|
Correspondence from Karl Germer to Gerald Yorke
August 9, 1948.
Dear Yorke,
I'm writing you from my vacation spot. Thank you for your letters of July 12 and 27 with the copies of the part of the Ab Ul Diz working, Commentary to The Book of Lies. It is a pity that interesting Ab Ul Diz document is not complete and has many passages left open.
I shall be glad to get your copies of A.C.'s letters to you, and will file them properly when they are here. Thanks for sending the Yi King sticks, the pin and Egyptian statuette, and attending to the shipping. I also acknowledge receipt of the copies of Manifesto To Man, and the Simmons letter. I believe I have mailed you a copy of Astrology a week or so ago. In the rush of events I do not know for sure, and cannot check my files in N.Y. before the end of the week.
Now a word about the "Stélé of Revealing itself". I wrote you before that I cannot check on dates before I have got my Brussels files which seem to be on the way at last. However, I want to answer your question as well as I can.
I have stated repeatedly to several people in the past that in my opinion the crucial and fatal mistake made by all students of LL [Liber Legis], and the other Holy Books (in fact of any book given in similar ways), is to attempt to interpret the words or verses from the rational plane. I have argued this point with A.C. repeatedly. I told him among other things, that if Liber Legis (LXV, VII, etc.) were just to announce, describe or foretell, facts within the lifespan of those extant at the particular period, how come that it is presumed to give a Law for, say, the coming 2,000 years? In my view the author of Liber Legis was in a state of concentration utterly impossible for the normal mind to even imagine when he dictated the book. Fourth Dimension is perhaps a current word to apply.
I further think that one has to have a lucky moment, when one happens to approach a state of that type, that one is able to grasp the real sense of any particular verse; in other words, the real meaning can only be obtained by a sort of grace or illumination, or whatever the word is. No amount of study, intelligence, or hard work can supply the key: yet they seem to be the precondition. (I have followed the obtention of the "Comment" very closely; I have a number of very personal letters by A.C. on that event in Sept. or Oct. 1926 when it happened. Some day I will get them again. Only from the above considerations can the absurd text of that Comment be understood. Most people think it is one of A.C.'s practical jokes.)
For the above reasons I cannot answer your question in a way as I would like. Let me only say that the meaning of the verse has been obtained clearly, and A.C. since then—except perhaps in brief moments of self-doubt—applied himself to the instruction assiduously.
While at it I'll touch one other point: the usual reader of AL vel Legis, knowing about the man A.C. who is the only thing visible to him, identifies A.C. with the names given in AL, such as Prince Priest, the Beast, etc. Such reasoning, for instance, makes people like Stansfeld Jones [Charles Stansfeld Jones] write that "A.C." has not carried out the "one thing that he should have done to prove his work". It leads to innumerable misconceptions. In my view The Book of the Law is quietly, silently, more or less smoothly (according to the tools that are available and their amenability) being worked out—invisible to the outer. Its author does not give a hoot whether the rational critics sneer: they are but part of their silent design.
As far as A.C. goes, he was a magnificent tool of rare chances of combination. Still, he lacked a side. that was alien to his vision. Being a magician, he wanted by sheer force to bring the fire down to earth—or rational understanding. (He succeeded to an unheard-of degree. That is why the posterity is so important.) He had to see that there was a limit, and that certain things must remain on that "Fourth Dimension", and, though understood by the initiate, cannot be brought down to earth.
There are other verses of a cryptic nature that have been solved; some I know too. I believe that a great many remain for future initiates to "expound". If it were different, it would be a sorry book, considering the more than 20,000,000 geniuses that we have alone in this country, and the "quiz boys" who are so super clever.
After all, I am not a "magician" but a typical "German Mystic", and this side of nature has always been more normal to me; and the other, the conditions of the physical life on this planet, difficult to understand and to learn.
John Symonds puzzles me a little. Do you think his biography will be as good as it might have been? Possibly it will serve its needed purpose for the time being. I cannot imagine that he can grasp A.C.'s stature, his value for the English language, and the privilege that the British have for having him as a son.
I'll write separately about the printing of Liber Aleph and The Golden Twigs.
Sincerely yours,
Karl Germer
|