Hi Felicia,
>>As I stated to Ben: OTO is a legal entity. Others have produced no
>>documentation to support their claims of lineage", "current" or
>>"offshoot". This argument got old in the 1990s. If you wish to speak of
>>well-researched studies, by all means.
If you need to continue to discuss claims made by people who ceased making
those claims long, long ago, count me out.<<
Although I belong to the "legal entity" OTO, can we really say that other
OTOs are not, or were not, also OTOs? I just wonder, after the death of a
charismatic leader (Aleister Crowley), isn't it quite common for groups to
splinter like that, for other charismatic types to claim lineage - whether
on paper or not. How un-OTO does one of these groups have to be to be "not
OTO"? I mean is the Typhonian OTO considered not OTO - at all? Obviously a
lot of people think that non-Caliphate OTOs are OTO... Isn't it a bit like
Wicca in its growth out from an original model?
~Caroline Tully.
http://www.myspace.com/carolinetully
|