Most notable in the discussion of occult topics, this man has made quite a name for himself. He was a 33rd degree Free Mason, until he branched off and started his own occult groups. With being labeled as "The Beast 666", he is often labeled a Satanist, though any info about his affiliation with Satanism is vague. He dedicated his life to learning and teaching Ritual Magick and Yoga, claiming that he has used them to evoke spirits into physical appearance, to astral travel, and many other supernatural type things.

He supposedly went into deep meditative trance to speak higher intelligence who revealed to him "The Book of the Law", which was the foundation of Thelema, a religion that closely resembles that of a Laveyan Satanist, preaching about free will, and doing only things that you want to do. The religion is based on 1 simple line "Do what though wilt shall be the whole of the law". Alot of the practices and rituals of Thelema have to do with the worship of multiple Egyptian gods/godesses. He never claims that any of them do or don't exist, but that certain actions will bring certain results.

I believe he was a Satanist, i've read some of his material, where he would relate satan and lucifer to certain egyptian gods, saying that they were one in the same. I've also seen him use the name Satan for worshiping while explaining his rituals, especially when coming in contact with his guardian angel, where one must "summon the 4 princes of hell" (satan, lucifer, leviathan, and belial). I think he tried to cover up being a satanist to avoid a lot of shit that would come along with it.

I have only used his methods of yoga for taking control my mind, (which have reap me great results), and have not practiced much ritual magick, (mostly due to lack of a sufficient area to practice such long drawn out rituals without the worry of outside interference) but i am interested in seeing what type of results they would bring, since his techniques on yoga were so helpful.

He could have just been crazy, or it all could be just a big lie. Either way, he has undeniably made quite a name for himself.

What are your views on the topic?

Been a Thelemite for about 10 years. He was not a Satanist, and I don't really get how one could complete even a cursory reading of his work and reach this conclusion.

Oh Mister Crowley.

An unintelligible hodgepodge of badly appropriated ideas and concepts from different cultures and ages, all cloaked in a veil of mysticism to get laid easier. On the same level as Victorian spiritists.

That's the gist of it.

regardless of which, a fascinating personality.

I've read a little bit about Crowley, and hardly anything actually written by him (though I do own The Book of Lies and Gems from the Equinox, and plan to read both soon). Seems like everybody has all kinds of fun opinions about him. I love how much frenzy he works up.

I've read that he was something of an occult scientist or something? Which is to say that he practiced rituals of various occult belief systems from around the world, trying to see which were hogwash and which actually produced results for him, including gnostic Christianity. Is this true? I also read that he often told his readers/followers purposely contradictory information to make them do the work themselves, instead of clamoring over the heels of his study. I also have heard that in various writings of his he explicitly tells people not to believe everything that he is saying, to do the work themselves and find out what he is talking about, etc., etc. This is why I bought the Gems from the Equinox.

Is any of this true? I've only read what various historians, etc., have written about him and his teachings.

Correct (although the Gnostic part is slightly less accurate) - he had a syncretic and idiosyncratic system that worked for him, and despite setting up magical orders left, right and centre to make money he encouraged others to do the same thing. His philosophy (and it IS a philosophy with magical trappings, rather than a religion) is peppered with smatterings of Chinese mysticism, Judaism, Christianity, Theosophy and the Rosicrucian/Masonic traditions. This leads some reductionist philistines to denigrate Crowley as being inconsistent or some sort of magickal spiv. This may have an element of truth but people who leave it there are those who have never actually read any of his work properly - Liber Legis is one of the most powerful pieces of political poetry from the early 20th century, regardless of the dodgy provenance.

Thank you, Tantalus. That summary made me even more curious about his works. I'll probably crack open Gems from the Equinox soon, or is that not a good place to start? Where would you recommend a Crowley newbie start reading? The only thing I've read by him is The Book of the Law.
Also, Temporary Antennae is an awesome album, sir.

Thanks! Though I find it hard to listen to now due to the many moments of ineptitude.

If you've read Liber Legis/TbotL already then probably the best thing I can recommend is to combine reading a good biography of Crowley (I'd suggest Martin Booth's excellent and largely impartial 'A Magick Life') with Crowley's own Magick in Theory and Practice. Unfortunately because of his fondness for purple prose, Crowley's own non-poetic writing can be fairly hard going/inpenetrable, but MiTaP is very readable. Liber Legis is pure Thelemic philosophy whereas MiTaP gives a larger overview of Crowley's not-inconsiderable knowledge and opinion of the field as a whole.

Excellent, thank you very much.

I own a copy of Magick: Liber ABA and find it very fascinating stuff. As others have said he was most certainly insane but his ideas do have some sort of authenticity to them. He took many ideas from many different cultures and created a philosophy that was truly unique. To just discredit everything he did is sort of silly and ignorant

/thread


How convenient. It's far more likely that he didn't say which ones worked and which didn't because... let's see... none of them produce any results whatsoever?

If magic were real, someone would have provided evidence of it by now.

I was really interested by Crowley when I was a teenager and delved into this stuff.

Then I grew up.

You just don't believe enough!

On a more serious note I have been intrigued by this man and his life. I'll probably go through a weird phase in a few years and start reading all his material.

I think Aleister Crowley was an interesting guy, and I've read a bit about Thelema, but in the end I was forced to conclude that it was nonsense, just like all the rest of it. If it gives your life some purpose, great, but I really don't think there's anything to it. It seems like he was all too happy to court controversy just to get his name out there. Whatever floats your boat, but don't expect me to follow your religion.

I won't give a for or against for him, but cute shit like "that's the gist of it" when on the topic of a mystery system is as dumb as buying in blind. I'm saying that because I don't remember seeing a thelemite who wasn't successful in life.

Well I just wanna know what 'polemically sent' means.

That's like saying "playing with plastic dinosaurs while living on baby formula keeps you young, because I haven't seen any grown ups doing it".
It haven't occured to you that people who struggle to get by in life have more important things to occupy themselves with than to play with pseudo philosophy and call themselves "thelemites"?

Crowley was either the old timey equivalent of a French "Orthodox Black Metal" Satanist, someone who was using his nonsensical pseudo-mystic talk to get laid, or just a troll out to offend interbellum English sensibilities. Or maybe a mix of all three.

In any case, he's not someone to take seriously at all.

C'mon, how do you think we are all communicating? Magick!

That the angels of Contention bestowed upon him the power of Zealot Troll.



makes sense. But remember: correlation doesn't mean causation.

It's pretty rare to find any breed of person doing poorly who's alleviated their angst by way of repeated reinforcement as to their potency, prowess, and unstoppable impermeable will. The overconfident statistically live more "qualitatively happy" lives. There's little to differentiate the practice of magic to see a thing occur from the business of going about the work to make it occur. Put personal anxiety out of your head by any available means (alcohol, regular attendance and adherence to a cult of personality or spirituality, fraternity, lots of gratifying sex, cocaine) and you're far more likely to be successful. Not least because your nervous system isn't hampered by stress and you don't talk yourself out of half of your good ideas.

+ and, also, most of the information Crowley references and uses is in allegorical form. His Egyptian and Hermetic occult sources formed in much the same way and for similar reasons as the alchemical sybolism: that is, NOT LITERAL. They were intentionally encrypted. Taking Crowley literally is folly. It's a difficult leap for the skeptic, and an impossible one for the thrall. All of the Tarot, all the glyphs, all gods are symbols. Without the keys of translation, they remain opaque. If they're of interest to you, there's no shortage of theories. But only the initiated get the right keys, and even they may be troll-igions. So .. consume your Crowley well salted.

If you like The Book of the Law, you may as well read Blake's The Marriage of Heaven and Hell. Both men were convinced they were in the presence of angels, but Blake's a better writer.

Have you ever seen a Mormon who looked poor? Or a scientologist who is completely broke?

Correlation does not mean causality. Could, perhaps, the recruitment process have something to do with it?

[/quote]

makes sense. But remember: correlation doesn't mean causation.

It's pretty rare to find any breed of person doing poorly who's alleviated their angst by way of repeated reinforcement as to their potency, prowess, and unstoppable impermeable will. The overconfident statistically live more "qualitatively happy" lives. There's little to differentiate the practice of magic to see a thing occur from the business of going about the work to make it occur. Put personal anxiety out of your head by any available means (alcohol, regular attendance and adherence to a cult of personality or spirituality, fraternity, lots of gratifying sex, cocaine) and you're far more likely to be successful. Not least because your nervous system isn't hampered by stress and you don't talk yourself out of half of your good ideas.

+ and, also, most of the information Crowley references and uses is in allegorical form. His Egyptian and Hermetic occult sources formed in much the same way and for similar reasons as the alchemical sybolism: that is, NOT LITERAL. They were intentionally encrypted. Taking Crowley literally is folly. It's a difficult leap for the skeptic, and an impossible one for the thrall. All of the Tarot, all the glyphs, all gods are symbols. Without the keys of translation, they remain opaque. If they're of interest to you, there's no shortage of theories. But only the initiated get the right keys, and even they may be troll-igions. So .. consume your Crowley well salted.

If you like The Book of the Law, you may as well read Blake's The Marriage of Heaven and Hell. Both men were convinced they were in the presence of angels, but Blake's a better writer.[/quote]

One of the best posts I've read on here for a long time.

This thread is taking a decidedly hilarious turn. I wonder how many posts it will take before some other clown contends that the secret to eternal life is contained in Quiet Riot songs.

You just have to look real hard, you know?

For German readers:
http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/28/28820/1.html
http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/28/28821/1.html

Hans Schmid had written two lengthy articles about AC (Der böseste Mann von der Welt: Aleister Crowley und die Schrecken der Magie), which present him in a rather broad light and deal with issues, which are not presented all too often.

Nah, the real hilarity will ensue once we get one of the youngsters who has tried magick (with the "ck" in the end, that's important!), and got tangible but undefined results he won't explain in detail, because we are not part of the club, and we wouldn't understand. They are always amusing, trolls or not.

Pffft, it's called magik, old man.

As with all spirituality, I believe that everyone is free to exercise their own mind's approval of such, as bizarre and outlandish as it may seem to others. So for those acting the part of the all-wise, you come off as callous as the pious are foolish. At least in my eyes.

The guy was a creative individual who created his own belief system and stuck to it. Other people saw value in it and took it as their own. Not much more to say. I wouldn't denigrate those who retain value from it. Spirituality is in many ways subjective.

I believe everyone is free to live their spirituality as they see fit and believe in whatever they want to believe. That's freedom for you. However, if someone starts a discussion thread about it, it is this same belief in freedom that I use to share my own thoughts. That's what a discussion is about.

I think Crowley's stuff is bullshit, so I said so in a humorous (but maybe not so funny to some) comment.

I wrote a second comment when I saw a really weird statement being thrown around. I didn't feel like addressing it directly because it is so outlandish, I don't actually know what to say about it but please note some NUTJOB above is actually advocating that the use of cocaine and similarly destructive indulgences allows one to "let his good ideas out" and helps with stress management.

I bolded this motherfucker just in case someone misses this. That is one of the most stupid, fucked up thing I have read in a long time and a really dangerous notion.

Yeah, that's my opinion. I know, I know... everything can be seen as subjective. But when people say crap like that, I'm probably going to use humor because it is such INSANE SHIT that I don't really feel like arguing. If it looks like I feel superior or I know everything, fuck it.

Of course. I have nothing against people voicing their opinions against and for particular things. There were some pretty unnecessary comments sitting around in this thread though, similar to the one you mentioned.

Well, they DID tell me to "bang my head", and I'm still alive. Surely this is no coincidence.

On topic, he's an interesting fellow, but I haven't read any books that he wrote himself.

people who take AC's writings as gospel are the worst!! thelema is purely a personal thing and its up to you to make of it what you will

id suggest reading Austin Osmand Spare's writings over crowley anyday as it makes alot more sense and is more practical than High Magick based off masonry rituals, although the book of the law is a good read for the fundamental basics of the concept of Thelema

Your sig is too long, please edit it.

Nobody can truly know unless they have practice such rituals described in his works. Man id feel dumb going through all the hassle of actually doing one an then having no results

having done a few degrees with the OTO i can definitely confirm they have some merit, just not a fan of the ultra dogmatic approach crowley fanboys take

Well, that settles it. I am most reassured!

It always amazes me that the practioners of ye olde madgicke use it for such incredible feats as vague feelings that something changed in their lives because of it, yet it lacks practical uses such as cleaning the toilet, or doing the washing.

Screw cleaning the toilet, I wanna fly!