[kj] Crowley/Coleman/Gurdjieff

[god botherer]

Hi again Aleph!

I'll be brief, because it's evident to me now that there isn't actually much 
that separates us.

Words, as I'm sure you'll agree. are inadequate for this sort of thing, and 
misconceptions are easy to come by.

So when you say that these entities are internal rather than external, I 
agree. Ultimately, there is no distinction between internal and external, as 
meditation will confirm. But we still need to use figures of speech.

The three negative veils to which you refer, and Kether for that matter, are 
beyond duality, yes. Here, perhaps, is where Adam and Eve dwelt before 
eating of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil (please don't think I'm 
being literal). We, however, operate in the world of action (a term I used 
before, and I was using it in a Kabbalistic sense) in which every thought or 
act is significant. Of cousre balance is essential. That is at the heart of 
Kabbalah. I fully agree that to ignore one's ahadow side is folly. Remember, 
I am a Killing Joke fan. Why do I love this music so much? Because it is the 
only music I know which so powerfully expresses light and darkness 
simultaneously - well that's today's reason anyway.

Any serious attempt at self observation reveals one dark side. It is 
dishonest to be blind to it, and leads to all sorts of conditions. We are 
agreed on this I think.

Where we seem to differ is in our understanding of this good and evil 
business. Good and evil is not just another set of opposites. You say that a 
swing to either extreme is dangerous. How can it be dangerous to try to 
resist one's evil inclinations and lean more and more towards the good, the 
real and the true? I do not believe that this implies imbalance. Far from 
it. Evil is where there are imbalances, illusions, distortions, lies - the 
unreal. You seem to see good and evil as equally desirable - I woud suggest 
that the symbolic language or pictures you are working with are misleading.

I have sinned and sinned well. And perhaps that will retrospectively be seen 
as an important stage on my road to illumination or enlightenment. I can 
only hope so. (Blake's Songs of Innocence and Experience come to mind.) But 
it's not a very clever way to get there. I know how my sin has led me away 
from reality. My conclusion is that good is the only real. Evil leads 
ultimately to extinction.

Back now to Crowley. You would exonerate him of any charge of using people, 
because everyone is responsible for their own actions, but I know that there 
are some people not blessed with great intelligence around whom I could 
weave a spell; I could heavily influence their actions. How responsible can 
they be if their intelligence does not permit them to see what I am doing to 
them? The ultimate case would be those with learning difficulties, or the 
mentallty handicapped, to use the now non-PC term. People in these 
categories are often exploited, but perhaps we all sit somewhere on a 
sliding scale. We have a duty of care towards those less fortunate than 
ourselves. I don't think Crowley recognised such a duty of care. Will his 
philosophy cause you not to recognise it either.

Finally, how do you square your claim that Crowley reached illumination with 
the very squalid last years that he played out? Did Frater Perdurabo really 
endure?

Before closing let me say that you are absolutely right. People should be

>continually exposing themselves to new thoughts and
>ideas in order to keep expanding their knowledge,
>their understanding, and thier outlook on life.

Thank you for helping me to do that.

All GOOD wishes!

Si

P.S. For what it's worth, everything I've read suggests that, yes, Gardner 
got it all off Crowley. Not sure that extends to "Do what thou wilt and it 
harm none." That's pretty genuinely ancient, isn't it

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself with cool new emoticons http://www.msn.co.uk/specials/myemo