GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 http://deoxy.org/taowley.htm Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 This is great! Reading it now:-) What to make of the footnote saying Crowley got the hexagrams wrong? What if he didn't? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) Do you think so K? I found it a bit turgid to read. Flowing Hands version is much more poetic. Do remember that the old rogue was a complete con man, he no more 'walked in China' than my cat can dance a tango. Closest he got to China was in 1902 scrapping with his mate halfway up K2, as you can read on page 123 here... http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/reader/0898865883/ref=sr_1_3?p=S03K&keywords=Aleister+crowley+mountaineer&ie=UTF8&qid=1355674908 Excellent new biog on AC just published is well worth looking at too.... http://www.amazon.co.uk/Aleister-Crowley-Biography-Spiritual-Revolutionary/dp/1780283849/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1355675301&sr=1-3-fkmr0 Edited December 16, 2012 by GrandmasterP 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cheshire Cat Posted December 16, 2012 In addition to what GrandmasterP said, I add that Crowley claimed to be nothing less then Taishang Lao Jun. He claimed to be Laotzu... this is quite unlikely. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 16, 2012 Do you think so K? I found it a bit turgid to read. Flowing Hands version is much more poetic. Do remember that the old rogue was a complete con man, he no more 'walked in China' than my cat can dance a tango. Closest he got to China was in 1902 scrapping with his mate halfway up K2, as you can read on page 123 here... http://www.amazon.co...&qid=1355674908 Excellent new biog on AC just published is well worth looking at too.... http://www.amazon.co...01&sr=1-3-fkmr0 turgid is an understatement ... The Tao resembleth the emptiness of Space; to employ it, we must avoid creating ganglia. watch out for that ganglia chaps! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 (edited) I know.... Dreadful. Mind you AC's 'Gangliam Style' was a big hit with the flappers in its day. it was Number 1 in the charts for six weeks I believe. Edited December 16, 2012 by GrandmasterP Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 Thank you for sharing your views. The texts are there to be read should you choose to do so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 16, 2012 I had really hoped that this might turn out to be a thread for intelligent discussion on Crowley's TTC instead of just a preemptive opportunity to discredit the man and his works. I have found moderate use in his writings and methods, and based on biographical information in Perdurabo, the assertion that he was not in China in 1906 goes directly against documented data. Why bother to post this in Hermetic at all if your only interest was to shit on it? No offense intended. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 None taken. :-) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 I already own the text in print. I still don't understand the point in you starting a thread on something and then moving directly to discredit the content of the thread. What is your purpose in doing this? ...... Why so angry? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 Ahhh, life's natural course. Get used to that bro, it's a given. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 16, 2012 one lives to serve sifu. :-) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 Turgid. I'm enjoying reading it. Must mean I'm of turbid mind today:-) No, rather what I enjoy more are his mid-phrase notings of concurrent systems and similarities and references. Given I tend naturally that way (and of course DA BUMZ has fostered it too) I feel quite at home with turgid. I was hoping for some discussion and insights into his hexagram errors. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 16, 2012 Turgid. I'm enjoying reading it. Must mean I'm of turbid mind today:-) No, rather what I enjoy more are his mid-phrase notings of concurrent systems and similarities and references. Given I tend naturally that way (and of course DA BUMZ has fostered it too) I feel quite at home with turgid. I was hoping for some discussion and insights into his hexagram errors. Well I guess it just reads a little clumsy compared to the elegance of most translations. But he was clearly putting a lot of thought/work into his version and cross relating a lot of ideas/images ... Not sure about the hexagrams ... who says they are wrong and why. Such a statement would depend on having greater insight than the Great beast himself. In symbolic language there's hardly ever a right and wrong just a myraid echoes of truth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 16, 2012 Heaven ########## ########## ########## Ch'ien #### #### {had #### #### Water Fire #### #### Li, this ########## Tui {water ########## is Chen} ########## usually is K'an} Sun ########## {had Chen, #### #### this is Li} ########## ########## ########## Air ########## Sun #### #### Earth #### #### #### #### Ken Moon #### #### ########## K'an #### #### ah right some 'mistake' here ... Joyous lake is called water and water is called moon, thunder is called fire ... Fire in in the centre ... ... so are these mistakes or just some strange interpretation? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 Well, whoever put the Crowley version into this source mentions that it was a mistake on Crowley's part. There's pre-heaven and post-heaven arrangements and (or so I've heard from an interesting mention here on TTB's years ago) another arrangement that refers to a situation other than the 'classic' pre and post heaven. I was wondering if Crowley's was that one. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bubbles Posted December 16, 2012 There's pre-heaven and post-heaven arrangements and (or so I've heard from an interesting mention here on TTB's years ago) another arrangement that refers to a situation other than the 'classic' pre and post heaven. I was wondering if Crowley's was that one. You are perhaps referring to the Zhong Tian Bagua ( Middle Heaven arrangement). It is supposed to be in the lost version of Yijing (named Gui Cang). I was taught that it is useless and attributed to Huang Di to make it more legit because pre Heaven was already attributed to Fu Xi and post Heaven to Weng Wang... It doesn't look like Crowley's arrangement.. Let's wait for viator's picture. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Birch Posted December 16, 2012 You are perhaps referring to the Zhong Tian Bagua ( Middle Heaven arrangement). It is supposed to be in the lost version of Yijing (named Gui Cang). I was taught that it is useless and attributed to Huang Di to make it more legit because pre Heaven was already attributed to Fu Xi and post Heaven to Weng Wang... It doesn't look like Crowley's arrangement.. Let's wait for viator's picture. I didn't know about that one either. What's useless about it? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) I hope the quality is good enough to read clearly. I took the picture with a camera phone rather than scanning it to avoid having to flex the spine. Thanks! Interesting. Will have to ponder. Correspondances between systems always give rise to these kinds of ?what's the word? questionabilities. Edited December 17, 2012 by Apech Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 17, 2012 Right have been having a look at this and comparing Crowley's Tree with that given by Cat in her ppf which I think is from Dion Fortune. Firstly I think its important to remember that the I Ching is a complete and self-consistent 'system' (if system is the right word) as is the Kabbalah and the Tree of Life specifically. So within themselves there is harmony and completion. It seems to be a specific 'project' of modern Hermeticism to try to place everything on the Tree of Life ... to use it as a kind of universal schema (is that the right word) for all mystical thought. So the Tarot, the planets and so on are placed on it ... as a kind of meditation to give insight. Crowley then is going along with this approach .. to maybe allow assimilation of Taoist (or at least I Ching) into his system. I don't think Jewish Mystics would have bothered to do this ... so I guess this practice started with the likes of Mirandola ... and also I think it is entirely legitimate given that the basis and history of Hermeticism is entirely this unifying of strands of thought and insight. I think Crowley enjoyed being idiosyncratic and had, to put it politely, a very high level of self confidence. I don't go along with the view that he was just a charlatan ... I think he made a serious study of these ideas and had genuine insights ... although he did mix it with a lot of 'business' as they call it on the stage. So looking at his attributions of the trigrams to the Tree I have the following questions/queries about what he does here: 1. The Tao itself is placed on Kether (the crown) which seems a little odd ... I would have thought Aim Soph ... what is beyond the tree is the place for the mysterious 'source' ?? 2. He calls Thunder Fire ... why? 3. He calls Lake ... water and Water moon. Moon usually means the phasicity of the system ... but the water trigram is often associated with the dark and dangerous ... so not sure what the consequences of this are. 4. Heaven is Da'at .... no don't get that ... can anyone explain ... I know what Da'at is and I know what Heaven is but I can't get the equivalence. .... anyway just some thoughts ... 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
三江源 Posted December 17, 2012 from Dion, for Kether clarification AIN SOPH AUR, the Limitless Light. It is out of this that Kether is concentrated. Kether is equated with the most transcendent form of God that we can conceive, Whose name is Ehieh, translated in the Authorised Version of the Bible as "I am," or, more explicitly, the Self-Existing One, Pure Being. Mathers says "The limitless ocean of negative light does not proceed from a centre, for it is centreless,but it concentrates a centre, which is the number One of the manifested Sephiroth, Kether, the Crown, the First Sephirah." Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 17, 2012 Looking in the Richard John Lynn trans. of the I Ching I see that Kan (water) has the association moon ... so I feel happier about that now. @viator ... good points all ... still not sure about Daath and Heaven though. What kind of complicates this for me is the placing of single line yin and yang on Binah and Chokmah ... Te source of the mother? @cat ... yes I get that but still not very convinced. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GrandmasterP Posted December 17, 2012 from Dion, for Kether clarification AIN SOPH AUR, the Limitless Light. It is out of this that Kether is concentrated. Kether is equated with the most transcendent form of God that we can conceive, Whose name is Ehieh, translated in the Authorised Version of the Bible as "I am," or, more explicitly, the Self-Existing One, Pure Being. Mathers says "The limitless ocean of negative light does not proceed from a centre, for it is centreless,but it concentrates a centre, which is the number One of the manifested Sephiroth, Kether, the Crown, the First Sephirah." ....... Page 208 here is handy http://gnosticfellowship.com/reading/qabalah/mystical.pdf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Apech Posted December 17, 2012 ....... Page 208 here is handy http://gnosticfellow...ah/mystical.pdf That page is about Tipareth ... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
