Occult-Magick

Part four of the most revealing manuscript "Magick Without Tears", by Aleister Crowley, featuring a series of letters between Crowley himself and one of his Acolytes.
Magick Without Tears - part 1 | Magick without Tears part 2 | Magick without Tears part 3

Letter No. D June 8, 1943

Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Thanks for your letter. I couldn't find the O.T.O. typescript and then it struck me that it would be useful to await your reactions. If I were expecting some presumably important papers by post, I should get anxious after 24 hours delay (at most) and start enquiries. Anyhow, I can't find them for the moment;

but Mr. Bryant said he would lend you his Blue Equinox: pages 195-270 give what you require.
But the real point of your affiliating is that it saves me from constantly being on my guard lest I should mention something which I am sworn not to reveal. As in every serious society, members are pledged not to disclose what they may have learnt, whom they have met; it is so, even in Co-Masonry: isn't it: But one may mention the names of members who have died. (See Liber LII, par. 2.) Be happy then; the late X... Y... was one of us. I hope that he and Rudolph Steiner will (between them) satisfy your doubts.
The A.'.A.'. is totally different. One Star in Sight tells you everything that you need to know. (Perhaps some of these regulations are hard to grasp: personally, I can never understand all this By-Law stuff. So you must ask me what, and why, and so on.) There is really only one point for your judgment. "By their fruits ye shall know them." You have read Liber LXV and Liber VII; That shows you what states you can attain by this cirriculum. Now read "A Master of theTemple" (Blue Equinox, pp. 127-170) for an account of the early stages of training, and their results. (Of course, your path might not coincide with, or even resemble, his path.)

But do get it into you head that "If the blind lead the blind, they shall both fall into the ditch." If you had seen 1% of the mischief that I have seen, you would freeze to the marrow of your bones at the mere idea of seeing another member through the telescope! Well, I employ the figure of hyperbole, that I admit; but it really won't do to have a dozen cooks at the broth! If you're working with me, you'll have no time to waste on other people.
I fear your "Christianity" is like that of most other folk. You pick out one or two of the figures from which the Alexandrines concocted "Jesus" (too many cooks, again, with a vengeance!) and neglect the others. The Zionist Christ of Matthew can have no value for you; nor can the Asiatic "Dying-God" --- compiled from Melcarth, Mithras, Adonis, Bacchus, Osiris, Attis, Krishna, and others --- who supplied the miraculous and ritualistic elements of the fable.
Rightly you ask: "What can I contribute?" Answer: One Book.
That is the idea of the weekly letter: 52 of yours and 52 of mine, competently edited, would make a most useful volume. This would be your property: so that you get full material value, perhaps much more, for your outlay. I thought of the plan because one such arrangement has recently come to an end, with amazingly happy results: they should lie open to your admiring gaze in a few months from now. Incidentally, I personally get nothing out of it; secretarial work costs money these days. But there is another great advantage; it keeps both of us up to the mark. Also, in such letters a great deal of odds and ends of knowledge turn up automatically; valuable stuff, frequent enough; yes, but one doesn't want to lose the thread, once one starts. Possibly ten days might be best.

But please understand that this suggestion arose solely from your own statement of what you thought would help in your present circumstances. Anyway, as you say, decide! If it is yes, I should like to see you before June 15 when I expect to go away for a few days; better to give you some groundwork to keep you busy in my absence.

Love is the law, love under will.

Fraternally,

666




Letter No. E Aug. 18, 1943

Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Much thought has gone into the construction of your Motto. "I will become" can be turned neatly enough as "Let there be;" by avoiding the First Pronoun one gets the idea of "the absorption of the Self in the Beloved," which is exactly what you want.
"The creative Force of the Universe" is quite ready-made. Pyramis1, a pyramid, is that Force in its geometrical form; in its biological form it is Phallus2, the Yang or Lingam. Both words have the same numerical value, 831. These two words can therefore serve you as the secret object of your Work. How than can you construct the number 831? The Letter Kaph3, Jupiter (Jehovah), the Wheel of Fortune in the Tarot the Atu X is a picture of the Universe built up and revolving by virtue of those Three Principles: Sulphur, Mercury, Salt; or Gunas: Sattvas, Rajas, Tamas has the value 20. So also has the letter Yod4 spelt in full. One Gnostic secret way of spelling and pronouncing Jehovah is IAO5 and this has the value 811. So has "Let there be," Fiat, transliterating into Greek. Resuming all these ideas, it seems that you can express your aspiration very neatly, very fully, by choosing for your motto the words FIAT YOD.

Love is the law, love under will.

Fraternally,

666

P.S. Please study this letter, and these explanatory figures (the author, BAPHOMET X? O.T.O., in the original spells each word, giving the numerical equivalent of each letter in puramis, etc. This is here not copied.) and meditate upon them until you have fully assimilate not only the matter under immediate consideration, but the general method of Qabalistic research and construction. Note how new cognate ideas arise to enrich the formula.


Letter No. E Aug. 18, 1943

Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. Much thought has gone into the construction of your Motto. "I will become" can be turned neatly enough as "Let there be;" by avoiding the First Pronoun one gets the idea of "the absorption of the Self in the Beloved," which is exactly what you want.
"The creative Force of the Universe" is quite ready-made. Pyramis1, a pyramid, is that Force in its geometrical form; in its biological form it is Phallus2, the Yang or Lingam. Both words have the same numerical value, 831. These two words can therefore serve you as the secret object of your Work. How than can you construct the number 831?
The Letter Kaph3, Jupiter (Jehovah), the Wheel of Fortune in the Tarot the Atu X is a picture of the Universe built up and revolving by virtue of those Three Principles: Sulphur, Mercury, Salt; or Gunas: Sattvas, Rajas, Tamas has the value 20. So also has the letter Yod4 spelt in full. One Gnostic secret way of spelling and pronouncing Jehovah is IAO5 and this has the value 811. So has "Let there be," Fiat, transliterating into Greek. Resuming all these ideas, it seems that you can express your aspiration very neatly, very fully, by choosing for your motto the words FIAT YOD.

Love is the law, love under will.

Fraternally,

666

P.S. Please study this letter, and these explanatory figures (the author, BAPHOMET X? O.T.O., in the original spells each word, giving the numerical equivalent of each letter in puramis, etc. This is here not copied.) and meditate upon them until you have fully assimilate not only the matter under immediate consideration, but the general method of Qabalistic research and construction. Note how new cognate ideas arise to enrich the formula.

Letter No. C

April 30, 1943

Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

Thank you for your long letter of no date, but received two days ago. I am very sorry you are still feeling exhausted. I am not too good myself, for
I find this weather very trying. I will answer your various points as best I can.

I am arranging to send you the official papers connected with the O.T.O., but the idea that you should meet other members first is quite impossible. Even after affiliation, you would not meet anyone unless it were necessary for you to work in cooperation with them. I am afraid you have still got the idea that the Great Work is a tea-party. Contact with other students only means that you criticize their hats, and then their morals; and I am not going to encourage this. Your work is not anybody else's; and undirected chatter is the worst poisonous element in human society.

When you talk of the "actual record" of the "Being called Jesus Christ," I don't know what you mean. I am not aware of the existence of any such record. I know a great many legends, mostly borrowed from previous legends of a similar character.

9

It would be better for you to get a copy of the Equinox of the Gods and study it. The Great Work is the uniting of opposites. It may mean the uniting of the soul with God, of the microcosm with the macrocosm, of the female with the male, of the ego with the non-ego --- or
what not.

By "love under will" one refers to the fact that the method in every case is love, by which is meant the uniting of opposites as above stated, such as hydrogen and chlorine, sodium and oxygen, and so on. Any reaction whatever, any phenomenon, is a phenomenon of "love", as you will understand when I come to explain to you the meaning of the word "point-event". But
love has to be "under will," if it is to be properly directed. You must find your True Will, and make all your actions subservient to the one great
purpose.

Rahoor is the Sun God; Tahuti is the Egyptian Mercury; Kephra is the Sun at midnight.

About your problems; what I have to do is to try to teach you to think
clearly. You will be immensely stimulated by having all the useless trimmings stripped from your thinking apparatus. For instance, I don't think you know the first principles of logic. You apparently take up a more or less Christian attitude, but at the same time you like very much the idea of Karma. You cannot have both.

The question about money does not arise. This old and very good rule (which I have always kept) was really pertinent to the time when there were actual secrets. But I have published openly all the secrets. All I can do is to train you in a perfectly exoteric way. My suggestion about
the weekly letter was intended to exclude this question, as you would be getting full commercial value for anything paid.
Your questions about the Spirit of the Sun, and so on, are to be answered by experience. Intellectual satisfaction is worthless. I have to bring you to a state of mind completely superior to the mechanism of the normal mind. A good deal of your letter is rather difficult to answer.
You always seemto want to put the cart before the horse. Don't you see that, if I were trying to get you to do something or other, I should simply return you to
the kind of answer which I thought would satisfy you, and make you happy? And this would be very easy to do because you have got no clear ideas about anything. For one thing, you keep on using terms about whose significance we are not yet in agreement. When you talk about the
"Christian path," do you believe in vicarious atonement and eternal damnation --- or
don't you? A great deal of the confusion that arises in all these questions, and grows constantly worse as fellow-students talk them over --- the blind leading the blind --- is because they have no idea of the necessityof defining their terms.

Then again, you ask me questions like "What is purity?" that can be answered in a dozen different ways; and you must understand what is meant by a "universe of discourse." If you asked me "Is this sample of cloride of gold a pure sample?" I can answer you. You must
understand the value of precision in speech. I could go on rambling about purity and selflessness for years, and no one would be a penny the
better.

P.S. or rather, I did not want to dictate this bit.
Your ideas about the O.T.O. remind me of some women's idea of shopping.
You want to maul about the stock and then walk out with a proud glad smile: NO. Do
you really think that I should muster all the most distinguished people alive for your inspection and approval?

The affiliation clause in our Constitution is a privilege: acourtesy to a sympathetic body. Were you not a Mason, or Co-Mason, you would have to be proposed and seconded, and then examined by savage Inquisitors; and then --- probably --- thrown out on to the garbage heap.
Well, no, it's not as bad as that; but we certainly don't want anybody who chooses to apply. Would you do it yourself, if you were on the Committee of a Club? The O.T.O. is a serious body, engaged on a work of Cosmic scope. You should question yourself: what can I contribute? Secrets. There is one exception to what I have said about publishing everything: that is, the ultimate secret of the O.T.O. This is really too dangerous to disclose; but the safeguard is that you could not use it if you knew it, unless you were an advanced Adept; and you would not
be allowed to go so far unless we were satisfied that you were sincerely devoted to the Great Work. (See One Star in Sight). True, the Black Brothers could use it; but they would only destroy
themselves.

Love is the law, love under will.

Fraternally,

666


Please don't forget to visit the sister site to Occult magick for great authentic Occult Grimoires and Manuscripts Published in their entirety - OCCULT GRIMOIRES!

Letter No. B - April 20, 1943

Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

I was very glad to have your letter, and am very sorry to hear that you have been in affliction. About the delay, however, I think I ought to tell you that the original Rule of the Order of A.'. A.'. was that the introducer read over a short lection to the applicant, then left him alone for a quarter of an hour, and on coming back received a "yes" or "no." If there was any hesitation about it the applicant was barred for life.

The reason for the relaxation of the rule was that it was thought better to help people along in the early stages of the work, even if there was no hope of their turning out first-class. But I should like you to realize that sooner or later, whether in this incarnation or
another, it is put up to you to show perfect courage in face of the completely unknown, and the power of rapid and irrevocable decision without without counting the cost.

I think that it is altogether wrong to allow yourself to be
worried by "psychological, moral, and artistic problems." It is no
good your starting anything of any kind unless you can see clearly into the
simplicity of truth. All this humming and hawing about things is moral poison. What is the use of being a woman if you have not got an intuition, an instinct enabling you to distinguish between the genuine and the sham?

Your state of mind suggests to me that you must have been, in the past, under the influence of people who were always talking about things, and never doing any real work. They kept on arguing all sorts of obscure philosophical points; that is all very well, but when you have succeeded in analyzing your reactions you will understand that all this talk is just an excuse for not doing any serious work.

I am confirmed in this judgment by your saying: "I don't know if I want to enter into a great conflict. I need peace." Fortunately you save yourself by adding: "Real peace, that is living and not stagnant."All life is conflict. Every breath that you draw represents a victory in the struggle of the whole Universe. You can't have peace without perfect mastery of circumstance; and I take it that this is what you mean by "living, not stagnant."

But it is of the first consequence for you to summon up theresolution tostamp on this sea of swirling thoughts by an act of will;
you must say: "Peace be still." The moment you have understood these thoughts for what they are, tools of the enemy, invented by him with the idea of preventing you from undertaking the Great Work --- the moment you dismiss all such considerations firmly and decisively, and say: "What must I do?" and having discovered that, set to work to do it, allowing of no interruption, you will find that living peace which (as you seem to see) is a dynamic and not a static condition. (There is quite a lot about this point in Little Essays Toward Truth, and also in The Vision and the Voice.) Your postscript made me smile. It is not a very good advertisement for the kind of people with whom you have been associated in the past. My own posi-
tion is a very simple one. I obeyed the injunction to "buy a perfectly black hen, without haggling." I have spent over 100,000 pounds of my inherited money on this work: and if I had a thousand times that amount today it would all go in the same direction. It is only when
one is built in this way, to stand entirely aloof from all considerations of twopence halfpenny more or fourpence halfpenny less, that one obtains perfect freedom on this Plane of Discs.

All the serious Orders of the world, or nearly all, begin by insisting that the aspirant should take a vow of poverty; a Buddhist Bhikku, for example, can own only nine objects - his three robes, begging bowl, a fan, tooth- brush, and so on. The Hindu and Mohammedan Orders have similar regulations; and so do all the important Orders of monkhood in Christianity.

Our own Order is the only exception of importance; and the reason for this is that it is much more difficult to retain one's purity if one is living in the world than if one simply cuts oneself off from it. It is far easier to achieve technical attainments if one is unhampered by any
such considerations. These regulations operate as restrictions to one's usefulness in
helping the world. There are terrible dangers, the worst dangers of all, associated with complete retirement. In my own personal judgment, moreover, I think that our own ideal of a natural life is much more wholesome. When you have found out a little about your past incarnations, you should be able to understand this very clearly and simply.

Love is the law, love under will.

Fraternally,

666

Go To;
Magick Without Tears - part 1
Magick Without Tears - part 3

Please don't forget to visit the sister site to Occult magick for great authentic Occult Grimoires and Manuscripts Published in their entirety - OCCULT GRIMOIRES!

Biography of Aleister Crowley


Biographical Documentary film about the Master of Thelemic Arts; Aleister Crowley, who was named by the News of the World (British Tabloid newspaper) as "The Wickedest man in the World"

Thelema;
Thelema is the mystical cosmology Crowley announced in 1904 and expanded upon for the remainder of his life. The diversity of his writings illustrate his difficulty in classifying Thelema from any one vantage. It can be considered a form of magical philosophy, religious traditionalism, humanistic positivism, and/or an elitist meritocracy.

The chief precept of Thelema, derived from the works of François Rabelais, is the sovereignty of Will: "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law." Crowley's idea of will, however, is not simply the individual's desires or wishes, but also incorporates a sense of the person's destiny or greater purpose: what he termed "True Will."

The second precept of Thelema is "Love is the law, love under will" — and Crowley's meaning of "Love" is as complex as that of "Will." It is frequently sexual: Crowley's system, like elements of the Golden Dawn before him, sees the dichotomy and tension between the male and female as fundamental to existence, and sexual "magick" and metaphor form a significant part of Thelemic ritual. However, Love is also discussed as the Union of Opposites, which Crowley thought was the key to enlightenment.

Aleister Crowley, born Edward Alexander Crowley, (October 12, 1875 – December 1, 1947), was an English occultist, writer, mountaineer, poet, possible spy and yogi. He was an influential member of occult organizations, including the Golden Dawn, the A∴A∴, and Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O.), and is known today for his magical writings, especially The Book of the Law, the central sacred text of Thelema. He gained notoriety during his lifetime, was dubbed "The Wickedest Man In the World" and was often attacked by the media.

Apart from being perhaps the most genial Magician of the 20th Century, Crowley was also a chess player, painter, astrologer, hedonist, bisexual, drug experimenter, and social critic.

Watch Film; The Wickedest Man in the World

Links;
Wikipedia - Aleister Crowley – The Wickedest Man in the World

This is the first part of the publication of Magick without tears on Occult Magick blog. The whole book wil be published a chapter at a time at regular intervals.

In 1943 Aleister Crowley met a lady who, having heard of his
wide
knowledge and experience, asked his advice on occult,
spiritual, and
practical matters.

This chance connection resulted in a stimulating exchange of
letters. Crowley then asked others to put similar questions to him.The result was this collection of over eighty letters which are now being issued over the title that he chose, "MAGICK WITHOUT TEARS".

Crowley did not keep copies of his early letters to the above-mentioned lady, so was unable to include them in the collection that he planned to publish. Fortunately they have been preserved and are now included
in the introduction to this book. Their original form has been retained
with the opening and closing formulae which Crowley used in all his letters.

Crowley at first intended to call the book "ALEISTER EXPLAINS EVERYTHING",
and sent the following circular to his friends and disciples asking them to suggest subjects for inclusion.


"Much gratified was the author of THE BOOK OF THOTH to have so many letters of appreciation, mostly from women, thanking him for not 'putting it in unintelligible language', for 'making it all so clear that even I with my limited intelligence can understand it, or think I do.'

"Nevertheless and notwithstanding! For many years the Master Therion has felt acutely the need of some groundwork-teaching suited to those who have only just begun the study of Magick and its subsidiary sciences, or are merely curious about it, or interested in itwith intent to study. Always he has done his utmost to make his meaning clear to the average intelligent educated person, but even those who understand him perfectly and are most sympathetic to his work, agree that in this respect he has often failed.

"So much for the diagnosis --- now for the remedy!

"One genius, inspired of the gods, suggested recently that
the riddle might be solved somewhat on the old and well-tried lines of 'Dr. Brewer's Guide to Science'; i.e., by having
aspirants write to the Master asking questions, the kind of problem
that naturally comes into the mind of any sensible enquirer, and getting his answer in the form of a letter. 'What is it?' 'Why should I bother my head about it?' 'What are it's principles?' 'What use is it?' 'How do I begin?', and the like.

"This plan has been put into action; the idea has been to
cover the subjects from every possible angle. The style has been colloquial and fluent; technical terms have either been carefully avoided or most carefully explained; and the letter has not been admitted to the series until the querent has expressed
satisfaction.
Some seventy letters, up to the present have been written,
but still there seem to be certain gaps in the demonstration, like
those whitepatches on the map of the World, which looked so tempting fifty years
ago.

"This memorandum is to ask for your collaboration and
support. A list, indicating briefly the subject of each letter already
written,is appended. Should you think that any of those will help
you in your own problems, a typed copy will be sent to you at once ...
Should you want to know anything outside the scope, send in your question (stated as fully and clearly as possible) ... The answer
should reach you, bar accidents, in less than a month ... It is proposed ultimately to issue the series in book form."

_______

This has now been done.

Karl J. Germer
Frater Saturnus Xø
Frater Superior, O.T.O.
January, 1954 e.v.
Hampton, N.J.

LETTERS WRITTEN BY MASTER THERION TO A STUDENT

Letter No. A
March 19, 1943
Cara Soror,

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law
I was very glad to gather from your conversation yesterday afternoon that you have a serious intention of taking up the Great Work in
the proper spirit. Your criticisms of previous experience in the course of your ad-ventures appeared to be singularly sane and just. As I promised I am writing this letter to cover a few practical points which we
had not time to discuss and which in any case I think it better to arrange by correspon-dence.

1) It is of the first importance that you should understand my personal position. It is not actually wrong to regard me as a teacher, but it is certainly liable to mislead; fellow-student, or, if you like, fellow-
sufferer, seems a more appropiate definition.The climax of my life was what is known as the Cairo Working, described in the minutest detail in the Equinox of the Gods. At that time most of The
Book of the Law was completely unintelligible to me, and a good deal of it - especially the third chapter - extremely antipathetic. I fought against this book for years; but it proved irresistible.
I do not think I am boasting unfairly when I say that my personal researches have been of the greatest value and importance to the study of the subject of Magick and Mysticism in general, especially my
integration of the various thought-systems of the world, notably the identification of the system of the Yi King with that of the Qabalah. But I do assure you that the whole of my life's work, were it multiplied a thousand fold, would
not be worth one tithe of the value of a single verse of The Book of the Law.


I think you should have a copy of the Equinox of the Gods and make The Book of the Law your constant study. Such value as my own
work may possess for you should amount to no more than an aid to the interpretation of thisbook.
2) It may be that later on you will want a copy of Eight Lectures on Yoga so I am putting a copy aside for you in case you should want it.
3) With regard to the O.T.O., I believe I can find you a typescript of all the official documents. If so, I will let you have them to read, and you can make up your mind as to whether you wish to
affiliate to theThird Degree of the Order. I should consequently, in the case of your deciding to affiliate, go with you though the script of the Rituals and ex-plain the meaning of the whole thing; communicating, in
addition, the real secret and significant knowledge of which ordinary Masonry is not possessed
4) The horoscope; I do not like doing these at all, but it is part of the agreement with the Grand Treasurer of the O.T.O. that I
should undertake them in worthy cases, if pressed. But I prefer to keep the figure tomyself for future reference, in case any significant event makes consultation desirable.

Now there is one really important matter. The only thing besides The Bookof the Law which is in the forefront of the battle. As I
told you yesterday, the first essential is the dedication of all that one is and all thatone has to the Great Work, without reservation of any sort. This must bekept constantly in mind; the way to do this is to practice
Liber Resh vel Helios, sub figura CC, pp. 425-426 - Magick. There is another versionof these Adorations, slightly fuller; but those in the text are quite al-right. The important thing is not to forget. I shall have to teach you
the signs and gestures which go with the words.

It is also desirable before beginning a formal meal to go through the following dialogue: Knock 3-5-3: say, "Do what thou wilt shall be the wholeof the Law." The person at the other end of the table
replies: "What is thy Will?" You: "It is my Will to eat and drink." He: "To what end?"
You: "That my body may be fortified thereby." He: "To what end?"
You:"That I may accomplish the Great Work." He: "Love is thelaw, love underwill."
You, with a single knock: "Fall to." When alone make a monologueof it: thus, Knock 3-5-3. Do what, etc. It is my Will to, etc., that mybody, etc., that I may, etc., Love is, etc. Knock: and
begin to eat.

It is impossible to exaggerate the importance of performing these smallceremonies regularly, and being as nearly accurate as possible with regard to the times. You must not mind stopping in the middle of a
crowded thooughfare --- lorries or no lorries --- and saying the Adorations; and you mustnot mind snubbing your guest --- or your host --- if he or
she should prove ignorant of his or her share of the dialogue. It is perhaps because these matters are so petty and trivial in appearance that they
afford so excellent a training. They teach you concentration, mindfulness, moral and social courage, and a host of other virtues.

Like a perfect lady, I have kept the tit bit to the last. It is absolutely essential to begin a magical diary, and keep it up daily. You begin by anaccount of your life, going back even before your birth to your ancestry. In conformity with the practice which you may perhaps choose to adopt later,
given in Liber Thisarb, sub figura CMXIII, paragraphs 27-28, Magick, pp. 420-422, you must find an answer to the question: "How did I come to be in this place at this time, engaged in this particular work?" As you will see from the book, this will start you on the discoveryof who you really are, and eventually lead you to your recovering the memory of previous incarnations.

As it is difficult for you to come to Town except at rare and irregular intervals, may I suggest a plan which has previously proved very useful, and that is a weekly letter. Eliphas L?vi did this with the Baron Spedalieri , and the correspondence is one of the most interesting of his works. you ask such questions as you wish to have answered, and I answer them to the best of my ability. I, of course, add spontaneous remarks which may be elicited by my observations on your progress and the perusal of your magical diary. This, of course, should be written on one side of the paper only, so that the opposite page is free for comments, and an arrangement should be made for it to be inspected at regular intervals.

I am proud to present a Classic occult Manuscript for your reading pleasure and reference.

The Banned Lecture - Aleister Crowley
to have been delivered before the University Poetry Society by ALEISTER CROWLEY on the evening of Monday, Feb.3rd.1930

Long ago when King Brahmadatta reigned in Benares, a gentleman whose Christian names were Thomas Henry -you possible have heard of him-he was no less apersonage than the Grandfather of the great Aldous Huxley-once found himself threatened be a perdicament similar to that in which I stand tonite. He had been asked to lecture a distinguished group of people. What bothered him was this: what assumption was he to make about the existing knowledge of the audience? He adopted the sensible course of asking the advice of an old hand at the game; and was told "You must do one of two things. You may assume that they know everything, or that they know nothing." Thomas Henry thought it over, and decided that he would assume that they know nothing. I think that merely shows how badly brought up he must have been; and explains how it was that he became a kirty little atheist, and repented on his death-bed, and died blaspheming. Gilles de Raise was born sometime in 1404. He married Catherine de Thonars on the 30th of November, 1420, thus becoming the richest noble in Europe. He lived extravagantly until his arrest by the Church.

He geban alchemical studies under the instruction of Gilles de Sille, a priest of St. malo. Montague Summers believes he sacrificed around eight hundred children and quotes the proceedings of ecclesiastical high court in which a Dominican priest named Jean Blouyn took over as the delegate of the Holy Inquisition for the city and diocese of Nantes. Needless to say, Gilles "confessed", and was put to the stake and charcoaled on October 26th., 1440 leaving his estates and untold riches to Mother Church, who, wasting no time, added them to her list of material gains. Included in this particular catche were Gilles personal hand-painted manuscripts which were eagerly welcomed into the Mother Lode’s vault where they sit to this day. Unfortunately, the Vatican’s library is inaccessible to "common folk", and will probably remain so until the demise of Mother Church herself, at which time this author will assist other interested persons in converting it into a public library. No! No! that would be quite impossibly bad manners. I shall assume that you know everything about Gilles de Rais; and that being the case, it would evidently be impertinent for me to tell you anything about him.



So that we can consider the lecture at an end, and (after the usual vote of thanks) pass on immediately to the discussion, which I think ought to be more amuising, if scarcely as informative. It is rather an hard saying—however worthy of all acceptation in a university like Oxford, where, I understand, the besetting sin of the inmates is lecturing and being lectured, but discussions are always apt to turn out to be amusing, especially if conducted with blackthorns or shotguns, where as lecturing is merely an attempt, fordoomed to failure, to communicate knowledge which usually the lecturer does not possess.




I am sure that we all recognise that an attempt of this kind is impossible in nature. No! I am not proposing to inflict upon you my celebrated discourse on Scepticism of the Instrument of Midn. I am not even going to refer to the first and last lecture which I suffered at a dud university somewhere near Newmarket, in which the specimen of old red sandstone in rostrum began by remarking that political economy was a very difficult subject to theorise upon because there were no reliable data. Never would I tell so sad a story on a Monday evening, with the idea of Tuesday already looming darkly in every melancholic mind. I should like to be just friendly and sensible, though it is perhaps too much to expect me to be cheerful. The fact is that I am in a very depressed state. My attention was attracted by that little work "knowledge" of which we hear so much and see so little. I don’t pr&127;pose to inflict upon you the M.C.H., and demonstrate that the life and opinions of Filles de Rais were inevitably determioned by the price of onions in Hyderabad. But I do think that in approaching a historic question, we should be very careful to define what we mean—in our particular universe of discourse—by the work "knowledge." May I ask a question? Does anyone here know the date of the battle of Waterloo? Pause--(Someone—I bet—tells me "1815.") Thank you very much. To be frank with you, I know it myself. I did not require information on that particular point. What I asked was, wheter anyone know the date. I felt that, if so, it would have created a sympathetic atmosphere. But since we are talking about Waterloo, we may ask ourselves what, roughly speaking, is the extent of our knowledge? I have heard plenty of theories about why Napoleon lost the battle. I have been told that he was already suffering from the disease which killed him. I have been told that he was outgeneralled by Wellington.

I have been told that his army of conscripts was underfed and not properly drilled. I have also been told that the battle was won by the Belgians. Now, all these things are merely matters of opinion. There may be a little truth in some of them. But we have practically no means of finding out exactly how much, even if our documentary support is valid to establish any of these theories. It is, also, almost impossible to estimate the causes of any given event, if only because those causes are infinite, and each one of them is to a certian extent an efficient determining cause. Take a quite simple matter like the time of year. If it had been winter instead of summer, the hens would not have been laying and Hougomont and La Haye Sainte would not have been able to nourish the contending forces. But though it is profitable for the soul to contemplate the extent of what we don’t know, it is in some ways more satisfying to our baser natures to consider what we do know in a reasonable sense of the word. It is not disputable that the battle of Waterloo was fought and won. It is not disputable that it was the climax, or rather the denoucement, of campaigns lasting over a number of years. And there is no reason for doubting that Napoleon was born in Corsica, that he entered the French army, and rose rapidly to power by a combination of military genius and political intrigue. There is a vast body of indirect evidence which confirms these statements at every point. Taken as a whole, they would be totally inexplicable on any other hypothesis. But when we consider the character of Napoleon, we are at once involved in a mass of contradictions. Probably no one in history has been more discussed, and every writer gives a totally different account.



Each seeks to buttress his opinion by incidents which we have no reason to suppose other than authentic, but seem incongruous. So far as we can get any truth out of the matter at all, it is that the character of Napoleon, like that of everybody who ever lived, was extremely complex. And the writers are more or less in the position of the SixWise Men of Hindustan who were born blind and had to describe an elephant. Spiritually fortified by these simple meditations, we may apply their fruits to the problem of Filles de Rais, and ask ourselves what we really know about hime as o.posed to what we have heard about him. We know that he was a gentleman of good family, because otherwise he could not have held the offices which he did hold. We know that he was a brave soldier, and a comrade of Joan of Arc.

We know that he had a passion for science, for the basis of his reputation was that he frequented the society of learned men. We know finally that he was accused of the same crimes as Joan of Arc by the same people who accused her, and that he was condemned by them to the same penalty. I do not think that I have left out any verfiable fact. I think that all the rest amounts to speculation. The real problem of Gilles de Rais amounts, accordingly, to this. Here we have a person who, in almost every respect, was the male equivalent of Joan of Arc. Both of them have gone down in history. But history is somewhat curious. I am still inclined to think that "there aint no sich animile." In the time of Shakespeare, Joan of Arc was accepted in England as a symbol for everything vile. He makes her out not only as a sorceress, but a charlatan and hypocrite; and on tope of that a coward, a liar, and a common slut. I suspect that they began to whitwash here when they decided that she was a virgin, that is a sexually deranged, or at least incomplete, animal, but the idea has always got people going, as any student of religion knows. Anyway, her stock went up to the point of canonisation. Gilles de Rais, on the other hand, is equally a household work for monstrous vices and crimes. So much so, that his is even confused with the fabulous figure of Bluebeard, of whom, even were he real, we know nothing much beyond that he reacted in the most manly way to the problem of domestic infelicity. A moment’s digression; in fact, the main point. What is the most precise and most atrocious charge that is made against him?



That he sacrificed, in the course of alchemical and magical experiments, a matter of 800 children? I submit that, a priori, this sounds a little improbable. Gilles de Rais was the lord of a district whose population would not have been very extensive, and even in that age of slavery, dirt, disease, debauchery, poverty and ignorance, which seems to Mr. G. K. Chesterton the one ideal state of society, it must have been a little difficult to carry out abductions and murders on such wholsale principles. Whenever questions arise with regard to black magic or black masses, invocations of the devil, etc., etc., it must never be forgotten that these practices are strictly functions of Christianity. Where ignorant savages perform propitiatory rites, there and there only Christianity takes hold. But under the great systems of the civilised parts of the world, there is no trace of any such perversion in religious feeling. It is only the bloodthirsty and futile Jehovah who has achieved such monstrous births. Such upas-trees can only grow in the poisonous mire of fear and shame where thought has putrefied to Christianity. There is thus no antecedent improbability that Gilles de Rais (or any other person of that place and period) was addicted to black magical practices, for they were all Catholics. The power of the Church was, at that time, absolute, and even research was limited by the arbitrary theology imposed upon the mind of everyone. The abomination was at its height. But its decline has been rapid. True, one hundred years later it was still possible for Queens to be bulldozed by Presbyterian pulpiteers, but the time was already predictable when their best was for undergraduates to be bluffed by homosexual ecclesiastics. I suppose it is ll in the family. While these profound thoughts were producing a hypochondriac obnubilation of my mental faculties, it suddently occured to me that after all, I had heard this story before. And I saw the connection. In the pitch-dark ages, when Christianity held unchallenged sway over those portions of this globe which it had sufficiently corrupted, the pursuit of knowledge—knowledge of any kind—was justly estimated by the people in power as the one and only dangerous pursuit. Even so, as late as 300 years ago, it was not considered very gentlemanly to be able to read and write.

I am not sure that it is. In any case, it is a great error in education to teach these things. Grammar, we must never forget, appears in the word "Gramarye," beloved of Sir Walter Scott, and "grimoire," a black magical ritual—that is to say, any written document. Precious little knowledge filtered through Christianity. It was against the interests of the Church, and in those times it was much easier to suppress people and ideas than it is now, though even today we find priests—at least in Oxford—who appear not to have heard of a certain recent invention by a notorious Magician inspired by the Devil—the Printing Press. But they feared. So those who pursued knowledge were at the best under strong suspicion of heresy. I need not quote the obvious names. But there were certain bodies of people who did carry on the old knowledge, mostly by oral tradition, and who were perforce tolerated to a certain extent, because even the little knowledge that they did possess was so exceedingly useful. The best way to make armour, or to build Cathedrals, or to heal sickness would enable the Christian to get ahead of his friends. Therefore, although conscience evidently demanded the maximum amount of persecution compatible with the existence of villains, the Jews and the Arabs were at least allowed to live. Besides, the Arabs saw to the themselves. But no one was better aware than the Pope that knowledge was power. For all he know, and he probably knew that he did no know much, the Jews and the Arabs might get together and overturn the whole construction of society. Had he not in his own records the very best example of such a catastro.he? There is a large number of excellent people, possessed of even less that the minimum amount of brains required to grease a gimlet, who are always boring us with the bogey of the Jew-Bolshevist peril. But as most of them are Roman Catholic and unaware that Rome is laughing in its sleeve at them, they conveniently ignore what should be—if they realised it—their best argument.

What was the ultimate cause of the destruction of the great civilisation of Rome? What corrupted the spirit of a people unconquerable in arms? What but the spread of the slave morality of Jewish communists of the period? If you will take your New Testaments from your pockets, you will find in the fourth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles and the thirty-second verse: "And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and soul: and not one of them said that aught of the things that he possessed was his own, but that they had all things in common." Of course one of them, and he too was a Jew, tried to hold out on the kitty, and was struck miraculously dead for his pains. Lenin and Trotsky never did as well! So, as Roman Catholics are always telling us, the Church has a monopoly of logic, and The Pope argued that all Jews were communists. Anyone who had or wanted knowledge must be a Jew, and therefore a communists, and therefore—well, the Pope too believed in preparedness, though he probably called it a programme of disarmament. When people scrap battleships in the name of peach on earth and goodwill to men, it means that they have found battleships useless and too expensive, and that they have found something cheaper and more deadly. So the Curia kept a weapon in reserve, in order to be sure of having a nice jolly pogrom whenever they gave the word. And what was the word to be? Nice quiet peasant folk, or genial hard-working hunters and fighters, are not easy to arouse to indiscriminate slaughter without reason. In order to get them going, there are only two things which you can play on—greed and fear. The motive behind the Crusades was the story of the fabulous wealth of the East. We find, in fact, that well-organised armies of buccaneers, such as the Templars, did not bring back incalculable spoils, while the honest pious mugs ruined themselves in the process. Now, in this particular sport of suppressing earnest enquirers, it was not much good trying to play on people’s greed. For everyone knew that even if the Jews had wealth, they managed to hide it very successfully, and that they had a nasty was of arranging for protection with peo.le who were too powerful to be bullied, and too good business men to be fooled into killing the goose that laid the golden eggs. So the only motive available was fear, and in those ages where ignorance was fostered with infinite devotion, it was even easier to create a scare about bogies than our propaganda in the recent scrap found it.



I was in Venice just before the war, when Halley’s comet was around, and although the Pope himself sprinkled holy water over the comet, and sent it his special benediction and told the people it would do no harm, in his most excathedra manner, the Venetians gathered themselves in panic-stricken crowds in the Square of St. Mark and waited, howling, for the end of the world. It was accordingly easy enough to associate the pursuit of knowledge with the most abominable crimes, real or imaginary or both. For this reason, we hear—not as a demonstrated thesis, but as a commonplace of inherited knowledge—that Jews were sorcerers and wizards. In other works, they know something about grammar. We heard that they transformed themselves into cats or bats, and sucked pe&127;ple’s big toes. I have never, personally, investigated the question as to whether this form of nutrition is palatable. But, alas! even in those idyllic Chestertonian times there was a little shrewd common sense knocking about; the instinct—sometimes very splendidly described as horse sense—which comes from intimate wordless unintellectual communing with Nature(please do not take that word "communing" in any bad sense; if it were not for Baldwin, I would be a Conservative myself)--the instinct of some people, who at the bottom of their hearts, did not so much believe in these phantasms. I was not so easy to get them to go out and murder a lot of inoffensive people at the word jump. They had to be supplied with something a little more tangible. You will notice how all this fort of argument is invariably of the ad captandum variety. It is produced out of nowhere for a definite purpose; and, as the French say, does not rime with anything.

If it did, of course, it would immediately be exposed as nonsense. It is satisfied that nobody can disprove it any more than they can prove it. Take a concrete example. A nice young gentleman the other day wanted (very properly) to earn his living, and not being peculiarly endowed by Nature in the matter of original invention, he thought he might make a story out of the idea of a Suicide Club. In this he was evidently correct. Robert Louis Stevenson had in fact proved the point. So he took Stevenson’s story and transferred it to Germany, and drivelled on about the ace of spades, and quoted statistics of suicides, and said that I was the president of the Club and that the Berlin police were after me. Now, I am afraid it would be a little bit difficult for anyone to prove that I am responsible for any suicides that may take place in Germany. But, on the other hand, it is quite impossible for me to disprove it. So now, if you want to attack anybody without the slightest fear of contradiction, you know how to set to work. I omitted to mention that all these suicides were excessively beautiful and even boluptuous young women of high social position, and that the wicked president had blackmailed them out of vast sums. You see, the people for whom this dear young gentleman was writing all get sexually excited by pictures of young women, and also by any statement about large sums of money. For they immediately have a wish phantasm—if they had large sums themselves, what terrible fellows they could be. In the Middle Ages, the art of exciting the people was not very different. The Jew had always an immense hoard of ill-gotten wealth, and of course every penny that was exacted by Reginald Front-de-Boeuf was laid to the Jews’ account. But there was another treasure that the peasant was afraid to lose, the dearest treasure of all, his children. As little boys, thank God, have a habit of straying in search of adventure and getting lost in the process, which is good for thier souls, the peasant naturally has moments of serious disquietude as to whether something terrible can have happened to little Tommy.

Very Good. All we have to do is to play on the alarm. We put into his mind that little Tommy (who turns up all right, if rather muddy, half an hour later) has almost certainly been kidnapped by the Jews for purposes of ritual murder. The main accusation against Gilles de Rais is thereforejust this general accusation against anyone in Christendom who exhibited any desire for knowledge. Only, in his case, it was concentrated and exaggerated to fantastic lengths by some factor or other on which I feel it useless to speculate. The one thing of which I feel certain is that 800 children is a lot. I don’t know over how many years these practices were supposed to have spread. As I think you must all feel sure by now, I know nothing whatever of my subject. But scientific experiment in those days was always a very prolonged operation. They thought nothing of exposing some unknown substance to the rays of the sun and moon for periods of three months at a time, in the hope that in some mysterious way the first stage of some dimly—visaged operation might be satisfactorily accomplished. And even if they sacrificed a child every day, it would have taken a matter of two and a half years to dispose of 800 children. Besides, it must have taken more than a few minutes to kidnap a child with the secrecy obviously required. Did the disappearance of the first four hundred, say, put no parents on their guard? I think, at the best, it is a case of little Tommy who told his mother that therewere millions of cats on the wall of the back garden, but under cross-examination, in the style made popular by the dialogue of Lot with Almighty God, admitted that it was "Tom and another." Of course, it will be obvious to you by this time that I have been seduced by Jewish gold, and the only way that I can think of to disarm your suspicions is to bring forward another case of the same kind, little more then a century old, with which Jews had nothing to do.

There was a poet laureate—I am not quite sure what this species of animal is—but his name was Robert Southey, and he lived, if you can call it living, about the time of William Blake. He wrote a number of words arranged in some scheme connected with rime and rhythm; apparently, like golf clubs, "a set of instruments very ill-adapted to the purpose." But, anyway, he called it a poem, and the title was something to do with the old woman of Berkeley and who rode behind her. The person who rode behind her was Mr. Montague Summers’ friend, the Devil. What she actually did to merit this favour is to me rather obscure, because I have forgotten the whole beastly thing. But I do remember two lines, because I am in the same line of business myself. I have candles made of infants’ fat, I have feasted on rifled graves. Southey was an ambitious man. He was not content with the brilliant success of this masterpiece of the poetic art. He immediately sat down and wrote another alleged peom all about infants’ fat and rifled graves and the Devil coming for the villain at the proper moment. This poem has nothing to do with witchcraft. It is called "The Surgeon’s Warning." I think this is the best evidence in support of my thesis—whatever that is, I am not quite sure—that it is possible to adduce. In the minds of the kind of people who believe in their neighbours making candles of infants’ fat and digging up corpses to economise on the butcher’s bill, the surgeon—that is to say, the man in pursuit of knowledge which it is hoped may alleviate human pain—is the same kind of animal as the witch and the ritual-murdering Jew. It is, no doubt, because it is a part of the old taboo complexabout the corpses of one’s relatives, that the clerical attack on surgeons concentrated itself on one fact—the fact that to learn to be a surgeon you must have corpses to dissect.

For at that time, it will be remembered, hospitals were not as flourishing as they are today, and it was very difficult to find living people whom you could cut up to see what came of it. The surgeon was, in fact, not understood at all, except in the one way which such people were capable of understanding; i.e., as the body-snatcher. The rest of his proceedings were perfectly mysterious to them. You notice that even Charles Dickens—who may yet go down to history for having wished to prosecute Holman Hunt, of all people in the world, for painting indecent pictures—takes very much this popular view of medicine and pharmacy in Pickwick. I think, then, it is not altogether unfair to assume that Gilles de Raid was to a large extent the victim of Catholic logic. Catholic logic: and the foul wish-phantasms generated of its repressions, and of its fear and ignorance. He wanted to confer to a boon on humanity; therefore he consorted with the learned; therefore he murdered little children. I think it is about time that somebody got after J.B.S. Haldane. It is too late to do anything more to Fidley and Latimer, but I am quite sure that the candle they lit was made of infants’ fat. It is no use your starting to rifle Graves, because his publishers might resent you interference. Those in favor of the motion will now please signify the same in the usual manner. Any may the Lord have mercy on your souls!

The Six Chakra in the Human Body.
{Transcription from holograph notebook of Aleister Crowley}

1. Mûlâdhâra the place of the Root or of Beginnings is at the base of the spinal column. It has 3
petals & 55 rays, & is the seat of Prithivi or Bhu.
Here Kundalinî lies coiled in 3½ coils in the form of a serpent, over the entrance of the Sushûmna
canal, so closely knit together around it that no Prana can pass.

2. Svadisthâna. the “proper place” of Kundalini i.e. in the Yogi. Situated in the navel.
Seat of the Apo tatwa.

3. Manipûra the “city of gems” so-called because very brilliant. In the Solar Plexus.
Abode of Agni tatwa.
4. Anáhata also called Hridiyama means “sound without collision” or “heart”.
In the heart.
Abode of Vâyu tatwa.

5. Vishûddha means “purity”.
In the root of the neck below larnyx.
Seat of Akâsa tatwa.

6. Ajñâ between the eyebrows. Means “Knowledge”.
Seat of Mano tatwa.

7. Sahasrâra above the head means the “thousand-petalled”
There are 3 breathings:
Rechakam: throwing out
Kumbhakam: storing
Purakam: inhaling
First Breathing
Practice
for purifying the Nadi (rivers or {...})
Assume an Asana (posture) which keeps the spine & head in one vertical straight line.
With the thumb & ring-finger of the r.h. close Pingala & do Recakam through Ida.
[Note Also Pîngala is the Solar (Surya = 6) current on the r.h. side of the human male
The Six Cakra in the Human Body
Download as A pdf file! Sanskrit letters will appear as visible.
– 2 –
body; Ida is the Lunar (Candra = 9) current on the l.h.
In women these are reversed.
Sushumna or Devamarga (path of the gods) is in the middle & is the vehicle of Agni.]
Then without any intermission, do Purakam through Ida.
Then close Ida with the ring-finger & do Recakam through Pingala.
And so on.
One cycle may be inaccurately termed a Prana-yama.
Let him do 80 such 4 times a day; but not more than 80.
The times of day are
(a) one hour before dawn
(b) at noon before feeding (This applies universally)
(c) About sunset
(d) Midnight
Ascertain the rate of Pranayama each man for himself: the idea is to breathe slightly more slowly,
but much more deeply, than usual.

Prana-yama means “control of Prana”. Prana is the cosmic Spirit of Life.
By restraining breath, then, we restrain Prana: by restraining Prana we restrain thought: thought,
departing, leaves room (Heb. in space) for nothingness.
It now becomes permissible, the nerves being purified to do a more-correctly-so-described Pranayama,
which is identical with above but internal Kumbhakam.
A Yoglet may know when his Nadî are purified by the appearance of the following signs:
1. Clear skin ü
2. Beautiful voice ü
3. Calm appearance of face
4. Bright eyes
5. Hearing constantly the Nada (silence)
Pratyâhâra the “drawing towards” of all the faculties: i.e. introspection as a constant and trained
natural attitude.
Dhârana “mental concentration on one object.” This results from Pratyahara.
Dhyâna is “when the thought-stuff flows in a continuous stream towards the object of Dhârana.
Cittam the thought stuff.
The Six Cakra in the Human Body




– 3 –

C
Download as A pdf file! Sanskrit letters will appear as visible.
Samâdhi is when the soul, remaining fixed in Dhyâna, discards the phenomenon meditated on, &
remains concentrated on its noumenon.
There are two sorts of Samadhi
Sa-vikalpa with a subject
Nir-vikalpa without a subject
Sa-vikalpa gives power.
Nir-vikalpa gives Môksha.
Moksha beggars description. It surpasses thought & may inaccurately be compared to Nirvana.
Moksha is the Peace or Bliss resulting from Nir-vikalpa.
There are two sorts of Moksha
Abhâva Non-existent i.e. to sense and thought
Ahamkâra the ego-making faculty
Ahimsa non-injuring.
The Constitution of the
Human Organism
Atma the Self or Knower
Sat absolute existence
Chit ——— wisdom
Ananda ——— ecstasy or bliss
These are not qualities of the Atma, but Atma is these three.
Anthakarana the internal instrument
C Atma
D Manas the mind or thought faculty
A Buddhi the discriminating faculty
B Cittam the thought-stuff
E Ahankara egoity
N.B. Manas & Chittam differ as the movement of the waters of a lake differ from the water itself.
Next come five organs of knowledge Gnanendriyam. D
Five organs of action Karmendriyam. A
Five subtle airs or Prânas. B
The five tatwas C D A B E of E
The Six Cakra in the Human Body
– 4 –
The Atma of Antakarana has 5 sheaths, called Kos’a.
C 1. “Body of bliss” is innermost
Anandamayakosá is still an illusion. Atma Buddhi & Manas at most participate.
2. Manomayakosá the illusionary thought-sheath including Manas Buddhi Chittam Ahankara
in union with one or more of the Gnanendriyams
3. Viññanamyakosá the consciousness sheath consists of Antakârana in union with an organ of
action or of sense (Gnan- & Karm-endriyam.)
4. Pranamayakosá Here we drop below Antakârana. Consists of the five airs.
5. Annamayakosá “Body of nourishment.” The faculty which feeds on the five tatwas.
The three Sharirani, or bodies
1. Karana Sharira Causal Body almost = the protoplast
2. Sukshuma Sharira Subtle Body. Consists of vital airs &c.
3. Sthula Shirara Gross Body.
{...}1 incarnated soul, plunged in Tamas, Rajas & Sattvas (Darkness, Energy, & Calm) & limited
by above-cited 25 instruments, & the Freed Soul, pure Atma or Paramatma or Viananukti, which by
virtue of practice of Yoga has seperated itself from the bondage of the 25 & is united to pure
Brâhma.2
3
{...}4
Tatsâvitútvarényåm
Bhârya Orasys Dhimahi
Dhiya Yo Na Prachoddyat
——||——
Aum! Let us meditate on the Adorable Light of That divine Savitri, May She enlighten our minds!
Aum! Tat Sat! Aum!
O the Existant Truth! O!
1 The top portion of the notebook is cut off here.
2 Note in ms:
3 Note in ms (Yorke’s hand):
4 The title has been cut off.
Download as A pdf file! Sanskrit letters will appear as visible.