They are waiting for you, II
similia said:
Assuming the validity of Aiwass as an independant entity (at least as much as a HGA may be considered independant), I guess its my opinion that Aiwass would use any symbolism sufficiently resonant with his message, that would get through Crowley's thick skull
So Nuit is used because that mythology was attractive to Crowley at that time, not because the gods of egypt play any special role in the lineage of Thelema.
Crowley writings may appear to disagree with that idea when interpreted literally, but that doesn't dissuade me. I've also read what Crowley has to say about people who interpret mythology literally
Yet, if we assume the validity of such an entity operating ‘outside’ the physical constraints of space-time, what is to prevent this intelligence from influencing the development of both ancient and modern mystic traditions simultaneously? This is what I mean by perplexing ramifications.
Aiwass wouldn’t need just any symbolism sufficiently resonant with “his” message to get past Crowley's "thick skull". Such a being could pop up at any time in (pre)history and work through any “medium” suitable to the design of the Great Work.
[ This is by no means an endorsement for the literal interpretation of Thelemic, Egyptian or {pestilence} any mythology - fundamentalism is a system of control that diminishes intellect and robs the soul ]
Having seen The Book of Thoth as an alchemical formula, a map of inner & outer space, and as the calendar for the Real Time, I can definitely appreciate the enigmas presented by Crowley’s opus.
I do not recommend anyone use it to follow a paath other than that of the arrow.
If anything, at the heart of Thoth’s Tarot and Aiwass’ Liber Legis lies a rosetta stone for understanding the symbolism and allegory of every mythos.
VITRIOL is, after all, the Universal Solvent.
I agree that the Stele of Revealing is a device, like a Key (or is it the Lock?).
But, in accepting the validity of this Being from the ‘deep, blue light,’ we are opening ourselves to the distinct possibility that object 666’s originally intended properties and context may be as "relevant" as its’ intended contemporary function.
Which is to say, we might gain a better understanding of the spirit, if not the letter, of the Law by not being so quick to dismiss Nut, B_hadet, or Re-Horakhty from our discussion.