Correspondence from Aleister Crowley to the Occult Review
[Undated: circa March 1911]
To the Editor of the Occult Review.
Dear Sir,—I hope I am not presumptuous in taking Mr. Wilmshurst's article as an attack upon myself, as I am the person chiefly responsible for popularizing the connection between the ideas of ecstasy and magic, and as Mr. Waite's [Arthur Edward Waite] book, on which this article purports to be a comment, has nothing to do with the former.
I am bound to remark that this type of attack is not original. In Devil-Worship in France, for example, Mr. Waite wished to refute attacks upon Freemasonry. But instead of confining himself to serious authors, he dragged a penny dreadful from the Paris gutter and in several hundred scholarly pages proved that its statements were improbable.
Now Mr. Wilmshurst ought to know that by ceremonial magic no educated man can mean the grimoires, which circulated only among the most benighted peasants in the darkness of the darkest age of history.
By ceremonial magic one means
rituals, of which the Mass is the most popular surviving
example; rituals of worship and will working through
symbolic methods, rituals to which selfishness or impurity
are absolutely foreign.
But I am well content to be attacked by any one who can dismiss the attainment of the Buddha as "contraband illuminism" and who implies in every phrase that he and Mr. Waite are the only persons in possession of truth and light. I had supposed that spiritual pride pushed to this pitch was the peculiar property of the exclusive Plymouth Brethren.
A friend of mine was recently interred at Woking. He has promised me to communicate his experiences of heaven, and the following is an extract from his second letter:—
Mr. Wilmshurst may then be confident that the Father of all will be attentive to his smallest necessities.
Your obedient servant,
ALEISTER CROWLEY.
124, Victoria Street, S.W. |