The Temple of Set II

Home > Other > The Temple of Set II > Page 16
The Temple of Set II Page 16

by Michael A Aquino


  Revealing, and these interpretations have been published as The Law is for All (Ed. Regardie), Magical and

  Philosophical Commentaries on the Book of the Law (Ed. Symonds

  & Grant), and The Commentaries of AL (Ed. Motta). Crowley’s account of the Cairo Working - the

  transcription of the Book of the Law - is contained in The Equinox, The Confessions, and The Equinox of the

  Gods.

  The concepts introduced in the Book of Coming Forth by Night make possible an entirely new analysis of the

  Book of the Law. This should be understood neither as an æsthetic criticism of Crowley’s comments nor as an

  attempted distortion of them. It is rather the result of the perceptual vantage-point of the Æon of Set as opposed to

  that of the Æon of Horus. The original Comment to the Book of the Law forbade all discussion or criticism of that

  text, not unjustifiably on the presumption that initiates below the grade of Magus could not evaluate it with

  Æonic perspective. As an Ipsissimus I assert a trans-æonic perspective, hence the right - even responsibility - to

  comment accordingly on the Book of the Law.

  A Note About Æons ...

  As far as most occultists are aware, references to æons began with Aleister Crowley’s much-advertised Æon of

  Horus, which he proclaimed to have followed first the Æon of Isis (roughly pre- Christian paganism) and then

  that of Osiris (roughly 2,000 years of Christianity). Since Crowley’s understanding of Egyptian mythology was

  essentially that of the Osiris/Isis/Horus trinity, this tied Western civilization up into a nice, neat package.

  Not only was Crowley responsible for bringing about the Æon of Horus, we are told, but that of Osiris as well

  - in a previous incarnation as the High Priest of Osiris [and Priestess of Isis] Ankh- f-n-khonsu. The detailed story

  of this is told in his memoir of that incarnation, “Across the Gulf”, in Equinox #I-7:

  But Thoth the mighty god, the wise one, with his ibis- head and his nemyss of indigo, with his Ateph crown

  and his phœnix wand and with his ankh of emerald, with his magic apron in the three colors; yea, Thoth,

  the god of wisdom, whose skin is of tawny orange as though it burned in a furnace, appeared visibly to all

  - 68 -

  of us. And the old Magus of the Well, whom no man had seen outside his well for night threescore years,

  was found in the midst; and he cried with a loud voice, saying, “The Equinox of the Gods!”

  And he went about to explain how it was that Nature should no longer be the center of man’s worship,

  but man himself, man in his suffering and death, man in his purification and perfection. And he recited the

  Formula of the Osiris as follows, even as it hath been transmitted unto us by the Brethren of the Cross and

  Rose unto this day ...

  In his own writings Crowley does not indicate where he came by this concept of “æons” or exactly what is

  meant by it. A little detective work, however, takes us back to the days of the Golden Dawn and the writing of a

  book entitled Egyptian Magic by Florence Farr, Scribe of the G.'.D.'., in 1896. This book, part of a 10-volume series

  Collectanea Hermetica edited by W.W. Westcott, contained a very interesting chapter called “The Gnostic Magic of

  Egypt”:

  Let us first consider the essential principles of Gnosticism, which are briefly as follows:

  First - A denial of the dogma of a personal supreme God, and the assertion of a supreme divine

  essence consisting of the purest light and pervading that boundless space of perfected matter which the

  Greeks called the Pleroma. This light called into existence the great father and the great mother whose

  children were the æons or god-spirits. That is to say from the supreme issues the nous or divine mind

  and thence successive emanations, each less sublime than the preceding. The divine life in each becoming

  less intense until the boundary of the Pleroma, or the fullness of God, is reached. From thence there

  comes into being a taint of imperfection, an abortive and defective evolution, the source of materiality and

  the origin of a created universe, illuminated by the divine but far removed from its infinitude and perfection.

  Now the Gnostics considered that the actual ruler and fashioner of this created universe and its beings

  good and evil was the Demiurgos, a power issuant from sophia or wisdom. By some it was said that the

  desire of souls for progression caused the origin of a universe in which they might evolve and rise to the

  divine.

  The Gnostics definitely believed in the theory of cycles of ascent and return to the evolutionary

  progress of worlds, ages, and man; the ascents & descents of the soul; the pre-existence of all human souls

  now in worldly life; and the surety that all souls that desire the highest must descend to matter and be born

  of it. They were the philosophical Christians.

  The rule of the Christian church, however, fell into the hands of those who encouraged an emotional

  religion, destitute of philosophy, whose members should be bound together by personal ties of human

  sympathy with an exalted sufferer and preacher rather than by an intellectual acceptance of high truth.

  The Gnostics dissented from the creed then being taught, on the ground of the inferiority of the

  hero- worship of Christ to the spiritual knowledge of the supernal mind, which they considered he taught.

  The Gnostics were almost universally deeply imbued with the doctrines of Socrates and Plato; and a

  religion of emotion and reverence, combined with moral platitudes, did not seem to them of a sublimity

  sufficiently intense to be worthy to replace the religious mysteries of Egypt, India, and Persia, the

  theocracy of the Jews, or the sublime truths hidden in the myths of Greece.

  In Religion in Ancient History S.G.F. Brandon comments:

  In his “First Epistle to the Corinthians” Paul had occasion to contrast his teaching with that of other

  systems known to his readers. In so doing he was led to give this significant account of his own: “Howbeit

  we speak wisdom among the perfect: yet a wisdom not of this world, nor of the rulers of this world,

  which are coming to naught: but we speak God’s wisdom in a mystery, even the wisdom that hath been

  hidden, which God foreordained before the worlds unto our glory: which none of the rulers of this world

  knoweth: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory” (ii. 6-8).

  In our official English translations the proper meaning of this passage is obscured at two crucial

  points. The Greek word translated as “world” here, severally in its singular or plural forms, is aion, which

  does not mean this physical world or Earth, but “time” or “age”.]

  Paul’s use of aion here accordingly shows that he was thinking in terms of an esoteric system of

  “world- ages” that probably derived ultimately from Iranian and Babylonian sources, and that in various

  forms was much in vogue in current Græco-Roman thought. Next the words translated as “rulers of

  this world” ( archontes tou aionos toutou) do not refer, as is popularly supposed, to the Roman and Jewish

  authorities who were responsible for condemning Jesus to death. They denote dæmonic beings who were

  associated with the planets and believed to govern the lives of men on Earth.

  As Farr and Brandon both go on to observe, Gnostic Christianity was regarded as a very serious threat to

  the Christian church and was intensely persecuted. Had it become prevalent, the 2,000 years might have evolved
r />   very differently in Western civilization - with a very intellectual, philosophical, and initiatory religious climate

  instead of the intolerant, ferocious, and ignorant horror of dogmatic Christianity.

  - 69 -

  Now we are beginning to see this term æon in a new light, if I may be excused the expression. The Æon of

  Horus is not just a period of time when ideas symbolized by Horus are dominant. Rather it is a Ding an

  sich, a noumenon: something of purely rational apprehension, not perception by the senses.

  Thus in what one might term the Lesser Black Magical sense, an æon is simply an attitude which one chooses

  or is conditioned to adopt. This is what is meant by saying that different people “exist in different æons”: that a

  Jew, Christian or Moslem exists in the Æon of Osiris, a Wiccan in that of Isis, and a Thelemite in that of Horus.

  Accordingly, while æons are “pyramidal” in sophistication, after the fashion of Plato’s “pyramid of thought”,

  there is no reason to consider them time-sequential, with each new one superseding and obliterating the one before it.

  In an LBM sense, therefore, the population of the world continues overwhelmingly in the grip of the Æon of

  Osiris, the best intentions of Aiwass notwithstanding. The Æon of Isis is the next influential, followed by that of

  Horus. The Æon of Set, highest on the pyramid and most difficult to comprehend and indwell, is the most rarified

  and elusive of all.

  As with an initiatory degree/grade system, it would be very difficult if not impossible to spend all of one’s

  time in a “higher æon”. When we go about our affairs in the profane world, we are usually Osirians, peering with

  curiosity and vague alarm at ecological activists (Isis) or avant-garde artists (Horus). Yet we experience periods of

  Isis and Horus too - and, when we wish to, that very rarefied Æon of Set.

  Crowley, who suggested that æons were periods of time in “catastrophic succession” - I presume in order to

  more forcefully advance the cause of the Æon of Horus - predicted in the Equinox #I-10 that following the ÆH

  “will arise the Equinox of Ma, the goddess of justice. It may be a hundred or ten thousand years from now (1913),

  for the computation of time is not here as there.” In 1921, in his “new comment” to Liber Legis, Crowley

  speculated that the next æon would be that of Thmaist, third officer in the G.'.D.'. Neophyte ritual. Yet, he

  continued, “It may be presumptuous to predict any details concerning the next æon after this.”

  That is essentially my attitude as well. As Magus of the Æon of Set, I am an Eye in that particular Triangle [or

  Shining Trapezohedron], as it were. The only one who knows for certain what the next-conceived æon will be, if

  indeed there should be one, would be the Magus or Maga who Utters its word.

  Above I made reference to æons “in an LBM sense”. There is a “Greater Black Magical sense” as well:

  Seen through the lens of GBM, an æon is in fact a living entity, in which its initiates are “cells”. This is the secret

  which the Gnostics brought from antiquity, and which so frightened the Christian dogmatists. The “god” of an æon

  is thus a creature of the total magical and philosophical energy of material beings who are initiates of that æon, i.e.

  who are aware that they are “components of the god”. [Are you now beginning to see the ancient origins of

  Hegel’s concept of an “overmind”?]

  Understood in this sense, a GBM working is a way of the “part’s” reaching out to contact, experience,

  and/or express the “whole”. This is why true GBM is not even remotely like “prayer” as the profane practice it.

  Nor is it mere meditation, in which the mind of the meditator merely extends to its own limits. It is the greatest

  secret, and the greatest fulfillment, of unique existence.

  Once an æon is apprehended in this way, a great many veils fall away, a great many mysteries of what magic is/

  why it works are revealed, and indeed the entire “why” of human consciousness is explained. All you need is the

  nœsis to perceive it. Don’t be concerned if you don’t attain such nœsis immediately. It is there; and when you are

  ready for it, It will be ready for you.

  ... And About Initiatory States of Being

  The concept of magical æons is further involved - one might say entangled - with the three highest

  designations of Western initiation: Magister Templi, Magus, and Ipsissimus.

  These and their preliminaries are usually attributed to the Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn (G.'.D.'.) in

  turn-of-the-20th-century London. 104

  The G.'.D.'. never conferred the three senior grades (as they were called), reserving them to the mysterious/

  supernatural “Secret Chiefs”; they were thus held to be “astral” grades beyond incarnated human attainment.

  When Aleister Crowley founded his G.'.D.'.-superseding A.'.A.'. in 1907, he made it possible for incarnates to

  attain the astral by a process of consciousness-transformation he referred to as “crossing the Abyss”. Now the

  grade of Magister Templi (8)=[3] came into focus as characterizing one capable of completely comprehending

  (“Understanding”) an æon. A Magus (9)=[2] identifies one who creates (“Utters the Word of”) a completely new

  æon, or who significantly expands or enhances apprehension of an existing one.

  So far so good, but Crowley left Ipsissimus (10)=[1] floundering in vagueness: “It is beyond all this and

  beyond all comprehension of those of lower degrees.” 105

  104 Nevertheless they go back considerably farther. G.'.D.'. founder Dr Wynn Westcott adapted them from the elder Societas

  Rosicruciana in Anglia (founded by Robert Little in 1866), which in turn had adapted them from the Gold und Rosenkreuz, a

  Prussian occult society (founded 1757?). Cf. Christopher McIntosh, The Rose Cross and the Age of Reason: Eighteenth-

  Century Rosicrucianism in Central Europe and Its Relationship to the Enlightenment (Brill Academic Publishers, 1997).

  105 Crowley, Aleister, “One Star In Sight” , Magick (New York: Weiser, 1994).

  - 70 -

  What the Temple of Set later attributed to it is both simple and self-evident: the attainment of a perspective

  above and beyond all existing æons, enabling the Ipsissimus to harmoniously and beneficially integrate them. 106

  Where the Book of the Law is concerned, what this means is that, as the inauguration and Utterance of the

  Word of the Æon of Horus, it should [in 1904] have instantly redefined Crowley as a Magus. Nevertheless he did

  not claim even Magister Templi until 1909, nor Magus until 1914. He never explained this awkward - and glaring -

  discrepancy. Moreover he did not initiatorily formalize the Æon until the founding of the A.'.A.'. in 1907, nor publish

  the Book of the Law itself until The Equinox #I-7 in 1912.

  And so with the Book of the Law we do not have a nice, neat package of human/divine interaction, but a collage

  of attention and reflection which gradually emerged only over several decades.

  106 Until the Temple of Set evolved these grades into its degree structure in 1975, they had never been even theoretically

  achievable by females. Setians Recognize them correspondingly as Magistra Templi, Maga, and Ipsissima.

  The First Chapter

  1.

  Had! The Manifestation of Nuit.

  This chapter is a verbalization of the Nuit-neter as perceived by Crowley. [Throughout this commentary

  the term “neter” (hieroglyphic ntr) is used in the Pythagorean/Platonic sense as a first and/or comprehen
sive

  Universal principle.] As the Egyptian sky-neter, Nuit was portrayed as the mother of Set, Horus the Elder,

  Ra, and Xepera.

  2.

  The unveiling of the company of heaven.

  The Book of the Law constitutes an explanation of concepts derived from these five neteru. HarWer is

  completely manifest, as is necessary for the Equinox of the Æon of Horus. The Xeper-neter is partially

  revealed through passages in the text dealing with transformation and evolution. The neter of Set would

  remain unrecognized and enigmatic, its presence but not identity sensed, until the announcement of the Æon

  of Set on the North Solstice of X/1975.

  3.

  Every man and every woman is a star.

  A star is a completely-contained environment of matter, energy, and the process of conversion between

  the two. Once formed, a star is an island of existence unique unto itself amidst the Universe, interacting

  comparatively remotely with other celestial bodies and phenomena through radiation and gravitation. The

  constitution of each uniquely self-conscious human being ( homo sapiens) is similar; one’s interactions with

  other beings and with one’s environment have the capacity to be dwarfed by the self-contained

  consciousness of the non- natural intellect. Ultimately the self-created perceptual universe (Subjective

  Universe/SU) of the magician can surpass the stimuli and consequences of the natural, material one

  (Objective Universe/OU).

  4.

  Every number is infinite; there is no difference.

  This principle was later revealed as an important key to #II-76 by the Book of Coming Forth by Night.

  Crowley’s extensive essay on the subject in both 777 and his 1920 Comment is excellent and deserves a

  thoughtful reading.

  According to Pythagoras and his Egyptian initiatory sources, numbers are the “building-blocks” of

  existence: They are not Forms per se, but are rather the “alphabet” through which many Forms are made

  comprehensible. 107

  If Nuit is considered to represent the expanse of the natural, material universe (OU), then the

 

‹ Prev