Zephyros
What is this book? Do I need to read it? I have it online, but I can't make anything out of it. MY GOD WHAT WAS ALEISTER ON?!?!?
Liber legis Panic
Centaur
LOL. The Book of Thoth is quite a confusing read.
I would recommend the following two texts, and I am sure that others will have other suggestions too.
Tarot: Mirrors of the Soul, by Ziegler
And
Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot, by Duquette
Most importantly, don't panic about not being able to get to grips with the Book of Thoth. I know people who have been using the Thoth for years, some of whom have never even read the Book of Thoth.
It is a valuable resource though... I go back to it periodically... but as for an easy read... erm NO! Haha.
I would recommend the following two texts, and I am sure that others will have other suggestions too.
Tarot: Mirrors of the Soul, by Ziegler
And
Understanding Aleister Crowley's Thoth Tarot, by Duquette
Most importantly, don't panic about not being able to get to grips with the Book of Thoth. I know people who have been using the Thoth for years, some of whom have never even read the Book of Thoth.
It is a valuable resource though... I go back to it periodically... but as for an easy read... erm NO! Haha.
Zephyros
No, I'm not talking about the Book of Thoth, which is fascinating but The Book of Law, Liber Legis. From what I understood, it was the Law for the New Aeon that was given to Al by the so-called "Secret Chiefs".
Centaur
closrapexa said:
Eeeeeeeeeeek! I haven't even touched that one!!! Muhahaha.
Good luck!!!
Oh... in his Thoth book, Duquette explains quite a bit about Crowley's magical perspective and occult background. You might want to check it out!
All that talk of the Great Whore, and the Whore of Babylon, etc, can be quite baffling. Hahaha.
Macavity
On pain of becomming (as once noted) a "centre of pestilence", perhaps...
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/leadbeater/0/liberp.htm
might help. On the other hand, maybe not?
ISTR There ARE various commentaries and concordances available? But my own inclination to wonder depends these days on funds and time. I think where to admit non-understanding exposes oneself to be termed (broadly) a "fool" it is difficult to be objective! One senses that is part of the purpose?
Macavity
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/leadbeater/0/liberp.htm
might help. On the other hand, maybe not?
ISTR There ARE various commentaries and concordances available? But my own inclination to wonder depends these days on funds and time. I think where to admit non-understanding exposes oneself to be termed (broadly) a "fool" it is difficult to be objective! One senses that is part of the purpose? Macavity
isthmus nekoi
lol.... He was high on god apparently (Aiwass to be precise) - if you look at his natal chart and the transits at the time he wrote it.... it's pretty incredible the energies that were coming his way, including the imfamous "Saturn Return". Basically, he is foreseeing the shift from matriarchal, pagan, earth centered religions to patriarchal ones (based on sacrifice) to the New Aeon (as featured in the Aeon card) based on the son of the Mother and Father. He's not really unique in his representation of the first two (god the mother, god the father), but speculation around the 3rd - god the child - is very rare.
It is highly recommended you find a copy in which Crowley elucidates the text of LL. He has a pretty good grasp on the first section, explains it well. The 2nd one, he has a general idea. The third book however, he seems to have no clue what he was channeling and takes a great deal of the verses literally (as instructions for rituals). The best version is the 1970s one published by Llewellyn - newer copies are "edited" I have heard.
It is highly recommended you find a copy in which Crowley elucidates the text of LL. He has a pretty good grasp on the first section, explains it well. The 2nd one, he has a general idea. The third book however, he seems to have no clue what he was channeling and takes a great deal of the verses literally (as instructions for rituals). The best version is the 1970s one published by Llewellyn - newer copies are "edited" I have heard.
