Atu X - The Wheel of Fortune

[Aeon418]

On 4/9/2024 at 3:08 PM, smw said:

Not having a religious Christian background, I don’t really understand the doctrine of vicarious atonement in any great detail.  Personally, though I have never thought it made any sense.

 

According to Christian theology Sin entered the world with Adam eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Every generation thereafter is presumed to be tainted with inherent Original Sin and therefore a captive of the Devil in Hell after death. The sacrifice of Jesus supposedly paid the 'blood ransom' required to 'redeem' or 'buy back' all the souls that had died before the crucifixion. This is based on an interpretation of the three days and nights Jesus is said to have spent in the tomb before his resurrection, where he supposedly descended into Hell and liberated everyone. (Harrowing of Hell - Wikipedia) After the resurrection anyone who wants this redemption must have faith in Jesus in order to be "washed in the blood of the Lamb" and have their sin redeemed.

 

However, the doctrine implied by the Wheel is one of inherent divinity within humanity, symbolised by the Axle of the Wheel. This is why Crowley commenting on the Hanged Man said: 

Quote

Redemption is a bad word; it implies a debt. For every star possesses boundless wealth; the only proper way to deal with the ignorant is to bring them to the knowledge of their starry heritage.

 

No one is cursed with Original Sin. They are merely ignorant of their own inherent divine Starry nature. The appearance of sin is simply a product of ignorance of that which is symbolised by the Axle of the Wheel. 

 

Quote

J. Daniel Gunther: "The sacrificial lamb slain for Jehovah in the Temple of Jerusalem, the lamb's blood of the first Passover, the crucifixion of Jesus, the “lamb of God which taketh away the sins of the world,” are all extensions of the same idea and rooted in the doctrine of Vicarious Atonement. Rejection of “original sin” as a first cause eliminates the raison d'être for atonement and grace. No more deplorable dogmas have ever been perpetuated than these, for their metastasis has corrupted the soul of the world with a rotten cancer."

 

If there's no Original Sin there's no need for faith in a Redeemer. One's "redemption" from one's own ignorance must be accomplished by each individual through their own efforts along the way of the Inward Journey towards the Axle of the Wheel.

 

Quote

J. Daniel Gunther: "Heh final of Tetragrammaton is attributed to Pentacles, or Coins. The “redemption” of Heh final is the restoration of the Daughter Malkuth to the Throne of the Mother Binah. The messenger of Babalon who delivered that Word of the Scarlet Woman unto the world was V.V.V.V.V., and that Word embodied the means of crossing the Abyss. It is not accomplished by vicarious atonement and faith in the labors of another; within the crucible of each individual heart the coin must be redeemed by self-sustained effort. The price is paid with our own blood, not by faith in the blood of another."

 

V.V.V.V.V. = 10 spokes of the Wheel. "In V.V.V.V.V. is the Great Work perfect. Therefore none is that pertaineth not to V.V.V.V.V."

[smw]

On 4/9/2024 at 5:49 PM, Aeon418 said:

 

This is the difference between esoteric spirituality and exoteric religion. In the former the deific imagery and symbols are a portal into something deeper that may be accessed and realized through the imagery. (A bit like Tarot.) While in the latter the symbols and deific imagery have become objects of worship in their own right.

 

Gunther comments on this in Initiation in the Aeon of the Child, chapter 6 (p.130-131), where he quotes from Jung's Psychology and Alchemy on the potential severing of the "participation mystique" that may occur when the emphasis shifts from internal connection to external imagery.

I have just been reading this chapter, (P & A)  it’s heavy going. 😑
 

So far, what seems a little clearer is the relevance of the ‘image of an image’  that Gunther refers to. 
 

According to Jung, the Self is wholeness and unity because it contains within itself, the uniqueness of definite human experience, while at the same time the indefinite, unknowable aspect of the universal (collective) unconscious. That looks familiar as AL LA  - something and not something, the point and the circle. 
 

Christ  or Buddha, atman  etc are archetypal representations or an ‘image of an image’ because they are not the psychic archetype itself. This would also include Thelemic archetypal imagery such the Beast & Babylon for the same reason. They are the form of the archetype not the unknowable content. 
 

The disconnection and loss of ‘aliveness’ of religious (archetypal external)  imagery seems to occur when the unconscious projection is complete without any conscious awareness at all. So there is no participation with inner individuality & the wider archetypal imagery. No unity…

 

I wonder when Gunther talks about ‘projection of the image into a restricting framework translated solely by the intellect’ As well as meaning that religious imagery is restrictive as being a defined form, he might also mean that it is interpreted and consciously manipulated, without any feeling or real passion, necessary to unify the inner subject and externality as one. 

Edited April 11 by smw

[smw]

On 4/9/2024 at 5:49 PM, Aeon418 said:

Of course you can argue that mainstream religions still try to foster a kind of connection through participation in communal worship. However, with the rise of the scientific worldview, many people are finding it increasingly difficult to engage in this kind "communion" without their rational intellect objecting to elements of belief that are patently superstitious and absurd

 

 

That sounds like Jung again - because we have lost the ability to connect with the world in a feeling sense, now only with disconnected rational causal logic… loss of Participation mystique. What struck me is the possibility that all relationships between others, ourselves is actually dependent on feeling. Otherwise we might be lumps of meat that can’t communicate with each other without making a leap of intuitive feelings and protections to bridge the gap. 

 

Quote

Human nature demands (in the case of most people) the satisfaction of the religious instinct, and, to very many, this may best be done by ceremonial means

On 4/9/2024 at 5:49 PM, Aeon418 said:

 

Aleister Crowley recognised this when he wrote the Gnostic Mass as the centre piece of the participatory "Thelemic mystery religion" he hoped to propagate for the masses through the Ordo Templi Orientis. (This still left the A.'.A.'. as the deeper mystical path for the individual.) 

 

The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, chapter 73: 

 

 

Maybe here Crowley thinks that the religious symbols can still  be alive through ceremonial ritual and through mysteries which are not quite knowable, so are less rigid. The living link as you say the AA, the  experiential internal quest, repeated in the symbolic rituals of the outer collective Mass. 

Edited April 11 by smw

[smw]

5 hours ago, Aeon418 said:

 

According to Christian theology Sin entered the world with Adam eating the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Every generation thereafter is presumed to be tainted with inherent Original Sin and therefore a captive of the Devil in Hell after death. The sacrifice of Jesus supposedly paid the 'blood ransom' required to 'redeem' or 'buy back' all the souls that had died before the crucifixion. This is based on an interpretation of the three days and nights Jesus is said to have spent in the tomb before his resurrection, where he supposedly descended into Hell and liberated everyone. (Harrowing of Hell - Wikipedia) After the resurrection anyone who wants this redemption must have faith in Jesus in order to be "washed in the blood of the Lamb" and have their sin redeemed.

 

However, the doctrine implied by the Wheel is one of inherent divinity within humanity, symbolised by the Axle of the Wheel. This is why Crowley commenting on the Hanged Man said: 

 

No one is cursed with Original Sin. They are merely ignorant of their own inherent divine Starry nature. The appearance of sin is simply a product of ignorance of that which is symbolised by the Axle of the Wheel. 

 

 

If there's no Original Sin there's no need for faith in a Redeemer. One's "redemption" from one's own ignorance must be accomplished by each individual through their own efforts along the way of the Inward Journey towards the Axle of the Wheel.

 

 

V.V.V.V.V. = 10 spokes of the Wheel. "In V.V.V.V.V. is the Great Work perfect. Therefore none is that pertaineth not to V.V.V.V.V."

Thanks, though I still suspect under this infantilising dogma lies living truths, where individuals find their own closeness with God and Christ figures, or  figures from other  religions that work for them. It may not matter whether they are perceived externally or internally. 
 

I noticed that Jung was careful to say even in his critique of Christianity that 

 

Quote

We can accuse Christianity of arrested development if we are determined to excuse our own shortcomings; but I do not wish to make the mistake of blaming religion for something that is due mainly to human incompetence. 
 

I am speaking therefore not of the deepest and best understanding of Christianity but of the superficialities and disastrous misunderstandings that are plain for all to see. The demand made by the imitato Christo- that we should follow the ideal & seek to become like it -ought logically to have the result of developing and exalting the inner man…

 

Edited April 11 by smw

[Aeon418]

On 4/11/2024 at 8:37 PM, smw said:

According to Jung, the Self is wholeness and unity because it contains within itself, the uniqueness of definite human experience, while at the same time the indefinite, unknowable aspect of the universal (collective) unconscious. .... 

Christ  or Buddha, atman  etc are archetypal representations or an ‘image of an image’ because they are not the psychic archetype itself. This would also include Thelemic archetypal imagery such the Beast & Babylon for the same reason. They are the form of the archetype not the unknowable content. 

 

Yes, any imagery, Thelemic or otherwise, is capable of being interpreted as a thing in its own right, rather than a representation of something much deeper. But there is a bit of difference. A difference that was noted by Jung himself in Aion, where he comments on the sublimely flawless image of Christ demanding psychic balance and wholeness in the form of an anti-Christ. He goes on to say how the writer(s) of the Apocalypse would have experienced this as a 'revelation.' But because this material had to be interpreted within the context of a one sided view of deity, it could only be interpreted as an antagonistic battle of the end times where good and evil slug it out in one final conflict. Crowley's adoption of the imagery of the so-called 'bad guys' of the apocalypse is an acknowledgement of the need for integration in a new wholeness and a view of the divine that contains opposition and contradiction within itself. However if one where to approach Thelemic symbolism as if it were nothing more than anti-Christian, then you've gone from on polar extreme to another.

 

The imago of the Christ in Thelema is Horus. But for this reason he is a dual god, composed of the child Harpocrates and the avenging Ra-Hoor-Khuit. No one has a problem with cuddly little Harpocrates, but it's not uncommon to see people who have serious issues with Ra-Hoor-Khuit. But I would argue this is another case of 'image of an image.' Instead of seeing this resistance as a reflection of conflict and lack of balance within the self, it is projected outwards and kept at arms length in such a way that the transformative power that could potentially be accessed through the image is lost.

 

In this context see the Wheel-like diagram of the Sevenfold Arrangement of Hoor on page 179 of Initiation in the Aeon of the Child. Notice the balance between the different active and passive aspects of Horus being contained within the balanced wholeness of Heru-Ra-Ha.       

 

On 4/11/2024 at 8:37 PM, smw said:

I wonder when Gunther talks about ‘projection of the image into a restricting framework translated solely by the intellect’ As well as meaning that religious imagery is restrictive as being a defined form, he might also mean that it is interpreted and consciously manipulated, without any feeling or real passion, necessary to unify the inner subject and externality as one. 

 

I believe this is what Gunther was pointing to in his quote from Jung. Particularly the last part.

 

Quote

It may easily happen, therefore, that a Christian who believes in all the sacred figures is still undeveloped and unchanged in his inmost soul because he has “all God outside” and does not experience him in the soul.

 

To me this suggests the Wheel again, but with a disconnect between the internal and the external. Everything is being projected outward onto the rim in an act of Othering that divorces the symbolism from the potentially inner transformative effect it could have. Your subsequent quote from Jung points to this, where transformation through the image is necessary. 

 

Quote

The demand made by the imitato Christo- that we should follow the ideal & seek to become like it -ought logically to have the result of developing and exalting the inner man…

 

Where the Thelemic Horus differs from the above is that he is a symbol of balanced open ended growth that does not necessarily have a fixed form. This is different from previous 'imitato Christs,' where they are more like a mould that the self needs to be conformed with to attain perfection. But the mould itself can be another form of restriction and conflict unless it contains contradiction within itself. Once again we are back to Christ demanding the balance of anti-Christ. 

Edited April 13 by Aeon418

[Aeon418]

Going back to Crowley's vision of the Wheel.

Quote

It seems that this wheel is being spun by a hand. Though the wheel fills the whole Aire, yet the hand is much bigger than the wheel. And though this vision is so great and splendid, yet there is no seriousness with it, or solemnity. It seems that the hand is spinning the wheel merely for pleasure, it would be better to say amusement.

 

The "hand" mentioned here is the motive power of the Wheel. But the hand is also the meaning of the letter Yod (Atu IX), which is synonymous with the Axle of the Wheel. Yod spelt in full, YUD = 20 = Kaph, the letter of Atu X - Fortune. This suggests that the Experiencer at the heart of individual existence is simultaneously the energizing creator of its own experience, which is done for pleasure and amusement. If this is so why is the Wheel also the Wheel of Samsara? Perhaps this is due to a fundamental misidentification of ourselves, the Experiencer, with our experiences that causes sorrow.

 

Later on in the vision Crowley desires to see the mover of the Wheel:

Quote

I beseech thee, O my Lord, to grant me the vision of thy glory." And all the rays of the wheel stream out at me, and I am blasted and blinded with the light. I am caught up into the wheel. I am one with the wheel. I am greater than the wheel. In the midst of a myriad lightnings I stand, and I behold his face.

 

My eye is drawn to the phrase, "I am caught up" and its connection to 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and the Rapture of Christian theology in which the faithful will be caught up to meet the Lord in the air. This makes sense of Crowley's assertion that the latter part of the vision of the 20th Aethyr corresponds to the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. This is the Lord he beholds face to face amid the lightnings depicted on Atu X - Fortune, which also strike the Tower of Atu XVI. Note the symbolism of the Eye on both cards, literally shown on the latter and symbolically in the former, where it is the Eye (Axle) in the Triangle.

 

At the end of the vision Crowley hears the words:

Quote

"Shalt thou not bring the children of men to the sight of my glory? 'Only thy silence and thy speech that worship me avail.' 'For as I am the last, so am I the next, and as the next shalt thou reveal me to the multitude.' Fear not for aught; turn not aside for aught, eremite of Nuit, apostle of Hadit, warrior of Ra Hoor Khu! The leaven taketh, and the bread shall be sweet; the ferment worketh, and the wine shall be sweet. My sacraments are vigorous food and divine madness. Come unto me, O ye children of men; come unto me, in whom I am, in whom ye are, were ye only alive with the life that abideth in Light."

 

Part of this speech is almost a direct quote from Liber LXV, 3:62. But the following verse is also significant. 
 

Quote

62. But as Thou art the Last, Thou art also the Next, and as the Next do I reveal Thee to the multitude.

63. They that ever desired Thee shall obtain Thee, even at the End of their Desire.

 

The Next that is revealed to the multitude is the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. Crowley believed the level of consciousness this represented was the next step for humanity. Curiously, the K&C is described here as the desire to end all desire. This is the Nirvana of the Buddhists, who claim it represents the stopping of the Wheel of Samsara and the release from suffering. Some people seem to think this is some sort of blissed out state of consciousness in which the pain of existence is no longer experienced. But while blissful states may be experienced in breakthrough moments of realization, I think the fundamental realization is the knowledge that all one's experiences in life are not some sort of unwilled Fate that is forced upon us by an invisible outside force. Rather, it is our True Self that is and always has been the means and the motive behind our life experiences. The release from suffering is achieved by fully accepting the totality of our lives and ceasing to desire a life other than the one we are living because, at a very deep level, we have chosen this life and are the maker of our own Fortune, wherever it may lead.

 

Quote

Follow thy Fortune, careless where it lead thee.
The axle moveth not: attain thou that.

 

Edited April 15 by Aeon418
Typo

[smw]

On 4/13/2024 at 3:03 PM, Aeon418 said:

 

Yes, any imagery, Thelemic or otherwise, is capable of being interpreted as a thing in its own right, rather than a representation of something much deeper. But there is a bit of difference. A difference that was noted by Jung himself in Aion, where he comments on the sublimely flawless image of Christ demanding psychic balance and wholeness in the form of an anti-Christ. He goes on to say how the writer(s) of the Apocalypse would have experienced this as a 'revelation.' But because this material had to be interpreted within the context of a one sided view of deity, it could only be interpreted as an antagonistic battle of the end times where good and evil slug it out in one final conflict. Crowley's adoption of the imagery of the so-called 'bad guys' of the apocalypse is an acknowledgement of the need for integration in a new wholeness and a view of the divine that contains opposition and contradiction within itself. However if one where to approach Thelemic symbolism as if it were nothing more than anti-Christian, then you've gone from on polar extreme to another.

 

 

Yes, that would seem to be the case.

However, Jung did suggest that the revelatory flip from Christ to anti-Christ was not just prophetic but a psychological law or enantiodromia, a tendency of things to change into their opposites. When I was going through a particularly unpleasant period, I had it constantly... it was terrible, sickening. A flash  like a serpent, positive to negative, an image with light edged sides. Then flipping back to beneficence. I still get it sometimes, though I try to ignore it. Otherwise, it an lead to a tendency of paranoia, thinking that an inverse meaning comes from external material or motive. Or of course, it might be just picking up the inherently paradoxical nature of thoughts and ideas that may not be intended consciously but are there anyway.

 

 It is exhausting though trying to reconcile Jung's idea of the self, holding the conflicting paradoxes of light and dark, which somehow is distinguished form the Christian symbol of spotlessness, as 'casting off its’ own shadow or excluding as the adversary.

 

As at the same time Christ is considered the sublime Imago Dei, the pure image of God.

 

Quote

Christ exemplifies the archetype of the self. He represents a totality of a divine or heavenly kind, a glorified man. a son of God... unspotted by sin. As Adam Secundus he corresponds to the first Adan before the Fall, when the latter was still a pure image of God

Jung also mentions the very early church's own attempt at reconciling the paradox of light and dark with the two sons, the brothers, the elder son Satanael. Or 'The Spirit Mercuriius' A symbol uniting all opposites.

 

Edited April 16 by smw

[smw]

On 4/13/2024 at 3:03 PM, Aeon418 said:

The imago of the Christ in Thelema is Horus. But for this reason he is a dual god, composed of the child Harpocrates and the avenging Ra-Hoor-Khuit. No one has a problem with cuddly little Harpocrates, but it's not uncommon to see people who have serious issues with Ra-Hoor-Khuit. But I would argue this is another case of 'image of an image.' Instead of seeing this resistance as a reflection of conflict and lack of balance within the self, it is projected outwards and kept at arms length in such a way that the transformative power that could potentially be accessed through the image is lost.

 

I think I understand what you are saying, it makes sense and the world of projections can be lonely too. 

 

Quote

The effect of projection is to isolate the subject from his environment, since instead of a real relation to it there is now only an illusory one. Projections change the world into the replica of one's unknown face. In the last analysis therefore, they lead to an autoerotic or autistic condition in which one dreams a world whose reality remains forever unattainable

 

I'm not sure though that an instinct against unpleasant or downright horrible words/actions is always a projection of personal shadow. 

 

Quote

with a little self - criticism one can see through the shadow -so far as its nature is personal. But when it appears as an archetype... it is quite within the bounds of possibility for a man to recognise the relative evil of his nature, but it is a rare and shattering experience for him to gaze into the face of absolute Evil

 

 

 

How do you see the dual images of Horus  relating to Gunthers HGA description of  the Augoeides and Evil persona?

 

Quote

both images must be ignored, for they are but shells and phantoms, and the Ruach has not the means to distinguish between them... because either image contains elements of the other, a house of mirrors that is true as it is false. This is one reason the HGA speaking in Liber LXV describes Himself as "an Image of an Image".

 

[Aeon418]

8 hours ago, smw said:

How do you see the dual images of Horus  relating to Gunthers HGA description of  the Augoeides and Evil persona?

 

I think the most important thing to remember about Horus within the context of Thelema is that he represents the True Self (Harpocrates) and its outward manifestation into the world as True Will (Ra-Hoor-Khuit). In Liber AL, III:22 he is described as the visible object of worship. But his function as a solar image of aspiration is to draw you towards the centre of the Wheel (see also Liber Tzaddi) where you realize yourself as that which he represents. But to be "contented with the image" is an admission that you are not operating from the centre. Being out of alignment with one's True Self, one's manifestation in the world is also in need of a course correction, symbolically described as War and Vengeance in Liber AL.

[smw]

On 4/17/2024 at 4:17 AM, Aeon418 said:

 

I think the most important thing to remember about Horus within the context of Thelema is that he represents the True Self (Harpocrates) and its outward manifestation into the world as True Will (Ra-Hoor-Khuit). In Liber AL, III:22 he is described as the visible object of worship. But his function as a solar image of aspiration is to draw you towards the centre of the Wheel (see also Liber Tzaddi) where you realize yourself as that which he represents. But to be "contented with the image" is an admission that you are not operating from the centre. Being out of alignment with one's True Self, one's manifestation in the world is also in need of a course correction, symbolically described as War and Vengeance in Liber AL.

 

Ah, thank you. 

Quote

one's True Self, one's manifestation 

 Something to ponder on...

[Aeon418]

2 hours ago, smw said:

  Something to ponder on...

 

Maybe it would help to consider the dynamics of the Fool: Silence - Harpocrates, and the Magus: Speech - Ra Hoor Khuit, emanating out of the sephira Kether and how this is symbolised on a lower arc as the Sun (Heru Ra Ha), being both an image of Horus and of our realized selves. 
 

Quote

XIX, The Sun: 

Give forth thy light to all without doubt;
the clouds and shadows are no matter for thee.
Make Speech and Silence, Energy and Stillness,
twin forms of thy play.

 

Or perhaps the imagery on the Aeon card, where Harpocrates could be interpreted as the "seed" of the unmanifested, secret and silent Self. Whereas Ra-Hoor-Khuit is the ever Becoming child that is continually conceived and born from this conception. As the saying goes, you reap what you sow. 

 

Quote

Aleister Crowley - "It is bad Magick to admit that one is other than One's inmost self."

 

As with practically all the symbols Crowley describes, this has an individual and a wider societal interpretation. Initiation for the individual is reflected in the birth of the Aeon of Horus as a whole. If the seed of our actions is not in alignment with the True Will, then its manifestation in the world will exemplify this same imbalance and lack of connection, necessitating a potentially unpleasant course correction. 

 

Quote

Liber AL, I:52. ....  if the ritual be not ever unto me: then expect the direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!

 

Edited April 18 by Aeon418

[Aeon418]

A different angle into the nature of Horus might be found in Crowley's commentary on Liber AL II:8, which tangentially touches upon the symbolism of Atu X - Fortune and Atu XVI - The Tower. (see the Book of Thoth, p.91 for the connection between these two cards.) 

 

Quote

The Aspirant must well understand that it is no paradox to say that the Annihilation of the Ego in the Abyss is the condition of emancipating the true Self, and exalting it to unimaginable heights. So long as one remains "one's self", one is overwhelmed by the Universe; destroy the sense of self, and every event is equally an expression of one's Will, since its occurrence is the resultant of the concourse of the forces which one recognizes as one's own.

 

"So long as one remains "one's self", one is overwhelmed by the Universe" is another way of saying one is bound to the Wheel and subject to Fate so long as one identifies "one's self" with the individual egoic personality.

 

But "destroy the sense of self, and every event is equally an expression of one's Will," is  an affirmation of the True Self at the centre of the Wheel. No matter the circumstances, one's True Self finds authentic expression through those circumstances rather than identifying self with circumstance, which is what the ego habitually does. As a result of this shift in perspective the hand of Fate that spins the Wheel is now realized as one's own.

 

The "Annihilation of the Ego in the Abyss is the condition of emancipating the true Self." The annihilation of the ego is depicted on Atu XVI - The Tower, which Crowley subtitled WAR. This "war" is primarily an inner struggle to emancipate the True Self from the false ego-self that oppresses and restricts it. The "god" of this struggle is symbolically represented in Liber AL vel Legis as Ra Hoor Khuit, whose "war and vengeance" are a campaign aimed at the emancipation of his twin brother, the silent True Self - Harpocrates. These "gods" are us and the battle ground is the self.

 

Quote

Atu XVI - The Tower.

Break down the fortress of thine Individual
Self, that thy Truth may spring free from the ruins.

 

But to the extent that we fail to tackle this inner struggle for self-transformation, we tend to direct it outwards into the world and manifest War in our lives. Instead of combating the enemy within, we seek it outside of ourselves and consequently remain unchanged within. The martial force of self-transformation instead appears as a rising tide of anger and violence in the world, mistakenly directed at other people. Instead of dedicating our own life-blood to the Great Work, we seek a "sacrificial scapegoat" to blame the ills of the world upon. All the while the root cause of the problem remains the same and may, as a result, have to suffer self inflicted karma in the form of the "direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!."  

 

Quote

Aleister Crowley, Book 4: "One last word on this subject. There is a Magical operation of maximum importance: the Initiation of a New Aeon. When it becomes necessary to utter a Word, the whole Planet must be bathed in blood. Before man is ready to accept the Law of Thelema, the Great War must be fought. This Bloody Sacrifice is the critical point of the World-Ceremony of the Proclamation of Horus, the Crowned and conquering Child, as Lord of the Aeon.

This whole matter is prophesied in the Book of the Law itself; let the student take note, and enter the ranks of the Host of the Sun."

Quote

Magick Without Tears, letter XLVIII: “The Book of the Law takes us back to primitive savagery,” you say.  Well, where are we?

We're at Guernica, Lidice, Oradour-sur-Glane, Rotterdam and hundreds of other crimes, to say nothing of Concentration-camp, Stalag, and a million lesser horrors and abominations, inconceivable by the most diseased and inflamed Sadistic imagination forty years ago.

You disagree with Aiwass—so do all of us. The trouble is that He can say: “But I'm not arguing; I'm telling you.”

 

Edited April 19 by Aeon418

[smw]

On 4/19/2024 at 5:40 PM, Aeon418 said:

A different angle into the nature of Horus might be found in Crowley's commentary on Liber AL II:8, which tangentially touches upon the symbolism of Atu X - Fortune and Atu XVI - The Tower. (see the Book of Thoth, p.91 for the connection between these two cards.) 

 

"So long as one remains "one's self", one is overwhelmed by the Universe" is another way of saying one is bound to the Wheel and subject to Fate so long as one identifies "one's self" with the individual egoic personality.

 

I looked at p.91 & what might be the connection with the theme of Unity in the two cards.  It seems that Fortune, the wheel is like a chariot in the  Merkabah writings taking him in the vision to be united in the golden presence of God.
 

Quote

I am one with the wheel. I am greater than the wheel. In the midst of a myriad lightnings I stand and I behold his face…….All one gets is a liquid flame of pale gold 

 

I noticed here ( my favourite section) the number 2 or two things, & that the wheel itself is detailed but at the same time a simple object 

 

Quote

And wherever the rays from any two wheels meet, there is a blinding flash of glory. It must be understood that though so much detail is visible in the wheel, yet at the same time the impression is of a single, simple object

 

In AC’s description of the sword  🗡️ the word ‘simple’ comes up again, this time in reference to the the Tower. Also, with imagery of  being ‘taken up into the air’ the rapture you mentioned earlier. 
 

Quote

At the coming of Adonai the individual is destroyed in both senses. He is shattered into a thousand pieces, yet at the same time united with the simple…The whole mind of man is rent by the advent of Adonai, and is at once caught up into union with Him. “In the air, the Ruach

The passage clarifies ‘simple’ & it’s role in union further 

 

Quote

And since marriage can only take place between one and one, it is evident that no idea can thus be united unless it is simple. 

This seems to go with the meditation technique of XVI, using the sword as a war on thoughts and annihilating them from the subjective position as they arise, each simple single (one) thought.

 

The unity meditation for the Wheel, represents the objective ‘one’ that also needs to be reduced to a simple idea - hence the two wheels blinding flash  quote above.
 

I’m kind of thinking though that the meditation on the wheel is more mystical than magical, an intuitive experience of 210 rather than a mental exercise of thought chopping.

Though the idea of the sword to free the perceptions from the web of emotion is helpful. Even if the horse may have already bolted…

Edited 22 hours ago by smw

[Aeon418]

15 hours ago, smw said:

I looked at p.91 & what might be the connection with the theme of Unity in the two cards.  It seems that Fortune, the wheel is like a chariot in the  Merkabah writings taking him in the vision to be united in the golden presence of God.

 

Crowley seems to be pointing to the annihilation of the individual ego and the simultaneous realization of one's own godhead. Unlike the Merkabah mystics who only rose (or descended) into the presence of God, there is a further step in which complete unity is attained in which the object of worship is realized as one's Self. On the Tower card we see the individual ego struck by the lightning of realization that opens the All Seeing Eye that annihilates any theistic notions of a separate God. The same is depicted on the Fortune card where the Axle is the pupil of the Eye of Shiva. But as long as one clings to the rim of the Wheel, the Eye of godhead is closed and the vision of unity denied. "Follow they Fortune careless where it lead thee" is a very hard thing for the individual to do because it is rooted in a fear driven need to protect itself. This is the exact opposite of the symbolism of the devotee of Jaggarnath that Crowley mentions on page 91 of the Book of Thoth, who only attains complete perfection when they are crushed under the Wheel, annihilating the duality of Self and Other.   

 

15 hours ago, smw said:

I noticed here ( my favourite section) the number 2 or two things, & that the wheel itself is detailed but at the same time a simple object

 

According to the sequential mapping of the Aethyrs to the worlds of the Qabalah, the vision of the Wheel is Malkuth in Briah. This marks the transition point from the mental multiplicity of Yetzirah to the spiritual apprehension of Unity in the world of Briah. This is why the Wheel is described in such a complicated way, while simultaneously being so simple and unified and consistent with the opening of the All Seeing Eye.

 

In the previous vision of (21st Aethyr - Kether in Yetzirah) ASP, Crowley confronts the One God. But instead of the glorious vision of the almighty, he finds a lonely and miserable Oneness who is the antithesis of Change. Out of fear he has closed his Eye and stares throughout unchanging eternity with the twin eyes of duality. But the key point is that he represents the final projection of the ego that insists that God is Other than Self.

 

Quote

Go, therefore, and rejoice, for thou art the prophet of the Aeon arising, wherein He is not.

Give thou praise unto thy lady Nuit, and unto her lord Hadit, that are for thee and thy bride, and the winners of the ordeal X.

 

Back to the vision of the Wheel we see this playing out in Crowley's increasing difficulty of explaining what he is experiencing because of his desire to present a direct experience of Briah in the symbol-vision language of Yetzirah. How can one express Unity in the language of separateness and multiplicity? From the 20th Aethyr onwards, Crowley attempts to convey in visionary language something that is beyond the limited capacities of vision and voice. 
 

Quote

I who speak to you, see what I tell you; but I, who see him, cannot communicate it to me, who speak to you. 

 

This vision is not perfect. I am only in the outer court of the vision, because I have undertaken it in the service of the Holy One, and must retain sense and speech. No recorded vision is perfect, of high visions, for the seer must keep either his physical organs or his memory in working order. And neither is capable. There is no bridge. One can only be conscious of one thing at a time, and as the consciousness moves nearer to the vision, it loses control of the physical and mental. Even so, the body and the mind must be very perfect before anything can be done, or the energy of the vision may send the body into spasms and the mind into insanity. This is why the first visions give Ananda, which is a shock. When the adept is attuned to Samadhi, there is but cloudless peace.

 

This vision is particularly difficult to get into, because he is I. And therefore the human ego is being constantly excited, so that one comes back so often.

 

Edited 6 hours ago by Aeon418