Liber Al desribes guerilla warfare as successful warfare?
-
Americans somehow lost the war against the Vietnamese. How? It's a miracle eh? Well the main factor was this guerrilla warfare y'know attack unexpectedly, run a way and hide, continue when it's all calmed down, start all over again. Drives a massive army crazy.
Is this written about in Liber Al; * Lurk! Withdraw! Upon them! this is the Law of the Battle of Conquest*
-
it could refer to a different type of war fare, something more "new aeon"...
like online troll armies
-
"Lurk! Withdraw! Upon them! this is the Law of the Battle of Conquest: thus shall my worship be about my secret house."
So, what does the end of the verse mean?
-
Ok, so you're interested only in a discussion of an out-of-context sentence fragment. Good to know.
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"Ok, so you're interested only in a discussion of an out-of-context sentence fragment. Good to know."
Yes that's right I am.
It's not out of context. The first initial statement stands in and of itself with my point. For this thread I'm not interested in the second bit of the line. It's irrelevant to the definition of what successful warfare is about. It's an additional point.
-
"It's not out of context."
-
What the thinker thinks, the prover proves.
-
y?
-
" Fear not at all; fear neither men nor Fates, nor gods, nor anything. Money fear not, nor laughter of the folk folly, nor any other power in heaven or upon the earth or under the earth. Nu is your refuge as Hadit your light; and I am the strength, force, vigour, of your arms."
"There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt."
The section of III:9 that you quoted, gerry, may be the active component to III:17, the means of achieving it if you will. (The keyword in that sentence is may.) A complement to this could be found in III:42. Maybe. The crux of my post is that you don't listen to it!!!!!...a few more...!!!
The rest of III:9 could tend towards this:"Completely renouncing all desires arising from thoughts of the world, one should restrain the senses from all sides with the mind. Slowly and steadily, with conviction in the intellect, the mind will become fixed in God alone, and will think of nothing else. "
-
I've been perusing various commentaries, so...
Crowley's Old and New Comments allow for both an internal and a literal interpretation. I know the internal interpretation is more popular here, but in the Comment, Crowley is open to external events acting in literal fulfillment of the verses.
As to the internal interpretation, points 1-3 of Liber Turris seem to line up quite nicely with "Lurk, Withdraw, Upon Them."
From Liber Turris, parenthesis mine:
"
(Lurk) 1. First Point. The student should first discover for himself the apparent position of the point in his brain where thoughts arise, if there be such a point. If not, he should seek the position of the point where thoughts are judged.(Withdraw) 2. Second Point. He must also develop in himself a Will of Destruction, even a Will of Annihilation. It may be that this shall be discovered at an immeasurable distance from his physical body. Nevertheless, this must he reach, with this must he identify himself even to the loss of himself.
(Upon Them) 3. Third Point. Let this Will then watch vigilantly the point where thoughts arise, or the point where they are judged, and let every thought be annihilated as it is perceived or judged."
However, as to the literal interpretation, it only makes sense that the Law is using a functional principle of warfare to be applied analogously to internal events. It would not make much sense as an analogy if the external principle were not effective in reality. Indeed, "...this is the Law of the Battle of Conquest..."
But I don't see it as necessarily referring to guerrilla warfare. Rather, the tactics of observation (Lurk), planning and gathering resources (Withdraw), and then attacking at the right moment (Upon Them) seem to me to apply to all warfare, whether guerilla or not.
-
@Hermitas said
"From Liber Turris, parenthesis mine:
"
(Lurk) 1. First Point. The student should first discover for himself the apparent position of the point in his brain where thoughts arise, if there be such a point. If not, he should seek the position of the point where thoughts are judged.(Withdraw) 2. Second Point. He must also develop in himself a Will of Destruction, even a Will of Annihilation. It may be that this shall be discovered at an immeasurable distance from his physical body. Nevertheless, this must he reach, with this must he identify himself even to the loss of himself.
(Upon Them) 3. Third Point. Let this Will then watch vigilantly the point where thoughts arise, or the point where they are judged, and let every thought be annihilated as it is perceived or judged."
"Nice. Nice. Dammit, nice!
A very potent technique, Liber Turris. It is the yang to the yin that is pratyahara. -
@gerry456 said
"Military history. Anyone steeped in military history here?"
It's not my thing but Maj. Gen. J.F.C. Fuller, CB, CBE, DSO (Ret.) wrote for The Equinox before he split ways with Crowley.
"For all his foibles and failings, Fuller was a visionary. In the early 1930s he predicted, as Anthony Trythall wrote, “future armies would be surrounded by swarms of motorized guerillas, irregulars or regular troops making use of the multitude of civilian motorcars that would be available.” Fuller also mused that one day “a manless flying machine” would change the face of war."
I found all of that in under two minutes. Tops.