Author Topic: Crowley: Set = Becoming (pre-Aquino)  (Read 593 times)

Frater V.I.M.

Crowley: Set = Becoming (pre-Aquino)
« on: June 03, 2018, 01:44:02 am »
Just thought this was pretty neat . . . and kinda odd that I've never seen Aquino or anyone else in the ToS camp directly mention it. Maybe they have and I've missed it. But, apparently, Crowley explicitly linked his idea of "Sht" (Set/Satan/Shaitan) with the concept of "Becoming." It's from a diary entry where he's discussing the "LAShTAL" formula. Figured I'd point it out here for folks that might also find it cool:

"We might call LA 'not-being,' ShT  'becoming,' and AL, 'being,' thus declaring the three possible states. Each being 31, they are ultimately identical. Our own formula is 93, to show that we can apprehend them."
- Crowley, diary entry, 2 June, 1920

Also, despite Crowley's entrenchment in Osiris-era mythology, he nonetheless explicitly identified Horus with Set anyway . . . something else I've never seen Aquino and co make much of a deal about (unless, once again, I missed it.)

"This child Horus is a twin, two in one. Horus and Harpocrates are one, and they are also one with Set or Apophis, the destroyer of Osiris. It is by destruction of the principle of death that they are born."
- Crowley, The Equinox of the Gods

Apparently, some "Setian" concepts aren't as alien to the "Aeon of Horus" and Crowley's ideas of it as it's sometimes made to seem.
"The old gods did not die, they fell into Hell and became devils.”
- Anton LaVey

Xepera-maSet

  • Guest
Re: Crowley: Set = Becoming (pre-Aquino)
« Reply #1 on: June 03, 2018, 04:19:27 am »
These tend to be recognized in the Typhonian Tradition. I am a Setian who takes from both traditions. People like Grant and Levenda are very aware of these truths. I asked Dr. Aquino once if he looked into Grant and the Typhonian Tradition. He said:

"Actually I’ve made it both clear and explicit since the 1960s that I consider Grant and his mixture of Crowley, Lovecraft, Spare. Set, and his own penis ridiculous (no pun intended). - M.A."

Frater V.I.M.

Re: Crowley: Set = Becoming (pre-Aquino)
« Reply #2 on: June 03, 2018, 05:45:12 am »
I knew Grant was aware of such things. I figured Levenda might be . . . but I'm not too concerned either way with what Levenda and his alarmist, conspiracy-theory loving butt thinks about things.

And Aquino does have more than a bit of a point though. While I don't hate Grant by any means, and I do appreciate his openness in admitting that Crowley considered Aiwaz to be Satan/Set, and he certainly deserves respect for trying to preserve Crowley's diaries and stuff for the public . . . it is true that he has a flagrant and utter disregard for historical accuracy that tends to show its face more than a few times in his work. It's a shame too, because it doesn't do him or his work any favors to pull that shit. What bothers me about it the most is he's too smart for it to be on accident. He just doesn't care. But for all that, I at least like him more than the California O.T.O. crowd. :P

"The old gods did not die, they fell into Hell and became devils.”
- Anton LaVey

Xepera-maSet

  • Guest
Re: Crowley: Set = Becoming (pre-Aquino)
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2020, 12:25:03 am »
We don't even need later interpretation, even the book of the Law itself says Set is the hidden God, he is the ordeal half hidden.

"There is a splendour in my name hidden and glorious, as the sun of midnight is ever the son."
AL III:74

Set is the midnight sun and son of the most important thelemic being - Nuit.