Saturday, December 26, 2015

Don't Forget To Follow This Blog's Facebook Page

Many fun and interesting things posted there as well, pretty much every day.

Example, new and excitingly vile photographic portrait of everyone's favorite Devil, Choronzon, along with an explanation of how you just might be one of his little imps. See if you're contributing, or confabulating for things lost long ago in a galaxy that never existed.

VISIT NOW!

Friday, December 18, 2015

The Black Hole of Liberty

Black hole reveals its presence by bending the light rays of a distant galaxy. And so, in terms of our perception, the existence of what is superficially not there at all, at least in terms of direct visual apprehension, is revealed as a power greater than anything we know. This is the very idea of magick (bending of perception) and the Work occultists say is the highest purpose of a properly devoted life of Light. One defines himself and reveals himself by such Works. It is not however a revealing of one's inner truth, but only of the presence of that truth as it works in the body and mind of one particular star or Hadit. Thelema as an initiatory evolution removes the suggestion that any Hadit or Great Worker needs to be anointed in a human organizational regime to be a valid agent in the Law. The only regime that matters in Thelema is Nuit's call and Hadit's answer. And that answer always starts the same: with acceptance of the ALL as a joyful noise. That is the essential liberty, out of which all else, all lawful work, proceeds.

If Thelema is the Law of Liberty, then it is a different brand of liberty, one made for this age and not the 18th century. It is a brand of liberty that chiefly depends upon self-restraint, and so an understanding of self-realized and self-regulated rules of operation and engagement. This is not restraint merely as a loss of something, but as in the gaining of something true—self definition.

And yet, for all that self-orientation, Thelemic Liberty is a path of sublimation to a higher purpose, or anyway the purpose, which is high in relation to the many lower and untrue purposes one might make of his life.

As we know, or should know, this makes the life of a Thelemite very easy—and unbelievably difficult. For it is incredibly easy to live a purpose-directed life that emerges out of a righteous devotion to principles or the Law. But it is incredibly difficult to do this in a self-generated and self-oriented way that makes a clear and correct distinction between "self" in the lower sense, of egomaniacal worship of one's reflection in the mirror, and faithful devotion to the self as the chosen tool to conduct one's business (i.e., the business of Thou) in the New Aeon.

So, we are not animals of society so much as others have been in the occult. We are not "we" at all except as a species of perception and current-sharing with others like us. We are the creatures of the future, continually being born into a past where ancient monuments are constructed, whose edifices are covered in the prophecies of the times we shall live and mold.

Do not therefore worry about the fate of humanity. It is going where it needs to be to enable the unfolding of events charted long before your eyes opened upon the stars.

Worry about and achieve the accumulation of everything, so that your liberation from it, in the definition of the only thing, shall be total.
"The Law of your being becomes Light, Life, Love and Liberty. All is peace, all is harmony and beauty, all is joy."
To understand that merely as a promise of good feeling, or as a reward for doing what you are told, is to seek comfort in the sties of swine. A liberated spirit does what is righteous because it is in his nature and no other course is open to him. He is in that respect an Angel of the Light. "All" is every potential, realized and accepted as necessary—like a bend in a mountain road one must take to advance. The only other choice is to go back or fall.

This is transcendentally horrible to the blind, who century after century beg for relief from the laws of the Universe. However, the apprehension of simple truth is joy to the enlightened, not because they delight in the "evil" potentials, per se, though some do, but because the Universe is a gloriously beautiful thing built from the inside out upon the annihilation of everything. Those with this understanding can only ever be monsters—or stars—to the asteroids.

Remember that is around such monsters that galaxies are constructed.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Friday, July 4, 2014

The "Last Generation" Argument

Originally published June 7, 2010
Written just before the Hijra began.

Now the Christians and their Old Aeon mimickers are asking the obvious and vital question. They are even making it mainstream to discuss it. Their ultimate expression of vanity, to imagine their presence or absence matters a whit to the Way.

Look there goes another rubber-tree...plant.

But I see a certain revealing light...as I have been seeing more and more this year. Unfortunately, part of becoming a Thelemic saint is losing everything. How else to shrink to the necessary point?

But the thing is, I now see a path to Thelemic hegemony that does not involve having to overthrow the dominant regimes. They, guided as they shall be, by the Old Aeon common human sentiments, which mass produce and deliver something like McDecency's, will do the decent thing---and commit suicide.

It is thus the virtuous Work of Thelemites to do one thing for now and for the time of this change. Survive.

Inheritance is a lot easier than conquering or convincing.

(jk)30—AKA Jess Karlin, Adjustment avatar for Glenn F. Wright

Thursday, July 3, 2014

Thelemic Jihad

Originally published April 15, 2010

"Now this age is pre-eminently a 'time of war', most of all now, when it is our Work to overthrow the slave-gods."—OR—"So you killed them not, but it was Allah Who killed them...that He might overthrow the disbelievers. " The first is Thelema. The second Islam.

At some point, all Thelemites know this, there will be a call from without and within the Thelemic current of divine destiny, and Thelemites will go to war. The enemy will be easy to locate, for he shall be anyone who is not a Thelemite; specifically he shall be anyone defending the faiths, powers, and practices of the Old Aeon.

If this war were declared today, it would not last long. Indeed, it likely would not amount to much of a war at all, as the vast majority of Thelemites are cute little hippies who wouldn't die for much of anything except more drugs and sprout-burgers. Their leaders, on the other hand, are pasty neg-heads, who couldn't command or plan an insurgency if their lives depended upon it, which they assuredly do not.

At most, the OTO might be able to stage a newage festival, and hope some SCA types would show up so at least an ornamental threat might be engaged against the tanks and planes and highly-trained killers of the combined militaries of the Old Aeon. Imagine Lon Milo DuQuette attempting to wipe out brigades of enemy warriors with his singing—well, OK, that MIGHT have the intended effect, but a chorus of lousy singers and magicians on the Thelemic side would not win a military battle, much less the war.

How then shall this war ever come about, and when shall it be declared, and even more importantly WON by the Thelemic side?
"It’s only too easy to form a cult,
To cry a crusade with “Deus Vult”—
But you won’t get much of a good result
from empty-headed Athenians."
Well, we get some idea about this by looking at Crowley's vision of that other religion which came close to being Thelema centuries before Thelema—and that is the martial faith of Islam. Of course we have listened to endless American meatheads tell us "Islam is a religion of Peace!", while trying to wipe enough blood and gore off the Koran to find those peaceful verses. But, the fundamental truth about Islam is that it was born, and spread, and flourished in greatness by the sword. An Islamic theological argument was the edge of a sword on the neck of an infidel. These days, the blade is used only ceremonially, to make horrific decap-vids for the Jihadist web. Generally, Muslim faithful prefer to blow motherfuckers the hell up (or down) using IEDs or suicide bombers.

Now, let me interject here that this sort of discussion is likely to make the Thelemic managers extremely uncomfortable, as it raises serious questions about their commitment to real versus carny Thelema; the real sort being that which engages in a serious manner Liber AL (LAL), and its many provocative verses; the carny brand being what OTO operates as an Old Aeon business. The latter necessarily kowtows to the laws and traditions of whatever state in which it resides, sets up the Abomination of Desolation and gladly worships it, and of course collects a living for the managers out of the blood of the ignorant members.

It is a comfortable, pestilent, pond of saturnine aspic (see Eight of Cups). But it is no training ground for Thelemic warriors, or Thelemites of any sort at all.

For anyone truly obeying "Do what thou wilt", but also truly acknowledging and accepting "I am a god of War and of Vengeance" AND "Kill and torture; spare not", understands that before Thelema can flower upon the Earth, it first must conquer and destroy the gardens of the enemy—and of course the gardeners and worshippers of those dying beds.

As we said, it is to Islam that we might apply ourselves to see what Crowley particularly valued about it, to such an extent that he even used the Islamic term "Caliphate" to describe the global goal of Thelema—world hegemony.

Many people may be surprised to learn that, at least in the view of Aleister Crowley, Mohammed was in the same holy order as himself, and was in fact, a founder of one of the "originating constituent assemblies" of the OTO.

More than this, Crowley speculated that Mohammed may have been a forerunner of the Equinox of Horus,* i.e. a kind of bridge between the Aeon of Osiris and that of Horus. Mohammed was based in the cultures and the theology of the dying gods, while looking forward in style and vigor of faith to the Aeon of war and vengeance of Horus. Thus, Crowley suggested there were aspects of Islamic faith that Thelemites should admire and aspire to copy.
*—See Old Comment to AL III, 34

One virtue of Islam, or its believers, as Crowley noted, was their willingness to "fight and die for their ideas".* Crowley constantly reminded Thelemites that a life lived in fear and compromise of one's liberty is no life at all. This is certainly not a new message of course, as most of us have heard the notion of "Liberty or Death"—which sounds great when you're young, male, drunk and not looking at much of a future anyway. To most people, that famous exhortation to fight for ideas is like a nostalgic bit of advertising, approximately the same in real force and depth of meaning as "Merry Christmas", or in these secular days maybe "20% off all housewares". It's just something some crazy guy said a long time ago that doesn't mean much of anything to anybody.
*—Crowley, Collected Works

For one thing, most of us know quite well that our choices are infinitely greater than liberty or death. If in fact that were not the case, maybe that binary would be more urgent in its appeal. But we can do many more things than be free, or completely free as we would have it, and many of those alternatives are infinitely more appealing to us than being dead. Now, of course the premise of the charge—to fight for the idea of Liberty—is that having the freedom, for example to decide what freedom even means, is a better thing than being a slave. That is the easiest way to understand it. Would you fight to the death to keep from being chained to—what exactly? A plow? A job? A set of expectations others have for you? A life that is as alien to you, though you live it every day, as a Martian meatloaf? The Devil?

And what does fighting to the death really mean? We can mostly agree I imagine that what we would prefer to do, if fighting is required, is to fight to the other fellow's death, not our own. Indeed, to have much chance to work on any future Work, we had better survive the battle to be available for it. Thus, either discretion or valor had better come to our aid, and some hard and effective training in combat wouldn't be bad either. Nobody is going to lease us a warrior's body, mind, or spirit, although we may be able to purchase mercenaries, which is to say people whose principal ideas are symbolized by little dead pieces of clinkage, to fight for us. This is what Americans have decided to do. And it has only enabled repression of liberty, because the citizens no longer demonstrate the ideals of the nation, such as those can even be agreed to, are worth fighting for.

Crowley, in that infamous exhortation to the violent defense of liberty, Liber OZ (Devil Book), said: "Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights." It is in fact the role and purpose of the Devil that calls us to liberty, and to the defense of liberty, because it is the force which pulls the Sun north (towards Life), and a Martian (individual) expression. Its counterpart, which pulls the Sun down to the darkness of Bliss, is called appropriately Death. Yet Death paradoxically yields Netzach-Victory, the apprehension of Beauty through individual valor and devotion. It is all about fighting for the Love of God, and for Love as God. And here Crowley placed Mohammed and his faith. On the opposite side he placed Buddha, and the heartless rationale of Indolence. In the synthetic position, in 6-Tiphareth, he placed himself, and Thelema,* and one can see many borrowings from the antecedents. But chiefly from Islam, is its heart and passion to express and defend the faith with complete prejudice favoring the Will and Work of God.
*—See Liber Tisharb, 10, for the basis for this discussion.

Now, you may reasonably ask what I am saying here, respecting practical action on the part of Thelemites and their organizations. Am I saying that the only truly Thelemic life must be martial in nature, and aimed at, for the time being surreptitiously, preparation for Armageddon?

Yeah, that is what I am saying.

What I am not saying is exactly when this battle shall be fought. It might happen only in the aftermath of a cataclysmic exchange of military destructive force between the OA powers. But if that happens, if that is the opening that allows the Thelemic rats to conquer the OA dinosaurs, it may be centuries before civilization can right itself into anything Thelemites, or anybody else, would wish to rule.

This may be inevitable. Human beings, faced with utter annihilation if they refuse to deny their gods and their most cherished beliefs, often choose death for everyone and everything. So it may be for the OA ministers and armies. So it may be for many or most Thelemites too.

Of course, there is another way—there usually is. And that would involve an appropriation of the OA means of command, an infiltration of its command structures, and an indoctrination of key command figures allowing for the subversion and overthrow of the various OA regimes. This is essentially the Christian method, used successfully to overthrow the pagans of the Roman Empire. That could take a very long time, and certainly would put Thelema into the position of being labeled by the old regimes as a "terrorist" movement. No doubt many Thelemites would be thrown to the lions before emperors would start declaring Thelema to be the state religion.

Finally, and I will talk more about this soon, but there is always the possibility that Crowley's writings about war and about the martial nature of Thelema were just literary exercises, or attempts to satirize religious extremism. That seems unlikely to me, since to take seriously that notion, one has to think Crowley the most devoted satirist in the history of the world. Of course, a satire taken to a globally transformative level of seriousness might have been the cosmic joke Crowley (or Aiwass) intended all along.

jk(30)—(AKA Jess Karlin), Adjustment avatar for Glenn F. Wright

Sunday, June 29, 2014

Against The Cant Of The Christo-Thelemite Mob And Their Metaphors

Arguing, unbelievably stupidly, as so many grazing Christo-Thelemites do, that Liber AL is just a book of self-transformational tips, ignores what Crowley believed about the book, and what he fought for concerning it. Liber AL is a book of Aeonic Law. And by Law is meant the irresistible conforming of human collective will to the higher Will of the Aeon, a process enabled and administered on Earth by the monarch-bishops born to rule (by right of battle): the Thelemites.
There is an argument, implicit in some of the critiques made against what I write about Thelema, that because I have misunderstood an allegedly basic notion—that Liber AL must only be viewed as metaphors for an interior spiritual exercise—my observations about any external implications of the Law, these critics assert, are superficial and indicative of someone who has suffered from a lack of proper initiation. When I rejected the assumption the "basic notion" was correct, and argued instead for what Crowley had argued for, that the external and surface meanings of Liber AL also have relevance, the criticism devolved pretty quickly into a defense of petty tribal beliefs and loyalties.

Here are a few examples of this offered lately on Facebook:

“Glenn Wright—I have a question for you Baby Boom: Why are you even here? If you think you're original in what you're doing you're not. Have been down this road numerous times already... some Baby Boomer asshole writing articles or books full of ignorant shit, which you proceed to flaunt all over, and when challenged everyone but you is the idiot. Especially the way you're challenging every single word anyone says.”—Written by Matthew Kobler*
*—Kobler’s Complaint (as we shall now always call it) about “challenging every single word” comes from the anxiety generated in younglings and other ignoramuses, when the old people, such as myself, who actually know and employ tools of online debate, use inline quotations to facilitate relevant discussion. Kobler Kiddies, being head-burstingly self-obsessed and dumb as stones, assume if you are quoting them—with their own words they wrote and everything—that is a form of abuse. They are stupid to the point of insanity. 

“Listen Glenn Wright I have tried to politely give you some feedback [example: “Your article is blinkered. Come back in 5 years when you've delved deeper!”], feedback which you sought by writing and promoting your article. Your article is childish as is your understanding. I'm sorry I can't spoon feed you the information you lack. The personal attacks in the article too speak volumes. Rather than seeking to find facts to fit your own ‘blinkered view’, you'd do well to have an open mind. But first of all grow up!”*—Written by James Gosling
*—I replied to James on the question of “growing up”, which obviously meant growing into a form resembling James: “You may find this hard to believe, but I do not count turning into a bloated moth as growing up, even though I suppose it involves some kind of maturation. Did you need some help getting back to the shadows?”

“No, Glenn, we will not read your troll article. You lost the last shred of respect when you thought body shaming was a valid form of magical criticism. [I asked how someone could know this if they had not read the article.] You are scum. Go away. [This was followed up by…] You are the worst kind of egotist—the kind that tries to become bigger by trying to put others down. Were it not for your insignificance, you would be toxic. Maybe you hope that by being rude to famous people you’ll somehow become famous, but no. This is the last warning.* Peddle your badly written narcissistic bullshit elsewhere.”—Written by Saddie LaMort
*—“Being rude to famous people”?? Yep, that was Saddie’s groupie-form complaint. People who threaten “last warning” are asking for assistance in working up the courage to throw you out. So I generously provided it to simpleton Saddie: “Go fuck yourself, you disgusting little maggot.” That was in fact offered mainly as dating advice.

None of this hysterical, perfunctory H8-M8ing (we used to call it “jk worship” on alt.tarot) on the part of these critics (or bleaters) follows from any objective criticism of the text of Liber AL, or any argument about what Crowley himself had to say, but is a vomiting forth of emotional sentiment, in part reacting to my saying something these individuals did not like, and in part because I had the nerve to criticize an extraordinarily minor "famous person", Lon Milo DuQuette.

One exception to the fact few critics have had any substantive, text-based, criticism of what I was saying, was the repetition, rather like slogan defenses or talking points put up by zombies of various political viewpoints, that I had missed one obvious verse that should have cleared up everything. The defenders of the mature, unblinkered, kindly Thelema complained Crowley's or Aiwass's verse about the “best blood” being of the Moon, clearly showed no child sacrifice could have been intended. Of course, I had talked about that verse in the Lon article, pointing out precisely what the critics were chanting I had stupidly missed. And that is another sign or symptom of the vain and lethargic emptiness in the heads of these critics—they didn’t even read what they were whining about so piously.

In spite of all of this nonsense, which is a typical reaction to facts being discussed in the occult, there is a worthwhile question raised about whether Crowley meant that the severity of Liber AL is to be applied only in the sense of people being hard on themselves (obviously not too hard—somebody might get cranky), or hard on the world of defective, deficient slaves (a notion many Christians posing as Thelemites find naturally abhorrent).

Let us focus on one verse and commentary from Liber AL to see if we can find any clues about how to interpret all the verses.
AL II,25: "Ye are against the people, O my chosen!"
Now, Crowley fully understands that verse is sufficiently vague that the Koblers, Goslings and LaMorts of the world might twist it into meaning: against the bad people, i.e. who have not equated initiation with being stuffed full of hallmark-card-brand love and light.

But that isn't what Crowley means.

Crowley’s Old Comment on the verse says:
"The cant of democracy condemned. It is useless to pretend that men are equal; facts are against it. And we [Thelemites] are not going to stay, dull and contented as oxen, in the ruck of humanity."
I doubt most people reading that will bother to look up the word “ruck”. Seriously, why put yourself out to gain a better understanding—through stupid old knowledge of the meanings of words—when you can just make up shit and call it wisdom?

For the other two of you, poor blinkered souls caring about denotations, “ruck” means “the mass of ordinary people and things”. In other words, “ruck” is the very opposite of "Thelemite".

In The New Comment, Crowley goes into this in much more interesting detail:
“By 'the people' is meant that canting, whining, servile breed of whipped dogs which refuses to admit its deity. The mob is always afraid for its bread and butter—when its tyrants let it have any butter…. And when the trouble begins, we aristocrats of Freedom, from the castle or the cottage, the tower or the tenement, shall have the slave mob against us.”
“Aristocrats of Freedom”?

In other words, those made noble by their natural condition of being, instead of by inheritance of a title. And so, regardless of whether or not the Thelemites wish to dominate the “slave mob”, it is natural and inevitable that they will do so.

This is the social and political analysis of AL II:25.

But then Crowley tells us:
“Still deeper, there is a meaning in this verse applicable to the process of personal initiation. By "the people" we may understand the many-headed and mutable mob which swarms in the slums of our own minds.”
So, Crowley tells us the social and political ideas can also act as metaphors for—something deeper. A process? A technique? An initiation?

It is a mirroring, in one’s mind, of the natural, Thelemic condition of the world, and society—that the few and free will dominate the many and the enslaved. And so, in one’s mind, the natural chaos of thoughts can be dominated by the few, directed, focused dictators of True Will.

What we should understand from this is two-fold:

1. Crowley very definitely saw in the verses of Liber AL external meanings and implications, and internal ones. The tendency of the New Aeon to push its agenda happens from without as well as from within. Thus to claim Liber AL is just a book of self-transformational tips, ignores what Crowley believed about the book, and what he fought for concerning it. By the latter I mean Crowley clearly understood and expected that society itself would undergo a kind of HGA-led revolution, which would bring about a Thelemic restructuring that would raise up the new nobility, and would eliminate the inefficient, and divisive, democratic demon that is the natural enemy of Thelemites.

2. And, more than this, the deeper, internal, meanings, relevant for “personal initiation”, were, in Crowley’s view, properly understood as metaphors reflecting the external, social and political, development of the Thelemic Aeon. So, it is not a sign of superficial reading or impaired initiation to see the often violent and bloody establishment of the new cosmic governance of the world directly mirrored in the internal spiritual conflict of an individual trying to beat down and enslave his mob of false selves. And it is definitely not Crowley’s idea that Liber AL is just a little red book of somewhat crazy and mean-sounding meditations. It is an action plan for the New Aeon’s world as well.

Thursday, June 26, 2014

What if Thelema Were True?

Originally posted February 27, 2010

What if Thelema Were True?

What would that mean?

I don’t mean: what would it mean for Bill Breeze?

I mean: what would it mean for you?

That you can feel good about wilting your do?




"Satan Smiting Job With The Plague Of Boils", by William Blake. The key issue in Thelema is understanding the individual will as a product of and an instrument of the Divine Will. So long as one is ruled by the false veils of selves, produced in the factory of temporal culture, one experiences the calling of the True Self and the True Will as being tortured by a terrible demon, such as Satan. However, when this experience is properly understood, Satan transmutes to Lucifer, the bringer of Light.
The thing is, Christianity makes no distinction between the pope and the pauper, not spiritually. And it is easy for the pauper to understand this, because he knows that all he has to do to be saved is to express his faith in Jesus Christ as his Lord and Savior. He might live like a rat in his human time, but this is merely a sign to others of the essential rathood underlying any presumption of righteous value in even the most virtuous or materially prosperous human existence. In the end, all the rats are redeemed in the Body of Christ, where they will once again be individually extinct, but fully alive in the Unity of Divine Light.

The Thelemite, on the other hand, does not have an easy time of things. First off, he is told that faith is a corpse, and that he had better rely upon something more tangible, like himself, to get saved.

And the best way to do that?

“Do what thou wilt”.

But, nobody can say, with authority or certainty, what that means exactly. Or what it means to anybody generally, since it could mean one thing to a person at one stage of his life and something else entirely to that person at another stage of his life. And then there is the question of whether doing what “thou” wilt means doing what YOU want, or something else? And why is there really a difference? We are told there is this “higher” self that wants to be in charge of directing traffic, but it requires the lower self to submit in order to have any power and authority.

What a strange way to get any Great Work done in the world!

Of course, people make careers, such as they are, addressing these questions, but the point is that Thelema introduces a whole list of quandaries for any believers, or knowers, and these are not intended to be easy to understand or to follow consistently. The ethics of Thelema, the moral guidelines that would shape behavior are in fact extremely problematic. Unlike the fictional Thelemites, whose nobility both qualified them to belong to the exclusive Abbey of Thelema, and disinclined them from vice, Crowleyan or Aiwazan Thelema is supposed, somehow, to be the natural law affecting everybody. Yet, Thelema argues, just as does Christianity, for a hierarchical social arrangement, with the vast majority of people doing their Will by being the slaves of the Thelemites.

The very essence of a Thelemic community and government is demonstrated in OTO (Ordo Templi Orientis), which is a dictatorship of an elite (not necessarily enlightened) handful of people over the mass of its (presumably unenlightened, and certainly uninformed) members. The argument is made that if people allow themselves to be dictated to, or to be treated as slaves, that is what they deserve. In essence, it is their Will and their destiny to be ordered around by their Thelemic masters.

And you might, reasonably, ask, and many have asked this—so what exactly is the difference between the Thelemic dictatorship and any other brand? Supposedly, the Thelemic dictatorship is largely free of any bigotry in its treatment of others. It is, in other words, an equal opportunity dictator. If one who is born to poor economic circumstances rises up on his own mettle, he shall not be prevented from doing so merely because of his impoverished origin, his skin color or ethnicity, or any other irrelevant consideration. Of course that is a self-fulfilling prophecy, since by definition only the Thelemically deserving would “rise up” or be allowed to rule in the system. The ones who are defeated in their Will to rule, by bigotry or whatever obstacle, were simply too weak to obtain the goal.

As with bugs, Nature or the Way or Nuit makes plenty of copies of a type, and most may in fact fail to achieve their personal attempt at the portion of the Great Work assigned to them.

But again, what is the difference between that and what we see here and now, in the collapsing edifices of the Old Aeon? One might say the difference cannot be apparent to current or any near-future generation.

For, if Thelema is true, and true in the sense Crowley believed, then for many centuries to come the strains of a crumbling world and the struggles of the rising world will make the Earth a bubbling cauldron of war, destruction, and all the other good, old-fashioned, human values. These latter expressions are not subject to extinction merely because some Aeon or the other has passed away or taken up residence and control. And even if that were the case, no cauldron of war and destruction is likely to pass away, but instead will be lifted up, as the main temple of the gods in the administration of Horus and Mars.

When warriors have conquered—everything—they are left to ponder rule and order and even the dreaded notion, peace. Crowley felt a kind of decay would inevitably set in at that point, as the challenges become more complex, political, and “victory” fades into a discursive ambiguity. But again, that is a problem for Thelemites a long time from now to confront, and no doubt a big part of the answer they will seek at that time will be an exploration of the need that will still exist for an inner conquest. If and when Thelema has been transformed into the dominant doctrine, the point of the establishment of that new regime would be to engender and to encourage a society of introspective extroverts—meaning those whose Work is directed first to the rectification of self, to the honing and tempering of self as a weapon of will, then to the exploitation of time and place (i.e., one’s circumstances) to complete the Great Work of the rectified self.

One again can challenge this achievement and opportunity, to ask what is particularly unique about this desirable outcome? What sets its aside, as a peculiar expression of Thelemic Law, contrasted to the usual occult challenge to seekers to reform within and without?

The main difference I think is one of mode of conduct, and the nature of the energy, which is going to be martial in its essence, and ruthless in its application. If Thelema does take hold, and does inspire a movement of political and social revolution, it is likely to be something which even current, enlightened, adherents, will find extremely troubling, and alien to their nature.

But this, again, is what we should expect, given the prediction for the scheme of development of the Aeon.

I asked this question—What if Thelema were true?—because I see so much idle debate about “defining” Thelema, as if Thelemites themselves had some collective responsibility or power to define the current. If Thelema is true, that notion (of the need for definition) is an absurdity, as if a planet or a star requires a human name or permission to keep moving upon its natural course. The thing is, if Thelema is true, no Thelemites are required to make it so. But, if Thelema is true, all humans who move in accord with the current of the Way of the Aeon of Horus, are Thelemites.

What needs to be defined is one’s understanding and personal conviction.

Fewer words need to flow at this time. Much more mindful action.

What wilt thou do?

jk—Adjustment Avatar of Glenn F. Wright