930418

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law. [Honestly.]
The word of Sin is Restriction. [Would I kid you?]


Does one man's words encompass the majestic vision of thousands
of individuals?  Quoting a man is not the same as quoting the
Order.  Taken out of context, words can be interpreted much
differently than had one applied them within the confines of
their original expression.

I think this is the case regarding Hymenaeus Beta, Frater Superior 
of the Order to which I belong.  When he included that bit
from Merlinus X' he did us all a service.  He showed us the extremes
to which Order members have been known to go in their fervor.
I have little knowledge regarding Reuss' background, but surely
he was an unusual man, and he was an important force in the Order 
for many years.

Yet as people change so do Orders change, and while we look back
so carefully at the dirty laundry of O.T.O. remember that this is
only the surface skim and that many perspectives are now encompassed
which extend beyond any one individual.  I hope to show that there
was and is much room for a difference of opinion within the Order
itself, perhaps by testing the limits myself.


Let us examine this issue a bit more closely....

"In 1895, Karl Kellner (1850-1905), a wealthy Austrian industrialist
and paper chemist, as well as a high-grade Mason, founded the Ordo
Templi Orientis.  Kellner had traveled widely in the East, where he
met three adepts who instructed him specific magical practices.  
Kellner's efforts to develop the Order were later assisted by Franz
Hartmann, Heinrich Klein and Theodore Reuss, who had worked together
prior to joining the O.T.O.  The Order was first proclaimed in 1902
in Reuss's Masonic publication, 'Oriflamme'.  On Kellner's death,
Reuss succeeded him as Outer Head [O.H.O.].  The 'Jubilee' edition of
the 'Oriflamme', published in 1912, announced that the Order taught
secret of sexual magic.
 
"Theodore Reuss was an interesting character.  Born June 28, 1855 in
Augsburg, he entered Masonry in 1876.  He was a singer, journalist and
possibly a spy for the Prussian political police, infiltrating the Socialist
League founded by Karl Marx's daughter and her husband.  Reuss was
later associated with William Wynn Westcott, a leader of the Golden
Dawn, who later introduced him to John Yarker.  Yarker chartered Reuss to
found the Rites of Memphis and Mizraim in Germany.  After several
attempts to concretize various Masonic Rites, Reuss settled on the
development of the O.T.O.

"The Order experienced reasonably steady growth under Reuss' leadership.
For example, he chartered Papus in France, Rudolph Steiner in Berlin
and H. Spencer Lewis in the USA.  In 1912, the historic meeting between
Reuss and Crowley occurred.  Crowley wrote that Reuss came to him and
accused him of revealing Order secrets.  When Crowley looked at it afresh,
the initiated interpretation of sexual magick unfolded itself to him for
the first time.  Reuss appointed Crowley as Supreme and Holy King of all
the English speaking world, and it was this authorization that he invoked
when publishing the material of the Equinox.

"Reuss resigned as Outer Head of the Order in 1922 after suffering a
stroke and named Crowley his successor.  All was well until 1925 when
_The Book of the Law_ was translated into German.  There was a break
in the continuity of the Order.  Manyk members split with the new O.H.O.
over the book, which Crowley was actively promulgating through the Order.
He had earlier revise dthe Order rituals at Reuss's request, deeply
infusing the doctrines of the New Aeon revelation."

_An Introduction to the History of the O.T.O._, by Ad Veritatem IX'

Within _Equinox III:10_, Edited by 
  Hymenaeus Beta, Frater Superior, Rex Summus Sanctissimus,
    Caliph of the United States of America,
      Published by Samuel Weiser, 1990.



There are many possible reasons that our Frater Superior included this
material in _Equinox III:10_.  And this is the real point, is it not?
Why did he wish to publish such things about the history of his own
organization?  Does he represent a dogmatic threat to the principle
of Thelema?  Or is he exercising his True Will and putting forth very
complex pictures with no easy answers?  A picture which leaves room
for very many interpretations.

It is quite easy for me to see, for example, that all of O.T.O. derived
out of the dribble of faltering Masonry, purchased by clever hucksters
with an ounce of courage and some writing ability to aid them.  And I
can take that all the way down to our present Caliph, whose feeble
support of the 'Law of Thelema' is laughable at best.

Would I be thrown out of the Order for speaking in this way?  
Will I?  
I think not.
Why?  Because my Frater will see it as a perspective, an interjection
I am using as an example.  My illustration shows that we may express things
in the context of a larger work and the true significance of this may be
quite difficult to apprehend at first.

So it may be with OTO and Merlinus X'.  Please look O.T.O. more carefully.
I do not support Reuss's words myself, as I am not qualified to assess
them, and I am critical of their pomposity.  If I who am a member of
the Order take such a stand and am allowed to continue doing so, then
what can this say about the health of the Order?  Does it mean that
the Order has 'gone soft' and abandoned its moral principles?  Or
does it mean that it is strong in its ability to let the will of
universal kinship arise on its own, not shackled by some dogmatic
requirement?  How shall we resolve these two possibilities?


I find a high calibre of individual associated with Ordo Templi Orientis.
They are often quite intelligent and sometimes very well versed in arcane
or usual information.  They are quite often artists and geniuses.  
Having met some 20 longstanding members in the SF Bay Area (many who are or
were very heavily involved with the Order), I can vouch for the integrity
of the organization as it stands.

I have sometimes questioned the policy of Hymenaeus Beta.  In these moments 
I followed my intuition, and I've found little to stop me from requesting
a Second initiation from a different O.T.O. body.  I'm happily participating
in social groups (Feasts or Initiations) and have come to know the Gnostic
Mass well enough for my tastes.
 

This doesn't make me an authority on Order politics and explanations, however.
I can only hypothesize and relay to you what I understand based on my
limited contact with other members.

I urge you not to take the words of Merlinus X too far.  There are many
ways to interpret words, and many people who have become involved with
the Order feel very strongly about the sanctity of personal freedom
and the preservation of individual vision.

I welcome other comment on this issue and will be writing more in response
to other posts in this thread.


Invoke me under my stars.  Love is the law, love under will.

I am I!