Jump to content
RemedySpot.com

Re: Tarot

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Sorry. Hate to disagree with you on this one.

Crowley called himself " The Beast 666. " He was in for shock value,

frankly. A very superficial person, actually, who loved getting

attention, even if it was very negative attention. That part could

possibly be blamed on his mother's parenting practices...

Fact is, much has been played down to cover up the sheer negative

hedonism this man was involved in, and just how ludicrious his

lifestyle was. If you are under 50, you might not be aware, because

most literature in the last 40+ years involving him has been greatly

edited, so as not to scare people away from the cults that grew up

around his writings, because there is such a rising interest in

paganism.

To be honest, Crowley was not pagan. He was a drug addict and a

hedonist, and lived a very self-indulgent yet self-destructive

lifestyle.

The exact quotation in full is " Do what thou wilt is the whole of

the law. Love is the law...Love under Will. " It fails to mention

that the Will invoked is not the individuals.... it's Crowley's. He

wanted everything to be all about him, and not anything or anyone

else, actually.

Crowley practiced what he termed Gray Magick, which involved sexual

practices. He had a veritable stable of " priestesses " that

participated in his " rituals. "

The guy was a narcissic, vainglorious fruit, IMHO. Furthermore he

was not the artist who did the paintings for those Tarot Cards

bearing his name.They were done by one of the women who lived with

him as one of his many " priestesses. " I forget her name because I

haven't been involved in this since about 1980. I might be able to

find it somewhere, though... but I don't have any of the books,

anymore, due to a flood in 1987. Crowley's actual artistic

capability was more on the level of a schoolchild's, and the works

attributed to him were done by various women in his " harem. " I am

not certain how much participation he did actually have in their

design, and it did not come out until after his death that he was

not the artist. I'm glad that you are aware that he did not do them

himself, at least. Many aren't.

He really was quite amoral. I don't know of any admirable traits he

may have had and I think I've read about everything that was written

by him or about him before 1970, which was mostly work by his

followers, who actually lived with him and admired him, during his

life.

Sorry if I sound heated. I lost a dear friend to this cult, back in

1969-'70. I did read everything this person gave me to persuade me

to join him, and yes there is much power in this group, but it's

hedonistic and not used for the good of society as a whole, but is

more focused on the corporeal. And yes I maintained contact with him

and kept reading books by Crowley for years afterwards. Lots

happened to him that was pretty astounding... but there is so much

that showed the corruption of his chosen path, and it is sad where

he ended.

If you do have a genuine interest in Crowley, try finding some works

that were published before 1970, at least... preferably in the '40s

if you can find them. I don't mean republished and " re-released "

editions, but the originals that are not re-released and not edited.

It won't be easy but it will open your eyes, perhaps.

- Sue

> > Greebo:

> > > I collect tarot cards too, not sure how many packs I've got,

but

> no

> > where near as 200 though. I like Aleister Crowleys pack, have you

> > heard of his (or perhaps got)?

> >

> > Something that I've been wondering about for quite a long time

is;

> doesn't

> > it bother anyone that Crowley was a self-professed satanist and

> claimed to

> > be the most evil man in the world (not that I think he actually

> wins that

> > title, but just to aspire for it I find disturbing enough).

> >

> > Most people I have met in New Age circles (through friends with

> such

> > interests) I perceive as truly well-meaning souls, wanting only

to

> help and

> > support the planet and all beings on it. Yet, many still don't

seem

> to have

> > a problem with things explicitly connected with black magic

rather

> than

> > white (I am personally not overly comfortable with either form).

> Perhaps one

> > of you guys can explain it to me? I know that Crowley did not

> invent the

> > tarot, he only designed that deck. But still; since symbols also

> convey

> > energies, is it only me who can feel the difference in energy

> depending on

> > the mindset of the designer?

> >

> > Inger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for this info, Sue.

Inger

Mamasue:

> Sorry. Hate to disagree with you on this one.

> Crowley called himself " The Beast 666. " He was in for shock value,

frankly. A very superficial person, actually, who loved getting

attention, even if it was very negative attention. That part could

possibly be blamed on his mother's parenting practices...

> Fact is, much has been played down to cover up the sheer negative

hedonism this man was involved in, and just how ludicrious his

lifestyle was. If you are under 50, you might not be aware, because

most literature in the last 40+ years involving him has been greatly

edited, so as not to scare people away from the cults that grew up

around his writings, because there is such a rising interest in

paganism.

> To be honest, Crowley was not pagan. He was a drug addict and

a hedonist, and lived a very self-indulgent yet self-destructive

lifestyle.

> The exact quotation in full is " Do what thou wilt is the whole of

the law. Love is the law...Love under Will. " It fails to mention

that the Will invoked is not the individuals.... it's Crowley's. He

wanted everything to be all about him, and not anything or anyone

else, actually.

> Crowley practiced what he termed Gray Magick, which involved sexual

practices. He had a veritable stable of " priestesses " that

participated in his " rituals. "

> The guy was a narcissic, vainglorious fruit, IMHO. Furthermore he

was not the artist who did the paintings for those Tarot Cards

bearing his name.They were done by one of the women who lived with

him as one of his many " priestesses. " I forget her name because I

haven't been involved in this since about 1980. I might be able to

find it somewhere, though... but I don't have any of the books,

anymore, due to a flood in 1987. Crowley's actual artistic

capability was more on the level of a schoolchild's, and the works

attributed to him were done by various women in his " harem. " I am

not certain how much participation he did actually have in their

design, and it did not come out until after his death that he was

not the artist. I'm glad that you are aware that he did not do them

himself, at least. Many aren't.

> He really was quite amoral. I don't know of any admirable traits he

may have had and I think I've read about everything that was written

by him or about him before 1970, which was mostly work by his

followers, who actually lived with him and admired him, during his

life.

> Sorry if I sound heated. I lost a dear friend to this cult, back in

1969-'70. I did read everything this person gave me to persuade me

to join him, and yes there is much power in this group, but it's

hedonistic and not used for the good of society as a whole, but is

more focused on the corporeal. And yes I maintained contact with him

and kept reading books by Crowley for years afterwards. Lots

happened to him that was pretty astounding... but there is so much

that showed the corruption of his chosen path, and it is sad where

he ended.

> If you do have a genuine interest in Crowley, try finding some works

that were published before 1970, at least... preferably in the '40s

if you can find them. I don't mean republished and " re-released "

editions, but the originals that are not re-released and not edited.

It won't be easy but it will open your eyes, perhaps.

- Sue

> > Greebo:

> > > I collect tarot cards too, not sure how many packs I've got,

but

> no

> > where near as 200 though. I like Aleister Crowleys pack, have you

> > heard of his (or perhaps got)?

> >

> > Something that I've been wondering about for quite a long time

is;

> doesn't

> > it bother anyone that Crowley was a self-professed satanist and

> claimed to

> > be the most evil man in the world (not that I think he actually

> wins that

> > title, but just to aspire for it I find disturbing enough).

> >

> > Most people I have met in New Age circles (through friends with

> such

> > interests) I perceive as truly well-meaning souls, wanting only

to

> help and

> > support the planet and all beings on it. Yet, many still don't

seem

> to have

> > a problem with things explicitly connected with black magic

rather

> than

> > white (I am personally not overly comfortable with either form).

> Perhaps one

> > of you guys can explain it to me? I know that Crowley did not

> invent the

> > tarot, he only designed that deck. But still; since symbols also

> convey

> > energies, is it only me who can feel the difference in energy

> depending on

> > the mindset of the designer?

> >

> > Inger

FAM Secret Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and

acceptance. Everyone is valued. Always remember that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome, my good

friend Sue! I’m glad to see you

here.

Thanks for the

information. I am sorry to hear

about your friend.

“The Beast 666”,

now I know who everyone is talking about – knew his name sounded familiar. In my senior year of high school (’83-‘84)

I did a paper on black magik (and became lost in

research several times at the library, so much so that my parents were frightened

I would start worshiping the devil!) and probably came across his name

there.

Wendi

Re:

Tarot

Sorry. Hate to disagree with you on this one.

Crowley called himself " The Beast 666. "

He was in for shock value,

frankly. A very superficial person, actually, who

loved getting

attention, even if it was very negative attention.

That part could

possibly be blamed on his mother's parenting

practices...

Fact is, much has been played down to cover up the

sheer negative

hedonism this man was involved in, and just how

ludicrious his

lifestyle was. If you are under 50, you might not

be aware, because

most literature in the last 40+ years involving

him has been greatly

edited, so as not to scare people away from the

cults that grew up

around his writings, because there is such a

rising interest in

paganism.

To be honest, Crowley was not pagan. He was a drug

addict and a

hedonist, and lived a very self-indulgent yet

self-destructive

lifestyle.

The exact quotation in full is " Do what thou

wilt is the whole of

the law. Love is the law...Love under Will. "

It fails to mention

that the Will invoked is not the individuals....

it's Crowley's. He

wanted everything to be all about him, and not

anything or anyone

else, actually.

Crowley practiced what he termed Gray Magick,

which involved sexual

practices. He had a veritable stable of

" priestesses " that

participated in his " rituals. "

The guy was a narcissic, vainglorious fruit, IMHO.

Furthermore he

was not the artist who did the paintings for those

Tarot Cards

bearing his name.They were done by one of the

women who lived with

him as one of his many " priestesses. " I

forget her name because I

haven't been involved in this since about 1980. I

might be able to

find it somewhere, though... but I don't have any

of the books,

anymore, due to a flood in 1987. Crowley's actual

artistic

capability was more on the level of a

schoolchild's, and the works

attributed to him were done by various women in

his " harem. " I am

not certain how much participation he did actually

have in their

design, and it did not come out until after his

death that he was

not the artist. I'm glad that you are aware that

he did not do them

himself, at least. Many aren't.

He really was quite amoral. I don't know of any

admirable traits he

may have had and I think I've read about

everything that was written

by him or about him before 1970, which was mostly

work by his

followers, who actually lived with him and admired

him, during his

life.

Sorry if I sound heated. I lost a dear friend to

this cult, back in

1969-'70. I did read everything this person gave

me to persuade me

to join him, and yes there is much power in this

group, but it's

hedonistic and not used for the good of society as

a whole, but is

more focused on the corporeal. And yes I

maintained contact with him

and kept reading books by Crowley for years afterwards.

Lots

happened to him that was pretty astounding... but

there is so much

that showed the corruption of his chosen path, and

it is sad where

he ended.

If you do have a genuine interest in Crowley, try

finding some works

that were published before 1970, at least...

preferably in the '40s

if you can find them. I don't mean republished and

" re-released "

editions, but the originals that are not

re-released and not edited.

It won't be easy but it will open your eyes,

perhaps.

- Sue

> > Greebo:

> > > I collect tarot cards too, not sure

how many packs I've got,

but

> no

> > where near as 200 though. I like

Aleister Crowleys pack, have you

> > heard of his (or perhaps got)?

> >

> > Something that I've been wondering about

for quite a long time

is;

> doesn't

> > it bother anyone that Crowley was a

self-professed satanist and

> claimed to

> > be the most evil man in the world (not

that I think he actually

> wins that

> > title, but just to aspire for it I find

disturbing enough).

> >

> > Most people I have met in New Age

circles (through friends with

> such

> > interests) I perceive as truly

well-meaning souls, wanting only

to

> help and

> > support the planet and all beings on it.

Yet, many still don't

seem

> to have

> > a problem with things explicitly

connected with black magic

rather

> than

> > white (I am personally not overly

comfortable with either form).

> Perhaps one

> > of you guys can explain it to me? I know

that Crowley did not

> invent the

> > tarot, he only designed that deck. But

still; since symbols also

> convey

> > energies, is it only me who can feel the

difference in energy

> depending on

> > the mindset of the designer?

> >

> > Inger

FAM Secret

Society is a community based on respect, friendship, support and acceptance.

Everyone is valued. Always remember that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Rosie, I forgot to comment on this post earlier, and then my phone line

broke.

> I feel the difference, too. Some decks I can't bear to be in the

same room with, let alone touch.

Cool. I have books that have such a bad vibe that I've had to throw them

out. Also, anything that has a Rosicrucian symbol on it makes me so nauseaus

that I sometimes have to throw up. I don't know why. If it is a personal

subjective reaction to something unpleasant in a distant past, or if it is

an objective reaction due to them being into shady rituals (I seem to be

rather 'allergic' to black magick).

I also tend to get a bad vibe in my solar plexus from music made by

heroin-addicts. Pity since some of them have real talent.

> I am that way about pretty much any kind of object, not just tarot

decks. Always have been. I remember being a child at parties or

gatherings and I would become very upset about where my coat was

placed in whatever room of the house was being used for all the

coats. I would become obsessed with revisiting the coat room,

making sure a coat with a negative imprint would not be near or

touching mine.

Interesting! I am very careful how I place books on my shelf so as not to

place an unpleasant or boring book next to a nice one (since the nice one

might not like the company). :-)

> Between that and my social " oddities " , as an adolescent I was

generally delegated " cloakroom duty " when I had to go with my

mother to these gatherings. Yech. Stuffed in a room with dozens of

peoples' coats all talking loudly...rofl.

:-)

> It sounds like delusion or paranoia to most folks, I'm sure;

Not to me!

> however, when I was able to take a coat into a roomful of strangers

and tell the room intimate details about its owner and physically

describe that person, having never seen the person and the coat

together (my mum was habitually late)...and to do this accurately

fifteen times....well, I wasn't asked to do cloakroom duty

anymore. :-)

Cool. It's called psychometry, I belive? (Or clairaudience if you actually

HEAR them.) That is a more advanced skill than what I have. I just feel

energies (clairsentience) but usually not the consciousness content of those

energies. Though I have been trying just for fun to see what I can figure

out about people on a picture that I don't know anything about. I was

surprised myself at how accurate my guesses were.

Once I was on a mailing list and kept getting these very strong New Yorky

vibes from the owners of it. I was floored when they said they lived in

Oregon or something, and felt off for days as my brain was struggling to

accept this fact. But then it turned out that they had only moved there a

few years ago and had lived in New York all of their lives! :-)

> It's an interesting topic of discussion, though: a commercially

produced deck that one may purchase was never touched by the

artist. Yet, the images convey the artist's energetic imprint.

It's the same with books or with anything. Naturally the energy will be

strongest from the original, but a reproduction will still convey something

of the original intent.

> Many people would say that so-called " psychic " skills are a matter

of personal belief...but I dare to propose that some people have a

greater sensitivity to or awareness of other dimensions.

Precisely my view. We are not imagining things; we simply have extra

developed perception.

> I have slowly been reading some of Greene's materials (string theory

> and M-theory in layman's terms), and it seems science is finally getting

> close to quantifying what some sensitive people have felt over the

> milleniae.

Right. And about time too! :-)

Inger

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...