Evidence in Richard...
 

Evidence in Richard T. Cole's Liber L. vel Bogus.  

Page 9 / 10
  RSS

belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1015
28/02/2016 10:21 pm  

@Horemakhet
"Look at how he never climbed again after that fatal K2 expedition"

and RTC:
"Would that be the K2 expedition in which ol’ Fakey walked away from a disaster (primarily created by his attitude and behaviour) with no regard for assisting survivors, then wired fabricated reports to newspapers – To the condemnation of all?"

Kanchenjunga (1905), not K2 (1902).


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 10:34 pm  

@belmurru - A perfect post! Thank you.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1650
28/02/2016 10:35 pm  

@sandyboy

You wrote: "When you make a statement that appears to be at odds with one made in private I feel revealing that is justified."

Well, when I compare my private correspondence with RTC with his published account of the "Liber Bogus Reception Myth", I clearly see that not everything adds up. So far I won't reveal it because probably it's an "artistic gimmick" that the book to reveal the fake of Liber L uses the same faking methods (including Adobe Photoshop™ and other stuff). Who knows?

By the way, many of the bad ass stories of the K2 and Kanchenjunga climbs do not show up in the accounts of other members of the climb.

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
28/02/2016 10:43 pm  

@the real simon iff

Interesting about the conflicting accounts of the climbs. I thought members of his climbs had criticised his behaviour. If not, do you know where those stories came from? Much as I love Confessions, I always felt AC's own accounts - however intended - would not be seen by most readers as showing him in a good light.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 10:45 pm  

Lutz,

I believe that private correspondence should be just that - private. Abuse of that sort of confidence would be justified only in the most exceptional circumstances. At least I feel better informed now: Sandy has demonstrated his willingness to break that confidence at a whim when his participation in a previous RTC product was highlighted. Fortunately, I have entertaining, open and informative email exchanges with a great many leading Thelemites and others interested in AC and will continue to trust them to remain discrete. 😉

Paul

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 10:50 pm  

@sandyboy wrote:

@the real simon iff

Interesting about the conflicting accounts of the climbs. I thought members of his climbs had criticised his behaviour. If not, do you know where those stories came from? Much as I love Confessions, I always felt AC’s own accounts – however intended – would not be seen by most readers as showing him in a good light.

Alternatively, rather than deflect this thread yet again away from posts that could be considered critical of RTC, you could always focus on the core matter here, as noted by @belmurru. Which is that RTC was referring to K2 (i.e. Chogo Ri) when he actually meant Kanchenjunga. Wrong mountain, wrong year.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
28/02/2016 10:53 pm  

Post deleted by Moderator. See the Guidelines.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 10:56 pm  

Good for you, @sandyboy - Meanwhile, back to the subject in hand.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
28/02/2016 10:59 pm  

Post deleted by Moderator. See the Guidelines.


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 61
28/02/2016 11:06 pm  

Apologies for mixing my mountains. I can only suggest temporary disorientation caused by the unanticipated and seemingly total collapse of the Secret Rituals thread... A landslide perhaps? If so, definitely nothing to do with 'him'...


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 11:11 pm  

MODERATOR'S NOTE

I’m not trying to “deflect” anything.

@sandyboy: Please restrict your posts to the subject at hand and not as an opportunity to complain about moderating decision or guidance with which you disapprove. Also, please take note of the following extracts from the Guidelines:

Members must not engage in disruptive activity such as persistent off-topic postings on the Forums.

The editor’s decisions are final: complaints about moderating decisions are likely to lead to the immediate termination of accounts. Moderating decisions – including the closure of accounts – will be undertaken without public or private justification or discussion.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 1650
28/02/2016 11:14 pm  

@sandyboy

I have to check the exact quotes, but the accounts of the Austrian climbers in Austrian climbers journals of the 1902 expedition never mention the "pistol episode" for example, and if I am not totally wrong, Reymond's diary of the Kanchenjunga adventure also mentions nothing especially bad ass.

I will check, but as Paul said, this should maybe kept out of this thread.

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
28/02/2016 11:18 pm  

@RTC wrote:

Apologies for mixing my mountains. I can only suggest temporary disorientation caused by the unanticipated and seemingly total collapse of the Secret Rituals thread… A landslide perhaps? If so, definitely nothing to do with ‘him’…

No idea what you're referring to with your 'total collapse', 'landslides' and 'him' references, RTC, but the thread you mention is fascinating and most definitely not in a state of collapse! Having said that, it's best not mixed-up with this one. Reader can view your feared 'utter collapse' at: http://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/for-sale-the-secret-rituals-of-the-o-t-o-by-francis-king-daniels-1973/

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
28/02/2016 11:22 pm  

Post deleted by Moderator. See the Guidelines.


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
29/02/2016 12:27 am  

@the real simon iff

I understand that this is not relevant to the thread. Thank you Simon.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
29/02/2016 3:10 am  

Horemakhet (February 28, 2016 at 9:26 pm #95475 Rep): "@sandyboy I bought your book 20 years ago & found it delightful. In regards to the K2 expedition I’m not saying that AC was not partially to blame in the tragedy which transpired there but that it is telling that he quit climbing after this. This was an activity which he loved & identified himself with decades after yet he stopped. We also know that much of his ‘bad reputation’ was a cover for his espionage work. So it takes some sifting to arrive at a conclusion."

"THE LAST STRAW
It is a shameful fact that in July 1914 there was an Englishman so dirtily degenerate --- I quote the Patriot Bottomley --- that he was engaged in solitary climbs among the High Alps, daring native and foreigner, professional and amateur, to follow him. He did not do this to annoy anybody; he had too often already exposed the cowardice of the moneyed "Herren" of the English alpine Club; but he wanted to encourage the younger generation to climb alone, and to keep himself in good training for his third expedition to the Himalayan Mountains, which he intended to make in 1915." Source: Chapter 76 in Confessions.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
29/02/2016 3:14 am  

The K2 expedition was in 1902.


ReplyQuote
sandyboy
(@sandyboy)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 84
29/02/2016 3:17 am  

@wellreadbread

I understand the moderator has stated this mountain-related material is not relevant to this thread and is verboten. Perhaps a separate thread is possible as it's interesting but has nothing to do with the stated purpose of this thread. I'm not being pedantic just stating the situation.


ReplyQuote
Nino Antinous
(@ninaantonia)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1
29/02/2016 6:31 pm  

Sounds like an apology for domestic violence - The charm and the harm


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
29/09/2016 2:15 pm  

Richard T. Cole has to this site, generously provided the free-to-download third digital pdf edition of Richard T. Cole’s book Liber L. vel Bogus – The Real Confession of Aleister Crowley; https://www.lashtal.com/liber-l-vel-bogus-the-real-confession-of-aleister-crowley-free-download/

On page 145 and 146 in the said edition of this book, Richard T. Cole writes the following:

"Crowley's original plan saw him return from Cairo at the helm of a New Equinox, with a contemporary version of the Book of Thoth, underwriting his claims." and that "Crowley would love nothing more than to point triumphantly at the three pages of notes relating to Tarot card correspondences now revealed as a contemporary Book of Thoth, and which underline his occult credentials. Well, he'd certainly like to, but can't. Since this material appears in OS27 [OS27 is the label of a small Japanese vellum notebook, containing Crowley's Magickal diary titled The Book of Results, dated 16 to 23 March 1904] after his return [from Egypt in 1904] to Boleskin, Crowley can't pass it off as a part of the Cairo Revelation. This places him in a difficult position. He needs an incidental hint in published works (i.e. a passing reference to the futile Tarot divination), the significance of which is only revealed later, but is reluctant in the extreme to draw attention towards material clearly not written in Cairo. To solve this conundrum, ha adapts The Book of Results. However, his solution is not without inherent issues."

On page page 152 in the said edition of this book, Richard T. Cole writes this about the said Tarot divination:

"Crowley's three-page Tarot divination marks the final entry in the the vellum notebook, and this he definitely penned after he returned from Cairo. Crowley's claim to have written this material on 23 March is patently erroneous."

And with relevance to the purpose of this thread; to discuss the ‘evidence in Richard T Cole’s’ book, he does on page 146 and 147 of it writes the following:

"For ease of reference a selection of scans from Crowley's vellum notebook titled Invocation of Hoor (OS27) are included in this section. These do not include all pages, but merely outline the sequence of its various sections. Markus Katz's 2010 publication The Invocation of Hoor reproduces a full transcript of this material. As such, his book would be an invalubale resource in the study of these issues - Had it not been withdrawn from circulation."

Richard T. Cole provides the said scans from Crowley's vellum notebook on page 147 and 148 in this book, but they are so small in size that the text in them is impossible to read.

Why did you, Richard T. Cole, not provide scans big enough so that the text in them was readable?

And do anyone know where one can find readable scans of Crowley's said Japanese vellum notebook?


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
19/10/2016 9:51 pm  

[[[All quotes from RTC or Richard T. Cole, is from the version of Liber L. vel Bogus that members of this site can download and read for free.]]]

Michael Staeley February 22, 2016 at 12:08 am #95335 (page 24 in thread 'Evidence in Richard T. Cole’s Liber L. vel Bogus.'):

"... the real issue here is that despite an absurd hype campaign running for several years, whereby your bogus book was apparently going to rock the world of Thelema to its foundations by proving that Crowley fabricated the reception of The Book of the Law in 1904, you’ve failed to deliver. "

AC did both describe the Book of the Law as (Cole page 67) "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing.", on a title page he prepared (in 1904?) (Cole page 67 and 68:) "for Liber L. vel Legis. He never used this, nor is it included in any of the innumerale published editions." AC did also describe the Book of the Law as a book in which "His utterance is enshrined", listed as one of "the Sacred Writings.", "... whose existence may one day be divulged unto you."(, meaning divulged by AC himself,) in Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae, written by AC in 1907. AC additionally also described the Book of the Law as "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing." on (Cole page 97:) "the typeset version of the handwritten cover pafe (as prefaces the Appendix dropped from Collected Works) [...] (Cole page 230 and 231:) "Sept. 1907 Collected Works Vol. III aborted Appendix".

AC does in his December 1907 diaries in reference to rest of "the Sacred Writings." that the Book of the Law is listed together with in Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae, written by AC in 1907, state that “Looking back on the year, it seems one continuous ecstasy … I am able to do automatic writing at will.” The said title page that AC prepared for the Book of the Law, the Appendix of Volume III of The Works of Aleister Crowley, and all other documents which contradicted AC's later statements from 1909 about how the Book of the Law was written, were never published (source: http://www.cornelius93.com/EpistleCoverofLiberAL.html – An Open Epistle On The Cover To Liber AL vel Legis by Frater Achad Osher 583), except for Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae which was originally included in the Class A classification, "but has since been reclassified as Class D." (Source: http://www.tomegatherion.co.uk/holybooks.htm - TO MEGA THERION THE GREAR BEAST 666 - HOLY BOOKS OF THELEMA).

And this documents and demonstrates that AC's myth about him receiving the Book of the Law, as a book dictated to him by a praeterhuman named Aiwass, a name mentioned within the beginning of text of the said book, was a later fabrication, differing from his original descriptions of how the said book was written as "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing." So we do not need another book from RTC or Richard T. Cole to prove that Crowley fabricated the reception of The Book of the Law, when presenting Aiwass, a name mentioned within the beginning of text of the said book, as a praeterhuman dictating this book to him.

"I guess then a simple anagram 'As i saw' or 'As i was' or 'I was as' or 'i saw as' [or 'As I saw'], suggests the inspiration for Aiwass." Source: The Origins of Aleister Crowley's Thelema, and the possibility that its an elaborate hoax. - http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread830832/pg3&mem=

"I write this therefore with a sense of responsibility so acute that for the first time in my life I regret my sense of humour and the literary practical jokes which it has caused me to perpetrate. I am glad, though, that care was taken of the MS. itself and of diaries and letters of the period, so that the physical facts are as plain as can be desired." Source: The Equinox of the Gods, Chapter 7. Remarks on the method of receiving Liber Legis, on the Conditions prevailing at the time of the writing, and on certain technical difficulties connected with the Literary form of the Book; http://hermetic.com/crowley/equinox-of-the-gods/remarks-on-the-method-of-receiving-liber-legis.html


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 408
19/10/2016 9:56 pm  

"When correlated with their Hebrew equivalents the numeric values of letters comprising Crowley’s original title of Liber L vel Legis, total…666! This does not hold true following his addition of an ‘A’, which brings the sum to 667."

FWIW thread number 6667 from the old Lashtal forums revealed some interesting anagrams of Liber AL vel Legis:

original post thread number 6667:

http://www.lashtal.com/forum/index.php?topic=6667.1 5"> https://web.archive.org/web/20140714203330/http://www.lashtal.com/forum/index.php?topic=6667.15

same post in new forum:

http://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/hence-my-entire-alias/page/2/#post-85192

Liber AL vel Legis anagrams


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 408
19/10/2016 9:58 pm  

RTC, i'm reading your book now. Thank you for the free pdf. I believe your book is very important just as a trial is sometimes important to get things in the public record and prove guilt or innocence. You also garner much attention and dialogue which although may ruffle feathers I think it's needed.

Your writing style thus far (i'm on page 38) is very entertaining and your gotcha-isms, loud brow beating and finger pointing circus fare is reminiscent of the man himself, and would quote quite nicely in one of those Daily Mail hit pieces we so often see.

But the Crowley researchers are cruelly pinpoint accurate to the point of insanity so you really can't expect any wiggle room if you got things (details, dates) wrong. Your indictment of the OTO and the change of one letter in Liber AL is quite damning though (and hilarious given the Liber AL quote "shall not in one letter change this book") and is a crack in the OTO armor i'm afraid. The Book should not have been touched. It was published in Crowley's time and while it's evident he considered the change it should have been a footnote like you said.

I've updated the anagram gif to include yours and some others. If you look up the word glib it means shallow. Perhaps there are shallow lies in the story of Liber AL but the Book stands on it's own and will survive this review just fine. As for Crowley's reputation, hasn't that been nuked already many times?! While your assessment of AC as a psychopath may be technically accurate, you seem to miss the spirit of the man, the seriousness of which he took his work, and his sense of humor.

Whether L's in the anagram is "Libeler's glib lie" or "Liber's glib lie" is open to interpretation. I think it's both. Both sides are guilty of glib lies.

Liber AL vel Legis anagrams updated

For the record Jamie I believe in Magick and I believe the reception story. Are we really this skeptical of otherworldly events on this the AC society forum? Funny! So be it. But there is much credible evidence that otherworldly events do happen, RTC even alludes to it in the writing process of his book.

Google "Sammy Hagar alien encounter" or check out the "riddle of angel priest" story from 2013. Many witnesses to that one! And that one made the Daily Mail..ha!

Doesn't the introduction to the Book of the Law predict that the cipher will be the proof of it's inception? I guess we shall see.

Onward fools! I suffer ye not!

-mst

suck it!


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 2064
19/10/2016 10:01 pm  

Thanks for your sharing your line of inquiry, @elitemachinery its a very valid one. I am enjoying this discussion.

Point to note, the OTO website http://lib.oto-usa.org/libri/liber0031.html?num=45 has the exact same scans as the website you linked. http://book-of-the-law.com/
Just compared the two sites and scans. I think its http://hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib31al/1-13.html
That contains the high contrast, photoshopped images.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
19/10/2016 10:05 pm  

You are right sandyboy, and I am sorry for having added "not relevant to this thread" stuff.

[[[All quotes from RTC or Richard T. Cole, is from the version of Liber L. vel Bogus that members of this site can download and read for free.]]]

Michael Staeley February 22, 2016 at 12:08 am #95335 (page 24 in this thread):

"... the real issue here is that despite an absurd hype campaign running for several years, whereby your bogus book was apparently going to rock the world of Thelema to its foundations by proving that Crowley fabricated the reception of The Book of the Law in 1904, you’ve failed to deliver. "

AC did both describe the Book of the Law as (Cole page 67) "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing.", on a title page he prepared (in 1904?) (Cole page 67 and 68:) "for Liber L. vel Legis. He never used this, nor is it included in any of the innumerale published editions." AC did also describe the Book of the Law as a book in which "His utterance is enshrined", listed as one of "the Sacred Writings.", "... whose existence may one day be divulged unto you."(, meaning divulged by AC himself,) in Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae, written by AC in 1907. AC additionally also described the Book of the Law as "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing." on (Cole page 97:) "the typeset version of the handwritten cover pafe (as prefaces the Appendix dropped from Collected Works) [...] (Cole page 230 and 231:) "Sept. 1907 Collected Works Vol. III aborted Appendix".

AC does in his December 1907 diaries in reference to rest of "the Sacred Writings." that the Book of the Law is listed together with in Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae, written by AC in 1907, state that “Looking back on the year, it seems one continuous ecstasy … I am able to do automatic writing at will.” The said title page that AC prepared for the Book of the Law, the Appendix of Volume III of The Works of Aleister Crowley, and all other documents which contradicted AC's later statements from 1909 about how the Book of the Law was written, were never published (source: http://www.cornelius93.com/EpistleCoverofLiberAL.html – An Open Epistle On The Cover To Liber AL vel Legis by Frater Achad Osher 583), except for Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae which was originally included in the Class A classification, "but has since been reclassified as Class D." (Source: http://www.tomegatherion.co.uk/holybooks.htm - TO MEGA THERION THE GREAR BEAST 666 - HOLY BOOKS OF THELEMA).

And this documents and demonstrates that AC's myth about him receiving the Book of the Law, as a book dictated to him by a praeterhuman named Aiwass, a name mentioned within the beginning of text of the said book, was a later fabrication, differing from his original descriptions of how the said book was written as "a highly interesting example of genuine automatic writing." So we do not need another book from RTC or Richard T. Cole to prove that Crowley fabricated the reception of The Book of the Law, when presenting Aiwass, a name mentioned within the beginning of text of the said book, as a praeterhuman dictating this book to him.

"I guess then a simple anagram 'As i saw' or 'As i was' or 'I was as' or 'i saw as', suggests the inspiration for Aiwass." Source: The Origins of Aleister Crowley's Thelema, and the possibility that its an elaborate hoax. - http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread830832/pg3&mem=

"I write this therefore with a sense of responsibility so acute that for the first time in my life I regret my sense of humour and the literary practical jokes which it has caused me to perpetrate. I am glad, though, that care was taken of the MS. itself and of diaries and letters of the period, so that the physical facts are as plain as can be desired." Source: The Equinox of the Gods, Chapter 7. Remarks on the method of receiving Liber Legis, on the Conditions prevailing at the time of the writing, and on certain technical difficulties connected with the Literary form of the Book; http://hermetic.com/crowley/equinox-of-the-gods/remarks-on-the-method-of-receiving-liber-legis.html


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1091
21/10/2016 4:05 am  

@wellreadwellbred :

Why did you, Richard T. Cole, not provide scans big enough so that the text in them was readable?
If you will allow me to to second-guess for Richard here, wellread, surely the answer is blindingly obvious --- why, to save the casual reader from wasting his or her valuable time over reading them! (Boom, tish!)

@elitemachinery :

For the record Jamie I believe in Magick and I believe the reception story.
And I believe in one secret and ineffable Lord -.and in one Father of Life, Mystery of Mystery, in His name Chaos, goeth the Gnostic Mass. For I believe in the Father, the Son and and the Holy Ghost, sayeth the Christian Credo. 'Do you believe in magic?' asketh the Lovin' Spoonful. "What do you believe, and why do you believe it?" quoth the sadly deceased Daevid Allen. "I don't believe it!" crieth Victor Meldrew. Which one is right here? Answer - none of them and all of them, of course... (Choose ye well!)

Are we really this skeptical of otherworldly events on this the AC society forum?
You tell me! (or, You tell me?)

И ∫ºλ


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 408
21/10/2016 7:10 am  

I hadn't checked the site in weeks and was surprised to see two recent posts by me when I checked the site yesterday. I emailed Paul with various conspiracy theories before remembering that these must have been posts in pending mode submitted months ago and recently approved. Thanks to Paul for publishing. Apologies if some of the content in #95161 and #95208 is redundant.

93!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/06/2017 3:29 am  

having tortured myself for a year now with Yorke TSs and Crowley MSs, i think the "Egypt 1904" note at the top of the page from OSa2 looks very much like Yorke's handwriting - particularly the cursive capital E which is typical of Yorke. on the other hand, the following lowercase g is not a typical Yorke lowercase g). The lower case e-s on the left hand page are clearly different from those on the right. Unfortunately i can't find another g on the left, but i'm virtually certain that the left hand page is in Yorke's hand and the right in Crowleys... in which case the 1904 was written (or changed) by Yorke...


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5308
11/06/2017 3:09 pm  

I've been reading Crowley's (appalling) handwriting for 4 decades and can say beyond a shadow of a doubt that 'Egypt 1904' is not in his hand. I suspect you're right about it being by Yorke, but I have less experience of his handwriting.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
12/06/2017 12:11 am  

Elsie Gray Parke: "... in which case the 1904 was written (or changed) by Yorke… ":

"... (or changed) by Yorke… ", as in an instance of Yorke changing Crowley's 1902 into 1904?


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 837
12/06/2017 5:10 pm  

... or as an instance of Yorke (or someone else) changing Crowley's "1902" into "Egypt 1904", by adding the word Egypt, and changing the number 2 in "1902" into number 4. This does not seem likely, though, as all of "Egypt 1904" seems to be an example of something written fast in the same handwriting style.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1091
13/06/2017 1:41 am  

Could somebody please clarify --- if "Egypt 1904" was added in Yorke's hand, what is it that this is meant to go to show/ prove?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
30/11/2019 8:28 pm  

@RTC

So what happened to Liber Appendix? Where is the watermark evidence?

 


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
30/11/2019 8:39 pm  

@RTC

And the highly anticipated new "evidence" from Rose Kelly, who Crowley was much in love with in 1904, which would be extremely interesting

Its now three years on from the publication of Liber Bogus. Maybe you might feel an update would be appropriate?

Johnny


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
30/11/2019 8:52 pm  

@sandyboy

More dead sheep found in the New Forest plus a desecrated vicar

" Animals targeted in 'occult' attacks in the New Forest'

www.guardian-series.co.uk/uk_national_news/18058357.animals-targeted-occult-attacks-new-forest/

 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 364
02/12/2019 4:27 am  
Posted by: @frater_anubis

@RTC

So what happened to Liber Appendix? Where is the watermark evidence?

 

Ironically, but not surprisingly, the watermarks prove just the opposite of what Cole claims; they prove that no human being could have authored the text of the Book of the Law.

 


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1308
02/12/2019 5:39 am  

Of course

the human understanding

would configure a meaning

as a premise

 

 

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3520
02/12/2019 6:12 pm  
Posted by: @herupakraath

they prove that no human being could have authored the text of the Book of the Law.

One might encounter great difficulty proving this concept in court ... or even in a forum.


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 364
05/12/2019 4:27 am  
Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @herupakraath

they prove that no human being could have authored the text of the Book of the Law.

One might encounter great difficulty proving this concept in court ... or even in a forum.

Why is that?

 


ReplyQuote
djedi
(@djedi)
Member
Joined: 1 month ago
Posts: 30
05/12/2019 4:59 am  
Posted by: @herupakraath
Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @herupakraath

they prove that no human being could have authored the text of the Book of the Law.

One might encounter great difficulty proving this concept in court ... or even in a forum.

Why is that?

 

Epistemics in the mind of those uninitiated in the mystery of the peeled onion is, on account of their stinging eyes, a Gordian knot of infinite but delusory potential solutions. They follow the string, but never disentangle. Consider how the benighted Jungian might answer your arguments about the watermarks; he'll say that, by some miracle of Crowley's subconscious mind he was able to arrive at knowledge of the watermarked pages without consciously recognizing it as so. Just as he'd say that Aiwass was some bicameral regression arrived at by autohypnosis. He ignores the components of his argument which would have him confront the basis (or lack-thereof) of his worldview, that would have him draw back the veil on that certain factor infinite and unknown, which makes fools of us all, some laughing and others weeping. But why should he not ignore it? All the gamboling apes of the world would sooner agree with him than you. That's democracy in action, and it's all that matters to him. Does it matter to you what they think?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3520
05/12/2019 6:07 am  

Aleister was not a human being?

He was not the author who wrote on watermarked papers?

Oh yes, it is well known that he claimed he wrote it down, but Aiwass was the author.

It really depends on whether a person believes in Aiwass or Jung.
(Praeterhuman vs the Anima.


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 364
05/12/2019 3:02 pm  
Posted by: @djedi
Posted by: @herupakraath
Posted by: @shiva
Posted by: @herupakraath

they prove that no human being could have authored the text of the Book of the Law.

One might encounter great difficulty proving this concept in court ... or even in a forum.

Why is that?

 

Epistemics in the mind of those uninitiated in the mystery of the peeled onion is, on account of their stinging eyes, a Gordian knot of infinite but delusory potential solutions. They follow the string, but never disentangle. Consider how the benighted Jungian might answer your arguments about the watermarks; he'll say that, by some miracle of Crowley's subconscious mind he was able to arrive at knowledge of the watermarked pages without consciously recognizing it as so. Just as he'd say that Aiwass was some bicameral regression arrived at by autohypnosis. He ignores the components of his argument which would have him confront the basis (or lack-thereof) of his worldview, that would have him draw back the veil on that certain factor infinite and unknown, which makes fools of us all, some laughing and others weeping. But why should he not ignore it? All the gamboling apes of the world would sooner agree with him than you. That's democracy in action, and it's all that matters to him. Does it matter to you what they think?

Fortunately the court of public opinion seldom rests on intellectual posturing, and to answer your question,  no, I do not care what they think. 

 


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
05/12/2019 9:34 pm  

@RTC

I'll ask this question again as I havent had a reply - where is Liber Appendix and the new Rose Kelly evidence alluded to above?

Johnny


ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 61
06/12/2019 12:17 pm  

@frater_anubis "I'll ask this question again as I havent had a reply - where is Liber Appendix and the new Rose Kelly evidence alluded to above? Johnny"

I have answered this question numerous times, on numerous threads.  Perhaps you could request that a member of this site point you in the right direction.  Though I’d advise against phrasing any such enquiry with the foot-stomping, egocentric arrogance you displayed in the above.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3520
06/12/2019 5:37 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

I have answered this question numerous times

I guess we all missed finding the "proof."

Posted by: @therealrtc

the foot-stomping, egocentric arrogance you displayed

So, Anu, I guess that puts you in your proper place, you ego-centered twit.

Please note that when anyone pushes RTC into a corner and demands a simple answer to a specific question, he lashes out with personal derogations. This is intended to belittle you, cause you to hesitate, and guess what? The question is never answered.

 


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
06/12/2019 6:16 pm  

@therealrtc

You have failed to answer the question(s) to my satisfaction. To resort to personal abuse is a sign that you have lost the argument - because clearly, there is no evidence to support your arguments in Liber Bogus. It looks to me that you wrote it in your sensational style to earn a few bob, probably because you are unemployable

In your case, i'm going to ask again in my foot stomping, egocentric arrogant way - where is the evidence?


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 200
06/12/2019 6:22 pm  

@shiva

I'm aware of Cole's tactics in his contributions to Lashtal. My response is to continue to ask for the evidence. He clearly has an incentive to subject anyone who is not swayed by his arguments to personal abuse - he wishes to sell more copies.

Johnny


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3762
06/12/2019 7:07 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

I have answered this question numerous times, on numerous threads.  Perhaps you could request that a member of this site point you in the right direction.

@therealrtc

As "a member of this site" I'd love to be able to enlighten frater_anubis, but inexplicably I don't recall seeing this answer of yours at all, never mind "numerous times, on numerous threads". Perhaps you could repeat it here for the purpose of us dolts, please.

This post was modified 1 week ago by Michael Staley

ReplyQuote
RTC
 RTC
(@therealrtc)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 61
06/12/2019 7:13 pm  

@frater_anubis – Your surprisingly persistent indignation is noted.  As for “... to earn a few bob... and “...sell more copies.” Oh, come on!  The Webmaster of this site was good enough to host a Free-To-Download PDF of the book just one year after its release.  Can you offer a single comparable instance?  In your case, I’ll re-re-restate my previous restatement... The Appendix in question, namely, Part IIB of “The Governing Dynamics of Thelema,” is scheduled for release following “666, Sex and the New Aeon of Horus(in early 2020) and “The Paranormal Decided(in late 2020).  As noted on “The Inauguration...” thread, by the time you’ve played with your Horus Toy®, any further excavation of Crowley's fabrication is... redundant.   

BTW – I sincerely hope you are being as ‘stompy’ with the official guardians of Crowley’s legacy.  These, surely, are best placed to comment on such matters.  Yet, not a single word... In fact, when was the last time this august body actually did anything?  Would someone in the vicinity please give them a nudge, just to reassure all that the entity didn’t expire some years ago.

 @Shiva – Yup, you got my whole life-strategy.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3762
06/12/2019 7:55 pm  
Posted by: @therealrtc

The Appendix in question, namely, Part IIB of “The Governing Dynamics of Thelema,” is scheduled for release following “666, Sex and the New Aeon of Horus(in early 2020) and “The Paranormal Decided(in late 2020)

@frater_anubis

Probably best not to hold your breath.

 


ReplyQuote
Page 9 / 10
Share: