[kj] Crowley/Coleman/Gurdjieff
Djehuti111
djehuti111 at yahoo.com
Thu Jul 15 17:53:21 EDT 2004
Greetings Si,
*Whew* this is going to be a long one. ;)
--- god botherer <acroastic at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Aleph
>
> My respect for you has increased greatly after
> reading that. You obviously
> have a sharp intellect and you care enough to want
> to engage in discussion
> with me seriously.
It's my feel that we're all here to learn from one
another.
I enjoy discussing other peoples' points of view, One
of the things that it does is it helps me learn more
about myself.
I'm not in the habit of thinking that my way is the
only way, or that I have all the answers.
> I do understand 'Do what thou wilt', not as 'do
> whatever you want' but as
> 'develop real will and act accordingly'. No problem
> with that. 'Do what thou
> wilt shall be the whole of the Law' was Crowley's
> full aphorism. That, I
> think, is his spin on 'Do what thou wilt and it harm
> none'.
I believe you're referring to a part of the Wiccan
Rede/Witches Creed which is "...an it harm none, do
what you will."
I know that this may open up a can of worms with some
folks but Crowley's version pre-dates Gerald
Gardner's.
> The 'and it harm none' clause seems to imply a
> universal morality. I know
> that much 'morality' is conditional upon time, place
> and culture,
Heh, and don't forget "vested interest". ;)
Blood for Oil anyone?
> but don't
> you think that beyond all that there is a basic
> universal morality?
I believe that there are Universal Truths and that
they are beyond any human ascribed morals.
The Universe (IMHO) is always the best at doling out
undeviating Justice.
> Do you think there is such a thing as karma?
I do.
The concept of Karma is a very simple one, that of
maintaining balance.
> I get the Kabbalistic idea of duality and on one
> level duality is the basis
> of all (or perhaps one should say that where there
> are two there are three).
But, before the 1, 2, 3 of Kether, Chockmah, Binah,
there is the 0, 00, and 000 of Ain, Ain, Soph, and Ain
Soph Aur.
Before duality is Unity.
> But I believe that thinking of good/evil as a
> duality to be ranked along
> with day and night, yang and yin, male and female,
> etc. is a mistake.
Again, it's just another set of opposites and a swing
to either extreme is dangerous.
Ask any Psychologist worth their salt, to ignore one
"shadow side" is to invite neurosis.
> Perhaps beyond duality there is no good or evil, but
> here in the flesh, in
> the world of action, one can do evil deeds. The
> potential for any one of us
> to hurt another is there, and it is not possible,
> with any kind of
> sophistry, to defend acting out malice (or even
> thinking it).
Again, I believe that the Universe is much better
equipped than I at deciding who is acting in
accordance with the laws of nature, and who is not.
I don't feel that I'm qualified to tell other people
how to live their lives.
> There is a basic knowledge in the human heart about
> the wrongness of hurting
> another. The signs (although I admit I can not know
> - I have no evidence,
> only what others have said or written) are that
> Crowley - if he did not
> actually hurt anybody - at least did not prevent the
> suffering of some who
> came into his circle.
Crowley believed (as do many) that we all have our
own specific path to tread and our own ordeals to
overcome.
I don't think that he felt qualified to tell others
how to live their lives either. ;)
> Did he use people? I don't
> know. What do you think? If
> yes, was that OK?
Use people?
I'm not sure that I understand your question.
> Would not some of the conduct ascribed to him,
> supposing it were true, have
> some bearing on how one reads his 'way'?
The only power that anyone has over you is the power
that you give them yourself .
You are responsible for your own reactions towards
other people's behaviour.
Your reactions boil down to you projecting your own
set of Morals onto somebody else, and how YOU feel
someone else should be living their life.
If some one tells you that you have a big nose, and
you really like your nose, the insult is impotent.
However, if you are self conscious about your nose,
then the insult stings.
Only you can decide for yourself what power you give
away to others.
> Compare this with the conduct ascribed to the
> Buddha, and what that says
> about his 'way'.
Crowley studied Buddhism and even took his
Boddhisatva vows.
As I mentioned in another email, Thelema embraces and
shares many of the core tenets of Buddhism.
The Buddah understood that both humans have both
Light and Shadow qualities.
The difference is that no one ever called him "The
Wickedest Man in the World" for pointing that truth
out to people.
> I know that one would not think less of, say,
> Liszt's music for knowing the
> life he led,
I don't know about that...
Do you think that someone might think less of Jaz if
they'd found out about the Liver and Maggots episode,
or the fact that Killing Joke would occasionally pull
the odd journalist into an alley for a beating when
given the Yellow Press treatment?
> but with a teacher, guru, whatever (no
> doubt Crowley would be
> exempt from any of these labels),
Again, I disagree.
He referred to himself as both of these things, and
even as the Prophet of the Aeon!
> their life is
> central to what they are
> imparting, since the core of any esoteric teaching
> does not come off a page
> but from the very being of the teacher.
While there is a degree of truth to this (The Teacher
is a valuable tool for leading us in a specific
direction for a time) , I believe that True
Illumination comes from WITHIN each of us.
As "they" say...
"Know Thyself"!
> Is it true that Crowley boasted of hanging his wife
> by her thumbs so that
> she would bear him a beast? OK, there are so many
> little stories like this
> (and I take the point about the yellow press), but
> doubtless he did say some
> outrageous things. Was it all just to shock? Was it
> part of his method
> intended to sort the sheep from the goats?
> To'eliminate the unfit'? It
> doesn't sit well with me.
I'l tell you a secret, Crowley did say and do some
outrageous things, he wanted people to think for
themselves and not to follow him or his teachings
blindly.
But, the most effective tool that he used for
"blackening" his image was to never deny any charge
that the press ever levelled at him.
Sheer genius, he MUST be guilty if he isn't denying
it, right?!?
"To eliminate the unfit" merely means that he
couldn't be bothered with people who looked at Magick
as just the next fad, or those who weren't genuinely
interested in rolling up their sleeves and doing some
hard work.
Of accomplishing the Great Work, of attaining
Illumination, just as Crowley, The Buddah, Mohammed,
and Jesus did.
> Nor does the prospect of summoning entities of which
> one can not really have
> full understanding. What are they, really? Michael?
> Gabriel? Raphael? Uriel?
> Your Guardian Angel? Are you sure?
I believe that all the Angels, Sprits, demons,
whatever title you'd like to hang on them are simply
parts of our own personalities and are "internal"
forces and not "external" beings.
The only way to "be sure" about anything, in Life or
Magick or Math class is by solving (beyond the shadow
of a doubt) whatever the problem before you is to
yourself.
As mentioned before, the Motto of the A.'.A.'. (The
Order that Crowley started) is "The Method of Science,
The Aim or Religion."
Crowley was insistant that eveyone involved in the
Work keep a diary with all the results of any
"experiments" that they made.
> There are records of more than one meeting between
> Gurdjieff and Crowley
> (they are supposed to have been lodging at a guest
> house in Frintion on
> England's east coast at some point during the war).
> They may have had more
> to do with each other than we know. They probably
> had a lot in common. But
> the meeting reported in J.G. Bennett's book
> 'Witness' (which is a bloody
> good read actually - I think you'd enjoy it; about
> far more than Gurdjieff)
> ended with Gurdjieff repudiating Crowley and simply
> commenting,
>
> "Him dirty inside."
A friend of mine just passed along the story of their
meeting.
My understanding is that Gurdieff had quoted that to
a student after Crowley had said something that
bothered the student.
> Gurdjieff was said by Ouspensky to have reached a
> stage in his life where he
> could to become either a saint or a monster (my
> words). Did Crowley come to
> the same point and take a wrong turning? It seems as
> though he did to me.
What makes you think that he became a "monster"?
Is it because you personally don't agree with his
methods?
>So
> why? And why didn't Gurdjieff?
Not knowing much about Gurdjieff, I'll have to pass
on this one.
> The end of Crowley's life is well documented as
> being very sad and squalid.
> Doesn't that concern you?
I believe that we're all responsible for making our
own choices in life.
> You're going to follow his
> 'way' even though it
> didn't do him any good?
Actually, I'm not a "Crowley-ite".
I don't follow in the man's footsteps, I don't agree
with everything that he had to say, and quite frankly
I find some of his viewpoints on racism and sexism
nauseating.
We're two completely different people.
Why in the world would I want to be like Crowley?
Liber AL vel Legis states that "Every man and every
woman is a star." ie: utterly unique and individual.
As a Thelemite I know that it's my duty to cut my own
path through the forest.
Crowley's example shows one many things, some
positive, some negative.
But, I've got my own mistakes to make. ;)
> Still, I could have completely misunderstood, and I
> am reaching decisions
> based on very limited information.
>
> As you say the path of Magick IS dangerous. So one
> should be careful to
> fully inform oneself before setting off merrily into
> what can initially be
> very seductive, exciting and rewarding territory.
I absolutely agree.
Sometimes it proves to be more than just initially
exciting and rewarding too.
Sometimes the fruits of one's labors last lifetimes.
> But if people need to go
> ahead and read The Book Of The Law they'd probably
> better go ahead and do
> it.
I can't think of a single argument against people
continually exposing themselves to new thoughts and
ideas in order to keep expanding their knowledge,
their understanding, and thier outlook on life, can
you?
> OK, I baled out. You, my friend are probably
> stronger, maybe wiser than me.
I disagree.
I think that perhaps Thelema just isn't your path.
It doesn't work for everybody, and you made a wise
decision by stopping after you realized that it wasn't
for you.
> I reached the point where I had to concede that I
> was putting myself at the
> mercy of ... what, I didn't know. Fear? Maybe. I
> prefer to think of it as
> gut instinct.
Always go with your gut.
Intuition is always right, the intellect (which is at
the mercy of the ever flattering ego) is tricked more
often than not.
> One thing is for sure though. I don't let others do
> my thinking for me. I
> have thought about these things a great deal. The
> funny thing is, the longer
> this process goes on the less I really feel I know.
I find that the longer I do this, the more I know
that I don't know anything. ;)
> So I judge nobody.
I try to do the same thing.
But, every now and again somebody on an email list
will irk my ire. ;)
> I simply wish you good fortune, if you believe in
> such a thing, and I thank
> you for this dialogue. I don't get to talk to too
> many people on this level,
> and I really need it.
I wish you the best of luck in all your endevours and
thank you back for the discussion.
Be(a)st regards,
~Aleph
>
> Sincere best wishes
>
>
> Si
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: Djehuti111 <djehuti111 at yahoo.com>
> >Reply-To: "A list about all things Killing Joke
> (the band!)"
> ><gathering at misera.net>
> >To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the
> band!)"
> ><gathering at misera.net>
> >Subject: Re: [kj] Crowley/Coleman/Gurdjieff
> >Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 22:55:08 -0700 (PDT)
> >
> >Greetings Si,
> >
> >--- god botherer <acroastic at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > I became very interested in Crowley many years
> ago.
> > > I read Liber 777, The
> > > Book Of The Law, Aha, etc. and learned a lot. I
> also
> > > read about Crowley's
> > > participation in the Golden Dawn and beyond. I
> > > recognised that he must have
> > > been an extraordinary man - highly intelligent,
> > > gifted, extremely
> > > knowledgeable, but I also learned of the many
> > > wounded people - even dead
> > > people - he left in his wake,
> >
> > Let me interrupt here for just a minute.
> > Are implying here that Crowley was responsible
> for
> >causing someones death?
> >
> > Crowley (the Man) was on occasion a complete
> bastard,
> >and systematically drove away most of his closest
> >friends.
> >
> > However the implication that he was directly
> >responsible for someone's death sound very "yellow
> >press" to me.
> >
> > There is SO much misinformation spread about this
> man
> >that it's simply ridiculous, and I'm always
> astounded
> >at what people genuinely believe this man was
> capable
> >of.
> >
> > > and I found that I
> > > could not accept some of
> > > his practices.
> >
> > Nor can I.
> > Nor can a lot of Thelemites.
> >
> > One of the things that he insisted on was that
> people
> >find their own path, whether they agreed with his
> >findings or not.
> >
> > > I also questioned where following the
> > > labyrinthine path down
> > > which studying the correspondences and Gematria
> was
> > > actually leading me.
> >
> > It's always possible that it might lead you to
> the
> >same place that many Initiated systems of Magick
> (or
> >Religious beliefs, or Philosophical Schools of
> >thought, or years of Psychotherapy) might lead
> you....
> > It's quite possible that it might just lead you
> to
> >discover who you really are.
> >
> > > So many people have warned against reading The
> Book
> > > Of The Law - including
> > > Crowley himself - that it can not be paranoid
> > > superstition to refer to such
> > > admonitions.
> >
> > Magick (Or Philosophy, or Psychotherapy) is a
> very
> >dangerous path.
> >
> > It will be useless to you if fear of the unknown
> is
> >your bedrock, or if you choose to go against your
> >nature and stagnate, or if you want nothing but to
> >have others do your thinking for you.
> >
> > Fear is failure, and the forerunner of failure.
> >If you convince yourself that you have no voice,
> then
> >you don't.
> >
> > Fear is how governments keep people docile and
> under
> >control.
> >
> > Fear is our biggest enemy, because it leads to
> >inaction.
> >
> > Crowley (along with many other leaders of
> thought)
> >recognized this, and wrote not only to "Fortify the
> >fit" but also to "Eliminate the unfit".
> >
> > If the comment at the back of the Book of the Law
> is
> >all that it takes to dissuade you from Thelema,
> then
> >Thelema is certainly not your path.
> >
> > Thelema is for the individual, not the herd.
> >
> > > As for Gurdjieff recognising something
> > > unclean in Crowley, I am
> > > merely paraphrasing Bennett's autobiography.
> >
> > So, I'm to understand that because Bennet has
> >mentioned it in his autobiography (Which in this
> case,
> >if I'm reading you correctly, seems to be a
> >autobiography of Gurdjieff as seen through Bennets
> >lens) that this is your opinion too?
> >
> > > Let's be cool.
> >
> > I have NO issue with you as a person, I have no
> idea
> >who you are other than someone who is also a
> Killing
> >Joke fan.
> >
> > I have issue with people that speak out of
> ignorance
> >(you having studied at least some Crowley are
> >different than the other people who have involved
> >themselves in this discussion) and assert
> themselves
> >as authorities on the subject.
> >
> >Especially when they admit to knowing next to
> nothing
> >on the matter.
> >
> > Thelema is a subject that I know at least a
> little
> >bit about, and is something that has been maligned
> >more often than not.
> >
> > Crowley and Thelema are topics that (at least iup
> to
> >"Extremities Era" KJ) are part of the roots of
> Killing
> >Joke, and since no one here has much positive to
> say
> >about the topic, I'm piping in.
> >
> > Killing Joke were my introduction to Crowley, so
> it's
> >a vested interest to me to dispel ignorance on
> either
> >topic.
> >
> > The same thing happens if someone's only
> knowledge of
> >Killing Joke come from the "Liver and Maggots"
> story.
> >;)
> >
> >
> > > I do not regard myself as qualified to judge
> Crowley
> > > - or indeed Gurdjieff.
> > > Both men were vastly superior to me in all sorts
> of
> > > ways. But if someone of
> > > Gurdjieff's standing took the angle he did on
> > > Crowley then I have to take
> > > note.
> >
> > Heh, then by the same token, one should take
> >Crowley's opinion of Gurdjieff the same way, right?
> >
> > I'd rather form my own opinions on both of them.
> ;)
> >
> > > And what is one to make of Jaz's branding of
> Crowley
> > > as 'a very dubious
> > > character'? This from someone who went into
> Crowley
> > > fairly deeply, I
> > > believe.
> >
> > What I hear I Jaz's voice when he makes that
> remark
> >is nothing but "tongue in cheek" and comes from
> those
> >self same years of study.
> > But that's just what I hear.
> >
> > > The case remains open for me on Crowley, but I
> fear
> > > I shall never really
> > > understand what he was all about.
> >
> > But even the fact that you are "open" to
> discussion
> >and asking to be "educated" on the matter puts you
> >head and shoulders (in my opinion) above those that
> >believe they know it all without bothering to
> delve
> >into the topic in the least. ;)
> >
> > > And is it all that
> > > important anyway?
> >
> > Absolutely not!
> >
> > What I hear is that "Every man and every woman is
> a
> >Star" and should be left necessarily to their own
> >devices and opinions.
> > This is simply mine, and I hope that no one out
> there
> >takes it as anything other than that.
> >
> > > As for the Buddha, I sense that following his
> > > teachings is more likely to
> > > bring me to happiness and make the world a
> better
> > > place than following
> > > Crowley's 'way' (whatever that is) will.
> >
> > The tricky thing with Crowley (as with all modern
> >Psychology) is that he acknowledged both a "Light"
> and
> >"Dark" side of humanity.
> >
> > This is apparent in Nature (ie: Spring and
> Winter,
> >Day and Night, Harvest Time and Time to Plant crops
> >etc. ad infinitum) and since we humans are merely a
> >part of that Nature, we are subject to the same
> >cycles and Light and Dark parts of our
> >"personalities".
> >
> > He recognized this fact and sought to work
> equally
> >with BOTH sides.
> > How else does one achieve Balance?
> >
> > Most religions are loathe to approach this topic
> in
> >any way other than the eternal (Exoteric) battle
> >between "Good" and "Evil".
> >
> > "Heat is "Good" for coffee, but it's "Evil" for
> Ice
> >Cream."
> >
> > Both qualities are inherent in all humans,
> including
> >Crowley, Coleman, Gurdjieff, and even the Buddha.
> >
> > Very few will cop to this fact.
> >
> > So Crowley, by recognizing this fact, and working
> to
> >abolish the Victorian Era ideas of Good and Evil
> which
> >he was surrounded by at the time gets branded the
> >"Wickedest Man in the World".
> >
> > > I am ready to listen to anybody who can shed
> light
> > > for me on why Crowley
> > > deserves uncritical admiration.
> >
> > I'm afraid that I can't be that person.
> >
> > Crowley (or anybody, fictional or other) doesn't
> >deserve those qualities.
> > My guess is that he wouldn't have wanted it any
> other
> >way.
> >
> > Uncritical admiration means that one listens and
> >agrees passively.
> >
> > He very specifically went out of his way to make
> sure
> >that he'd never be Deified, and that there would
> never
> >be a cult of mindless, non thinking "Crowleyanity".
> >
> > Make you own decisions on the topic.
> >
> > > I would genuinely
> > > welcome an attempt to
> > > defend Crowley on a moral basis.
> >
> > Most of what passes for "Morals" in even this day
> and
> >age is what Christianity has told us that we need
> to
> >adhere to.
> >
> > While Christian Morals work for Christians, they
> >don't work for me since I don't ascribe to their
> >system of thought.
> >
> > I'm a firm believer in "Do What thou Wilt".
> >
> > And, if you think that means Do what you WANT,
> you've
> >got another think coming. ;)
> >
> > > There is more that unites us than divides us so
> > > let's not fall out.
> >
> > "There is nothing that unites the divided but
> Love,
> >all else is a curse...".
> >
> > Much Respect,
> >
> > Aleph
> >
> > >
> > > Si
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >From: Djehuti111 <djehuti111 at yahoo.com>
> > > >Reply-To: "A list about all things Killing Joke
> > > (the band!)"
> > > ><gathering at misera.net>
> > > >To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the
> > > band!)"
> > > ><gathering at misera.net>
> > > >Subject: RE: [kj] Crowley/Coleman
> > > >Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 21:18:03 -0700 (PDT)
> > > >
> > > >Greetings Lexi,
> > > >
> > > >--- Alexi Hamilton <alexih at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > > Awwww...Nicholas, you just might bring the
> ever
> > > >elusive Aleph out of hiding with this one...
> > > >
> > > > Nah, I'm not going to waste my time with
> > > opinionated
> > > >rubbish, ("Clearly, he recognised that which
> was
> > > >unclean in Crowley and didn't want him near his
> > > >students any more.") or paranoid superstition (
> > > "And
> > > >by the way, reading The Book of the Law might
> not
> > > be a
> > > >great idea.").
> > > >
> > > > And I'm certainly not going to let one of the
> > > most
> > > >imbalanced "buddhists" to ever snipe from
> behind a
> > > PC
> > > >get my Goat.
> > > >
> > > >("crowley was a twat who completely wasted the
> > > >insights he had.")
> > > >
> > > > Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!
> ;)
> > > >
> > > > I'll just scrape it off my shoes and ignore
> the
> > > >stench.
> > > >
> > > > XoXoX
> > > > Aleph
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >~Alexi
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >=====
> > > >"The scene was wild and somewhat sinister. The
> > > >darkness, the palms, the mountainous
> background,
> > > the
> > > >silent lake below, the impenetrable canopy of
> > > space,
> > > >studded with secretive and significant stars,
> > > formed a
> > > >stupendous setting for the savage noise and
> blaze
> > > of
> > > >the ceremony."
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >__________________________________
> > > >Do you Yahoo!?
> > > >New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB
> messages!
> > > >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >Gathering mailing list
> > > >Gathering at misera.net
> > >
> >http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
> > >
> > >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
> > > Express yourself with cool new emoticons
> > > http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Gathering mailing list
> > > Gathering at misera.net
> > >
> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
> > >
> >
> >
> >=====
> >"The scene was wild and somewhat sinister. The
> >darkness, the palms, the mountainous background,
> the
> >silent lake below, the impenetrable canopy of
> space,
> >studded with secretive and significant stars,
> formed a
> >stupendous setting for the savage noise and blaze
> of
> >the ceremony."
> >
> >
> >
> >__________________________________
> >Do you Yahoo!?
> >Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We
> finish.
> >http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
> >_______________________________________________
> >Gathering mailing list
> >Gathering at misera.net
> >http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>
>
_________________________________________________________________
> FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get
> it now!
>
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Gathering mailing list
> Gathering at misera.net
> http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
>
=====
"The scene was wild and somewhat sinister. The
darkness, the palms, the mountainous background, the
silent lake below, the impenetrable canopy of space,
studded with secretive and significant stars, formed a
stupendous setting for the savage noise and blaze of
the ceremony."
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - 100MB free storage!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
More information about the Gathering
mailing list