Notifications
Clear all

The Comment  

Page 1 / 2
  RSS

elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 505
14/04/2020 5:16 am  

How soon after AC "received" Liber AL did he write the comment below? Is there a consensus on why he wrote this and what it means? Is there a reason everyone ignores it? Is it a joke?

https://hermetic.com/legis/ccxx/the-comment

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

The study of this Book is forbidden. It is wise to destroy this copy after the first reading.

Whosoever disregards this does so at his own risk and peril. These are most dire.

Those who discuss the contents of this Book are to be shunned by all, as centres of pestilence.

All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself.

There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.

Love is the law, love under will.

The priest of the princes,

Ankh-f-n-khonsu


Quote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
14/04/2020 3:22 pm  
Posted by: @elitemachinery

How soon after AC "received" Liber AL did he write the comment below?

It's known as the "Tunis comment" and was written in 1925.

Posted by: @elitemachinery

Is there a consensus on why he wrote this and what it means?

No, there isn't. Some say that it was penned after he got tired of hearing Norman Mudd's web of speculation; others say not so. I don't think it's a joke, apart perhaps from the advice to destroy the book after the first reading which I think is odd.

Some people do take seriously the injuction not to discuss the contents of the book. I don't; on the other hand, though, I do appreciate the sentiment that we each need to reach our own understanding of the Book.

 

 

 


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5322
14/04/2020 3:35 pm  

An important point to note is that, although 'written by' Crowley, it's signed by 'Ankh-f-n-Khonsu'.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


elitemachinery and liked
ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 505
14/04/2020 4:25 pm  
Posted by: @elitemachinery

All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself.

Posted by: @michael-staley

I do appreciate the sentiment that we each need to reach our own understanding of the Book.

Ok thanks Michael. I was a little puzzled by the vernacular of the line above but your answer makes sense of it for me.

Re burning of the book? To each his own. Crowley was probably sick of the criticism.

But my policy is to not take orders from Archetypes or Holy Books or Gurus. Doing so can get one in heaps of trouble. Therefore I will be keeping my copy.

Posted by: @lashtal

An important point to note is that, although 'written by' Crowley, it's signed by 'Ankh-f-n-Khonsu'.

Ok Paul. Considering the Book was received in Egypt i'm sure this is an important distinction.

More info here for anyone interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu_i


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
14/04/2020 5:33 pm  

To me the comment seems to be very much in the style of Liber 333. I haven't figured it all out but it seems like a koan-like joke, its telling you to "do what thou wilt" (eg think for yourself) in one line and then do something as absurd as burning the book the next. If you were to follow this "instruction" and burn it, would you really be doing your own will?

As noted above, its written by Ankh-f-n-Khonsu and not AC.

"All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings"

This comment is the only thing he ever wrote!

 

Posted by: @elitemachinery

But my policy is to not take orders from Archetypes or Holy Books or Gurus. Doing so can get one in heaps of trouble. Therefore I will be keeping my copy.

Indeed. 😉 


ReplyQuote
Set-Tetu-Ra
(@setguy)
Member
Joined: 6 months ago
Posts: 171
14/04/2020 5:53 pm  

The comment was not originally part of AL. Aiwass repeatedly said not to change or add anything to the book, then Crowley did. And he only added it so his interpretation couldn't be questioned. 

"The other images group around me to support me: let all be worshipped, for they shall cluster to exalt me… There is a splendour in my name hidden and glorious, as the sun of midnight is ever the son."

Set = I, Was = Aiwass


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1542
14/04/2020 5:59 pm  

elite posted
"Re burning of the book? To each his own. Crowley was probably sick of the criticism."

Might be a joke on the notion of a fixed self
before " the truth that has crossed over "
and opens the dwelling place of the stars.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
14/04/2020 6:24 pm  
Posted by: @elitemachinery

Re burning of the book? To each his own.

The exactly precise word was/is "destroy," not "burn."

Book-burners may employ fire in a censer, but others must devise their own destructo. As you say,to each his (or her) own.

Posted by: @elitemachinery

I will be keeping my copy.

This is most dire.

 


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
14/04/2020 6:58 pm  

Destroy leads to the result of achieving distancing from the work, perhaps solely as a preventive against Mudd-iness. Physical destruction, whatever form that takes, is one way to assist in achieving that goal. Although, it may not destroy and achieve distancing in the subtler connections. It's through the application of will, not only with the physical destruction, that distancing is achieved in an intellectual, emotional and spiritual sense where the preventive can be effective and clarify the relationship of the individual to Liber Legis.


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 10 years ago
Posts: 505
14/04/2020 7:17 pm  
Posted by: @elitemachinery
Posted by: @elitemachinery

Re burning of the book? To each his own.

The exactly precise word was/is "destroy," not "burn."

oops! must be the Catholic baptism kicking in....we Catholics usually burn books...and sometimes witches too!

"In 364, the Roman Catholic Emperor Jovian ordered the entire Library of Antioch to be burnt. " (source Wikipedia)

Posted by: @shiva

This is most dire.

hehe i'm damned either way!


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 369
14/04/2020 9:07 pm  

I am amazed that whenever this topic comes up nobody makes any reference to the secret messages hidden in the Tunis Comment. So be it. Also the Lon Milo Duquette story that he actually burned his first copy do to this imperative makes me more inclined to dislike him then not.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
14/04/2020 10:40 pm  
Posted by: @set-tetu-ra

The comment was not originally part of AL. Aiwass repeatedly said not to change or add anything to the book, then Crowley did.

But Aiwass instructed that "the work of the comment" should be easy (III:40), and it generally appears as a coda in most printed versions.  There is no known holograph text of the scribe's 'penmanship' however, unfortunately for the puzzle-solvers. 

Posted by: @runelogix

I am amazed that whenever this topic comes up nobody makes any reference to the secret messages hidden in the Tunis Comment.

Please don't be coy - what secret messages?!

Norma N joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 369
15/04/2020 12:35 am  

@jamiejbarter if you want me to do your work for you you will be disappointed!

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
15/04/2020 1:34 am  

Oh, I'm not disappointed - after all didn't I intimate you would turn out to be coy about revealing anything, in which I turned out to be 100% correct, as I imagine you'll also prove my assumption that you've just been grandly bullshitting all along!

"So be it" & Congratulations on your joining the serried ranks of the big teazers who only (after The Beatles) took us half the way there,

N Joy


RuneLogIX liked
ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 369
15/04/2020 2:05 am  

@jamiejbarter Haha. I was enjoying a lot of George Harrison's works the other day. Alright here is a hint: count the significant features of The Comment like how a qaballist would. When you find significant numbers welcome to Wonderland.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/04/2020 2:06 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

didn't I intimate you would turn out to be coy about revealing anything, in which I turned out to be 100% correct

Your name has been added to the Profit of the Yeer competition ... for next year ... judging this year in the rear-view mirror.

 


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
15/04/2020 2:18 am  

@runelogix

Hmmm... Is it formatted the same way in every edition?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/04/2020 2:23 am  
Posted by: @duck

Is it formatted the same way in every edition?

Many editions don't even include the Comment, much less format it.

 


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
15/04/2020 2:29 am  

@shiva

In those that do, have you noticed any differences?


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 369
15/04/2020 2:34 am  

@duck Only refer to Ankh-af-na-khonsu's writings on the matter. If you must defer further, look to the demon Crowley 😋 

Force and Fire is not metaphorical. In Prophetes Veritas Venit.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
15/04/2020 3:07 am  
Posted by: @runelogix

@duck Only refer to Ankh-af-na-khonsu's writings on the matter.

But what "writings" though?  When, as the duck quacked earlier

Posted by: @duck

This comment is the only thing he ever wrote!

Pestilentially yours (in good company),

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/04/2020 4:52 am  
Posted by: @duck

In those that do, have you noticed any differences?

No, but I wasn't looking for differences. I was mostly reading the original books once owned by the Crowley library in Hastings and West Point. First editions, you see. Maybe you don't know the story?

Posted by: @jamiejbarter

But what "writings" though?  When, as the duck quacked earlier

If you expect Rune to do your work for you, you'll have to pay him/her. Beer money, you know?

 


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5322
15/04/2020 9:30 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

But what "writings" though?  When, as the duck quacked earlier

Posted by: @duck

This comment is the only thing he ever wrote!

Not true.

 

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
thearthuremerson
(@thearthuremerson)
Member
Joined: 6 months ago
Posts: 32
15/04/2020 11:32 am  
Posted by: @duck

To me the comment seems to be very much in the style of Liber 333. I haven't figured it all out but it seems like a koan-like joke, its telling you to "do what thou wilt" (eg think for yourself) in one line and then do something as absurd as burning the book the next. If you were to follow this "instruction" and burn it, would you really be doing your own will?

Surely one's will could be comprised of following directions. 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 445
15/04/2020 11:45 am  
Posted by: @elitemachinery

Is there a consensus on why he wrote this

In July 1923, during a period in which Crowley was intent on proving Aiwass authored TBOTL, Norman Mudd challenged Crowley on what would be considered good evidence. Crowley concluded that any evidence he could muster would be subjective in nature, and shortly thereafter wrote that he should forbid all analytical study of TBOTL; this is when the concept of the Tunis Comment actually began to form.

Posted by: @set-tetu-ra

Aiwass repeatedly said not to change or add anything to the book, then Crowley did

Not true. Crowley is warned not to change as much of the style of a letter, but is instructed to make changes to certain lines of text, and told to add the stele versifications to the published form of TBOTL.

—and thy comment upon this the Book of the Law shall be
printed beautifully in red ink and black upon beautiful
paper made by hand; and to each man and woman
that thou meetest, were it but to dine or to drink at
them, it is the Law to give. Then they shall chance to
abide in this bliss or no; it is no odds. Do this quickly!

The instruction to print the comment beautifully in red and black ink upon beautiful paper made by hand, would be pointless if the comment were intended be a single page that forbids the study and discussion of the TBOTL. Likewise, the law to give infers an elaboration on the meaning of the verses, not a directive that forbids their study and discussion. Do this quickly was an imperative to comment on the verses while still under the influence of the magical effects of The Cairo Working: Crowley failed to do so.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/04/2020 4:06 pm  
Posted by: @duck

burning the book

"Destroy" not "burn" is the proper classification.

Note: In OTO I*, the candidate is advised to "study constantly" in AL. The I* was written by AC-Baphomet. Another set of conflicting injunctions, thus one of the Mysteries.

 


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3110
15/04/2020 4:16 pm  

It is wise to destroy this copy after the first reading.

Maybe it's my legal training, but i can't help noticing a loophole a mile wide in this injunction (or perhaps two loopholes).

It says to destroy "this" copy; nothing stops aspiring students from obtaining another copy. It also applies the rule to either the "first reading" of the copy of, or perhaps of the text of, AL.

Whether that second copy would need to be destroyed to comply is debatable, since while reading it would be the "first reading" of that copy (requiring destruction?), it would not be the "first reading" of the text.

Possibly just a way of keeping book sales up?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/04/2020 6:51 pm  
Posted by: @ignant666

It says to destroy "this" copy; nothing stops aspiring students from obtaining another copy.

1984. A done deal.

Also, some versions do not have the COMMENT, so one could keep that copy and read it all they wanted willed.

I've been in and out of council with many others for decades over the COMMENT. Here are variations on WTF?

1. Scare off the timid, the curious, the (really) superstitious, the cowards ... those kind of undesirable people who will stab themselves in the foot if they ever get to handle a magical dagger. And, of course, all Christians.

2. A Real Warning. If one gets involved in any serious way with AL, their life and consciousness are going to change. The warrior will accept that, but the weaker, office worker might find the change a bit drastic. Just imagine having everything taken away. Well, not everything, only those things to which one is attached or reliant upon.

#1 & #2 (above) are not incompatible.

3. A Challenge. Let's see what you've got.

4. A Joke. Oh, no. I never viewed it as humor. Not even Humour.

Posted by: @ignant666

Whether that second copy would need to be destroyed

Based on my experience, I will proclaim that no second book needs destroying. The destruction of the first book, in a magickal setting, is sufficient to trigger a certain change in perspective. This might have been the most powerful ceremony I ever performed. And there was no libation involved. Tobacco was allowed (outdoors).

Did it diminish my reliance on AL? Oh, yes.

Did it diminish my respect for, and opinion of, AL? Oh, no.

Can anybody do this at home without professional supervision? Try it and see. The circumstances under which I did this heresy (or was I following instructions from Ankh?) were unique and pretty darn hard to duplicate. But anyway, I recommend a copy with the COMMENT be incinerated (a form of destruction), preferably in a magical censer with dancing girls, and another copy without the COMMENT be pulled off the shelf or purchased externally.

Take no heed of the ashes, for they are as dust.

At dinner, Mr White turned to me and said, "I hope you burned that Book really well." I assured him that every page had been reduced to ash with a magical dagger.

Posted by: @ignant666

Possibly just a way of keeping book sales up?

The books were usually printed and given away. Bibles are often given away. Only idiots like me give books away, but I've done so. I would think attracting someone's intense reaction.

PS - I am not naive enough to think that tonnes of ALs have been given away. Some, surely. But any search for one comes up with a price. PDF versions are free.

 


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3110
15/04/2020 6:59 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

PDF versions are free.

And easy to destroy after each and every reading, evoking new ones as needed.


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
15/04/2020 7:32 pm  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

But what "writings" though?  When, as the duck quacked earlier

Posted by: @duck

This comment is the only thing he ever wrote!

Not true.

Sorry, I guess AC might have signed some other works "Ankh-f-n-Khonsu" as well, I'm not very knowledgeable on this. The original Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu might have written the stele then, and probably some other things, I'm not aware of any that have survived.

We could also see the whole of AL as written by Ankh, depends how one wants to look at it.

 

Posted by: @thearthuremerson

Surely one's will could be comprised of following directions. 

Of course. Its also comprised of stepping back and thinking for itself about certain directions, and denying them if they seem "silly".

 

My whole thinking on this has probably been influenced by never having a physical copy. Had I had one when younger I may well have burnt it in a state of paranoia about the occult. I used to "suffer" from these states, though I look at things differently now.

 

Posted by: @ignant666

And easy to destroy after each and every reading, evoking new ones as needed.

You could say that a pdf is "destroyed" (as an actual book) every time you close your pdf viewer. It then only exists as either a sequence of magnetic polarities on a HDD or as a sequence of switches on an SSD, these sequences could not be described as a "book" while in this state. So this "ritual" is performed every time one closes the pdf whether one intends to or not. 😝 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
15/04/2020 10:39 pm  
Posted by: @herupakraath

Do this quickly was an imperative to comment on the verses while still under the influence of the magical effects of The Cairo Working: Crowley failed to do so.

If this is more than just your subjective reasoning where is your justification for this conclusion?  Crowley finally wrote the Comment in 1925, more than two decades afterwards - obviously this was hardly 'quick' at all, but why shouldn't it be a matter of months (or even say, anytime before the first world war, to pluck a date out of thin air) rather than in effect, days?  (Or how long do you think the "magical effects of the Cairo Working" would have lasted for; when do you reckon should have been their 'expiry date'?)

Posted by: @duck

Sorry, I guess AC might have signed some other works "Ankh-f-n-Khonsu" as well, I'm not very knowledgeable on this. The original Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu might have written the stele then, and probably some other things, I'm not aware of any that have survived.

Same with me - AC might well have written other things under the 'pen name' of Ankh-af-na-khonsu; I just couldn't recall any offhand. And still can't.

Posted by: @lashtal
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

But what "writings" though?  When, as the duck quacked earlier

Posted by: @duck

This comment is the only thing he ever wrote!

Not true.

However some might say it would have helped move matters along a bit to have given a couple of f'r'instances, rather than apparently manifesting another example of this same infectious coyness once again which only serves to still leave some (at least 2) people wondering what they could have been!

(Appropriate emoji unavailable),

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
16/04/2020 2:58 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

this same infectious coyness

Look, there's multiple aspects to LAShTAL. Let me count the planes ...

10. Practical. "Where can I buy this (ABC) book?

9. Emotional/Astral. "Why are you stalking me, you troll?"  Typical barroom swagger and cockiness.

8. Linear Mental. A=1. A=0. Lengthy detailed QBL threads with puzzles and solutions. Historical data retrieval. The Galleries. Discussion and debate about dates, times, places, people's names, the order of the English alphabet.

7. Cultural bias and Social programming form the basis of disputes. On the positive side, a philosophical knowledge of Thelema (writ in Greek to confuse the cowans) in parts, or in its entirety, creates a fraternity (sorors always invited) of rogues, most of whom know absolutely everything about anything.

6. Harmony Club. This is where everybody gets along and interesting research gets done with sharing and delight. Many threads start out here, but after 3 to 17 posts, they succumb to gravity and descend to one of the levels listed above, maybe mixed, but out of Sun City.

5. Octagon. This is where one goes to fight the heavy battles.One on one. One against many. Tag teams. Football games (very rare, as human group activities are usually short lived on this plane.

4. Coy Palace. Here it's like a chess match. THIS IS THE GAME ROOM TO WHICH YOU, JJB, ARE INQUIRING. Hints, feints, promises of things to come. Strategies. Implications of secret knowledge.

It's all part of the matrix, Jamie.

The final three levels are administrative and behind the scenes. Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
16/04/2020 3:26 am  
Posted by: @shiva

It's all part of the matrix, Jamie.

*Wow!* It's full of stars! like I've just woken up to the Wake World!

Posted by: @shiva

The final three levels are administrative and behind the scenes.

That's nothing (to be concerned about), then (?)

Posted by: @shiva

Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain.

Oh, him! I thought he was just the janitor! 🙃 

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
16/04/2020 3:47 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

That's nothing (to be concerned about), then (?)

There is no concern for those who are up there.

If you, or I, want to be concerned about it, down here, that's fine. We can compare notes and assign characteristics to forums and beings that do not exist.

Posted by: @jamiejbarter

Oh, him! I thought he was just the janitor!

He is. He has to clean up all the messes we leave after partying in the seven lower spheres.

 


ReplyQuote
herupakraath
(@herupakraath)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 445
16/04/2020 10:35 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

If this is more than just your subjective reasoning where is your justification for this conclusion?

Actual experience. Altered states of consciousness that result in experiences similar to those experienced by Crowley, consist of the conscious mind relinquishing control to the subconscious: such states are impossible to maintain indefinitely, with the effects slowly diminishing over time, hence the need for Crowley to write the comment quickly.

 


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5322
16/04/2020 11:49 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

However some might say it would have helped move matters along a bit to have given a couple of f'r'instances, rather than apparently manifesting another example of this same infectious coyness once again which only serves to still leave some (at least 2) people wondering what they could have been!

'Infectious coyness'?! You could, maybe, just have looked it up? It seems reasonable to assume that people interested in this stuff have at least done some background reading, surely; otherwise why would they be commenting? 

The 'author' of The Comment indicates that 'All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings.' Ankh-f-n-Khonsu (or some variant of that spelling) is shown as the pseudonymous author of The Short (or Tunis) Comment and The Summons (see The Equinox of the Gods), as well as The World Teacher to the Theosophical Society, and several of AC's diaries. To this we can probably add Across the Gulf (The Equinox I:7), based on content alone. Then there's the material written by the actual historical Ankhefenkhons: his stèle (not just the registers from The Book of the Dead), the graffiti he left on the roof of Khonsu Temple, and the hieroglyphs on the extant statuettes. 

image

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
16/04/2020 8:07 pm  

@lashtal

Principal Skinner has spoken, argument over.

Sorry for not thinking before typing, which lead to this mini-discussion. I'll try not to do it (so much) in future.

So it seems Ankh f.n. K doesn't necessarily apply to all A.C's work. Is there something special about those works? They seem to be lesser known ones.

I'm still not sure why I should take advice from a guy who puts a "C and B" in his signature like a 13-year old. 😝 


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 3110
16/04/2020 8:14 pm  

You mean like that?

image

ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
16/04/2020 8:27 pm  

I forgot about that, and I guess, the same thing applies. 😝 


ReplyQuote
Behemoth
(@behemoth)
Member
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 74
16/04/2020 8:53 pm  
Posted by: @duck

I'm still not sure why I should take advice from a guy who puts a "C and B" in his signature like a 13-year old. 😝 

Posted by: @lashtal
Posted by: @ignant666

 

Simple cock & balls would have been too one-layered even for AC.

 

The A clearly resembles the sign of Caput Draconis or "Dragon's Head" of which Crowley writes: Caput Draconis, the head of the Lion-Serpent, the Beast 666.

Caput Draconis

 

And the spermatozoon: Leo in the Zodiac, his ascending decan.

 

Behold now Behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.


RuneLogIX liked
ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
17/04/2020 1:26 am  

@behemoth

To be totally honest, I think this second meaning is even sillier than the first. 😜 🤣 


ReplyQuote
Behemoth
(@behemoth)
Member
Joined: 8 months ago
Posts: 74
17/04/2020 4:53 am  
Posted by: @duck

@behemoth

To be totally honest, I think this second meaning is even sillier than the first. 😜 🤣 

 

 

The point I was making also was that it would make sense to use the sign of Caput Draconis Lunae that marks the point of lunar orbit's ascending node at least in connection with the name and signature of Ankh-af-na-khonsu [Life of the Sky-rider or “[He whose] Life [is] in Khonsu] considering Khonsu quite literally means a traveller (associated with the travel of the Moon across the night sky) and perhaps to signify indeed that the (dead man) Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu has completed his underworld travels or that his Ankh has completed the travel.

 

Behold now Behemoth, which I made with thee; he eateth grass as an ox.


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
17/04/2020 5:44 am  

Its all good, I was just being a bit silly there. Your research is sound. Occasionally I just get completely cynical with the whole thing as my mood changes. Nothing personal.


ReplyQuote
frater_anubis
(@frater_anubis)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 242
18/04/2020 9:10 pm  

@michael-staley

Its not that people want to discuss the content of Liber Al vel Legis that offends - its that they quote verses from it, usualy trying to prove or disprove some belief they have, or some puerile point.

Whenever i read Liber Al I seem to find fresh and frequenly topical events reflected in a book written in 1904, which sorta proves to me that it is a sacred text.

Crowley must have had a better reason to write the Tunis Comment than Norman Mudd bothering him about it once too often


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
MANIO - it's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 4021
18/04/2020 10:56 pm  
Posted by: @frater_anubis

Crowley must have had a better reason to write the Tunis Comment than Norman Mudd bothering him about it once too often

I didn't say that that was the reason. It may have just been one amongst several reasons.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1836
19/04/2020 12:37 am  
Posted by: @michael-staley
Posted by: @frater_anubis

Crowley must have had a better reason to write the Tunis Comment than Norman Mudd bothering him about it once too often

I didn't say that that was the reason. It may have just been one amongst several reasons.

Maybe it was a much hoped-for side-effect...


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
19/04/2020 10:46 pm  
Posted by: @lashtal

'Infectious coyness'?!

Why, yes!  Tracking back the outbreak to its source, the coyness apparently seems to have started with a reluctance to divulge further Cairo-based details on the solution to the II:76 riddle (such as those based on copies of the manuscript and the stele and a 1904 map of the region)?  

Posted by: @lashtal

You could, maybe, just have looked it up? It seems reasonable to assume that people interested in this stuff have at least done some background reading, surely; otherwise why would they be commenting? 

What, check through all of AC's extensive writings to see which ones he may have decided to attribute the pseudonym Ankh-af-na-khonsu to?  That's hardly background reading particularly if some (most) of the books aren't easily to hand to flick through: surely it's far easier to ask somebody - or in fact the person who is suggesting otherwise - to give at least one or two examples to back up the statement that the Comment wasn't the only instance when he did so?

Posted by: @lashtal

The 'author' of The Comment indicates that 'All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings.'

That's a very good point you made there Paul, whether consciously (deliberately) or not: the distinction between AC's "writings" - of which there are very many - and those "writings" of Ankh-af-na-khonsu - of which there are relatively extremely few.

Posted by: @lashtal

Ankh-f-n-Khonsu (or some variant of that spelling) is shown as the pseudonymous author of The Short (or Tunis) Comment and The Summons (see The Equinox of the Gods), as well as The World Teacher to the Theosophical Society, and several of AC's diaries.

I accept the one from "The Summons" as the one apparent positive exception I can see.  I'll have to take your word for the World Teacher as I don't recall having come across that particular example, nor am I familiar with AC using it for "several diaries" (although the no-longer-extant "Hermit of Aesopus Island" would have been a good candidate!)

Posted by: @lashtal

To this we can probably add Across the Gulf (The Equinox I:7), based on content alone.

Yes, I thought it might at least have been "Across the Gulf" myself and did actually check that one out (from The Equinox I:7) - but no, unfortunately it's attributed to Crowley too.

Posted by: @lashtal

Then there's the material written by the actual historical Ankhefenkhons: his stèle (not just the registers from The Book of the Dead), the graffiti he left on the roof of Khonsu Temple, and the hieroglyphs on the extant statuettes. 

I didn't know we were counting examples from incarnations before Crowley's actual birth date in this!

So, I grant you: from the whole of his AC's corpus therefore, apparently one other definite and (leaving the diaries aside) one possible, exception to The Comment being the only case where he ever uses Ankh-af-na-khonsu as a pseudonym.

Posted by: @herupakraath

such [altered] states [of consciousness] are impossible to maintain indefinitely, with the effects slowly diminishing over time, hence the need for Crowley to write the comment quickly.

So, how long do you actually think that "the magical effects of the Cairo Working" actually lasted for, herupakraath; when do you reckon they should have expired, then?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
20/04/2020 3:54 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

unfortunately it's attributed to Crowley too.

It doesn't matter. They, all of them, are the same person, who we know and love so well.

Posted by: @jamiejbarter

I didn't know we were counting examples from incarnations before Crowley's actual birth date in this!

It doesn't matter. They, all of them, are the same person,past, present, and (maybe) future.

 


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 5322
20/04/2020 9:38 am  
Posted by: @jamiejbarter

I'll have to take your word for the World Teacher as I don't recall having come across that particular example,

Published by Mandrake Press in 1993 and again in Thelema Lodge Calendar (1994) and Red Flame 8 (2000)

 

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
21/04/2020 2:11 pm  

Thanks for the references Paul; I don't have any of them but will try to look them up when I do come across them.

By its apparently sparing use in only around three instances it appears that "Ankh-af-na-khonsu" was not a pseudonym which A.C. employed very often during the course of his lifetime (as compared with, say V.V.V.V.V. for example).  

Does his title/ job description "the priest of the princes" only have its origin from within The Book of the Law or are there any older antecedents?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: