Your opinions on Crowley?

Edge

RViewer said:
Now as to digging my own grave, a bit over the top wouldn’t you say?

NO is right on target as you continue to prove again and again.

RViewer said:
Here are a few more quotes from AC taken from 'A Magick Life'. The first one is from a dream that he relates and one that I think gives a feel for his energy and demeanor:

Crowley:
“I have a fatal weakness for believing the best about everybody. In face of the plainest evidence I cannot believe in the existence of dishonesty and malice, and I always try to build with rotten material”

Those who have actually read the confessions will recall the greater context of this quote. See pg 323 of The Confessions.

What you have missed in this quote is the paragraphs leading up to and after the remark. You forgot to point out how the “wicked devil” of a man despite the fact he was physically ill and downright exhausted from the mountain climbing expedition, despite extreme danger and terrible weather conditions. This “evil man” left his base camp to save another mans life. A life that another man, one in his own group had abandoned for dead. Your right about the “energy and demeanor” part. Setting aside your own safety in order to try and help another is an act of selflessness that I admire.

The virtual pissing contest that you have started has time and again been blown right back in your face. You can misquote your books all you like but the fact is AC was no devil, satanist or monster. Sure you can quote from various text and cast a spell of illusion for weak minded individuals who take comfort in the security of their man made gods and devils. But what you cannot prove with your john bull tactics is that this man was an evil devil worshiper. The gig is up. Of course opinions can and will be shared especially in this thread. But yours like many others in the thread are not supported by any actual knowledge of the life and work of AC.

ravenest

Aeon418 said:
What Crowley is confessing to here is that he ejaculated 150 times per year during acts of sacremental sex without getting his partner pregnant. It's as simple as that. Unfortunately Crowley could not write so plainly during his day because he would have been prosecuted under the indecency laws of the time.

And what a time it was! Someone could write that they murdered children but not write about sex or sex magick without fear of prosecution! (See the Life {and death in jail} of Ida Craddock for an example.)

But the judge in one of AC's court cases didnt seem to mind. When AC tried to explain his theory and practice of Sex Magick (in a roundabout way) the judge replied something like this; " Oh, you mean you made a wish."

And on the basic level, sex magick is as simple as that!

'When you wish upon a fallen star your dreams come true.'

ravenest

RViewer said:
As to why you consider it challenging just to discuss opinions of Crowley and his teachings I am not sure why.

No. What I was trying to make clear was that when someone expresses an opinion thats fine, but when the opinion is put forward as fact and backed up by 'fact' and certain references that seem dodgey THEN someone gets challenged. I was trying to make a distinction for you on the difference between attack and challenge.

BUT I have to say RV that I am begining to get annoyed at your constant evasion of certain questions. If you are not prepared to answer the valid questions that people put to you (more than once) then I hardly see how you can expect the same consideration from others.

RViewer said:
You seem to be well qualified to speak of this shady and secret issue and many could benefit from hearing the truth of it.

Sorry, what shady and secret issue?

RViewer said:
One gets the feeling you could justify just about anything in the world as just peachy keen while looking for anyway to discredit those who are trying to discuss this matter. Again it is not too hard to understand why.

I can agree with this, there does seem to be ONE with this opinion of Aeon, but I haven't come across another one, as yet.

RViewer said:
Maybe you could possibly understand why I am asking for a little help in understanding the way in which these teachings are used by some in a postive way? I am curious and do appreciate what those who follow this path are willing to speak of.

When I taught my adolescent development class I started with this; I looked at the kids (and some of them had a lot of problems!) and I said "Each and every one of you is a genius. You all have your own specific skills and tasks and unique insights thats why you are here, to give your light to the world. The problem is a lot of us have forgotten or are unclear on what our individual genius is." And on it went. I found kids that had a low opinion of themselves because of what they had been taught even by their own parents. After several weeks these kids started to shine! They built things, learnt things, and at the end of the first month put on a performance for the rest of the teachers. It was middle-eastern dance performance with traditional dance and drumming, they learnt it in 2 weeks (many had never danced or drummed before) the other teachers were amazed. I could go on about the other wonderful things these kids/ pre-adults did, but space...

To me this is a result of the essential core of AC's teachings, which I already refered to above; Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law, Love is the Law, every man and every woman is a star.

PS. A bit of friendly advice. I would not reccomend putting forward the idea (as I believe you did in posting quotes) linkling the OTO with human sacrifice and other unethical and illeagel practices. The OTO fights against these allegations vehemently, and recently certain individuals (and people that re copied their allegations on websites) have had court cases go rather badly against them. I am not saying you have done this deliberatly, but maybe unintentionaly. Accusing people (or supporting others acccusations) falsly of crimes is slander and libel.

ravenest

RViewer said:
All you two have done is get instantly defensive and try to turn this into a "RViewer is so silly and clueless" fest. This is similar to Crowley's behavior toward those who questioned what he had to share so it is not so surprising that Ravenest and Aeon 418 share the same methods of operation. ...

Maybe you need to get a little more practical experience and a little less intellectual theory.

RViewer said:
Well Ravenest I was speaking to Aeon 418 about being a little heavy in the theory department but thank you for letting us in on a little of your experience

AND RV, the above is why I assumed you were referening to BOTH of us. If it is a writing mistake, well, fair enough.

If it is yet again an attempt to cover the facts of your innacurate and misleading (for some) posts and back-peddle your way out of a wrong and uninformed accusation then all I can say is I expect you to be more of a man about it.

Aeon418

A quote from Lon Milo DuQuette's, The Magick of Aleister Crowley.
(emphasis added)

Was Aleister Crowley a Satanist or a devil worshiper?

No. Although he can be misquoted (and quoted out of context) to suggest otherwise, Crowley most certainly was not a Satanist or a devil worshiper. There is no question that he seemed to enjoy his sinister reputation. It is also true that he loved to shock the shockable and was quite happy to allow anyone who was ignorant and superstitious enough to believe in a bogeyman devil to be afraid of him also. But in order to be a Satanist (by the most common definition during Crowley's lifetime) one must acknowledge the reality of the Judeo-Christian-Muslim spiritual worldview - a worldview that embraces the concept of a devil who is the all-evil opposite to a god who is all-good. As Crowley repudiated Judeo-Christian-Muslim doctrines (including belief in the existence of their "devil") there are no grounds whatsoever to charge that he was a Satanist.

"The Devil does not exist. It is a false name invented by the Black Brothers to imply a Unity in their ignorant muddle of dispersions. A devil who had unity would be a god."

It is true that there is much in the imagery of Crowley's writings that is dark and at first glance very terrifying. But if we view these works objectively, we find nothing in them any more frightening than the imagery we find in the Bible or any number of other religious literature, Eastern or Western.

Crowley especially despised the hypocrisy and the spiritually restrictive aspects of established religions, especially Christianity, and did not deny charges that his philosophy was anti-Christian. However, a careful examination of his writings reveals his profound understanding and respect for the pure spiritual impulse that is at the heart of all religions including Christianity. His allusions in his writings to Satan, Lucifer, the devil, and so forth are pertinent only within the self-referential documents of Thelema. They can only be understood and evaluated within those contexts and should only be disturbing or offensive to those individuals who for whatever reason are unwilling or unable to do a little honest homework.

Your opinions on Crowley?

Edge

ravenest

ravenest

ravenest

Aeon418