Posts Tagged ‘doctrine’


Perhaps the very first thing we should bear in mind, the object of highest priority, when contemplating the message of Aiwass, is the verse from Liber Legis (2:70) that reads:   “if thou do aught joyous, let there be subtlety therein”.  I.e.,  true will carries with it “millionfold joy”, so if you are to do your true will — as opposed to some ill-formed personal agendum — you simply have to learn its incredible depth of subtlety.   The whole book is
extraordinarily subtle all throughout, and the consequences of failing to
realize this, of misinterpreting the book in so many possible ways, are
severe:   “There is great danger in me;  for who doth not understand these
runes shall make a great miss.   He shall fall down into the pit called
Because, and there he shall perish with the dogs of Reason.”  (2:27.)

The atheism of  The Book of the Law is evident first in vs.20-23 of ch.1. It is in v.20 that we are told that the key of the whole ritual — in other words, the key to our new form of religion — is to be found in “a secret word” given to the prophet.   I go over all of this, albeit briefly, in The AQBL Key:   see pages 10-18. But an excellent example of the subtlety of the book can be found right here in this verse.   What I didn’t write in that segment of The AQBL Key,  is the following important insight into the full intended meaning of the word “secret” here (in The Key I really only examine its AQBL meaning), though I do note the atheistic basis of the following verses.   I’ll get back to this in just a moment.

As for those who dispense with the whole notion of religion outright, I tend
to see this as throwing out the baby with the bathwater.    It is primitive
religion that is outmoded, not religion itself.    Religion sans God,
centered instead on the mystery of consciousness,  i.e.  on Self-Gnosis and
the acceleration of the evolution of the temporal mind, bringing it to a
measure of apprehension of the underlying reality of the praeternatural
Mind, is the nature of our atheistic theological system.   Crowley is in
agreement with this: there is not only that line in Liber Oz, “There is
no god but man”, but we have other examples of his position on this matter.
E.g., the very first line of the “Blue Equinox” reads as follows:

“THE WORLD NEEDS RELIGION.   Religion must represent
Truth, and celebrate it.   This truth is of two orders: one,
concerning Nature external to Man; two, concerning Nature
internal to Man.   Existing religions, especially Christianity,
are based on primitive ignorance of the facts, particularly of
external Nature.”

Again, it is primitive religious theory that must be discarded in the
interest of science, not a liturgical theory wherein the objective is to
uncover and attain the unknown potential of the mind.

Then there is p.395 of The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, with this
line:   “The importance of religion to humanity is paramount.”  Paramount.
It is only superstitious religion that is beneath us.

Back to the “secret”.   The key to the riddle of the “secret word” that is
itself the key to our unique system of religion, is this:   that it is
“secret” in the sense that it is actually secreted into the very first
line of the very next verse. The word is “nothing”:   “With the God & the
Adorer I am nothing”.   Now look in the verse after that:   “Bind nothing!”
The atheistic creed:  “there is no God where I am” (2:23) — “I am” is
significant too, because it is the name of God according to the Hebrews;  but
note also the number of the verse, as it is the same as the Gematric value
of “I am”.   Now jump ahead a bit to 1:27-28:   “O Nuit, continuous one of
Heaven, let it be ever thus;  that men speak not of Thee as One but as None;
and let them speak not of thee at all, since thou art continuous!   None,
breathed the light, faint & faery, of the stars, and two.”   I.e., God is
“None” — not “nothing” in the sense of absolute absence of being, but
“None” in particular; and “two”, the reality of division in which we
experience infinite possibilities, is all.   Look next at verse 46:  “Nothing
is a secret key of this law.”   There we have it, as plain as day.

But the atheism of Thelema is unique as well, not your garden-variety
materialism, but much different, though it acknowledges the sanctity of
materialistic indulgence, as is healthy.   In Thelema we see consciousness
itself, independent of the brain but utilizing it as a vehicle, as a form of
energy that is not only ultimately independent of its limitation but in fact
unlimited in intelligence and linked to every other point of consciousness ad
.   What one encounters in Samadhi — an experience that very few
have truly known, and yet one that many more have either disengenuously or mistakenly laid claim to — that total manifestation of the underlying
source of all awareness across all of the cycles of time and space,
that is essentially what God is, and from the limited, temporal
perspective in which we initially find ourselves, this being seems objectively real — it is even in the possession of greater knowledge than we ourselves, in our temporary blindness, think that we are capable of.   What we do not realize until we progress beyond this limited perspective, by opening up our realization through the routine of sacerdotal work that accesses this
infinite underlying reality, is that we are not merely in the moment:   we
are at once in the past and the future as in the present;  and this greater
mind of God that is at the heart of the phenomenon called Atmadarshana, that underlies and indwells us, is really our own, on a level not ordinarily
known but which we peer into at odd moments, in dreams and in visions.

That we see multiple Gods expressed in Liber Legis should not lead to the
primitive-minded conclusion that Thelemic religion is polytheistic;  again,
it is not theistic at all, for the indwelling deity that it proposes is not
objectively real nor is it personally-limited, but simply the essence of our
own (and all) awareness.   It is our contention that the kind of spiritual
self-awakening that we undertake actually leads to our “achieving Hadit”, or
shifting our perspective to the broader one without sacrificing or
diminishing our place.   These “gods” are facets of a single reality that, as
it is unconstrained to any limitation but in every point continually, is
really nothing in particular.   They are, moreover, formulae that convey a
doctrine.   For instance, having three in one (or none) is vital to us now,
as we have advanced first out of the Aeon of Isis, the Mother, and
matriarchal cults, through the patriarchal formula of the old Aeon, that of
Osiris, the Father, finally to an ideology that embraces neither female nor
male as superior, but both equally:   i.e., the Child, who is really Baphomet,
the two-in-one Androgynous Hoor-pa-kraat and Ra-Hoor-Khuit, passive and
active, feminine and masculine.

The key thing to understand is that our form of religion does not postulate
a God apart from oneself, and consequently, there is no need for petition,
as there is in fact no God to get personally interested in your petition,
and also no need for the silly yet psychologically damaging notion of sin,
which is dangerous not only for the effect that the consequent guilt-complex
poses to the mind exposed thereto, but to a healthy social interaction as

Isis, Osiris, Horus: these might be said to be Nuit, Hadit, Ra-Hoor-Khuit;
but they are also Babalon, Beast, Baphomet (Babalon and Beast conjoined);
and too, H KOKKINE GYNE, TO MEGA THERION, and AIWASS. These are all names not of actual entities that are in some celestial cafe right now, but names chosen for their symbolic significance.

93 93/93

Read Full Post »

%d bloggers like this: