I am The Beast 666
 
Notifications
Clear all

I am The Beast 666  

  RSS

Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
25/10/2014 1:43 pm  

I found an essay that on Jungian synchronicity which inadvertently alludes to the concept of Crowley's application of Magical Memory.  Here is a pasted section which I tweaked slightly;

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/ciencia/ciencia_synchronicity03.htm

Jung felt that meaningful coincidence gave conclusive evidence for his concepts of "archetypes" and "the collective unconscious", in that it was descriptive of a governing dynamic that underlay the whole of human experience and history — social, emotional, psychological, and spiritual.

Jung believed that many experiences perceived as coincidence were not merely due to chance but, instead, suggested the manifestation of parallel events or circumstances reflecting this governing dynamic.

One of Jung's favourite quotes on synchronicity was from Through the Looking-Glass  by Lewis Carroll, in which the White Queen says to Alice:

"It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards". 
Events that happen which appear at first to be coincidence but are later found to be causally related are termed Incoincident.

With that in mind consider the following ideas about Crowley and the Beast 666;

Before I touched my teens, I was already aware that I was THE BEAST whose number is 666. I did not understand in the least } what that implied; it was a passionately ecstatic sense of identity.

Crowley, Introduction to  Magick 

http://hermetic.com/crowley/book-4/defs.html

That's an interesting statement particularly as it appears amongst the more scientific and sceptical section of Crowley's writings where he sets out to outline and demystify the principles (what he calls, "theorems") of magic(k).

Crowley seems to be saying that he "intuitively" knew as a child where his "destiny" lay.  As a child he had some sort of powerful experience that he couldn't rationalize or explain and at a time when he obviously knew absolutely nothing about the Cabbalah and the gematria based implications of numbers, let alone 666. He knew, as a boy that he was the Beast in the Bible's Book of Revelations, as it were.  It's the sort of thing you hear pop stars say; that they knew as children where their destiny lay however how many children say that but go on to become bus-drivers, cops, school teachers etc?    Hundreds of thousands.

Was this experience the stirrings of his transmigratory True Self urging his brain and body to wake up to his mission to fulfil his incarnation?  I too underwent similar experiences as a child where I knew that certain things were somehow important even though I had no rational understanding of what they meant or were.  I'm sure you know  where i'm coming from.

That aside perhaps there is a more mundane explanation.  Crowley's father was a (financially) powerful Bible-bashing preacher and Crowley's dominant puritanical mother (also Bible obsessed) would often call young Aleister, "the Beast" when scolding him.  Maybe , as Regardie said, Crowley was,"his father's son" i.e. he weighed up the odds at an early age and figured that he too would go into the religious preaching game and continue the family tradition.  The cabbalsitic, aeonic  gematria aspects of Beast and 666 are mere coincidence. 

Speaking on coincidence here he gives an account of a bizarre event he once experienced;

I traveled from Louisville to Detroit by a railroad whose nickname was the "Big Four", my object being some business connected with my Book 4.  The name of my express was the "Big Four"—it left from No. 4 platform at 4 p.m.  My sleeping berth was No. 4 in Car No. 4; and my ticket was No. 44,444. I ought to have been April 4, I suppose; but it wasn't.

MAGICK WITHOUT TEARS

Chapter XL: Coincidence

http://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_40.html

Later on he elaborates on the properties of coincidence

In all this the important point for my present purpose is to show you how entirely this question of probability and coincidence is dependent on your attention.
The sequence B B B B B B B at roulette is most unlikely to occur; but so, in exactly the same degree, is the sequence B R B R R B R or any other sequence.  The one passes unnoticed, the other causes surprise, only because you have in your mind the idea of "a run on black."

Extend this line of thought a little, and link it up with what I was saying about the Magical Diary; you realize that every phenomenon soever is equally improbably, and "infinitely" so.  The Universe is therefore nothing but Coincidence!
   

Maybe these circumstantial forces of his family upbringing (mentioned earlier) conspired in a moral way to cause some sublimated identification-complex with the bad boy monster-character of The Bible. 

   

Crowley seems to be generally dismissive of any meanings attributed to coincidence when he says,"the first and most irretrievable trick of the enemy is to dupe you into passing Captain Coincidence as 'Friend,' whereas he is naturally the most formidable of all your foes when it comes to a question of proof."

..but he seems to be more open to mystical explanations as he brings Magical memory into the discussion and involves the concept of purpose and prophecy.

Chance blindly rules the Universe.  But what is Chance?  And where does purpose intervene?  To what extent?

Coincidence links up with Prophecy!

A fortiori, Coincidence is destroyed by Purpose, if, wishing to enlighten you on the subject, I write this letter and post it to your address, your receipt of it is no longer Coincidence.  So then coincidence must be entirely both unforeseen and unintentional; in other words, absolutely senseless.  But we have just proved that the Universe is nothing but Coincidence; it therefore is senseless."


Quote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
25/10/2014 5:05 pm  

To sum up.  How would you explain the boy Crowley's experience that he knew he was the Beast 666?  Do you see it as the embryonic stirrings of his transmigratory True Self urging his brain and body to wake up to his mission to fulfil his incarnation or you dismiss it as coincidence in terms of his family upbringing and maternal gibes about the Beast?  if you do dismiss it as coincidence then why did he slot this account of his experience into his most objective, rational of books, Magick?  Furthermore is this not a contradiction if we take into account that this is the man who held the view that,"the first and most irretrievable trick of the enemy is to dupe you into passing Captain Coincidence as 'Friend,' whereas he is naturally the most formidable of all your foes when it comes to a question of proof"?

Do you view Crowley's Magical Memory work as being conterminous with Jung's concept of synchronicity (meaningful coincidence) particularly now we know his (Jung's) favourite related quote on the matter was from Through the Looking-Glass  by Lewis Carroll, in which the White Queen says to Alice: "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards". 

What does Crowley mean when he writes,"Chance blindly rules the Universe.  But what is Chance?  And where does purpose intervene?  To what extent?  Coincidence links up with Prophecy!  A fortiori, Coincidence is destroyed by Purpose"?  Isn't he here nullifying his earlier comment about coincidence being,"a most formidable of all your foes when it comes to a question of proof"?

Finally, do you record your synchronicities in your Diary and if so, why?


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
27/10/2014 12:42 pm  

Going by your plug elsewhere, david, and as the thread you’ve created here seems pining for attention & straining on the leash to get involved,

Reply #21 by david on 'Crowley's belief in the "supernatural"' thread: October 26 2014 at 11:42:12 am:

Crowley had a lot to say about "strange"  coincidences.  I started a thread on this subject here;
http://www.lashtal.com/forum/http://www.lashtal.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=8
You may want to contribute.

I’ll chuck you in a bone  (this doesn’t mean I’m feeding & giving succour to the dogs of reason, of course…!)

"david" wrote:
To sum up.  How would you explain the boy Crowley's experience that he knew he was the Beast 666?  Do you see it as the embryonic stirrings of his transmigratory True Self urging his brain and body to wake up to his mission to fulfil his incarnation or you dismiss it as coincidence in terms of his family upbringing and maternal gibes about the Beast?  if you do dismiss it as coincidence then why did he slot this account of his experience into his most objective, rational of books, Magick?  Furthermore is this not a contradiction if we take into account that this is the man who held the view that,"the first and most irretrievable trick of the enemy is to dupe you into passing Captain Coincidence as 'Friend,' whereas he is naturally the most formidable of all your foes when it comes to a question of proof"?

It depends how one approaches the reality of the space-time continuum and how much one may be limited by a linear viewpoint, i.e. event A is followed by event B which is followed by event C (etc.).  As a result of the amount of time and force put into it, and in view of his passionate energetic identification with it throughout the rest of his life & events that happened to him in his later life in this capacity, A.C. would, holistically, be therefore influenced in his feelings as a young boy that he was The Beast.  It is only in the sense of approaching time as rigidly sequential, as a sceptical materialist-rationalist is likely to do, that any sort of contradiction might appear to be involved.  By such means, apparent phenomena such as that described as ‘synchronicity’ can all be explained, together with e.g. what Kenneth Grant regards as the simultaneity of (what Crowley regarded as successive) aeons (one of the areas with which I tend to agree with him on.)

"david" wrote:
What does Crowley mean when he writes,"Chance blindly rules the Universe.  But what is Chance?  And where does purpose intervene?  To what extent?  Coincidence links up with Prophecy!  A fortiori, Coincidence is destroyed by Purpose"?  Isn't he here nullifying his earlier comment about coincidence being,"a most formidable of all your foes when it comes to a question of proof"?

You are asking what Crowley means when surely you know by now it is a case of interpreting him, each for oneself?  But if it's meant to be a free-for-all here and we’re all asking “what do think X means when...”, I might as well ask you what do you think Jung means in relation to

"david" wrote:
Do you view Crowley's Magical Memory work as being conterminous with Jung's concept of synchronicity (meaningful coincidence) particularly now we know his (Jung's) favourite related quote on the matter was from Through the Looking-Glass  by Lewis Carroll, in which the White Queen says to Alice: "It's a poor sort of memory that only works backwards". 

especially with regard to Crowley’s Liber Berashith

I also think as OP you might state whether you regard coincidence and synchronicity as interchangeable terms and complete synonyms, and if not, what you perceive as being the difference between them.

"david" wrote:
Finally, do you record your synchronicities in your Diary and if so, why?

You are making assumptions here david that everyone maintains a “Diary” (I note the capital d), when this may not be the case at all.  So there is no “why”.  I deliberately gave up recording one back in - 1994, I think was my last entry (you may care to peruse the relevant thread I also started on “The Magickal Diary: Worthwhile Or Worthless?” – now locked for further contributions, however.)

Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
30/10/2014 1:06 pm  

"I am The Beast 666" hm-sometimes i feel like this, too, in the morning when hangover 😉


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
30/10/2014 1:25 pm  

How would you explain the boy Crowley's experience that he knew he was the Beast 666?

He didn't know - AC tells us that his mother told him, and he believed her.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
30/10/2014 3:11 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:

He didn't know - AC tells us that his mother told him, and he believed her.

No.  No and no.  I specifically quoted what AC said in MITAP about "ecstatic sense of identity.". Please reread the OP.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
30/10/2014 3:48 pm  
"david" wrote:
No.  No and no.  I specifically quoted what AC said in MITAP ...

Yes, yes and sorry, yes.

Okay, it says, "Before I touched my teens, I was already aware that I was THE BEAST whose number is 666. I did not understand in the least what that implied; it was a passionately ecstatic sense of identity."

But, surely, his mama was telling him how he was "The Beast" of Revelation before "Before I touched my teens ..."

Early childhood comes before pre-teenagerness. One could argue how long before "I touched my teens," but I suspect the Beast was being Beastly as a little kid, and that his motherly annointment started the whole thing ... and then as a, say, nine-year old kid, he got ecstatic about his Beast persona, and took it on with him into adolescence and adulthood, all the way to old age.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
30/10/2014 4:49 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
[...] but I suspect the Beast was being Beastly as a little kid, and that his motherly annointment started the whole thing ...

As I’m sure we know, there is a world of difference between a mother chiding her errant and wayward son with the words :”Oh you horrid little beast! Go to your room!” and “Oh, you’re so wicked I don’t know what I’ve given birth to - you must be… the Beast of the Apocalypse!”

It does seem a strange thing for a mother to address her son as, but the more I have looked into it, the more it seems a very strange relationship A.C. had with his mother, period.  Apparently she lived well into the First World War and saw her little boy intermittently and surprisingly fairly affably from time to time – although history unfortunately does not record what she made of his calling as the Prophet in The Book of the Law, or of his ‘lewd’ poetry, or any of his other shenanigans that the old goat – or perhaps that should be ‘young scamp’ here? – got up to.

Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1021
30/10/2014 5:07 pm  

My impression is that he only started "acting out" when his father died, when he was 11, which is probably what caused his mother in exasperation to call him "the beast". Her loss and desperation must have been apparent, subconsciously at least, to young Aleister, and her retreat into religiosity, a veneer of "God's will" covering the hypocrisy of really blaming and hating God for taking the elder Crowley, must have been clear to him. She was probably a happy woman, as far as Crowley knew, before her husband's death, and her sudden withdrawal, his acting out for attention but unable to elicit anything but Biblical condemnation, caused unresolved anger in him. He would defeat this smug fake "God", tear off the hypocritical veil his mother wore, and make her free and see herself as she really was again.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
31/10/2014 7:23 pm  
"Shiva" wrote:
"david" wrote:
No.  No and no.  I specifically quoted what AC said in MITAP ...

Yes, yes and sorry, yes.

Okay, it says, "Before I touched my teens, I was already aware that I was THE BEAST whose number is 666. I did not understand in the least what that implied; it was a passionately ecstatic sense of identity."

But, surely, his mama was telling him how he was "The Beast" of Revelation before "Before I touched my teens ..."

Early childhood comes before pre-teenagerness. One could argue how long before "I touched my teens," but I suspect the Beast was being Beastly as a little kid, and that his motherly annointment started the whole thing ... and then as a, say, nine-year old kid, he got ecstatic about his Beast persona, and took it on with him into adolescence and adulthood, all the way to old age.

You're not getting it.  Others aren't getting it either.  He is documenting a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4954
31/10/2014 8:35 pm  
"david" wrote:
You're not getting it.  Others aren't getting it either.  He is documenting a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Of course ... but the specific spiritual experience seems to have been preceded (and thus implanted) by his mother's admonition.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
31/10/2014 8:37 pm  
"david" wrote:
You're not getting it.  Others aren't getting it either.  He is documenting a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Is he?

I don't understand what you're driving at with this thread. The subject at hand seems pretty straightforward. Crowley identified with a character as a child. When he got older, he identified with that character even more strongly and found great symbolic depth in the character. Where's the great mystery?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
31/10/2014 10:29 pm  
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
You're not getting it.  Others aren't getting it either.  He is documenting a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Is he?

I don't understand what you're driving at with this thread. The subject at hand seems pretty straightforward. Crowley identified with a character as a child. When he got older, he identified with that character even more strongly and found great symbolic depth in the character. Where's the great mystery?

As an uneducated child he attributed an inexplicable/irrational sense of destiny to the Bible's Beast and then later on as an adult would discover that 666 "the number of the Beast" contained cabbalistic attributes that appertain to the "new aeon."  Furthermore that part of the Bible , Revelations is traditionally said to be a prophetic account of the end of (Christian) time.  It's an amazing coincidence............which is why I bring in his views on coincidence in the OP.   


ReplyQuote
OKontrair
(@okontrair)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 501
31/10/2014 10:41 pm  
"david" wrote:
As an uneducated child ..............

Maleducated maybe but certainly not uneducated.

OK


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
31/10/2014 10:53 pm  
"OKontrair" wrote:
"david" wrote:
As an uneducated child ..............

Maleducated maybe but certainly not uneducated.

OK

He wasn't educated in the cabballah.  You get me? 


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
31/10/2014 11:38 pm  
"david" wrote:
. . .  a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Really? How do you know?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
01/11/2014 1:54 am  
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
. . .  a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Really? How do you know?

Before I touched my teens, I was already aware that I was THE BEAST whose number is 666. I did not understand in the least } what that implied; it was a passionately ecstatic sense of identity.

Crowley, Introduction to  Magick 

To answer your question; due to my comprehension of the English language specifically I..e that's what he wrote..  I view this account as one of Crowley's wacky newagey moments.


ReplyQuote
soz
 soz
(@soz)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 93
01/11/2014 4:18 am  

'Twould be interesting if there were more info available about this.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
01/11/2014 9:30 am  
"david" wrote:
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"david" wrote:
. . .  a specific spiritual experience he had as a child.

Really? How do you know?

Before I touched my teens, I was already aware that I was THE BEAST whose number is 666. I did not understand in the least } what that implied; it was a passionately ecstatic sense of identity.

Crowley, Introduction to  Magick 

To answer your question; due to my comprehension of the English language specifically I..e that's what he wrote.

So Crowley's words, which you quote, lead you to believe that he had this "specific spiritual experience"?

That's interesting to know. In another thread - "Crowley and the 'supernatural'" - you seem to maintain that despite his many accounts of occult work over the decades, Crowley was a sceptic, only affecting a belief in the occult. And yet, here you seem to have no difficulty in accepting that his account reflects "a specific spiritual experience".

Assuming that consistency is a word in your vocabulary, what's the difference here?


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
01/11/2014 11:21 am  
"Michael Staley" wrote:
So Crowley's words, which you quote, lead you to believe that he had this "specific spiritual experience"?

That's interesting to know. In another thread - "Crowley and the 'supernatural'" - you seem to maintain that despite his many accounts of occult work over the decades, Crowley was a sceptic, only affecting a belief in the occult. And yet, here you seem to have no difficulty in accepting that his account reflects "a specific spiritual experience".

Assuming that consistency is a word in your vocabulary, what's the difference here?

I have always maintained and admitted that Crowley the sceptic undeniably had his "blooper moments" where he appears to deviate from his general rationale and it behoves us to work out for ourselves when these occur in his writings and his life.  Yes I addressed this in that thread

On analysis I tend to think that his scepticism and his religiosity worked like a bicycle (Method : science Aim : religion) where the scepticism is (a) the thrust of the foot on the pedal and (b) the brakes but the religious experience/suspension of disbelief are the wheels so both forces drive the vehicle forward in an orderly manner but one without the other means he goes nowhere.  I guesse he could've rode to the top of a hill, took his feet off the pedals ,abstained from using the brakes and let the wheels do all the work downhill but that would've been unwise and probably disastrous (this of course is what the New Agey world does where scepticism is openly discouraged.)


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
02/11/2014 10:41 pm  
"david" wrote:
It's an amazing coincidence............which is why I bring in his views on coincidence in the OP.   

How's it a coincidence? He identified with a character as a child, and when he got older, he identified even more with that character. I wouldn't even say that that's unlikely.

I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
02/11/2014 11:04 pm  
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
It's an amazing coincidence............which is why I bring in his views on coincidence in the OP.   

How's it a coincidence? He identified with a character as a child, and when he got older, he identified even more with that character. I wouldn't even say that that's unlikely.

I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.

I guesse it could be seen as a mere process of ego-identification a la  the way he did with the Shelleian character Alastor. the Wanderer of the Wastes.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
02/11/2014 11:12 pm  
"Los" wrote:
I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.

So is david, clearly.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
02/11/2014 11:24 pm  
"Michael Staley" wrote:
"Los" wrote:
I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.

So is david, clearly.

??  I refer you to Reply #21 if you want to stay OT.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
03/11/2014 5:43 pm  
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
It's an amazing coincidence............which is why I bring in his views on coincidence in the OP.   

How's it a coincidence? He identified with a character as a child, and when he got older, he identified even more with that character. I wouldn't even say that that's unlikely.

I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.

Cf. with:

Reply #37 by Los on “Thelema is not Magick?  Magick is not Thelema?” thread: November 2 2014 at 10:30:00 pm:
What the hell, David?

This thread -- like nearly all of your threads, I might add -- has gone completely off the rails.

&

Reply #86 by Los on: Novemeber 2 2014 in “Crowley’s belief in the ‘supernatural’ thread at 10:22:00 pm:
Quote from: david on Yesterday at 10:01:01 pm
Here you have found Crowley in supernatural mode.

No, he hasn't. Just like you didn't find some sort of unexplainable contradiction on that other thread when Crowley said he identified with the Beast as a child.

David, this appears to be where the guru figure snubs his would-be chela and mockingly spurns his judgment.  I wouldn’t take it personally, as I have noticed this pattern happen with Los before - after a certain stage, he just doesn’t seem to like people agreeing with him whatever & prefers to argue with them come what may! 

Possibly “your move” now though, I believe…??  Will you still stick with anti-supernaturalism, or change tack once again??  😀
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
03/11/2014 6:22 pm  
"jamie barter" wrote:
"Los" wrote:
"david" wrote:
It's an amazing coincidence............which is why I bring in his views on coincidence in the OP.   

How's it a coincidence? He identified with a character as a child, and when he got older, he identified even more with that character. I wouldn't even say that that's unlikely.

I'm completely baffled as to what your point could possibly be.

Cf. with:

Reply #37 by Los on “Thelema is not Magick?  Magick is not Thelema?” thread: November 2 2014 at 10:30:00 pm:
What the hell, David?

This thread -- like nearly all of your threads, I might add -- has gone completely off the rails.

&

Reply #86 by Los on: Novemeber 2 2014 in “Crowley’s belief in the ‘supernatural’ thread at 10:22:00 pm:
Quote from: david on Yesterday at 10:01:01 pm
Here you have found Crowley in supernatural mode.

No, he hasn't. Just like you didn't find some sort of unexplainable contradiction on that other thread when Crowley said he identified with the Beast as a child.

David, this appears to be where the guru figure snubs his would-be chela and mockingly spurns his judgment.  I wouldn’t take it personally, as I have noticed this pattern happen with Los before - after a certain stage, he just doesn’t seem to like people agreeing with him whatever & prefers to argue with them come what may! 

Possibly “your move” now though, I believe…??  Will you still stick with anti-supernaturalism, or change tack once again??  😀
N Joy

Los is correct about the Beast 666 being a mere example of AC'S identification twofold  and in the OP I ask for opinions about AC's ideas on (such) coincidence and how they relate to Jung.  I think people overlooked this and my quotes from Magick Without Tears namely the Coincidence chapter.  Anyway yeah I got some opinions including one from Los. If you or Los think that I suddenly disagree that Crowley's scepticism was null and void well you're mistaken. 

The final issue you address, well that was a mistake by Belmurru and then myself in that we slipped up and didnot explore the context of Crowley's quote about logic.  I, however did not know the source chapter but Belmurru should've known better as he did know it.  Los is right; if you are going to make a quote from some of Crowley's writings then take the time to study the passages prior to it and the passages that follow.  I am very surprised that Belmurru didn't do that.  This leads nicely to why I also agree that Los sheds light on that quote about logic and how it relates to "the fall of because" and how our logic misleads us if premises are fake.  I believe this is why Blake famously said that, "reason is a whore" (i.e. goes with anyone if paid off) and Voltaire was cited as saying that those who believe absurdities can be convinced to commit atrocities.


ReplyQuote
jamie barter
(@jamie-barter)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 1688
04/11/2014 12:14 pm  
"david" wrote:
Los is correct about the Beast 666 being a mere example of AC'S identification twofold  and in the OP I ask for opinions about AC's ideas on (such) coincidence and how they relate to Jung.  I think people overlooked this and my quotes from Magick Without Tears namely the Coincidence chapter.  [...] The final issue you address, well that was a mistake by Belmurru and then myself in that we slipped up and didnot explore the context of Crowley's quote about logic.

The point I was making to you was not concerned with either coincidence or logic.  I wasn't discussing the specific content of the post excerpt examples I quoted, but their overall implications – giving you a tip and a wink as it were - which seemed to have totally bypassed you, incidentally.  Well, never mind.  Do what thou wilt.

"david" wrote:
Anyway yeah I got some opinions including one from Los. If you or Los think that I suddenly disagree that Crowley's scepticism was null and void well you're mistaken.

To give you one specific example: I don't think I was so much making this suggestion, as just discussing it as a possibility.  As far as Los goes, his stance on scepticism & the oojie-hoojie-woojie (or somesuch, as he affects to call super-naturalism) is well known to be pretty rock hard & immutable.  But yours, however – well, as has been pointed out previously, Constance is by no means your middle name (along with Consistency)...

So much so, in fact, that I’m just wondering how long it will be before your at times seemingly mercurial mind will select another avatar image and signature for our delectation & deelite.  (Btw, was that previous one meant to represent some weird amalgam of Guy the Gorilla and the Ape of Thoth?  Not altogether inappropriately chosen there, then, I feel!... ;D )

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
04/11/2014 12:19 pm  

the ape?  I prefer the canine avatar.

My view on Crolwey's scepticism have never faulted just the reading comprehension of others;

On analysis I tend to think that his scepticism and his religiosity worked like a bicycle (Method : science Aim : religion) where the scepticism is (a) the thrust of the foot on the pedal and (b) the brakes but the religious experience/suspension of disbelief are the wheels so both forces drive the vehicle forward in an orderly manner but one without the other means he goes nowhere.  I guesse he could've rode to the top of a hill, took his feet off the pedals ,abstained from using the brakes and let the wheels do all the work downhill but that would've been unwise and probably disastrous (this of course is what the New Agey world does where scepticism is openly discouraged.)


ReplyQuote
Share: