My quotes from, & c...
 
Notifications

My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: “Case of the Cairo Working"  

Page 1 / 2
  RSS

wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
31/01/2017 2:51 pm  

--- My quotes from download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle:

Page 4: Regardless of wheter one believes the Book of the Law is what Crowley claims it is, there can be little doubt that his perception of the book chaged over the years.

Page 5: Most of the content in the Book of the Law can be traced to to contemporary sources that Crowley would have been exposed to while reading popular or academic literature, [...] except some of the Egyptian elements, and it is within those we find a glimmer of truth as to the autorship of the text. [...]

Page 5: "... he [Crowley] would need to have known what the three primary images on the stele represents, since each chapter [of Crowley's the Book of the Law] correaltes to a specific image on it. [...]

Page 5: At the time there were no published descriptions of the imagery of the stele [...] There were also no published photos of the front of the stele, thus requiring a visit be made to the Cairo Museum by Crowley in order to see the stele imagery, facts that put to rest the accusation that Aleister and Rose Crowley never visited the Museum.

Page 6: Although most of the god names in the Book of the Law are taken from Maspero's writings [Gaston Maspero, resident Egyptology expert, and the person in charge of Egyptian antiquities in 1904 in Cairo], a few others consist of odd spellings found nowhere else.

Page 7: [...] the voice Crowley perceived as that of Aiwass was nothing more than internal dialogue formed from his own knowledge and thougts. [Not the position of Timothy Moss, but a position mentioned by Timothy Moss.]

Page 7: Ra-Hoor-Khuit as as a stand-alone spelling is nowhere to be found in Maspero's works; the name was apparently constructed from parts of other names, an indication the author of the Book of the Law read and understood Egyptological writings to the point of being able to accurately construct god names.

Page 7: There are two god names that were used in the ritual to invoke Horus that are of particular interest: Heru-pa-kraat and Hoor, The first name is significant in that it contains the word kraat, a word that utilizes the letter a twice in a row, a characteristic not seen elsewhere except in some of the god names of the Book of the Law, and a fact that suggests whoever conceived the spelling Heru-pa-kraat is also the author of the book.

Page 9: Crowley, [...] rejected the [ancient] Egyptian religion as a source of meaning for the Book of the Law.

Page 10: Summary and Conclusion [...] Although there are elements of the [ancient] Egyptian religion in the Book of the Law that could serve as a basis for its revival in some form, Crowley rejected the idea, concluding instead that the god names are mere literary conveniences, and not to be treated as Egyptian gods.

--- My comment to download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle:

Before writing the Book of the Law, Crowley went to Ceylon in Sri Lanka, to visit an English friend, Alan Bennett, who was also involved in esotericism and had studied Hinduism and Buddhism. And before writing the Book of the Law Crowley also traveled through India staying at ashrams and studying with Hindu gurus. And also before writing the Book of the Law, Crowley's honeymoon with his first wife, took them to Paris, Naples, Cairo, India, and then back to Cairo in the spring of 1904.

Within Hinduism as a religion, deities can be understood both as theological personages, and as terms for natural forces and principles, like for example the cosmic functions of creation, maintenance, and destruction, being personified as a triad of deities, typically Brahma the creator, Vishnu the preserver, and Shiva the destroyer/transformer. Something resembling how Crowley used the three 'deities' supposedly expressing themselves respectively, in the three chapters of "the threefold book of Law." (Chapter 1:35), as terms for natural forces and principles.

And within Hinduism as a religion, the deities Shiva and Shakti can be understood both as theological personages, and as terms for the interplay between two forces, which if you experience a perfect unity of them, supposedly can lead to the aim of Tantra and Yoga, through supposedly leading to the dissolution of duality (Swami Nischalananda Saraswati, “Shiva & Shakti—The Twin Realities"). Something resembling how the 'deity' in the last and third chapter of The Book of the Law (used as a term for your “silent self” or “Holy Guardian Angel” in Crowley's New Commentaries to that book), according to Crowley can be understood as a child of the interplay between two 'deities', supposedly expressing themselves respectively, in the first and and the second chapter of the said book. And how the 'deity' in the said last and third chapter, can lead us to the aim of the so called the Great Work, according to how Crowley in his New Commentaries to The Book of the Law III:1 "Abrahadabra; the reward of Ra Hoor Khut.", describes this 'deity' as the rewarder of "Abrahadabra [...] the formula of the Aeon, by which man may accomplish the Great Work."


Quote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
14/06/2017 3:22 am  

As for Crowley's four visits to Egypt, the first happened after him returning from a (cirka one year) long visit to India and Ceylon (= Sri Lanka), the second happened before him returning to India, the third happened after him returing from India, and the fourth lasting a week, happende befor him returning to India again, for a (cirka half a year) long visit.

During his two long visits to India, Crowley traveled to the Himalayas.

The Hindu twin gods Nara-Narayana (twin-brother avatar of the God Vishnu on earth), were famous enough to have the opening verse of the Mahabharata dedicated to them. And they were reborn as two central characters in the Mahabharata, Arjuna and Krishna. (Symbolically, Nara-Narayana can represent the relationship between man and God, or God in every human being.) In the Swaminarayan sect (a subsect of Vaishnava Hinduism, whose founder Swaminarayan, also known as Sahajanand Swami (1781-1830), held that Vishnu and Shiva are different aspects of the same God), the twin gods Nara and Narayana, are called Nara-Narayana Deva. They are believed to reside in a main holy shrine in the Himalayas, the Badrinath temple (hot springs just below the temple with a year-round temperature of 55 °C (131 °F), are considered to be medicinal), and to be the prime controllers of the destiny of all beings, depending on their karma.

In Aleister Crowley’s 1938-preface to The Book of the Law, Aiwass, “the minister of Hoor-Paar-Kraat” (BOTL I:3), is described as "a messenger from the forces ruling this earth at present, as will be explained later on.", and later on Heru-Ra-Ha (BOTL 3:35) is explained as "... a combination of twin gods, Ra-Hoor-Khuit and Hoor-Paar-Kraat (BOTL 3:35)."

The following youtube video depicts the Hindu twin gods Nara-Narayana, that according to the Swaminarayan sect, are the prime controllers of the destiny of all beings, depending on their karma: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9IqncKZAtg


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
14/06/2017 10:24 am  

The twin-brother avatar of the God Vishnu on earth, Nara-Narayana, is working for the preservation of dharma or righteousness, and in the concept of Nara-Narayana, the human soul Nara is the eternal companion of the Divine Narayana. In the Hindu epic Mahabharata, the warrior Arjuna and the God Krishna (an avatar of Vishnu), are identified with respectively Nara and Narayana ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nara-Narayana).

In the Mahabarata, a major hindu epic focusing on the power of the gods, the God Krishna is a warrior(/philosopher) serving as the charioteer for the warrior Arjuna, the chief hero of the Mahabarata.

In third and last chapter of The Book of the Law, Ra-Hoor-Khuit is described as "a god of War and of Vengeance (BOTL III:3).", and as one "... half of the word of Heru-ra-ha, called Hoor-pa-kraat and Ra-Hoor-Khut (BOTL III:35)." The said chapter does also contain the following verse referring to twin warriors: "Hail! ye twin warriors about the pillars of the world! for your time is nigh at hand (BOTL III:71)."


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
14/06/2017 4:53 pm  

You are serial posting. Please knock it off. Get a Blog, please.


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5314
14/06/2017 10:41 pm  

Yes, what @Shiva said.

Click on Content and then Blogs.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
16/06/2017 12:43 am  

"That's told yer!"

The strange thing is, there is already a thread created on this same "Thelema" board by herupakraath involving his 'mundane' personality of Timothy Moss, entitled "Squaring The Circle", and to which wellread has himself contributed not more than five months ago & which has now just entered its fourth page.

Although occasaionally wandering off topic (as would appear to be fairly inevitable up to a point), was there really a need to create a totally new thread here which ostensibly on the face of it is covering exactly the same ground? If there was, I for one would very much like to read what it is. Oh, and I'd also be very interested to read some more posts by people who're convinced they're Aleister Crowley reincarnated again... That's always good value, and --- along with those deigning to give the rest of us mere mortals the benefits of their perspective from above & beyond the Abyss --- invariably far more entertaining.

Save our bandwidth?"
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
16/06/2017 2:01 pm  

Jamie J Barter: "The strange thing is, there is already a thread created on this same “Thelema” board by herupakraath involving his ‘mundane’ personality of Timothy Moss, entitled “Squaring The Circle”, and to which wellread has himself contributed not more than five months ago & which has now just entered its fourth page. Although occasaionally wandering off topic (as would appear to be fairly inevitable up to a point), was there really a need to create a totally new thread here which ostensibly on the face of it is covering exactly the same ground?"

Timothy Moss/herupakraath started the other thread by presenting the following objective: "The objective in creating the document is to provide readers with tangible evidence that an intelligence with abilities and insights that exceed those of any human being is responsible for the authorship of the Book of the Law."

My objective with this thread was presenting quotes from and comments to Moss/herupakraath's “Squaring The Circle”. I don't know how relevant the said quotes and comments are at present time, because Moss/herupakraath has since revised “Squaring The Circle” (source: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/squaring-the-circle/page/3/#post-98466).

But the Summary and Conclusion of "Case of the Cairo Working", another document by Moss/herupakraath avaiable in the downloadsection of this site, does also reflect the objective of providing "... readers with tangible evidence that an intelligence with abilities and insights that exceed those of any human being is responsible for the authorship of the Book of the Law."": "the evidence suggests Crowey [...] failed to recognize what are clearly adapted elements of the Egyptin religion contained within it, leaving little choice but to conclude that someone other than Crowley authored the text."

My point is that Crowley did not fail to recognize "what are clearly adapted elements of the Egyptian religion contained within" The Book of the Law, because the said elements were not his main inspiration during the process of creating The Book of the Law, but they were necessary because he needed to 'superimpose' the said book upon an ancient Egyptian artefact which happened to have 'superimposed' upon it a number he strongly identified himself with (that is, Crowley nedded to make it appear that the said ancient artefact, was somehow linked to his new 'unmatched' currently applicable holy book for the whole world).

A more likely main source of inspiration during the process of creating The Book of the Law, are Crowley's travels through India staying at ashrams and studying with Hindu gurus, during his visits to Sri Lanka and India from 1901 to 1905. A practical approach to liberation within Hinduism, is Karma yoga, which upholds the necessity of action. However, this action is to be undertaken without any attachment to the work or desire for results ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagavad_Gita). And this approach to liberation has resemblance with the following from Crowley's The Book of the Law: "42. Let it be that state of manyhood bound and loathing. So with thy all; thou hast no right but to do thy will. 43. Do that, and no other shall say nay. 44. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect (BOTL I:42-44.)."

More convincing evidence for the ancient Egyptian religion being the direct inspiration for Crowley during the process of creating The Book of the Law, would be if the core beliefs expressed in ancient Egyptian religious texts, could be demonstrated to have resemblance with the core beliefs expressed within the The Book of the Law.


ReplyQuote
ptoner
(@ptoner)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2077
16/06/2017 3:20 pm  

Anyone else not read "wellreadwelldred"'s posts....


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 5314
16/06/2017 6:24 pm  

@ptoner - It's the curse of being the webmaster here, that I'm required to read all posts to ensure compliance with the Guidelines. Not always as simple a job as it sounds!

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
17/06/2017 12:09 am  

"That's told yer, twice!"

I get the feeling that you're not likely to give up easily, even if this particular gateway manages to get "locked"... However, being so well, indefatigable (for which I have a sneaking admiration, in a little way) well, and before we all move on, can you possibly answer the following question (& here I challenge you to limit yourself to one sentence, without quoting anything?!), based on your previous contention:

“the evidence suggests Crowley […] failed to recognize what are clearly adapted elements of the Egyptian religion contained within it, leaving little choice but to conclude that someone other than Crowley authored the text.” My point is that Crowley did not fail to recognize “what are clearly adapted elements of the Egyptian religion contained within” The Book of the Law, because the said elements were not his main inspiration during the process of creating The Book of the Law, but they were necessary because he needed to [...]

More convincing evidence for the ancient Egyptian religion being the direct inspiration for Crowley during the process of creating The Book of the Law [...]

My question here is: whether or not you believe The Book of the Law to be a bogus albeit 'inspired' entity, i.e. a concoction deliberately and pre-meditatedly constructed by A.C. with the purpose of pulling off an unprecedented and unparalleled confidence trick, and that nobody else but he "authored the text".

For the record, like --- just so's I can know where you sit, in relation to the fence
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
17/06/2017 2:23 am  

ptoner: Anyone else not read “wellreadwelldred”‘s posts….

I came upon a midnight clear ... no, that's not right ... I came upon WRWB's lengthy, rambling posts, seeing a serial rant reminiscent of an itinerant standing on a soap-box near a busy intersection.

I cried, "Foul!" but failed to actually read the posts.

WRWB displays in-depth intelligence at times, but has also been called (on one of these very threads) "The greatest troll of all time." Perhaps it's a case of refusing medication or over-indulgence in "strange drugs."

Thanks to the Moderator and Sir Barter for getting into the depths of the monologue.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
17/06/2017 11:49 am  

My answer to your question is yes, JJB.

As for core beliefs expressed in ancient Egyptian religious texts, resembling the core beliefs expressed within the The Book of the Law, this book was according to Crowley supposedly dictated to him by Aiwass, and written by hand on its 'original manuscript' which still exists. And to this 'original text' has been added (supposedly on the instruction of Aiwass), text from Crowley's poetic rendering of the text on an ancient Egyptian artefact, an artefact which he appropriated and repurposed for his own purposes, the so called 'The Stele of Revealing' (actually the Stele of one Ankh-af-na-khonsu).

"For example, chapter 1, page 2, line 9 was written as "V.1. of Spell called the Song" and was replaced with: Above, the gemmèd azure is The naked splendour of Nuit; She bends in ecstasy to kiss The secret ardours of Hadit. The wingèd globe, the starry blue, Are mine, O Ankh-af-na-khonsu!" (source: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Liber%20AL%20vel%20Legis&item_type=topic)

"Chapter 3 [...] includes large chunks inserted from Crowley's paraphrase of The Stele of Revealing." (source: https://www.revolvy.com/main/index.php?s=Liber%20AL%20vel%20Legis&item_type=topic)

As for the original text of The Book of the Law, that was supposedly dictated to Crowly by Aiwass, it expresses a core belief in reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body: "36. My scribe Ankh-af-na-khonsu, the priest of the princes, shall not in one letter change this book; but lest there be folly, he shall comment thereupon by the wisdom of Ra-Hoor-Khuit (BOTL I:36)." This was an unknown belief in ancient Egyptian religious texts, from the time that the so called 'The Stele of Revealing' was made, because the core belief about life after death at that time was that a dead person could remain connected to the living world by an image of the person while alive, or a mummified body. But the expressed belief in reincarnation within The Book of the Law, was in line with Crowley's need to make it appear that the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu was somehow linked to him and the said book.

Also, Crowley during January 1904 in Colombo, Ceylon (Sri Lanka), wrote "Arm! Arm, and out; for the young warrior of a new religion is upon thee; and his number is the number of a man." (Crowley identified himself with the "mark of the beast", mentioned in the Book of Revelation in the Christian Bible (King James Bible: Revelation 13:18: "Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.")), in his play title Why Jesus Wept. That is, there is a documented indication that Crowley already well before he visited Egypt in 1904, was relating the concept of "a new religion", to the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu (which already well before Crowley's first visit to Egypt in 1902, happened to have the number 666 attached to it).


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
19/06/2017 1:46 am  

Thank you for your unequivocal and relatively concise answer there, well. Following on from it, I was just wondering whether you'd always held this bellef, as I seem to recall some of your older posts were a little more ambiguous wth respect to this position. Has your pespective therefore ever changed with regard to this? And, if so, how much influence is due to the central thesis put forward in Richard T Cole's Liber Bogus, which initially seems to be very similar to your own stance?

As for the original text of The Book of the Law, that was supposedly dictated to Crowley by Aiwass, it expresses a core belief in reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body. [...] This was an unknown belief in ancient Egyptian religious texts, from the time that the so called ‘The Stele of Revealing’ was made,
Assuming that you've got your 'Egyptological' facts about it right (I don't know enough about the subject & will leave it to someone else to possibly point out any error), how can you say such a belief was "unknown" when it may simply be that we (you?) don't have that knowledge about it yet, in the sense that it might yet have to be discovered/ uncovered/ revealed?

because the core belief about life after death at that time was that a dead person could remain connected to the living world by an image of the person while alive
So are you saying that such an image would include that on the obverse of the (so called) Stele of Revealing Itself (the image where Ankh-af-na-khonsu is seen making an offering to Ra-Herakhuty)?

However your contention about the peculiar 'prophecy' of the Why Jesus Wept extract is not new, and has been made in several other places before. It's also in Richard's book.

N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
19/06/2017 3:44 pm  

What is all this talk about "belief?"

"Let him credit NOTHING but that which lies in the realm of his own experience."


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
20/06/2017 2:52 am  

"As a matter of fact, the stela symbolised the door leading to the private apartments of the dead, a door closed and sealed to the living. It was inscribed on door-posts and lintels, and its inscription was no mere epitaph for the information of future generations; all the details which it gave as to the name, rank, functions, and family of the deceased were intended to secure the continuity of his individuality and civil status in the life beyond death."
Source: "Chapter III, section 1. Mastabas:", "The Double and his Needs", in Manual of Egyptian Archaeology: A Guide to the Studies of Antiquities in Egypt. For the use of students and travellers. By Gaston Maspero [1846-1916], Sir G. K.C.B., D.C.L. Oxon. Member of the Institute of France; Professor at the College De France; ex-Director general of Egyptin Museums. Translated by Amelia B. Edwards. New Edition, revised and enlarged by the author. With Three Hundred and Nine Illustrations. 1895. ( https://archive.org/stream/manualofegyptian14400gut/14400.txt)

That the main or ultimate purpose of a stele, like for example the Stele of Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu, with "... all the details which it gave as to the name, rank, functions, and family of the deceased were intended to secure the continuity of his individuality and civil status in the life beyond death.", was basic information easily available in Manual of Egyptian Archaeology: A Guide to the Studies of Antiquities in Egypt. For the use of students and travellers, authored by the French Egyptologist Sir Gaston Camille Charles Maspero (1846 – 1916), published in various editions, in English translation, well before Crowley's four visits to Egypt from 1902 to 1905.

The just mentioned basic information about the main or ultimate purpose of a stele like the Stele of Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu, would also have been provided to Crowley during a discussion he had about it with the Egyptologist Émile Charles Albert Brugsch bey (1842 - 1930), according to the following description: "Brugsch Bey of the Boulak Museum dined with us once to discuss the Stele in his charge, and to arrange for its "abstruction (The Equinox of the Gods).""

My apparently more ambiguous older posts, reflects me being uncertain about if Crowley in The Book of the Law claims to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu (BOTL I:36), just because he didn't know better, being ignorant about the main purpose of a stele from the Ancient Egypt, due to him lacking access to relevant information.

The central thesis put forward in Richard T Cole’s Liber Bogus, has had little direct influence on my position expressed in this thread, but a larger indirect influence as an example of demonstrating inconsitensies in Crowley's "The Equinox of the Gods-version" of the Cairo Working.

The main or ultimate purpose of a stele was to secure the continuity of the deceased's individuality and civil status in the life beyond death, and this is different from believing in
reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body. The two just mentioned beliefsystems would be two different beliefsystems, even if they existed at the same time.

(Humorous aside:
"36. My scribe Ankh-af-na-khonsu, the priest of the princes, shall not in one letter change this book; but lest there be folly, he shall comment thereupon by the wisdom of Ra-Hoor-Khuit (BOTL I:36)." "10. Get the stele of revealing itself; set it in thy secret temple -- and that temple is already aright disposed -- & it shall be your Kiblah for ever. It shall not fade, but miraculous colour shall come back to it day after day. Close it in locked glass for a proof to the world (BOTL III:10)." "... The self-slain Ankh-af-na-khonsu Whose words are truth. I invoke, I greet ... (BOTL III:37)." The core belief in Ancient Egypt about a Stele and life after death, was that all the details which it gave as to the name, rank, functions, and family of the deceased were intended to secure the continuity of his [or her] individuality and civil status in the life beyond death. And this was the ultimate purpose of the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu.

That this ultimate purpose was profaned or desecrated by Crowley's The Book of the Law (BOTL I:36), where Ankh-af-na-khonsu is appropriated and repurposed as an earlier life from which Crowley has reincarnated (an unknown concept in the Ancient Egypt where Ankh-af-na-khonsu lived), could actually be used as a main plot element in the next movie in Tom Cruise's The Mummy franchise reboot released this year 2017 (remember that Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu was a priest of Montu, a falcon-god of war in Ancient Egyptian religion, that is, a god that it could be unwise to anger). In that case, Tom Cruise being a member of The Church of Scientology founded by L. Ron Hubbard who "... asserted that, due to his efforts, the headquarters [of Crowley's OTO in the USA] was torn down, a girl rescued from the group, and the group ultimately destroyed ( http://signaturebooks.com/excerpt-the-church-of-scientology/) .", Tom might expect some advise from his church concerning what to not include about Aleister Crowley and L. Ron Hubbard.)

Correction:
In this thread I am actually mostly providing quotes from and comments to “Case of the Cairo Working”, another document by Timothy Moss/herupakraath available in the downloadsection of this site, and not from the document mentioned in the title of this thread, "My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle".


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
20/06/2017 7:49 am  

Some fascinating background material provided on the purpose of stelae here, well.

The main or ultimate purpose of a stele was to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death, and this is different from believing in reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body. The two just mentioned beliefsystems would be two different beliefsystems, even if they existed at the same time.
Is it therefore your contention that this perception & understanding of reincarnation would completely negate (as opposed to being able to live alongside) Crowley's own particular interpretation & use of it also?

The just mentioned basic information about the main or ultimate purpose of a stele like the Stele of Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu, would also have been provided to Crowley during a discussion he had about it with the Egyptologist Émile Charles Albert Brugsch bey (1842 – 1930), according to the following description: “Brugsch Bey of the Boulak Museum dined with us once to discuss the Stele in his charge, and to arrange for its “abstruction (The Equinox of the Gods).””
It would be most educational to be able to find out if Brugsch Bey ever left any memoirs or other writings mentioning his meeting(s) with Crowley in any detail and in any way which would be able to throw supplementary light upon A.C.'s magickal intentions vis-a-vis the Stele and perhaps with regard to his ambitions with respect to becoming the future Prophet of Thelema, New Aeonic messiah, etc.
Do you consider it likely that Brugsch Bey, in view (or in spite) of his official position, would have given active assistance to A.C. with regards to the "abstruction" of the Stele of revealing itself? (meaning perhaps he may have been open to bribery & 'leaving the back door to the museum open', etc?)

My apparently more ambiguous older posts, reflects me being uncertain about if Crowley in The Book of the Law claims to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu (BOTL I:36), just because he didn’t know better, being ignorant about the main purpose of a stele from the Ancient Egypt, due to him lacking access to relevant information.
Do you know when it was, in relation to the [alleged] reception of The Book of the Law, that Crowley first claimed to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu? (When he only went through his associated sequence of reincarnations in the curse of the magical retirement at Oesopus Island during his American sojourn in the First World War, over a decade later).

The central thesis put forward in Richard T Cole’s Liber Bogus, has had little direct influence on my position expressed in this thread, but a larger indirect influence as an example of demonstrating inconsitensies in Crowley’s “The Equinox of the Gods-version” of the Cairo Working.
I wonder how much of this may be a contributing factor towards the trail-off in forum posts here on Lashtal (compared with the much larger magnitude of postings three or four years ago previously before the publication of RTC's Liber Bogus with its available free download, and compared with the possible degree due to a decline in the dexterity of the software used and available, over roughly the same period? It would be interesting to find out which of the two has had the greater influence over this period.)

Doing my pleasure on the earth while among the living,
N Joy,


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
20/06/2017 11:13 pm  

I don't know if Brugsch Bey ever left any memoirs or other writings mentioning his meeting(s) with Crowley in any detail.

The first instance I know of, where Crowley at length claims to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu, is in "Across the Gulf":

"... in the tale titled "Across the Gulf", [first published in his magical journal, The Equinox, in March 1912] Crowley imagines (or indeed believes) himself to be a reincarnation of the priest, Ankh-f-na–Khonsu. The tale concerns the distinctly sado-masochistic adventures of Crowley's ancient alter-ego, who transfers his allegiances between Isis (for whom he becomes a transgender High Priestess in the first part of the story), Osiris (for whom he is a High Priest in the second), and ultimately, Horus, in his 20th century incarnation. He refers to his discovery of the Stele of Revealing at the beginning and the end of this remarkable story. At its outset he recalls that it is five years since he discovered it in the Boulak museum, but adds that it wasn't until experiencing "a certain initiation in the city of Benares last year" (i.e., 1910 - the story was composed in 1911) that he was able to recall "the memory of my life in the Twenty-Sixth Dynasty." At the end of the tale he explains that "Ankh-f-na-khonsu left unto me the stele 666 with the keys to that knowledge." (Source: Page 100 in Ancient Egypt in the Popular Imagination: Building a Fantasy in Film, by Av David Huckvale, McFarland & Co., 2012. https://books.google.no/books?id=bqPVFW-0B3MC&pg=PA232&lpg=PA232&dq=Aleister+Crowley+%2B+%22ACROSS+THE+GULF%22&source=bl&ots=-McnSIO2zk&sig=T48fjzMaFcnU-CRvD_pkTq0oC2w&hl=no&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjSyOvZnczUAhWFFJoKHcvYA14Q6AEIgAEwEQ#v=onepage&q=the%20gulf&f=false)

The perception & understanding of life after death, behind a stele like the Stele of Ankh-f-na-khonsu, where the main or ultimate purpose of all the details which it gives as to the name, rank, functions, and family of the deceased, is to secure the continuity of Ankh-f-na-khonsu’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death, is negated by Crowley in The Book of the Law appropriating and repurposing the said Ankh-f-na-khonsu as an earlier life from which Crowley has reincarnated (BOTL I:36), appropriating and repurposing Ankh-f-na-khonsu's Stele as "... the stele of revealing" (BOTL III:10).", and describing Ankh-f-na-khonsu as "The self-slain Ankh-af-na-khonsu (BOTL III:37)." The said perception & understanding of life after death, is also negated by Crowley in a text titled "Across the Gulf", claming that Ankh-f-na-khonsu's had as a purpose, to leave his Stele unto Crowley, as an object with keys to some special knowledge. It is further negated by Crowley in the same text claiming that he during his life as Ankh-f-na-khonsu had some sado-masochistic experiences, and by claiming that he as Ankh-f-na-khonsu transfered his allegiances between Isis, Osiris, and ultimately, Horus.

The person behind the Stele of Ankh-f-na-khonsu appropriated and repurposed by Aleister Crowley, had no relatives that could defend his legacy against Crowley's various negations of the perception & understanding of life after death, behind his Stele.

The decline in the dexterity of the software used and available on a site, will have a decreasing effect on visitor's forum post activity.

I don't know how open Brugsch Bey may have been to bribery, but Sir Gaston Camille Charles Maspero who worked in Egypt from 1899 until retiring in 1914, superintended the removal from Gizeh to the new quarters at Kasr en-Nil in 1902, of the collections in the Bulak Museum. He is described like this on wikipedia: "... Maspero was popular with museum keepers and collectors because he was known to be a "pragmatic" director of the Service of Antiquities, one who would allow them to remove from the country what he did not want for the Bulak Museum in Cairo. Maspero did not attempt to halt all collecting, but rather sought to control what went out of the country and to gain the confidence of those who were regular collectors. When Maspero left his position in 1886 and was replaced by a series of other directors who attempted to halt the trade in antiquities, his absence was much lamented ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaston_Maspero) ."


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
21/06/2017 4:54 am  

WRWB: The first instance I know of, where Crowley at length claims to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu, is in “Across the Gulf”

Yes, but Across the Gulf was a novel. It was not an A.'.A.'. Publication of any Class (A through E). Not that it doesn't represent a "claim" on his part. It's an absolutely great story.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
21/06/2017 11:13 am  

WRWB: The first instance I know of, where Crowley at length claims to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu, is in “Across the Gulf”

Yes, but Across the Gulf was a novel. It was not an A.’.A.’. Publication of any Class (A through E). Not that it doesn’t represent a “claim” on his part. It’s an absolutely great story.

My point is that the content of Crowley's ¨Across the Gulf¨, irrespective of its status within Crowley's belief system Thelema, in the way it describes the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu and the said Ankh-af-na-khonsu, negates the ultimate purpose of the said Stele, to safeguard the said Ankh-af-na-khonsu's individuality and civil status into perpetuity.

Jamie J Barter, I don't think that the publication of Richard T Cole’s Liber Bogus which is available as a free download on this site, had any major long-lasting effect with respect to the magnitude of postings on this site.

You asked me how I can say that a belief in reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body, was unknown in Ancient Egypt at the time the Stele of one Ankh-af-na-khonsu was made, (with the same ultimate purpose as other funerary steles made at that time, to secure the continuity of the deceased's individuality and civil status in the life beyond death (that is, to safeguard the deceased's individuality and civil status into perpetuity)).

A belief in reincarnation in the sense of your soul leaving the body and then returning in a different body, hypothetically having been well known at the time the Stele of one Ankh-af-na-khonsu was made, would have left clear and strong indications of the said belief. For example clear and strong indications like grave steles or funerary steles containing curses against any that should seek to turn the Stele from its ultimate purpose, to secure the continuity of the deceased's individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity. Curses that could have had a wording resembling the following curse from Aleister Crowley:

"36. 666 identified with Ankh-f-n-Khonsu. I am in some way, One and the same Man and Ankh-f-n-Khonsu, whose Stélè helped to bring about the writing of that Book. [...] 666: His Curse upon any that should seek to distort the Book, or His comment. Thus as a safeguard against such, I, by the wisdom of Ra-Hoor-Khuit, do now foresee and guard against all fraud and false ways of reading the Book in simple and plain language. And I lift up my voice and curse with the Great Curse of a Magus of Power him that shall seek to turn my Word from its Truth." (Source: The Comment called D (The Djeridensis Working), Chapter I, https://hermetic.com/legis/djeridensis/chapter-i)


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
21/06/2017 7:33 pm  

Thanks for giving some cogent replies to my queries well, It makes a pleasant change and goes to show. Furthermore, in answering it matters less whether one may be wrong or right (and often it is difficult to establish such a tidy black or white resolution anyway) as instead, whether one has been successful in the setting in motion of any fruitful trains of thought or an occasional sudden epiphanic revelation of things which might not ever have been realised before.

Yes, in 1912 Across The Gulf did predate the Oesupus Island "series of reincarnations" by several years. Any advance on this, from anyone? (cue tumbleweed). I can't recall any mention in 1909's The Vision and the Voice, which would seem a likely candidate as any.

Yes, but Across the Gulf was a novel. It was not an A.’.A.’. Publication of any Class (A through E).
Yes, but it's also known as Liber LIX, published in Class C and is recommended as one of the texts that the Philosophus will be examined in for the A.'. A.'. Course VI (see the Big Blue Breezeblock, pp.457, 465.)

The person behind the Stele of Ankh-f-na-khonsu appropriated and repurposed by Aleister Crowley, had no relatives that could defend his legacy against Crowley’s various negations of the perception & understanding of life after death, behind his Stele.
And any curses then invoked against its sacrilege or misuse --- "against any that should seek to turn the Stele from its ultimate purpose, to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity" --- would seem to have been woefully lacking in their efficiency?

The decline in the dexterity of the software used and available on a site, will have a decreasing effect on visitor’s forum post activity.
Yes this will definitely have had a decreasing effect, but it isn't an insuperable handicap that can't be overcome --- as you or I or Shiva or a number of others have proved. However this is only "half the equation":
I don’t think that the publication of Richard T Cole’s Liber Bogus which is available as a free download on this site, had any major long-lasting effect with respect to the magnitude of postings on this site.
since the effect RTC's thesis may have had will not have been negligible either, although it's another thing trying to quantify it. Maybe people have now become so disillusioned with A.C. and consider his stock to be so "bogus" they cannot even be bothered to countermand this assertion!?

In which event his stature will surely not surpass the stars, nor shall they worship his name,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
22/06/2017 4:52 am  

Shiva said: "Yes, but Across the Gulf was a novel. It was not an A.’.A.’. Publication of any Class (A through E)."

JB replied: Yes, but it’s also known as Liber LIX, published in Class C and is recommended as one of the texts that the Philosophus will be examined in for the A.’. A.’. Course VI (see the Big Blue Breezeblock, pp.457, 465.)

Oh drat and the thirteen pixels! I may or may not stand corrected, depending on who slapped a Class C on it. Before issuing my original remark, I looked up Gulf in the original Equinox. No Imprimatur! Now I don't have a Breezeblock, but I'll take your word for it that somebody slipped in after the original publication and put Roman numerals and a Seal on it. The question is, who dunnit? Was it AC, or the BB company? Depending on how many sworn affidavits and solemn oaths are provided, I may be forced to recant my statement.

Note: I do not recognize or sustain actions by the BB company as being valid, including fill/kill, nor do they reciprocate in like manner towards my earlier efforts. There is division hither homeward ...


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
It's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3836
22/06/2017 8:52 am  

Was it AC

Shiva, I'm sure it was Crowley. I recall seeing the title in the list of Libri in one of the appendices of the 1929 edition of Magick in Theory and Practice.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
22/06/2017 4:28 pm  

Alas! I hereby eat my words. Class C is rated "suggestive," but that gives me no wiggle-out-of-it room, does it?


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
29/06/2017 11:16 pm  

Crowley's first visit to Allan Bennett in Asia began in August 1901. Crowley's second visit was just after Allan Bennett's ordination as a Theravada monk in February 1902, and his third and last visit was in November 1905:) "Since leaving England, I had thought over the question of the authority of Mathers with ever increasing discomfort. He had outraged every principle of probity and probability; but he was justified, provided that his primary postulate held good. I could think of only one way of putting him to the test. It concerned an episode at which Allan Bennett was present. Allan, and he alone, could confirm the account which Mathers had given me. If he did so, Mathers was vindicated; if not, it was fatal to his claims. It seems absurd to travel eight thousand miles to ask one question --- a childish question into the bargain! --- but that was what I did." (Source: Page 220 and 221, Chapter 25, The Confessions of Aleister Crowley; http://www.metaphysicspirit.com/books/Confessions%20of%20Aleister)

JB: "It would be most educational to be able to find out if Brugsch Bey ever left any memoirs or other writings mentioning his meeting(s) with Crowley in any detail and in any way which would be able to throw supplementary light upon A.C.’s magickal intentions vis-a-vis the Stele and perhaps with regard to his ambitions with respect to becoming the future Prophet of Thelema, New Aeonic messiah, etc."

JB: "Do you know when it was, in relation to the [alleged] reception of The Book of the Law, that Crowley first claimed to be the reincarnation of Ankh-af-na-khonsu? (When he only went through his associated sequence of reincarnations in the curse of the magical retirement at Oesopus Island during his American sojourn in the First World War, over a decade later)."

JB: "Yes, in 1912 Across The Gulf did predate the Oesupus Island “series of reincarnations” by several years. Any advance on this, from anyone? (cue tumbleweed). I can’t recall any mention in 1909’s The Vision and the Voice, which would seem a likely candidate as any."

My impression is that Timothy Moss/herupakraath's position is thar Aleister Crowley was wrong in "... concluding [...] that the god names [in The Book of the Law] are mere literary conveniences, and not to be treated as Egyptian gods. (Source: Page 10, Summary and Conclusion, "Case of the Cairo Working", by Timothy Moss/herupakraath.)

My position is that Crowley was right in doing so, and that Allan Bennett would have been the most likely fellow Initiate of him in 1905, "... which would be able to throw supplementary light upon A.C.’s magickal intentions vis-a-vis the Stele and perhaps with regard to his ambitions with respect to becoming the future Prophet of Thelema, New Aeonic messiah, etc." This because Crowley respected Allan Bennett both as a teacher and as a fellow Initiate, and in Chapter 25 of his Confessions, describes himself as traveling (Crowley's first visit in August 1901) "eight thousand miles to ask one question" from Allan Bennet, "the question of the authority of Mathers", with respect to the Secret Chiefs. Also because both Bennet and Crowley believed in the possibility of remembering past lives, and morover, both believed in the importance of remembering past lives. And because Bennet was someone that Crowley would have been likely to trust enough to openly discuss the posibility of Crowley having been Ankh-f-n-Khonsu in a past life. Maybe even trust enough to openly discuss The book of the law with Bennett, and ask the latter about how to confirm if this was a sign from the Secret Chiefs.

Crowley's third and last visit to Allan Bennett in November 1905: "The conversation, [...] turned to considerations of what my Kamma [karma] had in store for me. "This might be discovered," he [Allan Bennett] said, "by acquiring the Magical Memory." This is equivalent to Sammasati, Right Recollection, the seventh step on the Noble Eightfold Path. [...] There are two main methods of acquiring the Magical Memory as defined above. One is to train the normal memory to work backwards instead of forwards, so that any past action is presented to the mind after the manner of a cinematograph film set running in the reverse direction. (I never succeeded fully in acquiring the technique of this method.) The other is to deduce from present circumstances those which gave rise to them." (Source: Page 463, Chapter 54, The Confessions of Aleister Crowley; http://www.metaphysicspirit.com/books/Confessions%20of%20Aleister%20Crowley.pdf)

(An article about Allan Bennett’s Influence on Aleister Crowley: The Bhikkhu and the Magus: Exploring Allan Bennett’s Influence on Aleister Crowley, by John L. Crow University of Amsterdam: http://www.cesnur.org/2008/london_crow.pdf)


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
01/07/2017 2:45 am  

I am sorry you appear to be experiencing a bit of ‘tech trouble’, well. Sign o’ the times and all that. There seems to be a lot of quoting my words back at me without actually making a point, though. But since you don’t say you actually disagree with any of them, will I be right in assuming you thought they were so splendid you’d give everyone the opportunity of the benefit of a second airing?

My position is that Crowley was right in doing so, and that Allan Bennett would have been the most likely fellow Initiate of him in 1905, “… which would be able to throw supplementary light upon A.C.’s magickal intentions vis-a-vis the Stele and perhaps with regard to his ambitions with respect to becoming the future Prophet of Thelema, New Aeonic messiah, etc.” This because Crowley respected Allan Bennett both as a teacher and as a fellow Initiate,
Your position may be possibly true, although there was Jones as well to be considered particularly in view of their July 1906 collaboration (the one where Jones crucified Crowley in Croydon). They too were on very good terms from A.C.’s start in the Golden Dawn, until their dimuendo in falling out over the Looking Glass debacle.

and in Chapter 25 of his Confessions, describes himself as traveling (Crowley’s first visit in August 1901) “eight thousand miles to ask one question” from Allan Bennet, “the question of the authority of Mathers”, with respect to the Secret Chiefs. [...] It concerned an episode at which Allan Bennett was present. Allan, and he alone, could confirm the account which Mathers had given me. If he did so, Mathers was vindicated; if not, it was fatal to his claims. It seems absurd to travel eight thousand miles to ask one question — a childish question into the bargain! — but that was what I did.”
Unfortunately the exact form of the question --- childish though it might well have been well and somewhat disingenuously for A.C. to have then omitted to include it --- appears lost to history. Although it would seem to be on that thorny subject of "authority" --- or perhaps even "Authority", yes.

Why are you sometimes spelling Bennett with only one 't', well?

Also because both Bennet and Crowley believed in the possibility of remembering past lives, and morover, both believed in the importance of remembering past lives. And because Bennet was someone that Crowley would have been likely to trust enough to openly discuss the posibility of Crowley having been Ankh-f-n-Khonsu in a past life. Maybe even trust enough to openly discuss The book of the law with Bennett, and ask the latter about how to confirm if this was a sign from the Secret Chiefs.
Again, the vexed crucial matter of Authority. A.C. also notified 15 people concerning the Equinox of the Gods just after his [alleged] reception too, but unfortunately a copy of the text of this letter has yet to resurface also. But going back to your original point, if for the sake of argument we took on board as truth for a moment the fact that A.C. actually was Ankh-af-na-khonsu in a past life then surely he would have the right to deal with his image (as in 'his' Stele) in any way he saw fit in his new incarnation, including possibly superceding the original (and in comparison limited) usage from Maspero which you quoted ("to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity.").

Crowley’s third and last visit to Allan Bennett in November 1905: “The conversation, […] turned to considerations of what my Kamma [karma] had in store for me. “This might be discovered,” he [Allan Bennett] said, “by acquiring the Magical Memory. […]”
From being A.C.'s "most likely" and respected fellow initiate and one-time teacher, A.C.’s continuing relations with Bennett also appear to have been on a gradually downward slope as time progressed from its zenith with him at the Chancery Lane flat they shared together at just before the turn of the century, to its decline as time went by (what with comparing him with a snake in his path and so on! In fact this appears to have been their last communication with one another, although Bennnett died nearly twenty years later?) But is it therefore your contention here that A.C. would not have entertained any thoughts about having actually been Ankh-af-na-khonsu at all until at least November 1905 and the start of his work with Magical Memory, despite being confronted and acquainted with his 'image' for at least eighteen months preceeding? (And in the words of examiners the world over: "And if so, why?"!)

Moisten your dryness, well – come tell an amusing joke with plenty of hoke & make me laugh, eh!?

In the spirit of Donald O'Connor and singing in the rain,
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
01/07/2017 5:13 am  

Me sometimes spelling Bennett with only one ‘t, is me sometimes making an error (I hope that makes you laugh).

Jamie J Barter: "... is it [...] your contention here that A.C. would not have entertained any thoughts about having actually been Ankh-af-na-khonsu at all until at least November 1905 and the start of his work with Magical Memory, despite being confronted and acquainted with his ‘image’ for at least eighteen months preceeding? (And in the words of examiners the world over: “And if so, why?”!)"

No, my point is that Crowley from when he first saw the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu (1902?), entertained thoughts about having actually been Ankh-af-na-khonsu, but was aware, or became aware, of the conflict between such thougts, and the ultimate purpose (“to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity.“) of the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu that caught his interest. And my point is also that it took some extra effort on Crowley's part (for example work with Magical Memory) to overcome the said conflict, and that this is part of the explanation for Crowley being relatively late in going public in declaring the major importance of his The Book of the Law.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
01/07/2017 9:49 am  

Me sometimes spelling Bennett with only one ‘t, is me sometimes making an error
Once may be happenstance, twice coincidence, but three times within the same paragraph...? That's what made my think the style might not be wholly accidental. Please don't take it the wrong way as my remark would apply to any poster who inadequately proofreads in the presence no longer of "Preview", but one would hope your concentration and diligence in any applied practical magical work might be more assiduous and accurate than that though, well!

(I hope that makes you laugh).
Not this time --- not even a crease! Try harder!

No, my point is that [...] And my point is also that [...]
Thank you for your answer to my query, the manner of which is getting conciser and more spot on as time progresses. Well done well & keep it up - you may bring around your detractors yet! So concise though, you have omitted to address my point about whether or not you consider if A.C. WAS Ankh-af-na-khonsu in a past life he would have the right to make use of the image (of 'his' Stele) in any way he saw fit...

N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
01/07/2017 1:00 pm  

"Two main events were destined to put me on the road towards myself. The first took place in Stockholm about midnight of December 31st, 1896. […] The second event took place in October 1897. [...] I was appalled by the idea of the futility of all human endeavour. Suppose, I said to myself, that I make a great success in diplomacy and become ambassador to Paris. There was no good in that --- I could not so much as remember the name of the ambassador a hundred years ago. Again, I wanted to be a great poet. Well, here I was in one of the two places in England that made a specialty of poets, yet only an insignificant fraction of the three thousand men in residence knew anything about so great a man as Aeschylus. I was not sufficiently enlightened to understand that the fame of the man had little or nothing to do with his real success, that the proof of his prowess lay in the invisible influence with he had had upon generations of men. [...] I was not content to be annihilated." Page 123, 124 and 125: Part One: Towards the Golden Dawn[.] Chapter: 14, in The Confessions of Aleister Crowley.

Crowley was initiated in 1898, and took the name Frater Perdurabo (Latin for "I will endure to the end").

My point with respect to the above just mentioned information about Crowley, is that he from 1897, "was appalled by the idea of the futility of all human endeavour, and "not content to be annihilated.", and that this position is reflected in the magical name or magical motto he took in 1898.

And my point is also that Crowley after he started paying close attention to the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu that caught his interest, soon would realise that the main and ultimate purpose of the said stele was to safeguard the deceased’s individuality and civil status into perpetuity, that is, that the main and ultimate purpose of the said stele was to avoid the deceased’s annihilation.

As for Aleister Crowley having the right to make use of the image (of ‘his’ Stele) in any way he saw fit, since he "WAS Ankh-af-na-khonsu in a past life", this seems to have been, or to have become, Crowley's own poistion on this matter. Also, as Crowley was "not content to be annihilated.", and had taken Perdurabo (Latin for "I will endure to the end") as his magical name or magical motto, it would be very fitting for him to intimately identify himself with an ancient funerary artifact, whose main or ultimate purpose was to avoid the deceased’s annihilation.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
04/07/2017 12:47 am  

Raised among the Exclusive Brethren, a more conservative faction of a denomination known as the Plymouth Brethren, Aleister Crowley at some later time rebelled against the Exclusive Brethren. The founder of the Exclusive Brethren, John Nelson Darby (1800 – 1882) is considered to be the father of modern Futurism. "Interpreters with a futurist perspective think that Jesus' prophecy [about the abomination of desolation] deals with a literal, end-times False Prophet. Futurists consider the abomination of desolation prophecy of Daniel mentioned by Jesus in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14 to refer to an event in the future, when there appears [...] the "False Prophet [(King James Bible, Revelation 16:13, 19:20, 20:10)]" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abomination_of_desolation).

The Book of the Law supposedly received by Aleister Crowley in 1904, repeatedly refers to him as a prophet, and contains the following claim concerning that the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu shall be called the abomination of desolation: "That stele they shall call the Abomination of Desolation; count well its name, & it shall be to you as 718 (source: The Book of the Law, Chapter III, verse 19.)."

Jamie J Barter: "... if for the sake of argument we took on board as truth for a moment the fact that A.C. actually was Ankh-af-na-khonsu in a past life then surely he would have the right to deal with his image (as in ‘his’ Stele) in any way he saw fit in his new incarnation, including possibly superceding the original (and in comparison limited) usage from Maspero which you quoted (“to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity.“)."

Well, Jamie J Barter, does that mean that a person who actually was Napoleon (1769 – 1821) in a past life, surely would have the right to deal with the said Napoleon's funerary artifact(-s) in any way the said person saw fit? Does that mean that a person who actually was Alexander Alexandrovich ((1845 - 1894) the second last Russian Tsar 1881 - 1894) in a past life, surely would have the right to deal with the said Alexander Alexandrovich's funerary artifact(-s) in any way the said person saw fit? And does that mean that a person who actually was Kim Il Sung (1912 - 1994) in a past life, surely would have the right to deal with the said Kim Il Sung's funerary artifact(-s) in any way the said person saw fit?

With respect to your apparent liking for song and dance numbers, you might have liked one (or a musical) covering the adventures involved in exercising one's sure right to deal with the funerary artifacts of one's actual past lives, in any way one sees fit. 😉


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
04/07/2017 4:21 am  

As Crowley was “not content to be annihilated.”, and had taken Perdurabo (Latin for “I will endure to the end”) as his magical name or magical motto, it would be very fitting for him to intimately identify himself with an ancient funerary artifact, whose main or ultimate purpose was to avoid the deceased’s annihilation.

Well, let's be clear: would (or wouldn't) you say this therefore makes a nonsense of the avowed intent of the Master of the Temple to have annihilated one's ego (i.e. in this case Aleister Crowley) and become as a pile of dust? That there would instead be an eternal glorification of the [his] ego, not only within his lifetime but over at least two lifetimes and several thousand years and maybe even to the end of recorded time itself (or however long it is stelae last)?

Hmmm!... We did seem to have been making some progress vis-a-vis concision & all that jazz and that there was a sign that the light at the end of the tunnel wasn't that of an oncoming speeding locomotive, but perhaps this was being slightly premature: Boney, Kim and Alexander Alexandrovich rather reeking of being red herrings (those smelliest of fish)? Maybe it might help matters if you let me turn my point around and instead put it the following way:

If for the sake of argument we took on board as truth for a moment the fact that A.C. actually was Ankh-af-na-khonsu in a past life then why WOULDN'T he surely have the right to deal with his image (as in ‘his’ Stele) in any way he saw fit in his new incarnation, including possibly superceding the original (and in comparison limited) usage from Maspero which you quoted (“to secure the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity“)?

Yours, (making a song and dance) in the annihilation of desperation
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
05/07/2017 4:51 am  

(Emphasis added by me.)

No, because the Master of the Temple stuff took place later in his life (1909), that is, years after he started (as early as 1902?) identifying himself with the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu.

Asking you if a person who actually was Kim Il Sung (1912 – 1994) in a past life, surely would have the right to deal with the said Kim Il Sung’s funerary artifact(-s) in any way the said person saw fit?, is not a red herring, but very relevant. Because Kim Il-Sung’s main residence now is his mausoleum, to emphasize his status as North Korea’s Eternal Leader ( http://www.travelingeast.com/asia/north-korea/where-to-go-in-north-korea/2/). And a person defiling the said funerary artifact would be likely to face extremely severe punishments.

Robbery, defilement or desecration of graves or tombs, was severely punished in Ancient Egypt ( http://anubis4_2000.tripod.com/subpages1/robbers.htm), and "The punishments for those convicted as tomb robbers were extremely severe. Robbery, damaging tombs and the fencing of stolen tomb goods were criminal offences. [...] Death sentences were rare in Egypt compared with other ancient societies but robbers were executed. Executions took the form of impalement or being burnt alive. Both of these methods of execution had implications for the eternal life of the tomb robbers. To be burnt to ashes would mean that there was no body to pass into the afterlife and the sentence of impalement meant that the Ka would be forever tied to the place of execution ( http://www.historyembalmed.org/egyptian-tombs/tomb-robbers.htm) ."

What Crowly did with the Stele of one Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu, defiling its main or ultimate purpose, would in Ancient Egypt be a criminal offence punishable by execution.

Crowley's "... Thelema and the New Age movement, are examples of religious syncretism, that is, blending of two or more religious belief systems into a new system [...]. In modern secular society, religious innovators [like Crowley] sometimes create new religions syncretically [...], often with the effect of offending the original religions in question ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_syncretism) ."


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
05/07/2017 9:06 am  

Emphasis added by me. ("damaging tombs")
Wherefore this actual "damage"? As far as I know A.C. was never a member of any Egyptological archaeological expedition and never even entered tombs to handle ancient artifacts far less damaged them.

No, because the Master of the Temple stuff took place later in his life (1909), that is, years after he started (as early as 1902?) identifying himself with the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu.
Yes, cos when A.C. joined the Golden Dawn in 1898 he would have been aware of its basic structure and grades, etc, and that becoming Adeptus Minor (let alone Crossing the Abyss) would (at some time) involve the sublimination and then the annnhilation of the ego. Are you saying then that he would have deliberately taken on a magical name or motto which would have set him at direct odds with such a later intention? To my understanding, "I will endure to the end" did not mean "My ego as A.C. [Ankh-af-na-khonsu] will resist annihilation forever" but "I [A.C.] will carry on in the service of my Higher Self/ True Will for the rest of my existence".

Asking you if a person who actually was Kim Il Sung (1912 – 1994) in a past life [yadda yadda]
So nonetheless in spite of all the toing and froing, you seem to be agreeing with me that the reincarnated person (i.e. A.C.] would have the right to deal with his previous incarnation's (i.e. Ankh-af-na-khonsu's) funerary artifact (i.e. the stele) in any way he saw fit, including paraphrasing its hieroglyphics and utilising the image and godforms depicted.

And a person defiling the said funerary artifact would be likely to face extremely severe punishments. ... What Crowley did with the Stele of one Ankh-ef-en-Khonsu, defiling its main or ultimate purpose, would in Ancient Egypt be a criminal offence punishable by execution.
Isn't the act of perceiving an act of defilement a subjective one, impugning A.C. by attributing the basest of motives to what might actually have been carried out by him from the highest? Who behooves it to judge?

Crowley’s “… Thelema and the New Age movement, are examples of religious syncretism, [...] often with the effect of offending the original religions in question
So what is it A.C. would have been meant to have done which could be construed as so really offensive in the Halls of Judgement? Especially if his intention was never to have actually caused offence (unless you can point out where?)

"To be burnt to ashes would mean that there was no body to pass into the afterlife and the sentence of impalement meant that the Ka would be forever tied to the place of execution"
So do you think karmic justice was therefore served by A.C. being cremated and that his Ka is thereby doomed to never leave the environs of Brighton and Hastings (as the rather more modern-day curse has pronounced)?!

Beep beep!
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
05/07/2017 12:44 pm  

No, Crowley was appalled by the idea of the futility of all human endeavour, and not content to be annihilated in 1897, one year before joining the Golden Dawn in 1898, and thus not likely to be very familiar with a the Golden Dawn degree like Master of the Temple. "The grade structure of the Golden Dawn supposedly allows for a grade entitled Magister Templi, also known by the enumeration 8=3, which corresponds to the Qabalistic Sephirah of Binah. However much controversy surrounds this and other grades of the Golden Dawn system. The controversy mainly concerns whether the grade in fact exists for ordinary humans, and if it does, whether it actually means anything or not ( http://mystic.wikia.com/wiki/Golden_Dawn_Magister_Templi) ."

This thread was started by me as a response to Case of the Cairo Working, a document authored by Timothy Moss/herupakraath, and available in the downloadsection of this site. Timothy Moss/herupakraath does on page eight in the said document state that the process of reincarnation is implied in the identification of Aleister Crowley with Ankh-af-na-khonsu as seen in The Book of the Law, and that Ankh-af-na-khonsu's reincarnation as Aleister Crowley is the ultimate purpose of the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu.

Graveyards and cemeteries in ancient Egypt at the time the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu was made, "... served as a point of contact where deceased relatives and rulers could still commune with the living. Archeologists have discovered numerous "letters to the dead" which were written by Egyptians asking for some kind of assistance here on earth from those who had gone into the afterlife. In this context, the dead were viewed as being able to intercede in some fashion on behalf of the living in order to influence things in a positive way http://anubis4_2000.tripod.com/subpages1/robbers.htm ." A funerary stele like the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu, was intended as a door for the deceased who was supposed to use the door to communicate with the world of the living, and be able to partake of the food and refreshments placed on a table of offerings ( http://www.louvre.fr/en/oeuvre-notices/false-door-stele-sheshi). "... the funerary stele of Ankh-f-n-khonsu was intended to give him a virtual tomb within which to rest and provide him the eternal food piled on the offering table ( http://www.patheos.com/blogs/starandsnake/2014/06/the-stele-of-revealing-part-2-what-does-this-have-to-do-with-reincarnation/) ." "The practice of making stelae emerged [...] as a response to the phenomenon of tomb robbing. When it became clear that a tomb’s inhabitant might not sail into eternity undisturbed, the stele was created to act as a miniature tomb ( http://www.patheos.com/blogs/starandsnake/2014/06/the-stele-of-revealing-part-i-a-funerary-stele/) ."

The symbolism used on the Stele or miniature tomb of one Ankh-f-n-khonsu, was bastardized by Crowley to express something completely different within the belief system of Thelema developed by the latter. And the said tomb was in that sense damaged or defiled by Crowley, acts that were severely punished in Ancient Egypt.

My point is that one irrespective of having the best of intentions or motives in dealing with the image of North Korea’s 'Eternal Leader' Kim Il Sung, in any way one sees fit as the new incarnation of the said Kim Il Sung, would be subject to extremely severe punishments for doing so in the present time north Korea.

And my point is that Aleister Crowley (with his Thelema), irrespective of having the best of intentions or motives in dealing with the Stele or miniature tomb of one Ankh-f-n-khonsu, in any way he saw fit as the new incarnation of the said Ankh-f-n-khonsu, would have been subject to extremely severe punishments for doing so in ancient Egypt at the time the said Stele or miniature tomb was made.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
05/07/2017 1:24 pm  

To the Ankh-f-n-khonsu on the Stele or miniature tomb used by Crowley in his Thelema, to be burnt to ashes like Crowley was without having made himself a Stele or miniature tomb like the said Stele, would nullify the main or ultimate purpose of why he had his Stele or miniature tomb made; to secure the continuity of his individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
05/07/2017 11:40 pm  

No, Crowley was appalled by the idea of the futility of all human endeavour, and not content to be annihilated in 1897, one year before joining the Golden Dawn in 1898, and thus not likely to be very familiar with a the Golden Dawn degree like Master of the Temple.
Well I guess his distaste for annihilation must have stuck at least a year later on, then!

However, I am not aware of A.C. selecting "Perdurabo" before entering the hallowed halls (or robing rooms) of the Golden Dawn back in '98, and still say he did not choose "Perdurabo" as a means of making his individuality avoid annihilation but as an expression of aspiration --- do you disagree here??

This thread was started by me as a response to Case of the Cairo Working, a document authored by Timothy Moss/herupakraath, and available in the downloadsection of this site. .
But isn't the subject of this thread his other piece though ("Squaring The Circle")? Incidentally Timothy Moss/herupakraath seems to be keeping very quiet on the matter? Maybe he's on his summer holidays and out of internet range... <"he added generously">

The symbolism used on the Stele or miniature tomb of one Ankh-f-n-khonsu, was bastardized by Crowley to express something completely different within the belief system of Thelema developed by the latter. And the said tomb was in that sense damaged or defiled by Crowley, acts that were severely punished in Ancient Egypt.
Some might say instead he improved upon --- progressed or evolved --- the idea? You seem extraordinarily defensive about the whole thing - anyone would think that Ankh-af-na-khonsu might have been some remote ancestor of yours & it looks like you do think karmic justice was served upon him (A.C.) re his Ka & Brighton Crematorium!? So I ask again, what is it A.C. did which would be construed as so actually offensive in the Halls of Judgement --- especially if his best motives were never to have intentionally caused offence --- that his Heart should be flung to the Ammit?

My point is that one irrespective of having the best of intentions or motives in dealing with the image of North Korea’s ‘Eternal Leader’ Kim Il Sung, in any way one sees fit as the new incarnation of the said Kim Il Sung, would be subject to extremely severe punishments for doing so in the present time north Korea.
And my point is that Aleister Crowley (with his Thelema), irrespective of having the best of intentions or motives in dealing with the Stele or miniature tomb of one Ankh-f-n-khonsu, in any way he saw fit as the new incarnation of the said Ankh-f-n-khonsu, would have been subject to extremely severe punishments for doing so in ancient Egypt at the time the said Stele or miniature tomb was made.

Lucky for him he wasn't around in Ancient Egypt or Modern North Korea then! 🙂

To the Ankh-f-n-khonsu on the Stele or miniature tomb used by Crowley in his Thelema, to be burnt to ashes like Crowley was without having made himself a Stele or miniature tomb like the said Stele, would nullify the main or ultimate purpose of why he had his Stele or miniature tomb made; to secure the continuity of his individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity.
So which is it: the actual image which is ON the stele, or the physical SHAPE of the stele as miniature tomb/ the doorway for the deceased to the afterlife (as well as the living) itself, which acts as a guarantor for perpetual life?

Pip Pop!
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
07/07/2017 6:59 am  

"I ask again, what is it A.C. did which would be construed as so actually offensive in the Halls of Judgement — especially if his best motives were never to have intentionally caused offence — that his Heart should be flung to the Ammit?"

Well, we can agree on the following: "Lucky for him he wasn’t around in Ancient Egypt [...] !"

I have written nothing about the ancient Egyptian afterlife belief in 'the Halls of Judgement', or 'karmic justice'. My main point here is that the Ankh-f-n-khonsu Stele and miniature tomb used by Crowley in his Thelema, in its original context reflects the core importance within an ancient Egyptian belief system, of securing the continuity of the deceased's individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity. And that the said core importance would mean failure with respect to - and is in contradiction to, and is incompatible with - the core importance within Crowley's Thelema of releasing all attachment to everything with which one identifies, and to everything that one possesses, during a process called Crossing the Abyss. That is, the belief system that is reflected by the said Stele in its original context, is incompatible with Crowley's belief system Thelema, within which this 'Stele is repeatedly referred to within the most holy text, The Book of the Law.

That the core importance within an ancient Egyptian belief system, of securing the continuity of the deceased's individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity, would imply failure (to Cross the Abyss) according to Crowley's belief system Thelema, would - to use your words - be; "... actually offensive in the Halls of Judgement ... ."


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
07/07/2017 10:52 pm  

Jamie J Barter: "I am not aware of A.C. selecting “Perdurabo” before entering the hallowed halls (or robing rooms) of the Golden Dawn back in ’98, and still say he did not choose “Perdurabo” as a means of making his individuality avoid annihilation but as an expression of aspiration — do you disagree here??"

I agree with that he did choose “Perdurabo” [Latin for “I will endure to the end”] as an expression of aspiration", but I add that he did choose it also to identify himself to others, so as to be known and recognized as an individual with that aspiration, and so as to eventually be remembered as an individual who had the said aspiration.

Jamie J Barter: "... isn’t the subject of this thread his other piece though (“Squaring The Circle”)? Incidentally Timothy Moss/herupakraath seems to be keeping very quiet on the matter? Maybe he’s on his summer holidays and out of internet range… <“he added generously”>"

I corrected this June 20, 2017 at 1:52 am in Reply #99809 at the bottom of this thread's first page (Read: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/my-quotes-from-comment-to-download-timothy-moss-squaring-the-circle/?bbp_reply_to=99809&_wpnonce=37358bba7c#new-post): "Correction:
In this thread I am actually mostly providing quotes from and comments to “Case of the Cairo Working”, another document by Timothy Moss/herupakraath available in the downloadsection of this site, and not from the document mentioned in the title of this thread, “My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle”."


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
08/07/2017 3:25 am  

I agree with that he did choose “Perdurabo” [Latin for “I will endure to the end”] as an expression of aspiration”, but I add that he did choose it also to identify himself to others, so as to be known and recognized as an individual with that aspiration, and so as to eventually be remembered as an individual who had the said aspiration.
OK I can go along with that, seeing as he did choose to publicise his motto in The Equinox and elsewhere.

“Correction: In this thread I am actually mostly providing quotes from and comments to “Case of the Cairo Working”, another document by Timothy Moss/herupakraath available in the downloadsection of this site, and not from the document mentioned in the title of this thread,
Er --- why "mostly", if at all?! (And whither Mr Moss?!)

the said core importance {of the Stele within an ancient Egyptian belief system} would mean failure with respect to – and is in contradiction to, and is incompatible with – the core importance within Crowley’s Thelema of releasing all attachment to everything with which one identifies, and to everything that one possesses, during a process called Crossing the Abyss. That is, the belief system that is reflected by the said Stele in its original context, is incompatible with Crowley’s belief system Thelema {...} That the core importance within an ancient Egyptian belief system, of securing the continuity of the deceased’s individuality and civil status in the life beyond death into perpetuity, would imply failure (to Cross the Abyss) according to Crowley’s belief system Thelema,
This is a question of temporal degree isn't it, surely? In other words, the quasi-trance like state of mind (i.e. wherein the mind is stilled) attained by the M.T. (=the Crosser of the Abyss) is "impermanent" and not lasting for all time, and that when s/he returns to more normal mundane consciousness s/he would continue to chop wood and carry water. And seek to secure the continuity of their individuality (i.e. survival needs) and civil status by basick living and carrying on (i.e. by doing their pleasure & their will).

would – to use your words – be; “… actually offensive in the Halls of Judgement" { … } "I have written nothing about the ancient Egyptian afterlife belief in ‘the Halls of Judgement’ {...}"
I know. I was using the reference in line with your other comments about ancient Egyptian beliefs in the afterlife. It seemed appropriate somehow.

or ‘karmic justice’. (as in : "You seem extraordinarily defensive about the whole thing – anyone would think that Ankh-af-na-khonsu might have been some remote ancestor of yours & it looks like you do think karmic justice was served upon him (A.C.) re his Ka & Brighton Crematorium!?" --- concerning which you observed: "The symbolism used on the Stele or miniature tomb of one Ankh-f-n-khonsu, was bastardized by Crowley to express something completely different within the belief system of Thelema developed by the latter. And the said tomb was in that sense damaged or defiled by Crowley, acts that were severely punished in Ancient Egypt." {...} "To be burnt to ashes would mean that there was no body to pass into the afterlife and the sentence of impalement {sic} meant that the Ka would be forever tied to the place of execution."
I may be wrong (please tell me if so), but you seem to be going along with a certain relish with the sentiment expressed in these quotations and in thinking justice had prevailed. (And like I said, "isn’t the act of perceiving an act of defilement a subjective one, impugning A.C. by attributing the basest of motives to what might actually have been carried out by him from the highest: who behooves it to judge?") You'd expressly deny this yourself, of course then?

“I ask again, what is it A.C. did which would be construed as so actually offensive in the Halls of Judgement — especially if his best motives were never to have intentionally caused offence — that his Heart should be flung to the Ammit?”
Sorry what is it you say, again: If A.C.'s motives and intentions were never to deliberately cause offence, his heart in line with the Forty-Two Confessions would therefore be "pure" & he would be unassailable..

Well, we can agree on the following: “Lucky for him he wasn’t around in Ancient Egypt […] !”
Yes, for sure we can well agree --- or agree, well --- that it was indeed lucky for A.C. he wasn't around in Modern North Korea [!]

So which is it: the actual image which is ON the stele, or the physical SHAPE of the stele as miniature tomb/ the doorway for the deceased to the afterlife (as well as the living) itself, which acts as a guarantor for perpetual life?
Or is it maybe both? But in that case which would have the greater importance? And what if the drawing of Ankh-af-na-khonsu wasn't (imagine me whispering this here sotto voce) a very good likeness?

Minded of Carousel (another musical from the immediate post-war period. About the after-life),
N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
08/07/2017 6:23 am  

"I may be wrong (please tell me if so), ..."

You are wrong, I could have provided many more horrible details about the punishments for damaging tombs.

The belief system that is reflected by the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu in its original context, existed before the belief system of Thelema developed by Crowley. The belief system reflected by the said Stele, and the said belief system of Thelema, are two different belief systems. And my point is that how the said Stele i used within the said Thelema, would have been considered defiling and sacrilegious, by the practitioners of the belief system that is reflected by the said Stele in its original context.

"... “isn’t the act of perceiving an act of defilement a subjective one, impugning A.C. by attributing the basest of motives to what might actually have been carried out by him from the highest: who behooves it to judge?”"

I don't know if claiming madness could be a lifesaver against charges of tomb defilement, in Ancient Egypt. I think claiming to have defiled a tomb with the best of motives and intentions would hardly help, as an execution would serve both to prevent others from thinking that good intentions could justify tomb defilement and desecration, and to satisfy the public outrage over such a claim.

"If A.C.’s motives and intentions were never to deliberately cause offence, his heart in line with the Forty-Two Confessions would therefore be “pure” & he would be unassailable.."

Good for him ("... in the Halls of Judgement ..."). 😉


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
08/07/2017 10:48 am  

(Erratum (statement of an error and its correction inserted):)

"And my point is that how the said Stele is used within the said Thelema, would have been considered defiling and sacrilegious, by the practitioners of the belief system that is reflected by the said Stele in its original context. "


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
08/07/2017 2:03 pm  

... the said Stele is used within the said Thelema, would have been considered defiling and sacrilegious ...

Yet, said said consideration would be a said reaction from a previous said Aeon. The said ways of the said old time are said to be black.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
08/07/2017 8:28 pm  

"Yet, said said consideration would be a said reaction from a previous said Aeon. The said ways of the said old time are said to be black."

The Book of the Law, Chapter II, verse 5.: "Behold! the rituals of the old time are black. Let the evil ones be cast away; let the good ones be purged by the prophet! Then shall this Knowledge go aright."


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
19/07/2017 1:00 pm  

[Correctin of correction: At the bottom of the first page in this thread I wrote the following correction: "Correction:
In this thread I am actually mostly providing quotes from and comments to “Case of the Cairo Working”, another document by Timothy Moss/herupakraath available in the downloadsection of this site, and not from the document mentioned in the title of this thread, “My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle”.

In this thread I never quote from ’Squaring the Circle’, only from 'Case of the Cairo Working', but I make a big misleading blunder within the "June 16, 2017 at 1:01 pm #99797:-reply, when I, as an answer to question from Jamie J Barter (where he points out that there already existed a thread dedicated to 'Squaring The Circle'), state that "My objective with this thread was presenting quotes from and comments to Moss/herupakraath’s “Squaring The Circle”."

My actual original objective with this thread was presenting quotes from and comments to Moss/herupakraath’s 'Case of the Cairo Working']

"Crowley's New Aeon deities are not theological personages, as traditional religions would have us imagine. They are simply convenient terms for natural forces and principles that, because of evolutionary advances in human consciousness, we are able to comprehend more clearly than our spiritual ancestors (page 20, Lon Milo DuQuette - Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot, 2003)."

"Before creation there is only Paramatma (Primordial, Singularity) [resembling the Hadit "expressing itself" in the second chapter of The Book of the Law (Lon Milo Duquette, The Magick of Aleister Crowley: A Handbook of the Rituals of Thelema, 2003, page 75: "HADIT See Liber AL vel Legis (especially Chapter II). The Second Deity of the Thelemic Trinity. Lover of Nuit. [...] (Perhaps the concept of pre "Big bang" negative singularity postulated by modern physics.))"] and Parabrahma (Infinite Space) [resembling the Nuit "expressing itself" in the first chapter of The Book of the Law]. Why they merge together? Nasadiya Sukta [also known as the Hymn of Creation in Rigveda] tells they unite because of desire (Kaama) and leaves it at that. And the creation stops when the desire(Kaama) is destructed. And that responsibility is with Shiva who destroys Kaama with his third eye ( https://www.quora.com/Who-created-Brahma: (Harsha Matadhikari, Hindu Atheist ...Any Questions? Updated Jun 23, 2016)."

"Narayana is the parabrahma, Paramatma or SUPREME SELF who is the supreme source and power behind whole existance including all gods and goddesses. That is the vital force + supreme consciciousness combined. Brahma, Vishnu, Ishwara are the Gods of creation, sustenance and destruction, the three aspects of this existential and dynamic universe. Vishnu is the god of consciousness, Brahma is the creative face and Ishwara is the absorbing or annihilating face of Narayana, the supreme God ( https://www.quora.com/Is-Lord-Narayana-the-ultimate-supreme-being-Paramatma: (Raghu Tippur, works at Afcons Infrastructure Limited Answered Apr 13, 2015:)."

"Narayana [...], also Narayan, is the supreme absolute being in Hinduism and is considered as the supreme deity in Vaishnavism. The Bhagavata Purana declares Narayana as Para Brahman Supreme Lord who creates unlimited universes and enters each one of them as Lord of the Universe.[...] Narayana engages in the creation of 14 worlds within the universe as Brahma when he deliberately accepts rajas [purity, goodness] guna [tendencies, qualities, attributes]. Narayana himself sustains, maintains and preserves the universe as Vishnu when he accepts sattva [purity, goodness] guna [tendencies, qualities, attributes] and annihilates the universe at the end [apocalypse] of [a] maha[great]-kalpa[Kalpa is a Sanskrit word meaning an aeon, or a relatively long period of time (by human calculation) in Hindu and Buddhist cosmology.] as Shiva or Rudra when he accepts tamas [imbalance and/or destruction] guna [tendencies, qualities, attributes]. [...] ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narayana )".

Crowley studied Raja Yoga under Allan Bennett and P. Ramanthan in Ceylon. The latter was Solicitor-General of Ceylon (Sri Lanka) and after his retirement became the Shaivite guru Shri Parananda ( http://www.luckymojo.com/thelema/philosophy/9707.acyoga-.tn). In Ceylon, Bennett was the tutor of the sons of P. Ramanathan, who became a Shaivite Hindu (a sect that worships Shiva as the supreme God) ( http://www.thelemicstudies.com/past-issues/volume-i-number-1-autumn-2007/thelema-buddhism-parts-1-4-by-iao131/). Shiva can, as already stated above, witin Hinduism be understood as a signifier for the supreme absolute being, when it accepts tendencies, qualities or attributes of imbalance and/or destruction, and annihilates the universe at the end of a great aeon.

Within the Book of the Law (supposedly written in 1904 after Crowley’s first and second visit to Allan Bennett, in respectively August 1901 and February 1902), the 'god' expressing itself in the third and last chapter, Ra-Hoor-Khuit, has annihilate an universe:

"I am the Lord of the Double Wand of Power; the wand of the Force of Coph Nia--but my left hand is empty, for I have crushed an Universe; & nought remains (Chapter III, verse 72)."


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
20/07/2017 4:57 am  

[Correctin of correction: At the bottom of the first page in this thread I wrote the following correction: “Correction:
In this thread I am actually mostly providing quotes from and comments to “Case of the Cairo Working”, another document by Timothy Moss/herupakraath available in the downloadsection of this site, and not from the document mentioned in the title of this thread, “My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: Squaring The Circle”.

In this thread I never quote from ’Squaring the Circle’, only from ‘Case of the Cairo Working’, but I make a big misleading blunder within the “June 16, 2017 at 1:01 pm #99797:-reply, when I, as an answer to question from Jamie J Barter (where he points out that there already existed a thread dedicated to ‘Squaring The Circle’), state that “My objective with this thread was presenting quotes from and comments to Moss/herupakraath’s “Squaring The Circle”.”

My actual original objective with this thread was presenting quotes from and comments to Moss/herupakraath’s ‘Case of the Cairo Working’ [...]

I originally replied "Er — why “mostly”, if at all?! (And whither Mr Moss?!)" but this inquiry has apparently been superceded by the fact that you seem to have somehow now managed to change the thread title itself (possibly with the active assistance of Lashtal?) to "Case of the Cairo Working"?

What then would be the basis of the whole of your original post actually being from "Squaring the Circle" instead? 

And could you perhaps briefly take the opportunity to summarise, in a couple of brief sentences if possible, exactly what the objective of the whole endeavour is re: quotes and comments from wherever it might be again? Is there something in particular you are asking, or making a point about, and if so could you let us all know what that is?

Yours mystifiedly, with thanks
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
20/07/2017 2:46 pm  

I just noticed among the morass of detail and corrections to corrections that you appear to have also stated "In this thread I never quote from 'Squaring the Circle'"[at all], when I was under the impression there was at least some quoting going on somewhere.  I now confess myself hopelessly confused!...

N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
20/07/2017 11:46 pm  

Jamie J Barter: "I originally replied “Er — why “mostly”, if at all?! (And whither Mr Moss?!)” but this inquiry has apparently been superceded by the fact that you seem to have somehow now managed to change the thread title itself (possibly with the active assistance of Lashtal?) to “Case of the Cairo Working”?"

Yes.

Jamie J Barter: "What then would be the basis of the whole of your original post actually being from “Squaring the Circle” instead?"

A major mistake on my part, in misleadingly presenting quotes from the Timothy Moss/herupakraath authored document titled 'Case of the Cairo Working', as being quotes from the Timothy Moss/herupakraath authored document titled 'Squaring The Circle'.

Jamie J Barter: "... I was under the impression there was at least some quoting going on somewhere [from 'Squaring the Circle']. ..."

In my '#99797 Reply', within page one of this thread ( https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/my-quotes-from-comment-to-download-timothy-moss-squaring-the-circle/#post-99797), I quote the following from a thread titled 'Squaring The Circle' ( https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/squaring-the-circle/), started by Timothy Moss/herupakraath:

“The objective in creating the document [= 'Squaring The Circle'] is to provide readers with tangible evidence that an intelligence with abilities and insights that exceed those of any human being is responsible for the authorship of the Book of the Law.”

That is, I do quote from Moss/herupakraath writing about his document titled ‘Squaring the Circle', even if I do not provide quotes from the said document.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
21/07/2017 1:31 am  

Aha! It was the circle squared in its failure.


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1223
21/07/2017 2:46 am  

Oho!  Regarding whatever is going on here --- now onto its 4th page --- rather than squaring the circle wouldn't a more accurate description perhaps be the hammering of square pegs into round holes?

Well, the matter still remains: if you could briefly summarise exactly what the objective of the whole endeavour is with regard to sundry quotes & comments from wherever it might be, as to whether there is something in particular you are querying or making a point about saying (e.g. maybe about the place and relevance of Hindu mythology in Thelema)?  Or are we meant to infer by the lack of one that there isn't one?

As inspector Clouseau, concerning the Case of this working, might have observed but didn't: "Hmmph! Zer web thickens..."
N Joy


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3759
21/07/2017 4:47 am  

It's a Zen web, not a Zer web. It's not supposed to make rational sense. It's designed to make you Enlightened.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 891
22/07/2017 2:00 pm  

Jamie J Barter: "... could you perhaps briefly take the opportunity to summarise, in a couple of brief sentences if possible, exactly what the objective of the whole endeavour is re: quotes and comments from wherever it might be again? Is there something in particular you are asking, or making a point about, and if so could you let us all know what that is?"

Jamie J Barter: "Well, the matter still remains: if you could briefly summarise exactly what the objective of the whole endeavour is with regard to sundry quotes & comments from wherever it might be, as to whether there is something in particular you are querying or making a point about saying (e.g. maybe about the place and relevance of Hindu mythology in Thelema)? Or are we meant to infer by the lack of one that there isn’t one?"

The objective of the whole endeavour with respect to "My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: “Case of the Cairo Working”, was to argue in support of the following positions of Crowley, mentioned/quoted in the original posting of this thread:

Page 9

: "Crowley, […] rejected the [ancient] Egyptian religion as a source of meaning for the Book of the Law."

Page 10

: "Summary and Conclusion […] Although there are elements of the [ancient] Egyptian religion in the Book of the Law that could serve as a basis for its [the said religion's] revival in some form, Crowley rejected the idea, concluding instead that the god names are mere literary conveniences, and not to be treated as Egyptian gods."

And I am making a point about that treating the [ancient] Egyptian religion as a source of meaning for The Book of the Law, could become like (to use your words) "the hammering of square pegs into round holes", exemplified in this thread by my arguments about why the claim made in the middle section on page eight of the document 'Case of the Cairo Working', that Ankh-af-na-khonsu’s reincarnation as Aleister Crowley is the ultimate purpose of the Stele of Ankh-af-na-khonsu, is incorrect and misleading.

My reference in the original posting in this thread, to how deities can be understood both as theological personages, & as terms for natural forces and principles within Hinduism as a religion, is meant to demonstrate that Crowley did not do anything entirely new, in treating the deities in his The Book of the Law as convenient terms for natural forces and principles. Even though the following statement, already quoted earlier in this thread, could imply otherwise:

“Crowley’s New Aeon deities are not theological personages, as traditional religions would have us imagine. They are simply convenient terms for natural forces and principles that, because of evolutionary advances in human consciousness, we are able to comprehend more clearly than our spiritual ancestors (page 20, Lon Milo DuQuette – Understanding Aleister Crowley’s Thoth Tarot, 2003).”

My mentions of Crowley's trip to Ceylon (Sri Lanka), and trips to India, before 1904 when The Book of the Law supposedly was written, is meant to indicate that Crowley was likely to have gained some first hand knowledge about basic consepts within Hindusim as a religion, before he wrote The Book of the Law, and that the content of the said book might reflect elements of this knowledge.

Ra-Hoor-Khuit is in THe Book of the Law described as a deity that will be replaced by Hrumachis (III, 34.: "But your holy place shall be untouched throughout the centuries: though with fire and sword it be burnt down & shattered, yet an invisible house there standeth, and shall stand until the fall of the Great Equinox; when Hrumachis shall arise and the double-wanded one assume my throne and place. Another prophet shall arise, and bring fresh fever from the skies; another woman shall awakethe lust & worship of the Snake; another soul of God and beast shall mingle in the globed priest; another sacrifice shall stain the tomb; another king shall reign; and blessing no longer be poured To the Hawk-headed mystical Lord!")

This has resemblance to how the Hindu gods are not eternal, but only for this cycle of creation ( http://hinduism.stackexchange.com/questions/3776/do-hindu-gods-share-some-similarity-with-the-gods-of-other-religion).


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2
Share: