Ask a Thelemite! :)

[sidhe]

Hey Ravenscape.

Currents are deities and spiritual ideas. One's magickal Will is a current, for example. They're similar to a currents in a river in that if you tap into a current, it'll carry you along, but it'll be hard to go against the current. Also, some currents are stronger than others. The Thelemic current is a potent one, but so is the Wiccan current, or the Jesus current. People find certain currents easier to flow with than others.

Or, at least that's my understanding of currents.

 

[ravenscape]

Thanks! I like the metaphor.

 

[Moros]

no offense meant, but i never cared for Crowley, his lifestyle and ideas were kinda whacked to me.

Consider the time frame. The whole Victorian era was "whack." Religious puritanism is most often met with libertine excess.

 

[Mrs.Sidhe]

hi all- yep i have studied the tree of life and used to do pathwork on it.

no offense meant, but i never cared for Crowley, his lifestyle and ideas were kinda whacked to me.

and the thelema philosophy not for me.


-Horab

I thought this was "Ask a thelemite" not comment on how you dislike it..

Here's a question for ya Mr. Sidhe

Why couldn't you be both Thelemic and Zensunni (incidently if you read later into the books Zensunni is actually Zensufi..*hope I got that spelling and stuff right*...but that's way later into the series..)

Okay...time to go must indulge my geekyness and watch Dune and stuff
WOOT!

 

[sidhe]

I thought this was "Ask a thelemite" not comment on how you dislike it..

Here's a question for ya Mr. Sidhe

Why couldn't you be both Thelemic and Zensunni (incidently if you read later into the books Zensunni is actually Zensufi..*hope I got that spelling and stuff right*...but that's way later into the series..)

Okay...time to go must indulge my geekyness and watch Dune and stuff
WOOT!

You could be a Thelemite and also be a Zensunni/Zensufi.

Given that I'm a massive Dune geek myself, I think it'd be an interesting experiment.

 

[Skillganon]

Same question seid, that I posted in the over thread.

 

[sidhe]

Same question seid, that I posted in the over thread.

Which I answered in the other thread. If you want more info, tell me what you want to know.

 

[Skillganon]

Is in it weird to take demons, the creation of GOD, as Godesses/God?

 

[sidhe]

Is in it weird to take demons, the creation of GOD, as Godesses/God?

Nope. Considering that you're applying your view to another religion, that's not at all what's going on.

I worship a goddess.

In the strict terms of Thelema, you serve a slavemaster rather than worship a god. You would not agree with this, obviously. But different religions view each other differently.

 

[YahwehisHisname]

I only know about A Crowley, because I read a book called "hammer of the gods" , a few ages ago which is about the story of Led Zeppelin. Jimmy Page was/is obviously a Crowley fan. I think he even owns his house, or something. Cool book, if I remember correctly. Thus I know nothing about the topic at hand. Right off, I wondered about Destination while reading the thread. Someone finally asked about it also and I guess a follower of this religion believes in reincarnation, correct? Can you elaborate on this a little? Does every follower believe this also? Do all adherents read from a singular source to get these answers? What is it? What is Crowley's position in the religion? Revered? Good example to follow? You say his acts toward women were nothing to emulate, yet he followed a goddess? Thanks for any clarification.

 

[sidhe]

I only know about A Crowley, because I read a book called "hammer of the gods" , a few ages ago which is about the story of Led Zeppelin. Jimmy Page was/is obviously a Crowley fan. I think he even owns his house, or something. Cool book, if I remember correctly.

Yeah, Jimmy Page owns Boleskine. If I'm correct, it's something of a sticking point with the Caliphate O.T.O., as I'm pretty sure Page is a Satanist rather than a Thelemite.

Thus I know nothing about the topic at hand. Right off, I wondered about Destination while reading the thread. Someone finally asked about it also and I guess a follower of this religion believes in reincarnation, correct? Can you elaborate on this a little? Does every follower believe this also?

Reincarnation is something interesting, as Thelema denies the existence of a soul (at least as "soul" is generally interpreted). There is an eternal part of you that can be reincarnated, but it's not a static, unchanging entity. And, of course, will rules over all. IOW, reincarnation is definitely possible, if reincarnating is within your will. If your will is to not reincarnate, there's no reason you would have to.

Do all adherents read from a singular source to get these answers? What is it?

Liber AL vel Legis, aka The Book of the Law is the standard Thelemic sourcebook. Liber 49 isn't strictly "canon," but is held in high regards by some. Liber AL doesn't really answer questions, though. It's a really complex, symbolic text. Questions are answered via experience and magickal experimentation.

What is Crowley's position in the religion? Revered? Good example to follow?

Crowley was the latest prophet and Magus of Thelema, and brought it to light in the modern time. As such, he is revered, and accepting the Great Beast as the prophet is one of the few standard Thelemic beliefs. That doesn't mean he was the best example to follow, as he was an extraordinary man with a particular will. It would be folly to try to follow Crowley as an example, as - chances are - the individual doing the following isn't Crowley.

You say his acts toward women were nothing to emulate, yet he followed a goddess? Thanks for any clarification.

Yeah. That's some irony. Crowley tended to believe that women should work to be reincarnated as men, as that was the only way they could achieve enlightenment, then held up Nuit and Babalon as goals towards which all should aspire. If I'm correct, the idea is that as Babalon is female, only a male can achieve union with her. But, as Crowley did some experimentation in homosexual sex magick, he should've known that gender does not denote giver/receiver as much as action. From what I've seen, an open-minded woman has an easier time achieving union with Babalon than a close-minded man.

Anything more?

 

[YahwehisHisname]

Nope. I think that wraps it up nicely. Very well written. I thank you. I wish I could get answers that directly, more often .

BTW. Huge Floyd fan.

 

[Abbadon]

Have you read Alan Moore's Promethea?

 

[sidhe]

No. I'm currently finally reading Rabelais' Gargantua and Pantagruel. It's excellent. Especially the scene with the monk killing the attackers on his abbey using the processional cross. It's laugh-out-loud funny.

 

[Abbadon]

Ah. I asked because Promethea almost reads like an attempt to turn Liber 777 into a comic book with some footnotes by Moore.

 

[sidhe]

I'm way out of the comic book loop. It sounds like it'd be an interesting read, though.

ETA: Just read the Salon review. I have to check this out.

 

[very_irreverand_Bill]

I'll open with a standard Thelemite greeting{though I'm not thelemite}
"do what thou wilt shall be the whole fo the law,
love is the law...."

What are your thoughts on the beeing contacted by Crowley, LAM?

Is it a representation of Horus{like Aiwass, and the other manifestaions}, or is he/it Extra-terrestrial or inter-dimensional.
Do you think Crowley opened a portal through his magick to the E.T.'s{whatever they are}. It is said that Scientologist L.Ron Hubbard and an accomplice of his managed to contact the same entity as Crowley,LAM, this in the 40's.
Shortly thereafter, the roswell thing happened and a new era of E.T. and ufo phenomena began?

Did Crowley start this do you think?

Also, do you think LAM is one entity or also a species as theorized by some?

And does LAM play into modern Thelema in any way; or is it seperate completely from Thelema and seen merely as something else that Crowley contacted.

And hey, what other prophets does Thelema claim to have? I was under the impression that Crowley founded it with the writing of Liber a Vel Legis{book of the law}.

You mentioned Therion and Babalon.
Isn't Crowley the master Therion? Or am I misintrepeting something here?

I'd like more info on Babalon if you don't mind. I also heard that Crowleys wife whom Aiwass suppoedly dictaed the liber al though is Babalon? Did the sources I get that from misintrpet something?

What are the Khabs and the Khu? I have taken it to be egyptian speak or something for body and light. The khabs beeing the light, the Khu the body{the khabs is in the khu, not the khu in the khabs}.

Anyways, I'll probably have more questions for ya later. But this is all for now.

Hey, i don't think you mentioned Liber Oz. Great poetic thelemetic quote there; heck... not just thelemetic, but just a great way to describe ethical and personal principle in general{in my opinion}.

I'm not a Thelemite, but I do find much of it fascinating. I own Liber Al, I also own Crwoleys kabbalistic writings- "777,sepher sepheroth,gematria", but find most of it incomprehensibe; and I find actually much of Crowleys stuff and Thelemetic stuff way over my head. But, as far as revealed religion goes, Thelema is probably the only one I can stand{due to it's intense individualism and beeing balso somewhat based on Crowlyes own deisre to remain as rationalistic as possible even whilst beeing mystical}- kinda like a new Buddhism or something.

Anyways, I'll probably have more questions for ya later. But this is all for now.

Hey, I don't think you mentioned Liber Oz. Great poetic thelemetic quote there; heck... not just thelemetic, but just a great way to describe ethical and personal principle in general{in my opinion}.

I'm not a Thelemite, but I do find much of it fascinating. I own Liber Al, I also own Crwoleys kabbalistic writings- "777,sepher sepheroth,gematria", but find most of it incomprehensibe; and I find actually much of Crowleys stuff and Thelemetic stuff way over my head. But, as far as revealed religion goes, Thelema is probably the only one I can stand{due to it's intense individualism and beeing also somewhat based on Crowleys own desire to remain as rationalistic as possible even whilst beeing mystical}- kinda like a new Buddhism or something.

Oh, and do you really believe in Aiwass{or Ra Hoor Khuit; or in other words- the god Horus}, or is it only a metaphor or symbol to you{as an individual thelemite, and also what do most thelemites you've encountered think}, I know that Crowley once admitted that Aiwass may have merely been some kinda intelligence in himself...not a discarnate praetorion self-existent intelligence; in other woeds Crwoley was unsure and sketpical but still hedl that there was something special about it. I'd love to know your take on this, and what your perception of most thelemites take is.

And what is with the statements suggestion to not study, and it beeing wise to destroy this copy after first reading? Do you take that seriously/ do most thelemites? why? Or do you play the pick and choose game and ignore that, and why? Why did Crwoley state that it is wise to not study it and to destroy it; and that all questions of law are to be referred to the writing sof the master therion{I assume this is Crowley himself}, does that not call into question the rest of inherent individualism of the whole thing?

Yeah, Jimmy Page owns Boleskine. If I'm correct, it's something of a sticking point with the Caliphate O.T.O., as I'm pretty sure Page is a Satanist rather than a Thelemite.

Actually I think Page is just a standard occultist and Crowley-ite. Neither Thelemite nor Satanist.

The other prophets/Magi of Thelema are Lao Tze, Siddartha Gautama, Dionysos, Krishna, Moses, Tahuti (Thoth), and Mohammed. Crowley's take on Mohammed is a little strange, and is sometimes open to argument, but the rest fit well. They aren't seen as fortelling Thelema, but setting up the principles that would be the basis of Thelema.

Woh!!! You're kidding right? I mean I can see Siddartha and Lao Tze as fitting into this paradigm, and I'm unsur eof Dionysus and Krishna because I thought they were purely mythological enttities{deities, I think;perhasp I'm wrong}, but Moses and Mohammed, how does that work? To read Moses despotic atrocities as well as Ohammeds thuggery and sexual exploitations{most notably of a little girl bride} and that the gods they each serveed were apr tof ABSOLUTIST and ONE-WAYist sytems- tyrant deities, how do they play in AT ALL, does'nt that contradict the inherrent individualism and will thing of Thelema? On top of that, in liber Al they are seriously chastized{but then agains so is the buddhist, the indian, and the mongul}- violently so even!{esepcially Jesus and Mohammed}=
Liber Al 3:

49. I am in a secret fourfold word, the blasphemy against all gods of men.
50. Curse them! Curse them! Curse them!
51. With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.
52. I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.
53. With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.
54. Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.
55. Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you! 56. Also for beauty's sake and love's!

Anyways, that's all for now.

In Reason:
Irrev.Bill

 

[Abbadon]

I'm no Thelemite, but I'll try and get some of the work done for Sidhe (or possibly cause more work).

It is said that Scientologist L.Ron Hubbard and an accomplice of his managed to contact the same entity as Crowley,LAM, this in the 40's.

I heard that Hubbard (pre-Scientology) and Jack Parsons tried to summon Babalon but not LAM. Haven't heard of LAM.

Did Crowley start this do you think?

Now that's definately a question for the individual Thelemite.

I'd like more info on Babalon if you don't mind. I also heard that Crowleys wife whom Aiwass suppoedly dictaed the liber al though is Babalon? Did the sources I get that from misintrpet something?

Crowley was supposed to be the Great Beast and his wife was supposed to be the Scarlet Woman (despite the names, not quite the same ones in the Christian book of Revelation). Those were supposed to be either really great imitations or avatars or mediums from what I've read.

Babalon basically is a sacred feminine, along the lines of Ishtar or Shakti, and a sort of cosmic mother (but not the bloody flowerchild kind). But I'm not a follower of the religion.

I own Liber Al, I also own Crwoleys kabbalistic writings- "777,sepher sepheroth,gematria", but find most of it incomprehensibe

Well, I'd recommend finding some other material relating to Qabbala (poke around sacred-texts.org's Judaism section for more) to help understand 777 a bit more.

standard occultist

Major contradiction here, there's no such thing as a standard occultist. I believe he meant "devil worshipper" kind of Satanist, not LaVeyan Satanist.

I mean I can see Siddartha and Lao Tze as fitting into this paradigm, and I'm unsur eof Dionysus and Krishna because I thought they were purely mythological enttities{deities, I think;perhasp I'm wrong}, but Moses and Mohammed, how does that work?

With Dionysius and Krishna, keep in mind that Crowley lived in the Victorian era.

As for Moses, Crowley probably read Kircher, who thought that Hermes Trismegistus was the pagan memory of Moses (though the legend usually goes that H.T. was just passing Moses's wisdom down to some folks that passed it down to Plato). Crowley's interpretation of Mohammed is supposed to be fairly unique from what I hear. Crowley was also influenced by Nietzsche, and Mohammed did a fair amount of will to power (at least in Crowley's eyes, I'm guessing).

the gods they each serveed were apr tof ABSOLUTIST and ONE-WAYist sytems- tyrant deities, how do they play in AT ALL, does'nt that contradict the inherrent individualism and will thing of Thelema?

If it were individualist in the way you describe, it wouldn't be all that individualist at all. If it's the individual's desire to contact the deity that matters, it wouldn't matter what the deity's name is. (Again, I'm just guessing according to Thelema, not posting my own thoughts).

On top of that, in liber Al they are seriously chastized{but then agains so is the buddhist, the indian, and the mongul}- violently so even!{esepcially Jesus and Mohammed}=
Liber Al 3:
49. I am in a secret fourfold word, the blasphemy against all gods of men.
50. Curse them! Curse them! Curse them!
51. With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.
52. I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.
53. With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.
54. Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.
55. Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you! 56. Also for beauty's sake and love's!

I'm guessing that the fourfold word would be the Tetragrammaton, the blinding of Jesus and Mohammed corresponds to Odin's or Oedipus's blindings, and the tearing of the flesh either is the talk of Victorian era English men (not likely) or (more likely) "I bring these fellows to thier goal" since Hinduism and Buddhism abhor materialism. The spitting on creeds probably is Nietzsche speaking, since he was for getting rid of social structures that noone knew the purpose of (which could also be an explanation for the bodily harm of the other figures). The virgin Mary being torn by wheels probably goes back to Crowley's view of Mary as an aspect of Binah and Binah being Babalon (who is supposed to be a harlot because she accepts anyone).

But these are just my guesses regarding the subject and not my beliefs.

 

[sidhe]

Do what thou wilt be the whole of the law.

I'll open with a standard Thelemite greeting{though I'm not thelemite}
"do what thou wilt shall be the whole fo the law,
love is the law...."

What are your thoughts on the beeing contacted by Crowley, LAM?

Is it a representation of Horus{like Aiwass, and the other manifestaions}, or is he/it Extra-terrestrial or inter-dimensional.
Do you think Crowley opened a portal through his magick to the E.T.'s{whatever they are}. It is said that Scientologist L.Ron Hubbard and an accomplice of his managed to contact the same entity as Crowley,LAM, this in the 40's.
Shortly thereafter, the roswell thing happened and a new era of E.T. and ufo phenomena began?

Did Crowley start this do you think?

Also, do you think LAM is one entity or also a species as theorized by some?

And does LAM play into modern Thelema in any way; or is it seperate completely from Thelema and seen merely as something else that Crowley contacted.

Heh. I've never even heard of LAM until now, and I'll chalk that up to just another being Crowley contacted. I have limited knowledge of the Amalantrah workings, but then again I'm not all that interested in Crowley's specific magickal workings, except where they specifically relate to Thelema.

And hey, what other prophets does Thelema claim to have? I was under the impression that Crowley founded it with the writing of Liber a Vel Legis{book of the law}.

Covered more below.

You mentioned Therion and Babalon.
Isn't Crowley the master Therion? Or am I misintrepeting something here?

Therion refers both to the Master Therion (Crowley), and the Shiva/Shakti principle that accompanies Babalon. At least according to Lon Milo Duquette, who I trust on such things.

I'd like more info on Babalon if you don't mind. I also heard that Crowleys wife whom Aiwass suppoedly dictaed the liber al though is Babalon? Did the sources I get that from misintrpet something?

Babalon is incarnate in the Scarlet Woman (which was the magickal title of Crowley's consort), and is also the goddess-guardian of the City of Pyramids in qabalistic initiations, she who drains the ego-blood of the initiate into her holy graal as part of the transition from 7=2 to 8=3 in the A.'.A.'. system. She represents the Yin, Shakti, and general feminine principles of magick. However, Babalon does not have patience for nancy-boys.

What are the Khabs and the Khu? I have taken it to be egyptian speak or something for body and light. The khabs beeing the light, the Khu the body{the khabs is in the khu, not the khu in the khabs}.

http://www.perdurabo10.com/id351.html I like this explanation.

Hey, i don't think you mentioned Liber Oz. Great poetic thelemetic quote there; heck... not just thelemetic, but just a great way to describe ethical and personal principle in general{in my opinion}.

Liber OZ is good.

I'm not a Thelemite, but I do find much of it fascinating. I own Liber Al, I also own Crwoleys kabbalistic writings- "777,sepher sepheroth,gematria", but find most of it incomprehensibe; and I find actually much of Crowleys stuff and Thelemetic stuff way over my head. But, as far as revealed religion goes, Thelema is probably the only one I can stand{due to it's intense individualism and beeing balso somewhat based on Crowlyes own deisre to remain as rationalistic as possible even whilst beeing mystical}- kinda like a new Buddhism or something.

I will, as always, recommend Liber Aleph as an accompaniment to Liber AL, as Liber Aleph makes a nice expansion on Liber AL. And, for Qabala, The Chicken Qabala According to Rabbi Lamed Ben Clifford by Lon Milo Duquette. It's all the essentials of Qabala, delivered with enough humor to make it stick.

Oh, and do you really believe in Aiwass{or Ra Hoor Khuit; or in other words- the god Horus}, or is it only a metaphor or symbol to you{as an individual thelemite, and also what do most thelemites you've encountered think}, I know that Crowley once admitted that Aiwass may have merely been some kinda intelligence in himself...not a discarnate praetorion self-existent intelligence; in other woeds Crwoley was unsure and sketpical but still hedl that there was something special about it. I'd love to know your take on this, and what your perception of most thelemites take is.

Ask four Thelemites, get ten opinions. I say Aiwass was both an intelligence within Crowley, and a praeternatural intelligence outside him. To paraphrase Lon Milo Duquette, spirits are all in your head, you just have no idea big your head is.

And what is with the statements suggestion to not study, and it beeing wise to destroy this copy after first reading? Do you take that seriously/ do most thelemites? why? Or do you play the pick and choose game and ignore that, and why? Why did Crwoley state that it is wise to not study it and to destroy it; and that all questions of law are to be referred to the writing sof the master therion{I assume this is Crowley himself}, does that not call into question the rest of inherent individualism of the whole thing?

The short comment is a warning to the life-changing affects of reading and studying Liber AL. No one destroys their copy of Liber AL, as far as I know, though the O.T.O. (from what I understand) takes the "No additional comment" prohibition seriously. Things that are incomprehensible are best referenced to Crowley, but most Thelemites - to my knowledge - make personal interpretations all the time. They just don't make "official comment" on the book of the Law.

Actually I think Page is just a standard occultist and Crowley-ite. Neither Thelemite nor Satanist.

Still, not - to my knowledge - part of the C.O.T.O., and thus his ownership of Boleskine is an issue to the C.O.T.O.

Woh!!! You're kidding right? I mean I can see Siddartha and Lao Tze as fitting into this paradigm, and I'm unsur eof Dionysus and Krishna because I thought they were purely mythological enttities{deities, I think;perhasp I'm wrong}, but Moses and Mohammed, how does that work? To read Moses despotic atrocities as well as Ohammeds thuggery and sexual exploitations{most notably of a little girl bride} and that the gods they each serveed were apr tof ABSOLUTIST and ONE-WAYist sytems- tyrant deities, how do they play in AT ALL, does'nt that contradict the inherrent individualism and will thing of Thelema? On top of that, in liber Al they are seriously chastized{but then agains so is the buddhist, the indian, and the mongul}- violently so even!{esepcially Jesus and Mohammed}=
Liber Al 3:

49. I am in a secret fourfold word, the blasphemy against all gods of men.
50. Curse them! Curse them! Curse them!
51. With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.
52. I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.
53. With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.
54. Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.
55. Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you! 56. Also for beauty's sake and love's!

Ahhh, but according to Crowley, Mohammed was misunderstood in his own time. And Allah is a great name for God ("Al" meaning God, and "La" meaning "nothing"...God is in the Nothing. Very Qabalistic). I, personally, don't understand Mohammed's inclusion either. I haven't done a great deal of research into it. But, the importance of each Prophet/Magus is their Logos, and "ALLAH" certainly makes the cut as a meditation on the nature of God.

Crowley's take on Moses was that Moses was an Egyptian Magician whom the Hebrews made the hero of their Exodus for some unknown reason. Now, as I have better comprehension of Judaism (part of my family being Jewish) and am not carrying Victorian anti-Semitism with me, I know that Judaism is not "One-Way Only" at all, but that all those who are virtuous will be rewarded in the World To Come, regardless of their religious persuasion. Moses' importance is in his pronunciation of YHVH as his Logos, and the elaboration of the Qabala upon such a word, anyway, rather than the specific religious beliefs of Judaism.

Anyways, that's all for now.

Ask any time.

Love is the law, love under will.

Sidhe

 

[WingsOfTheNeophyte]

Who is Laylah??

I was reading the book of lies, and Laylah came up quite often, whole chapters dedicated to her

Even the commentary didnt do much to elaborate on Laylah

(Im hoping the spelling on her name is right)