Aurum Solis, Servants of Light, and filling the GD-AA gap
-
Thank you so much Tony. What I understand from what you say is that it really doesn't matter how old an order is (or its lineage, for that matter), but it is the integrity of the people within it that makes it better or worse than other groups.
Usually once its founders die, the order can change its overall "frequency", for lack of a better word. I wonder how both the Aurum Solis (with the new grand master) and the SOL (after Butler's death) have changed, for better or worse. For the former at least I feel, (and this is purely subjective) that there is a rivalry between the Aurum Solis and the Ordo Astrum Sophiae. It just comes across this way to me in the article on their page, a sort of warning to people, that the overall spirit of the OAS has changed since Denning died and Osbourne Phillips stepped down... which probably affects the "strength" of their initiations.
-
I do believe lineage to be very important. The S.O.L still uses the lessons Butler wrote. I do agree that the people that make up an Order at the present time, particularly the leaders and the local group you associate with is very important in regards to the frequency you mention. But without lineage and the oral teaching and training that comes with it is a study group not an Order. I would note that every major contributor to the Western Mystery Tradition had Lineage...
Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk
-
Yes, in regards to elements of their teaching but Butler did not pass on the Group Ritual work to the S.O.L. , it is a correspondence course with a personal supervisor...
And as Dion Fortune wrote her own rituals I would not consider the S.I.L. ritual work Lineage to come from Mathers either but obviously much of the teaching does.
Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk
-
Very nice Tony
Freya thanks for mentioning OAS, i'ill look into that. Id' be interested too to hear more concerning latest evolutions of AS.
Since the initial post i've read Denning and Philips material. I think it doesnt need comment.
Read also quickly Biasi's Tarot book, which seems very nice too.As for SOL lineage i've read Ina Custers Magick book. Nice stuff there too. For instance they start rituals in the north, use different color attributions, star magick, pathworking based on various traditions and such. They seem to have good pedagogy for the begginner.
As for the effectiveness of orders/styles or lodges/teachers/techniques, i feel currently that it is more a question of what is optimal for a specific individual at a specific time, in conjuction with the background and environement factors. That combination will make what is optimal fluctuate for everyone, although in different rythms and different ways.
As Tony says, a Zelator of GD can be actually better than a Zelator of AA. Certainly there are even people already Adepts in Yoga who get initiated in Masonry. Thus they are as advanced as an Adept of AA on the middle pillar. Who knows how basic masonry would work for him starting with such background? Masonry material might work strong enough to make him of similar skills on all three pillars with an Adept Exemptus of AA. Still, he would not be considered as such without being able to demonstrate all required syllabus to that specific style(AA).
AA as the super complete and direct system might as well be not the fastest way possible to adepthood in some cases. In my own path for instance i'd love to join the AA now but actually it would be not optimal now, so i dont. The wanting of joining has a part which is genuine. Indeed, it is a part of my true will to join the AA(and probably the AS
) . But in my own path, this may be optimal after attainement of Adepthood.Many factors come into play. Some of them: i've started the path many years ago with eastern martial arts. Now the real internal and philosophical results start to pay off and it is a lot of work to "digest" them. Also it is a lot of work to articulate them with the western aproach .
Thus, the perfection of eastern practice and the philosophical articulation of that mastery with the western basics occupy two pillars already. Add this Thelemic religious practice, basic magick, and straight meditation, and it makes a complete and optimal "system" for my specific situation and being at that time in the path.
Each style, aspect of style, combination of styles/practices might be optimal for each individual at a specific time. For me, AA/AS may be of best use after adepthood. Some "uses" may be: kchga, (better)accomplishement of the true will, work on karma, "masonic" action(for instance in a way similar to Jim's type of involvement in Thelema and Hermetics).
All the best to all brothers and sisters of any approach.
-
@Frater Horus said
"
For me, AA/AS may be of best use after adepthood. "
This actually does not make any sense. Because, first: the AA system is specifically designed to get a person to that "goal" (the Next Step for humanity) - that is, at least for all those people who are not "there" yet
; and second, because after you have reached adepthood, you actually do not need any system to "guide" you further - you have the direct conscious connection with your Angel (I'm not saying it's not good, or not preferred, to work within a system, I'm only saying that it is not necessary). -
I find some material by Denning and Phillips to be "new-agey", lacking substance, and their explanation of the qabalah to be quite sketchy, compared to other authors... but that's just me. I prefer Dion Fortune, Butler and Crowley's writings (and HP Blavatsky), and to what has been recently published by the OAS. It seems to me they are very different from the GD and AA....the SOL appear to me to be closer to those systems than the OAS.... but I may be wrong
-
Check out their five volume ( I believe now in 3 paperbacks ) Magical Philosophy - it is excellent. The "guide to" books I have seen do appear to be sort of flakey..
Sent from my GT-N5110 using Tapatalk
-
@danica said
"
@Frater Horus said
"For me, AA/AS may be of best use after adepthood. "
This actually does not make any sense. Because, first: the AA system is specifically designed to get a person to that "goal" (the Next Step for humanity) - that is, at least for all those people who are not "there" yet
; and second, because after you have reached adepthood, you actually do not need any system to "guide" you further - you have the direct conscious connection with your Angel (I'm not saying it's not good, or not preferred, to work within a system, I'm only saying that it is not necessary)."O Mistress Danica, whip me, whip me, i'm such a naughty student.
Yes those systems are designed to get to that "goal" but so are the eastern ones !
An adept yogi or taoist is as much an adept as an AA/AS one.I see the point of "not needing a system" past adepthood(at least in theory) but if it is just to attain mystical achievement up to Tiphareth in the fastest way possible for most people possible i see straight eastern systems as much more direct. They cover all three pillars more than enough, in a simpler way. They have their magick and philosophy too, not only meditation. AA and AS on the other hand have the particularity of covering with precision all three pillars past adepthood, and providing much more refined magick(is it really useful before adepthood...?) which i'm not aware of similar thing in the eastern systems.
If you were to write a 300 page book concerning how to get to adepthood, what would you put inside? Would you put elaborate qabalah and magick of all imaginable refinements and art, or the most very basics in most simple, functional ways and aplications, with every practicle detail so it can be perfected by anyone of enough potential? On the other hand, if you were to write a thesis for 7=4, there will be a need for refinements and artistic power as well
Within the three thelemic systems designed by Crowley, we could say(maybe?) EGC material is "enough" to become an Adept, OTO enough to Geburah, and AA contains syllabus for Exemptus and more.
But if in a system it contains stuff for Exemptus and more, there are many chances earlier stuff are to some degree related already. On the contrary if a system focus up to adepthood, it is as such(excluding other factors) much more direct for that specific goal.With the new aeon the old systems went a world down. Thus only new aeon systems(formal or informal) can make one cross the abyss now. But the systems which made one cross the abyss before can now make one an adept, just like those which made adepts before can make zelatores now. And they even might be optimal for that for anything not directly serving a goal might go against it. How does this sound?
-
@Freya said
"I find some material by Denning and Phillips to be "new-agey", lacking substance"
How do you find Taoist classics?
This i quoted from you seems as a compliment to me Not as such, but what it brings when i try to make correspond AS books and "new agey_lacking substance". My intuition says "its true ! but in a good/ the taoist way". There is indeed somekind of vacuity in those books I think it shows there are not only good adepts but also good pedagogs and writers. They make the material feel "light" but i think it is not in any way. It's the way of writing that may produce the effect. -
@Frater Horus said
"
O Mistress Danica, whip me, whip me, i'm such a naughty student.
"
I prefer gentle touch and caress
(BTW, regarding whipping, have you seen Trier's "Nymphomaniac"?)"...
How does this sound? "Like a lot of theorizing
"Adephood" by which system's definition?
AA is not a social club; if one wants to joint, regardless of his/her actual spiritual development thus far, one goes from the beginning, that is - goes through the system step by step. The method of science, ya know. -
Thanks Tony, the material I read so far wasn't very good in my opinion, but that's just me. They also advise the use of planetary hours which, IMO, is not to be followed.... I find Taoist teachings very good, but I do not expect from an Eastern system to teach in the same way as a Western one. This is just my opinion, and it is purely academic (I am comparing the substance of their writings to Crowley's), and it is without prejudice. I am sure that all of Denning and Phillips books will be (and already have been) useful for many people.
-
@danica said
"
@Frater Horus said
"O Mistress Danica, whip me, whip me, i'm such a naughty student. "I prefer gentle touch and caress
(BTW, regarding whipping, have you seen Trier's "Nymphomaniac"?)"...How does this sound? "
Like a lot of theorizing
"Adephood" by which system's definition?
AA is not a social club; if one wants to joint, regardless of his/her actual spiritual development thus far, one goes from the beginning, that is - goes through the system step by step. The method of science, ya know."Let there be gentleness then
I'll look the movie
"Adepthood" by my own secret system's definition.
Thou are against all social clubs, hippies, cowards and mediocrities O my chosen !
Let there be caress
-
@Freya said
"I find some material by Denning and Phillips to be "new-agey", "
I was very annoyed by that until I realized that among the new age stuff there was some hardcore magick tech. It still annoys me, but at least I do have some fun with the tech.
-
I know there's fluff material everywhere you look. I know also there are children camping in the wilderness when I go out and do my serious hermitage. What really annoys me is the people who feel superior about themselves by labeling things "newagey" as if the things so labelled actually cared what you think.
-
I am entitled to my opinions, just as you are entitled to yours. I have written my opinions without prejudice, and they are not personal. I cannot control the emotional reactions of others, nor is it my concern to do so. I am not interested neither in people caring about what I think, if it is me you allude to under the term "people", nor in feeling superior. I assume this comment was not meant personally as you have no personal knowledge of me, so you cannot possibly know how I feel about myself. What I said was a personal opinion on what I believe is the quality of some Denning and Phillips writings compared to Crowley's. It is not a personal attack on anybody, merely my views on some of the work that I have personally read. Having made it abundantly clear what my position is in this matter, I find it futile to continue this conversation if it is taken out of context and made it about personal character.
-
In case it helps clear things up... (Filter out the opinion portions as opinion. They're padding so I can get to the relevant fact or two.)
D&P's primary series on Aurum Solis (5 volumes hard cover, now 3 volumes paper) are phenomenal, an apex of magical writing of the last half century. Some of their other books, such as that on magical self-defense, are of a similar caliber.
However, as part of their... relationship... with Llewellyn, they were asked to pop out a few pop books along the way. I doubt this was ever in the form of "write this pablum, or we won't publish your other stuff;" however, it did seem at the time (to me, and to a couple of people who knew them better than I) that there was a bit of "house production staff writer" aspect to the relationship. This also popularized the D&P brand, of course.
Even in these pablumish works, they put an enormous amount of solid information - some of it overt, some of it snuck in so you didn't necessarily know you were getting the jewels while scrounging for acorns. But you end up going home with a pocket of jewels.
I don't like all their stuff. But I adore them per se, and utterly adore their best stuff, and very much like a lot of the rest.