Hermetic.com » Beast Bay

//search////add////forum////info//

The javascript bookmark tool appears to not be working or you have javascript disabled  

Like this page on Facebook

Like THL on Facebook

 

+1 this page on Google

+1 THL on Google

 

 

The javascript metadata tool appears to not be working or you have javascript disabled

 

 

Join the
Hermetic Library discussions
at the


Hrmtc Underground BBS

 

 


Welcome to The Beast BayGeneral ThelemaScienceArtScholarshipThe Beast Bay website

 up a level
 search
 main

  CHUD Management

Weirdness Posted by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday July 24, @01:56PM
from the morlock-warlocks dept.

One of the well-known peculiarities of Thelema is its tendency to attract some of the brightest and most creative individuals at the same time as it also draws in some of the most disruptive and pathological people imaginable. Concerning the latter, who in their most extreme manifestations are not easily distinguished from CHUD (Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dwellers): how do Thelemic communities deal with them? Incorporate them into their own special interest groups (“Guild of Thelemic CHUD”)? Ignore them and hope they go away? Or eject them and hope they don't burn down your house?



<  |  >

 

  Related Links
Articles on Weirdness
Also by Xnoubis
Contact <author>

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


**Re: CHUD Management**
by Tim Maroney on Tuesday July 24, @05:57PM

Well, maybe I'm missing something here, but…

If there's a behavioral problem – which generally would mean multiple complaints about the same behavior from several people – discuss it with the person privately; or if the behavoior is egregious enough that it needs to be dealt with right away, ask them to step outside to discuss it with you. If they agree to improve their behavior, which most people will, then give them a chance and keep them around for as long as they're making progress. If the behavior persists, or the person refuses to change the behavior, then ask them not to come around any more.

There are a few lines not drawn explicitly in this flowchart, but that's the basic procedure, isn't it?

Tim


**Re: CHUD Management**
by f.oul-mouthed s.ubhuman T.helmite on Tuesday July 24, @06:57PM

[In the Shells]


  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday July 25, @09:39AM\\|

    [big grin]\\


**Re: CHUD Management**
by <Parlertriks> on Tuesday July 24, @07:29PM

“some of the brightest and most creative individuals”/“some of the most disruptive and pathological people imaginable”

there's a contradicttion between the two?


**Re: CHUD Management**
by Oog Grindlegrunt on Wednesday July 25, @10:11AM

Dear Sir:

On behalf of the American CHUD Anti-Defamation Leage, I must protest in the strongest terms your implication that we CHUD would have anything to do with you Thelemites.

Contrary to misrepresentations in the popular media, most CHUD seek only the simple life, roaming in our sewers and feasting only on the occasional passer-by. We have no messianic pretentions, and tend to avoid all political entanglements, unlike you blasted Crowley kooks.

We are prepared to meet with a small party of young, lean Thelemites to discuss this matter further, if they agree to bring along a generous portion of marinated vegetables as a side dish.

Sincerely,

Oog Grindlegrunt
Chairman of Media Relations, ACADL
Somewhere beneath the MTA, Boston


**Re: CHUD Management**
by Fra THA;M on Wednesday July 25, @11:13AM

How to deal with Them? Use them of course. Send them out on the frontlines. Exploit their ignorance and credulous natures for the furtherance of the Great Work.


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Parlertriks> on Wednesday July 25, @03:42PM\\
whatever are you talking about?\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday July 25, @03:48PM
The Process Church was famous for that kind of approach, actually. They'd round up all the bums and drug addicts they could lure with a free meal, give 'em a black robe, and send 'em out on the sidewalk with pamphlets. It didn't really help their reputation in the long run.\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by Lord Hitler on Wednesday July 25, @06:36PM\\|

    All goes to show: If you want something done right…\\


**Re: CHUD Management**
by Shasu Ma'akheru on Thursday July 26, @02:08AM

Boy, do I know the type. I met the woman I later married when she was dating a “Thelemite” who avidly pursued polyamory under the excuse that, in order to unite with Nuit who is all women, he would have to sleep with all women. (Not that polyamory needs an excuse, as such.) Thelema was just a tool for him to get laid, a role also often filled by feminism or Wicca. He had a lot of other unpleasant habits he covered with “do what thou wilt” (where “wilt” is understood to be synonymous for “want”).

After impregnating two women in less than a year, the fashion value of Thelema was unable to overcome his reputation as a generator of welfare cases, and he eventually dropped it. Unfortunately, a lot of people in his social circle got a rather distorted idea of Thelema as a doctrine of personal irresponsibility.

I confess I don't know what to do about rogue pseudo-Thelemites like this, other than to try to set a good example myself. I ended up adopting the child he abandoned, who is now eight, but I suspect people will remember him more readily in connection with Thelema than they will me.

I'm also not sure this is unique to Thelema – Christianity attracts a lot of sociopaths, too. Does the name David Koresh ring a bell? The Christians compensate by distancing themselves from their problem members, so why shouldn't we? People who are going to generalize about a group, Thelemites or otherwise, on the basis of its worst members are already plainly prejudiced.

Mind you, it would certainly help if an uncloseted Thelemite did something worthy of public acclaim, like winning a Nobel prize or plucking children from a burning building and attributing it to the guidance of Ra Hoor Khuit…


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <GM> on Friday July 27, @12:19PM
Dear Shasu Ma'akheru\\
\\
Si Vales, Valeo\\
\\
You said: I confess I don't know what to do about rogue pseudo-Thelemites like this, other than to try to set a good example myself. I ended up adopting the child he abandoned, who is now eight, but I suspect people will remember him more readily in connection with Thelema than they will me.\\
\\
This is truly sad, and you are right. Currently the trend, or the ruler, which is used by peer pressure to measure “Thelemicness” is very crooked. It is sad that some people will hold a loudmouth arrogant idiot in a higher regard that the gentle soul that is trying to do their will and do the right thing. Your particular situation seems to appropriately illuminate the problem.\\
\\
Thank you for doing what is obviously the right thing, and for choosing to take the higher road. It is hard to fly like an eagle when you are surrounded by maggots.\\
\\
Now if only maggots would stop calling themselves Thelemites…\\
\\
Pax Profundus,\\
GM\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @01:38PM\\
[In the Shells]\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Friday July 27, @07:39PM\\
Why, precisely, is this comment in “The Shells”?\\


  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <me> on Wednesday August 01, @12:30PM
    |

    No reason. Just looks better on a black background. (Thought it was tasteful and humorous myself–but that's me.)\\
    \\

**Re: CHUD Management**
by Jana Rutkowski on Thursday July 26, @10:22AM

My theory is that CHUD are attracted by missionaries. I once had a manager (a Mormon, by the way) who was into saving people. He hired a CHUD for my staff. No one would go out to lunch with him after he demonstrated his social skills – yelling at the adolescent daughter of a family in a parking lot “Hey, little girl, I'd like to tie you up with barbed wire and….” Use your imagination for the rest. Not that he meant it for real; that was just his usual mode of expression. He was in his early forties, and lived with his mother. He spent most of his time at work reporting on the misfortunes of his life – like the time his mother cleaned his room, and finding his collection of 'used panties', washed them. We couldn't get him fired, no matter how bad his job performance was, or even for raiding other people's desks supposedly looking for food. So, we got all the headhunters trying to recruit us to find him another job, and eventually we were rid of him. Our manager was sorry to see him go!

The point being that CHUD always look like prime material for doing good works, viewed from any religious viewpoint – even that of Thelema. Hey, there are even versions of O.T.O. that are bare-faced CHUD magnets, if you know what I mean…


**Re: CHUD Management**
by Darkness Vector 17 on Thursday July 26, @04:26PM

The major issue with “undesirable” folks involved in the “Thelemic Community” has to do with the goals and directions of that community. If these goals and plans aren't serious, non-serious people will not be weeded out, and will create a problem.

Say it is my will to establish a bookstore. Everything that contributed to the growth and success of that store would be welcomed, everything that hampered that success would be …“banished.” Hard working, punctual and knowledgable employees would be welcomed, pot smoking, unwashed, lazy, penniless hippies would not be. Since most of the “Thelemic Orders” have not established what their goals are, they have no way of really determining who the CHUD is and isn't. In reality, it's a crisis of not knowing your will and not doing it.

In addition, the Thelemic community is -in general -suffering under the belief that being a “good Thelemite” (or non-specified Order member) means not judging other people. Anyone with even a passing understanding of AC and his life will quickly know that not passing judgment or challenging people was a “virtue” he never saw the value of. Why this is such a commonly held view remains a deep mystery to me.

Once people actually know and understand what their will is, they can usually tell who is aiding them in their pursuit of it, and who isn't. At the far end of that spectrum is the CHUD. If CHUD are a problem, doesn't this say more about our own problems in tolerating them than is usually admitted?

The solution, I think, is to challenge the “Thelemic Magical Orders” to come up with a plan. Any plan. Serious people will be attracted, non-serious people will be weeded out. Non-profits work this way in the real world, and they have goals, plans, and timelines set for achieving their goals. If we don't, why don't we?


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Thursday July 26, @05:40PM
>Anyone with even a passing understanding of AC and his life will quickly know that\\
>not passing judgment or challenging people was a “virtue” he never saw the value of.\\
>Why this is such a commonly held view remains a deep mystery to me.\\
\\
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that, unlike Christianity with its “Imitation of Christ” philosophy, Thelema isn't about imitating Crowley, but about finding and doing our own wills.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Sam Evans on Thursday July 26, @08:13PM
Well, true we must discover our own wills. But why does that mean I have to “not judge” anyone to be a good Thelemite or member in an “Official Thelemic Order”?\\
\\
The “no judgment” rule -unspoken or otherwise seems to impede people's wills. One must endlessly tolerate pests, weasels, and other CHUD-like characters, or one is seen as being “judgmental.” If it's a choice between being kind and tolerant to the CHUD -or “judging them” as unworthy of time and attention, I know which choice I'm going to make.\\
\\
The big bond in most of these Official Thelmeic Orders is “I won't challenge you if you don't challenge me.” How this is helpful in getting the Organization to actually do too much is beyond me. It also doesn't seem helpful in encouraging anyone to find out what their true will is an do it. The track record is pretty shabby.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Thursday July 26, @11:35PM
I wasn't trying to justify tolerance; unkindness and intolerance are just fine with me. I was merely trying to point out that the poster's surprise that more Thelemites don't emulate Crowley is, in my opinion, misplaced.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <GM> on Friday July 27, @11:51AM
Dear Sam\\
\\
Si Vales, Valeo\\
\\
I think the problem comes from a misunderstanding of Thelema, or perhaps I should say an understanding of Thelema which is not conductive to its own survival or growth.\\
\\
Everyone is so concerned with being accepted into these Thelemic groups, that no one dare take a definitive stance for or against anything for fear of being labeled “unThelemic.” Talk about your peer pressure. Thelemic circles have their own form of political correctness. No one wants to draw the line. I am okay, you are okay too. Do what thou wilt, just don't get the cops involved.\\
\\
It isn't until the individual embraces Thelema with an open heart that the realization that CHUD exist in the first place, and that there is a problem which needs to be fixed.\\
\\
Take the Thelemic groups that think they are more Thelemic than others because they tolerate scoundrels? What happens to the scholars, the truly fraternal, the “brightest?” If they are that bright, they go somewhere else, where they don't have to pay dues to be stabbed in the back or risk being arrested by actions of their “Brethren.”\\
\\
Thelema will never be taken seriously until the people who profess to be Thelemites realize what a tremendous privilege it is to be one, and how their actions in general will help define what it is to the rest of the world.\\
\\
It really is this simple.\\
\\
Pax Profundus,\\
\\
GM\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Carolyn Stoddard on Friday July 27, @12:16PM
I think this post shows that you have been thinking about these issues for awhile. Thanks for sharing your thoughts.\\
\\
I was speaking to a friend awhile ago who is a very dedicated Thelemic student and scholar. He has scrimped and saved to buy first editions of many AC books including Book 4 and an entire set of the Equinox. I was defending participation in the “Official Thelemic Organization” by saying that it was an experiment in trying to figure out how a group of people who had accepted Liber Al could work together. Sooner or later this experiment needed to be made, and the only other option I could see was living and working alone -a sort of “ghetto of one” in the larger world. He responded by asking me, “How do you know these folks have really accepted Liber Al and are serious about it? Without serious commitment and work, isn't the experiment really worthless?” I have struggled to resolve this question ever since.\\
\\
Part of my evolution in thinking along these lines came when I started to try to evaluate the will power and direction of those around me. Haven't we all met people who are very good at knowing exactly what they want and who work hard to get it, regardless if they have read Liber Al or not? I have friends who are very “successful” in material terms and some who are involved in “big business.” These people have a lot of moxie and resources, but because they don't look like “bohemians” they don't fit my stereotypes as Occultist/ Thelemites. Yet, in terms of being successful at knowing and doing what they posit to be their wills, they rank very highly.\\
\\
If someone claims to be part of a tantric order - or even a leader in it, but can't ever find sex partners, isn't this a little silly? If people claim to be “magicians” and never practice magick -or are afraid of it, isn't this a little silly? If someone claims to have vast powers, but never produces anything and can't work a simple job, isn't this a tad ridiculous? Yet, how common are all of these cases in the “Official Thelemic Organization”?\\
\\
Are the real Thelemites out in the real world being successful whether they even know about Liber Al or not? Or are they living in hovels, getting by on nothing, and puffing on the bong of unrealized goals and unicorn dreams?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @01:44PM
“I was defending participation in the “Official Thelemic Organization” by saying that it was an experiment in trying to figure out how a group of people who had accepted Liber Al could work together.”\\
\\
In that you would err. To what end do they work? And what does it mean to accept Liber AL?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Victoria Winters on Friday July 27, @02:41PM
»In that you would err. To what end do they work?\\
\\
Well, this seems to me to be fairly obvious. One Thelemic group may want to create the kind of organization found described in “The Equinox.” Another might want to start an Abbey based on Cefalu. Still another might have other projects in mind. Any non-profit group usually has goals that are Strategic (in that they fit into a pattern of larger goals and are thus connected to each other), Measurable (in that they can be easily seen and grasped), Accountable (in that specific individuals are responsible for certain tasks), Realistic (!), and on a Time Line. In other words S.M.A.R.T.! If “Official Thelemic Organizations” don't have these sorts of goals and plans, then what do we have?\\
\\
Awhile ago, someone asked me, “Would you work for a business that didn't have a business plan?” My answer to that was frankly, no. Why shouldn't the most important task in the world - establishing the Law of Thelema - not have a plan that would surpass any plan by any business on earth? Most of the Thelemic community doesn't have the goals and plans that the worst non-profits have. Why is this? More importantly, what does this say about us?\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @03:39PM
    |

    First off, I'd like to clarify –as there were many 'mights and maybes' in your answer – that I have implied that there are no definite ends. If so, where are these groups? and what have they done? Are they involved in administering political changes in the country which they're based? Do they even voice their opinions in orderly well-thought out plans in public? Much less have they furthered spiritual/magical development as far as the times decree?\\
    \\
    The only answer that I am a aware is a flat out “no.”\\
    \\
    Now, I don't know what it says about Thelemites in general. But it speaks volumes for the general public, and societies in which the former were brought up.\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Friday July 27, @07:58PM
>If someone claims to be part of a tantric order - or even a leader in it,\\
>but can't ever find sex partners, isn't this a little silly?\\
\\
As a slimy attempt to find sex partners, however, it does make sense :-)\\
\\
>If people claim to be “magicians” and never practice magick -or are afraid of it,\\
>isn't this a little silly?\\
\\
It actually makes a lot of sense when seen as a defense mechanism. It's like hiding something in plain sight. It also always holds out the possibility of some prig stumbling into a real initiation (for better or worse).\\
\\
>If someone claims to have vast powers, but never produces anything and can't work\\
>a simple job, isn't this a tad ridiculous?\\
\\
A Lunatic writes to Dan.\\
\\

Judgement\\
by Shasu Ma'akheru on Thursday July 26, @08:38PM
Perhaps it has something to do with the fact that, unlike Christianity with its “Imitation of Christ” philosophy, Thelema isn't about imitating Crowley, but about finding and doing our own wills.\\
\\

The irony being, of course, that by hewing to a course of non-judgment, one is imitating Christ, if not Crowley. Christ was urging his followers to turn off their brains, cripple their rational minds, and accept his poisonous doctrine in lieu of reason, to say nothing of will.\\
\\


If I am obligated to pursue my will, it follows that I am obligated to judge everything in terms of whether it is useful or harmful or in some way relevant to my will. If, in the course of evaluating you – “you” in the generic sense, not specifically you, Mordecai – I reach the conclusion that you are a self-serving parasitic jerk with the emotional maturity of a three-year-old, I will plan my actions accordingly. That doesn't mean I will necessarily abuse you, interfere with your business, or denounce you publicly. It doesn't mean that I will conclude you are “evil”, and it doesn't mean that I will close my mind to the possibility that I have made a mistake in judgment or that you might change in the future.\\
\\


I don't see this as being in conflict with Thelema, nor do I see it as necessarily being the same as the absolutist judgments of the Christians – the difference being that a Thelemite is (ideally) aware of the fallability of his or her own judgment, and also aware that it is his or her own judgment, as opposed to the Christian habit of attributing one's own reactions to God.\\
\\

  • |Re: Judgement\\
    by <Mordecai> on Thursday July 26, @11:38PM
    |

    I take your point, but it's not one I was arguing with (see reply above).\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Revilo P. Oliver on Friday July 27, @01:19PM
“Thelema” may not be about imitating AC, but he is still an important figure. Who else's copyrights provide so much income? Which other Thelemite is so widely read? Who else's opinions about ritual are followed and listed in such close detail? Given that that's the case, why do so many of the Thelemic Organizations pay such close attention to these details if he's not meant to be imitated?\\
\\
Most, if not all, of the Thelemic organizations operate on a hieratic structure that seems to be in direct contradiction to the sickly-sweet egalitarianism many of the members embrace. What problems does this contradiction create and doesn't it add to an enviornment in which the CHUD can thrive?\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <Mordecai> on Friday July 27, @08:12PM
    |

    >why do so many of the Thelemic Organizations pay such close attention\\
    >to these details if he's not meant to be imitated?\\
    \\
    Well, of course, he meant himself to be imitated (though perhaps ironically), and organizations which want to be considered his heirs certainly see it in their interests to imitate him. That's all fine by me. I just don't think of them as Thelemic organizations, but rather as Crowleyan organizations. Thelemites may belong, a king may choose his garment as he will, but all the groups I've known are really Crowleyan groups. Maybe it's all the revenge of Crowley's own CHUDself!\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday July 26, @08:22PM
Seriousness, eh? That could mean a couple of different things. One would involve a distinction between being/play vs. becoming/development. A person who values development considers another who values play as “not serious”. A person who values play considers another who values development as “too serious”. We could bridge that dichotomy by emphasizing quality rather than seriousness. We might play poorly or well; we might develop poorly or well. I originally framed the problem in terms of CHUD because it suggests those who both play and develop poorly.\\
\\
If a Thelemic community is concerned mainly with development, then the bookstore analogy holds. But some Thelemic communities may more closely resemble a family, a neighborhood, or a parish. These are generally more concerned with being. Some amount of directed activity can benefit such communities, but they can also become too directed: highly-strung, future-directed, intolerant. A balance is needed.\\
\\
Not all development-oriented groups will wish to weed out the same types of people, either. A music studio specializing in hip-hop, say, will need many creative individuals who would never be able to get a job in your bookstore.\\
\\
I think that the goals of some Thelemic orders are fuzzier than you might find comfortable because they are more being-oriented, and so necessarily more inclusive. My idea of a “Thelemic Mission Statement” comes from the 12th Aethyr of The Vision and the Voice:
> And the Angel sayeth: Blessed are the saints, that their blood is mingled in the cup, and can never be separate any more. For Babylon the Beautiful, the Mother of abominations, hath sworn by her holy cteis, whereof every point is a pang, that she will not rest from her adulteries until the blood of everything that liveth is gathered therein, and the wine thereof laid up and matured and consecrated, and worthy to gladden the heart of my Father. For my Father is weary with the stress of eld, and cometh not to her bed. Yet shall this perfect wine be the quintessence, and the elixir, and by the draught thereof shall he renew his youth; and so shall it be eternally, as age by age the worlds do dissolve and change, and the universe unfoldeth itself as a Rose, and shutteth itself up as the Cross that is bent into the cube.\\
\\
And this is the comedy of Pan, that is played at night in the thick forest. And this is the mystery of Dionysus Zagreus, that is celebrated upon the holy mountain of Kithairon. And this is the secret of the brothers of the Rosy Cross; and this is the heart of the ritual that is accomplished in the Vault of the Adepts that is hidden in the Mountain of the Caverns, even the Holy Mountain Abiegnus.

You might well respond that this “mission” requires excellence, and I would agree. But what I also see there is a playfulness and rapture that can be dispersed at the slightest frown.\\
\\
Now, what of judging people? I've occasionally seen problems caused by individuals suspending judgment when judgment was required. But what I see as Thelema's great bane is the constant uncontrolled judgmentalism of everyone against everyone else. Some spiritual traditions recognize this as a handicap. I know you'll disagree, but it's clear to me that Thelema lacks this recognition because Crowley never dealt with it in himself. (Some other time, it would be interesting to examine the phenomenon of attainment in spite of unresolved psychological complexes.)\\
\\
(Also, I acknowledge that this has relevance to my role as moderator: I'm required to exercise judgment although I'm far from finished sorting out my own judgmental complex, making me feel perpetually like Arjuna at the opening of the Bhagavad Gita. I'm trying to learn as I go.)\\
\\
> If CHUD are a problem, doesn't this say more\\
> about our own problems in tolerating them than\\
> is usually admitted?\\
\\
I'm not convinced that CHUD are really a problem; they're just a fact that occasionally has to be dealt with. I genuinely admire Tim's method outlined above, especially his operational definition of what we're really talking about: “a behavioral problem – which generally would mean multiple complaints about the same behavior from several people.” That makes clear that we're not just talking about someone who is disliked by someone else.\\
\\
> The solution, I think, is to challenge the\\
> “Thelemic Magical Orders” to come up with a\\
> plan.\\
\\
At least some of the Thelemic magical orders do have a plan. One that comes to mind seems to operate on the plan of: achieve stability, be inclusive, grow. It's a very being-oriented plan, and in this way it precludes a dramatic shift towards the goal-orientation that you seem to seek. Some people, no doubt, would prefer it to be even less goal-oriented than it is. My guess is, it's attained a balance that is best suited for the bulk of its membership.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by David Collins on Friday July 27, @10:02AM
It is interesting to me how people gauge the issue of seriousness. Is our “play” serious? Should it be? One can ask oneself, “Is this a serious organization? Is it doing what a serious organization would do?”\\
\\
Often people ask me, “Is your church a *real* church?” I used to find this question offensive, but I tend to understand it more by looking at it another way. “Is it serious?” is often the question they are asking. Does it have buildings? A paid staff? A real program? I think most of the Thelemic community is in a quandry over whether we really want those things or not. If we want them, what sort of changes will we have to make?\\
One of my main frustrations with 60's style approaches (a broad brush there, I'm sure) is that many seem to be arguing for everything, without choices or costs. This conflicts with my experience in the “real world.”\\
\\
If the Official Thelemic Organizations decided that they no longer wanted to meet in people's houses, and instead wanted to own their own temples and “profess houses” -what steps would they have to take to get these? What sacrifices would have to be made? How would this change the characters of those involved with that “playing”?\\
\\
I think many folks see the Thelemic community as an escape and refuge from the “serious world.” In such a climate, one seeks to find a world in which the challenges and judgements made by the outside world slip away. It is a place, as they used to say, to “freak freely.” Given that desire and the community it creates, is it any wonder that those who “freak” a little too freely show up - the CHUD?\\
\\
I think one effect of this is a set of very low expectations for the Thelemic community. When we go to a Doctor, we want someone is is the best in their field. When we apply to a school, we aim as high as we can. Are we really looking at our “community” the same way, or are we making allowances for it in exchange for a place in which people will not make demands on us? Is this really a good idea? What are the negative consquences of an undemanding atmosphere?\\
\\
If we demand people work hard, and meet high standards in certain parts of our lives -as at least some of us do, I'm sure - why make an exception in our religious community? I can't help but think, on some level, that this short-changes us and the community.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Night Mallard on Friday July 27, @10:14AM
It is a place, as they used to say, to “freak freely.”\\
\\
The challenge that this presents, then, is to “freak mo' bettah.” The best Thelemic communities I've seen freak most excellently.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Russell> on Friday July 27, @10:45AM
Maybe so, but most of the Thelemites I've known couldn't freak their way out of a paper bag.\\
\\
It sounds like some people think that Thelemites should be having bake sales, fund drives, mail order operations, investment funds and the like, which sounds fine - if you didn't get enough of that growing up with the Lutherans.\\
\\
If you want to get organized, why not look at starting raves or Burning Man theme camps or something? There are so many creative artist types who have a lot in common culturally with Thelemites, but are able to get out there creating things of beauty without getting bogged down in degrees, lineages, or shooting each other down out of misplaced projections.\\
\\
We can strive for excellence without having to compare our brothers and sisters to doctors and colleges.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Bill Malloy on Friday July 27, @10:50AM
Gee, I don't know about you, but I'd love to have the best schools in the country run by Thelemites, the best arts college, the best medical schools, the best lawyers, etc. Why would that be so bad?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @11:11AM
Is anyone saying that it would be bad? But I think there's an important difference between
* seeing those whose will it is to run institutions and asking how they can be allied to Thelema, and
* seeing those whose will it is to be Thelemites and asking how they can be made fit to run institutions.

\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Burke Devlin on Friday July 27, @11:44AM
I always thought Thelema was about excellence at anything. A community, a parish, a hang-out, all of those things require some institutional infra-structure of some kind.\\
\\
Is it taboo to ask, “Are we working as hard as we should be?” Is it wrong to ask, “What are our expectations?” Rather than blame the CHUD -which is hardly a strict category since your High Priestess might be someone else's “bottom feeder,” shouldn't we be looking at ourselves?\\
\\
A friend of mine noted the differences in attitude shared by AC and his contemporaries and our current “Thelemic Community.” He said that from reading their letters and writings - notably that of Leah Hirsig - that they seemed much more commited than we do. Is this a fair estimation? Is it even a fair question?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @11:59AM
> shouldn't we be looking at ourselves?\\
\\
Looking at ourselves is one thing. Looking at those around us is something else again. Most often, I find that we think we're looking at others but see only unrecognized aspects of ourselves, or our parents' perceptions of us.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Burke Devlin on Friday July 27, @12:31PM
I think the goal is to see how the “community” may be encouraging problematic behaviors. In short, if the CHUD bother you -and they clearly are a concern of your's or you wouldn't have started the thread -how much are they a result of your own karma and that of the “community” around you?\\
\\
Often members of “Official Thelemic Organizations” are quick to point out that the problems facing their “enemies” are the “karmic” results of their mistakes. But rarely do those members see their own “enemies” (and CHUD) as being bourne out of *their* mistakes. Why is that?\\
\\
If the CHUD are bugging you, it is because - I fear -you have nourished them at your own teat, and given them an attractive home to grow and multiply in. It is up to you to change those circumstances so that they no longer are a problem.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <GM> on Friday July 27, @12:43PM
Dear Burke:\\
\\
Si Vales, Valeo\\
\\
You: If the CHUD are bugging you, it is because - I fear -you have nourished them at your own teat, and given them an attractive home to grow and multiply in. It is up to you to change those circumstances so that they no longer are a problem.\\
\\
How “unThelemic” of you to insinuate that one should have a cancer removed. What if that cancer is doing its will? Then what? Doesn't that cancer have a right to exist? And if that cancer eventually consumes your entire body choking out your very life, isn't it then your will to die at the hands of the cancer?\\
\\
I recommend, Sir, that you go back to Thelema 101 since you have obviously lost all perspective.\\
\\
Pax Profundus,\\
GM\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @01:28PM
“if the CHUD bother you -and they clearly are a concern of your's or you wouldn't have started the thread”\\
\\
I can see how it would seem that way, but in fact I haven't found it to be a substantial problem for many years. I was re-reading Sam & Max: Freelance Police, and came across the passage: “New York, New York, it's a helluva town… The mimes are food for the bums underground, New York, New Yoooork!” Then the phrase “CHUD Management” came to mind, and I wrote the paragraph. This wouldn't happen if people would submit articles more often…\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @01:56PM
    |

    What if the CHUDs are actually the highest profile Thelemites in its organizations? What do you do then?\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Joe Haskell on Friday July 27, @01:39PM
Burke:\\
\\
re: I think the goal is to see how the “community” may be encouraging problematic behaviors. -how much are they a result of your own karma and that of the “community” around you?\\
\\
A valid point. In essence, isn't every “Thelemic community” the aggregate of abilites -or lack of- imbued by the people involved? With this in mind, if a “Thelemic community” does little to structure its workings or affirm that the actual concept of work is important, where does that leave them? In chaos.\\
\\
Without a clear message of how a Thelemic group functions (short of many bad examples) what impressions will newcomers have of the group? With Thelema in general? As a playhouse to air their worst behavior? In turn, what sort of people will this behavior attract? CHUDS. It's a sucessive chain of sustained values that will make the difference, good or bad.\\
\\
Hippie pipe dreams and words come cheap. The Great Work is just that, WORK!\\
\\
-Joe\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @01:53PM
>He said that from reading their letters and writings - notably that of Leah Hirsig - that they seemed much more commited than we do. Is this a fair estimation? Is it even a fair question?\\
\\
Indeed. Commitment died with Crowley. After him only clowns surfaced; and no one, and I mean, no one wants to stand behind a clown!\\
\\

  • |Re: clown fun\\
    by <woof> on Saturday July 28, @12:27PM
    |

    After him only clowns surfaced; and no one, and I mean, no one wants to stand behind a clown!\\
    \\
    Ah, a really really new perversion appears. Clown Buggery!!!\\
    \\
    (okay, so I just like saying Buggery!!!!)\\
    back to the regularly scheduled silliness, loves.\\
    \\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by David Collins on Wednesday August 01, @12:58PM
    |

    “Commitment died with Crowley”\\
    \\
    I don't think this is true at all. I do think it has adopted a much lower profile, and I think that while that is sad, it a natural reaction. If you were really commited and dedicated, and you went to an “Official Thelemic Organization” and found a bunch of lazy lay-abouts, smoking pot and attacking AC, wouldn't you turn on your heel and leave? Why would you stay and put up with that?\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Magaret Evans on Friday July 27, @12:58PM
Does this question imply that there is an inherent conflict between those who are good at running institutions and those who are Thelemites? Or that - in some way - institutions are, by their nature, “un-Thelemic”?\\
\\
Any successful human enterprise seems to me to be dependent on the will-power and vision of the people engaged in it. If the organization is a failure, it is very often due to apathy, laziness, and uncommited folks - in other words, a lack of will. The irony to me is that these are the exact problems that plague Official Thelemic Organizations. Are we lacking the will to be willful? If so, what does this reveal?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @01:50PM
That's not my point at all. I'm just saying that the path to excellence doesn't begin by showing revulsion for the people around us.\\
\\
If some of us are discouraged that we're surrounded by beachcombers rather than executives, I think we're better off encouraging them to loftier heights in their beachcombing way, rather than disparaging them because their way is not what we would prefer.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Mrs. Johnson on Friday July 27, @02:30PM
»“I'm just saying that the path to excellence doesn't begin by showing revulsion for the people around us.”\\
\\
Gee, why not? In the case of Hegalian dialectic, that's part of the process. In many instances throughout history, people got fed up with the status quo and went on to do something better. In a certain sense, this is how evil aides the Great Work. If “revulsion” with CHUD, apathy, and other problems hurting any “Official Thelemic Organizations” causes a change, then above the abyss -evil will equate with good!\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Monday July 30, @07:59PM
This is close to the core disagreement, isn't it?\\
\\
I'll harp on Buddhism again, in this case because it nowadays is attracting many of the brightest, most successful, and creative individuals in our culture, very much the sorts of people that you and I both would like to see swelling the Thelemic ranks. My contention is that Buddhism is attracting them, not through the stringency with which it weeds out undesirables (though there are some strains that do this), but through engaging people effectively at whatever level.\\
\\

Buddhism the answer?\\
by Elizabeth Collins on Tuesday July 31, @03:06PM
>“My contention is that Buddhism is attracting them, not through the stringency with which it weeds out undesirables (though there are some strains that do this), but through engaging people effectively at whatever level.\\
“\\
\\
I'd like to go to a premiere Buddhist organization and observe the differences in teaching, attitude, and demands that they make on their people. I think the “Thelemic Community” flounders around without much of a purpose or plan, and they - otoh -have a definite agenda and a seriousness about what they are doing. With a plan, a purpose, and leadership you can get things done. Without them, you can't get too much accomplished. Since most (though not all) of us have to live and work in the real world, we should be able to draw conclusions from our experiences in business, non-profits, etc. and see how good leadership and expectations changes things.\\
\\

  • |Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday July 31, @10:53PM
    |

    Since we're running out of room, I've replied over here.\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Francis Parker Yockey on Friday July 27, @03:31PM
“If some of us are discouraged that we're surrounded by beachcombers rather than executives, I think we're better off encouraging them to loftier heights in their beachcombing way, rather than disparaging them because their way is not what we would prefer.”\\
\\
Well, I think you started the thread by complaining about the CHUD. Do we really want to encourage them to greater heights of CHUD-ness? Isn't the difference between what you would call CHUD and I would call “a beachcomber” relative?\\
\\
There are any number of ways to look at this sort of question. I would like to see Thelemic organizations that are big enough for beach-combers as well as CEOs. But I don't want the beachcombers to depend on the CEO's for their daily bread, nor do I want them to dip their toes in the sand and pretend they ARE CEOs when someone new to the beach strolls over a dune. And the beachcombers shouldn't be deluding themselves that they are building temples in anything but the sky.\\
\\
If you think the Organization is diverse enough along these lines, that's fine. I don't think it is, not by a long shot. It amazes me to read books about communal experiences in the 1960's and see these same issues being hashed out over and over again. It seems we are doomed to endlessly re-invent the wheel, and to repeat the history we haven't learned.\\
\\
The best book I have found on this topic -as it relates to the “Official Thelemic Organizations - is “The Boo Hoo Bible” by Art Kleps. Words of wisdom, to be sure.\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @04:29PM
    |

    I think you started the thread by complaining about the CHUD.\\
    \\
    It wasn't my intention to complain, although it's certainly been perceived that way. Plainly, I should have been clearer in how I expressed my intention.\\
    \\
    Isn't the difference between what you would call CHUD and I would call “a beachcomber” relative?\\
    \\
    We might not agree on what exactly constitutes CHUD, but I think there's more than a relative difference. A necessary component of CHUD is aggression, which was central to my point.\\
    \\
    I would like to see Thelemic organizations that are big enough for beach-combers as well as CEOs. But I don't want the beachcombers to depend on the CEO's for their daily bread, nor do I want them to dip their toes in the sand and pretend they ARE CEOs when someone new to the beach strolls over a dune.\\
    \\
    Agreed.\\
    \\
    And the beachcombers shouldn't be deluding themselves that they are building temples in anything but the sky.\\
    \\
    Ah, but here is what I meant about loftier heights. Most executives are beaureaucrats, as most beachcombers are idlers. But both can become something more through persistence and determination.\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Lord Hitler on Friday July 27, @03:45PM\\
What would those “be(a)st's” look like?\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by Tim Maroney on Friday July 27, @11:16AM
I genuinely admire Tim's method outlined above, especially his operational definition of what we're really talking about: “a behavioral problem'– which generally would mean multiple complaints about the same behavior from several people.” That makes clear that we're not just talking about someone who is disliked by someone else.\\
\\
Thanks. One thing I'd like to add is that not all multiple complaints about a single behavior are complaints we should heed, and there needs to be a step of self-examination by the group when an issue like this comes up.\\
\\
To pick a point that has personal significance, I almost never say “93”. If there were to be several complaints about someone refusing to say “93”, that would not necessarily be something that should be forced on the individual. In this case, the problem would be that the group was attempting to enforce conformity where it did not need to be enforced for the good of the group, and the complainers might more properly be thought of as the ones with a problem.\\
\\
There is a whole range of issues like this. For instance, a serious dilemma could arise between people who were brought up on the “Grady's amateur hour” school of ritual, where ritual is treated as a joke and heckling by the audience is constant, and people who were raised in a more “high church” fashion. In this case, there's not necessarily a clear right or wrong approach to the subject, only a conflict of tastes. If there were more than one representative of either side of the issue, it would not be clear which complaint should be affirmed. However, it's not an issue that could simply be ignored. Similarly, there are groups where one could get in trouble for flirting too much, but there are also groups where one could get in trouble for flirting too little.\\
\\
Tim\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Saturday July 28, @12:06AM
>the “Grady's amateur hour” school of ritual, where ritual is treated as a joke\\
>and heckling by the audience is constant,\\
\\
Well, I was there and you weren't, and I contend that this is an inaccurate distortion of what went on in the early days of Thelema Lodge's Gnostic Mass. The ritual was treated as anything but a joke (which doesn't mean the celebration was entirely humorless, but the humor was reverent, if you can bend your mind around that concept), and constant heckling was not only not approved, it in fact would lead to the heckler's exclusion. Your basic issue is valid, but I wish you wouldn't rely on false, sometimes malicious, gossip for your examples.\\
\\

Addendum\\
by <Mordecai> on Saturday July 28, @12:12AM
The “amateur hour” referred to the fact that Grady didn't require people to memorize the mass, or even prove themselves any good at it, before they were allowed to perform it publicly. This wasn't because he didn't want to see it well performed, but because he was a great believer in learning by doing (also he couldn't be too choosy if he wanted to sustain a weekly mass for years on end). I did see some really horrendous renditions, but I never saw the sort of audience behavior you describe; it would not have been tolerated for long.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Tim Maroney on Saturday July 28, @04:29PM
I suspect that what and I perceive as “heckling” would be described more favorably as “improvisational audience participation” by someone more accepting of this behavioral mode.\\
\\
I'm not relying on rumor, but on the evidence of my own senses. I know what I saw of this loose performance style in the early 1990's. I also know that at that time, people would sometimes show up who had not been around much since the earlier era, and they behaved in an even more “participatory” way. This behavior was identified at the time as a remnant of early to mid-1980's ritual style by other people who had been there. I also know what I see when I attend Berkeley OTO rituals today. There is a distinct continuum.\\
\\
Tim\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <Mordecai> on Saturday July 28, @05:35PM
    |

    Perhaps you heard the phrase “Grady's amateur hour” invoked by people to justify their rudeness, but I still contend, as one who was there, that your characterization is inaccurate. I believe that Craig Moore was around at some point during that time, maybe he will give us his impressions.\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Victoria Winters on Friday July 27, @03:05PM
»“Now, what of judging people? I've occasionally seen problems caused by individuals suspending judgment when judgment was required. But what I see as Thelema's great bane is the constant uncontrolled judgmentalism of everyone against everyone else. Some spiritual traditions recognize this as a handicap. I know you'll disagree, but it's clear to me that Thelema lacks this recognition because Crowley never dealt with it in himself. (Some other time, it would be interesting to examine the phenomenon of attainment in spite of unresolved psychological complexes.)“\\
\\
Could you be more specific here? “Everyone vs. everyone else” suprises me. What is this refering to?\\
\\
\\
In regards to AC's attainments, it is common in some circles to bash him. Yet, when I look at the money coming in to at least one Official Thelemic Organization, he is providing -after death -a large part of the pie. Given how “messed up” AC was, I'd suspect that copyrights and revenue from less “messed up” and more healthy writers would be giving us the lion's share of the wealth, but that isn't the case yet. Gee whiz, I wonder why?\\
\\
For all the folks who complain about how “damaged” AC was, very few seem to be able to produce what he did. Is calling attention to AC's supposed problems a way to dodge a lack of attainment on one's own behalf?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <me> on Friday July 27, @04:03PM
>Is calling attention to AC's supposed problems a way to dodge a lack of attainment on one's own behalf?\\
\\
Great point! It is either that or mixed in failure to attain to clairvoyance; and that typically is due to “Bad Past Masters” (i.e., the ones running the show after the great war). Such stagnation breeds CHUDs–clear and simple–for that the only way to shew the angel into giving to you the Formula is that of vengeance. Similarly, when the org has lost all its majesty confusion imminently sets in.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @04:05PM
Could you be more specific here? “Everyone vs. everyone else” suprises me. What is this refering to?\\
\\
There are certain problems that almost everyone has to deal with on the path. The feeling that one is separate from the world, for instance, or that one's life is fundamentally meaningless. Applying oneself to Thelema can help remove these problems.\\
\\
Another problem is that one develops an inner critic based on the rules that are imposed on one in childhood. This critic is necessary in childhood; the problem is that we don't outgrow it. It becomes a permanent part of our functioning, so that we spend our lives believing that its rules are our rules.\\
\\
This critic has an outward direction as well. If we accept the rules we were raised with, we attempt to enforce those rules on those around us in order to be the “good” child, and uphold the moral order. Or we might rebel from those rules, and rail against them whenever we think we see them manifest in other people.\\
\\
You'd think that Thelema would help with this problem, too. The inner critic could be seen as the manifestation of Osiris within the soul, for instance. But traditionally, this is a problem that Thelema utterly neglects.\\
\\
So, when someone first joins a Thelemic community, they're on their best behavior for a while. But once the bloom wears off, the critic rears its head. For some, this only manifests internally. More often, the critic co-opts the message of “force and fire” and takes the opportunity to run rampant, condemning as much and as harshly as it can get away with. If it is clever enough, it can get away with it indefinitely.\\
\\
The hammering of critic against critic is the course of least resistance for Thelemic groupings. When communities rise above that, it's through a careful alchemy undertaken by individuals of great skill and patience.\\
\\
There are other communities that attain a kind of stability by attacking common enemies. When I hear people complaining about Thelemites, it's generally from exposure to these “critic clusters” rather than from bad experiences with idlers.\\
\\
In regards to AC's attainments, it is common in some circles to bash him.\\
\\
For some of us, one of the better aspects of Thelema is that Crowley need not be held up as a model of perfection. Blinders are not required.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Mathew the Caretaker on Friday July 27, @04:21PM
Some criticism is justified, some isn't. Some people produce, some don't. I don't think the Thelemic Organizations tend to look at themselves too carefully, or want to draw anything but happy comparisons between themselves and other groups.\\
\\
A friend pointed out to me the excercise in Liber III in which one takes on different attitudes, etc. as an attempt to control thought. How many of us have tried being a liberal PETA person one day, and a John Birch society person the next? What would that teach us about the costs and rewards of a variety of ways of looking at things?\\
\\
I think the urge to constantly posit external enemies is an attempt to find purpose and seriousness when there isn't anywhere else to find it. People busy building temples, schools, hospitals, etc. have other worries. Perhaps we need to explore their way of looking at the world.\\
\\
I'd point out that you began this thread by offering a critique of people within the Thelemic community. Are you one of these “out of control critics”? One cannot have it both ways.\\
\\
Re: AC, I'd like to think that we are spared slavish worship of him, but when I see how few people have studied his methods or approaches, I wonder if disparging AC becomes a way to dodge actually having to DO work like Liber III. It's easier to lie back on the beach and talk about how “messed up” he was.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @04:44PM
I'd point out that you began this thread by offering a critique of people within the Thelemic community. Are you one of these “out of control critics”? One cannot have it both ways.\\
\\
This is a point that I had expected to be brought up much earlier. For one thing, I was speaking not of people who have already established relationships within a Thelemic community, but of people who show up at the door. Next, since it was an issue presented in the abstract, it could be exemplified by either a realistic assessment or a case of mistaken superego. Tim's contribution puts the subject on a better footing; if I had taken the time to be more careful, it would never have gone any other way.\\
\\
Lastly, I in no way claim to have resolved all of the issues regarding my inner critic. It's an objective, and I'd like to think that I've made some headway on it over the years, but it's absolutely still with me. I speak of it as a problem we all share, not as something that others should overcome as I have.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management and “The Inner Critic”\\
by Mrs. Johnson on Friday July 27, @05:00PM
I have to admit, seeing the “Inner Critic” as the “Dying God” is an interesting idea. At least we will be assured he will rise again.\\
\\
When I moved to California I noticed that most of the people I met seemed to have no guilt about anything at all -at least by East Coast standards. This made them more relaxed but also more shallow on a certain level.\\
\\
Do you really think everyone should get rid of their inner critic? Is that the goal? I think critical thinking skills are important, if not essential.\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management and “The Inner Critic”\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @08:32PM
    |

    The inner critic isn't the same as critical thinking, although it's easy to confuse the two in practice. The former is an emotional response. My rule of thumb is, did I “just have to” say it? If so, it's my inner critic. Then there's the issue of denial…\\
    \\
    Yeah, I think that cutting through the “judge” is part of the goal, as is cutting through all our tape loops.\\
    \\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <GM> on Friday July 27, @04:56PM
Dear Victoria:\\
\\
Si Vales, Valeo\\
\\
The problem, as I see it has little to do with Crowley, but with people who use Crowley as an excuse to try to get away with something he wouldn't even have done, or something he didn't do, but could have done. It is an “honesty” problem. It is an issue of a bunch of people gathered together under the premise of wanting to grow as individuals, or discover their True Wills, when what is apparently going on is a pissing contest in which people with little or no social skills, babies and diletants are allowed to spread their disease like a virus because no one will dare speak up. Or maybe the people who *would* speak up are already gone?\\
\\
Crowley did a lot of very good things too, but you don't see people doing any of those, or using those things as an example.\\
\\
The best thing these so-called Thelemic Orders could do to improve their gene pool is to flush the toilet once in a while.\\
\\
Pax Profundus,\\
GM\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday July 27, @08:34PM\\
Damn, dude…\\


AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Mitch Ryan on Saturday July 28, @07:08PM
It's interesting to compare Magick -as a science - to a “real” science, like physics. Suppose we uncovered a journal that revealed A. Einstein to be a twisted bigot. Say he was a guilty of any number of “politically incorrect” beliefs. Would that render the study of the rest of his works unnecessary? If one wanted a degree in physics, could one beg off reading and knowing AE because of his “political” thoughts? Nope, that wouldn't fly.\\
\\
Look at Martin Heidegger. He thought and did some pretty rotten -by our standards - things in the 1930-40's. But philosophy students don't invoke these issues as an excuse not to study him. It's usually just a footnote. Many important figures in the sciences believed things and did things we would disaprove of. But you can't exapect anyone in those fields to take you seriously if you say, “I'm not studying this person because of his nasty beliefs!” Yet, we tolerate this all the time -when it comes to AC -in Magick.\\
\\
I was reading an account of some recent advances in neuro-science today, & it prompted me to ask myself, “Why isn't the science of magick conducted the same way?” People can do experiments, they can make advances in both fields. But one is usually treated very seriously, and the other is seen in a very different light. I thought the “method of science” meant advancing magick in the same way the sciences advance. Why have we dropped this aspect of it? Is it easier to mock AC's personality issues than to emulate his research and strive for his level of attainment?\\
\\
Shouldn't the “Thelemic Community” be more like a collection of scientists? Wouldn't this banish the CHUD?\\
\\
Many Official Thelemic Organizations are like strange gyms. You go in to one expecting everyone to be getting in shape, and instead see a collection of enormous fat people sitting around expressing opinions about the equipment they have never used. If you try to start your own gym, or publish a guide to how the orginal machines work, the fat people rally together and hire lawyers to sue you. When they are not telling people why the unused equipment won't work, they are bad-mouthing the opinions of the gym's founder, and then using his name to attract members to pay their rent.\\
\\
Many of the fat people seem to be waiting around for a teacher to come along who has opinions they like more than the gym's founder. But since they haven't gotten very far with him, how will they be ready for someone better?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Fra THA;M on Monday July 30, @01:41PM\\
This comment states clearly what we should all accept. Hearken to the words. Well said.\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Roger Collins on Monday July 30, @04:59PM
It's more of a common sense issue than anything else. We need to see Thelemic Organizations meeting the same standards we have for any other group or institution we have in any other part of our lives. Or even higher standards!\\
\\
The same goes for individuals. Do we expect more or less of someone when we find out that they are a Thelemite? if it's less, why? Isn't that not a good thing?\\
\\
Often, inside or outside, we make excuses for Thelemic organizations, or hold them to seperate standards. When one spends even a tiny amount of time thinking about this, it makes no sense at all. We don't go to a famous hospital and say, “Oh well, this isn't going to be any good, because it's a Jewish hospital.” Or, “The college can't be any good, it was run by Methodists.” We tend to have higher expectations for other religions and their achievments and works than we have for our own! And the irony is compounded when out “Thelemic” brothers and sisters turn around and dis' those very religions!\\
\\
An interesting further example. Recently the Taliban knocked over some Buddhist statues. Various members of an “Official Thelemic Organization” howled -along with the rest of the civilized world. Later, Fox TV ran a story that took people “inside the scariest places on earth” including the ruins of Cefalu. The building is slowly being destroyed. Did anyone complain, or feel the same pain they did when they saw or read about the statues being destroyed by the Taliban? No, they did not.\\
\\
Why would you care more about those statues being destroyed than Cefalu getting destroyed -and mocked in the process? I can't help but feel this lack of interest and concern about our own religion represents some really screwed up and unexamined values.\\
\\
Do people not care because on some level (or levels), they dislike AC? Or because they think that being too into any religion isn't cool (except Buddhism)? What would a careful study and practice of Liber Asarte reveal? Isn't it depressing and discouraging to be surrounded by people who think that by dissing AC they somehow make themselves more “Thelemic” and their own failures less obvious?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Monday July 30, @07:50PM
We need to see Thelemic Organizations meeting the same standards we have for any other group or institution we have in any other part of our lives.\\
\\
You can say, “higher standards” all you want, but that doesn't change the situation that we have many different values at play within the same communities. Isn't there a definition somewhere of politics as the art of reconciling people's aspirations? What you seem to want is a narrowing of the aspirations under consideration so that those that remain may be persued with greater focus.\\
\\
I'm saying, go ahead and persue your aspirations with like-minded Thelemites, but don't be intolerant of those with other aspirations. We should work to reduce needless conflict between the different visions of Thelema, and I see Thelemic Organizations often striving to achieve just that. The executive shouldn't have to breathe patchouli, and the beachcomber shouldn't have to fill out a form to surf.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Frank Gardner on Tuesday July 31, @02:49PM
>You can say, “higher standards” all you want, >but that doesn't change the situation that we >have many different values at play within the >same communities.\\
\\
Actually, I think pointing out the problems, silliness, and contradictions is part of the process by which those things can be overcome.\\
\\
I am working with folks who are liked-minded, but one cannot meet them unless one advertises one's position. It was only after I -and others -started pointing out these issues that we even discovered there were people out there who agreed with us.\\
\\
As far as being intolerant, I don't even see why that's an issue. Why should you tolerate the CHUD? You don't invite them into your house, do you? A good friend of mine served as the leader of his local “Official Thelemic Organization.” Every time there was a meeting at his home, things were later discovered to be missing. When he told the lame, lazy, and half-assed members he wasn't going to deal with their BS any more- was he being intolerant? Or just following his will?\\
\\
People need to feel that they can stand up and oppose nonsense. If that's being “intolerant” than I want to be the most intolerant person you ever met.\\
\\
Do we err in the “Thelemic Community” by being too tolerant of things we shouldn't? Or by being too intolerant, and not giving people a chance? I think that the pendulm needs to swing back to the center. It has a 30+ year history of being WAY on the other side.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Tuesday July 31, @08:52PM
I could not possibly agree with this more. I have, on several key occasions, been known to be extremely intolerant. I should not need to point out to anyone who witnessed these situations that my “intolerance”, which was extreme, was a direct reaction to the intolerance of others toward me. In fact, I did not become intolerant until after extended efforts at conciliation with the offending party, in my opinion a capital CHUD (but I quite caught the argument about beachcombers and executives, I am not missing this concept).\\
\\
I do think that I had some lessons to learn in there. I can appreciate what to me seems to some degree like a conspiracy against me in those circumstances.\\
\\
I agree with the concept that we should all feel free to oppose nonsense. Differing views is one thing, bullshit is bullshit and should be apparent to any rational adult. I think that the justification for tolerating the CHUD that ignorantly berated me for statements I hadn't even made, erroneous misinterpretations of my statements, was that it would be better to be patient, understanding, and allow the person the opportunity to learn and grow. I think this is a wonderful concept and although it opposed and continues to oppose my own interests, I have accepted it and gone along with it. It seems to me that the CHUD in question has made it more than apparent that he hasn't even the slightest intention of ever learning anything.\\
\\
Am I missing something?\\
\\
It seems to me that the concern about burning houses is the most rational justification here, and it also seems to me that a fairly tightly knit order of practicing occultists should have a little more courage than to be in fear for such things from people who clearly have difficulty even formulating thoughts.\\
\\
Also, since the events in question I have watched the number of “CHUDS” grow from a mere two to a number which is becoming increasingly difficult to count. Someone made the statement that this community is simply becoming a harbor for hardcore CHUD and I couldn't agree more. Even the contributer who made that statement qualifies as a CHUD in my book.\\
\\
I even think I am a CHUD, so I am just going to shut up now.\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Virbius> on Tuesday July 31, @09:09PM\\|

    I got 93! Haha, I win…\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday July 31, @10:30PM
Actually, I think pointing out the problems, silliness, and contradictions is part of the process by which those things can be overcome.\\
\\
Sometimes, although problem-pointing can sometimes in itself be a problem. In this case, I'm attempting to point out a problem with your call for “higher standards,” in that it ignores the fact that there are often multiple standards at play within a community.\\
\\
one cannot meet them unless one advertises one's position\\
\\
Then why not just make your advertisement as an invitation, without trying to say that everyone should feel the same way you do?\\
\\
As far as being intolerant, I don't even see why that's an issue.\\
\\
Apparently not. It's one thing to pursue a particular vision of Thelema, but another to throw stones at those pursuing other visions of it. Within the “Thelemic ecology,” those strains that interfere the most with other strains tend to be the most problematic.\\
\\
People need to feel that they can stand up and oppose nonsense.\\
\\
Funny, it seems to me that people are already very quick to exclude different ways of thinking.\\
\\
Do we err in the “Thelemic Community” by being too tolerant of things we shouldn't? Or by being too intolerant, and not giving people a chance?\\
\\
Intolerance means more than not giving people a chance. It's meant argument and schism, from the Golden Dawn to Motta and beyond, to the point that our reputation in the general Pagan community (for example) is of a group perpetually breaking into smaller and smaller factions, each one finding fault with all of the others.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Wednesday August 01, @03:42AM
» People need to feel that they can stand up and oppose nonsense.\\
> Funny, it seems to me that people are already very quick to exclude different ways of thinking.\\
\\
If I am correct in my interpretation of the author's meaning “nonsense” in the context that it was used here, does not refer to a “different kind of thinking” but rather to deliberate lack of thought. The author used the example of a group of “Thelemites” who frequently stole from the host of their gathering. In my understanding this type of behavior can hardly be justified as simply “another type of thinking”.\\
\\
In another sense the word 'nonsense' can mean playful word combination which eludes 'ordinary' interpretation, such as the quotation of ee cummings posted below. In my opinion that is an example of substantial and meaningful nonsense (in fact I was the one who posted it). But I don't think that is the sense of our particular “nonsense” in this context.\\
\\
Hey, I'm all for Fantasy and Imagination, even Poetry, but are you really of the opinion that Delusion should be considered a “different kind of thinking”? In particular I refer to all of the self-proclaimed Maguses suddenly in our midst. I understand that you are going to spring the argument on me “Who is to make the call on what is Delusion and what is not?” You mentioned that you noticed a dynamic where a group's leader's shortcomings are echoed in it's followers, and I absolutely agree. You leave me no choice but to make the following proclamation:\\
\\
Xnoubis is a CHUD!\\
\\
Who started this conversation anyway? let's burn his house down… ;-)\\
\\
The conversation has now officially swallowed it's own tail. Now that we know Xnoubis is a CHUD, how should we manage him?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Mordecai> on Wednesday August 01, @01:58PM\\
So you're saying that Xnoubis is really Orobouros?\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday August 01, @06:40PM
Xnoubis is a CHUD!\\
\\
First of all, I need to point out that the above comment, as a personal attack, would ordinarily be cast into the shells. But since it's been cleverly inserted in the midst of an impassioned debate, shelling would all too easily be interpreted as mere defensiveness on my part, as the author intended. Suffice it to say that I'll continue to shell future attacks, against others or myself.\\
\\
But there's another reason this remark is worth saving. I don't think I qualify as a CHUD (sauteed calf brain is about as close as I get), but I do have a past as a condemner, and it's come back and bitten me on the ass, right enough.\\
\\
My reflections on CHUD were based on memories from years ago, when I was more quick to condemn others. Once I eased up on that, I no longer had dealings with CHUD. My conclusion is that they were mostly of my own manufacture.\\
\\
But I wrote this original article in the grip of a cynical humor, and phrased it in a way that it could be (and has been) taken as an assertion of an approach that I am utterly opposed to. A valuable lesson.\\
\\
My point in regard to the “nonsense” remark is that it's easier to dismiss people than understand them. (What I didn't fully appreciate until now is that dismissal also makes for more compelling rhetoric.) That doesn't mean that all views are of equal value in every domain, just that the impulse to dismiss is widely prized, while the need to understand is seldom appreciated.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Thursday August 02, @02:52AM
I am of the opinion that the making for more compelling rhetoric fully justifies the case for dismissal, that would be SO Crowley, wouldn't it…? Talk about rhetoric, the man was the KING! But I never was arguing for dismissal in the first place (not here anyway). I appreciate your response to this, I quite accept it.\\
\\
In relation to this community (BeastBay) there are certain types of comments besides personal attacks that should probably also be shelled, and those are comments where a) the contributer clearly has not read the post he/she is responding to, b) the contributer clearly does not understand what they are responding to, for example clearly berating the original contributer for statement they have not made, and c) the contributer rambles on excessively with little or nothing to actually contribute. I understand that the diagnosis in these cases can get tricky, but I am of the opinion that an attempt needs to be made.\\
\\
The problem with these types of postings, in my opinion, is that they are hostile. In many cases they are just longwinded smokescreens patently shutting out any view opposing the author's (often misguided) viewpoint. I have personally been witness to circumstances where extended “rhetoric” of this sort has shut out completely contributers who actully had something to contibute.\\
\\
I quite catch the concept of the CHUD being a creation of condemnation, and take it to heart. Simultaneously (both-and) I strongly urge consideration of my suggestion made above concerning off topic postings.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @07:25AM
compelling rhetoric fully justifies the case for dismissal\\
\\
[grin] I feel that I've made the substantial case in other postings. But I see what you mean.\\
\\
there are certain types of comments besides personal attacks that should probably also be shelled\\
\\
I disagree, but not strongly. How do others think?\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Virbius> on Thursday August 02, @07:50AM
    |

    I couldn't help but notice that you left plenty of space for people to respond…\\
    \\
    [grin]\\
    \\
    How about a comment on my question about the application of “both-and” thinking to the multiple Spiral Dynamics types?\\
    \\
    To clarify my view on the shelling of certain comments, my view is that this SHOULD be a rare occurrence, but that certain types of discourse which have become common here could possibly require it to be a bigger deal in it's institution. Generally, a conversation should run it's course until it becomes apparent that a particular person just isn't listening and doesn't really care to, the only thing they care about is preaching their own, as I say often misguided, interpretation. THEN, when it has become apparent, warn them, they will naturally rebell against it and claim they are being censored and, in fact, they are, precisely because their contribution by it's mere existence is effectively censoring others.\\
    \\
    I've seen it happen, I can quote examples in past discussions.\\
    \\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Mitch Ryan on Wednesday August 01, @10:33AM
Why didn't you address the example about the “Official Thelemic Organization” leader who kept getting things stolen?\\
\\
I think, you, and the rest of the Thelemic Community - bend over backwards not to critique or question other people. This seems to be a grave error, and has let the lcd rule the roost. people need to know that they can stop tolerating people creating problems and that can be a “good thing.”\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday August 01, @06:44PM
    |

    Why didn't you address the example about the “Official Thelemic Organization” leader who kept getting things stolen?\\
    \\
    Because, as you know, the details of that particular example lead to a morass of political and social issues I'm not going to get into.\\
    \\
    Again, I think the real solution to this sort of problem was quickly and concisely jotted down by Tim in comment #1.\\
    \\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Elizabeth Collins on Wednesday August 01, @11:22AM
“Sometimes, although problem-pointing can sometimes in itself be a problem. In this case, I'm attempting to point out a problem with your call for “higher standards,” in that it ignores the fact that there are often multiple standards at play within a community.”\\
\\
I think you miscontrue my purpose. I feel there are many people in the “Thelemic Community” who have - what I consider to be at least - a thirst for higher standards and greater levels of action and purpose than we are currently seeing. I think these folks can be rallied to create a better community. If this discomfits others who don't share these values and ideas… too bad. To each, their own.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday August 01, @06:49PM
To each, their own.\\
\\
That, of course, is all I'm asking for. There are people in the Thelemic Community who have a thirst for your standards, and that's fine. There are other Thelemites with other standards, though, and it seems as if you say (correct me if I'm misinterpreting) that those who don't feel compelled by your standards lack all standards. You're not saying, “everybody who agrees with me, get over here,” but “let's get rid of those who disagree with me.”\\
\\
The Pink Floyd tune that comes to my mind is “Get 'Em Up Against the Wall.”\\
\\
(In Spiral Dynamics terms, if anyone familiar with the terminology cares, I see this debate as split between a red/blue/orange “win by upholding righteous authority,” view, and a green/yellow “preserve the system by caring” view. Red/blue/orange views green as lacking discernment, green/yellow sees the red/blue alliance as lacking perspective of other views.)\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Pink Floyd on Wednesday August 01, @09:08PM
That tune is actually called “In The Flesh”, another one from our best selling album The Wall. Please buy many copies. I am still really burned about McCartney having more money than I do. It's making it really hard for me to get chicks.\\
\\
- Dave\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Thursday August 02, @02:59AM
Concerning the Spiral Dynamics types, how do you see the application of my suggestion of “both-and” type thinking?\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @07:53AM
    |

    Yellow, now that you mention it.\\
    \\
    The way I would frame what I'm hearing as your point is, these are two different arguments. I originally asked, how do you deal with behavior that is disruptive to social functioning in an environment that values diversity? Tim then pointed out, it's not that hard once you think about it. Unfortunately, the question was still there to kick around.\\
    \\
    Then came the voice of many names, saying (it seems to me), value tolerance less, and social functioning will get disrupted less. When I responded that I don't find this to be an acceptable solution, I was painted as someone who values disruption.\\
    \\
    Ultimately, functionality and tolerance are both important. Functionality means that there are limits to tolerance, but those limits have to be understood and implemented intelligently or functionality suffers.\\
    \\
    In my experience of Thelema, the greatest problem by far has been intolerance. More than intolerance, really: the natural tendency to condemn, which often gets enflamed by misapplication of Crowley's writing. In the experience of “My Name is Legion,” apparently, the greatest problem has been disruption. (But again, condemnation feeds disruption.)\\
    \\
    There's a scene like that in one of the CHUD movies, actually. Two hungry CHUD stagger past a busy cocktail lounge. One says, “Great taste!” The other says, “Less filling!” Then they go in and feast, to the sound of rising screams.\\
    \\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Marcelo R. Motta on Wednesday August 01, @11:29AM
“Apparently not. It's one thing to pursue a particular vision of Thelema, but another to throw stones at those pursuing other visions of it. Within the “Thelemic ecology,” those strains that interfere the most with other strains tend to be the most problematic.”\\
\\
Can my “particular vision of Thelema” include people not stealing things from house? Or will protests about that hurt your feelings?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Mordecai> on Wednesday August 01, @02:03PM
Of course your protests are justified, but shouldn't they be directed to the thieves and the police instead of the online Thelemic community?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Margret "Maggie" Winters on Wednesday August 01, @02:40PM
Not if the people online foster, perhaps without thinking about it, a community in which thieves and thugs are welcome! This was the orginal point of the thread…\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Wednesday August 01, @03:25PM
Personally I don't even really think that was the point of the argument. The author used an extreme example to make his point. The point was one that I have often harped on myself: right and wrong are objective. At the risk of repeating myself I will again assert my core thesis: There is a line that gets crossed between “difference of opinion” and objective falsehood. The example of the theif makes this point very clear. The problem of “CHUD” from my perspective is clearly a result of the failure to make open recognition of this line.\\
\\
What I have heard in this thread is that a number of people are desperately searching for a more committed, more reponsible Thelema. What I hear in response is that this somehow excludes certain people or ideas, and that it somehow inherently prevents a “kinder, more gentle” Thelema. I refuse to accept this argument on the grounds that it is a synthetic “either-or” knee jerk reaction to the desires of many to seek “higher standards”. The reality of a “both-and” approach is not only possible, but in fact the only rational approach.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Margret "Maggie" Winters on Wednesday August 01, @04:04PM
“What I hear in response is that this somehow excludes certain people or ideas, and that it somehow inherently prevents a “kinder, more gentle” Thelema”\\
\\
This is why I think people are attracted to Nema. She presents a way to soften the blow of a lot of what AC wrote. Sadly, I think this is a path away from solving the important problems. It is similiar to the sad and silly “As it harms none..” - the so-called Wiccan rede.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <woof> on Wednesday August 01, @05:21PM
I guess with the psycho buffer of a puter, without the in-person problems of actual meetings, a pseudo-cyber-community like HML can seem “kinder, more gentle”. LOL\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Wednesday August 01, @06:19PM
My apologies for participating after I said by e-mail I wouldn't, but I felt a need to clarify what seems to be a misunderstanding. Explicitly wishing to avoid any kind of splitting or factioning here, I don't think there is a nicer way to say that it seems you missed half of my point. What you are doing here is an example of “either-or” thinking as opposed to the “both-and” method I suggested. The fact is that “either-or” (one has to be false the other has to be true) only works on paper in algebra class, not in the real world and it seems to me also not in any philosophy significantly advanced enough to handle modern problems. Approaching your disagreement with a particular interpretation in this manner is probably not going to be effective, particularly when your only argument against it is that “you don't like it”.\\
\\
Remember please that I am wholeheartedly agreeing with what I feel is your central issue, that somehow higher standards need to be sought, and that rejecting nonsense can hardly be called “intolerance”. That being said let me inform you that in my interpretation your responding to only half of my argument while ignoring the rest as if you had blinders on is “nonsense”. But I have very high standards, so pardon me if I come off a little heavy…\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Roger Collins on Thursday August 02, @12:36PM
Re: the “both and” issue, while it sounds great, i'd like to see some practical examples. Let's say I am a part of an “Official Thelemic Organization” and I and my friends have a body. The body meets at my house. If my friends and I exclude people who don't fit into our program, and won't allow them in our home, what is going to be the response?\\
\\
What if we meet in a rented hall. To make the monthly rent on the hall, we must each pay $20 a month. What if there are people who -for a variety of reasons -can't make the $20 a month, or don't want to sacrifice to do it? Should they be excluded? What will their response be?\\
\\
These are the sort of practical, real-world questions that create problems. I don't see how the “Both paying and non-paying” people can work together.\\
\\
It seems like a lesson folks should have learned in the 60's.\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Mordecai> on Thursday August 02, @01:33PM
    |

    >I don't see how the “Both paying and non-paying” people can work together.\\
    \\
    It happens all the time in groups like Earth First! and Food Not Bombs; people contribute what they can in the way of money, materiel, and work. There's even a place for freeloaders (i.e., eaters of the free meal, bodies at the demo, etc.). Why can't Thelema do the same? Actually it does, though not among folks who aren't Thelemites, but just play one online!\\
    \\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @03:50PM\\|

    Oops! Let's move over.\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Monday July 30, @07:46PM
AC Not the Problem\\
\\
That's true, in the sense that no one Thelemite is necessarily constrained by gaps in Crowley's teachings. If there are gaps for that particular Thelemite, they can find what they need elsewhere, and many do.\\
\\
I remember, though, an occasion when Genesis P-Orridge acknowledged that he saw problems arise in Thee Temple Ov Psychic Youth which seemed to be aspects of his own problems magnified on a large scale, and speculated that something similar might occur with AC and Thelema. And this matches my observations as well. Not problems for each Thelemite, but tendencies that crop up in Thelemic community because of the way that the foundation of the tradition is sketched out. This could be a phenomenon common to teachers and their teachings.\\
\\
A possible solution to this problem would be for a tradition to accrue enough masters to be able to round out the rough edges of what was left by the founder. Of course, the drawback is that later revisionists can also make the system less functional by changing things without sufficient perspective. The history of Buddhism, for instance, contains examples of both kinds of reform.\\
\\
I know of some people who deny that Crowley fully attained; I'm not saying that. It does seem to me that he demonstrated a kind of attainment that did not involve working through certain personality complexes. That in itself is something for future generations to make note of: such resolutions are apparently not a necessary condition for attainment. It could even be that this was part of his point. He may have felt that the Great Work could be accomplished by more of humanity if they knew that they didn't have to work through their personality conflicts first.\\
\\
As I look at the history of Thelema and the Western tradition in general, though, I wonder whether that's a workable approach for many others besides him. I think he had a pretty overactive superego, but it didn't stop him. I think it's an obstacle for many of his students, though, unless they find a way to deal with it – and they won't find much of Crowley's material helpful for that particular struggle.\\
\\
It's interesting to compare Magick -as a science - to a “real” science, like physics.\\
\\
It's more illuminating to compare magick with a “soft” science, like psychology – the reason being that in psychology, like magick, ideas about the subject of study can affect the observed results. Therefore the character of the individuals having the ideas is a legitimate concern.\\
\\
This could be illustrated by L. Ron Hubbard and Scientology. They think of themselves as having a technology superior to conventional psychotherapy. But for non-Scientologists, the personality of the founder is a relevant avenue of inquiry for evaluating the “science.”\\
\\
Shouldn't the “Thelemic Community” be more like a collection of scientists?\\
\\
That would depend on the Will of the individuals in the community. I sometimes think they should be more like a Sufi Dancing circle, but more often, I doubt that these opinions of what things “should be” really matter. Instead, I think of the Robert Fripp aphorism, “Qualitative action works by example and invites reciprocation.”\\
\\
Many Official Thelemic Organizations are like strange gyms.\\
\\
If they seem that strange, maybe the expectation that they are supposed to be like gyms should be questioned.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Bill Malloy on Tuesday July 31, @02:58PM
>A possible solution to this problem would be for >a tradition to accrue enough masters to be able >to round out the rough edges of what was left by >the founder.\\
\\
That would mean they would have to work as hard as he did. You don't get to be a `master of magick just because you want to. It takes more work and effort that the “community” generally want to recognize. If I want to be a mediocre Doctor, how much work and training do I have to go thru? Does a mediocre magician have to do the same amount of work, study, etc. and make the same sacrifices?\\
\\
People have this great desire to find people who have the Thelemic message but are easier to take than AC. i would suggest that the things you find most difficult about him are the things that make him the most important. This may be difficult for you to accept, but it's almost always true.\\
\\
The problem, I think, with the “Thelemic Community” is hardly “too much AC.” It's not enough! People don't really do all the ritual, exercises, and work he proscribes. I never fail to be amazed at all the folks who have barely scratched the surface of reading and studying his writings! The ones that do don't have the same “issues” as the ones who whine about his “personality problems.”\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday July 31, @10:39PM
That would mean they would have to work as hard as he did.\\
\\
Agreed. (I did use the word “master,” after all.) At this point, not much “rounding” has been possible. I think of Nema's work as one of the few substantial contributions since Crowley's time (to which, I recall, you disagree), and she needs to be rounded out in turn.\\
\\
There's no reason we shouldn't discuss what we see as difficulties with the canon, though. Kenneth Grant, for instance, although he may not have provided enduring solutions, has offered up criticisms of Crowley's thought that Thelema in general is stronger for. It might be that by discussing the problems today, we may set the stage for an eventual masterful resolution of them.\\
\\
the things you find most difficult about him are the things that make him the most important. This may be difficult for you to accept\\
\\
Well, I certainly don't agree with the sentiment that AC's ideas are beyond scrutiny. “Crowley is the measure of all things,” or “Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain”?\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Victoria Winters on Wednesday August 01, @10:50AM
I'm not suggesting that you not subject AC to critique, but I am suggesting that 99% of the critique I hear about him is worthless to me. It seems inspired by the idea that if I disagree with him on some level, this makes me better or smarter than he was. This is a tempting way of looking at things, but it's a delusion.\\
\\
You might think Nazism is evil, but this doesn't make you a better philosopher than Heidegger. Given that so many people in the Thelemic Community have so many problems with AC, one wonders why they are involved in the community at all. is it for the drugs? The chance to see a nude woman once a week? I really wonder sometimes…\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Mordecai> on Wednesday August 01, @02:16PM
>You might think Nazism is evil, but this doesn't make you a better philosopher than Heidegger.\\
\\
And the fact that Heidegger was a good philosopher clearly doesn't make him a good person. I agree with you that Crowley's character is irrelevant to his philosophical and social message, but when people actually critique his thought from a scientific or sociological standpoint they are generally ignored or reviled by the Thelemic subculture. Quite a few “Thelemites” are obsessed with dissing AC, but there seem to be far more who hero worship him uncritically.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Margret "Maggie" Winters on Wednesday August 01, @02:50PM
“And the fact that Heidegger was a good philosopher clearly doesn't make him a good person. I agree with you that Crowley's character is irrelevant to his philosophical and social message, but when people actually critique his thought from a scientific or sociological standpoint they are generally ignored or reviled by the Thelemic subculture. Quite a few “Thelemites” are obsessed with dissing AC, but there seem to be far more who hero worship him uncritically.”\\
\\
Then we disagree. The model I have seen is usually a combo of dissing AC to seem better than he was or pitaful ignorance of his actual teachings and writings.\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Virbius> on Wednesday August 01, @03:45PM\\|

    I've seen all of these. I agree with you both.\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Fra THA;M on Thursday August 02, @10:44AM
Through his writings, AC constantly and consistently warns against hero-worship or deification of him (although his ego quite loved it). Dire warnings are leveled towards those individuals whose vision and life are conciously modeled on his, who raise Him up on an unreachable pedestal.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Victoria Winters on Thursday August 02, @11:35AM
Where are the AC worshippers? I haven't met any. if you mean people who carefully study his books, and do his excercises with the same attention say, Buddhists do with their thing, then do they count? Anyone who takes AC more seriously than you do is an AC worshipper in the “Thelemic Community.” No wonder there are so few serious people.\\
\\
On another forum, someone suggested that the “HGA” is a substitute for Guru-Yoga work. I never heard about that in anything AC ever wrote.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @12:40PM
That was me:\\
\\
I'd propose that there is something that the Western Tradition has worked out to a greater degree than has Buddhism: the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. The Tibetans approach this with Guru Yoga, I believe, which is possibly a more secure way of going about it if you have a culture with reliable teachers. But the HGA is a concept more compatible with our heritage.\\
\\
This is a speculation that I've kicked around with friends. Do you see a problem with it? I'm not saying the two are completely cognate. Both deal with inner guidance, but the Western approach integrates personality and the divine in a way that Buddhism doesn't deal with until much further along.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <me> on Thursday August 02, @01:23PM
You are worried over nothing of value if you don't see the utter corruption involved with this statement. What you compare the HGA to is not unlike that of the long perverse jesus. But doesn't this tie in with the current topic of CHUDness? The problem (at least in your mind) obviously is that Thelema doesn't advocate morals; it advocates magick. When gibberish like that of preaching the HGA to be at all human is spewed over the airwaves, what sort of effect do you think this has? No one can possibly gather an understanding of Crowley's Thelema if every present day Thelemite confound each and every space mark of its teachings! Therefore, when there is no longer anything to aspire to but madness and confusion – you're damn right – there's gonna be ruckus, laziness, obsessive drug-taking, violence. (Ooops! I like these things! Oh well– at least I can say my picture aint fuzzy.)\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @02:07PM
Do you know what I'm referring to by “Guru-Yoga”? It certainly isn't union with a human guru.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Friday August 03, @07:20PM
I should have been more clear. “The Guru in Guru-Yoga is no more human than is the HGA,” is what I meant to say.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <me> on Friday August 03, @08:51PM
Well, Xnoubis, this nomenclature can get quite ridiculous, as I've stated similarly before.\\
\\
No one can possibly know what you mean. Arguing over a pointless event is equally useless, if that there is to be no connection shared. Yet, when I or anyone else sees a blatant ego of “This is the absolute truth; you cannot question it” when at the same time what is offered is lacking and loosely spoken, what results is surely an argument.\\
\\
To anyone I know, Guru means a human mentor. But there are enough prefixes created in yoga to make Tony Blair's head spin, which anyone with a half a brain can see is quite ridiculous.\\
\\
If the HGA is anything more than clairvoyance than I want no part of it! I have the right to make this my definition, yet you know not what I mean by the use of the term “clairvoyance”!\\
\\
Furthermore, all teachings of “how to live your life” is left over from BS xtian-flattering freemasonry, and I think of such as so petty and obvious to spur the most schismatic conflicts abound in the people who buy into it.\\
\\
Narrow:\\
\\
Thelema Of Future And Past\\
The killer on the road\\
\\
Some one had asked: To what direction should Thelema be taken?\\
\\
But I balked at this question, and laughed hideously to myself.\\
\\
I thought wildly:\\
\\
Crowley is an imp. His Holy Books of prose are sorely useless, bar the sometimes stringent, sometimes fruitful entertaining feather of his words. His treatise on Tarot is insipidly lacking in any one detail of the higher mystery insofar as the straightforward truth may claim. His Book Four stylishly neglects the true metaphysical interpretation of elements of ceremonial magick as would apply to body and Self. In Part I there is no mention of 'how' to perform Yoga, nor any tasteful details of what to expect and is to result by an experienced master. In fact, all of the Works of Crowley are sorely lacking. There is but style to soak up, and subtle hints of perfection to pound in one's brain in its reading. Certainly, Liber 418 is unquestionably, one of the greatest books ever written. It requires however, the auspicious and skillful few to interpret any one of its many events therein.\\
\\
Now, there remains a question as to whether Thelema is a complete Path, but of the greater things of which we are certain, this is entirely not the case. It is not merely a path at all, nor can one truly say that it offers any knowledge that is entirely original or foreign to anything else that has come before man in his long history.\\
\\
It does however provide a wonderment of illusions to which the sane and progressive man may at odds dispel.\\
\\
What then remains of the future of these illusions?\\
\\
The problem, like that of Freemasonry, whose secret has been lost and then found, guarded and then made corrupt; whose structure is dwindling in the obsolete, and altered to suit one's own nationality; or to the Grade of the Magus, whose task is complete Mastery over Change, shall the blood of a new prophet stain the tomb, or be his curse for ever enshroud him.\\
\\
Thelema is owned by none, for there be not any worthy to have it. Only shells remain, and which core is nonexistent upon the earth. For throughout the scattered and broken pieces of yesterday lingers a voice. Its message: Be thyself: for only that which is Not-Self is Thy Self.\\
\\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Virbius> on Saturday August 04, @05:17AM
I have a tendency to agree that Xnoubis' scholarship is not what I expect from him, but I don't exactly see you as holding the upper hand. It seems to me that anyone who really knew as much as you claim to would be able to express himself more clearly, in a veritable cosmos of fewer words.\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <me> on Saturday August 04, @08:06AM\\|

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Virbius> on Saturday August 04, @04:28PM
    |

    I regret having made this comment, I guess it was one of those things I “just had to share” that I probably shouldn't have. I definitely have a variety of observations concerning this whole topic and it's dynamics, but I feel it's best they be taken off line.\\
    \\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Xnoubis> on Saturday August 04, @10:17AM\\
It's just a jump to the left.\\


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by Neil Armstrong on Thursday August 02, @01:32PM
The only problem I can see with it is that it posits that K & C is easier for people to attain than I generally think it. I also think it ignores and seeks to bypass the problems associated with Guru-Yoga for very much the wrong reason.\\
\\
I get the idea that you'd be much happier and more assured working guru-yoga with someone in any other tradition than the one you find yourself involved with. I think this is funny and ironic, but I wonder if you will see why.\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @02:27PM
    |

    The only problem I can see with it is that it posits that K & C is easier for people to attain than I generally think it. I also think it ignores and seeks to bypass the problems associated with Guru-Yoga for very much the wrong reason.\\
    \\
    Those both sound like points I think I'm implying. (1) There's an aspect of what we call K & C that isn't part of Tibetan Guru-Yoga, but something that they cover much further along. (2) There are problems with Guru-Yoga in the context of our culture.\\
    \\
    I get the idea that you'd be much happier and more assured working guru-yoga with someone in any other tradition than the one you find yourself involved with.\\
    \\
    I'd thought about formulating a Tibetan Guru-Yoga style practice based on the image of Crowley, but only for a moment, and half in jest. It seems to me that Thelema isn't about treating Crowley as a guru, and that's one of the things I like about it.\\
    \\
    Maybe it would work out if somebody did take that approach, though. I'm unsure I've ever met such a person. Is that how you see Crowley?\\
    \\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @02:50PM
    |

    I get the idea that you'd be much happier and more assured\\
    \\
    I have a pretty happy life, actually. You don't sound too happy from your writings, but I suspect that you enjoy yourself despite appearances. As far as assurance, to me, more isn't necessarily better.\\
    \\

Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <Mordecai> on Thursday August 02, @01:46PM
>Where are the AC worshippers? I haven't met any. if you mean people who carefully\\
>study his books, and do his excercises with the same attention say, Buddhists\\
>do with their thing, then do they count? Anyone who takes AC more seriously than\\
>you do is an AC worshipper in the “Thelemic Community.” No wonder there\\
>are so few serious people.\\
\\
When I think of “AC worshippers” I certainly don't imagine serious students of his mystical/magical system. I see an infantile Aleister Crowley fan (of any age) with at best a muddled understanding of magick and Thelema, which for them is a party, a fashion, an ideology, or an excuse.\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Saturday July 28, @10:06PM
>Crowley did a lot of very good things too\\
\\
Could you give a few examples of what you mean? Not good writing or ritual that he did, but actions that might be considered morally exemplary. Did he ever do any charitable work along the lines of your OTK?\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by Fra THA;M on Friday July 27, @11:03AM
Anyone with a passing understanding of AC and the way he often treated people, and reascted to situations will recognize him as the The Royal Troglodyte Imperator of the CHUDs.\\
\\

**Re: CHUD Management**
by Mark Shekoyan on Friday July 27, @03:00PM

The particular path to realization Crowley puts forward is intimately woven with the Shadow side of the psyche. One aspect of Thelema that makes it so appealing to me is that it addresses the Jungian emphasis on the necessity of going “Through” the shadow with the intention of integration. Thelema's approach to the greatwork ultimately involves transforming all of our “Chudness” in the alchemical process of self integration/evolution.

One thing that makes this a real issue for Thelemic groups is that people who are in the thick of their own Shadow Process(CHUDNESS) are part of an organization with others at various stages of the initiatory process.

So, how do we make a space that allows others to interact from their own places of understanding(irregardless of the level of initiatory integration) while still forming a semblance of fraternity dedicated to fostering self individuation/realization of others at various stages along the path?

This is the Eternal One and the Many question that plagues every facet of human endeavor from multiculturalism to religious freedom.

Many small groups and traditional cultures have “Councils of Elders” that serve as mentors and reference points for the community at large.
Given our latent hostility and resentment torwards authority in this society, we shy away from such institutions, particularly if we ourselves have been damaged by patriarchal religious and political institutions.

It seems, however, that we do need “Higher Examples” which can serve as references points of initiatory possibility for those who are themselves befuddled by Chud.

So, how do we foster such a group of peers who might serve to guide, mentor, or council CHUD laden individuals as they work on their path torwards awakening?

For me it gets back to the basics. Cultivate Awareness in oneself, integrate and uplift the broken shells of one's own being, and serve from a place of integrity. The more of us that do this, the more we will create a collective morphogenetic field which “refines” the CHUD ness in our environments. Slowly, but surely your irritating CHUD will become your next door BUD and Sweet Wine will flow through the Garden again.


Re: CHUD Management\\
by Barnabas Collins on Friday July 27, @07:09PM
Dear Mark:\\
\\
93!\\
\\
> Many small groups and traditional cultures\\
> “Councils of Elders” that serve as mentors\\
> and reference points for the community at\\
> large. Given our latent hostility and\\
> resentment torwards authority in this\\
> society, we shy away from such institutions,\\
> particularly if we ourselves have been\\
> damaged by patriarchal religious and\\
> political institutions.\\
\\
Sounds a lot like the blind leading the blind. “You can't tell me what to do. Even if it's right and you know more about it than I do!” The Thelemic “movement” (I guess it is a movement, even if it is moving in a direction I dislike) is not creating scholars which contemporize the wisdom of yesterday to make it accessible to modern people. It is creating a group of know-it-alls that stand to gain more from unplugging the arts than to achieve the goal of enlightenment.\\
\\
As to a group of “Elders.” I could be wrong about this, but I think that the OTO has a group of wise sages called the “Areopagus” who postulate the philosophical paradoxes inherent in Thelema. I am looking at how successful they have been by how their work is manifesting in the OTO members I meet, and what kind of behavior is tolerated.\\
\\
So far, I am not impressed.\\
\\
93 93/93\\
Barnabas\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by Fra THA;M on Monday July 30, @12:38PM
    |

    “I could be wrong about this, but I think that the OTO has a group of wise sages called the 'Areopagus' who postulate the philosophical paradoxes inherent in Thelema.”\\
    \\
    And wrong you are. Neither wise, nor sage, and lacking any of the profundity that is a prerequisite to be called philosopher. Though they are high adepts schooled in the economic and exploitative magick of the Aeon of Mammon.\\
    \\

**Re: CHUD Management**
by jazzcat goodshiplollypop on Friday July 27, @05:13PM

…first question, are there any so-called chuds to answer for themselves?

once again it seems to me that there are a lot of indians, and they all want to be chiefs!

another point, as i guess i am a slime from the bottem feeder, cuz i speak in nonsequitures, and
i comb the beach of seaweed, broken dreams, and small sea shells, that i listen to the silent roar of Ra hoor from , and if that makes yu crap your yuppie pants so mote it be…and another shell i pick up echos the oceanic night name of her of the infinite stars…Nuuuuuuuuuuuuu, nuuuu, nuu, nui..t…

and one more nonpointy…coming from the Grady bunch school,(thats not the Breighton bunch ,(spl)
i was a hippy pipe dreamer from Santa Cruz that got my education in the streets and used bookstores, where i became aquainted with Crowley
as i was passing through various psychic phenomena
that would turned many an other into a gibbering idiot( i know that some of yu CEO chiefs to be think that i should be in an institution, at least lard hitler had the honesty to come right out and say it, and though i equate the clown to the fool, or coyote trickster, which if truth be told, there would be no Thelema with out that FOOL(trixter matrixter)…and so i do digress, but whats the hurry anyway, whats the big rush to make far sweeping scholarly catagorical judgements about
what and what is not thelema, when we can't agree
on what juz is this strange difficult form of knowledge in the first place, as soon as yu define it, IT slips through your fingers, aye; do some rituals, read some huge tomes, make offical statements, but in the wee hours after you have
made love or rolled a fatty, or just said Liber Resh, or done a daily banishing, cuz i have found that doing a daily banishing, is a great way to
clear the ol brain synapse, and keep the brain cells nice and sparky, ready to be a “communicating vessel” for what 93 current might be localy avalable, cuz you never know juz what might be channeled in the shapeshifting variety
of the multiplicity of revolting possibility that we are challenged with every fucking second(read eternity) on our Aeon…

perhaps i learned to be a thelemite in spite of those whom where my initiators, perhaps the hierophantic mystery is revealed in a small statue of Baphomet on Gradys wall….

perhaps i am on a beach of spacetime and i am looking into infinity, along the shores tongue
and it is saying to me; never never never can yu measure the word of the Aeon….cuz when yu do
it becomes something else….


Re: CHUD Management\\
by Mark Shekoyan on Friday July 27, @06:33PM
The Word That Can Be Spoken Is Not The Eternal Word…\\
\\
That being said…\\
\\
Yuppies, Puppies, Institutionaly, or Self Educated, ultimately none of that should matter. To me what matters is am I being true to myself and am I living the life I was born to live.\\
\\
Isn't that what were supposed to be about? A 1001 flavors of individuality? That being said, when people start to abuse, or assault me or those I care about, their “inviduality” becomes an issue for my own experience.\\
\\
It shouldn't be a problem if people are doing their wills, right, “No Clashing…“\\
\\
For me would mean clashing; Orbits that are not on their own paths coming together in fragmented ,disharmoniousness.\\
\\
I've had my own drug/schizophrenic D.N.A. induced shamanic dismemberment which I worked through for years, and managed to come out on the other side with something I liken to “Wholeness.”\\
\\
Now speaking for myself as I ground through the Fool, Coyote, Clown, Idiot Tricketer, Grail, Goddess, NutCase Archeytpes and didn't know what the Cazoo I was doing to myself, or others, I learned some hard lessons. I myself acted quite “Chudlike” torwards people around me. I could cause pain, and hurt without thinking of the implications.\\
\\
I made it to other side more or less intact, but not without a deep sense of how much this culture lacks the kind of initiatory, shamanic guidance that is integral to many societies.\\
\\
Young people in many tribal cultures begin their lives with a vision quest which sets them forward on their path. Far be it for me to define what that is for anyone, but alot of the trauma, self, and other abuse which arises in this culture is do in my opinion to the fact we lack initiatory systems of spiritual awakening with councils of mentors.\\
\\
We throw people in Nuthouses, medicate them, or marginialize them, but we rarely listen to them and help nurture their own process of development through wise council and spiritually informed leadership.\\
\\
People do get “Stuck” in their process. It happens all the time. We have whole complexs of neurotic patterns, resentments, negativity, fear, unforgiveness, and other heavy Qlippothic shells which foster a “CHUDNESS” in our behavior torwards ourselves and others.\\
\\
To me it all gets back to the same thing, we've got to do our work, heal our wounds, integrate our fragments, uplift the holy sparks, and rekindle the Flame of Loving Wholeness.\\
\\
Tikkun Olam, Renewing Ourselves, reweaving the world, reintegrating the fragments, Lifting the Holy Sparks.\\
\\
Love Is The Law, Love Under Will.\\
\\
And What Is the Nature of That Will? LOVE.\\
\\
93 93/93\\
\\
Mark\\
\\

Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Parlertriks> on Friday July 27, @08:19PM\\
[In the Shells]\\
\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by jazzcat goodshiplollypop on Saturday July 28, @01:04AM\\
[In the Shells]\\
\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Parlertriks> on Saturday July 28, @01:00PM\\
you too buddy\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by jazzcat goodshiplollypop on Sunday July 29, @02:08AM\\
[In the Shells]\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by Pink Floyd on Monday July 30, @04:13AM\\
[In the Shells]\\


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Hypocrates> on Monday July 30, @08:18PM
I can't believe that a comment from David Gilmour of Pink Floyd got “shelled”\\
\\

  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by <Parlertriks> on Monday July 30, @11:19PM
    |

    i can't believe that David Gilmour was sober enough to post a comment.\\
    \\

**Re: CHUD Management**
by E. E. Cummings on Saturday July 28, @03:53AM

The poem to come is for you and for me and is not for mostpeople –it's no use trying to pretend that mostpeople and ourselves are alike. Mostpeople have less in common with ourselves than the squarerootofminusone. You and I are human beings; mostpeople are snobs.

Take the matter of being born. What does being born mean to mostpeople? Catastrophe unmitigated. Socialrevolution. The cultured aristocrat yanked out of his hyperexclusively ultravoluptuous superpalazzo,and dumped into an incredibly vulgar detentioncamp swarming with every conceivable species of undesirable organism. Mostpeople fancy a guaranteed birthproof safetysuit of nondestructible selflessness. If mostpeople were to be born they'd improbably call it dying–

You and I are not snobs. We can never be born enough. We are human beings; for whom birth is a supremely welcome mystery, the mystery of growing: the mystery which happens only and whenever we are faithful to ourselves. You and I wear the dangerous looseness of doom and find it becoming. Life, for eternal us, is now; and now is much too busy being a little more than everything to seem anything, catastrophic included.

Life, for mostpeople, simply isn't. Take the socalled standardofliving. What do mostpeople mean by “living”? They don't mean living. They mean the latest and closest approximation to singular prenatal passivity which science, in its finite but unbounded wisdom, has succeeded in selling their wives. If science could fail, a mountain's a mammal. Mostpeople's wives can spot a genuine delusion of embryonic omnipotence immediately and will accept no substitutes

–luckily for us, a mountain is a mammal. The plusorminus movie to end moving, the strictly scientific parlourgame of real unreality, the tyranny conceived in misconception and dedicated to the proposition that every man is a woman and any woman's a king, hasn't a wheel to stand on. What their most synthetic not to mention transparent majesty, mrsandmr collective foetus, would improbably call a ghost is walking. He isn't an undream of anaesthetized impersons, or a cosmic comfortstation, or a transcendentally sterilized lookiesoundiefeelietastiesmellie. He is a healthily complex, a naturally homogeneous, citizen of immortality. The now of his each pitying free imperfect gesture, his any birth or breathing, insults perfected inframortally milleniums of slavishness. He is a little more than everything; he is democracy; he is alive; he is ourselves.

Miracles are to come. With you I leave a remembrance of miracles: they are by somebody who can love and who shall be continually reborn, a human being; somebody who said to those near him, when his fingers would not hold a brush “tie it into my hand”–

Nothing proving sick or partial. Nothing false, nothing difficult or easy or small or colossal. Nothing ordinary or
extraordinary, nothing emptied or filled, real or unreal, nothing feeble and known or clumsy and guessed. Everywhere tints childrening, innocent spontaneous, true. Nowhere possibly what flesh and impossibly such a garden, but actually flowers which breasts are among the very mouths of light. Nothing believed or doubted; brain over heart, surface:nowhere hating or to fear; shallow, mind without soul. Only how measureless cool flames of making;only each other building always distinct selves of mutual entirely opening; only alive. Never the murdered finalities of wherewhen and yesno, impotent nongames of wrongright and rightwrong; never to gain or pause, never the soft adventure of undoom, greedy anguishes and cringing ecstasies of inexistence; never to rest and never to have:only to grow.

Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question


Re: CHUD Management\\
by <Mordecai> on Saturday July 28, @01:04PM\\
That's beautiful, e.e., where did you originally publish it?\\


  • |Re: CHUD Management\\
    by E.E. Cummings on Monday July 30, @07:58PM
    |

    Sorry, can't answer that on account of\\
    \\
    \\
    I'M DEAD\\
    \\
    +\\
    \\
    I hope\\
    \\
    <\\
    \\
    it is not too inconvenient\\
    \\
    ;\\
    \\
    \\\
    \\
    for you.\\
    \\

**Re: CHUD Management**
by Fra THA;M on Monday July 30, @12:21PM

If these communities consist of some of the laughable and naive incorporated jokers I have in the past encountered, I will happily wear the troglodyte mantle. When they attempt to wither me with their derisive and venomous insults, I will use the label of CHUD, and wear it as a title of honour.

Grand Imperator CHUD-33 degree.
Ancient And Reformed Order Of The Holy Sewers.


**Re: CHUD Management**
by <me> on Monday July 30, @02:13PM

o when idiots attempt to sound like aristocrats!

The beast bay is but a harbor of chuds!


**Re: Buddhism the answer?**
by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday July 31, @10:51PM

[Continued from above.]

Buddhism, of course, isn't monolithic. There are Buddhist groups committed to a narrowly defined vision of what there community should be, and others that are more loosely structured and less demanding. But what I was speaking of is that one doesn't see a lot of condemnation between Buddhists.

An exception to the rule might illustrate the point. The Gelugpa have a Dharma Protector, a godform of sorts, called Dorje Shugden. H.H. the Dalai Lama was criticized for ending the recognition of this godform within the government of Tibet-in-Exile. Turns out that one of Dorje Shugden's duties (according to many Gelug practitioners) is to protect the Gelug doctrines from Nyingma influences.

This oppositional attitude stands out because of its rarity in Buddhism. It's also unappealing enough that it's easy to sympathize with the Dalai Lama's decision. Good thing for Buddhist P.R. that these kinds of skirmishes don't happen with the frequency they do in Thelema.


Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by Burke Devlin on Wednesday August 01, @10:21AM
Buddhists don't struggle and argue amongst themselves? I am sorry, but I have seen too much evidence to indicate otherwise.\\
\\
If you want to be a Buddhist, more power to you. My work with it was interesting, but it doesn't do for me what the Thelemic model does. The best parts of Buddhism - I think - are contained within the Thelemic approach.\\
\\
I think the real difference between Buddhism and the Thelemic Community is that the Buddhists have serious, professional people involved, who are real practioners, and are really serious. We don't have those sorts of folks yet.\\
\\
I also think that the Buddhists are “afraid” of Buddhism the same way people in the Thelemic Community are afraid of magick and Thelemic principles. I have noted this fear and wimpishness for years. It's really remarkable.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Wednesday August 01, @06:56PM
Buddhists don't struggle and argue amongst themselves?\\
\\
They do, but emotional struggles and chest-thumping are recognized as obstacles, so they usually get ratcheted down. Practices such as Generation of the Four Immeasurable Virtues (loving kindness, compassion, joy in the joy of others, equanamity) are helpful to practitioners both individually and collectively.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by Mrs. Johnson on Thursday August 02, @10:13AM
I find it interesting that you see so much intolerance in the Thelemic Community. In the communites I've been involved with, the whole ethic of that community seemed to be that you had to put up with anybody and anything. I remember sitting and listening while someone smashed every dish in the kitchen! I remember watching people get totally intoxicated and ill-behaved. To suggest that this sort of thing was anti-social, or disruptive was unheard of. Expecting people to behave the way they would at a Buddhist temple was considered “repressive” or “square.”\\
\\
Many Buddhist Temples -at least the ones in Japan -are run along authoritarian lines. In some Zen schools the master can hit people with a stick. Do you think people in the Thelemic Community would put up with that?\\
\\
I think you are struggling through a common contradiction found at the heart of the Thelemic Community, and I wonder if you have really realized it. On the one hand, you want the benefits of groups that are more authoritarian, more strict, and have higher standards. On the other hand, you resist any effort to set up the structures you need to get those things in the Thelemic Community. How will you work your way out of this impasse?\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @11:56AM
How will you work your way out of this impasse?\\
\\
Most of the time, I find that it's already been resolved. My Thelemic associates are caring, gifted people, for whom I am grateful. When one of my friends gets caught up in the Critic, I try to give them space, and they generally extend the same courtesy to me, although there are occasional slip-ups on both sides. Nonetheless, there's a lot of good will going around, so I generally feel benefits similar to those found in groups I used to envy.\\
\\
“Life is not without its problems. But life is not without its solutions, either.” – Lee Lozowick\\
\\
It's what I hear from Thelemites elsewhere that worries me.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Virbius> on Friday August 03, @09:03PM
What are you trying to accomplish? It seems to me that every time you are proven wrong you just change your position. Do you just enjoy conflict? What is your will? Try me and see if I even believe you. I am truly sorry I “sided” with you because I agreed with one of your concepts. I am not in agreement with your methods at all. At this point I suspect everything you say to be a game like Monty Python's “Argument Clinic”, but try me, let me see if I can find any substance in you.\\
\\
Fewest, plainest words possible, please, you know how stupid everyone except you is, the rest of us can't really handle big words or difficult concepts…\\
\\
Your 5 minutes starts now…\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Saturday August 04, @10:58AM
Maybe I shouldn't get involved here, but this is an interesting subject.\\
\\
It seems to me that what he's trying to accomplish is pretty clear. He feels that what Thelema needs is for Thelemites to accept Crowley's writings as they are, to work diligently in the manner he lays out, and to weed out those who don't. (Do I have it wrong?)\\
\\
I, on the other hand, advocate examining Crowley's work by the light of one's conscience, in the context of the world's spiritual traditions, while working toward a Thelemic culture that supports many different orientations.\\
\\
I applaud the work that he and others are doing in applying themselves to a strict interpretation of Crowley's regimen. But my approach apparently runs counter to his hopes for Thelema's direction, so he's quite motivated to cast my approach in the worst possible light.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Virbius> on Saturday August 04, @04:20PM
It seems to me that Christians have pointed out the error of literal, context free interpretation, but apparently most people here will not be able to follow me with that argument and will accuse me of all sorts of evil for sharing it.\\
\\
On the contrary X, maybe I shouldn't get involved.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Mordecai> on Saturday August 04, @10:06PM
>apparently most people here\\
\\
How accurate a picture do you think one can get of the reader/writership of Beast Bay at any given time? Perhaps the Xman could institute an ongoing poll of various controversial issues, e.g., “Stamp down the wretched & the weak. Law of the strong or clever blind?”\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Virbius> on Saturday August 04, @10:54PM
> Perhaps the Xman could institute an ongoing poll of various controversial issues, e.g.,\\
\\
Of course amazon.com instituted the “do you consider this comment helpful” polls somewhat after my positive review of Helen Ellerbe's “Dark History of Christiany” evoked extensive frothing debate from extreme right-wing Christians posing as reviews. I am not saying I caused it, but Xnoubis would probably agree I was likely a large part of the controversy. The “helpful or not” polls, which are attached to each comment, and a running total of “yays” and “nays” seem to be helpful, but contrary to what I feel are Xnoubis' wishes.\\
\\
I really like the idea of reducing the controversial issues to “core disagreements” and then subjecting them to polls, not to prove them right or wrong, but just to get a reading on the community's position on the issues. If the polls were simply a number of “yays” and “nays” then getting an accurate count brings up difficult issues like registered membership, which I think X has also clearly stated he is against.\\
\\
While this seems to conclude another “impasse” I want to state that I think a solution exists.\\
I tend to harmonize with the idea of running opinion polls.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Sunday August 05, @07:56AM
Polls? We could do polls; there's already a Zope module for it. It's true that, if we wanted to use them for guiding policy, we'd want to put a registration mechanism in place. But as long as registration wasn't required to participate in the discussions, I wouldn't have a problem with it.\\
\\
As far as “helpful or not” polls, I've never been interested in filling them out on other sites, but could see having them here if they were wanted. (Hey! We could hold a poll on the subect!) What I wouldn't want would be a poll with the options “helpful or fuck off and die.” :-)\\
\\
Mostly, I need a local (SF Bay) Thelemite to take up an interest in Zope to help me implement new stuff. There's a calendar function that needs to get done, and more, but I never seem to have time.\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by Fra THA;M on Sunday August 05, @03:29PM
I started frequenting the Beast Bay as a result of the quality of both the contributors input, and the quality of the site itself. A rare oasis in the abomination of this electronic desolation. I implore you to not consider adding polls, which would reduce your beautiful project to the mere status of populist dumping ground (exponentially more so…). As it stands, the input of your contributors is of (usually) high standard, and quite intelligent. I realize you didn't ask for my opinion, but here it is.\\
\\
Osculum Infernum\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Virbius> on Sunday August 05, @08:22PM
Where is the “fuck off and die” button???? I have this aching desire to press it mercilessly!!!!\\
\\
Seriously though, I was not interested in polls until Mordecai pointed out that my analysis (“most contributers” would misinterpret my statement about the comparison between a literal context free interpretation and Fundamental Christianity) was probably unfounded.\\
\\
It just appears as if most contributers would react that way, since a variety of participants are the most outspoken. But the reality is that quite a number of different views are represented in the mostly silent reading membership. Most notably, a great majority of persons such as myself avoid commenting on statements that appear to be “objectively false” and delusional, as if it is not our place to judge the contributer no matter how out of line he appears to be (as I've pointed out before, the female CHUD seems to be a non-existant species, but correct me if I am wrong). A great majority of objectively false interpretations go unquestioned, except by a relative few, who put themselves out on a bit of a limb to do so.\\
\\
In light of that dynamic, it seems that something on the order of “polls” are practically a requirement in order to get a true assessment of any topic discussed. We are interested in truth, or aren't we? Are we so obsessed with “personal interpretation” that outright delusion is an acceptable interpretation of Thelema? It is my opinion and understanding that Thelema, based as it is on radical personal liberty, is also a very much a child of Science and Empiricism, and must honor it's parents if it is to prosper.\\
\\
I wonder what are the objections to polls, hopefully something more scientific than “I just don't like them”.\\
\\
On the other hand, we could just give up and become Buddhists…\\
\\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by Fra THA;M on Monday August 06, @01:48PM
The reasons I object to polls are two-fold. One, As in any type of populist opinion polls, they are generally filled out by people on either extreme which doesn't then a common veiwpoint and present useful information. Two, on a personal note, unless one can articulate and defend their opinions on salient points, their inputy is worthless. Even the most slack-jawed, slope-browed CHUD can express an opinion, but that doens't make it valid. Opinion polls…how cliche and how plebian.\\
\\

  • |Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
    by <Mordecai> on Monday August 06, @03:19PM
    |

    Even the most high-brow intellectual giant can express an opinion, but that doesn't make it valid.\\
    \\

Re: Buddhism the answer?\\
by <Virbius> on Saturday August 04, @11:42PM
errata: Ms. Ellerbe's book is actually called “The Dark Side of Christian History”. At least one of my interlocuters in that argument (in which each got ONE comment) assumed I was female and speaking as a feminist. I kind of appreciate the implications, but that was a clear example of my thesis of the dichotomy between “difference of opinion” and objective falshood.\\
\\

**Systems View**
by <Xnoubis> on Thursday August 02, @03:48PM

[Continued from here.]

Let me use just your first example.

There's the system of the local body, which is a subsystem of the organization. Problems with the protective strategy can occur in relation to the body members, people who come to the door, neighboring bodies, or the organization as a whole.

If the body members want a tight protective strategy, that has implications for the rest of the system. Since more people will be turned away at the door, there are more hurt feelings to be dealt with. Neighboring bodies might polarize, imitate, or ignore, depending on how they're handled. If the polarization affects the whole organization, the organization may want to step in and change things.

If the body members want a loose, communal environment, similar considerations apply. Since more people will be coming through the door, there are more security problems to deal with. Neighboring bodies might polarize, imitate, or ignore, depending on how they're handled. If the polarization affects the whole organization, the organization may want to step in and change things.

“Both/and” suggests to me the recognition that both security and feelings need to be dealt with for best results.

One asymmetry that I notice is that tight groups often want everyone to be tight, whereas loose groups just want the right to be loose themselves, and other groups can do what they like. A tight group that adopts a laissez-faire attitude towards the rest of the system, it seems to me, would have a greatly improved chance of good relations with their peers.


**Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1**
by <Xnoubis> on Saturday August 04, @10:15AM

[Continued from here.]

No one can possibly know what you mean.

Anyone who's studied some Tibetan Buddhism and some Thelema would. They might not agree, although those I know do, but I'd find an informed disagreement interesting.

you cannot question it

What do you claim I'm saying can't be questioned?

Crowley is an imp […]

Wow! Until you got to “Certainly, Liber 418…” I thought you were lampooning my position that we don't have to follow Crowley unquestioningly. But you're serious, aren't you? You're welcome to your opinion, but I'd like to go on record as saying that I value Crowley's work much more than that, myself.

I agree that 418 is one of his greatest achievements.


Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
by <me> on Saturday August 04, @02:50PM
“Anyone who's studied some Tibetan Buddhism and some Thelema would. “\\
\\
One should also be of the ability to read your mind to know just what you understand of it.\\
\\
“What do you claim I'm saying can't be questioned?”\\
\\
Your attitude about certain things.\\
\\
“I'd like to go on record as saying that I value Crowley's work much more than that, myself.”\\
\\
Like I value eight-track tapes and polyester!\\
\\

  • |Re: AC Not the Problem Part 1\\
    by <woof> on Saturday August 04, @08:14PM
    |

    “Anyone who's studied some Tibetan Buddhism and some Thelema would. “\\
    \\
    >One should also be of the ability to read your mind to know just what you understand of it.\\
    \\
    If you don't know what he's meaning (which though I haven't had years to learn about, I did), bring in some informed debate about it (that might take a couple months of study of Tibetan Buddhism). Ask an intelligent question regarding where you don't “get it”.\\
    \\
    »“What do you claim I'm saying can't be questioned?”\\
    \\
    >Your attitude about certain things\\
    \\
    There's this forum. Its easy to go on mostly anonymously and post things, and its quite enjoyable (thanks!). Doesn't seem to hold a “no questioning” attitude imho.\\
    \\

**Re: Polls?**
by <me> on Tuesday August 07, @10:55AM

There is no urgent need for polls. What we really want to see is good, advanced material about magick, or intense ballsy and contraversial socio-political re-engineering.. Recently, there has been only weak basic crap that everyone has studied at age 5. Methinks fear of public view is silencing genius.


Re: Fear\\
by <woof> on Tuesday August 07, @12:06PM
>Methinks fear of public view is silencing genius\\
Maybe.\\
I mean folks CAN'T have only been doing Star Ruby maybe a little Star Sapphire, and only read The Book of the Law after years in the work, can they? A thelemite should perhaps be weighing what and how much Silence they want to use as a Restriction. Leaving behind some idle chatter, and blowing basic spells by talking about it, thats also basic stuff someone past newbie stage transcends- have so few figured out when to use speech? Is every last Thelemite so solely LHP that they don't want others to evolve, unless they've asked for a mentor in the A∴A∴? I don't know, but yes, the conversations do get repetitive pretty quickly, even in a fine forum such as this one. :-/\\
\\

Re: Fear\\
by <Mordecai> on Tuesday August 07, @12:15PM
>Is every last Thelemite so solely LHP that they don't want others to evolve,\\
>unless they've asked for a mentor in the A∴A∴?\\
\\
Isn't A∴A∴ considered the method of evolution in this path? I don't mean by that any of the various organizations that call themselves A∴A∴ (not that they aren't A∴A∴, I don't want to open that particular can of worms), but rather the “Invisible College” of developing consciousness which transcends all particular organizations. Isn't asking for mentoring from this “Current” part of our various paths?\\
\\

Re: A.A of the ether?\\
by <woof> on Tuesday August 07, @12:37PM
93 Mordecai - I'll need to think on this one (and how if any I can write a clear response, LOL), seems to stir in me some recognition that I hadn't placed till now, which I'm still confused by. Thanks for your view. 93 93/93 :-)\\
\\

Re: Fear\\
by <me> on Tuesday August 07, @01:52PM
I've seen more coherent work of real progress from [even] the 'exoteric' display of the U.R. et O.O. -So, no. As far as I see, the A\ A\ has lost its ticket.\\
\\
“Isn't asking for mentoring from this “Current” part of our various paths?”\\
\\
You act as though only orgs. have rights to which human beings have held for nearly 5 million years! possibly even other mammals even insects, far longer!\\
\\

  • |Re: Fear\\
    by <Mordecai> on Tuesday August 07, @07:14PM
    |

    >I don't mean by that any of the various organizations that call themselves A∴A∴\\
    \\
    I had thought this would make it clear I'm not talking about organizations per se. Apparently I was wrong. I certainly don't think that the “Current” resides in any particular group or ideology, but in individuals (and perhaps in the totality as well).\\
    \\

Re: Fear\\
by <me> on Tuesday August 07, @01:46PM
“I mean folks CAN'T have only been doing Star Ruby maybe a little Star Sapphire, and only read The Book of the Law after years in the work, can they?”\\
\\
I don't understand. Can I have your views of what Liber 25 and Liber 36 are about? (Don't drill me on OTO's version, because it is BS.)\\
\\
I can tell you that I've learned the lessons involved [in those libri] before ever reading the Book of the Law. But no, that's not all I've done before reading Liber CCXX. I don;t see your point at all? Can you speak in your own terms?\\
\\

  • |Re:\\
    by <woof> on Tuesday August 07, @02:23PM
    |

    > I don;t see your point at all?\\
    You are welcome to disagree with me, I don't mind.\\
    \\
    > Can you speak in your own terms?\\
    Can you see this sign language? hehehe\\
    \\

Re: Polls?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday August 07, @01:37PM
What we really want to see is good, advanced material about magick, or intense ballsy and contraversial socio-political re-engineering.\\
\\
I appreciate feedback like this. Really. And I'll try to keep it in mind.\\
\\
At the same time, y'all can always step up to the plate yourselves…\\
\\

Re: Polls?\\
by <me> on Tuesday August 07, @02:02PM
Thank you! This means a lot to “me” after I know I've probably come off as a complete a**hole (not personal or intentional–would you believe?). But elseways, I was waiting for others to step up the bill! (I hate posting something that draws zero comments! It's like the audience reads it and then goes “Ha?”! –Just testing the waters, me matey!)\\
\\

Re: Polls?\\
by <woof> on Tuesday August 07, @02:31PM
“Ha?”! –Just testing the waters, me matey!)\\
Arrrhh! ;→\\
\\

Re: Polls?\\
by <Xnoubis> on Tuesday August 07, @02:36PM
I hate posting something that draws zero comments!\\
\\
That's a learning process for everybody, I think. Often, I'll post something that I don't expect to get a response. But it can be off-putting to discover that no one but me finds the plight of Martinist orphans in Borneo a totally fascinating topic of conversation.\\
\\

  • |Re: Polls?\\
    by Fra THA;M on Tuesday August 07, @07:29PM
    |

    I almost always peruse your postings with pleasure. Even though I am a windbag, I think that sometimes the postings speak for themselves and don't require a comment. The fact that one has gone through the effort to find tantalizing tidbits of info, and post them, speaks volumes, regardless of whether people respond.\\
    \\


  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 ]

Home | Features | Fellows | Figures | Forms | Reflections

Hermetic.com | About | Contact | Participate | Become a Patron

Hermetic Hosting | Hermeneuticon | Hrmtc Underground

This is an official and authorized archive of The Beast Bay

Hosted by Hermetic.com

— fileinfo: path: '../hermetic.com/beastbay/996008210/index.html' created: 2016-03-15 modified: 2016-03-15 …

  • Last modified: 2016/03/16 01:28
  • (external edit)