Liber AL Commentary
-
I would like to see the Djeridensis Working (The Comment called D) included in future editions of The Law is for All. Is there any reason why it wasn't included in past editions? Is there any reason why it shouldn't be included in the future? It seems like a common sense addition to the Old and New Comments, if you ask me.
-
If there are no objections to the idea, I'd like to get everyone's thoughts on whether or not you would likely purchase a new edition of The Law is for All with the Djeridensis Comment included in it. If you already own a copy of The Law is for All, would you buy the new edition anyway? If you do not yet own a copy, would the inclusion of the Djeridensis Comment make it any more likely you'd get one?
The Djeridensis Working (The Comment called D) has been published only once, in a '95-'96 issue of The Magickal Link.
-
93,
I have no information on the Djeridensis working. I asked for information about it in another thread, and no one was forthcoming, so, maybe no one's really sure why Crowley never published it.
I would not be interested in purchasing a new Law is for All, because all of the documents are available online, and also because after reading Crowley's Confessions I don't find his commentaries to be particularly important, with the exception of the Tunis Comment - which, conversely, I now pay more attention to.
Just my personal, differentiated, POV.
Love=Law
- C
-
Why do you care if someone would buy it? Do you have any remote chance of getting this to be so? Why even wonder about it? Why care if the whole Djeridensis Working is available online for anyone
"because after reading Crowley's Confessions I don't find his commentaries to be particularly important"
The irony...
Not reading commentaries based on a commentary...
IAO131
-
@ThatNarrowFellow said
"I have no information on the Djeridensis working. I asked for information about it in another thread, and no one was forthcoming, so, maybe no one's really sure why Crowley never published it."
It's a little strange that no one seems to have anything to say about why it hasn't been published. We're talking about one time in an issue of The Magickal Link, which is hardly as convenient as having it available in a book. And unless you're in the OTO, you can't even get that. If you google search the word "Djeridensis" the first thing you'll see is a link to Ash's website. Why isn't it on hermetic.com and other sites that try to host all the major Crowley writings? Hermetic has commentary from Motta, Rowe, Sam Webster, etc., but no Comment D.
This isn't some inconsequential letter Crowley wrote to an acquaintance, it's a comment on The Book of the Law. Why isn't there any interest? Even if you personally have no interest in studying it, doesn't it strike you as odd that no one else seems to care about it either?
-
@Aum418 said
"Why do you care if someone would buy it? Do you have any remote chance of getting this to be so? Why even wonder about it?"
I find it curious that it's never been published. I was asking if people would buy it because I wanted to see if there's any interest in having it published. If there appears to be an interest, I can take additional steps like emailing people to inform them that there are people out there who want to see it published some day. As it stands, nobody seems to care much about it here. I hope this answers your questions.
-
@Frater H. said
"Why isn't it on hermetic.com and other sites that try to host all the major Crowley writings? Hermetic has commentary from Motta, Rowe, Sam Webster, etc., but no Comment D."
About hermetic.com specifically, the answer is probably that the host (Al Billings) doesn't consider himself a Thelemite any more and is busy with other things. The hosted parts of hermetic.com (home pages of Dionysos, Sabazius, Webster, del Campo, etc.) seem to be updated by the "guests," so the parts that Al himself manages don't see frequent updates. I would think he would add something as major as Comment D if someone sent him a copy.
But D is available on quite a few web sites that host Crowley material. Maybe the absence of clamor about its publication is due to the fact that most people who want it, already have it.
One confusing thing, though, is why Crowley himself didn't have the thing published in his lifetime, or why Symonds, Grant, or Regardie didn't include it in post-1947 editions of the comments. (Might they not have had copies of it?) I agree with many others that D packs a more poetic wallop than the Old and New, and that it contains interesting insights that don't appear anywhere else.
Steve
-
Symonds and Grand did publish it. It's in the back of Magical & Philosophical Commentaries on The Book of the Law. I've had it in that beautifully made book (produced in part, BTW, by a gifted young publisher named Bill Breeze) for 30 years or so.
On the other hand, I probably haven't even looked at it in 15-20 years. I was never very impressed with it. It's main virtue is that it is short and is simply another set of thoughts Crowley had on a different day than when he was writing his other thoughts on it.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Symonds and Grand did publish it. It's in the back of Magical & Philosophical Commentaries on The Book of the Law. I've had it in that beautifully made book (produced in part, BTW, by a gifted young publisher named Bill Breeze) for 30 years or so."
I was unaware of it being published in the Magical & Philosophical Commentaries. That's good to know. For most people, I would imagine, M&PC isn't much of an option due to cost.
It's not a matter of vital importance that it gets published. After all, it's available on a few websites. But it does strike me as odd that something like D, which is short and compact, would be left out of books like The Law is for All. Steven Cranmer echoes my sentiments in a comment above.
"One confusing thing, though, is why Crowley himself didn't have the thing published in his lifetime, or why Symonds, Grant, or Regardie didn't include it in post-1947 editions of the comments. (Might they not have had copies of it?)"
I'm seeing a general disinterest in D, anyway. Nobody else is excited about the idea of it being included with the other commentaries in the future, so it looks like my stapled print outs will have to do for now. Thanks, Jim, for the info on M&PC, and thanks to everyone else for chiming in.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Symonds and Grand did publish it. It's in the back of Magical & Philosophical Commentaries on The Book of the Law."
Interesting! This is another reason for me to finally track down a copy of this book. Another reason is that the online versions of the Old and New commentaries don't have many of the Qabalistic footnotes that are said to be in the M&PC. I think Bill Heidrick didn't key them in because some of them were really Grant's own additions? (Speculating again...)
Steve
-
Before Steve or Frater H. go out and spend a few hundred dollars trying to track down a copy of *Magical & Philosophical Commentaries *you might be interested to know that a new and more complete copy of ALL of the commentaries with a massive amount of footnotes in a hardcover edition is said to be in the works right now by the O.T.O. under the leadership of Hymenaeus Beta.
The O.T.O. has the rights to Crowley's writings and since *Magical & Philosophical Commentaries * was not done with the permission of the O.T.O. I don't expect there is going to be a reprint. Especially since the O.T.O. is said to be working on a better and more complete volume of all the commentaries.
This project and several other exciting projects are said to be coming very soon through Thelema Media. www.thelemamedia.com
The other projects are said to be never before printed Diaries of Crowley's, an Equinox edition that Crowley set up but never printed, and more.
If you want a printed copy of Commentary D that has been done lately you can find it in an edition of The Lifted Lance done by the O.T.O. body Knights Templar Oasis.
If we could just get Jim's book about the A.'.A.'. system back in print sometime soon just think about all the wonderful material we would have that we could study! -
@Frater Pantha said
"Before Steve or Frater H. go out and spend a few hundred dollars trying to track down a copy of *Magical & Philosophical Commentaries *you might be interested to know that a new and more complete copy of ALL of the commentaries with a massive amount of footnotes in a hardcover edition is said to be in the works right now by the O.T.O. under the leadership of Hymenaeus Beta."
Excellent! That's what I wanted to hear. Any word on when this stuff is going to be released?
-
Sorry. I wish I knew more myself. From what I understand they are trying to get this done sooner rather than later, but they want to do it better and more complete then it has ever been done before. So if they need to take some more time to get it right it seems that they are going to take the time they need. They want it to be in a nice hardcover edition, and very complete. By very complete I mean all the commentaries, with footnotes, and user friendly. I have no inside track on this information so I am only telling you what I have been hearing through the grapevine. You know how that goes ... I could be WRONG on some of the details, but based on what I have seen done with some other projects I am hopeful that this information is correct.
-
@Frater Pantha said
"The O.T.O. has the rights to Crowley's writings and since *Magical & Philosophical Commentaries * was not done with the permission of the O.T.O. I don't expect there is going to be a reprint."
Since Magical and Philosophical Commentaries was published in 1974, and O.T.O. did not purchase the Crowley copyrights until the early 1990s, Grant and Symonds did not need their permission. Obviously the situation is different now, and I agree that it's unlikely there will be a republication.
I wouldn't discourage anyone from buying this book in anticipation of a fuller publication from Bill Breeze, for two reasons. The first is that the two publications will be very different; Bill's will doubtless have much more in the way of material perhaps edited out by Grant and Symonds, or perhaps simply not to hand in the early 1970s, and there will be copious notes and cross-references, but regardless of merit any notes by Grant will not be included (I appreciate that some will not regard this as a loss). The second reason is that there is a bottleneck in what is currently being prepared for publication, and it may be a while before this and other projected publications materialise.
Best wishes,
Michael.