Fair enough, dude.
I note that neither of our "cypher solvers"/"prophets" have replied, in 6, and 7, hours respectively, to my pointing out the odor reminiscent of bovine feces that i have detected in their recent posts.
Perhaps they are busy today. But i am sure they have very good answers that i am just too unenlightened to have thought of, and will get around to posting them soon.
BTW, i apologize deeply for misspelling "bovine" in my last post.
Officially accepted by whom?
Yes, OTO seems to publish most of the Libers online, as a public service. However, there is no indication that they accept it, other than as a Crowley artifact.
Crowley himself wrote that he found it "unsatisfactory." So much for Class A stuff, eh? However, some A.'.A.'. lineages still continue to demand memorization of Trigrammaton before moving into the next grade. I went through this memorization crap in Lutheran Catechism - a rather light duty selection of verses was provided - the Rev thought he'd continue tradition, but only choses 12 verses.
So Crowley finds Trigrammaton "useless," yet he sticks it in as a requirement for passage? And then his followers continue this tradition, because it's a hold-over Christian tradition, and Crowley loved memorizing the bible names.
Does not all this cause you (everyone) to throw up your hands and cry out, "WTF?"
It's obviously accepted as part of the Liber Library, but its validity seems to be lacking their recommendation or Seal of Approval.
I am not a member of any orders, and claims by long-dead folks that certain Libers are "class A" do not bind me, sorry.
How bold of you. I , a long-living ancient (from before the days of plastic and transistors) could possibly step in and assign you to The Book of Lies. But that would be foolish, as you already have it memorized. Can you not see how the wisdom in Lies comes closer to the surface when a Magus arises?
Officially accepted by whom?
So it's on the O.T.O. website. So what? I what way does that mean that it is "officially accepted"? Do you think that the O.T.O. have the final say on the meaning of Crowley's work? On Thelema? What has Trigrammaton to do with the work of the O.T.O.?
the wisdom in Lies
Which is of course a mere "class C", not a divinely-inspired "A" like Trigrammaton.
My thanks to ignant666 for pointing out that while i can do my gematria, i can fail to spot the difference between five and six. And thanks to the real simon iff for drawing attention to the Hebrew ChITh in verse 57 of Liber MA.
So, lets try it again. Adding the 418 of ChITh to the previous 329 gives 747. Now, while i like this palindromic number, 747 being the reflex of 474, it has not been especially revealing to date. OK, so I do have QVL HThVR, "the voice of the turtledove", rather poetic, from Canticles 2.12. (In the Greek, 747 is hamadryas, a wood-nymph; perhaps she is in league with the Enochian Leprechauns?). Adding 418 to 2259 to give 2677 is not much help either.
So, no self-evident and incontrovertible proof of anything to be found there it seems. But do continue.
Just a little reminder that we are all waiting for the ex cathedra replies from our two cypher-solving, text*-receiving prophets:
- 24 hours since i demonstrated that @herupakraath does not understand the concepts of "proof", or evidence", or "logical reasoning";
- 20 hours since i pointed out that the "author" of Liber Ma (who is definitely not @threefold31) does not know the correct Hebrew spelling of "Ammon"/"Ammmonite", due to not in fact being able to speak/write Hebrew.
Looking forward to the replies from each, when it is convenient for them to post them.
----------------------------
* I don't actually know whether the new system of magick revealed by "an Egyptian adept" to @herupakraath took the form of a Liber, or was just verbal, but close enough for rock'n'roll.
So, lets try it again. Adding the 418 of ChITh to the previous 329 gives 747.
The real problem, regardless of summations and sums, is that you are approaching the matter from the viewpoint of an archeological qabalist, saying A=1 and I=10 ... which is what most of us do. But the premise of Liber MA (41) is that its its numerological intricacies are based on Liber Trigrammaton, which is a whole different set of correspondences.
Of course, it does no harm [I can't prove this] to run the numbers, letters, and words through the Hebrew audit check.
But do continue.
No chance of that not happening ...
So, lets try it again. Adding the 418 of ChITh to the previous 329 gives 747.
The real problem, regardless of summations and sums, is that you are approaching the matter from the viewpoint of an archeological qabalist, saying A=1 and I=10 ... which is what most of us do. But the premise of Liber MA (41) is that its its numerological intricacies are based on Liber Trigrammaton, which is a whole different set of correspondences.
Of course, it does no harm [I can't prove this] to run the numbers, letters, and words through the Hebrew audit check.
But do continue.
No chance of that not happening ...
Yes, I did consider that any result I obtained that might be significant to me from the Thelemic/text of Liber AL perspective might not be relevant to Liber MA itself. But threefold31 did imply that simple gematria analysis of the six Hebrew letters "in full" would produce a result that was of obvious significance to all of us, despite our presumed unfamiliarity with the Liber Trigrammaton based and implied numerological intricacies of the text. So what was he hoping for us to realise. I wonder?
But threefold31 did imply that simple gematria analysis of the six Hebrew letters "in full" would produce a result that was of obvious significance to all of us
Yes, yes, this is the "result" we all are looking for - The Lost word that is numbered correctly. Maybe there is hope or at least help in some other spell(ing)s?
So what was he hoping for us to realise. I wonder?
Ignantus has asked him to spell it ot, rather than present Chinese or Taiwanese number puzzles. As previously cited, The burden of proof lie upon the one making the (any) claim.
In accordance with One Star In Sight (aka Liber 489, a "Class B" publication), we know that, now that this new (but misspelled) Word has been proclaimed by the Magus Omega Logion 9°=2□* (sometimes known among men, women, and trogs as @threefold31), we are at a new "'Equinox of the Gods' at the end of an 'Aeon'"- in fact, by his utterance of this Word, "the planet on which he lives [is transformed] by the installation of new officers to preside over its initiation". He has undertaken the literally awesome responsibility of inaugurating a new aeon.
As a result, "the secret formula [that is, the word "Thelema" and the formula of "NOX"] which expresses the Law of [the former aeon's] action becomes outworn and useless to [humanity's] further development" [emphasis added]. So anyone undertaking any A.'. A.'. work, or any work based on AC's life and legacy, should stop that right now. The Magus Omega Logion 9°=2□ has made Thelema/the work of AC "outworn and useless".
Now, if i were a Magus, and in the habit of putting "9°=2□" after my name in public fora, and also in the habit of transforming planets and whatnot, and then someone pointed out that my "Word" is not spelled correctly, because the "praeterhuman intelligence" that dictated my Magus revelations does not understand Hebrew spelling, and erroneously thinks "Ammon" begins with an aleph, i would feel it was incumbent on me to make some sort of reply.
But of course i am not everybody, and some other folks, after making six (6) posts in the four (4) days after starting this thread publishing said revelations, might choose to enter into a "period of silence" that has lasted 2 days so far since i pointed this out. A job of promulgation rivaling that of the Breezy (c)OTO, and not at all in keeping with the gravity of the task of a Magus.
------------------
*It is worth noting that this magickal motto translates from the Greek as "The Big 'O' of Science [or 'of Scholarship']", with obvious sex-magickal implications. Any cowan ignorant enough of Greek to imagine it might mean "The Last Word" should get a Greek-English dictionary, or invoke the daemon google on their computing device.
... by his utterance of this Word, "the planet on which he lives [is transformed] by the installation of new officers to preside over its initiation".
This is true for a full-blown Magus who is initiating a new era or Aeon of consciousness and conditions ... the previous one having lasted about 119 years, which is a long count away from 2000 years, or the more realistic 2400-2500 years.
To avoid the burden of changing the guard and installing new officers in the Seat of the East throne-room, one could let it slide and just match vibes with the current [Horus] word.
anyone undertaking any A.'. A.'. work, or any work based on AC's life and legacy, should stop that right now
There is a time-lag that varies according to assorted individuals' response reflexes. Magisters, Magi, and advanced Adepts will have already adapted - I can smell the Crowley books burning.
Everyone else will suffer by clinging to the old stuff which is now abrogated.
I recommend putting the Aeon Theory in its proper place, and getting back to work.
I would say that Ammonites refers to:
and thus also the fossil of such creatures...
To which the geometry provides a particular lattice of probable living import, along with suggestions of Cthulhu... to which the inclusion of Hebrew spelling could well be a form of both gas lighting and means of bisecting particular gematrical resonances whose access is facilitated though the Hebrew Qabalah...
We do know the scribe lives in a blue dome in Detroit, that he built himself, and requiring certain competencies in geometry and math, and where such structures can accentuate contact through states of consciousness not confined to most architectures, that well an ammonitic or amniotic state might facilitate this translation, transmogrification or rather conversation with Liber Legis...to which memorization of The Book of the Law does denote a certain earned proficiency that would well instruct the incoming of a message...I am sure that if taken side by side, that the content may well hold up in a manner that is not a destruction of the superstructure but serves to show both an awe of the original as well as a certain process of transformation and metamorphosis of the message, through the psyche of the author...
Dwtw
There are 6 Hebrew letters found in Liber MA, and their spelling 'in full' is equal to 747, which is the value of the name אמון AMUN, as found In Sepher Sephiroth. I found that to be rather interesting in a Book where one of the deities speaking is Amun. I didn't state the answer at first because I thought someone else might be interested in finding it. I make no claim as to what it means, beyond the obvious.
Now that deity called Amun by the Hebrews has his name spelled as Ammōn by the Greeks, who equated him with Zeus, and thus he was called Zeus-Ammon. Although no such word existed in classical Greece (as far as I know), such a follower would be called an Ammonités (singular, not plural), just as a follower of Theléma would be called a Thelémités (singular not plural). The English suffix "ite" for a follower of something or a denizen of a place derives from this Greek suffix, "ités".
Presumably, the text of Liber MA is saying that a follower of Ammon (or Emunah) would be called an Ammonite. It has nothing to do with the similar homophone of Ammonite found in the Bible, which word begins with an Ayin, not an Alef. Those were people who dwelt in a place called Ammon, and thus they also have the 'ite' ending appended in English. But that Biblical word Ammonite is not referring to Emunah. To cast aspersion on me (whom you presume is the author) as if I don't know Hebrew or how to spell it in English transliteration, is to jump to an unwarranted conclusion. I actually know how to spell, read, and pronounce Hebrew; thank you very much. I was once married to a speaker of Hebrew.
Ignant666 has a tendency to jump to conclusions without considering alternatives. A good example is assuming that Nambé referred to a language and not a place name. Sometimes it helps to consider alternatives when the language is unintentionally ambiguous.
Another example is assuming that when I say there are 'proofs', that I am talking about a rigorous mathematical formula. I mean no such thing. I am saying that when a gematria (of any language) involves arithmetic (and to a lesser extent geometry) that is consistent and contains interconnections that are highly unlikely to have been calculated by the author(s) of a given text, that is the only 'proof' we are likely to have of a non-human authorship. Some people accept such things as 'proof' (in a non-mathematical sense, as found in Liber AL 3:10-11) and others don't.
In the case of Trigrammaton, there is a large amount of data (found in a Book that ignant666 is unlikely to have read) that presents the case that Crowley's chosen English gematria indeed decodes the text. This is not universally accepted and never will be, nor will any other English gematria. That's just the way it is. We'll never 'prove' it to everyone's satisfaction. But that discussion is as old as the hills and not terribly fruitful. If one reads my original statement, I already said as much.
As for the claim by Shiva that Crowley disavowed Liber Trigrammaton, this is an oft-stated position, that conveniently ignores the instance where he says it fulfilled Liber AL verse 2:55. The fact is at first he thought it was the solution to English gematria (the 'Old Comment'), and later he though it wasn't ('the New Comment'). But since he didn't know base 3, he didn't realize what he created. So he was both for and against it. That is the only truthful thing to say about his position. It was not either/or, it was both.
Nevertheless, I have not made any claim about the English gematria of Liber MA. That's why I suggested looking at Hebrew, since the values are a settled tradition.
All the verbiage about a new word and abrogation of an old one has nothing to do with what it says in Liber MA. Those are just more assumptions made by someone who is not taking alternatives into consideration. Liber MA did not proclaim a new Law. The word Law does not appear in the Book. But the word that does appear in verse 1:39 is spelled correctly. As for the Word of the Aeon, that was uttered over 2 years ago, and does not appear in Liber MA. And if I remember correctly, the world did change considerably in the year 2020.
Regarding my motto, maybe you should try a Greek dictionary yourself. The word Logion literally means Oracle in classical Greek, and Omega is metaphorically used to indicate the end of something.
Litllwtw
O.L.
[The] deity called Amun by the Hebrews has his name spelled as Ammōn by the Greeks
Presumably, the text of Liber MA is saying that a follower of Ammon (or Emunah) would be called an Ammonite.
So, let me see if i have this straight: we have an Egyptian deity, usually spelled in English as Amon or Amun, with the Hebrew name אמון *.
Your "praeternatural intelligence" can't spell this word in Hebrew, and "dictates" אמונה**.
This is really odd, because you know how to spell this word in Hebrew correctly, since you do so in the first sentence of your last post. Curiously, you correctly note that the correct spelling's gematria value is 747, which you say "is the value of the name ... as found In Sepher Sephiroth".
When i look on the line for the number 747, on p. 60 of Sepher Sephiroth, what i find is.... nothing. No attribution is given. Perhaps you merely mean that אמון adds up to 747 if we use the QBL values universally used by everyone except you? As noted above by @satansadvocaat, so what? "Let him who hath understanding count the number of the Fluffy Bunny, for it is the number of a big jet plane"?
Anyway, when we switch from Hebrew to English to form the English-language name of his followers that isn't wrong, we don't use either of the conventional English spellings, and we also do not transliterate the Hebrew name of this deity to English (which would be more or less the same as either conventional English spellings).
Instead, we pick one of several alleged Greek spellings (you give two: "Ammon (or Emunah)"), and form the word "Ammonites", which happens also to be a homophone of the Biblical term for a tribe of pagan Semites from the city of Ammon, as well as being, as @hadgigegenraum helpfully points out, a homophone of the name of an extinct prehistoric mollusk.
I do apologize for assuming that your slavish fluffy bunny-ized copy of AL proclaimed your new claimed "Word of the Aeon" as the last word of Ch. 1, v. 39, as did the text you† are so obviously copying verse for verse. I stand corrected that you†† actually destroyed the world with pastel cotton candy (candy floss to you Brits) two whole years ago, with some other word.
I think that is enough of your obscurantism for today. You were better off when you were keeping silent. Maybe instead of criticizing others for your inability to write clear English prose, you should work on that?
_______________________
* Aleph-Mem-Vav-Nun final (=747 per Sepher sephiroth values).
** Aleph-Mem-Vav-Nun-Heh (=52)
†Sorry, meant the praeternatural intelligence who dictated this to you, not you-you.
††Here i really do mean you, The Prophet, the One who has made Aleister Crowley's work "outworn and useless"- frankly, i don't know why we don't just shut this site down right now.
Apol for double post of time-barred edit, should have appeared as penultimate para of above:
As to my misunderstanding of your motto, it was rooted in
- the fact that "Omega" literally means "Big 'O'" (just as "Omicron" literally means "little 'O'"), and
- my inability to believe that anyone could possibly be enough of a conceited [expletive deleted] to actually call themself "The Final Oracle".
We live and learn.
One more error i am time-barred from correcting:
Anyway, when we switch from Hebrew to English to form the English-language name of his followers that isn't wrong...
should of course read
Anyway, when we switch from Hebrew to English to form the English-language name of YOUR followers that isn't wrong...
[math synchrony] the only 'proof' we are likely to have of a non-human authorship.
It should be noted that the unconscious mind of every person has the potential capacity to produce miraculous or synchronistic phenomenon. My grandfather was one of those guys who could stand by the tracks and give you the sum total of the serial numbers on the boxcars that had just rolled by. Nobody claimed "non-human." (What did he do for a vocation?) - he was an accountant for a railway line - (I see some sort of synchronicity there).
As for the claim by Shiva that Crowley disavowed Liber Trigrammaton, this is an oft-stated position, that conveniently ignores the instance where he says it fulfilled Liber AL verse 2:55
I think most of us know that it was his go at obtaining the order and number ... I merely quote the "unsatisfactory" word because it was his bottom line written appraisal of its effectiveness or usefulness.
However, I have always found its structure to be interesting. I have an unbalanced fondness for the trigrams, hexagrams, and taichis of the Orient over that of my careless regard of Hebrew letters. So I would not discourage you, or anyone, from pursuing it further.
we have an Egyptian deity, usually spelled in English as Amon or Amun, with the Hebrew name אמון *.
I had reason to chae this down: Amon, Amun, Amoun, Amen - all of these are in commun use. Big-shot political guy: Mont or Montu by name. I don't like him - for purely petty personal strife reasons carried over from the old times.
You were better off when you were keeping silent.
Again and again
the Word for men
is found again
in the 4th power of the sphinx
- frankly, i don't know why we don't just shut this site down right now.
Firstly, probably because we don't own the site.
Secondly, because as Post-Thelemic Oldies but Goodies, it is our duty to maintain the Thelemic framework for thos unfortunates who are attempting to get out of Isis or Osiris (these aeonic states are typified by "living in mom's basement" or "working in dad's business").
- "The Final Oracle".
We live and learn.
I am confused. Is it The Lost Word or The Last Word that we are looking for here?
So, let me see if i have this straight: we have an Egyptian deity, usually spelled in English as Amon or Amun, with the Hebrew name אמון *.
Your "praeternatural intelligence" can't spell this word in Hebrew, and "dictates" אמונה**.
Dwtw
No, you don't have it straight. I'm not sure why you insist 'the word of the Lauds' needs to be the name of the deity. You are simply mistaken.
This is really odd, because you know how to spell this word in Hebrew correctly, since you do so in the first sentence of your last post. Curiously, you correctly note that the correct spelling's gematria value is 747, which you say "is the value of the name ... as found In Sepher Sephiroth".
I said no such thing about the 'correct spelling'; that is your misconception. I said that the Hebrew letters in full equal the name of the deity of the second chapter.
When i look on the line for the number 747, on p. 60 of Sepher Sephiroth, what i find is.... nothing. No attribution is given. Perhaps you merely mean that אמון adds up to 747 if we use the QBL values universally used by everyone except you?
Amun is 747; this is Strong's H0538
Anyway, when we switch from Hebrew to English to form the English-language name of his followers that isn't wrong, we don't use either of the conventional English spellings, and we also do not transliterate the Hebrew name of this deity to English (which would be more or less the same as either conventional English spellings).
You seem to be missing the word-play being used by the author. This is very typical of Egyptian writing; their hieroglyphs are full of puns, word play and double-entendres. And Liber MA is full of them.
You make lots of assumptions that are clearly mistaken, including assuming that Ammonites should be translated into the Hebrew word in the previous verse, and that it referred to an ancient tribe, when it does not.
Here i really do mean you, The Prophet, the One who has made Aleister Crowley's work "outworn and useless"
I have said no such things. I am not the Prophet ( a word that does not appear in Liber MA), nor is AC's work 'outworn and useless'. You have a tendency to put words in other people's mouths.
Litllwtw
O.L.
Apol for double post of time-barred edit, should have appeared as penultimate para of above:
As to my misunderstanding of your motto, it was rooted in
- the fact that "Omega" literally means "Big 'O'" (just as "Omicron" literally means "little 'O'"), and
- my inability to believe that anyone could possibly be enough of a conceited [expletive deleted] to actually call themself "The Final Oracle".
We live and learn.
Dwtw
You are correct, the letter-names for O-mega and O-mikron simply mean Large O and Small O.
My choice of Motto was based on To Mega Therion, (who was a conceited [expletive deleted] who called himself The Great Beast), because Omega Logion is the next Magus to follow him, and so the motto contains similar syllables to his motto. If one makes a strict translation, this means Large O and Oracle. Metaphorically it means the Last Oracle. But that is not why it was chosen, not does that need to be taken in a literal sense. It's a play on words; but a deeper reason lies in the value of the Greek letters, which are enumerated on the title page of Liber MA.
Litllwtw
O.L.
[I apologize for the length of what follows, but the nature of the "Gish Gallop" is that the logorrheic flow of nonsense is such that the effort of replying is much greater that the effort of creating said nonsense]
No, you don't have it straight. I'm not sure why you insist 'the word of the Lauds' needs to be the name of the deity. You are simply mistaken.
So, "AMNVH", the "word of the Lauds" is not the name of the deity Amon/Ammon/Emunah/AMVN, the one speaking in the second chapter, even though they are spelled almost identically, and are pronounced identically. It is some entirely different thing that is not at all the same.
But in the post that i was replying to, in explaining what the "word of the Lauds" is, you say that MA is
a Book where one of the deities speaking is Amun.
and then in this post you note
the [alphabetic names of the six] Hebrew letters [spelled] in full equal the name of the deity of the second chapter.
This makes perfect sense.
Then, you say
I said no such thing about the 'correct spelling'; that is your misconception.
but you have just yourself spelled this god-name the same way the Hebrew Bible does (which is thus the "correct" Hebrew spelling)
the name אמון AMUN,
Were you spelling it wrongly then? If "AMVN" is not the correct Hebrew spelling of the Egyptian god name, why did you spell it that way? Why does the Bible spell it that way?
Amun is 747; this is https://biblehub.com/hebrew/528.htm
I cannot understand what meaning you are attempting to convey by appending this comment to the paragraph i wrote that you quote- you need to explain this more clearly for my unenlightened brain to comprehend.
You seem to be missing the word-play being used by the author. This is very typical of [ancient] Egyptian writing; their hieroglyphs are full of puns, word play and double-entendres. And Liber MA is full of them.
You do understand that Liber MA is a thing written in the 21st century in the USA, slavishly based on an early 20th century text, and is thus not in fact a piece of "Egyptian writing", right?
And before you inanely say "I did not say it was ancient Egyptian writing! You are putting words in my mouth again!! Wah!!", please note that modern Egyptian writing uses Arabic script, not hieroglyphics.
And of course MA is not written in hieroglyphics; it is written in the English alphabet (with 6 Hebrew letters).
So "Ammonite" is sort of pun, word play or double-entendre, presumably on the cognate* words for the Biblical tribe and the extinct mollusk, and has nothing to do with the god Amon, even though (you say) it does?
Got it. I mean, this makes zero sense, but OK.
You make lots of assumptions that are clearly mistaken, including assuming that Ammonites should be translated into the Hebrew word in the previous verse
In the text you are copying, it is very clear that, when ch.1, v.39 ends with the Greek spelling of "Thelema", and then v.40 mentions that "Thelemites" is not a wrong name for followers of "Thelema", that they are forms of the same word in two alphabets.
So you are now saying that, when your text's ch.1, v.39 ends with a word in Hebrew, and then your v.40 uses an English word that is a homophone of a Greek transliteration of that Hebrew name for an Egyptian god, with the suffix "ites" appended, i make a mistaken assumption in imagining that these words are connected in a way similar to the way the identically-positioned words in AL are used?
Got it. Makes as much sense as anything else you are saying (zero).
I have said no such things. I am not the Prophet ( a word that does not appear in Liber MA), nor is AC's work 'outworn and useless'.
You have claimed 9=2, have issued a new Word, and have issued a new Book. You have said that you have inaugurated a new Aeon in 2020:
the Word of the [current] Aeon [...] was uttered over 2 years ago,
Your new Book, the one that arrives in your new Aeon, is clearly incompatible with Thelema, and is obviously deliberately constructed to provide a new Fluffy Bunny post-Thelema dispensation. You have styled yourself in emulation of AC's Magus name (discussed below).
But it is true that your parody of AL substitutes the word "seer" every time the book it is copying uses the word "prophet".
Clearly i was being terribly unfair.
[i have not said] AC's work [is] 'outworn and useless'. You have a tendency to put words in other people's mouths.
No, you have indeed not said this. However, Aleister Crowley said that this is what happens when there is a new Word and a new Aeon, both of which you have proclaimed:
[T]he secret formula [that is, the word "Thelema" and the formula of "NOX"] which expresses the Law of [the former aeon's] action becomes outworn and useless to [humanity's] further development...
My choice of Motto was based on To Mega Therion .... who called himself The Great Beast), because Omega Logion is the next Magus to follow him
So, you are "the next Magus to follow" Crowley. Got it. All the others who say they have attained this grade are liars (mostly true of course).
[Crowley] was a conceited [expletive deleted]
Agreed. Of course he had some basis for his high self-regard. History will judge whether your similarly inflated self-aggrandizement is seen as rooted in similar accomplishments 75 years after you are dead.
I am certain you will provide us with another long and obscurantist reply, again reeking with self-importance, and the odor of bovine feces, in response to this post, and will again accuse me of misunderstanding both you and Crowley.
I may or may not bother to reply. If i just give up on trying to reason with an unreasonable person like you, and don't reply, you will doubtless conclude that your doughty intellect, and intense degree of spiritual advancement, have has rendered me simply unable to contend with One so mighty.
Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.
___________
*I erroneously said "Ammonite", a used in MA to mean a follower your new revelation, which, you have helpfully just explained, has nothing at all to do with the god Amon, is a homophone of "Ammonite", meaning a word that sounds like "Ammonite" and "Ammonite", but of course it is the exact same word, and thus a cognate and not a mere homophone.
I recommend putting the Aeon Theory in its proper place, and getting back to work.
Aeons seem to be much like buses, despite the timetable you wait ages for one and then two come together, which has simply been an impediment to the process of getting on with your affairs.
Good to get some clarification from threefold31. So 747 = AMVN, counting Nun final. Fair enough, but not particularly enlightening.
For MLXXXII, or 1082, I have the correspondences of Ouroboros, the Tail-eating Serpent; and semeia megala kai terata, "great signs and wonders" Matthew 24.24. (the first 'e' in semeia is an 'eta'). But this is not to be taken as any sort of endorsement of anything on my part.
Regarding the previous post - having trouble with the quote option. First sentence is by Shiva replying to ignant666 and the rest is my response, ok?
I'm going to have a bottle of Stella Artois now and that is not an endorsement either.
I am not the Prophet ( a word that does not appear in Liber MA), nor is AC's work 'outworn and useless'.
Well, good. At least we got that part in an affidavit.
The Great Beast), because Omega Logion is the next Magus to follow him
In your book and in your mind. The insertion of additional Magi between Therion and Logion remains a possible subject for discussion ... after the goal posts are re-concreted and the foreign dicts (dictionaries) have been re-compiled.
the logorrheic flow of nonsense is such that the effort of replying is much greater that the effort of creating said nonsense
I have perused the length of your retorted report. I am already playing catch-up, spending two hours to trim the text of the femine way (for a parallel thread), and now I find the Aeon of Maat and the Dissertation Committee involved in the Oral defense Interrogation exercise, with no time or space limits imposed.
I am overwhelmed ...
I seek refuge in ...
*
Nine
There will come upon you times of darkness. These are your testing times - to see how well you stand alone, when there is no-one in the outer to lean on, and inside the psychic activity and contact is nil, and depression, fatigue, or isolated self-interest threaten ... this is testing time ... and teaching time.
To be shut off in all areas but the music of the spheres.
Harmonize with the soul-note and be at peace.
This is also The Book of Death.
Every initiation is the death of that which went before, and the beginning of life on a new plane.
Every initiation means greater freedom. Therefore, death is freedom.
Initiation is death, and therefore they 1 fear the number 9. 2
But at the Heart of every Initiation, which is the point of death (or total detachment), is a golden Fire.
He who enters herein burns as a Phoenix and becomes initiate. He is no more, but his greater Self gathers up the ashes and builds a new vehicle. This new vehicle is subject to the greater Self.
Thus the soul walks on Earth.
When darkness comes, the soul withdraws. Keep with the soul at these times ... withdraw. Thus the inner and outer are correctly reflected.
1 The non-initiated; the common folk.
2 Nine is the number of initiation.
I may or may not bother to reply.
You are considering the use of The Nine.
Were you spelling it wrongly then? If "AMVN" is not the correct Hebrew spelling of the Egyptian god name, why did you spell it that way? Why does the Bible spell it that way?
Dwtw
You are clearly confused about the word Emunah, the name of the deity Amun, and the word Ammonites, and the roles they play in Liber MA. And you make many statements that are simply not true in regard to them. I'm not going to keep spelling it out for you.
I am certain you will provide us with another long and obscurantist reply...
Not
Litllwtw
O.L.
You are clearly confused about the word Emunah, the name of the deity Amun, and the word Ammonites, and the roles they play in Liber MA.
According to search, "the word Emunah" is not found within the text of MA. Perhaps you refer to the place where you misspell this alleged Greek version of an Egyptian deity's name in Hebrew? But you have earlier explained that AMVNH is not the name of the deity Amon/AMVN, so that can't be what you mean here.
"Amon" occurs 4 times, but never in the two-line passage we have been discussing.
"Ammonites" occurs exactly once, in the passage we are discussing.
How am i "confused"? I mean, your comments are incoherent gibberish, and make no sense at all, but this is hardly my fault.
I am, however, impressed that you seem to have now grasped the First Law Of Holes, and have bailed out on trying to explain yourself, as you clearly aren't capable of doing so.
Anyway, good luck with your whole Magus/"Seer" of the New New Aeon project. I am sure that having your future followers call themselves extinct mollusks will be the marketing move that will really sell this thing.
The Great Beast), because Omega Logion is the next Magus to follow him
In your book and in your mind. The insertion of additional Magi between Therion and Logion remains a possible subject for discussion ... after the goal posts are re-concreted and the foreign dicts (dictionaries) have been re-compiled.
Dwtw
Yes, thank you for pointing that out. I should have been more specific. I was referring to the next Magus to utter a Word of an Aeon. There have been other people who claimed to be Magi in the interim. As to their grades and accomplishments, it is not for me to say whether they are legitimate or not; that's between them and their Angel. Katrice was kind enough to provide a list of some of the names; I don't recall if any of their Words were supposed to relate to a new Aeon or not. But since Liber AL says that Boleskine must burn down before the Next Aeon comes, any Word of an Aeon uttered before 2016 would have been premature, in terrestrial time.
At any rate, that is really a subject for a different thread. My grade and Word has nothing to do with the contents of Liber MA.
When i look on the line for the number 747, on p. 60 of Sepher Sephiroth, what i find is.... nothing. No attribution is given.
My mistake, thank you for pointing this out. I have been using the updated version made by Ian Rons for so many years, I had forgotten how bare bones AC’s edition really is. I made the false assumption that everybody uses the more comprehensive version.
In the revised edition, there are several entries for 747:
I would say that Ammonites refers to...and thus also the fossil of such creatures...
Yes, it's possible that the name Ammonite was a sly reference to the extinct mollusc whose name derives from the 'horns of Ammōn', since it has a spiral shape like the ram's horns used on depictions of Zeus-Ammōn. The chambers of these creature grow in a spiral based on the Golden Ratio. According to the text, the suitability of this term is found by “counting the letters of the word”
Spelled in Greek, the word Ammōnités = 1449 = 7 * 207
...I am sure that if taken side by side, that the content may well hold up in a manner that is not a destruction of the superstructure but serves to show both an awe of the original as well as a certain process of transformation and metamorphosis of the message, through the psyche of the author...
I think @hadgigegenraum is coming closest to understanding the nature of Liber MA, as being a conversation with Liber AL. What appears at first glance as merely imitative is in fact an 'evolution' of the original text, as I stated in the original announcement. It is entirely possible that the two texts derive from the same source, and are mirror expressions of each other. That would make sense from the perspective of Ma'at; a balancing of the forces.
Litllwtw
O.L.
You are clearly confused about the word Emunah, the name of the deity Amun, and the word Ammonites, and the roles they play in Liber MA.
According to search, "the word Emunah" is not found within the text of MA. Perhaps you refer to the place where you misspell this alleged Greek version of an Egyptian deity's name in Hebrew? But you have earlier explained that AMVNH is not the name of the deity Amon/AMVN, so that can't be what you mean here.
"Amon" occurs 4 times, but never in the two-line passage we have been discussing.
"Ammonites" occurs exactly once, in the passage we are discussing.
Dwtw
I used Emunah as a typical English transliteration of the Hebrew word אמונה
Amun/Amon/Amen are all typical English transliterations of the Hebrew word אמונ
The two words are related to the same root, with similar meanings.
Nothing in the book is misspelled. This is your repeated, and incorrect, assertion.
Litllwtw
O.L.
Liber AL says that Boleskine must burn down before the Next Aeon comes, [so] any Word of an Aeon uttered before 2016 would have been premature, in terrestrial time.
Your reading comprehension skills and/or memory are pretty deficient. I thought you said you had AL memorized?
AL of course says nothing of the kind:
But your holy place shall be untouched throughout the centuries: though with fire and sword it be burnt down & shattered, yet an invisible house there standeth, and shall stand until the fall of the Great Equinox; when Hrumachis shall arise and the double-wanded one assume my throne and place. Another prophet shall arise, and bring fresh fever from the skies; another woman shall awake the lust & worship of the Snake; another soul of God and beast shall mingle in the globèd priest; another sacrifice shall stain the tomb; another king shall reign; and blessing no longer be poured To the Hawk-headed mystical Lord! [3:34; emphasis added]
So, far from saying that "Boleskine must burn down before the Next Aeon comes", it actually says that the burning down of Boleskine is both expected and totally irrelevant to when the next Aeon comes, because "an invisible house there standeth" after it burns down.
Note that, if you are still claiming, despite this prophecy, to be "the next Magus to utter a Word of an Aeon" after AC, your claim that you are not a "prophet", but only a mere "seer", is contradicted by the following sentence "Another prophet shall arise, and bring fresh fever from the skies". If you are claiming to be that Magus, you are claiming to be a prophet, and are saying that AC's work is now "outworn and uselss", despite saying previously that you are not dsayying this. Get your story straight son.
But then Crowley was a pretty trivial sort of prophet in your scheme of things: the Aeons of Isis and Osiris lasted thousands of years, whereas only 116 years elapsed between the world being destroyed by fire in 1904 by the utterance of the word Thelema, and again being destroyed by cotton-candy in 2020 by the utterance of whatever word you uttered.
Truly, we are blessed to be in the presence of such greatness, and doubly blessed to have your wisdom shared with us.
Dwtw
Of course you are entitled to interpret Liber AL any way you want, but the conclusions you draw are entirely your own, and I disagree with your line of reasoning. Our interpretations of Liber AL are very different, and at best we can only agree to disagree about it.
And I guess you slept through 2020, when the world went through a major transformation? As for 1904, I think it was a few years before the world was 'destroyed by fire' after the Word of the Law was written down. It remains to be seen what other developments will ensue in the new Aeon, or how long they will take.
I have not said that AC's work has become 'outworn and useless', and I don't think it implies that in Liber AL either, but that's just my take on it. Theléma is still the Word of the Law.
Litllwtw
O.L.
AL simply says nothing like what you wish it said. In your mind
But your holy place shall be untouched throughout the centuries: though with fire and sword it be burnt down & shattered, yet an invisible house there standeth, and shall stand until the fall of the Great Equinox
really means
But your holy place shall be untouched for just over a century: then with fire it will be burnt down & shattered, and no invisible house thereafter standeth, because this fire is the fall the Great Equinox
Got it. Makes as much sense as your other claims.
2020 was certainly an eventful year, but it could hardly compare with say 1917 or 1919 or 1939 or 1945 or 1989 or 2001, as far as "a major transformation" of the world.
Katrice was kind enough to provide a list of some of the names; I don't recall if any of their Words were supposed to relate to a new Aeon or not.
Technically only Aquino, that I know of, and I disagree with that claim, seeing his as an "Aeon enhancing" Word, ie: a Word in alignment with the Word of the Aeon You could say that Carroll's does, but his Pandaemonaeon is said to encompass all Aeons rather than to necessarily inaugurate a new one, similar to the Maatian idea of PanAeonic Magick.
AL simply says nothing like what you wish it said. In your mind
But your holy place shall be untouched throughout the centuries: though with fire and sword it be burnt down & shattered, yet an invisible house there standeth, and shall stand until the fall of the Great Equinox
really means
But your holy place shall be untouched for just over a century: then with fire it will be burnt down & shattered, and no invisible house thereafter standeth, because this fire is the fall the Great Equinox
Dwtw
How thoughtful of you to convey what's on my mind to others. Unfortunately that is not my position, and I've already discussed this in the past on the appropriate thread. The gist of my position is that the 'holy place' is Boleskine (according to AC's own words); that it will be burned down (which came true); that afterward there will still be a power center there for the so-called '93 Current'; that this power center will last for 'centuries' (which could be any length of time counted in hundreds); and that this center will no longer be active after the Equinox of MA arrives.
That's a lot different than saying that 'no invisible house there standeth' after the fire, and that 'this fire IS the fall of the great equinox'.
Litllwtw
O.L.
[S]ince Liber AL says that Boleskine must burn down before the Next Aeon comes, any Word of an Aeon uttered before 2016 would have been premature, in terrestrial time.
[T]his power center will last for 'centuries' (which could be any length of time counted in hundreds); and that this center will no longer be active after the Equinox of MA arrives.
Aside from ludicrousness of saying that "centuries" does not mean the one and only thing that it actually means in English (periods of hundreds of years, and not periods of hundreds of seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, or months), these two statements which you have made would seem exceedingly difficult to reconcile with your statement that your New Fluffy Bunny Aeon has not superseded the Aeon of Thelema, and that the formula of "NOX" has not been superseded by the new formula of "EPM"*.
You can't have it both ways: either you have proclaimed a New Aeon, and thus are AC's successor, or you haven't, and aren't.
___________
* "Extinct Prehistoric Mollusks"
Carroll's does, but his Pandaemonaeon is said to encompass all Aeons rather than to necessarily inaugurate a new one
This is a state, or a vision, that can be glimpsed under certain circumstances ... such as during the departure from an incarnation.
I remain confused, but not concerned, about which Aeon this is and what Law I need to follow in order to avoid disintegration.
[S]ince Liber AL says that Boleskine must burn down before the Next Aeon comes, any Word of an Aeon uttered before 2016 would have been premature, in terrestrial time.
[T]his power center will last for 'centuries' (which could be any length of time counted in hundreds); and that this center will no longer be active after the Equinox of MA arrives.
Aside from ludicrousness of saying that "centuries" does not mean the one and only thing that it actually means in English (periods of hundreds of years, and not periods of hundreds of seconds, minutes, hours, days, weeks, or months), these two statements which you have made would seem exceedingly difficult to reconcile with your statement that your New Fluffy Bunny Aeon has not superseded the Aeon of Thelema, and that the formula of "NOX" has not been superseded by the new formula of "EPM"*.
You can't have it both ways: either you have proclaimed a New Aeon, and thus are AC's successor, or you haven't, and aren't.
___________
Dwtw
According to Merriam-Webster, the second definition of centuries is "a group, sequence, or series of 100 like things".
I don't particularly care that you disagree with me, but I will ask you to please stop putting words in my mouth. I did not use the incorrect term "Aeon of Thelema". I said that the Word of the Law is still Theléma. You imply that I said something about NOX, which I did not.
I did say that I uttered a Word of the Aeon (which is not in Liber MA), and that the Aeon of Horus has been succeeded by the Equinox of MA, and in consonance with that, I succeeded To Mega Therion as a Magus in order to utter that Word.
There is a difference between the commencement of a new Aeon and the pronouncement of a new Law. There has been no new Law mentioned in Liber MA, as noted earlier. Liber AL was about the Law; Liber MA is about the Lauds.
Litllwtw
O.L.
Dwtw
The word of the Lauds is אמונה, which is typically transliterated as Emunah.
This word is Strong's Hebrew 530 and means firmness, steadfastness, fidelity, truth.
This word is derived from Strong's Hebrew 539 the primitive root אמן Aman, meaning to confirm or support.
This root is also the source of the common word אמן Amen that ends a prayer, which is Strong's Hebrew 543 and means verily, truly.
A similar word, of foreign origin, is אמונ, Amun, Strong's Hebrew 528 meaning the name of the Egyptian god Amun/Amon/Amen.
None of these words are related to the word עמוני Ammōni, Strong's Hebrew 5984 (spelled with an Ayin, not an Alef), usually transliterated as Ammonite, a dweller of the land of Ammon, now in modern Jordan, whose capital Amman preserves a connection to the ancient name.
The word Ammonite as a denizen of Ammon is rendered in Greek in the Septuagint as Ammanités, or Ammonitōn, (no Strong’s numbers).
On that basis, a follower of Ammōn, the Greek version of the Egyptian name Amun could be called an Ammōnités, (a singular form, with a gematria of 1449). This could be transliterated as the word Ammonite, (plural Ammonites). This is also the name of an extinct mollusc, whose spiral shape suggested the ram’s horn, and was thus named by Pliny the Elder as ammonis cornua – ‘horns of Ammōn’, because Zeus-Ammōn was depicted with ram’s horns.
To call a follower of Ammōn an Ammōnite does not mean they are being called an extinct mollusc. But that animal is so named because of its shape, and so a double entendre may be intended. This is not to be confused with the demonym of Ammonite (dweller in Ammon), which is simply rendered the same in English, making it a homophone with Ammonite (follower of Ammōn).
If one forms a new word for a follower of Theléma, hence a Thelémite, it might be construed that in likewise fashion, the name for a follower of Emunah would be formed on the same basis and be called an Emunite. But the word chosen by the author of Liber MA is Ammonite. This may refer to both Emunah and Amun, since they use almost the same letters in their Hebrew spelling. But it is likely a double reference to Amun/Ammōn as the god, and a play on words with Ammonite, the fossil that is ultimately named after the horns of Ammōn, the Greek rendition of the Egyptian god-name Amun.
Litllwtw
O.L.
There is a difference between the commencement of a new Aeon and the pronouncement of a new Law.
If the Law remains the same, then why bother to have a new Aeon?
I did say that I uttered a Word of the Aeon (which is not in Liber MA), and that the Aeon of Horus has been succeeded by the Equinox of MA, and in consonance with that, I succeeded To Mega Therion as a Magus in order to utter that Word.
I'm glad we got that settled and in print. It is now my duty as ask a final question - the answer to which will determine the next mini-yuga ...
During his initiation into daily life, To Mega Therion declared (wrote) that he had come acroos some "truth," and it was so terrible that he wondered how his previous, fellow Magi were able to continue doing the work.
The 64-Trillion (inflation, you know) dollar question is ...
Can you give up the
Terrible Secret of a Magus
or Not
?
A Magus can utter a Word without being Magus of an Aeon, and anyone can receive a Book, but I've never seen any reference to not having a new Law.
I like the idea of this, but I wonder what leads you to think that this is the case?
I like the idea of this, but I wonder what leads you to think that this is the case?
Could you please clarify what exactly are you referring to?
Crowley's own writings say that more than one Magus can exist within an Aeon.
Plenty of people who are not Magi have received Books
And I had believed that a new Law is a component of a new Aeon?
Many thanks for those pointers. I had forgotten that remark in One Star in Sight.
You're welcome. I've kept that quote handy ever since I got in to an argument with someone who said that only one person can ever attain any of the Supernal grades per Aeon. He also claimed that nobody has gone past Philosophus since Crowley. And called himself an A:.A:. teacher. And said that it was dangerous to associate with people of lower initiatory status. I don't have a lot of faith in that particular lineage.
Good bit of entertainment
"There is none that shall be cast down or lifted up: all is ever as it was." - Liber Legis 2:58
"To Me do ye reverence! to me come ye through tribulation of ordeal, which is bliss." - Liber Legis 3:62
only one person can ever attain any of the Supernal grades per Aeon.
Echoing rumbles from The Black Lodge.
nobody has gone past Philosophus since Crowley.
That's the Spirit! Pound 'em down - keep 'em in their rabbit holes beneath Paroketh.
This person obviously runs an Outer Order, of which he is the Grand Neophyte, and (again) obviously points towards his own grade, his own limitations, and he has associates who grovel the same, so there has never been a living role model in his esoteric life.
And called himself an A:.A:. teacher.
Oh! That's different. Wow. Or woe.
If the Law remains the same, then why bother to have a new Aeon?
A Magus can utter a Word without being Magus of an Aeon, and anyone can receive a Book, but I've never seen any reference to not having a new Law.
But I'm not a Magus.
Dwtw
I think that what complicates things is that the Book of the Law was sort of the first of its kind, and it doesn't actually use the term Aeon in the Crowleyan sense. It says there is an 'Equinox of the Gods', and that there will be a 'Fall of the Great Equinox', which I interpret as meaning that the E.O.T.G comes to an end. But it doesn't say a whole lot about the specifics of what happens then. Does a new Aeon necessarily come with a new Law attached? It's hard to say. But the next thing I will say, you can take or leave; I have asked my Angel whether there will be a new Law given, and the answer was in the negative.
There may be some guidance in Liber B vel Magi, where the word Law is mentioned three times:
"14. Let Him beware of abstinence from Action. For the curse of His grade is that He must speak Truth, that the Falsehood thereof may enslave the souls of men. Let Him then utter that without Fear, that the Law may be fulfilled.
And according to His Original Nature will that law be shapen, so that one may declare gentleness and quietness, being an Hindu; and another fierceness and servility, being a Jew; and yet another ardour and manliness, being an Arab. Yet this matter toucheth the Mystery of Incarnation, and is not here to be declared.
19. And woe, woe, woe, yea, woe, and again woe, woe, woe, unto seven times be His that preacheth not His law to men!"
Now one way to interpret this passage in v.14 is that the Truth fulfills the Law. Since the 'word of the Lauds' is Emunah, which means Truth, then perhaps its purpose is to fulfill the Law, which is Love, and whose word is Theléma. This would allow, if not require, that The Law of Thelema, (which is a misnomer, it is really more accurate to say the Law of Love) has to be fulfilled with Truth.
The law is shaped by the 'Original Nature' of the Magus, and some examples are given of the Hindu, the Jew and the Arab, with the door being left open to whatever the Nature of the Magus happens to be. But this is left unsaid, since it deals with the 'Mystery of Incarnation'. So that doesn't help a whole lot.
Nevertheless, the Magus is required to 'preacheth his law unto men'. This Law is not necessarily a new Law; it could well be the Law of Love. And the word 'preach' appears in the two verses leading up to Liber MA 1:39, where it says that 'The word of the Lauds is Emunah'.
So it seems that there is an intermingling of Truth, Thelema, and Love (Agape?) in the conversation between Liber AL and Liber MA. And 'Do what thou wilt' is thus related to 'Speaking the Truth'.
And as @katrice pointed out, a Magus can utter a Word that is not necessarily a Word of an Aeon. So if a Magus (within a given aeon) can fulfill the injunctions in Liber B vel Magi without formulating a new Law, then it stands to reason that a Magus with a Word of the Aeon can do the same thing.
It seems most likely that since Do what thou wilt is a universal Law, that it will remain true regardless of what the current Aeon is. And to Shiva's question, (why bother with a new Aeon that doesn't have a new Law), it's possible that the new Aeon is the time when the Law gets fulfilled.
This post is meant to be speculative, just as all the Holy Books are open to interpretation.
Litllwtw
O.L.
it doesn't actually use the term Aeon in the Crowleyan sense. It says there is an 'Equinox of the Gods'
This is true. The Aeon Paradigm Concept does appear to be a Crowley invention. More specifically, O.M. set it out straight on a 2,000-year rotary timeclock in his Intro to AL.
Then we find Ankh living (and dying) around 500 BVE, and he brought in the Osiris Aeon ... so we must allow some stretching to 2,400 years for that Aeon.
Then he (AC, OM, Therion) lines up the Aeons with the houses of the Zodiac. This immediately becomes problematic when we realize that the cusp of Aquarius is ~400 years away (in the future) from The Equinox of the Gods '04.
Somebody has to debunk this shit. Oh, Frater Shiva, will you do it? Firstly, no. Secondly, yes.
Firstly -
AC debunked his own fiddling by repeating the message "... for time there is not as it is here," saying the Aeon of Horus could end any time, shorter or longer. I wonder why he then layed that open-ended "fact" with all the other stuff?
Secondly - AC said transitions between Aeons is marked by "increased communication." He likens the expansion of Roman highways as the emblem of Osirian rule with the rapid increase in travel and talk in our new-breaking Horus age - and he missed out on the www and the 747.
It has been my personal experience that, yes, there has been/is a rapid increase in communication. As a kid, if I wasn't home (with phone), and I needed to make a call, I had to locate a "telephone booth" - this experience will not be unfamiliar to most readers - younger readers may think, "how strange."
The phone booth wanted 5-cents for a local call. It would accept brass slugs from Las Vegas nickel-slot-machines, and 1-cent pennies would form the diameter of a nickel if spun properly in the drop slot.
Today, I understand that all of you (anyones) have Dick Tracy TV Smartphones with unlimited distance for no extra nickels. It is therefore my New Year's vugari Message to "Reinforce the idea that we are in the middle of a transition from one way of living to another, and that (according to tradition) confusion is prominent."
Thank you for accepting that message. I'm sure it makes you feel much bettabout the nature of changing reality.
I interpret as meaning that the E.O.T.G comes to an end.
A "Grand Equinox" or a "Great Equinox," is pretty much a standard term for a rev through the 12 signs, at about ~26,000 years.
I have evoked my linear mind, obtained the exact scientific number of years in a Great Equinox, and divided by 12, to get 2167 years per Zodiacal Sign. Then when one crams 2000-year Aeons in there, it doesn't quite fit. This is due to the Prominence of Confusion. Confusion says, "Wise man drops this stuff."
Well, you know what? This 2000-year thing fits pretty well into historical place - from a viewpoint in the early 1900s: 2,000 years back to Rome, only 1900 to 4 ADev. But then it breaks down. Rome was not preceded (2000 +/-) by a Age ruled by women
Does a new Aeon necessarily come with a new Law attached? It's hard to say.
Your point is taken. I know of no specific references that sort out Aeons, Laws. Words of Aeons. Words of the Laws. So (unless somebody pops up ... where's The Librarian when you need him?) we probably won't be looking them up and citing scripture.
I suggest the solution of gnosis. Yes, it takes a supernal link to gnos properly, but surely that is no problem - there are surely a bunch of posters who can do this sporadically. I would do it - you know - gnos the technical structure of these aeonic terms. Become the process, passively - look around. Let it sink in. Then sort it out with the linear mind and 777 (which does NOT have a column for these confusions).
Then I would proclaim the Law, giving its Word with proper pronunciation, along with which Aeon we're in [*} and the Word of that time-stretch, pronounced properly, and finally revealing The Truth about The Exact Length of an Aeon (here - not there).
Yeah, I would do this, but there are younger folks who feel the need to do this sort of thing. So I'll pass for now.
"For the curse of His grade is that He must speak Truth, that the Falsehood thereof may enslave the souls of men."
And then there is The Terrible Secret of The Curse of This Grade - not disclosed, except here and there in Liber 333. It is hinted at in Liber B - perhaps openly declared.
And woe, woe, woe, yea, woe, and again woe, woe, woe, unto seven times be His that preacheth not His law to men!"
Yeah, woe, wah. Speak up or suffer.
It seems most likely that since Do what thou wilt is a universal Law, that it will remain true regardless of what the current Aeon is.
Yeah, its Chokmah. Wisdom = Will. Confusion says, "The ise man gnos what to do" [without thinking].
This post is meant to be speculative, just as all the Holy Books are open to interpretation.
Yes.
Also, compare how many previous Magi Crowley acknowledges (Laotze, Gautama, Krishna, Dionysus, Thoth, Moses, Muhammed), and how many Aeons he lists. But every Magus he lists has a Word.
Dwtw
I think there are a few different lists of these Magi; in The Heart of the Master the word Magus is not used, but a long list of people who brought a Word is given, including Pythagoras and Plotinus, et. al.
In The Vision and the Voice, 6th Aethyr, the Angel says:
"...this is the Mystery of the great prophets that have come unto mankind. Moses, and Buddha, and Lao Tan,and Krishna, and Jesus, and Osiris, and Mohammed; for all these attained unto the grade of Magus, and therefore were they bound with the curse of Thoth. But, being guardians of the truth, they have taught nothing but falsehood, except unto such as understood; for the truth may not pass the Gate of the Abyss."
Since Jesus is mentioned in this list, it is interesting to consider the famous passage from Matthew 5:17
“Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them."
So here is a case where a Magus came and brought a Word, but did not abrogate the Law that came before him.
Litllwtw
O.L.