Thelema: Joke or no joke?

[swimwithlove]

Did Aleister Crowley invent Thelema just for kicks, in the same sense that L. Ron Hubbard invented Scientology just for kicks?

Or was Aleister Crowley truly contacted by a spirit entity named Aiwass?

Here's an interesting tidbit SWIM has been wondering about recently, taken from Rick Strassman, M.D.'s DMT and the Soul of Prophecy: A New Science of Spiritual Revelation in the Hebrew Bible:

"I propose that the common biological denominator is the presence of elevated levels of DMT in the brains of individuals in both states. In prophecy, I hypothesize that DMT levels rise endogenously, and this mediates certain features of the experience. In my New Mexico research subjects, brain levels of DMT rose because I injected into their bloodstream large doses of the pure compound.

The common spiritual or metaphysical mechanisms involve what the medieval Jewish philosophers refer to as the faculties of the mind. One of these is the imaginative faculty, in which emerge the phenomenological contents—visions, voices, emotions, and so forth—of the experience. This is prophecy's form, or "body." The other is the rational faculty, whereby one interprets and communicates the information those contents convey. This message is prophecy's essential nature, its "soul."

This model also adds to the discussion the involvement of God, who is the ultimate arbiter of whether someone attains prophecy. While one may possess through birth or training high-functioning rational and imaginative faculties, these only determine one's qualifications for prophecy, not its attainment. This model is theocentric inasmuch as God is the initiating and organizing principle, rather than brain anatomy and function assuming this role. It proposes that changes in brain function are the means by which God communicates with us, rather than proposing that changes in brain function create the impression of such communication. It is a top-down rather than a bottom-up model."

So what do you guys think? Aleister Crowley = awakened? Or just bored?

 

[null24]

I'm not a thelemite nor a practical magician, my interest is merely theoretical, but I think that Crowley most definitely experienced a great deal of what he transmitted. His battle with Choronzon was most likely made up to terrify his companion, but I think Aiwass was real.

He experimented with mescaline along with a plethora of other psychoactive substances, as is the magical /visionary tradition. If you haven't, check out the correspondences in 777, lists of plants and drugs pertaining to the sephiroth are given . I want to say mescaline is geburah-yikes!

 

[travsha]

Look at his life - seems like he had trouble after trouble after trouble.... Dug addiction, divorce, lawsuits ect.... Really hurt a lot of people in his life and while he seemed to have a lot of adventure and get lots of attention.... I would say he is a good example of who not to be like.

Usually best to follow teachers who seem like their practice worked for them. Crowleys practice seemed to mostly bring him trouble.

 

[swimwithlove]

SWIM thinks Crowley's a sham. He started experimenting with psychedelics in his early twenties, well before he was "contacted" by Aiwass at the age of 29.

He also studied Hindu and Buddhist practices in India before he was "contacted" by Aiwass in Egypt.

So SWIM thinks Thelema's all a product of Crowley's own subjective reality. He was completely primed for these auditory hallucinations.

Swim is 60% sure it was all subjective for Crowley, because we can never be 100% sure about anything. Maybe Aiwass was an objectively real entity, who knows. But right now SWIM is leaning towards the former.

 

[swimwithlove]

SWIM is also terrified about continuing the use of psychedelic substances for fear of potentially developing schizophrenia like Crowley.

Maybe Crowley wasn't schizophrenic but actually met an objectively real entity named Aiwass, or maybe he was schizophrenic after all, or maybe he was just bored out of his mind. Who knows.

 

[Yumi]

Thelema ins't my cup of tea, but I respect others who follow it.

 

[jiva]

a friend of mine is not only part of the OTO but way up in the hierarchy.
from him i received 2 prints of the Doomsayer’s Digest. This is a journal where the OTO tries to continue the works of Crowely.

for what i know about him, the OTO (mostly from him) and about the texts of Crowely himself, they are absolutely serious about this.

in my mind Crowely himself was a maniac exploiting everyone around him and driving multiple people into insanity and poverty. I do think what he himself went through to get to the point where he claimed to be the avatar of some being is very similar to what a lot of esoteric people experience - i know a person who claims she knows that god exist, because she went on a hike with him (while on a daily does of speed, mdma and DMT for a year!)



edit:
i asked on my friends opinion on this... curious to see what he replys

 

[jiva]

here is the reply my friend sent me

the general attitude in the oto is that it is immaterial as to whether or not the aiwass myth was founded in some real happening. the book of the law and the other inspired writings of aleister crowley stand on their own and are so dang sweet that they might as well have come from space or gods or whatever.
this is curious because to take the I° in oto you have to "accept The Book of the Law," and most people are like "okay, i accept it..." But Crowley comments somewhere that this implies accepting that it comes from a praeterhuman source. why would crowley demand this? the reason is more obvious in teh first degree. suffice to say that this idea of the Secret Chiefs is integral to Thelema. Most people mock this and say "Crowley needs you to believe that his authority comes from an inaccessible higher power." But I think the answer is actually quite simpler.
To accept the Secret Chiefs (and thereby the possibility of transmitted gnosis or doctrines or whatever) is to accept the core principle of Thelema which is "knowledge and conversation with the holy guardian angel," which is, Crowley later wrote, communicating with a dead magician/mystic, aka someone who has (to quote the Stele of Revealing) walked after death or otherwise managed to extend their consciousness, identity and Will beyond the limitations their previously animated corpse allowed.
so I think it's less about saying that The Book of the Law comes from god's butthole and more about saying that one accepts the possibility that one can extend one's life beyond one's death and one can communicate with these spirits or "angels."
Do I believe the narrative? For me, as for most magicians who are practiced in evocation and astral work, the possibility of discarnate independent intelligences is not silly like it is to most people. I have had many visions (some contrived, some somewhat prophetic, if only on a personal scale) where i interacted with a spirit that knew more than me or otherwise told me something i didn't know. So frankly, the idea that Crowley could have Aiwass (the true god of the Yezidis, some dead Levantine guy) visit him and dictate a book isn't that implausible.
Do I need to believe in the narrative? Not really. In Liber O Crowley writes:
1. This book is very easy to misunderstand; readers are asked to use the most minute critical care in the study of it, even as we have done in its preparation.
2. In this book it is spoken of the Sephiroth and the Paths; of Spirits and Conjurations; of Gods, Spheres, Planes, and many other things which may or may not exist.
It is immaterial whether these exist or not. By doing certain things certain results will follow; students are most earnestly warned against attributing objective reality or philosophic validity to any of them.

 

[anon_003]

To be QUITE honest... I have never been able to garner much of Crowley's literature. It's too cryptic and removed from my era. It is true I am relatively new to this subject, but in my personal experience, there are other resources available that describe much the same thing in much clearer detail. I really suggest Condensed Chaos by Phil Hine, and/or Liber Null by Peter J Carroll.

An example of magic.... Say I give you a specific compliment on your outfit, and you continue to wear it because (subconsciously or not)... Thats magic. I tell you im leaving you if u dont stop drinking, and you stop drinking... Thats magic.

Although, it gets soooooooo much freakier and subconscious than those instances. Our brains r super weeeeeeeiiiiiird. Super dee duper weird.

It's one of those things that you just have to see for yourself. It has a lot to do with programming your mind to interact with the system of the collective unconscious in a specific way.

All magick is dependent on hard work torwards achieving gnostic states.

It will only make sense after trial and error... personal experience.

If you are interested, a good bit of advice given to me by Hiyo was to start with Chaos Magic. It's the most adaptable and easily understood magical system available to us atm (in my noob opinion). It doesnt exclude other magical systems, but rather eliminates the dogma. Do the work, analyze how which systems worked for you, and learn from them. Chaos magic is all about using the systems we got to draw similarities and eradicate the bs, to enable a unique pathway for all practicing magicians..

Because its such a personal art / science! This is one of those things you need to figure out for yourself.

Almost no use in an armchair magician... Get to work!!!!!