Home Forums Thelema Thelema Aiwass

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 114 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #113322

    Shiva
    Participant

    For the third time this morning, over a period of 4 hours, I selected this thread to see what Wellread had said. But each time, I got a page that included only the Reply scenario … with clearly visible boxes. But no “last post” or any post(s).

    So I decided to make a Reply, and this is it, in order to bump the thread into proper page break sensibility.

    #113324

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    To read what I have said, drag your browser over the word Thelema, among the words “Home › Forums › Thelema › Thelema › Aiwass” listed to the left on top of this thread. Then click on the word Thelema, and you will under Topic find the topic Aiwass. Then click on number 6 on the pages listed in this topic, to read what I have said at the bottom of that page.

    #113325

    Shiva
    Participant

    w: As for the nature of Aiwass, this Aiwass appears to be identical with one “V.V.V.V.V.

    Yes, I agree. But we must consider any and all such names, titles, and figures to be an emanation of the universal self, witch is generically called Atma by the Hindoos. Thelemically, the term would be “True Self.” On that plane, or in that dimension, “there is no difference.”

    “V.V.V.V.V.” is described “as a ray of my light, as a messenger”, sent forth “from the Ages beyond the Ages

    Okay. So Atma sends forth VVVVV – yes, he would be a messenger or a messiah or some other “m-” word.. Yes he displays a cosmic persona (below the Abyss), and that makes him “different” from other messengers, mahachohans, and magi, which tells us all this differentiation is taking place at Chesed or further downstairs.

    At the bottom of the stairs, we find the dense physical vehicle called Edward Alexander. All his physical plane letters and publications describe an interaction between Aleister and Atma (A.’.A.’.) at various levels and in different formats.

    I see all that. There remains one further “dimension,” where the universal Self is seen as a projection of (universal) mind, and thus as an illusion. 61.

    #113344

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    As already mentioned, “… Liber Legis [= The Book of the Law], Liber Cordis Cincti Serpente, Liber Liberi vel Lapidis Lazuli and such others whose existence may one day be divulged unto you ….”, are within Liber 61 or Liber vel Causae, written by AC in 1907, described as “the Sacred Writings”, within which V.V.V.V.V.’s “utterance is enshrined”.

    I wonder if this is the basis for Richard Kaczynski within his Perdurabo, The Life of Aleister Crowley, Revised and Expanded Edition (page 172, 2010 edition), stating that “Liber VII” was “… the first of a series of “Holy Books” that Crowley claimed were dictated by his holy guardian angel, Aiwass.”

    AC first published The Book of the Law among other “Class A”-texts (consisting of works that are not to be changed, even to the letter), in 1909 under the title “ΘΕΛΗΜΑ”, within the last and third volume of this “ΘΕΛΗΜΑ”.

    AC did not publish any details about Aiwass dictating The Book of the Law to him, before March 1912 in The Equinox, Volume I, number 7. It appears that AC when he first published it, did not include his claim that The Book of the Law is the only “Class A”-text, he had no part in the authorship of.

    Kaczynski is a member of the current OTO, and has had access to its archives writing this biography. But I don’t know if is the official position of the current OTO that The Book of the Law and all the “Holy Books” of Thelema were dictated by AC’s HGA.

    #113347

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    Shiva: “I see all that. There remains one further “dimension,” where the universal Self is seen as a projection of (universal) mind, and thus as an illusion. 61.”

    In An Account of A.·.A.·., in The Equinox, Volume I, Number 1, AC describes V.V.V.V.V. as the Messiah: “This society is in the communion of those who have most capacity for light; they are united in truth, and their Chief is the Light of the World himself, V.V.V.V.V., the One Anointed in Light, the single teacher for the human race, the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”

    And with respect to AC’s just mentioned description of V.V.V.V.V., I do grasp that there is wisdom in comprehending “the universal Self” as an illusion, or any description of “the universal Self” as an illusion, to counteract “Old Aeon” thinking about “the universal Self”.

    But what is the meaning of the number “61” at the end of your REPLY #113325 in this thread, Shiva? Is it some kind of number magick?

    #113348

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    @wellreadwellbred

    AIN, a Hebrew word meaning ‘Nothing’, enumerates as 61.

    Don’t thank me, WRWB; it’s nothing.

    #113349

    Shiva
    Participant

    “Nothing is a seret key … 61 the Jews call it. I call it 8 (infiniy + other significants), 80 (T+A+O = 80), 418.” Says so in the AL scripture.

    #113359

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @wrwb :

    In An Account of A.·.A.·., in The Equinox, Volume I, Number 1, AC describes V.V.V.V.V. as the Messiah: “This society is in the communion of those who have most capacity for light; they are united in truth, and their Chief is the Light of the World himself, V.V.V.V.V., the One Anointed in Light, the single teacher for the human race, the Way, the Truth, and the Life.”
    However doesn’t V.V.V.V.V. as such an important and leading character seem to rather abruptly disappear and be displaced when the Master Therion (To Mega Therion 9=2) appears on the scene around 1915 in the figure of the Logos of the Aeon?

    And with respect to AC’s just mentioned description of V.V.V.V.V., I do grasp that there is wisdom in comprehending “the universal Self” as an illusion, or any description of “the universal Self” as an illusion, to counteract “Old Aeon” thinking about “the universal Self”.
    In which case, what is this “Old Aeon” thinking about” the universal Self” and how does it notably differ from “New Aeon” thinking about it?

    But what is the meaning of the number “61” at the end of your REPLY #113325 in this thread, Shiva? Is it some kind of number magick?
    It’s surprising that you’re not familiar with this number as Shiva has made reference to it many times and as a regular reader of Lashtal (or even someone with a very basic knowledge of cabbala) you’d have encountered it before? Although “the Jews” call it (Ain) 61, Aiwass himself instead equated it with 8, 80 & 418 (although of course every number is infinite [and/or zero] and there is no difference.)

    But I don’t know if is the official position of the current OTO that The Book of the Law and all the “Holy Books” of Thelema were dictated by AC’s HGA.
    Probably not, as it would be harder to attribute copyright and intellectual property rights to an airy entity rather than Aleister Crowley, whom they have already collared the rights under probate from the British Inland Revenue. Authorship of The Holy Books of Thelema was also attributed to Crowley when McMurtry published them in 1983 and The Book of the Law had “Crowley” as implied author along the spine of the red leatherette edition which came out in the 1990s.

    N Joy

    #113362

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    @Jamie

    Probably not, as it would be harder to attribute copyright and intellectual property rights to an airy entity rather than Aleister Crowley

    In the runup to the ‘Thelema Beyond Crowley’ conference of 2004 we were thinking of publishing a centennial edition of The Book of the Law, and consulted the intellectual property experts Finders Stephen Innocent on this very point. They dug up a precedent, when Bligh Blond took to court a medium who had claimed copyright on a text that she had received during work with Bond. The judge said that he could not attribute authorship to “the other side of the river”; the medium had transcribed the material and thus authorship was to be attributed to her.

    It would be a similar case with any of the ‘Holy Books’, I imagine.

    #113368

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    Jamie J Barter: “In which case, what is this “Old Aeon” thinking about” the universal Self” and how does it notably differ from “New Aeon” thinking about it?”

    “Old Aeon” thinking in the sense of understanding AC’s description of V.V.V.V.V. as a Messiah figure as referring to an actual Messiah, instead of ultimately an illusion.

    Jamie J Barter, earlier in this thread you wondered about why Aiwass via The Book of the Law provided only “the one utterance in rather gnomic fashion”.

    It appears that Aiwass’ (or V.V.V.V.V.’s) utterance was provided via all of the ‘Holy Books of Thelema’.

    Jamie J Barter: “It’s surprising that you’re not familiar with this number …”

    Well, I have never cared much for the “gnomic” aspects of The Book of the Law. Aiwass’ (or V.V.V.V.V.’s) capability to provide utterance[-s] repeatedly over many years, bodes well for being capable of also providing less gnomic utterance[-s] in the future.

    AC understood “the attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel” as “… communication similar to The Book of the Law as to origin, authority and value, each as may be suited to the nature and T[rue] Will of the aspirant or experimenter.” (Source: Norman Mudd, Notes of Conversations with Aleister Crowley concerning the Book of the Law, quoted in The Holy Books of Thelema, Weiser 1985.) The Book of the Law can be understood as communication particularly suited to the nature of AC.

    #113375

    Shiva
    Participant

    I’m conn-fuzed. What do gnomes have to do with all this?

    #113376

    wellreadwellbred
    Participant

    “gnomic /ˈnəʊmɪk/ adjective adjective: gnomic” [=] “difficult to understand because enigmatic or ambiguous.
    “I had to have the gnomic response interpreted for me””
    (Source: https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-e&q=Dictionary#dobs=gnomic)

    #113377

    Jamie J Barter
    Participant

    @wellreadwellbred :

    “Old Aeon” thinking in the sense of understanding AC’s description of V.V.V.V.V. as a Messiah figure as referring to an actual Messiah, instead of ultimately an illusion.
    Are you equating “the universal Self” with V.V.V.V.V. in this respect? Doesn’t “the universal Self” imply more than a simple, particular personal character/entity identifiable by name? Regarding the universe as (an) illusion, wouldn’t “Old Aeon” thinking also take into account concepts such as Maya?

    Jamie J Barter, earlier in this thread you wondered about why Aiwass via The Book of the Law provided only “the one utterance in rather gnomic fashion”. It appears that Aiwass’ (or V.V.V.V.V.’s) utterance was provided via all of the ‘Holy Books of Thelema’.
    Be your interpretation of it as it may, my actual wondering was concerning why Aiwass had only “uttered” (primarily) The Book of the Law (but granted, also The Holy Books of Thelema) as communicated with Crowley: there is a marked absence of any further communications (with the arguable exception of the apocryphal Book of Perfection) which is rather peculiar when you think that not only were many of the injunctions made in The Book not carried out in order to progress the course of the Aeon, but being the main transmitting intelligence of the ‘nuteru’ and the ‘minister’ of HPK, he would have more to say to the human race particularly in these turbulent times of transition? Why has he apparently gone quiet — has he run out of things to say?

    Jamie J Barter: “It’s surprising that you’re not familiar with this number …”
    Re. Shiva’s possibly also gnomic reference(s) to 61, as I pointed out Aiwass’ own utterance put 8, 80 & 418 in central focus and seemed to what could almost be called dismissively by comparison put “61 the Jews call it” into a sidelined second place.

    Well, I have never cared much for the “gnomic” aspects of The Book of the Law.
    Which parts of The Book of the Law which are not gnomic do you care for? For example, which bits seem especially “beautiful” to you?

    AC understood “the attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel” as “… communication similar to The Book of the Law as to origin, authority and value, each as may be suited to the nature and T[rue] Will of the aspirant or experimenter.” (Source: Norman Mudd, Notes of Conversations with Aleister Crowley concerning the Book of the Law, quoted in The Holy Books of Thelema, Weiser 1985.) The Book of the Law can be understood as communication particularly suited to the nature of AC.
    The sentence as presented from Mudd/ Crowley is interestingly worded & structured, but with its general application what has it to do with your point about number (or assuming that it hasn’t, what is it to do with, i.e., the point you’re making?)

    N Joyo

    #113378

    Shiva
    Participant

    I caught another REPLY BOX ONLY with no way out except to post a “bump.”

    BUMP!

    #113379

    Shiva
    Participant

    Nope. It didn’t BUMP. It’s listed under Forum Replies, but I still get ONLY the reply box with no navigation doo-dads. Egad an Ahoy! I have fallen into the3 Abyss, and there is no hope for the widow’s son>.

Viewing 15 posts - 91 through 105 (of 114 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.