Ordo Templi Orientis Phenomenon
Proto-Fascist Elements in the O.T.O.
First read:
Das Milieu des Templer Reichs - Die Sklaven Sollen Dienen. Hanns Heinz Ewers - Lanz von Liebenfels - Karl Germer, Arnoldo Krumm-Heller - Martha Kuentzel - Friedrich Lekve - Hermann Joseph Metzger - Christian Bouchet - Paolo Fogagnolo - James Wasserman. Unbequeme Aspekte in der Geschichte des O.T.O. und ThelemaEnglish Version The Templar's Reich
Here are two approximations at dialogue, where people have given their
reactions to my loosely-expressed thoughts in 'Proto-Fascist Elements
in the OTO'. JH is an an ex-member of the 'Caliphate' OTO; while KALIL
still belongs to the the 'Caliphate', and was responding to the points
I made in an early paragraph of my essay. After these two 'dialogues'
the reader will find a comment by Bryony Murds who edited the text. See
also my Online discussion with David Scriven
P.R. Koenig, Jeroen Hoogeweij (JH), Kalil and Bryony Murds
PRK: My understanding of the term 'proto-fascist' is made up of
several interlinked definitions and points of view. So what I mean
by proto-fascist is a compound of several things.
JH: A very interesting set of observations, which contains much truth.
I'm not sure, however, if the interpretational framework you
placed it in is sufficient. First of all, you defined the term
'fascistoid' as consisting of the sum total of your observations,
which nobody will accept as a workable definition. It is
impossible to obtain an operational understanding of the term
'fascistoid' out of these loosely connected observations. It's an
easy target for any self-respecting nitpicker!
Not a big problem though, because you can easily apply some
theoretical frameworks to nest your observations in. I am thinking
of two specifically: 'The open society and its enemies' (from
Popper methinks), and Adornos's tool the 'F(ascist)-scale'. In the
seventies it was very popular, and on the basis of a checklist one
could calculate the F-rating of an individual or institution. The
'Caliphate' would definitely fit this, and you have collected
enough observations and material to make a valid start on me
asuring your 'Phenomenon' on the F-scale basis, and can easily
prove why the phenomenon is an enemy of any sort of 'Open
society'.
The term 'fascistoid' turned out to be untenable in practice, so
use the term 'totalitarian' instead. Accusations of fascism were
over-used in the 1970's (whether on the basis of the F-scale or
not) and became a cliché. Nowadays historians would mostly see
such accusations as subjective value-judgements.
Another thing; you seem to have confused 'fascism' and 'racism',
though these two things don't necessarily intersect. I would start
with the hypothesis that the ontological field you recognise is
essentially both totalitarian and racist. Then you define those
terms and use them in relation to the ontological field you
defined. That would make it waterproof, in my opinion.
PRK: The short explanation that follows contains no specific sources,
but is based on my knowledge of 'Liber AL vel Legis'; all the OTO
constitutions produced by Reuss, Crowley, and the 'Caliphate'; the
various adjuncts to these constitutions, such as Libri CI, LII,
CLXI, and CXCIV; OTO rituals, including Liber OZ; and my contact
with people involved in the OTO, including recent correspondence.
The explanation also relies upon what I know of the lives of
Theodor Reuss, Crowley (such as his diary-entry for May 29th 1923),
E.T.H. Kurtzahn, H.J. Metzger, and a number of people who were both OTO
protagonists and Theosophists such as Heinrich Tränker, Eugen Grosche,
Arnoldo Krumm-Heller, and Friedrich Mellinger (although the latter was
Jewish, the TS did teach a form of racism with its idea of 'Root Races',
and therefore can be seen as implicitly anti-Semitic).
My definition of what makes someone a 'Thelemite' appears to be
narrower, however - such as the Thelemites associated with the
'Caliphate', for instance. Likewise, those in the 'Typhonian' OTO
would consider themselves to be Thelemites, yet not hesitate to
contaminate Thelemic doctrine with things from Kenneth Grant.
JH: OK. So your ontological field is the above, plus group dynamics in
Orders - applying those documents in various settings, like
attitudes their members have towards outsiders, defence mechanisms
they apply, or contrasts they recognise (fundamentalist vs.
thelemite etc), so as to create an essentially false sense of
identity.
PRK: These Thelemites consider themselves as 'subjects' - while
non-Thelemites are 'objects' - as in Crowley's "the slaves shall
serve" or Grosche's "things, objects, material". In occult terms
the Thelemite is a dichotomist, seeing themself as a superior
being or a 'chosen one', while everyone else is as nothing. This
sort of Thelemite lives in a world ruled by good and evil; of
course, as a superior being these Thelemites might reach a level
that is above that - but nevertheless the world below the abyss is
only black and white. Thelemites are trapped in such
relationships; all are victims and culprits, masters and slaves,
Gods and sub-humans, and this is mirrored in their language when
they describe their critics. On the one side the Thelemite, on the
other the (Christian, fundamentalist) Church; one one side
Crowley's 'orthodox' Liber XV, on the other Reuss's translation of
it (even though they only differ in irrelevant details). Because
they have to keep Thelemic doctrine pure (no Grant, please!) they
distort reality.
JH: This is very true for the great majority of people involved in
thelemic 'occulture', and certainly the 'newbies'... they get the
'Übermensch' attitude for at least a couple of years, because they
believe they have obtained an ideal form of being only through
having proclaimed themselves Thelemites. Also, the injunction to
be joyful all the time is taken quite literally, which leads to a
rather unnatural kind of person. What Crowley means is
deprogramming in my personal analysis, but contemporary Thelemic
orders are into the reprogramming business, just like Hubbard and
all the rest of them freaks!
I think this is a warped style of self-assertion which doesn't really
arise from true feelings of superiority at all, but from a sense
of inferiority. A common way of acting out an inferiority complex
is putting other people down. Incidentally, there is a Dutch
author worth reading in this connection, called Menno ter Braak; he
committed suicide when the Germans invaded the Netherlands. He
wrote an essay on Nazism and Communism identifying them as
'resentment ideologies', not based on a constructive ideal, but a
common focus of resentment. Such resentment seems to be the
unifying force behind any kind of totalitarian system, far more so
than actual physical oppression.
PRK: Some current writers on OTO history, practices and beliefs try to
hide the flaws in their arguments by dogmatic assertions (like
David Scriven or William Heidrick) or by verbal exhibitionism
(Heidrick again). If they can't counter their critics on the same
level, they try to transfer the argument to details and
irrelevancies - such as an excessive use of German and Hebrew
words (often spelt wrongly) to try and exhibit their supposedly
immense erudition. Or else they resort to _ad hominem_ sniping,
such as "he 's not a member", "not a member of the real OTO",
"once a peripheral insider, now an outsider", "Peter Pill Popping"
"He's kicked out", "below the anthropodiea" and so forth; they are
trying to stop people thinking by making as much noise as they
can, blocking a true exchange of ideas, and using emotive language
to defame critics. It gives a good insight into the psychology of
those who use such tricks (Heidrick starts to sound like Reinhard
Heydrich, perhaps?) and the use of such language by some OTO
'chiefs' merely reflect badly on their own groups.
If someone in a corporation was dictating company views and
policies in writing, through private emails, throughout the
company and the company did nothing to stop them, then the
company is condoning their actions and they could be held liable
if that individual said something slanderous. When such a
problem surfaces most companies immediately 'fire' the person in
order to distance themselves from that person's actions and to
show zero-tolerance of such behavior. This sends a strong
message to other employees, who value their jobs, not to be
stupid. Plus, in a Court of Law, it shows that the company is
trying to resolve such issues and is acting on "good-faith." The
same should go with the OTO. Now, you can argue that these
individuals are not speaking on behalf of the Order but legally
if the OTO "lets them speak about anything OTO in an
authoritative capacity" without saying, "Stop, you have no
authority to discuss OTO publicly" then it is, in a
round-about-way, condoning their actions. And a Court of Law
would have to determine the fine-line whether or not the Order
is liable.
JH: Oh yes, Heidrick's treife [impure] kabalah. For a while I was a
bucher [student] in yeshivah Aish Hatorah (rabbinic education in
Jerusalem) and actually read Hebrew; I think he doesn't deserve to
be called a Hebrew scholar at all, on examination of his
publications. Oh yes, there are lots of silly stupidities in the
Thelemic system that are just based on faulty Hebrew (Dr. - duhhh
- Rudd). They think for example that the letter Ayin represents an
'O' sound and base the most exotic interpretations of ON on it. Of
course Vau represents the O-sound. You know; bye-bye solar-phallic
falsity!
When other people get analytical with the 'Caliphate', they're annoyed
and immediately get _ad hominem_, like with you and many, many
others. I tried out their medicine on t93, and I must say it was
really successful. Are people that stupid? Wow... An OTO high
booboo once explained to me - when I told him was planning to
write an analysis of Liber AL showing its hypertextual function in
relation to the rest of his _corpus_ - that there was a difference
between 'Thelemic scholarship' and being a literary scientist with
thelemic texts. This sounded really weird to me. They're actually
scared of impartial scholarship and will always identify
'impartial' as 'hostile'. This is an expression of fear and
reveals a sense of theoretical inferiority. Quite justified, btw.
PRK: This sort of Thelema seeks historical legitimation; it wants to
supplant Christianity, with its litany of saints in the Gnostic
Mass, and its lines of apostolic succession. Sources that go
against its own version of history are ignored, facts are
conveniently forgotten, and anyone who dares criticise them is
denounced. And sometimes, without even mentioning critics, these
critics' findings are sedulously plagiarised as the official
Thelemic line. I doubt, for example, that 'Caliphate' would
publicly admit that I have discovered many valuable new
'landmarks' for Thelemites. There is an endless repetition of
their own version of history - just like the Nazis. For example,
the 'Caliphate' claim that they had the OTO degree-rituals in 1971
(although the 'Caliphate' was non-existent before 1977).
JH: This is what the present Caliphate made of it indeed. The way the
KEW ritual was constructed shows that pretty well, or the way they
go about 'becoming a soldier of Thelema' - and the crucifixion of
a frog is very funny! They just impose their own reality; historic
falsification is their middle name... but on the other hand...
true authenticity is an illusion. Where should you draw the line?
Sometimes the 'Caliphate' seems like a self-therapy group for
people who had a problematic Christian background, unlike me. I
could never relate to that.
PRK: The concept of Thelema attracts people with a positive self-image
and tendencies towards self-delusion and conceit ('homo est
deus'). Human beings are not equal, and life is according to
Darwin - "life is hard, only the strong survive" (Liber OZ). This
self-aggrandisement is often nourished (or acts as a compensation
for) a devaluation of the outside world. Some Thelemites are
obsessed with Crowley (who can hardly be described as an
integrated or coherent personality) and change their own lives to
mimic his - which reflects their own previous instability, since
they all seem to have had ego, sex, or drug problems before.
JH: Nope... I definitely don't think they have a positive self-image,
though I do agree with the delusional notion. They're trying to
compensate for inherent inferiority complexes, and this is one of
the reasons why those people end up in a club like the 'Caliphate'
- it's about re-inforcement. Crowley mentioned people who, before
joining an Order, were experiencing what he called the 'trance of
sorrow'; people joining his club have a recognition of this trance
- and once you're in, you're supposed to have transcended it -
"remember all ye that existence is pure joy". Obviously one's life
is just as shitty or even shittier, but you have to conceal that
because you're supposed to have been 'transformed' now, and be
joyful all the time. In the minds of nearly all 'Caliphate'
members, the fact of their dramatic initiation already presupposes
illumination. Very insecure people indeed. And with such a
resemblance to the methodology of their supposed enemies, the
'charismatic' Christians. Awful... people who lived bad lives, and
then saw the light one day - which enslaved them - and now they
walk around with that dreadful _smile_... yuk!
PRK: Organised Thelema like the OTO tends to attract juvenile
personalities who often suffer from troubled relationships; once
in the organisation, they find themselves at the centre of
attention in things like rituals, and thereafter become 'superior
beings'. The idea of an 'order' of Thelemites which exists to
serve the ideal of a 'secretive and chosen' society lightens the
burdensome need for subtlety in thought; inside the Order are
friends, but outsiders are enemies against whom the Order offers
protection. It all seems very exciting; instead of being a mere
talking-shop it offers 'action' in the form of initiation.
JH: I fully concur. Observing the population inhabiting the
'Caliphate', it must be stated that the average OTO member can be
called a juvenile society misfit. I saw a lot of a 'Trainspotting'
kind of youngster (if you saw that movie)... Not eccentric, but
simply uneducated or half-educated and/or impoverished - jobless
teens and tweens. I witnessed many different 'Caliphate' groups in
various countries, and the whole bunch without exception resembled
some sort of trailer-park population. I may go as far as
connecting certain social groups as the target groups of the OTO -
juvenile lower-middle-class people. It's just like it was in
Nazism: look at the way the SA was 'marketed' in the thirties, and
you'll find 'Caliphate' resonances.
To a large extent, it's a wish to escape a _petit-bourgeois_ life,
concieved within a _petit-bourgeois_ frame of mind, and born of a
large portion of resentment projected on whatever comes to hand.
PRK: The language of Thelema is an attempt to render rational thought
superfluous, and for this purpose it uses craftily manipulative
tricks to camouflage its real meaning: "The method of Science, the
aim of Religion", and so on. Thelema has to disguise itself to
hide its true nature; if Thelema equals Crowley, it also equals
spermo-Gnosticism. It uses euphemism, irrelevance, and perversion
of meaning to achieve its ends: if it speaks about "family",
"duties", "privilegies", or a desire to "make the world a nobler
place", why then is Thelema so very preoccupied with things like
evoking demons to destroy enemies? Nuit, Hadit, and the rest of
Egyptian mythology are revised to suit Thelemic tastes, and
reduced to the level of a soap-opera. This revisionism calls for
Thelemic research, so that the elements of all myths may be
reduced to a table of correspondences. And of course, there is
only one person who knows the 'correct' interpretation...
JH: Yes... in this context, it's interesting to see how Hubbard
adopted OTO principles to his Scientology structure, how he made
rational thinking superfluous by making someone 'clear'. The
definition of a clear is quite identical to someone doing his
'true will'; the whole setup is a trapping process. Comparison
with Scientology makes that more evident.
And regarding your camouflage remark, taking their abuse of the
term 'science' as an example: I'd like to envision myself as a
scientific illuminist, and am very willing to test all kinds of
yogas, rituals, pujas, self-change things and whatever, to see if
it works out in my existential analysis (in the Heideggerian sense
of 'Dasein'). An important factor in science is experiment (I
think the true name of the science would be 'Soteriology', not
'Scientific Illuminism'). When I started to work as a probationer,
I worked a yoga discipline in a Mahayana context, and had
completed the Crowleyan basic yoga curriculum. I believe the
Tibetans obtained a proficiency in yoga not to be found in
Thelemic circles, and that Thelemic work might develop by studying
other disciplines. It is perfectly scientific to test previous
theories by trying to find faults in them - but it is not at all
scientific to proclaim Crowley's system the be-all and end-all of
spiritual development. Trying to find faults in a theory is not a
hostile act, as the 'Calipornians' presuppose, but the very way
science develops. This attitude reveals them as dishonest.
So as a probationer of Breeze's A\A\, you take an oath to perform all
practices of scientific illuminism, as you deem yourself fit (I
forget the exact wording of the oath). I told them that I was
investigating the Tibetan Tantric realms, but I was actually
forbidden to do so, and instead ordered to start all over again
with basic excercises from Crowley's 'Class B' publications. This
implies that the A\A\, at least as represented by this lineage, only
admits Crowley's instructions as being scientific. That makes them
a restrictive sect based on faith.
PRK: As a doctrine, Thelema (be it disguised as "the new Aeon", "the
new religion", the "new magick" or whatever) will generally
"pretend" and "claim", but rarely try to prove a thing objectively
on the basis of evidence; therefore it could validly be claimed
that Thelema is as much a prejudice as a belief-system. As the
inventor of the doctrine, Crowley is seen as unfallible, and the
only standard;
discussion of 'Liber AL' is forbidden, and only
AC's three written Comments are permitted. Adherence to the
Crowley-cult (a strict following of his "teachings", "orders",
"ideas" etc.) produces, step-by-step, a state of divorce from
reality. A trend has started among Crowley cultists of
differentiating between the "man Crowley" and Crowley the
"Thelemic prophet". This limits the ability to think objectively
or critically, and substitutes activism, beliefs, cultishness,
ritualism and myth.
JH: Yup... they manipulate with terms, applying them to label things
otherwise than their conventional meaning. They attempt to attract
people with 'radiant' language, which refers to other things on
closer examination.
PRK: Thelema wants to communicate its ideas to the world. It
evangelises with the ultimate aim of destroying society's
standards. It frequently claims that it is performing an
educational task, with its 'Colleges' of Thelema, its 'Schools of
Hermetic Science' its 'Seminars on Gnosticism', and through the
OTO order structure as well. But what does a 'school' that teaches
ideology remind you of?
JH: Hmm... though I believe that notion was already in place at the
very root of the OTO (the 'Academia Masonica'), and obviously the
A\A\ teaches as well. However, the teachings are not based on
science, but have been frozen as dogma; exactly the kind of thing
the 'Cloud upon the Sanctuary' warned against.
PRK: Thelema has to be ready for criticism, and therefore uses a
tactic of 'restricted rationality' where its representatives learn
set arguments that have the twin advantages of supporting their
doctrines and excluding criticism. This tactic, augmented by the
dissemination of disinformation and suppression of facts, only
serves to reinforce false self-images, and raise up imaginary
bogeymen - as may be seen in the 'Caliphate' lawsuits against the
Haenssler Verlag, and against Symonds/Naylor/Mandrake Press.
JH: Yes... the famous spin-doctoring.
PRK: The concept of an 'Order' reinforces its members' experience as
'we/us' (rather than 'I/me'), and helps to repress and
depersonalise inviduality of thought and deed - these
reinforcements and repressions are also found in many of Crowley's
instructional Libri, and in the A\A\'s exercises. The people in the
Order must be of one mind, for example in their attitude to
external 'claimants' and critics, and must accept their position
and/or grade in the Order. Dynamic group processes create
pressures to conform in uniform reactions, verbal stereotypes in
passwords and stock phrases ("the fundamentalists hate us"),
standardised symbolism (729 = Baphomet, the Order's 'lamen', Nuit,
Hadit, and son on). All these serve as substitute for rational
analysis and experience, and encourage the prejudging of issues
and intolerance of external criticism.
JH: I don't entirely agree... depersonalisation is part of the
trajectory in most mystical systems I'm aware of. Vide the
'Tongleng' (exchanging self for others) excercises in Tibetan
Buddhism, and Meister Eckhart, for example. Deprogramming is one
thing, but the actual bite is in the reprogramming.
PRK: And then there is nationalism: what makes a nation? What are
'they' X° of? Is there a X° of the English-speaking territories?
Or is it defined by geographical or political rules? Or do you
assume that as nation is defined by "those belong to a nation are
those who WANT to belong to a nation"?
JH: This could be taken in a magickal sense, and refer to the status
of the Priest-king in the 'Golden Bough' (someone in for a
killing?) In my personal view, the concept of the nation state is
a nineteenth century antiquity, ready to be thrown out as junk
together with some other concepts in the OTO structure which smell
of old mothballs.
PRK: Keeping all the topics above in mind, would you now find it
easier to answer my question about the psychological mechanisms
which allow people to differentiate between Crowley and Thelema?
And also, would you agree that people who have joined the Order or
converted from another religion find in it a stabilisation for
their ego - or even a new identity?
JH: As you're probably aware, Kundalini work doesn't exactly induce a
stable personality, and mystical experience isn't identified as
stable either. One of the more important people in the field of
the cultural history of mystical experience, J.B. Hollenback (in
_Mysticism... Experience, Response and Empowerment_), describes
mystical experience as the other side of the coin of
schizophrenia. The essentials of the Order are in their own view
the Kundalini thing (or so Markus Jungkurth told me), so I don't
feel the 'Caliphate' actually claims to give you a new identity,
or a more stable personality.
PRK: So what about an increase in their power within society?
JH: There are old OTO constitutions which claim all sorts of business
co-operation, but it doesn't work like that in practice.
PRK: Do they get enhanced social abilities?
JH: Nope, actually being socially outcast, and trapped in a
self-referential and isolated system.
PRK: Have they changed their landmarks?
JH: What - Masonic landmarks? Bwahaha!
PRK: Have they become more open?
JH: I do not think the OTO formally connects spiritual development
with the advancement in degrees, though contradictory statements
can be found.
PRK: So how about them becoming less depressed, not feeling so
inferior, and generally cheering up, then?
JH: I have witnessed quite the opposite... strangely enough, people
very often work themselves into some sort of spiritual crisis when
working through the initiation system, and there is certainly a
higher percentage of depressed people inside the 'Caliphate' than
outside it (this counts for 'occulture' in general, though).
PRK: How often would they have 'trance' experiences?
JH: Well, I did! But then again, I also had them before I joined the
OTO. The order wasn't quite the vehicle for inducing that sort of
thing...
PRK: Would you say that members accept things more easily than before
they joined - things like out-of-the-body experiences, or enlarged
consciousness?
JH: I have always been quite accepting, so I wouldn't know. Nope... no
measureable influence from the 'Caliphate'; actually, my magickal
activity _lessened_ when I joined OTO.
PRK: Do they experience unusual mental or physical states, and then
get an understanding of them?
JH: Not at all. The teachings given after the initiations are very
superficial, merely scratching the surface of what is suggested in
the rituals, in my opinion. I published the initiation papers on
my website, because they're useless anyway - if one would actually
_want_ to attach one's spiritual reference-system to the symbolism
of the 'Caliphate'.
PRK: Would you agree in general that many people who had fears, no
goal in life, a sense of futility, or a feeling of hopelessness
_before_ they joined the OTO, now have a method of dealing with
these things?
JH: They imply it, but when asked straightforwardly, they will evade
it by stating 'Do what thou Wilt' or something useless like that.
PRK: In that context, I'd like to ask why Heidrick so often expresses
satisfaction at the high proportion of Jewish recruits to Thelema
and the OTO?
JH: Hmmmm...
_______________
KALIL is Marlene Cornelius, wife of Jerry Cornelius
KALIL: Before proceeding, I must state right up front that I am very,
very sorry that your experience with Thelemites has led you to
these conclusions. I do not doubt that you have encountered many
who fit this description but then there are equally many who do
not. I can vouch for this fact...not all of us are Scrivens or
Heidricks or Breezes. Unfortunately for Thelema, they are the more
vocal and visible. Many of us simply live our lives and practice
our Magick without such glamour or fanfare. Even the people on
the world-wide-web are not very indicative of the majority of
serious people I've met. I would like to take this opportunity to
counter-balance your statements with my impressions. Take them for
what they are: mine. I am sure you understand that no offense is
meant to your own ideas.
PRK: ...these Thelemites consider themselves as 'subjects' - while
non-Thelemites are 'objects' - as in Crowley's "the slaves shall
serve" or Grosche's "things, objects, material".
KALIL: However this is not the case, for in Thelema "every man and
every woman is a star." True, I am the subject of my own reality
and others are not as major a part in my Universe, but this is due
to my subjective viewpoint. Thelema requires one to also allow
that Others have their own Universes which are equally important
and central to their own star. If my actions impose upon another
star's course, then who am I to determine that they are out of
orbit? Perhaps it is my own star out of orbit. Thelema demands
self-knowledge and reflection. Have you read the wonderful essay
by Jack Parsons on 'Freedom is a Two-Edged Sword'?
PRK: In occult terms the Thelemite is a dichotomist, seeing themself
as a superior being or a 'chosen one', while everyone else is as
nothing. This sort of Thelemite lives in a world ruled by good and
evil; of course, as a superior being these Thelemites might reach
a level that is above that - but nevertheless the world below the
abyss is only black and white.
KALIL: Again, this is not implicit in Thelema, although many who call
themselves Thelemites may like to think it is. I am a firm
Elitist... but that does not mean that I must negate others to
prove it. In fact, one who stands upon the heads of others to feel
themselves tall is usually only an emotional cripple who has no
firm Knowledge of his own Godhood. I revel in my brothers and
sisters... the beautiful stars in their shining glory! I have met
many Satanists who deny existence and live in a hate-filled a nd
dark world, but this is not Thelema. "Beauty and strength, leaping
laughter and delicious languor these are of us!" Perhaps one could
claim it Hedonistic, but this world is indeed our plaything... for
our experience thereof.
I also see that you have no understanding of "the Abyss". It is not
of this plane at all... rather it relates to the inner, spiritual
places of the psyche itself. Thelema is very much into the
Raja/Gnana yogas... going inside Self. Finding the balance.
Thinking of things in "black and white" can only ever be a Lie.
Dichotomy is only one part of the formula, it is 2. The entire
formula reflects that it cannot exist apart, 0=2. The Thelemite
does not revel in the 2 but strives for the 0. That it cannot
exist inside of incarnation is the wonderful play of this thing we
call Life. The eternal play of light and dark. Black and white are
but reflections of this and each is equally beautiful and also a
Lie.
PRK: Thelemites are trapped in such relationships; all are victims and
culprits, masters and slaves, Gods and sub-humans, and this is
mirrored in their language when they describe their critics. On
the one side the Thelemite, on the other the (Christian,
fundamentalist) Church; one one side Crowley's 'orthodox' Liber
XV, on the other Reuss's translation of it (even though they only
differ in irrelevant details). Because they have to keep Thelemic
doctrine pure (no Grant, please!) they distort reality.
KALIL: Oh my God! How utterly tragic is this picture! No wonder you
don't like Thelemites. However, I see the Thelemite as struggling
to be free from such limitations. "Let no difference be made among
you between any one thing and any other, for thereby there cometh
hurt." I adamantly refuse to be anyone's Master... in fact I only
try and struggle to be master of my own Self (this is difficult
enough!). True, I feel some are indeed subhumans - but that is not
a negative appellation, but a statement of fact. These poor
creatures must be helped; but not at the cost of my Self. Rather
as a service to my Self. The curse of the Avatar... the aim of the
Great White Brotherhood... is that the entire human race must
evolve together... each individual can only progress so far as the
species is capable and then we must reach a gestalt. Let me help
you see the big picture, so I can eventually turn the page!
Anyone who claims to be or keep the "pure doctrine of Thelema"
should be treated as the misguided mental case that they are. So,
how do I reconcile this with my own beliefs as set out in my
discussion above? Simple. This is my Understanding, my Universe. I
do not expect another to accept it nor will I allow another's
impressions to carry more weight within it than my own. I believe
that a Star is an aggregate of experience and that all events are
attracted to it by its own force. These experiences are the
necessary building blocks of my Universe and no other can perceive
them as I do. Thus I am I and other is other. And yet the
interaction of the 1+1 can aid both. My experience of reading
Crowley and the Bible are not contradictory, but rather a
synthesis by my very experience of them. Well.
I have so far responded just to your first paragraph... and I find
myself left with even more questions than when I started. Is this
of any use to you? I hope you do not mind my refusal to accept
your view of Thelema. It is no matter to me in any case, but I
wanted to express that it is not ALL like you have seen, or wish
others to believe.
_______________
Comments by Bryony Murds who edited above text
JH's comment "...consisting of the sum total of your observations,
which nobody will accept as a workable definition" has some
relevance. You frequently make reference to such 'keywords' (by which
I assume you mean 'definitions') and yet they can be hard to pin
down, either because they are defined in another piece of yours, or
else you are assuming the reader has prior knowledge of them. I'm not
suggesting that you start each essay with a dictionary definition
like some lumpen-Rotarian giving a lunchtime talk - but I think it
might be helpful if you provided a list of these definitions as a
separate item on the website, or else descended to the expedient of a
'F[requently] A[sked] Q[uestions]' section like everybody else (I
know an FAQ sounds horrible, but grit your teeth, dear chap!)
Although you reject the 1970's fashion for accusations of fascism
(with some justice - it became a kind of intellectual totalitarianism
in itself) JH's point about the 'F-scale' is a valid one, at least in
helping in providing a clear definition of totalitarian tendencies in
the OTO. I suspect the 'F-scale' has now been superseded; I know that
Amnesty International has devised a checklist for detecting
totalitarian tendencies, and there is also a list for evaluating
cults that I saw used very effectively on an anti-Scientology
website. I think both of these would be useful in helping to tighten
up your admittedly 'loose' initial thoughts.
I have altered your original comment about the TS teaching
anti-Semitism, as (to the best of my knowledge) there is no evidence
that they were any more or less anti-Semitic than anyone else at the
time. The 'Root Race' business - which wasn't really HPB's idea, but
a later accretion from the Leadbeater/Besant era - was certainly
_implicitly_ racist, and was abused and distorted later in things
like the Thule Gesellschaft &c., but it was a reflection of attitudes
_then_, and should not really be adduced as evidence, except as a
_precursor_ to current - and different - OTO bigotries.
Then there is the point about Thelemites as 'subjects', and
non-Thelemites as 'objects'. Although I'm sure that JH's comments
about ontological fields are right, you both seem to have missed out
on an obvious source for such ideas in Nietzsche (even though JH
later uses the word 'Übermensch'). I'm sure this could be developed
in terms of comparisons with later misunderstandings and distortions
of Nietzsche into mean-spirited stuff like Thatcherism or
Reaganomics. It leads me to speculate why so many OTOites are ageing
hippies (e.g. McMurtry, Breeze, Heidrick) who, having found peace and
love a defective philosophy, did a _volte-face_ at some stage in the
1970's, and evolved into snaggle-toothed proponents of social
Darwinism? They do seem to bear a generic resemblance to people like
Abby Hoffman, don't they? How many of them voted Reagan into power?
How many of them have read - not Darwin or Nietzsche, as they
probably haven't got the brains for that - but things like Ayn Rand's
crypto-fascist drivel? Perhaps this spirit also accounts for the
increased interest in sado-masochism generally, and all these
blood-and-sperm-soaked rituals among the Thelemites specifically?
JH casts doubt on "Heidrick's treife kabalah". This is a trifle
unjust, as any Qabalah to do with occultism is _ipso facto_ going to
be 'treyf' (literally 'impure' or non-Kosher) to a presumably Jewish
ex-yeshiva-bucher like JH. In GD terms, Heidrick did do some original
and accurate work years ago, as in his 'Magical Correspondences'.
It needs to be emphasised that there are two broad schools in
Qabalah: historical Jewish mysticism as expounded by Gershom Scholem,
and the Golden-Dawn inspired occult one as found in Dion Fortune -
and almost never shall the twain meet, it appears.
The historical Jewish variety is very definitely a tradition, and has
changed very little since the mid-19th century (hardly surprising,
considering the havoc wrought on Judaism in Europe by pogroms and the
Diaspora); presumably it was a version of this which JH found in his
yeshiva when he was studying Torah - the Qabalah of 'gematria',
'temurah' and 'notariqon' used to interpret the odder bits of Hebrew
in the Torah in some Jewish seminaries - which is what yeshivas are.
On this side of the Qabalistic divide you _could_ include such
aberrations as 'Ze'ev ben Shimon Halevi' (aka Warren Kenton,
previously famous for his books on amateur dramatics) and his dreary
plagiarised Gurdjieff masquerading as 'the way of kabbalah'; or the
modish Hollywood cult of watered-down Baal Shem Tov that has
attracted such great thinkers as Madonna, Jerry Hall and Roseanne -
because they both nominally originate from Jews - but they are firmly
in the occult camp, from what I can see.
On the occult side, Qabalah has blossomed in all sorts of un-Jewish
ways, with much more emphasis on the Tree of Life, and still more on
the Tree's paths, than is found in the Jewish tradition. Scholarship
(of a sort) and accuracy are occasionally to be found, but mostly the
occult Qabalah is - to be charitable - a creative, poetic exercise,
where æsthetics matter as much as scholarship. Otherwise, why is
there such emphasis on correspondances in occult Qabalah, where the
Tree is populated with rainbows of colour, all manner of myths,
deities, angels, spirits, and devils, perfumes, plants, minerals,
astrology, and a welter of symbols - except as an essentially
artistic form?
Enough of this excursus; JH mentions Dr. Rudd and faulty Hebrew,
which is quite true - he was an 18th-century vicar who tried to
transliterate the names of the spirits in the 'Goetia' grimoire into
Hebrew, and made a complete hash of it, as the 'Goetia' is not of
Hebrew origin. But even Mathers (in his MS. of the 'Goetia' which
Crowley pinched and published) as a _fons et origo_ of occult
Qabalah, said that Rudd was wrong; and Heidrick didn't use Rudd. As
for 'Ayin' not sounding like 'O' - well, how 'Ayin' sounds (it's
often called 'rough breath' and is classified as a 'vowel carrier' in
Hebrew grammars) depends on which vowel-sign you put with it, or what
other letters precede or follow, as is the case with any Hebrew
written out in full. And of course, while written Hebrew is
consistant, the same cannot be said of spoken Hebrew - even within
the Sefardi and Ashkenazi dialects there are variations. The
interpretations of 'ON' do not originate with either Thelema or the
OTO, but come from Freemasonry, where the name of Solomon is
expounded as SOL-OM-ON (SOL Latin for 'Sun', OM the Sanskrit 'Aum',
and ON various obscure Near Eastern stuff). Therefore the 'Caliphate'
are no better or worse than United Grand Lodge in perpetuating an
18th-century ætiological myth.
JH then proceeds to the 'Caliphate's' _ad hominem_ attempts at
character-assassination; part of the problem is that they probably
ARE as stupid as he seems to think. Intelligence has never been a
real advantage in rising to the top of a cultic dung-heap, so the
Kremlin-mouthpiece style of their public insults comes as no
surprise, if one assumes that their spokesmen have an apparatchik's
mentality. To look at this from another viewpoint, one should
remember that bullies are usually compensating for being dimwitted -
and what else is the 'Caliphate' doing both internally and
externally, but trying to bully people?
Another reason they tend to offend us as Europeans could simply be
the cultural differences; the UK and US are said to be 'divided by a
common language', and I suspect the UK and Helvetia have far more in
common with each other than they do with the USA - in terms of
population-density and length of history if nothing else. The USA had
as many German-speakers as English-speakers around the time of the
War of Independence, and this Germanic quality still shows in some
parts of the American character. It used to be said of Germans before
WWI that they were 'either at your feet or at your throat'; an unfair
generalisation about a whole nation, but one which certainly has some
applicability to the 'Caliphate' - or Heidrick (how many other
'Caliphate' members are of German descent, I wonder?)
JH's anecdote about "Thelemic scholarship" shows that the 'Caliphate'
ignores both scientific methodology AND literary criticism.
Presumably by Thelemic scholarship the "high booboo" meant a kind of
uncritical elaboration of symbolic connections in the Thelemic texts,
which, while it might be æsthetically pleasing, is merely adding to
an already overloaded body of supposed 'correspondences' which are
largely self-referential and only internally consistent; rationally,
this is as much use in the real world as Hubbard's Scientology texts,
and is on the same exegetical level as the Jehovah's Witness
interpretation of the Bible. Once again, they fear real creativity,
because a proper analysis (scientific and literary) of Crowley and
his writings would yield results that would upset their
tightly-constrained _Weltanschauung_.
So of course they will try to stamp out any signs of empirical
reasoning (I think empirical reasoning what what JH really meant);
the 'Caliphate's' ideas are perforce fixed in stone because they are
just as much a cult as the Branch Davidians, and reality must not
interfere in their microcosm. If the 'Caliphate' ever do reject their
Sisyphean ideology, and admit that Thelema is NOT a science, but a
subjective religious philosophy with a limited application to
essentially immature people, they might make th emselves look a
little less foolish. They refuse to admit that 'the man Crowley' did
indeed have a very strong effect on 'Crowley the prophet', for if
they applied even that tiny bit of common-sense, they would see that
as a sociopathic and megalomaniac personality Crowley was bound to
inflate his fundamentalist background and Reuss's obscure
pseudo-Masonic sex club (to list just two factors) into apocalyptic
prophecies of worldwide Thelemic social and sexual revolution. As one
of Crowley's contemporaries said, 'thank Heavens he was never drawn
to politics!'. But being part of an 'elect' who are in on the
ground-floor of the revolution is always going to appeal more to the
inadequates ripe for Thelema, than being an eccentric artistic
fan-club...
I think that JH fails to make a sufficient distinction between art
and science, but if he wants to be a "scientific illuminist", then
good luck to him; I hope he realises that he's attempting something
that's left the greatest minds since Goethe stumped! For myself, I
doubt if the division between the 'two cultures' of science and art
can ever be bridged satisfactorily. This shouldn't stop us trying to
bridge it, but ultimately I fear it is destined to remain one of the
great enigmas in human nature and culture.
Again, where JH refers to Thelemic "manipulation" of "terms", there
is a valid comparison to be made with George Orwell's _Nineteen
Eighty-Four_; specifically 'Newspeak' and 'doublethink'. (I've
actually slipped a reference in to that, as it fits so well).
Orwell's Ingsoc Party was of course supposed to be a political party,
but as a totalitarian oligarchy it certainly displays characteristics
found in modern exponents of Thelema - the deliberate alteration of
the meaning of words, before those words are used in a restricted
vocabulary that maintains internal consistency, but limits external
applications. When JH talks of "'radiant' language, which refers to
other things on closer examination", it makes me wonder what
proportion of Thelemites have had any sort of higher education, and
if they _have_ had higher education, what proportion of them studied
an arts subject, where the critical faculties are trained? Not many,
I'll bet. People who think they are scientists, or using scientific
reasoning always make better fanatics.
Perhaps the dull-witted average 'Caliphate' member is why Heidrick
rubs his hands together gleefully at thought of the the number of new
Jewish 'Caliphate' recruits; in the USA, Jews tend to be better
educated than average - so to Heidrick they might represent a
compensatory factor in ameliorating the 'Caliphate's' tendency to
blunt its member's intellects. And of course, Jewish Americans tend
to be better off on average as well, so Heidrick is doubtless also
thinking of keeping the 'Caliphate' coffers well-stuffed. Or perhaps
with his slight experience of it in the Qabalah, he sees Judaism as a
dangerous (because intellectual) opposing force to Thelema; as a
legalistic religion Judaism usually creates a _modus vivendi_ between
logic and instinct, and is therefore to be feared by the proponents
of 'force and fire' - and once Heidrick's converted all the Jews to
Thelema, he can start on the Moslems, too!
As to 'Kalil', what on earth is he (or she) doing in the 'Caliphate'?
I assume he's in the English branch, to judge by the spelling and
phraseology, so perhaps those strictures on the "Scrivens or
Heidricks or Breezes" can be expressed more freely here than in
'Caliphornia'. If this is so, then it shows that Clive Harper is
running a less proto-fascist affair in the UK, and pursuing a British
policy of compromise and 'the middle way'. I exclude from this such
people as the Riettis, or Fernee - they would have been expelled from
any half-way decently-run group of any sort.
There's a telling phrase in Kalil's "Many of us simply live our lives
and practice our Magick without such glamour or fanfare" - precisely
the opposite of the attitude on the other side of the Atlantic; and
his comment on the Internet betrays what a heavy presence the
'Caliphornians' and all their immoderation and immodesty have there.
With "every man and every woman is a star" Kalil evinces the usual
Thelemite trait of not having thought their chosen belief-system
through properly - or else of still being young. The logical result
of this misreading of Nietzsche (who can be seen as actually dealing
with creative art) would be anarchy, which despite some of its useful
by-products is unworkable as a practical political philosophy.
(Anarchist meeting; Chairperson: "Disorder, disorder PLEASE, ladies
and gentlemen!") Kalil's deadly vagueness about "If my actions impose
upon another star's course, then who am I to determine that they are
out of orbit?" would lead to some very nasty dilemmas in a truly
Thelemic world - 'Oh well, it must have been my True Will operating,
and that young mother's Will being out of orbit that meant I
accidentally nudged her baby under the wheels of that oncoming train.
But hang on: what about the train-driver's True Will? What about the
True Will of the train company? Oh, it's all VERY difficult being a
Thelemite where everyone else is one too..." Kali hasn't realised
that the sort of ultimate selfishness proposed in Thelema is a denial
of instinctive human altruism - as _vice-versa_ the sort of ultimate
altruism proposed by Communism is a denial of instinctive human
selfishness. We are complicated beings, and Thelema does not begin to
recognise that complexity - just as Crowley failed to recognise it.
Or does Kalil really think that Crowley's High Tory, distinctly
proto-Fascist views _didn't_ affect 'The Book of the Law' with "the
slaves shall serve"?
Sorry, but "I am a firm Elitist... but that does not mean that I must
negate others to prove it" just isn't true. Never mind the slight
hint of underlying insecurity in the capital 'E' in 'Elitist' (_pace_
the Crowleyan/occult penchant for adding redundant capitals); if you
are a firm élitist, _ergo_ you are part of or will form an élite; and
_ergo_ again, an élite by its very nature negates, or excludes, or
looks down on others to prove it IS an élite. I have received
Thelemic responses to that last point myself; usually some mystical
cantrip about resolving opposites with the 0=2 formula - but that is
merely ducking the issue by refusing to _think_. If Kalil wants
"Beauty and strength, leaping laughter and delicious languor..."
fine; but he'd better be ready to earn the means and time for this
hedonism without affecting the True Wills of others - or does he wish
to emulate Crowley in sponging off these others, while hoping that a
Rich Man from the West will come and save him from having to lift a
finger to be productive or remotely useful?
I also see that Kalil has no understanding of "the Abyss"; it is not
inside us, or anything to do with Yoga, but a rather fearsome stage
in the ascent of the Qabalistic Tree of Life, akin to the 'Dark Night
of the Soul'. The 'hidden' Sefirah Da'ath resides in the Abyss, and
is not an integral part of the Tree, despite the Thelemic insistance
that it is - but they've only adopted it to make the Sefiroth add up
to a Thelemically significant eleven.
"I adamantly refuse to be anyone's Master... I feel some are indeed
subhumans - but that is not a negative appellation, but a statement
of fact... the entire human race must evolve together..." A nice
triple contradiction in terms, there.
If Kalil's "experience of reading Crowley and the Bible are not
contradictory" then I can only assume he has either not looked into
either of them very closely, or he's thinking of the fairly crude
similiarities between the more sadistic bits of the Pentateuch and
Liber AL. Possibly Kalil is talking about a mystical interpretation
of both Liber AL and the Bible - but mysticism can read anything into
any text, and is not capable of rational analysis, which rather lets
his attempt to be rational down. I suspect that as someone with an
essentially artistic temparament, Kalil has actually been affected by
the subliminal similarities between the language of the King James
Bible, and that of the 'Holy Books'. But as Crowley absorbed King
James with his mother's milk, so to speak, this should come as no
great surprise. (Incidentally, the Plymouth Brethren believed that
the King James translators were every bit as inspired as the original
Hebrew and Greek text).
Oh well, Kalil seems like a nice boy (or girl) with some poetry in
his soul. If he has left himself "with even more questions than when
I started" after dealing with just your first paragraph, it shows
that he does read _some_ things carefully, and that there is still a
chance he won't easily fall prey to the artistic and Thelemic vice of
not thinking clearly. He strikes me as someone who would be far
better off in terms of artistic inspiration if he were to follow the
Golden Dawn and its version of the Qabalah, rather than thinking the
'Caliphate's' version of Thelema is anything original or worthwhile.
But he should certainly try to grow out of trying to swallow Crowley,
Thelema, and the OTO whole.
Crowley is of some value to occultists, but he is like the proverbial
curate's egg - good in parts, and needs to be treated selectively and
critically - one should never accept him at face-value. Take his
poetry as an example: apart from some clever pastiches of Browning
and Swinburne, and a rare poem elsewhere that is reasonably good, the
whole vast corpus of his verse, which he promoted as a deathless
masterwork, is almost entirely worthless. Yet true (if unconscious)
poetry may be found in his 'inspired ' writings; it may not be to
everybody's taste, but it is there nonetheless - not that Crowley
would have realised it, since for him poems _had_ to rhyme and/or
scan - to that extent he was thoroughly Victorian. He never realised
that he was much better at writing prose than poetry. In that
connection, his analyses of Buddhism are not without literary and
esoteric value, and the language and form of some of his rituals has
its own appeal; he was a competent pornographer, for those who take
such things seriously enough to treat it as literature.
But accept Thelema as a guiding philosophy of life - except in the
most theoretical and rarefied sense - and you will inevitably be
taking on Crowley the man, who is inseparable from Crowley the
prophet, writer, and magician - whatever Messrs. Breeze, Heidrick or
Grant might think. And Crowley the man was really far more 'mad, bad,
and dangerous to know' than Byron ever was; to those who knew him in
real life, he was someone who constantly cadged money, would try to
seduce your wife or husband, rarely stayed in one place for more
than a fortnight without starting a blazing row, was suspicious to
the point of paranoia, was full of grandiloquent and impossible
schemes, and was filthy in his personal habits - such as the famous
incident where he shat in the corner of a friend's dining room,
rather than ask where the lavatory was.
(There, is that enough to be going on with?)
This has set me to thinking why so many fringe (not just OTO)
characters are so overwhelmingly obsessed with 'genuine' lines of
succession - it can't just be to keep the Logos Spermatikos going, as
there are so many other non-Gnostic groups with the same lust for
'authenticity' at any price, like the promoters of degree-mills,
pseudo-aristocracies like the Carlists, or any one of the rogue
schismatic offshoots of Mormonisn, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the
Jehovah's Witnesses, the Worldwide Church of God (of 'Plain
Truth/Echte Wahrheit' fame), Scientology, Theosophy, and so forth. I
think that the likeliest explanation is probably the simplest one for
this; it's a compensatory psychological prop for insecurity and a
poor self-image. That surely accounts for part of the attraction of
even 'regular' Masonry, with its long-winded titles and secrecy;
bored businessmen get a kick out being called a Master, or the likes
of a 'Prince of the Pregnant Puffin' in the higher degrees, I'm
sure. And this sort of apostolic succession sometimes provides an
excuse to dress up in fancy robes and play-act - again, an indication
of a basic insecurity, as that could well be a comforting form of
retrogression to childhood 'let's pretend' or 'dressing up' games.
It's because they disguise this compensation and reversion by taking
it so deadly seriously that it verges on a pathological or obsessive
state. I'm not saying that it IS a pathological condition; as a
benign form of exhibit ionism I think that most use this ability to
pretend temporarily as a bit of fun, and admit it. I suspect more
integrated people with such desires express it by becoming actors, or
playing exotic games in the bedroom, rather than claiming copyright
royalties that aren't theirs, eh?
contact Bryony Murds
A fine example of how Thelemites react on critics: Jealous that we can sniff our balls without shame?
Aura of the O.T.O. Phenomenon
- Tradução Portuguesa: A Aura do Fenômeno O.T.O.
- versione italiana: Origine dei gruppi O.T.O. e la Magia sessuale
deutsche Version: Sperma-Gnosis und der O.T.O.
traduccion castellano: Ordo Templi Orientis: Espermo-Gnósticos
tradução portuguesa: Os Espermo-Gnósticos e a Ordo Templi Orientis
ceská verze: Asketictí a Libertinstí Gnostikové
Versiune romana: Spermo-Gnoza
-
traduccion castellano: Gnosticismo Correcto
Versiune romana: Gnosticism corect
- Of a similar nature: Phantoms of the Paradise and
What Will I Give For An Encore?
- Part Two: More on "The chajoth, the ‘living creations’ or “flying things”
- deutsche Version: Ekstatische Erzeugung von Kultur [overdubbed version] Die kommerzielle Plünderung der okkulten Leitfossilien
tradução portuguesa: Criação Extática de Cultura
The McDonaldisation of Occulture [update 1999]
- deutsche Version: Die McDonaldisation der Okkultur [release 2.3] Das Internet im Spannungsfeld
potentieller Schöpfung
Nosferatu's Baby -- Too Hot To Handle
- Versiune romana: Bebelusul Nosferatului
-
ceská verze: SATURNSKÁ GNÓZE
Versiune romana: SATURN GNOSIS: Adevaratul Fraternitas Saturni
- Saturn:
Raumkunst, Lebenskunst, Liebeskunst Kunst als
Gedächtnis der Okkultur?
tradução portuguesa: Saturno-Gnose: A Arte de Amar e Viver
Versiune romana: Arta de a iubi si de a trai - Gnoza lui Saturn
- The Templar's Reich - The Slaves Shall Serve
Versiune romana: Reich-ul Templier - Sclavii trebuie sa serveasca
More about all this in: Andreas Huettl and Peter-R. Koenig: Satan - Jünger, Jäger und Justiz
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
O.T.O. Phenomenon content page | main page | Aura of the O.T.O. Phenomenon | mail
What's New on the O.T.O. Phenomenon site?
Scattered On The Floor
Browsing Through The Rituals