College of Thelema: Thelemic Education

Ed posted something in another thread that I feel is most applicable to your question about magical hygiene.

As Ed stated, the first rule of magic is: yes, this is all in your mind.

If you do not "put down that which you call up" you are creating psychological archtypes that you may not wish to have idly interacting with your subconscious mind as your sitting at work or otherwise going about your day. A banishing puts such subtle influences to rest.

It bears mentioning that the choice to do so is a function of the work being performed, but I believe that Jim was just attempting to call awareness to the fact that it is not to be overlooked.

If you want to walk around with such things influencing your actions, more power to you, just be aware of what it is you are (or are not) doing.

That's a theme you can find in many places.

For instance, the plot of Asimov's "Foundation" series consisted of two schools of knowledge: one exoteric and one esoteric. Both had equal command over their given technologies, each appearing "magic" to the other.

It was only when these two schools of knowledge were reunited did humanity truly grow to a knew level of understanding the universe.

I believe that I can say with relative certainty that we are but 100 years from that very occurrence within the Western world.

How quickly it catches on is another discussion...

Unfortunately such surface comparisons do not withstand the necessary mathematical corollary.

There is quite a bit of overlap, but it is not so obvious.

I'd recommend avoiding such comparison without a firm grasp of the math and derived theories that create such structures.

It is nearly impossible to answer the OP question as presented.

Is your love something you reserve for private, or something you express to everyone you see, every single day?

Love, per Thelema, is not something intended merely to be pontificated upon... the wisdom to be gained is only through the continuous refinement of its expression.

We, as Thelemites, hold that will is the primal force of creation, and love is its highest motivation.

We, as Thelemites, also hold that you are the primary actor of creation.

Every day you wake up and empower yourself with your daily rituals... showering (or not), shaving (or not), coffee (or not), smoking (or not), LBPR (or not), Resh (or not), television (or not), books (or not), work (or not)... The combinations are as endless as the number of paths upon which we walk, yet one must not forget that each combination creates a path.

Respect them all. Love them all. Treat everyone you meet as a King and a God, for we, as Thelemites, know that we are.

To paraphrase John Lennon: displays of love and peace aren't just for hippies in the 60s... love and peace are eternal.

Strive to become the ultimate example of love and peace in your life and, given enough time, you will answer your own question.

Just highlighting the similarity. Blavatsky's influence is equally as ubiquitous.

I did want to comment one more point in general about what Crowley did-or-did-not use.

The phrase we all know is "the method of science, the goal of religion". Crowley's creation did require historical accuracy, rather the "truth" of his creation was intended only to be judged in the experience of the consumption of the whole.

It's a heavy meal with multiple courses, and it borrows flavors from a variety of cultures to create a new and intriguing dishes.

One may not judge the accuracy of Thelema through historical analysis; one may only judge its claims through personal experience with the system as it was designed.

It is a point asserted quite frequently and all too often ignored.

@Jim Eshelman said

"
@Alias55A said
"but how come they throw eliphas levi's name around in there as the one who influenced there series of books or something similar on that line, just asking "

Everyone threw in Levi's name if they could. Levi was god. I don't think most people today generally realize how large one person could be on the European occult landscape."
You mean like Crowley has become today?

@Jim Eshelman said

"
@FraterIgnatius said
"A house divided upon itself is still but a single house."

Yes, but it's a duplex."
Unless you rent it out, it's still your house. It is when the doors and walls no longer exist at your slightest pleasure that they become oppressive and restrictive; as opposed to a confined, controlled space for growth and exploration.

Traditional Japanese housing is an exemplification of this ideal: the walls are temporary and illusory, literally made of paper. They may be moved and destroyed at the whim of the owner to create a new, more desired environment.

I've come to see Thelema not so much as an abhorrence to walls, but a means by which to identify those walls we did not build ourselves. The choice of what next to do with such constructions is purely the will of the individual.

Some choose to destroy them, some choose to integrate them, some choose to ignore them, but all make a choice.

A house divided upon itself is still but a single house.

I've always considered the LBPR to be one of the most beautiful rituals within the hermetic system because of its complex, but subtle, elegance. Given Jim's excellent explanation of the mathematically resonant nature of the ritual, I'll jump in with another of those many reasons why practicing the LBPR is a good thing for both the neophyte and the adept, however from a psychological perspective.

It is the first tool by which the practitioner is immersed in the act of attaining that subtle resonance with their universe that is essential to all ritual operations.

It formulates resonance with the archangels, resonance with the cardinal directions (the four worlds, if you prefer), resonance with expressions of ein sof, and resonance of your mind and will. This ritual, at its conclusion, does little else but then focus all of these forces together at the fixed point of the practitioner, and it is within these resonances that your work is then performed.

Quickly one comes to see the value in taking such spiritual harmony into their daily lives: it provides for one to become a greater and greater expression of love and creation in the perception of all those with whom you come in contact. It is, at the same time, one of the most simple and yet one of the most powerful expressions of Thelema.

... and all from one little ritual.

More thread necromancy.

I have come to consider the same thing and Fr. I-ness, in that Thelema was not intended to be an accurate transmission of AE religion, but utilizes the key points from that art within itself.

That aside, I've also come to understand that the "khabs" and the "khu" are not to be taken within the AE sense, but more within the greater body of Crowley's writing.

Given that we in the post-nuclear age have little problem with a dualistic universe, I think that those around the turn of the previous century had significantly greater intellectual resistance to two things being equal-yet-opposite at the same time.

I've come to term it this way:
"The khu in the khabs or the khabs in the khu: it matters little beyond what you will to do!"

The way you perceive the relationship is directly related to the design of your creation. Crowley did not so much "refute" GD doctrine as he added an additional level of understanding of the operations of hermetic systems within the overall GD perspective. This, of course, was not his perspective on the matter; it is mine through the benefit of hindsight.

Truth be told, I believe that much of the modern Western mystery schools have missed (or perhaps "ignored") the past 100 years of advancements in both the temporal and mystic sciences.