What would it mean to you?
-
- I have always tried not to let to let what I don't understand and appreciate about the more religious writings in Thelema bother me—I will come to understand it in the future or I won't.
Or, looking at it from the other side. When a passage or a book, or an idea connects to my situation and my practice, it does exactly that, and nothing should be able to change that fact.
- In regards to the practical instruction connected to Thelema, the Class D documents, they have always stood on their own merits in my mind, and have little connection to The Book of the Law.
In the first instance, if it was revealed that Crowley considered Thelema to be a big joke or swindle—which makes no sense because there is very little indication that he profited from it in ways we would have expected if this were the case—I suppose I would have some soul searching to do. In the end though, I would imagine I would keep my insights as useful things.
In the second instance, nothing would change. It was in fact an appreciation on my part that Crowley's life and work summed up the western magical tradition—there really being no alternative if I am going to practice magick—which attracted me, and allowed me to consider Thelema.
Love and Will
-
Crowley went through something similar himself with his break with Mathers. He deemed Mathers unworthy and a fraud, subsequently "destroying" the order by publishing its material (though not truly destroying it).
The value is in the methods and science rather than in the person. I'd take the same approach with Crowley. If it works it works.
-
I think the recently posted meditational passage from Liber LXV really expresses my current feeling
"There must ever be division in the word.
For the colours are many, but the light is one."Every expression is a transmission of the one light, but the specific word we seek at each point in our life is determined by our state of mind. And it's real value is in the effect it has on the audience or person giving expression. Does it make you reach for something higher? Does it expand your experience of the light, by recognizing it's presence in yet another distinctly new form?
I know of so many times I could say "yes" emphatically to that, from so many forms of expression, that I know it didn't really matter if it was 'fiction' or 'non-fiction'; film, book, song, or poem; included 'nonsense', had flaws, was or wasn't alleged to have been misinterpreted, or was written by a nice person or a jerk. It just happened to have an effect on the person that was sitting there taking it in at that moment in time and space.
-
93,
@AvshalomBinyamin said
""There must ever be division in the word.
For the colours are many, but the light is one.""That was a passage that I remembered as well, when I read this post.
@AvshalomBinyamin said
"Every expression is a transmission of the one light, but the specific word we seek at each point in our life is determined by our state of mind. And it's real value is in the effect it has on the audience or person giving expression."
I agree with this wholeheartedly.
Also these passages, from the same chapter of LXV, seem to expound that same idea:
*So they will reproach thy servant, saying: Who hath set thee to save us?
He will be sore distressed.
All they understand not that thou and I are fashioning a boat of mother-of-pearl. We will sail down the river of Amrit even to the yew-groves of Yama, where we may rejoice exceedingly. * v. 37-39and here:
*And V.V.V.V.V. answered and said: O my lord, my dove, my excellent one, how shall this word seem unto the children of men?
And He answered him: Not as thou canst see.
It is certain that every letter of this cipher hath some value; but who shall determine the value? For it varieth ever, according to the subtlety of Him that made it. * v. 51-52
Love is the law, love under will.
-
I wound indeed have some soul-searching to do (as Robert stated above) if "Thelema turned out to be a hoax." However, what is really of value to me wouldn't change at all - my own experiences and growth. The framework would probably change for me, but I would continue more or less down this path (or so I think).
As stated by several people in the thread, the system of Thelema has merits all its own, and Crowley's intentions in promulgating its concepts and viewpoints has little to do with the actual usability of the concepts themselves. Also, if Crowley really "swindled" us, then what he got out of it must've been very, very abstract, because he struggled financially for much of the time - and after a certain threshold, "what he got out of it" becomes less of a swindle and more of an even trade.
I apologize if any of this is unclear, I'm exhausted - to paraphrase Crowley: "I was more tired than 14 dogs, each more tired than all the rest put together."
I think his ideas and concepts (and even more so those of Thelema, to distinguish "Crowleyanity" from Thelema) are so valuable that it's pretty much irrelevant what his intentions were.
Not that the thought of an elaborate hoax never crosses my mind... but this line of thinking usually solves my doubt pretty well.
93, 93/93.
-
"If some sort of definitive evidence emerged to show that Crowley did not produce the Book of the Law when he claimed, would that change the validity of it's message to you?"
Not really. Some Lineages/Traditions say that the Book was written April 1,2, and 3, instead of the the 8, 9, and 10. Don't make a difference to me. It was written, transcribed, whatever. I think what you are asking is if we found out that Liber AL was not transcribed from Aiwass, but a creation of Crowleys. Does genius make it any less of use? If you judge it by anything less, you are already out of what Crowley was teaching anyway. Gotta love the what-if game. If it did turn out to be a fraud, then a good many others are then frauds, and it turns into a conspiracy of a sort. Lol.
-
FWIW to the discussion... One thing I take as objective fact is that, from the moment Aleister Crowley was born, his horoscope showed that approximately 1 PM (Cairo time) on April 10, 1904 would be the most important hour in his life, bringing his whole purpose of being into concentrated focus.
(Technically, 1:30-1:40 PM would have been even better.)
So I have a little difficulty entertaining the premise of the question in the first place. Whatever the other facts, that hour when Liber L. was reportedly completed was arguably the most significant in his entire life, to the point of setting the tone for the entire rest of it.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"FWIW to the discussion... One thing I take as objective fact is that, from the moment Aleister Crowley was born, his horoscope showed that approximately 1 PM (Cairo time) on April 10, 1904 would be the most important hour in his life, bringing his whole purpose of being into concentrated focus.
(Technically, 1:30-1:40 PM would have been even better.)"
a probably expected question
: how did you calculate that, Jim? -
@danica said
"a probably expected question
: how did you calculate that, Jim?"Long answer and I'm on the fly. Short way for you to retrace it: Look at most important stuff in the natal (the angular Sun EXACTLY aspecting the Saturn-Uranus opposition). For April 1904 look at Saturn... then the Sun... then the Moon at 1 PM April 10. The extra half hour is for Moon and Saturn to actually rotate to the exact horizon.
-
nice and easy...
for others interest, I found the related analysis on solunars.net: solunars.net/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=9