Dear Friends
Thank you for the info
- i suppose the american OTO needs to receive its own "fourth chapter"
that would really carry it forward - some new revelation - but so far
its mainly footnote fodder -
been done to death really - the enduring legacy of Kenneth Grant is that
he did indeed develop the mythos -
perhaps adding something that wasn't really there in the original
inspiration - ie the whole Sethian thing -
it needed to be done as Crowley picked such an uninteresting piece of
Egyptian mythology although
one kindof knows what he was looking for?
Blessings to Caroline Tully for elucidating Crowley's motivation in
Egypt and why even he failed to follow up and
actually go find Ankh afna Khonsu?
"love and do what you will"
Mogg Morgan
> Hi Mogg;
> While I have avoided worrying about it too I can sketch it out a bit.
> William Breeze who is OHO OTO wants to change the word fill to kill in the verse interpretation that Crowley wrote of the Stele of Ankh af na Khonsu.
> The verse wasn't dictated and Crowley was instructed to insert it into the Third Chapter by Aiwass who then moved on with dictating.
> Based on finding one copy of the Book of the Law in which Crowley had crossed out the 'f' in fill and replaced it with a 'k' to make kill, Breeze wants to change the 'official' OTO text version of the Book of the Law.
> I agree that OTO are running out of viable ideas.
> Crowley always held the copyright in his own name. He died a bankrupt and his copyrights became the property of the Crown. It is OTO trying to squeeze a few more bucks out of Crowley's books.
> Hope that clears up the main points.
> David
>
>> Date
|