It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Have you guys ever heard of Aleister Crowley?

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 10:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by AnthraAndromda

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by metalholic
 


No I haven't read the book. I know better. A psychopath will tell you 99 truths to implant 1 lie. I understand he's highly intelligent, so won't even bother trying to decipher truth from fallacy.

Besides your first mention, everything is really easily explainable. Crowly was highly intelligent. He had a bit of genius. Genius can see the future. It's really not that difficult. I've foreseen many things that have already come to pass, and still foresee much of the future that's pretty much set in stone from my point in view. Anyways, I'm not going to take up this thread with you debating Crowley. If you hold him as a prophet, you're obviously biased. There's no real point in speaking any further of this.


And you don't see the folly of you words! Alas. Your words also show your own bias. If One is not willing to seek out the truth, then he will never find it. All that he will have is his own delusions, and misgivings.

We all need to seek the truth. Truth is all we have that is real.


Yet you do and remain silent
How unconscionable!

Care to enlighten me?

I can be wrong.




posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by metalholic
reply to post by unityemissions
 


your laughing that suggests you never read book of the law and if so didnt catch the clues in it..it talks about a house..not a house like a building but a cluster of stars and or planets kinda like a zodiacal house if you will the house is called 418! the description in the book matches the picture that the hubble telescope took of it...


Any links to this picture? I'd kinda like to see it ... sounds interesting.



the book was authored to crowley by an alien in cairo egypt of 1904 supposively! if u read it it tells this!...

it talks about the popularity of the wireless...sorry i might have grown up on a diff planet but there was wireless in 1904???? oh and it talks about the popularity of guessing competitions..game shows anyone?


Wireless in 1904 ... barely, Radio was in it infantcy then, and hardly recognizable as radio as we know it today (or even in the 1920's).



posted on Jul, 26 2010 @ 10:22 PM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


Okay, in the quote you had, the guy said that the will is above love, yet love is the law, yet will is the law
Do you see how he's twisting here?? Then he says that love is just like hate :hate: Can you not see how this is further twisting ??? Seriously??? Then he says that if love is conflicting with the will, follow the will. WTF ???

He's saying basically, the will should be thought of as being equivalent to the heart. The heart should be followed in accordance with the will. When they conflict, follow the will! He's slowly twisting so that he can phuck with people. It's what psychopaths do! They twist and twist and twist, until you question all of morality, then you become a psycho yourself!!



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 12:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


Okay, in the quote you had, the guy said that the will is above love, yet love is the law, yet will is the law
Do you see how he's twisting here?? Then he says that love is just like hate :hate: Can you not see how this is further twisting ??? Seriously??? Then he says that if love is conflicting with the will, follow the will. WTF ???

He's saying basically, the will should be thought of as being equivalent to the heart. The heart should be followed in accordance with the will. When they conflict, follow the will! He's slowly twisting so that he can phuck with people. It's what psychopaths do! They twist and twist and twist, until you question all of morality, then you become a psycho yourself!!



Well, actually, that is not what he is saying. It seems quite clear to me, but I'm afraid, that if you can not understand the original words, then there is little hope of me explaining it.

All I can begin to suggest is that you meditate upon this, perhaps after some time you will begin to see the truth contained within.

The entire point I'm traying to make is that you and many others have condemned Crowley and his entire body of teachings based on the misunderstanding, and lies of the popular press of some 90 years ago. People like Crowley who are decades ahead of their time are often misunderstood. I don't think it is right to disreguard him or his knowledge based simply on others lack of intelligence or understanding.

Course, then again, I'm sure TPTB would like it very much if Crowley's entire body of teachings could be buried along with him. It would certainly make their jobs much easier.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 12:08 AM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


Yeaaaaahh, riiiiiight. I'm simply not reading him correctly, because I'm not intelligent enough to understand him. It's not as if I aced school and thought it was a joke, test in the gifted range on an IQ test, or anything like that. I'm just stupid!

Thanks for the detailed explanation!



oh and btw a sign of high intelligence is taking complex concepts and putting them into easily understood phrases. So .. you're not up to the challenge??

Explain to me how what he said makes sense. Explain to me how he's not twisting. I see it quite clearly. What you see with clarity is what I'm wondering.

[edit on 27-7-2010 by unityemissions]



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 12:33 AM
link   
love is the law, love under will

what that means is that love, AGAPE love, is an action - it is a choice.

you CHOOSE to love others who are not even considered "lovable" by most of society.

it isn't a reaction, emotional or otherwise, and it isn't about romance or the give-and-take of relationships.

it's about doing what you know is good and beneficial for another person just because they are human, too.

to say that love is "under will" means that it is directed by the will rather than directing the will, as is most often the case.


everything that Crowley said in this wise was just about the same that Paul wrote in the last parts of the bible.
no one got Paul and no one gets Crowley.

agape love is a hard concept for those who are inside themselves, looking out.

but for those who have dissolved the barrier of within and without, it's almost natural. maybe it IS natural, i don't know.

but it feels good.

----------------------

to Metalholic:
i like that "prophet in wolf's clothing" idea. very novel and very apt.
remember:

SUCCESS IS PROOF



we are about to witness "the birth of Babalon"
!!!!

to the rest of you:

93!!!






posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 12:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by undo
he was a proponent of sex magick. that's what Lam is. it's coitus, to put it mildly.




right.
that's funny, really.

actually, LAM is derived from LAMA - the tibetan word for a teacher of the Dharma.

"LAM" is "the way" or "the path"

sex magick might have facilitated the meeting with LAM but LAM is not sex magick.
the babe in the blue egg is what came out of the ritual, not the ritual itself.

LAM is probably beyond such carnal preoccupations...but i could be wrong.

this is what is interesting:
LAM sounds like lamb.
in the bible, Jesus said he was the way.
the bible says Jesus is the lamb.

lamb=lam=the way.

Babalon speaks of her brother and father. this makes perfect sense to me.



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 01:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


Yeaaaaahh, riiiiiight. I'm simply not reading him correctly, because I'm not intelligent enough to understand him. It's not as if I aced school and thought it was a joke, test in the gifted range on an IQ test, or anything like that. I'm just stupid!



I did not say you were lacking in intelligence. Though I did hint that perhaps you are lacking in understanding.

Understanding is something that One gains from knowledge, and knowledge from education, research, reading, experience, and other sources.

Etharzi od Oma



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 01:45 PM
link   
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
 


I'm going to start this out with passages from the book: The Book Of The Law! you might have read it and mis-understood it you might not have read it at all but you cannot deny the truths concealed within. do I believe everything in it not 100%. But I do believe it has enough weight to be brought into this discussion which I'am going to start. some may let the author of this book's reputation get in the way of there perception some might not have a clue at all. all I ask is stay on topic and dont get into the life and times if thats all you have to attack with KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!

The study of these passages necessarily demands supreme human scholarship to interpret it needs years of intense application. A great deal has still to be worked out. But enough has been discovered to justify its claim the most sceptical of intelligence is compelled to admit its truth. On the other hand the language of the book is admirably simple clear and vigorous.

This book explains the universe the elements of space that is the total possiblities of every kind. Every event is a uniting of some one monad with one of the experiences possible to it. Every man and every woman is a star. That is an aggregate of such experiences constantly changing with each frsh event which affects him or her consciously or sub-consciously.

Each one of us has a universe of his own but it is the same universe for each one as soon as it includes all possible experience. This implies the extension of consciousness to include all other consciousness. In our present stage the object that you see is never the object that I see. We infer that it is the same because your experience tallies with mine on so many points that the actual differences of our observation are negligible.

For instance if a friend is walking between us you see only his left side I his right. But we agree that it is the same man although we may differ not only as to what we may see of his body but as to what we know of his qualities. This conviction of identity grows stronger as we see him more often and get to know him better. Yet all the time neither of us can know anything of him at all beyond the total impression made on our respective minds.

Each of us stars is to move on our true orbit as marked out by the nature of our position the law of growth the impulse of our past experiences. All events are equally lawful and everyone necessary in the long run for all of us. Only one act is lawful for each one of us at any given moment. Therefore duty consists in determining to experience the right event from one moment of consciousness to another.

The third chapter of the book is difficult to understand and may be very repugnant to anyone born before 1904 the date of the book. It tells us the characteristics of the period on which we are now entered. Superfically they appear appalling. We see some of them already with terrifying clarity. Certain vast stars (or agreggates of experience) may be described as gods.

This present period involves the recognition of the individual as the unit of society. Every event including death is only one more acceration to our experience freely willed by ourselves from the beginning and therefore also predestined. Observe for yourselves the decay of the sense of sin. The growth of innocence and irresponsibility the strange modifications of the reproductive instinct.

With the tendency to become bi-sexual or epicine the childlike confidence in progress combined with nightmare fear of catastrophe against which we are yet half willing to take precautions. Consider the outcrop of dictatorships only possible when moral growth is in its earliest stages. And the infantile cults like Communism, Fascism, Pacifism, Health Crazes, Occultism in nearly all its forms. Religions sentimentalised to the point of practical extinction.

Consider the popularity of the cinema, the wireless, the football pools, and guessing competitions all devices for soothing fractious infants no seed of purpose in them. Consider sport the babyish enthusiasms and rages which it excites whole nations disturbed by disputes between boys. Consider war the atrocities which occur daily and leave us unmoved and hardly worried. We are children.

Democracy dodders. Ferocious fascism cackling communism equally frauds cavort crazily all over the golbe. They are hemming us in. Liberty stirs once more in the womb of time.

Evolution makes it's changes by anti-socialistic ways. The abnormal man who forsees the trend of times and adapts circumstance intelligently is laughed at persecuted often destroyed by the herd. But he and his heirs when the crisis comes are survivors. Above us to-day hangs a danger never yet paralleled in history. We suppress the individual in more and more ways.

We think in terms of the herd. War no longer kills soldiers it kills all indiscriminately. Every new measure of the most democratic and autocratic governments is communistic in essence. It is always restriction. We are treated as imbecile children. Dora, the shops act, the motoring laws, sunday suffocation, the censorship they wont trust us to cross the roads at will.

Fascism is like communism and dishonest into the bargain. The dictators suppress all art, literature, theatre, music, news, that does not meet their requirements yet the world only moves by the light of genius. The herd will be destroyed in mass.

The absolute rule of the state shall be a function of the absolute liberty of each individual will.

If you read the rest of the book it reads more like a bible there are things un-known in 1904 that are hidden in the rest of the book through cipher, and cryptograms. You have to know what to look for or know what you've found when you come across it. For example:

4 6 3 8 a l g m o r 3 y x 24 89 r p s t o v a l. That code has yet to be still un-coded with certainty. Also there are more obvious things in there such as the name of a nebula that can only be seen through the hubble telescope. It's name is 418 and the description matches the picture as far as the color goes! Now remember this book was written in 1904 way before the hubble.

apod.gsfc.nasa.gov...



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by metalholic
 


Just to keep the record straight here. I was introduced to Crowley around 1970, and have read everything he has written ... several times. I've also been a student of Western Ceremonial Magick, and the Golden Dawn systems as well as Enochian Magick. All from the very early 70's.

So, I am very familiar with Crowley and his works. I've even done a bit of writing myself, though no books ... yet.

Thanks for the Image, by the way. Very cool! Will have to save it for further apprecation.

Etharzi od Oma



posted on Jul, 27 2010 @ 07:39 PM
link   
i think you guys are having a communication breakdown.
i'm addressing this to metalholic and AnthraAndromda

i've been reading this thread, just the posts, mainly, since it re-newed this year, and you two are on the same side.

but metalholic, i'm thinking that in the last bit of exchange, that you've gotten AnthraAndromda mixed up with unityemissions.

your last post, this one, seems more aptly directed to unityemissions, only by virtue of how the conversation between you two has so far been.

either that, or you are not realizing that AnthraAndromda was replying to one of unityemissions' posts, in the post that you are replying to.

egad.
i knew that would get confusing.

i'm just trying to let you know that, as an observer, i can see a misunderstanding brewing and it's not necessary. so i want to point it out so you can get it cleared up.

you both are obviously fond of Crowley and respect him and his work - that's obvious to me.
but maybe you're not seeing it in each other.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by crowdedskies
 


Here we go, you hit the nail right on the head with that post.

I think that when I first started this thread the main point I was trying to invoke out of people is that the "Greys" are actually extradimensional entities, or what the average person might call spirits or demons.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
I think that when I first started this thread the main point I was trying to invoke out of people is that the "Greys" are actually extradimensional entities, or what the average person might call spirits or demons.


In all of Occult literature and tradition there is nothing that even begins to suggest that there are anything remotely like "extradimensional" entities. In the Occult we talk of several "planes" of existance (30 actually), but not dimensions.

Many of the more advanced concepts and theories of the Occult are now being put forth by science. String theory and quantun physics are two good sources for these new theories. And it is beginning to appear that what we (Occultists) attribute to the planes or levels of the Tree of Life may be what science is referring to as dimensions. This is evidenced by the idea that there are 11 dimensions in the universe, and there are 11 major planes to the Tree, with the 11th usually being refered to as the "shells". Though it should be noted that this 11th "plane" is also the lowest. and the first or top "plane" existing aeyond what we call "the Abyss". This has the effect of making the first "plane" wholly beyond Human comprehension. Though Crowley did in his "Naples Agreement" set forth a rather good definition of these "planes", except for the last (11th).

As a note: it is interesting, as I was refreshing my memory on the Naples Agreement. It seems that Crowley may have left "room" for Dark matter and energy in there as well. Its a bit early to tell.

In any case; Occult tradition seems to clearly separate the ideas of Spirits and Demons from what modern man thinks of as ET's. Spirits and demons are clearly of the "spiritual" realms, and ET's, all ET's, are of the physical. THere is also no account that I'm aware of where a Spirit or demon has abducted anyone. And this is in several thousand years of Occult tradition.

As I have already pointed out, the entities in the "zone guirdling the Earth" are all clearly spiritual in nature, and none of them have a description that is even vaguely close to that of any known or hypothetical ET. I would also like to point out that like a Leopard, these entities can't change their "spots" or appearence. The forms they take upon manifistation seems to have been "fixed" for the past several thousand years. Carefully documented by serious Occultists, and passed down in tradition and literature.

So as an Occultist of some 40 years, I have to be quite skeptical of this association of ET with the spirit realms, at least until there is some verifiable research that indicates otherwise.

And, as an ET, I will remain offended until such research appears.

Etharzi od Oma.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   
reply to post by queenannie38
 


i was giving him the link of that picture whiel also giving everyone namely unityemissions something to read



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 01:34 PM
link   
reply to post by metalholic
 


well, that's what i was thinking but then it was a little unclear.

i'm just one of those "can't we all get along" people.
not always necessary.




posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 04:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Diplomat
reply to post by crowdedskies
 


Here we go, you hit the nail right on the head with that post.

I think that when I first started this thread the main point I was trying to invoke out of people is that the "Greys" are actually extradimensional entities, or what the average person might call spirits or demons.


I realise the point you were making. I only wish you could have found a different example. Crowley is bound to attract heated discussions (such as as : he was a very evil man ....oh no he wasn't)

Yes, I reached the conclusion a long time ago that we are talking about demons/spirits/entities when we discuss aliens and ufos. There is no need for anyone to throw the occult book at me. I would even suggest that the majority of occultists would agree with me on this.

Some people will very strongly oppose this notion because they cannot bear the thought of 'physical aliens' not existing. Mind you spirits,demons or entities however you call them can still become dense enough to be physical.

You only have to look at any representation of ETs to realise the demon features. Even S Spielberg's ET looks very demonic. It is amazing that the movie could endear people to that horrid creature. It was a PR success for demons.

Anyone who is passionate about UFOs eventually gets to see them. The more passionate the more you see- not halucinations; you can actually photograph and video them. Without some basic occult training it can become dangerous and the passion to see UFOs becomes obsession which in turn can lead to 'abduction' (effectively possession). You need to know how to turn off.














[edit on 28-7-2010 by crowdedskies]

[edit on 28-7-2010 by crowdedskies]



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
what i'm wondering is how you guys can know what a demon looks like?

where do we find portraits or photographs?



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
this vid talks alot about A.C. very good...it gets into him about half way thru

Illuminati Vol 2: The Antichrist Conspiracy- Part 1/12




posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by crowdedskies

Yes, I reached the conclusion a long time ago that we are talking about demons/spirits/entities when we discuss aliens and ufos. There is no need for anyone to throw the occult book at me. I would even suggest that the majority of occultists would agree with me on this.


It would be my educated opinion that you have reached a wholly unfounded conclusion. Not only in attempting to equate ET to demons, but that any truly serious Occultist would agree with you on that.



Some people will very strongly oppose this notion because they cannot bear the thought of 'physical aliens' not existing. Mind you spirits,demons or entities however you call them can still become dense enough to be physical.


If, you are talking about a more generic "alien" then perhaps you could stretch things enough, however, When I, and many others, think of an "alien" we are thinking about extraterrestrials. And, ET is most surely not a demon, regardless of what he looks like.

Yes, it is possible to evoke a demon to physical manifestation, it is, however, a great deal of work. Those who have done it will know what I'm talking about.



You only have to look at any representation of ETs to realise the demon features. Even S Spielberg's ET looks very demonic. It is amazing that the movie could endear people to that horrid creature. It was a PR success for demons.


Some ET's do look rather "strange" as compared to a Human, but then so do most terrestrial animals. Some ET's are virtually indistinguishable from Humans; are they demons too?



Anyone who is passionate about UFOs eventually gets to see them. The more passionate the more you see- not halucinations; you can actually photograph and video them. Without some basic occult training it can become dangerous and the passion to see UFOs becomes obsession which in turn can lead to 'abduction' (effectively possession). You need to know how to turn off.


Abduction is a very different sort of event from possession! I've delt with people who were "possessed", and I delt with abductions. They are very different.

By the way, the evocation of any demon or spirit requires much more than "basic" occult training to allow it to be safe enough to perform. In my school for instance, evocation typically isn't permitted for anyone with less than a couple of years of study.

Etharzi od Oma.



posted on Jul, 28 2010 @ 06:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Funkydung
 


The problem, as I see it, with this, or indeed, any video. or attempt to link Crowley with the Illuminati, as it is understood by most people today is; Crowley was never involved with any group currently extant or historical that even vaguely resembles the modern conceptions of the "Illuminati".

These attempts to associate him with these kind of groups stems solely from a total misunderstanding of the man and his body of teachings.

Etharzi od Oma



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join