[Opinion] Thelema.. Is it worth studying?

[Beyond Everything]

So 'higher degree OTO ' work is about money magic is it ?

The 9th degree is supposed to transmit the 'ultimate' key for practical magic, so yes money magic is subsumed under that.

 

[Firetree]

The 9th degree is supposed to transmit the 'ultimate' key for practical magic, so yes money magic is subsumed under that.

I am calling BS on that unless you can cite or quote . Also you are 'all over the place ' ; an ultimate key is a tool , eg ; clear intent, intense focus, and the ability to feel as though the desired outcome is already achieved.

Getting money successfully is a result not a key . You dont appear to know what you are talking about .... especially in regard to the 9th degree !

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 2:53 AM

Wasn't my choice of words, that's what Hyatt called them. And that was after helping the OTO many times, including financially.

If it isnt your choice of words and something you made up or repeated gossip ... cite it !

I just did a check on line ... cant find a trace of your claims anywhere .


Waiting ......

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 3:00 AM

''
Christopher S. Hyatt was a member of the Ordo Templi Orientis (OTO) at the time of his death.
He was initiated into the OTO in 1987 by Lon Milo DuQuette and eventually reached the rank of a Ninth Degree member. While Hyatt co-founded other organisations later in his life—most notably the Thelemic Order of the Golden Dawn (TOGD) in 1990—he remained a high-ranking member of the OTO until he died of cancer in Scottsdale, Arizona, on 9 February 2008. ''

and here is a book of tributes written for him including some from OTO regarding his work , position and ongoing influence in the order .

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

 

[Beyond Everything]

I am calling BS on that unless you can cite or quote . Also you are 'all over the place ' ; an ultimate key is a tool , eg ; clear intent, intense focus, and the ability to feel as though the desired outcome is already achieved.

Getting money successfully is a result not a key . You dont appear to know what you are talking about .... especially in regard to the 9th degree !

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 2:53 AM

Ritualistically mixing the fluids and smearing a talisman with them, Yes, money magic (a talisman designed to attract money) is subsumed under the 'final, practical' key to magic that OTO degree claims to give. The fact they don't talk specifically about money magic doesn't mean it isn't obviously included...simple logic

If you're unaware, the degrees were published decades ago, and the OTO sued over it lol

If it isnt your choice of words and something you made up or repeated gossip ... cite it !

I just did a check on line ... cant find a trace of your claims anywhere .


Waiting ......

Cite what? It's in a couple of Hyatt's 'Black Book's. He calls them trailer trash etc

 

[Firetree]

Ritualistically mixing the fluids and smearing a talisman with them, Yes, money magic (a talisman designed to attract money) is subsumed under the 'final, practical' key to magic that OTO degree claims to give. The fact they don't talk specifically about money magic doesn't mean it isn't obviously included...simple logic

'the fact that they dont talk about money magic does not mean it isnt included .

The fact that you are stating it is included does not mean it is !

You just proved to us by your own words the claim is made up by you ! AS were the others , I now must presume .

If you're unaware, the degrees were published decades ago, and the OTO sued over it lol

I am not going off 'published degrees ' , and if you are , you still admit it isnt in there !

Cite what? It's in a couple of Hyatt's 'Black Book's. He calls them trailer trash etc

Cite the negative stuff you say that Hyatt said about the OTO .

I know he criticized organisations in some ways , and certain people in them .... why not ? Every group has problems ... however ;

Despite his biting rhetoric, Hyatt’s actions confirmed his support for the order's core system:

• IX° Membership: He maintained his status as a IX° (Ninth Degree) member, the highest degree available to most, until his passing in 2008.
• Collaboration: He worked closely with other O.T.O. leaders, most notably Lon Milo DuQuette, who originally initiated him in 1987.
• Thelemic Order of the Golden Dawn: While he co-founded this separate organization in 1990, it was intended as a synthesis of systems (Thelema and the Golden Dawn) rather than a breakaway or protest against the O.T.O

Hardly a solid base for considering Thelema is not worth studying is it ? ( To remind you of the topic in question here ) .

 

[Beyond Everything]

'the fact that they dont talk about money magic does not mean it isnt included .

The fact that you are stating it is included does not mean it is !

You just proved to us by your own words the claim is made up by you ! AS were the others , I now must presume .

Is English not your first language? If I tell you I will give you the ultimate key to practical magic, then by logic that key would be applicable to any type of practical magic. Money magic is a form of practical magic. It's not that difficult.

ERGO- If someone says they are in possession of the ultimate key to practical magic (Crowley having all the OTO degrees), and they can't afford paper (Crowley again) , well there is a major disconnect there.



As far as Hyatt, I told you- he disparages Crowley and Thelemites in the Black Books, so if you're that interested just read those. Hyatt's expressed views changed. For instance, somewhere in his Radical Undoing material he is pretty dismissive of the entire value of the HGA despite having written books on it.

I previously told you Crowley said 'free will= predestination' and you told me I must be wrong. I proved he did in fact say "free will= destiny' in Magick WIthout Tears, so maybe take a moment and think that I have an excellent memory for things I've read.

 

[Firetree]

I said predestination, he uses the word destiny, which is the same thing

It is from Magick Without Tears:

'Free-will" is "Destiny"

I could elaborate more on Crowleys stupid metaphysics, but people are going to believe whatever they want. I'll just reiterate he wasn't teaching the highest initiatic truths.

It seems stupid when YOU misquote it . Magick without tears says nothing of the sort ! Free will is not discussed , you , like many others that do not understand the system , often confuse TRUE WILL ala Crowley with Free Will .

Now you are retiring to your original position , without defining what these ' highest initiatic truths' are ( aside from being successful doing base money magick and it not being as good as runes ... and the immortality issue , which has already been addressed .)

Thelemic teaching on money magick ;

So shalt thou gradually develop the powers of thy soul, and fit thyself to command the Spirits of the elements. For wert thou to summon the Gnomes to pander to thine avarice, thou wouldst no longer command them, but they would command thee. Wouldst thou abuse the pure beings of the woods and mountains to fill thy coffers and satisfy thy hunger of Gold? Wouldst thou debase the Spirits of Living Fire to serve thy wrath and hatred? Wouldst thou violate the purity of the Souls of the Waters to pander to thy lust of debauchery? Wouldst thou force the Spirits of the Evening Breeze to minister to thy folly and caprice? Know that with such desires thou canst but attract the Weak, not the Strong, and in that case the Weak will have power over thee.

All your protests can be invalidated by actual Thelemic teachings .

 

[BBBB]

Most of Beyond Everything's posts on this forum seem focussed on denigration and deconstruction for some reason.

There is a good saying in my native language, which means: "Criticizing do offer an alternative" - he never does, and that kind of people are much worse than yes-people in terms of social health, because they don't really point out mistakes to be corrected, they degrade every possibly good endeavor, on claims that it's imperfect somehow. (So you better not do it!) Don't study Thelema, don't look at Bardon, bad, bad, bad. And when confronted with a question about an alternative, he just tells you BS about some secret system he practices, but he won't discuss it. This is pure toxicity.

 

[Firetree]

Further more when Crowley adress FREE will in MWT he states ;

"Most people live in a state of 'free will' which is actually a state of continual flux and reaction to their environment. They are not doing their Will at all; they are merely reacting to the pressures of their surroundings, their upbringing, and their own shifting desires."

MWT Ch 6 ( and that is how you do a citation ! )

he doesnt even believe free will is a thing !

if someone doesnt know the difference between Crowley's True will and regular free will , I would not be taking any advice they have on the validity of Thelema . To validly give that advice one should understand the system first !

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 5:17 AM

There is a good saying in my native language, which means: "Criticizing do offer an alternative" - he never does, and that kind of people are much worse than yes-people in terms of social health, because they don't really point out mistakes to be corrected, they degrade every possibly good endeavor, on claims that it's imperfect somehow. (So you better not do it!) Don't study Thelema, don't look at Bardon, bad, bad, bad. And when confronted with a question about an alternative, he just tells you BS about some secret system he practices, but he won't discuss it. This is pure toxicity.

I am still being amused about how one can insist something is in a book but cant prove it and then wants others to prove how somwthing is not in a book .

What , post the whole book here and say '' See ... not there ! '

Anyone can make a claim .... but where is the 'pud' ?

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 5:23 AM

Confessions ;

'' "The average man is a bundle of conflicting impulses, most of them implanted by his parents, his schoolmasters, and his social environment. He has no unit of purpose... his 'free will' is nothing but the clashing of these various complexes."

Bol Commentary I ; 44

"The 'will' of the individual is usually hampered by the ego, which seeks to direct it according to its own petty desires and fears... it is only when the ego is silenced that the True Will can be heard.''

ie. there is no 'free will' an individual is driven by hunger , sex drive, social status, programming , upbringing , peer expectations ' etc etc .

- many a paper has been written about this , its not an uncommon view .

 

[Beyond Everything]

It seems stupid when YOU misquote it .

I quoted Crowley directly, here's the fuller quote directly from chapter 3 of Magick without Tears

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it “Reality” is “Illusion”, “Free-will” is “Destiny”, the “Self” is the “Not-Self”; and so for every puzzle of Philosophy.

There was no misquote there. If you want to marinate in Crowley's heroin-addled bullshit, have at it.

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 5:59 AM

Thelemic teaching on money magick ;

Crowley did plenty of magick trying to get money. This is documented, including by himself. lol

 

[Firetree]

I quoted Crowley directly, here's the fuller quote directly from chapter 3 of Magick without Tears

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it “Reality” is “Illusion”, “Free-will” is “Destiny”, the “Self” is the “Not-Self”; and so for every puzzle of Philosophy.

There was no misquote there. If you want to marinate in Crowley's heroin-addled bullshit, have at it.

I will post that chapter below so anyone who is believing you can check for themselves ... chapter three you are claiming ?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and by the way , flinging gutter insults is not helping you make your case . Its a lame tactic , often used when some have the facts against them and have not learnt yet how to deal with it .

Post automatically merged: Yesterday at 5:59 AM

Crowley did plenty of magick trying to get money. This is documented, including by himself. lol

and your point is ? .... that he used this adopted GD teaching as he realized its value after his own failures at the attempts ?

From now on it is going to be hard for anyone to believe what you say, after this embarrassing mess .

Spoiler

See if you can find it folks ... here is the claim ;

'' I quoted Crowley directly, here's the fuller quote directly from chapter 3 of Magick without Tears

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it “Reality” is “Illusion”, “Free-will” is “Destiny”, the “Self” is the “Not-Self”; and so for every puzzle of Philosophy ''

Chapter III: Hieroglyphics: Life and Language Necessarily Symbolic​

Magick Without Tears

by Aleister Crowley
Chapter III: Hieroglyphics: Life and Language Necessarily Symbolic

Cara Soror,
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Very natural, the irritation in your last! You write:—

“But why? Why all this elaborate symbolism? Why not say straight out what you mean? Surely the subject is difficult enough in any case—must you put on a mask to make it clear? I know you well enough by now to be sure that you will not fob me off with any Holy-Willie nonsense about the ineffable, about human language being inadequate to reveal such Mysteries, about the necessity of constructing a new language to explain a new system of thought; of course I know that this had to be done in the case of chemistry, of higher mathematics, indeed of almost all technical subjects; but I feel that you have some other, deeper explanation in reserve.

“After all, most of what I am seeking to learn from you has been familiar to many of the great minds of humanity for many centuries. Indeed, the Qabalah is a special language, and that is old enough; there is not much new material to fit into that structure. But why did they, in the first place, resort to this symbolic jargon?”

You put it very well; and when I think it over, I feel far from sure that the explanation which I am about to inflict upon you will satisfy you, or even whether it will hold water! In the last resort, I shall have to maintain that we are justified by experience, by the empirical success in communicating thought which has attended, and continues to attend, our endeavors.

But to give a complete answer, I shall have to go back to the beginning, and restate the original problem; and I beg that you will not suppose that I am evading the question, or adopting the Irish method of answering it by another, though I know it may sound as if I were.
Let me set out by restating our original problem; what we want is Truth; we want an even closer approach to Reality; and we want to discover and discuss the proper means of achieving this object.

Very good; let us start by the simplest of all possible enquiries—and the most difficult—”What is anything?“ “What do we know?” and other questions that spring naturally from these.

I see a tree.
I hear it—rustling or creaking in the wind.
I touch it—hard.
I smell it—acrid.
I taste it—bitter.

Now all the information given by these five senses has to be put together, although no two agree in any sort of way. The logic by which we build up our complex idea of a tree has more holes than a sponge.

But this is to jump far ahead: we must first analyze the single, simple impression. “I see a tree.” This phenomenon is what is called a “point-event.” It is the coming together of the two, the seer and the seen. It is single and simple; yet we cannot conceive of either of them as anything but complex. And the Point-Event tells us nothing whatever about either; both, as Herbert Spencer and God knows how many others have shown, unknowable; it stands by itself, alone and aloof. It has happened; it is undeniably Reality. Yet we cannot confirm it; for it can never happen again precisely the same. What is even more bewildering is that since it takes time for the eye to convey an impression to the consciousness (it may alter in 1,000 ways in the process!) all that really exists is a memory of the Point-Event. not the Point-Event itself. What then is this Reality of which we are so sure? Obviously, it has not got a name, since it never happened before, or can happen again! To discuss it at all we must invent a name, and this name (like all names) cannot possibly be anything more than a symbol.

Even so, as so often pointed out, all we do is to “record the behaviour of our instruments.” Nor are we much better off when we've done it; for our symbol, referring as it does to a phenomenon unique in itself, and not to be apprehended by another, can mean nothing to one's neighbors. What happens, of course, is that similar, though not identical, Point-Events happen to many of us, and so we are able to construct a symbolic language. My memory of the mysterious Reality resembles yours sufficiently to induce us to agree that both belong to the same class.

But let me furthermore ask you to reflect on the formation of language itself. Except in the case of onomatopoeic words and a few others, there is no logical connection between a thing and the sound of our name for it. “Bow-wow” is a more rational name than “dog”, which is a mere convention agreed on by the English, while other nations prefer chien, hund, cane, kalb, kutta and so on. All symbols, you see, my dear child, and it's no good your kicking!

But it doesn't stop there. When we try to convey thought by writing, we are bound to sit down solidly, and construct a holy Qabalah out of nothing. Why would a curve open to the right, sound like the ocean, open at the top, like you? And all these arbitrary symbolic letters are combined by just as symbolic and arbitrary devices to take on conventional meanings, these words again combined into phrases by no less high-handed a procedure.

And then folk wonder how it is that there should be error and misunderstanding in the transmission of thought from one person to another! Rather regard it as a miraculous intervention of Providence when even one of even the simplest ideas “gets across.” Now then, this being so, it is evidently good sense to construct one's own alphabet, with one's own very precise definitions, in order to handle an abstruse and technical subject like Magick. The “ordinary” words such as God, self, soul, spirit and the rest have been used so many thousand times in so many thousand ways, usually by writers who knew not, or cared not for the necessity of definition that to use them to-day in any scientific essay is almost ludicrous.

That is all, just now, sister; no more of your cavilling, please; sit down quietly with your 777, and get it by heart!

Love is the law, love under will.
Fraternally,
666

..

 

[Durward]

This whole section brings up my basic value statement; What did Crowley actually accomplish? What did he do that made anyone believe he could do anything at all? Where is the evidence of his magic?
I started down that path once, and when I discovered he was raping little girls as part of his 'magical' practices, I dumped it. What an old pervert liar.
The folks involved in his circle tried to act like they were the leaders of the skill, at the time, and that what they were publishing was the expert level best of the best. It didn't impress me, and is not my thing, so I dumped it and moved on.
There might be a few gems in there, but they were not discovered by Crowley, but compiled by him and his cohorts, into materials he could sell to finance his habits. So, quite a loser to those who bother to do the homework.
That doesn't mean the materials don't have some kind of value to someone traveling that road, but they are not an accurate or sole source. They are recompiled, like most things that end up in the popularity pile. That makes this plagiarism, unless he quotes the sources.
But, I see nothing that showed he, or his minions, could do anything at all that would impress me.

 

[Beyond Everything]

I will post that chapter below so anyone who is believing you can check for themselves ... chapter three you are claiming ?

and by the way , flinging gutter insults is not helping you make your case . Its a lame tactic , often used when some have the facts against them and have not learnt yet how to deal with it .

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it "Reality" is "Illusion", "Free-will" is "Destiny", the "Self" is the "Not-Self"; and so for every puzzle of Philosophy

Page 31, go look, it's right in there. Here's the entire book

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

lol you keep insisting something he wrote isn't in there. That's a pdf of the book, you can search for the words and see it's there. I literally read the book decades ago and I remembered it.

and your point is ? .... that he used this adopted GD teaching as he realized its value after his own failures at the attempts ?

My point is the OTO claims to have the ultimate key to practical magic. But Crowley's own practical magic (for money) was often a failure (after he was in possession of their amazing secrets)

 

[Firetree]

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it "Reality" is "Illusion", "Free-will" is "Destiny", the "Self" is the "Not-Self"; and so for every puzzle of Philosophy

Page 31, go look, it's right in there. Here's the entire book

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

'Free will is destiny ' is one of the contradictions inherent in thought and experience ... I already pointed out where he said 'free' will is an illusion .

This is why I want a full quote , not your snippet as a snippet does not have CONTEXT .

My point is the OTO claims to have the ultimate key to practical magic. But Crowley's own practical magic (for money) was often a failure (after he was in possession of their amazing secrets)

If you want to switch to the claim that OTO has the ultimate key to practical magic then show that claim and we can discuss it ..

By the way , I am not claiming there are no contradictions in Crowley's writing ... far from it !

Post automatically merged: Today at 1:33 AM

This whole section brings up my basic value statement; What did Crowley actually accomplish?

He was a prolific English occultist and writer who founded the religious philosophy of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, centered on the maxim "Do what thou wilt". He authored

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, established magical orders like the A∴A∴, created the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

, and significantly influenced modern Western esotericism, occultism, and 20th-century counterculture .

What did he do that made anyone believe he could do anything at all? Where is the evidence of his magic?
I started down that path once, and when I discovered he was raping little girls as part of his 'magical' practices,

You left out the part where after that he BBQed them and ate them with sex magick sauce in a giant OTO feast .

I dumped it. What an old pervert liar.
The folks involved in his circle tried to act like they were the leaders of the skill, at the time, and that what they were publishing was the expert level best of the best. It didn't impress me, and is not my thing, so I dumped it and moved on.

Good , if its not for you, move on .

There might be a few gems in there, but they were not discovered by Crowley, but compiled by him and his cohorts, into materials he could sell to finance his habits. So, quite a loser to those who bother to do the homework.
That doesn't mean the materials don't have some kind of value to someone traveling that road, but they are not an accurate or sole source.

There was no original question of if they were a 'sole source ' the question is in the title .

They are recompiled, like most things that end up in the popularity pile. That makes this plagiarism, unless he quotes the sources.

In my reading of him he often praised his mentors , he talked about it being an older tradition , cited people like Levi and declared he saw so far as he stood on the shoulders of others . Sometimes he cited lifted sources, other times not ( like Swinburne in the rites of Eleusis - but that depends on which copy you are looking at ) other times , yes plagiarized . Other times wrote original stuff under another name .

Pssst ... you know that Shakespeare guy ? he lifted stuff too

 

[Beyond Everything]

'Free will is destiny ' is one of the contradictions inherent in thought and experience ... I already pointed out where he said 'free' will is an illusion .

He says free will IS destiny. That they are identical lol

His philosophy is a bunch of bullshit, anyway. Free will is an illusion, but he also says illusions are reality. It's a Ouroborus of semantic bullshit.

There is no 'true will' anyway, there are simply more developed and less developed wills- ones more enchained to material circumstance (say , like heroin addicts) and others less beholden to them. The universe does not give a shit if you become a baker or a cellist.

This is why I want a full quote , not your snippet as a snippet does not have CONTEXT .

No, you said he didn't write it at all. lol

If you want to switch to the claim that OTO has the ultimate key to practical magic then show that claim and we can discuss it ..

It's not my claim, it's the OTO's and Crowley's. lol And his (and their) practical results stand in marked contrast to the claim.

This has gotten quite dull as you have difficulty comprehending basic English.

 

[Firetree]

He says free will IS destiny. That they are identical lol

No it is that the idea that free will is destiny is an illusion . If the meaning is unclear one must rely on the evidence of corpus .

That is very basic comprehension and standard practice .

His philosophy is a bunch of bullshit, anyway. Free will is an illusion,

So you agree with Crowley !

but he also says illusions are reality. It's a Ouroborus of semantic bullshit.

The way you twist it is , he said (as many others do ) reality is an illusion .

There is no 'true will' anyway, there are simply more developed and less developed wills- ones more enchained to material circumstance (say , like heroin addicts) and others less beholden to them. The universe does not give a shit if you become a baker or a cellist.

Oh, switched back to true will now , ok . How did this 'Universe ' entity get into it ? The prime benefit is with the individual , it gives purpose fulfillment and is a core ingredient towards eudamonia .

No, you said he didn't write it at all. lol

Not in the reference you gave at first , he didnt . You selectively quoted at first , now we see the whole passage it can be seen where you went wrong .

It's not my claim, it's the OTO's and Crowley's. lol And his (and their) practical results stand in marked contrast to the claim.

Oh come on ow ! Surely you must realize I want you to cite by direct quote where the OTO says the key to magick is successful money ritual ... that is your claim .

This has gotten quite dull as you have difficulty comprehending basic English.

Nah , but I agree , you were very dull .

No need for me to continue , as I am happy that whoever reads the above , with a minimum unprejudice , will comprehend .

 

[BBBB]

I like the point about Shakespeare, actually. It's not that he invented everything (or anything), but he is classic for a reason, just like Crowley. And many more would return to his works yet, while impostors and plagiarists would be forgotten. It's easy to criticise, but try to become a new Shakespeare or Crowley and we'll see how you fare.

I think Beyond Everything should be reported every time he tries to shit on somebody, as it is clearly no mistake, but deliberate and consistent action he repeats over time. And I think his game is obvious at this point. It's the illusion of power he gets, when he manages to convince somebody that some system or person is worthless (mirroring his own worthlessness, actually), and if he can't, then at least he gets a rush from making you spend your time and energy on him. Any reaction to him is more than he can hope for, knowing exactly how worthless he is deep down, so it's always a plus Ridicule and ignore is all he deserves, and if I was staff, he'd be long gone.

 

[Beyond Everything]

No it is that the idea that free will is destiny is an illusion .

No, you are completely misunderstanding what he is saying. He is saying free will is identical to destiny.

It is the only system which reconciles all the contradictions inherent in Thought, and in Experience; for in it "Reality" is "Illusion", "Free-will" is "Destiny", the "Self" is the "Not-Self"

He is saying in the ultimate reality, all these things are identical. So you got this completely opposite of his intended meaning.

Oh come on ow ! Surely you must realize I want you to cite by direct quote where the OTO says the key to magick is successful money ritual ... that is your claim .

You didn't understand what I said there, either. I didnt say the OTO says the key to magick is successful money ritual (sic), I said they claimed to HOLD the general Key to successful practical magic. I can't keep repeating things since it's obvious English is not your first language, and I've lost interest anyway

Post automatically merged: Today at 5:24 AM

I think Beyond Everything should be reported every time he tries to shit on somebody, ]

Yes, report me for noting Crowley's unsuccessful money magic, and for Bardon's ill health, and for Castenada's fraud.

 

[Firetree]

Maybe in your ranting you forgot what you were saying ?

You clearly linked all those things together .... it all up there ^ .

Now its just going circular .... bye bye .

 

[Beyond Everything]

Maybe in your ranting you forgot what you were saying ?

You clearly linked all those things together .... it all up there ^ .

No, the thread screwed up when I was responding to you.

The general point was the 'master magician' Crowley couldn't even get most of his money magick to work. As well, the OTO is supposed to hold extremely powerful secrets of practical magic, but the results are nowhere evident.

What's even more surprising is Crowley had a lot of mental training, could concentrate and visualize chess games, but he was nevertheless so inept or lacking magical juice he couldn't even get simple manifestation magic to work for him.

I'll bring up his meeting with Gurdjieff once again. Crowley called him an 'advanced adept', but Gurdjieff had no regard whatsoever for Crowley and threw him out. lol

And I'm on-topic with all of this as the OP asked if thelema is worth studying.

 

[Firetree]

Yes ... Thelema is worth studying .... any failure of Crowely's doesn't' cancel that out .

Did you want to see some 'success is their proof ' ?


there are many published accounts, diaries, and anecdotal reports of successful Thelemic magick, primarily recorded by Aleister Crowley, his contemporaries, and modern practitioners. However, in Thelema, "success" is defined by the magician (the "proof" is in the results).
Here are the primary types of published results:

• Aleister Crowley’s Diaries: Crowley published his magical records, including the Liber ABA (Book 4), The Equinox, and Magick in Theory and Practice, which document his rituals, invocations, and their claimed outcomes, such as the Cairo Working that resulted in the reception of The Book of the Law.
• The "93 Current" Reports: Modern practitioners often publish accounts of working in the "93 Current" (Thelema), claiming success in aligning with their "True Will." Reports include improved mental state, increased motivation, and positive life changes, with some practitioners noting success in changing personal circumstances.
• Transformation of Self: Many practitioners focus on "high magick" (spiritual development) rather than "low magick" (material gain). Published accounts often emphasize the successful integration of the "Holy Guardian Angel" (HGA) or the finding of one's True Will, leading to a more focused life, as described in literature regarding the A∴A∴ order.

The Definition of Success
In Thelema, the dictum "Let success be thy proof" implies that if a ritual produces the intended change in the magician's reality, it is successful. Because the aim is often personal transformation, many "successful" results are subjective rather than objective, such as changes in consciousness or psychological state.
Sources of Results

• The Equinox: A journal published by Crowley containing various magical rituals and their results.
• Magick in Theory and Practice (Book 4): Contains detailed instructions and examples of rituals.
• Thelemic Literature/Reddit: Modern forums (e.g., r/thelema) serve as a repository for anecdotal reports of magical success, such as improvements in personal life or mental state.