Announcements from
Lodge Members and Officers

    Other Events:

    Hriliu Oasis meets every Friday at 8 pm. They'll have Gnostic Masses on the 1st, 15th, and 29th at 7:30 pm and Minerval Initiations on the 26th at 1 pm. Call Tammy at (707)-795-7529 for details and directions.

    April Events:

    April Fool's Party and Full Moon Ritual on the 1st. The party begins at 8 pm. If you wish to participate in Liber 70 come dressed as your favorite New Testament character. Lunar ritual starts at 9:30 pm.
    April 8th, 9th and 10th ---- the three days of the writing of The Book of the Law will be celebrated around the Bay Area.
    Lodge Meeting on the 12th at 8 pm.
    Egyptiana Returns...

    It shouldn't surprise people to learn that we get letters asking about the significance of particular verses in Liber AL. After all, O.T.O. is one of the many Thelemic organizations around, owns the original manuscript and seems a logical place to go for interpretation. That may be logical, but it's also a bit of a problem. Thelema espouses private interpretation. In other words, each individual must interpret for him or her self. No declarations of "actual meaning" of expressions in Liber AL are acceptable to a conservative Thelemite. Some people do make such "definitive" interpretations and publish them. I don't mean to suggest that those people are wrong because of an injunction in Liber AL not to do such things. That would be interpretation of Liber AL! We simply don't accept such work in O.T.O. To proceed on that line of thinking is to mentally circle in paradox. Bear with me, the paradoxes are not over.
    Study requires research. Research requires access to the ideas of others. For study of Liber AL, if we are not to be limited to meditation and vision, there must be a body of reference material. Dictionaries and encyclopedias only go so far. You can discover that "Obeah" and "Wanga" are words from Afro American religion. You can go to Crowley's comments, evidently done by him in answer to a perceived injunction in his reading of Liber AL. What about Thelemic history? What about the ideas of the thousands of Thelemites since Crowley? Where is the line to be drawn against discussion and interpretation of The Book of the Law? These questions can be answered in many ways, and other questions are engendered in the process. Do we forbid talk? Do we burn the diaries of deceased Thelemites lest in reading them a necromantic discussion of Liber AL take place? Perhaps some would say "yes!" to these last questions. Yet:

AL I,41: "The word of Sin is Restriction. O man! refuse not thy wife, if she will! O lover, if thou wilt, depart! There is no bond that can unite the divided but love: all else is a curse. Accursed! Accursed be it to the aeons! Hell."

    Compromise is a dangerous art, albeit a sometimes necessary one. The very act of citing Liber AL without comment makes the text before and after take on characteristics of discussion of the meaning of the citation; no way out there.

    Necessity is a very real pressure. What are we to answer when someone innocently asks about these verses:

AL III,12: "Sacrifice cattle, little and big: after a child."
AL III,13: "But not now."
AL III,14: "Ye shall see that hour, o blessed Beast, and thou the Scarlet Concubine of his desire!"
AL III,15: "Ye shall be sad thereof."

No answer or the wrong answer could equally lead to murder in the case of an unstable mind. Shall we allude to Numa's question of Jupiter and speak of heads and pilchards? Shall we pour over Crowley's Magick in Theory and Practice and note that Crowley meant contraceptive sex when he wrote of sacrificing a child? Shall we remark that Crowley sacrificed "big children" by declaring a Magical Child and dedicating the life of an adult to doing good works in the name of Thelema? Are such observations not discussion of the meaning of verses in Liber AL? Some say "Yes! It's wrong. Liber AL itself forbids it!" The first paradox is back again. If you say "Liber AL forbids all interpretation," you have interpreted Liber AL.

    A paradox is a logical flaw produced by the circular collision of reason.

AL II,32: "Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise."

    Some paradoxes can be deflated by recognizing Aristotle's fallacy of four terms, that favorite of salesmen and politicians. For serious cases, split hairs on definitions. Gauss' Theorem tells us that no large body of axioms and postulates can be proven to be free from paradox. Reason lies, for there will always come some point unknown in its application, some finite limit to the validity of the base of reason. Yet, in a skew-wise world there is occasional need for skew-wise words.

    Here's a split hair and a sophistry: Define discussion of Liber AL to be arguement on the true meaning of the verses. Set aside from this definition the sharing of ideas evoked by the verses. The hair falls neatly in half: To one side, forbidden discussion to definitive meaning. To the other side, "harmless" sharing of thoughts without final conclusion. If it is the nature of reason to lie, let it be true to its nature! For sophistry a disclaimer:
    Anything said about Liber AL, with the limited exception of Crowley's comments, is subjective. No case should be made that this is in any way an effort to explain what it really means. Everybody interprets Liber AL personally and privately. No one should try to interpret it for anybody else. These are just ideas that occur to me, or ideas I have heard from others. If they help, fine. It's what Liber AL means to you that counts, not what I or anybody else thinks or says it means. That said, on to some thoughts:

Q1: In I,15, do the references to Beast and Scarlet Woman refer to roles or people, like Crowley and Rose?

AL I,15: "Now ye shall know that the chosen priest & apostle of infinite space is the prince-priest the Beast; and in his woman called the Scarlet Woman is all power given. They shall gather my children into their fold: they shall bring the glory of the stars into the hearts of men."

    Crowley held a variety of views about this and other parts of Liber AL during his lifetime. Those views changed with his experience and insight. Crowley also had alter egos, roles and alternate personalities. He was Therion, Perdurabo, Ankh-f-n-khonsu, and many others. Most of the time, Crowley treated these alter egos as modes of action and thinking. As Baphomet, Crowley was head of O.T.O. As Perdurabo, he was a simple brother and student of the mysteries. Some of these alter egos were personal, like Perdurabo, just his. Others were true roles, like Baphomet, an office others would come to fill under that or another title. Ankh-f-n-khonsu seems to be at least two different aspects: 1. an expressed belief that Aleister Crowley was a reincarnation of a particular Egyptian Priest. 2. an adorative state of mind in which the gods and goddess of Ancient Egypt related to Crowley. A third aspect may have been involved: 3. As a priest of the deities, Crowley was responsible for passing on their revelations in Liber AL to others through his writings and deeds. For Crowley, the first Scarlet Woman was Rose, his first wife. I suppose that he might have thought of Rose as "THE" Scarlet Woman, a particular person, until his marriage to her began to deteriorate. After the end of that marriage, Crowley took up with other ladies. Some of those he came to call his "Scarlet Woman". This made "Scarlet Woman" a role taken by different individuals in his personal life, instead of one particular person. Probably because of this, Crowley came to speculate that "Beast" was also a role as well. As roles, Beast and Scarlet Woman partake of the nature of deities or "faces of the gods". That can be different from offices or mundane roles in some ways. The office of Governor of the State of California, for example, is filled by a succession of individuals. At times there may be no Governor. There can be only one Governor. Once there was no Governor of California, and in the long passage of time there will be a point past which no Governor of California will ever be again. As semi-divine roles, Beast and Scarlet Woman may be eternal and may manifest in more than one person at a time. An example would be an actor fully caught up in playing Macbeth. A thousand actors could play Macbeth at the same time throughout the World. There is one Macbeth who can manifest through many actors. The Beast and Scarlet Woman may manifest through one person each at a time or through many; it isn't clear. Common practice of Thelemites indicates many manifestations is the norm, with perhaps one set being the best or primary manifestation at any given time.

Q2. Please comment about Verses 54 - 56 of Chapter I

(Ditto on disclaimer)

AL I,54: "Change not as much as the style of a letter; for behold! thou, o prophet, shalt not behold all these mysteries hidden therein."
AL I,55: "The child of thy bowels, he shall behold them."
AL I,56: "Expect him not from the East, nor from the West; for from no
expected house cometh that child. Aum! All words are sacred and all prophets true; save only that they understand a little; solve the first half of the equation, leave the second unattacked. But thou hast all in the clear light, and some, though not all, in the dark."

    These verses appear to address the rigidity of physical appearance of Liber AL, the fact that not all was known to the prophet and some indication that another will know more. Crowley held that he should not change the capital or lower case usage in Liber AL, but was free to alter punctuation in accord with another verse about "space marks". I have had the honor of examining the original Manuscript of Liber AL, and there is some doubt that Crowley always limited himself to not changing the style of the Letters. There are signs of re-touching, especially on:

AL I,57: "Invoke me under my stars! Love is the law, love under will. Nor let the fools mistake love; for there are love and love. There is the dove, and there is the serpent. Choose ye well! He, my prophet, hath chosen, knowing the law of the fortress, and the great mystery of the House of God."
    "All these old letters of my Book are aright; but # is not the Star. This also is secret: my prophet shall reveal it to the wise."
    (# In MS, a mark in this place is commonly read as the Hebrew letter Tzaddi.)

    The mark commonly cited by Crowley as "Tzaddi" has been retouched at least twice.

    On the question of the Child, there have been many speculations. Is it a human being, possibly the natural son or daughter of Crowley? Crowley has two living daughters who apparently have no interest in Thelema. Crowley's surviving son, Aleister Attaturk McAlpine, has made claims along these lines over the years; but he has not been taken very seriously. Is this Child a "magical son", not physically fathered by Crowley but mystically? Crowley seemed to prefer this view, naming several people in succession as his "Magical Son". None of these has shown major insight into the mysteries of Liber AL, at least on a level that would bear out the prophesy. Is the Child a suggestion of intangible spirit, capable of dwelling in any and all Thelemites? That view has been popular, mainly from the late 1960s. Is this a reference to the Child Horus, a deity mentioned elsewhere in Liber AL? That possibility can be satisfied by the appearance of Heru-Pa-Kraath in the latter part of the book. The verse may refer to a future communication and another prophet. There have been a number of attempts to "complete Liber AL" through mystical reception of additional communications from Aiwass. All of these have attempted to introduce themselves as continuations of or prefaces to Liber AL, and that seems to doom them. Liber AL contains what appears to be a definite statement that it is ended as a written work. The reference to "child of thy bowels," seems to suggest a physical son or daughter of Crowley; but this can be taken as a reference to the Manipura Chakra, the source of major projective Magick in the Body of Light. You can see it on the Thoth Atu's of The Chariot and Lust. Verse I,56 also appears to say that half of Liber AL is an unwritten mystery, the concealed wisdom that can never be completely understood by any prophet. In that sense, the "Child" could refer to the next Aeon, about 2,000 years from now. It could also be thought to be the accumulated living essence of all Thelemites.

    Note: One purpose behind printing this is to see what people think about the approach. I am most assuredly not The One True Number Two, the Beast Mark II. I can be beastly. I have occasionally been a "mark", tho' never a "nark". I could say that I am from the land of the Wes. I could remark on those remembered balmy days with Sah, spent hunting in the Field of Reeds. I could even lay a claim to coming from the fetal star near the Trapezium -- for astronomy buffs. I can't say that "Iwas from outer space" and wear my hair combed like a helmet --- not enough hair left. Al kidd'n aside, would our readers like to see more of this sort of thing? Anybody object? I hope a certain friend has retained his sense of humor.

The Year 1581 through 1582
The First Book of the Mysteries
At Mortlake.^*

		John Dee his Note.
Angelus, sive Intelligentia, toti Mundo praedominans. 4 Angeli praesidentis Cardinibus Caeli: et Agrippa notati. in scala Quaternary.		ANNAEL		Etymologia Gratiola }Dei Afflicta Misericors.
	Michael	Gabrieliii.	Raphael	Uriel
Etymologiaeii.	Fortitudo Dei	Prevalescentia---- } Dei sive Praepotentia- sive fortitudo }--   praevalescens	Medicina    Dei	Lux Dei

et

Anna, et Annah,

obsecrantis, et confitentis particula est hac roeiv., non absurde innuere videtur, Orantem et confitentem Deum.

		John Dee his Note.1.
The Angel, or Intelligence, that now predominates the whole world. The Four Angelic governors of the Cardinal points of Heaven: as Agrippa notes in his scale of four.2.		ANNAEL		Etymology: The Grace }of God The Affliction The Compassionate
	Michael	Gabriel	Raphael	Uriel
Etymologies3.	The Strength of God	The Superior expert of God or the very powerful or most influential strength       of God	The Healing Power      of God4.	The Light of God

and

ANA, and ANaH

It is our particular request that through our solemn appealing and confessing we may see a serious sign, of the speech and manifestation of God.

		EXPLICATIO.
		The preceeding angelic arrangement is a synthesis of
		Renaissance metaphysical principles; in particular combining
		the occult doctrines of H. Cronelius Agrippa with John Dee's
		own rather peculiar magical theorems. The four archangels
		central to this table are the angelic personalities whose
1. More discussion of this       will be given in the       forthcoming issue.		proper names appear in the Cannon and Apocrypha of traditional
		Hebrew and Christian scripture.1 It was the primary intention
		of Dee's religious magick, as will become clear in the exegesis
2. Note that these archangelic       beings form the foundation       of much of the ritual practice       of modern ceremonial magick.       See A. Crowley, Liber O vel       Manus et Sagittae (Book 6);       B. Heidrick, Magick and       Qabalah; and I. Regardie,       The Golden Dawn. etc.		of his spiritual diaries, to make contact with these angelic
		intelligences.2
		It is the placement of Annael in the superior position of
		this hierarchy that is rather unorthodox. It is probable that
		Dee is identifying this particular angel with the Anima Mundi,
		or World Spirit, as predominating over the rulers of the four
3. Initiates of the VIII O.T.O.       will notice Crowley's direct       application of this formula       to Enochian Magick; see De       Nuptiis Secretia Deorum cum       Hominibus (Book 24), chs. xi       & xii; also Liber XXX AErum       vel Saeculi (Book 418). aethers       ix & ii. etc.		elements. This representation of the feminine aspect of
		nature, and the female spirit in particular, can be seen in
		the concluding plate of the first edition of Dee's Monas
		Heiroglyphica, where she is pictured grasping in her right
		hand a seven-pointed star4. This heptangular symbol is
		cabalistically attributed to Netzach, whose ruling archangel
		is Haniel, an alternate form of the name Annael. Studious
4. Ambix vol. xii. nos. 2 & 3       (June & Oct. 1964), plate iii.		attention to the phonetic exposition of his concluding note,
		as well as to the etymological and hieratical implications of the
		upper right-hand notation, will support this proposition.
		The concluding note is itself both an attempt to translate
		and to latinize the given Hebrew idiom, and in so doing to set
		forth the formative method of Dee's Magical experiments in the
		science of theurgy.

	Bibliography
	The following bibliographic citations refer only to points raised in Dee's actual text. Our readers should note that this bibliography is cumulative over the course of the project, and that a comprehensive indexed listing is in the works.
	Henrici Cor. Agrippae, De Occulta Philosophia Libri III: Quibus       Accesserunt . . . (Paris: 1567). The classic overview of       Renaissance magical thought, and the source-book for Dee's       working method.
	Henry Cornelius Agrippa, Three Books of Occult Philosophy, trans.       J. F[reake] (London: 1651). English translantion of Libri III       above.
	Francis Barrett, F.R.C., The Magus, or, Celestial Intelligencer       (London): Lackington, Allen & Co., 1801; modern facsimile       reprint Ilkeley, Yorkshire: The Scholar Press). A gathering       of the essential material from Agrippa's School of occult       philosophy.          {Note to Web edition: The modern reprint is not a fascimile but a re-typing, very              defectively done, especially on the Hebrew in-line text}
	Bill Heidrick, Magick and Qabalah (Berkeley: Ordo Templi Orientis,        1980). An invaluably concise introduction to the cabalistic        use of Hebrew etymology in the Western mgaical tradition.
	C. H. Josten, "A Translation of John Dee's Monas Hieroglyphica       (Antwerp: 1564), with an Introduction and Annotations," Ambix       vol. xii, nos. 2 & 3 (June & Oct. 1964). The definitive       translation of Dee's Heiroglyphic Monad. Indispensable to       the comprehension of Dee's metaphysical theory, and useful       to the student of Dee's Latin prose.

Afterword & Acknowledgements.

This month we extend particular appreciation to Brother Clifton Cheshire, Brother Craig Brown, and Sister Caitlin Aliciane for their labor and support in bringing this project to fruition. And our thanks as always to the fellows and associates of the Center for Enochian Studies at Thelema Lodge, for the preparation of the foregoing offering.       For a copy of the manuscripts from which this month's article has been edited, with pertinent supporting materials, please send $3.00 (make checks payable to CASH) and request "C.E.S. appendix vol. I, #2." {Note to web edition: This offer is no longer in effect. Don't send money for this purpose. Included here for historyonly.}       Next month we present Doctor John Dee's Latin prefatory prayer to this his First Book of the Mysteries.

Events Calendar for March 1988 e.v.

    The viewpoints and opinions expressed herein are the responsibility of the contributing authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of OTO or its officers.

   Note to update: the addresses and phone numbers in these issues of the Thelema Lodge Calendars are obsolete since the closing of the Lodge. They are here for historic purposes only and should not be visited or called.

Thelema Lodge
Ordo Templi Orientis
P.O. Box 2303
Berkeley, CA 94702 USA

Phone: (510) 652-3171 (for events info and contact to Lodge)

Production and Circulation:
OTO-TLC
P.O.Box 430
Fairfax, CA 94978 USA

Internet: heidrick@well.com (Submissions and circulation only)