CHIMAERA,CHIMAERAS @HollywoodInsiders.net

Michael Wynn's Occult Reference Library

CHIMAERA,CHIMAERAS

Return to Occult Library Index

ALEISTER CROWLEY MAGICK WITHOUT TEARS

s a bleak and barren landscape. terrific mountains rim the world. in the midst looms a cluster of blue-black crags. now there appears from their recesses a gigantic being. his strength, especially in his hands and in his loins, it terrifying. he suggests a combination of lion, mountain goat and serpent; and you instantly jump to the idea that this is one of the rare beings which the greeks called chimaera. so formidable is his appearance that you consider it prudent to assume an appropriate god-form. but who is the appropriate god? you may perhaps consider it best, in view of your complete ignorance as to who he is and where you are, to assume the god-form of harpocrates, as being good defence in any case; but of course this will not take you very far. if you are sufficiently curious and b

of any of her more amiable magic without tears get any book for free on: www.abika.com 129 characteristics. you will therefore make up your mind that it is a saturnian god-form that you need. fortunate indeed for you that you have practiced daily the assumption of such forms! very firmly, very steadily, very slowly, very quietly, you transform your normal astral appearance into that of sebek. the chimaera, recognizing your divine authority, becomes less formidable and menacing in appearance. he may, in some way, indicate his willingness to serve you. very good, so far; but it is of course the first essential to make sure of his integrity. accordingly you begin by asking his name. this is vital; because if he tells you the truth, it gives you power over him. but if, on the other hand, he te

ALEISTER CROWLEY THE LOST CONTINENT

dging of the gulf between earth and venus. these were connected intimately; the theory was that if atlantean brains could exist in bodies sufficiently subtle to traverse aether, the task was done. some of the experiments were crude enough, and, to our minds, horrible. they attempted to breed a new race by crossing with snakes, swans, horses and other animals* the greek legends of such monsters as chimaera, medusa, lamia, minotaur, the centaurs, the satyrs and the like are mere filtrations of the atlantean tradition. the only theory behind such experiments was that they were contrary to the natural order, and so worth trying. men of more scientific mind more plausibly passed zro vapour through sea-water; but they only created serpents of vast size, which they cast into the sea about the hig

ALEISTER CROWLEY THE OLD AND NEW COMMENTARIES TO LIBER AL

e of evolution, or puritans about his priapistic character, or idealists about his unfitness for civic government. the advocates of homosexuality "primus inter pares, john addington symonds- hammer away like hercules at the spiritual, social, moral, and intellectual advantages of cultivating the caresses of a comrade who combines apollo with achilles and antinous at the expense of escaping from a chimaera with circe's head, cleopatra's body, and cressida's character. why can't they let one alone? i agree to agree; i only stipulate to be allowed to be inconsistent. i will confess their creed, so long as i may play the part of peter until the cock crow thrice. they urge more strenuously still the claims of homosexuality to heal the hurts and horrors of humanity, almost the 'complete cohort

GILBERT THE GOLDEN DAWN TWILIGHT OF THE MAGICIANS

s ideals allvanishedin the second world war. none of the original templessurvived-thehermes temple in bristol lasted longest, dying in1972with its last chief, who protested to the end the non-existence of the rival hermanubis temple described by francis king. my own efforts to find it went no further than an accommodation address in the balls pond road and i believe it to have been no more than a chimaera. other, more recent innovations exist, claiming descent from the cipher manuscripts, and the various offshoots of the old order that straggled across the atlantic still surviveinthe form of paul foster case's brotherhood of the adytum. but mathers has gone, felkin has gone and waite has gone. perhaps only the secret chiefs remain. in1966a box was found on the beach near seisey bill which

LEWIS JAMES SATANISM TODAY AN ENCYCLOPEDIA OF RELIGION FOLKLORE AND POPULAR CULTURE

ngton: university press of kentucky, 2000. kagan, daniel, and ian summers.mute evidence. new york: bantam books, 1984. stewart, james r. cattle mutilations: an episode of collective delusion. the zetetic 1, no. 2 (spring/summer 1977. cerberus in greek mythology, cerberus was the guardian or watchdog of the underworld, hades. the offspring of typhon and echidna (who also parented the hydra and the chimaera, he was described as having three heads (though hesiod attributes him with fifty heads, a snake s tail, and a row of snake s heads sprouting from his neck. he greeted the newly dead with eagerness, but ate anyone who tried to escape. cerberus was said to have been charmed by orpheus, who was the only mortal he willingly allowed to enter hades. in another story he was defeated in a struggl

MOTTA MARCELO THE COMMENTARIES OF AL

e of evolution, or puritans about his priapistic character, or idealists about his unfitness for civic government. the advocates of homosexuality--primus inter pares, john addington symonds--hammer away like hercules at the spiritual, social, moral, and intellectual advantages of cultivating the caresses of a comrade who combines apollo with achilles and antinous at the expense of escaping from a chimaera with circe's head, cleopatra's body, and cressida's character. why can't they let one alone? i agree to agree; i only stipulate to be allowed to be inconsistent. i will confess their creed, so long as i may play the part of peter until the cock crow thrice. they urge more strenuously still the claims of homosexuality to heal the hurts and horrors of humanity, almost the 'complete cohort

PHILIP NEIL MYTHS LEGENDS EXPLAINED

although cepheus and cassiopeia pledged andromeda to perseus, she was already betrothed in marriage to her uncle phineas. nonetheless, her wedding to perseus went ahead, only to be interrupted by the arrival of an irate phineas with a large armed guard. in danger of being overwhelmed by such numbers, perseus used the gorgon s head to turn phineas and 200 of his men to stone. bellerophon slays the chimaera by giovanni-battista tiepolo (1696 1770) bell erophon slays the chimaera bellerophon, like perseus, was a heroic, royal figure who enjoyed the patronage of athena. a guest at the court of king proetus of argus (see p. 44, the queen falsely accused him of trying to rape her. loath to kill a guest directly, proetus sent him to his father-in-law king iobates with a letter asking that the bea

ophon, like perseus, was a heroic, royal figure who enjoyed the patronage of athena. a guest at the court of king proetus of argus (see p. 44, the queen falsely accused him of trying to rape her. loath to kill a guest directly, proetus sent him to his father-in-law king iobates with a letter asking that the bearer be put to death. iobates, expecting him to be killed, asked bellerophon to slay the chimaera, a fire-breathing monster with the front legs of a lion, the body of a she-goat, and the tail of a snake, which was devastating his kingdom. bellerophon tamed the winged horse pegasus with a golden bridle given to him by athena, and, swooping down, riddled the beast with arrows and thrust a lump of lead between its jaws. the chimaera s breath melted the lead and it choked to death. when h

ldless or risk calamity to thebes. laius either disobeyed the oracle s advice or was so upset that he got drunk and slept with his wife jocasta anyway. the sphinx this monster with a woman s head, an eagle s wings, a serpent s tail, and the body of a lion, was the daughter of echidna (who was part-woman, part-serpent. echidna s brood included many of the monsters of greek mythology, including the chimaera (see p. 47, the hydra, cerberus (see p. 31, the nemean lion, and the crommyon sow (see pp. 54 55. 49 the tragedy of oedipus oedipus feet the name oedipus means swollen foot. when he was left to die as a baby, oedipus feet were pierced with a spike perhaps to prevent his ghost from walking. the city of thebes the city of thebes was the capital of boeotia (not be confused with the egyptian

RUBY TABLET OF SET

balance, with shu's conscious vision, and tefnut's conscientious reflection. plan your future, create your future, a future befitting the god you shall become [all assembled now meditate and shape their paths of xeper as inspired [closing: farewell to set, close the gate, extinguish the candles, ring the bell [shu and tefnut, echoed by all others] thus it begins. reading list: the sphinx and the chimaera following is the text of a conversation between a sphinx and a chimaera, evoked to manifestation in order to explore certain magical implications of the dialogues of plato. placed upon the altar: the collected dialogues of plato, hamilton& cairns (ed, princeton university press, 1961 ce] the sphinx: i think it essential to preface any discussion of a single platonic dialogue with two majo

hamilton& cairns (ed, princeton university press, 1961 ce] the sphinx: i think it essential to preface any discussion of a single platonic dialogue with two major qualifications. the first is that, to be treated without distortion, plato's philosophy must be appreciated in its entirety. emphasis upon any single dialogue or group of dialogues carries with it a certain unfairness to the author. the chimaera: yet our span of materialization is limited, and we cannot hope to treat the entire range of plato's thought in the time available to us. the sphinx: true, and so let us focus first upon the sophist, which illustrates many of the points most important to this investigation. the chimaera: but what is your second qualification? the sphinx: there is the problem of understanding what plato "r

my understanding of plato as he is translated into the english language. the dialogues center much of their discussions around terms whose final definitions are elusive at best, even in conversations carried out at intellectual planes below that of plato. then, too, there is always the spectre of imprecise translation from the greek to the english. and plato himself could not anticipate this. the chimaera: your qualifications are entirely acceptable. proceed. the sphinx: the initial question raised by the sophist is its raison d'etre. why should plato have felt it necessary to include such a dialogue as this in his philosophy at all? was it truly because the included lines of argument required exposure? or did plato intend the document rather as a gauntlet of sorts to be flung before the s

t rather as a gauntlet of sorts to be flung before the sophists themselves? classification: v2- 184.ri- 1 author: michael a. aquino v date: may 30, x (date of working) publication: nov. 6, x (first distribution to the priesthood) xxii (date of first publication) aug. 31, xxiv (transcribed by robert menschel, iv) html conversion: sept. 10, 1998 ce subject: platonic philosophy reading list: 12c the chimaera: i sense that the editors of this book ventured one explanation. grasping it with a forepaw, he turns to page #958. yes, here it is: the argument is hung on the figure of the sophist quite arbitrarily. no real picture is given of the men who were the professional instructors of greece for many years. all plato does is ascribe to them every notion he disapproves. he detested the whole band

a dialectical process which, in retrospect, seems a transparent parody of plato's more serious argumentative style. in most of the platonic dialogues one feels that socrates is not "managing" the conversation towards an end that he has conceptualized before hand. but every twist and turn of the sophist is designed only to channel the conversation into providing a part of that final statement. the chimaera: but how would you have plato compose such a definition, save by a summary of the component arguments preceding it? the sphinx: i quarrel not with the final assembly process, but rather with the fashion in which the components themselves were forged. for, you see, there are many ways along which each of those component arguments could have proceeded. each, however, consistently follows a

ways along which each of those component arguments could have proceeded. each, however, consistently follows a path derogatory to the sophists. if the sophists were in fact personifications of all that is erroneous and destructive in teaching, all possible paths would lead to the same conclusion, i.e: one derogatory to the sophists. but this is not the case at all. see. he takes the book from the chimaera and turns to page #973: stranger: they cross-examine a man's words, when he thinks that he is saying something and is really saying nothing, and easily convict him of inconsistencies in his opinions; these they then collect by the dialectic process, and, placing them side by side, show that they contradict one another about the same things, in relation to the same things, and in the same

alogue should have proceeded in a different direction. i merely demonstrate that it would have been possible. this fact. that it is possible. testifies to the looseness of plato's logic in this instance. rather than refining the definition of the sophist by the careful elimination of inconsistent characteristics, plato simply ignores implications which do not support his preconceived notions. the chimaera: i'm beginning to see what you mean. the sphinx: there are other examples which i could take from the text. but i think this demonstration sufficient proof of the principle involved. the entire dialogue is not an attempt to understand what a sophist is. it is an attempt to denigrate sophists. as such it is of no value as an exercise in logic or in the true process of reduction. the chimae

that, viewed in isolation, the sophist is logically invalid; this we have just proven. seen against a larger background, however, it may indeed be significant. we attempt, like archimedes, to move a world. for a place to stand we have the existence of the sophist; for a lever we have its bias. the world need move only a little, and we who push against the lever may count ourselves satisfied. the chimaera: i follow you, but beware of unsubstantiated speculation. the sphinx: the proponent of a viewpoint who feels secure in his position will not find it necessary to attack the mere existence of opponents. he may point out the fallacies in their arguments in an effort to hasten their understanding of his "correct interpretation" but he will not see their "incorrect" views as a threat to the t

when one is uncertain of the invulnerability of one's own position. permitted to exist, competition might pose a mortal challenge. hence it must be destroyed without delay. such a preemptory strike is justified by the rationalization that, while one has glimpsed an ultimate truth, more time is needed to refine the ideas to a form which may be understood by those of lesser intellectual acumen. the chimaera: you are suggesting, then, that plato may not have felt secure in his philosophy. that he feared the axioms upon which he based his logic to be false? the sphinx: let us not say that he feared them to be false. it is enough to say that he may not have been completely certain of their truth. had he been, he would have ignored the sophists. the chimaera: why should plato have attacked the s

theorists. whether he considered the sophists as comprising only specific individuals or whether he considered sophism more broadly to be composed of all challengers to his own philosophy is an issue we cannot decide. if we are to look through plato's eyes via the sophist, we can establish only that the sophists were guilty of teaching according to methods too close to those of plato himself. the chimaera: you mean, i take it, by the process of cross-examination described by the stranger in the passage we considered earlier? the sphinx: precisely. i ask you to consider both the praise that the stranger accords the system itself and his unsubstantiated reluctance to credit that system to the sophists. history contains many examples pointing to the fact that the most dangerous threats are th

s. history contains many examples pointing to the fact that the most dangerous threats are those akin to the favored philosophy in all ways save one. which is considered to be crucial. wars have been fought simply because men were unable to agree upon one name for the same god, or, later, because they could not agree upon the same meanings for words such as "freedom "democracy" and "equality" the chimaera: only two wars that i recall strike me as having made any sense: the trojan war, which was fought for sex, and the carthaginian wars, which were fought for money. the sphinx: very funny. but to return to the issue at hand, we have the evidence of that passage in the sophist to substantiate this point. plato regarded the process of teaching through cross-examination to be a standard of exc

he sphinx: very funny. but to return to the issue at hand, we have the evidence of that passage in the sophist to substantiate this point. plato regarded the process of teaching through cross-examination to be a standard of excellence in itself. its use to teach anything other than pure philosophy, accordingly, would have been intolerable to him. hence his extraordinary anger at the sophists. the chimaera: but we do know more about the sophists than that. even if we limit our scope to the school of protagoras, we know that sophistic thinking disavowed absolute knowledge. despairing of attaining such knowledge, they regarded even its pursuit as worthless. so they taught a sort of relativistic pragmatism as the only sound basis for human affairs. hence protagoras' famous statement that man i

so they taught a sort of relativistic pragmatism as the only sound basis for human affairs. hence protagoras' famous statement that man is the measure of all things. the sphinx: that is right. and we know that plato was firmly opposed to this view. perhaps our most convincing evidence of this is the inscription above the entrance to his academy: let no one ignorant of mathematics enter here. the chimaera: i thought it was "geometry" the sphinx: unfortunately for purists it has been recorded both ways. but either serves to illustrate the point. plato saw in mathematics unshakable evidence that there was an absolute standard for the universe. and where one such standard existed, it was logical to assume that there were others. today humans regard mathematics principally as an applied scienc

point. plato saw in mathematics unshakable evidence that there was an absolute standard for the universe. and where one such standard existed, it was logical to assume that there were others. today humans regard mathematics principally as an applied science, but in plato's time it was considered by the pythagoreans to be "pure" having nothing to do with the gross and imperfect everyday world. the chimaera: i presume that plato would have been somewhat upset to learn of the theory of relativity, which is inconsistent with the notion that mathematics adhere to a fixed standard. but do i understand you to say that plato was a pythagorean? the sphinx: not in the sense that he had any connections with one of the pythagorean schools as such. he was born in athens in 427 bce, and he was a discipl

n the sense that he had any connections with one of the pythagorean schools as such. he was born in athens in 427 bce, and he was a disciple of socrates from 409 to 399. following socrates' execution in that year, plato traveled abroad, absorbing pythagorean doctrines in many of the greek cities located in italy and africa. it was not until 387 that he returned to athens to found his academy. the chimaera: that is interesting, but it does not constitute evidence that plato endorsed the views of the pythagoreans. the sphinx: no, and for that one must turn to the timaeus, wherein plato presents his concept of the universe. here he describes the five possible regular solids. that is, those with equivalent faces and with all lines and angles equal. four of those represented the four elements

anetary bodies move in exact circles (the perfect curve) along with the crystalline spheres (the perfect solid) holding them in place. all of these theories were originally pythagorean, as one may see from the writings of philolaus and other avowed pythagoreans. but we wander too far afield. let us return to plato's conviction that the universe was based upon absolute, not relative standards. the chimaera: i presume that the sophists did not consider mathematics as an invalidation of their relativism. the sphinx: whether the issue centered around mathematics or not is something we cannot know. we do know that the sophists considered whatever evidence plato offered insufficient to dislodge them from their position. from their point of view, the sophists were champions of logic. they based t

ew "common sense" conclusions. what so antagonized plato was not that they held different views than his concerning the primal forces of the universe. rather it was the intolerable insult. in plato's eyes. that they were not interested in that topic as a field for rational inquiry. plato must have felt somewhat akin to noah building his ark in the midst of an ignorant and unconcerned society. the chimaera: the noah legend is not in our myth-cycle, if you please. the sphinx: my apologies. the chimaera: and so plato wished to identify the primal forces of the universe. this resulted in his famous theory of the forms, if i am correct. but i sense a weak point here. plato was a finite being, and yet he desired to comprehend universal absolutes. as perfect standards they would necessarily be in

ith. plato, being a man of no mean intellect, was certainly aware of this. he feared that an intelligent sophist might see it as well and proceed to attack the foundations of his entire philosophy as illogical. and so, in the dialogues, he constructed a very elaborate defense of his concepts according, apparently, to the most rigorous standards of the cross-examination system of the sophists. the chimaera: statements like that are liable to get you into a great deal of trouble, i hope you know. the sphinx: only with those who underestimate plato and interpret this as a slur against him. quite the contrary, it is all the more indicative of his brilliance. the entire process of "logical reasoning" is ultimately circular. what humans loosely term "cause and effect" relationships are not reall

he color red and the color blue are distinct, or why the universe exists at all. yet every one of our senses tells us that these things are so, and if we, as descartes, deny the validity of our sensory input, we resign ourselves to insanity. plato's faith derives from no greater and no lesser observation than things are what they seem to be. once that consistency is granted, all else follows. the chimaera: if that is so, why should plato have gone through all the trouble to create the dialogues? merely as a blind for sophist critics who might have interfered with his academy or accused him personally of being irrational or illogical? the sphinx: again the explanation is not that simple. the dialogues may indeed have served as a blind for the sophists, inasmuch as they defend platonic princ

mple. the dialogues may indeed have served as a blind for the sophists, inasmuch as they defend platonic principles according, apparently, to sophistic logical criteria. but the dialogues would thus serve only a negative function, and that hardly seems to justify the obvious effort of their preparation. plato was first and foremost a teacher, and he would have designed the dialogues to teach. the chimaera: that appears to run afoul of your previous statement that faith and reason are mutually exclusive. if platonic students studied the dialogues only to become skilled at the sophistic argumentative procedures employed therein, they would complete the academy only as skilled sophists. the sphinx: we are at something of an impasse. i confess that i cannot resolve this evident inconsistency

s seek fresh counsel. quite suddenly there materializes a gryphon. the gryphon: the dilemma can be resolved, but it is so constructed that it defies resolution by sophistic logic. and that is precisely the trap into which the two of you have fallen. indeed the dialogues are there to teach, but the student must put forth the effort to see past the sophistic teachings to those of plato himself. the chimaera: but the argumentative pattern of the dialogues is sophistic, and any connection between sophistic logic and platonic faith cannot exist. do you think to pursue me? the gryphon: the key to plato rests in the meno. here. he turns to page #364: socrates: those who tell it are priests and priestesses of the sort who make it their business to be able to account for the functions which they pe

HP LOVECRAFT A DARK LORE

ams in the deep, and decay spreads over the tottering cities of men. a time will come- but i must not and cannot think! let me pray that, if i do not survive this manuscript, my executors may put caution before audacity and see that it meets no other eye. the dunwich horror by h. p. lovecraft written summer 1928 published april 1929 in weird tales, vol. 13, no. 4, 481-508. gorgons and hydras, and chimaeras- dire stories of celaeno and the harpies- may reproduce themselves in the brain of superstition- but they were there before. they are transcripts, types- the archtypes are in us, and eternal. how else should the recital of that which we know in a waking sense to be false come to affect us all? is it that we naturally conceive terror from such objects, considered in their capacity of bein

Return to Occult Library Index

http://www.hollywoodinsiders.net
MWLibCreator Ver.2 By:Michael Wynn