rea 15 1-100 ************ Topic 15 Tue May 29, 1990 FASA.2 at 00:00 EDT Sub: Make Mine Magick Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. This topic is intended as a discussion of magical technique, traditions, styles, ethics, etc. Preaching or proselytizing is not welcome from any source. 403 message(s) total. ************ ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 1 Tue May 29, 1990 FASA.2 at 00:13 EDT Ave fratres et sorores, merry meet, and hi y'all. I notice that while there are topics discussing Wicca, Paganism, and assorted other subjects, there is nothing just talking magic (or magick) as such. Many and many are the traditions in the Art. , croll, uit ?s Ceremonial magick (my own approach), the more nature oriented ritual and meditative styles of Wicca and the shamanic traditions, the chrome of the emerging cybermagicians, the eclectic forms of Chaos Magick, etc. etc. My hope that this topic will be of interest to practitioners, to newcomers to this study, to the interested. But first, a harsh, but perhaps necessary word... To the sincere beliefs of conservative Christianity, I can but offer admiration, peace, but neither agreement or any tolerance for proselytization. Please - if you feel the need to explain our errors to us, with or without scriptural reference, pray, rise above it. I can only guarantee a friendly, courteous request to eschew such a mission once. After that, I cannot guarantee my temper will last. OK - why is this different from the Wicca Topic, the Pagan Topic, etc. etc.? Well, I could answer that the reading list is on a different slant? Where a modern Witch is going to (guaranteed) recommend SPIRAL DANCE, DRAWING DOWN THE MOON, and something by either Ray Buckland or Scott Cunningham (or perhaps the Farrells) my own suggestions run more towards THE GOLDEN DAWN (and virtually anything else by the late and much lamented Israel Regardie), or Donal Kraig's MODERN MAGICK, or the work of Denning and Phillips (such as their new PLANETARY MAGIC). This all got started when a post on the Games RT asked about Aleister Crowley, a teacher for whom I have a good deal of respect. When Scorpia pointed out that this area existed, I wandered over, noted the absence of anything in this line, and decided to start it up. Any questions will be cheerfully answered, and if this languishes in limbo, unread, unappreciated (sob - rejection!) than so mote it be. Love is the law, love under will. Paul Hume ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 2 Tue May 29, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 00:20 EDT There's a world of difference between "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" and "Love is the law,love under will"... What do you think of Arthur Edward Waite? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 3 Tue May 29, 1990 FASA.2 at 22:53 EDT Louis - 93. I have to disagree (surprise). I see "Do what thou wilt..." and "Love is the law..." as two sides of the same coin, yin and yang, Hadit and Nuit, etc. I suppose that, as a Thelemite, that answer from me comes as no surprise. The Will is (we hope) essentially pacific, seeking to unite All into One. The vehicle, the method, the "unified field" under which this occurs is Love. Do what you bloody well want is not the same as Do what thou wilt. I know, I know. You've heard that from a zillion people right before they go out and do something supremely egotistical. Still, we must try. When, knowing the True Will, the pattern by which the magician fits into the Universe in this incarnation, he does THAT, and nothing else, then doing that Will is indeed the whole of the Law. And Love under Will, Love as the motive force which makes the pattern of Will a living force, is indeed the Law. Well, that's how I apply it. The traditional response of one who admires Crowley is to howl with maniacal laughter at the mention of Waite. Indeed, I must admit to laughter to this day at the exquisite parody of Edwin Arthwaite in MOONCHILD. However, Alice could indeed be a contemptible bitch, and nowhere was his bitchiness more evident than in his vitriolic pursuit of Waite ("the disciple that Crowley loved"). Waite's scholarship was immense, but his style was appalling. His snobbery was the equal on anyone's in those highly snobby days. Yet when the ego shut UP and let the spirit that informed Frater Sacramentum Regis speak clearly, he could produce work of lucid thought and heart-piercing beauty, viz. passages from his rituals of the AO. While, in the main, I (like most) don't agree with what he wrought in trying to replace the Golden Dawn rituals, he did a damn fine job of it. One can (in magick, I think one must) enjoy the aesthetics of the Art, even when exercised by magicians with whom one cannot agree. I do think that, like Eliphas Levi, is Waite could have seen his honestly to a Catholic or High Church vocation, instead of dancing around the fringes, he would have been more satisfied. As is, the conflict between what he thought he SHOULD want, and what his spirit so clearly yearned for, contaminates most of his work. Law=Will/Love. Paul PS - to other readers. This may not mean much to you if you've never read Waite. The most accessible work is PICTORIAL KEY TO THE TAROT. Next comes BOOK OF CEREMONIAL MAGIC. Both are straightforward, opinion-loaded treatments, one of the Tarot, the other of the mediaeval grimoires (and I do NOT recommend experimentation from the latter!). Any questions on this jazz are welcome and will be answered as simply as I can (sometimes not very). PRH ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 4 Fri Jun 01, 1990 J.CASADY2 [NIGHTSHADE] at 02:12 MDT Hi, I hate to change the subject, as interesting as it may be, but since you mentioned it ... what do you think of D.M.Kraig's book MODERN MAGICK? I have found that it is pretty straight forward as far as books on ceremonial magick go and the techniques described are effective and not any abracadabra-paper- back-trashy-spell-list type of book. Its a good intro to the subject. Also, I am trying to find a good book on the tarot. I have read one of Eden Gray's books on the tarot but it can best be described as "Tarot for the Masses - enquire within for disinformation and slap-stick divination". It was, well, not what I was looking for. I've thought about rpurchasing a book called "The Rabbi's Tarot" but the description I read of it seems to say that it only covers the Major Arcana. Any Suggestions? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 5 Sat Jun 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 00:44 EDT Nightshade - I think highly of Kraig's book. As either an intro to the subject or a do-it-yourself handbook for magickal training, it is far and away the clearest modern work on the subject, sans the stilted-even- for-its-time language of the major works frlom the first half of the century. ANyone feeling a need for more background on the material Kraig deals with can proceed directly to THE GOLDEN DAWN, preferably the humongous COMPETE GOLDEN DAWN SYSTEM OF MAGIC, from Falcon Press, but the Llewellyn paperback edition has the virtue of portability. I worked part of Kraig's training system before changing to the program I presently follow, and found it effective. Gods, that sounds pompous. Yes, it is accurate, safe when taken as directed, and better than most of what you will find floating around the occult bookshelves today. THE RABBI'S TAROT is (or claims to be) an exegesis on the qabalistic aspects of the tarot. The Paths, in other words. I haven't read it, so cannot speak to it further than that, but I have gotten leery of much of Llewellyn's present output (but then Kraig is an exception to that, as is much of (not all of) Schueler's Enochiana, and Denning and Phillips PLANETARY MAGIC. So who knows). In the qabala, the minor trumps, while important, are of less impact than the Trumps. There is not a lot useful on the tarot. I am a BOOK OF THOTH man myself (what a surPRISE, Paul), and back that up with Golden Dawn material. However, my Thoth deck is presently in the drawer and I am working with good old Waite/Coleman-Smith, aka the Rider Deck, for purposes of a specific training program, and find my old antipathy to that deck pretty much gone. It is really a fascinating piece of work, and insightful for interpretations of a human-affairs level. I find I cannot get a reading worth spit out of it on spiritual matters, which seems to be (for me) where the Crowley/Harris deck shines. Wang's QABALISTIC TAROT is a good read for the Golden Dawn view of the Tarot, without the specifically magickal material that one must assimilate in the GD source documents. It is tied into Wang's rendition of the Golden Dawn deck, which I have but do not care for aesthetically. (And before anyone asks, those three are IT. I don't collect decks). 93. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 6 Sat Jun 02, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 06:38 EDT As you might guess,here the only one in the house is Waite-Smith(Univ Books edition,with book...not Rider). ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 7 Sat Jun 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 10:39 EDT Louis- Waite-Smith is allsame as Rider deck. University Books edition - you mean PICTORIAL KEY TO THE TAROT, yes? That was the book Arthur wrote to go with the deck, anyway. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 8 Sat Jun 02, 1990 OLORIN [Dave] at 11:10 EDT Paul, Since you're coming from a Cermonial Magick perspective, I'm curious as to your opinion of Bonewits' _Real Magick_... --Dave ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 9 Sat Jun 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 15:40 EDT Dave - I read the first edition (since I was in college when PEIB was receiving his BA in Magic from UC-Berkeley) but have not read the second. I did glance through the afterword to that edition, and naturally disagree with Bonewits on the impossiblity of living by Crowley's law of Thelema without becoming an egotitst and sex fiend. I like what Bonewits has to say, and admire the style with which he says it, but dislike his peg that all magick is based on psi, that everyone until him got it wrong (but that seems endemic to occult teachers), and his 60's mindset on most everything (though, since it was the 60's, this is honestly come by). It is a nice read, a valuable series of insights, but you cannot learn magic from it (nor did PEIB intend that one could, of course). Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 10 Sat Jun 02, 1990 OLORIN [Dave] at 17:45 EDT Paul, I would argue that it is *impossible* to learn magick from a book. Books may provide interesting ideas, directions, or concepts, but the only way to learn anything about magick is to practice it. Just be careful... I would be intersted to know what you think of Marion Weinsteins _Positive gic_ (it gets a little too dogmatic for my tastes -- but then I'm not fond of the people who argue that moving in a particular direction is prima faciae an indication of paths walked...) --Dave ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 11 Sat Jun 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 20:32 EDT Dave - As soon as I finished that post, I said to myself "OK - which book makes you a magician." Duuuh! Obvious error of associattion. Because, for so many and for so long, the only source of magical information is the printed page, I tend to fall into an unspoken premise: "This book can teach" is substituted for "The program in this book, carried out with energy, can produce experiential results." As to risk - arguable. My own cautions in that line tend to limit themselves to two: 1) DON'T use Enochian Magic before gaining a thorough grounding in basic ceremonial theory and technique. 2) DON'T use Thelemic ritual unless, as far as you are concerned, Do what thou wilt REALLY shall be the whole of the Law. Don't use Thelemic magick unless you come to terms with Thelema. Otherwise, whether it is Paul Huson advocating the reverse Pater Noster as a declaration of independence from Christian cultural sets, Zee Budapest equating Wicca with the most virulent form of anti-male feminism, or Al Manning noting that "love is all you need" as far as protective wards go, follow your inner voice as far as which techniques to use, modify, or drop. I have some Weinstein, but skimmed it and was not impelled to read in greater depth. She is far from the only occultist to charge that those not following THE path are in error or even evil. She is not even the most strident. Sad but true, if that criterion kept me away from the writers who espouse it, I would have missed some valuable material. However, to your original point: jah, oui, si, da, you betcha! Book learning "magicians" are a sad thing. Eventually, you gotta get down to it and do it. Nobody is going to be the worse for doing the Lesser Pentagram daily for 90 days, and by then, if they have any tendency for this Art, they will have a feeling of where they want to take it from there (instead of LBRP, fill in the blank for the basic setting up exercise of the trad that attracts you, if ceremonial style is not it). Law=Will/Love Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 12 Mon Jun 04, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 00:11 EDT Ah, Paul, we DO get around. At the Tahuti "Symposium", I asked Wassermann for an exegesis of "love under will". He replied that AL also says "...thou knowest not love", and as someone who accepts the Book as revelation and a fortiori knows not love, he could hardly be able to explain it.... "The disciple whom Crowley loved"--- that line is in MASKS OF THE ILLUMINATI. Does that mean that Babcock is supposed to be Waite? Alfgar ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 13 Mon Jun 04, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 00:11 EDT Do not forget William Gray, MAGICAL RITUAL METHODS. (Well, it was on _my_ elementary reading list.) ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 14 Mon Jun 04, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 00:12 EDT With a comment that will offend everyone likely to read this: the only good books on tarot I can think of are Michael Dummett's, wherein he makes a persuasive case that the "occult" connotations of the tarot did not even exist before Court de Gebelin in the 18th century. (This is largely an argument from silence, but a strong one, and is confirmed by what additional material I have been able to check. I mean, if cards had been used for divination, Rabelais at least would have mentioned it along with the 53 other methods in Herr Trippa's repertory.) ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 15 Mon Jun 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:15 EDT Hi Alfgar - re: "Thou knowest not love..." - hmmm, the copy of AL I keep at the office seems to have vanished. Not being a literalist in Thelema, it's no skin off my schnozz, but I am curious as to the context and will hunt it up. I know I've written up my "love is the binding force" spiel on MagickNet more than once, and a touch of it here. Given the "initiated" definition of Will, Love "under" that quality does not distress me as much as it does some. The yearning to the ecstasy of Union under the direction of the divine Will within is indeed the Law of spiritual evolution, or so it seems to me. Easy to say, darn difficult in practice (else would we all be saints by inclination and without effort). The joke about the disciple that Crowley loved shows up in numerous Waite-skewerings in THE EQUINOX. And yes, Wilson applies it to Babcock in MASKS, but Babcock is a synthetic figure of Crowleyan foils and chelas. The "historical" Babcock was the poor schmoe who, having revealed to AC in an agony of moritifcation that he once caught the clap, was there- after referred to as "Badcock." Either, or both, a typically nasty piece of Crowleyan humor, or the kind of combat psychotherapy AC excelled at. Gray is certainly a must on any reading list dealing with the western tradition, though he is not my cuppa. His work with symbols and their elucidation is brilliant, but his ritual is too left-brain pedantic for my taste. Chacun a son etcetera. Love is the law, love under will (whether we "know" it or not). Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 16 Mon Jun 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:27 EDT Alfgar - 93. Are you trying to drive poor US Games to Chapter 11? Like mucho in modern magic, claims of antiquity for anything can profitably be examined for loopholes (assuming the ink is dry enough to handle the parchment yet). Anyone with a nodding - nay, the least twitching of the brow - acquaintance with Egyptology gets the giggles when someone solemnly explains that the tarot comprises the ancient mysteries of Khem, in pictorial form. Right up there with Atlantean crystal technology and the Rosicrucian succession. What matters is results. The work of de Gebelin, Levi, Encausse, etc. etc. created an engine for magical work, divination, meditation, of great power. Similarly, it don't matter two hooted hekau if the principle books of the Qabala were penned by Simeon bar Yochai in the 1st cent. AD, or by the Spanish school in the 14th - the insights and structuring of the system are still invaluable. I don't think we are disagreeing on this (?). We do know that the tarot was around as early as, what 14th cent.? Tarocco was being played as early as 15th, anyway. Since the decks did not likely spring full blown into the designs known then, there was a century or so of lead-time we may safely posit. And you are right that no one much before the 18th century has diddly to say about them in an occult context (nothing in ANY of the grimoires, or in mundane lit.). I don;t know that this invalidates the tarot structures built since then, though. Law=Will/Love Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 17 Tue Jun 05, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 19:50 EDT Actually, what I am trying to do is put the games back in "Games Systems" by creating an atmosphere where I can propose a game of tarocco without being accused of sacrilege (or moving to France). As far as validity of the system goes, ANYTHING works if you believe it will. "Thorn" relates that she has read drinking straws in a pinch, and you probably read Gross' pamphlet on the divinatory use of Rubik's Cube. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 18 Tue Jun 05, 1990 FASA.2 at 22:35 EDT Soooo ka. The idea of using their sacred pasteboards for tarroco or its descendant, tarot whist, sends the card cuddlers into a snit? I wouldn't play with a deck I used for ritual purposes, any more than I'd mix a martini in my chalice or use the pantacle as a frisbee. This is not to disparage those trads that DO use "kitchen witchery," where the household role of an item reinforces its magickal potency, but it isn't a ceremonial "thing," as you know. Though for years the only thing I used my Waite/Coleman-Smith deck for was discussing tarot with strangers or acquaintances (as much to avoid freaking them out with the Thoth deck as to "preserve" that deck's "purity"), or for tarocco. Yet now, for various reasons, I read from that deck and it still "works" fine. I haven't read the Gross thing on Rubik's cube divination (I did once fiddle with a joke article on Rubik's Enochian Tablets, but could not make the engineering accurate enough to stay funny). Was that Michael Gross, as in National Lampoon? If you ascribe the powers of divination, etc. to the cards themselves then anything that threatens to trivialize the symbols threatens the sense of empowerment you ascribe to them. We shall draw a kindly veil over the ignoble thought that such things also threaten the self-image (dare I say ego?) of the person as well. Surely no such fragile personalities are to be found in the occult community?! (All right Hume, stop sniggering). If, as I do and I think you once mentioned in a post, you see the value of the cards (or the runes, or the ) as a focus that frees up the insight, clairvoyance, precog, whatever, that is inherent in all of us, then indeed you can read straws, dice, Rubik's cube, the flights of birds, or what you Will. The cards become a tool, to be treated with care due any useful tool, but hardly the reverence accorded sacred symbols. The sad part in humanity's quest for the spiritual is this kind of mixture of form and substance. "This" makes me feel holy, therefore it is of itself holy. The fact that "this" may simply be a perfectly good phenomenon that helps you find the noumenon within, is all too often overlooked. My this soapbox is high, isn't it? Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 19 Sun Jun 10, 1990 FASA.2 at 15:59 EDT The Lesser Ritual of the Pentagram: This is the basic setting up exercise, opening process, and all-around magical starting point for many contemporary occultists. While it is basically part of the hermetic or qabalistic school, aka ceremonial magick, it is also used by those in other traditions. Many variants exist, but this post gives the plain vanilla form: 1. Stand comfortably erect facing East. Envision your body (your astral body, if you will) growing to enormous size: your feet firmly established upon the ground, your head among the stars. Grow even further until all the known universe is left behind, an infinitesimal spot of light at your feet. 2. From infinite distance above your head, a beam of blinding white light descends. Know that this comes from the Most High. Raise your right hand to receive it. Bring your hand down to your forehead and as the Light, following it, strikes upon your brow, say the Hebrew word, ATOH (Ah-toe), Meaning "Unto Thee." 3. Draw your hand down to your breast, or solar plexus, and feel the Light follow it, passing through your body, and sweeping on to pass down through your body, out your feet, and on into infinity. Say the Hebrew word MALKUTH (Mahl-kooth), meaning "The Kingdom." You are now suspended at the mid-point of a vertical beam of white Light, of infinite length. 4. Touch the right shoulder, and say "Ve-Geburah" (Vah-Gah-boo-rah) meaning "and The Power." Touch the left shoulder and say "Ve-Gedulah," meaning "and The Glory." As you formulate these points, envision a horizontal beam of light extending into infinity on either side. So you are now at the central point of an infinite Cross of Light. 5. Clasp the hands on the breast, and say "Le Olahm, Amen." (Lay- Oh-lahm. Amen), meaning "Unto the Ages. Amen." Parts 2-5 define the process known as the Qabalistic Cross. 6. With the right hand, or right forefinger, or the appropriate magical weapon (the wand, or dagger) trace the Banishing Pentagram of Earth (what the heck is that? Patience.) in the East. Visualizr the star in brilliant blue flame - or perhaps laser-like lines of energy. Thrust your right hand through the center of the pentagram and say the Divine Name YHVH - in this context pronounced letter by letter: Yod-He-Vau-He (yohd - hay- vow - hay). Drawing the star: This is the five pointed star traditionally associated with the occult. Draw it clockwise, starting at the top. So - extend your hand pointing forward at the level of your forehead. Draw downwards, keeping arm extended, until the hand is at your right hip. Draw the next line by bringing the hand up and across, to the level of your left shoulder (still pointing forward, though). The next stroke is straight across your body, bringing the hand to the level of the right shoulder. Then draw the next line by bringing the hand down to the level of the left hip. Finish drawing by bring the hand back to the starting point, lined up with the center of the forehead. So you are using your arm and hand as a big paintbrush, drawing the five-pointed star in the air in front of you. 7. Trace the boundaries of a circle, moving clockwise, painting the circle's borders in the air at the level of your chest. Stop when facing South. Trace the pentagram again, only now, when you finish, the Divine Name is ADNI - Adonai, meaning "My Lord" and pronounced "ah-doe-nah-ee". 8> Continue tracing the circle to the West. Trace the star, and say AHIH, or Eheyeh, pronounced "ay-yuh-hay-yuh." This is is the first word of the phrase Eheyeh asher eheyeh, or "I am Who am," spoken by God to Moses from the burning bush. 9. Continue tracing the circle to the North. Trace the star and say AGLA, pronounced "ah-guh-lah." This is a notarikon, or what we call an acronym today (like DOS or IBM). It stands for the sentence "Atoh Gibor Le-olahm Adonai," meaning "Thou art mighty forever, oh Lord." 10. Continue tracing the bounds of the circle until you are back in the East, where you began. You are now surrounded by a chest-high circle of blue light, connecting the centers of four pentagrams, also in blue light, standing at each of the compass points of the circle. 11. Extend your arms to form a cross. Say: Before me RAPHAEL (Rah-fie-el) Behind me GABRIEL (Gah-bree-el) On my right hand MICHAEL (Mee-kah-el) On my left hand AURIEL (Ow-ree-el) For about me flame the pentagrams, and in the column shines the six-rayed star. (On this last line envision a golden hexagram, ie. the Star of David, shining within your body, in the center of the breast) Repeat the Qabalistic Cross (parts 2-5) to close the ritual. Now, there are numerous "internal" pieces of the ritual - images and energies - wehich are best discovered by experiment, though I will gladly expand on these points if anyone wants. Note - all this stuff you "say" - well, actually, the technical term is "vibrate." For starters it is enough to say that these are delivered in a resonant voice, one that makes your body buzz or tingle. Try to get the voice deep deep in the chest. What this ritual does is clear the area within the circle, banishing by the power of the pentagrams and the Divine Names all vague or hostile influences. Then the pure elemental energy, personified and consecrated by the Archangelic Names, is invoked to fill this area. The opening Qabalistic Cross sets you up to open the rite, and establishes your "sacred space" at the center of the Universe (the center point of a cross of infinite dimension, remember?). The closing Q-Cross seals the energies of the rite, locking the working space in place. The ritual can be a prelude to more specific workings, or dine in its own rite to purify the aura, and to attune the mind, body, and spirit to the energies of the Elements. Use it in Light. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 20 Mon Jun 11, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 23:57 EDT No, Jim Gross, as in AstroDice. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 21 Tue Jun 19, 1990 J.CASADY2 [NIGHTSHADE] at 08:24 MDT Paul - What is MagickNet? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 22 Tue Jun 19, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:23 EDT Nightshade - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. MagickNet is a set of FIDO echonets operating on various BBS's all over the world. It is not part of the FIDO backbone, but available only to sysops who agree to abide by its rules - no offensive or proselytizing messages, etc. Nodes keep coming and going, in the ever-shifting world of the FIDO BBS network (this is just people running BBS software on their home machines, nothing elaborate like here). I believe there is also a magic/pagan SIG on usenet, as well as 'dis here, Section 8 of the Religion Forum on CI$, and a few other places one can discuss magick (more or less in depth or on a beginning basis) via modem. I don't have a listing of nodes (and the old one I used to have is hopelessly inaccurate) but if people are interested, please contact me by email and I will see if I can scare up a BBS access number near you (or at least not entirely on the opposite side of the continent) so you can see what it's like, and maybe search for a node closer to home. Needless to say, if anyone gets the information from me and then makes a nuisance of themselves on the 'net, I will think nasty thoughts about them. Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 23 Sun Jun 24, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 at 11:35 PDT Can you explain exactly what "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law" means? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 24 Sun Jun 24, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 16:30 EDT Uptopic he insists that it DOESN'T mean what it literally says--do whatever you plese. [pleAse] ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 25 Sun Jun 24, 1990 FASA.2 at 17:12 EDT Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Well, gee Louis, if it literally meant do whatever you please wouldn't it SAY "Do whatever you please shall be the whole of the Law"? The pivotal concept is "Will." The Will to Live can keep people breathing when all they WANT, all that would PLEASE them, is to give up and die. The Will to become skilled in some art or craft keeps people practicing when want they WANT is to go play somewhere. Enough examples of the difference between Will and want. I could get really esoteric and expand on the "Thou." It is meant in the same sense as in I AND THOU by Martin Buber - the Thou of the God within. So - Thelema would have us learn our Will - defined in one work as "our purpose in this incarnation." Then, the sole law for the individual is to do that. Indeed, elsewhere in The Book of the Law, we are told "Thou hast no right but to do thy will." Not only does this mean keep your hands off the karma of others, it means that once you know your Will, it is a deviation from your reason for being to do anything else. This is a rule as free as any doctrine in history, and as grindingly restrictive as the most extensive list of "thou shalt nots." Where it flips out many people is that the rule of one's life must come from within. Suggestions, guidelines, ideas, etc. can come from elsewhere, but the implementation, the doing of things, rests solely on the individual (and his Higher Self, if speaking in purely magickal terms). Is it a rule for everybody? Nope. Is it capable of massive abuse? You betcha. Magick will never be "for the millions," despite the existence of several spell "cookbooks" of that name in the 1960's. No more than music, painting, or computer programming is for the millions. In counterbalance to the supremely inner directed statement "Do what thou wilt..." you should often (equally often) hear "Love is the law, love under\ will." The unity among all ensouled beings - the much abused concept of Love - the energy that "under will" - that is, directed by the Will - drives the human soul along the path of spiritual evolution. The decisions the ego makes about the Will are always suspect - "Well, maybe it is my Will to do X" can be a bang-up rationalization. The element of Love will, we believe, enter into any choice that truly comes from the Will. Does that make things any clearer? Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 26 Mon Jun 25, 1990 OLORIN [Dave] at 10:32 EDT At the risk of making mistakes (clarificans if I do so would be welcome, Paul).. Crowley's Will is much like the Perfect Will of Kant. It is that which you *should* be doing. And, like Kant's, your Will can never violate the Will of another. So the statement (phrased loosely in standard American English) is "Fulfill your destiny while never preventing another from fulfilling theirs is the Law." --Dave ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 27 Mon Jun 25, 1990 FASA.2 at 19:43 EDT Dave - 93 (Qabalistically equivalent to the statement "Do what thou wilt...") Crowley was an admirer of Kant, and it would therefore not surprise me (unread in Kant) to find resonances. The subjunctive aspect (should) is messy - but so it is in ethics as in magick. Its resolution - turning the subjunctive into an eternal indicative, as it were - is the basis of implementation, again ,whether reviewing a system of ethics or one of initiation. What steps do I take to: 1) Learn my true Will and 2) Having learned it, do it. 93=93/93 (equivalent to "Love is the law...") Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 28 Mon Jul 02, 1990 GILLIMER [Gillimer] at 00:09 EDT In short, the difference is a matter of following your WILL, instead of the hodgepodge of urges we mistake for it. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 29 Mon Jul 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 01:09 EDT Gillimer - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. As always, elegantly and succinctly put. Of course, it is as easy to say "Will" in our hermetic tone of voice as it si to say "E=MC**2" but DOING something with the formula takes a LOT of engineering! Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 30 Mon Jul 02, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 at 19:14 PDT Paul, you've both cleared it up and made it more complicated. One question that springs to mind; how do you know that one person's "Will" might not happen to conflict with another's? Is there some kind of "cosmic balance" that keeps everyone on non-intersecting paths? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 31 Mon Jul 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 23:00 EDT David - 93. That is the hot potato. The Thelemic equivalent of the problem of Evil. As an article of belief, there is indeed a cosmic balance. Call it karma, or what you will (or Will). "Scripturally" we believe: "Every man and woman is a star" and "There is star and star, system and system." However, this does not mean lie back and take it if things get rough. Those who follow their ego are referred to on a number of levels as "slaves." Slaves of their desires, slaves of those who lead them, and while the primary task is defined as striking off the bonds that hold them, sometimes that is impossible. We do not turn the other cheek unless it is our Will to do so. Should conflict arise, it is our belief that this is a sign of error, or that the apparent conflict is part of the correct evolution of the Wills involved. If it comes to open conflict, then "as brothers fight ye." Crowley, an only child, may have had an unrealistic notion of the nature of sibling fights, but let us take the phrase in its more charitable meaning (it is, after all, Aiwass, the Herald of The Gods, who is talking anyway). You may notice I keep saying "believe," "faith (a danger word, but let itlie), etc. The religous precepts upholding an ethical behaviour are all, as far as we incarnate types can tell, pious hopes: divine judgement, karma, the Wiccan law of threefold return, the essentially pacific nature of true Wills, all establish a concept on which to base right action. We may all be whistling in the dark, of course. Anyway, I still hold "thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that and none other shall say thee nay." But if it comes down to it, then "in success is your proof," and "strike hard, and low, and to hell with them, master." Law=Will/Love Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 32 Tue Jul 03, 1990 B.WEBER4 at 19:18 CDT L*H THE OCCULT CORNER (205)344-9507 5PM-9PM 7 DAYS A WEEK NEW BBS SYSOP IS ALIESTER AZARRA THIS BBS IS FOR THE PERSON LOOKING TO ORDER THINGS OF A MAGICAL NATURE "LOVE IS THE LAW,LOVE UNDER WILL 418" ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 33 Tue Jul 03, 1990 FASA.2 at 22:17 EDT B.WEBER4 - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. I don't know that Harry will appreciate sticking "billboards" in the topics. I am not sure I do, either. Is the proprietor's name really Aliester? Or do we have a spelling and/or ego problem looming in sight? Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 34 Tue Jul 03, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 21:22 CDT Idunno if Harry will like that or not. Seems like there was a BBS listed in the Christian BBS topic but I've completely forgoten the reaction to it. Hot potato? Who would ever want to eat a cold potato?! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 35 Wed Jul 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 02:10 EDT What, you've never had vichysoisse? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 36 Wed Jul 04, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 at 10:54 PDT OK, I'll bite. What the heck is vichysoisse? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 37 Wed Jul 04, 1990 OLORIN [Dave] at 15:09 EDT French for "overpriced". ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 38 Wed Jul 04, 1990 B.WEBER4 at 17:22 CDT THE NAME IS ALIESTER AND THE SPELLING IS NOT WRONG JUST BECOUSE IT IS NOT SPELLED ALEISTER AND AS FAR AS THE POSTING OF THE NUMBER WHAT IS DONE IS DONE.418 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 39 Wed Jul 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:54 EDT Dave - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. 1) Vichysoisse is COLD potato and leek soup (overpriced, Dave? You been eating in the wrong places (g)). 2) B.WEBER4 - (if I knew the name, I'd use the name). Ah - there are more banishing rites than the Pentagram, frater. Lotsa topics contain "holes" where the sysop has summoned his powers and exorcised entries. Sorry about the name thing. Love is the law, love under will. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 40 Wed Jul 04, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 18:34 CDT What is done can easily be UNdone via DEL but Harry hasn't compained so I GUESS it's all right. Could-ya cut the all-caps please? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 41 Thu Jul 05, 1990 B.WEBER4 at 19:26 CDT Some people have so little since of humor to be so into CROWLEY'S magick and about the CAPS does it really bother you that bad?418 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 42 Thu Jul 05, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 20:56 CDT YES If it was ment to be humorous stick a or :) or something on it. I can't tell by tone of voice or facial expresion here. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 43 Thu Jul 05, 1990 FASA.2 at 23:35 EDT B.- Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. The caps are usually (only a custom of course) reserved for emphasis, though I can see that the excitement of getting the board open may have meant they were intentional. Congrats on the board and store by the way. Best wishes in both endeavour Ahem - the humorless reference to Thelema gives me to wonder, but we can let it lay (or not, of course, if you wish, or Will, to pursue it). I am , as far as I know, the only Thelemite in the topic, and meant it more as a ceremonial magic(k) discussion than a specifically Crowleyan one. I always thought we were a comedic tradition, but perhaps not? Love is the law, love under will. Paul PS - What DOES the B stand for - I feel silly addressing posts to just B or to the entire address. PRH ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 44 Fri Jul 13, 1990 SOFTSERV at 14:09 EDT Fans of Robert Anton Wilson won't want to miss his RTC in the "SOFTSERV" RoundTable, this Monday evening (July 16th) at 10PM Eastern (7PM Pacific) in SoftServ RTC room 1. Bring friends! Neil Schulman ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 45 Fri Jul 13, 1990 FASA.2 at 20:36 EDT OOOOH! OOOOH OOOOOOOH! WIth bells on (can we rig a scanner for autographs - oh never mind). Second the recommendation folks - if you are not a fan a RAW already, why not!? Be there. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 46 Fri Jul 13, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 [Screwtape] at 18:54 PDT Yeah! The original Illuminatus! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 47 Wed Jul 18, 1990 SOFTSERV at 01:47 EDT Well, the RTC with Wilson went great. For those of you who missed it, I'll have the transcript in the "SOFTSERV" RT Library 18 in a couple of days. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 48 Wed Jul 18, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:35 EDT Bless you - I got mugged (as it were) by problems at work (ironic, since I work for GEIS) and my terminals were all tied up. Ahem - the big question: DID HE MENTION THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE HISTORICAL ILLUMINATI BOOKS? Are the rights out of litigation yet? Is anyone likely to publish them before the immanentization of the eschaton? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 49 Thu Jul 19, 1990 SOFTSERV at 02:39 EDT He didn't say anything about litigation on them so it must be okay. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 50 Fri Jul 20, 1990 SOFTSERV at 19:31 EDT The illuminating transcript of the Robert Anton Wilson RTC is now in "SOFTSERV" Library 18, File 314 -- RAW-RTC.TXT. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 51 Sat Jul 21, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 14:18 CDT Hehehe, sounds like Eddie Murphy was there! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 52 Sat Jul 21, 1990 SOFTSERV at 19:19 EDT It was raw enough, I suppose! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 53 Sun Jul 29, 1990 FASA.2 at 12:30 EDT Liber OZ sub figura LXXVII "the law of the strong; this is our law and the joy of the world." AL II,21 "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." AL I,40 "thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no other shall say nay." AL I,42-43 "Every man and every woman is a star." AL I,3 There is no god but man 1. Man has the right to live by his own law - to live in the way that he wills to do; to work as he will; to play as he will; to rest as he will; to die when and how he will. 2. Man has the right to eat what he will - to drink what he will; to dwell where he will; to move as he will upon the face of the earth. 3. Man has the right to think what he will - to speak what he will; to write what he will; to draw, paint, carve, etch, mould, build as he will; to dress as he will. 4. Man has the right to love as he will - "take your will and fill of love as ye will, when, where, and with whom ye will." AL I,51 5. Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights. "the slaves shall serve." AL II,58 "Love is the law, love under will." AL I,57 Aleister Crowley ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 54 Sun Jul 29, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 15:37 EDT I am not a Crowleyan. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 55 Sun Jul 29, 1990 FASA.2 at 21:07 EDT Thelemite. So? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 56 Mon Jul 30, 1990 SHADES at 04:26 EDT 93! Paul was gracious enough to invite me to participate in this topic, which until recently I was not aware of, to which I am grateful. For my first offering, here is one of my favorite mss from A.C. which is basically a very basic and simple outline of magick. I hope you enjoy it. POSTCARDS TO PROBATIONERS by Aleister Crowley from EQUINOX Vol. I No. 2 THEOREMS I. The world progresses by virtue of the appearance of Christs (geniuses). II. Christs (geniuses) are men with super-consciousness of the highest order. III. Super-consciousness of the highest order is obtainable by known methods. Therefore, by employing the quintessance of known methods we cause the world to progress. ESSENTIALS OF METHOD I. Theology is immaterial; for both Buddha and St. Ignatius were Christs. II. Morality is immaterial; for both Socrates and Mohammed were Christs. III. Super-consciousness is a natural phenomenon; its conditions are therefore to be sought rather in the acts than in the words of those who attained it. The essential acts are retirement and concentration -- as taught by Yoga and Ceremonial Magic. MISTAKES OF MYSTICS I. Since truth is supra-rational, it is incommunicable in the language of reason. II. Hence all mystics have written nonsense, and what sense they have written is so far untrue. III. Yet as a still lake yields a truer reflection of the sun than a torrent, he whose mind is best balanced will, if he become a mystic, become the best mystic. THE METHOD OF EQUILIBRIUM I. THE PASSIONS, Etc. I. Since the ultimate truth of teleology is unknown, all codes of morality are arbitrary. II. Therefore the student has no concern with ethics as such. III. He is consequently free "to do his duty in that state of life to which it has pleased God to call him." II. THE REASON I. Since truth is supra-rational, any rational statement is false. II. Let he student then contradict every proposition that presents itself to him. III. Rational ideas being thus expelled from the mind, there is room for the apprehension of spiritual truth. It should be remarked that this does not destroy the validity of reasonings on their own plane. III. THE SPIRITUAL SENSORIUM I. Man being a finite being, he is incapable of apprehending the infinite. Nor does his communion with infinite being (true or false) alter this fact. II. Let then the student contradict every vision and refuse to enjoy it; first, because there is certainly another vision possible of precisely contradictory nature; secondly, because though he is God, he is also a man upon an insignificant planet. Being thus equilibriated laterally and vertically, it may be that, either by affirmation or denial of all these things together, he may attain the supreme trance. IV. THE RESULT I. Trance is defined as the ek-stasis of one particular tract of the brain, caused by meditating on the idea corresponding to it. II. Let the student therefore beware lest in that idea be any trace of imperfection. It should be pure, balanced, calm, complete, fitted in every way to dominate the mind, as it will. Even as in the choice of a king to be crowned. III. So will the decrees of this king be just and wise as he was just and wise before he was made king. The life and work of the mystic will reflect (though dimly) the supreme guiding force of the mystic, the highest trance to which he has attained. YOGA AND MAGIC I. Yoga is the art of uniting the mind to a single idea. It has four methods. Gnana-Yoga Union by Knowledge Raja-Yoga Union by Will Bhakta-Yoga Union by Love Hatha-Yoga Union by Courage add Mantra-Yoga Union through Speech Karma-Yoga Union through Work These are united by the supreme method of Silence. II. Ceremonial Magic is the art of uniting the mind to a single idea. It has four Methods. The Holy Qabalah. Union by Knowledge The Sacred Magic. Union by Will. The Acts of Worship. Union by Love. The Ordeals. Union by Courage. add The Invocations. Union through Speech. The Acts of Service. Union through Work. These are united by the supreme method of Silence. III. If this idea be any but the Supreme and Perfect idea, and the student lose control, the result is insanity, obsession, fanaticism, or paralysis and death (add addiction to gossip and incurable idleness), according to the nature of the failure. Let then the Student understand all these things and combine them in his Art, uniting them by the supreme method of Science. 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 57 Mon Jul 30, 1990 SOFTSERV at 14:37 EDT A recipe for impotence and paralysis. What a crock! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 58 Mon Jul 30, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:14 EDT Softy - Patently one of the two articles punched a button? Could you elaborate on that? Or simply sit in a simpering snit? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 59 Mon Jul 30, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 21:20 CDT More messages at 4:30am Shades!? I'm happy to see you are coding the game into the wee hours but sleep deprivation breeds bugs! Something doesn't make any sense here. Perhaps that is the point? If so then you should be happy when somebody says this is all nonsense! "Theology is immaterial". The entire document looks theological to me. Is it then immaterial? "Morality is immaterial". Bull honkies. The entire purpose of gaining "super- consciousness" (whatever that is) seems to be to help the world "progress" (interesting word, what does it mean today?). The best way to get an action labled as immoral is to show that it causes damage to the normal progress of humans. This last statement couldn't be even close to true if morality isn't material. The Passions seem to be saying that, since morals are relative, one should not try to change another person's morals. For example, if some dictator type decided to have some of his men walk into a Lutheran church and kill every man, woman and child because they pose a threat to the polical position of that dictator then you should ignore this action because it is just a guy who is trying to maintain his God-called 'state of life'. The Reason seems nearly useless. The little afterthought of a note at the end of III seems to indicate that part I only applies to rational statements made in one plane about another plane. BUT the stament stating that no rational statement can be made about other planes is itself a rational statement about other planes. Thus it proves itself to be false. Oh now I get it! The Reason is NOT a rational statement BECAUSE it proves itself wrong. Let's skip down to a good bit. "...uniting them by the supreme method of Science." Very nice but flattery will get you nowhere. I see no evidence of anyone using the scientific method here at all. Like most staments about the spiritual, this stuff is mostly unfalsifiable and thus not scientific. With all this attacking reason I was very suprised to see this statement tacked on to the end. The scientific method works great on the physical but when it comes to the spiritual it can rarely be applied, let alone trusted. I suggest that everyone contradict this vision and refuse to enjoy it because: 1. A contradictory vision does exist. 2. Though you are God, you are also a man on an insignificant planet. Da Sloth ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 60 Mon Jul 30, 1990 FASA.2 at 23:09 EDT Sloth - Well, it beats Softserv's typical response: I don't understand it, so its crap. How you equate morality with progressing the world beats the hell out of me. The immoral Christians (as far as the Romans were concerned) induced progress. Perhaps it would help to see it as "Codes of Theology" are immaterial. Buddha, Christ, Ignatius Loyola, despite massively different codes, achieved genius. "Codes of morality" are immaterial - certainly in matters of genuine morals. The morals of a Socrates and a Mohammed hardly bear comparing, but does not affect their ability to change the progress of the world. As you have been busily proving, any rational statement seems to bear seeds of paradox within itself. In fact, you are well on your way in that arena. However, this does not mean one need disregard the usefulness of rational statements about a given plane - ie. universe or field of discourse - within that plane. They provide a place to hang your hat, at least. Relativity superceded Neowtonian mechanics - but not in traffic. The dictator's troops are not a problem in ethics. Pest control, perhaps. Applying a nice, ethically neutral machine gun will alleviate any agonizing about the effectiveness of tampering with their personal (and irrelevant) morality. The "Postcards" are not rules for starting a business, or a government, but notes to "Probationers" - those starting on a formal study of magick (the plane on which these statements hold true). They are designed to combat dogmaticism, "one true way"-ism, "anything that feels good MUSt be spiritual"-ism, etc. Whassa prob? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 61 Wed Aug 01, 1990 SOFTSERV at 03:51 EDT I'll ignore the ad hominem and respond to the point: Crowley's constant fallacy is the rejection of what we have in favor of what we can't have -- and he uses what we have to reject it. He undercuts his own argument's foundation in virtually every sentence, and pats himself on the back for doing it. Utter nonsense results. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 62 Wed Aug 01, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:11 EDT Pray don't ignore the ad hominem -it was crafted especially for you. Why so many folks respond to various statements (it need not be in the magico-religous realm) in the strongest and most offensive terms, and then whine about ad hominem argument when addressed in the same key, beats me. If it is a disheartening discovery to learn that the basis,the raison d'etre, for initiation, for mystical study, etc. is a dissatisfaction with "what we have" - a search for what "we can't have" (and who says, please, that we cannot?) - then I am not surprised that the premisses in the Postcards look nonsensical. Come to that, most of the stuff in a magic(k)-oriented topic is going to punchthe wrong buttons for you. I had rather missed where Crowley pats anyone on the back in this text - which does set it aside from many of his others,I grant you. Gee - the Postcards are paradoxical. They even use paradox. Now surely it may be posited that one or even two such incidents in the text are accidental. But the whole thing? I assume (wrongly) that the nature of a "koan" is not unknown to you? The use of paradox to kick the reason into a loop that keeps it out of your hair while you get some work done? The use of handles makes it difficult to tell. I was perturbed - I will even say angry - at the response from "SOFTSERV" since I had expected rather more from the author of The Jehovah Contract. Am I under a misapprehension? And even if we pound each other's faces in on this, Love is still the frickerty law, love under willy-nilly. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 63 Wed Aug 01, 1990 FASA.2 at 20:50 EDT Softserv - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Re: the peceding post. I must make a note not to check GEnie at the office - I am cranked up high enough to bite the face off Mother Theresa at that point in the day. Without ameliorating the points made to try and present why I find the Postcards valuable, I would apologize for the tone. Let's drop back 20 and punt here. The Postcards are formulated, along with many other statements by Aleister Crowley and others, within a framework of initiation. This is a regimen, a belief, a tradition that looks for a controlled approach to spiritual evolution in the individual. Some initiatory trads also posit that the development of their members will advance the overall condition of the species. Maybe yes, maybe no Mr. Danger, but since one must achieve personal development before one can presume to address the development of others, the point may be moot. Many people complain that this philosophy is intrinsically selfish. They are right. So? Now - my own belief is that pushing initiation at anyone is a prime waste of effort. Deciding to move into that frame of reference, whether one views it as positive, which I patently do, or negative, as many others do, is an ultimately personal decision. I would go so far as to say that initiation taken under duress, or at the promptings of anything other than the personal Will to do so, is open to question, if not invalid. Once in the realm of ceremonial magick, there is room to share viewpoints, techniques, flames, debate, etc. I will note that I am not wildly interested in defending these viewpoints, no more than I am in selling them. And since I can no more convince a confirmed skeptic of the "reality" of magick than he can convince me of its "unreality," such debate would be, by my definition, a religous argument, and thus doomed to pointless and acrimonious futility. Love is the law, love under will. Paul Hume ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 64 Thu Aug 02, 1990 SOFTSERV at 02:57 EDT Paul, the author of \The Jehovah Contract\ is indeed an admirer of Crowley. He is Victor Koman, GEnie address SOFTSERV-VK. (He's Vice Prez of SoftServ.) And he's working on getting the rights to Crowley's books to publish electronic editions on SoftServ. As for me, I'll take Aristotle's axioms to Crowley's postcards, and if I want to know the sound of one hand clapping, I'll accelerate it to Mach 1 and listen. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 65 Thu Aug 02, 1990 SHADES at 10:24 EDT 93! Wow! Quite a bit of a response to that one! ;-) (However, not entirely unexpected.) Hmmm, maybe I should post Liber Al so we can get some serious discussions going on?! Naw, I don't think we're ready for that yet. << Yeah Sloth, late night happens to be my most productive hours, and I never sleep (well almost never) anyway, so its not a problem. ;-) >> Anyway, where to begin... First off let me say that any explanation I give as to how magick works, or what is meant by this, or any other document is purely my opinion, and that you should not neccessarily accept this opinion as fact. Accept no dogma, not even mine. Find what is right for you, within your own value structure. Who knows, we may even agree. ;-) This reply is likely going to be lengthy, since I am addressing all 8 messages since I was last here. You may want to quit now if you aren't interested in this topic. Paul pretty much gives a good rundown of Crowley's intention behind writing this document. It is indeed a text prepared for aspiring followers of the magickal path, and it is supposed to make you look at yourself and your beliefs in order to help you stomp out any Dogma you may have in the closet, before you get too involved in magick. Its secondary purpose is to give you a very brief rundown on some of the theory [and science] behind magick. The document itself is sort of an initiation. If you can read it, and truly understand it, you have achieved success. If not, you probably aren't quite ready for the magickal path, and should do a little more studying and/or take a long hard look at yourself before getting more involved. Granted this forum isn't exactly a class on ceremonial magick, but I believe its intent is to give folks a better understanding of it. I am sure there will be some who may want to take a closer look into magick, either before or after scanning this forum, to whom the text and information here may be of use to. As far as the text is concerned, everything is immaterial when not in proper context. Theology (religion) and Morality included. That in itself is dogma. One must free themselves from [the sin of] restriction before one can grow. Of course, that isn't to say that you can ignore laws and such, but rather that you should look at the basis behind such things, see where they take their value, see where such values would not apply (see the duality in all things), and acknowledge both. Paul's statements in regard to these questions are equally true. Super-Consciousness is the state of being in touch with that higher power which is called your "genius", "holy guardian angel", "higher self", "god", and many other names. It is a mark of mastery, and the goal of many [if not all] magicians, and is not usually easy to accomplish. One should strive to not influence another to do anything against their wishes. However, one should *never* interfere with another's will. The difference is quite vast, however I won't go into detail here, as I believe Paul explained it earlier on in the thread. In the example, (dictator having folks shot in a church for political reasons), there is a possible conflict on many levels. First off, the dictator would probably not take this action if he had achieved "super-consciousness". Secondly, there is a magickal balance in the universe called "Karma", which would surely retaliate for such wanton destruction of life (perhaps not right away, or even in this lifetime, but eventually). Thirdly, there is nothing that says that the unjust shall not be punished. It is likely that the action was not in accordance with the will of the dictator, just as it is not likely that apprehending the dictator was directly in accordance with your will, but that doesn't mean that you must ignore him. There are rules, and there are many fine shades of grey between them. Part of the path is knowing which ones are correct for the proper time. The method of science is indeed there. Scientific method is used every day by practicing magicians. One is to keep a diary of the results of every magickal operation one does, and how many times, under what conditions, if it was sucessful or not, and to what extreme, as well as any other data that could possibly influence the outcome. This is in addition to the daily diary that magicians should also keep. Ceremonial magick is not based on faith, it is based on result. One of the tenants of magick says: Doubt. Doubt thyself. Doubt even if thou doubtest thyself. Doubt all. Doubt even if thou doubtest all. This is trying to say that one should not accept anything without proof. Even the ancient Egyptians held this tenant true. Every ritual the priests used was given a rating showing how many times it was used, and how effective it was. They used that data to fine tune the rituals. Major failures were thrown away and started anew, and the others eventually would be given the "tried thousands of times and found good" rating, which meant exactly what it says. Most magicians also use this logic in their own rituals. If it isn't replicatable, chances are something is amiss. Most beginning magicians will find that it takes a lot of hard work, study, practice, and many consultations with the magickal diary before they are able to achieve regular successes. Remember, just because one doubts, does not mean one should give up, or not attempt something. There is one caveat to this as well. You may doubt the success of a ritual before, or after it occurs, but one should think of nothing other than the ritual itself during the ceremony. I don't believe entirely in SOFTSERV's remarks regarding Crowley's "constant fallacy". However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Actually, I do notice that many folks opinion of the works tend to change if they read enough of them (they are intented to be confusing to the non-initiate), and/or if they have a solid foundation upon the magickal path. I agree with you Paul, force-fed initiation is definately a waste of time and material. It must be a conscious choice for an individual, and should definately be their will to do so. It is a very important step, and in most cases very illuminating and positive to everyone involved. Real magick cannot even be attempted without some sort of initiation. Besides, as they say, it builds character! ;-) Sharing viewpoints is one thing, and a positive thing. There is always room for discussion and education. Flames are quite another thing however. One should always try to see the point of the other side, before flying off the deep end. How else could one argue without knowing what one is arguing against? Good luck in getting the rights to Crowley's books. Many are out of print and intend to stay that way. Some never have been published, others are owned by either the O.T.O. and are being published by Dover, Weiser, Falcon Press, or have been sold already. Electronic editions may make the difference however. But hey, if you do get the rights, be sure to let us all know right away! ;-) 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 66 Thu Aug 02, 1990 SOFTSERV at 14:52 EDT You can count on it! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 67 Thu Aug 02, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:23 EDT Re: AC's literary estate... While I am not sure just what the terms of the court decision regarding the Crowley copyrights says, if one follows the latest copyright laws, I believe all of his writings go public domain in 1997 (death + 50 years). I don't know if the same goes for trademarks (various Thelemic symbols are tm by the OTO, f'rinstance), and since my few brushes with trademark law have come to regard copyright laws as simple and strauightforward by comparison. Ran this past the OTO officer who is the "keeper of the keys" on the material the OTO has control of, and he wasn't sure either. A lot of earlier Crowley material is PD anyway, as he let the copyrights lapse before his death (at least Weiser is publishing them as PD these days). Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 68 Thu Aug 02, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 18:34 CDT Well, I took a day off thinking that this BB was goin' slow so I wouldn't miss much. RAZZ! I saw the word 'science' used up above, should have a fun night. Maybe two or three nights! (And by then nobody will remember what I'm responding to, oh well) ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 69 Fri Aug 03, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 00:21 EDT Actually the 75-year rule,not life+50,applies to pre-1978 copyrights that were in their second 28-year term on 1/1/78. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 70 Fri Aug 03, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:14 EDT Ah - that would explain why material published in the pre-WW I period is already PD. And also means that his later works will stay in copyright for some time to come? Oh well, it is the OTO's issue, not mine. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 71 Fri Aug 03, 1990 FASA.2 at 18:23 EDT Let me toss this one out: Is a discipline (to avoid the s-word) of spiritual development feasible, in the view of the readers of this topic? Are there any givens upon which one can build? I will toss out my own point of view, that systems are possible, in an organized sense, but that no system has inherent value. One works, always, from axioms adopted for their pragmatic or aesthetic value. Application of these axioms allows the construction of fairly comprehensive approaches to spirituality, but the effect is measurable only in subjective terms. I doubt a magicometer, or a spirituanalytical engine, is achievable. In this I differ from many contemporary occultists, especially in the areas of "psychic research" and "the New (urk) Age" - who insist that the only problem in validating their work is Science's purblind, pig ignorant insistence of scientific method. Comparable, in my arrogant opinion, to insisting that all music is mathematics, or vice-versa. Both are beautiful, both essential within their respective spheres. There are even points of congruence. Yet insisting that one validate the other is a profound error. Does this mean anyone can mix systems at whim? An unprovable opinion of mine is that a suitable system or systems exist for every incarnate being, but by no means are all systems equally valid for everybody. Thoughts? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 72 Fri Aug 03, 1990 SHADES at 21:11 EDT 93. Hmm, that is a very interesting question. In my experience there are many many individual disciplines that one can become involved in that will eventually all net the same final result. Personally, I have been involved with quite a few before taking up the path of the initiate. Every system has its own pro's and con's. It is ultimately a matter of personal preference and idealism. Being in one of the major magicko-spiritual crossroads in the U.S. (Berkeley, CA), I have seen many that are equally valuable in reaching the result. Most anyone you ask will tell you a different definition of spirituality and how it should be best developed. A couple examples which I have personal experience in is: Yoga / Meditation Pathworking Psychic "spirituality" Magick Organized Religion Each has given me different perspectives of the same goal. I do tend to mix all of these systems now in my personal view on occultism and spirituality. Chances are that with most [if not all] of these systems the result could be obtained without any mixture. They are just as useful independantly as in concert. There are also two other systems I have seen used, which I do not have a lot of experience with. These being: Zen (meditation, and the other disciplines) Psycho-Stimulants (as well as Psychodelic drugs) From what I have heard, these are also possible methods to achieve the goal. The second usually being the cop-out, or the easy way to achieve some of the perspectives without knowing how one got there. But they also can have some adverse side-effects as well, and I don't recommend trying this path. Zen is by far probably the most intensive of the disciplines I have encountered. And since I have not tried it myself (nor do I plan to spend 20-30+ years doing so), I cannot really say if it is better or worse than any other way. Of course, as Paul states, any analysis is very subjective anyway. There is nothing inherently wrong with scientific method. It does have its usefulness in the proper context. Some things were not designed to be strictly measured. i.e., spirituality. That is not to say that all spirituality falls outside the realm of science. There has been quite a bit of very tangible research into occultism and psychic phenomenon which can be considered an aspect of spiritualism as a whole. (If you can get your hands on the CIA documents on morphogenetic field theory and the experiements performed in the USA, Soviet Union, and Japan in psychic related phenomenon, I highly recommend you take a good look. There is quite a bit of interesting information there. And if I remember correctly, much of that is now publicly available due to the declassification that happened a few years back.) Anyway, in closing, I would probably say that any system that works for you, in any form, is probably just as good as any other system practiced by another. But by no means does that mean that all systems are equivilant. There ARE very well researched and tried and tested methods of spiritual discipline available. It is your job to find those that work best for you. Anyone else? 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 73 Sat Aug 04, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 00:25 EDT Isn't it time we got to 94? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 74 Sat Aug 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 12:20 EDT Louis - 93 (which is to say: Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law) Not for about 2000 more years (Crowleyan inside joke). Just to clarify, 93 is the qabalistic value (numerology if you prefer, which I don't but the some of the principles are the same) of the Greek word Thelema (theta-epsilon-lambda-eta-mu-alpha) which means "will." It is the short-form, therefore, of the Do what thou wilt... statement. And much faster to type. Thelemites therefore, in this sadly degenerate age, often use 93 in place of the full statement (esp. ifthey are too lazy to program it into a macro). Similarly, 93 is the value of AGAPE, Love, as used in Love is the law, love under will. under will. So I close, at times, with 93 93/93 Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 75 Sat Aug 04, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 20:34 EDT But 93/93 is equal to 1... Do what thou OUGHT should be the whole of the law. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 76 Sat Aug 04, 1990 FASA.2 at 22:29 EDT Louis - Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. EEEK! Subjunctive? Wash your mouth out with soap. Ought - on whose terms? God's (excuse, which one please). The government? Your neighbors? Do what someone thinks you OUGHT to do should be consigned to oblivion. Ah - something YOU think you "ought" to do? Why do you think that? What makes it an ought? If it is - as usual - that the ought comes from someone else, we are back to letting others lead your life for you. "Ought" you to do it because you find it right, even necessary, to accomplish your life as you would have it? Then it is not a subjunctive ought but an imperative MUST and by Gods shall be the whole of the law. The statement "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." does not mean (haven't I done this spiel here yet? Oh well...) do what you want is all the law there is. I may want to get laid. This hardly justifies rape. (Where is the "Love under will" in that?). I may wwant to smoke another cigarette - stupid, unless my WIll includes kicking off from cancer (no one said Law was easy - I am back on the idiot coffin nails as i write this). Will in this context means the drive to achieve your unique starring role ("Every man and every woman is a star") in this incarnation. As you learn more clearly what will help you in that endeavour, everything that helps becomes mandatory, and everything else becomes unthinkable. What sounds like a call to license becomes one of the most stringent constraints upon behaviour possible. But what one "ought" to do? Either it is someone else's idea of what you ought to do, in which case screw them and the horse they rode in on, or it is your perception of what needs doing, in which case you have no business farbling around with ought but "ought" to be doing it right now. Love is the law, love under will. Paul As to 93/93 being 1, sure it is - but 93 is also 0, so 0=1. No problem. Seriously, though - gematria (aka qabalstic numerology) is a meditative technique that serves as a mnemonic and that sparks connections in the mind that sheer logic does not. Some of it premises are mathematical nonsense, but that goes for other, more respectable fields, like computer programming. You disagree? Well: Z=Z+1 is not very good math, is it?) ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 77 Sat Aug 04, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 23:15 EDT Your perception of what needs doing can be flawed. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 78 Sun Aug 05, 1990 SHADES at 06:58 EDT 93 Hmm... It seems a comment on the law of thelema is at hand. Why not let Therion explain this himself? Liber II -- THE MESSAGE OF THE MASTER THERION by Aleister Crowley [ The quotations in this Message are from Liber Legis -- The Book of the Law. -- Ed. ] "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." "There is no Law beyond Do what thou wilt." "The word of the law is [Greek letters: Theta, epsilon, nu, mu, alpha]." [Greek letters] -- Thelema -- means Will. The Key to this Message is this word -- Will. The first obvious meaning of this Law is confirmed by antithesis: "The word of Sin is Restriction." Again: "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." Take this carefully; it seems to imply a theory that if every man and every woman did his and her will -- the true will -- there would be no clashing. "Every man and every woman is a star," and each star moves in an appointed path without interference. There is plenty of room for all; it is only disorder that creates confusion. From these considerations it should be clear that "Do what thou wilt" does not mean "Do what you like." It is the apotheosis of Freedom; but it is also the strictest possible bond. Do what thou wilt -- then do nothing else. Let nothing deflect thee from that austere and holy task. Liberty is absolute to do thy will; but seek to do any other thing whatever, and instantly obstacles must arise. Every act that is not in definite course of that one orbit is erratic, an hindrance. Will must not be two, but one. Note further that this will is not only to be pure, that is, single, as explained above, but also "unassuaged of purpose." This strange phrase must give us pause. It may mean that any purpose in the will would damp it; clearly the "lust of result" is a thing from which it must be delivered. But the phrase may also be interpreted as if it read "with purpose unassuaged' -- i.e., with tireless energy. The conception is, therefore, of an eternal motion, infinite and unalterable. It is Nirvana, only dynamic instead of static -- and this comes to the same thing in the end. The obvious practical task of the magician is then to discover what his will really is, so that he may do it in this manner, and he can best accomplish this by the practices of Liber Thisarb (see Equinox I. VII. 105) or such others as may from one time to another be appointed. It should now be perfectly simple for everybody to understand the Message of the Master Therion. Thou must (1) Find out what is thy Will. (2) Do that Will with (a) one- pointedness, (b) detachment, (c) peace. Then, and then only, art thou in harmony with the Movement of Things, thy will part of, and therefore equal to, the Will of God. And since the will is but the dynamic aspect of the self, and since two different selves could not possess identical wills; then if thy will be God's will, *Thou art That*. There is but one other word to explain. Elsewhere it is written -- surely for our great comfort -- "Love is the law, love under will." This is to be taken as meaning that while Will is the Law, the nature of that Will is Love. But this Love is as it were a by-product of that Will; it does not contradict or supersede that Will; and if apparent contradiction should arise in any crisis, it is the Will that will guide us aright. Lo, while in the Book of the Law is much of Love, there is no word of Sentimentality. Hate itself is almost like Love! Fighting most certainly is Love! "As brothers fight ye!" All the manly races of the world understand this. The Love of Liber Legis is always bold, virile, even orgiastic. There is delicacy, but it is the delicacy of strength. Mighty and terrible and glorious as it is, however, it is but the pennon upon the sacred lance of Will, the damascened inscription upon the swords of the Knight-monks of Thelema. Love is the law, love under will. I hope this serves to help some of you come closer to understanding the law of Thelema. (Even if you choose not to follow it yourself). 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 79 Sun Aug 05, 1990 FASA.2 at 10:44 EDT Shades - Actually, I have never found quoting Alester Crowley in defense of his ownteachings to be terribly profitable. Too much danger of deferring one's own search for the Will in doctrinaire appeals to Therion's own authority (a thought that made him gag). The dangers of fundamentalism are as profound in Thelema as anywhere else - perhaps moreso, since while many are Christian by inertia rather than by passionate commitment, damn few are Thelemite except by their own choice, and often in the face of fierce opposition from family and society. I know that was not your intent in posting the liber, but felt compelled to make the point. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 80 Sun Aug 05, 1990 FASA.2 at 10:50 EDT Louis - Sure, my perception of what needs doing may be- almost certainly will be, on many occasions - flawed. How does this change the basic problem? Only YOU can determine and act upon the demands of your Will. Even if you agree to the suggestion of another, YOU have carried out that decision. And even if a gun is at your head, you have the freedom to refuse to obey its wielder. So "what one ought to do" remains a phantom. We ALL face the daily ordeal of doing what we WILL to do - and if we do our own idiosyncratic Will or Will ourselves to surrender to the dictates of another, no one else bears responsibility for that decision but we ourselves. If my view of what needs doing is flawed, what then shall I do? Taoism points out that ALL action proceeds from a flawed premise. But doing nothing is equally an action. Thus neatly tying that argument into paradox (or as stated in the Postcards - the idea contains its own contradiction). Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 81 Sun Aug 05, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 15:27 CDT You folks obviously arn't going to sit back and wait for me to have time to respond are you? ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 82 Sun Aug 05, 1990 FASA.2 at 16:56 EDT Sloth - It's a fast movin' world, innit? Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 83 Mon Aug 06, 1990 SHADES at 05:28 EDT Paul, 93. Yeah, I do see your point. Of course, as you said, I hadn't meant to "preach the gospel of thelema" in that last message, but rather, I felt that particular document expresses in the most concise terms (at least in my eyes) the meaning of the law (at least as interpreted by its prophet). But then again, I am the type of Thelemite that tends to quote verses from Liber Legis from time to time. ;-) But regardless of how I tend to express my interpretation of the law, I am very aware of the dangers of dogma. Believe me, my view of the universe varies greatly from that of Fra. P., and from the view of most others as well for that matter. ;-) Hey Sloth, whats the matter, can't keep up? Better check in more often! 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 84 Mon Aug 06, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 18:20 CDT Something about Shades seems to make topics go MIGHTY fast! Da <12 new messages before your reply> Sloth ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 85 Mon Aug 06, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 23:43 EDT Fast?They seem stuck at 93! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 86 Tue Aug 07, 1990 SHADES at 03:41 EDT Haha! Yeah, true on both counts! ;-) ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 87 Tue Aug 07, 1990 OLORIN [Dave] at 20:16 EDT Shades: What is the latest on the OTO lawsuits against Berkely. The most recent news I've heard is that the Berkely Police Chief has resigned, and that a Police Review Comission has determined the affadavit (and hence the warrant) was tainted by religious persecution and thus invalid. (BTW: A text description of the raid should be in this Library around File #470) --Dave ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 88 Wed Aug 08, 1990 SHADES at 04:43 EDT Dave - 93. The latest on the raid is pretty much what you have heard. Although there are a few more details such as the suit being filed against the city of Berkeley and the Police department. The Berkeley police department was out of its juristiction when they entered the Lodge to begin with (It is in Oakland, about 1 block away from the Berkeley border), and they didn't find drugs or anything else that was on the warrant (nor were they really looking for any), but they sure spent a lot of time videotaping the temple and confescating personal property of the lodge members. In fact, they arrested everyone who was in the lodge at the time (with the exception of 2 people, one who just got there, and one who was not a member -- luckily I didn't come in that day), and some of the folks were held in jail for up to 3 days! Another funny thing about it is, when we called in to the police station to ask for information about one of the members arrested, the officer who took the call said, "Oh, you mean the satanist?". Heads are gonna roll for this one! If anyone else is interested, I could upload some transcripts from the Thelema Lodge newsletter in regards to the incident, for all to peruse. (I don't know the extent of the file that you mentioned, as I haven't read it). Although that was quite a while back now, I know that I, nor many of my friends who were involved, will likely forget this incident soon. Goes to show how strong religious prosecution still is. Even in a city heralded for its dedication to personal freedoms such as Berkeley. Be careful out there! 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 89 Wed Aug 08, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 19:04 EDT Uh,93 and 93/93 add up to 94,not 335... ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 90 Wed Aug 08, 1990 FASA.2 at 20:57 EDT Actually it is 93=93/93 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 91 Thu Aug 09, 1990 L.EPSTEIN [Louis] at 01:25 EDT Where I learned math,93=93/1....while 93/93=1. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 92 Thu Aug 09, 1990 SHADES at 22:39 EDT Louis - 93. Actually, the 93 93/93 thing isn't meant to be math, its a quick and simple abbreviation for "Love is the law, love under will". And the opening "93" stands for "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law". (These two phrases are often used to open and close letters, especially on magick oriented business, or at least thats what I do.) The 335 is an abbreviation for a word that represents my magickal motto, which is also used as a signature. Sorry for any misunderstanding. Hey Paul, how did the RTC go last night? I was stuck on the side of a road for a few hours last night and couldn't make it online to check it out. 93 93/93 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 93 Fri Aug 10, 1990 HERM [ ERT assist.] at 18:52 EDT And I thought 42 was the answer! :( ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 94 Sat Aug 11, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 [Screwtape] at 00:06 PDT "Make Mine Mathematics"...... oops, wrong topic! ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 95 Sat Aug 11, 1990 D.BURCH at 12:54 CDT Hi! Although I have read A.C. and use him as a reference, not all ritual magicians are Thelemites. Many of us see that religion as an expression of A.C.'s ego. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 96 Sun Aug 12, 1990 SHADES at 07:40 EDT D.Burch, 93. Welcome. I agree, not all ritual magicians are Thelemites. I imagine some would have had that impression considering that both Paul and I attest to this connection. (Although I am sure we each have our own ideas of how the law of Thelema relates to us individually). This is indeed not the case for everyone! Many magicians use A.C. and the other pioneers in the art and science called Magick, as references for their own unique blend of ritual. That is how I originally came to become a Thelemite, through the searching and studying and practicing, til I eventually had enough information to make decisions on what I wanted to accomplish, and how. I based my decision on many different sources of information, and although I do not agree with A.C. on every case, I found truth (at least for myself) in some of his writings, and in the Book of the Law as well (as delivered unto him via Aiwaz/Aiwass.) Now, not everything you read should be taken as literal truth about A.C. and his writings. There are many things in there that folks will take as deliverances from his Ego (as mighty as it was). There is some truth in this. But not everything you read is useless either. The prophet shall make difficult the ordeals. There are many twists and tricks in his writings that you will have to overcome before you can completely understand the man and his message. On the surface, it may also seem like the babblings of a lunatic, to some. Everyone who reads his work should make their own decision about the man, and what his words mean to them. But at least read enough to have some kind of basis before making a hasty decision. Of course, considering you stated that you have read A.C., and use him as a reference, you probably understand this, and so have already made your decisions. The diatribe is mainly for folks who are reading this who haven't put in the research time yet. Anyway, the bottom line is that you don't have to follow the Law of Thelema in order to practice ceremonial magick. Nor do you have to follow any one specific teacher in your practice either. But, you should research many different traditions, and read many authors before jumping into this! Btw, my personal impression of A.C., is that he was a great teacher, and powerful magician, through whom I have gained a great deal of knowledge and insight, but I do not worship him, nor do I agree with all of his opinions on magick, and especially not with his way of living. But despite this, there is much truth (for me) in a good deal of his teachings, and I do live by the Law of Thelema (and the bylaws of the Argentum Astrum), and do consider myself a Thelemite. 93 93/93. 335 ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 97 Tue Sep 11, 1990 FASA.2 at 22:59 EDT My - it's quiet in here. Hel-lOOOO? (hel-looooo!) (hel-loooo!) Wow - what an echo. Anyone have any ideas for discussion? Magickal training/exercises? (And 1 and-2 and-stretch that chakra and -3 and -4 and project that astral and...). Talismans? Taliswomen? Spells? Spelling bees? Spell checkers? Hex dumps? Or we could apply an idea of Shades' - upload Crowley's Book of the Law and watch the fireworks. (Peck peck). Oh well - I am out of town next week - maybe things will pick up later. Paul ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 98 Wed Sep 12, 1990 R.BINGHAM2 [Da Sloth] at 18:15 CDT Most the boards I've been attending have died out a bit. Things tend to die out at the start of summer as well as the end. ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 99 Wed Sep 12, 1990 HERM [ ERT assist.] at 20:49 EDT People saving their money till October.\ ------------ Category 13, Topic 15 Message 100 Wed Sep 12, 1990 D.EDELSTEIN2 [Irreverent] at 23:42 PDT Yeah!! ------------ REPly to topic, QUIt reading STArt new topic, #,#-# read prior PERmanently ignore this topic or to continue ?