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 - 61 through 75 (of 103 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #67078

    Azidonis
    Participant
    "Patriarch156" wrote:
    Crowley made perfectly clear Russell’s lack of official standing in a circular letter in the 1920s. Russell is consequently cut contact with as early as 1923 e.v. as shown in a letter from 16. march that year, where A.C writes to Charles S. Jones:

    “I have decided to take no further notice of Genesthai’s communications, whatever one writes he makes it an excuse for a new outburst of insolence, self-glorification, and envious abuse of his superiors. I make a point of lettig you know my decusion immeditely. It may be important, when he explodes, to be able to show that he has acted throughout in direct and deliberate opposition to the principles of the A.’.A.’. and to the instructions of his superiors; and this as in the case of Ryerson, has been the cause of his crash. You will of course have noted that with a lunatic’s cunning he eats humble pie as soon as he feels that he has gone too far, so as to get in with us again. Please be on your guard against these tactics. Your letters to him, so far as I have seen then, have been admirably correct; but I really doubt the wisdom of having anything to do with him. If the smash does not finish him entirely, it may knock some sense into him and it might be our duty to pick up the pieces; but I should certainly cut him off completely until that smash has come to pass.”

    In order to make effective this new policy of removing undesirables who no longer were considered in good standing, A.C. later on 27. september 1923 e.v., through his Scarlet Woman Alostrael who signs it as a Magister Templi, declares a new set of rules which enables one to separate the wheat from the chaff so to speak as far as being in “good standing” is concerned.

    Despite the quoted comment in the letter to Jones about his “duty to pick up the pieces” Crowley a few years later after Russel becoming an increasingly bigger problem since he presented his own work as that of the A.’.A.’., declares in a circular letter Russell a persona non grata as far as A.’.A.’. work is concerned:

    “The Master Therion warns all Aspirants to the Sacred Wisdom and the Magick of Light that Initiation cannot be bought, or even conferred; it must be won by personal endeavor.

    Members of the true Order of A.’.A.’. are pledged to zeal in service to those whom they supervise, and to accept no reward of any kind for such service. Nor does the order receive any fees whatsoever when degrees of Initiation are confirmed by its authority.

    He especially warns all persons against C.F. Russell of Chicago, Ill., and his agents. He is a thief, swindler, and blackmailer; he has stolen the property of the Order and used it to enable him to pose as its representative, and so to carry on his swindles upon would-be Initiates.”

    Crowley discusses moreover frankly the mental state of C.F. Russell in a letter to Charles s. Jones on february 23. 1923 e.v.:

    “Your advice was excellent but I should have as little to do with himofficially as possible. I believe him quite capable of murdering somebody in honour of Choronzon and we do not want to be mixed up in that.”

    As far as the quality of Russel’s writings goes, it is an interesting (in its pejorative sense) amalgamation of the O.T.O. and the A.’.A.’. (Culling’s presentation of it is not really all that representative of it). He keeps the structure of the A.’.A.’. basically intact but institutes a new Grade that is the highest one, located in DAATH.

    One of his chief original (as in not originating from the A.’.A.’. and the O.T.O. unlike his first versions of his instruction on the Yi Ching which simply were a repackaging of Crowley’s version) instructions were Liber M, an instruction claiming to contain “a partial revelation of the true nature of God, the actual facts of CREATION, the real ORIGIN OF SPECIES, with the secret plan of evolution,” in particular is revealing, but all his instructions shows that while it is obvious that Russell had access during his stay at Cefalu to both his rare manuscripts as well as Crowley himself, he understood little.

    In particular the document touch upon the “miracle of incarnation” and argues that other races are in fact different species and that “[t]he WHITE RACE is the ‘divine race’, the ‘Sons of God’, & the species exclusively descended from ADAM, the head of the mammalian order.” I think you can imagine how it continues and in fact it makes a specific point out of how it was the “Parents of the White Race” that lived in the Garden of Eden and how Adam’s descendants are the ones that are particularly suited for the apotheosis that Russell teaches, and that the Fall consisted basically in the communication “to the race an hereditary and incurable form of insanity,” which apparently “consists of a spirit of abnormality & perversity & causes the race to degenerate into the small black-eyed type, such as the Hindoos, Pareses, Syrians, Jews, Arabs, Fellah & Mediterranean Races.”

    He ends his “race twaddle” as crowley would call it, by noting that only the White Race are not so afflicted and so are the only true descendants of Adam, having his nobility and powers of being and even throws in a paragraph about how hell is an actual place with a definite location, ruled over by the Devil.

    This is probably one of the best posts I’ve read.

    #67079

    uranus
    Participant

    Thank you Patriarch, for clarifying the situation with C.F. Russell as clearly as you have. I was unaware that he had presented himself and his work as the A.’.A.’. following his fall out with A.C.

    I will reiterate here that my own research led me to a lot of the same materials here quoted by Patriarch. I should also, just to be clear, reiterate, since it has apparently been a source of confusion for some, but in the past I have expressed that I accept the only Authority in the A.’.A.’. to be the IMprimatur that presents itself in the Equinox vol. IV in the forms of V., V.V. and S.U.A.I have posted this in the past on this forum and others. As far as my associations with the A.’.A.’. in the past I will say I am merely an Aspirant of the Mysteries of the Order. Any claims or statements in the past, consider null & void. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    #67080

    Azidonis
    Participant

    93,

    Coming soon: New and improved A:.A:. Dog Tags!

    That’s right! Now you can stun the opposition, call to arms, and ‘yep yo set’ like never before!

    With the new A:.A:. Dog Tags, everyone’s filial allegiance is in the open for all to see!
    [size=7px]
    Not for use in all countries and all cases. This product may get you a date, but may not guarantee authority.[/size]

    Well, I suppose every “claimant group” should have a house in the City of the Pyramids. If it doesn’t then what really, can you do? I mean, who ever goes out of that City to look for other houses?

    [size=7px]Three’s Company theme song playing… “come and knock on my door…”[/size]

    93 93/93

    #67081

    amadan-De
    Participant

    Based on this quote;

    "666TSAEB" wrote:
    The Brothers of the A.ยท.A.ยท. refuse none. They have no objection to any one claiming to be one of Themselves. If he does so, let him abide by it.

    Liber LXXI

    The answer to the original question would seem to be,
    “You just have. Now, can you handle the work and fufill the responsibilities or are you getting off the boat here? No passengers, everyone must row.”

    #67082

    Camlion
    Participant
    "uranus" wrote:
    I do not accept the idea of lineages.
    "uranus" wrote:
    Thank you Patriarch, for clarifying the situation with C.F. Russell as clearly as you have. I was unaware that he had presented himself and his work as the A.’.A.’. following his fall out with A.C.

    I will reiterate here that my own research led me to a lot of the same materials here quoted by Patriarch. I should also, just to be clear, reiterate, since it has apparently been a source of confusion for some, but in the past I have expressed that I accept the only Authority in the A.’.A.’. to be the IMprimatur that presents itself in the Equinox vol. IV in the forms of V., V.V. and S.U.A.I have posted this in the past on this forum and others. As far as my associations with the A.’.A.’. in the past I will say I am merely an Aspirant of the Mysteries of the Order. Any claims or statements in the past, consider null & void. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    A change of tune? ๐Ÿ˜‰

    If I were to hazard a prediction, it would be that this will be the trend for the future with regard to the A.’.A.’., and that such a reunification would be in keeping with Crowley’s intent – although the very necessity for a reunification at all might easily be said to have been Crowley’s own fault.

    (This is not to say that some others are not doing fine Work of their own outside of this trend, for the time being, which some are, imo.)

    #67083

    Azidonis
    Participant

    93,

    "Camlion" wrote:
    If I were to hazard a prediction, it would be that this will be the trend for the future with regard to the A.’.A.’., and that such a reunification would be in keeping with Crowley’s intent – although the very necessity for a reunification at all might easily be said to have been Crowley’s own fault.

    (This is not to say that some others are not doing fine Work of their own outside of this trend, for the time being, which some are, imo.)

    Here’s a question…

    Let’s say there are oh 10 “claimant groups” (10 is just some random number). In order for these 10 groups to unify, it would take all 10 heads of those groups to sit and decide on… anything.

    Of course, as soon as one begins trying to decide who is and who is not “with us” a division has been made, and the whole mess unfolds outside of the City.

    93 93/93

    #67084

    uranus
    Participant
    "Camlion" wrote:
    "uranus" wrote:
    I do not accept the idea of lineages.
    "uranus" wrote:
    Thank you Patriarch, for clarifying the situation with C.F. Russell as clearly as you have. I was unaware that he had presented himself and his work as the A.’.A.’. following his fall out with A.C.

    I will reiterate here that my own research led me to a lot of the same materials here quoted by Patriarch. I should also, just to be clear, reiterate, since it has apparently been a source of confusion for some, but in the past I have expressed that I accept the only Authority in the A.’.A.’. to be the IMprimatur that presents itself in the Equinox vol. IV in the forms of V., V.V. and S.U.A.I have posted this in the past on this forum and others. As far as my associations with the A.’.A.’. in the past I will say I am merely an Aspirant of the Mysteries of the Order. Any claims or statements in the past, consider null & void. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    A change of tune? ๐Ÿ˜‰

    If I were to hazard a prediction, it would be that this will be the trend for the future with regard to the A.’.A.’., and that such a reunification would be in keeping with Crowley’s intent – although the very necessity for a reunification at all might easily be said to have been Crowley’s own fault.

    (This is not to say that some others are not doing fine Work of their own outside of this trend, for the time being, which some are, imo.)

    Never a change of tune. I have been a supporter of Gunther and his work since I first read Initiation in the Aeon of the Child. It really changed my perspective on Thelema. My previous comment was definitely not a criticism of Gunther but me saying I am not affiliated with them at this time. I do not know Gunther or any of the other members of the Equnox editorial board and also I do not accept the concept of lineages. I despise the word because it is anathema to the concept of the A.’.A.’. in my own opinion. No, no change of tune, I just realized my initial post could be read the wrong way in spite of the fact that I have repeatedly expressed my admiration for Gunther and his work on these forums over the last two years.

    #67085

    Camlion
    Participant
    "Azidonis" wrote:
    93,

    "Camlion" wrote:
    If I were to hazard a prediction, it would be that this will be the trend for the future with regard to the A.’.A.’., and that such a reunification would be in keeping with Crowley’s intent – although the very necessity for a reunification at all might easily be said to have been Crowley’s own fault.

    (This is not to say that some others are not doing fine Work of their own outside of this trend, for the time being, which some are, imo.)

    Here’s a question…

    Let’s say there are oh 10 “claimant groups” (10 is just some random number). In order for these 10 groups to unify, it would take all 10 heads of those groups to sit and decide on… anything.

    I was no doubt somewhat unclear in my use of the word “reunification,” Az, sorry. No one need sit down and decide anything in this context. We will each eventually just lay down and die. What will remain was the focus of my forecast as to the future continuation of one trend and the demise of others. This post-Crowley transitional period for the A.’.A.’. is still underway, but I was just hazarding a prediction as to the eventual outcome. The best chance for long-term survival for any “10 claimant groups,” I think, would be for at least 9 of them to be known as something other than “the A.’.A.’.,” as is already the case with several groups.

    #67086

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    For how long do you think the “post-Crowley transitional period” might last? It’s already been under way for longer than the organisation of that name existed during Crowley’s lifetime.

    Best wishes,

    Michael.

    #67087

    Camlion
    Participant
    "MichaelStaley" wrote:
    For how long do you think the “post-Crowley transitional period” might last? It’s already been under way for longer than the organisation of that name existed during Crowley’s lifetime.

    Best wishes,

    Michael.

    Time will tell. ๐Ÿ˜‰

    #67088

    Michael Staley
    Participant

    Or perhaps not, because time is not here as there.

    #67089

    Shiva
    Participant
    "MichaelStaley" wrote:
    For how long do you think the “post-Crowley transitional period” might last?

    1947-1904 = 43

    2000-43 = 1957

    Exactly 1957 years!
    More or less.

    #67090

    FraDiavolo
    Participant
    "LucemPortabo" wrote:
    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

    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.

    There is actual a quite good book by Mr. Regardie:
    The One Year Manual: Twelve Steps to Spiritual Enlightenment
    which covers the steps to initiation quite thoroughly.

    I was very impressed by it and am sure if you follow it to the end that the chance of becoming enlightened will surely increase.

    You can read it on GOOGLE BOOKS here:
    http://books.google.com/books?id=wACw3ru2BcAC&printsec=frontcover&hl=de&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false

    Like the Buddha said “get off your ass (or arse if you’re British) and do it”.
    And Vivekananda added that what we call “enlightenment” is a direct result of body functions which can be brought about by using some techniques tought by Raja and Hatha Yoga.
    The same think Mr. AC told us over and over again.

    So, don’t expect your right A:.A:. to pop up before you and say “all your problems are solved now”. Even if it did – what would be the use for you? You’ll still have to work it out on yourself.

    But Regardie’s book is a better point to start at as Silver Ravenwolf’s books for example ๐Ÿ˜€

    #67091

    Swamiji
    Participant

    You know, the obvious influence on the A.’.A.’. curriculum is the G.’.D.’.; but I think it is less clear that the structural influence on the A.’.A.’. (which is clearly not similar to the G.’.D.’. in that sense) is in fact similar to certain sufi lineages. I see it as evidence of the influence of Sufism on Crowley’s spiritual work.

    And if we follow that line of thought, it becomes very clear that the A.’.A.’. would certainly have never been meant to be a single coherent order after the founder’s death, at the very least, if not earlier, but rather to turn into a number of different structures; some of which were meant to prepare a student for working with a teacher, and others to allow the teacher to create a teaching framework for the student.

    If that’s the case, then indeed anyone who seeks to be a probationer of the A.’.A.’. IS a probationer of the A.’.A.’., and there could be “lineages” of the A.’.A.’. that would not be recognizable either by “apostolic succession” or by orthodoxy of practices; while in fact any group that slavishly sought to imitate the structure of the A.’.A.’. as it existed in Crowley’s day would in fact not be legitimately engaging in the Work, but maintaining an empty shell.

    #67092

    Azidonis
    Participant
    "Swamiji" wrote:
    You know, the obvious influence on the A.’.A.’. curriculum is the G.’.D.’.; but I think it is less clear that the structural influence on the A.’.A.’. (which is clearly not similar to the G.’.D.’. in that sense) is in fact similar to certain sufi lineages. I see it as evidence of the influence of Sufism on Crowley’s spiritual work.

    And if we follow that line of thought, it becomes very clear that the A.’.A.’. would certainly have never been meant to be a single coherent order after the founder’s death, at the very least, if not earlier, but rather to turn into a number of different structures; some of which were meant to prepare a student for working with a teacher, and others to allow the teacher to create a teaching framework for the student.

    If that’s the case, then indeed anyone who seeks to be a probationer of the A.’.A.’. IS a probationer of the A.’.A.’., and there could be “lineages” of the A.’.A.’. that would not be recognizable either by “apostolic succession” or by orthodoxy of practices; while in fact any group that slavishly sought to imitate the structure of the A.’.A.’. as it existed in Crowley’s day would in fact not be legitimately engaging in the Work, but maintaining an empty shell.

    Well said, sir.

Viewing 15 posts - 61 through 75 (of 103 total)
  • You must be logged-in to reply to this topic.