Aleister Crowley

>>17509797
Well played anon your video is so mysterious that I can't find the link.

>>17509810
oh sorry, i forgot, here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZ0IIZficFY

>>17509797
What video.

>>17509814
>>17509813

The video is retarded but the figure of aleister crowley is interesting to me.

He was supposed to be the head figure of occultism in europe.

The ultimate wizard, a very interesting character, but, nobody can make a decent documentary movie or article about the guy.

He seems to have a supernatural talent for disinfo and shills.

Been reading some of his stuff and the bastard is just brilliant, he had a talent for manipulation that rivals Joseph Gobbels's.

So incredible that some of his shit affected me over his books and works for real, harmless meaningless shit that I'm not gonna repeat so the shit doesn't work on you.

How can you make the world forget that you existed and did so many horrible powerful world changing stuff and become a joke.

A sidenote in history, of a madman who wanted to much power and got it.

>>17509867
There are multiple solid biographies. Go read one.

>>17509875
I know I read some of his stuff and stuff about him, is all fascinating, way to to fascinating indeed.

That's my complication, how did he do it, how do you crate a world that can acknowledge what you did, without destroying their own reality.

It's just to advanced for me, classic CiA disinfo, low level shit, 9/11, just a day on the job. What Aleister did was the real deal, he changed the reality of humanity and got away with it.

How?

>>17509911
>wrote some pretentious garbage
>changed the reality of humanity

Lel

File: 1455538849564.png (2MB, 1280x800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1280x800px

>>17509911
Damn I thought i was making a good point but i guess the thread is to weird to attract someones curiosity.

>>17509911
This isn't the truth.

>>17509797
So you know nothing about Crowley then?

It looks like some sort of orgy, that is kind of what Crowley was all about.

>>17509797
because,the video director missunderstood the meaning of "do what thou wilt"

>>17509957
Think about it he changed the general public percieve magic and occultism.

He really did it.

Just think about it.

>>17510000
OH GEE MAN!!!

>>17510003
That sentence should be "he changed how the general public perceives magic and occultism."

Damn Crowley, give me dyslexia.

>>17509972
Of course it isn't, we can get closer to the truth because he make it that way.

We don't know what he really did, we just know that powerful influencial people talked with him.

That he wanted power, and used magic to do so.

Proof of what he did is all around us, but we can't understand his reasoning to do it.

He made a clown of himself, he made public sacrifice of his persona. What he got in return?

>>17510025
At some point in this in life we discover or true influence in the world. How it is for other people to live with us, what we take from society and what we produce from ourselves to society.

He took than idea and created a different reality from what he was and he did, he changed in a way we can see, he blinded us from the truth, using or own static view points againt us.

I watch that picture and I can only see a Madman.

He did in a way that I can't take him serious, because at some point i'm afraid of what he really did.

>>17510000
Nice get, but that's not the "mark of the beast" as used in initiation.

File: young-aleister-crowley.jpg (51KB, 375x420px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 375x420px

Look at him, how did he became know as the great beast?

How many people do you have to fuck?

How many blood do you have to drink?

>>17510037
>I watch that picture and I can only see a Madman.
Maybe if you read through the Yorke Microfilms you'd see the scholar.

Hell, maybe if you just read Berashith or Gospel of St. Bernard Shaw.

>>17510071
He was a scholar a genius maybe a true gifted individual, then?

Why the image manipulation?

Who benefits?

>>17510124
What did he succesfully hide from us?

>>17510045
all you have to do is start calling yourself the great beast when you dress up in funny robes with the freemasons.

>>17510145
It's not just name calling.

He got the big gigs, the truly scary stuff.

He became a world renowed, pop culture icon.

For what?

Can you see it, he did something big, and he we just don't know.

My best friend is actually related to this Crowley guy, has the last name and stuff. It was his great great great grandpappy or some shit like that. He got some fucked experiences because his family line is practically cursed for all eternity

File: randallgair.jpg (68KB, 647x527px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 647x527px

>>17510183
That's p. funny.

Crowley's only surviving daughter who would have bore his name changed it, moved to the states. Died at like 80something after living a quiet life. Aleister Macalpine changed his name too, Randall Gair. Pic related. He lived a full life too.

One of his grandkids is a pianist, vid related.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C72XaWdESCw

He's a recent cancer survivor and divorcee :^)

>>17510201
>He's a recent cancer survivor and divorcee :^)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUV-GwLW-3A

>Writing History is a difficult thing, the truth is >often not necessary the same as the Law as >written in the conclusions or by decisions of a >Court.
>In the context of the O.T.O. Phenomenon, a >new O.T.O. group founded in 1977 and (still) >calling itself 'Caliphate' has put the >methodically researched facts and findings >befor the conclusions of a Judge. In 1985, a >rather uninformed American judge ruled in >favour of the 'Caliphate', thus making way for >thousands of dollars from the Aleister >Crowley copyrights to roll into the bank >account of this new O.T.O. group.
>Obviously, this 'Caliphate' not only declared >itself to be 'the real OTO' from 1985 on, but >also openly put the historical facts into three >categories of historical truths:

>Legally protected historical truths. The Truth >was defined by a Court itself. Everyone >openly querying or denying it finds himself in >Court (be it a mundane Court or the >Inquisition room of the group in question).
>Officially privileged historical truths. When >only a handful of selected and chosen faithful >and favoured people have access to the >sources the public has to rely on their >findings.
>Ordinary historical truths. Every other >historical fact without any reference to legally >protected or officially privileged historical >truths, e.g. what they call distorted facts by >enemies or critics.

>These categories have nothing to do with >methodical academic research of history but >nourish the bureaucratic levels of legally >introduced hierarchy of 'truths'.

"Lawyers and Historians: The 'Caliphate' versus the Truth?"

http://www.parareligion.ch/sunrise/justice.htm

>>17510211
I love Pete's site.

Too bad he's an "enemy of the Order", he's really the best historian they have, despite his personal dislike of AC/the Work.

I've got his OTO Rituals and Sex Magick and How To Make Your Own McOTO in my library over in the usual occult thread (archive or /his/ thread).

>>17510201
Idk man he mentioned that he's related to him in some sorts and I believe him considering he's a pretty trusty guy

>>17510183
>My best friend is actually related to this Crowley guy, has the last name and stuff. It was his great great great grandpappy.

Crowley is WWII era, how could there four generations in between then and now?

>>17510249
see
>>17510237
That's proof enough for me, forget all that family shit I posted with pics and vids!

>>17509867
>>17509911
>I know I read some of his stuff and stuff about him, is all fascinating, way to to fascinating indeed.
>That's my complication, how did he do it, how do you crate a world that can acknowledge what you did, without destroying their own reality.
If same anon... wow - very compelling evidence with all the works and pieces you cited qnd whatnot

>>17510045
>How many people do you have to fuck?
Exactly zero, then at thirty you turn into a genuine wizard, come on man learn your shit.

bump for interest
who is he ?
are there some good books he wrote i can read ?
and what was his influence ???

>>17510287
>who is he ?
He's a man, like you or me.

>good books he wrote that I can read
He wrote dozens, if not a couple hundred depending on how you carve up the work. Google. Crowley. Use my library on /omg/ either here or on /his/. Order some from Amazon. It ain't hard.
>influence
Influences on him? Cloud upon the Sanctuary, The Bible, Chaldean Oracles of Zoroaster. Haeckel, Hume, Nietzsche, Whitehead, Greek Magickal Papyri, The Golden Dawn, Lemegeton, Abramelin, Ferdowsi, anyone in the roll of Gnostic Saints, etc.,

>>17509810
Kek

File: Aleister-Crowley_1691696c.jpg (11KB, 460x288px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 460x288px

>>17510290
I have make my bit of research, I read about what Goebbels did, how public reality was shaped in order to create a coexistence with the general population, so you can make the big material changes.

Anyone can reach the conclusion that this stuff works only if you believe in it.

What do we believe about Crowley?

Maybe the bastard did it, went the distance and created a new world, a world that doesn't fear him that doesn't fear what he did, he turned the dark dangerous side of our society into a play.

He acted his part to perfection, so he could do it for real, so he could touch the other side.

>>17510382
>Anyone can reach the conclusion that this stuff works only if you believe in it.
Kek, ok.

>What do we believe about Crowley?
He is a Prophet of my Path which I've studied for like 15 years now.

>dark, dangerous
You took the b8, dudebro. Go READ the fuckin' guy's books.

>he acted
K.

Looks exactly like Eminem. Can't unsee that guys.

>>17510382


Regarding Crowley's antidemocratic, racist and misanthropic writings, followers point out: "The reason [...] aspects of Thelema are omitted [in public discussion] indicates the actual problem with presenting Thelema as a religion and attempting to get Thelema sanctioned by the government or approved by the public: Thelema is ultimately in contrast to and transgressive of normative society. Thelema rejects the morals and values of normative society and acts to transgress and violate these norms. From the inclusion of intoxicants in ritual, to the positive view of sexuality, which frequently is seen as promoting promiscuity, to the pro–authoritarian and Nietzschian aspects of Thelema, normative society has much to reject in Thelema and conversely, Thelema encourages its adherents to reject most aspects of normative society."

>>17509797
brazilian occultist and shit, that's the secret of rich and famous people.

>>17510129
the christian conspiracy circles accuse him human sacrifice

but he accuses jews of human sacrifice, so i don't know what to make of it.

and to answer the OP about why he's in "shitty poor people music about sex from Brazil" I think its because he broke all the sexual taboos in the the late 1800s and was instrumental in paving the way for the sexual liberation movement of the 60s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oP2SS8ggLtU

>>17510399
What he said, and what he did are not the same.

What he was capable of doing given the power and influence he had, gives me vertigo.

We as plebs, put this stuff in the scary shelter for a reason, it's not that easy to find the way back, the moral structure of society is oppressing of the individual, but protective of the society as a whole.

Maybe he went to far and destroyed something we needed, in order to get something he wanted, his area of influence is, without a doubt, bigger than ours, how can you know what occult societies were doing before him?

The most common misconception is that they do it for the pleasure or the lulz, but anyone that devotes his life and public image, has a plan, a big fucking plan, and his line of reasoning only leads me to some obscure conclusions.

At some point you ask for something that shouldn't happen, what you do if it happens?

File: 1458958814980.jpg (121KB, 528x805px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 528x805px

>>17510446
So basically he was a celeb way back then, created some controversy, started some fads and people try to copy and some stupid shits follow what he wrote as some sort of great teaching while the rest of the world lets him fade like any other meme guy. Sounds like any other famous, kek at you for wetting your pants over how cool he was while not being able to mention one cool thing he did.

>>17510470
Look at it from this perspective, you run one of those occult societies, that everyone fears cause they allegedly can make magic and scary stuff, big powerful people wants to conmute with you because you do the cool things, orgies, arcane rituals all the good stuff. but you are at the same time an individual with high aspirations, you want a permanent change in society no more pussy bullshit, everybody has to be hardcore like you, nihilists, egomaniacs that put sex and pleasure above anything else.

Look around, how much of what he talked about is now normalized, just normal everyday stuff, with no negative results.

How many people lives his life not following him, but himselfs, and stumble across a world that tolerates and even promotes everything he promoted, more than any free thinker of his time.

We are not a Chaplin society, we don't follow the teachings of saints, we looks for ourselves first, we are hedonistics, we are sarcastic, and we doubt others.

We are what he wanted, not wanted good well natured men wanted us to be.

Maybe he won. It was a battle for our souls and he won it.

my dad is a 32nd degree mason and I try to ask him about that stuff and argue bible to him and he'll usually try to sell me gnostic bs. one time he told me to look into crowley and all I could think was "oh fuck my dad is an edgy faggot"

>>17510550
>you run one of those occult societies
He ran two, one of those of his own creation, always incredibly small, and the other he took over from obscurity. The OTO has more members today than ever before, but still only a couple thousand.

Powerful people did not come to him, he went to them, largely.

>nihilists
You've obviously read zero fuckin' Crowley because a Nihilist, he ain't.

>sex and pleasure above everything
Again you've never read the guy. It's hilariously obvious when folks like you try to pass off knowledge about AC. Going to India to meditate and climb mountains does not sound like "sex and pleasure" above all else.

Go read the man's diaries.

We are NOT what AC wanted. He wanted an educated society. He also hated abortion, along with a lot of other strange ideas that probably conflict with the "free thinker" image.

>>17510561
Did you ever stop to, I dunno, read something of his?

>>17510592
>Did you ever stop to, I dunno, read something of his?

Not him, but it's all convoluted "clever" bullshit. If you want real spiritual knowledge read the Upanishads or Puranas.

>>17510602
Or why not the Agamas so you can pic out where they an AC agree, if you're lucky enough to be familiar with both.

Hell, Kaulapurana exists. Either way AC directs you to the best core yoga available to the mass market at the time he was writing.
>also, the Upanishads
>also Buddhism
I don't think he gets into Puranic material, though, may not have actually had access.

>>17510618
>prayanama and asana
>best core yoga

Give me a break.

>>17510592
I don't expect a single man to shape society, or live a role model life.

What is relevant to me is the shape of public discusion, what we tolerate, how often some very disturbing stuff we take for granted just how the world is, what we consider normal changes trough the ages and we change with it.

Crownley put this dark rituals in the mass culture, if he wanted this is not relevant, it just happened that way as a result of his actions,

If you read about the ideological wars, you will notice how similar they are to the stories about the occult wars.

To me they are the true wars of the 20th century.

>>17510651
>Crownley put this dark rituals in the mass culture

Give me one example

>>17510631
CURRICULUM OF A∴ A∴

COURSE I.
GENERAL READING
...
The Upanishads. (S.B.E. Series.) The Classical Basis of Vedantism, the best-known form of Hindu Mysticism.

The Bhagavad-Gita. A dialogue in which Krishna, the Hindu "Christ", expounds a system of Attainment.
...
The Shiva Sanhita. A famous Hindu treatise on certain physical practices.

The Hathayoga Pradipika. Similar to The Shiva Sanhita.
...
The Dhammapada. (S.B.E. Series, Oxford University Press.) The best of the Buddhist classics.

The Questions of King Milinda. (S.B.E. Series.) Technical points of Buddhist dogma, illustrated by dialogues.
^^^

All cited from Magick in Theory and Practice.

>>17510652
^That.

>>17510663
Hey that's actually a pretty good list. Earned a little more respect for Theletubbies

>>17510663
Thank you.

File: huehue.jpg (226KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

226KB, 1920x1080px

Wasn't Crowley an anti-semitic, woman beating pedophile, who died as a drug addled pauper?

What reasonably sane person would hold him up as a legitimate example of how to be?

>>17510683
>anti-semitic
Eh, that's somewhat debatable. His article on Nationalism may well have been paid propaganda. If it wasn't it's still good to examine the extent to which assimilation facilitates integration. Oddly, the conversations's still relevant.

>woman beating
BDSM is not the same as assault.

>pedophile
[citation missing]

>Drug addled
Clean for six months at time of death.

>pauper
Had a strongbox of cash under his bed at the Netherwood, of which he rented a whole quarter.

What reasonably sane person would be so direly invested in lying about some turn of the century occultnik?

File: 1415333606073.jpg (199KB, 1200x1650px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1200x1650px

>>17510701
>Eh, that's somewhat debatable
And yet most of the cornerstone theosophic writings are thoroughly antisemitic. From Blavatsky on through. Bro-wley was no exception.

>BDSM is not the same as assault.
Assault is not the same as BDSM. He was a notorious and admitted abuser of women. Period.

>pedophile
Did he not write poetry about molesting his own children? Was he not an avowed pansexual deviant? Will you deny it?

>Clean for six months at time of death
Prove it. Only his fawning, whitewashing biographers make such a claim.

>strongbox of cash
The cherry pickin' sure is fine this season, pa!

Yeah, nah. Your obsession with him is an absurd delusion. The fellow was a devout degenerate elitist who wouldn't deign to even spit in any of your directions. He shat upon floors like an animal, ate cum for fun, diddled kiddies, slapped sluts, abused animals & was just generally a piece of shit. I don't need to lie, he's the most famous occultist in the last 500 years a least. You can downplay the truth to promote your agenda (rusing the gullible crowds of true believers), but I've always seen through your shtick, K. You're an unoriginal hack, just like Bro-wley...and that is that.

>>17510743
Funny. Coming from a Traditional Satanist background, ONA criticizes him for not enacting "real world evil". Others seem to criticize him for the exact opposite.

File: 1445720431075.png (414KB, 530x464px) Image search: [Google]

414KB, 530x464px

>>17510701
>>17510743
Maybe it's not really relevant, but why do so many people idolize Crowley anyway? I'm kinda new to the whole occult thing but I feel like part of the occult is supposed to be strengthening yourself as an individual, not trying to follow others. Even still though I always see people talking about Crowley like he's some kind of messiah rather than just examining his writing, and it's off-putting as hell to me.

>>17510743
>theosophic
>Crowley
Pick one, or demonstrate otherwise.

>He was a notorious and admitted abuser of women
K. He was a loving father to Ataturk who never once harmed him or Dierdra. Period.

>Did he not write poetry about molesting his own children?
Wasn't a poem and it wasn't about a biological child, but that's beyond the scope of your smear campaign.

>Prove it. Only his fawning, whitewashing biographers make such a claim.
You mean Yorke, his harshest biographical critic?

>The cherry pickin' sure is fine this season, pa!
>while ignoring that Netherwood was a nice property

>>17510753
People can't look at the man, they look at the myth.

>>17510801
What's off putting, which texts and why?

File: 1451948692209.jpg (22KB, 500x625px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x625px

>>17510801
Firstly, because he was amazingly erudite & articulate and the type of weak minds which accept occult teachings as unabashed truth are also weak enough to fall in step with anyone who displays the slightest amount of charisma. It's easier than studying & applying oneself, and allows the fool to remain a fool whilst trumpeting their supersekretclub status.

Now, as to strengthening oneself through occult means. Yes & no. Essentially the idea is synthesis of seemingly opposing frequencies in order to create (actually realize) a higher reality. Transcending illusions of time & space & their necessary ancillary divisions. The advancement of the individual is the advancement of the collective, thus the need for dissemination of information, guidance being crucial - lest one end up as a dying-god worshiping savage who molests serpents and calls it divine.

>>17510848
So I gotta ask, if you'll even reply, is it then absolutely impossible for someone to be interested in studying what the erudite guy was studying, or is any and all association related to Crowley, a priori, implication of weak mindedness?

File: Perfect+Loop+8_a88606_4406865.gif (187KB, 600x338px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 600x338px

Sorry about the late response. Hopefully one of you is still around here

>>17510819
>What's off putting, which texts and why?

I meant specifically that the people talking about Crowley are off-putting, not Crowley. I haven't read anything from him yet so I can't really judge him. Whether he was a druggy asshole or not isn't really relevant to me; if I read something from him and it makes sense, cool. Like I said though, I haven't gotten to him yet.

The people on here talking about him though are definitely off-putting. It's almost cult-like and just kind of strikes me as oblivious groupthink at times. I can't really quote anybody verbatim but I'm sure you've seen some examples. People talk about him like HE himself is what's important and not what he wrote

>>17510848
>the advancement of the individual is the advancement of the collective
Maybe some of the people I'm talking about think the opposite applies too. Just to be clear, you're talking about achieving synthesis with the macrocosm right? I don't know if I'm using the right terminology there but you probably know what I mean

File: 1445265756741.gif (879KB, 500x400px) Image search: [Google]

879KB, 500x400px

>>17510869
Study what you want. I don't care.

Cult of personality bullshit, in all it's myriad forms, is a waste of finite energy & one can do loads better than Crowley. The self referential experience should always be the ultimate mean by which one measures the implications of ontological thought. Crowley & those of his ilk espouse wholly subjective philosophies which do nothing but further their own biases. The objective is the realization of the homogeneous from the disparate, and I'm sorry but I've seen only the complete opposite coming from those types. There is essentially no discernible difference between the A.A. & other organized religious structures, obfuscating language notwithstanding - if there were, we could realize this new world without recourse to mythos. And we will.

That isn't to say I throw the baby out with the bathwater. But get your fuckin' noses out the books once in a while & make your own magics.

God has hair on her pussy & waits, burning with desire for you...

File: 1449893413793-0.jpg (384KB, 1141x1400px) Image search: [Google]

384KB, 1141x1400px

>>17510910
What I'm saying is, there is no opposite with which to apply. There is no micro/macrocosm. Those are just words & words are just conglomerations of symbols - crystallized exhalations. The creative logos ritualized into the contemplative mythos - and because of TIME we have become confused and assign limitations/divisions.

Read your books, but also realize you are a book. Words exist to describe the lack of what is. What are you? Magical text are authored by those who lack magic. The direct experience & vital, transformative dissolution of your delusions will march forward, unimpeded by lofty notions of manipulating truth. You can shape your reality in the same way a child can color an image of the sun purple instead of yellow - but you cannot change what is, regardless of what self styled wizards will tell you - for a nominal fee of course.

File: saturn.jpg (46KB, 421x551px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 421x551px

>>17510942
>There is no micro/macrocosm

That's what I've been thinking lately. I feel like it's basically the same thing happening at the same time from different perspectives and the whole LHP/RHP argument is completely retarded and pointless. What gets me the most though is that any intellectual understanding of this stuff isn't an actual understanding of it. Any attempt to rationalize it just leads to rationalizing a form of it and I just wind up back where I started. I feel like I'm getting a grasp for these things but it's hard to tell. Either way, thanks for your advice

>>17509797
Sex is an act divine and an intentional one at that, so it is essentially magick.

All the build-up and then the ultimate release are a ritual for one's own benefit.

>>17510045
You can be called the Great Beast by your insane mother and people like her, perhaps? Look around you and you'll find that kind of person, even in your own family. Your boss could be one of those types, the kind who think that the devil spoiled his milk that morning. That's why and how the title was given to "Aleister Crowley" and thus history was made.

>>17510998

This philosophy is nearly correct, barring that it doesn't exclude the differences in perception due to inductive stimulus.

>>17511093

Get on Skype, cuntboigah.

>>17511127
Sure thing...

>>17510998
Subjective reality is now taken as a fact, we are sure that we are not sure, the Socrates bs.

We accept our own lack of capacity, for asserting reality, way to easy, what Crownley did is amazing as you notice that he got away with it, created a cult, a myth, a modern pantheon, behind closed doors.

What scares me is how little power do we really have to grasp the underbelly of history, decisions were taken, words were published, and history was written in the aftermath of what really happened, millions died in Europe in the times of Crownley, the great minds, the richest bastards, the most talented and influencial, all failed to prevent the war, or fought to make it a reality, youn can say that you are free and in control of your life, but how true is that?

How much can you do, if you need an operational society to function as you do, Crownley changed western civilization, along with a few, power crazy bastards. The spiritual side of society, the side that cannot be rationalized, he lied to us, he lied to anyone that attempts to follow what he did, reality is a story, a well crafted narration of facts, you can make people believe what you want and influence what comes after.

Socrates installed the methodical doubt in us, in the journey of intellectual discovery you have to ponder what he said, Crownley did the same, you have to question, some of the rational line of events to take into consideration his influence in the occult side of global politics.

What was the war about?

Why do we fight the muslims now?

How can they make us afraid and hateful?

They always say money an power, but they had money and they have power, then why?

Aleister Crowley's connection to L Ron Hubbard is interesting to me. I think they might be the two beasts of revelations.

A lot of occultism in hollywood is due to Crowley and a lot of media types are Scientologists.

I think the "Sea Org" of scientology could be the reason one beast is described as the beast from the sea.

>>17509813
>I feela the poop
Actual lyrics from this song

>Been reading some of his stuff and the bastard is just brilliant, he had a talent for manipulation that rivals Joseph Gobbels's.

List a single profound thing Aleister wrote. Just one, out of all his shit books. Go on.

>>17513332
>Liber 65
>Liber 333
>Hymn of the 9th Aethyr
>Gnostic Anthem
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1GBrr7nB3U

>>17513338

Be specific. Post the actual quote and post why you believe it to be profound.

>>17513359
Indubitably, magic is one of the subtlest and most difficult of the sciences and arts. There is more opportunity for errors of comprehension, judgment and practice than in any other branch of physics.

The conscience of the world is so guilty that it always assumes that people who investigate heresies must be heretics; just as if a doctor who studies leprosy must be a leper. Indeed, it is only recently that science has been allowed to study anything without reproach.

The supreme satisfaction is to be able to despise one's neighbor and this fact goes far to account for religious intolerance. It is evidently consoling to reflect that the people next door are headed for hell.

I slept with faith and found a corpse in my arms on awakening; I drank and danced all night with doubt and found her a virgin in the morning.

>>17513647
“People think that talking is a sign of thinking. It isn't, for the most part' on the contrary, it's a mechanical dodge of the body to relieve oneself of the strain of thinking, just as exercising the muscles helps the body to become temporarily unconscious of its weight, its pain, its weariness, and the foreknowledge of its doom.”

>>17509867
He became a headfigure after the fact not during.

>>17513662
“But it so happens that everything on this planet is, ultimately, irrational; there is not, and cannot be, any reason for the causal connexion of things, if only because our use of the word "reason" already implies the idea of causal connexion. But, even if we avoid this fundamental difficulty, Hume said that causal connexion was not merely unprovable, but unthinkable; and, in shallower waters still, one cannot assign a true reason why water should flow down hill, or sugar taste sweet in the mouth. Attempts to explain these simple matters always progress into a learned lucidity, and on further analysis retire to a remote stronghold where every thing is irrational and unthinkable.

If you cut off a man's head, he dies. Why? Because it kills him. That is really the whole answer. Learned excursions into anatomy and physiology only beg the question; it does not explain why the heart is necessary to life to say that it is a vital organ. Yet that is exactly what is done, the trick that is played on every inquiring mind. Why cannot I see in the dark? Because light is necessary to sight. No confusion of that issue by talk of rods and cones, and optical centres, and foci, and lenses, and vibrations is very different to Edwin Arthwait's treatment of the long-suffering English language.

Knowledge is really confined to experience. The laws of Nature are, as Kant said, the laws of our minds, and, as Huxley said, the generalization of observed facts.

>>17513682
It is, therefore, no argument against ceremonial magic to say that it is "absurd" to try to raise a thunderstorm by beating a drum; it is not even fair to say that you have tried the experiment, found it would not work, and so perceived it to be "impossible." You might as well claim that, as you had taken paint and canvas, and not produced a Rembrandt, it was evident that the pictures attributed to his painting were really produced in quite a different way.

You do not see why the skull of a parricide should help you to raise a dead man, as you do not see why the mercury in a thermometer should rise and fall, though you elaborately pretend that you do; and you could not raise a dead man by the aid of the skull of a parricide, just as you could not play the violin like Kreisler; though in the latter case you might modestly add that you thought you could learn.

This is not the special pleading of a professed magician; it boils down to the advice not to judge subjects of which you are perfectly ignorant, and is to be found, stated in clearer and lovelier language, in the Essays of Thomas Henry Huxley. ”

>>17509797

Rappers make their money by being controversial. Do you think this nigger really has studied Crowley's teachings? Get real, man.