spirituality - physics - conspiracy - philosophy - wisdom - and more...
You are not logged in. Please login or register.
Noble Realms → Conspiracy → lonelygirl15 : killed by religious cult The Order
Lonelygirl15 was killed off in the last episode of the first season, being sacrificed by religious cult The Order.
I never watched her series on youtube, but that's just weird.
Videos here:
http://youtube.com/user/lonelygirl15
From what I heard they dropped a lot of indirect symbols using Aleister Crowley and Thelema. I'm not sure of their background. They most likely didn't have any hidden agenda. Nothing devious about Crowley and Thelema, right?
What is this whole lonelygirl thing about neways? Just some girl on a webcam????
Here is something?
Lonely = 29 = 11 = 2
girl = 28 = 10 =1
15 = 6
2+1 = 3
36
666
Hello all.. been away quite a while i know.
. ~Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law~ .
LG15 did indeed use the popular image of Crowley to create a fictitious, ominous "Order" for their story.
Their only agenda was to try and make an interesting drama in new media. (not quite sure they succeeded... or maybe i'm just being peevish :-) )
They did in fact pubish a disclaimer after the complaints/comments of some thelemites to the use of thelemic imagery for their "evil order".. and no, after quite a few years following Crowley's esoteric curriculum and significant research...
(which means reading the actual content of thelemic doctrine/practice and not the sensationalitic John Bull trite that's eternally ressurrected and brandished about like a scarecrow)
... I can safely say there is indeed nothing particularly devious about Thelema.
{ -edit - Now, as far as singular people that decare themselves thelemites, that would have to be evaluated on a case by case basis. Compare Pope Leo X to St.Francis of Assisi, for example. QED.}
Crowley as a man did however, have quite a few personal issues... then again Castenada loved a good leg-pull, Gurdieff was often puffy and short of temper and Socrates was not all he could have been in the husband and father department.
But they're all dead. The lot of them.
What we have left is the doctrines and practices they've left us, and that's all that really warrants our attention. Anything else is trivia.
My twopence (decimalised):
http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=4084
93/93 ~ Kallisti!
Hello all.. been away quite a while i know.
. ~Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law~ .
LG15 did indeed use the popular image of Crowley to create a fictitious, ominous "Order" for their story.
Their only agenda was to try and make an interesting drama in new media. (not quite sure they succeeded... or maybe i'm just being peevish :-) )
They did in fact pubish a disclaimer after the complaints/comments of some thelemites to the use of thelemic imagery for their "evil order".. and no, after quite a few years following Crowley's esoteric curriculum and significant research...
(which means reading the actual content of thelemic doctrine/practice and not the sensationalitic John Bull trite that's eternally ressurrected and brandished about like a scarecrow)
... I can safely say there is indeed nothing particularly devious about Thelema.
{ -edit - Now, as far as singular people that decare themselves thelemites, that would have to be evaluated on a case by case basis. Compare Pope Leo X to St.Francis of Assisi, for example. QED.}
Crowley as a man did however, have quite a few personal issues... then again Castenada loved a good leg-pull, Gurdieff was often puffy and short of temper and Socrates was not all he could have been in the husband and father department.
But they're all dead. The lot of them.
What we have left is the doctrines and practices they've left us, and that's all that really warrants our attention. Anything else is trivia.
My twopence (decimalised):
http://forum.noblerealms.org/viewtopic.php?id=4084
93/93 ~ Kallisti!
Crowley was anything, but "evil". It is unfortunate his name is always associated with Satanism (common opinion of what is considered Satanic anyways). He obviously didn't practice a left-hand path. Aside from Crowley's personal issues, I find Thelema and his style of magic quite effective. Too bad more people don't give his writings a chance. They're quite good.
covertmetaphor:
yes they are indeed quite good and useful, even if he did sometimes fall into a "rivalry" mentality when citing his contemporaries. Today it is much easier to get to the root of the practices, too, as more recent authors have much commented and clarified (without dumbing down) his exposition.
Personally, once i finally got past the mind-block brought on by the never-ending torrent of vilification his figure is still subject to, i found his expositions to be wonderfully informative, prejudice-busting and yes, even uplifting. He also may not have been as great a poet as he liked to consider himself, but some of his work (and not referring to just the holy books here) is really inspirational.
I feel that, as with so many other things, the misconception is enforced by those factions that would keep folks chasing their tails instead of making progress. Certainly much of the noise comes from misinformed people with good intentions, repeating what they've heard... but the volume of positive material now out there and easily available, in my opinion, counterbalances and even exceeds the original slanders.
Therefore the fact that the mud is still thick on his name i think is part of the usual fare from TPTB, or the "Black Brotherhood" as the Old Sinner would have put it.
Whether one adopts his cosmogony, philosophy, and the specific A.'. A.'. practical curriculum or not, his essays and his complilation of data from comparative religion alone are worth reading for any sincere seeker.
Making sure people are put off, or even afraid to have a look-see at what he was on about is undoubtedly a great victory in obfuscation on the part of the forces of ignorance.
One thing can be said though... by getting such a scandalously bad reputation he indeed insured that now, 60 years on from his death, people are still talking about him. Personally though, i think that was only half-planned at best, at least as far a conscious planning on the part of the Man. :-)
If he wanted people to listen to him, why the "I AM THE BEAST 666" crap?
I personally like Crowley's work very much. Crowley has been more of a teacher to me than anyone else. I do even understand the 666 and 'The Beast.'
Did he ever explain what he meant by referring to himself as 'The Beast'? My best guess is from personal experience of it being a reference to biology, pan, life-force. It is indeed a crime that these things are considered 'Satanic' by the masses. Crowley's workings can lead to a dark place, but this darkness isn't the void of Choronzon, but is instead the place where the smallest filaments of life reside. Little wormy things that look scary. Beastly. The material basis of life!
That's my experience of 'the Beast.' If this is correct, it was foolish of Crowley to be so direct with it, using that word. It's a great word to describe it, and I even understand how a life-fearing St. John would chastise it in his dream/vision. But surely Crowley should have guessed that calling himself 666 Beast would forever taint his reputation in a world of people who believe the New Testament.
He relished in leaving those with closed minds at the door... of their own accord!
Anyway the accounts of his rapport with the idea, imagery and qabalistic significance are well documented, strange to see someone complimenting the works who wouldn't know those accounts...
666 means "Little Sunshine". ;-)
I haven't ready any biography. Just
777
lectures on yoga
book 4
book of thoth
books of lies
liber aleph
just to vindicate my claim on some crowley knowledge, that list. not that i've read through and through with understanding those books. one thing i like about reading crowley is that i understand a little bit more each time i go back to a book.
like the sentences open up.
Oh well, 777 should clear up 666 easily, I do hope it's the version that includes Liber D (Sepher Sephiroth).
Crowley rebelled strongly against his Plymouth Brother upbringing, and his Mother was apt to call him "The Beast 666" when she felt him a bit too antinomian, or even more simply, to be a naughty boy. He picked up a sense of the role as opposed to idiocy and prejudice, and relished the language-style of Apocalypsos (King James Version).
When he came into contact with Qabalah and Gnosticism he furthermore found the term to be vindicated and freed from the puritan accretions and Church-imposed disastrous eschatology, considering their "end of the world" to actually be the "end of THEIR world", the end of an era; not a final destination but rather a changing of the guard.
For him the Beast and the Whore were positive figures of revelation, not evil bringers of armageddon. And he had great fun with the fact that those unwilling to research even as far as apocrypha would render themselves silly by harping on the fact of "such evil pseudonyms".
I see that you have AC at both his most lucid and clear (777, 8 lectures, Thoth) and his most obscure and coded (333). Best of luck with that one ;-)
He was wont to use language both to inform the reader and to please himself with his use of it. When he tries to do both at the same time it can get quite interesting... and indeed most of his writings continue to open up a bit at a time as you absorb some, assimilate it through your own experience and the grinding of time, and come back to it.
I won't say every time i re-read, but quite often a new flower blooms in that garden for me and i've been studying that particular corpus for quite a bit now. Not sure it ever ends... actually I quite think it doesn't :-)
Remember, however verbose some passages are, it's the ones that seem exceedingly simple that are apt to have more hidden in them than appears at first read.
Noble Realms → Conspiracy → lonelygirl15 : killed by religious cult The Order
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.