|
Correspondence from Aleister Crowley to Charles Stansfeld Jones
Collegium ad Spiritum Sanctum, Cefalů, Sicily.
July 18, 1921.
My beloved Son,
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
I have your letters and appointment dated, more or less, June 24. They make me very happy indeed. But there are points in your letter which make me a little uneasy about you. As a matter of fact, it is not so much myself as two other people here who feel this disturbance. I am not trying to shift the responsibility—I only mention the fact to show that I am not alone in my wool-gathering.
The root of this apprehension is that you may have incurred trouble by incompleteness with regard to the Abyss. There seems a tendency to interpret sacred writings in too personal a sense. I may mention "Abominable lonely one". That may refer to you but it also unquestionably referred to me. "Alastor—spirit of solitude"
I am taking up this matter rather fully because of certain possibilities in the future. As Frazer tells us, it was the old formula for the son to become his father's successor by overthrowing him. But this is the formula of Osiris; and it is the most fundamental point of the New Law to show that this process is due to misunderstanding. I need hardly emphasize that the Oedipus-complex is at the root of most psychological trouble. It should be the function of the New Aeon to free the world from the curse of Oedipus. I therefore think it of the utmost importance that you and I should be at pains to eliminate the minutest seed of antagonism.
I notice that in one paragraph you seem to expect me to interfere with you. Nothing is further from my mind.
I sent you my comment in the hope that you would take the trouble to let me have your own suggested additions to incorporate so as to make the thing as perfect as possible.
I am very pleased with your program and think you are quite right about the possibility of establishing the Law, especially with regard to education, but I think your optimism, about the Abyss in particular, quite unjustified. This seems to be caused by your own experience of taking heaven by force. My experience of old is confirmed by recent records that, even with the new Law, the difficulty is tremendous in practice.
In recent essays of my own I have overcome theoretical difficulties about the self in a most satisfactory way. I have no doubt in a course of a generation from the Universal acceptance of the Law, we shall be able to make things much easier, but at present it is not so. I enclose a letter written to-day to the British and American Consuls. Do you really imagine that these dirty Sicilian dogs are going to become free men and initiates? If so, I call your attention to the Book of the Law "The slaves shall serve." We are not aiming at Universal attainment; and any one who expects peace during the formula of Horus is not a Wandering Fool but an ordinary damn fool.
I wish you would tell me where it is written "There is no Law above Do what thou wilt." It seems to me that you mix up the planes in a very exalted way. The danger of your formula of reversal is very great. If you insist on applying it wrongly, the Zelator's "No" transcends the Neophyte's "Yes" but that does not make "No" the word of the Neophyte.
I wish you would accompany your letters by statements suited to my low intelligence, of the facts you wish to communicate. Am I right in surmising that (a) there was a particular manifestation of the Aurora Borealis, (b) that you are fucking Marie, (c) that she is menstruating cro[illegible], (d) that school teachers are a pruriently puzzled as they have always been?
I don't know what you mean by "the people expound the Law of Thelema in public gatherings etc." There are times when I wish you did not take so much after your mother, from whom it was always impossible to obtain a sensible statement, unless she had a particularly important lie to tell. When detected, she invariably explained that "No" was the polite equivalent of the vulgar "yes".
I also enclose a copy of a letter I have just written to Jacoby [Oliver Jacobi] about business. You might write to him yourself as to coming to some arrangement about making up sets of Equinoxes and as to whether you would consider lowering prices to mutual consent.
Things are going astoundingly well here except for the lack of ready money. Russell [C. F. Russell] told me that you had something to my credit before he left which should doubtless be increased by now. I wish you would send me whatever is available.
With regard to Part 3 of Bk. IV [Magick in Theory and Practice]—I have just been through it, and notice one or two important omissions which I shall repair shortly. I will send you the additional matter as soon as it is ready. In any case, I must read the proofs of the Book personally.
I had a long cable from Mudd [Norman Mudd] the other day. He is all right. You must not be surprised at delay in letters. I have not had any from him, though his cable was in answer to a request of mine.
Love is the Law, Love under Will.
Thy Sire,
The Beast 666.
P.S. I hope you will get in touch with Hanson [William Hanson], at least sufficiently to convince him that we can take over the publication sooner or later, so as to prevent him from destroying the sheets. I wrote him surrendering all rights in the number on condition that he issued it himself, but have not had an answer. This therefore need not [illegible] you either way.
I am sending you "One Star in Sight" which you might arrange to issue in pamphlet form.
There is an amazing number of bad spellings in your letter which I cannot understand at all. Please do not tell me that "spelling is defunct."
|