Welcome to The Beast Bay General Thelema Science Art Scholarship The Beast Bay website
 up a level
 search
 main


  The Dying God and the New Aeon
General Thelema Posted by Matt on March 25, 2002 @ 11:40 AM
from the rood-awakenings dept.

Since the Aeon of Horus is to replace that of Osiris, what is the place of the formula of the "dying god" at this point in history?

I have often read that the concept of the dying god is no longer necessary, since it is based on the belief that the sun dies every day and is born again at sunrise. Due to the discovery of the fact that the earth revolves around the sun (and not the other way around), the dying god should rightfully be replaced by the crowned and conquering child, who represents (among other things) solar consciousness.

I agree that the dying god is no longer needed as a model for self sacrifice, which is clearly condemned by The Book of the Law. However, there is an aspect of the dying god which represents the natural process of death and rebirth that characterizes life itself.

Here on Earth, we experience the sun as dying each day and each year as well, only to spring back to new life (if you will pardon the pun). In Liber Resh, Crowley himself treats the sun as if it traveled around the earth, though he obviously knew better.

So, my real question is this: Can the dying god/year god still be venerated by a Thelemite, provided the god is seen as representing acceptance of the natural cycle of decay and birth? Or do I have it all wrong?



<  |  >

 

  Related Links
  • Articles on General Thelema
  • Also by Matt
  • Contact author
  • The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by Ataniell Rising on Monday March 25, @11:55AM
    Color me Clueless, but I don't see any reason why a Thelemite can't venerate any God/dess he or she Wills to venerate.

    The ruler of the Aeon is the Crowned and Conquering Child. That doesn't mean that there are no other Gods, especially not since we are all Gods. I venerate BABALON quite a bit. I identify with Her in certain parts of my life and places in my head, and I adore Her. I enjoy it, too. I also venerate Kannon Izunome, Benzai-Ten, Kali, Shango, and whoever else I want to venerate.

    Monotheism is not for everyone; it certainly isn't for Ataniell Kamanthil.

    Do thy Will.

    93!

    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by iporshu on Monday March 25, @08:36PM
    Excellent Post! ...who said curiosity killed the cat?

    The "Ritual of Initiation"; those Neccessary Universal steps that Each Individual must take upon the Path to Enlightenment, are still capable of being Symbolicly represented by the four quarters of the daily Sun, and of the yearly Sun.
    Those steps include:

    1. the midnight Sun{winter};the seed lay in complete Darkness{ignorance}, awaiting spring.

    2. sunrise{spring}; the seed blossoms, the Child is given birth, it breathes air and sees the light of day{it acheives the K&C of the H.G.A."sees the light"=learns the True Will}.

    3. midday; the seed bears Fruit; the child reaches Adulthood; and seeks to reclaim the throne of his Father Asar{Osiris}; he seeks to acheive Perfection{the throne of Osiris;the "Black" God} by the Fomula of Balancing and Identifiing opposites.

    4. Sunset{Fall};the seed is cast to the Earth; he succeeds in his endeavor, and by the Formula of Love under Will he is made All One, and thence drawn back into the Original Nothing from which he came, into the womb of our mother Nuith, impregnating her.

    Many Truths can be drawn from the Solar Metaphor, just as many Solar Metaphors can be drawn from the Truth.

    It doesn't matter so much which Symbols are used to represent Truth, it matters that the Symbols used are Understood by the ones using them. For instance, Truth can be spoken in many languages{symbols}, but it will only be understood by one who speaks the language it is spoken in.

    I hope to have been an assistance,iporshu
    "DO WHAT THOU WILT!"

    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by Mordecai on Tuesday March 26, @09:10AM
      It doesn't matter so much which Symbols are used to represent Truth, it matters that the Symbols used are Understood by the ones using them.

      It matters less that the speaker understands the symbols he/she uses than that the hearer does. An earnest student may learn even from a charlatan teacher.


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by iporshu on Tuesday March 26, @09:40AM
        You have made an excellent point! Good for you!!
        {just jokin'...don't bite!!!}

        Indeed, I have even heard Christians quote Crowley, seeking to condemn him, and in their ignorance they payed him Homage.

        One,iporshu


    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by A. Carper on Wednesday March 27, @09:44AM
      Quite so. But AUMGN has five letters in the Aeon of Horus. I take it you are just being coy in only giving four points!


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by Mordecai on Thursday March 28, @08:37PM
        But AUMGN has five letters in the Aeon of Horus

        Or it still has three. Check out Chapter VII of MTP where Crowley refers to "his compound letter MGN" and says, "It was nevertheless important to avoid disturbing the Trinitarian arrangement of the word, as would be done by the addition of other letters."


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Carper (was A. Carper) on Tuesday April 02, @06:04AM
          Damn your eyes, sir--I was hoping to get away with an easy life! You are perfectly right, of course. It was my presumptuous assumptions that got in the way. You see, if I am making notes, I am inclined to write AUMGN when referring to the New Aeon's recension of the Word, but use the Sanskrit sigil (the one like "3o") when referring to its older significancies. I assure you, if I had meant to use the Word in its older formulation, I would have said so.
          I'll give you my reasoned take on this matter, but only if you'll let me get away with a little second-rate literary criticism of the whole passage in MTP!
          If you'll take up your copy of MTP and follow along, the following springs readily to eye. Firstly, Crowley doesn't even begin analysing AUMGN til after your quote. Until then, he is basically establishing the context and fixing terms for the expansion of the Word AUM to follow. Secondly, the quoted passage. In Crowley's day "Trinitarian", especially when capitalized, was understood to refer to the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity, and has been since the 18th century. In its earliest usages it could refer in particular to unorthodox interpretations of the Trinity. No doubt it also refers to the Hindu Trimurti in AUM, but such a pun from a Master of English like Crowley cannot be ignored. Remember how much he loved his etymological dictionary! Thirdly, after your quote, Crowley clearly and concisely explains the significance of AUM's expansion. Then he promptly goes and sums it up as five letters despite his qualification that it shouldn't be! Basically, I would argue that the expansion of AUM to AUMGN parallels the Change of Aeon that we call the Equinox of the Gods, and they should be interpreted accordingly. This is no more surprising than that a quadratic equation should have two roots. Finally, do you not detect a compositional pattern in the whole passage that reflects the Word AUMGN itself?
          Incidentally, my touchstone for the understanding of the Hindu AUM is the Mandukya Upanishad. I think the degree of mutual exclusivity between the two readings is justification enough for my position. You are, I trust, no stranger to the Doctrine of the Two Truths. And I know you can read between the lines.


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by Lloyd Keane on Tuesday March 26, @04:39AM
    93,

    Lets not forget that the whole myth of Horus (as in Egyptian myth, Thelemite myth or in the life of Crowley) is defined in its relation to the Osirian myth. By understanding the father (Osiris) can we come to know the son (Horus). It seems to my Crowley was more concerned with the Osirian limitations in ritual and cosmology. Thelema looks to the Supernal Triad as its main focus, which is part of the "new" way of viewing the universe. The Osirian focuses on Tiferet, which is pre-Abyss. This is a bit over simplified, granted. However, the point is the literal sun can take on dozens of meanings depending on the person. God, sefira, or cancer causing ball of light, everything is permitted.

    93 93/93

    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by adrian dobbie on Tuesday March 26, @06:35AM
    93

    Rather than seeing the Formula of the Dying God as being replaced by the Crowned and Conquering Child, it would be better to regard it as having passed out of the spotlight in favour of the new current. It is obviously still relevant but is no longer the focus of religious or mystical attainment. IMHO, all Thelemites who choose to use Magick would benefit from some form of self-sacrifice, or identification with such, as without it certain subsequent paths of investigation will remain barred. Earth is 93 million miles from the Sun after all…

    93 93/93

    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by Ataniell Rising on Tuesday March 26, @11:44AM
      What do you mean by that?

      Personally, I think that a lot of women would benefit magickally by divesting themselves of an identification with self-sacrifice. But then my whole life has been a rebellion against that, in some ways.

      93!


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by iporshu on Tuesday March 26, @12:22PM
        The Whole Idea of Self Sacrifice is False and quite Egocentric{from One Point-of view}.

        Allow me to explain, All of Us have some kind of Goal that we seek to attain. In order to attain any Goal, one must do the required Work. Even if my goal is as simple as "to take a shit", I will have to get up, go to the bathroom, pull down & sit down, push the button, pull the chain, here comes chocalate choo-choo train!

        WORK seems to imply "Sacrifice" to most people.
        To become a Doctor or Lawyer, one will have to "Sacrifice" much time for Study. And the same applies in all walks of Life; one must Work{Sacrifice} to acheive any kind of Victory or Success.

        But is that Work really a Sacrifice if it is in fulfillment of the True Will. It depends{again} on ones point-of-view.

        In LIBER AL, Nuit says "but whoso gives one particle of dust shall lose all in that hour",
        which means{to me}that she is strictly opposed to the Idea of Self Sacrifice. You see, a Wo/Man must Work very hard to become a God/dess. And if s/he possesses the attitude{point-of-view}that a Sacrifice is being made, then s/he "shall lose all in that hour"{they cannot cross the Abyss without giving up the Egocentric point-of-view of Sacrifice}.

        One, iporshu


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Mordecai on Tuesday March 26, @06:22PM
          In LIBER AL, Nuit says "but whoso gives one particle of dust shall lose all in that hour", which means{to me}that she is strictly opposed to the Idea of Self Sacrifice. You see, a Wo/Man must Work very hard to become a God/dess. And if s/he possesses the attitude{point-of-view}that a Sacrifice is being made, then s/he "shall lose all in that hour"{they cannot cross the Abyss without giving up the Egocentric point-of-view of Sacrifice}.

          This is one possible interpretation, and quite literally "correct". But there is a sense in which that verse is saying that self-sacrifice is absolutely necessary to the process of realization. As Crowley writes in his 1913 commentary to verse I:61, "Practical and literal; yet it may be doubted whether "to lose all in that hour" may not refer to the supreme attainment, and that therefore to give one particle of dust (perhaps the Ego) or the central atom Hadit, her complement, is the act to achieve. (For 'dust' see Liber 418.)"


          • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
            by iporshu on Tuesday March 26, @07:49PM
            Two Excellent Replies in One Day! You are on a roll!! Is that really You? {just kiddin'..PLEASE don't Bite!!!}

            "lose all in that hour"

            I can see the Truth of your reply, and I thank you Very much for sharing it. My interpretation seems to be in a more "negative" perspective, and the quote you made seems to present "lose all in that hour" from a more positive perspective, and yet in the end both of the perspectives produced a True Interpretation.
            Glory! Glory!! Glory !!! be given to the law of Love; the Formula of Love Under Will. And Thank the Gods, O mighty Gods! for the manifestation of Us "centers of pestilence", whom Dare speak! Amoun

            One, iporshu


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Ataniell Rising on Wednesday March 27, @03:14AM
          Work is only a sacrifice if you don't want to do it. I'm with you on the Self Sacrifice thing, yuck-o. I do a lot of things for other people, but I do them out of love, and it isn't a sacrifice then. But doing things out of a sense of 'obligation' is a really icky and ungoddessly feeling.

          I don't think divesting oneself of illusions that are in one's way (per crossing the abyss) is a sacrifice either.

          93!
          Ataniell


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Ataniell Rising on Thursday March 28, @06:52PM
          "The Whole Idea of Self Sacrifice is False and quite Egocentric{from One Point-of view}."

          Anyone who ever knew my mother would have to agree.

          "But Ataniell, how can you DO THAT!!! After everything I've done for you!"

          ::shudder::


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by Samael on Tuesday March 26, @11:51AM
    The Formula of Osiris isn't gone, any more than Newtonian Physics is gone just because of Einstein. It's just been subsumed into a larger, more comprehensive understanding. Granted that the old formula may be to the new as a bow and arrow to a rifle, but there are always going to be contexts where the bow will be the logical weapon of choice.

    "Can the dying god/year god still be venerated by a Thelemite, provided the god is seen as representing acceptance of the natural cycle of decay and birth?" Or do I have it all wrong?"

    No, I'd say you've pretty much got it right. But then what you've described isn't exactly the old Aeonic understanding of the Dying God's formula, a catastrophe in nature, only to be overcome by a supernatural act.

    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by A. Carper on Wednesday March 27, @09:47AM
    Good points.
    I would just like to draw your attention to the fact that Asar is shown on the Stele 666, and referred to as such in the hieroglyphics.
    An obvious point I admit: but there is a lot hidden there :).

    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by iporshu on Wednesday March 27, @10:39AM
      Please, don't leave me in suspense any longer! I cannot take it!! I have to Know!!!

      Explain to me those Five points you spoke of in your other reply{or just the one I left out}! Tell me what is "hidden there", a lot!! And PLEASE hurry!!!

      anxiously awaiting, iporshu


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @06:06AM
        Ok, Iporshu. Your plaintive wails from the pillar are just too heart-rending! So for you and anyone else who is interested, if you will indulge me, I'll give it--but in the form of a recipe. I think it best if we feed themselves!
        Take MWT Letter G and Chapter 13. Correlate them to obtain something like this:
        1. 0º (Minerval). The Ego is attracted to the Solar System.
        2. Iº (Initiation). The Child experiences Birth.
        3. IIº (Consecration). The Man experiences Life.
        4. IIIº (Devotion). He experiences Death.
        5. IVº (Perfection, or Exaltation). He experiences the World beyond Death.
        6. Perfect Initiate (Annihilation). This entire cycle of Point-Events is withdrawn into Annihilation.
        Correlate this in turn with the analyses of AUMGN in MTP Chapter VII and Liber Samech. You might need to add a pinch of Liber Resh at this point.
        Cook it up!
        (It will not have escaped the attention of Beast Bay's attentive readers that there are six points to the table above. I won't infringe any further on the prerogatives of the O.T.O. beyond pointing out that the solution is to be found in Liber 194.)
        The question remains as to who goes through the process, and here, imho, a distinction is to be drawn between the "Once Born" and the "Twice Born"of William James referred to in MTP Ch. V. Connections with the Stele are obvious.
        (Iporshu, you should know I caught your high-sign. Abul-Hol indeed . . .;))


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by iporshu on Tuesday April 02, @07:57AM
          Thanks for your expedient response{good thing I didn't hold my breath!}; all jokes aside, thanks for the new attributes. I'm not all that familiar with the system of the OTO.

          Oh, what "high-sign" are you referring to? and what does "Abul-Hol" mean?

          I need to Know now! Hurry damn it!! I can't hold my breath much longer!!!

          iporshu


          • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
            by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @11:46AM
            Sorry for the delay. I've been holidaying away over Beaster.
            "Abul-Hol" is my poor rendering of the modern Egyptian name for the Sphinx of Gizeh in Arabic. The vowels are all short and the aitch is an hard aspirate. It means "Father of Terror". I though your "to Know" reference might imply a query as to whether the AUMGN formula could be connected. I think so.


            • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
              by iporshu on Tuesday April 02, @08:27PM
              Thankyou again...now I can see!I can See!! I can SEE!!! AUMGN now has a Deeper meaning to me.

              Oh! it feels so good to get a piece of information that was previously unknown to me{almost as good as a fat Blunt of that sticky green}, and to be able to assimilate such Knowledge into understanding because of your ability to patiently explain your view...I am always greatful for the gifts of Knowledge bestowed upon me, thanks again! Again!! and AGAIN!!!

              iporshu


              • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                by Carper on Wednesday April 03, @02:14AM
                Stop before someone tells us to go and get a room!


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by Prophet 718 on Saturday March 30, @09:38PM
    Since the Aeon of Horus is to replace that of Osiris, what is the place of the formula
    of the "dying god" at this point in history?

    ***An Aeon of Osiris will presumably mark a period when Osiris is worshipped. Within 400 years of the rise of Christianity the meaning of hieroglyphics were lost and all worship and spoken references to the Egyptian gods stopped for 1400 years. An Aeon of Osiris is an impossibility during the timeframe projected by Crowley.

    ***What the Stele of Revealing depicts graphically is the Osiris-Horus cycle, the central process recognized by the Egyptians as the completion of the life-death cycle, recognized universally by the affluent, and aspired to by the deceased on a routine basis. When the reigning Pharaoh died he became Osiris, while his successor assumed the office of Horus, the new King. In Egyptian myth, Osiris was only resurrected long enough to impregnate Isis. The similarities between the myths of Christianity and Osiris are very superficial. Rather than look towards god-worship as a source-myth for Christianity, one has but to look at the etymology of the word CHRIST, which comes from the Greek word CHRISTOS, which means 'annointed one'. A likely source of the word is the Egyptian term KARST, which also means annointed. The term was used to describe the mummies after being prepared and wrapped for 'resurrection'. The myths of Christianity are probably based on an individual(s) who underwent the Egyptian mummification process.

    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @06:14AM
      > Since the Aeon of Horus is to replace that of Osiris, what is the place of the formula of the "dying god" at this point in history?

      See the Stele 666. Put it in context of the Cairo Working and its subsequent development. Oops! Sorry, you were obviously being rhetorical as you must know this.

      > ***An Aeon of Osiris will presumably mark a period when Osiris is worshipped. Within 400 years of the rise of Christianity the meaning of hieroglyphics were lost and all worship and spoken references to the Egyptian gods stopped for 1400 years. An Aeon of Osiris is an impossibility during the timeframe projected by Crowley.

      Your presumption is only an assumption, and your conclusion lacks any convincing rigour. Mere word-play.

      > ***What the Stele of Revealing depicts graphically is the Osiris-Horus cycle, the central process recognized by the Egyptians as the completion of the life-death cycle, recognized universally by the affluent, and aspired to by the deceased on a routine basis. When the reigning Pharaoh died he became Osiris, while his successor assumed the office of Horus, the new King. In Egyptian myth, Osiris was only resurrected long enough to impregnate Isis. The similarities between the myths of Christianity and Osiris are very superficial. Rather than look towards god-worship as a source-myth for Christianity, one has but to look at the etymology of the word CHRIST, which comes from the Greek word CHRISTOS, which means 'annointed one'. A likely source of the word is the Egyptian term KARST, which also means annointed. The term was used to describe the mummies after being prepared and wrapped for 'resurrection'. The myths of Christianity are probably based on an individual(s) who underwent the Egyptian mummification process.

      We can see here a graphic demonstration of the author's literary tastes. One would suppose, like any Osirian Patriarch, only the quality and quantity of his progeny matter to him. Graphics aside, what of the Stele's literary aspect in light of your thesis, Mr 718?
      And, for your information, Liber 888's account of the Forging of Christianity still withstands contemporary scrutiny with due corrections in light of the discoveries made since it was written.


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by star_phoenix on Sunday March 31, @04:30AM
    In order to understand the advent of Horus and current 93, it's necessary to fill in some gaps that haven't been addressed in the foregoing entries.

    There is no direct link or linear progresssion between Horus and Osiris (as is sometimes imagined), notwithstanding the familial ties alluded to in mythology. The two represent divergent currents; currents that operate from distinct and opposing polarities.

    The essential point of distinction between the theurgic action of a Christ or Osiris and that of Horus is the role of faith. The dying god symbolises an act of redemption accomplished on behalf of the follower. The great cosmic ritual inherent in this act of self-sacrifice requires an act of belief in something outside the self; it necessitates a leap of faith.

    The function of Horus is quite different from this and in order to fully understand the Horus function, it's essential also to fully grasp the significance of his twin brother, Set. The two after all are indivisible faces of the same coin.

    Transcendence of ego in the aeon of the dying god was achieved through identification and submission through faith. In the present aeon the destructive action of Set is triggered by an act of will and intent (subject to knowledge of course), and the ego is absorbed into a larger primal matrix (often typified as 'the beast'). Set, in his role of delusion slayer is a god of death, while not himself a 'dying god' - an action that has been notoriously maligned by Christians as malefic. This formula of magickal transformation was qabalistically expressed by Crowley in the word LAShTAL - the number of which is 93.

    Set is associated with the south, with Yesod, with the moon and as a consequence also with the serpent power that springs from thence. When the early tribal migrations from equatorial regions took our ancestors to the north, the star of Set sank beneath the horizon and he became associated with the underworld. To the north the star of his twin Horus arose.

    It was through these northerly migrations that civilizations arose which allowed the individual to differentiate 'self' from the group identity. As a result of this psycho-social evolution it was possible for the will to transcend law as the modus operandi of the new aeon.

    So the function of Set/Horus is to destroy the limited ego-based personality complex, in order to initiate into deeper levels of primal selfhood. This action is not dependent upon faith or contrition, but requires 'the will to die'. It is an action predicated upon knowledge and defined intent.

    So any attempt to marry the energies of Set/Horus with those of a dying god can only be the pastime of dreamers or lunatics. The dying god produces men and women who are part of the homogenised 'reborn' (if only in their imaginations!), whereas Set/Horus transforms and elevates the individual to the stature of a god (every man and woman is a star) by means of specialised theurgic action.

    Love under will.

    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by iporshu on Sunday March 31, @08:38PM
      "...in order to fully Understand the Horus function, it's essential also to fully grasp the signifigance of his twin brother, Set."


      It certainly looks as if you did your homework regarding the "Myth of Horus", but looks can be deceiving at times.

      Actually, there is not much that I disagree with in your reply; I think you Have done your homework.

      Nevertheless, I too have studied here and there{concerning Horus/Heru/Hrumachis/Her-em-akhet etc.}, and I have never ever...EVER came across a version of the Myth in which Horus and Set were Twin Brothers. I thought that it was widely acknowledged that Set & Osiris/Asar were brothers.

      Maybe you made a typographical error, or maybe you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

      Please Direct me to the place where I can find a reference to Horus & Set being Twin Brothers.

      thanks, Heru-ra-ha


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by starphoenix on Monday April 01, @09:00AM
        If you are unfamiliar with the Horus/Set connection then it might be worthwhile drawing your attention to the fact that Beast Bay is in large part a Thelemic forum in which its not unreasonable to expect a modicum of enlightenment on the part of users - at least as far as the Thelemic tradition is concerned. Since you are obviously a novice in these matters allow me to offer you a quickie version of Thelema 101.

        Horus is the Greek version of the Egyptian god name Heru-ra-ha - a god who was double sided, containing in himself the twin forms of Ra-Hoor-Khuit and Hoor-Paar-Kraat.

        The genesis of these twins require an understanding of two key symbols of 'The Book of the Law' - these being Nuit (consciousness absolute) and Hadit (manifestation of consciousness) - a union traditionally symbolised by a circle with a point at it's centre. The union of Nuit and Hadit produced Ra-Hoor-Khuit, the crowned and conquering child, or 'Horus in action' if you will. However the concept of the doppleganger or double is implicit in Heru-ra-ha and Hoor-paar-Kraat, or Set, is thus the hidden side of Horus - the side that absorbs the projected energy of Horus in a magickal tension that allows for transformation of consciousness.

        But don't take my word for it. In 'The Book of the Spirit of the Goat' Crowley says the following -

        "Horus leaps up thrice armed from the womb of his mother. Harpocrates (another name for Hoor-paar-kraat/Set) his twin is hidden within him. Set is his holy covenant, that he shall display in the day of M.A.A.T. ...now is the magickal power known."

        I could go on providing extensive references to this central Thelemic concept from a wide variety of sources. However I'll leave the homework up to you, since you seem to be a homework enthusiast. Any number of Thelemic texts will provide the illumunation you seek.


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by iporshu on Monday April 01, @11:03AM
          In BOOK FOUR, within chapter VIII it says:

          "Isis was Liberty; Osiris, bondage; but the new Liberty is that of Horus. Osiris conquered her because she did not understand him. Horus avenges both his Father and his Mother. This child Horus is a twin, two in one. Horus and Harpocrates are one, and they are also one with Set or Apophis, the destroyer of Osiris."


          ...Oh! maybe you were referring to that version...Doh!!!{he pops himself in the head}

          it's been an enlightening pleasure making your aquantence, Apophis


          • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
            by starphoenix on Monday April 01, @12:12PM
            What's your beef? Are you some kind of literalist anxious to score brownie points?

            Yes, correctly interpreted this passage illustrates the Horus/Set connection.


            • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
              by iporshu on Monday April 01, @12:59PM
              Maybe you didn't see the intentions of my last reply.
              I meant that you had pointed something out to me{sarcasticly I might add}, and I humbled myself to do a little homework. I then found the Quote in BOOK FOUR, and I saw for myself that there is indeed an Identity made between Horus and Set{it is possible not to know Everything!}, then I humbled myself again and wrote the reply to tell you in my own way that you were right, and that "its been an enlightening pleasure making your aquantence".

              Where's the Beef?

              I apologize for the misunderstanding, iporshu


              • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                by starphoenix on Monday April 01, @02:16PM
                Thanks for your clarification iporshu!

                Love under will.

                S_P


                • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                  by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @06:08AM
                  Stripped of the Grantian piffle, I think you have made some very useful points.
                  Unfortunately, you, like Lloyd Keane, miss the complexity of the myths of the God Horus as they have come down to us. Any decent book on Egyptology (even Budge's!) make clear the multifarous aspects of the God. Ignoring any aspect (I'll resist the urge to say "restricting") produces a partial view. I do not think this can be right.
                  Incidentally, you are saying nothing that is not common knowledge among Thelemites. Permit me to quote you a little bit of Crowley's poem "The Twins" from The Winged Beetle:

                  Look! in the polished granite,
                  Black as the cartouche is with sins,
                  I read the searing sentence
                  That blasts the eyes that scan it:
                  "HOOR and SET be TWINS."
                  A fico for repentance!

                  The rest of the poem is equally illuminating, though I don't think it would please a ToSer.


                  • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                    by starphoenix on Tuesday April 02, @12:09PM
                    Thanks for your response Carper.

                    Not being much of an Egyptologist or collector of dry bones, I confess to a shortage of knowledge in what may be termed the 'classical' tradition. Maybe it's the gnostic in me, or possibly the lazy bastard, but I'm only interested in symbols I can use. So you could say that I had certain a priori convictions which required a form, and the esoteric interpretation of the Horus myth met that need. The litmus test for me is magickal rather than academic, so in arguing efficacy - I can only say it works for me.

                    Thanks for drawing my attention to the quotation from The Winged Beetle. Despite A.C.'s protestations to the contrary, I've always thought that W.B. was the better poet, but maybe thats just an Irishman's prejudice! At times the old man's verse makes me grin when I should be looking solemn - in my opinion he always did better in the irony and satire department when it came to rhyming couplets.

                    According to a Thelemic zine I once subscribed to there is good evidence that during his penniless Hollywood soujourn he was a stand-in for one of the Three Stooges. The zine actually produced a grainy photograph from the set showing A.C. in the role (a plumber I believe)- although I can't recall which Stooge he played.

                    Any Thelemic cinephiles out there who can vouch for the truth of this?


                    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                      by Anonymous on Tuesday April 02, @12:35PM
                      I can vouch for its untruth. The Three Stooges never made any silent pictures. Crowley was in Hollywood during WWI, before the development of commercial sound movies. The "stand-in" story is an impossibility.



                    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                      by Carper on Wednesday April 03, @02:26AM
                      > Maybe it's the gnostic in me, or possibly the lazy bastard, but I'm only interested in symbols I can use.

                      Yeah! I'm a member of that club too!

                      I just want to clarify a point about my posting though. When we speak about the Lord of the Aeon we must realise that there are at least two major aspects to harmonise: viz. Horus and Harpocrates.
                      The former is the sun-sky deity who is the brother (or twin) of Set--the latter is the child of Isis and Osiris. I think they are unified in Heru-Ra-Ha (capitals are deliberate :)).


                  • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                    by Lloyd Keane on Wednesday April 03, @04:45AM
                    Hello Carper,

                    Would you be imlying Thelemic (or Golden Dawn for that matter) Egytology is somehow actually linked to "historical" Egyptology? Not an accusation, just curious.

                    Lloyd


                    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                      by Carper on Thursday April 04, @04:23AM
                      Hello Lloyd,
                      I'll run my banner up the flagpole and see if you salute! To paraphrase one of my earlier posstings in this thread: my touchstone in this matter is the Cairo Working. Now, if that means there is a historical connection through both the Stele 666 and Crowley's take on Egyptology, then I the answer must be "Yes". Provisionally ;)


                      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                        by Lloyd Keane on Thursday April 04, @04:45AM
                        OK, I've just re-read this post (...oh so long)and I think I get where you coming from. So consider me saluting...at least...provisionally. :-)


    Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
    by Alcofribas Nasier on Monday April 01, @01:30PM
    To All Assembled in This Thread:

    Desist from personal attacks, including the casting of aspersions on other correspondents' intentions or knowledge of the subject, in carrying out this or other Beastbay threads. There are much better things I could be doing for this board than riding herd on flame wars.


    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by Anonymous on Monday April 01, @06:04PM
      I was wondering when the threats of censorship would begin. I suppose this is what we should expect when a non-Thelemite runs a so-called Thelemic board.



    • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
      by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @06:12AM
      I ignore personal snipes that are off the mark. Fair criticism I have no problems with. Take your best shot and remember AL III, v. 59!
      As for a non-Thelemite moderating Beast Bay (and is he or is he not?), big deal!


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by iporshu on Tuesday April 02, @09:57AM
        Yes, I think a most valuable fuction of the Beastbay is that it Allows us Thelemite Intellectuals to Clash our mighty Thelemite Swords together,and in the process of doing so there is a good deal of Knowledge, Understanding, and Wisdom being shared amongst Brethren...sometimes we get our egos checked by others{for recreation} which often poves to be beneficial as well, but it is All Good!

        "As brothers fight ye!"- indeed, now and Forever!

        Now, that being said, to Battle!!!

        iporshu


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by Anonymous on Tuesday April 02, @09:59AM
        He is not, by his own admission, and of course it wouldn't matter to another non-Thelemite, would it? But, lacking a real Thelemite's commitment to free expression, I would expect the new "moderator" to impose his personal likes and dislikes by censoring, banning, and other unThelemic acts. Just watch!



        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Anonymous on Tuesday April 02, @10:02AM
          Oh, and he'll feel free to change people's signon names without their permission as well. All in a high-handed day's work.



        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @11:52AM
          And it shouldn't matter to a Thelemite either. It certainly doesn't bother me. I'm with the goats on this one!


      • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
        by Alcofribas Nasier on Tuesday April 02, @12:53PM
        I ignore personal snipes that are off the mark.

        An ideal policy for improving the quality of discussion. I try to do the same.

        Fair criticism I have no problems with.

        Nor should anyone; but even fair personal criticism would violate site policy. Let's all try to stick to the issues.

        As for a non-Thelemite moderating Beast Bay (and is he or is he not?), big deal!

        For me, this came under the heading of "I ignore personal snipes that are off the mark." However, you may rest assured that I am in fact self-identified as a Thelemite. As for those who would say someone else is "not a Thelemite" because they happen to disagree on some pet point of doctrine, I can only say that commenting on that behavior would violate BeastBay policy.

        Alcofribas Nasier


        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Anonymous on Tuesday April 02, @01:15PM
          In the discussion thread for "The Hall of Maat" you wrote: "'Thelema' is Crowley's thought, which has many redeeming values but which is also severely tainted by sexism, anti-Semitism, political naivete, authoritarianism, historical inaccuracy, and facile philosophizing. There's a lot of good stuff to steal from there, but overall I dont know why a reasonable person would choose to identify with his system in any unique or primary fashion. The good is hard to find elsewhere but the bad is not something that can easily be brushed aside. I am influenced by Crowley but I am no adherent of his system, philosophy, attitudes or scripture."

          In addition, many people, myself included, have heard you disclaim the label of Thelemite. However, when it is convenient for self-justification you seem to have no trouble claiming it. As a gadfly of the Thelemic community you have served an admirable purpose. Unfotunately, as is often the case, when a critic of authority becomes an authority himself he is unable to refrain from abusing the power thus given.



        • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
          by Carper on Tuesday April 02, @04:21PM
          My apologies for not being clear enough. When I said, "As for a non-Thelemite moderating Beast Bay (and is he or is he not?), big deal!", I meant that I does not bother me in the least either way. At least one other thinks otherwise.
          Two questions though. Fair comment, yes? Fair personal comment, no? If that is your policy then I'm with you. Otherwise I think the quality of some of Beast Bay's debates may suffer.


          • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
            by iporshu on Wednesday April 03, @02:01AM
            Fair comment, yes? Fair personal comment, no?

            This would seem to be a good standard to use for Judgement, but how can we be sure if this individual Understands the Difference{Thelemite}
            Between the Two{is there a difference?} ??

            I suppose that only Time will tell.

            And I anxiously await the opportunity to Smite him with my Mighty Magus Wand{as some would say}if he Fails in Judgement!!!

            iporshu


            • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
              by Carper on Wednesday April 03, @02:20AM
              Ay! Yes to fair comment, and no to unfair personal comment.
              Let's just agree to call him a muppet and get back to the thread.


              • Re: The Dying God and the New Aeon
                by Carper on Wednesday April 03, @02:53AM
                Oops! (A red face here!) I should have read it properly.
                I meant to say:
                "Ay! Yes to fair comment, and no to fair personal comment.
                And let's just agree to call Mr Anonymous a muppet and get back to the thread."
                Freudian or what?
                I most sincerely apologise for that one. No excuses.



     
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.


        "As St. Paul says, 'Without shedding of blood there is no remission,' and who are we to argue with St. Paul?" -- Aleister Crowley
    All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments are owned by the Poster.
    [ home | search ]