault?

93 93/93


Quote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

These articles might interest you:

http://gyllenegryningen.blogspot.fi/2012/10/red-herrings-regarding-higher-teachings.html
http://gyllenegryningen.blogspot.fi/2008/09/on-nature-of-secret-chiefs-and-third.html

I personally don't believe there is any other "secret" and unpublished Golden Dawn material beyond those found in books by Crowley, Regardie, R.G. Torren, Francis X. King, etc.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Now my question is, even though Mathers himself initiated Crowley into the 2nd Order he was only in the 2nd Order a brief time before Crowley released their secrets. Was it really possible for him to know ALL of the 2nd Order's secrets that quickly that he could know all of their secrets?

ALL what secrets? They were written documents that were published. There were no further "secrets."

"Clearly since Mathers was unable to finish the 3rd Order, there were still many many secrets & rituals left to be known."

Why clearly? You seem to be under the impression that there are "secrets" and "special rituals." This has been recently discussed. I think it was the quote to Curwin [sic?] about  no giving of secrets that sums it up.

Why did he double cross Mathers/GD when Mathers was the one who started the GD & allowed Crowley to initiate into the 2nd Order?

It turned out that Mathers was an alcoholic who made bad decisions - but that's only superficial - maybe someone else has a better grasp of the details. The true deal is that AC was a first-ray operator. They initiate eras. The first result of first-ray energy is destruction. The "old ways" had to be destroyed before the new stuff could come in. Publishing "secret" docs destroys their "secrecy" and thus their "potency."

Now Mathers original plan was to have 3 levels of degrees for the GD, but Crowley destroyed the 3rd Order by releasing the 2nd Order's secrets.

Crowley destroyed it all.

This most occult of all orders originated in Sumer, continued in Chaldea and in Egypt, and was brought to Europe by the Greek and Roman empires.

"My religion is older and better hidden than yours."

If Regardie was never initiated into the 2nd Order, how was he able to initiate Cris Monnastre who was then able to initiate Griffin who has some how become an A+O with a direct lineage to the true, 1888 HOGD?

Oh for Kee-Rist's sake and the Seven Dwarfs!  Don't you know that all these authorities and lineages are are all made up? All G.'.D.'. lineages are splinters off of the Mathers empire. All A.'.A.'. lineages are self-appointed Magisteri (NOPE - No Charters Here!). There is only one legal OTO lineage on the material plane, all others are clandestine, including my very own Solar Lodge, which pre-existed the caliphate so it's not even under consideration. This contemporary, incorporated gathering doesn't TEACH magick (as compared to G.'.D.'. or A.'.A.'.). OTO is social-fraternal based on interest in AC & Magick - Magickal TASKS are not required for advancement.

How could Griffin have that lineage if it was originally through Regardie who was never part of the 2nd Order himself & how did he have the authority to initiate into the 2nd Order?

By asking these questions, you are giving your own answers. It's all a case of Sam-the-Sham and the Pharoahs who come to us from the land of make-believe.

Now I ask these questions because I am deeply interested in the Sumerian Magick & wondering how much, if any of these teaching Crowley was aware of & incorporated into his redesign of the O.T.O.?

You better go do your own original Sumerian research.

Also does anyone have more info, details of materials used or photos of a GD Rosicrucian Vault?

Try Google Images and Videos. Unless you think somebody is holding-out with a "secret" diagram that hasn't been webized yet.

[/align:7f233f72]

"This trail takes us to the actual ritual of the Vault of the Adepts ..."[/align:7f233f72]


ReplyQuote
Philip Harris-Smith
(@philip-harris-smith)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 62
 

Because Crowley and later Regardie published GD secrets means the bulk of the material has seen the light of day.  However because Crowley's advancement was opposed and Regardie just got to 5-6 it may be that some material has not been published.  The question I would suggest is whether or not the unavailable material is important in some way or of practical value and contains usefull praxis.

Certainly the material that both Crowley and Regardie had, they and subsequent authors have fully fleshed out and explained in detail.

There is stuff that seems obscure to me, but I'm not sure it is worth the effort to puzzle over when so many magickal technique are open and clearly explained.  Personally as an eclectic practitioner I like to draw material from many sources and as I say puzzling over some obscure GD stuff is perhaps not parsimonious


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
The plants talk to me....
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2219
 

For additional information on the Vault.
NOTE: The structure described in the Fama was most probably not a real building but a symbolic internal construction intended for visualisation, meditation and final self-initiation.

http://www.levity.com/alchemy/g_work.html


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Was it really possible for him to know ALL of the 2nd Order's secrets that quickly that he could know all of their secrets?

What "secrets?" Passwords and signs? Magic words and gooble-de-gook? The so-called "second order" (the inner order) was a venue from which one set forth to contact one's HGA - which AC did.

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Clearly since Mathers was unable to finish the 3rd Order, there were still many many secrets & rituals left to be known.

"Unable to finish the 3rd Order?"  How about: "Unable to start the 3rd Order? The so-called third order (the "supernal" order") was, at the time of Mathers' GD, an unknown thing/place that was populated by "secret chiefs," who Mathers claimed to be in contact with. It was AC who went on to define that "Great Order in the Sky," and to proclaim himself a member thereof.

What "... many many secrets & rituals left to be known."  ;D

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Including Sumerian Magick.

What "Sumerian Magick?" Really, are you re-opening that old controversial topic?

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
So it seems Crowley opened his mouth before he was able to learn the highest levels of Magick?

Is this a question - or a statement? We see the question-mark. So the answer is No. Theoretically, there are no "higher/highest" levels of Magick than contacting one's HGA.

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Why did he double cross Mathers/GD when Mathers was the one who started the GD & allowed Crowley to initiate into the 2nd Order? I can understand being pissed at the rest of the GD for them not initiating you because of your sexuality (which must have been REALLY taboo back then) but why double cross your mentor & his life's work & creation?

It seems like Mathers had become a drunk and was ineffectual in ruling his GD/RC. Also, AC had his own agenda about "rising to the top of the hill," and this included usurping anyone who was "over" him. See especially: Mathers & Reuss (GD/RC & OTO).

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Now Mathers original plan was to have 3 levels of degrees for the GD, but Crowley destroyed the 3rd Order by releasing the 2nd Order's secrets.

???   How could he destroy something (a 3rd Order) that did not exist? He (AC) gave definition to to the so-called 3rd Order.

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
According to Griffin it seems as of 1999 the GD & A+O has decided to move all previously published secrets by Crowley & Regardie of the 2nd order, to the Outer Order in order to re-create the 2nd Order & finally create the 3rd Order.

Who is Griffin, and why is he playing with old wine in new bottles?

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
Griffin goes on to say that since 1999 they have reformulated the GD & have created new secret magickal rituals for the 2nd order AFTER they had received from Frater Lux et Tenebris with the teachings and esoteric corpus of the solar, direct mysteries, together with cipher manuscripts for the initiation rituals to comprise the Third Order of the Rosicrucian Order of A+O. Griffin says that this "Frater Lux et Tenebris," a representative of an extremely secretive and ancient European western mystery school. This most occult of all orders originated in Sumer, continued in Chaldea and in Egypt, and was brought to Europe by the Greek and Roman empires.

Oh My God! This is a fantastic new idea. Where can we join?  😉

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
If Regardie was never initiated into the 2nd Order, how was he able to initiate Cris Monnastre who was then able to initiate Griffin who has some how become an A+O with a direct lineage to the true, 1888 HOGD?

How could Griffin have that lineage if it was originally through Regardie who was never part of the 2nd Order himself & how did he have the authority to initiate into the 2nd Order? If he was never part of the 2nd Order, how did he know their secrets? Through Crowley's teaching & also documents he acquired later in his life from the Stella Matutina?

It's all part of the process known as The Spiritual Con, where anybody says anything they want ... and then people line up to pay their dues and to give their spiritual recognition.

"JohnnyScience" wrote:
But there still is the 3rd level of unknown magick & rituals that the secrets of were yet to be known.

No there isn't. You are dreaming - or otherwise exercising wishful thinking.


C'mon Johnny, let's live up to your last name![/align:lkr92rqx]


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 

Technical glitch. I have been infected by the Obamacare "train wreck."
I firmly believe lashtal.com has been infiltrated by Sumerian goblins!
Please ignore this superficial post.


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 547
 

JohnyScience,

I would not let others put you off. If you think there is something to be gained by this line of enquiry then take up the research yourself and if you find anything of interest please come back and share it with us.

93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Yea but Shiva's cynicism saves Time


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 

Like some sort of a stitch, you mean?! 🙂

Sumer-where I’ll find you…”
Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 547
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
Like some sort of a stitch, you mean?! 🙂

From the saying "A stitch in time saves nine", which according to phrases.org.uk "was clearly meant as an incentive to the lazy".

We'll have none of that!

😮
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 

Let's not forget that JohnnyScience made the OP on Dec 02, 2012 - and I responded to it at that time. Then this thread popped up again, but only the OP appeared (gremlin-demons from Sumeria, no doubt), and I forgot about responding the first time - so I posted again, saying essentially the same thing. Then, when I actually hit "POST," the whole site crashed (for me), but at least the (2nd) post got through.

I'm not sure what "cynicism" is - doesn't it have something to do with those old-time rulers in Russia?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 547
 
"Shiva" wrote:
I'm not sure what "cynicism" is - doesn't it have something to do with those old-time rulers in Russia?

"Cynicism is an attitude or state of mind characterized by a general distrust of others' apparent motives believing that they are selfish in nature and/or displaying that themselves. Or a general lack of faith or hope in the human race or in individuals with desires, hopes, opinions, or personal tastes that a cynic perceives as unrealistic or inappropriate, therefore deserving of ridicule or admonishment. It is a form of jaded negativity, and other times, realistic criticism or skepticism. The term originally derives from the ancient Greek philosophers called the Cynics who rejected all conventions, whether of religion, manners, housing, dress, or decency, instead advocating the pursuit of virtue in accordance with a simple and idealistic way of life.

By the 19th century, emphasis on the negative aspects of Cynic philosophy led to the modern understanding of cynicism to mean a disposition of disbelief in the sincerity or goodness of human motives and actions. Modern cynicism, as a product of mass society, is a distrust toward professed ethical and social values, especially when there are high expectations concerning society, institutions, and authorities that are unfulfilled. It can manifest itself as a result of frustration, disillusionment, and distrust perceived as owing to organizations, authorities, and other aspects of society."

Cynicism (contemporary)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

😀
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"Hamal" wrote:
"Cynicism is an attitude or state of mind characterized by a general distrust of others' apparent motives believing that they are selfish in nature and/or displaying that themselves. Or a general lack of faith or hope in the human race or in individuals with desires, hopes, opinions, or personal tastes that a cynic perceives as unrealistic or inappropriate, therefore deserving of ridicule or admonishment.

Well, yes, in most cases, all these definitions apply - to almost everybody - but not all. Some still "advocate the pursuit of virtue in accordance with a simple and idealistic way of life."

But what about those Russian guys - called Czars? Or was it Cyrllic?


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 547
 
"Shiva" wrote:
But what about those Russian guys - called Czars? Or was it Cyrllic?

You'll be wanting a cynical keyboard next or is that cyrillic!  😀

Me I'm in favour of having a go, work as its own virtue, those who can do should do, tally ho and get on, and so forth!

🙂
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I want to point out something that is erroneous in this post.

Regardie causes, unintentionally, a great deal of confusion on the Golden Dawn, especially in regard to the Holy Guardian Angel and the Abramelin working. Same goes for Crowley's influence as well. WHat is accepted by many people as a given on the interpretation of certain words, such as Adonai, in the Golden Dawn as associated with the Higher Self and the Higher Self's association with the HGA, are part of Crowley's idiosyncracies and were not canon to the Golden Dawn. Mathers translated the Abramelin text but it was never considered a part of the GD or R+C curriculum or grade structure. The attitude to the Abramelin manuscript was in fact that it was extremely dangerous. Many of the Adepti of the GD and later SM and AO chapters had barely heard of the Abramelin and if they had it was in reference to the works of Crowley and a book translated by Mathers. Even Crowley held the contents of the book to be extremely dangerous to those who had not worked the operation, chiding Grady McMUrtry for handling his bound edition of hand drawn Abramelin squares using the Enochian alphabet while Crowley was residing in London during WWII. Looking at Crowley's ideas on Adonai as the HGA/Higher Self complex of the psychological make-up of the aspirant and his importance to the magical movement following his death and the revival of interest in his works in the 60s to today much is missed, especially his later assertions that the HGA is in fact an independent entity that operates freely of the aspirant in works like Magick Without Tears. While the Golden Dawn does use the word Adonai as a substitute for the Higher Self, very loosely I might add, it is nowhere implicated or equated with the HGA outside of the works of Crowley and by extension, Israel Regardie through the influence of Aleister Crowley on his young mind.

How Regardie contributed to this confusion is that he was the primary author of many works, definitive works, on the Golden Dawn system. It is forgotten that many of his most important works, like Tree of Life and Garden of Pomegranates, were written before he was initiated into the Stella Matutina, and were highly influenced by his years with Crowley. Perusing Garden of Pomegranates, one clearly sees that influence when Regardie writes about the building of the magical implements in associated grades. Because of his later work as primarily a Golden Dawn author, it is taken as gospel by many, especially the old guard of modern occultism, that the primary work of the 5=6 of the Golden Dawn system, that they are to accomplish the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. The cross pollination of his early work with his post Golden Dawn work has been detrimental to true scholarship on what the Golden Dawn really taught and the implications of the system vis a vis the Fraternitas A.'.A.'. In point of fact, with a cursory examination of the materials of both orders, one can clearly see that the Zelator of the A.'.A.'. is roughly the equivalent of the 5=6 of the old Golden Dawn. Reading Initiation in the Aeon of the Child by Daniel Gunther one sees a connection here when he writes about Mount Abiegnus being lower on the Tree of Life than what was traditionally held to be fact, Mount Abiegnus being in Tiphareth. Here he isn't absolutely clear because he is not writing a work about the Golden Dawn, but is writing a work on the system of the A.'.A.'. and the paths on the Tree of Life and how the new doctrine reworks several of the symbol sets of the old Aeon. Also looking at the GD system in relation to the A.'.A.'. system, a lot of the work undertaken in the outer order of the A.'.A.'. overlaps with the sub grades of the Golden Dawn's 5=6 work with the addition of the intense raja yoga practices designed to increase concentration and focus to assist in the Abramelin working. It is in fact at Zelator, the last time that the GD and A.'.A.'. systems overlap as far as how the systems work. The fundamental difference being a matter of perspective where the GD focuses on LVX as a thing outside of the aspirant and given to him/her, the A.'.A.'. being that the source of power comes from within.

Considering all of this, it is rather... absurd(?) to think that the GD system had anything to do with the HGA and Abramelin operation except by one's own personal prejudice from having a primary source of information on the Golden Dawn being Israel Regardie and Aleister Crowley. Crowley was not a GD author, he was a Thelemic author who learned magick through the Golden Dawn and greatly changed the approach to magick and while there is a certain sympathy between the A.'.A.'. and Golden Dawn work, they are not mutually exclusive and are very different approaches to magick. One is inward (the A.'.A.'.) and one is outer (Golden Dawn). Meaning... the A.'.A.'. and it's primary formula of NOX are about the inward journey and recognizing the Star within: Khabs is in the Khu, not the khu in the khabs. The Golden Dawn's LVX is the opposite, the power comes from divine grace.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Ive never done a comprehensive study of the GD material, but if I did, it would have been Regardie's books im sure, so im glad you posted that, Uranus. His Tree of Life and Foundations of Practical Magick were the first two books I read concerning modern western systems. He, Crowley, and others would have us thinking that Eliphas Levi had undergone an Abramalin Operation, as well as everyone else who attained higher grades in the Western Magick Tradition. This may be heresy on here but im beginning to think the so-called "Western Magick Tradition" is a nothing but a phantom. Are people asserting that figures as far apart in history as Iamblichus, HC Agrippa, John Dee and Eliphas Levi are part of an initiatory chain of standardized practices and grades?


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2967
 
"uranus" wrote:
In point of fact, with a cursory examination of the materials of both orders, one can clearly see that the Zelator of the A.'.A.'. is roughly the equivalent of the 5=6 of the old Golden Dawn.

Eshelman said this too, IIRC.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Hamal" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
Like some sort of a stitch, you mean?! 🙂

From the saying "A stitch in time saves nine", which according to phrases.org.uk "was clearly meant as an incentive to the lazy". ...

Without explaining too much - which always kills any intended jokey banter stone dead - it was more to do with the act of stitching saving time than the number of times itself.  (Eight could do.  Or ten.  Or five!)  And in addition to the repair-job of the proverbial original, stitching could (nb not does) also mean a ‘stitch up’, a cramp in the guts, a rectificatory surgical thread after a wounding - ooh lots of other things!  Apologies if all this seems self-explanatory!  However,

"Shiva" wrote:
... I'm not sure what "cynicism" is - doesn't it have something to do with those old-time rulers in Russia?

Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings a realist would state: “pass the milk”; an optimist might exclaim: “pass the cream”; a pessimist would reply: “I think it’s all gone”, whilst the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

Regarding Uranus’s interesting addition

"uranus" wrote:
... The fundamental difference being a matter of perspective where the GD focuses on LVX as a thing outside of the aspirant and given to him/her, the A.'.A.'. being that the source of power comes from within.

... very different approaches to magick[:] One is inward (the A.'.A.'.) and one is outer (Golden Dawn). Meaning... the A.'.A.'. and it's primary formula of NOX are about the inward journey and recognizing the Star within: Khabs is in the Khu, not the khu in the khabs. The Golden Dawn's LVX is the opposite, the power comes from divine grace.

This is a fundamentally huge difference – in effect, the basic difference between the old and the new aeon approach – but it should be made clear that the G.’.D.’. referred to here is [Mathers’] H.O.G.D. and not Crowley’s third order of the A.’.A.’..  Also,

"uranus" wrote:
... Reading Initiation in the Aeon of the Child by Daniel Gunther one sees a connection here when he writes about ...

I’m surprised, in view of its subject matter and authorship, that no one has begun a thread on the Reading Circle on Gunther’s book.

"sumerian131" wrote:
... This may be heresy on here but im beginning to think the so-called "Western Magick Tradition" is a nothing but a phantom. ...

There is something in this.  But then again, there is something ‘phantomic’ in everything, if one starts looking hard enough.

JohnnyScience appears to have vanished from the conversation which he initiated. It does seems to be the case on the Lash that OPs often do not continue through with what they started.  I was going to ask him, in the context of the title of the thread, where does 1999 come in & what did it mean (apart from an excuse to partay)?  “A + O” might have done with a little clarification for the benefit of nwer readers who may not be familiar, also...

N Joy


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 5356
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings a realist would state: “pass the milk”; an optimist might exclaim: “pass the cream”; a pessimist would reply: “I think it’s all gone”, whilst the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

Um, ok...

You really did like Mr Suster, didn't you? 😉

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings ... the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

OK. By that definition, I (me, personally) am not a cynic ... so we can forget that crap.

Some other folks may qualify.

Getting back to the topic, AC obviously "lifted" the term/emblem G.'.D.'. from Mathers and simply made it into an outer order (which it already was under Mathers). All road lead to the HGA, or the "higher" or "inner" self, by whatever name is applied. Supposedly "Augoeides" (Pythagorus), "Superior Man" (I Ching / Yi King), "Atman" (Hindooese), etc, all imply a better way of thinking/living. The so-called "path" is a multifaceted approach (variable according to its founder and/or followers) that suggests one can do certain things (practices or rituals) and then a connection (knowledge, conversation, unified unity) will be established.

The real question is, "Is there really a so-called "higher" self of any kind? Most advocates and adherents claim that there is.

If the answer is "no," then any study of, or reference to, a G.'.D.'., a R.'.C.'., an A.'.A.'., etc, is rather superfluous.

As previously noted by Jamie, it is indeed true that many OPs make an OP and then do a disappearing act. It's just part of the game. Many people get their name in the newspaper just once, and then they're never heard of again.


[/align:c40snkdp]


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Regarding Uranus’s interesting addition

"uranus" wrote:
... The fundamental difference being a matter of perspective where the GD focuses on LVX as a thing outside of the aspirant and given to him/her, the A.'.A.'. being that the source of power comes from within.

... very different approaches to magick[:] One is inward (the A.'.A.'.) and one is outer (Golden Dawn). Meaning... the A.'.A.'. and it's primary formula of NOX are about the inward journey and recognizing the Star within: Khabs is in the Khu, not the khu in the khabs. The Golden Dawn's LVX is the opposite, the power comes from divine grace.

This is a fundamentally huge difference – in effect, the basic difference between the old and the new aeon approach – but it should be made clear that the G.’.D.’. referred to here is [Mathers’] H.O.G.D. and not Crowley’s third order of the A.’.A.’..  Also,

It's interesting to see how whole thought-based systems are built according to semantics on how the mind 'thinks' Self-realization / Attainment works.. coming from within/without, old aeon, new aeon etc. Precisely the stuff that kept theologians busy for a few thousand years.

Besides the question of whether a "Higher Self" actually exists (as pointed out by Shiva), the REAL question is whether an individual of any type exists.. (yes, blasphemy for Western Occultism). Certainly not according to most Eastern schools (Atman is not an individuated 'self' but the impersonal Absolute, and Anatta pretty much sums up all five personal aggregates as as 'not-self'), hence who is this mysterious individual exactly pulling "LVX" from within or without according to which aeonic system they're apparently following? Sometimes the structures of these heavily mapped out 'paths of attainment' (that look good on paper and with framed certificates) tend to implode under their own weight when examined. As Korzybski said, 'the map is not the territory'.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"lashtal" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings a realist would state: “pass the milk”; an optimist might exclaim: “pass the cream”; a pessimist would reply: “I think it’s all gone”, whilst the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

Um, ok...

You really did like Mr Suster, didn't you? 😉

Just to briefly mention, as you enquire, Paul, yes - Gerald was a close friend and brother.

I might also add that he sometimes tended to stir up such a singular amount of amount of opposition from some quarters that I feel almost obliged in some ways to try to rectify the balance.  Plus, at the age of 49, it seems that he rather went before his time.  Plus, he said some quite witty things from time to time (imho)!

"Shiva" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings ... the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

OK. By that definition, I (me, personally) am not a cynic ... so we can forget that crap.

Some other folks may qualify....

By the by, and in parentheses, Shiva, ‘twas not I who mentioned the word ‘cynic’ / 'cycnicism' first!

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"zazenji" wrote:
Besides the question of whether a "Higher Self" actually exists (as pointed out by Shiva), the REAL question is whether an individual of any type exists.. (yes, blasphemy for Western Occultism).

You're talking about two very different things (or, rather, you're switching scope in the middle of your sentence).

In terms of practical work, a "Higher Self" doesn't exist (and Crowley was emphatic about the HGA not being a "higher" self but the "true" self), but a True or Authentic Self certainly does exist, and you can demonstrate to yourself that it exists right now. Just be quiet and shut off your thoughts for a bit, and you'll find that you still have preferences, even when you're not thinking about what "should" be done. Those preferences -- the authentic preferences of your being -- comprise what we call the True Self.

Those preferences exist and can really be detected, whether or not there "really" is some metaphysical "self" to which we can attribute them (which is a different question, addressing a different scope of inquiry).


ReplyQuote
Hamal
(@hamal)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 547
 
"Los" wrote:
In terms of practical work, a "Higher Self" doesn't exist (and Crowley was emphatic about the HGA not being a "higher" self but the "true" self), but a True or Authentic Self certainly does exist, and you can demonstrate to yourself that it exists right now. Just be quiet and shut off your thoughts for a bit, and you'll find that you still have preferences, even when you're not thinking about what "should" be done. Those preferences -- the authentic preferences of your being -- comprise what we call the True Self.

I like burying bones.... Aaaaaa! I'm a dog!

😮
93
Hamal


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"zazenji" wrote:
Besides the question of whether a "Higher Self" actually exists (as pointed out by Shiva) ...

Personally (I, Shiva), think that there is indeed a Higher Self. It exists as an archetype, just like all the other concepts we study and argue about. The archetypes are hardwired into our brains/minds and thus they have a relative reality, especially for the separated persona of the Outer Order and even for the separated Ego/Soul of the Inner Order. It's not until the Supernal Order that ...

"zazenji" wrote:
... the REAL question is whether an individual of any type exists.

The separated persona of the Outer Order (that's all of us as we run around buying, eating, paying taxes, fighting with our neighbors, etc, will indeed proclaim that his/her/our individuality really exists. Anyone who, claiming mystical insight, disagrees is eligible to drop by my house amd I'll drop a brick on his/her foot or hit his/her hand with a hammer - and then they can reaffirm that they don't exist  😮

Even the separated Ego/Soul of the Inner Order, the so-called Adeptus, still defines his/her "higher self" as being unique. "Yea! deem not of change: ye shall be as ye are, & not other." - AL II-58. Liber AL says "make no difference," then goes on to expound several differences between Thelemites and the common folk, and between AC and his assorted critics/enemies.

It's not until the Supernal Order that ... one might chance upon a mystical state wherein the "Self" disappears. So, mystically speaking, there ultimately might be a state of non-individuality, but anyone who runs around proclaiming this in the external world is asking for commitment.

In this case, "commitment" means being commited to an asylum.

Now then, our asylum(s) under discussionare are the GD - both Hermetic Order of the and A.'.A.'. Outer - (I am not comparing here to OTO). It seems like anyone who undertakes the prescribed "path" goes through a period of Self-intensification. Only after many years (decades?) does the candidate finally get around to Self-effacement or a tendency to recognize Self-annihilation.

These (^) comments have been inscribed in order to proclaim the concept of relativity. It depends on "where you are looking from" as to whether you have a sense of Self.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 4273
 
"Los" wrote:
"zazenji" wrote:
Besides the question of whether a "Higher Self" actually exists (as pointed out by Shiva), the REAL question is whether an individual of any type exists.. (yes, blasphemy for Western Occultism).

You're talking about two very different things (or, rather, you're switching scope in the middle of your sentence).

In terms of practical work, a "Higher Self" doesn't exist (and Crowley was emphatic about the HGA not being a "higher" self but the "true" self), but a True or Authentic Self certainly does exist, and you can demonstrate to yourself that it exists right now. Just be quiet and shut off your thoughts for a bit, and you'll find that you still have preferences, even when you're not thinking about what "should" be done. Those preferences -- the authentic preferences of your being -- comprise what we call the True Self.

Those preferences exist and can really be detected, whether or not there "really" is some metaphysical "self" to which we can attribute them (which is a different question, addressing a different scope of inquiry).

In what way, Los, do you think you have addressed the post to which you have responded?


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
In what way, Los, do you think you have addressed the post to which you have responded?

In the way of suggesting that one of the post's assumptions may be flawed or incorrect. Specifically, the post to which I was responding seems to be assuming that there not being an individual would in some sense contradict the idea of a "True Self" or "inner light" (LVX). However, as I pointed out, the poster to whom I was responding was talking about two different things as if they were the same.

All of this is explained in my post above.


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2967
 

Tell the man with a gun to your head that neither he, nor the gun exists, and he will laugh at you while blowing your brains out.

Telling yourself that "you" exist as an entity separate from the totality of the actual living universe is about as foolish as telling the man with the gun the absurdity above.

The "self" does not change.

Nothing exists called "self" that can undergo a change.

What changes in this case, or rather mutates, are the perspectives from which the non-existent "self" is viewed.

The "self" is but a reflection of thought.

This set of apparent changes is little more than a rearrangement of thought patterns and perceptions, and have more to do with perpetuating the illusion of a separate self and separate existence, than the actual, ever-changing, living, universe.

Thought is a disease.

To try and "cure oneself" from the disease of thought by using thought only serves to perpetuate more thought.

The "you" has to go in order for the living organism to be in its natural state.

The term "nirvana" means "blowing out".

What is blown out?

"You."


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Shiva" wrote:


[/align:3hges81s]

Without commenting too much on the contents and meaning themselves, Shiva (- for that would be too ‘off-topic’?!) could you just confirm that the top left box is “Salient Actors” [sic] and not “Salient Factors”.

Who is the author of this powerpoint presentation?  Could it be that famed Dr. Goebbel D. Ghouke, again? (and is that he pictured?)

It reminds me slightly of that artist – what is his name now? – always did extremely detailed charts & diagrams of stuff about esoteric subjects…

I meant to also remark before, Zazani, that you speak trout fluently here (sooth or truth that is, not cod’s-wallop!):

"zazenji" wrote:
It's interesting to see how whole thought-based systems are built according to semantics on how the mind 'thinks' Self-realization / Attainment works.. coming from within/without, old aeon, new aeon etc. Precisely the stuff that kept theologians busy for a few thousand years.

Besides the question of whether a "Higher Self" actually exists (as pointed out by Shiva), the REAL question is whether an individual of any type exists.. (yes, blasphemy for Western Occultism). Certainly not according to most Eastern schools (Atman is not an individuated 'self' but the impersonal Absolute, and Anatta pretty much sums up all five personal aggregates as as 'not-self'), hence who is this mysterious individual exactly pulling "LVX" from within or without according to which aeonic system they're apparently following? Sometimes the structures of these heavily mapped out 'paths of attainment' (that look good on paper and with framed certificates) tend to implode under their own weight when examined. As Korzybski said, 'the map is not the territory'.

I seem to have read this, or similar argument about the existence or not of a Higher “Self” somewhere on the Lash before now, I think?!  Maybe someone can jog my memory… I’m sure there must have been once!  Also there is a quite good joke connected with that Korzybski quote, but unfortunately I have forgotten it for now!  (I am getting old!! :D)

Maybe a “Sign O’ The Times”, indeed… (oh-yeh!)
N Joy

PS, I notice we are now getting some of the old mass debaters back on that very subject, drawn by the scent of something no doubt (- I thought it was a whiff of déjà-vu I caught in the air!)  Please forgive me if I therefore abstain from the gleeful merriment and sit this one out, at least for the moment…


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
... could you just confirm ... Who is the author ... and is that he pictured?

Ummm ... Images are derived from the Internet. I am unable to comment or confirm. It's not my pic, and I'm sure the portrait is not the author of the diagram. One can always trace the pics back to their source in order to analyze its content. Now, staying on-topic, I refer you to an olde G.'.D.'. maxim: "You have already been given enough info to make your own link with the Secret Chiefs" ... all by yourself.
(End of rough quotation and end of mess-age).


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"Shiva" wrote:
Ummm ... Images are derived from the Internet. I am unable to comment or confirm. It's not my pic, and I'm sure the portrait is not the author of the diagram. One can always trace the pics back to their source in order to analyze its content. Now, staying on-topic, I refer you to an olde G.'.D.'. maxim: "You have already been given enough info to make your own link with the Secret Chiefs" ... all by yourself.

Hmmm ... not sure I have either the time or inclination to do this, S old bean! (wade through the Internet, that is, as opposed to make my own contacts with the Secret Chiefs for the purposes of nada nada etc).

There does seem to be a typo with “Salient (F)Actors”, though, imho; it doesn’t quite fit in with the rest of the jargon.  But it is really irritating me now that I cannot at least place this artist to whom I referred:

"jamie barter" wrote:
... It reminds me slightly of that artist – what is his name now? – always did extremely detailed charts & diagrams of stuff about esoteric subjects…

I believe I read a feature on him in the Theosophical Society magazine “Esoterica” a little while ago – and the breadth of his artwork and conception, although similarly goebbeldeghouke-esque, was quite astounding in its execution - but in my increasingly entropic mess I cannot locate it at present.  (Soon I will reach the point of not being able to sleep at night until I can track it down.)

Apologies to zazenji – I looked at your name quickly & obviously ‘read’ it rong.  No intentional misspelling of your avatar name or offence was intended.

Well come on then – all back to the “ ‘Higher Self’ – real or not?” debate, if you must!!

NJoy


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
Apologies to zazenji – I looked at your name quickly & obviously ‘read’ it rong.  No intentional misspelling of your avatar name or offence was intended.
Well come on then – all back to the “ ‘Higher Self’ – real or not?” debate, if you must!!
NJoy

Hi Jamie, no problem.. it's just a handle. I don't really have the energy to debate about whether the "Higher Self" is real of not, though it's certainly an interesting topic that can keep people going for a while (and a good distraction from doing real investigation Work). Let's just say that in many cases, it would appear that once the multiple 'imposter' selves are discovered (root cause being "me") and discarded, then there might be room for 'something else' to become apparent. People either have a propensity for nondual perspectives or not, it's no big deal, there's no rush.. conditioning and cycling has been going on for eternity.

Re: the argument about conventional vs Absolute reality.. I'm well aware of the issue. Conventionalists love to point out "Well if there's no individual here, what about I drop a brick on your face?", which proves nothing except that an organic-based body would be injured, some pain would arise somewhere in the skandas, and conditioning just play itself out like it does every day for the majority of mankind from breakfast till bedtime. Jnani yogis have been living 'as if' when Self-realized for centuries, sh&t just takes care of itself like it always has, except that there's one less robot on the planet thinking they have "free-will" or are "doing their God-Given True Will", when in fact they're totally dependent on causes and conditions. Gurdjieff had it right when he stated "Man is a machine", or Christ "I can of mine own self do nothing". Lots of goodies in Liber 333 cf "Consciousness is a symptom of disease. All that moves well moves without will" (32).

Anyhow, enough from this squawk box. Its probably gone off-track from the thread title which was bizarrely about GD, 1999, OTO and Sumerian Magick-- now there's some interesting conditioned randomness for you. Cheers.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"zazenji" wrote:
Its probably gone off-track from the thread title which was bizarrely about GD, 1999, OTO and Sumerian Magick ...

Right On!  Or is it Right Off (the topic)?  We recently had one thread locked for meandering too far and too long off the topical path, so be-ware.

G.'.D.'. is part of the topic. I have no idea how 1999 came into it. Sumerian Magic (with a k? - I didn't know that the Sumers used the "k") really has not much of a relationship. We know that AC was a GD member and that he held on to the emblem (as the outer order) when he built up the A.'.A.'.. What with all the coat-tailing and copy-catting from all kinds of folks, some people have tried to "carry on" or "re-vitalize" (a form of necromancy) the Golden Dawn. If we are to judge any of these efforts, let it be by the number of fully-enlightened magisters they have produced!

What do you mean, "But none of them seem to have produced any magisteri"?

Yes, that's one of the factors that needs to be considered. Orders, ordos, orderi everywhere - but nary a Master to drink, er, to think, um, to be seen. Can it possibly be that the curriculi of any/all of these GDs, in any form, actually doesn't work? I mean, they essentially offer to reveal the mysteries - which supposedly leads to attainment or enlightenment - but then ther's little evidence that anyone actually attains or lights up.

The Sumerian Magic(k) is just another spin off. AC mentioned the Sumer connection in one place*, and that's become a quest all in itself (for some).

* If a second place exists, feel free to post it.

This thread was a bit confusing and mixed up with disparate terms from the beginning, and that's why it is so hard to keep it cohesive. I dunno, I guess I'll just retire now.

[/align:1sh2wkpt]


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 19 years ago
Posts: 5356
 
"Shiva" wrote:
The Sumerian Magic(k) is just another spin off. AC mentioned the Sumer connection in one place*, and that's become a quest all in itself (for some).

* If a second place exists, feel free to post it.

The Caphaloedium Working:

Now on the day of the Sun, in this the Sixteenth Year of the Aeon, when He stood in the 6th Degree of the Sign Sagittarius, whose letter hath the value of 60, the Moon being in the 16th Degree of the Sign Cancer whose letter hath the value 8, did the Beast 666 TO Mega Therion a Magus of A.'. A.'. Baphomet 729 the Supreme Holy King of Ireland, Iona and all the Britains that are in the Sanctuary of the Gnosis Xth degree O.T.O., Avatar of Bacchus Diphues in the Place of the XIth degree O.T.O., Logos of the Aeon of Ra Hoor Khuit, Grand Master of the Knights of the Holy Ghost, Grand Master of the Knights of the Temple, Eidolon of the Rosy Cross, Alastor the Destroyer, Spirit of Solitude, Wanderer of the Waste, of the Blood of Kerval Arch-Druids Hereditary to the Oak, whose Holy Angel his Guardian is Aiwaz 93, the God first dawning upon Man in the Land of Sumer, whose breast beareth the token adventure upon Mountains beyond any man of his fellows, whose body and blood bear witness of the wounds of Astarte, and the shames of Priapus, even I in the Abbey of Thelema at Cephaloedium that am hidden, did convene therein to counsel Alostrael, 31-666-31, the Scarlet Woman Lea my concubine, in whom is all power given, sworn unto Aiwaz...

Liber Aleph:

For the Root thereof is {Sigma }{Digamma }, which signifieth the Incarnation of the Spirit; and of Kin are not only the Sun, Our Father, but Sumer, where Man knew himself Man, and Soma, the Divine Potion that giveth Men Enlightenment, and Scin, Light Astral, and Scire also, by a far Travelling.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"lashtal" wrote:
... whose Holy Angel his Guardian is Aiwaz 93, the God first dawning upon Man in the Land of Sumer ...

For the Root thereof is ... Sumer, where Man knew himself Man ...

Okay, that's two places - with another one (the one I had in mind) making three.

That's three refs to Sumer/Sumarian, with two referring to Aiwass as a god and one referring to the natural state.

[/align:2euztmcr]


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Azidonis" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
In point of fact, with a cursory examination of the materials of both orders, one can clearly see that the Zelator of the A.'.A.'. is roughly the equivalent of the 5=6 of the old Golden Dawn.

Eshelman said this too, IIRC.

I've not read him but have been told as much on a few occasions. I have flipped through his A.'.A.'. book though. I also participated in his forums from time to time. A lot of my assertions are drawn from past experience with the A.'.A.'. system and  research into the Golden Dawn, then reading Golden Dawn message groups and shaking my head at the assumptions of so-called leaders about the 5=6 work of the GD... when one looks at the GD vs. A.'.A.'. in the context that the 5=6 work is the same in both... it makes one wonder why bother with A.'.A.'. when the Golden Dawn is so much faster... 😉 Though, all told, the Abramelin isn't all that difficult to achieve, the A.'.A.'. system just insures success by teaching one in the outer order the necessary depth and zealotry to achieve perfect success from an A.'.A.'. perspective. That said... K&C can be achieved spontaneously as well by people who have never even heard of or practiced any system of occultism and Crowley said as much in his work (no citations, sorry, this is a forum, not a peer review magazine) and part of the reason I believe so many think one can be a Thelemite without having read the Book of the Law. Nope, sorry, disagree and not what I think Crowley's intent was and the opposite of what he said. We aren't Thelemites until we are reborn as Horus...


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
"Hamal" wrote:
"jamie barter" wrote:
Like some sort of a stitch, you mean?! 🙂

From the saying "A stitch in time saves nine", which according to phrases.org.uk "was clearly meant as an incentive to the lazy". ...

Without explaining too much - which always kills any intended jokey banter stone dead - it was more to do with the act of stitching saving time than the number of times itself.  (Eight could do.  Or ten.  Or five!)  And in addition to the repair-job of the proverbial original, stitching could (nb not does) also mean a ‘stitch up’, a cramp in the guts, a rectificatory surgical thread after a wounding - ooh lots of other things!  Apologies if all this seems self-explanatory!  However,

"Shiva" wrote:
... I'm not sure what "cynicism" is - doesn't it have something to do with those old-time rulers in Russia?

Gerald Suster had an amusing take on cynicism.  According to one of his pithy little sayings a realist would state: “pass the milk”; an optimist might exclaim: “pass the cream”; a pessimist would reply: “I think it’s all gone”, whilst the cynic would add: “yes – and if there’s any left, it’ll all have gone sour.”

Regarding Uranus’s interesting addition

"uranus" wrote:
... The fundamental difference being a matter of perspective where the GD focuses on LVX as a thing outside of the aspirant and given to him/her, the A.'.A.'. being that the source of power comes from within.

... very different approaches to magick[:] One is inward (the A.'.A.'.) and one is outer (Golden Dawn). Meaning... the A.'.A.'. and it's primary formula of NOX are about the inward journey and recognizing the Star within: Khabs is in the Khu, not the khu in the khabs. The Golden Dawn's LVX is the opposite, the power comes from divine grace.

This is a fundamentally huge difference – in effect, the basic difference between the old and the new aeon approach – but it should be made clear that the G.’.D.’. referred to here is [Mathers’] H.O.G.D. and not Crowley’s third order of the A.’.A.’..  Also,

"uranus" wrote:
... Reading Initiation in the Aeon of the Child by Daniel Gunther one sees a connection here when he writes about ...

I’m surprised, in view of its subject matter and authorship, that no one has begun a thread on the Reading Circle on Gunther’s book.

"sumerian131" wrote:
... This may be heresy on here but im beginning to think the so-called "Western Magick Tradition" is a nothing but a phantom. ...

There is something in this.  But then again, there is something ‘phantomic’ in everything, if one starts looking hard enough.

JohnnyScience appears to have vanished from the conversation which he initiated. It does seems to be the case on the Lash that OPs often do not continue through with what they started.  I was going to ask him, in the context of the title of the thread, where does 1999 come in & what did it mean (apart from an excuse to partay)?  “A + O” might have done with a little clarification for the benefit of nwer readers who may not be familiar, also...

N Joy

I'd say no one has started a reading circle on Gunther here because there is a bit of vitriol about the man's work in these here parts from what I have seen based on the marketing of his first book and assertions in said marketing to being "The World Teacher". The introduction by Wasserman and comments by Beta about the book have not been so helpful either. The two men have... engendered ill will from the non-OTO community, more so with Beta through his legal actions to protect the OTO and copyrights as well as the major slow down of publications and the fill/kill debate. You are the company you keep. Personally, I think the vitriol is more a sad commentary on the sense of entitlement in Thelema and also Jerry Cornelius continuously bringing out the guns with his assertions that Gunther & Breeze are wanting to copyright and trademark everything to do with A.'.A.'. even though it has been made clear that nothing of the sort would happen. Like they can stop people from privately using Crowley's instructions or something in their own brand of A.'.A.'.?!?

Most reactions to Gunther's work have been based on misunderstanding of the work and it's intent. I can't express, not being the author, the true intent but to me it appears that it is to explain the changes in the symbolism based on the "Khabs is in the khu" verses of Liber AL, analysing the traditional symbols of alchemy and Rosicrucianism as well as the paths of the Tree of Life. Analzying the book from this perspective and in light of how these symbols play into the Tarot reveals much wisdom as well as received knowledge at play in the book as a whole. It is wholly an A.'.A.'. work.

The real matter is looking at how Thelema had developed before, with local traditions etc and the popularity of authors like Grant et. al. in the movement and how people raised up in those environments have developed their own sense of what makes Thelema and that is awesome and nowhere has the author discredited, or attempted to discredit those people. Gunther has explored symbols that others haven't touched upon and related them in the context of the A.'.A.'. as embodied today and deriving from the Golden Dawn and traditional resources such as Rosicrucianism, Masonry, and Alchemy he has created the skeleton of the New Aeon Qabalah, the framework on which the symbols will be developed and enriched in light of the Gnosis of the Holy Books and The VIsion & The Voice. It appears to me that his work is the first holistic approach to writing a Thelemic text book, taking into account the entirety of the sacred writings to create a work that encompasses the utterings of V.V.V.V.V. and Aiwass as opposed to the majority of authors who only take into account the Book of the Law as their resource for Thelema. They ignore the rich & vibrant cosmology offered in other holy books, including the aforementioned The Vision & THe Voice. The only other author to really approach the work in that light is... Marcelo Motta where his work reflected the other holy books and V&V. I understand many have issue with Motta's work and why so I am not arguing the merits of the work, I can do that as well in a better place.

Some authors approach the other holy books but it feels more tentative or they approach it as justification for their own ruach masturbation in regards to their lives and how they live as a Thelemite. Well & good in my eyes honestly but it doesn't approach the level that Gunther has attempted to express his findings.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"uranus" wrote:
I'd say no one has started a reading circle on Gunther here because there is a bit of vitriol about the man's work in these here parts from what I have seen based on the marketing of his first book and assertions in said marketing to being "The World Teacher". The introduction by Wasserman and comments by Beta about the book have not been so helpful either. The two men have... engendered ill will from the non-OTO community, more so with Beta through his legal actions to protect the OTO and copyrights as well as the major slow down of publications and the fill/kill debate. You are the company you keep.

I suppose this cannot help matters.

"uranus" wrote:
Personally, I think the vitriol is more a sad commentary on the sense of entitlement in Thelema and also Jerry Cornelius continuously bringing out the guns with his assertions that Gunther & Breeze are wanting to copyright and trademark everything to do with A.'.A.'. even though it has been made clear that nothing of the sort would happen. Like they can stop people from privately using Crowley's instructions or something in their own brand of A.'.A.'.?!?

Most reactions to Gunther's work have been based on misunderstanding of the work and it's intent. I can't express, not being the author, the true intent but to me it appears that it is to explain the changes in the symbolism based on the "Khabs is in the khu" verses of Liber AL, analysing the traditional symbols of alchemy and Rosicrucianism as well as the paths of the Tree of Life. ...

Not only Mr Cornelius.  I believe Saint Peter König has also expressed the same question, amongst others?  Maybe we could do with some sort of a categorical “statement of denial” on this or another medium from those held responsible?!

"uranus" wrote:
... It appears to me that his work is the first holistic approach to writing a Thelemic text book, taking into account the entirety of the sacred writings to create a work that encompasses the utterings of V.V.V.V.V. and Aiwass as opposed to the majority of authors who only take into account the Book of the Law as their resource for Thelema. They ignore the rich & vibrant cosmology offered in other holy books, including the aforementioned The Vision & The Voice.

It’s not a bad book, but then again, not many sincerely (i.e., from the heart) books written by purported Thelemites are really bad (C. F. Russell being an exception?!)

I may say more, but in the context of a review on a separate thread on the said book under discussion.

"uranus" wrote:
The only other author to really approach the work in that light is... Marcelo Motta where his work reflected the other holy books and V&V. I understand many have issue with Motta's work and why so I am not arguing the merits of the work, I can do that as well in a better place.

Yes, Motta could write great trout also.  And also codswallop & great gibberish, on occasion.  But his good generally outweighs the bad, imho.

Teh-tah for now,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2967
 
"uranus" wrote:
Some authors approach the other holy books but it feels more tentative or they approach it as justification for their own ruach masturbation in regards to their lives and how they live as a Thelemite. Well & good in my eyes honestly but it doesn't approach the level that Gunther has attempted to express his findings.

What would you say he actually found, that wasn't 'out there' already?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Azidonis" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
Some authors approach the other holy books but it feels more tentative or they approach it as justification for their own ruach masturbation in regards to their lives and how they live as a Thelemite. Well & good in my eyes honestly but it doesn't approach the level that Gunther has attempted to express his findings.

What would you say he actually found, that wasn't 'out there' already?

I'd say it was more connecting the dots. My own copy is on loan at the moment so I can't give a precise comment but there is a good bit of formally oral material contained in there that I'd learned from other mentors in the A.'.A.'. that weren't readily available. In some cases he is more pointing out an obvious that people missed, that clarifies the difference in perspective that THelema represents at it's core moreso than being a whole new doctrine. That's the essence of Thelema, the recognition of God within as opposed to being some external force. Sure, some recognized it before then, that's obvious, but much of magick pre-Crowley still operated on that idea that the Light was an external force, as opposed to internal. With that change in perspective some of the old symbolism became obsolete while others simply changed and Gunther, early in the book stresses this difference. INRI still opens the gates of Abiegnus, but ABiegnus is not in Tiphareth as an example. This is based on the Golden Dawn system and if the Adeptus Minor of the Golden Dawn achieved Abiegnus... and the Adeptus Minor of the old Golden Dawn is more equivalent to the late Neophyte and post Zelator period up to about Adeptus Minor Within, minus the K&C requirement of the HGA that A.'.A.'. emphasizes. The systems do cross back over to an extent, without the Yoga requirements, at Adept Major but the differences at that point are HUGE. It's like.. and average penis vs. a John Holmes to whip out a penis joke. 😉

I've digressed though. What is new is the changes to the symbolism as revealed in the Holy Books. Gunther has collated that material in one location and in a very skeletal manner that could be developed into a new, rich Qabalah and this is just the lower portion of the Tree of Life! The next book in the series covers the rest of the Tree of Life and from friends who have read the material in proof, quite brilliant. I've read some quotes that simply blew my mind. Gunther points out a lot of missed connections that reading the books independently might not be drawn and here, he makes those connections obvious. One critic chastised Gunther for the use of the Golden Dawn Rosycross on the cover... except, it isn't and is the same Rosy Cross on the back of the Thoth cards and there are a few subtle differences that the critic missed such as the lower arm of the cross being green and not the four colors of the GD version. This is drawn from Liber LXV where the changed is directly addressed and touched on in the book. It reveals a subtle clue to the nature of the A.'.A.'. and it's initiatic process and easily missed by the majority of Thelemites.

An interesting revelation is that the candidate is ALREADY Osiris and is ressurected as Horus.  The old colors of Malkuth apply to the Probationer, the full, bright green is the color of Malkuth for the Neophyte and higher. What does this mean? The Probationer is in the Qlippoth, and the purity of Malkuth is dispersed into the 4 colors. I can analyze this according to my own school of thought based upon Qabalastic Psychology very simply. The candidate moves out of operation in the Nephesh, the psychic censor and root of most "Black Lodge" experiences, and into the Ruach as the new filter of experience. Moreso, the Nephesh moves up out of the Qlippoth and starts operating in the planes of the Ruach, especially once Zelator is achieved. The Nephesh is what is being initiated. Without the filter of the QLippoth the Nephesh begins, just begins to see things as they truly are, allowing for the experience of the vision of the HGA following the first Kiss that draws us all into the Great Work.

Again, I have digressed... oh my.

Back to Gunther, I think I've summarized as best I can without the book handy, the material in the book. What's new is more, connecting the dots to reveal what we may have missed and much is material that someone in the A.'.A.'. would already have gathered together based on experience or on a gut level. The new revealed doctrine I'd have to pull it out for and am now wondering when I will get my book back! L'sigh. Much of the book is indeed brilliant and definitely revelatory in the same manner that much of Crowley's material outside of the Class A material contains revealed doctrine. In other words, formerly secret material laid plain, things once understood but never defined.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

AH Koenig... He has an axe to grind no? I don't see any reason that Gunther et. al. need to say anything, actions speak louder than words. They haven't done it, there is no indication in the actual rumblings behind the scenes from sources that matter in this regard. Yes at one time there were rumblings that Seckler spoke directly with Breeze about and things were signed in that regard as related by Cornelius on his site! That he continues to stir this up every few months or so implies that he has an agenda but I won't say for sure as I do not know Jerry and I am of the mind that he really believes this will occur. It sure does get the independent A.'.A.'. brands stirring and in arms which really seems to miss the point and even then... they are rumbling over the copyrights, which the OTO already owns! What's the issue? Why are people crying over this still? Why do they think it means the OTO can control who uses the material in privacy? It's a dead horse that people keep trying to resurrect for some unknown reason. it has already occurred and nothing of the sort has occurred... the OTO is not going to come and tell you you can't use Liber O or Liber V unless you're OTO, they aren't going to say you can't work the A.'.A.'. system even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. so please... really? I should end this particular rant... ahem.

I disagree that heartfelt books aren't bad... I've seen some pretty bad ones that were heartfelt... not just Russell. Just because it comes from the heart doesn't mean the person can write! I can think of a handful of authors in Thelema that I enjoy... Lon, Motta, Grant, Gunther (so far) and... that's about it. Lon it's more that he makes formerly complicated matters and makes them easier to understand, prime example being Enochian Vision Magick. Good god that book is great and makes Enochian Magick far, far less intimidating. Motta provides some valuable insights and a good laugh on occasion in spite of being surrounded by some not so subtle paranoia. Grant is a brilliant magical artist, providing wonderful vistas and inspirations and tying together the work of many brilliant authors in unique and creative ways. Gunther, I've gone on about enough already and we'll see for sure when the Angel & The Abyss comes out and I get to read more than just a quote. In the past, when I was first starting I enjoyed Gerald Del Campo's book and see some flaws in that first edition but it's still valuable but not a must have. The vast majority though... I just don't have the time to bother with and honestly, my focus is more on Esoteric Voudon and related work these days. So mcuh good stuff coming out of that school in journals and books, like Voudon Gnosis by Beth, Szyzygy by Tau Palamas, the Carrefour Tarot by Chris Woodward and more in the offing. The art work of our own Kidneyhawk is just breathtaking. Just such an inspirational and vibrant, living current. I also enjoy Michael Staley's essays the material in Starfire greatly.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"uranus" wrote:
AH Koenig... He has an axe to grind no?

It seems everyone may have an axe to grind, if one is looking for the axe hard enough.  (I say, that seems quite profound to me!  Maybe I should stick it in my book of quotes! :D)

"uranus" wrote:
... I don't see any reason that Gunther et. al. need to say anything, actions speak louder than words. They haven't done it, there is no indication in the actual rumblings behind the scenes from sources that matter in this regard. Yes at one time there were rumblings that Seckler spoke directly with Breeze about and things were signed in that regard as related by Cornelius on his site! That he continues to stir this up every few months or so implies that he has an agenda but I won't say for sure as I do not know Jerry and I am of the mind that he really believes this will occur. It sure does get the independent A.'.A.'. brands stirring and in arms which really seems to miss the point and even then... they are rumbling over the copyrights, which the OTO already owns! What's the issue? Why are people crying over this still? Why do they think it means the OTO can control who uses the material in privacy? It's a dead horse that people keep trying to resurrect for some unknown reason. it has already occurred and nothing of the sort has occurred... the OTO is not going to come and tell you you can't use Liber O or Liber V unless you're OTO, they aren't going to say you can't work the A.'.A.'. system even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. so please... really? I should end this particular rant... ahem.

Yes there were “[g]rumblings” of some sort of a deal done and dusted between Seckler and Breeze, but I understood it only related to not suing HER particular “lineage” and was only arrived at after much preliminary foreplay & footsie dancing around malarkey; it is still presumably open season on all the others?  An official disclaimer – possibly on this website, if not on Heruraha.net or another – would be so easy to effect, so why hasn’t it been done instead of allowing it to foster discontent and breed paranoia?

"uranus" wrote:
I disagree that heartfelt books aren't bad... I've seen some pretty bad ones that were heartfelt... not just Russell. Just because it comes from the heart doesn't mean the person can write!

I was trying to be kind there!!

"uranus" wrote:
... I can think of a handful of authors in Thelema that I enjoy... Lon, Motta, Grant, Gunther (so far) and... that's about it. Lon it's more that he makes formerly complicated matters and makes them easier to understand, prime example being Enochian Vision Magick. Good god that book is great and makes Enochian Magick far, far less intimidating. Motta provides some valuable insights and a good laugh on occasion in spite of being surrounded by some not so subtle paranoia. Grant is a brilliant magical artist, providing wonderful vistas and inspirations and tying together the work of many brilliant authors in unique and creative ways. Gunther, I've gone on about enough already and we'll see for sure when the Angel & The Abyss comes out and I get to read more than just a quote. In the past, when I was first starting I enjoyed Gerald Del Campo's book and see some flaws in that first edition but it's still valuable but not a must have. The vast majority though... I just don't have the time to bother with and honestly, my focus is more on Esoteric Voudon and related work these days. So mcuh good stuff coming out of that school in journals and books, like Voudon Gnosis by Beth, Szyzygy by Tau Palamas, the Carrefour Tarot by Chris Woodward and more in the offing. The art work of our own Kidneyhawk is just breathtaking. Just such an inspirational and vibrant, living current. I also enjoy Michael Staley's essays the material in Starfire greatly.

Yes, I agree with all of your other statements about all the authors and artists mentioned here.  We are in accord!

Ain’t that wonderful?
N Joy


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"uranus" wrote:
...even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. ...

Well, it seems that when they started their order (when was it? 1970's / 80's?) and decided to call it A.'.A.'. they did make abortive movements toward going after pre-existing orders that happened by an unfortunate coincidence to share that name. In fact, it seems that some of the first things they did was attack the already existing A.'.A.'. in an attempt to put their new order in it's place.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"nashimiron" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
...even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. ...

Well, it seems that when they started their order (when was it? 1970's / 80's?) and decided to call it A.'.A.'. they did make abortive movements toward going after pre-existing orders that happened by an unfortunate coincidence to share that name. In fact, it seems that some of the first things they did was attack the already existing A.'.A.'. in an attempt to put their new order in it's place.

This first inkling of Gunther, Starr and Breeze as an A.'.A.'. matter came in the early 90s. The one grumbling came from Cornelius during the period of his expulsion for the Red Flame no. 7 and it's contents. Aside from that, they were quiet, extremely quiet and Breeze signed an accord with Phyllis to not pursue the exclusive rights to A.'.A.'. by trademarking the seal etc. Nobody had much of an inkling of who anybody was in the officer roles aside from Starr and nobody was even aware of Gunther for the most part until the publication of his book. Aside from that, I've not seen any rumblings and I'd been on the front lines for years in competing lines.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I never meant to imply that Shiva was officially a "cynic" in every aspect of his life. I should have used the word  the word "skepticism" and I meant it to be limited to the topic discussed. I also recall being a bit drunk when I called Shiva cynical. Apologies Shiva.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 1688
 
"uranus" wrote:
"nashimiron" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
...even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. ...

Well, it seems that when they started their order (when was it? 1970's / 80's?) and decided to call it A.'.A.'. they did make abortive movements toward going after pre-existing orders that happened by an unfortunate coincidence to share that name. In fact, it seems that some of the first things they did was attack the already existing A.'.A.'. in an attempt to put their new order in it's place.

This first inkling of Gunther, Starr and Breeze as an A.'.A.'. matter came in the early 90s. The one grumbling came from Cornelius during the period of his expulsion for the Red Flame no. 7 and it's contents. Aside from that, they were quiet, extremely quiet and Breeze signed an accord with Phyllis to not pursue the exclusive rights to A.'.A.'. by trademarking the seal etc. Nobody had much of an inkling of who anybody was in the officer roles aside from Starr and nobody was even aware of Gunther for the most part until the publication of his book. Aside from that, I've not seen any rumblings and I'd been on the front lines for years in competing lines.

But why does it appear to be so difficult for them (the Gunther A.'. A.'.) to just issue as statement saying (e.g.) “We are not ever going to sue or restrict anybody.  Do what thou wilt.”  Fourteen simple words.  (The C.O.T.O. might think of profitably doing this, too.)

Yours suggestively,
N. Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 6990
 
"sumerian131" wrote:
I never meant to imply that Shiva was officially a "cynic" in every aspect of his life.

The "true (lost) word is "sarcastic."

Sarcastic: "marked by or given to using irony in order to mock or convey contempt."
Irony: "the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect."
Schuster: We don't really care what his feeble definition was.

Shiva's Explanation: (Oh no!  Now he's gonna explain the Mysteries, right? "The world is so overwhelmingly loaded with absurdity and despair that some people might become angry. Anger is injurious to one's reputation ("nobody likes an angry person," except another jihadist), and anger is injurious to one's health ("liver fire overacting on the heart = shen [consciousness] disturbance >:().  So sometimes (as often as is possible), it's better to utilize a touch of humor - because, as we all know deep in our ruach:
[move:lotzs3th]It's all a game!  ;)[/move:lotzs3th]

[/align:lotzs3th]

Now, in order to stay on-topic, I would like to say that the GD came and went. Before it was, it was something else (either a clever idea, or an archetype of an umbrella, or a secret adept in Germany). And after it was, it still is - in fragmentation, or it is still to be - in revision.

But here's the irony: Irony is the science and state of working with iron: Let any one of these societies, or their brethren in their similarity, step forth and name the name of their enlightened adept who devised a system that was put in motion ... and which caused his or her students to become enlightened in the same manner.


The Transmission of Enlightenment[/align:lotzs3th]


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"jamie barter" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
"nashimiron" wrote:
"uranus" wrote:
...even if they deny that there are other versions of the A.'.A.'. they have yet to go after ANYONE else claiming to be working the A.'.A.'. ...

Well, it seems that when they started their order (when was it? 1970's / 80's?) and decided to call it A.'.A.'. they did make abortive movements toward going after pre-existing orders that happened by an unfortunate coincidence to share that name. In fact, it seems that some of the first things they did was attack the already existing A.'.A.'. in an attempt to put their new order in it's place.

This first inkling of Gunther, Starr and Breeze as an A.'.A.'. matter came in the early 90s. The one grumbling came from Cornelius during the period of his expulsion for the Red Flame no. 7 and it's contents. Aside from that, they were quiet, extremely quiet and Breeze signed an accord with Phyllis to not pursue the exclusive rights to A.'.A.'. by trademarking the seal etc. Nobody had much of an inkling of who anybody was in the officer roles aside from Starr and nobody was even aware of Gunther for the most part until the publication of his book. Aside from that, I've not seen any rumblings and I'd been on the front lines for years in competing lines.

But why does it appear to be so difficult for them (the Gunther A.'. A.'.) to just issue as statement saying (e.g.) “We are not ever going to sue or restrict anybody.  Do what thou wilt.”  Fourteen simple words.  (The C.O.T.O. might think of profitably doing this, too.)

Yours suggestively,
N. Joy

Why should they even acknowledge the rumors? Why should they cave to the demands of people not even associated with them? As time goes by the kerfluffle will die down because people will realize it's just fear mongering.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 53 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I think it's recorded in the book of Phylis Secklers writings ( http://teitanpress.com/) that Breeze signed the agreement with Seckler not to sue her for using the A.'.A.'. logo on her publications. It seems that happened because they initially told her they would sue her. Basically, it looks like a group of blokes who had either been expelled / resigned or never been in the A.'.A.'. went to the highest ranking aspirant known at the time and told her to take the A.'.A.'. underground and cease publications in that name, so that they could pretend to be the order she was actually a part of.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: