THE |
|
a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining
to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects. |
To: alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick,alt.magick.order,talk.religion.misc,talk.religion.newage,alt.pagan.magick From: nagasiva@luckymojo.com (nigris (333)) Subject: Secrecy and Thelema Date: 23 Jul 1999 23:57:13 -0700 49990710 IVom a correspondent writes: # ># Does anyone out there honestly believe that the prospective # ># Minerval will run screaming into the hands of the Black # ># Guard if they discover what the symbols contained within # ># represent? 333: # >not likely, but they may have the rite 'spoiled' for them in # >the same way that a preview to a film or play or book can be # >by making reference to it prior to its experience. I have # >often enjoyed entering into such experiences without preview # >and my inability at times to 'forget' them or refrain my # >mind's interjection of memories within present experiences # >makes that preview rather frustrating. the same correspondent responds: # ...I believe the key here is that you can attend the film or # play, or perhaps read the book, as you will. No one demands # two sponsors or paperwork or a mandatory wait to get in to # see the latest blockbuster or purchase a book at the MegaMall. these media events are public spectacles, not private membership initiatory rites. therein lies the difference. if you acquire a copy of the rites (say, from Brother Paul Smith) and choose to get together with a few of your friends and initiate one another into your OTO using these rituals, you do not need sponsors or paperwork or even rehearsal (though I would recommend the last). I doubt that the (c)OTO would bother to try to stop you if you were engaging a private event. if you began to charge money, billed it as 'OTO Initiations (TM?)' or claimed the copyrights to documents or its trademarks (competing with it), then you're more likely to run into opposition (and with good reason given the officers' choice to rely on secret rites as a membership tool and definition). # ># For all this "If you choose to enter as a spy, so be it" # ># that is preached, I fail to see it in practice. # > # >I have as much as proclaimed my 'spyhood' to my fraternal # >kin and have enjoyed the welcome and warmth of many of # >them concerning that with which the Order deals. it is as # >much a challenge to the membership's discipline to state # >this ideal about 'not knowing or caring' as it is to the # >member who submits hirself to any restrictive oaths. # # I'm fascinated that you've managed to become accepted given this # admonition; some of this has to do with my activities, which do not usually admit of the kind of qualities presumed of a 'spy'. indeed I do compliment, sometimes represent, and coddle the communication and interaction with noted "OTO adversaries" such as Peter Koenig, as well as those whom the (c)OTO has decided to oppose such as Ben Fernee. I have opposed a variety of positions taken by the (c)OTO officers in public, and I have actively sought to bring out discussion of "OTO secrets" while adhering to the desires of the order by not quoting documents supposed to represent these or in some way convey them which I have acquired. on the other hand I have always made it known that I wish to keep a good relationship with this organization, have in the main consulted administrators when making a variety of files copyrighted by (c)OTO available to the public, and been very straightforward as to my attitudes and motivations (self-serving discipline, org- serving critical scrutiny) as I proceed. being up-front and open about my activities I can walk the line where others might be suspected of greater ills and investigated for 'treason'. :> more than this I have a vested interest in seeing to the HEALTH of the (c)OTO as it represents to me a bastard of A Crowley and has the capacity to change the world in ways I find valuable. in this and the ways previously mentioned I differ markedly from a "spy" who seeks to harm or debilitate the whole of which I am an admittedly revolutionary part. as I have said before, that my order continues to allow me to be a part of it is a mark in its FAVOR, since I provide some measure of instability to it by making known my membership and engaging in what others may find troublesome and of questionable value. # my question ultimately is whether or not a spy can pass # information on in violation of their oaths and yet remain # a member of the organization. I've said it before to the order officers, in usenet publically to my order kin, and will say it again to you in this email list: I have never taken an oath of secrecy. I do not consider my initiatory experiences to have included them and understand that the administration of the order of which I am a member considers revealing specific information (that contained in the rites) to be an act which deserves censure and, if continued despite warnings, dismembership. I act knowing that this is the social environment. I'd also mention to you that there have been many many times that my order kindred have mentioned to me information which was in violation of their oaths of secrecy as *they* saw them yet they somehow reconciled this in their consciences. they remained members of the (c)OTO. they were NOT spies, far less were they the kind of 'spy' which I am, and I don't think that their activities ever came to the attention of the officers. what is a 'spy' in your eyes? if this is someone who intends to harm the organization, then they can only really do so if they are covert about it. a spy who openly breaks the codes so established by the officers of the organization regarding the ritual contents is a very POOR spy. ;> she will meet with warnings and then be removed from membership. there is never, as many others have said here, any analysis of what hir "Will" may be in matter. the issue is protection of private membership materials as has been continued in secret societies for a very long time. the spy who reveals information about the rites to which she has been exposed will only suffer inasmuch as it becomes EVIDENT to the administration that this has occurred. it is a simple matter comparable to the discovery of having broken social laws or customs and the attendant repercussions for this. # If this is not the case, then the Order does in fact care # what your Will is. not really. it could be that my (true!) will is to keep this material secret from the world and I am actively attempting to make it public. it could be that my (true!) will is to make it public and in this case the order couldn't stop me even if it tried. we enter into the epistemological discussion of how to know another's (true?) will, what it matters if one knows it, and whether this can ever be thwarted or delayed. there are several schools of thought on the matter, as have been well- represented in the threads following on the PSmith Posting Incident. :> if you have read my text in any depth you know that I think the tao and the true will are identical and so cannot be thwarted or opposed. discovering it is as simple as looking back over your shoulder with scientific scrutiny (histology) or looking inward with spiritual sensitivity (intuition). # >agreed. what actions may easily be discerned to have the # >quality of this prevention? please detail how we can go # >about discerning orbit-adherence from violation. # # The quality of prevention can reasonably be measured by the # following traits: # (1) Outside standards put upon the individual which restrict # their ability to move forward, backward, stay the same, or # withdraw. the only way this can be done is through draconian control. this is why the "drugs" trade continues in such backwards countries as the USA, whose govt engages a 'drug war' with a 'drug czar' and yet has no power (yet) to institute the kind of totalitarian crackdown (no pun intended) to effect its success. prosecutions are not the same thing as prevention. # Oaths of eternal loyalty which cannot be broken, # time restrictions (rather than on, say, a test of knowledge # done in an objective manner) between dissemination of # information, et cetera. no such oaths need be taken in the (c)OTO as I understand it. those who choose to take such oaths I consign to the hell or heaven they choose for themselves. # (2) Restriction of membership or attainment based on nebulous, # unspoken standards, .... the standard of communication is very obvious and in no way "nebulous". Paul Smith was a blatant example of someone who flaunted the restrictions to *membership* of (c)OTO, but he may not be a member and was using a relatively anonymous channel. had he identified himself the standard could have been applied very quickly and easily to him. # particularly when this restriction prohibits an individual's # ability to get documents or ideas which may be necessary or # believed to be necessary for their spiritual growth. belief is a trap. those who believe that these secret documents are necessary for their spiritual growth are the victims of the very secrecy-machine that they seek (simplistically) to spoil. the long-term opposition to this includes constant opposition to the secrecy from the INSIDE and the creation of ongoing, successful ALTERNATIVES on the outside. PSmith's was an act of terrorism plain and simple (not to condemn terrorism as a tool of war, but it is seldom supported by civilized peoples). # (3) Active attempts to withdraw information which was # publicly available in the interest of secrecy or to # "protect" the group. that depends on how it was made publicly available. when the result is due to theft or treason it is understandable that an organization would do what it could to recapture lost terrain. # (4) Threats of physical violence, social ostracism, legal # action, and the like, to any individual who seeks to # acquire or discuss an idea. I haven't seen this occur. there is restriction on the public expression of certain documents, but we are free to discuss these documents here and in public all we want. nobody has sought to restrict ME from doing so. let's get to it, shall we? in fact I have begun to think few are serious about studying these secret documents because when I have brought up their contents and IDEAS very few have responded in meaningful ways. instead we get into meta-discussions or silence due to a lack of interest or common knowledge without follow-up to effect a parity. prove the exception, Reverend. I welcome it. # >the power is not restricted to said individuals. the means # >provided by private documents to these people is restricted # >but I have no evidence that these documents contain some # >special or superior ritual technology unavailable to the # >general occult world. # # I don't believe that they are superior to other techniques; # word for word, the old TOPY stuff generally packs a more # effective method. this strikes me as just as much an overgeneralization. different individuals will likely experience different things amongst different groups doing different rites, don't you think? such attempts to put organizations or rites against one another in such a simplistic manner and compare their "power" or "effectiveness" without regard to the condition of the candidate (history, age, relation to the initiators, etc.) is just more braggadatio or speculation without basis. # What I suppose I am objecting to here is the fact that the # central theme of Crowley's work (AL not included), referred # to time and time again as vital to understand the ideas # discussed in _Magick in Theory and Practice_ and elsewhere. # In essence, what is particularly reasonable or ethical about # presenting a "teaser" when the original is not attainable # in a licit manner? it is neither reasonable nor ethical. it is done to draw marks, make points, play elitist games, and generally to use the lever of specialized knowledge as a fulcrum for social violation. this is usually done in the context of a weak and immature spirit. the master does not need to refer to these texts or their specifics in order to convey the proper information, and does so in ways which are consistent and which yield no opposition (on account of hir perfect assimilation of the power of Agape and its unitive qualities). # If "Light, Life, Liberty, and Love" is to be available to all, # then why is it not so? some information is private. most private information is none of our business and not worth our time. the mechanism of 'the secret book' is well-known in academic circles as a ploy to generate interest in the book and in organizations or cliques which have the capacity to make these documents available to the interested (at a price of course!). here is an elaboration from the perspective of the Middle Ages quoted from a text I was recently perusing (recommended!): The cult of secrecy can be explained in large part as an outgrowth of the cultural setting for magic. What we have called the common tradition was widely available in medieval society, but the new occult sciences were originally the possession of certain clerics. Doubtless there was much pressure to lower this barrier and share this extraordinary learning, particularly if it could be put into simpler form for popular consumption. The empasis on secrecy came partly, no doubt, as a reaction to this demand for popularization. The scholars who held jealously to their occult learning were in effect declaring that they would not allow it to become debased through assimilation to the broader, common tradition; rather, they would preserve it in its purity and retain its power for themselves. The insistence on secrecy highlights a dimension of the occult arts that might otherwise be less clear: their value simple as a form of knowledge. From the viewpoint of these writers, knowledge might *bring* power but it also *was* power. Knowing mysterious things was in itself valuable, even if the knowledge was never put to effect in action. In the extreme cases magic was intended for the sole aim of gaining knowledge: to learn all that happens on earth, the secrets of everyone's mind, and even heavenly things, one manuscript recommends beheading a hoopoe at sunrise, under a new moon, and swallowing its heart while it is still palpitating. The point is not so much to gain control over the world, though magic might also accomplish that. More basically, it is cherished simple because it brings hidden things to light, or at least to the dim visibility of the shadows. In keeping with this cult of the occult, works on magic were sometimes referred to as "books of secrets," even if they had only tenuous connection with this new learning, and indeed even if there was no real secret about their contents. In the later Middle Ages a *Book of Secrets* ascribed to Albert the Great circulated quite widely. It contained various kinds of magic, none of it as sophisticated as technical astrology or alchemy; it ws essentially a work of popularization, but with added glamor derived from the pretense of sorcery. By far the most influential work of this genre was the pseudo-Aristotelian *Secret of Secrets*, which one author with pardonable exaggeration has called the most popular book in medieval Europe. Widely accepted as an authentic work by Aristotle, this book was well known in its Latin version, was translated into nearly every vernacular language of Europe, and was even put into poetic paraphrase. It purports to contain Aristotle's instruction to his pupil Alexander the Great. In fact, it is a motley compilation of material, put together in several different Arabic versions during the early Middle Ages long before its translation into Latin. Much of it is devoted to principles of statecraft and personal health, but natural magic also appears in its pages. Medicine, the powers of gems, astrology, and related topics are all included. The show of secrecy is carried beyond the title: much of the work, claiming to represent Aristotle's esoteric learning, is concealed in riddles and other cryptic formulas, and Aristotle exhorts Alexander not to violate the divine mysteries by letting the book fall into the wrong hands. One could hardly find a better example, however, of a further reason for this display of secrecy: the semblance of mystery is itself a splendid advertisement, and a way to ensure wide distribution of a work. ______________________________________________ "Magic in the Middle Ages", by Richard Kieckhefer, Cambridge University Press, 1995; pp. 142-3. ------------------------------------------ # >I hope that those who claim that these documents are THE # >tools to achieve this betterment provide support for their # >claims. # # I wish there would be some explanation of why a common # celestial sphere that is witnessable by all humankind # is a "grand secret", and how that secret does in fact # have relevance to bettering one's magick, relationships, # sex life, e-mail connectivity, or whatnot. by virtue of the sphere's ineffable inapprehensibility, so can the utterances of all manner of mage be praised as having authority and, if constructively suppressed, inspire a kind of heated desire to obtain them. when the promise of so coming to obtain them is a side-benefit of joining any particular organization, this can serve the purpose of a cult or social body which desires to make use of this very old tool. when we have placed into proper context the folly of this tool within an organization purporting to support and/or promulgate the Law of Thelema we shall have achieved a success to benefit all of humanity by our efforts and those which perpetuate it will fall by the wayside or take up the banner more properly. # >I, for one, having seen reflections of these docs # >and been a member of said order, do not yet believe it to # >be true. # # I would wholeheartedly have to agree. then we might as well proceed to more substantial topics ;> and contrast what we DO think has substance in the realm of '(sex?) magic(k) documents', secret or no. blessed beast! __________________________________________________________________________ (333) nagasiva@luckymojo.com; http://www.luckymojo.com/nagasiva.html -- emailed replies may be posted; cc replies if response desired
The Arcane Archive is copyright by the authors cited.
Send comments to the Arcane Archivist: tyaginator@arcane-archive.org. |
Did you like what you read here? Find it useful?
Then please click on the Paypal Secure Server logo and make a small donation to the site maintainer for the creation and upkeep of this site. |
The ARCANE ARCHIVE is a large domain,
organized into a number of sub-directories, each dealing with a different branch of religion, mysticism, occultism, or esoteric knowledge. Here are the major ARCANE ARCHIVE directories you can visit: |
|
interdisciplinary:
geometry, natural proportion, ratio, archaeoastronomy
mysticism: enlightenment, self-realization, trance, meditation, consciousness occultism: divination, hermeticism, amulets, sigils, magick, witchcraft, spells religion: buddhism, christianity, hinduism, islam, judaism, taoism, wicca, voodoo societies and fraternal orders: freemasonry, golden dawn, rosicrucians, etc. |
SEARCH THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
There are thousands of web pages at the ARCANE ARCHIVE. You can use ATOMZ.COM
to search for a single word (like witchcraft, hoodoo, pagan, or magic) or an
exact phrase (like Kwan Yin, golden ratio, or book of shadows):
OTHER ESOTERIC AND OCCULT SITES OF INTEREST
Southern
Spirits: 19th and 20th century accounts of hoodoo,
including slave narratives & interviews
|