Notifications
Clear all

Typhonian Order: 2 questions  

Page 1 / 5
  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
31/12/2009 6:19 pm  

I have taken a great interest in the Typhonian Order from what I have read about it online. My first question is does anyone have any recommended readings/books concerning this order? Secondly, I have noticed that nowhere have I found how a person joins this order. Is it a simple word of mouth membership or how does one go about joining? Thanks!


Quote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1850
31/12/2009 6:41 pm  

does anyone have any recommended readings/books concerning this order?

Starfire Publishing recently rereleased Kenneth Grant's Outside The Circles Of Time, which is a fine place to begin exploring the major themes of the Order and Current.

how does one go about joining?

Contact Mr. Michael Staley at

starfire.books@btinternet.com

93,

Kyle


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
01/01/2010 11:34 am  

93/23

The soon to be released first volume of the Trilogies "The Magical Revival" would be the best book to start with, because it is the FIRST volume. I can hardly wait for mine to arrive in the mail. In the meantime, I recommend reading all of the articles on this webpage concerning the Typhonian Current:

http://user.cyberlink.ch/~koenig/staley.htm

I also echo Kyle's statement about "Outside the Circles of Time". It also wouldn't hurt to purchase the most recent, and excellent, issue of "Starfire" and some of the older issues, if you can find them. The two soon to be published issues of "Starfire" should be purchased, as well. His poetry and fiction titles are very good too. If you could get your hands on "Against the Light" pick it up, it really is excellent! The most important book, IMHO, would be "At the Feet of the Guru" because it is really the Key to all of Grant's other works. I'd consider the works of Nema, Achad, Bertiaux, Chumbley, Spare, and Lovecraft as essential supplimentary reading material, as well. There's a wealth of relavent reading material out there to suppliment Grant's writings. So, besides the Trilogies, there is quite a bit of material listed here that you can learn a lot about The Typhonian Current from.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
01/01/2010 12:14 pm  

Whilst I admire the work of Kenneth Grant very much, I would warn that his books aren't the clearest works available; at times, they are both confused and confusing. Nor are they particularly Thelemic either, though they contain occasional ingredients of Thelema.

That said, the Kenneth Grant books I do own, are amongst my most treasured items.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
01/01/2010 2:55 pm  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Whilst I admire the work of Kenneth Grant very much, I would warn that his books aren't the clearest works available; at times, they are both confused and confusing. Nor are they particularly Thelemic either, though they contain occasional ingredients of Thelema.

Whilst I know what you mean, Michael, in my opinion it's largely a matter of perseverence. The first couple of volumes in the Trilogies are fairly straightforward, but I'm happy to concede that the volumes thereafter call for more application.

Not that this applies just to Grant, of course. Spare's works such as The Book of Pleasure and The Focus of Life can be difficult to assimilate for the first few readings. The first book by Crowley which I read, in the late 1960s was Magick in Theory and Practice, and I found it very heavy going at first; it became clearer with subsequent readings.

There is of course another aspect to this, which is that a book might seem impenetrable to us, but several years later when our understanding has changed, the text is now not only more comprehensible, but sparks further insights as we read it.

In 1980, for instance, when Outside the Circles of Time was first published, I found the book impossible to understand beyond the opening chapters, and put it aside. Many years later I came to the book again, and found it fascinating, though it took a few more years before I came to really appreciate it.

There is the principle that when the aspirant is ready, the guru appears. This principle of readiness can be applied to books as well, since our understanding transforms and what was formerly a "closed book" to us becomes more comprehensible.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1850
01/01/2010 4:42 pm  

There is of course another aspect to this, which is that a book might seem impenetrable to us, but several years later when our understanding has changed, the text is now not only more comprehensible, but sparks further insights as we read it

This is exactly it. Having spent years with my various books by Mr. Grant, I have found them to be as a "guru on paper," always opening up new doorways of understanding and unforeseen application. Particular passages which struck me, at one time, as too fantastic or convoluted would later reappear in sharp focus, evoking the exilaration and even shock of shifting into a new "reality tunnel."

Momentarily turning aside from aspects of the work which may be open to question, I would be curious to hear from michaelclarke18 why the sometimes problematic prose of KG remains

amongst my most treasured items

What do you like best about Grant's writing?


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
01/01/2010 6:02 pm  

What do you like best about Grant's writing?

That they are - please excuse my slightly general terms - truly 'occult'.

One always gets the feeling, that one is dipping into something both dark and deep, which remains just out of the range of access; in that sense they are rather like a mystery. For me, very few authors offer that same kind of 'experience' writing.

Grant's books don't have the tidy and contained endings, all is left open and largely unresolved - so the mystery continues.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
02/01/2010 11:50 am  
"michaelclarke18" wrote:

What do you like best about Grant's writing?

That they are - please excuse my slightly general terms - truly 'occult'.

One always gets the feeling, that one is dipping into something both dark and deep, which remains just out of the range of access; in that sense they are rather like a mystery. For me, very few authors offer that same kind of 'experience' writing.

Grant's books don't have the tidy and contained endings, all is left open and largely unresolved - so the mystery continues.

That's well-put, and I agree with what you say. The value of a work lies in the echoes which it creates. In my opinion, great work abounds with loose ends which are followed up, and in this way work is continued across the generations and the centuries.

Loose ends and naughty knots - what more could we ask? Otherwise, it's money for old rope.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 351
02/01/2010 12:19 pm  

Yes, I most certainly go along with very much of what is being said here.

As Michael S. points out, Michael C's last comment very much hits the vital point about Kenneth Grant's Work - which has informed and inspired me, stimulated and tantalised me (and occasionally driven me to distraction) for quite some time now! When I return to my cherished tomes, sometimes I find myself saying "No, I can't really go along with that Kenneth", then turn over the page and discover a new insight, a different slant on the apparently familiar territory. And you can't say that about far too many supposedly enlightened 'Occult' authors. Plenty of old rope dressed up with new ribbons out there.

Greetings to All for 2010 e.v.
93, 93/93.

Satan's Advocaat.


The Children of Transgression are the Dragons of the Law.


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 655
02/01/2010 10:00 pm  

I think there are only a few 'occult writers' who are worth being called occult writers, most persons feel themselves called to write about occult things, while their only are writing some kind of inessential, boring New Age stuff, I think best occult writers are they that write from their own experiences, all the other ones seem to be very lucky that paper nowadays isn't that expensive anymore and see their writings published way too easely, the saddest thing about all this is that these writings cost money and take room.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
03/01/2010 10:02 am  

Alysa:

And gets most sold books..


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 655
03/01/2010 1:32 pm  

"And gets most sold books", yeah ofcourse.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
03/01/2010 6:29 pm  

All,

The Kenneth Grant / Starfire corpus is an excellent start to the Typhonian tradition; these include the 3 trilogies of course; but also Kenneth Grants Novellas and the Starfire journal itself. Speaking personally they are all deep; and you will find that they do repay repeated reading over time making their study the work of a lifetime.

However Grant's work has such a wide depth, that I am sure that many people will have different definitions as to what "Typhonian" means beyond its strict interpretation. For example; in its most literal form this includes the mystery of the God Typhon and these are (as we would expect) explored in depth, frequently from a Setian perspective. Grant looks at these closely in the early trilogies; for example the chapter "Dark Dynasties" in the Magical Revival, and "The Draconian Cult of Ancient Khem" in cults of the Shadow are good starts there.

These will lead you to books such as by Gerald Massey, (many of which are available for free (and legally) online) and others. I recommend the following books all of which I view as Typhonian.

The Book of Beginnings (2 vols) - Gerald Massey
The Natural Genesis (2 vols) - Gerald Massey
Ancient Egypt: Light of the World (2 vols) - Gerald Massey
The Light of Egypt (2 vols) - Thomas Burgoyne
The Lost Light - Alvin Kuhn
Monstrous Cults: A Study of the Primordial Gnosis - Stephen Sennitt

For example the above chapters in Grant and parts of Massey go into the mysteries of Queen (technically king) SobekNoferu who was arguably the first ruling female in Egypt and a devotee of Sobek. Since Sobek takes the Crocodile as a totem, and given that many of the interpretations of Typhonian refer to these as Orphidian or Draconian mysteries i am sure that you can see the relevance.

Speaking magically, Sobeknoferu seems to have been the historical personage behind Tera in Bram Stokers "Jewel of the Seven Stars" and Hammer horrors brilliant interpretation of this "Blood from the mummies tomb". I know as a fact that a new grimoire (Queen of Seven Stars) looking into these mysteries from a practical Typhonian perspective is in preparation and will be announced over the next year or two.

Of course a lot of the sources such as Massey developed out of the archaeology of the day and it is also worth looking into modern research to see where some of this has lead. This includes the work of modern writers such as Andrew Collins whose recent discoveries on the Giza plateau are suggestive of deeper mysteries in antiquity which are now resurfacing and to my mind at least belong within this tradition.

You could of course take the Typhonian research in other directions - for example following the strands of Lovecrafts Necronomicon gnosis; or exploring the Qlippoth from Liber 231 as discussed in Nightside of Eden. Kenneth Grant's books are very deep and explore the web of magic from so many directions the choice really is yours. I always enjoy looking at the bibliography of Grants books to explorer the books which he read and see how big this model of the universe really is.

Other books which I view as Typhonian include:

Typhonian Teratoma's - Mishlen Linden
The Black Goddess and the sixth Sense - Peter Redgrove (any of his books really)
Dark Doorway of the Beast - Gareth Hewitson may
The butterflies of Thantos - D A Chitty

Finally, a new book you might want to chase up is "Aleister Crowley and the Aeon of Horus" by Paul Weston. This grand tour, very reminiscent of the writings of Robert Anton Wilson look at many pertinent subjects including Lam, The UFO enigma and much more.

cheers Paolo


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5326
03/01/2010 7:23 pm  

Nice post, Paolo. I especially endorse your recommendation of Gerald Massey, whose influence on Grant - and, perhaps, on Crowley - is often overlooked.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
03/01/2010 7:35 pm  

Thank you. 🙂

I think Massey is crucial because from his archaeological/anthropological background he grounded many occult ideas into the history and culture of the civilisations which interest us with these topics. His interpretation is not dry and perhaps can be said to move us away from the academic giving us energy to breathe into practice. His books hold many treasures and are brilliant.

cheers Paolo


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/01/2010 5:32 am  

WOW, wasn't expecting this much information- great stuff! Thanks a bunch to all who posted and those who may still.


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 351
04/01/2010 11:12 am  

Care Paolo and Care Webmaster,

Have to say that I'm not that keen on Gerald Massey, despite, or because of his substantial influence on KG. Some of GM's stuff is just whimsical, Victorian fantasy.

But speaking of weird fiction - great that you mention Stephen Sennitt's 'Monstrous Cults', I possess a copy and have just had an email from him this morning; first for ages, now ain't that syn-with-a-bit-of-chronicity.

Not so much in Festat, but more in Restat,

The Sands of the Mauve Zone whisper through the Pharaoh's grave....

Satan's Advocaat.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/01/2010 12:15 pm  

Even though Grant may have used elements of Massey's work the two are actually irreconcilably offset given the nature of their conclusions. It also doesn't matter in this light Grant following Massey's proposition that the mysteries were originally physiological rather than 'metaphysical'. For if taken to its end, there could be no place for Atlantis, Lemuria, cosmic consciousness, and similar extra-human items, forming the important position in Grant's cosmology as they do.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/01/2010 3:03 pm  

In my course of study I have found Mr. Kenneth Grant a breath of fresh air. His elucidation of Thelema as well as his personal theories are unparalleled in the area of Thelemic research. When I found the works of Grant it changed my life as well as my understanding of Thelema. I could not recommend his works more highly. They are the true gold of Thelemic literature. As has been stated above, begin with the first three volumes of the trilogies. After assimilating them move on to the others. Granted, it takes many years of study and one must return to them time and time again for each time you will find a new gem. Grant is truly an asset to Thelema.

93 93/93

Solaris 671


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
05/01/2010 9:13 pm  

I enquired about the Typhonian Order (T.O.T.O.) approximately one year ago. I recieved a letter back asking that I choose a single magical practice and keep a careful record of it for one year, then to send that journal to the order.

my question is, how similar is the "gradeworK" of the Typhonian Order to the A. A. ?


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
06/01/2010 8:38 am  
"SSS" wrote:
I enquired about the Typhonian Order (T.O.T.O.) approximately one year ago. I recieved a letter back asking that I choose a single magical practice and keep a careful record of it for one year, then to send that journal to the order.

The term is nine months.

"SSS" wrote:
my question is, how similar is the "gradeworK" of the Typhonian Order to the A. A. ?

There is no similarity.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
06/01/2010 1:26 pm  

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

"michaelclarke18" wrote:
Whilst I admire the work of Kenneth Grant very much, I would warn that his books aren't the clearest works available; at times, they are both confused and confusing. Nor are they particularly Thelemic either, though they contain occasional ingredients of Thelema.

I am curious as to what you mean by them not being Thelemic? I may not agree with Grant one hundred percent but would not arrogantly dismiss him as un-Thelemic. I don’t mean this as a criticism of you Michael Clarke directly but of a present culture within Thelema that I think misleads. If we are to be exact the only ‘true Thelemic’ literature are the Holy Books Of Thelema as in the Class A texts and nothing else. Not even some of Crowley’s opinions on the Holy texts are ‘Thelemic’ if we are to draw such lines. Certainly no other authors work at all and no present magickal order could therefore claim to be ‘Thelemic’.

I think we have to be very careful not to draw such distinctions, they can only backfire. Not just about Kenneth Grant’s work but any of the others who have written extensively on Thelema and Magick. An absolute orthodoxy after only 100 or so years of Thelema would make the extreme orthodoxy of Christianity look like a hippy free for all. That and of course Kenneth Grant has probably more of a right to call himself a Thelemite than any other living person and I say that as someone who has never been a member of his order nor even read many of his books for that matter.

Love is the law, love under will.

Alex


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
07/01/2010 3:43 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"SSS" wrote:
I enquired about the Typhonian Order (T.O.T.O.) approximately one year ago. I recieved a letter back asking that I choose a single magical practice and keep a careful record of it for one year, then to send that journal to the order.

The term is nine months.

"SSS" wrote:
my question is, how similar is the "gradeworK" of the Typhonian Order to the A. A. ?

There is no similarity.

Best wishes,

Michael.

I checked the letter that is in my file, it does indeed say 9 months. I'll be getting back to you on that sometime. Do you care if I send you some private messages concerning that letter and my questions here on Lashtal?


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1850
07/01/2010 4:35 am  

I checked the letter that is in my file, it does indeed say 9 months

It always struck me that these "9 months" were an "incubation" period, a "coming to term."

Afterwards, "how the Child will grow up" is "for us to determine, growing up ourselves in the way of the Law of Thelema..."

93,

Kyle


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 526
07/01/2010 7:32 am  

. . I am very interested in what you Typhonians have been doing. I will have to check out the works of Grant, & others. I can concur with Michael that the A.'.A.'. & this order must differ in the 'Probationary' term. I have never felt that THELEMA is anything other than a perfectly philosophical community: Rabelais is the Master . . .


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
07/01/2010 8:56 am  
"Horemakhet" wrote:
I have never felt that THELEMA is anything other than a perfectly philosophical community: Rabelais is the Master . . .

We all have our different perspectives and interests. I'm sure that Thelema as "a perfectly philosophical community" has advantages, but in my opinion the essence of Thelema is to be reached through mystical and magical experience.

Of course, this is classic chicken and egg territory. It might of course be that my drive for mystucal and magical experience colours my view of Thelema. It's all in the egg, as they say.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 526
07/01/2010 9:18 am  

. . . The two are wholly compatible. It is all 'advantageous'. It is all 'Thelemic' in essence...


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
07/01/2010 3:33 pm  

in my opnion, thelema is magic or sorcery. but it have general difference: this doctrine using nor each will, nor each desire. only channeled from supreme planes, nor everyday life, nor even mundane. this is timeless will. right?


ReplyQuote
Horemakhet
(@horemakhet)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 526
07/01/2010 4:45 pm  

Sure! Why not? Do it. Sorcery all the way. . .


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
07/01/2010 5:43 pm  

ch. 27 Book of Lies for Sorcerers.


ReplyQuote
michaelclarke18
(@michaelclarke18)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 1264
07/01/2010 6:33 pm  

I am curious as to what you mean by them not being Thelemic?

Arrogant or not, a significant proportion of Grant's work - especially the later works - have very little to do with Thelema as conceived by Aleister Crowley. I would advise you to go and have another look at Grant's work. Sure, it's very inventive, intriguing etc but it tends to be more about Kenneth Grant and his view and researches, as opposed to working within the confines of Thelema. This is in no way denigrates Grant's contribution as I find the work of great interest, but I would call it something other than 'Thelemic'.............perhaps 'Typhonian' would be a better word. 🙂


ReplyQuote
alysa
(@alysa)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 655
07/01/2010 7:03 pm  

'Thelemic Typhonian' or 'Typhonian Thelemic' might be good descriptions ?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
07/01/2010 7:11 pm  

Typhonian is symbolic name of Grant's works, but this is more than doctrine, i think. it is attempt to make a referential integrity of ancient mighty arts of thelema. excellent attempt to find roots in lost (maybe erased) memory of humankind.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
08/01/2010 9:15 am  
"SSS" wrote:
I am very interested in the occult work of Kenneth Grant; however, the whole issue of his claim to OHO of OTO conflicts with oaths that I have made. Politics aside, I am interested with working with the "typhonian" current in a structured setting.

You don't need to belong to an Order to align yourself to a particular current. I'm sure that there are many people working along what might be loosely termed "Crowleyan" lines who are not members of the various recensions of the A.A., O.T.O., or other Thelemic Orders; equally, there are probably many people who immerse themselves in the work of Blavatsky but do not join the Theosophical Society.

I don't see why an earlier poster in this thread takes it upon himself to say what Orders other than the Typhonian Order Kenneth Grant or myself may or may not belong to. Whatever happened to notions of discretion and privacy?

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 351
08/01/2010 5:35 pm  

Thelema is not Sorcery.

While I have no particular objection to the practice of sorcery - done it in my time - it relates to the control and manipulation of usually demonic spirits (raw essences of the psyche), in order to obtain limited and desired objectives of will. The exploration of the True Will, the pursuit of Thelema, may result in the secretion, or side effect of obtaining siddhis by which one may achieve such objectives, but it is a sideshow, a mere shadow-play of the essential reality.

Magical fiction, as is often the case, supplies us with a good example. The magical villain of James Blish's 'Black Easter' earns a good living by murdering chosen victims through the control of Goetic Demons - all Magic is based on the control of Spirits, we are informed. The guy's name is Theron Ware - because of which (Theron = Therion ??), some have identified him with Our Blessed Therion - nothing further from the truth, I would assert.

93, 93/93.

Satan's Advocaat.


The Children of Transgression are the Dragons of the Law.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
04/02/2010 4:56 am  

Returning to a previous question in this thread, what do you like about Grant's writings(?). Its a pleasure to read, at least if one doesn't demand of it academic veracity and structure. It has been a pleasure for me to read over all, though I've not read all. I like what Michael said about 'stepping into something dark and deep.' I guess those sorts of environs are to my liking. I'd perhaps add the word sticky, to 'dark and deep'. I also need what I perceive to be a non-dualist realisation operative there and an atypically open minded and open heartedness there in the writings of an occultist, most of whom for the longest time have been obscurantists and obfuscationists in total. These positive elements in Grant I can related to and emulate in some way. There are others these days who write on some of the same subjects with remakable care and clarity, like Thomas Karlsson or David Beth. Much of the value of someone's work is what sort of later manifestations that work makes possible or even say, gives birth to. Much that is worthwhile today was and is heavily influenced by Grant. My shelves are so full of important things I haven't yet read, when will I get back to reading some Grant again?


ReplyQuote
spike418
(@spike418)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 216
04/02/2010 6:05 pm  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Whatever happened to notions of discretion and privacy?

Michael.

Endangered virtues in this world, along with silence 😥


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
05/02/2010 4:23 am  
"Satan'sAdvocaat" wrote:
Thelema is not Sorcery.

While I have no particular objection to the practice of sorcery - done it in my time - it relates to the control and manipulation of usually demonic spirits (raw essences of the psyche), in order to obtain limited and desired objectives of will.

Interesting, I had always considered sorcery to be the magical manipulation of words, images and objects. As such I had always viewed it as a natural faculty and not as something demonic.
Sorry to drag off the topic again though.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
05/02/2010 4:46 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Not that this applies just to Grant, of course. Spare's works such as The Book of Pleasure and The Focus of Life can be difficult to assimilate for the first few readings. The first book by Crowley which I read, in the late 1960s was Magick in Theory and Practice, and I found it very heavy going at first; it became clearer with subsequent readings.

There is of course another aspect to this, which is that a book might seem impenetrable to us, but several years later when our understanding has changed, the text is now not only more comprehensible, but sparks further insights as we read it.

In 1980, for instance, when Outside the Circles of Time was first published, I found the book impossible to understand beyond the opening chapters, and put it aside. Many years later I came to the book again, and found it fascinating, though it took a few more years before I came to really appreciate it.

There is the principle that when the aspirant is ready, the guru appears. This principle of readiness can be applied to books as well, since our understanding transforms and what was formerly a "closed book" to us becomes more comprehensible.

Best wishes,

Michael.

Last winter when I picked up Outside the Circles of Time, I forced myself to read it cover to cover, regardless of how much of a headache it gave me. I'm not joking either, my mind felt literally strained and at some points I wasn't even sure what the book was supposed to be about. I would often find myself a page and a half into one of his infamous qabalistic analysis of this or that before realizing I had no idea what he was even analyzing or talking about at all. By the time I had finished the book, I felt like I had just read a large collection of inane monkey jabber and had comprehended nothing. I equated the whole experience to something akin to taking bad LSD.
I had similar issues with part two of Book Four, and of course when I first read the Book of Pleasure I was equally dumbfounded by Spare's weird use of grammar and teerminology. My initial response was that Crowley was a mad charlatan and that nobody could possibly think in such a way, and my initial response to Spare was that he was making up his own words, Grant seems to have mastered both of these charms.
I'm just about through re-reading Cults of the Shadow, and I am relieved by the lucidity of the book.


ReplyQuote
SatansAdvocaat
(@satansadvocaat)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 351
05/02/2010 6:17 pm  
"AEternitas" wrote:
"Satan'sAdvocaat" wrote:
Thelema is not Sorcery.

While I have no particular objection to the practice of sorcery - done it in my time - it relates to the control and manipulation of usually demonic spirits (raw essences of the psyche), in order to obtain limited and desired objectives of will.

Interesting, I had always considered sorcery to be the magical manipulation of words, images and objects. As such I had always viewed it as a natural faculty and not as something demonic.
Sorry to drag off the topic again though.

I was attempting to be precise in considering 'Sorcery' from its etymology of 'ensorcel' - "to bind spirits", I believe; not necessarily demonic, but usually the favoured form. My point was really to emphasise that although members of the Typhonian Order might practise sorcery, in the manner of AOS, or whatever - that essentially the Typhonian Order is a Thelemic Order.

There are those who say that there is not much Thelema in Kenneth Grant's Work, but their point of perspective must be a fairly narrow or doctrinaire one for them not to recognise the presence of its essential and vibrant influence.

Love is the law, love under will.

Satan's Advocaat.


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 856
05/02/2010 7:56 pm  
"Satan'sAdvocaat" wrote:
There are those who say that there is not much Thelema in Kenneth Grant's Work, but their point of perspective must be a fairly narrow or doctrinaire one for them not to recognise the presence of its essential and vibrant influence.

"must be... fairly narrow"? Perhaps it is 'finely honed.'

I'll give Grant his due as to discovering his own Gnosis, and certainly some of his works, particularly the Carfax Monographs are very Thelemic in nature, but the further that Kenny goes down the rabbit-hole, the further he seems to get from Crowley and Thelema. Whatever saffron of Thelema remains in the mix by his 3rd Typhonian Trilogy tastes to me to be pretty much overpowered by the curry of more Typhonian factors, UFO's, The Necronomicon, Voudon Gnosticism, the Mauve Zone, Spider Gods, etc., etc.

Grant's work has grown on me the 20-odd years I've been exposed to it. I certainly appreciate the later works of his 2nd Typhonian Trilogy much more than I did when I first read them. But IMO they're hardly Crowleyan, and while perhaps Thelemic in intent, they do little to propogate the Word of the Law.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
05/02/2010 11:35 pm  

I think that your words "Crowley and Thelema", and your later use of "Crowleyan", suggest to me that to some extent you conflate Crowley and Thelema. Crowley himself is on record, somewhere or other, as having said that one could be unaware of the term "Thelema" and yet be a Thelemite. My own conception of Thelema is close to, if not identical with, the Tao; I get a similar feeling from, for example, Liber Aleph or The Book of Lies.

Personally, I think that Grant's works propogate the Word of the Law admirably.

Best wishes,

Michael.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
06/02/2010 12:09 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
Crowley himself is on record, somewhere or other, as having said that one could be unaware of the term "Thelema" and yet be a Thelemite.

Where is he on record as having said that? I have asked around and nobody has yet to pinpoint a source for this claim. It seems very uncharacteristically of him to do so which is why I am asking.

In a letter to W.B. Crow he simply declares that the sole criterion is the acceptance of the Book of the Law.


ReplyQuote
kidneyhawk
(@kidneyhawk)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 1850
06/02/2010 1:02 am  

In a letter to W.B. Crow he simply declares that the sole criterion is the acceptance of the Book of the Law.

So, one can just "accept The Book of the Law" and that's that? You're a "Thelemite" and better off than those poor...whatever else there is floating about?

I've heard applying the same forumla to Jesus Christ can wash your sins whiter than snow and detour damnation. 🙄


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4060
06/02/2010 1:45 am  
"Patriarch156" wrote:
Where is he on record as having said that? I have asked around and nobody has yet to pinpoint a source for this claim. It seems very uncharacteristically of him to do so which is why I am asking.

Well, I'll find it and come back to you. I'm sick to death of the identity of Thelema and Crowleyanity.


ReplyQuote
Aleisterion
(@aleisterion)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 343
06/02/2010 3:11 am  

I've quoted this recently but it applies here as well. Clearly, if one can go through the ordeals and attain the degrees of the A.'.A.'., from Neophyte all the way to Ipsissimus, without ever doing a ritual or even reading The Book of the Law, then surely one can be a Thelemite and yet be unaware of the term Thelema:

"Many people may go through the ordeals and attain the degrees of the A.'.A.'. without ever hearing that such an Order exists."- The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, .p.657

And note that he writes "Many people" --- not just "some".


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
06/02/2010 5:22 am  

Aleisterion, are you really suggesting that one can not attain the various attainments along the Tree of Life and aspire towards the third eternal Order without being a Thelemite? If so, I think you are not only coming at it from an entirely different point of view than Crowley who scrupulously (and unscrupulously) defended his position as far as the Law of Thelema went but maintained the perennial aspect of the third Order (as expressed also in An Account of the A.'.A.'.), but also doing a great deal of disservice to all those who does aspire and work towards attainment who would want nothing to do with Thelema under any of its myriad forms.

So I maintain, unless someone actually quotes Crowley as having stated that one can be a Thelemite without accepting the Book of the Law it remains very uncharacteristically of Crowley to make such a claim and consequently unless someone points me to the source it seems more like an urban myth tha reflects many modern Thelemites take on the subject matter rather than Crowley being on record as having stated it.

I would love to be proven wrong however, since it is always interesting to see how Crowley's ideas concerning Thelema evolved.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
06/02/2010 5:24 am  
"kidneyhawk" wrote:
So, one can just "accept The Book of the Law" and that's that? You're a "Thelemite" and better off than those poor...whatever else there is floating about?

I've heard applying the same forumla to Jesus Christ can wash your sins whiter than snow and detour damnation. 🙄

It is very good that you roll at your eyes at Crowley, but surely this does not come as a surprise coming as it does from a person who regarded those who have not accepted the Law of Thelema with him as its head as troglodytes?


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
06/02/2010 5:26 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"Patriarch156" wrote:
Where is he on record as having said that? I have asked around and nobody has yet to pinpoint a source for this claim. It seems very uncharacteristically of him to do so which is why I am asking.

Well, I'll find it and come back to you. I'm sick to death of the identity of Thelema and Crowleyanity.

I would be very interesting to read that Michael. As far as the identity of the two I have so far read nothing from Crowley that does not stress that identity (at least if by Crowleyanity you mean Thelema as Crowley envisioned it or in whiter words as the praeterhuman intelligences informed him about it), so it would naturally be very interesting to see such a statement and place it in its proper historical context.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
06/02/2010 6:10 am  
"Aleisterion" wrote:
I've quoted this recently but it applies here as well. Clearly, if one can go through the ordeals and attain the degrees of the A.'.A.'., from Neophyte all the way to Ipsissimus, without ever doing a ritual or even reading The Book of the Law, then surely one can be a Thelemite and yet be unaware of the term Thelema:

"Many people may go through the ordeals and attain the degrees of the A.'.A.'. without ever hearing that such an Order exists."- The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, .p.657

And note that he writes "Many people" --- not just "some".

Yes, that makes perfect sense, Aleisterion.

So I maintain, unless someone actually quotes Crowley as having stated that one can be a Thelemite without accepting the Book of the Law

I'd like to see a quote that says one has to accept the Book of the Law to be a Thelemite? And that only those who accept the Book of the Law are Thelemites??? Ridiculous.

t remains very uncharacteristically of Crowley to make such a claim

Of course Crowley had one single character and it was very consistent and uniform. 🙄

And the fact that he makes the exact same claim regarding the A A in his Confessions, a public record, not in some letter to someone, is just a coincidence. 😕


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 5
Share: