Notifications
Clear all

Initiation

Page 2 / 6

 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I think that you have expressed very nicely what I consider to be the major downside of such Orders, Shiva.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
It is all relevant to Cam's apparent suggestion of more cOTO-centric discussion on the site.

Cam, for example... and I trust I am keeping to Paul's request for discretion and sense with this post.

If the aspirant is "a native of Corinth" but he or she is captured en route to Heliopolis, the city of the sun. Beyond the obvious symbolism of a journey to the Sun this is interesting if you examine the motions of the candidate about the lodge chamber after the ordeal of the I* they follow an orbit around the solar system. Its almost like an astronomical body "captured" by the pull of a star.

Its been a while since I gave this much thought but I seem to recall you can actually superimpose the Tree of Life over the Lodge in the I* with Saladin's tent pole as (I believe?) Yesod. I'd have to go back a few years in notebooks and uncover the drawing. This makes sense as it is "the foundation" and is where the minerval is actually welcomed into the OTO.
I would be interested in other considerations on this.

Also worth seeing is a drawing of a map by Soror Meral of a journey from Corinth to Heliopolis that was published in The Magickal Link in the 70s. A google search will uncover this, which was published by the cOTO itself.

You know, I have read that they didn't know the OTO degrees in the MOE related to the chakras until Wasserman found a marginal note in a Crowley document... lol reconstruction.

So you see Cam, there is much to be discussed here and I imagine it would be a fresh and enlightening conversation! It can be approached without "revealing" anything to the casual innocent while still exploring materials that are widely available to review offsite! I'm certain many well read and experienced members of this forum can and would contribute to such a knowledge base.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
So you see Cam, there is much to be discussed here and I imagine it would be a fresh and enlightening conversation! It can be approached without "revealing" anything to the casual innocent while still exploring materials that are widely available to review offsite! I'm certain many well read and experienced members of this forum can and would contribute to such a knowledge base.

Sounds great, Scott.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Atzilut" wrote:
The current debate on whether or not to have an AA style curriculum in the OTO does have adherents on both sides.

As Shiva pointed out, this has in fact been accomplished many decades ago, more than once. In fact, it was probably the first thing of any note to happen to either organisation when Crowley died! You may need to brush up on your history of the material in question.

Kenneth Grant states in his Typhonian Trilogies that when he reformed the British Branch of the O.T.O. (in the 1950s) it was in fact a complete revisioning of the structure which incorporated the inner work of the AA material as well as expanding on it considerably to include other things that Crowley wasn't in a position to know about.

Also, Solar Lodge did it, as Shiva said.

"Camlion" wrote:
I, for one, would like to see OTO members posting to these forums more often.

I found myself wondering something vaguely similar the other week, quite independently.

I don't necessarily want to see more or less OTOers, Typhonians, Independents or anything else posting here. Whatever.

But what I wonder, is why Michael Staley is the only representative of a Crowley-informed occult order who posts here recognisably as such under an identifiable civilian name?

I mean, this is by far the most well-established site related to discussion of Crowley and Thelema, with the highest readership and hit count, by far. I know that Michael is posting here in a personal capacity but he is, simultaneously, undoubtedly, the clear representative of the Typhonian Order. There is no similar high-ranking representative of the O.T.O. who posts here. Why is that? He doesn't strike me as being any less busy than I imagine the others to be, quite the contrary if anything, with a day job, running Starfire, etc.

I'm not saying that this is necessarily more meritorious, or that anyone should post in any particular way, but, well, where are the Milo DuQuettes and so forth? Why is there no Caliphate representative here to chat to as there is for the Typhonian Order? Is it because they attach a dollar value to each word that might be construed as "instruction"? I can't work it out. I know in the past (when the copyright case was on) there were a couple of Breeze's pals who posted here but they've gone all quiet.

Just curious.

N.

___


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 5354
 
"Noctifer" wrote:
I know in the past (when the copyright case was on) there were a couple of Breeze's pals who posted here but they've gone all quiet.

That's an interesting point, Noctifer, and it stems at least in part, I think, from the enthusiasm of many members - yourself included - to keep their 'real' identities private. That's inevitable and sensible in certain parts of the world, of course, but it does mean that we don't automatically know the affiliations of the great majority of posters. As owner and editor of the site, I'm fortunate to know the 'real names' of a substantial number of the active participants here and I can confirm that the OTO is very well represented here. Their user names aren't necessarily shared within their own groups, which has lead in the past to some amusing situations where, for example, OTO members have protested about the anti-OTO sentiments posted by someone I know to be 'prominent' within the OTO! In the interests of balance, I should add that the same situation has arisen with supporters of - if not members of - the Typhonian Order.

In short, it's perhaps unhelpful to make assumptions about membership and affiliations of members unless one knows them personally.

Your core point about 'representatives' of the OTO is well made, though. Perhaps it has something to do with the number of OTO websites as compared with the number of websites run by other Orders?

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

That's an amusing tale Paul! As I implied, I'm not discouraging anyone from anonymity (obviously!), it's vital that privacy is an option for those who require it. But I don't see what the number of OTO websites has to do with the total absence of a single recognisable authoritative OTO representative on the single most-read, best-established Crowley website, apart from perhaps indicating a disinclination on their part to communicate with non-members (apart from the free advertising for their books and events).


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Noctifer" wrote:
That's an amusing tale Paul! As I implied, I'm not discouraging anyone from anonymity (obviously!), it's vital that privacy is an option for those who require it. But I don't see what the number of OTO websites has to do with the total absence of a single recognisable authoritative OTO representative on the single most-read, best-established Crowley website, apart from perhaps indicating a disinclination on their part to communicate with non-members (apart from the free advertising for their books and events).

They have a high visibility on Facebook but never, that I have seen, in an open forum that they do not moderate themselves.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"Noctifer" wrote:
That's an amusing tale Paul! As I implied, I'm not discouraging anyone from anonymity (obviously!), it's vital that privacy is an option for those who require it. But I don't see what the number of OTO websites has to do with the total absence of a single recognisable authoritative OTO representative on the single most-read, best-established Crowley website, apart from perhaps indicating a disinclination on their part to communicate with non-members (apart from the free advertising for their books and events).

They have a high visibility on Facebook but never, that I have seen, in an open forum that they do not moderate themselves.

I wonder whether this is a product of a) corporate proprietary brand control, b) the military thing, c) simple cultishness d) inability to function coherently outside of a contrived filter-bubble, e) all of the above?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"Noctifer" wrote:
That's an amusing tale Paul! As I implied, I'm not discouraging anyone from anonymity (obviously!), it's vital that privacy is an option for those who require it. But I don't see what the number of OTO websites has to do with the total absence of a single recognisable authoritative OTO representative on the single most-read, best-established Crowley website, apart from perhaps indicating a disinclination on their part to communicate with non-members (apart from the free advertising for their books and events).

They have a high visibility on Facebook but never, that I have seen, in an open forum that they do not moderate themselves.

um, like I said earlier, I would like to see more of them participate in these forums, under whatever member names they like. With Scott's assurance that proprietary ritual details will not be on display, perhaps more will. 😉


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Camlion" wrote:
...I find the apparent orientation of many OTO members to be refreshing...I would attribute it to the 'Path in Eternity' degree system and the overall mission of the OTO with regard to the promulgation of the Law of Thelema.


Wait, that?

Cam, when did you change your opinion on the OTO and promulgation?

On Apr 13, 2011 you told me in no uncertain terms your opinion was the OTO MOE Initiatory system is experimental until proven. You also said it has pretty much been proven not to work as intended.

You went on to say the MOE Initiatory System of the OTO was not very high on AC's list of priorities for the OTO,

Lastly you said:
"They happen to suck at promulgation and some of their other clearly defined functions, too..."

So... may I ask what brings about this change of heart? Was Krzysztof that seductive in his prose? My god... you must have had la petite mort when reading the promotional materials for "Initiation in the Aeon of the Child."

please tell us more.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
...I find the apparent orientation of many OTO members to be refreshing...I would attribute it to the 'Path in Eternity' degree system and the overall mission of the OTO with regard to the promulgation of the Law of Thelema.


Wait, that?

Cam, when did you change your opinion on the OTO and promulgation?

On Apr 13, 2011 you told me in no uncertain terms your opinion was the OTO MOE Initiatory system is experimental until proven. You also said it has pretty much been proven not to work as intended.

You went on to say the MOE Initiatory System of the OTO was not very high on AC's list of priorities for the OTO,

Lastly you said:
"They happen to suck at promulgation and some of their other clearly defined functions, too..."

So... may I ask what brings about this change of heart? Was Krzysztof that seductive in his prose? My god... you must have had la petite mort when reading the promotional materials for "Initiation in the Aeon of the Child."

please tell us more.

I believe it is experimental, and I believe Crowley thought so, too. I am personally disappointed by some of the results. (Not that it matters.) I believe that Crowley was too, and I suspect that he would be now if he was around.

I believe that their promulgation efforts are too religion-oriented, among other things. Too narrow in focus, too dependent upon intangibles, I could go on - and have elsewhere in these forums.

BUT, it is the emphasis that I admire, and I do admire it.

I am very fond of Crowley's vision for the degree system:

http://hermetic.com/crowley/magick-without-tears/mwt_13.html

And I am very fond of his vision for a pragmatic promulgation of the Law, as far as he went with it.

I have my own Initiation and my own projects under my belt, so if the OTO falls short, it's not the end of the world, but I do admire the effort.

I welcome the participation of OTO members here, and want to at least do my part in expressing that welcome, even if it is not shared by other prominent posters to the forums.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Camlion" wrote:
...even if it is not shared by other prominent posters to the forums.

Who are you implying? If you have something to say please say it - dont play coy with oblique inferences.

I have see no one in this thread say they would not welcome the OTO. Quite the contrary, I have seen people ask why the OTO seems to avoid posting outside its "comfort zone."

What are you on about? I do see you in this thread waxing with love for an order and a system you have otherwise disparaged. That strikes me as disingenuous and strange.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Clarification to the above:

I was referring to the Initiatory system as being experimental.

Also, I do not believe that Crowley would dislike the promulgation efforts at all, he is directly responsible for them.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
...even if it is not shared by other prominent posters to the forums.

Who are you implying? If you have something to say please say it - dont play coy with oblique inferences.

I have see no one in this thread say they would not welcome the OTO. Quite the contrary, I have seen people ask why the OTO seems to avoid posting outside its "comfort zone."

What are you on about? I do see you in this thread waxing with love for an order and a system you have otherwise disparaged. That strikes me as disingenuous and strange.

Scott, you, for one, have what I consider to be an irrational disdain for the OTO. You are not objective about it at all. In fact, bias to any extreme distorts one's view, in my experience.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Camlion" wrote:
Scott, you, for one, have what I consider to be an irrational disdain for the OTO. You are not objective about it at all. In fact, bias to any extreme distorts one's view, in my experience.

I'm flattered to be called prominent - thank you Cam. Will you change your mind on this in a few months when a new opinion suits you? 🙂

I do not consider my skeptical, critical, and objective view of the American Reconstructed OTO to be irrational. I consider blindly accepting the quasi religious doctrine of a 30 some year old American corporation as doctrine and history to be irrational to the extreme.

but I digress, you said "Scott, you, for one..."

if you have people in mind Cam, call them out or bite your tongue. Its unbecoming to lack the conviction of your vision and the hole you are digging gets deeper. I never said the OTO would not be welcome here. They obviously are and you grossly overestimate my "prominence" if you think I register as a deterrent.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Camlion" wrote:
In fact, bias to any extreme distorts one's view, in my experience.

Agreed.

However, evaluation based on personal experience and - yes - prior 'objective' assessment (if such a thing exists outside of idealised abstraction) is not "bias", it's the result of experience and observation.

Knee-jerk dismissal of said data as "bias" simply because it may be unwelcome is, itself, bias.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 6474
 
"Noctifer" wrote:
I wonder whether this is a product of a) corporate proprietary brand control, b) the military thing, c) simple cultishness d) inability to function coherently outside of a contrived filter-bubble, e) all of the above?

At one point, early in my career as a human being, I established and influenced and enforced some (some) of these issues. Come with me here for a moment and step inside the concensus reality of Solar Lodge (1965 - 1972, RIP) :

a) corporate proprietary brand control - This is certainly an issue today. The Magickal Texts and Sacred Symbols have become Copyrighted and Trademarked. They do not want others to infringe on this territory and they will vigorously defend it. However, most of the major texts appear to be available online, usually bearing their copyright notice and sometimes offered directly from their own websites.

Solar Lodge didn't care. We "were" the OTO, with a named-lineage but no hard copy documents to prove it, as if anybody cared. There was no competition. There were no other claimants (except for Kenneth Grant, but we knew nothing about his claim or his activities). If you entered our circle (the energetic ashram or a designated temple), the books and the symbols were displayed. But we NEVER, EVER (yelling) 🙄 displayed this stuff to the outer world (you know, the trogolodytes - the Establishment) in connection with our person. That is, nobody ever said to the external environment, "I am OTO" or "Lookit my Baphomet Lamen t-shirt." As a group, we erected the Eye of Horus as a small billboard over our bookstore and issued documents with OTO insignia all over it.

b) the military thing - F**k you, Noctifer. my dad can beat your dad at anything.

Solar Lodge never had much military stuff, but the Templar grades or classes arose of their own accord. There was of course the Master of the Temple (a Templar designation many centuries before the A.'.A.'. title arose). There were the priests (who could also be warriors). This is like the 8th & 9th degrees. There were the Sergeants, who supervised the Warrior-monks, who were the "men of earth." I'm describing how it played out in Solar Lodge, but without the titles - it was the same in the heyday of the Templars.

c) simple cultishness - Them versus Us is a basic, dynamic, powerful archetype to be used for cohesion in a group setting. It is very popular and is seemingly universal in its manifestation.

Solar Lodge's "them" was Scientology and the Riverside County law enforcement and inquistion departments. On a wider scale, "them" included all non-initiates, although some profane people had a (non-magickal) working relationship with us. In the end of the myth, "them" was the FBI and the Federales.

d) inability to function coherently outside of a contrived filter-bubble - I don't think this one applies. Although you may be reading deeper than most care to see.

One trains for years in martial arts until they perfect all the movements. Then they step onto the mat, or into the ring, in a competetive tournament. Outside of the "contrived filter-bubble," it's an entirely different world. Perhaps posting on an forum is similar. I mean, signing in to lashtal is sometimes like entering the octagon.

In Solar Lodge we didn't have this problem. There were no forums, except in the philosophy dept at USC. There was nobody to debate. There was just a lot of work to do. All day, all night, Maryann.

e) all of the above - Why not? Throw the Book at them. But better be careful - you're treading the periphery of the sacred mysteries.


ReplyQuote
Nomad
(@nomad)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 86
 

It is disappointing to see so many references to the content of OTO rituals in this thread.

Those that post such references do a great disservice to the many men and women who wisely refrain from reading rituals before their initiation. As Crowley points out in MWT, it is the surprise factor that is a key element in an initiation's efficacy. People should be able to read these forums without the risk of having future initiations spoilt.

And after all, what on earth is the point of discussing the content of OTO initiations in a public forum? These are things to be reflected on by initiates, as the karma of the initiation works into the fabric of their lives. The 'meaning' of any degree is unique and personal, and only arises through the magical experience itself.

Non-initiates can surmise all they like about what an OTO ritual does or doesn't mean, but at the end of the day their opinions are baseless for they are not initiates. It would be like a person claiming to know what the Oath of the Abyss is all about when they are not a Magister Templi.

Most OTO initiates have little to say on the topic of OTO initiation, as most OTO initiates understand the fourth power of the Sphinx. If an initiate did speak publicly about ritual content then they are in direct violation of their magical oaths, and are thus of dubious character and limited magical understanding anyway.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Nomad" wrote:
It is disappointing to see so many references to the content of OTO rituals in this thread.

Those that post such references do a great disservice to the many men and women who wisely refrain from reading rituals before their initiation. As Crowley points out in MWT, it is the surprise factor that is a key element in an initiation's efficacy. People should be able to read these forums without the risk of having future initiations spoilt.

And after all, what on earth is the point of discussing the content of OTO initiations in a public forum? These are things to be reflected on by initiates, as the karma of the initiation works into the fabric of their lives. The 'meaning' of any degree is unique and personal, and only arises through the magical experience itself.

Non-initiates can surmise all they like about what an OTO ritual does or doesn't mean, but at the end of the day their opinions are baseless for they are not initiates. It would be like a person claiming to know what the Oath of the Abyss is all about when they are not a Magister Templi.

Most OTO initiates have little to say on the topic of OTO initiation, as most OTO initiates understand the fourth power of the Sphinx. If an initiate did speak publicly about ritual content then they are in direct violation of their magical oaths, and are thus of dubious character and limited magical understanding anyway.

Sorry, but this argument doesn't hold up to reality.

Firstly, Crowley broke his magical oath (and what modern legislation calls "intellectual property law") by publishing the Golden Dawn's rituals and other material, as an explicit aggressive act to "destroy" the order's mystique. But people still use it, and work it, in full knowledge of the contents. If an artificial "surprise" is the best thing in the ritual, it can't be particularly good.

Secondly, the "fruits" of said rituals in the souls of those who have undergone them without any taint of "spoiler", might be measured by their behaviour, which quite frankly often leaves much to be desired.

Thirdly, and most importantly, the rituals have all been in the public record, published, repeatedly, and legally, for DECADES now. It is absurd to insist on pretending they're "secret" or "surprising" when you can google for 1 minute and get a complete PDF of Koenig's book or Francis King's, or buy them in a shop or online. There simply is no surprise element to anyone who sincerely researches the maximum information on what they're about to undergo, as any sensible and responsible individual should (but that's just my view).

Regardless of what "OTO members" are told to pretend, or what retrospective and anachronistic litigation has been engaged in by that company, the material is now publicly known for a generation or more; to pretend it isn't, so as to produce a false sense of surprise, seems like trying just a bit too hard, to my mind.

Either it works, or it doesn't. Don't blame the public record.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

93 Noctifer.

I think you’re missing the point that if someone takes a magick oath to hold something sacred and secret, it’s the oath that is important. These oaths are (imo) done not only before brothers and sisters of the Order but are made before God.
It is completely irrelevant if the rituals are in the public domain or if AC broke his own oaths within the GD, its about personal ethics and trust.

GK


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

einDoppelganger:

"That I might fortify minds thereby.
To what end?
That I might accomplish the Great Work.

Love is the Law, Love under Will"

Then why not start with a warning that those who want to keep it a secret should not read? This disrespects the rights of others.

Also, why not properly quote from Class A? In Class A you do not change so much as a style of a letter.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Heliopolis-156" wrote:
Also, why not properly quote from Class A? In Class A you do not change so much as a style of a letter.

Despite Crowley changing many - and Rose - to the point the originals of some words are illegible in the Liber AL Manuscript.

Come now dear, is that the best you can do?

There is no spoiler warning because the world is a dangerous place, oh brave solider of Thelema. You will have to venture into it fortified and without fear of hearing tell of who made Dumbledore eat the bread and salt and who may have dilated on Saladin's pole.

Meanwhile, the adults want to have a conversation about writings by the subject of this site which you happen to pretend are secret and sacred.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"gkraay" wrote:
93 Noctifer.

I think you’re missing the point that if someone takes a magick oath to hold something sacred and secret, it’s the oath that is important. These oaths are (imo) done not only before brothers and sisters of the Order but are made before God.
It is completely irrelevant if the rituals are in the public domain or if AC broke his own oaths within the GD, its about personal ethics and trust.

GK

No, you have missed the point. Read the first paragraph of my post. Learn your Crowley history. Then come back. kthxbai.

How can it be "completely irrelevant" if the author of those "secret" (but really, not) rituals broke his own magical oath to the order he was in before the OTO? What does that say about them and the tradition of which they are a part? Isn't he a big shining example according to the OTO?


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Nomad" wrote:
It is disappointing to see so many references to the content of OTO rituals in this thread.

Gee, sorry. This is the AC society website and its part of his body of work. most references would be under the radar to anyone who hadn't read or experienced them if you didn't feel the need to harp on it.

Those that post such references do a great disservice to the many men and women who wisely refrain from reading rituals before their initiation.

Oh for crying out loud this argument is so old. The OTO cannot seem to decide if the publication of the rituals (they used to reconstruct the OTO) is a disservice to members, irrelevant, or possibly damaging to the efficacy of the rites,... Geez..

As Crowley points out in MWT, it is the surprise factor that is a key element in an initiation's efficacy. People should be able to read these forums without the risk of having future initiations spoilt.

Oh well um... the rituals were secret when AC wrote that.. they aren't anymore. Life goes on - the world changes . Maybe if the American Reconstructed OTO and her international subservient franchise holders evolved too...

And after all, what on earth is the point of discussing the content of OTO initiations in a public forum?

Its part of ACs body of work and valid to discuss. The initiations contain much of his poetry and the poetry of those he respected, his philosophy, and you can gain insights by comparing the differences in versions of - say - the I* initiation, for example.

Ultimately, this is not an occult website - it is a site for the discussion of ACs body of work.

These are things to be reflected on by initiates, as the karma of the initiation works into the fabric of their lives. The 'meaning' of any degree is unique and personal, and only arises through the magical experience itself.

Um, yeah... This is a site for the discussion of the life and *work* of Aleister Crowley. Works like the various initiations he wrote for his version of the OTO (which all but collapsed by his death and the American wing did collapse after his death) Thankfully some Americans reconstructed it with the help of Francis King and the US judicial system.

Non-initiates can surmise all they like about what an OTO ritual does or doesn't mean, but at the end of the day their opinions are baseless for they are not initiates. It would be like a person claiming to know what the Oath of the Abyss is all about when they are not a Magister Templi.

My god thats absurd! but hey - thank you for making my point for me... By that logic you have to agree the OTO is entirely fraudulent from a magical perspective since not one of the reformers experienced all the degrees. From what I understand the Secretary of the OTO after Crowley's death, Karl Germer experienced *none* of them.

Most OTO initiates have little to say on the topic of OTO initiation, as most OTO initiates understand the fourth power of the Sphinx. If an initiate did speak publicly about ritual content then they are in direct violation of their magical oaths, and are thus of dubious character and limited magical understanding anyway.

yeah, like Scientologists tend not to discuss Scientology outside the safehaven of those who work the tech... just sayin.

einDoppelganger


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:

Non-initiates can surmise all they like about what an OTO ritual does or doesn't mean, but at the end of the day their opinions are baseless for they are not initiates. It would be like a person claiming to know what the Oath of the Abyss is all about when they are not a Magister Templi.

My god thats absurd! but hey - thank you for making my point for me... By that logic you have to agree the OTO is entirely fraudulent from a magical perspective since not one of the reformers experienced all the degrees. From what I understand the Secretary of the OTO after Crowley's death, Karl Germer experienced *none* of them.

S.N.A.P.!

😆

I think we can safely say that there is absolutely no reason to regard parts of the public record as something to tip-toe around unless one is threatened with a lawsuit for not doing so, or has a vested financial interest in the policy.

And that, my friends, is that.


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

I can see it in the year 2567... "You can say anything you like on this non-cable TV station... anything, except talk about the initiation rituals."

I don't usually talk about the initiations I've had simply because for most of you it's none of your damn business. As for Crowley's rituals, who cares? Some of his rituals were extremely lame, by the way.

So I am walking through a hallway, and all of the lights are on. I see a big hole in the middle of the hallway. There is no way for me to get past that hole, but I have to try. As I begin trying, the lights in the hallways are turned off. The hole does not disappear, and I still have to get past it. So the light is on (read the rituals), or off (didn't read them), the hole is the same, the ordeal is the same, only the perception differs.

Personally, I don't mind spoilers. I'm a big boy. If I'm curious enough to read spoiler information then I have to allow myself to be gullible enough to experience it for the first time when I actually do experience it for the first time. There is still a difference right, between book knowledge (reading the rituals) and experience (performing them)? Also, is not Thelema about personal responsibility? What's with all of the "protectors of virgin eyes" that I am seeing? Mystery is the enemy of truth. Let them see. If it is a real initiation, they can read about it all they like, but experiencing it will definitely be a different animal.

I remember my first formal initiation (NOT O.T.O. ...those of you who thought so, you knew better)...

I read an initiation rite. Okay, cool. I think I have it all mapped out in my head how it will go. The next thing I know, I am hanging out at my "friend's house", and we are all getting wasted. Some of us guys hop in the car for a ride. We smoke one, bullshit a bit, and then turn down this gravel road. Frater X looked at me and said, "This is the part where we blindfold you." He slipped the blindfold on and away we went. Nothing, I repeat nothing (no thing) I had read or could have read up to that point, nothing I could have watched on YouTube or anything else, would have diminished the subsequent hours. 11 years ago now, and I remember it like yesterday... take that "Google Rituals"!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

That's an interesting point, Noctifer, and it stems at least in part, I think, from the enthusiasm of many members - yourself included - to keep their 'real' identities private. That's inevitable and sensible in certain parts of the world, of course, but it does mean that we don't automatically know the affiliations of the great majority of posters. As owner and editor of the site, I'm fortunate to know the 'real names' of a substantial number of the active participants here and I can confirm that the OTO is very well represented here. Their user names aren't necessarily shared within their own groups, which has lead in the past to some amusing situations where, for example, OTO members have protested about the anti-OTO sentiments posted by someone I know to be 'prominent' within the OTO! In the interests of balance, I should add that the same situation has arisen with supporters of - if not members of - the Typhonian Order.

In short, it's perhaps unhelpful to make assumptions about membership and affiliations of members unless one knows them personally.

Your core point about 'representatives' of the OTO is well made, though. Perhaps it has something to do with the number of OTO websites as compared with the number of websites run by other Orders?

This is so very true. As a member of the OTO there have been many times when I have posted a kind of anti-OTO sentiment, usually regarding a particular issue, on a site, only to find myself suddenly recognising the style of writing or character trait of one of the members of the Lodge I belong to, arguing the opposite. Paul is absolutely right on this. Anyone who knows me personally, can easily recognise me by my style and the nature of the gripe.
Sometimes I post my contentions here and elsewhere because I genuinely seek a wider and more critical evaluation of the ideas put forth.
The OTO, like any organisation, needs fresh blood and input on all levels. Knowing many members as well as I do, it is difficult to justice to the many levels of reasoning that go to make up the decisions it arrives at. However, what I can testify to is that the old arguments do reappear again and again and no doubt will continue to do so, for many reasons.
As to the argument regarding prior knowledge affecting the outcome of an initiation, this would depend on the individual. What seems to indicate a level
of 'maturity' regarding the initiation isn't the grade itself, but the self awareness with which the candidate senses whether or not he or she is ready to undergo that initiation. This point is often overlooked by those who are not actually in the OTO. What I can say is that many members do not rush through the MOE initiations. They measure their readiness not by curriculum, books or so-called 'knowledge', but by the level of internal feeling and effects they feel either before or after a given initiation.
Of course, a good Lodge Master is very helpful in these matters. I am grateful to those who,despite holding very different opinions to me, have nevertheless always shown the greatest courtesy and helpfulness at the appropriate times. To me that is a sign of real maturity.

Atzilut


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 2967
 
"Atzilut" wrote:
As to the argument regarding prior knowledge affecting the outcome of an initiation, this would depend on the individual. What seems to indicate a level
of 'maturity' regarding the initiation isn't the grade itself, but the self awareness with which the candidate senses whether or not he or she is ready to undergo that initiation. This point is often overlooked by those who are not actually in the OTO. What I can say is that many members do not rush through the MOE initiations. They measure their readiness not by curriculum, books or so-called 'knowledge', but by the level of internal feeling and effects they feel either before or after a given initiation.

And you are only talking about O.T.O. (c) initiations here, right? Or even more narrowly, O.T.O. (c) initiations that you have personally witnessed?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

In this case I was specifically recalling those conversations with OTO candidates both before and after an initiation, at some given point, some of which I chose to witness. Candidates are constrained in the OTO by minimum time requirement to pass before moving on o the next degree. Naturally, some candidates are ready before this time has elapsed and others are not.
However, Im sure this applies equally to the concept of Initiation generally.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

einDoppelganger do you consider yourself a member of O.T.O?


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"AL-Bertrocious" wrote:
einDoppelganger do you consider yourself a member of O.T.O?

None of your concern and furthermore of no bearing on this discussion.

if you must persist I warn you -

I consider myself a black brother.

like... Dolemite!

Yeah you read that right...All girl army of kung fu killers muthafucka - stick that in your Aiwass.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Dork by any other name
warn?
please. try again...


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"AL-Bertrocious" wrote:
Dork by any other name
warn?
please. try again...

wait.. wow...

Did you actually just call me... a "dork?"

like... really - with no self effacing irony you actually said that..
heheheh sorry Im gonna be over there laughing my ass off at you - back in a min.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

93

Many thanks to those who posted their opinions in regards to the article in question.
Since then we've received enormous amount of orders for the Journal.

einDoppelganger, I understand completely a drive to study Crowley's all material but, in regards to the mysteries, magick should be always experiental. To give you a culinary analogy;
we can debate endlessly about preparation of Foie Gras served with excellent Cadiallac and study its receipt. We may even try something similar.
We may argue that our previous experiences with other dishes were so similar that we know all about it. We may even photocopy the receipt and share it with our friends
warning them against poisonous juices of the dish or in our presumption to prompt them to make it while praising its quality. But it will never be the same unless we make it.
It will all remain in "the desolate land of Barren Words" (Liber LXV V:59). We deal with dead letters here because they are not sealed up into the blood and the heart is closed.
What counts is a subtlety of taste.

Shiva wrote: "Threads dealing with OTO usually end up getting Locked because differences of opinion easily arise."

There is nothing wrong in diversity of opinions. Moreover, a good debate should be always based on different views.
Perhaps those threads are locked for other reasosns? Digressions, blind and violent expressions of emotions, prejudices, already assumed and unchangeable views, arrogance, lack of tact and respect to others and bull baiting as per 52th chapter of The Book of Lies. Just see what's happening in this topic.

Since from page 2 of this thread most comments (if not all) have nothing to do with the subject I therefore request it to be locked.

93 93/93
Krzysztof


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"krzysztof" wrote:
Just see what's happening in this topic.

no Krzysztof. opinions contrary to your own have been presented, that is all.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

In response to a few other points.

einDoppelganger says "There is no reason, if you are so inclined, we could not discuss the symbolism of the degree initiations ourselves. The various motions, words, and ordeals. The passwords of the grades pop up in Crowley's various writings".

The correct passwords are not written publically in AC's writings, I can tell you that much. If you believe that they are please tell me in which publications they are written. Also, at the end of the day it is just a password and whilst there may well be some interesting symbolism related to the password, at the end of the day the initiation is about the process whereby one journeys inwards and works with the process of karma yoga in the O.T.O..

What you have is a piece of paper with words on it.

No matter how long you look at those words and how much analysis you put into your study, you will never truly understand the process of initiation in the O.T.O. degrees if you do not experience it yourself. Every man must cut his own way through the jungle, a piece of paper will not help you to do that. All of the "secrets" are written in very plain english in AC's works, but what you have to have is the sight to see and to perceive them. There is so much more to those degrees than what is written in the text of the initiation, you just have to have the sight to see it.

Taking it away from the O.T.O. for example, AC wrote a lot about the experience of KCHGA. I can write extensively on almost every single thing AC said about that, but at the end of the day, until I experience it I will not be able to truly understand it. Another good example, I read Liber Pyramidos for years, I diligently studied the words and discussed the symbolism with others, however I never really understood it until I passed through ThROA. Even on a close study of the text of ThROA or Pyramidos one can never actually understand the true symbolism of the Grade of Neophyte until they themselves have experienced it. When you have and when you have appreciated the Vision of God first hand you come to realise that all you had before was pieces of paper with words on them.

Shiva you say that "Er, let me help you out here. the key is "service,"". This was not what I was referring to. I appreciate what you say in your post and whilst I won't comment on these things on a public forum, I do see what you mean. I would suggest that there is a difference between what AC envisioned for the Order and how it currently functions today.

Shiva you also say "Crowley said that an initiation ceremony should be bestowed in recognition of work that had already been accomplished (not as a rite that will somehow propel a person into the next level of consciousness). If there is no defined "work"to be done, then how can those "in charge" determine when a candidate is ready to receive the next level? By toadying and washing the dishes?"

I recall that we have discussed this before. Whilst I completely agree on this statement from an A:.A:. perspective, I don't think it is quite that way in the O.T.O.. During the MOE degrees this was certainly my experience but I have sponsored and initiated candidates where it has been the reverse. Whilst there is no defined work and there is no defined curriculum, the initiation works on the basis of the Life of the initiate. I would venture to suggest that one knows when they are ready to advance to the next degree. Each degree has a process of karma yoga which is associated with it and it is against this that one needs to evaluate their own readiness to proceed. Academic and intellectual ability has nothing whatsoever to do with ability to advance in the O.T.O. - I would initiate someone to the IIIrd degree who didn't even know what qabalah was if they showed an aptitude in relation to assimilating how the initiation system works. Those "in charge" do not determine when someone is ready to proceed in the MOE (advancement to degrees above this Grade would be an interesting discussion for another day!).

Tidying and washing dishes is an important part of the work of a Lodge. If I have a plate from which I eat my food then it is my duty to wash up that plate and tidy it away. If the floor also needs hoovering then I may suggest to another person that I hoover the floor and they wash my plate, but there is work to be done and someone has to do it. This is the case across all areas of life - office, home, etc. This is about maturity and living in the real world. I don't care if someone can produce a 50 page analysis of the Star Ruby, but I do care if they have an inability to wash a plate.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Heliopolis-156" wrote:
What you have is a piece of paper with words on it.
No matter how long you look at those words and how much analysis you put into your study, you will never truly understand the process of initiation in the O.T.O. degrees if you do not experience it yourself.

Then I say again thank you for reaffirming the fact the OTO is magically impotent.

By that logic you have to agree the OTO is entirely fraudulent from a magical perspective since not one of the reformers experienced all the degrees. From what I understand the Secretary of the OTO after Crowley's death, Karl Germer experienced *none* of them.

Thank you


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"Nomad" wrote:
It is disappointing to see so many references to the content of OTO rituals in this thread.

Gee, sorry. This is the AC society website and its part of his body of work. most references would be under the radar to anyone who hadn't read or experienced them if you didn't feel the need to harp on it.

Those that post such references do a great disservice to the many men and women who wisely refrain from reading rituals before their initiation.

Oh for crying out loud this argument is so old. The OTO cannot seem to decide if the publication of the rituals (they used to reconstruct the OTO) is a disservice to members, irrelevant, or possibly damaging to the efficacy of the rites,... Geez..

As Crowley points out in MWT, it is the surprise factor that is a key element in an initiation's efficacy. People should be able to read these forums without the risk of having future initiations spoilt.

Oh well um... the rituals were secret when AC wrote that.. they aren't anymore. Life goes on - the world changes . Maybe if the American Reconstructed OTO and her international subservient franchise holders evolved too...

And after all, what on earth is the point of discussing the content of OTO initiations in a public forum?

Its part of ACs body of work and valid to discuss. The initiations contain much of his poetry and the poetry of those he respected, his philosophy, and you can gain insights by comparing the differences in versions of - say - the I* initiation, for example.

Ultimately, this is not an occult website - it is a site for the discussion of ACs body of work.

These are things to be reflected on by initiates, as the karma of the initiation works into the fabric of their lives. The 'meaning' of any degree is unique and personal, and only arises through the magical experience itself.

Um, yeah... This is a site for the discussion of the life and *work* of Aleister Crowley. Works like the various initiations he wrote for his version of the OTO (which all but collapsed by his death and the American wing did collapse after his death) Thankfully some Americans reconstructed it with the help of Francis King and the US judicial system.

Non-initiates can surmise all they like about what an OTO ritual does or doesn't mean, but at the end of the day their opinions are baseless for they are not initiates. It would be like a person claiming to know what the Oath of the Abyss is all about when they are not a Magister Templi.

My god thats absurd! but hey - thank you for making my point for me... By that logic you have to agree the OTO is entirely fraudulent from a magical perspective since not one of the reformers experienced all the degrees. From what I understand the Secretary of the OTO after Crowley's death, Karl Germer experienced *none* of them.

Most OTO initiates have little to say on the topic of OTO initiation, as most OTO initiates understand the fourth power of the Sphinx. If an initiate did speak publicly about ritual content then they are in direct violation of their magical oaths, and are thus of dubious character and limited magical understanding anyway.

yeah, like Scientologists tend not to discuss Scientology outside the safehaven of those who work the tech... just sayin.

einDoppelganger

Scott,

This is a fantastic attempt to justify breaking your oaths/word, since you are incapable of keeping your oath you show yourself in your true light, untrustworthy, unreliable and irrelevant. You shame yourself and those that would call you brother.
GK


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"krzysztof" wrote:
93

Many thanks to those who posted their opinions in regards to the article in question.
Since then we've received enormous amount of orders for the Journal.

einDoppelganger, I understand completely a drive to study Crowley's all material but, in regards to the mysteries, magick should be always experiental. To give you a culinary analogy;
we can debate endlessly about preparation of Foie Gras served with excellent Cadiallac and study its receipt. We may even try something similar.
We may argue that our previous experiences with other dishes were so similar that we know all about it. We may even photocopy the receipt and share it with our friends
warning them against poisonous juices of the dish or in our presumption to prompt them to make it while praising its quality. But it will never be the same unless we make it.
It will all remain in "the desolate land of Barren Words" (Liber LXV V:59). We deal with dead letters here because they are not sealed up into the blood and the heart is closed.
What counts is a subtlety of taste.

Shiva wrote: "Threads dealing with OTO usually end up getting Locked because differences of opinion easily arise."

There is nothing wrong in diversity of opinions. Moreover, a good debate should be always based on different views.
Perhaps those threads are locked for other reasosns? Digressions, blind and violent expressions of emotions, prejudices, already assumed and unchangeable views, arrogance, lack of tact and respect to others and bull baiting as per 52th chapter of The Book of Lies. Just see what's happening in this topic.

Since from page 2 of this thread most comments (if not all) have nothing to do with the subject I therefore request it to be locked.

93 93/93
Krzysztof

I wanted to add, I think it is a poor idea to request the thread to lock. It seems to me the discussion - like many of the best on this site - evolved and while I admire your clear and cogent posts, reacting to dissenting opinion by asking for a lock is seems opposed to the purpose of the site.

Many valuable threads developed from an initially unrelated seed comment. Perhaps the topic can be split but locking it in light of an outpouring of contrarian opinions is a bad idea.

Paul has made his stance on the thread clear already and I don't see why this attempt to silence the dialogue should come from you now.

I also want to say I enjoy your posts a lot Krzysztof - you are obviously a very well respected member of your lodge and its readily apparent why. Thank you for the rest of your analogy. It is problematic for your case as it still does forefront the fact that none of the founders of the reformed OTO experienced the full initiation cycle.

To continue the culinary analogy - how can you have your cake and eat it too?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

"Then I say again thank you for reaffirming the fact the OTO is magically impotent."

I said nothing of the sort. You clearly again show yourself again to be incapable to comprehending my basic english and have just hijacked this thread for your own agenda.

I agree with Krzysztof, this should be locked. This thread was once interesting until it disappeared into this nonsense again.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"Heliopolis-156" wrote:
"Then I say again thank you for reaffirming the fact the OTO is magically impotent."

I said nothing of the sort. You clearly again show yourself again to be incapable to comprehending my basic english and have just hijacked this thread for your own agenda.

If you read past the first sentence you might grasp this.. Read my post above to Krzysztof and maybe it will sink in. Otherwise, take 2 cakes of light and come back later.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

My my, what weak stuff.

A request to lock the thread? From people with a handful of posts? Sorry, everything here fits the guidelines. - apart from the "dork" insults directed at eindoppelganger. From you. Deal with it.

Clearly the simple fact that Crowley was the biggest transgressor in occult history of the whole "don't publish the secrets" thing - plus the fact that neither he nor his appointed successor ever went through the Grades of the OTO, doesn't gel well with those calling (typically, cult-like) for the thread to be locked (i.e. censorship, Restriction, death, etc.). Whilst I sympathise with your plight, I also don't see it as the end of the world. But that's because it doesn't matter to me.

Knights? LOL.

Anyway, what was this thread about? Anyone know?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

93

You are mistaken here, Noctifer.
Please, read my posts more carefully and keep your prejudices for yourself. The request is based on the observation that comments here posted have nothing to do with the subject of this thread. Perhaps it's a time to open a new one for you to pour out your venom. Gentleman? LOL.

93 93/93
Krzysztof


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"krzysztof" wrote:
93

You are mistaken here, Noctifer.
Please, read my posts more carefully and keep your prejudcies for yourself. The request is based on the observations that comments here have nothing to do with the subject of this thread. Perhaps it's a time to open a new one where you will be free to pour out your venom. Gentleman? LOL.

93 93/93
Krzysztof

Krzysztof, the thread evolved. Its really sad that all you can think to say is cry out "lock the thread" until you don't have to address these points anymore. If you are so bothered simply click the unsubscribe link in the email from the forum.... Try not to treat the forum moderator as a kill switch or escape route...

Will you answer my question. If magic is, as you said, experiential, especially as it pertains to the initiations; how can you justify the fact Germer, Grady, and others did not experience the initiation cycle? By your own logic that invalidates the magical efficacy of the OTO.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"krzysztof" wrote:
93

You are mistaken here, Noctifer.
Please, read my posts more carefully and keep your prejudices for yourself. The request is based on the observation that comments here posted have nothing to do with the subject of this thread. Perhaps it's a time to open a new one for you to pour out your venom. Gentleman? LOL.

93 93/93
Krzysztof

Perhaps it's time for you to realise that you haven't addressed any of the issues raised here, whether you wish to label them as "prejudices" (which they aren't, btw) or not?

Would you like for us to repeat them, in bullet-point form for easier comprehension?

Scott, if you'd be so kind...or, no - perhaps a representative of the O.T.O. can oblige. Oh wait, there isn't one. Ok, back to you, Scott....


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

While he (or she) is of course in no way obliged to, I do think the author of the piece should address some of these points. It sounds as if the author focuses on the conundrum in the closed context of the lodge in question, drawing from personal experiences etc. But it would be interesting to hear what the author thought about it as a principle in general.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 

93

einDoppelganger, I do appreciate your logical approach.
I guess that in your question you should also include late K. Grant, Crowley and Reuss 😉 .
It is a very interesting question but hasn't got much in common with this thread. I really enjoy when discussions evolve but in my humble opinion it would be preferable to open a new thread, mainly for the sake of clarity.

I have a feeling that you didn't understand my analogy. Btw do you cook at all? You've made quite a few references to the Man of Earth rituals saying that there is nothing transmitted there. How can one know what's going on there when one never passed through them? However, if one passed and still claims they didn't work, we would have much bigger problem to consider here. I'm not in favour of intellectual masturbation hence my suggestion to leave the subject of those rituals out.

And please, don't consider my reply as a weak attempt to sneak your question away.

93 93/93
Krzysztof


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"the_spurious_simon_iff" wrote:
While he (or she) is of course in no way obliged to, I do think the author of the piece should address some of these points. It sounds as if the author focuses on the conundrum in the closed context of the lodge in question, drawing from personal experiences etc. But it would be interesting to hear what the author thought about it as a principle in general.

In all fairness, the author might address the original question of how degrees represent a valid measure of maturity - magical or otherwise. There are other aspects of the discussion that grew, quite organically I might add, from this initial consideration of the nature, function, and mechanism of an initiation ritual.


ReplyQuote
einDoppelganger
(@eindoppelganger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 915
 
"krzysztof" wrote:
I guess that in your question you should also include late K. Grant, Crowley and Reuss

Thank you for your reply krzysztof!

Grant, like Grady, was given the IX without passing through the other degrees. One wonders if any of Crowley's IXs did...

There is an important distinction here though since Grant never made the claims for the initiations that you are making. Quite the opposite - because he considered them to be unnecessary and removed them entirely. Grant took this approach because he believed that Crowley's intention was the restructure the OTO in a manner other than the antiquated masonic form you see today. Grady continued by administering initiations he never experienced (sometimes using the King book as a script!)

Reuss didn't pass through Crowley's degrees and actually expelled Crowley from the OTO so I don't know why we even have him in here.

You seem to be hanging your hat on the idea that the rituals need to be experienced to be functional and yet the very people responsible for reconstructing the OTO never experienced the rituals. Its a gross double standard.

It is a very interesting question but hasn't got much in common with this thread.

Well the discussion evolved - organically... Will you please accept this and stop trying to band the "split or lock the threads" drum? Its distracting and pointless.

I really enjoy when discussions evolve but in my humble opinion it would be preferable to open a new thread, mainly for the sake of clarity.

I understand but we are here now and I would rather not make more work for our moderator. Also, this wasn't your thread to begin with but you seem to want to keep it as more free ad space for your journal unencumbered by dissenting opinions.

I have a feeling that you didn't understand my analogy. Btw do you cook at all?

Are you ever condescending? 🙂

You've made quite a few references to the Man of Earth rituals saying that there is nothing transmitted there. How can one know what's going on there when one never passed through them?

I said once that nothing is transmitted in them. Again here we go... Do the initiations transmit something or is it in the heart and mind of the aspirant?? This is how you want to have the cake and eat it. If the rite transmits a gnosis then the function of the OTO is "cut off at the knees" because the initiations were performed by those who had never experienced them firsthand. How was anything transmitted to *them*

And please, don't consider my reply as a weak attempt to sneak your question away.

well... frankly you didn't answer my question at all... here it is again


Will you answer my question. If magic is, as you said, experiential, especially as it pertains to the initiations; how can you justify the fact Germer, Grady, and others did not experience the initiation cycle? By your own logic that invalidates the magical efficacy of the OTO.

93 93/93
Krzysztof


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 52 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"einDoppelganger" wrote:
"krzysztof" wrote:
I guess that in your question you should also include late K. Grant, Crowley and Reuss

Thank you for your reply krzysztof!

Grant, like Grady, was given the IX without passing through the other degrees. One wonders if any of Crowley's IXs did...

There is an important distinction here though since Grant never made the claims for the initiations that you are making. Quite the opposite - because he considered them to be unnecessary and removed them entirely. Grant took this approach because he believed that Crowley's intention was the restructure the OTO in a manner other than the antiquated masonic form you see today. Grady continued by administering initiations he never experienced (sometimes using the King book as a script!)

Reuss didn't pass through Crowley's degrees and actually expelled Crowley from the OTO so I don't know why we even have him in here.

Indeed.

Actually - didn't Crowley bestow Grant his IX° despite the latter not having gone through the rest? And McMurtry as well? That in itself shows it's not a linear path. Which of course makes perfect sense in light of Crowley's envisioned remodelling of the structure (which only Grant appears to have bothered implementing, I don't know the details but there was something about it being circular rather than linear, and there's a pyramid in there too, or at least used to be).

Reuss bestowed (which grade? I forget) on Crowley as a result of reading the latter's Book of Lies. Or so Crowley says. So Crowley didn't go through even Reuss' set of iniatory rites, let alone his own.

In other words, it doesn't matter, unless you need it to.


ReplyQuote
Page 2 / 6
Share: