[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
him open his eyes to that which his sympathy had masked hitherto, that the
picture is abominably conceived, abominably composed, abominably drawn, and
abominably coloured, as it is pretty sure to be.
Let him further study those masters, in science or in art, who have observed
with minds untinctured by emotion.
Let him learn to detect idealizations, to criticize and correct them.
Let him understand the falsehood of Raphael, of Watteau, of Leighton, of
Bouguereau; let him appreciate the truthfulness of John, of Rembrandt, of
Titian, of O'Conor.
Similar studies in literature and philosophy will lead to similar results.
But do not let him neglect the analysis of his own emotions; for until these are
overcome he will be incapable of judging others.
This analysis may be carried out in various ways; one is the materialistic
way. For example, if oppressed by nightmare, let him explain: "This nightmare
is a cerebral congestion."
The strict way of doing this by meditation is Mahasatipatthana,
See Crowley, "Collected Works," vol. ii, pp. 252-254.>> but it should be aided
in every moment of life by endeavouring to estimate occurrences at their true
value. Their relativity in particular must be carefully considered.
Your toothache does not hurt any one outside a very small circle. Floods in
China mean to you nothing but a paragraph in the newspaper. The destruction of
the world itself would have no significance in Sirius. One can hardly imagine
even that the astronomers of Sirius could perceive so trifling a disturbance.
Now considering that Sirius itself is only, as far as you know, but one, and
one of the least important, of the ideas in your mind, why should that mind be
disturbed by your toothache? It is not possible to labour this point without
tautology, for it is a very simple one; but it should be emphasised, for it is a
very simple one. Waugh! Waugh! Waugh! Waugh! Waugh!
In the question of ethics it again becomes vital, for to many people it seems
impossible to consider the merits of any act without dragging in a number of
subjects which have no real connection with it.
The Bible has been mistranslated by perfectly competent scholars because they
had to consider the current theology. The most glaring example is the "Song of
Solomon," a typical piece of Oriental eroticism. {96} But since to admit that
it was this would never do for a canonical book, they had to pretend that it was
symbolical.
They tried to refine away the grossness of the expressions, but even their
hardihood proved unequal to the task.
This form of dishonesty reaches its climax in the expurgating of the
classics. "The Bible is the Word of God, written by holy men, as they were
inspired by the Holy Ghost. But we will cut out those passages which we think
unsuitable." "Shakespeare is our greatest poet -- but, of course, he is very
dreadful." "No one can surpass the lyrics of Shelley, but we must pretend that
he was not an atheist."
Some translators could not bear that the heathen Chinese should use the word
Shang Ti, and pretended that it did not mean God. Others, compelled to admit
that it did mean God, explained that the use of the term showed that "God had
not left himself without a witness even in this most idolatrous of nations.
They had been mysteriously compelled to use it, not knowing what it meant." All
this because of their emotional belief that they were better than the Chinese.
The most dazzling example of this is shown in the history of the study of
Buddhism.
The early scholars simply could not understand that the Buddhist canon denies
the soul, regards the ego as a delusion caused by a special faculty of the
diseased mind, could not understand that the goal of the Buddhist, Nibbana, was
in any way different from their own goal, Heaven, in spite of the perfect
plainness of the language in such dialogues as those between the Arahat Nagasena
and King Melinda; and their attempts to square the text with their
preconceptions will always stand as one of the great follies of the wise.
Again, it is almost impossible for the well-mannered Christian to realize
that Jesus Christ ate with his fingers. The temperance advocate makes believe
that the wine at the marriage feast of Cana was non-alcoholic.
It is a sort of mad syllogism.
"Nobody whom I respect does this."
"I respect So-and-so."
"Therefore, So-and-so did not do this."
The moralist of to-day is furious when one points to the fact that
practically every great man in history was grossly and notoriously immoral.
Enough of this painful subject!
As long as we try to fit facts to theories instead of adopting the scientific
attitude of altering the theories (when necessary) to fit the facts, we shall
remain mired in falsehood.
The religious taunt the scientific man with this open-mindedness, with this
adaptability. "Tell a lie and stick to it!" is "their" golden rule.
{97}
{diagram on this page: The Sigillum Dei Aemeth pantacle, taken from the version
in the Equinox. This caption below: "THE SIGILLUM DEI AEMETH, A PANTACLE MADE
BY DR. JOHN DEE.}
{98}
CHAPTER IX
THE PANTACLE
AS the Magick Cup is the heavenly food of the Magus, so is the Magick Pantacle
his earthly food.
The Wand was his divine force, and the Sword his human force.
The Cup is hollow to receive the influence from above. The Pantacle is flat
like the fertile plains of earth.
The name Pantacle implies an image of the All, "omne in parvo;" but this is
by a magical transformation of the Pantacle. Just as we made the Sword
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]