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.

 

Was Aleister Crowley a Freemason? (!?)

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by LightCraft

Originally posted by NewAgeMan
reply to post by network dude
 


Isn't the goats head with horns worn by the Worshipful Master..?




LOL now that would be something to witness.

No, the master of the lodge wears a hat of his choice. Usually a top hat or something similar.

exept in Lodges in England and countries where thr Lodges are more influenced by the UGLE




posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheForgottenOnes
exept in Lodges in England and countries where thr Lodges are more influenced by the UGLE
What does the WM of a UGLE lodge wear as a head covering, if anything?



posted on Feb, 16 2011 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Tamahu
 


Crowley freely borrowed/Stole esoteric from every occult organization he came in contact with including Golden Dawn etc. L Ron Hubbard was a science fiction writer at the time he was staying at Parsons occult commune. There is no doubt L Ron learned a lot of the Ordo Templi Orientis esoteric and he actually made off with 19-year-old Betty Northrop a female initiate Crowley had chosen to produce a moon child with Parsons.

www.bariumblues.com...

Before I trusted and gave control to any religion I would want to assimilate the beliefs of their founder.
Scientology claims to be non dualistic like Buddhism. From a Buddhist perspective the darkest evil and and the brightest good cannot exist without each other. The Buddhist practices of eliminating desire remove the power evil has over the ego.

There is no inherent power in the occult, you are the one giving power to the esoteric. Several of Crowleys wives ending up in insane asylums, one till she died there in the 1960's. That seems to suggest that Crowley was choosing women partners with some organic condition such as temporal lobe epilepsy. Among the symptoms of temporal lobe epilepsy is hyperreligiosity. Curiously back in the 1970's Scientology used to screen for that.

en.wikipedia.org...

You can't pigeonhole Crowley and the occult as all about evil and disease though. Complex people are attracted to complex expressions. I'm sure if they did a study of heterosexual goths they would find a higher incidence of tantric sex practices where the female partner was in charge.
edit on 16-2-2011 by Bordon81 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 18 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by JoshNorton

Originally posted by TheForgottenOnes
exept in Lodges in England and countries where thr Lodges are more influenced by the UGLE
What does the WM of a UGLE lodge wear as a head covering, if anything?

A WM in most Lodges outside of North America wear nothing



posted on Feb, 19 2011 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheForgottenOnes

A WM in most Lodges outside of North America wear nothing


which is why masonic lodges in other countries are so well built. If they were drafty, then the WM would be very cold.


Just kidding, I know what you meant. Just couldn't pass up a golden opportunity.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:13 PM
link   
Hello again everyone. Thank you again for taking enough interest in the subject line to post your thoughts. It has been great reading them. I do think this post has died so I would like to try and put a cap on it.
I had promised to get to a post about the 'Magick' of Aleister Crowley but I am going to keep it short. As I am sure some of you are aware 'Magick' did not die when Aleister Crowley died (I'll get to that at the end of the post). Lots of interesting people picked up the torch and continue to experiment with Crowley's work to this day. Folks like Timothy Leary once did and the lately deceased author and playwright Robert Anton Wilson did as well. I think that Wilson said it best when he postulated that Magick could be defined as 'Brain Change Willed'. To keep this short and easy I am going to embed a video that at first glance might seem very boring. It is Allan Schore. The leading authority and researcher in the field of Affective Neurobiology. If you can stand to give up 6 minutes of your life to listen to this man break it down for you, you will realize why 'Brain Change Willed' is important to all of us. And I will leave it at that...


Now on to what this post is about. Was Aleister Crowley a Freemason? You will have to decide for yourself.
But let me offer this. I say again that it was very fashionable during the time period in question (roughly 1875-1928) for men to be involved in some type of Freemasonry. Some type? You might ask. Well yes. Every flavor you can imagine. I know that things in Freemasonry today are predictable and calm when compared to the era in question. And I realize that that type of Freemasonry existed then as well. But during the time we are talking about things ran a little wild. It was all about 'Aegyptified' Freemasonry in France. In Germany and England it was all the fashion to be a Templar. And especially a Templar with secret sexual knowledge. And the Golden Dawn was all over the place. I know that the Golden Dawn is not Freemasonry but it is built upon the same chassis as Freemasonry. That is, Templar Order and military structure. See how it all works together? I say again. All of these people were swapping spit. They all wanted to be the Uber-Templar with the secret mystical knowledge. Usually of a sexual nature. All of this was happening or beginning to happen in America as well. Or it was transforming into other "occult fashions' Like Pascal Beverly Randolph's spin on the same material.
So was A.C. a Freemason. I think he was working just as hard or harder to be as 'Freemasonly-Freemasoned-Out' as any of his colleagues or competitors in the field. Here are some pictures of other folks whose names you might recognize who also liked to be in current fashion...
Here's Wynn Westcott

And Theodore Reuss is lookin' dapper...

And even I don't know what MacGregor Mathers is dressed for...'Honey you are not going out in that...'

And let's not forget Albert Pike. You couldn't take that guy anywhere.


And finally. There seem to be a lot of folks that have a sort of knee jerk reaction to Aleister Crowley. Just the mention of his name or a picture can set these poor folks off in to a solipsistic tizzy. To these people I say: Fear not, for Aleister Crowley is Dead. I say again. There will always be folks who will make it their job to get deeply in to all the gooey, icky, creepy crap that Crowley did. Always and forever. I would like to offer that maybe we as a whole need to go there to go forward to wherever it is we are going. Crowley just made sure that for ALL those going there the keys would be available and not lost in the hands of those who would be like unto Black Brothers and be selfish and stingy towards their fellow man. And believe me, I will be available for anyone who would like to post about how certain classes of human being should be kept from the knowledge.
So that's really all I have to say about that.
Thanks again for coming by to visit the post
edit on 25-2-2011 by Frater210 because: spelling, punct



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Frater210
 


This is probably the simplest answer you'll ever get on the subject.

Would YOU or ANY group trying to be known for charitable contributions and positive societal and community impact want someone known as "The Beast" 666 to be recognized as a contributing member of their "society"/group.


It's a complete conflict of interest.

and if they were to admit him as a contributing member who had an impact on freemasonry your only question would be, knowing his history and antics, "What could he possibly have contributed?"

With that being said, it's better to obscure whatever, if any contributions he's actually made.



posted on Feb, 25 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
Aleister Crowley's contribution to Freemasonry lies within The Ancient and Primitive Rite of M.M.. Here is a link to the international website.www.iss-ic-memphis-misraim.com...
Check this out. Look at the list of Past Grandmasters. They have chosen to leave Aleister Crowley out of this list. But history remembers the truth. It can be easily shown that the whole ball of wax was handed off from John Yarker to Aleister Crowley. So why his name is dropped between, and for that matter after, John Yarker and Theodore Reuss is a question for the The International Sovereign Sanctuary.


Crowley made The Ancient and Primitive Rite of M.M.. his life's work. The Gnostic Mass is a masterpiece (let those who have ears, hear). The folks in the O.T.O. are simply cousins from another tent. All of this must taken within the context of our present position within the post-post-modern era in which we live. Why does everyone want to get all precious and Ancient about all this? I hear the squeaking of rusty old machine parts.
edit on 25-2-2011 by Frater210 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Frater210


Was Aleister Crowley a Freemason? If you turn to the Web to look for an answer you will see many treatments of the history on this. Modern Freemasonry considers Crowley to not be regular member and does not recognize him as a Brother. But it is my opinion that it is very short sighted not to recognize Aleister Crowley's involvement in and contribution to Freemasonry.


While I would concede that Crowley certainly contributed to the popularity of occultism, Hermeticism, Kabalah, etc., I would argue that he made no actual contributions to Freemasonry. For example, in his "Magick Without Tears" he made a few glowing errors concerning the administrative rules of Freemasonry, which showed a lack of understanding of it.

Nevertheless, Crowley was a master symbolist, and no one should ust automatically throw the baby out with the bathwater.



posted on Feb, 28 2011 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by PuRe EnErGy

Would YOU or ANY group trying to be known for charitable contributions and positive societal and community impact want someone known as "The Beast" 666 to be recognized as a contributing member of their "society"/group.






"If one were to take the bible seriously one would go mad. But to take the bible seriously, one must be already mad.
Aleister Crowley

Christian Doublespeak

An essential problem in dealing with and speaking with Christians is "Christian doublespeak."

For the Christian, their definition of "absolute goodness" is the jealous, psychopathic human hating tribal deity of the ancient Israelites, who later incarnated as a fake miracle worker who promoted a fundamentalist and strict adherence to the primitive and savage Mosaic Law. This is the Christian definition of "goodness," but to an Antichristian it is a definition of absolute evil. Thus a person who declares himself to be a "Satanist" is essentially declaring themselves to be "good;" to be a lover of humankind and an enemy of the vile and diabolical being whom the Christians refer to as "God."



Thus to the devotees of the human hating daemon referred to as "God," a title such as "The Beast 666" is obviously a term which implies "goodness" and resistance to evil, however since many of the Christians are totally hypnotised and indoctrinated to the extent where they accept a human hating defintion of "evil as good," they are entirely confused about this matter.

Anyone can merely "claim" to be good and that their religion is good, but "good" is just a word, and it is a word which needs to be clearly defined; even the most vile people do and say innocent things most of the time, but we do not define them as evil because of the innocent things they do and say. We could make a list of "good" things about the Third Reich, but that would not define the Nazis unless we consider also the evil they did; similarly with the Biblical deity; we could make a list of entirely innocent and harmless passages from the Bible, but similarly that would not define the deity unless we also consider the evil of the Bible.

The modern revolution against Christianity and against the established organised religions of the past Aeon, which began essentially with Nietzsche is not merely a hobby or a meaningless pastime; it is a revolution against human evil which has been redefined as "good," and a Holy Crusade for the salvation of humankind; i.e., to save them "from" the vile professional hypnotists (i.e., the priesthood, the clergy) of organised religion.

As soon as human evil is defined as "good" or as "God," and a person is hypnotised and indoctrinated into accepting that, all manner of evil can then perpetrated by holy warriors, thinking that they are "saints" on their way to being eternally rewarded in heaven for their hatred of humankind and their utter contempt for human nature, and the long and bloody history of Christianity, Islam and Hinduism (the world's three major religions) establishes this.

The penalties for promoting vile human hating religions such as Christianity and Islam will be severe, terrible, dreadful, wrathful and genocidal. If the intellectual war against the old religions is not successful, the only possible alternative is actual apocalyptic war.

Lux
Fire, plague and poisoned waters.




posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer777
 

As I say to all those who hastily misquote, you cannot get the feel of a book from a few snippets. You pervert text to snare fool's minds. As for Ann Coulter, she in my opinion, is an extremist and extremists of all beliefs should be despised. You are an extremist.

"Religion is flawed only because man is flawed." If there be any evil to what a organized religion has done is because of man's weakness and evil in his heart. You speak as if there has been nothing of worth up until Nietzshe and materialists of the 19th century. Some of the most enlightened in history were men of faith.

You stand for atheistic fascism and intolerance to those matters. I stand for allowing people to worship, or not, in whatever manner they choose. I stand for freedom, to include financial, you don't. And you call me wicked for my Christian faith? You would commit genocide over this, and you call me wicked? First, you're mad and there is nothing intellectual about what you propose. Second, bring it on!

Oh, and nice failure with that last picture since Sinclair Lewis was not born until 1885 and your picture says he was quoted as saying that in 1835. Fail.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason

Oh, and nice failure with that last picture since Sinclair Lewis was not born until 1885 and your picture says he was quoted as saying that in 1835. Fail.


Not to mention the fact that "fascism" was a term coined by Mussolini in the 1920's.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Lucifer777
 

As I say to all those who hastily misquote, you cannot get the feel of a book from a few snippets. You pervert text to snare fool's minds.


Contradiction is a poor substitute for argument and evidence; if you feel that I have perverted the Bible, state your case.


As for Ann Coulter, she in my opinion, is an extremist and extremists of all beliefs should be despised. You are an extremist.


I simply offer a dialectical response to extremism; for example if I call for the executions of Christians who work on Friday (Venus / Lucifer's Day) instead of the Sabbath (Saturn's day), or for Christians who refuse to commit adultery, or who refuse to worship other gods, those are perfectly acceptible dialectical responses to proponents of the god of the 10 commandments; however it does not mean that my position is entirely serious.



"Religion is flawed only because man is flawed." If there be any evil to what a organized religion has done is because of man's weakness and evil in his heart. You speak as if there has been nothing of worth up until Nietzshe and materialists of the 19th century. Some of the most enlightened in history were men of faith.


There has never been a truly great philosopher who was an ally of God; all the truly great philosophers had the courage to declare themselves to be the enemies of God and the allies of humankind and human nature.


You stand for atheistic fascism and intolerance to those matters. I stand for allowing people to worship, or not, in whatever manner they choose.


If you wish to worship some psychopath in the sky, that is your problem, but a person who promotes Christianity and Islam is also promoting a system of barbaric and savage Law and of tyrannical government, and in that case it is a problem for myself and for humankind.


And you call me wicked for my Christian faith? You would commit genocide over this, and you call me wicked?


I have never committed genocide and I doubt that I ever will, but since the Biblical and Islamic deities are genocidal deities with a long and provable history of such behaviour, it is entirely appropriate to support a militant response to such fanatics. One cannot eradicate militant religious fanatics by pacifism; militant religionists necessitate a militant response; just as militant, genocidal imperialistic Capitalists cannot be exterminated with a peace flag.


Oh, and nice failure with that last picture since Sinclair Lewis was not born until 1885 and your picture says he was quoted as saying that in 1835. Fail.


My apologies; it is not one of my own images; however the date is irrelevant to the relevency Lewis' prophecy.

Lux



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer777
 

There have been many great philosophers who were followers of God.

No, if I choose to worship a god that is my choice, not a problem. It's you who has the problem with my faith. The problem I have is with your intolerance and genocidal feelings.

You're calling for genocide in your previous post. You said the way was through war. To say all those who follow are to be killed is immoral and evil. You sound like Hitler.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSigMason
reply to post by Lucifer777
 

There have been many great philosophers who were followers of God.

No, if I choose to worship a god that is my choice, not a problem. It's you who has the problem with my faith. The problem I have is with your intolerance and genocidal feelings.

You're calling for genocide in your previous post. You said the way was through war. To say all those who follow are to be killed is immoral and evil. You sound like Hitler.


I have no problem with anyone who has a "harmless" belief in a god or a demon or in Santa Claus; however the genocidal Biblical and Islamic deities are another matter entirely; if you are going to pick a deity, there are myriads to choose from, but if you pick a religion which calls for the genocide of all non believers; that is going to incite a similarly genocidal response from your enemies.


"Worship me with fire & blood; worship me with swords & with spears. ...:Trample down the Heathen; be upon them, o warrior, I will give you of their flesh to eat!"
A.C. Book of the Law.


Since the context of the thread is Aleister Crowely, I cannot forsee the possibility of global Thelemic Revolution without total war against the militant religionists of the Old Aeon, especially the Christians and Muslims, whose vile religions are are not merely religions but political philosophies (theocratic monarchy / dictatorship) and systems of law, which are simply the primitive and barbaric laws of ancient paternalistic slave societies and which are anti-thetical to universal human freedom. Any person who believes in such laws and in such tyranny is simply morally subhuman as far as I am concerned.

Lux


edit on 1-3-2011 by Lucifer777 because: The text was "still" not diabolical enough.



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 02:06 PM
link   
Youth springs eternal, no? Look, Lucifer, the revolution has already occurred. There will be no 'Thelemic Revolution'. It has come and passed. There is no Old God. Time is a human artifact. We are the time benders. The only place that new or old Gods are residing in the sub-lunar realm is in peoples heads. From the Gnostic Mass: "I am alone. there is no god where I am". What do you really think that Crowley was saying here. Was he making a statement about human beings or 'Gods'?
So here, I have a question for you that might be more conducive to civilized discussion...
Can a person have Jesus Christ as their spiritual Master and Lord without worshiping Yahweh? Chew on that.
Oh, and do you think that Aleister Crowley was a Freemason? Cuz that is the point of this thread.
Please try to stay on topic guys or I will ask the moderators to close this thread. I did not want to go here with this and as far as I am concerned this thread is finished.
Thanks.
Lucifer, your enthusiasm is appreciated.
Oh, and P.S. Aleister Crowley is dead! (undead, undead, undead...)
edit on 1-3-2011 by Frater210 because: Being funny (Bauhaus).



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 02:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frater210
Can a person have Jesus Christ as their spiritual Master and Lord without worshiping Yahweh?


Yes


edit on 1-3-2011 by Tamahu because: fixed link



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Tamahu
 


Hey, Tamahu. Nice to see you are still around. Let's see what Lucifer has to say about it. Or maybe someone should start a thread on this...

Oh, I see, you are the best. you included a link.
Everyone.. Tamahu's 'yes' is a link. Thanks, man. I have massive homework but i will catch up and see you there soon.
edit on 1-3-2011 by Frater210 because: Meritocracy



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Frater210
Youth springs eternal, no? Look, Lucifer, the revolution has already occurred. There will be no 'Thelemic Revolution'.


I am not referring to some obscure concept, but to universal human freedom; there already has been a "Thelemic Revolution" occurring of course; there are millions of modern Europeans and Americans who reject all religious laws; even the humanist and atheist philosophers are Thelemites by this definition as was Nietzsche, as are all Anarchists by default; however much of the world's population are still unaffected by modern European values and therefore such a "Thelemic" revoluton has certainly not occurred for them; though if you believe that it has, you obviously have your own person redefinition of the term.


It has come and passed. There is no Old God....Time is a human artifact. We are the time benders. The only place that new or old Gods are residing in the sub-lunar realm is in peoples heads.


These Biblical and Islamic gods are certainly anthropomorphic projections, which is not to say that there are no similar human hating intelligences in other dimensions which are similar to such deities, though I am not referring to a Universal Creator.

I have no idea what you refer to as "Time bending;" time is an aspect of physics; I have only ever lived in the present moment and I cannot go back to the past or into the future, and noone else seems to be able to do so either.


From the Gnostic Mass: "I am alone. there is no god where I am". What do you really think that Crowley was saying here. Was he making a statement about human beings or 'Gods'?


Crowley was not a materialist and though there has been a modern tendency to interpet him purely psychologically, he clearly held that there were intelligences in other dimensions that he could evoke and communicate with.


So here, I have a question for you that might be more conducive to civilized discussion...
Can a person have Jesus Christ as their spiritual Master and Lord without worshiping Yahweh? Chew on that.


The fictional Jesus is descibed as a fundamentalist religious fanatic whose religion was Judaism, and who promoted strict adherence to the primitive, savage and genocidal "Law and the Prophets;" his God "was" the Old Testament deity and in fact Christians believe that Jesus and the Old Testament deity were one and the same. To evoke Jesus is essentally to evoke a rather primitive and savage concept of deity which clearly despised human nature.


Oh, and do you think that Aleister Crowley was a Freemason? Cuz that is the point of this thread.


It is not a matter of opinion; he was initiated into an "irregular" lodge in Mexico and attempted unsuccessfully to regularise himself in England; however many of the "irregular" esoteric societies of that era were founded by Masons anyway.

Lux
edit on 1-3-2011 by Lucifer777 because: mis-spelling-itis



posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucifer777
 




I am not referring to some obscure concept, but to universal human freedom; there already has been a "Thelemic Revolution" occurring of course; there are millions of modern Europeans and Americans who reject all religious laws; even the humanist and atheist philosophers are Thelemites by this definition as was Nietzsche, as are all Anarchists by default; however much of the world's population are still unaffected by modern European values and therefore such a "Thelemic" revoluton has certainly not occurred for them; though if you believe that it has, you obviously have your own person redefinition of the term.

Gotta run. But I'll be back. Thought we could start with this one, Lucifer..
I know that you are referring to universal freedom. I have gathered as much from paying attention to your posts. You have a good heart. Remember what The Book of The Law has to say about those who refuse to keep up? "The Slaves Shall Serve". I feel for folks but it is not my responsibility to make sure they are on time for the train. And there is not one iota of anything in the 'universe' that gives one rat's ass whether you make the train or not. And I mean you. Or me, or anyone. There is no help here.
And yes I am using my own personal definition. Just like you or anyone else. I don't want to be a "Center of Pestilence'. Do you?



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join