THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick,alt.magick.tyagi
From: Re O'Stat 
Subject: Re: OTO and Thelema
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 01:41:33 GMT

In article <39690315.4841@luckymojo.com>, catherine yronwode 
 wrote:


> I personally enjoyed learning the G.D. material (and the similar
> B.O.T.A. material) many years ago, and i still fall back on the G.D.


> The O.T.O., on the other hand, has never been my cup of tea. Like
> Theosophy, it just leaves me cold. In both cases, it has been my dislike
> for the *personal activities* of key founding and supporting members
> (Blavatsky and Leadbeater in Theosophy and Reuss and Crowley in the OTO)
> that has led me to choose other paths for myself. 

Cat, I think you may be more than a bit unfair, here. For example, you 
are saying nothing about the behavior of Paul Foster Case, founder of 
the BOTA, who tried to have his mistress move into his house until his 
wife put her foot down and said, "No!" Then, his mistress took over the 
order upon his death and got in touch with a G.D. group and asked them 
to declare her the adept of the century (They politely said "No," and 
escorted her back to the plane she had arrived on). So we've got sexual 
impropriety and egomania (why else would she have made that horrendous 
album?) in the founding of the BOTA. And yet you "enjoyed" their 
material.

Similarly, the egomania and sexual adventurism within the G.D. certainly 
was not better than HPB, Leadbeater, Reuss and Crowley.

Now, you may not have know about this so your enjoyment of the G.D. and 
BOTA material might have been different had you known otherwise.

In short, it seems to me that you have not separated the message from 
the messengers. And had you known about the activities of other 
messengers, would you have denied their message, too, even though 
(before this post) you said you enjoy them and come back to one of them?

IMHO, I understand where you are coming from, but to deny valuable 
information simply because you don't like the messenger could be 
devastating. Example: Hitler wouldn't look into atomic weapons until his 
scientists could come up with another theory for how they could work. He 
wouldn't accept Jewish science as being valid.



> > I mean people *do* apparently find the GD and OTO useful, and some of
> > these people are demonstrably reasonably sane and successful magicians
> > by anyone's reckoning. Of course there are the *freaks* but it's not
> > like Thelema, the GD, or OTO has a monopoly on them.


Very true!



> I think that for the serious student of "the Western Esoteric
> Tradition," a familiarity with the G.D. material is a must, although i
> also hope that modern-day teachers of this material will deal frankly
> with its limitations within the context of the colonialist British
> Victorian era in which it arose. It is important, in my opinion, to
> defuse the intensity of the G.D.'s system and its hold upon young minds
> by explaining a priori that for each tradition and era from which the
> G.D. writers appropriated a fragment of magical knowledge, there is an
> entire CULTURE's magical tradition that deserves deeper notice and
> study. 

I think your politicalizing of this is off the mark. Certainly it was a 
colonialist British milleu which gave rise to the G.D., but the main 
source of the problems of their minimalization come via Theosophy and 
are more focused on the then-popular notion of syncretism: all religions 
are one except for superficial environmental/sociological changes. Thus, 
the G.D. tried to squeeze Egyptian, Enochian and other systems into the 
4-world, 10-sephiroth Christian kabalistic system.



> 
> The same colonialist-mentality limitations hold true for Crowley's
> Edwardian-era materials, but i find his writings so fraught with factual
> errors, bigotry, misanthropy, misogyny, and racial prejudice that i
> would caution anyone against studying his books *as a system of magic.*
> They read, to me, more like a case-study in mental illness and drug
> addiction. 


IMO, Crowley (like Dion Fortune) cannot be considered Edwardian. Rather, 
they are transitional between Late Victorian and Early Edwardian. Some 
of their works seem dull, overwrought and dated while others are bright, 
fresh, lean and exciting. Was Crowley a bigot, misanthrope, misogynist 
and racist? Looking at him with today's eyes, undoubtedly so. But that's 
like saying Tom Sawyer was racist. With today's eyes, it is. At the 
time, though, it was considered incredibly liberal and tolerant.

Respectfully, you seem to be looking at things in the worst way they 
could possibly be seen. With the G.D. you ask that we look at them as 
manifestations of their era. But for Crowley you want us to ignore the 
tolerance he showed in relation to others of his time and only react to 
him in comparison with thinking today.


> Negativity is not my major interest here, however, so, confining my
> comments only to the writers of the Victorian and Edwardian eras who
> were members of the G.D. and/or the  O.T.O., i will risk public
> amusement one more time by stating that as the years go by, my respect
> for Arthur Edward Waite only increases. No, Waite was not a splashy
> personality (far from it) and he was not given to amusing his readers
> with scurrilously funny put-downs of his colleagues, but as far as i can
> tell, he was a practicing magician in addition to being a scholar, he
> did his research well, and he told the truth insofar he knew it. If i
> can fault the man at all, it is for his reliance upon and
> popullarization of the work of Eliphas Levi, which he should have
> discarded for the strangely alluring rubbish that it is. 


While it is true that he did not amuse his readers with scurrilously 
funny put-downs of his colleagues (I don't think he had enough wit to do 
that), I respectfully disagree with your other statements. Here is why:
1) It was his actions, and those of his followers, which resulted in the 
break-up of the G.D. (and not Crowley as many think). See Yeat's letter 
(I believe it is called, "Is the R.R. et A.C. to remain a magical 
order?") which opposed the Waite faction. 
2) Waite was a horrible scholar (as were many of the occultists of the 
time) and many of his pronouncements resulted from his mistranslations, 
poor translations and misunderstanding of earlier writers.
3) Levi was already popular among occultists (and I would call most of 
Levi's stuff rubbish--nothing alluring about it). Even Crowley translated 
some one of Levi's books and respected him. (Well, actually he thought 
he was the reincarnation of Levi.)
4) As for being splashy: there is a well-known picture of him in his 
full Golden Dawn (his schismatic version) regalia (for which he wrote 
boring and pompous rituals) that is so over the top it makes some 
Masonic paraphernalia look plain.





> 
> But Waite, a staid classicist at heart, spawned no nouveau-religion to
> bark after him like a stray puppy, 

Actually, he tried to do this with his version of the Golden Dawn. When 
he failed to get the attention and popularity he desired, he simply 
broke up his group.


> and his texts are dense enough that
> one may need a high school education to read them, hence he is gradually
> becoming the Forgooten Man of Magic, while the Crowleyan fife-and-drum
> corps marches on, a source of amusement or alarm to onlookers, depending
> on one's mood and whether one thinks children may be harmed by its
> robotic Gnostic jigs and its second-hand Thelemic dervish-whirls.   
> 
> cat (more's the pity) yronwode 


I think he's becoming forgotten because he is dull, boring, pedantic, 
and a voluminous but poor researcher. He should be seen as 
representative of his time.

Re

Path: typhoon.sonic.net!newsfeed2.skycache.com!newsfeed.skycache.com!Cidera!128.230.129.106!news.maxwell.syr.edu!newsxfer.eecs.umich.edu!cyclone.rdc-detw.rr.com!news.mw.mediaone.net!cyclone-west.rr.com!news.rr.com!news-west.rr.com!lsnws01.we.mediaone.net!typhoon.we.rr.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Re O¹Stat 
Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.magick.tyagi
Subject: Re: OTO and Thelema
Organization: Tantric Psychological Association
References:  <3968E44F.47F8@luckymojo.com> <8kaql1$dck$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <39690315.4841@luckymojo.com>  <#NkvsAw6$GA.349@cpmsnbbsa08>
User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.0 (PPC)
Message-ID: 
Lines: 93
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 16:00:18 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.130.56.255
X-Complaints-To: abuse@mediaone.net
X-Trace: typhoon.we.rr.com 963331218 24.130.56.255 (Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:00:18 PDT)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 09:00:18 PDT
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick:202195 alt.magick.tyagi:24287

In article <#NkvsAw6$GA.349@cpmsnbbsa08>, "Nuit"  
wrote:

> "Re O'Stat"  wrote in message
> news:user-2354B8.18433009072000@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
> > Cat, I think you may be more than a bit unfair, here. For example, you
> > are saying nothing about the behavior of Paul Foster Case, founder of
> > the BOTA, who tried to have his mistress move into his house until his
> > wife put her foot down and said, "No!" Then, his mistress took over the
> > order upon his death and got in touch with a G.D. group and asked them
> > to declare her the adept of the century (They politely said "No," and
> > escorted her back to the plane she had arrived on). So we've got sexual
> > impropriety and egomania (why else would she have made that horrendous
> > album?) in the founding of the BOTA. And yet you "enjoyed" their
> > material.
> 
> What we've got here is a seriously deranged paraphrase of history.
> 
> It entirely ignores the fact -- just for starters -- that Harriet Case
> backed and strongly supported Ann Davies for the nearly 30 years after
> Paul's death that both Harriet and Ann were both alive.
>

But that does not deny
1) That PFC kept her as his mistress
2) That PFC tried to move her into their home
3) That she tried to become the ³Adept of the Century²
4) That AD made at least one terrible record album




 
> > Similarly, the egomania and sexual adventurism within the G.D. 
> > certainly was not better than HPB, Leadbeater, Reuss and Crowley.
> 
> I didn't see Cat specify that it was sexual adventurism that she objected
> to. Did I miss that sentence? I think there were a lot of other things 
> she specifically objected to.


Not in those terms, no. But that seemed to me to be what she was saying.


> 
> And, other than Dr. Berridge (whose motto happened to be the same one Ann
> Davies chose years later), 

Irrelevant.

> Golden Dawn sexual adventurism was damn boring
> pre-Crowley. He really startled the poor Victorian bums.


Not at all. In actuality, there are several stages to Victorianism. In 
the later stage (the late 1800s), much of the stodgy, anti-sexual 
attitudes had broken down among society¹s elite. They were already 
having salons where they discussed, in detail, sexuality. The works of 
Arthur Avalon (AKA Sir John Woodroffe) on Tantra were available and 
pornography, usually available to the wealthier ³by subscription only,² 
was widespread.

Only one person in the G.D. objected to Berridge¹s information, and she 
was slapped down by Moina Mathers who simply told her that there were 
things in higher degrees she didn¹t yet know and to keep her mouth shut.

Crowley¹s sexuality and drug use startled the masses (who tended to be a 
generation behind the elite), something that was used by the British 
newspapers to help raise their circulation.



> 
> Personally, I thought Cat's summation of the two groups of groups was one 
> of the funniest and most intelligent things I've read here in aeons -- 
> whether I agree with the characterizations or not!! ;->
> 
> > > But Waite, a staid classicist at heart, spawned no nouveau-religion 
> > > to bark after him like a stray puppy,
> >
> > Actually, he tried to do this with his version of the Golden Dawn. When
> > he failed to get the attention and popularity he desired, he simply
> > broke up his group.
> 
> On the contrary, it still exists, though it is very quiet.
> 
> --
> 56


On the contrary. It has been reconstructed. I wish it well.

Re

From: "Nuit" 
References:  <3968E44F.47F8@luckymojo.com> <8kaql1$dck$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <39690315.4841@luckymojo.com>  <#NkvsAw6$GA.349@cpmsnbbsa08> 
Subject: Re: OTO and Thelema
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2000 19:19:23 -0700
Lines: 34
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2919.6600
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6600
Message-ID: 
Newsgroups: alt.magick,alt.magick.tyagi
NNTP-Posting-Host: 1Cust41.tnt5.lax1.da.uu.net 63.24.118.41
Path: typhoon.sonic.net!news-out.cwix.com!newsfeed.cwix.com!cpmsnbbsb04!cpmsnbbsa07
Xref: typhoon.sonic.net alt.magick:202305 alt.magick.tyagi:24329

"Re O¹Stat"  wrote in message
news:user-DB4EE0.09022611072000@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
> In article <#NkvsAw6$GA.349@cpmsnbbsa08>, "Nuit" 
> wrote:
> > What we've got here is a seriously deranged paraphrase of history.
> >
> > It entirely ignores the fact -- just for starters -- that Harriet Case
> > backed and strongly supported Ann Davies for the nearly 30 years after
> > Paul's death that both Harriet and Ann were both alive.
>
> But that does not deny
> 1) That PFC kept her as his mistress

Rumored, never confirmed. And, if true: So what?

> 2) That PFC tried to move her into their home

Tried, schmied. She and her daughter lived there for years.

> 3) That she tried to become the ³Adept of the Century²

Somebody else's terms, not hers. Definitely the impression the S.T. gang had
of her in New Zealand.

> 4) That AD made at least one terrible record album

Oh, the album was fine -- it was the cover photograph that really should
have been taken *before* she died, rather than after!

--
56