@toadstoolwe – I suggest you study the recent fifth edition of Liber Bogus. This incorporates numerous expansions and clarifications of material originally released nine years ago. It would also be instructive to consult the two ‘Bogus’ threads once available on this website. I say ‘would’ because several years ago, in response to a member’s query, it was revealed that - ‘whilst editing these threads both were accidentally deleted, without back-up...’ Upps.
I think it pertinent to ask what possible reason ‘someone’ had to be ‘silently editing’ (where have we heard that phrase before?) two Locked and, therefore, dead threads, at all? It is difficult to comprehend how one (the longest thread in LAShTAL’s history) was completely obliterated from the record, but for two separate threads to befall the same ‘accidental’ fate beggars belief. Moreover, an assertion that no back-up copy of either thread was available is insulting to the intelligence.
I ask - Who benefits from this literary extermination?
Similarly, and with reference to the Warburg microfilm - Approximately half this archive was scanned (over 20,000 documents.) The disappearance of OS23 was the only significant error. The omission of this material was not accidental and could only have been orchestrated by someone with unquestioned access (and motive) to this material. The content of OS23 is, in itself, almost fatal to Crowley’s Reception fable.
Again, I ask – Who benefits from this literary extermination?
In November 2012, approximately six months prior to the scheduled publication of Liber Bogus, a pre-release booklet was forwarded to several ‘target’ individuals. My research demonstrated, beyond any reasonable doubt, that contemporary source material underpinning the Reception myth was written (by Crowley) not in Cairo, and much later than explicitly stated.
I genuinely and sincerely hoped that receipt of this information would, finally, compel the head of Crowley’s grand pyramid scheme to ‘come clean’ and abandon a four-decade long campaign to conceal, suppress and otherwise mislead all with an interest in Crowley’s legacy. It did not. A few months later, the first public utterance in five years appeared on its website in the form of the utterly calamitous and wholly unnecessary ‘F-K’ change.
Far from representing “a very important text correction,” the straw-clutching exercise of morphing a ‘Commandment,’ from ‘thou shalt not kill,’ to ‘thou shalt not fill,’ served only to paper-over a crater raised by Bogus. Two of the three points supporting his ‘F-K’ change referred to the supposed content of a ‘long-lost’ Cairo notebook – A document, I note, that prior to 10 April 2013 nobody, including Crowley, had ever mentioned, referenced, quoted from or lamented the loss of. The miraculous manifestation of this wholly fictitious notebook served only one, vital function. It provided a barely plausible explanation of hopelessly out-of-sequence and falsely dated material in OS23 and OS27 – This demonstrably bogus material was, allegedly, later copies of material originally written in the long-lost Cairo notebook – How very, very convenient.
Again, I ask – Who does this shameful sleight-of-hand subterfuge benefit?
In the months following his ‘F-K’ decision, a veritable mountain of material was published in attempting to support the ludicrous ‘correction’ and reduce collateral damage generated by it. Thus was an already fatally-fractured group further splintered by this self-serving attempt to bury an accurate account of Crowley’s fabrication. In stark contrast, not a single word (in almost a decade) addressing any of the issues raised in Liber Bogus has emerged from the Heart of Darkness.
Again, I ask – Who benefits from this resounding silence, from the perpetuation of Crowley’s lucrative lies?
I waited patiently for three decades anticipating someone would grow a conscience and explore myriad discrepancies littering Crowley’s account. Nobody did. I watched in despair as a procession of officially-sanctioned researchers, authors, experts, Thelemic Adepts, sex-Magick gurus and the like all sacrificed their integrity in preference to jumping on Crowley’s gravy train, and ignoring, side-stepping, white-washing and otherwise minimising glaring inconsistencies that would derail the comfortable lifestyles and prestige mined from a shameful perpetuation of misinformation and lies.
So, when @the_real_simon_iff (who contributed greatly to a defence of the ‘F-K’ train-wreck) helpfully dismisses me as “angry,” I suggest that ‘disgusted’ is a far more appropriate label.
Incidentally, I recently asked @the_real_simon_iff why he would not apply his, perhaps unique, knowledge of Crowley to an investigation of these issues. Tellingly, he replied “Because this does not suit my purposes.”
Again, I ask – Who benefits from such 'head-in-the-sand' purposes?
Finally, I quote a recent post by @michael-staley with reference to Marcus Katz’s The Invocation of Hoor (or, rather, sections of OS27 reproduced therein) –
“... I recall little of the content to be honest, indicating I think that these were no revelations therein.”
Astonishing, isn’t it, what cant be seen when not looking.
Incidentally, I recently asked @the_real_simon_iff why he would not apply his, perhaps unique, knowledge of Crowley to an investigation of these issues. Tellingly, he replied “Because this does not suit my purposes.”
Would you be so nice and point me to that answer of mine and your question? This answer does not sound like me at all (as a German speaker), but I simply do not remember. But since you think this was "telling[ly]" I would very much to read it myself. Thank you very much.
Finally, I quote a recent post by [Michael Staley] with reference to Marcus Katz’s The Invocation of Hoor (or, rather, sections of OS27 reproduced therein) –
“... I recall little of the content to be honest, indicating I think that these were no revelations therein.”
Astonishing, isn’t it, what cant be seen when not looking.
Astonishing, isn't it, what can be implied to a remark with sufficient twisting. Would you be kind enough please to state precisely what it is in the material published by Katz that was so revelatory?
Over the years I have stated several times my position that although I do not believe that Crowley fabricated the reception of The Book of the Law, I would change my opinion if evidence were brought forward which demonstrated that he did. I have yet to see such evidence, from you or from anyone else. On the other hand, and again over the years, I have got tirades of abuse from you because I am not convinced by your effusions.
Seriously, mate, after all these years: either put up or shut up. I'm weary of your jabber: the Carrot_Childe persona lost many years ago whatever diamond-geezer charm it once possessed.
Well, Richard, as you just said to me in a Facebook PM, YOU THINK my reply "because this does not suit my purposes" was to one of your Facebook posts. It would still nice if you can find it, especially when you use it as proof for your conspiracy nonsense. Fortunately one can search for all comments ever made on Facebook and if "recently" doesn't mean "more than a year ago" I could not find it. Anyway, it doesn't sound like me, especially because I have no "purpose" when it comes to anything about Crowley (apart from collecting a little). Maybe you want to look again for it, it might have slipped beneath your watermark files.
P.S. Funnily I just thought yesterday about a new Liber L inconsistencies thread when I seemingly realized for the first time (or I had forgotten about it) how it is possible that AC missed the very first Word of the dictation, since "Had!" obviously was inserted later.
Again, I ask – Who benefits from such 'head-in-the-sand' purposes?
I would dare to say: only you benefit. Because it sells. If you really think any inconsistencies in any of Crowley's notebooks would change how Thelemites regard Crowley and Liber L, you are quite disillusional. As I said I am sure you have P. R. Koenig's scan of OS23 why not ask the OTO for publication permission and if they don't answer go and publish it?
@therealrtc Thank you for your in depth and scholarly defense of your main thesis. You will be pleased to know that I received a 2022 revised edition of your monumental study LiberL Vel Bogus just yesterday. I have read at least some of the online editions of your work. You have certainly raised the ire of some members of LASHhTAL . I think Judas got better press than you. I am intrigued by your core belief that Crowley's entire Cairo operation was to put it mildly, humbug. Having visited Egypt myself, it was a thrill to walk in the footsteps of Crowley. (As well as the countless others who have visited Egypt for the last 2000 years or so) Cairo is a romantic place. Part big city chaos, and part timeless activities. (I saw an old woman herding goats through an alley) I thought, this would have made Jesus feel at home. I digress. Anyway, your book demands and requires careful reading. I look forward to this thrilling detective story.
So, when @the_real_simon_iff (who contributed greatly to a defence of the ‘F-K’ train-wreck) helpfully dismisses me as “angry,” I suggest that ‘disgusted’ is a far more appropriate label.
Sorry for the multiple post but Richard asked me via PM on Facebook to answer here on Lashtal. I DID NOT contribute greatly to a defence of the F/K matter but I happily engaged in finding all the different instances of either Fill or Kill. I also was and still am convinced that AC's original poetic transcription reads Kill. Since Fill is on the manuscript I think Crowley f*cked up, still, it is on the manuscript. If it was a good decision of the OTO to change it in Liber 220 I don't know. I welcomed it since I think it is the right rhyme. And if anyone thinks that this change did anything more to Thelema than fuel the decade-old pro- and anti-OTO fighting he probably just thinks as either pro or anti but not about that rhyme in itself.
My research demonstrated, beyond any reasonable doubt, that contemporary source material underpinning the Reception myth was written (by Crowley) not in Cairo, and much later than explicitly stated.
One last answer, sorry again. If you really want to "defend your thesis" again, Richard, why not open a new thread? Since not many people seem to be convinced, your definition of "reasonable" might be flawed.
Also, many many threads have been lost in the forum software change, but probably only to get rid of "yours"?
You have certainly raised the ire of some members of LASHhTAL .
I promise, I make a break after answering this fanboy.
Toadstoolwe, RTC did not "raise our ire" because of his detective story, since there are no OTO members here and nobody really gives a sh*t about the conception story and many Lashtal members helped digging up inconsistencies that finally culminated in Bogus. He "raised our ire" when he started promising proof (which everybody here would have welcomed) and never delivered, when he started faking proof to make his point, and probably finally when he came up with his "train-wreck" of eLGMOR. And mine when he started calling me a sex-toy of Bill Breeze, LOL.
@the_real_simon_iff How about letting me reach my own conclusions? By the way, if you don't give a S#@*t, I guess I don't either. Have a nice day.
@the_real_simon_iff How about letting me reach my own conclusions? By the way, if you don't give a S#@*t, I guess I don't either. Have a nice day.
Of course you can reach your own conclusions, I thought you might be interested in facts. Not facts about Liber L, but facts about why RTC is not so highly regarded here. Hint: it's not about his "detetctive story". Why not find anyone here who is angry because RTC doubts the reception? (Well, maybe Herupakraath.) I hope you see the difference. It may be "much foe, much honour", but not "much foe, so I am right."
It is difficult to comprehend how one (the longest thread in LAShTAL’s history) was completely obliterated from the record
It is not comprehensible at all with the linear mind. These destructions roll on infinitely throughout eternity. Anicca, anicca - everything passes away. Consider Paroketh, the Abyss, and The Planetary Ring Pass-Not.
A proponent, or propellant, in the mystical literature and power zone of illusion is nobody until they've been expelled from, or maybe blacklisted up front by, some Imperial Order or Sect, and his/her works are worthless trash, of no value at all, until The Establishment begins to burn one's books.
Anyway, who cares about old threads where other people express their opinions, when the new revised fifth! edition explains and resolves all the issues ?
Do you offer subscription services, in order to keep up with the rolling updates ? You know, like the major operating systems do ? ... because they didn't get it right in the first place.
I ask - Who benefits from this literary extermination?
Everybody. Why cling to the sordid past when the new revised fifth! edition explains and resolves all the issues ?
Um, we of A LAShTAL Investigative Group (ALIG=44) have checked out everything that comes our way, (especially) many of your notifications of falsehood.I waited patiently for three decades anticipating someone would grow a conscience and explore myriad discrepancies littering Crowley’s account. Nobody did.
I do not speak for others, but it is my impression that many, most, or all have seen enough to know that Crowley made things up, on occasion, and that the manipulations of The Black Lodge are waiting for anyone in a neighborhood near them.
helpfully dismisses me as “angry,” I suggest that ‘disgusted’ is a far more appropriate label.
Well, you get to wallow around in the astral shit if you take this stuff seriously, which you obviously do.
Again, I ask – Who benefits from such 'head-in-the-sand' purposes?
Not The Tong - I hear it's slowing down and falling apart. Not LAShTAL, there's no money or myth-promulgating here. Not me, as I don't care. Not Iff, as he's elsewhere. Please tell us, Qui Bono ?
Would you be kind enough please to state precisely what it is
Now begins the search for proof, coming from several folk who have been singles out for inattention or incapacity of some kind The Gang of Four are identified, LAShTAL, Breeze, Iff, and Staley (for starters), and RTC is looking for a fight.
I would change my opinion if evidence were brought forward
This is the decade+ long problem. Everything is implied, readers are led on an investigation by asking questions, as if we are students in a philosophy class. But no proof is ever supplied. Even though it's been promised. Uh-oh.
The bottom line, as anyone can read, is pointing fingers at antagonists, not at the moon.
I would dare to say: only you benefit. Because it sells. If you really think any inconsistencies in any of Crowley's notebooks would change how Thelemites regard Crowley and Liber L, you are quite disillusional.
Now comes the Summarium of it all. Further comment might ruin the spell of clarity.
Thank you for your in depth and scholarly defense of your main thesis.
Um, it's the scholarly part that's under dissection, here. That, and charges of perjury.
this would have made Jesus feel at home
The closet Christian is appearing more frequently in your series of posts.
I promise, I make a break after answering this fanboy.
Why? You have been selected by RTC to take your turn in the barrel.
when he started calling me a sex-toy of Bill Breeze, LOL
You will agree, or your reputation will be tarnished.
Of course you can reach your own conclusions, I thought you might be interested in facts.
Don't go confusing folks with the facts. Toad is alreading toadying up to RTC with all his honorific adjectives. Now that he is under the spell, I suppose I should just turn off my computer for a week ... You know, in order to avoid any possible sympathy for a degenerating mentat.
Obviously, to be continued. After all - it's Spring.
I wonder what ChatGPT would say about UG's "The Biology of Enlightenment".
The closet Christian is appearing more frequently in your series of posts.
Maybe. What if I had written "this would have made Abraham feel at home" or Mohammed, or Sargon I?
Okay, I confess, I have no idea how angry ... sorry ... disgusted old men tick. There goes Richard, one of them, making a lengthy post (mostly consisting of an ominous "who would benefit?"), "quoting" me as a witness to his conspiracy theory (but only THINKING I said what he said I said), then harrassing me through Facebook PMs - well, not really harrassing me, but urging me - to answer on Lashtal. To pick up the conversation. To answer. To talk about it. And then?
Silence.
It's probably just simple trolling by an angry - sorry, disgusted - old man. Well, Dick, why? Why don't YOU answer the question "who would benefit" from the (very much possible) fact that the Cairo Myth is not (at least entirely) true? I gave you an answer: YOU would profit. But then: your conspiracy theory implies that Thelema stands and falls with that, that people are attracted to Thelema because of its "divine" origin and that therefore all possible hints doubting it were hidden by the evil OTO. So let me ask you this: do you really believe that people are attracted to Thelema because of the Cairo Myth? Really?
I gave my answer numerous times in the old Bogus thread: nothing would change. It admittedly would be kind of shocking if your watermark thing would have been true. Everybody would have had to accept it. But it would not change AC's legacy too much. I, and the nice staff at Aberdeen University, where the Pirie&Sons archives are held, are looking for a proof for years now, so far nothing turned up.
Your case is not getting stronger with this, even if you have found (a) new fanboy(s).
You are asking for my "unique" knowledge. What do you think that is aside from sucking Bill Breeze's d*ck, a fantasy you so clearly love to indulge in? I have P. R. Koenig's works, as do you. What can I possibly own that would help you?
@the_real_simon_iff How about letting me reach my own conclusions? By the way, if you don't give a S#@*t, I guess I don't either. Have a nice day.
Of course you can reach your own conclusions, I thought you might be interested in facts. Not facts about Liber L, but facts about why RTC is not so highly regarded here. Hint: it's not about his "detetctive story". Why not find anyone here who is angry because RTC doubts the reception? (Well, maybe Herupakraath.) I hope you see the difference. It may be "much foe, much honour", but not "much foe, so I am right."
No harm done. I overreacted. I will try to be dispassionate in my reading and judgement. By "reception" do you mean RTC doesn't believe Crowley received any preternatural insight?
I wonder what ChatGPT would say about UG's "The Biology of Enlightenment".
Perhaps you should ask the AI, though I would prefer to hear your take on this. I am not familiar with the work.
@toadstoolwe By reception I meant the "Liber L reception story as told by AC". This has nothing to do with any insights AC received or not. In fact, RTC believes AC received exactly that but interpreted it wrongly. Though I guess it was only later - after he could not prove his points - that he made this concession to AC.
But that is not what RTC's book is about. It is about that AC for various reasons invented the Cairo myth and Liber L was written 2 or 3 or 4 years later. As in every good detective story he brings up a lot of (good) arguments and evidence about something being wrong about Liber L being received as AC says. He makes us doubt. Of course everyone who ever looked deeper into the myth had his doubts. But for some reasons RTC decided doubt is not good enough, so he invented undenyable proof. The important word here is "invented". When you have dived forther into the Bogus book, when you have ingested anonymous psychologists giving definite answers to AC's character, when you have ingested all the things that are fishy about the Cairo myth, you will come to a point when he brings up definite proof that the Liber L manuscript is a hoax! The watermark on the paper it is written on clearly says 1906, so it could not have been written in 1904. Unfortunatlely the watermark doesn't say so! RTC very unconvincingly retouched the watermark. There IS NO date on it (and as I said, so far no proof was found if that specific kind of paper was available in 1904 or not). It would have been the final nail in the coffin of the reception story, but - it was just a hoax by RTC to prove HIS theory. Which is only that: a theory. Later - I don't remember if it is in his book or if it was in the thread - he also said he was in possession of Rose Crowley's diaries which also would prove his point. Guess what? He never showed us these diaries. MY guess? They don't exist. As you are fairly new to Lashtal you probably don't know that there were numerous threads dedicated to all the inconsistencies of the Cairo myth, I myself delivered important evidence to some inconsistencies that RTC gloated about. But after 9 years? All there is is a good detective story, no proof whatsoever. The best "proof" there is, is that if AC faked the thing it would have been the worst fake ever. A fake would somehow at least try to be convincing, but AC stayed with all these inconsistencies till the end of his life. Whereas RTC demonstrably used fakes to further his agenda. And so this has become the pizza-gate of Thelema. A conspiracy theory. Unproven. But it would be sooooooo cool if it would be true.
P.S. I still don't get why RTC did not open a new thread. This discussion has nothing to do with AI's summary of Liber L.
@the_real_simon_iff Thanks for setting it straight I still haven't gotten around reading my copy of Aleister Crowley and the Temptation of Politics.
@the_real_simon_iff Thanks for setting it straight I still haven't gotten around reading my copy of Aleister Crowley and the Temptation of Politics.
Yeah, read that first. It's better. Though it won't help with Bogus... and I frankly have no idea why you mention it. But what do I know of conspiracy people?
@the_real_simon_iff Just unnecessary verbiage on my part.
Well, that doesn't help any discussion. I wish this would not become a Social Media disaster, but it feels like it. Maybe you think about what you excrete the next time. It's really boring trying to be reasonable all alone. Meh!
Maybe. What if I had written "this would have made Abraham feel at home" or Mohammed, or Sargon I?
You would be wondering about what other dead people MIGHT have thought, done, or said. It is a form of a [break]
Why don't YOU answer the question "who would benefit" from ...
Let;s put this in perspective. Carrot Childe operates by posing questions ... not answering them. You (any person brave enough to even post on this thread of nitroglycerine) are supposed to give your opinion of who benefits. It's not likely to be me or Ignant, but it could (obviously) be either you or Bill H.B.
do you really believe that people are attracted to Thelema because of the Cairo Myth?
Well, yes. Because the Cairo ritual "was of sex," and that's why they come, not caring about the details.
I frankly have no idea why you mention it
Toad has a stool episodes of acausal association and repwtition. Acausal is a Jung term, meaning "no apparent cause related to the effect."
So, when he hears/sees a given term or phrase (any might do, and nobody but Nemo can tell which one), an associated thought, term, phrase, etc arises in his mind, and he is compelled to register it.
Around here, register means typing on a keyboard to publish an associated thought (in his mind) that comes out as not related, off-topic, or an element in an agenda.
But an acausal association is "meaningful" (to him), which is why I often ask him about his acausal remarks ... in order to see if there is a connection through, say, The Binah Hotel.
Although we can sometimes come to terms on these exalted planes, usually the connection is routed through The Netzach Motel (cultural stuff, you know), and since he's not claiming to solve a puzzle or be the incarnation of anybody we know, it'll probably be okay if we just remember acausal.
Well, yes. Because the Cairo ritual "was of sex," and that's why they come, not caring about the details.
That's a really good answer. Especially the "not caring about the details" part. Sex it is. And very often the megalomaniac "the slaves shall serve" too. Still, RTC worries about the details.
... worries about the details.
We do too. But we try to separate the fact from fiction. This entire recurring Springbird contest is filled, as noted, with fantasy. When the fantasy is called, exposed, or questioned, the details get set aside in favor of personal attacks. I believe (oh, no) that the best thing is for our author to get the name of todstool's Rx (posted upstream or in some sidestream).
I want to (again) leave you with a thoughtly thrill
The Cairo Legend is muddled, can't you see?
There are acausal factors, as mentioned by me
lit up the fire known to me and you
and turned out the .txt then known as L
all made possible while under the spell
of AL
@shiva – “Well, yes. Because the Cairo ritual "was of sex," and that's why they come, not caring about the details.”
This can’t possibly be true, because Crowley explicitly and repeatedly stated that he was completely unaware of Sex Magick until his 1912/13 (Crowley’s ambiguity) meeting with Reuss.
Whilst preparing an account of his Cairo fantasy, Crowley deleted from the public record all references to Sex Magick rituals he wrote and participated in (long before 1912/13). So, actually, that’s not why “they come” because there’s nothing there for them to come into.
Read all about it in Crowley’s final word on his grand deception (EoG). That’s the one in which he earnestly declares of himself –
“Morality – Sexually powerful and passionate. Strongly male to female; free from any similar impulse towards my own sex.”
Take your pick as to which bundle of lies you prefer to believe. Cue another tedious, meandering and pointless monologue from grandpa @shiva -Simpson, who should form a comedy double act named ‘The Long and Winding Olds,’ with the failed Neophyte of Death Valley - Time for another joint?
@the_real_simon_iff – “... harrassing me through Facebook PMs”
Actually, I wrote – “RE: Your recent Lashtalk post. Your ‘does not suit my purposes’ response appeared on a Facebook thread – Buggered if I can be bothered tracking it down, but am 100% sure you wrote it. However, and for the record, I ask again. Why are you so reluctant to employ your, perhaps unique, knowledge of Crowley in an investigation of the craters littering Crowley’s Reception fabrication. Especially as you threw yourself so eagerly and wholeheartedly to a defence of wheeze’s utterly ridiculous ‘F-K’ change.”
This is not ‘harassment.’ Neither was your response, which is more akin to outright offensive abuse -
“Nobody is prepared to answer - mimimi - why don't you just go and fuck yourself, you stupid nothing of an opponent? Why do you even post?”
WOW, that's one heck of a rational response... And who can forget your recent confession (on this very thread)? – “I tried, but things got in the way, drugs, heartbreak, depression, work for a living, more drugs, more heartbreak, more depression. Now I am mostly watching and listening from the ouside.”
Should we mark you as yet another glowing triumph for Thelema, @the_real_simon_iff?
It's really boring trying to be reasonable all alone.
There's many of us here trying to be reasonable, Lutz.
WOW, that's one heck of a rational response
If you persistently target someone with your pathetic jeering and schoolboy name-calling, is it any wonder that occasionally they make a rude response? I'm amazed at how generally polite towards you Lutz has remained.
Again, I ask: what's so revelatory about the document published by Katz that it needed to be suppressed? Try to keep to the point.
Should we mark you as yet another glowing triumph for Thelema, @the_real_simon_iff?
I am here for the Aleister Crowley Society, not to explain or to represent Thelema. And surely I am everything else but a glowing triumph as a person, which I openly confess on a lot of occasions. Anyway, urging me in multiple PMs minutes after your post here, to answer your ominous "Who profits?" and me even being nice enough to do that after all your ad hominem nonsense in word and meme about me and you don't even want to answer, is just another lesson learned: Do not feed the troll! And when I am angry and disgusted or furious and irrational I put that in a PM not in a thread. Lesson also learned, thanks.
Anyway, I am glad you had the opportunity to whine and mimimi instead of answering the questions directed at you.
Also pointing to my alleged quote would be helpful. Hint: since you did not post really much recently it should be relatively easy to find. I had no success.
This can’t possibly be true, because Crowley explicitly and repeatedly stated that he was completely unaware of Sex Magick until his 1912/13 (Crowley’s ambiguity) meeting with Reuss.
You obviously did not get what was meant here. When I asked you if you really think that people are attracted to Crowley/Thelema because of the Cairo myth (implying that once you - or anyone else - can prove that to be a hoax, Thelema will crumble and that is why the OTO is trying to suppress any evidence for that), Shiva answered that people are more probably attracted to the Sex Magick of the Beast and I think that is a good guess. When and how AC came to Sex Magick is totally irrelevant. Once you are attracted you might become aware of the historical facts if you are interested in such details. If Crowley used Sex to receive Liber L or if it was dictated in exactly the fashion he describes or if he made it all up later is just another detail and totally not affecting Thelema, Sex Magick or any other Magick. In fact what will probably remain of Crowley is "Do not believe me!"
This can’t possibly be true, because Crowley explicitly and repeatedly stated that he was completely unaware of Sex Magick until his 1912/13 (Crowley’s ambiguity) meeting with Reuss.
As stated by you, and by me, and by a few other as well ... Crowley was known to fib.
The they in "they came for sex," refers to (past and modern) Thelemic adherents, not the Cairo Triad.
Since AC's Record says ... "the ritual is of sex," then how can he deny knowledge of sex magic 'til Reuss showed up ... unless he merely refers to the elixir part, which is the only secret associated with the IX, now gone public.
Take your pick as to which bundle of lies you prefer to believe. Cue another tedious, meandering and pointless monologue from grandpa @shiva -Simpson, who should form a comedy double act named ‘The Long and Winding Olds,’ with the failed Neophyte of Death Valley - Time for another joint?
I\ll take no pick as it's of absolutely no concern to the central idea of not believing, but doing one's own work (practices, not reading or exploring other people's ideas).
We weren't there to take notes and snap selfies with Hamid behind. So who cares? AL stands or falls on its own merits or demerits. Period.
As to the remainder of your clever paragraph, it should be noted that when people with loose screws in their craium started expomding their agenda, and there have been many indeed, when it gets into the clinches, they always lash out at age. For some reason in their feeble minds, they think that 'cause they're a few years younger, they can turn to elder abuse.
Over and over, many before you, dribbling derision for anyone older. So, anyway, I'm 83, and ...
you are invited to say these things
in-person to my face
I won't hit you, not even spit you,
but you'll be on the floor in disgrace
RTC, your butt has a date with the ground.
another lesson learned: Do not feed the troll!
But we don'y seem to re-apply the lesson learned, when the next troll climbs out from under the bridge. No, we treat them as normal [?] human folk, and attempt to orient them toward the rising sun.
It may be necessary to start posting the
Please don't feed the troll!
emblem on a regular basis.
I move that RTC be declared a Troll for various reasons obvious to any semi-balanced person, male or female, of any age, with or without libation, library, or lucidity.
I had no success.
The Lost Word remains Lost ... drag the candidate around the circle for another round - if he can't find it, his behind's got a date with the ground.
When I asked you if you really think that people are attracted to Crowley/Thelema because of the Cairo myth (implying that once you - or anyone else - can prove that to be a hoax, Thelema will crumble and that is why the OTO is trying to suppress any evidence for that), Shiva answered that people are more probably attracted to the Sex Magick of the Beast and I think that is a good guess.
I fully admit it was sex magick, and Crowley's "Wickedest Man In The World" reputation, that first drew me in, and from there I was led from dabbling for shock value to serious practice.
When and how AC came to Sex Magick is totally irrelevant.
Randolph's writings were readily available and being distributed at the time, and multiple groups had access to them. People like Gustav Meyrink had copies and pretty much hopped from group to group throughout Europe. The Confrerie de la Flèche d'Or, the UR Group, and Franz Bardon all had access. The "Secret" wasn't a secret even then.
Once you are attracted you might become aware of the historical facts if you are interested in such details.
While I am clearly all about the historical aspects of magick in general, if the Cairo story was revealed definitively as a hoax, I would be a bit disappointed, but I'd still keep practicing, because I have done the Work and benefited from my involvement in Thelema, and whatever happened in Cairo that day cannot take that away from me. The idea that Thelema would crumble seems based in the opinion that Thelemites are sheep. While I don't doubt that some may be, I like to think that that is not the norm among those who pursue the Work seriously.
if the Cairo story was revealed definitively as a hoax, I would be a bit disappointed
Me too. However, people are drawn to The Book of the Law for its contents, not its provenance. I've been a Thelemite since the late 1960s. In that time my attitude to and assessment of Crowley the man has changed a good deal. However, that's not my focus; his works are of enormous value.
While I am clearly all about the historical aspects of magick in general, if the Cairo story was revealed definitively as a hoax, I would be a bit disappointed
I clearly remember the time when RTC (an earlier member incarnation of him) announced that he found proof that the paper Liber L was written on was not available before 1906. At that time there was no reason to not believe him. I think Paul (Lashtal) even thought this would be THE biggest discovery in the field of Crowley research. And I found me thinking "well, that's then. Gotta live with it." I guess most Thelemites would just live on being Thelemites. Hardcore Caironists would probably say "It still happened. AC just had to re-write it for some reasons." I am sure, if unquestionable proof would surface that the Liber L Cairo myth was just a hoax, even people like for example Herupakraath would still go "It was a hoax, but it was a hoax arranged by the Gods (it got my name written all over it)." Everybody who is a little interested in historical research of the reception story is aware that there are things that do not add up. Yet there it is, that little book.
Calm down everybody. Does anyone really think the events in the Old and New Testament happened exactly as it is described? The scriptures were written centuries after the event. The Bible is a well-crafted book (or series of books) of popular myth, ancient history (History in the sense of, for example, Herodotus, or Josephus in which fact and fantasy had equal weight.) Drama, tragedy, morality tales against a background of archeologically proven events and places. It is not 100% true, or 100% false. Whether Liber al vel Bogus is true and accurate really should be the opinion of the reader. The events of Cairo are at best half-truths. But that is a writer's (Crowley) prerogative. I respect his insights and vision. and I find no fault in this man. (Where have I heard that before?) Peace out everybody.
Calm down everybody.
I am out of calming medication and shall ravage, rape, reveal, and bend - Everlasting world without End !
This is the RTC show you've been waiting for ... and you say ... Calm down ?
Does anyone really think the events in the Old and New Testament happened exactly as it is described?
Well, yes. It says so in the scriptures.
The scriptures were written centuries after the event.
But AL was writ in ~1904, and the follow-up documents were writ in the same lifetime. You are introducing acausal biblical stuff from another time-zone.
The events of Cairo are at best half-truths.
It is noted that you have never acidified yourself, or peyotized, and then entered into a major magical operation, and so your opinion, giving 50% true at the outside, lacks credibility.
But that is a writer's (Crowley) prerogative.
So you say it's okay to write something is true ... then lie about it?
Well, yeah, okay if it's fiction being written.
Yama/Niyama considerations now apply.
I find no fault in this man.
The Universal Jokester.
It is noted that you have never acidified yourself, or peyotized, and then entered into a major magical operation, and so your opinion, giving 50% true at the outside, lacks credibility.
[/quote
I don't know where you got that from, I wrote a while ago about taking L.S.D. on several occasions. I am not sure what a "major Magical Operation "is. Do you mean like the Abra-Melin operation? Or does it involve animal sacrifice, or some bestial sex act? Or the rituals mentioned in Crowley's publications?
[qIuote data-userid="6573" data-postid="126052"]
So you say it's okay to write something is true ... then lie about it?
Colin Wilson did it all the time. (I like his stuff.)
Is that your opinion on the matter?
Is that so? Or...your opinion?
I am giving Crowley the benefit of the doubt. Just for argument, yes, at some point in his life he was in Cairo with his wife. But is that where Aiwass spoke to him? Again, I have to finish The Real Confessions.
Other opinions may differ.
I was paraphrasing Pontius Pilate, and was referring to Crowley.
I was paraphrasing Pontius Pilate
I know you were.
But is that where Aiwass spoke to him? Again, I have to finish The Real Confessions.
Would you trust old Uncle Al to...tell you the Truth?
Don't get me wrong! I'm here as both a Thelemite and a long-time admirer of the works of AC! I have lots to say in condemnation and praise of the man-and my own "opinions" have changed over the years. I think the one opinion which has remained consistent, for the most part, is that AC was, absolutely, a "mixed bag." I still learn from him, am still inspired by his words. I haven't "outgrown" Crowley-nor would I wish to! But I certainly do not bow down to the man.
There is a weird religiosity around AC which the OTO, Inc (especially) promulgates. It is, of course, in contrast to the message of Thelema itself BUT AC himself encouraged all of this. He wrote of wanting us to cut our own way through the jungle but when anyone began to diverge from subservience to his authority, that idea was thrown out the window!
This has become a bit of an odd thread as it started with "A.I." trawling the web to comment on Liber AL. It has now shifted to reactions to RTC's work. I've been lurking along on most days, as I do, hoping for something interesting to jump into here. The "A.I." theme is worth discussion and debate-if only because it is going to become an increasingly omnipresent factor in our lives as "Children of the New Aeon."
Personally, I'm not impressed. One aspect of the "Old Aeon" which was found odious by the Horusian Rebel was the idea of "Vicarious Atonement." In fact, this is why I believe Liber AL specified that the eyes (vision) of Jesus were pecked out while he hung upon the CROSS. Horus hits the Jesus who "died for your sins." In the New Aeon, you are on your own: personally responsible and pushing forward into your own direct experience (Gnosis).
"A.I.", as I have seen it utilized, does what YOU could do. It will write your term paper. It will paint your painting to specification. It's gonna play your guitar and bang on your drums. And you won't have to learn to write or draw or strum...you won't have to research...you won't need to fall in love with a writer and spend your life engrossed with their work...whatever YOU could say, it can say better.
Except it can't.
Who here saw the horribly campy movie Megan?
There is a scene at the end when Megan, the creepy doll, has her face torn off and we see the metallic skull beneath. But even this is not her "true form." Within, is the little box, running a program. THAT is "Megan."
And, I suppose, no matter WHAT Liber AL actually IS (and I DO suspect that RTC was on to something with regards to its writing being entangled with AC's ambitions in the Occult World of the Golden Dawn), it is a HUMAN PRODUCTION. It arose from the Human struggle in the world. It contains elements which belong to our existential pain and joy.
An "A.I." recap is no match for a genuine human accounting of how the book spoke to them and what it meant in terms of living life.
Would you trust old Uncle Al to...tell you the Truth?
[/quote
I would trust him to mix the truth with good old-fashioned embellishment. But also, there is a lesson to be learned if you listen closely enough.
Personally, I'm not impressed. One aspect of the "Old Aeon" which was found odious by the Horusian Rebel was the idea of "Vicarious Atonement." In fact, this is why I believe Liber AL specified that the eyes (vision) of Jesus were pecked out while he hung upon the CROSS. Horus hits the Jesus who "died for your sins." In the New Aeon, you are on your own: personally responsible and pushing forward into your own direct experience (Gnosis).
The mythos of a god or goddess, or messiah scarifying his/her life, shedding his/her blood for the greater benefit of a social order is as old as religion itself. But I get your interpretation of Horus blinding Christ on the cross. I look at this way. By that point in his life, Christ didn't need his eyes anymore. He was going to die.
No, I have not seen ME3AN, but I read a synopsis. It would be interesting if someone were to write an easy comparing the "death" of ME3AN, with the "Death" of Hal in 2001: A Space Odyssey. Both are compelling metaphors for humankinds' relationship to AI. Who is master, who is slave?
I am not sure what a "major Magical Operation "is.
Thank you for illustrating my point.
You see, there is a difference between casually passively taking acid, or anything strange, ... and taking said poison, then getting up off one's butt and doing some ceremonial magic. "Major" means you do all the rites, then call up a demon to charge your pre-prepared talisman to become rich and famous ... which will keep you trapped in the gravity well for an additional 3 to 7 incarnation.
"Major" usually includes several officers, or gang members. I would tell you the story of the desert circle 100 feet across, marked by nine flaming Tiki torches, at night ... with a BIG tent in the center. About 15 people, all in black robes, bearing sharp steel, with legal Sandoz acid on tap ... but that would be off-topic.
Even minor Major ceremonies can easily take 3-4 Moons just to prepare ("the labor of preparation" is an essential pre-requisite).
Things like that.
Colin Wilson did it all the time. (I like his stuff.)
So, because somebody else (Wilson) speaks or writes Lies - that's okay (in your mind) for Crowley, or me, or you to purposely write Lies ? Like RTC allegedly did? ... which is the core-root of why we're discussing such atrocities.
So, you like Wilson's stuff, knowing it is false, yet enjoying the illusion? I would think this is okay ... if it's a novel. But if it's presented as scholarly, informative, or biographical truth, and you actually "like" this sort of thing, then I must pause and consider the present state of the universe - before I either utter the dreaded "WTF?" or just drop it all for a while ...
[sigh]
"Major" usually includes several officers, or gang members. I would tell you the story of the desert circle 100 feet across, marked by nine flaming Tiki torches, at night ... with a BIG tent in the center. About 15 people, all in black robes, bearing sharp steel, with legal Sandoz acid on tap ... but that would be off-topic.
Were you and your cohorts trying to replicate Crowley's Liber 418 or summon Chaos?
So, you like Wilson's stuff, knowing it is false, yet enjoying the illusion? I would think this is okay ... if it's a novel. But if it's presented as scholarly, informative, or biographical truth, and you actually "like" this sort of thing, then I must pause and consider the present state of the universe - before I either utter the dreaded "WTF?" or just drop it all for a while ...
Historiographic metafiction can be very entertaining. I also like straight-up nonfiction. But who is to say what is truth and what is fiction? Most books about Crowley (for example) repeat the same mostly exaggerated BS about him over and over again. Now I going to be acausal, I ordered a copy of Wilson's book Aleister Crowley, the nature of the beast. I will see what truth can be had.
Were you and your cohorts trying to replicate Crowley's Liber 418 or summon Chaos?
I was describing a scene from 1966, or so ... back when I had cohorts. 418 came years later. I never mixed with Chaos, nor has any upstanding quart that I know, except for P. Carroll, and I barely knew him.
But who is to say what is truth and what is fiction?
Why The Grand Tribunal does. RTC is currently appearing before that body, mostly one Tribune at a time. Did you see how gnarly he can be?
That is all we do here: Share stories that are related, causally, with lines drawn between the dots, to AC or his progeny ... and then we subject it (the story and all of its elements) to the Scale in The Judgment Hall of Maat ... who really decides what's going up or down. As stated, a case is in Tribunalism right now, one that you have waited for, bought $ a book for, and you ask us to calm down while dismissing it all as "who is to say ...?"
Um, Ram Dass said Be Here Now
Truth is being dug up daily from the sands of The Cairo Hotel.
By the way, what was the actual name of that manor, back in AC's day? It never registered on my breain. Or maybe it did, and it was on the part I threw away.
Most books about Crowley (for example) repeat the same mostly exaggerated BS
I never recommend books ABOUT Crowley, even if some authors have done a bang-up good job of exposing something new ... except for Cosmic Trigger, which I would recommend for someone who asks about magic or Crowley, but then that Wilson was dealing from experience ... not scholarly research.
Other than that, I say Read Crowley himself ... especially the Class D stuff, then do it.
Reading endless books about AC merely reduces the time one has available to do what he said ... preferably regularly, and on the hard physical plane.
The Cairo Hotel [...] what was the actual name of that manor?
The Annex of Shepeard's Hotel, the most expensive/upper-crusty hotel in Cairo, for Brits, from 1841 to the end of WW II.
Legendary in many other circles, besides Thelema. There is a current hotel of the same name in Cairo, but it has nothing to do with the old one.
By the way, what was the actual name of that manor, back in AC's day? It never registered on my breain. Or maybe it did, and it was on the part I threw away.
Are you referring the apartment building in Cairo? I looked up forthethelemites.com refers to it as belonging to Congdon & Co. For a while it was The Standard insurance building, currently it is the Chalk Building.
Other than that, I say Read Crowley himself ... especially the Class D stuff, then do it.
Good advice, I will. "Calm down" was probably a projection.
Are you referring the apartment building in Cairo? I looked up forthethelemites.com refers to it as belonging to Congdon & Co. For a while it was The Standard insurance building, currently it is the Chalk Building.
There is no site at forthethelemites.com, or at for-thethelemites.com, or at thethelemites.com, nor can i find any references to any buildings in Cairo called the Congdon & Co. Building, The Standard Insurance Building, or the Chalk Building on any sites.
Additionally, there is the fact that i have already given the different, and correct, answer above.
What on earth is your source?
You are the least librarian-like librarian i have ever encountered. And i have known many.
I move that RTC be declared a Troll for various reasons obvious to any semi-balanced person, male or female, of any age, with or without libation, library, or lucidity.
Dwtw
I second that motion. There should be NO response to the discredited Troll until he provides the proof of 1906 watermarks, and the Rose Crowley diaries.
Seriously. Just stop responding.
I will do my part by not responding to any response to this, my first and last response.
Litllwtw
O.L.
Dear Shiva is misunderstood as concerns Colin Wilson...and then again to be regailed with the emblem of tiki torch beglamor in the desert but that is part of the story...and Colin Wilson could make the analysis of the genius and maladies and thus he was not lying, for embedded in the work concerned acquiring higher states of consciousness and functioning, and Crowley was a somewhat fascinating story, but I think Wilson got bored, and had not fallen for the Reception story, or came to do the work, but observer through a lens, as all of this is, but our lens perhaps feeds algorithms...
So relative to RTC thesis, that it was all faked, which I think Shiva could constructively describe as a form of ring pass not, very much in line with what happens when belief might be shattered...
After going through the RTC's work as ring pass not, there is a @realsimoniff properly observed
Yet there it is, that little book.
And which is I characterized in a thread in a past spring fever
There is that which remains!
Yes Katrice for those whose work has been sincere.... It is sort of like the whole exposure of Blavatsky, and then something much deeper was born of that which was more than some grand cut and paste,,,but deeper and more mystical than what one could imagine~ au Nuit...a glad Wordm, the glad word
Even if @RTC has unlocked II. 76 and the grid page...but what if that was the plan of the gods from the beginning.
And so maybe the palimpsest that Rtc has unlocked is thus almost a certain trap door, Crowley did not like what he was writing, and he was enchanted and challenged and might well be wracked insane, for something did happen and strange.
And then there is the ruse and curse of certain grades or something more serious
than debunking that is all part of the lila
and so think of this~
AI can never canoe to Oesephus
.
... but our lens perhaps feeds algorithms...
Perhaps we need less Borg and more Karma Yoga.
AI can never canoe to Oesephus
Me neither, too, any more.
But, look, in relation to your bottom [line], this AI demanded, or at least wanted, control of his creator's computer. If that could be pulled off, the computer could order the canoe ride, plus tranportation by limo to the dock ... I'll not go on, but this stuff is dangerous - it could paddle me or you.