|
Correspondence from Gerald Yorke to Charles Stansfeld Jones
17 June 1948
Dear Jones,
Your 12/6/48. My omission of the 93 formula on my letters is deliberate. Like you I am a Thelemite with qualifications, the qualifications however probably being different. I am not a Thelemite from the point of view of A.C., nor from the point of view of believing literally in the whole of Liber Legis. In order therefore not to mislead others, I omit the formula. It is a question of honesty. There is of course something in what you say. Having read chapter 7 of your book again I cannot resist the somewhat cheap quotation—cheap in my quoting it in this context—"Therefore let me mind my own business, cease to make any attempt to interfere with the will of another, and see what results."
In your 9/5/48 you wrote with regard to A.C.'s Diary of a Magus 19/7/18 to 21/9/18. "if I sent you the original would you have copies made for yourself and Germer [Karl Germer] and return original and an extra carbon for me?" I accepted rapturously, but your subsequent silence led me to fear that you had changed your mind, and I returned to the subject in every other letter. I gather now that your second thoughts are not to let me see this material. It is not for me either to evaluate or criticise your motives, but I should be dishonest if I did not register my extreme disappointment and violent disagreement with your decision, if it be your final decision. Yesterday, John [John Symonds] and I met Swinburne Clymer, head of the American Rosicrucian Foundation. He at once offered to send us for perusal and return the whole of his anti-Crowley file, which consists of all the anti-Crowley newspaper articles which have appeared in the States. He also described with much miscomprehension the incident when the old sinner put on the Gnostic Mass in front of the Masons and Rosicrucians of Detroit. Incidentally when I asked him if he knew the secret of the IX°, he said yes and his elaboration caused me much quiet amusement, if it had not been so tragic, but I did not think it was my business to enlighten him. Personally I think that the true stature of your "magical father" is revealed by his "nakedness", and that to clothe him with imaginative garments of glory is both false and qliphotic. The height of spiritual attainment reached, despite the personal defects which you and I deplored so intensely, is what is so interesting and important. We have no difficulty in getting material which throws light on the defects, indeed we already have almost more than we want on this aspect. It is in his own magical diaries that the true evidence of the heights reached can be found. Just to post this item could have no delaying effect on your constructive work, and this was your original suggestion. I would not have written at this length if your letter of June 12 had been a plain straightforward refusal.
Mudd's [Norman Mudd] letter to you is in hand and is very valuable in giving further details of A.C.'s quarrel with the authorities of Trinity College, Cambridge. I shall not in fact have it copies, but John is taking notes from it, and I will then return it to you.
The letters from Tränker [Heinrich Tränker] are most interesting to me, as they clear up some minor but important points in the history of the O.T.O. They show him in a most favourable light.
I could borrow, or raise by selling things, the fare to Vancouver, but am not prepared to do so. Many thanks however for the invitation.
Congratulations on solving riddle of II.76. I bet however that you keep it to yourself.
Your 11/6/48. How on earth you read "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" into the old Testament is beyond me. It looks to me like a typical wish phantasm.
Yours,
|