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.

 

Crowley real or hoax?

page: 2
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 04:08 AM
link   
So tell me what do you make out Bill Schnoebelen to be if you make out Mr. Crowley to be such a good person? Will you tell me everything Schnoebelen says is to be all lies? Lol I would say Schnoebelen seems to be a man holding "some" credibility wouldnt you?



Cug

posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 04:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
Lol I would say Schnoebelen seems to be a man holding "some" credibility wouldnt you?


I guess you have nothing to say on anything true about Crowley.


What credibility does Schnoebelen have?

Do you you believe he was A Born Again Christian, A Mormon, and A Wiccan all at the same time like he claims?

And what does this have to do with Crowley?



posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 04:46 AM
link   
Well for one I was going by the other things Schnoebelen showed certification in. Which was the scottish right and a different sect in the Illuminati. He wasnt just a wiccan either and he wasnt just a mormon! He was somebody who actually told about how Joseph Smith robbed Freemasonry and started the Mormon religion based upon stolen Masonic Dogma. Thats why the people pulling the triggers who assassinated Smith wore Masonic Rings. Duh? Also more than just a witch! He was also really good friends with one of the main king Druids in the east coast. Now youre going to tell me he knows NOTHING about crowley? Im not here to "proove" anything to you, if its that important that you find out about that child-molesting bigot youd go and google up Bill Scnoebelens videos, he shows all his certificates which made him a hierarchy in different lodges. I have better things to say for Schnoebelen than I do anyday Crowley. He actually had the strength and courage to find real truth and put down Freemasonry like a real person of truth! Its funny how Masons around here speak so highly about Crowley when Crowley actually described Freemasonry as "Girl Scouts" lol!

Happy researching..




Cug

posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
He wasnt just a wiccan either and he wasnt just a mormon!


Of course he wasn't "just" a Wiccan that would be too easy.. he had to claim he was a high ranking priest in four different traditions, in an impossibly short amount of time at that.


He was somebody who actually told about how Joseph Smith robbed Freemasonry and started the Mormon religion based upon stolen Masonic Dogma.


Dude, you haven't even read his stuff! He claimed the Mormon Church was started by Wiccans!


He was also really good friends with one of the main king Druids in the east coast. Now youre going to tell me he knows NOTHING about crowley?


If you know a high ranking Druid that means your an expert on Crowley????



Im not here to "proove" anything to you,


That's because you can't. You don't know a thing about Crowley other than someone said he was bad.


Its funny how Masons around here speak so highly about Crowley when Crowley actually described Freemasonry as "Girl Scouts" lol!


Other than Masonic Light, What masons are you talking about?

Now lets get back on-topic shall we?



posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 05:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by topsecretombomb
So tell me what do you make out Bill Schnoebelen to be if you make out Mr. Crowley to be such a good person? Will you tell me everything Schnoebelen says is to be all lies? Lol I would say Schnoebelen seems to be a man holding "some" credibility wouldnt you?


First and foremost...those closest to you do not know you.
You are ever evoloving and changing, if your lucky you are aware of the changes...if not...well, you change but are in illusion that your not.

In saying that, how far can we be from truly grasping the inner workings of anyone else...especially through writing...it can mean various things to different people -based on their lifes experiences.

We cand make 'stories' but we will never know A.C., as again, even those closest to you, that you swear you know...you do not konw but that outer layer of who they are.

As for A.C., once again, why not look at the bright side of life?
So many people focus on negative, whats wrong if there seems to be one place that people defend a person? Not a problem really...

Peace

dAlen (former evangelical christian)



posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 02:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by dAlen
First and foremost...those closest to you do not know you.

Wow! That hit me like a ton of bricks this morning, dAlen! I read it last night and although I instinctively knew it was surely truth, I did not understand it.

But upon reading it again, suddenly it is much clearer.


You are ever evolving and changing, if your lucky you are aware of the changes...if not...well, you change but are in illusion that your not.

No doubt! But is it truly 'luck' or rather the sincere desire 'to learn' being held as the ideal in the individual rather than the ideal of that individual more one of seeking 'to know?'

I don't believe in coincidences - or luck. I feel that both those concepts come to AWARENESS. And awareness is next to impossible when one is self-oriented - and self-orientation is almost as hard to overcome just by virtue of being born a human (read: spirits captive in a material world).


In saying that, how far can we be from truly grasping the inner workings of anyone else...especially through writing...it can mean various things to different people -based on their life's experiences.

I tend to agree with that, on one level; that in which we base our reality of self-orientation. We tend to forget that we are all ONE yet each individuals and that our inner most needs and hopes are common although our lives and the way and means with which we seek to satisfy ourselves differs greatly - we judge (others) based on the apparent effects they have on other people yet when we judge ourselves, we have difficulty seeing beyond the (I) to the (WE).

But if we surrender our personal strife for the sake of joining the ECHAD consciously, with the intention of not only alleviating our OWN miseries, but rather seek to make things as best as possible for ALL souls - then we can see that NONE of us are different yet ALL of us are unique in and of ourselves.


We can make 'stories' but we will never know A.C., as again, even those closest to you, that you swear you know...you do not know but that outer layer of who they are.

But those close to us conceive they are separate from us because our own skin covering makes it appear as if we all have our OWN interests - and our talents are hidden to those who cannot see their own godliness, too.

If we practice NAMASTE as an idea and not a word...then it becomes more clear just how bright we ALL shine in truth.


As for A.C., once again, why not look at the bright side of life?

In DEED! Reading about his life, in general terms, I got the impression that he was quite happy, even when he felt he had erred because he didn't mind admitting the things he knew he misjudged. But at the end, it seemed as if his outlook had changed; I wonder if it was because he felt as if he'd failed - and perhaps those around him reinforced this attitude - either by directly bearing witness to his less than perfect decisions, in his personal life, by carrying their own hurt instead of forgiving - and/or those who sought him out for spiritual guidance, etc., expressing their disappointment that the manifestation THEY EXPECTED did not appear before he died.


So many people focus on negative, whats wrong if there seems to be one place that people defend a person? Not a problem really...

Not at all! And to defend a person's inherent right to be themselves - both and fully the light and dark which are two 'sides' we ALL are made from - does not require comparison to other people!

To compare ourselves or another to someone else as a means for validation of ANY kind is judgment - unfair and partial judgment. I finally learned (almost 100%) to quit comparing myself to others - even thinking that I should be more like this one or that one is destructive to my own potential!

AC was AC - and I know at least 7 or 8 other people who share those same initials, including myself - and they do seem to share some inherent common characteristics yet each is a gem in their own right - not identical but equivalent in their immeasurable worth. The thing that allows our unique glimmer to shine through the flesh is SINCERITY. I do believe Mr. Crowley was sincere in all that he did - even his irreverent (ornery) side that loved to poke fun at ourselves (including himself in that, IMO) was sincere. And beneficial in its own way, too.

I do not think we should take ourselves so seriously that we forget to have fun - FAITH and FUN are two 'f' words that don't join in with the BIG 4 letter F word, which is FEAR. Many seem to judge AC based upon their own fears, and in so doing, are blinded to the fact he did have fun as well as faith - and I truly think that the fears of others clouded his last days. And maybe, too, he had some jealousy/envy that was unresolved - related to Jack Parsons and L. Ron Hubbard - which did not allow him to understand the contribution of JP and the value of LRH's opposition to the 'GREAT' work.

I have come to understand that, just as the basic structure of the atom is composed of 3 elemental qualities:
+ | - | +/-
(the +/- being one which can be either a stabilizer OR a catalyst for change),
so also is the structure for any divine or GREAT work...which = all things that men do, at the core!

I see AC as the + (RHP?) and LRH as the - (LHP?) and JP as the +/- (middle path?) as the catalyst for change - in their personal lives, their triple dynamic interdependent relationship in their occult pursuits, and ultimately in the effect their existence had/has/will have upon the human race's common spiritual evolution.

Only one of them disappeared without verifiable proof of death - and then was bestowed with dubious immortality - memorialized on the 'Dark Side of the Moon.'


Yet JP's non-occult contributions have impacted humanity irreversibly! I believe that his occult activities did the same - and that his foray out into the wilderness in 1946 with LRH was required to complete AC's endeavors. Yet without AC's endeavors (and those who came before - Dee and Kelly, specifically - and all that walked with God - 'Enochian') there would not have been any need for JP to do his own part.

It is about:
tEamWork
NOT
coMpEtItIon!



posted on Mar, 22 2007 @ 07:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by queenannie38


I'm interested in what you guys, Masonic Light and Cug, specifically, have to say about my impressions - how they compare with your own.



With the exception of Crowley being "conservative", I think you and I pretty much agree!


Actually, it was Crowley who first introduced me to occultism. Like millions of others, I'd never heard of him before until I saw the cover of the Beatles' "Sgt. Peppers" album. John Lennon's interest in Crowley aroused my curiousity, and I picked up Crowley's "Book 4 Parts 1 and 2" soon after. I've been a diehard fan ever since.



And what do those you associate with think, as well? Just for the sake of furthering my understanding of AC's enigmatic being-ness.


Practically all of my friends and acquaintances who have an interest in occultism admire Crowley, even if they don't always agree with him. The very fact that it was Crowley who was responsible for generating such popular interest in the occult, and Magick in particular, proves his divine ordainment (which was prophesied in Liber AL long begore it actually happened).

Without Crowley, it is unlikely there would even be any modern interest in occultism of value. IMO, we can thank the Beast for taking Truth from the mountain top and giving it to the People, just like Prometheus had done.



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 04:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
With the exception of Crowley being "conservative", I think you and I pretty much agree!

POOR choice of word, on my part (did I say THAT?)

I don't even really know what 'conservative' means aside from 'waste not want not.'


What I should have said is that I sense an inner orderliness that few in the following generations seem to have - but that may well be due to circumstances, too.


Actually, it was Crowley who first introduced me to occultism. Like millions of others, I'd never heard of him before until I saw the cover of the Beatles' "Sgt. Peppers" album. John Lennon's interest in Crowley aroused my curiosity, and I picked up Crowley's "Book 4 Parts 1 and 2" soon after. I've been a die hard fan ever since.

Too bad Lennon didn't get his way completely regarding his choices for that album cover.




The very fact that it was Crowley who was responsible for generating such popular interest in the occult, and Magick in particular, proves his divine ordainment (which was prophesied in Liber AL long before it actually happened).


Yes, of his appointment, I personally have no doubt - and I've had some amazing proof of such lately, too. Which I didn't know was about Crowley, but was pointed in his direction by the 'bluebird' on my shoulder.



Without Crowley, it is unlikely there would even be any modern interest in occultism of value. IMO, we can thank the Beast for taking Truth from the mountain top and giving it to the People, just like Prometheus had done.


Prometheus Crowley!

Got heat? That's proof!



posted on Mar, 27 2007 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light
Without Crowley, it is unlikely there would even be any modern interest in occultism of value. IMO, we can thank the Beast for taking Truth from the mountain top and giving it to the People, just like Prometheus had done.


I have myself said almost the exact same thing. And I have always associated Prometheus(the light bringer) with Lucifer(light-giver) and there we are back at the Beast. I'm no satanist but I hold Lucifer to be the ally of man and hence I have always thought A.C.s nicknames "The Beast" and "anti-christ" to be completely accurate.

Vas



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 01:32 AM
link   
Anyone find it interesting that Crowley made his way on up in masonry enough to be able to practice his black magic occultism at Studholm lodge in England?

One order/declaration that I am aware of that he passed through masonry was about an Occult God called Jabulon (sp)

It's also interesting how he had two children that died under mysterious circumstances.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 01:38 AM
link   


Of course he wasn't "just" a Wiccan that would be too easy.. he had to claim he was a high ranking priest in four different traditions, in an impossibly short amount of time at that.

All Im saying is if you knew the main covens that originated from the original druids you would have people who are around Crowley who actually knew him on a basis!


Dude, you haven't even read his stuff! He claimed the Mormon Church was started by Wiccans!

Yes I have read his stuff, youre the one whose denying the fact that Joseph Smith was murdered by Masons to begin with! Youre probably a mormon yourself!


If you know a high ranking Druid that means your an expert on Crowley????

Like I said, if you know the highest ranking druids youd be closer to the inner circle that actually KNOWS the sicko Mr. Crowley.


That's because you can't. You don't know a thing about Crowley other than someone said he was bad.

So youre saying Crowley isnt bad? Do you honestly think kids should grow up to be just like Mr. Crowley? I bet you think elementary schools should be teaching children that aspiring to be the "great beast 666" as a good thing! Then Im going to describe how Crowley wanted to remove religion, then youll call this "a good thing." Well fine, lets get rid of religion and hand this world over to the Neo-Con scumbags that attack their own country just to start civil wars.


Other than Masonic Light, What masons are you talking about?

The rest of the "Masons" in here that are still in the "Blue'r" degrees of freemasonry lol.

I really dont have anything to proove here, I just want to be known as the many who know Mr. Crowley to be a bad person, I mean what Im trying to say is you people can post replies all you want on this thread, but everybody in the rest of the entire planet is convinced that wierdos like Mr.Crowley are a big thumbs down. The only good "beast" is a dead beast.





posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 02:02 AM
link   
Crowley was definately one sick dude and a pyschopath. But we have him to thank because his philosophy of praying to satanic Gods was a belief that we need to push the envelope to know where we stand.

Crowley was all about knowing where our limits lay. And for him he was willing to go much further then any of us ever will.


Cug

posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 03:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jotfish
Anyone find it interesting that Crowley made his way on up in masonry enough to be able to practice his black magic occultism at Studholm lodge in England?


Nope could not of happened, However He did manage to get into a regular masonic meeting one time and claimed as they let him in he was now recognized. (He was wrong) I can't find find it right now so I can't say if that was Studholm Lodge or not.



One order/declaration that I am aware of that he passed through masonry was about an Occult God called Jabulon (sp)


Now don't be pawning off that masonic God on us occultists!!


Which one of these orders was it?

1) 33° of the Scottish Rite in Mexico From Don Jesus Medina.

2) 3° Anglo-Saxon Lodge No. 343 France. (Grande Loge de France)

3) 33° 'Cerneau' Scottish Rite/90°/95° of the Rite of Memphis/Misraim (From John Yarker)




It's also interesting how he had two children that died under mysterious circumstances.


Nuit Ma Ahathoor Hecate Sappho Jezebel Lilith Crowley (whew!) - typhus
Anne Léa "Poupée - She died after a protracted illness.

Not all that mysterious..

He also had 3 children who survived him

Lola Zaza
Astarte Lulu Panthea
Aleister Ataturk


Originally posted by topsecretombomb
All Im saying is if you knew the main covens that originated from the original druids you would have people who are around Crowley who actually knew him on a basis!


Are you talking about Wicca?? Yes Gerald Gardner knew Crowley.



Youre probably a mormon yourself!


Man with lines like that you should be a stand up comedian! I suggest you check out the open mick night!



Like I said, if you know the highest ranking druids youd be closer to the inner circle that actually KNOWS the sicko Mr. Crowley.


Actually I have a few letter I exchanged with someone who actually knew Crowley.. Does that mean I get to be in the inner circle too???




Then Im going to describe how Crowley wanted to remove religion, then youll call this "a good thing."


Describe it, I double dog dare you!



The rest of the "Masons" in here that are still in the "Blue'r" degrees of freemasonry lol.


Well, feel free to post some links.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 07:33 AM
link   
First of all, many thanks to Cug for sticking up for truth and reason. Both have been sadly lacking around this forum lately.

Now, concerning Aleister Crowley:

1. He would be well pleased that he is hated among cerain members of this forum. After all, he dedicated his entire life to attacking hypocrisy, superstition, and the other aspects of the herd mentality. He was not a saint, and didn't want to be. He was a realist, and had an extremely low tolerance for morons.

2. As for Masonry, Crowley was not a big fan of it. In his introduction to the MMM of the O.T.O., he wrote that he chose to define Freemasonry as a method of communicating Truth, but also said that in doing so he chose to ignore what it "too often actually is". Some of Crowley's criticisms of Masonry are of course exaggerated, but they do indeed contain a germ of truth.

3. Crowley wasn't interested in Druids, Masonic societies, or gods created by anti-Masons such as "Jahbulon". He was interested in the establishment of the Law of Thelema, without regard as to what clubs or fraternal societies one belonged to.


Crowley was (and is) hated by the establishment simply because he denounced the establishment as one giant fraud every time he spoke. This is also the reason that Crowley has always been beloved by the counterculture. And the establishment (both religious and political) will continue to condemn Crowley, while the counterculture (both religious and political) will continue to applaud him.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Vasilis Azoth


I have myself said almost the exact same thing. And I have always associated Prometheus(the light bringer) with Lucifer(light-giver) and there we are back at the Beast. I'm no satanist but I hold Lucifer to be the ally of man and hence I have always thought A.C.s nicknames "The Beast" and "anti-christ" to be completely accurate.

Vas


I agree with you concerning the myth of Lucifer, which is quite obviously a Miltonian spin on the legend of Prometheus. Many mythological systems portray an individual that wishes to bring some sort of knowledge and enlightenment to mankind. In the stories, the chief god always bullies his creations, and tries to keep them dumb. Then, when Prometheus or Lucifer or whatever actually tries to give man liberty, he is ostracized by the herd, and caricatured into the "devil".

Alas, mankind would be a very funny species if they were not so sad. The myth os Satan/Lucifer simply shows that man is afraid to be free.

[edit on 28-3-2007 by Masonic Light]



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 06:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Masonic Light

Alas, mankind would be a very funny species if they were not so sad. The myth os Satan/Lucifer simply shows that man is afraid to be free.


i disagree. man is not afraid to be free. man craves total freedom. man is afraid of powers beyond his ken. any myth making aimed at this fear is BOUND to BECOME a real FORCE to be RECKONED with.

BOUND: held in thrall
BECOME: come into being
FORCE: power
RECKON: reason



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   
Sure Aleister Crowley was right about some things...

(He was originally Initiated into an authentic Gnostic Tradition)



But that people continue to overlook many of his other filthy actions, as to paint him as some sort of saint, is complete insanity:



"During a 1921 ritual, he induced a he-goat to copulate with his mistress, then slit the animal's throat at the moment of orgasm."






Of course some of the websites that this^^^ can be found in 'throws the baby out with the bath water' in many ways; however this is just one example of Aleister Crowley's extreme degeneration.


Sorry, but A.C. is no Yahowah-Lucifer.

He clearly worshipped Javhe-Satan.


Considering the things he did that we do know about...

Imagine(although I'd rather not) what he did that we don't know about.....




[edit on 28-3-2007 by Tamahu]



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by topsecretombomb


Other than Masonic Light, What masons are you talking about?

The rest of the "Masons" in here that are still in the "Blue'r" degrees of freemasonry lol.


Masonic Light is the only Mason here who has spoken openly about his respect for Crowley, dude.

Not that I'm specifically against Crowley. He was a wild one, though. A bit wild for me...

Just for your info, there are other Masons here who have collected degrees outside of the Blue degrees. Appak, for one.

The thing that most people don't understand is that NONE of the appendant degrees (outside of the 3 Blue degrees) bestow a higher "rank" or authority upon the recipient than the degree of Master Mason.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob


i disagree. man is not afraid to be free. man craves total freedom. man is afraid of powers beyond his ken. any myth making aimed at this fear is BOUND to BECOME a real FORCE to be RECKONED with.



I too must disagree, although I certainly wish I could agree with you.

I don't think every single person is afraid of freedom, but I think "man" in general certainly is. The topic is probably outside the scope of this thread, but for a more elaborate discussion of how man fears freedom, I strongly suggest the works of Jean-Paul Sartre.

You may be correct that man "craves total freedom", and even Sartre may agree with you. But, in many cases, it seems tro be a case of "be careful what you ask for". On a very deep level, man doesn't want to be free at all, and thus invents all sorts of religions, superstions, and political ideologies to keep him from his freedom.



posted on Mar, 28 2007 @ 10:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tamahu



But that people continue to overlook many of his other filthy actions, as to paint him as some sort of saint, is complete insanity:


Of course it is. Crowley never claimed to be a saint. In fact, he claimed to be the Beast, which is the exact opposite.




"During a 1921 ritual, he induced a he-goat to copulate with his mistress, then slit the animal's throat at the moment of orgasm."


Tamahu, I think you know that is complete horse manure. Crowley never "induced a he-goat to copulate" with anybody, nor did he practice blood sacrifices. Such absurd and lurid tales were invented by the Fascist press when he was expelled from Italy.

The rituals practiced by Crowley were orthodox in the Western Hermetic / Rosicrucian tradition. If you want to disagree with Crowley, fine, but there's no reason to lie about him.




Of course some of the websites that this^^^ can be found in 'throws the baby out with the bath water' in many ways; however this is just one example of Aleister Crowley's extreme degeneration.


Crowley would no doubt have taken being called a "degenerate" as a compliment. He probably even would have gotten a good laugh about the goat story. He was funny that way.




He clearly worshipped Javhe-Satan.


Crowley was not a "worshiper". He was an Adept, and a High one at that. Occultists do not "worship" external deities in the exoteric tradition. He recognized Heru-Ra in his form of Ra-Hoor-Khuit as the personification of spiritual integrity in the current stage of human evolution, but did not consider Horus a "god" in the profane sense, i.e., as something external to be worshiped. As his motto read, Deus et Homo: God is Man.



Considering the things he did that we do know about...


As occultists, we are not as concerned with what Crowley did as we are with the practicality and truth or falsehood of his magical system. We all know that Crowley liked to drink it up, party hearty, chase women, and raise hell in general. But even this has magical import. He was, after all, a Magus, and in that, embodied the principles of the Aeon, which are chaotic in nature. Furthermore, we are both discussing the subject from a particular point of view, which by definition is below the Grade of (8)=[3]. One who has renounced his Adeptship in fullfilment of it has attained the Grade of Magister, and views the world from the universal perspective: what Crowley called the Mystery of Pan, and the "Universal Joke". We shouyld not be surprised that a Magister Templi lives out a colossal practical joke at the expense of the Profane: indeed, the Adepts of Mahayana Buddhism have been doing it for centuries.

The only difference with Crowley is that he was the first of such Adepts to be featured in the New York Times!



[edit on 28-3-2007 by Masonic Light]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join