Scientific Illuminism vs Thelema
-
- Deliberately, therefore, did he take refuge in vagueness. Not to veil the truth to the Neophyte, but to warn him against valuing non-essentials. Should therefore the candidate hear the name of any God, let him not rashly assume that it refers to any known God, save only the God known to himself. Or should the ritual speak in terms (however vague) which seem to imply Egyptian, Taoist, Buddhist, Indian, Persian, Greek, Judaic, Christian, or Moslem philosophy, let him reflect that this is a defect of language; the literary limitation and not the spiritual prejudice of the man P.
- Especially let him guard against the finding of definite sectarian symbols in the teaching of his master, and the reasoning from the known to the unknown which assuredly will tempt him.
We labour earnestly, dear brother, that you may never be led away to perish upon this point; for thereon have many holy and just men been wrecked. By this have all the visible systems lost the essence of wisdom.
We have sought to reveal the Arcanum; we have only profaned it.
Liber LXI vel Causae
Q. Is Thelema compatible with Crowley's original ideas of Scientific Illuminism?
That question has been on my mind for some time and I've yet to find a solution. So I am interested in hearing other people's views on this.
As I understand it Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was an attempt at constructing a fully testable, non-sectarian system of initiation, with methods stripped of dogma and superstition. Crowley began publishing his methods in the first volume of The Equinox, and up until issue 7 he remains relatively consistent in his promotion of a non-sectarian, scientific system of initiation. (Aha in no.3 and Liber 418 in no.5 being the exceptions.)
But in issue 7 of The Equinox, Crowley seems to break the rules of his own game by introducing a definite sectarian system with it's own specific symbols - Thelema. On top of this the main focus of Thelema is a "revealed" text that was dictated to Crowley by a discarnate intelligence called Aiwass in an Egyptian hotel room. (I struggle with that part sometimes.
)How does Crowley's claim of the reception, a claim that cannot be independently verified, fit into a sceptical, scientific system of initiation? The story of the reception is almost a matter of faith because you have to take Crowley's word for it. That's hardly scientific.
-
@Her said
"The story of the reception is almost a matter of faith because you have to take Crowley's word for it. That's hardly scientific.
"Well..... I think one does have to accept that Crowley didn't just write Liber Legis as a deliberate scam. Elsewise we're in L-R-H territory....
But I think skepticism about the mode of transmission is just fine with being a Thelemite. I still think Hulse's conjecture that it was classical subconscious "automatic writing" deserves serious consideration. It doesn't matter to me if Aiwass wasn't speaking in loud, unaccented English! Crowley might be forgiven the implied hypocrisy (i.e., starting to confabulate and proseltyze a bit after going on so much about being scientific and non-sectarian) given the sublime nature of the text that was received.
( For Hulse, see forum thread: heruraha.net/viewtopic.php?t=488 )
There are a host of things that Thelemites tend to take literally that could arguably be interpreted in a more metaphorical fashion -- and still be a solid member of the "93 current" in my opinion. Facing physically toward Boleskine? Taking razor to breast in the Mass of the Phoenix? Even interpreting the loads of sexual symbolism in the texts as specific instructions for, um, juice mixing and cake baking? All optional, IMHO...
Steve
-
@Her said
"Is Thelema compatible with Crowley's original ideas of Scientific Illuminism?"
Excellent question, and one on which I've spent various periods seriously reflecting over the last 30 years. It seems a bigger question, I think, because - mostly along lines you noted - the way that the A.'.A.'. system, in particular, was presented (in contrast to, say, what the A.'.A.'. system inherently is) did change. The two biggest shifts appeared to be the points of Crowley's attaining 8=3 (in December 1909 - between Equinox 2 and 3) and 9=2 (October 1915, between Equinox Vol. I and Vol. III).
More about those thresholds in a bit, but back to your post...
"As I understand it Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was an attempt at constructing a fully testable, non-sectarian system of initiation, with methods stripped of dogma and superstition."
I agree with "nonsectarian" in terms of both the essence of the system and the intentional space for each aspirant to ultimately relate his or her own inner symbols to the illumination attained. (I said that last part badly, but I'm not going to do any better at this hour - the main thing I meant was that every sect should have equal access to the methods and that Truth is ultimately nonsectarian).
But I would disagree that the method of the A.'.A.'. was ever intended to be nonsectarian. The passage you quoted speaks eloquently of the underlying problem that some "sect" had to be selected for the purpose of building a language - therefore, the Probationer was alerted from the beginning not to place overmuch attention on its particulars, just use it as a tool.
From the beginning - before even Equinox 1 was published in 1909 - the A.'.A.'. initiation rituals already was intensely sectarian in method, especially as reflected in the grade rituals. The Probationer initiation itself is pretty nonsectarian. A quasi "grade ritual" important in the Probationer grade emphasizes the Old Gods in the form of the seven planets and their promise. The 1=10 initiation is an Osirian ritual, and the 2=9 ritual is built around Horus and the emergence into the New Aeon. The 5=6 initiation as conceived at that time was a self-initiation process centered on old Graeco-Egyptian formulae.
It's not so important exactly what these were, as is the point that very specific (almost exclusively Egyptian and Grecian) formulae were used. Some definite sectarian methodology was employed. But, from the beginning, the Probationer was alerted to the importance of seeing past the particular form to what was important underneath.
The formulation of the A.'.A.'. system was all about creating a specific system to deliver a specific result. It is, therefore, entirely pragmatic. For example, one needn't believe that there is a Goddess named Artemis in order to meet Her in a ritual, work with Her, and derive benefit from the interaction. Her suspect existence is no reason not to schedule lunch with Her!
BTW, as a point of history, I'm not sure that the Scientific Illuminism approach should be credited to Crowley - at least, not entirely. Soror Meral and I discussed this many times, and I eventually came around to her view that it was primarily George Cecil Jones' contribution. Jones was a scientist by training and profession. Crowley was characterologically attracted to the approach and, I think, was for this reason especially drawn to adepts such as Jones and Bennett who were experimental and empirical. From fragments of remarks by AC here and there, it seems likely that the whole Scientific Illuminism approach which became the A.'.A.'. hallmark was originally a Cecil Jones idea, with which AC then ran. The A.'.A.'. documents that appeared in the earliest issues of The Equinox - especially the seminal Liber E and Liber O - were written before Crowley was willing to embrace The Book of the Law - during the time he'd lost the manuscript and was doing his best to forget the whole thing - and especially bear the mark of it (to their benefit, I think). He was willing to follow the instructions concerning the new enunciation, but, at that time, considered it an "inner secret" - there was no mention of Liber L. before 2=9, and the 2=9 initiation admitted one to a ceremonial exposure to the Horus formulations (Horus as Pentagram completing the Cross of Osiris from 1=10).
One last point on Jones: It was after his departure from active day-to-day involvement with A.'.A.'. (just before Equinox 5) that more of Crowley's individual style began to emerge. But, more subtly (and particularly affecting Equinox 3 and 4 - the 1910 issues), we see the influence of Crowley having accepted Liber Legis in the summer of 1909 and then attained to 8=3 that December.
And it's about a year after that point that the second stage of disclosure of the Holy Books (A.'.A.'. Class A Documents) occurred. It's not usually mentioned that the Holy Books of Thelema (other than Liber L.) came in two main waves, respectively following by about a year Crowley's attainment of 5=6 (in the A.'.A.'. sense) and 8=3. His 5=6 working began in early 1906, reached a significant breakthrough that summer, then climaxed in the results of October 1906. It was then in October through December 1907 that he received Liber VII, Liber LXV, Liber Stellae Rubeae, part of Liber CCXXXI, the trio of Porta Lucis, Tav, and Trigrammaton, and Liber Ararita. He then attained to 8=3 in December 1909 and, between the fall of 1910 and the spring of 1911, he received Libri B, Tzaddi, Cheth, A'ash, and the remainder of CCXXXI.
"Crowley began publishing his methods in the first volume of The Equinox, and up until issue 7 he remains relatively consistent in his promotion of a non-sectarian, scientific system of initiation. (Aha in no.3 and Liber 418 in no.5 being the exceptions.) "
I think AHA shows what was more or less the original plan all along: It is a fictional work (based on Crowley's actual experience) that begins as the story of traditional methods - those (especially in terms of yoga) that were gathered for the foundation of the core A.'.A.'. system. It brings this to a head and then, as a fruit of them, dramatizes the reception of Liber L. and the new enunciation with new working methods. Finally, it concludes, in response to the wise student's query, that the old and the new have to be held to the standard of proof in experience.
Liber 418 is as empirical as can be because - especially as originally published in The Equinox (without Crowley's later extensive marginalia) it is simply the report of a working. What one chooses to make of it is another matter - this is simply the diary of a very major magical working.
"But in issue 7 of The Equinox, Crowley seems to break the rules of his own game by introducing a definite sectarian system with it's own specific symbols - Thelema. On top of this the main focus of Thelema is a "revealed" text that was dictated to Crowley by a discarnate intelligence called Aiwass in an Egyptian hotel room. (I struggle with that part sometimes.
)"The original system was never intended to be free of religion. Quite the contrary. The motto "The Method of Science - The Aim of Religion" emphasizes the aims were always passionately religious to begin with. Again, the differentiation is between method and purpose. Liber O (for example) doesn't at all deny communication with nonmaterial beings and other reality-altering inner experiences - in fact, it teaches you how to go about getting them! - but it does give the soundest advice I've ever read about how to regard them when they occur.
In other words, I don't see a contradiction between the two.
I do see, though, that there is a going off in a particular direction after having established the more general framework. I think this was always part of the plan, at least semi-consciously - witness the way that the initiation rituals were created years before.
But there are those two definite thresholds: Crowley's final acceptance of Liber L. in summer 1909, and this his passage to 9=2 in 1915. His True Will had been articulated as, "To Teach the Next Step," and he initially understood the Next Step to be "the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel." Having substantially completed the building of the system that would deliver that result, his 9=2 initiation brought a different understanding of the Next Step, now as meaning "the Law of Thelema." Crowley then set out to specifically promulgate this as the Next Step for humanity as a whole and also of individuals.
His duty as a 5=6 to 7=4 was different from his duty as a 9=2.
"How does Crowley's claim of the reception, a claim that cannot be independently verified, fit into a skeptical, scientific system of initiation?"
Liber O gives the right attitude to approach this, I think.
But it doesn't matter if you can confirm the event. That's simply his record. The result itself can be confirmed by results derived from it in practice. That is, it doesn't mater how somebody discovered that sulphuric acid should be added to water (rather than adding water to the acid) - what matters is that the result of the original scientist's experience can be applied by others predictably. Similarly, the scientific issue here, I think, is whether the Law of Thelema, as received and understood, can be applied to produce intended spiritual results.
The story of the reception is almost a matter of faith because you have to take Crowley's word for it. That's hardly scientific.
" -
93,
@Her said
"The story of the reception is almost a matter of faith because you have to take Crowley's word for it. That's hardly scientific.
"Keep in mind, though, that Crowley went to great lengths (see Equinox of the Gods) to demonstrate what he considered to be the "scientific" (or otherwise empirical) evidence for the authenticity of the process of the reception of AL, e.g. explaining the statistical unlikelihood of the chain of events, the numerical correspondences and apparent "predictions" in the book itself, and so on.
93 93/93
David
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"BTW, as a point of history, I'm not sure that the Scientific Illuminism approach should be credited to Crowley - at least, not entirely. Soror Meral and I discussed this many times, and I eventually came around to her view that it was primarily George Cecil Jones' contribution."
Interesting. I had assumed - for no good reason that Crowley contributed it. But I also assumed that he got it from Levi. Although Levi makes what seems like many spurious assertions in Transcendental Magic, he emphasizes a sort of scientific approach. Moreover, that sort of thing appears to have been part of the broader magical culture in which Crowley was raised. I forget in which book, but I remember reading quotes from some early GD folk, including Mathers, in which they talked about magic as scientific and how they would eventually discover its principles as certainly as they understood chemistry - though they didn't really pose a "scientific" method for their own pursuit of magic. Then again, maybe Jones helped to contribute to this earlier GD emphasis on science.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"It seems a bigger question, I think, because - mostly along lines you noted - the way that the A.'.A.'. system, in particular, was presented (in contrast to, say, what the A.'.A.'. system inherently is) did change."
I think that hits the nail right on the head for me. I've always viewed the A.'.A.'. system through the lens of Liber O. "By doing certain things certain results will follow." To me that one sentence is the very core of what I think Scientific Illuminism is. Up until now I have viewed the A.'.A.'. system as a kind of road map. To get from A to B do X, but X is only a means to an end and nothing more.
With the introduction of Thelema method X suddenly acquires a deeper, more religious meaning that takes it beyond mere technique. That's where I have always become a little confused and felt that Crowley was blurring the lines of his own system just to sneak Thelema into it.
I can see that this is yet another instance of the importance of paying attention to the Crowley time-line. It seems that Crowley's writings always have to be viewed within the context of when they were written and who he was working with at the time. This is something I constantly seem to forget.
-
@Her said
"With the introduction of Thelema method X suddenly acquires a deeper, more religious meaning that takes it beyond mere technique. That's where I have always become a little confused and felt that Crowley was blurring the lines of his own system just to sneak Thelema into it."
I'm left wondering what the resistance to religion might be.
For example, if you think of the religious elements as simply the best means he could find to communicate an otherwise incommunicable map of the nature of the human psyche, then it's still just another tool in the toolbox.
"I can see that this is yet another instance of the importance of paying attention to the Crowley time-line."
Definitely something to do IMHO! It makes a whole lotta stuff clear that just isn't clear otherwise.
"It seems that Crowley's writings always have to be viewed within the context of when they were written and who he was working with at the time."
And also: for whom he was writing it. He would give varying answers and perspectives not so much according to time as according to the specific ears for which it was intended - not as a secrecy thing, but in terms of what would be most effective for a person to hear according to their specific stage of development and the particular work they were doing at that point.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Her said
"
The passage you quoted speaks eloquently of the underlying problem that some "sect" had to be selected for the purpose of building a language - therefore, the Probationer was alerted from the beginning not to place overmuch attention on its particulars, just use it as a tool.
"
"This has been a very interesting, informative and thought provoking thread. Thanks
The above quote from Jim brought to my mind immediately the verses in Liber LXV:
-
For the colours are many, but the light is one.
-
Therefore thou writest that which is of mother of emerald, and of lapis-lazuli, and of turquoise, and of alexandrite.
-
Another writeth the words of topaz, and of deep amethyst, and of gray sapphire, and of deep sapphire with a tinge as of blood.
-
Therefore do ye fret yourselves because of this.
-
Be not contented with the image.
-
I who am the Image of an Image say this.
-
Debate not of the image, saying Beyond! Beyond!
One mounteth unto the Crown by the moon and by the Sun, and by the arrow, and by the Foundation, and by the dark home of the stars from the black earth.
-
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm left wondering what the resistance to religion might be.
"I have no resistence to religion at all.
To me religion is a very personal thing, but the original motto of the Equinox was The Aim of Religion. The Method of Science. As far as I'm concerned science is both objective and detached. Religion is neither of those two. That's why I feel that Crowley began to blur the lines of Scientific Illuminism in no.7 of the Equinox.
-
But this motto calls for coexistence of both - of the characteristics of religion and of science.
The work must be passionate or it will fail. Therefore, it isn't solely founded on the scientific method, but also on the religious aim.
-
<deleted>
-
Yes, and also, we've grown up to realize we didn't know anything, so if we should discount religion we should on the same grounds discount science. Therefore the creeds seem perfectly logical to me.
-
@TripleFlower said
"If we discount the reception of the Book of the Law because we can only take Crowleys word that he approached it in a scientific manner, then we must discount ALL SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERIES THAT ARE NOT DIRECTLY OUR OWN."
That's not what I am saying at all. Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was to place the magical tools and techniques in the hands of the student so that he or she could obtain direct experience for themselves. It literally is personal experimentation via the method of science. Crowley's testimony of the reception falls completely outside of that scheme. You only have Crowley's word for what happened and you either have take it or leave it. It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith.
Also even if the principles within Liber Legis prove to work in practice, it still does not mean that Crowley's account of the reception is true.
Personal experience Personally I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing in the notion of a discarnate "Secret Chief" that appears in an Egyptian hotel room on three successive days to dictate a book to Aleister Crowley.
Just to set the record straight. It appears that some people think I object to Crowley deviating from the principles of the motto of the Equinox. I don't. It is merely something that puzzles me and seems to be something that slips below the radar of some people quite often.
-
Heru,
Good points. Well said.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
@Her said
"That's not what I am saying at all. Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was to place the magical tools and techniques in the hands of the student so that he or she could obtain direct experience for themselves."
I wouldn't put it that way at all. "Experience in magick" wasn't per se what it was about at all. That's still means, not end.
I would say that the purpose was to use the empirical (not scientific, actually, but empirical) method - applied, by each individual, to magical and mystical techniques - in order to to attain illumination.
"It literally is personal experimentation via the method of science."
Not by science, really, but by empricism.
And it isn't primarily personal experience to the extent that it doesn't usually start with making stuff up - that is, it doesn't really "start from nothing." It starts with applying known, traditional techniques and keeping a record of the results if any, and under varying conditions. (I make this statement based on the specific assignments within the system.)
"Crowley's testimony of the reception falls completely outside of that scheme."
Not at all. It's history. Sciences starts with history. This is no different than, "I was wondering outside during the rain one night looking for food, and lightning hit a bush and started a fire and killed a rabbit, and when I left the rabbit next to the fire (or so I called it), it became better to eat." That's report is an important foundation of empirical science and a basis for later structured experimentation!
To say it a different way: It's a report of result, not method.
"You only have Crowley's word for what happened and you either have take it or leave it. It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith."
And - as others have said above - this is true of the anecdotes behind every other scientific discovery.
When a scientist awakes from a dream that has a solution, are we to question the basis of the breakthrough because we can't replicate the dream? Of course not! The real work begins when the scientist applies that dreamt solution and it works. That's exactly what Crowley did.
"Also even if the principles within Liber Legis prove to work in practice, it still does not mean that Crowley's account of the reception is true.
"Still sounds like you have an axe to grind here. (Nor do I really understand what this statement has to do with the original topic or the questions under discussion.)
Something basic to the scientific community is that a scientist's reported work is generally accepted without any reason to presume they are lying.
"Personal experience Personally I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing in the notion of a discarnate "Secret Chief" that appears in an Egyptian hotel room on three successive days to dictate a book to Aleister Crowley.
"I suppose it's 20-30 years or so of fruitful communication with discarnate entities that makes it easy for me to accept this story as almost certainly verbatim truth.
"Just to set the record straight. It appears that some people think I object to Crowley deviating from the principles of the motto of the Equinox. I don't. It is merely something that puzzles me and seems to be something that slips below the radar of some people quite often.
"Religion is what it was all about. Scientific methodology (so-called) was just a means to an end. The aim of the whole work was a religious result - the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel - the very kind of result that Crowley documented (in one variation) in the Cairo Working.
-
93
May I suggest, Heru, that it doesn't matter whether you or I believe what Crowley wrote and experienced. What matters, as you point out, is that he left the technique, and described his experience.
And should you follow that technique, don't be surprised if a few years down the line you wake up one morning and find Hadit, Nuit and Ra Hoor Khuit sitting with you by your bedside.
93, 93/93
-
Ye are against the people, O my chosen!
does "tak{ing} refuge in vagueness" actually "warn ...against valuing non-essentials"? I suggest that it does not and that specifying the essentials and comparing these with and contrasting these against the non-essentials (if these be known) will be of greater efficacy in producing lasting progress. in a nascient science operating in subjective regions we may expect a great number of false starts and complete derailments (compare the dead end of phlogiston). in the mean time whatever data was acquired or accumulated must be preserved against loss through time by providing it as an object of veneration or as a feature in cultic operation. this is the state at which we are currently operating outside of strict objective and material applications.
@Her said
"{quoting Liber LXI vel Causae} Should therefore the candidate hear the name of any God, let him not rashly assume that it refers to any known God, save only the God known to himself. Or should the ritual speak in terms (however vague) which seem to imply Egyptian, Taoist, Buddhist, Indian, Persian, Greek, Judaic, Christian, or Moslem philosophy, let him reflect that this is a defect of language; the literary limitation and not the spiritual prejudice of the man P."
here we have the start of a clarified methodology, on an individual basis (without resort as yet to peer review) of the individual mystic."{continuing quote} 24. Especially let him guard against the finding of definite sectarian symbols in the teaching of his master, and the reasoning from the known to the unknown which assuredly will tempt him. ..."
note that this caution is about one's master, not about one's self. in a manner this (if emphasized) would provide for the dedicated student a reason to dispute with and to distance oneself from Crowleyan cults.let me state this more plainly. there are differentiated platforms of exposition being promoted or promulgated in varying ways, at times disjointed, even at cross-purposes. on the one hand we have ideals of scientific scrutiny and advance intended to refine and perfect the methods under consideration (even if these cannot initially be described with precision). this includes frank warnings against inference or manufacture of cultic dogma and speculation without warrant (here classed appropriately as 'superstition' by Heru).
on the other hand we have proliferated cultic embellishment within the same social milieu doing precisely what is warned against. I suggest to you that the reason that this is effected in this manner is so as to pursue what religion tends to be helpful in achieving: the preservation (as in amber) of certain expressions or ideas so as to serve future aspirants with insight and skill. those who preserve may not be scientifically disposed, and this is satisfactory ("...the slaves shall serve").
@Her said
"Q. Is Thelema compatible with Crowley's original ideas of Scientific Illuminism?"
a tricky question. if you mean compatible with what is stipulated in Liber Causae, then Thelema as it proceeds as a cult is not really compatible, no. this is one of the reasons that the Crowleyan cults are doomed by their own myopic stagnation and flagrant, worthless delusions. they will be forever self-selected to a social backwater without any scientific value as long as they persist in thinking they can fuse these modalities or strands of endeavour. they cannot ever do so, and this document explains how they can escape their ongoing problem. it's a hold-over from previous generations struggling to marry religion and science with religious epistemology trumping rationalism, thereby destroying it in the process. this is what both makes the notion of scientific illuminism attractive and pits it adamantly against base-level methodologies with which religious are smitten. (cf. tales of Galileo and the Church of his time in terms of cosmology/astronomy). once one is familiar with both modalities one may be innoculated against its confirmation bias and leading premises (as by Liber Causae), however repugnant this will seem to zealous cultists.@Her said
"...Crowley's concept of Scientific Illuminism was an attempt at constructing a fully testable, non-sectarian system of initiation, with methods stripped of dogma and superstition. Crowley began publishing his methods in the first volume of The Equinox, and up until issue 7 he remains relatively consistent in his promotion of a non-sectarian, scientific system of initiation. (Aha in no.3 and Liber 418 in no.5 being the exceptions.) But in issue 7 of The Equinox, Crowley ...introduc{es} a definite sectarian system with it's own specific symbols - Thelema."
agreed. this has happened many times in the history of science - the scientific method is disrupted and waylaid by the urge to sacrifice it to achieve the delusion of religion's promise. this is why there are competing cults without any reliable means to choose amongst them, and why the method of science is superior insofar as applicable, reliable technology can be gleaned from it.I am asserting not that the Beast was at fault for putting his energies into these twin strands of 'The Current' - merely that those of his students who fall into religious method(s) are helping only with one modality of the cult: preserving the data as such until someone with greater scientific capacity comes along. one may only carry through that for which one is suited. when the Master has no successors of sufficient quality to persist in the illuminating endeavour along scientific lines, then all which may be hoped for is that what was achieved in the way of refinement of methods may be retained, rather than completely discarded by those without eyes to see. he may have even been of two minds on the matter himself. that he left some tools to effect the scientific character of the illuminism he sought to promote should be considered admirable, and we can be grateful for his effort.
@Her said
" ...the main focus of Thelema is a "revealed" text that was dictated to Crowley by a discarnate intelligence.... How does Crowley's claim of the reception, a claim that cannot be independently verified, fit into a sceptical, scientific system of initiation?"
the problem with this kind of a specification is that the term 'Thelema' applies both to natural principle(s) and to social constructs or aggregates. when you seem to be talking about the social aggregate, of course they are obsessed with their Magic Books, yes. this is a longstanding bias amongst human beings. we are hopeful about our new storage technologies.when you regard Thelema as a principle of human nature, then the main focus of Thelema as such is the human will, even the ideal of the True Will which serves to achieve success where cults will fail. more, in response to Heru, below.
Thus ye have star & star, system & system; let not one know well the other!
-
thou hast all in the clear light, and some, though not all, in the dark.
{some reshuffling has occurred, as well as combining of posts}
@Her said
"...the lens of Liber O. "By doing certain things certain results will follow." To me that one sentence is the very core of what I think Scientific Illuminism is."
the certainty of those results are disputed and at issue.@Jim Eshelman said
"...the way that the A.'.A.'. system, in particular, was presented (in contrast to, say, what the A.'.A.'. system inherently is) did change."
@Her said
"Up until now I have viewed the A.'.A.'. system as a kind of road map. To get from A to B do X, but X is only a means to an end and nothing more. With the introduction of Thelema method X suddenly acquires a deeper, more religious meaning that takes it beyond mere technique. ...Crowley was blurring the lines of his own system just to sneak Thelema into it."
I will deal with this in other threads relating to the essence of "what the A.'.A.'. is", particularly outside of any system or culture. suffice it at this time to say that it was made rather plain to me by stipulating it as an extension of "the Great White Brotherhood". since then i have laboured to understand its character in comparison to groups like the Taoist Celestial Masters. Third Order business will inevitably remain half-concealed.@Her said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm left wondering what the resistance to religion might be."
I have no resistence to religion at all."
then you are not following out Liber Causae's recommendations and will not effect a scientific illuminism. it will be left to others in your stead. those who ask what resistance to religion there might be are insufficiently familiar with both and better suited to the promulgation to the people of cultic standards.@Her said
"To me religion is a very personal thing, but the original motto of the Equinox was The Aim of Religion. The Method of Science. As far as I'm concerned science is both objective and detached. Religion is neither of those two....."
then the matter is somewhat complicated by semantics. effectively the difference between spirituality (which you are calling here 'religion') and religion proper is the number of people involved, the ordinary characteristics established in its pursuit, and the variables concretized within any temporal and geographic zone (complicated by exported or 'universalist' religions and liberated travel/communication due to technological advance).what is not being covered here are the referents to the motto. it is insufficiently clear, within a religio-spiritual context, what 'method of science' might look like (this is nascient), though its principles in a materialistic and objectivist empiricism are fairly well-established (and why those such as Thorndike espouse the notion that magic is primitive science). it is insufficiently clear in general to what "The Aim of Religion" relates. ignoring for the moment any specialized or initiated meanings of this motto implied by its capitalization, not only is there no singular aim for religions, but they are not easily compatible or executed in the same fashion.
it is therefore all well and good to mouth the motto, but without specificity as to what this scientific method will be applied, a diversity of results will be difficult to consolidate into a meaningful set of data. insufficient familiarity with the method and specificity as to the aim leads merely into a replication of cult - quickly squelching any scientific illuminism from arising.
@Her said
"{responding to TripleFlower} ...It is not possible to confirm Crowley's account by personal experimentation. It is a matter of faith.... "
there are several disciplines intersecting here and colliding. some of these collisions occur due to the nature of religious epistemology. where we are talking about history and its relation to specialty events and religious heros your assertion is insufficiently strident by my assessment. not only is it not possible to 'confirm' this account, but it is wholly and completely unimportant to do so except so as to fashion ourselves as cultists downwind of the Beast (because doubt, not faith, is our primary tool of achievement).what may be replicated and explored, experimented, will be the constructs made using these tools, both by instrument and process. when we have replicated the finding of True Will, had K&C of the HGA, and received our own Lawbook, then we can begin to compare notes with the Master. until then we are pawns within the cultic milieu after him, solidifying into dogma the results of his endeavours.
imagine, if you will, that scientists began to revere and worship the data that they have acquired in statistical analysis and record-keeping. preserving it out of holy duty, their ultimately superstitious pursuits might assist some active scientists in the future who will use, refine, and then attempt to apply that data rather than merely emphasize its sacred quality and enforce preservation. By their fruits ye shall know them.
@Her said
" ...I find it odd that Thelemites can laugh and pour scorn on other traditions that have equally bizarre accounts of their genesis, but don't even think twice about believing ...."
I think that I have adequately addressed the divergence of modalities here. allow me to simply note that pouring of scorn and biased emphasis is precisely the Method of Religion.I suggest that, alike to the actions of others, ignoring the contentions within works such as Liber Causae, and further, failing to become specific (or refine to specificity due to study) about this motto damages and ultimately undermines the scientific aspect of scientific illuminism. all of this depends upon philosophic acumen in the realm of epistemology - something with which most involved with scientific illuminism have little to no skill.
as such, and as a contribution of more than irritated criticism with respect to the cults of the Beast, please allow me to provide some rudimentary ideas pertaining to the motto under scrutiny. methods generally may be evaluated by quality, and empiricism in a physical, apparent dimension are sufficiently well-studied so as to be employed in a variety of ways to exploratory effect. the details of employed application thereafter will require peer review to achieve supportable contention.
aims being the fulcrum methodological success, their particulars will need be at least identified as a body, even if these be at odds. I do not agree that a resort to vagueness does anything but support religious agencies and hierarchs. it is obvious by its nomenclature that the primary vector of "success" with respect to aims inherent to this subculture is associated to illumination, the implication being a condition of clarified consciousness whose features have been provided description by numerous cults, including the Buddhist and Gnostic.
the primary challenge in pursuit of replicable success in results is evaluation, and too much latitude left to perception and isolated pockets of "adepts" issuing proclamations about condition, aggrandizing and rewarding candidates ostensibly part of the enterprise will inevitably compromise it and become the focus of social strife (compare politics and economics intending equalitarian or communalistic aims when the reality is in fact that hierarchs and social classes are continuing to operate at odds with its values of implementation).
until such a time as greater empirical methods are developed outside of cultic traditions, it behooves us to simultaneously share as much as we are able from our own Magical Records and to suspend our heavy, emphasized, strong disbelief about the astonishing, miraculous, and supernatural elements included therein. levelled out of humility, those of outstanding condition will learn to fend for themselves without being propped up as idols and issued social power (something featured at least partly as an aspect of Plato's Republic and its Philosopher-Sages).
Behold! the rituals of the old time are black. Let the evil ones be cast away; let the good ones be purged by the prophet! Then shall this Knowledge go aright.
-
Just so you know, this thread was last active seven years ago. The parties are not likely to respond. You may be mostly talking to yourself.