Talk:A∴A∴

message: The article makes this assertion:
"The A∴A∴ is present in all societies and epochs, although not necessarily under that name"
That sounds more like wish-thinking on behalf of its fans rather than a factual statement. Surely that sentence alone should be amended?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.91.209.143 (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neutrality? 

message: Copied from Talk:A.'.A.'.:
Cite please? Or is this simply based on the Illuminatus! books? -- The Anome 20:18, 26 Nov 2003 (UTC)
thread_title:  From Talk A.'. A.'. 

message: Anonymoyus user User:67.48.77.208 placed the disputed template on this article and made the following comment which I am moving here to talk:
According to "The Magick of Thelema: A Handbook of the Rituals of Aleister Crowley," by Lon Milo Duquette (Weiser 1993), A.'.A.'. does NOT stand for Argenteum Astrum.  On p. 216, the author states that this is commonly believed, but that he has "been informed in no uncertain terms that this is not the case."
I have looked at the reference you refer to, which appears as a footnote. It would seem to me that Lon Milo Duquette is expressing personal opinion based on the idea that the A.'. A.'. has other secret meanings, which with Crowley is undoubtedly the case. This does however not change the fact that Crowley himself used the Silver Star reference and connected this name to the passage every man and every woman is a star in Liber AL. --Solar 13:53, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree and have restored them (only six month late). Valtyr (talk) 18:45, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Disputed

message: there's a bunch of references to  - but that doesn't make any sense, since that corresponds to 'delete' in iso 8859-1 and unicode. what's the deal?
:In my browser, it shows up as a little square. Like the shape displayed for an unknown character, only smaller. Is that how it is supposed to look? IPSOS (talk) 02:21, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It is supposed to be a glyph that contains three dots, in the shape of a triangle. Unicode character 0x2234. ∴ jonathon 01:00, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No, that's not the one being discussed. This one is used for the square degree sign in 5=6, etc. IPSOS (talk) 20:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  wtf is &amp;#127; ? 

message: I don't know if it is notable enough to warrant a place in the article, but Aleister Crowley gave a grade 'above' Ipsissimus on page 25 of his table of correspondences included with 777 and other qabalistic writings.., though he did not give it a name; he included it in the 3rd order (of the Silver Star) & gave it's grade as (0=0°) (as opposed to probationer (0°=0) and all the rest with "°" before "", here "°" is after "". Nagelfar 16:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It's not a typo because its put alongside the grade of probationer on the opposite end, check it out yourself. Nagelfar 01:11, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Nothing rules out the possibility of a typo on one, but not the other. The very nature of typos is such. However, assuming for the sake of argument, that he did mean it to signify some sort of degree beyond Ipsissimus linking back to Probationer, it's actual significance is nil, unless some authentic secret tradition exists that has never been published. Until such time as some such tradition is published, it still doesn't warrant mention in the article, though its inclusion on the Talk Page is certainly appropriate. Anlala 05:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Which one or other are you referring to? It is clearly added as additional information in the source cited. Nagelfar (talk) 06:37, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  the grades (0°=0<sup></sup>), (1°=10<sup></sup>) ... through (10°=1<sup></sup>) & ...? 

message: What is the criterion for inclusion on this list, a documentation from Crowley of one's membership? a documentation from some other A∴A∴ claimant? or a self-identification? Grady McMurtry is included on the list, though I don't know of any documentation of his membership by Crowley or another, except McMurtry's own claim to be a Magister Templi. Phyllis Seckler said that McMurtry wasn't even a Neophyte of the A∴A∴ (which does leave open the possibility that he was recognized by her as a Probationer). Could anyone include themselves on the list by claiming to be a member? Anlala 05:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have to agree with it needing either reputable citations or deletions. If there isn't some documentation, then that section should be wiped as it can't be proven. (A lot of these people are DEAD. Good luck finding the truth). Also, forgive me if I'm wrong...but I thought the names of A.'.A.'. members weren't supposed to be made public in the first place. FUTURI (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: List of known members

message: It currently reads "The A∴A∴ (Arcanum Arcanorum)", though this is arguable, which should be put into the article itself. It should have the previously added "Latin: Argenteum Astrum or Greek: Αστρον Αργον, "Astron Argon", literally; "Silver star" in addition also.
Both are, according to wikipedia standards, attestable and note worthy, and all have been used in the literature surrounding the A∴A∴, to omit any well known attestable variation as such is going against the fiber of wikipedia. It seems on articles like this, pseudo-intellectual, secretive and self-interested types edit mercilessly to the detriment of the purpose behind the wikipedia project; to dispense information on the topic rather than instead monopolize or make exclusive some socially engineered view. Nagelfar (talk) 06:43, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm yet again being bold in this matter before a counter-argument or consensus, but I really do not understand the difficulty besides the demographic here on the subject matter relating to the addition of this information. Nagelfar (talk) 06:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Is it improper to point out that "astron argon" doesn't mean "silver star" in Greek? Silver would be "arguron." "Argon" means "shining."Antaios632 (talk) 19:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That certainly sounds like a fact we should add. But we'd want a source, perhaps a Greek dictionary of some kind. Google just gives "lazy" or "inactive". Dan (talk) 21:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of the A∴A∴ 

message: Ipsissimus doesn't quite mean anything to do with "self", which in Latin is rather "Sui-", but is in-fact much more subtle and unqualified in meaning than such, as per how "Ipsissima verba" means "the very words", not the "very identity of the words" or "the very entity of those words" et cetra... (However an Ipsissimus is an Iussuissimus, or law/ius- unto self/sui-, of the utmost possibility to be.) 67.171.248.22 (talk) 00:07, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  The very-most veritableness 

message: Anyone else think it would make sense to use the seal of A.'.A.'. as the image on this page? 70.181.242.86 (talk) 06:59, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems logical, Captain. FUTURI (talk) 00:55, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I added it. FUTURI (talk) 01:20, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Seal? 

message: Stealthepiscopalian has been waging a low grade edit war on these pages - removing legitimate external links to A.'.A.'. lineages.  I suggest that he immediately cease and try and seek consensus.  
The existence of other lineages such as the Bennett lineage or the  Charles Stansfeld Jones is factual and common knowledge.  The fact that no-one has yet thought to write about them in a book is not relevant as the fact of their existence is not in question nor controversial.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alrah Fraser (talk • contribs) 19:50, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: 'common knowledge' is insufficient as a standard for Wikipedia data.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 23:09, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lineages 

message: "The holy book of the order is Liber AL vel Legis (in English, The Book of the Law). This book and many others issued by the A.'.A.'. contains encrypted material derived from the Seven Palaces of Merkabah mysticism, rather than the Kabbalistic Tree of Life used by the O.T.O."
The fact that A.'.A.'. issued texts that are encrypted should not be controversial.  Again - it's common knowledge, not in dispute, and therefore not in need of citation although we could cite Crowley umpteen times on this matter.
I am an initiate of the A.'.A.'. and the Golden Dawn.  If anyone would like to challenge the factual basis of my claim that the System of the A.'.A.'. is based on the Merkabah Seven Palaces rather than the Kabbalistic Tree of Life, then please provide your reasons for doing so before demanding book citations be produced for initiated and previously secret knowledge.  Prove the A.'.A.'. is based on the Tree of Life or be Silent.  
If you don't know that .'. means the holder (whether an organisation or an individual) is in possession of the Lost Word - now you do.  Ask any Master Mason.  In this case it is the A.'.A.'. which is in possession of the Lost Word.  The A.'.A.'. has no name other than the two Alephs extracted from the Lost Word since names do not apply above the Abyss.  
The Lost Word has always been associated with the Merkabah rather than the Kabbalah.  It is the 'secret doctrine' talked of by Waite.  If it surprises anyone that the Inner Order system of the A.'.A.'. is based on the Merkabah rather than the Tree of Life then they should read Liber Al vel Legis again - "Thus ye have star & star, system & system; let not one know well the other!"
Think carefully before being pedantic on this issue. Review the matter and look at the page - considering how much I could be pedantic about on this and other pages if I was of the mind...
Thank you.  A .'.  93 93/93.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alrah Fraser (talk • contribs) 20:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: original research is insufficient support for data addition to Wikipedia.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 23:10, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  I can answer all of your enquiries on Crowley's use of the Lost Word and the Merkabah, CC but is this the proper place?  I invite you to join the FB A.'.A.'. group to discuss these matters if you will.  The Lost Word or true Name of God isn't just a Masonic thing.  Actually they have used substitute words for the MM and the Royal Arch for years so this shouldn't affect them.  The true name of God was hidden by the Jewish mystics.  It appears on the palaces of the Merkabah when you decrypt the Zohar.  It's the EL & Hadad pantheon of course, and the Palaces & paths are derived from ancient Babylonia - originally they were the 14 path of Inanna.  Hekhalot, is a loan word from Akkadian ekallu, "palace."  If you are interested I have a short article on the Zohar & Liber Al decryptions here:  http://www.paganspace.net/forum/topics/the-temple-of-solomon-the-lost-word-and-the-key-of-it-all  and I've keyed some of Crowley's texts to the Merkabah too on the 'Let it Fill me' FB page.  Just scroll down below the Tom Schuler lectures on the Tree of Life for them.  https://www.facebook.com/pages/Let-it-fill-me/253134744759426?fref=ts .  Crowley took the Merkabah and used it as a basis for his A.'.A.'. system but he's changed it for the New Aeon.  Best,  Alrah.  93 93/93.       Alrah Fraser (talk) 07:52, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The A.'.A.'. and the Seven Palaces of the Merkabah Mystics. 

message: Can someone please revert to good faith edits before user Alrah Fraser vandalized this article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.170.4.196 (talk) 05:24, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vandalism by Alrah 

message: Please Alrah, stop using this page as your personal catbox. Mvmontgomery (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please stop vandalizing this page. 

message: This is not the place for your independent "research", nor is it your place to make wholesale changes on the page. You do not speak for everyone in the A A and I find what you are doing extremely offensive, as is your crowing on FB about it. Don't worry, I already saved the thread. Mvmontgomery (talk) 06:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Exaggeration and  ad hominem attacks?  That's a sign of a weak position.  I was briefly involved in ONE edit war, but I suspect you are a regularly perp.  I have no idea who Jason Scott Dean is; I have never used sock puppets; nor did I ever pretend to be a 'he'.  But if all you can do is slander me and pull bizarre fantasies about me out of your ass instead of concentrating on the debate then you're just trolling wiki and you need to retire from this conversation.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alrah Fraser (talk • contribs) 05:05, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Alrah is capriciously vandalizing these pages. 

message: Wikipedia's page on "Religious order" states that: "A religious order is a lineage of communities and organizations of people who live in some way set apart from society in accordance with their specific religious devotion."
The A∴ A∴ and it's members do not conform to this definition.
Wikipedia's page on "Fraternity" states that: "A fraternity (or fraternal organization) is an organized society of men associated together in an environment of companionship and brotherhood; dedicated to the intellectual, physical, and social development of its members."
The A∴ A∴ is clearly a "Fraternal organization".
I intend to change the article to reflect this.
PedroLamarao (talk) 14:47, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a Religious Order 

message: I am working on an expanded section on the History of the Order. My objective is to increase the amount of time covered to match the History Lection. My work in progress is here: User:PedroLamarao/History_of_A⸫_A⸫. Please, feel free to comment and criticize. (I am sorry for the unusual glyph in that page's name. That is the ONE DOT OVER TWO DOTS PUNCTIATION character. I am used to writing the abbreviated name of the Order with it, by all my systems have additional fonts installed. I wasn't thinking when I started that page. )
PedroLamarao (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the Order 

message: Is the Name section of this article perhaps a bit POV?  It seems like the vast bulk of the table is based entirely on Eschelman's writings.  Is he the only source aside from Crowley (and, barely, de Camp) for public discussion of the meaning of the name?  --Geoff Capp (talk) 23:29, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name section and POV 

message: Would it be of note and relevant for the article that Fra. Sabazius has established the Gunther line from London as the single recognized administration of A∴A∴ as far as it concerns the purposes of O.T.O.? http://www.invisiblebasilica.blogspot.co.uk/2015/07/oto-and-aa.html viciarg ᚨ 12:18, 2 December 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Frater Sabazius X°: O.T.O. and A∴A∴ 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on A∴A∴. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20121028165711/http://www.totse.info/en/religion/the_occult/163733.html to http://www.totse.info/en/religion/the_occult/163733.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:29, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on A∴A∴. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090707122535/http://www.castletower.org/chief.html to http://www.castletower.org/chief.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140617075858/http://www.castletower.org:80/ to http://www.castletower.org
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071117101614/http://fet.egnu.org:80/wiki/A.%27.A.%27. to http://fet.egnu.org/wiki/A.%27.A.%27.
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:36, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified