'Pure' Thelema vs '...
 
Notifications

'Pure' Thelema vs 'Crowleyan' Thelema?  

Page 1 / 3
  RSS

 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
07/10/2007 10:54 pm  

Praeter-human Intelligence, the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, the Secret Chiefs, the Holy Books, 666, etc. in a word the entire Crowley corpus, could it be construed as mainly (and/or simply) Crowley's interpretation of Thelema? I think a large percentage of what is considered 'Thelemic' isn't necessarily so if we're being very strict in our definition of 'Thelemic' regarding that which has its foundation or roots in Liber AL vel Legis (or rather Liber Legis, no?).


Quote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
07/10/2007 11:03 pm  

Is Christianity really Mithraism? Or Buddhism really Hinduism? Most of the basic ideas of Communism comes from Christian ideas, does that mean that it is really merely Christianity? Or how about feminism, the two biggest victories of feminism, the right to vote and to own property was first fought by and inspired by people who were Christians who sought confirmation of this in their Christianity. Does this mean that feminism is Christianity as well?

In other words this cause the problem of infinite regress. Nothing evolves from nothing (despite ex nihilo nihil fit 😉 ) in this world of cause and effect.

I think a far better way of saying it is that the Law of Thelema is one particular framing/expression of the current that lies behind all of religious experience, rather than claim that those currents are Thelema.

I.e. as a thelemite I can discuss with and even see that the local Buddhist monk in the Temple 10 minutes from here is on the same road as me (in the general spiritual sense), but I wouldn't really call him a Thelemite and I know that he would be offended if I did.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
07/10/2007 11:14 pm  

Crowley = Thelema.

There is no protestantism without Luther.
There is no Thelema without Crowley.


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
It's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3831
08/10/2007 12:51 am  
"fraseth" wrote:
Crowley = Thelema.

There is no protestantism without Luther.
There is no Thelema without Crowley.

So you've never seen the essay by Crowley called 'The Antecedents of Thelema'?

No, Thelema does not = Crowley. On the contrary, Crowley amplified a current that existed previously.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 486
08/10/2007 1:13 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
So you've never seen the essay by Crowley called 'The Antecedents of Thelema'?

As far as I know the essay describes antecedents to Thelema, in the same way that Catholicism is an antecedent of Protestantism. Crowley holds still himself and the Book of the Law as supreme:

1. St. Augustine is namedropped but dismissed as having an alltogether different approach than that of A.C. and AL.

2. Rabalais receives a far more favorable mention, but again, is ultimately reduced to making a forecast of the Book of the Law.

Not saying that you have to agree, just saying that that particular essay doesn't really support your contention that fraseth is wrong.

Moreover, given that you refer to this essay, do you really believe that Crowley was right and Rabelais was not merely writing a satire, but deliberately making prophecies about the coming of the New Aeon in 1904, the reception of the Book of the Law, given by Aiwaz to Crowley, and that A.C. because of this should be worshipped?

As far as I can see Crowley's evidence for this, particularly the stuff that deals with perdurabo, is flimsy at best.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 1:35 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
No, Thelema does not = Crowley. On the contrary, Crowley amplified a current that existed previously.

Or Aiwass did, through Crowley. I agree with you, and this is an important point: thelema is alive, And thelema is not only Crowley, or only Aiwass. it is not a dead religion where all the important happenings are over and we can just sit down looking back at the great times. Actually we have the greatest change ahead of us. As Kenneth Grant said in 2004, before some uf us dies..! This is the fire of Thelema.

Thelema did not die when Crowley died, in any way. We have people like Steffi and Kenneth Grant, Michael Bertiaux and many other people functioning as prisms of the light of the current.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 1:51 am  
"MichaelStaley" wrote:
"fraseth" wrote:
Crowley = Thelema.

There is no protestantism without Luther.
There is no Thelema without Crowley.

So you've never seen the essay by Crowley called 'The Antecedents of Thelema'?

No, Thelema does not = Crowley. On the contrary, Crowley amplified a current that existed previously.

Oh I did see that, long time ago, but wasn't the essay about important antecedents of Θελημα and the use of the term? You can trace the term back to St.Augustine, probably even further. The Rabelaisian Thelema Abbey was a satirical construct, making fun of religious institutions of his time. The Rabelaisian "Do what you wilt" is not a religious statement, it is a political statement.

Now, let's assume it is true what you say, let's simply imagine modern Thelema without Crowley. There is not much that remains. It's comparable to imagining modern Christianity without Jesus. Possible, though.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 2:36 am  
"fraseth" wrote:
Now, let's assume it is true what you say, let's simply imagine modern Thelema without Crowley. There is not much that remains. It's comparable to imagining modern Christianity without Jesus. Possible, though.

You would be right if thelema was a religion. Fortunately, it's not.
It's a magickal system. It doesn't need Crowley or anything else. There are millions of people practising it without having any knowledge or need for Crowley, TBOTL or any other mental regalia. There are also some people who are obsessed with Crowley and talk of nothing else. Don't confuse them with each other.

MM


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 3:25 am  
"Mirrorman" wrote:
It's a magickal system. It doesn't need Crowley or anything else. There are millions of people practising it without having any knowledge or need for Crowley

Well, I see your point now. You certainly have one, at least as far as the systematics are concerned. It seems indeed possible to practise Thelema without Crowley. The Theory of Relativity is most certainly valid without Einstein. He was just the messenger, as Crowley was the messenger for Thelema. We might not know as much about the Theory without Einstein, though, and we would probably not know a whole lot about Thelema without Crowley either, but it still would work.

Besides, I do value Crowley, he is fun. Not that I am obsessed with him, I do enjoy his essence, though. He was so irresistibly gross, so obscene, so anti-establishment. For a child of the Victorian Age he was a true rebel, with few limits, an anti-hero without any concessions. Who can tell what would have happened without him?

"Thou hast conquered, O pale Galilean; the world has grown grey from thy breath;"


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 4:38 am  

The original intention of my posting was to indicate how sometimes all things Crowley are seen as all things Thelemic which, I don't think is always necessarily the case. For instance, the phrase "Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel" and the uses of the names "Babalon" and "Chaos" while they perhaps fit well in a Thelemic context are not necessarily integral to it's understanding or application.

That being said, I should say that I too value Crowley and his works, both, those that I do and don't understand, and am in no way infringing on his position (as if I could!) as 'top dog' of the magical world.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 9:04 am  

I think Crowley himself is at the center of what is Thelemic and his commentary just as important as any of his writings.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 9:17 am  

i see the topic you are getting at . I think its a very good one.

What is called ' thelema ' has an essesence or core meaning that has definetly been around for ages and maybe even since time began. So Crowley should not be seen as inventer of the wheel. But like someone said, he definetly kicked things into overdrive during his times and own calling.

Lets never forget that the man himself studied the masters. and sought the hidden masters. He read hard to find esoteric books like Levi, Bysshe, and beyond. The material he wrote and taught is invaluable. But what were HIS secrets ? Every great must have them to become what they are. Lets dont assume that he would expose every technique and master plan to his students and contemporaries. Neither do I.

Magick is an awesome tool. But, I am convinced that the laws of nature and powers attainable are inherit in each and every one of us : non-dependent on names and systems.

Like it is said, where theres a will, theres a way . . .

Ryan


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
08/10/2007 10:45 am  

I see your point, but one could not attribute the works of Shakespeare to the man who made the paper on which he wrote. If a person unveils a new idea and writes it in French, this does not mean the idea is to be attributed to France. If Magick is the wheel, then he did not invent it, but it is Crowley's way of using it that is Thelemic.


ReplyQuote
gurugeorge
(@gurugeorge)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 457
08/10/2007 10:28 pm  
"Martialis" wrote:
Praeter-human Intelligence, the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, the Secret Chiefs, the Holy Books, 666, etc. in a word the entire Crowley corpus, could it be construed as mainly (and/or simply) Crowley's interpretation of Thelema? I think a large percentage of what is considered 'Thelemic' isn't necessarily so if we're being very strict in our definition of 'Thelemic' regarding that which has its foundation or roots in Liber AL vel Legis (or rather Liber Legis, no?).

Excellent question! I think we could usefully distinguish between Thelemic ideas (which go way back), a Thelemic current (which is a sort of general "wind of change" animating the Zeitgeist), Thelemic organisations and Thelemic practices.

The first two don't need Crowley, and indeed part of the beauty of Thelema is seeing people who know nothing of magick or Crowley coming up with their own paraphrases, their own ways of living a Thelemic life. But Thelemic organisation and Thelemic practice arising from the revealed text Liber AL are definitely intrinsically connected to Crowley, and use symbolism developed by him. It's "his" religion, and if you follow it seriously as a religion, you follow that Prophet (blessing and worship to him! 🙂 ) and his ways.

The last two aren't everyone's cup of tea. The function of Thelemic organisations (I would say, according to my understanding of the theory anyway) is to generate and focus the energy that drives the broader Thelemic current that's going to animate human life - creative, business, political, etc. - and make it beautiful for the next few thousand years. For the next few thousand years, millions upon millions of people are going to be living Thelemic lives without ever having heard of Crowley, without ever having to hear about Crowley or do any practices he recommended. They will find their own way - if dedicated Thelemites do their part.

And there's a subtext there: yes, it's something of a straightjacket (haha 🙂 ), but one has a choice whether to become a Knight-Monk of Thelema or not; however, if one does it's like any other dedicated "calling", you give up everything for it and mould your life around prescriptions and rules. You do that so that others can be free. (That's how I see the Lover's way anyway, taking orders from the Hermit so that Men and Women of Earth can live lives of freedom, joy and beauty. It's where the beautiful idea of self-sacrifice goes, the place it has, after the death of its corrupted, mangled form, it took on in literalist Christianity, Buddhism, etc., etc.)

Thelemic practices per se are a bit neutral in all this. They are just the practices that Crowley himself developed, and will be used in a more or less "pure" form by Lovers, but I think they can be added to and developed along harmonious lines, and could be easily adapted for the use of Men and Women of Earth, probably in a multitude of different ways, just keeping the core mechanics.


ReplyQuote
Anonymous
 Anonymous
(@Anonymous)
Joined: 1 second ago
Posts: 0
10/10/2007 1:37 am  

I agree with all of you !


ReplyQuote
Sonofthoth
(@sonofthoth)
Member
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 45
10/07/2018 8:30 am  

To put in my two cents, "Pure" Thelema is entirely based on Liber Legis and Aiwass itself (whether you believe Aiwass to be God, the Secret Chiefs or the supposed HGA), "Crowleyan" Thelema is more based around the systemsmade by Crowley (OTO, A.A., Equinox, Book Four etc) and his related writings.

Neither is necessarily right or wrong but I do see a distinction. I think Thelema takes the role of many things to many people, although I'm not a relativist when it comes to truth.
To some, Liber Legis is exactly like the Quran (and I genuinely commend those people), to others Thelema is just a metaphorical initiatory system, to some it is a philosophy (which feels like an incredibly weak, dull and safe option for me; they're kidding themselves) then there are those that are just interested in Crowley as a writer (hey, he DID write some interesting non-Thelema stuff), to some it is an entirely revolutionary thing, to others it is entirely derivative of past religions/philosophies, then there are those who use it to push their political ideologies (who are usually very toxic people, whether Left, Right, Conservative, everything) - and out of all of that, it's hard to find anyone with a decent sense of humor.

I myself am sticking with Hinduism, Thelema has been a great ride and I like Crowley but ultimately it poses more problems (often very serious ones) than answers or solutions.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
10/07/2018 5:24 pm  

SOT" “Pure” Thelema is entirely based on Liber Legis and Aiwass itself

Huh? How about Nietzsche's Abbey of Thelema with the Do What Thou Wilt slogan, both of which pre-dated AC, Liber AL, Aiwass, et al?

I don't think there's anything "pure" anywhere in these terrestrial neurocircuits.


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 428
10/07/2018 6:41 pm  

@shiva wrote:

I don’t think there’s anything “pure” anywhere in these terrestrial neurocircuits.

@sonofthoth wrote:

Neither is necessarily right or wrong but I do see a distinction.

Thelema could be defined as unstoppable WILL guided by a LOVE that is not LOVE we are used to defining it. LOVE as a force or power like the SUN. Unstoppable and burning it's path relentlessly.

I see Thelema in great artists emerging in a new and creative direction or style. They are finding their way as they go and are unstoppable. Usually pioneering something innovative. They are often criticized but are too busy doing they're thing to care. And when it's all said and done they are appreciated even though their presence and actions were disruptive initially.

Thelema is in my mind often disruptive. I see it manifest in things too...like Bitcoin, Bittorrent, Google, all three unstoppable disruptive forces that no one can stop.

Personally, Thelema is a feeling, a realm, that you get and you just know what to do, and in so doing sometimes make your life much more difficult in the short run, even having regrets, or making mistakes. It's not the easiest path forward, but it is exciting and meaningful and will cause you and your world to grow. Maybe Thelemites could call it "Crowley Consciousness" as opposed to "Christ Consciousness."

Thelema exists with or without Crowley theoretically. But if remove Crowley from your version of Thelema he's still gonna be there.

Pure Thelema is pure WILL with the force and power of the SUN behind it. An unstoppable and disruptive creative force.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
10/07/2018 8:45 pm  

EM: Thelema could be defined as unstoppable WILL guided by a LOVE that is not LOVE we are used to defining it. LOVE as a force or power like the SUN

Right. It's too bad that "Love" cannot be accessed unless one undergoes dhyana or samadhi. The Love come from the fact that you realize YOU ARE that object, person, situation.

Thelema is in my mind often disruptive. I see it manifest in things too…like Bitcoin, Bittorrent, Google, all three unstoppable disruptive forces that no one can stop.

You are correct. As Israel Regardie said to Frater Luna (as he slapped the seat of his couch), "It's all Nuit, man. It's all Nuit!

Regardie was trying to convince Luna to invest in international money exchanges.

If Google an Bitcoin are unstoppable (and they seem to be so), then we must pay attention to the Borg, who seek "perfection," who say, "Resistance is Futile!"

Personally, Thelema is a feeling, a realm, that you get and you just know what to do

Good show! You are (personally) getting very close. If you "know" what to do (without anal-isis), then Chesed is involved and it' getting a thoughtform activated by Binah.

If you perform that same task without knowing, then you're all the way there. It's called intuition. It is not unique to Thelema.

Notes: When I say "you," I men anyone, including me.

Doing without intention or mental guidance is called Wu Wei by the heathen Chinese.

The impulse can also come from Chokmah to Chesed, and here (Chokmah) is where WILL (Thelema) is allocated. This is it, the highest state of human capacity. Any further progress only serves to remove you from the game (The Psissimus has NO WILL IN ANY DIRECTION) - Say's so in the scriptures!

Anything out of Chokmah, either as a Magus or as a beginner with strange drugs, is virtually guaranteed to piss off a lot of people, and your life WILL change. Thanks be to Hhorus and the Attractive Principle, who allow a few like-minded folks to drift in to your sphere of influence, because they've [fully or partially] seen/felt the same thing.

Thelema exists with or without Crowley theoretically

I agree. AC codified the symbols and taught men (and women) how to find their WILL. For those who begin, Crowley is important, because he hands-out the most practical exercises for getting there. "There" is Tiphereth. After that, we can drop the "theoretically" because our"Angel" know what best for us, even more so than Crowley.

Pure Thelema is pure WILL

Bingo! Give the man a cigar or a joint. "Pure Will, unassuaged of purpose ..."


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2119
10/07/2018 10:45 pm  

I don't really see Thelema in Google. Google seems more old-aeon-creepy-mega-semi-religious-we-own-you-and-will-watch-you-worse-than-the-Catholic-church to me. But I think I could agree with your first two ideas.

There is no such thing as pure Thelema because everyone interprets it in their own way; but I think they all have the True Will being paramount, followed by Love or Agape and acting with such, as long as it is in conformity with Will....


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2019
10/07/2018 11:04 pm  

Anything out of Chokmah, either as a Magus or as a beginner with strange drugs, is virtually guaranteed to piss off a lot of people, and your life WILL change.

So that explains it (my life)!

As to the OT: all these attempts at crafting a "Thelema without the Demon Crowley" (like the OP, and Los-ianity/Erwin-ism) are in the end silly.

Since the OP has left Thelema for the milky pastures of Hinduism, why should we take his thoughts seriously? Isn't this the "Aiwassianism" dude from a recent thread?

Shiva correctly points out that Thelema (like LSD) is just "faster and sneakier" than traditional methods, but if folks are so upset by AC, just pursue those paths, fortified by whatever insights you've gained from Thelema/The Demon Crowley.

If you think Thelema, as fabricated (either in the sense of "created" or "lied about"; note that "forged" also has this dual sense) by AC from prior historical materials and dubious praeterhuman contacts, is shit, recall that "You can't shine shit" (this is the difference between "shit" and "Shinola", a mystery that has puzzled the sages), and move on.


ReplyQuote
Sonofthoth
(@sonofthoth)
Member
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 45
11/07/2018 5:10 am  

I'm not the OP lol, there's an entire page behind this. I found this thread on Google, so I replied.
I think you replied to the Aiwassian thread too, so you're not innocent, many people replied to that thread.


ReplyQuote
Sonofthoth
(@sonofthoth)
Member
Joined: 3 years ago
Posts: 45
11/07/2018 7:13 am  

@Shiva I mostly agree with you but you forget you're referencing Hindu terms and even your name is a Hindu deity (the one of consciousness nonetheless)

Personally (since Ignant brought it up) find Adorantofhorus' Aiwassianism to be admirable but I am on the complete opposite side of the spectrum to their beliefs. I don't believe there is any originality in Thelema and find it to be closet Hinduism(with Taoist flirtation) strutting around in robes and doing Kabbalah.
There is not a single thing in Thelema that isn't derivative sorry, and I find the blinds/binds to be completely unnecessary when the very same ideas are expressed both more directly and eloquently without trying to knock the adept around through the woods with interpretation and dogmas intended to confuse or allure.

I actually like Crowley the man a lot, he is an endlessly interesting case study.

Thelema is "old aeon" too, hell, Hinduism again (which Thelema really IS when you think about it, it's Hinduism in sheep's clothes) was more progressive and liberal than even Thelema itself.

Subjectivity and objectivity are played with the same, so it's its treatment of sexuality and everything.


ReplyQuote
belmurru
(@belmurru)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1004
11/07/2018 10:17 am  

Shiva -

How about Nietzsche’s Abbey of Thelema with the Do What Thou Wilt slogan, both of which pre-dated AC, Liber AL, Aiwass, et al?

Do you mean Rabelais? If not, I would be interested to know where Nietzsche discusses these Rabelaisian ideas.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Member
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2119
11/07/2018 3:53 pm  

Sonofthoth said 'There is not a single thing in Thelema that isn’t derivative (of Hinduism)'

Wow... I can admit of course there are bits of a lot of different religions in Thelema, to say it is pretty much Hinduisum in other clothes is totally unaware or naive.
I was a bhakti of Kali for quite some time, and studied many of the sutras and bhagavad gita and writings of Sri Ramakrishna etc and there are many things in Hinduism that are not in Thelema.

Do you care to share concrete examples of Thelemic belief and practise that you think are 'stolen' from Hinduism?


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2019
11/07/2018 4:55 pm  

My apologies to Sonofthoth for not noticing he had resurrected an eleven year old thread, but since the only person who posted on the first page back in 2007 that is still around is Michael Staley, we can consider him the OP for all practical purposes. i also apologize for mixing up Thoth's son, and Horus' adorant.

That Thelema is "Hinduism in sheep's clothes" seems rather a broad and silly statement- surely wolf's clothes at least, with all the trouble someone (the "forger"AC and/or Aiwass) went to, to make Thelema "scary"?

What would be the cognate Hindu concept to "Will" as the term is used in Thelema? Can you show how this concept is central to Hindu practice and cosmology?

I didn't think so.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2018 6:29 pm  

I don't like the word thelema.. its an ugly word and ugly sound......BUT.... the concept? I call it Maat, I live by it and always have, even before I met the beast.

That's why I love autists (autistic).. and I use that label loosely as I do all labels.....

Autistic is pure will and YOU, well you go ahead and try to get in the way of that shit. I wrote an essay on autistic kids one time about 11 years ago...meh i was 2007 or 2003 if i remember right.. and I don't have memories cos I have kids...too many to frazzle my mind..

3 autistic and 3 not diagnosed YET thank gosh....

brodie's World .. pure will my kids had thelema down pat before I was even skimming the surface...

http://web.archive.org/web/20090429063638/http://itsockstobeme.com:80/blog/index.php?op=Default&postCategoryId=40&blogId=1


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
11/07/2018 6:40 pm  

Bel: Do you mean Rabelais?

Yes. My error. Do you sell memory pills? I must need some.
Wiki: The name was borrowed from François Rabelais's satire Gargantua and Pantagruel, where an Abbaye de Thélème is described as a sort of "anti-monastery" where the lives of the inhabitants were "spent not in laws, statutes, or rules, but according to their own free will and pleasure.

CS: I don’t really see Thelema in Google. Google seems more old-aeon-creepy-mega-semi-religious-we-own-you-and-will-watch-you-worse-than-the-Catholic-church to me.

You description is probably quite accurate. Of course, they want our money. ALL of it, if possible. My point was that in a samadhic trace, EVERYTHING is perceived as you (me, him, her). So I guess you're right: It's not that we're seeing Thelema in the Borg-Goog, but we're seeing a part of ourselves. "If you can perceive it, then you must take responsibility for it (if your talking about 8=3 perception, which I Am; maybe we should consult Los?).

Son: @shiva I mostly agree with you but you forget you’re referencing Hindu terms and even

Hindu terms are listed in 777, and thus equate to any other system (Arabic, Hebrew, NYNY, and west coast (USA) new-age lingo. Let me put it in plain English:
Sam = "with." Adhi (Adi) = primordial consciousness. "With the first awareness existing at or from the beginning of time; primeval awareness". Holy Crapola (Shinola)! You see why I use the shorter Hindu terms?

Thelema and Agape are booth Greek words. So? The idea is to get the whole package into your (my, his, her) mind (Hod) in a format that makes sense, regardless of culture or lingo.

P.S. Dhyana means "meditation" (the result, not the practice, and not contemplation. Book 4 Part I (as well as "8 Lectures on Yoga" were both based on Hindu terms (and explained in English).

There is not a single thing in Thelema that isn’t derivative

The name Aiwass and the (French) spelling of Nut (Egyptian), "Nuit," seem to stand alone, but they're just names tacked onto old concepts (the HGA, the Queen of Infinite Space). The whole deal was classified as "Old wine in new bottles" by Fuller(?). AC's contribution was to line it all up so that it would be (is) understandable by us English-speaker-readers. I'd say he did a good job. Some of his stuff was translated into foreign lingo, and there's surely more to come.

There are (too) many responses involving Hinduism (versus OR similar to) in comparison to Thelema, so that my Hod gets stirred up chasing the references. The truth is more rewarding.

There is only one spectrum of consciousness. Various cultures and their descriptive lingo. 777 (for example) gives us the following equivalencies to WILL:
Wisdom, Illuminating Intelligence, Amoun, Thoth, Nuith (as the entire surrounding Zodiac), Isis (as Wisdom), Shiva, Vishnu (as Buddha avatars), Akasa (as matter), Lingam [there's the Hindu connection], Joy, Athena, Hermes, Janus [[Mercury]] God the Father, God who guides Parliament [haha], Man, Star Ruby, Turquoise, Lingam, the Inner Robe of Glory, The Word, VIAOV, Musk, Hashish, Cocaine [sure! but this substance, obviously a Crowleyism - it really belongs at Geburah), Phosphorus [hot stuff], The Vision of God face to face, Vision of Antinomies, The Yang and Khien [heathen Chinese terms], Insanity [as a disease], Past Master, [Masonry], Almost any male image shows some aspect of Chokmah, 9°=2[] Magus, ... et cetera.

Allee Sammee! cries the Chinese Philosopher. The point is to get there, and when one IS there, there are no names or cultural attributions. It is a state, not a name.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
11/07/2018 7:13 pm  

Shiva. the Australian legends ties in with eastern with shiva kali and I find it's ALL logos and you can take from one what you can take from another, or find gems in a lunatics musing

which is actually giving.. the sharing of culture and history


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 428
12/07/2018 4:11 am  

"Thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that and no other shall say nay. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect." - Liber AL

Thelema and pure WILL obviously exist without Crowley, but once you call it Thelema I think you have to acknowledge the elephant in the room. Even if you ignore Crowley he is still there in your psyche being "ignored."

Pure WILL seems to operate best in unchartered territory where the rules haven't been written yet. Often the naysayers are left searching through their rule books and by the time the new LAW has been written it's often too late.

True individual WILL when discovered in artists, inventors, people, makes one so untouchable and unique, no one can take it from you and often no one can stop you. It's yours. Often this makes one the prototype that many people emulate on the way to finding their TRUE WILL.

Examples of Thelema in my opinion (pure will unassuaged of purpose)

Chuck Berry (invented rock guitar and inspired Jimi Hendrix, Beatles etc)

Little Richard (same as above...gave the doo doo doo to the dung rolling Beatles)

Beatles (the Beatles seem so nice in hindsight but they pissed a lot of people off and changed the world)

Hugh Hefner & Playboy (his vision was elegantly administered over 60 years and revolutionized sexuality and changed the world. He laid the groundwork for modern porn movies for better or worse he changed everything. He had a lot of shit thrown at him but kept going and never lost his cool)

Wikileaks (still pissing a lot of people off. and the naysayers are still trying to figure out what laws are being broken. Assange is not too elegant and doesn't seem to care much for his personal well being or safety.)

Napster (pissed a lot of people off. very unstoppable for a while...replaced by bittorrent)

Gay Movement (in the last 50 years or so going from outcasts hush hush to arguably injected into every fabric of society. very unstoppable.)

Iphone (a great invention that came out of nowhere. right out of a star trek episode or hg wells novel or james bond movie. now you can spy on others while being spied upon! and no one can stop it)

Google and the Nazi Party (same thing lol) both very unstoppable lawless entities that do whatever the hell they want with no apologies.

Punk Rock Movement (born out the angst of being force fed stadium rock young kids started the DIY punk movement. Who knew 14 yr old kids had an opinion and were intelligent and sarcastic? again very unstoppable and a huge wave of creativity.)

Miles Davis (his metamorphosis as an artist from straight jazz to blue note to fusion etc was a path uniquely his own.)


ReplyQuote
elitemachinery
(@elitemachinery)
Member
Joined: 9 years ago
Posts: 428
12/07/2018 6:18 am  

@elitemachinery said:

Thelema exists with or without Crowley theoretically.

then changed his stance to opine:

Thelema and pure WILL obviously exist without Crowley

Thelema to me implies action as opposed to non-action. I don't know much about Hinduism but it doesn't seem similar.

WILL is an active force that has a path and trajectory like the SUN or like an arrow shot into the sky. It doesn't have to be violent or disruptive but it often is.

add these to the list (pure will unassuaged of purpose):

Sex Pistols/John Lydon (asshole sarcastic non musician John Lydon was just a punk kid who hated Pink Floyd...out of nowhere he created the prototype for Punk Rock and was suddenly thrust to Rock Star status..many were pissed off...he then denounced rock stardom and started PIL "We're not a band we're a company."

Arab Spring (people responding to decades of oppression act out in violence demanding freedom and succeed in overthrowing their government. Not pretty and still going on)


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
12/07/2018 8:29 pm  

EM: Thelema and pure WILL obviously exist without Crowley, but once you call it Thelema I think you have to acknowledge the elephant in the room.

Aleister Ganesha

Little Richard (same as above…gave the doo doo doo to the dung rolling Beatles)

Nobody cold scream so loud and play piano so effortlessly t high speed like Richard. A 9=2 in the musical hierarchy.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 50 years ago
Posts: 0
14/07/2018 10:15 pm  

I love Ganesh he's such a happy god .. sad whats happening to him though from mankind ebony and ivory live together in perfect harmony


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 890
18/07/2018 10:56 am  

Sonofthoth: "I [...] find it [= Thelema] to be closet Hinduism(with Taoist flirtation) strutting around in robes and doing Kabbalah." (Source: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/pure-thelema-vs-crowleyan-thelema/page/2/#post-108147)

The 'Law' called 'THELEMA' presented by Aleister Crowley in his The Book of the Law (Chapter I, verse 39. "The word of the Law is THELEMA."), appears to be inspired by concepts found within Hinduism and Kabbalah. Concepts that Crowley due to his life experiences up until 1904 - which is the year that he claimed this book was dictated to him - then could have had first-hand acquaintance with.

Crowley is unlikely to have had first-hand acquaintance with Taoist concepts before he visited China for the first time in 1905-6. Can you Sonofthoth demonstrate Taoist flirtation within the text of Crowley's The Book of the Law?

For more on 'closet Hinduism' within Crowley's The Book of the Law: http://www.billheidrick.com/tlc1999/tlc1099.htm --- (text between the headlines: The Fall of the Great Equi-N.O.X., and The Monster Must be Destroyed), and https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/my-quotes-from-comment-to-download-timothy-moss-squaring-the-circle/ --- My quotes from, & comment to, download Timothy Moss: “Case of the Cairo Working”


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 890
18/07/2018 5:02 pm  

(The second posting in this thread from the one who started it:) Martialis: "The original intention of my posting was to indicate how sometimes all things Crowley are seen as all things Thelemic which, I don’t think is always necessarily the case. For instance, the phrase “Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel” and the uses of the names “Babalon” and “Chaos” while they perhaps fit well in a Thelemic context are not necessarily integral to it’s understanding or application." (Source: https://www.lashtal.com/forums/topic/pure-thelema-vs-crowleyan-thelema/#post-30265)

The “Silent” or “True Self”, is in Crowley's The Book of the Law symbolically expressed as Ra-Hoor-Khuit, Hoor-paar-kraat, Heru-pa-kraath, and Heru-ra-ha. And “the Great Work” or "The Great Work accomplished", is refered to with the cipher or codeword 'Abrahadabra', as "the reward of" this “Silent” or “True Self”, in the first verse of this book's third and last chapter:

"Abrahadabra; the reward of Ra Hoor Khut."

It does from this appear that the existence of the said “Silent” or “True Self” is necessarily integral to the understanding of the ‘THELEMA’ presented by Aleister Crowley in his The Book of the Law, or to the application of this 'THELEMA' in manifesting the said “Silent” or “True Self”.


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 890
19/07/2018 8:22 am  

Sorry for chain posting!

I have added the text in bold to this quote from the last paragraph of my preceding posting in this thread, to make it more nuanced:

"It does from this appear that the existence of the said “Silent” or “True Self” - or the belief in the existence of the said “Silent” or “True Self” - is necessarily integral to the understanding of the ‘THELEMA’ presented by Aleister Crowley in his The Book of the Law, or to the application of this ‘THELEMA’ in manifesting the said “Silent” or “True Self”."


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
It's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3831
19/07/2018 11:21 pm  

@wellreadwellbred

Crowley is unlikely to have had first-hand acquaintance with Taoist concepts before he visited China for the first time in 1905-6.

What do you signify by "first-hand acquaintance"?


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 1213
20/07/2018 1:25 am  

Crowley is unlikely to have had first-hand acquaintance with Taoist concepts before he visited China for the first time in 1905-6. Can you Sonofthoth demonstrate Taoist flirtation within the text of Crowley’s The Book of the Law?

in the absence of any contribution in response from the secret child of Tahuti, and so that wrwb doesn't have to continue to keep on posting ad infinitum or at least indefinitely (and whilst I personally hesitate about the employment of a noun such as "flirtation" here), how about I:28 for starters --- where "None" = the Tao, and "Two" is made up out of Yin & Yang (those inscrutable oriental twins)?

N Joy


ReplyQuote
wellreadwellbred
(@wellreadwellbred)
Member
Joined: 8 years ago
Posts: 890
23/07/2018 7:32 pm  

Michael Staley: "What do you signify by “first-hand acquaintance”?"

firsthand = "obtained personally, or directly from someone who is personally involved in something:" (Source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/firsthand)

acquaintance = "[ U ] formal knowledge of a subject:" (Source: https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/acquaintance)

Akin to how Aleister Crowley was given his "first groundings in mystical theory and practice." by the guru Shri Parananda (a Hindu), and by Bhikkhu Ananda Metteyya (Charles Henry Allan Bennett, a Buddhist monk, and former member of the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, and a close associate of Aleister Crowley), in 1901 (well before 1904 and the "dictation" to him of his The Book of the Law). As describe by him in the INTRODUCTION to his The Tao teh king: Liber CLVII : a new translation by Ko Yuen (Aleister Crowley). (Source: http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/lib157.htm)


ReplyQuote
qliphoth
(@qliphoth)
Member
Joined: 2 years ago
Posts: 5
06/08/2018 8:47 am  

Greetings,

I agree that there is an anarchistic aspect to Thelema but I hardly see any of those musicians/bands or business' as being Thelemic.
Thelema is not tyrannical either, lol.

93/93


ReplyQuote
Michael Staley
(@michael-staley)
It's all in the egg
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 3831
06/08/2018 1:20 pm  

@wellreadwellbred

The definition you give of "first-hand acquaintance" is in my view inadequate, though I concede that you have stitched tigether a Frankenstein's monster from dictionary sources. There is nothing "formal", for instance, about the experience of samadhi, or magical and mystical experience in general. You seem to be referring to the acquisition of knowledge through study, which accords with the quasi-academic style of your posts.

In my opinion, experiences such as dhyana and samadhi, combined with the study of and meditation upon relevant books in for instance Muller's series of Sacred Books of the East, would have given Crowley a great deal of insight into, and "first-hand acquaintance" of, the nature of Taoism.


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 254
25/01/2019 4:59 pm  

My two cents since I take exception to this statement:

first-hand acquaintance with Taoist concepts before he visited China for the first time in 1905-6.

Nor would he have even in Imperial China. Taoist teachers would reside in remote areas, be completely inaccessible, and as unlikely to speak English then as now. There is basically nothing Taoist about Chinese metropolitan areas where foreigners are expected to have the most interest in. Taoism as an ancient philosophy of living in harmony in nature is basically as remote from the daily lives of Chinese and Westerners as Stoicism or neo-Platonism is to average person today (and even less so in anti-religious China today). BTW I recommend visiting China, the people are by and large pleasant, modest people and the upper classes are very educated and curious (but do so with a native speaker). Crowley's writing on the topic leave little doubt he met no more teachers than the peaceful mountains, and really is anything more than them needed?

"When I walked across China in 1905-6, I was fully armed and accoutred by the above qualifications to attack the till-then-insoluble problem of the Chinese conception of religious truth. Practical studies of the psychology of such Mongolians [wtf really Mr Victorian?] as I had met in my travels, had already suggested to me that their acentric conception of the universe might represent the correspondence in consciousness of their actual psychological characteristics [ that is a very bold and ultimately unjustifiable preconceived idea]. I was therefore prepared to examine the doctrines of their religious and {2} philosophical Masters without prejudice such as had always rendered nugatory the efforts of missionary sinologists and indeed all oriental scholars with the single exception of Rhys Davids. Until his time translators had invariably assumed, with absurd naivite, or more often arrogant bigotry, that a Chinese writer must either be putting forth a more or less distorted and degraded variation of some Christian conception, or utterly puerile absurdities. Even so great a man as Max Muller in his introduction to the Upanishads seems only half inclined to admit that the apparent triviality and folly of many passages in these so-called sacred writings might owe their appearance to our ignorance of the historical and religious circumstances, a knowledge of which would render them intelligible [humbleness with ignorance is an admirable trait].

During my solitary wanderings among the mountainous wastes of Yun Nan, the spiritual atmosphere of China penetrated my consciousness, thanks to the absence of any intellectual impertinences from the organ of knowledge. The TAO TEH KING revealed its simplicity and sublimity to my soul, little by little, as the conditions of my physical life, no less than of my spiritual, penetrated the {3} sanctuaries of my spirit. The philosophy of Lao Tze communicated itself to me, in despite of the persistent efforts of my mind to compel it to conform with my preconceived notions of what the text must mean. This process, having thus taken root in my innermost intuition during those tremendous months of wandering across Yun Nan, grew continually throughout succeeding years. Whenever I found myself able once more to withdraw myself from the dissipations and distractions which contact with civilisation forces upon one, no matter how vigorously he may struggle against their insolence, to the sacred solitude of the desert, whether among the sierras of Spain, or the sands of the Sahara, I found that the philosophy of Lao Tze resumed its sway upon my soul, subtler and stronger on each successive occasion."

Sounds like a nice walk but for what higher purpose? IMO I only know of Bhagwan Rajneesh (aka Osho) to provide excellent discourses on Taoist thought.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
25/01/2019 11:17 pm  

rl: I take exception to this statement: first-hand acquaintance with Taoist concepts before he visited China for the first time in 1905-6.

Okay. But at least you could have cited who made the quoted statement, and probably it would have more meaning if you hadn't cut off the first few words of the quoted sentence.


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 254
25/01/2019 11:27 pm  

Okay. But at least you could have cited who made the quoted statement, and probably it would have more meaning if you hadn’t cut off the first few words of the quoted sentence.

I specifically did not quote him since I did not want to come across as accusative. And since I did not want to add more meaning to the comment, and wanted to focus on a specific statement, I cut it off. Thank you for your kind advice.

Force and Fire is not metaphorical.


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2019
25/01/2019 11:55 pm  

Do you even realize that that Charles Manson was Shiva's personal kill slave, runelogix?

I would advise more respect for your elders and betters, son. And more respect for citing clearly.

Perhaps you were never told as child to enter a room with your ears open, and your mouth shut, and to use a standard citation format?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
26/01/2019 12:53 am  

Ig: Perhaps you were never told as child to enter a room with your ears open, and your mouth shut, and to use a standard citation format?

You see, it's now come time to deal with another loose screw.

Where is Dom? Dom, come thou forth i say, and run the logic of motivation, proper quotation, illogical editing, and poor justifications.

Where is Jamie? NormaN, come thou forth i say, and assess/assay/assume something about what just happened (above).

It's funny haha how some things get turned around.

Rune, go thou forth I say unto the Grand Tribunal nearest you, and confess everything ... before it's too late.

(No need to threaten the lad with horrors and eldership. Cause & effect are dancing together faster and faster these days).


ReplyQuote
Tiger
(@tiger)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 1371
26/01/2019 12:57 am  

Rajneesh was well read but he lost his sense .
https://youtu.be/wfpIwjtJL0I


ReplyQuote
ignant666
(@ignant666)
Tangin
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 2019
26/01/2019 1:27 am  

Runey (do you mind if i call you "Runey"?), old son, notice that Fr. Shiva does not deny that Charles Manson was his personal robot kill slave?

Do you really want to get "creepy-crawled" by mind-controlled kill zombies, or do you just want to settle down and have a civil conversation, and cite things properly?


ReplyQuote
RuneLogIX
(@runelogix)
Magister
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 254
26/01/2019 3:02 am  

I'm going to offer this info to the debate started in 2007 "can Thelema be separated from Crowley?" with a quote from Crowley's 1920 diary: “I am Thelema.” =

IT = Liber 333 Ch. 31:

THE GAROTTE

IT moves from motion into rest, and rests from rest
into motion. These IT does alway, for time is not.
So that IT does neither of these things. IT does
THAT one thing which we must express by two
things neither of which possesses any rational
meaning.
Yet ITS doing, which is no-doing, is simple and yet
complex, is neither free nor necessary.
For all these ideas express Relation; and IT, com-
prehending all Relation in ITS simplicity, is out of
all Relation even with ITSELF.
All this is true and false; and it is true and false to
say that it is true and false.
Strain forth thine Intelligence, O man, O worthy
one, O chosen of IT, to apprehend the discourse
of THE MASTER; for thus thy reason shall at
last break down, as the fetter is struck from a
slave's throat."

Have a nice day!

Force and Fire is not metaphorical.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 3745
26/01/2019 5:06 am  

rl: I’m going to offer this info ...

You posted a Chapter with which we are all familiar. It applies to "Pure" Thelema vs "AC" Thelema in what way?


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 3
Share: