Crowley's Supposed Miracles
-
This seems like a fun Friday topic of conversation:
*At the time where Aleister Crowley was already called “the evilest man in the world,” by the yellow press of his country and by Roman Catholic publications in Latin, there was a bookseller in London whom he highly esteemed for his honesty and devotion to literature specialized in occultism, from whom he ordered rare books, and whose store he regularly visited. On one of these occasions, the bookseller complained, being half-serious, that, despite Crowley’s reputation as a “wizard of black magic,” he never saw the the magician perform any miracles.
Crowley pondered. "Pay attention," he said," and just for this, I’m going to do something that I rarely do. "Close your eyes."
The bookseller happily closed his eyes.
“Open them,” Crowley said.
The bookseller opened his eyes. His bookshelves, a few seconds before overloaded with precious first editions and volumes, were completely empty. Imagine the proprietor's anxiety! But after a moment Crowley told him to close his eyes again, and when he reopened them his stock had returned to normal.
It would be unnecessary to add that the bookseller would never again demand "miracles" from his strange customer.
[This bookseller was Mr. John Watkins, whose store still exists in London, a highly respected man in his circle of activities. This story was recounted by himself, and never by Crowley.]
On yet another occasion, the famous "satanic" host was invited to a social meeting in London by one who liked to collect intellectuals among his guests. It was night, winter, and the fireplace was extinguished. In a tone of craftiness, the "intellectuals" present suggested that Crowley use his magical powers to set fire to the fireplace.
“Sure, why not?” said the magician.
He made a gesture and pronounced a word: the firewood in the fireplace immediately blew up in flames.
No more about magic was said for the remaining portion the evening.
There is nothing fantastic in such phenomena; they are not "greater" or "better" than those attributed to diverse thaumaturgists through time, among others, the legendary "Jesus" of the Christists. But true initiates rarely execute actions that seem to oppose natural laws, and detest "miracles" of the type which produce collective hallucination: first, because phenomena are not tested, they lack the moral probity of its authors, lack the validity of the doctrines defended by them; second, because any "miracle" represents a waste of energy, which can more efficiently be applied in other projects, such as, for example, the spiritual evolution of the human species.
*--Taken from Astral Attack & Defense by Motta
Comments? Comments about comments?
-
@Dar es Allrah said
"Haha... I'm telling you the absolute truth now, mind you: with the knowledge of the arcane arts of the alchemist, I can cast stones upon the water and make them burn in a white hot inferno!
" Yes, but none of that compares to the "miracle" of life! And chemistry definitely has something to do with it...
Mansur was wise, but wiser they who smote
....him with the hurlèd stones;
And though his blood a witness bore, no
....Wisdom-Might could mend his bones.-- Burton
-
If that is what passes for miracles... surely I must be a God!
-
Why all the interest in being a God. (Even I uppercased it.)
I am as Crowley states even of himself, "a servant, the least of them all."
What is the use in mastering illusion unless you can teach others to master theirs?
I will now continue this idea in a new thread because this is going to go way off topic.
-
@ThelemicMage said
"What is the use in mastering illusion unless you can teach others to master theirs?"
Hmm. I don't think "Do what thou wilt..." necessarily includes a categorical imperative that is muddled with an ethical superiority complex. There is no inherent moral obligation to others when it comes to "knowing thyself", unless I'm missing the point?
Wouldn't it a be part of your own illusion to think that you're helping someone else? After all, aren't all of our own perceptions just a projection of our "self"?
I guess, to answer the question, the only usefulness anything has is the usefulness you assign to it through belief.
-
@Frater 639 said
"There is no inherent moral obligation to others when it comes to "knowing thyself", unless I'm missing the point?"
I think you are. - It's no use driving in your own lane when nobody around you knows where the lines in the road are (or even has a concept of "road").
"Wouldn't it a be part of your own illusion to think that you're helping someone else? After all, aren't all of our own perceptions just a projection of our "self"?"
Of course, at one very abstract level. But, then, so is "someone else" (at the same abstract level) - at least, "someone else" as you perceive and relate to them.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I think you are. - It's no use driving in your own lane when nobody around you knows where the lines in the road are (or even has a concept of "road")."
In this context, I believe there was some sort of objective morality being hinted at. I agree -- there is no argument that a common point-of-view isn't essential to effective communication -- it is the basis of the Magickal Link! But, effective communication does not necessarily mean excessively wordy or finite. For example, Zen koans are very effective mostly because they are not very pointed -- so a common point-of-view is useful, but runs the risk of being reduced to dogmatism, which, in this context, seemed to be the case. But, that was only my perception...
@Jim Eshelman said
"Of course, at one very abstract level. But, then, so is "someone else" (at the same abstract level) - at least, "someone else" as you perceive and relate to them."
Agreed. And illusion, in this context, came across as a very abstract concept.
By the rules of the game, then, we must think and act, or we risk every kind of error; but we may be perfectly well aware that the rules are arbitrary, and that it is after all only a game. The constant folly of the traditional mystic has been to be so proud of himself for discovering the great secret that the Universe is no more than a toy invented by himself for his amusement that he hastens to display his powers by deliberately misunderstanding and misusing the toy. He has not grasped the fact that just because it is no more than a projection of his own Point-of-View, it is integrally Himself that he offends!
I really like that passage.
-
@Frater 639 said
"*By the rules of the game, then, we must think and act, or we risk every kind of error; but we may be perfectly well aware that the rules are arbitrary, and that it is after all only a game. The constant folly of the traditional mystic has been to be so proud of himself for discovering the great secret that the Universe is no more than a toy invented by himself for his amusement that he hastens to display his powers by deliberately misunderstanding and misusing the toy. He has not grasped the fact that just because it is no more than a projection of his own Point-of-View, it is integrally Himself that he offends!
I really like that passage.
"Me too, thank you for sharing. It's very helpful at this particular point in time. What is it from?
-
The commentary to the Liber V ritual. Last paragraph.