|
Correspondence from Kenneth Grant to Karl Germer
[EXTRACT]
[14 June 1955]
. . . Being, as I have said, unlettered in the 'science' of astrology and unskilled in its use I am, or course, unable to understand your first paragraph in its full sense but the rest of your letter is only too easy to understand. Were it not for the fact that I have a folder full of letters from you, each in their different way trying to destroy any endeavour on my part to do anything constructive in the magical field, I should have taken this one very bitterly. As I am not bitter by nature, however, the only reaction it creates within me is one of weariness and a sense of the sheer futility of ever gaining your assent in any matter I might undertake.
Several years ago when you used to write to me in this negative, destroying vein I felt deeply a sense of my inadequacy for the Great Work which I had, perhaps foolishly, entered upon. But now matters are somewhat different and I prefer to place faith in my own ideas rather than in your criticism of them. Whether rightly or wrongly I believe that I am sincere in my interpretation of the Master Therion's teachings, and also that I am peculiarly and generously equipped for the promulgation of those teachings, not in any parrot-like, dogmatic and literal fashion but in the truer sense of their spiritual and magical significance according to circumstances and my own constantly developing knowledge and understanding. You strike me, on the other hand, as placing a very limited construction upon these teachings, but that is your business, not mine. I am not going to seek refuge in terms like 'revelation' or 'illumination' or anything like that but I wish to point out that my interpretation of The Book of the Law, or any part of it, is my interpretation, and being such is as valid and as good as your own. Whatever you believe Isis to be or not to be makes no difference to me and I do not agree with your remarks about this matter any more than I do about any other matter dealt with in your letter. The time for argument is over. It will get us nowhere to go on wrangling over words like this. I feel I must speak out plainly and what I would say is this:
I am not going to alter anything in my Manifesto [Manifesto of the New Isis Lodge], nor in my Grade Papers, nor in my Rituals, nor in any Script Instructions, nor in my manner of instruction or of imparting the knowledge reposing in New Isis Lodge, just because you do not agree with it. I refuse to accept that I am "sailing under false pretences" and I challenge any man to test me magically or otherwise where these matters are concerned. If the educated man's reaction to the Manifesto any myself is laughter, then let him laugh; the more educated he is the more he can laugh; he can spend his life laughing so far as I am concerned. Further, and this is final, I challenge any one to the position of responsibility implied by the headship of the British Branch of the O.T.O. I have always said and I still say that I am perfectly willing to work under anyone you nominate if he is magically sound. You do not nominate anyone, you wait and wait and wait. My answer is you'll wait in vain.
In view of this and my steadfast refusal to alter my position one jot or tittle, you had better proceed issuing your encyclicals, decrees, mandates, or whatever the name for these things may be. But I warn you that I no longer believe in your Sovereignty and you will have to strike hard to stifle New Isis Lodge or to knock me off the throne of the British Branch of the O.T.O.
. . . I say all this, not in any acrimonious spirit, strange as it may seem, but because I feel it is time that we stopped beating about the bush as we have been doing for so many years now. Notwithstanding—and this is the irritating part of the whole matter—I do feel that deep down, that is on the truly magical level, we are in accord with each other. But you will not admit this, basing your refusal, or so it seems to me, on a certain astrological incompatibility in our charts that has so influenced and warped your mind that you cannot recognize a true brother and friend when you see one.
. . . One other point I would like to make. It is really none of my business and I trust you will forgive my taking the liberty of putting it into words, but I say it because I feel it very deeply and I feel the tragedy of it very strongly at the moment. You are, I believe, in the unfortunate position of being basically (i.e. spiritually) in complete accord with Thelema and yet mentally just the reverse, for your mentality resumes all the Old Aeon fallacies with particular force. (Vide your so-called 'educated' man: the vaguest knowledge of history will convince anyone that education as you use the term plays no part whatever in spiritual or 'occult' matters. What, in fact, is educated?—only the conscious mind. In Magick the conscious mind, as you well know, plays so small a part as to be practically negligible; it is the atavistic, subconscious mind that supplies the violent impetus necessary to inaugurate a magical current, even as it is the pure Consciousness free from the conscious thinking principle that breathes the rarified air of sainthood and spiritual purity.)
Because of this fact and because you occupy a very powerful position in the Order—being its nominal head—you are doing more to cripple the cause of Thelema than any of its detractors could possibly do, Your relations with Grosche [Eugen Grosche] are typical: Lekve [Friedrich Lekve] and probably Peterson have also taken you seriously. There never was a better man than Lekve from our point of view and yet his letters to me about your treatment of him are pitiable in the extreme. Well, you will find me a harder nut to crack as I do not mean to lay down my magical right so easily. I have used the term 'nominal head' of the Order, above, for I believe that even as Reuss [Theodor Reuss] was said to have been peculiarly indiscriminate in his manner of dispensing charters and authorities (or so A.C. had written) so was A.C. in great error when he constituted you as the O.H.O. [Outer Head of the Order]. I do not say that I am right but this is what I believe to be the case; nor do I say or suggest that I would have been the man for the job—this is clearly absurd, I was but 21 at the time, or thereabouts—but what I do say is this: That as far as the British Branch of the Order goes there will never be a more sincere man even if there arises a more competent man than myself. And because I believe this to be the case I shall occupy that position until I am fairly ousted or until you realize that I am made for the job, when I shall continue to occupy it on a friendly and brotherly footing with you—a thing I have always dreamed of doing, anyway.
|