Yes thanks for this note. Yes Oliver St. John does give proper honor and recognition to the role played by Rose, Ouarda the Seer, in all of this. Mr. St. John's oeuvre is frankly one of the most welcome approaches to Crowley and Thelema that I have seen. I would say that he and Sophia Di Jorio's Ending of the Words is the book that I would recommend to not only those new to the subject, but also an opportunity for a a reboot for Thalamic veterans. Here we have a working occultist, carrying on his own way that which Kenneth Grant termed creative occultism. Fortunately St. John's approach is also an example of the work continues, and endures, certainly beyond the scope of what may befall the results of this thread, whether RTC proves his claims...or might some other call forth some new inconvertible proof as regards the riddle it would be that an example is being given, through Mr. St. John's efforts, that certain doors are open to those who might....
It is in a description to his occult order, O∴ A∴ , Ordo Astri, we have something of interest or rather perspective, something that goes beyond Crowley, but is steeped in that which he was instrumental in bringing forward to the world.
From Oliver St. John~
----Our Manifesto describes the O∴ A∴ in the following terms:
A vehicle by which magicians may develop supreme facility in the magical arts. The sole aim and purpose is the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. This may be defined as the personal realisation of cosmic consciousness. In other terms it may be defined as Gnosis or direct experience of the Mysteries.
The Law of Thelema is defined thus:
The core tenets of Thelema are outstandingly simple: “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law” and “Love is the law, love under will.” Thelema is the law of love—the spiritual intelligence or True Will that unites and harmonises all things. It is therefore a law based on relationship.
Ordo Astri and Thelema
Aleister Crowley and Rose Edith Kelly, Ouarda the Seer, were the recipients of a powerful magical transmission in Cairo, 1904. Some of the Book of the Law addresses the thoughts and questions of Crowley, some of it conveys knowledge of the Theban Setian cult of Mentu, reserved for Initiates. Some passages have served to conceal the secret doctrine from Crowley and his followers. The teachings of Aiwass are nonetheless consistent. For us, being Thelemic does not involve acceptance of Crowley’s methods, teaching or philosophy. We do not regard Thelema as a religion. Where belief begins, knowledge ends.
Initiation in the O∴ A∴ is achieved through personal work done. Each grade has an Oath and a Task to accomplish for the purpose of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Our methods are necessarily elitist, for this requires a high level of intelligence, integrity and resolve. Few people are able to work in this fashion over a lengthy period of time, or are in any way suited to it."----
The above quoted material italics is found here:
https://www.ordoastri.org/ordo-astri-thelemic-magical-collegium/
93
HG
...I would say Richard is giving a short window of opportunity to solve it for yourself. He is, most assuredly, going to release the book but once his solution becomes Exhibit A(L), the opportunity to independently research along the same lines will be gone............There is an Indiana Jones and National Treasure feel about this puzzle.
@kidneyhawk – “I am also very interested in those who have expressed their own doubts pertaining to the Reception story as presented by Crowley. I believe there have been a few such expressions while dismissing RTC's words as unconvincing. So, you are not swayed by Cole's suggestions and feel he is proving nothing-but still feel that things are not as Crowley conveyed. Why do you have that doubt? What is the basis for it?”
A spectacularly insightful question worthy of this ‘For Sale & Wanted’ bin. What, indeed, are these unvoiced suspicions, and why do they remain unspoken? Anyone care to offer a starter?
I am also very interested in those who have expressed their own doubts pertaining to the Reception story as presented by Crowley. I believe there have been a few such expressions while dismissing RTC's words as unconvincing. So, you are not swayed by Cole's suggestions and feel he is proving nothing-but still feel that things are not as Crowley conveyed. Why do you have that doubt? What is the basis for it?
For me, I don't have any specific doubts. I simply recognise that there are lacunae in Crowley's accounts and diary entries. Whilst I do not think that he fabricated The Book of the Law, my mind is open to the possibility that he did; however, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, I'll continue to accept Crowley's account.
I was attracted to The Book of the Law because of its content, not its provenance. I have no problem with the provenance being praeter-human intelligence; then again, I'm not a humanist nor an atheist.
Personally I think that if Crowley had fabricated The Book of the Law, he would have made a much better job of tying up the myriad loose ends and lacunae.
RTC weaves this very discussion and contributions from a variety of members into his narrative.
Surprised he would do this, after he said he wanted to do so, and Paul very clearly stated that he, as copyright-holder to posts here, granted no permission for the reproduction of discussions here in his book.
Individual posters may also have copyright claims in their posts. RTC may not reproduce any posting by me, or any portion of any posting.
Paul may change his mind, but, if he doesn't, RTC should reasonably expect legal action if he does go ahead with including material from these forums in his book. He will most likely lose any such copyright case, and i believe that in the UK the loser pays court costs.
RTC may want to reconsider basing his book on copyright infringements on material that he has already been refused permission to reproduce.
[H]e feels much less abrasive and mocking in the pages of his book. He even confesses to being “goady” with some of his words and expresses his motivation.
"Goady" is an interesting way to put "making a complete fool of himself" (and daily violating the site's terms with his rude and offensive postings).
Posted by: @therealrtc
Just three words expose the scam. On, 29 July 1906, Crowley wrote “DDS wants Authority.” I ask, why? What possible reason has Jones for suggesting he should run Crowley’s New World Religion?
Richard, in the morning, reading through the ZIM AEthyr I found a note (A.C.) from 4. december 1909 e.v. but it was written (note) some year after AEthyr Workings. There he call D.D.S. his superior. And the licence to found a new Religion was given to him after China-Burma walking where he finished his Abramelin Operation. Then he add how he for three years didn't want to accept the Magister Templi degree. The notes are Crowley's of course. But how this converse or disagree with your understanding of time line?
@ignant666 - "Individual posters may also have copyright claims in their posts. RTC may not reproduce any posting by me, or any portion of any posting.
Paul may change his mind, but, if he doesn't, RTC should reasonably expect legal action if he does go ahead with including material from these forums in his book. He will most likely lose any such copyright case, and i believe that in the UK the loser pays court costs."
- What makes you think that you have ever said anything worthy of reproducing? But thus is revealed the depth of your fear, as expressed in a last-ditch attempt to suppress a book which scares the crap out of your fossilised ego and which you'll (demonstrably) do all in your (albeit limited) power to prevent others from reading. What's four levels below 'pathetic?'
Well... I've got some real bad news for you coming in... in... erm... how many days to go? 😥
- What makes you think that you have ever said anything worthy of reproducing? But thus is revealed the depth of your fear, as expressed in a last-ditch attempt to suppress a book which scares the crap out of your fossilised ego and which you'll (demonstrably) do all in your (albeit limited) power to prevent others from reading. What's four levels below 'pathetic?'
And right on cue, to illustrate ignant's remarks, comes classic Carrot_Childe in full-on offensive mode.
depth of your fear [...] a book which scares the crap out of your fossilised ego [...] What's four levels below 'pathetic?'
Jesus, are you an asshole.
I want to read your book actually, to see if there is any substance behind all the hype- who said anything about "suppressing" anything?
From what you've produced here, it seems likely the book is more of the same crank material you have produced in the past- full of strained reasoning, and tendentious claims rooted in poor research. And, of course, your trademark rambling, incredibly repetitive, and breath-takingly self-indulgent prose, that is in desperate need of a good editor. But if you have something real, i want to know about it.
I just pointed out the obvious fact that if your book is dependent on reproducing copyright material that you have been refused permission to reproduce, you should expect legal action.
Why you would imagine that my ego would be threatened if we were to learn that AC fabricated AL in 1906 in a power play with Jones, or that I would fear such a development?
I have a lifetime of my own accomplishments to provide an adequate basis for ego-support, and in any case am not some sort of Thelemic fundamentalist. I know AC was a frequent liar, who also wrote some very useful stuff, and some very funny stuff.
I don't believe there are such things as "praeterhuman intelligences", or "aeons", or "prophets", and certainly don't take AL as a "holy book" (and have no interest at all in AC's other "holy books"). It isn't even, in my opinion, his most important work- that title i would reserve for The Book of Lies.
Richard, I apologize to urge from you the answer and to repeat my self on my question:
(Posted by: @therealrtc
Just three words expose the scam. On, 29 July 1906, Crowley wrote “DDS wants Authority.” I ask, why? What possible reason has Jones for suggesting he should run Crowley’s New World Religion?
Richard, in the morning, reading through the ZIM AEthyr I found a note (A.C.) from 4. december 1909 e.v. but it was written (note) some year after AEthyr Workings. There he call D.D.S. his superior. And the licence to found a new Religion was given to him after China-Burma walking where he finished his Abramelin Operation. Then he add how he for three years didn't want to accept the Magister Templi degree. The notes are Crowley's of course. But how this converse or disagree with your understanding of time line?)
But I am realy interested about your view on this dates and how they relate to your scenario of Reception Legend.
@ptoner – Is your pictured item For Sale, or Wanted?
@nassah - D.D.S. was Crowley’s occult superior. As @shiva noted, Crowley certainly paid lip-service to Jones' seniority. It suited his purpose. So, what did Jones do with his extra occult stripe? He promoted Crowley above him! - Which also suited Crowley’s purposes.
In this time period, the contentious 1907 proof Title Page comments (plus other ornamentation) are scrapped in favour of slipping a stripped-bare Legis quietly into the 1909/10 Holy Books, with a tacit understanding it is just another of the inspired works Crowley was sausaging, to order, at the time. Given this, it’s not unreasonable to suppose that Crowley was ‘grooming’ the senior occultist, Jones, to stumble upon the extra-inspired qualities of Legis - Which, in fact, he did, and promoted Crowley on the strength of it.
It isn’t until the 1912 Equinox that the world first reads of myriad Cairo miracles and wonders. By this stage, Jones has vanished down the 1911 Looking Glass and Rose is sleeping with the cuckoos. Crowley can now claim what he wants, and does. Hope that helps?
@michael-staley – “... classic Carrot_Childe in full-on offensive mode.” – My therapist reckons I am now 100% vegetable-free. Unlike yourself, who appears resolutely fixated. Move away from the carrot, Michael...
@ignant666 – Stay tuned!
I was attracted to The Book of the Law because of its content, not its provenance. I have no problem with the provenance being praeter-human intelligence; then again, I'm not a humanist nor an atheist.
Well said. You have expressed the sane approach to AL, if someone is attracted to the book's content.
If thst same someone, or maybe somebody different, is attracted to the book because of its transcendental, paranormal scenario of reception ... well, then we get threads like this one. And booklets to explain what really happened.
(and daily violating the site's terms with his rude and offensive postings).
But, setting any other brilliances or defects, he is the master of walking the fine line. His borderline derogatories might get him punched in a face to face insultory, but they are shy enough of outright blasphemy to avoid evocation of the Moderator's warning, locking, or blocking.
who said anything about "suppressing" anything?
RTC did. There is no gestalt involving you trying to suppress the book. There is apparent challenging of specific concepts (that don't make sense, yet), bizarre second circuit dominant behavior, and convoluted marketing techniques. You may pass on to the next pylon.
Why you would imagine that my ego would be threatened if we were to learn that AC fabricated AL in 1906 in a power play with Jones, or that I would fear such a development?
I was wondering the same thing. There is no indication that you are displaying fear, or have heavily invested in ego-structure fortifications. You may pass on to the next pylon.
Pile-on the rhetoric
We'll have a truckload of fun
The Book of Lies.
I second that notion.
But thus is revealed the depth of your fear, as expressed in a last-ditch attempt to suppress a book which scares the crap out of your fossilised ego and which you'll (demonstrably) do all in your (albeit limited) power to prevent others from reading.
93!
To me, this is the biggest mistakes Richard makes: that anything he might have found out or maybe be even able to prove will scare anyone in the Crowley universe. Or will affect the copyright holders. Or might even sink Crowley's boat. It will just be another footnote in the decade-long assembling of things that don't seem right with the Cairo story. There will always be Liber L or Liber AL left, which was there when AC said so, and will remain as great as it is, Cairo myth or not.
Nobody is preventing Richard from anything, nobody is scared of Richard, and if it is true that with the Horus Toy TM thingie Richard even promotes AC, then I do not know what he is after, except becoming another footnote in the Cairo Myth doubting society.
But maybe the riddle solution will change all that!
Love=Law
Lutz
RTC(@therealrtc): "“I, Aleister Crowley, declare upon my honour as a gentleman that I hold this revelation a million times more important than the discovery of the Wheel, or even of the Laws of Physics or Mathematics.” (Crowley, EOTG) [...]Unlike many, I was not content to repeatedly polish a vehicle that didn’t run (and invent increasing ludicrous reasons why I’d rather walk). "Bogus" was my attempt to look under the bonnet and tackle this issue. If nothing else, it demonstrates that Crowley’s published accounts present only a selectively edited version of the whole." (Source: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/thelema/the-inauguration-of-aleister-crowleys-new-aeon-of-horus/#post-101367 )
"In 2013, I happened to notice the [Horus] toy[™]. At that point, everything Crowley said suddenly started to make perfect sense. His only serious error was that of inserting a battery the wrong way round (the very same mistake everyone made, because an inescapable evolutionary mechanism compelled it)." (Source: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/thelema/the-inauguration-of-aleister-crowleys-new-aeon-of-horus/#post-101401 )
RTC, does your Horus toy™ make perfect sense of AC's II:76 Cipher?
And does your Horus toy™ make sense of the "Forward" [sic] at the beginning of The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, in which he states that the reward for his initiation was stupendous, and that "I was therefore the wealthiest man in the world, and the least I could do was to bestow the inestimable treasure upon my poverty-stricken fellow men." ?
That is, will your Horus toy™ accomplish said bestowment of said "inestimable treasure"?, upon the said poverty-stricken human beings?
wellreadwellbred – “That is, will your Horus toy™ accomplish said bestowment of said "inestimable treasure"?, upon the said poverty-stricken human beings?”
- My Horus Toy™ is entirely unconnected to Crowley’s cipher. It opens a portal to a dimension entirely unconnected to a users’ bank balance. 😭
Well, this is not in direct connection with tread but it is interesting enough (to me) in this contest of gematry (the solution of the cyphre).
Before fr. AcHD discovered his AL key, the Book of the Law was technicaly called LIBER L VEL LEGIS. Hebrew gematria:
LIBER 30+10+2+5+200 / L 30 / VEL 6+5+30 / LEGIS 30+5+3+10+300= 666
Now when AcHD pulled out A (in AL, not L anymore), the counting is altered to 667.
Dwtw
For the record, I first posted this gematria equivalent on these fora many years ago. Cole then put it in his Bogus book, p. 104, unattested, and acted as if he had come up with it on his own, which he surely didn't.
Litlluw
RLG
@herupakraath – “based on the translation of the Stele of Revealing provided to Crowley by the Egyptian Museum;” – Indeed, and as I recall, the process of allegedly seeing the stele for the first time, to receiving a translated hard copy from the museum, took around four working days! Wow, that’s a fast service. Do you think Aiwass lent a praeter-human hand (tentacle) to speed proceeding?
@herupakraath – Still await your insightful explanation... Or, anyone else care to take a stab at Crowley’s mind-bendingly nonsensical comments? 🤣
Dwtw
Your estimate of how long it takes AC to accomplish something was completely wrong when it came to the time from Cairo to Paris. Had you researched the facts you would have known better.
Translating a short hieroglyph fragment is hardly the work of months for an expert.
But knowing for sure would require actual research, for which you have shown remarkably little ability.
Litlluw
RLG
How about Jones' claim to superiority? Anything?
93!
I would really welcome to get back to facts again. Jones did not "claim superiority", he "wanted authority". What this means is open to debate, but I would say - not without evidence - he is looking for something that makes a new order real, and not aiming to be the big boss. So long as it is not decided I will not accept it as a fact and wouldn't answer. When have you stopped beating your wife?
I would argue nothing in the known diaries or the title page strengthens your case so I am hoping to see the solution doing just that. It does that, right?
Love=Law
Lutz
Dwtw
Well what do you know. Someone doing research. How refreshing!
Litlluw
RLG
Richard, I meant more documented (paper inspired) aspect of time-line not psychologickal one. The things you sad are known to me an as I sad I meant written sentences. But anyway I am gratefull for your answer. I supose that I will had to wait untill you edit the book. I agree, there is no hurry here.
treefold31, to me too was put under atention (by one Slovenian Adept) the gematria for Liber L vel Legis (666) and automaticaly I added an A and saw 667, we were both amused about it but soon forget about it. But I am sure that many other thelemic kabalists has came to same conclusion.
@threefold31 – “ Jones did not "claim superiority", he "wanted authority". What this means is open to debate” –
"The dictionary definition of ‘Authority’ is - “The power or right to give orders, make decisions, and enforce obedience.” It is not - ‘The power to request permission to give orders...' Consider the scenario of a metal detecting club, in receipt of a ‘hot tip’ and discussing a new dig. One member stands, and says “I want authority.” All club members understand this statement as a desire to head the operation. It is unlikely in the extreme that anyone would suppose the speaker was expressing a need to view the club’s permission to dig - In which case the phase would be ‘I want proof of authority.’" (extracted from The Race to Conquer eLGMOR – The Lesser Heresy)
But, I think I’m getting the hang of it now. So... any blinkered, selective and conformationally biased material NOT unfavourable to Crowley is called ‘Research,’ and any research critical of Crowley is dismissed instantly... Yup, got it... 😖
@ignant666 – Get ready for your quotefest... 😩
Dwtw
The problem with the conclusion that "authority" means being in charge, to the exclusion of every other meaning, is that such a definition is not provided in the material being quoted. If Jones says he wants 'authority', he could easily mean that he wants there to be some kind of 'Secret Chiefs' type of authorization, a 'higher power' if you will that is legitimizing this new magical order.
The problem is not that your definition is 'wrong', it is merely one option among many. And because you are hell-bent on disproving the Cairo story, you have confirmation bias and see conspiracies everywhere.
And don't put words in my mouth. Your last statement is typical of your bending someone else's statement to fit your own preconceptions. My insistence on Research has nothing to do with whether material is favorable to Crowley or not. it has everything to do with someone actually researching their material instead of just making things up. Your typical troll tactics of dismissing everyone who disagrees with you, and then goading them to respond, to which you avoid actually answering, is sooo early internet trolling behavior. See? There, I responded to your trolling. You should be satisfied. And you said nothing of substance, as usual.
Let's hear how you did some actual research and proved that watermark was not available in 1904. Remember how you promised us you would? and then never delivered? And then you faked the watermark image in your book, like you faked the image of the cipher you're trying to use to once again get attention for a half-baked theory that doesn't hold water and has no real research behind it. Same old Cole, same old troll.
When you can deal with your outright lies and fabrications and provide reasonable explanations for them, you might be taking the first step to having any sort of credibility. But you lost all of that with your Bogus book, which is a farrago of nonsense and hyperbole, backed with no research.
Litlluw
RLG
@threefold31 - Yes... My solution book really has got you a bit twitchy, has it not. Is that bile dribbling from your... 🤑
@threefold31 - Yes... My solution book really has got you a bit twitchy, has it not. 🤑
Dwtw
Your solution hasn't been shown yet, so I can't comment on it.
As usual, my detailed response is then responded to with an arrogant sneer.
You're a classic troll, and unable to own up to your lies.
You have zero credibility. Zero.
Litlluw
RLG
@threefold31 - Yup, and a good couple of notches above twitchy, I'd say. You may consider booking a course of therapy and medication in preparation for 01 April. 🤬
Dwtw
To clarify my stance, I would consider actual research about a statement regarding 'authority' to go beyond simply quoting a diary entry and then presuming your definition of the statement is the correct one. Since any objective observer would say that asking for 'authority' in this context is ambiguous without more information, then you need to find some other examples of Crowley using the term 'authority' unambiguously - what did the term actually mean to him, and how did he use it? Textual criticism goes beyond cherry-picking a quote to suit your purposes, or having a hunch that a quote might be a clue to a hidden meaning, but then not providing any further information to substantiate the hunch. Textual criticism requires research.
This is a position I'm willing to discuss or debate. It is not directed at Carrot Childe, because that person is not here to have a reasonable discussion.
Litlluw
RLG
Yes... My solution book really has got you a bit twitchy, has it not. Is that bile dribbling from your..
No it hasn't, and no it's not.
Yup, and a good couple of notches above twitchy, I'd say. You may consider booking a course of therapy and medication in preparation for 01 April.
You're the one in need of therapy and medication.
If Jones says he wants 'authority', he could easily mean that he wants there to be some kind of 'Secret Chiefs' type of authorization, a 'higher power' if you will that is legitimizing this new magical order.
Yes. "Easily meant ..." qualifies for an alternative paradigm, such as Jones believing in 8=3s, only one of which is required, He would have done better if he had looked inside rather than to the outer spheres. Anyway, " one V.V.V.V.V. arose," and that makes it better.
Dictionary definitions do not cut it, in this case. unless they include the possibility of DDS wanting some sort of "green light" (like a letter from Germany, or an angelic benediction).
It is my own (impersonal) personal opinion that no lineage, nowhere nor anyhow, is an active, working Order, unless there's a living 8=3 somewhere up the line. Discarnated Secret Chiefs and Aiwass-type entities may apply for recognition, but the waiting period may be extended indefinitely while real "proof" is sought and proven true - this may take centuries.
My solution book really has got you a bit twitchy, has it not. Is that bile dribbling from your...
Here we have a prototypical RTC-ism. It should be included in an Appendix to the Guidelines, labeled "Examples of Poor Behavior."
@shiva - "Dictionary definitions do not cut it, in this case. " - Yes, when discussing Crowley's "lacunae," (how are you spelling that @Michael-staley? 'Sink-holes' or 'caverns,' perhaps) inconvenient trivialities like definitions get swept under the carpet.
@ignant666 - That's a fascinating chronology of attainments you posted, so... are you trying to convince us, or you? Incidentally, it's taken longer than anticipated to extract your quote-mountain from The Race To Conquer eLGMOR - The Lesser Heresy. I will post a full list this afternoon. 😲
[Darn that Edit timer, darn it...]
... (@ignant666) - Since we're all getting so hyper about definitions, I meant 'extract' in the sense of 'compiling a supplemental list of...' and not delete, or otherwise remove. 🤣
That's a fascinating chronology of attainments you posted, so... are you trying to convince us, or you?
When did i post something that could be described as "a fascinating chronology of attainments"?
What is this "quote mountain", and what does it have to do with me?
I haven't posted in this thread for two days- are you confusing me with someone else?
@ignant666 - "I haven't posted in this thread for two days- are you confusing me with someone else?"
- Equally unlikely as me confusing 'Authority' with 'requesting a permission-slip from the Headmaster.' Your 'Quote-mountain' is a cut 'n' paste document comprising all posts penned by your good self (across various threads), as are included in my forthcoming The Race to Conquer eLGMOR - The Lesser Heresy... I'll post this voluminous corpus (with page number references) later this afternoon... 😏
What makes you think that you have ever said anything worthy of reproducing?
Your 'Quote-mountain' is a cut 'n' paste document comprising all posts penned by your good self (across various threads), as are included in my forthcoming The Race to Conquer eLGMOR - The Lesser Heresy
One more time: You said you wanted to include material from the forums in your book.
Paul told you, as the copyright holder to posts here, that you were not allowed to do so.
You appear to be planning to include lots of quotes from posts here in your book, since you say there is a "quote mountain" of posts by a person as unworthy of quote-reproduction as me.
Have you ever considered therapy for your very evident emotional/psychological issues?
@ignant666 - "...since you say there is a "quote mountain" of posts by a person as unworthy of quote-reproduction as me."
- I never said you were 'unworthy' and there's nothing 'appeary' about it. However, what with all this definitionitus around, I'll re-phrase it as 'your personal Quote-berg' - Same basic idea, though... Until later... 🧐
I never said you were 'unworthy'
What makes you think that you have ever said anything worthy of reproducing?
@ignant666 - That you are unwilling to perceive a clear distinction between the two is in itself a confirmation of the selectivity, bias and interpretational detours you habitually employ in reference to Crowley.
I actually (and humorously) suggested that... 'amongst myriad literary gems posted on this site, the calibre of those posted by your good self did not quite warrant reproduction. I did not suggest that you, the person, as a whole, was "unworthy." To use a simile - If I describe the performance of an athlete as 'not worthy' to receive a medal,' then nobody (including the 7th placed runner) would assume I meant that the athlete, as a person, whole life term, was "unworthy."
I do concede that the athlete in question may well vent his/her frustration at the sub-standard performance by lashing out blindly at the nearest convenient source... 😭
Have you ever considered therapy for your very evident emotional/psychological issues?
@ignant666 - I've been in therapy for decades. Why? Do you feel the need for a referral? 🤡
I've been in therapy for decades.
Don't stop any time soon.
Don't stop any time soon.
Ignant, you are missing a critical point: Anyone who is "in therapy for decades" will not be helped by "not stopping." Decades implies chronic issues. Well, if a pill-pushing psycho-iatrist is involved, then "not stopping" is usually correct.
@shiva - Quite right (dribbled from my special couch, uber-reclined position), and I feel that's not the only point ignant666, et al, are missing.
@ignant666 - Just finished compiling your quote-fest, or was it quote-mountain, or quote-berg? Anyway, I'll post it once I can find a big enough memory stick to tackle the job. 🙃
“21. Without Authority they could not do this, exalted as their rank was among adepts. They resolved to prepare all things, great and small, against that day when such Authority should be received by them, since they knew not where to seek for higher adepts than themselves, but knew that the true way to attract the notice of such was to equilibrate the symbols. The temple must be builded before the God can indwell it.”
“31. Also He conferred upon D.D.S., O.M., and another, the Authority of the Triad, who in turn have delegated it unto others, and they yet again, so that the Body of Initiates may be perfect, even from the Crown unto the Kingdom and beyond.”
The sense of the word “Authority” is completely clear unless you demand to be delusional.
I miss pre-Bogus RTC.
@ccx - "Also He conferred upon D.D.S., O.M., and another..."
- Erm... hadn't "He" already got all conferrey back in April 04? You know, the whole Reception thing. So why does "He" feel a need to re-confer Crowley, plus Jones and some other random? Terribly bothersome for a work-a-day deity, eh?
@ignant666 – An incidental item perhaps of marginal interest. Can I quote you on it?
The sense of the word “Authority” is completely clear unless you demand to be delusional.
Yes, Good quote.
Also He conferred upon D.D.S., O.M., and another, the Authority of the Triad, who in turn have delegated it unto others, and they yet again, so that the Body of Initiates may be perfect
"He" was VVVVV, who was Crowley in an exalted mode of operandi. The implication that there were three triads made up of nine people, plus a neophyte, is misleading. In essence, there were 3 people. "And another" was fuller, who was granted brevit 5=6 to fill in the middle triad, even though he was nowhere near that grade.
So the "authority" deal is obvious, but then the fiddling really began.
@shiva - So, Crowley (with his V5 engine in) confers upon Jones (Crowley's occult senior) the authority to promote Crowley above him...
Even if we accept the unlikely scenario in which Jones is asking (in 1906) ‘who’s paying the rent?’ Then why doesn’t Crowley slap Jones on the because with Liber L. and then, for good measure, whistle Aiwass to give Jones another good slap (as he’s demonstrably able - Though, quite how Elaine Simpson could summon Crowley’s HGA is another of those lacunae you could drive a bus through, sideways).
Bafflingly (as per @ccx quote), Crowley gets all mardy: “Without Authority they could not do this, exalted as their rank was among adepts. They resolved to prepare all things, great and small, against that day when such Authority should be received by them...” - Erm... Mr. Crowley, you already have it. Remember... That Liber L. stuff?
Here we encounter another contradiction of comparable dimensions to the ‘Nothing to do with me, guv vs Yup, dictated to me by an angel’ crash-site. Crowley either got his Master of the Universe badge in April 1904, or he didn’t?
Of course, if (at this time) Crowley is touting a general revelation of the Golden Dawn type (as I suggested earlier), then Jones' enquiries are perfectly reasonable, in both senses of the word 'Authority.'
As for 'triads'.... Heck, let's be honest. This was a game played by Crowley and Jones, with an obligingly pre-signed halo sat on a chair for a couple of years, awaiting Fuller...
So, Crowley (with his V5 engine in) confers upon Jones (Crowley's occult senior) the authority to promote Crowley above him...
Correct. Since the Abyss is involved somewhere in that equation, the logical mind will logically break down, so don't try to explain it further or you'll make us both appear unsettled somewhere.
“Without Authority they could not do this,..."
I don't see why they couldn't, but there was the Mahatmas, Secret Chiefs, Masonic Tradition. I think DDS was already a 7=4, so (theoretically) he already had the "authority." It seems he just wanted a token of permission from "the other side."
I am not clear as to how V5 got through to DDS and gave him the green light. Maybe you know, or maybe one of the intrepid researchers knows, or can find out.
Crowley either got his Master of the Universe badge in April 1904, or he didn’t?
Theoretically, yes, in a stretched You-nih-verse. If L/AL came in in Apr '04, it seems to me like that was K&C of his HGA, and he wrote the "C" down ... just like I did.
As for 'triads'.... Heck, let's be honest. This was a game played by Crowley and Jones, with an obligingly pre-signed halo sat on a chair for a couple of years, awaiting Fuller...
Fair enough. Please pass on to the next Pile-on.
@ignant666 - How many days is it now? Without your invaluable countdown it's difficult to keep a track on when to release my solution book (well, actually, more like a compendium of your best lashtal.com quotes). I felt that the countdown was empowering your life with a healthy routine, discipline, meaning and even purpose. 🤪