Theos-Talk Archives (October 1996 Message tl00050)

> Date: Wed, 2 Oct 1996 18:14:12 -0500 (CDT)
> From: "m.k. ramadoss" <ramadoss@eden.com>
> Subject: Re: THEOS-L digest 678
> Message-ID: <Pine.BSD/.3.91.961002181243.10913A-100000@matrix.eden.com>
>  Maurice de Montaine  wrote

>     Edward Alexander Crowley, who is better known to the world by
>his first name of Aleister, is a classic example of a lifestream who
>was once a student of the Adepts of the Great White Brotherhood but
>who turned from the Light to the dark side after approaching the Y in
>the path.

Did this happen in a previous incarnation, or after he was expelled
from the Golden Dawn (A.O. jurisdiction) by Mathers in 1905? or at
another time?  Kindly inform us, good Sir.

>     To take the right-hand path leads the traveller to the heights
>of spiritual attainment and life everlasting within the precincts of
>the Great White Brotherhood; however, to sojourn along the left-hand
>path is to take that way which leads to the darkest abyss of the

I've never checked out this neighborhood; do you know all about it?


>Black Brotherhood. So the choice was made on that occasion by the one
>who eventually called himself Chio Khan (the Beast). The name says it
>all, dear brothers and sisters in Theosophy, for no one who treads
>the right-hand path would ever adopt such a name and make it their
>own. The one who traverses the spiritual path and remains thereon is
>never the beast.

This is interesting.  Do you know of anyone else who ever called
him or her-self "the beast"?  Or was Crowley actually original here?

>     Remember this, travellers on the Way, so you can learn to
>discern the one from the other when you are confronted with the life
>history of another. In Theosophy we are taught that there is the
>right-hand path and its opposite the left-hand path. And every
>Theosophist should distinguish between the two as well as remain true
>to the Way of real Illumination to retain the designation
>Theosophist. For Theosophy is the Path of the Divine Wisdom.
>Incidentally, the Sanskrit for the right-hand path is dakshina-marga
>and those who follow this path are termed dakshinacharins, while the
>left-hand path is called vamachara and its followers vamacharins. An
>alternate appellation for vamachara is savyachara.

I beg to differ with you here, Monsieur Maurice.  These are technical
terms in Tantric Hinduism; vamachara refers to Tantric ceremonies
in which the 5 M's (including wine, which is widely used in other
religions, such as Judaism) are literally partaken of.  Dakshinachara
refers to Tantric ceremonies in which substitutes (whether physical
or meditative) for the 5 M's (kind of like Baptists using grape
fruit juice instead of wine at communion) are used.  These terms
definitely
do not refer to the "right hand path" and "left hand path" in the
theosophical sense that you are positing.  Ask any scholar of
Tantric Hinduism.


>     Crowley is generally acknowledged as having held membership and
>high position in the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn and also in

You are correct that Crowley was initiated into the Hermetic Order
of the Golden Dawn.  He was never a Chief of a Temple.  In view of
the lack of documentary evidence, some scholars of the history
of the Golden Dawn, such as Dr. Nicolas Tereshchenko, have proposed
that perhaps he was never initiated into the Second Order.  (But some
folks have even suggested this of Israel Regardie, now that the man
is dead, and cannot defend himself).

Dr. Stephan Hoeller has stated that viewing Crowley as a representative
or typical member of the Golden Dawn is a little like viewing
Martin Luther as the representative or typical member of the
Roman Catholic Church.

I would like to point out that Aleister Crowley had also been,
at one time, a member of the Plymouth Brethren, a Calvinist religious
denomination active then and still in england.


>the Ordo Templi Orientis (Order of the Eastern Temple [O.T.O.]), but
>it is not often mentioned that he was a Freemason of the Ancient and
>Accepted Rite. His 33rd degree Masonic diploma was issued in London
>during October 1910. He was subsequently expelled by the Grand
>Secretary General 33rd degree in London for conduct unbefitting that
>of a Mason.

I believe that your statements are rather misleading here, Maurice.
Crowley was given a clandestine (unrecognized) 33rd degree in Mexico.
The regular Ancient and Accepted Rite in england never recognized
this, and Crowley was never expelled.  Crowley ultimately joined
a blue lodge in France, Anglo-Saxon Lodge, working under the
Grand Lodge of France (this jurisiction of masonry was never
recognized by the United Grand Lodge of England, and Crowley himself
was never recognized as a Mason by the United Grand Lodge of England).
However, Crowley was admitted to some High-Grade rites in England;
he was made a 95th degree of the Ancient and Primitive Rite under
John Yarker in England.  (John Yarker had made one HP Blavatsky
also an adoptive member of this Rite.  Thus, in the Ancient
and Primitive Rite, Aleister Crowley and Helena Blavatsky were
Lodge Brother and Sister).

Now here is some true grist for your mill, Maurice:  Both Crowley
and Regardie were expelled from the nation of France; their passports
were stamped, and they were never to be allowed back into the country.
Does this mean that France, at least, knows how to handle these
horrible Black Magicians, Maurice?  Unfortunately, I am reliably
informed that their are 4 different thelemic OTO jurisdictions
active in this country today, one of which is headed by a violent
fascist.





>     The Beast was firmly enmeshed in the depravity of inordinate
>sexual activities and psychic delvings. I noticed that the former has
>been somewhat mentioned on this Theosophy list in the sense of sexual
>activity, but from a point of not being certain of whether this is
>legitimate or not in the life of a spiritual aspirant. Well, ordinate
>sexual relations are deemed acceptable but not the inordinate and
>perverted sexual expressions indulged in by Crowley.

There are some who would say that Leadbeater also engaged in perverted
sexual expressions.  Was Bishop Leadbeater also on the left-hand path,
Monsieur Maurice?  If so, just when did he reach that Y?

>Also, the real
>aspirant to spiritual attainment is not drawn by the phenomenal that
>is the psychic realm. This has been pointed out by the Masters
>themselves, Blavatsky and numerous other enlightened souls of Light.

That psychical phenomona played a huge role, or claims thereto, in
Blavatsky's role, is well documented.  Witness the numerous
manifestations of letters, not to mention apports of all kinds, which
were no doubt necessitated by conditions in pre-internet days.

>     Add to the above another, as in the pamphlet issued in 1935
>entitled Audi Alteram Partem (Hear the Other Side) by Dr H. Spencer
>Lewis, the Imperator of the Rosicrucian Order (A.M.O.R.C.) and holder
>of a charter of the O.T.O. direct from Theodor Reuss, the then head
>of the O.T.O., disavowed any connection with Crowley and his
>distortions within the legitimate O.T.O., etc. In fact, Dr Lewis
>considered Crowley to be a black magician.

The gilt hermetic cross sold by AMORC even today to members, is
based on Crowley's design, rather than the design of the orthodox
Golden Dawn Rose Cross.  Lewis held a Xth degree O.T.O. from Reuss,
and Crowley sued him on this basis in an ultimately failed attempt
to take over AMORC.  Crowley continued to have an evil reputation
in AMORC for many years, and in recent years, members have actually
been expelled from that Order for evincing too great an interest
in one Aleister Crowley.

>     Crowley even described his literary writings as the first
>serious attempt to place before the public the facts of occult
>science "since Blavatsky's unscholarly hotch-potch of fact and fable,
>Isis Unveiled." And he considered his new order called Astrum
>Argentum (Silver Star) as the truly occult representative of the
>Great White Brotherhood. The black magic-sex teachings of Crowley are
>indicative of the Brothers of the Shadow rather than the Brothers of
>Light.

>     I dare say many delude themselves through their own ignorance,
>ego and misconceptions. On the same token, it is amazing how many
>accept Crowley and his philosophy as being not only the genuine
>article but also spiritual. To these I say:-

>              From the unreal lead me to the Real
>              From darkness lead me to Light
>              From death lead me to Immortality.

>                       - Brihadaranyaka Upanishad






>Fraternally

>Maurice

Brother Maurice, overall I tend to agree with you about the impression
you have of Crowley; I just think that a few of your facts are
wrong or misleading.  Let some follower of Crowley defend Crowley;
I simply wish to defend the truth.

Robert
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* *
* Maurice de Montaine
  *
* E-mail: mauriced@hba.trumpet.com.au    Postal Address:   PO Box 205
  *
* Ph/Fax: Nat. (03) 6224 8105                              South Hobart
  *
* Internat. +61 3 6224 8105                                Tasmania
  *


*                         SALUTEM PUNCTIS TRIANGULI!       Australia
                       Do you know the Way?   RE Word
7004 *