Originally posted by woodwytch
and of course we cannot forget that he was the self-proclaimed 'King of The Witches' !!!
Woody, you disappoint me, Alexander Sanders (founder of the Alexandrian Wiccian Tradition) proclaimed himself 'King of the Witches' in the 1960's.
This was never attributed to Crowley
We are also told that he liked to be referred to as 'The Beast666' [(sounds like a username on ATS), to 'shock' and 'mock'.
Please refer to my earlier post where I explained the origin of that name. If you have questions on it I'll be happy to answer. I'm not sure why
you are bringing this back up, except to stir the pot. If you have issue with my explanation of the moniker, pls state it. Other wise this part of
your post is just being sensationalistic. Something you seem to be accusing Crowley of
So maybe it would be easier for all of us if he had one title ... let me think 'Egomaniac' ... yes, that about sums him up in one neat
He was an egomaniac. The ego is a very strong and powerful force. Ever study Jung? You might understand Crowley's 'demons' a bit better if you
This is displayed in his lore; 'Do what thou wilt, let that be the whole of the lore'.
Law NOT 'lore' also please dont forget the second part....Love is the law, love under will
Some Pagans practice sex-magick rituals as a mutual act, for the purpose of raising the energy. It is well documented that Crowley's agender
was often more perverted and a method of dominance and control of his 'subjects' ... and another ego-boost.
Crowley was into kinky sex. So are many Christians, wiccians and members of many other religions. There was one key difference between Crowley's sex
magic and the sex magic of your referenced pagans however. And to Crowley and many gnostics, it's the anthesis of being Luciferian.
He also condoned 'blood sacrifice' ... but for obvious reasons this was usually thinly disguised by using the word 'prana' as a
He recognized the powers inherent in blood and seminal fluid. Do you deny that they are conduits?
The confusing part is (for someone who referred to himself as the King of the Witches) ... he seemed pretty well obsessed with the Devil /
Satan / Lucifer ... and yet they are Christian concepts ... true witches don't acknowledge this Christian entity.
Again, wrong person. I guess you might be Gardenerian
Once we get past your incorrect comment, - - His use of Lucifer is in a gnostic alchemical sense. Lucifer is not Satan. Crowley had nothing to do
with satan or devils, he DID work with demons, and once again, I encourage you to read Jung for more background on this.
In truth this man did witches no favours at all. In fact he and his writings are responsible for a lot of the ridiculous ideas and
misconceptions that people have of modern day witches.
These misconceptions are not the fault of crowley but more the fault of the media and pop culture. Just as I said before, what most people know about
Crawley is what they hear about from rock bands, juvenile black arts practicioners, and the 700 club. Crowley never set out to smear witches. I'm
not sure he ever had anything to say on the subject actually.
This is only my opinion and you might have guessed that I'm not too keen on anything the guy stood for.
I'm actually not keen on the man either. Much of what he wrote is intentionally misleading, and I question the reason for that. I believe by being
intentionally misleading, he endangers people in an effort to hide his real meaning. I'm not a Thelemite. I'm not a member of the OTO. But, I
HAVE studied him. I have done much more than read his books. I have done nothing but play devils advocate and watch others continue to spit
inconsistencies. Spreading mis information does not help us 'deny ignorance' instead it propagates it.