Home Forums Administration Introductions How to join the AA?

  • This topic contains 102 replies, has 32 voices, and was last updated by  Anonymous 2 years, 6 months ago.
Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 103 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #67048

    Camlion
    Participant
    "AdoniaZanoni" wrote:

    Always funny when I read GM Kelly bad-mouthing Motta for bad-mouthing everyone else. 😉

    #67049

    einDoppelganger
    Participant

    I just going to interrupt this for a moment to ask if

    Thelemic provocateur GM Kelly

    is actually

    Voudon Gnostic priest and general martial arts badass

    Count Dante

    you decide!

    carry on…
    [/img]

    #67050

    AEternitas
    Participant

    I was under the impression somehow, from somewhere in Crowley’s writing but cannot remember where, that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only ne member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well. I’m not certain where I read this or if it is accurate, though I can see this schema branching off into different “trees” or lineages.
    Personally it seems to me that their is enough published material out there, all one has to do iis find a more experienced practitioner that they resonate with and got to them for advice and criticism, tips and details in instruction only gained by experience.
    Outside of that I think that today most would-be’s are perhaps chasing a certain glamour.

    #67051

    Azidonis
    Participant

    93,

    "AEternitas" wrote:
    I was under the impression somehow, from somewhere in Crowley’s writing but cannot remember where, that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only ne member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well. I’m not certain where I read this or if it is accurate, though I can see this schema branching off into different “trees” or lineages.
    Personally it seems to me that their is enough published material out there, all one has to do iis find a more experienced practitioner that they resonate with and got to them for advice and criticism, tips and details in instruction only gained by experience.
    Outside of that I think that today most would-be’s are perhaps chasing a certain glamour.

    He also indicated that in certain cases a “Grand Neophyte” could be appointed to handle many Probationers.

    There’s no limit as to how many Aspirants are allowed to any one line. The entire point, in my opinion, of the advancement decree is in keeping with the Bodhisattva idea, in that one learns very early not to hoard his own accomplishments for personal gain.

    Also along the Grand Neophyte lines, any person soever may take the Oath of the Magister Templi. While this is not recommended, it is surely another indication that there’s more to it than just, “Hurry up and make your Pantacle, Mr. Neophyte. I need to get to Practicus.”

    It is also my understanding that, as I’ve asserted quite frequently, the Exempt Adept has a very particular type of mission/quest, hopefully culminating with an entry in the City of the Pyramids. The notion of the 7=4 thesis resulting in the Adept becoming a leader of a school of thought easily accounts for many of the lines in existence to this day.

    Likewise, there is no monopoly on enlightenment. I think that 666 was quite clear on this by recognizing such figures as Madame Blavatsky as a Magister Templi, though there is no evidence or proof that she was ever in “Crowley’s A:.A:.”. And then of course we can go even further to the various Prophets as listed in “Heart of the Master” and elsewhere.

    The A:.A:. System was designed with the intent to strip both Eastern and Western systems of enlightenment to their bare-bones, and present them in a manner that anyone should be able to understand, thus allowing them the opportunity to assist both Eastern and Western minded people in attaining enlightenment. As well, the A:.A:. System also has a bare-bones, which is a further stripping away of even the very basic elements that 666 included into the system. The stripping away of such skin affords a much clearer, in my opinion, idea of the overall Aspirant’s Task while granting the flexibility to utilize any system in order to attain enlightenment.

    I would go far enough to say there are many Masters of the Temple even to this day in various Hindu, Taoist, Buddhist, and other traditions.

    Just because some guy with a paper trail doesn’t believe in your attainment doesn’t make it true, though it may help you sell more books.

    93 93/93

    #67052

    Shiva
    Participant
    "Azidonis" wrote:
    The notion of the 7=4 thesis resulting in the Adept becoming a leader of a school of thought easily accounts for many of the lines in existence to this day.

    This statement brings up a point of present interest. You know how, from time to time, we get an announcement of some new book or some lecture provided by “the most knowlegeable expert on magick presently in incarnation,” or words to that effect – normally blamed on the marketing director. I am referring not to any one person, but to the fact that there are quite a few hotshots stepping into the publick limelight right now.

    Some of these luminaries have many supporters and they are also subject to snide comments on forum threads. I have come to the conclusion that if these publick figures have really written THEIR OWN “theory of the universe and their proposal for its welfare,” then I am willing to see them as Exempt Adepti and wish them well in their endeavors.

    Of course, if their lectures or books involve An Elucidation of the Qabalah or Explaining Aleister to the Trogolodytes or Experiences Within a Known Secret Society (etc), and are merely a re-assembly of someone else’s ideas? Well, then a closer look might be warranted. Are they an author as in “authority” (7=4), or an author as in “book-writer” ($=$)?

    In any case, I am not available for research into the self-proclaimed authenticity of these fellows’ works, so I hereby grant Free Adept status to all of them.

    The aspiring candidate will simply have to look (themselves) very closely at any line, lineage, guru or god he or she is considering worthy to follow into eternity. It’s really just a matter of How much Light are they radiating?

    #67053

    LucemPortabo
    Participant

    Do not concern yourself with seeking any “official” society. Simply obtain the original A:.A:. instructions and follow them.

    Start here:
    http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib9.htm

    or PDF format:
    http://www.ordoaa.org/pdf/l009.pdf

    Follow the practices laid out in these instructions, and study the list of written works suggested. This will consist of your work as Probationer, which will last for a period of at least 1 year.

    If you insist of finding a Master, or joining into any society, you’d do well to heed this advice:

    During the whole of this elementary study and practice he will do wisely to seek out and attach himself to, a master, one competent to correct him and advise him. Nor should he be discouraged by the difficulty of finding such a person.

    Let him further remember that he must in no wise rely upon, or believe in, that master. He must rely entirely upon himself, and credit nothing whatever but that which lies within his own knowledge and experience.

    #67054

    Shiva
    Participant
    "LucemPortabo" wrote:
    Do not concern yourself with seeking any “official” society.

    … he will do wisely to seek out and attach himself to, a master, one competent to correct him and advise him. Nor should he be discouraged by the difficulty of finding such a person. Let him further remember that he must in no wise rely upon, or believe in, that master. He must rely entirely upon himself, and credit nothing whatever but that which lies within his own knowledge and experience.

    I believe that sums it up very nicely.

    One does the work and the link will appear.

    #67055

    jcyn
    Participant
    "Shiva" wrote:
    [Are they an author as in “authority” (7=4), or an author as in “book-writer” ($=$)?

    [/i]

    I would have saved myself much time and money if I would have asked this question earlier in my journey. Great stuff Shiva, you always hit the nail on the head!

    #67056

    Shiva
    Participant
    "AEternitas" wrote:
    I was under the impression somehow … that there could only be 10 or so actual members of the A A, while there may be numerous students and probationers, only one member at a time could fill a slot, and in order to advance, the person above you had to do so as well.

    From the viewpoint of the Neophyte, and assuming all the spheres are filled in with incumbents, this would be true. Ten rungs on the ladder, nine people ahead of you in the “chain of command.” Theoretically, all ten would take a step up together, the top dog stepping off into the void of ain soph aur and the Neophyte drawing a Probationer up into his vacuumed position.

    This scenario only gets tiresome when we realize that many probationers may rise to neophyte in a single year (say for example, 13 worldwide in this year of 2011 ev), while a magus only comes along once every two thousand years, more or less, according to need – so there is a time problem; but then any man may make personal progress to this magus level, so the cosmic elevator can keeping running.

    Note that the “stepping up a rung” on the ladder is theoretically simultaneous for all concerned, but actually initiated from the bottom; nobody can advance until his immediate inferior is suited to take his place. So the whole lineage rests heavily on the bottom man on the totem pole, and the strength of the whole chain is subject to its weakest link.

    Actually, I never read that “ten limit” thing anywhere. Thank goodness, in reality, any grade member can have one or many more under him. Does not the magus stand as a pillar in the midst of 7 Magisters? Theoretically and symbolically, of course.

    OTO used to require a member to introduce two members under him before advancing to the next degree. It’s the pyramid structure, you see. Spreading the Law of Thelema and all that. I suppose they still do it that way, but I really wouldn’t know.

    Most AA lineages claim they are closed right now because all their available “teachers” have their hands full with a maximum student load; we don’t know what that means in numbers for any given lineage, the bottom line being “there is no room in the Inn.” So then people come to lashtal, crying in the wilderness: “Where is the AA office to be found? I want to enlist!” It may be the most often-asked question.

    In real, real-time, reality (as an historical example), we found O.M. 7=4, taking over for OIVVIO’s (0=0) or Achad’s (1=10) “teacher” who dropped out. So the actual battlefield conditions are that when any two people get thrown together in the game of life and initiation, one will be the teacher and the other the student. Vast gaps (missing rungs) are obviously possible.

    Thank goodness it gets easier when we really work with the “for there are therein but three grades” concept.

    #67057

    Brother666
    Participant

    93’s

    The question of legitimate A:.A:. Membership has bothered me too. I have contacted two e-mail addresses recently for the A:.A:. One for Paul Roevelli and another for Ray Eales , does anyone know anything about these two ?

    The research I have done has resulted in a mixed bag of responses and opinions, I would be interested in hearing others views and experiences with these two lineage’s

    93/93

    #67058

    Azidonis
    Participant

    93,

    "Brother666" wrote:
    93’s

    The question of legitimate A:.A:. Membership has bothered me too. I have contacted two e-mail addresses recently for the A:.A:. One for Paul Roevelli and another for Ray Eales , does anyone know anything about these two ?

    The research I have done has resulted in a mixed bag of responses and opinions, I would be interested in hearing others views and experiences with these two lineage’s

    93/93

    I don’t know about Paul Roevelli, but you get a taste of Ray Eales’ “philosophy” at H.O.O.R.

    This isn’t a vouch for or against Mr. Eales… simply presenting the information.

    93 93/93

    #67059

    uranus
    Participant

    I once worked with Paul Rovelli and he is a very controversial figure in the Thelemic and A.’.A.’. circles. As a teacher he pushed me farther than any previous mentor but his controversial reactions to the events of 9/11 made him a Thelemic pariah. Is he nuts? No, he just experienced first hand, a very traumatic event and his reaction was justifiable but the aftermath for the man led to him being one of the hot potatoes in our movement. Think David Bersson or Marcelo Motta level. Both, good teachers if you can work with them, both teachers that will push you, piss you off and make you question if you made the right decisions. That is also Rovelli.

    Ray Eales is also controversial but not on the same scale. he holds a lot of opinions that a lot of O.T.O. members would find difficult but they are not opinions on his teachings, but his stance on the O.T.O. That is what makes him controversial but at the same time, unlike the other three, Mr. Eales doesn’t attack any O.T.O. group publicly and is quite friendly with some of the Thelemic orders out there, including some of the Typhonian leaning movements and former students of Motta that had experienced a falling out back in the day. Eales is also an excellent instructor, demanding in the right ways and challenging in the right ways and expects the best from his pupils and will call you out for not giving your best. Id say he is one of the best out there if you are serious about magick. He does practice the alternating periods of Speech and Silence much like Motta but in different cycles, having altered them to fit the 1907 year of Reformulation for the Order.

    #67060

    einDoppelganger
    Participant
    "uranus" wrote:
    …his controversial reactions to the events of 9/11 made him a Thelemic pariah.

    Uranus, can you expand on what this reaction was? Google hasn’t given me much info and I am curious what reaction would cause such a backlash.

    Thanks
    S

    #67061

    choronzonclub
    Participant
    "uranus" wrote:
    Yes, C.F. Russel was expelled. He’s the person referenced on One Star In Sight

    Really? That would be odd since Crowley wrote One Star in Sight over twenty years before he even met Russell and since no “expulsion” letter is extant. If you have one please quote and cite it instead of propagating false BS from the Gunther lineage, that has zero support in actual fact and is used because Motta and his descendants have no lineal transmission of initiation whereas the initiations of C. F. Russell are well documented.

    #67062

    choronzonclub
    Participant
    "uranus" wrote:
    Yes, C.F. Russel was expelled. He’s the person referenced on One Star In Sight

    Really? How could that be since Crowley wrote One Star in Sight decades before he ever met Russell. I know this BS is promulgated by the Gunther lineage, since Motta was never actually initiated into the A.’.A.’. and didn’t in fact even know the word of the Neophyte, but if you are going to spew this false BS you might want to actually cite the documents or at least quote the so-called expulsion instead of just spreading lies.

Viewing 15 posts - 31 through 45 (of 103 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.