The Temple of Set I

by Michael A Aquino

  and significant as to evoke change to its very core. In traditional magical terminology the Magus

  “Utters a Word” to set this dynamic in motion; although the full factor requires often quite

  detailed explanation and elaboration, it can be encapsulated, symbolized by a single term - such

  as Agape, Anatta, Agathon, Thelema (of the Æon of Horus), Indulgence (of the Age of Satan),

  and Xeper, Xem, Runa, Remanifest, and Arkte (of the Æon of Set to date).

  85 Crowley is referring to his 1921 diary, The Magical Record of the Beast 666, wherein he wrote of taking the Oath

  of Ipsissmus on May 23.

  86 Anatta is one of the more elusive and controversial concepts in Buddhism. Generally-accepted definitions of it

  tend to leave the reader even more confused! I would summarize it as the proposition that there is no isolate,

  unique, and immortal psyche such as the Egyptians, Plato, and the Temple of Set postulate. Rather, so the Buddha

  said, what people think of as their “soul” is an ever-changing “rain” of impressions upon their bodily senses from

  within and without the physical body, creating the illusion of a self. Thus there is no conscious immortality,

  although there is natural, all-inclusive perpetuity.

  - 198 -

  So intensely and obsessively does the Magus identify with the Uttered Word that it in effect

  becomes a personal universe, outside of which reality is unintelligible and inadequate. To others

  a Magus driven by this vision may seem inexplicable, irrational, even insane. This phenomenon

  is “the Curse of the Magus” - that is not to be Understood even by nearby Initiates of

  Understanding!

  It is into this conflict that the initiation of Ipsissimus/Ipsissima becomes not only necessary

  but, in Thomson’s phrase, supremely so. It is the function of an Ipsissimus to comprehend the

  greater synthesis of an Uttered Word with the collective æonic totality preceding it, and to

  delicately encourage and enhance that synthesis. Characteristically this is undertaken with such

  subtlety that the will and action of the Ipsissimus pass completely unnoticed, and this is as it

  should be if the harmonizing is to be perfectly fulfilled.

  Beyond this the Ipsissimus also confronts the still-intersecting “ripples” of many æons

  activated at various points in history, and performs workings to enable them to complement and

  improve, not clash with and destroy one another.

  As the Priesthood constitutes a merging of the individual soul with that of Set, so the

  Magistry constitutes an expansion of that merger to a full apprehension of the Æon of Set. The

  Master knows not only the consciousness of Set, but the reach of that consciousness and the

  resultant view of creation and existence it embraces. All particular phenomena are evaluated,

  placed, and balanced within the continuum of the Æon by the Master, and such adjustments in

  events as the Master makes are for Æonic purposes - some of which may be obscure or even

  imperceptible to those below this degree.

  Setians interacting with Masters of the Temple are tempted to assess them merely as

  “senior Priests or Priestesses”, and indeed every Master is first and foremost an Initiate of the

  Priesthood, invariably with a long and distinguished III° record. But the IV° is neither just an

  administrative promotion nor a reward for distinguished service; it is an initiatory state of being

  in itself. Onlookers - and Masters themselves - lose sight of this at their peril.

  Aleister Crowley, who felt that the grade of Magister Templi (8)=[3] was indeed attainable

  by incarnated humans, suggested that such attainment - the successful “crossing of the Abyss” -

  necessitated the annihilation of the personality and one’s absorption in the universal

  consciousness. The fallacy of this, of course, is that an (8)=[3] continued both a particular

  existence and a particular perspective. The initiate might insist that he possessed no further

  separateness from the cosmos, but the very act of insistence necessitates the sensation of such a

  distinction. A discussion of what this implies for holders of the (8)=[3] A.'.A.'. is beyond the

  scope of this writing.

  The degree of Magus - V° Temple of Set/Church of Satan, (9)=[2] A.'.A.'./ G.'.D.'. -

  identifies a Master who has “stepped outside” the totality of the existing Æonic formula to alter it

  in an evolutionary way. Such alteration may result in the inauguration of a new Æon, or it may

  result in an improvement in or strengthening of the current Æon. The change itself may be

  massive or subtle; but it will invariably be alien to preexisting values and will thus tend to be

  viewed skeptically or suspiciously. Implementation of the change is spoken of as the Task of a

  Magus, and undertaking of such a Task amidst the resistant inertia of preexistence is called the

  Curse of a Magus.

  The degree of Ipsissimus - VI° Temple of Set, (10)=[1] A.'.A.'./G.'.D.'. - was treated evasively

  by Aleister Crowley, most probably because his claim to the lower grade of Magus had already

  caused him such difficulty. [Initiates of higher degrees soon learn to their annoyance that a

  proportionate percentage of their time is devoted to defending their suitability for such exalted

  titles. The temptation is to refuse to admit to them altogether, so that one may get on with one’s

  work unpestered.] In any case, an Ipsissimus is essentially a “successful Magus”: one whose Task

  is complete.

  - 199 -

  Inherent in such completion is a unique perception of the new æonic inertia which has

  resulted, placing the Ipsissimus at once within and without the æon itself. To function as an

  Ipsissimus, he must work to perfect and harmonize not only the created or modified æon, but

  also its entire relationship with preexisting and potential æons. Thus he enhances the Work of

  the Magi; thus he ensures that the Understanding of the Masters of the Temple is not futile

  because of factors beyond the æon in which they tend their gardens.

  It is the Curse of a Magus not to be Understood, in that he has set out to define and

  promulgate something alien to the existing inertia of magical philosophy. It is the doom of an

  Ipsissimus to Understand a great many æons simultaneously: to see how they may be exclusive

  yet complementary, independent yet interrelated, sequential yet coincidental.

  The Initiate of any degree of the Priesthood (III°-VI°) may function in a lower degree than

  the highest one attained, and in fact usually does. About 90% of all Priesthood functions take

  place at the III° level, with most of the remaining Work characteristic of the IV°. V° Work is

  sharp and “surgical” in nature, and that of the VI° is usually - but not always - too subtle to be

  noticed.

  Of all the difficulties encountered by the Temple of Set - and its predecessors - since its

  inception, none has caused greater damage to both the institution and the individuals involved

  than abuses of the degree system: generally the result of rash, egotistical lunges towards what

  the ambitious person perceives simply in terms of increased social status. As I would hope this

  essay points out, such efforts by the unqualified merely result in a handful of air insofar as the

  individual is concerned - but accompanied by the very real hazards of trying to function in a

  hyperdemanding capacity without the necessary skills to do so if on
e somehow succeeds in pro

  forma Recognition.

  It is the sacred purpose of the Temple to Recognize each of its Initiates carefully,

  responsibly, and appropriately - and to encourage each and every Initiate to attain to his or her

  greatest potential. Let us remember too that there is intentional symbolism in the fact that all

  medallions - from I° to VI° - are identical save in background color. No Setian is “better” than

  any other Setian by virtue of holding a particular degree - only more well-traveled along certain

  kinds of paths. The more we perceive one another as fellow-travelers with meaningful

  experiences to communicate, the more we can maximize the very real benefits of the degree

  system as it was conceived to function.

  G. 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-na-khonsu. The 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 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!”

  - 200 -

  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 (#10I) 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”, from

  which the following quote:

  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

  preexistence 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).

  - 201 -

  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 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.

  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 LBM 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 “smallest” and most exclusive of all.

  As with the degree 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. On the other hand, he