"The Idea and only the Idea can be the true Fatherland for them. Not the fact that they are of the same nationality, that they speak the same language, and that they are of the same blood, but the fact that they belong to the same idea, should be the deciding factor that unites or divides them." -- Baron Julius Evola
Welcome to the latest iteration of “Frater O+X Speaks”. I’d been
thinking about starting a Rumble channel, but YouTube forced my hand by
spuriously suspending my channel because “Spam, scams or commercially
deceptive content are not allowed on YouTube,” despite the fact that
I’ve never engaged in any of these practices.
When I pointed out that I did not sell anything, try to sell
anything, or respond except to the comment or video in question (&
that sparingly), and further, I haven’t been posting much of anything
over the past year as I was deployed, courtesy of the US Military, they
(to paraphrase a bit) told me, “So What?”
Anyway, enough of the duplicitous inquisition of Silicon
Valley.
I am Frater O+X. I have gone by various other names, both online and
in Occult circles. Prior names have included Nexist, Nexist Xenda’ths,
31Seel, Gaeryth, Vividus Propter Deperire, IAO SABAO, and Eli Lith.
I have studied a wide variety of Occultic and Religious practice##s.
I am demitted from both the Freemasons and the Ordo Templi Orientis. I
am a Master Mason, I went through the degrees of the Scottish Rite, but
did not work them. In the OTO, I am a Sovereign Prince Rose-Croix, and
Knight of the Pelican & Eagle (or V*). I am an ordained priest of
the Ecclesia Gnostica Catholica. I also spent a few years practicing
Alexandrian Wicca prior to joining the OTO. All in all, I have spent 35
years practicing various forms of Occultism, three decades of which were
specifically Thelemic. I hold a degree in Asian Studies, with a focus on
Japanese Religion and Art.
This is nowhere near complete, but I hate people who tell you how
great they are — it should be self-evident. I am currently unaffiliated
with any organized group and the thoughts expressed are my own. They are
derived from the materials referenced and through a logical extension of
those ideas. I start with the radical idea that Crowley might have known
what he was talking about when it comes to Thelema.
So, where to from here. My goal is to discuss various topics of
interest to the aspiring Thelemite. I will discuss Thelema, Primordial
Tradition, various Religions, and Philosophy. I will discuss the
occasional book, song, or other media. I plan on trying to put out one
video a month to start.
Since I am not pretty, you won’t be looking at me.
Truth is repeatedly referenced in Occult literature. The quest for Truth, the pursuit of Truth, or otherwise understanding Reality (or the Truth about Reality) is a common theme in Occultism. Wisdom is derived from the application of truth. Affecting desired change on a thing necessitates knowing the Truth of a thing. Scientific Illuminism attempts to understand Truth via the scientific method. Thelemites are Scientific Illuminists.
As Liber AL tells us, ”Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise.” (AL II:32). In other words, reality is fundamentally irrational, it is important to learn how to identify the Truth, in as much as we can grasp it, so as to avoid Delusion. The current of Mysticism is always present within Magick. A siren’s lure leading us to destruction through self-delusion (q.v. Dangers of Mysticism). The Magician acts, the Mystic receives.
What is Truth?
To begin we must ask, “What is Truth?” This is a rather difficult question. Certainty has oft led mankind astray. History is littered with various mistakes. As Chantel Delsol tells us in Icarus Fallen, modernity is the traumatized remnants of failed certainties of the past. Given that “unknown factor”, it is far easier to highlight the truth by shading out that which is not truth.
Innocence, another unprovable condition, is defined as the absence of guilt. Merriam-Webster tells us that Innocence is defined as (a) “freedom from legal guilt of a particular crime or offense” or (b) “freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil : blamelessness”. This is why American courts have to prove guilt, rather than forcing the defendant to prove their innocence. In a sense, one could argue that innocence is the baseline and that guilt is the failure to meet that baseline.
In a similar manner, Truth is the absence of falsehood. This is a scientific way of pursuing Truth. One falsifies premises until one can no longer falsify a premise. That premise is then held as true until it is falsified. Further, one never ceases in their attempts to falsify a premise. As we are told in Terrier-Work, “Doubt all. Doubt even if thou doubtest all.” Only in this way do we persist in truth rather than falling into the pit of dogma as have other attempts at ascertaining the truth, both sacred and secular.
Obviously, one must know and understand the basic principles of logic (& its limitations). One should endeavor to be clear and concise with one’s speech and actions. However, there are some useful tools one can use in the search for truth. Some of the more helpful ones are the Scientific Method, Occam’s Razor, Hanlon’s Razor, and a knowledge of logical fallacies, both their use and misuse.
Tools for Finding the Truth
The Scientific Method is a constantly evolving doctrine. In reading Crowley, I feel that he was thinking of a more Humean version, however the modern version is more than enough to assist one in the pursuit of truth. I’ve linked a beginner’s description below. One thing to point out is the concept of the Null Hypothesis. The null hypothesis proves that your hypothesis is wrong. If I believe that heavier objects fall faster than lighter objects, a simple example of a null hypothesis would be that objects fall at the same rate regardless of their mass. The use of a diary and the setting of concrete goals is integral to the Thelemic system so that an analysis of the record would confirm or deny our hypotheses. Another important concept is Falsifiability. There must be a way to say ’This is true’, or ‘this is false’. A statement such as “all is Buddha nature” is not falsifiable. Anything not falsifiable is logically irrelevant.
It should be mentioned that not everything is testable. Given the factor infinite and unknown, this should not be surprising. However, the scientific method will let us properly identify and account for these. As they are untestable, we can just accept them provisionally until something better comes along. After all, the fact that I cannot prove the efficacy of logic (proving logic would be a self-referential fallacy) does not mean that I am unwilling to utilize logic and accept its validity on a provisional basis. The utility of a provisional axiom lay in whether the conclusions drawn from that axiom match with what is known, observable, and testable.
Now, in day to day life, there are some handy tools for determining the probable validity of any hypothesis or chain of events. The first of these is the more commonly known Occam’s Razor. Officially, it states “entities should not be multiplied without necessity”. More simply, “the simplest solution is most likely the right one”. Ensure that every item is necessary in your hypothesis. While it is possible that the plant was knocked off the shelf by trespassers sneaking into your home, it is more likely that the cat (who is already known to be present) did so.
The second is known as Hanlon’s Razor. For some reason, the occult community is rife with conspiracy theorists and shadowy secret cabals. To counter this, we have Hanlon’s Razor, which states “Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity”. Large chunks of convoluted arguments can be dismissed by virtue of these two razors. Keep them sharp.
Finally, we get to Logical Fallacies. Knowing logical fallacies is a poor substitute for knowing logic, but it quickly becomes apparent that many people have done just that. Some fallacies to keep in mind are equivocation (especially in its Motte and Bailey form), Appeal to Authority (whether popular or elite), and ad hominem.
Equivocation is the switching of a term’s definition mid argument. An example I recall was on the word “accept”. While it was being used in the sense of “agree with”, someone switched it to mean “received”. They claimed that because Liber AL had been physically handed to them, they had “accepted” the Book of the Law. Another form of the equivocation fallacy is termed Motte and Bailey. This is used quite often in political discussions where people will push for some radical policy but pretend that the opposition is attacking the non-radical core. A current example would be someone questioning the need to stockpile a month of supplies being told that they are dismissing the seriousness of the corona virus.
The Appeal to Authority is where someone perceived as an authority basically says “because I said so”. Now, this appeal should not always be discounted. If a medical doctor gives his assessment on a medical condition within their field of authority, it should be considered seriously. This is actually a common form of its misuse, to discredit the knowledgeable because it does not pander to one’s prejudice. It should be noted that the “Authority” does not have to be a single person or thing. “Everyone agrees” postulates that “everyone” is an authority and that the claim is true for no other reason than that agreement. Likewise, referencing an elite group sets that group as an Authority. These last two variations are commonly misused. Just because “everyone agrees” or “the cool kids like it” does not mean that the claim is automatically false, either. Egalitarians like to dismiss inconvenient claims by pointing out their appeal to the snobs and elites do so by pointing out their appeal to the vulgar masses.
Next is ad hominem. Attacking the person rather than their arguments does nothing to discredit the validity of their arguments. Hakim Bey’s (support for) pedophilia does not discredit his commentary on Cop Culture. Neither does Marx’s inability to handle money discredit Communism. It probably explains their motivations, but the truth or falsity of the arguments stand on its own. Ad hominem is commonly misused by people over-identifying with their argument. This is especially a problem if you analyze their logic. Another misuse is due to insults. If someone says “My god, you are so stupid,” that is not an ad hominem. It is an insult. It is totally separate from the argument. If they provide nothing else, the proper response is “and?” or “that’s nice, can you actually address the argument.”
Conclusion
To lay this out as a train of thought : Innocence is the absence of guilt. Likewise, Truth is the absence of Falsehood. By learning to identify the false, the invalid, the lie, one is able to remove that falsehood. If one were to remove all falsehoods, what remains would be truth. Therefore, what one holds to be true must be tested and tried. Ultimate Reality is likely irrational, or at the very least, vast enough that we will never encompass it all. However, where we live is governed by the Ruach (or if you prefer, the Mind). Thus, Logic, Data, and Facts allow us to strike down the falsehoods. Like a sculptor chipping away at a block of granite, the true shape of reality will eventually be brought forth. Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.
By ascertaining the Truth, we can then progress along the path of perfection. The path of perfection, or, as I think of it, the accomplishment of one’s will, is an ongoing process. By conceiving of one’s perfected self, one creates a goal. When one achieves this goal, the imperfections in one’s prior conception of the Perfect become readily apparent. Thus, one formulates a new conception of perfection and the process repeats. Perhaps, one will achieve an objective manifestation of perfection. Perhaps, we will become mired in Zeno’s paradox. Though I feel that overcoming this paradox is a suitable target for perfecting the self.
Truth is found in the rubble of falsehood.
Love is the law, love under will.
Citations, References, and For Further Information
Today I learn of the death of Julius Evola. Our last meeting goes back about ten years, even though I have passed through Rome several times since then. Memories surge up in me, those of my years at university, the books we had discovered together, the letters I received from him in Calcutta in which he instantly begged me not to speak to him of yoga, or of “magical powers,” except to report precise facts to which I had personally been a witness. In India I also received several publications from him, but I only remember a few issues of the journal Krur.
I had met him for the first time in 1937 at Nao Ionescu’s. Besides the three of us, Octave Onicescu and our professor’s current girlfriend were also there. That very morning Evola had had the opportunity to talk with Codreanu, and that meeting had impressed him greatly. Since Evola had asked him about the political tactics he expected to employ and the Legion’s chances during the coming elections, Codreanu had spoken to him about the effects of incarceration on the individual, of the ascesis it provokes, the contemplative virtues that can arise there, in solitude, a silence and a darkness which are just so many means by which an individual is revealed to himself. Evola was still dazzled by him. I vaguely remember the remarks he made then on the disappearance of contemplative disciplines in the political battle of the West.
Then the war came, and I heard nothing more of Evola until the day when I received his letter from Rome at the Hôtel de Suède. He had obtained my address through René Guénon, who must have gotten it himself from Valsan. He let me know that he was henceforth “immobilized for the rest of his days,” but that he would be happy to see me at his home, in the event that I should pass through Rome.
That is what I did in August 1949, after having notified him by phone of my visit. Having arrived at his home, I was taken into the drawing room where his father and a nurse asked me to wait while they helped him get up from his chair. He greeted me standing up and shook my hands for a long time. Then his father and the nurse helped him to sit down again, which he couldn’t have done himself without collapsing. We talked for over an hour. He told me that since from then on he had all the time in the world, he took advantage of it by translating French and German authors. He also spoke about Metaphysics of Sex, a book he was planning to write. We were at that point in our conversation when he took a little key out of his pocket, showed me an ivory elephant, and told me how to open it. The elephant contained a miniature bar, with numerous flasks and little glasses all made of crystal. He asked me what I’d like to drink, but the afternoon was steamy, and I didn’t want any alcohol. He insisted, however, under the pretext that we were carrying out a rite and I had to submit to it. I had to give in, and we both raised our glasses before ceremoniously drinking the contents.
I was to see Evola only once more, in 1952 or 1953, but we corresponded regularly. One day I received a rather bitter letter from him in which he reproached me for never citing him, no more than did Guénon. I answered him as best I could, and I must one day give the reasons and explanations that that response called for. My argument couldn’t have been simpler. The books I write are intended for today’s audience, and not for initiates. Unlike Guénon and his emulators, I believe I have nothing to write that would be intended especially for them.
About a decade and a half ago, I got into a spot of trouble for a seasonal prayer. I had posted it to a Thelemic Community Forum under a title like “Sol Invictus Benediction”. This being the solstice, I thought I would share it with you.
First we begin with the
Dedication
For The Fatherland, cradle of civilization.
For the ancestors and their indomitable spirit
For the elders from whom we can learn much.
For our youth who represent the promise for tomorrow.
For our people, the original people.
For our struggle and in remembrance of those who have struggled on our behalf.
For Gott the principle of unity which should guide us in all that we do.
For the creator who provides all things great and small.
An Aside: “Gott” is German for “God” and has been chosen to symbolize the principle of striving for & maintaining unity in the family, community, nation, and race. To this we add:
The Seven Principles:
Unity - to strive for and maintain unity in the family, community, nation and race.
Self-Determination - to define ourselves, name ourselves, create ourselves, and speak for ourselves.
Collective Work and Responsibility - to build and maintain our community together and make fellow European-American's problems our problems and to solve them together.
Cooperative Economics - to build and maintain European-American stores, shops and other businesses together.
Purpose - to make our collective vocation the building of our European-American community to restore our traditional greatness.
Creativity - making the world around us clean and beautiful and better than we inherited it.
Faith - to believe in ourselves, our family, our communities and our leaders and to believe the righteousness and victory of our struggle.
Now, before telling you the inspiration for this little piece, I will share what I recall of the drama.
I wrote it up and shared it to a Thelemic Community Forum. Initial reaction was slightly positive, with one girl saying how great it was. Then someone questioned some of the word choices. Then it was branded as racist. The girl who had waxed poetic quickly back-pedaled and condemned it.
This condemnation did not change when I revealed that it was the Kwanzaa dedication and their seven principles with only three changes.
I changed the word Motherland to Fatherland
I replaced the phrase “African-American” with “European-American”, and
I changed the African word “Umoja” to “Gott” while defining it in exactly the same way.
In fairness, the version I found at 123holiday.net does not use any racial language. Though the phrases can still be read in such a manner.
To be honest, I knew that I would get this reaction. Racist behavior is only deemed racist if a white person is doing it. Innocuous behavior is viewed as being racist if a white person does it.
When I first started publishing this kind of thing, I would take Christian screeds against pagans and invert the language. Mostly reversing the two phrases. The key was to keep as much intact as possible. The goal was to show hypocrisy. These works were applauded. Showing the “others” hypocrisy is always applauded. However, when I broadened the scope to include other sacred cows, the applause slowed. When I hit their sacred cows, they got out the pitchforks.
As it is said in Ecclesiastes 1:9 “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.”
May the Blessings of Gott be upon you this Season.
And remember, if you're at a social function and a benediction is said and the God invoked is not your own, it's a good idea to mutter, roll your eyes, and smirk, so your God will know that you're not taken in by some false God.
Truth is found in the Rubble of Falsehood
Love is the law, love under will
Haven’t had time to do much more than film people on the street from my balcony
Samsung S8+
Trying to figure out how to unobtrusively use my phone to take videos as I walk around. No one seems to have a lanyard for a cell phone…
These videos are being posted on Vid.Me and YouTube
Also, anything that could be said on the Google Memo has been stated quite well by the article “The Google Memo: Four Scientists Respond” (link below)
And, Black Pidgeon Speaks just uploaded a hilarious video regarding the Chinese tourists busted for Sieg Heiling outside the Reichstag.
If only they had been raping children instead, they would have gotten a free pass, just as many refugees have. Link Below.
On with the show
[TKK Excerpt]
I do believe in an actual objective reality.
However, do to the mediating force of our senses, we cannot actually apprehend this reality
However, I feel that a strong basis for postulating its existence can be drawn from the various commonalities of experience.
We all apprehend the sun, we can experience its light and warmth directly.
We can observe its effects on plants, animals, etc.
There is some objective truth which we interpret as the sun
Sadly, it is not just the senses interposing themselves between us and objective reality
Our minds puts forth a filter which sifts through the sensory input
This filters prioritizes and interprets phenomenon.
Now I admit that I find Metaphysics confusing
Sadly, for me, Metaphysics is very important in this schema.
“being as such”, or rather our conception of it colors our understanding of “reality”
Our metaphysics give rise to our values
Or perhaps it is more accurate to say that our values derive from the metaphysical interpretation of objective reality.
Sadly, few people examine the values they hold
Fewer people look at the metaphysical constructs which give form to those values
And yes, Heidegger is also confusing.
I doubt anyone has looked at pure objective reality freed from the forms given it by our values and metaphysics.
OK, so if people do not look at their values or examine their metaphysics, how are these values made available to them?
There are two expressions of socio-cultural values
Art
Religion
Now I am using some special definitions for these terms, so I will clarify.
Art covers all creative endeavors: music, painting, sculpture, poetry, video
One could argue that sex and procreation are also art
Art is a primal expression of socio-cultural values
Even degraded as it often is in the modern age
Early medieval art was ugly because it reflected the Early Christian view that the world was corrupt
Likewise many modern artworks are ugly to reflect a similar antipathy to the world as it is.
Our liking of a piece of art is often dependent on how it reflects the internalized values we hold.
Religion covers all ideologies that govern the relationship of the self and not-self.
Those things which give us a place in the world
Those things which define the I’s relationship to the not-I.
So, yes, in this sense, Atheism is Religion
So is Science
Below Religion is the manifestation of the Political
Religion tends to focus on the relationship of the self to the eternal
Politics is focused on the temporal.
One’s conception of the eternal will color one’s perceptions of the temporal.
However, with the death of god, the center which anchored human society was broken.
This has created some hybrid ideologies, such as Humanism, Communism, or Fascism.
This also explains the cultish behavior of various SJWs and Groups like BAMN, Anti-fa, or Wobblies.
As opiates are synthetic endorphins, so are these ideologies a synthetic “religion”.
And just like heroin destroys the mind and body, so do these ideologies destroy the mind and soul.
But I digress
Now we finally get to Morals, which are the practical application of your values, religious beliefs, and political structures.
For example, the moral belief that murder is bad derives from a value that holds human life as important, a religious injunction (e.g. Do not murder), and political laws (e.g. the criminalization of homicide).
This whole process can be summed by Chapter 38 of the Tao Teh Ching
The Tao Teh Ching is my second favorite set of Scripture.
Translation by Derek Lin from Taoism.net
Therefore, the Tao is lost, and then virtue
Virtue is lost, and then benevolence
Benevolence is lost, and then righteousness
Righteousness is lost, and then etiquette
Those who have etiquette
are a thin shell of loyalty and sincerity
And the beginning of chaos
Modern society operates on a level far from “Reality”
To be fair, this problem has been around for, at least, the 4th century BCE
Even I don’t posit that the Modern Age started that far back.
While I have explained these in a linear fashion, it should be noted that they are actually reciprocal. Things lower provide feedback to those higher. Those parallel feed into each other. It is all actually very dynamic. Religion defines the avenues of science and science validates or invalidates religion. God didn’t die of old age, Science killed him, and into the void flew a multitude of similar, but competing, ideologies.
What benefit does this knowledge/structure/System give us.
Well we can see what trumps what and what influences what.
It allows us to analyze our own system of beliefs
To understand where these beliefs came from.
One of the biggest problems I see with modern social movements is their inability to understand what they are promoting.
They are generally working at the level of morals with occasional bumps into Politics.
They do not examine (and many do not even acknowledge) what I have termed the Religious elements.
They conflate their morals with Values
This can be seen by the contradictory impulses that both support and oppose any given value.
They say they value equality, but posit unequal treatment of various group
They say they value women, but support groups who oppress women
They say they value pacifism, but continually vote for warmongers
They say they value certain ethnic groups, but promote policies that destroy those same groups.
A simple analysis of their behavior through the system I have outlined, and an understanding of the hierarchical nature of these items would bring a level of sanity and clarity to our social interactions.
So, to sum up.
Reality exists, but none of us can actually apprehend it objectively.
Reality is mediated through a series of layers which reciprocally influence each other.
Our values are expressed in our art and “religion”.
The lowest of these is morality.
I sneer at the good person, those who can, do, those who can’t console themselves with how moral they are.
[Crass Clip]
Only by examining these layers can we come to understand what we are doing
Only by understanding what we are doing can we eliminate contradictory impulses
Only by eliminating contradictory impulses can we succeed in implementing the values we actually hold.
Further, an understanding of all of this is necessary to apply reason and chart a path to maximize our individual freedom and garner success for our beliefs.
This illustrates some of what Crowley meant by “A Devil With Unity Would Be A God”.
As a side note:
The occultist works with Art and Religion to manifest their Values.
Magick is the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with will. (AC, MTP)
This is the last of my targeted word count writings. Future work will be less artificially constrained.
Recently, I have been fascinated by Confucianism. It created a meritocratic system of self-cultivation that lasted for centuries. While its practice may never have matched its ideals, I think we can learn much from this tradition. The official Thelemic viewpoint on Confucianism is favorable as well. The prophet references it in his new comment for verse III:53. Mongol is taken to be a probable reference to Confucianism (personally, I think it refers to all traditions of the “Mongols”). It, along with Buddhism, Hinduism, and the Qabalah, are taken as correct in essence, but imperfect in practice.
These practices have, by virtue of Crowley, Guénon, and Evola, had their flesh torn, as per III:53. The sole exception seems to be Confucianism. Crowley addressed Buddhism, Qabalah, Taoism, and the two traditions from III:51-52 (Christianity and Islam). Guénon dealt with Hinduism, Christianity, and Islam. Evola addressed Buddhism. These aren’t exhaustive, but reflect their work in conjunction with III:50-54. Other than a brief mention in Evola’s work on Taoism (in itself, a brief gloss), Confucianism has been largely ignored. This is unfortunate, as few traditions have the innate restorative power for a world fallen into the Kali Yuga as does Confucianism. It’s meritocratic methodology would restore the “confusion of the castes” that Guénon and Evola chronicled. Further, it would be self-selected and free from any bias other than the inherent bias of ascription to the principles being espoused (in this case, Thelema). Also, the intent of Confucianism seems to be replicated in Crowley’s vision of the AA and the reading lists.
The purpose of Confucianism is the cultivation of the superior man. To achieve this, one studies and practices the prescribed teachings. Beyond this, many Chinese dynasties utilized Confucian knowledge as the base for selecting government officials. Testing was a necessary component and one’s score determined one’s position within the government. These tests looked much like those I have seen for entrance into the A∴A∴. While some questions were capable of being answered by rote memorization, certain questions were designed so as to allow the student to show their own comprehension and internalization of the material. These questions had no specific answer (though they probably had wrong answers).
The A∴A∴ system, as it was written by Crowley, seems to be Confucian in nature. One is given Thelemic texts to study, along with materials meant to illuminate understanding and provide background to the texts. These are conjoined to practices which are meant to provide an experiential reference.
The Old Comment for this entire section is brief.
Appears to be a plain instruction in theology and ethics. I do not understand “Din.” Bahlasti = 358, and Ompedha, perhaps, 210. [Old Comment III:48-62] All other commentary is from the new comment. III:50:Curse them! Curse them! Curse them! III:51:With my Hawk's head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross.
We are to consider carefully the particular attack of Heru Ra Ha against each of these 'gods' or prophets; for though they be, or represent, the Magi of the past, the curse of their Grade must consume them.
Thus it is the eyes of 'Jesus' – his point of view – that must be destroyed; and this point of view is wrong because of his Magical Gesture of self-sacrifice.
One must not for a moment suppose that this verse supports the historicity of 'Jesus.' 'Jesus' is not, and never was, a man; but he was a 'god,' just as a bundle of old rags and a kerosene tin on a bush may be a 'god.' There is a man-made idea, built of ignorance, fear, and meanness, for the most part, which we call 'Jesus,' and which has been tricked out from time to time with various gauds from Paganism, and Judaism.
The subject of 'Jesus' is, most unfortunately, too extensive for a note; it is treated fully in my book 888.
III:52:I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him.
Mohammed's point of view is wrong too; but he needs no such sharp correction as 'Jesus.' It is his face – his outward semblance – that is to be covered with His wings. The tenets of Islam, correctly interpreted, are not far from our Way of Life and Light and Love and Liberty. This applies especially to the secret tenets. The external creed is mere nonsense suited to the intelligence of the peoples among whom it was promulgated; but even so, Islam is Magnificent in practice. Its code is that of a man of courage and honour and self-respect; contrasting admirably with the cringing cowardice of the damnation dodging Christians with their unmanly and dishonest acceptance of vicarious sacrifice, and their currish conception of themselves as 'born in sin,' 'miserable sinners' with 'no health in us.'
III:53:With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din.
“The Indian.” The religion of Hindustan, metaphysically and mystically comprehensive enough to assure itself the possession of much truth, is in practice almost as superstitious and false as Christianity, a faith of slaves, liars and dastards. The same remarks apply roughly to Buddhism.
“Mongol:” presumably the reference is to Confucianism, whose metaphysical and ethical flawlessness has not saved its adherents from losing those ruder virtues which are proper to a Fighting Animal, and thus yielding at last a civilization coeval with history itself to the barbarous tribes of Europe.
“Din” – 'severity' or 'judgment' may refer to the Jewish Law, rather than to the Faith (ad 'din') of Islam. Assuming this, the six religions whose flesh must be torn out cover the whole globe outside Islam and Christianity.
Why assault their flesh rather than their eyes, as in the other cases? Because the metaphysics, or point of view, is correct – I take Judaism as Qabalistic – but the practice imperfect.
III:54: Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds.
By sound Bahlasti suggests “hurling” or “blasting;” Ompehda is not too phantastically onomatopoetic for 'an explosion."
Note: References to the missing Appendix were removed.
I tend to describe myself as a Thelemic Traditionalist, with the caveat that this is more of a descriptor of what I aspire toward. I generally believe in the theories of René Guénon as interpreted by Julius Evola. To put a subset of their theories in simplistic terms, they posit a divine force from which all valid metaphysical values derive (q.v., 20150502). These manifest in various cultures as valid initiatory paths (Tradition). It is also referred to as “Perennial Philosophy” and “Primordial Tradition.”
Another element is the division of history into Yugas, which are meta-historical time periods. Given that the Hindu worldview is cyclical, it is difficult to determine whether the mapping of cyclic time as represented with the Yugas correlates accurately to the modern lineal conception of time. Yugas are commonly described as being 24,000 years. We have writings that date to about 24,000 BC. Given that I tend to side with facts provided from science, I will have to assume that the number of years provided in the Writings of Manu are in error. Given that both Buddhism and Hinduism have cycles of time that vaguely refer to billions of years, I do not feel that this is too much of a stretch.
Another important element of Tradition is its adherence to the conception of caste and to the hierarchy of humanity. I was raised in the modern west, so I feel that the caste system of Hinduism was ossified and no longer served its purpose. This may just be reactionary bias on my part, but I cannot dispute the fact that people of certain castes (or classes, as we prefer to say in the muddled west) view the world differently. In a way similar to how cultures interpret the eternal values in a specific manner, so do the members of a culture tend to interpret their cultural capital in diverse ways. Even in more homogeneous societies, the way that the peasant views the world differs greatly from that of the priest or the warrior-aristocrat. We see this in the class distinctions of the modern west, and in how they remain even if the modern indicator of class (i.e., wealth) changes.
Thelema, as delivered by the prophet, Aleister Crowley, is a form of the Primordial Tradition. It is a revelation of forged links to the divine which provide a valid form of initiation into a world in the latter stages of the Kali Yuga where the counter-initiatory forces of the anti-Tradition prevail. In addition, and by injunction of the revelation, Crowley also endeavored to rescue those elements of prior systems of initiation that had been perverted by forces of the anti-Tradition (in particular, Masonry, which was identified by Guénon as a valid initiatory path, and apostolic succession, which was also identified as valid by Guénon). It should be noted that he did not do this because of Guénon, but on his own.
Thelema’s Aeonic system sounds similar to the Traditional system of Yugas, but inverted. This could be explained by the fact that both are referring to spiritual cycles and the Thelemic Aeon seems to be 2000 years (tied to Zodiacal progression) rather than being fully ahistoric like the Yugas. I believe that the Thelemic Aeons are nestled within the Traditional Yugas. I dislike attempts to “sciencify” spiritual concepts as it tends to reduce the spiritual to material conceptions and quickly become dated as human knowledge progresses. Similarities and discrepancies between spiritual models and material ones should be noted, but one need not worry about forcing a reconciliation unless there is an actual discordance.
Thelema also posits a difference between people, in direct statements, that can relate to individuals, and in broad systems, that seem to correlate with the castes of old. There are trials of “fire,” “intellect,” and “the highest” as well as the standard division of Earth, Lovers, and Hermits. If we drop the “merchant” caste, which is not universal, we can map the Traditional castes to the Thelemic categories.
