The Book of The Law Study Group 3.54

[Grigori]

Originally Posted by Aiwass

54. Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.

http://www.sacred-texts.com/oto/index.htm
http://hermetic.com/crowley/index.html
http://lib.oto-usa.org/libri/liber0220.html

Other threads in this study group

[Always Wondering]

Bahlasti = 358.

Godwins lists Messiah or serpent. In this context I would think Messiah.

I like this though. The Sepher Sephiroth lists shame first.

"Shiloh shall come" is listed second. This would make sense if Shiloh was some messiah, but it appears to be a Biblical city.

I couldn't even begin to speculate on Ompehda.

AW

[Aeon418]

Bahlasti! Ompehda! My old dad makes noises like this. But that's what happens when you smoke 40 cigarettes a day for nearly 50 years.

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

Bahlasti = 358.

Godwins lists Messiah or serpent. In this context I would think Messiah.

The Messiah and the Serpent (NChSh) tempter of Genesis are thought to be two manifestations of the same thing. Also with the spitting mentioned in this verse it could be venom.

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

I like this though. The Sepher Sephiroth lists shame first.

Here's a possibility.

The first attack with the phallic beak relates to the Wand/Fire.
The second is wings - Air.
The third is claws - Earth.
And the final spit is Water.

Maybe this apparently sacrilegious act of spitting is actually a purification with holy water.

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

"Shiloh shall come" is listed second. This would make sense if Shiloh was some messiah, but it appears to be a Biblical city.

The first occurance of Shiloh is in Genesis 49:10. It appears to be a referrence to an individual. A common interpretation is that Shiloh is the Messiah.

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

I couldn't even begin to speculate on Ompehda.

No one really knows what these words mean. (Crowley thought these two words suggested an explosion. Others have claimed they are Enochian.) So it's all speculation and guess work. But OMPHDA transliterated in Hebrew is 200, which is the numerical value of the letter Resh - The Sun. It may be that the Messiah-Sun is being spat upon the crapulous creeds.

Crapulous creeds?

Creed is from the Latin, credo - I believe, belief.

Crapulous (Crapulence) is a state of sickness brought about by excessive indulgence or debauchery usually involving intoxicating drink or food. Are the excesses of religious belief, or what is commonly called "faith", being compared to a sickening intoxicant here? It does bring to my mind the famous Karl Marx quote: "Religion is the opium of the people." I'm also thinking of Crowley's description of the 7 of Cups. Hmm...

[Always Wondering]

Originally Posted by Aeon418

Here's a possibility.

The first attack with the phallic beak relates to the Wand/Fire.
The second is wings - Air.
The third is claws - Earth.
And the final spit is Water.

Oh yea. It's been a little while and I forget you were building up to this.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

Maybe this apparently sacrilegious act of spitting is actually a purification with holy water.



The first occurance of Shiloh is in Genesis 49:10. It appears to be a referrence to an individual. A common interpretation is that Shiloh is the Messiah.

No one really knows what these words mean. (Crowley thought these two words suggested an explosion. Others have claimed they are Enochian.) So it's all speculation and guess work. But OMPHDA transliterated in Hebrew is 200, which is the numerical value of the letter Resh - The Sun. It may be that the Messiah-Sun is being spat upon the crapulous creeds.

This explains Eshleman's thoughts. I couldn't figure out how he got from spitting to Tiphereth.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

Crapulous (Crapulence) is a state of sickness brought about by excessive indulgence or debauchery usually involving intoxicating drink or food. Are the excesses of religious belief, or what is commonly called "faith", being compared to a sickening intoxicant here? It does bring to my mind the famous Karl Marx quote: "Religion is the opium of the people." I'm also thinking of Crowley's description of the 7 of Cups. Hmm...

Very cool. I think I understand the 7 of Cups much better now.


AW

[Aeon418]

III x 54 = 162.

OTzB (Etsab), is a curious word with a lot of different meanings.

1) To pain or distress. Sorrow.

2) Images or Idols.

3) A thing constructed, fashioned or devised; a vessel or a utensil.

When considering meaning number 1 my thoughts are instantly drawn towards the 3 of Swords. The airy Sword of the partial intellect does not work well in Binah. How can the Sword of divison ever hope to comprehend the Cup of Unity? But isn't this what creeds attempt to do? They are intellectual constructs that seek to define That which is beyond them. But in the very act of definition they limit and distort. This may be why R.H.K. spits upon them. It is at once an insult and a blessing. The insult angle is obvious, but the blessing comes via Spit = Water = Heh. I interpret this "spitting" as the effect that direct spiritual experience has on airy dogma.

Definition number 2 suggests idolatry. Thelema does not object to idolatry per se. But what if the object of idolization is an intellectual construct. Formalized systems of belief seem to take on a life of their own and end up becoming valued for their own sake. Rather then being viewed as tools or ways they are elevated to an exalted status. I think we touched on this a little in a previous thread in the discussion of Yama and Niyama.

Definition 3 seems to follow on from this and maybe points to a proper perspective of creeds as artificial, constructed things that can be used. But they are not to be worshiped. They are a means to an end, but not an end in themselves.

(I'm not sure where I picked this up, so I will stand corrected if proven wrong, but I believe in Hebrew the second commandment is 162 letters long. Another idolatry link?)

[Always Wondering]

Originally Posted by Aeon418

III x 54 = 162.

OTzB (Etsab), is a curious word with a lot of different meanings.

How did you get there? I try to follow along with Godwins, but I can't figure it out.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

When considering meaning number 1 my thoughts are instantly drawn towards the 3 of Swords. The airy Sword of the partial intellect does not work well in Binah. How can the Sword of divison ever hope to comprehend the Cup of Unity? But isn't this what creeds attempt to do? They are intellectual constructs that seek to define That which is beyond them. But in the very act of definition they limit and distort. This may be why R.H.K. spits upon them. It is at once an insult and a blessing. The insult angle is obvious, but the blessing comes via Spit = Water = Heh. I interpret this "spitting" as the effect that direct spiritual experience has on airy dogma.

I love this. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

Definition number 2 suggests idolatry. Thelema does not object to idolatry per se. But what if the object of idolization is an intellectual construct. Formalized systems of belief seem to take on a life of their own and end up becoming valued for their own sake. Rather then being viewed as tools or ways they are elevated to an exalted status. I think we touched on this a little in a previous thread in the discussion of Yama and Niyama.

It's tricky, hua? I am actually going through something like this with a non religious group. I just appreciate some of the tools it has to offer and reject some outright. But everyone else is so on the band wagon that it makes me uncomfortable.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

Definition 3 seems to follow on from this and maybe points to a proper perspective of creeds as artificial, constructed things that can be used. But they are not to be worshiped. They are a means to an end, but not an end in themselves.

Ah, this helps with above.

Originally Posted by Aeon418

(I'm not sure where I picked this up, so I will stand corrected if proven wrong, but I believe in Hebrew the second commandment is 162 letters long. Another idolatry link?)

Interesting. If I can ever prove you wrong I will be sure to let you know.

AW

[Aeon418]

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

How did you get there?

Do you mean how does OTzB = 162? Remember that Tz is Tzaddi.

O = 70
Tz = 90
B = 2

Total = 162.

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

I try to follow along with Godwins, but I can't figure it out.

You won't find it in Godwin's or 777. But old Bill Heidrick's Hebrew gematria reference is a great resource.

http://www.billheidrick.com/works/hgemat.htm

[Always Wondering]

I found some things that equaled 162 but not OTzB.

I've been to Heidrick's and used it before, but here's my problem.

I can't get from Bet Tzaddi Ayin to OTzB. I've been meaning to ask you about it.

AW

[Aeon418]

Originally Posted by Always Wondering

I can't get from Bet Tzaddi Ayin to OTzB. I've been meaning to ask you about it.

I'm not sure I get what you're not getting.

This is just a guess, but are you forgetting that Hebrew words (writen in Hebrew characters) read from right to left? Thus OTzB in Hebrew script looks like עצב

Reading from right to left there is:

Ayin (O - ע)
Tzaddi (Tz - צ)
Beth (B - ב)

Transliterations of Hebrew words into English follow the usual standard and read from left to right.

[Always Wondering]

Oh yes, this would be my problem as I have directional confusion.
But it seems easy enough. If I see hebrew letters I read them backward.
Okay, this should help.



Thanks
AW