THE ARCANE ARCHIVE
	a cache of usenet and other text files pertaining to occult, mystical, and spiritual subjects.

To: alt.magick,alt.magick.tyagi,alt.magick.order
From: 333 
Subject: Re: OTO and AA Connections (Re: Statement by the Highest Authority of the A.'.A.'.)
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2001 08:50:32 GMT

50010704 VI! om Hail Satan!

333:
>>> ...numerous references to the AA as unofficially related to the (c)OTO
 
B Heidrick:
>> Exactly.  Not officially related or formally affiliated but considered 
>> friendly or at least worthy of external friendly relations.
>> 
>> That means neither OTO nor A.'.A.'. tells the other what to do 
>> internally.  The Crowley copyrights do complicate that.

sri catyananda :
> "Complicate" is a nice word! Why doesn't the (c)OTO let the Crowley
> copyrights go? Why not make a stab at being a truly mystical order
> instead of a publishing house? Do not the parallels to Scientology make
> you queasy?

is the objective to be "a mystical order", truly or no?
I suggest that an initiatic membership org needs no distinguishment
from a publishing house. in fact, the publishing house image may
be one that is being cultivated as *compared* with that of some
queer quasi-masonic left-over from a previous aeon.

quoting Hymenaeus Beta, from "Magical Link":
>>> a clear statement from the head of the O.T.O. that
>>> "a resigned O.T.O. officer" created "the Temple of Thelema,
>>> an occult group in Los Angeles" which "purports to act as a
>>> training group for the A.'.A.'.
>> 
>> And?   If you asked J.E. about that, would he countradict the remark 
>> you quote?  

nope. informal relationship between AA and OTO. Soror Meral is another
example of informal relationships. not only was she married to
Grady McMurtry (if memory serves), but she headed up 418 Lodge and
serves(d?) as the head of the AA lineage working out of the same region,
publishing "In The Continuum".

>> The occasion was a review of an OTO book that appeared on 
>> Amazon.com. That review apparently came from ToT and disputed the 
>> accuracy of a Crowley text in that book.  The topic of the text was .
>> the robe design of A.'.A.' grades.  The defense in the ML was to the 
>> accuracy of the published text.  The dispute from the review based on 
>> a tradition held in ToT and attributed to either Jane Wolfe or the 
>> assertion of being in A.'.A.'. by virture of descent from Jane Wolfe.  
>> The area of contest was literature, not dominion of an organization.

> Wait. Are you saying that the quote he gave about "the Temple of
> Thelema, an occult group in Los Angeles" which "purports to act as a
> training group for the A.'.A.'.was not accurate, that all that was under
> discussion was "the robe design of A.'.A.' grades"???? 

dunno what Brother Bill was saying, but I know that a number of OTO
members took the comments therein as being of FAR greater significance
to them and their involvement in OTO (because of the attitude given
by Hymenaeus Beta toward the concept of "lineages" -- i.e. he doesn't
approve of the idea because it implies competition rather than unique
org status -- compare his policies on the One True Oto).

>>> there has been an INFORMAL relationship between the
>>> two since Crowley and his cohorts created the A.'.A.'
>> 
>> Wrong.  Crowley set up A.'.A.'. to replace the Golden Dawn.  Crowley's 
>> OTO membership came years later.  Reuss insisted that A.'.A.'. and OTO 
>> have no functional connection of preferment or control.  Even in the 
>> 1920's Constitutions of the Order of Thelemites, short lived as it 
>> was, Crowley distinguished OTO from A.'.A.'. very cleanly.
>
> This is as i understood the history as well, from a non-OTO source close
> to Paul Foster Case, dating back many years now ... only she said it
> more bluntly: "After the Golden Dawn fell apart, Crowley came up with
> the A.'.A.'. to replace it, but that was miserable failure, so he joined
> the OTO and then tried to co-opt it, which proved a more successful
> gambit for him, especially in Great Britain and the USA." 

simultaneous membership and influence in one based on participation
in the other is an informal relationship. I see no data here which
contradicts me. Reuss's desires were not en toto carried out. there
were many OTO members, for example, who wanted nothing to do with
Crowley and his 'Thelema' ideas.

the fact that Crowley created the AA prior to his involvement in
OTO displays my ignorance of dates, but not of informal
relationships. when speaking of the Caliphate OTO and Crowley's
AA org, there is a well-known overlapping of membership which is
uncoincidentally influential upon one's position with respect to
each organization. this is made quite obvious in interacting with
many of those who admit of simultaneous involvement and whether
they expect there to be some influence based on dual-membership
(i.e. one may 'rise higher' in OTO based on AA involvement). as
lineages of the AA diversify, so also does the fragmentation of
OTO based on AA-loyalty become more likely).

333