It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Ordo Templi Orientis

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jun, 21 2004 @ 01:40 PM

Originally posted by Mundane Egg
Anyone else to diagnose????

Actually, Regardie provides a diagnosis in the book mentioned above, lol. He notes that Crowley had been traumatized as a child by the Christian cult he grew up in. While most Christian sects are innocent of the extremism of Crowley’s family cult, Crowley didn’t differentiate between them, and saw all forms of Christianity as being basically evil, murderous, and hypocritical.

Regardie notes that while Crowley was in college, he began to develop a reputation as a bohemian poet and ladies man. For the first time, at Cambridge, he was exposed to free thought and non-Christian philosophies, which intrigued him (as a youth, he had not been allowed to read anything but the Bible, and was once beaten for reading a Sherlock Holmes mystery).
He became very promiscuous while at school, which Regardie believed was a Freudian defense mechanism after realizing that he was a homosexual. Even though Crowley officially denounced Christianity, he still carried the baggage of his uncle’s obsession with “sin”, and attempted to drown his innate shame of homosexuality with heterosexual exploits. This continued for practically all of his life...he admitted freely in his writings that he was a homosexual, yet he also found the need to be married (three times) and to have a traditional family. It would seem that even though he felt comfortable rebelling against everything with his pen, he continued to feel conditioned restraint in real life. This also explains why much of his writings appear bombastic and maniacal, in contrast to his relatively simple day-to-day life. He found a strong outlet for repression in his writing, and made use of it.

Fiat Lvx.

posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 12:24 AM

The “entity” that dictated Liber AL was called “Aiwass”. Crowley identified Aiwass with his own Genius, or “Higher Self”, and it is not uncommon for those involved in Magick to come into contact with latent parts of themselves...actually, in a sense, that’s what Magick is all about.

Sorry but I've read from many sources that he claimed he saw this being with his very eyes, it was not somekind of "muse" or sunconsious alter-ego. He claimed it was very real. I even saw the drawing he made of that thing.

It is a fact known in psychiatry that religiouness worked as catalysis for schizophrenic behaviours in many people throughout history... no matter if that was in a negative (as for witches and herectics) or a positive way (some saints, gurus and medicine mans). Obviously, Crowley is not the only man to have suffered from the "cultural atrocities" of christian puritanism, but appearantly he was the only one, or one of the few, for whom it had the effect of a nuclear bomb on his psyche. Why does the other mens did not became as eccentric and spiritually obsessed as him? Because he was more clever? Because of his unique parental background? Because he was on drugs (like many intellectuals of this time)? That would be asking the very same questions that try to explain why someone turned schizophrenic...

To your informed point-of-view, he seemed to be somekind of Anton Szando Lavey for this era... a misunderstood man who was more defending a culture of marginality against a repressive Church rather than being the embodiment of Lucifer himself, and that`s something I'm very much inclined to believe, yes...

Also, I never said Rimbaud was schizophrenic, as he was not. I only used him as an example for an artist that was suffering of mental illness. He was depressive, and you only need to have some basic knowledge in litterature -and psychiatry- to see that through his poems, especially in "Une saison en enfer". Also, his chaotic, self-destructive and yet overly passionate lifestyle is obviously the one of a depressive.

Please read carefully what I write in my posts. It`s painful to always defend each line and word that I write.

posted on Jun, 22 2004 @ 11:36 AM

Originally posted by Echtelion
Sorry but I've read from many sources that he claimed he saw this being with his very eyes, it was not somekind of "muse" or sunconsious alter-ego. He claimed it was very real. I even saw the drawing he made of that thing.

Throughout Crowley’s commentaries on Liber AL, he claims that Aiwass is his own Genius, or “Higher Self”, which is called, in the jargon of the Golden Dawn, the Holy Guardian Angel.
This preter-human Force does indeed manifest itself in a Form which can be comprehended by the Adeptus Minor, but not in the same sense that actual “physical beings” are comprehend using the five senses.
Forces of Aiwass’ Nature manifest only in the so-called “spirit vision” or “astral plane” (which corresponds to Plato's world of Form, called Assiah in the Qabalah) and communicated Liber AL through his wife Rose, who acted in the ceremony as Seer.
This is a rather complicated thing to explain, and requires personal experience to understand; and as it requires knowledge of certain technicalities of Magick, it is out of place to go into great detail on a secret societies forum. However, suffice it to say that Crowley, in the aspect of Frater Perdurabo the Aspirant, did contact his Aiwass in an a real and actual manner, but the Force which he contacted did not exist “outside” of himself. In actuality, to the Magician, nothing exists outside of the Self, but again this view is highly technical, and likely cannot be appreciated by those not versed in Magick, with the exception of those Buddhist and Hindu mystics who have attained states of consciousness that equal those of the Supernal Sephiroth for the Qabalists.
As Crowley wrote in “Magick In Theory And Practice”, it is convenient (emphasis in the original) for the Magician to pretend that the Entity he has contacted is something outside of himself, and thereby commune with such Force as if it were an objective person.

It is a fact known in psychiatry that religiouness worked as catalysis for schizophrenic behaviours in many people throughout history...

Possibly, but schizophrenia has also been linked with chemical imbalance in the brain, with certain neurotransmitters refusing to fire, and with others going haywire. This can partially be treated with drugs, and the disease has a strong biological basis.
One of the most notorious symptoms of true schizophrenia is a state of illucidity in the patient, where he or she is unable to distinguish reality from fantasy. Although Crowley was indeed an eccentric, he admitted near the end that much of his famous weirdness was manufactured; and his serious writings show a man who was able to almost single-handedly revise the entire system of Magick, and present it in the form of a Science, including not only mystical attainment, but also physics, mathematics, psychology, and philosophy.
Before Crowley, Magick was masked in complete superstition and absurdity. He sought to show that real Magick is a scientific discipline. This is his true legacy.

For example, no one (at least not the modern rationalists) believes in “demons” anymore...but conjuring them has always been, at least in the minds of the Profane, an important aspect of Magick.
Crowley was the first Adept who published the formerly secret knowledge that what a Magician calls a “demon” is the same thing a psychoanalyst calls a “complex”. It is a gross, negative force that lies underneath the surface of the psyche.
When a Magician conjures the “demon”, he first objectifies it, then projects it apart from himself. The demon is then ritualistically “banished”...i.e., the unwelcome force is purged from the Self. Having overcome his own demons, the Magus is able to continue in his Work of self-perfection.
This is also a reason that Regardie considered Goetic Magick and psychoanalysis to be akin.

Fiat Lvx.

[edit on 22-6-2004 by Masonic Light]

[edit on 22-6-2004 by Masonic Light]

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 02:27 PM
Quote: "Thelema is the Occult Religion founded by Aleister Crowley."

Masonic Light - I agree with most of your Postings - except for the above line. Crowley did NOT create a Religion called Thelema. Thelema is the Greek word for Will - why don't you re-read the New Testament. Crowley CHANNELED the Book of the Law. Crowley was a Master of Quabalah - indeed there are many Codes & Ciphers in his “Occult” Works. This stuff is all BASED in the Judeo-Christian-Islamic-Hermetic-Gnostic-Masonic (i.e. Western) Tradition (as well as the Eastern Tradition - Yoga, Chakras & Meditation) & Through in Scientific Compatibility as well - what he does is expose the LIE that has been going on for a LONG Time - he shows the PAGAN & POLYTHEISTIC roots of said MONOTHIESTIC RELIGIONS. Thank You for Freedom from the Tyranny of Slave Gods Aleister! New Aeon Indeed!

Expand your Consciousness Ain Soph Stylee!!!!!

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 03:14 PM
Thelema is generally considered a religion by its adherents. It has its own scriptures (the Holy Books of Thelema, especially Liber AL), which promulgates Thelemic philosophy and theology. It has its own Liturgy and Eucharistic Communication through its religious body, the Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica (Gnostic Catholic Church).
Thelema is the religion promulgated by the Church; it celebrates the Gnostic Mass (which is Thelemic), ordains bishops, priests, and deacons, celebrates the Eucharist, practices the Rites of Baptism for converts to Thelema, etc.

Fiat Lvx.

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 05:26 PM
Yes but how is this any different than Standard Hermeticism & Gnosticism - who do the "Modern Thelemites" think they are - that either they or Aleister Crowley invented these concepts. This is Ancient Philosophy!!!

Yes it is true that Aleister Crowley wrote the Initiation Rituals - but what happens when you point out that Aleister Crowley was a 33rd Degree FreeMason & did this just to cut a lot of the CRAP out of Traditional Masonry - as to get to the "Meat" of it all if you will. Also having Channeled the Book of the Law - he wanted to make sure that the Rituals were compatible with its doctrines. Behold:

"For there are therein Three Grades, the Hermit, the Lover & the Man of the Earth"

Tell me what other "Order" has these three Grades?

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 05:43 PM

Originally posted by Seraphim_Serpente
Yes but how is this any different than Standard Hermeticism & Gnosticism - who do the "Modern Thelemites" think they are - that either they or Aleister Crowley invented these concepts. This is Ancient Philosophy!!!

Indeed it is; however, practically every religion is founded upon some sort of ancient philosophy.

Yes it is true that Aleister Crowley wrote the Initiation Rituals - but what happens when you point out that Aleister Crowley was a 33rd Degree FreeMason & did this just to cut a lot of the CRAP out of Traditional Masonry

Just to make sure we're being technically accurate, Crowley was not a regular 33° Mason. Aleister Crowley received the first three degrees of Masonry in 1904, having been initiated, passed, and raised in Anglo-Saxon Lodge under the Jurisdiction of the Grande Loge de France. However, in his autobiography, he relates that he received his patent of the 33° in Mexico in the year 1900.
This was a Ceneau patent, not a Scottish Rite one. He was not yet a Mason when he received this "33°", nor had he reached the required age (one must be at least 33 years old to receive the real 33°; Crowley was only 25 at the time).
The Cerneau Council would sell 33° patents to anyone willing to pay $50 for them.
Aleister Crowley was extremely knowledgeable concerning hermeticism, and was an expert Qabalist. However, he knew very little about Freemasonry, as is apparent from his "Confessions" and "Magick Without Tears".

"For there are therein Three Grades, the Hermit, the Lover & the Man of the Earth"
Tell me what other "Order" has these three Grades?

This, like all ritualistic references in Liber AL, concerns the Golden Dawn formula, which was divided into 3 Grades: the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn, the RR et AC, and the A.'.A.'.

Fiat Lvx.

[edit on 16-7-2004 by Masonic Light]

posted on Jul, 16 2004 @ 07:50 PM
Don't Forget S.R.I.A. as well as the American Version of S.R.I.A.

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 03:53 AM
I'm responding to threads so old I bet the authors nearly forgot what they wrote. I've been lurking once a month for years but in the paranormal section, waiting for a thread that seemed worth posting on. By the time I found one I'd forgotten my login and had to re-register.

Originally posted by Echtelion
have you ever considered, in a totally different perspective, seeing Crowley and his works as being terribly schizophrenic??? I mean have you ever looked at it from the "outside" and notice how this guy would just have been a perfect shot for any psychiatric insitute of today?

Quite a number of mystical experiences, described to any psychiatrist, would find a person well medicated in minutes.

One of the things that most intrigues me--more about QBL studies across the board, not so much Crowley or OTO specifically--is that a person can have experiences, visions and insights, and then years later discover them in occult literature. I've wondered if that meant the experiences were some group dream not limited by time. Then again it seems maybe that sums up reality itself. I don't know that it's fair to judge just Crowley by the recounted experiences et al., since we would have to go back in history and round up nearly every seriously interesting person who ever wrote things down and toss 'em in the same boat.

Reading Crowley's works, he strikes me as an extremely intelligent, well educated, very thoughtful, and spiritually proactive guy. His book 'Confessions' is really a great read. It's also sort of demoralizing to think that he was so aware of a lot of things last century, and he thought for sure that much was being learned and science would have things all figured out in another half century. Doesn't seem to me that culture is any farther along than it was during his time, in the areas of his studies.

I mean this guy was convinced that he was the Best of the Apocalypse,

His mother, a mega fundie, used to call him that when he was little. You know the saying, what doesn't kill you, defines you. I think there are many things about him that he recognized in himself and rather than accepting how it repressed him, he instead flipped it around and used it as a doorway. Some say it's healthy to seek out what you fear and to boldly explore what you fear about yourself. Maybe he did some of that. Then again, in some respects, I think he was just a lot louder -- quite the drama queen, LOL -- in his writing than he was in other ways.

he was practicing some extremely twisted sexual acts with other members of his order

There isn't much he was doing a century ago that I probably couldn't find in a two block radius of my midwest mostly baptist neighborhood. To me, he just really 'pursued loudly' such things (I equate this to the psychology of people who lead groups such as Queer Nation or the Dykes on Bikes -- basically, people who don't want to deal with the shame society wants to put on them, so they just throw it in the face of the world and dare the world to squeak about it).

he wrote the Al Liber under the strict guidance of a dark supernatural being

I don't think that's the words he used, heh.

who spoke to him by telepathy

We he would have had to have manifested as a human or a parrot to do otherwise, right? Telepathy is really not as uncommon as everybody thinks.

in a codified language,

TP isn't as flatly-linear as our spoken language, either, and our spoken language has several 'layers of meaning' (the sound, for example, has its own geometry, wholly apart from the meaning of the words or the shape of the written language).

and even saw the being appear out of nowhere opposed to from... somewhere? :-)

(the entity actually looked strangely familiar to a Gray, accroding to Crowley's own drawing). A being from the so-called "invisible world".

Crowley's self-portrait makes it clear that his perception was of an entity he identified with as, in one way of putting it, his higher self.

I believe that humans are essentially conglomerate identities, with many part of us and being part of others. It may be that what we consider alien is simply our encounter with identities or dimensions (for lack of a less new-age-ic word) we don't really grok and have assigned that label to.

If this guy was not crazy, it seems to me that it`s a fallen angel that he did business with,

And the logic for this is... that there are only two kinds of species of any kind of identity in existence? Humans and angels? What if there's more? What if there's a spectrum of identity and those are just two points on it?

a remant of the ones who rebelled against the authority of the God and still roam this world today, hiding from the light, and conspirating to ruin the lifes of many humans.

...because, like other evils (Halliburton, Paris Hilton, the IRS) they have nothing better to do? They wake up each morning thinking, "Today, I am gonna go ruin someone's day!" ? You think? I mean, maybe so.

I do not dispute that -- to be very fuzzy on details here -- such a group / intent / momentum exists and operates within our reality. I just think that jumping to conclusions and calling everything wolf, makes people take the actual wolves a lot less seriously when they come up in conversation. ;-)

all of his hermetic knowledge is hardly coherent,

Odd, as it is actually his rather logical, documented, organized approach to "causing change in accordance with one's Will" that I respect.

and his behaviour, more importantly, if far more the one of an eccentric and disconnected man than of a philosopher who was seeking the Truth

The definition of philosopher, or truth seeker, being... ? If you are expecting those who seek truth to be calm, well mannered, society's-norm people, I think you might have some major illusions about humanity. There is a saying that all progress is made by the unreasonable man, and I think Crowley embodied that pretty well at times.

At least he made no ritualistic murders (as far as I know), and this might be where we can draw a line between him and Charles Manson.

You might want to study a tad more about both before declaring them brothers... this is like responding to a person who says they're a christian and accusing them of representing The Inquisition and burning people LOL. People can only be held accountable for what they do. I don't think it's just to hold Crowley accountable for all the insanity in the world that might, in any way past, present or future, find a way to affiliate itself to the legend of his name.

I believe he may be guilty of murdering a frog, at the least. ;-) But he was more a lover than a fighter with people it appears.

Now I have some respect for the mentally ill... and many of paranoid/schizophrenic people achieved great things in their lifes that the ordinary bozo would not have the wit and imagination to. Think of Philip K. Dick, Tchaikovsky and Rimbaud, for instance. The world would be a boring place without those crazy geniuses.

If sanity is measured by a cultural norm, perhaps their diagnosis is more a matter of timing than reason.

But I think there`s a clear line between admiring a madman for his creations and the originality of what he was, and following a megalomaniac who`s imposing himself as the elected One that knows the secret knowledge of the Universe.

Now that's the best thing you said in the whole post. I completely agree. Fortunately, I think it's possible to respect the writings and insight of a person without worshipping them or even necessarily following in their footsteps in too literal a sense. I respect the writings and insight of several people (I am fond of Mark Twain, Ataturk and Jane Roberts for example) but I'm unlikely to adopt their hairstyles or 'try to be like them'. (I really feel an internal bond to Crowley that requires no additional external effort on my part; more like soul-family, and it rather precludes my feeling any need to care about the details.)

As I write this, Alester Crowley`s skeleton is resting well in his grave, testifying that he was nothing but a simple, mortal human, who probably got a little bit too far in his delirium. As for his soul, I'm not the one to judge or even determine where it is now, you guess...

I'm not sure any human is simple unless they choose to be, and mortality is an issue of body not soul -- and I can't speak to where anybody's soul "goes," as that requires some belief that the soul actually "goes" somewhere to begin with (which requires a solid belief that both time and space are literal and linear, which I don't really have).

I haven't even thought about this subject in eons. Just since rejoining this forum it's come up again in reading some threads. Weird how nothing ever really changes on the internet. Probably these same conversations as were had on USENET in 1993 as I recall, will still be going on with some other technology eons from now. :-)

<< 1  2   >>

log in