#Modern Thelema

[hadit93]

Some Thoughts on the Future of Thelemic Magick

It is my opinion that the Thelemic movement has been largely stagnant in terms of growth and development since the death of Aleister Crowley in 1947. This is not to say there have been no developments or innovative thinkers at all, simply that the majority do not question the documents Crowley penned and believe or ignore any other developments in occultism, magick, and academia.

One thing which needs to be adapted in the new aeon is the training of the order of AA. The guidelines were written over 100 years ago and were largely based on the Golden Dawn system and some rudimentary understanding of raja yoga. The fact is we know much more about both of these systems and understand much more about magical systems in general. People focus too much on the specific practices rather than the experiences these practices are meant to bring about. Not everyone will be able to use the original AA instructions and make them work, there are other methods and what matters is the experience gained rather than the work needed to get there.

Another thing I believe needs to go is the hierarchical system of magical orders. Every man and every woman is a star, the law is for all. There are no magical secrets anymore, and quite frankly those who are ill prepared to use certain techniques will not get very far to begin with. There is no need for pompous titles and secret handshakes. Kill it with fire.

I also believe utilising the tree of life as a structure for initiation is problematic. It just doesn't work in my opinion and is an idea developed by the Golden Dawn that needn't continue on into the modern day. People need to track their development, yes. But do people really need to be stuck in the relator grade because they can't hold an asana without moving for an hour? It makes for a pointless exercise. I believe everyone should try to master an asana, but why assign this to one grade? Especially when the elemental initiations were scrapped by Crowley?

I believe Jerry Cornelius was the first to propose a three grade system based on Liber Legis: The Man of Earth, The Lover, and the Hermit. He mapped these roughly to Neophyte, Adept, and Magister Templi. That is the first work is to prepare the temple for the Angel, to analyse the Self and master the Self. This is the work of the man of Earth- to become a stable foundation. The work of the lover is to attain knowledge and conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel which in the Thelemic system (as opposed to the Abramelin system from where the term comes) means achieving samadhi and a connection to the interface with the God head. The work of the hermit is to cross the abyss which I will not speak on because I have no real experience of this.

Crowley recognised that people needed to find their own ways to these goals very early on. In fact a lot of the time people did not go through the AA grades officially. They had an experience and Crowley recognised this as appropriate for a specific grade. Not everyone is going to forge a link to the angel with ritual, for some it will be devotional work and yoga, for others they want to invoke beings and have all the visuals, and others will find prayer to be a valuable tool. The AA has instructions in all of these, but to assume you need to master all of them is a false assumption and just makes life hard.

Something else that needs to be addressed is the people who have blinders on when it comes to developments in magick after Crowley. For example, his instructions on Astral projection are not great, they require further instruction and we have so many more tools at our disposal now that makes the whole process easier. Not to mention lucid dreaming research which can make entry into the astral during sleep easier and allow for the same during waking hours. There are countless books published by mystics and psychologists alike. Why not use them?

In terms of evocation we know Crowley's Goetia is the worst edition, and it wasn't even Crowleys (but that's another story)! We now know the roots of such practices and we hopefully have grown past the idea that chthonic spirits are evil and dirty. We have hopefully gone past the notion that all things must be, or even can be, banished before a magical working takes place. 

We must be past the idea that Crowley had mastered the Golden Dawn system, he had not. Crowley was also not really a practicing magician for the majority of his magical career. As soon as he found sex magick, that was his focus. Therefore whilst he was certainly knowledgeable, he was not the authority on the Golden Dawn system and modern adepts of that system should certainly be listened to as they have the benefit of receiving decades worth of teachings and information from people who actually practiced the system consistently for most of their lives.

Finally, and most importantly, we surely do not believe Crowley is the only prophet of the new age? The only magician who receives communications? The only one worth listening to? We must get past this, the point of magic is to establish communication with spiritual forces, why would the words of Crowley be placed on a pedestal above all others? I am not showing disrespect for Liber Legis or any of the other so-called 'holy books' but I also do not treat them like sacred scripture. I think it is ridiculous alongside any religious aspect applied to Thelema. Crowleyanity is an abomination.

I do not believe the time for instruction is over, I do believe magical orders are on the decline and this is because of their own stagnation. I believe the student-teacher relationship to be necessary not only to the student but also to the teacher. They keep each other aware of their own bullshit. They also question each other, challenge each other, and ultimately help each other to grow. This being said, I believe such relationships should come about naturally as opposed to being manufactured by the pairing up of individuals at random via an email list.

In short, I believe Thelema needs to change and in particular the orders of Thelema need to change quickly because they will cease to exist. Once they cease to exist Thelema will also decline and will be gone by the end of the current century. This would be a shame as many of the modern magical movements are drenched in Thelema, but Thelema at its core is a beautiful mystical philosophy that can inform an individual of their own sovereignty and their own course amongst the stars.

[apoloadonisandnarcissus]

“Nosferatu is a demon lover story”: what’s the deal with Ellen and Orlok in the 2024 adaptation?

“Robert Eggers wants you to see his Nosferatu as both a lover and a biter”: source.

But what demon(s) are we talking about here, exactly? How and why are Ellen and Orlok connected? What’s the demonic love story Eggers is talking about? And where is this “love” we keep earring about?

These figures are not straight-out mentioned in the film itself, but there are several clues towards their identities. There’s a lot of hidden occult meaning in this film, like is customary in horror movies, especially in Dracula and Nosferatu (the unauthorized version of Dracula) adaptations.

How many references there are to Aleister Crowley Thelema and to Enochian Magic in “Nosferatu” (2024)? A lot! Because many of these were already in the 1922 original, but in a different way.

Things to keep in mind to understand this story:

This script is esoteric-coded: every word and expression has an hidden meaning;

This is a masterclass in how to write occult stories; with hidden messages only recognized by the “initiated” or those like me who have intelectual and academic interest in these topics (I’m a Art History PdH student, and many would be surprised with the insane amount of occult messages in Modern Art, including cinema).

Robert Eggers’ “Nosferatu” is the story of a manifestation of Babalon (Ellen) and the Beast, the earthly incarnation of Chaos (Orlok), her spiritual consort. Mainstream Western societies know her by another name: the Whore of Babylon. Crowley called her earthly manifestation “Scarlet Woman”, and she’s seen as a divine feminine entity by occultists, who have re-interpreted her in a more empowering and positive light than biblical text.

I already discussed this in other post, alongside with Isis/Ellen and Osiris/Orlok, but will explore it further here. I recommend reading that first to understand what I’m talking about here.

We need to start with “Book of Revelations” from the Christian Bible because that’s the base for Thelemic and Enochian traditions present in the 2024 adaptation of “Nosferatu”:

Book of Revelations (Apocalypse)

“And I stood upon the sand of the sea. And I saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.”

Revelations 13:1

This passage is present in the actual film; when Friedrich Harding “expels” Thomas and Ellen, and they are returning home. One man on the street is paraphrasing this passage from “Revelations”, foreshadowing Orlok’s arrival to Wisburg (beast rise up from the sea). This is very straightforward. No doubts here.

In the same biblical text, there’s the story of the woman who rides this beast; Revelations 17:

“One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, “Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters. With her the kings of the earth committed adultery, and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries.”

Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple [lilacs] and scarlet [blood], and was glittering with gold [sunlight] precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. The name written on her forehead was a mystery:

Babylon the great, the mother of prostitutes, and of the abominations of the earth.

“Seven heads” = heptagram, the seven-pointed star (Orlok and Babalon sigils)

“Ten horns” = ten lilac flowers

“Golden cup” = considered the “Holy Grail” = womb

“Filled with abominable things” = sex with undead Orlok (necrophilia)

“and the filth of her adulteries” = adulterous sex (she’s married to Thomas before God, and in Christian tradition this can’t be dissolved)

I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus. When I saw her, I was greatly astonished. Then the angel said to me: “Why are you astonished? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and ten horns.

The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the Abyss and go to its destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because it once was, now is not, and yet will come.

“This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while. The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction.

[…]

“Then the angel said to me, “The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages. The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to hand over to the beast their royal authority, until God’s words are fulfilled. The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth.”

This is the Christian interpretation of the “Whore of Babylon” and her Beast. And I already saw others picking up on this on social media, but with this line of interpretation, which isn’t what Robert Eggers was going for; he’s following the occultist interpretation.

Enochian tradition and Crowley’s occult system Thelema have a very different interpretation of this tale.

The Holy Whore, The Great Mother

“She [Babalon] rides astride the Beast; in her left hand she holds the reins, representing the passion which unites them. In her right she holds aloft the cup, the Holy Grail aflame with love and death. In this cup are mingled the elements of the sacrament of the Aeon”.

Aleister Crowley, “The Book of Thoth”

“Her cup” = womb

“Aflame” = sexual climax; orgasm

“With love and death” = her love for undead Orlok (Death)

Babalon is a complex and mysterious figure, associated with several Goddesses and deities (Nuit, Isis, Kali, Lilith, etc.). She embodies several archetypes: the Divine Feminine; the Great Mother, the Succubus, the Initiatrix, the Holy Whore (or Divine Harlot), the Womb, the Great Sea and the Divine Blood itself. She’s more than liberated female sexuality and lust (“Holy Whore” because she enjoys sex without the burden of reproduction), she’s Mother Earth itself, a creative and destructive force. She’s the “mother of abominations” associated with natural calamities (catastrophes like earthquakes and hurricanes, plagues, etc.). She’s both good and evil, divine and diabolical. Crowley called her earthy manifestation “Scarlet Woman” and the Holy Grail (womb) is her symbol. She’s worshipped throughout the spectrum of Occultism and Mysticism: Thelemics, Hermetics, Kabbalists, Satanists, etc.

“I shall persist to join you every night, first in sleep, then in your arms. Everything will be mixed with abomination, and you’ll be knee-deep in blood. Everyone will cry. There will be none to bury the dead. You are promised to me.”

Is Ellen “promised” and “fated” to Orlok because of the oath she made to him in the prologue of the film? Or because he tricked Thomas into signing a dissolution of his marriage to Ellen?

“You are not for the living. You are not for human kind. You shall be one with me ever-eternally. Do you swear it?” “I swear.”

Not quite. Because Fate is a huge theme in this story: “destiny” and “providence” are mentioned throughout the film, by Ellen, Herr Knock and Von Franz several times. “I fear my destiny.” Ellen says to Von Franz.

“Your passion is bound to me.”

To understand what Orlok is talking about, we need to go to Enochian tradition, and to the writings of John Dee and Edward Kelly. In 1587, they supposedly underwent a serie of magical workings and made contact with a female spirit, who gave them a vision, which is the first historical mention of “Babalon” (“wicked” in Enochian language):

“I am the daughter of Fortitude, and ravished every hour from my youth. For behold I am Understanding and science dwelleth in me; and the heavens oppress me. They cover and desire me with infinite appetite; for none that are earthly have embraced me, for I am shadowed with the Circle of the Stars and covered with the morning clouds. My feet are swifter than the winds, and my hands are sweeter than the morning dew. My garments are from the beginning, and my dwelling place is in myself. The Lion knoweth not where I walk, neither do the beast of the fields understand me. I am deflowered, yet a virgin; I sanctify and am not sanctified.”

Ellen's psychosexual connection to Orlok in her teenage years described to a T.

“I am an appetite, nothing more.” Orlok says. In the 2016 script, he asked Ellen: “Submit to complete abandon. Submit to yourself, to your power […] I hunger for you. Unite with me in the abyss.” Then he chants a passage from the Enochian Keys. “I cannot be sated without you.”

"A maiden's token I see. Your bride? [...] Liliac. [...] You are fortunate in your love." "Give me her heart, she is mine" metaphorical exchange.

This is an idea that was cooking in Robert Eggers’ mind for some time. We can’t forget this remake of “Nosferatu” was his dream project, and something he always wanted to make. He wanted to get it done after “The Witch” (2015), but it was not possible. So we are talking about a story with a wild amount of research and thought put into it.

In the 2016 script, it’s Herr Knock who “awakes” Orlok via a summoning ritual in the prologue. Orlok takes an interest in Ellen right away (almost unexplainably so), as she has a vision of her marriage to Death on her actual wedding to Thomas. He justifies his interest in her when they meet face-to-face: “I have sought a creature from the depths. A Eve that remembers her Eden. You are such one.” A possible reference to Lilith (also associated with Babalon).

In the 2023 script and in the actual film, it’s Ellen herself who awakes Orlok with her summoning prayer, in the prologue, as well.

They went on to develop a spiritual connection that ends up with sexual astral activity between them. It all ends when she meets and marries Thomas, and if we forget the Female Gothic themes, and focus on the spiritual, it’s probably because she makes an oath before God? Marriage is a holy sacrament. And that’s why she says to Thomas their love was supposed to be sacred?

This provides a better explanation for Orlok interest in her (an atual backstory) and also more fitting with Babalon’s “mother of abominations” and destructive/apocalyptic energy. She’s the one who unleashes Orlok and his blood plague onto the world.

“I have brought this evil upon us.” “His pull on me is so terrible, so strong - yet my spirit cannot be as evil as his.” “I need no salvation. My entire life I have done no ill but heed my nature.”

Is Ellen “evil”? It depends how we interpret it. In Christian religion? Yes. In Thelemic belief, no, because there’s no good nor evil. In Satanism, she’s considered good. So take your pick, here.

We have no detailed backstory on human Count Orlok, really. Other than him being a Hungarian or Romanian nobleman from the 16th century, and one of the Solomonari (from Romanian folklore), a dark wizard, student of the Devil, who rode dragons and controlled the weather, who sought to conquer immortality. We don’t know if he’s suppose to be Vlad III (“Vlad the Impaler”, the infamous “Dracula”) or not because there’s no indication of this in the story.

According to the abbess who tended to Thomas, the Devil kept Orlok’s soul so his corpse might walk again in blasphemy, as a vampire and a “plague carrier”. However, according to Orlok himself, he has been dead for centuries until Ellen, the “enchantress”, awake him from his grave. So, indeed, it was not the Devil who awoke him. What these characters know about Count Orlok are legends and superstitions, really.

O’er [for] centuries, a loathsome beast I lay within the darkest pit, ‘til you did wake me, enchantress, and stirred me from my grave. You are my affliction.

Orlok “search” for a “Eve that remembers her Eden” in the 2016 script (because little was changed in the final result), has me wondering about human Orlok and his magic practices in life (beside the immortality ordeal). Can this un-dead warlock be a nod/reference to Aleister Crowley? He lived obsessed in conjuring Babalon (a ancient and primeval female force) into being. Was this also one of Orlok’s aspirations and why he became so obsessed with Ellen right away, and why they are connected from the start? Because in the prologue, there’s an immediate recognition between them.

And if Ellen is a manifestation of Babalon, was she the one who “made” Orlok into a vampire when she awoke him from his grave? You know, as in “mother of abominations”. This would certainly explain why he calls her “his affliction” and how she can summon him at will (“I bid you, come to me”). Sure, he probably sold his soul to the Devil in exchange for immortality but he was literally dead in a stone sarcophagus. The guy clearly died in the 16th century (his clothes, etc.). And it’s Babalon who rides the beast.

In the 2016 script, Orlok asks Ellen: “Unite with me in the abyss”’ and he compels her to surrender to her own power. The “abyss” is also mentioned in “Revelations 17” as the place where the Beast dwells. In Thelemic tradition, the “abyss” is a metaphysical realm, a void separating the material world from the Divine. Apparently this is where Orlok’s soul was before being resurrected (“darkest pit”). Which lead us back to Aleister Crowley beliefs (who personally identified with the Beast), because he claimed to have crossed the Abyss and battled with its guardian demon, to known Babalon’s embrace.

As I talked about in my original post about Occult references in Ellen’s character in the 2024 adaptation, we see a lot of Babalon/Scarlet Woman elements in her narrative: her “hysterical fits” mirror the ritualistic trances of the “Scarlet Woman” (womb and sexual female energy empower her magic); she walks between the physical and the spiritual worlds, her connection with both “love” and “death”, she’s compared to supernatural creatures (“changeling girl”, “sylph”) and called a priestess of a Divine Feminine Goddess (Isis).

Orlok himself is described as a “beast” several times in the film; both by himself (loathsome beast), and Von Franz, who also mentions Ellen’s “dark bond with the beast”. He even growls and moves like a literal beast. To Crowley, the “Scarlett Woman” and “the Great Beast” are also titles in ritualistic Sex Magick; the “Scarlet Woman” is the High Priestess, and the “Beast” is the Hierophant. Which also fits Ellen (the priestess) and Orlok (warlock, black sorcerer) in “Nosferatu” (2024).

Ellen is also the one who can stop Orlok, according to Von Franz and the entire story. Why? Because it’s Babalon female energy that keeps the male Beast in check, in Thelemic occult tradition. They are complementary energies; creation/destruction; order/chaos; life/death; and so on. Babalon is the one who unleashes the Beast, who controls him and who tames him, like Ellen does with Orlok in the 2024 “Nosferatu” adaptation.

Why are Ellen and Orlok “fated”?

Because the “Great Beast” is destined for spiritual union with the “Great Whore” Babalon. The “Beast” is the consort of Babalon, per Thelemic occult tradition, established in 1904 in “The Book of Law” by Aleister Crowley. Which is why Orlok tells Ellen her passion is bound to him, as Babalon’s love is united with the Beast. Ellen’s destiny is being spiritually united with Orlok, hence why she’s meant for Death (“You are not for the living.”), and why she was so happy marrying Death in her prophetic dream.

“You run in vain! You cannot out-run your destiny!” Von Franz laughs in religious fervor as Thomas tries to save Ellen (I’ll talk about Thomas’ role in all of this shortly).

“Soon I will be no more a shadow to you. Your spirit was never enough. Soon our flesh shall embrace and we shall be as one.”

Babalon and the Beast represent the Mysteries of Polarity, Sex, and “Otherness”. In Thelemic tradition, the “mysteries of sex” = “mysteries of death”. Robert Eggers has said the themes of “sex and death” are central to his adaptation of “Nosferatu”, hence the “Death and the Maiden” motif at the end. So there’s that, too.

“Tonight you denied yourself.” Orlok tells Ellen when they meet face-to-face for the first time. And he gives her three nights for her to, essentially, accept her own nature, a nature she denies (“you deceive yourself”). We have all of these occult themes underneath a vampire horror story, but they are still there.

What’s Orlok purpose? What does “surrender to the darkness” means?

He’s the Beast, after all. He wants to be joined with the earthly manifestation of Babalon, Ellen, who’s his spiritual consort. Which also fits the theme of “bride of Dracula” from Bram Stoker’s story. He wants Ellen to accept her real nature.

From a occultist point of view, the point of Orlok and Ellen’s final scene is not him sucking her blood, nor her apparent superficial sacrifice to save her town (a town who hates her and never accepted her and upon which she unleashed this beast and his blood pague as punishment) It’s about them having sex, their bodily and spiritual union. This is Sex Magick bordelining on Tantric sex.

Ellen (earthy manifestation of Babalon) has sex with Orlok (earthly manifestation of the Great Beast) and she has a powerful orgasm (“her cup […] aflame with love and death”). As Crowley wrote: “in this cup are mingled the elements of the sacrament of the Aeon”. “Aeon” is like a spiritual age. It’s Babalon ecstasy when she has sex with the Beast that manifests the beginning of a new age for mankind, according to Thelemic tradition.

“He is coming” has a whole different meaning now, does it? This walking corpse really traveled miles to have sex with this woman and birth a new age.

And that’s why the sun (Egyptian God Horus) is the end result of Ellen and Orlok’s union. Crowley believed the “Aeon of Horus” (collective) would succeed the “Aeon of Osiris” (religion). The “Aeon of Horus” is the same as the “Age of Aquarius” for “New Age” believers; where mankind will be closer to harmony, egalitarianism, and understanding. Eggers took a 1922 story and gave it an entirely new meaning.

Both Ellen and Orlok make the ultimate blood sacrifice to complete their covenant (by physically dying), because this is a demonic love story, after all. Where did their spirits go? No idea. There’s many theories about the true identity of the “Great Beast”, with some saying it’s the Devil himself. Did they go to the “abyss”, “Hell”, “Underworld”? Probably.

Dove/Serpent and Love

Ellen: “You cannot love.” Orlok: “I cannot. Yet, I cannot be sated without you. Remember how once we were? A moment. Remember?” Ellen: “I abhor you.” Orlok: “You are false! [...] Tonight you denied yourself.”

Many didn’t see any “love” between Ellen and Orlok in this adaptation, but we, once again, have to return to Aleister Crowley Thelema:

“Love is the law, love under will. Nor let the fools mistake love; for there are love and love. There is the dove, and there is the serpent. Choose ye well!" Aleister Crowley, “Book of the Law”

There are several interpretations of what this actually means, but Robert Eggers appears to be going by the Ophidian Thelema interpretation in his adaptation of “Nosferatu”, so that’s what I’m going to be talking about here. 

“There is the dove, and there is the serpent.”

“He is Infinity… Eyes shining like a jewelled diadem. Putrescence. Asphyxience. Devourance. […] He shall cast upon you curses, confusion, affliction and rebuke.” (Pigeons and doves are from the same family bird)

Herr Knock eats the head of the pigeon/dove in a very graphic way in the film, killing it. Dr. Sievers asks him why he does this. There's no verbal explanation. The occult explanation it's him not choosing the "dove" in this Thelemic dichotomy of dove/serpent ("choose ye well!").

The “Dove” is religion and its worship. Crowley saw the "law of the dove” as repressed Christian love: pure and divine. It’s blind and obedient love, taught in religious circles, but also peaceful and harmonious, like the “Holy Spirit”. It’s brotherly love, as well. This is what Herr Knock rejects, and what Ellen has with Thomas and Anna.

“You mustn’t leave, I love you too much!” "My heart is lost without my Thomas." “From our love, I became as normal.” “I love Thomas.” “Our love was supposed to be sacred.” “Let him see. Let him see our love!” 

Thomas and Ellen share pure and Christian love, sanctified by marriage, as they made a holy oath before God (sacrament).

She tries to be the obedient wife (as Anna is to Friedrich), but her passionate nature sometimes betrays her: "The honeymoon was yet too short! Take off your shoes." Friedrich Harding jokes she doesn't want Thomas to be leave because "her dashing young husband is leaving her bedside cold". and calls her nature "ardent". She wants passionate and hungry love: Thomas' pecks and small kisses are not enough for her (as we see in the 2023 script). He also dismisses her worries as "fancies" and part of her medical condition ("melacholia"), and she promises to be "good" for him.

"Leni, your words spring from your honest heart." “I love her. She’s blameless of her malady.” "Our friendship is a precious balm to my heart." / "Thank you for loving me.” 

Anna and Ellen share sisterly love, and while Anna tries to be supportive of Ellen, again, her nature sometimes puzzles the God-fearing Anna, even thought she dismisses it as part of her “condition” like Thomas does: “My sweet romantic” or “Leni, please. For the sake of the children – Christmastide is upon us. Why must you remain so exasperatingly contrary?!”

Like Herr Knock literally kills the pigeon/dove, this is the “love” Orlok means to kill in Ellen's life, as well: “Love is inferior to you.” and “Tonight you denied yourself, and thereby you suffer me to vanish up the lives of those you love.”

The “Serpent” is Spirit with its devotion, wisdom and delight. While the “Dove” descends; the “Serpent” rises. It's the fire from below, kundalini (divine feminine energy from Hindu tantrism) ascending to reach the higher planes, it's Eros, it's lust: erotic sexual love. It’s physical and animalistic expression of love. It’s sexual ecstasy, passionate and hungry love. It’s spiritual and transformative love, the circle of life and death, and rebirth (immortality).

Ellen: I have felt you like a serpent crawling in my body. Orlok: It is not me. It is your nature.

"My vocation is the Serpent", says Babalon. Which explains why Orlok says "love" (as in "law of the dove") is inferior to Ellen. This is the love Ellen and Orlok share, it's beastly, sexual and ravishing love. As she tells Thomas: "You could never please me as he [Orlok] could."

But this side of Ellen is not accepted by Christian society and religion (as we see with every character in the film, aside from Von Franz and Orlok), and causes her deep and great shame. And to understand this, we need to understand the historical context where this story takes place: the Victorian era, where women weren't supposed have sexual desire (even within marriage it should be modest and contain).

“There is something I must tell you. Something so loathsome, so base. […] He is my shame! He is my melancholy! He took me as his lover then, and now he has come back. He discovered our marriage and has come back!”

In Thelemic tradition, the Beast will be harsh once he arrives (duh?), as we see Orlok forcing Ellen to accept her own nature, which is also a part of Thelemic tradition, by the way.

But “love”, according to Crowley, is “harsh” as well, as he defines it as “love may best be defined as the passion of Hatred inflamed to the point of madness, when it takes refuge in Self-destruction.” Which explains why Ellen says she abhors (hates) Orlok: what they had was so intense and passionate “it turned to torture, it would kill me” (self-destruction) as she confesses to Thomas. 

Also, the fact, like she reveals to Von Franz, that her father caught her naked and chastised her as a "sinner" and it’s implied he institutionalized her (in an asylum or something), probably adds to the mix of her seemly hatred for him, since this is a clear reference to masturbation. "I'm unclean!" Ellen cries out.

Orlok cannot love as in the "law of dove", he loves as in the "law of serpent" (I cannot be sated without you). Ellen, as a manifestation of Babalon, loves both ways, because the Dove (Thomas and Anna) is love, and the Serpent (Orlok) is love. At the end, she reconciles with that fact, spiritually.

Orlok: “Do you accept this, of your own will?” Ellen: “I do.” Orlok: “Then the covenant is fulfilled. Your oath re-pledged.” Ellen: “Yes.” Orlok: “As our spirits are one, so too shall be our flesh. You are mine.”

In Thelemic tradition, every action of the Beast is performed out of love under will, because "love is the law", and "do what thou will shall be the whole of the Law".

What does this mean?

“Thelema” literally means “will”, and establishes every person has their own unique, individual and autonomous will. Each individual has the right and responsibility to find out their purpose, and to achieve it. Which explains why Orlok says the compact commands Ellen must willingly re-pledge her vow. “She cannot be stolen.” 

The ordeal of Thomas with the gold and Orlok doesn’t mean anything really, it’s a red herring in the narrative. First, because Thomas and Ellen are married, which is a holy sacrament, and the reason why more fervorous Christians don’t believe in divorce it’s because this sacrament can’t be dissolved, unless by a crime against God.  Adulterous sex with an undead vampire will probably do it.

By Thelemic tradition, Orlok forces Ellen to accept her destiny, as a earthly manifestation of Babalon, fulfilling his own role as the Beast. He removes Ellen's mask and exposes her true nature, and he does this out of love, because love is active and is how one discovers their purpose. Which is why Von Franz speaks about how the “maiden gave her love to the beast” and “redeemed them all”. 

[astra-ravana]

The Faerie Star

The seven-pointed star or Faerie Star is an emerging symbol in contemporary magick. It is most often used to represent the worlds of Faerie. It can be displayed as a protective shield, a powerful talisman, a focal point for meditation, or a symbol of the Shining Realms.

The seven-pointed star is called a septagram, septegram, or heptagram. This glyph has had mystical associations for centuries, probably longer, since the number seven is important in many spiritual traditions around the world.

Medieval alchemists used the seven-pointed star to stand for the seven alchemical metals and their corresponding planets. But it can also stand for the seven colors, the seven days of the week, the seven musical notes, the Seven Sisters (Pleiades), the seven chakras, or any of the many sacred things that come in groups of seven. In Hermetic Qabalah, the septagram can represent the sphere of Netzach and the corresponding planet of Venus. Aleister Crowley also chose a septagram as the Seal of Babylon, the Great Mother and Sacred Whore of Thelema.

The septagram, because it has an odd number of points, can be traced in a continuous line. Its unbroken form helps give the star its identity as a symbol of eternity.

The Faerie Star is most often shown as a continuous figure with elongated points. No one can really say how or when the motif became incorporated into modern Paganism, but it is now a common sight in books, on jewelry, and on altar tools. Many practitioners use the Faerie Star instead of, or in addition to, the familiar five-pointed pentagram. Some say that the seven-pointed star reflects planetary (celestial) magick, while the pentagram encompasses magick of the elements and the earth.

[talonabraxas]

“Oh, how superior is the Eye of Horus to the Mouth of Isis!” — Aleister Crowley

Aeon of Horus Talon Abraxas

The modern Aeon of Horus, with our times of self-realization as well as a growing interest in all things spiritual, is considered to be dominated by the Principle of the Child. The Word of its Law is Thelema (will) which is complimented by Agape (love), and its formula is Abrahadabra. Individuality and finding the "True Will" are the dominant aspects; its formula is that of growth, in consciousness and love, toward self-realization.

Of the Aeon of Horus, Crowley writes:

the crowned and conquering child, who dieth not, nor is reborn, but goeth radiant ever upon His Way. Even so goeth the Sun: for as it is now known that night is but the shadow of the Earth, so Death is but the shadow of the Body, that veileth his Light from its bearer. (Heart of the Master)

And also:

The Aeon of Horus is here: and its first flower may well be this: that, freed of the obsession of the doom of the Ego in Death, and of the limitation of the Mind by Reason, the best men again set out with eager eyes upon the Path of the Wise, the mountain track of the goat, and then the untrodden Ridge, that leads to the ice-gleaming pinnacles of Mastery! (Little Essays Towards Truth, "Mastery")

[maeviuslynn]

Happy Greater Feast to Aleister Crowley!

A "greater feast" is Thelema refers to the celebration of one's death. A "lesser feast" refers to one's birth. To quote the Book of the Law, "…a feast for life and a greater feast for death!" AL II:41.

This modern holiday is not one of the official ones called for in the Book of the Law, but people still like to celebrate it with food and reading some of Crowley's poetry.

Aleister Crowley asked for his friends in England to get together a year after he died and celebrate with a curry dinner. And they did that. Gerald York, Frieda Lady Harris, and others got together at Gerald York's place and had a curry feast. Many Thelemites in the modern day choose to carry on this tradition. I know my household will be having curry tonight!

[angelap3]

Nel greco antico i termini utilizzati per definire i vari sensi con cui attualmente si usa la parola “amore” sono in maggior numero e perciò più precisi, rispetto alle molte lingue moderne.

• Agape (αγάπη) è amore di ragione, incondizionato, anche non ricambiato, spesso con riferimenti religiosi: è la parola usata nei vangeli.

• Philia (φιλία) è l’amore di affetto e piacere, di cui ci si aspetta un ritorno, ad esempio tra amici.

• Eros (έρως) definisce l’amore sessuale.

• Anteros (αντέρως) è l’amore corrisposto.

• Himeros è la passione del momento, il desiderio fisico presente e immediato che chiede di essere soddisfatto.

• Pothos è il desiderio verso cui tendiamo, ciò che sogniamo.

• Stοrge (στοργή) è l’amore d’appartenenza, ad esempio tra parenti e consanguinei.

• Thelema (θέλημα) è il piacere di fare qualcosa, il desiderio voler fare.

Quanto mi sarebbe piaciuto fare il classico...

(Angela P.)

[thewitcheslist]

I dislike the phrase "traditional witchcraft" in a language and cultural studies kind of way because like... Do y'all mean witch-cult? 'Cuz Margaret has been discredited over and over and over again.

Do you mean Wicca? Cuz that started in '54; as far as world religion, it's practically an infant. (Author bias note: I was raised in a Wiccan Cult from ages 2 to 12)

Do y'all mean Cochrane's craft? Cuz she was literally a High Priestess of Gardner's Bricket Wood Coven (Which would make her an exWiccan or make it a denomination of Wicca instead of a completely separate faith)

Well, maybe you mean Feri? Nope. That is widely considered a denomination of Wicca too, even by those who practice it.

Crooked Path/Sabbatic? Andrew Chumbley started practicing witchcraft in the 90s, his teachings are patchwork made of Tantra, voodoo, and Christ.ian doctrine... And imo, Christ.ianity is definitely not where witchcraft originated... AND it is also considered a denomination of Wicca by scholars but considered a completely separate religion by practitioners

Thelema was started by a very very rich Englishman after he was apparently visited by the Egyptian god Horus and a disembodied voice called Aiwass in 1907 which would make it the oldest in my list here, but the majority of the scholarly writing on Traditional Witchcraft I could find doesn't include Thelema and it is considered a separate New Religious Movement (NRM) entirely.

Britannica defines traditional as

1 a : based on a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time : following the tradition of a certain group or culture b : typical or normal for something or someone : having the qualities, beliefs, etc., that are usual or expected in a particular type of person or thing 2 based on old-fashioned ideas : not new, different, or modern

This definition feels fuzzy to me, because Neopaganism is definitely new and modern, right? That's what the prefix Neo- means

The only (reputable, published scholarly *) sources I can find basically sum up Traditional Witchcraft as just Wiccan. I have found some (published) sources saying it isn't Wicca, but they are far fewer in number and are religious works, not academic.

I am not a religious scholar. But Neopagan seems to be a much more accurate word to describe these organized practices -- Or does the existence of a Hierarchy and religious leaders makes it "traditional."

And... Neopagan is a very very very broad term, making it somewhat impractical to use as a label when looking for your communities/learning resources/supplies

In my search for information I found this quote from Kelden Mercury, author of The Crooked Path: Introduction to Traditional Witchcraft

“Traditional Witchcraft is an umbrella term that covers a vast array of non-Wiccan practices that are inspired by folklore. These practices may be viewed as religious or spiritual depending upon the group or individual practitioner. Traditional Witches focus on the use of magic, connecting with the natural landscape, and working with various spirits in both the physical realm and the Otherworld.”

But 1) every single other source I'm finding is calling it a branch of Wicca - because the core values originated within Wicca. And 2) it isn't traditional if every practitioner does it differently and 3) What folk lore? There's a lot. I don't know which culture is being referred to here 4) this sent me down a secondary metaphorical rabbit hole to find what "The Otherworld" is, because my only prior knowledge was from my Wiccan Coven upbringing, and in this context, I'm being told we are definitely not talking about Wicca - but we are getting off topic

I have come across one paper grouping all the practices I listed in this post together as "contemporary traditions," and Contemporary Traditional Witchcraft is a bit of a mouthful and possibly an oxymoron but it definitely makes more sense from the perspective of this language nerd. Someone needs to write more on this from a scholarly and historical point of view and I am almost certain I am far too undereducated to do it.

And now, I'm super hyper fixated on the cultural impact of various NRMs, Neopaganism, and modern religion in the west. I cannot afford more student loans but I desperately want to learn more. I might audit some classes just for the hell of it honestly. This is so fascinating at this point. Why isn't this stuff getting studied yet? Does anyone know Ethan Doyle White? Can you give him my email address? (this is a joke, he probably doesn't want to talk to me.) Belief in witchcraft as malevolent magic has been around since ancient Mesopotamia and I can find records of that... But I want to study the cultural impact of this religious movement and there just isn't enough literature to satisfy my inquisitive nature.

Someone smart should be writing this down, because seeing how it spreads and how different groups respond to the movement as a whole could really help historians understand the very very old dead religions, and their cultural impacts.

*I want to emphasize the word Scholarly. I said SCHOLARLY and I mean it. Witchcraft is something very difficult to find historically accurate information about.

[DISCLAIMER: I'm not arguing the validity of any of these religions, nor am I saying they are bad. Religion, in my opinion, is a good thing. I like paganism. It brings me comfort. This is my brain struggling with the verbage used and lack of written history. I have absolutely no ill intent, I'm just frustrated at the lack of historical records and the limits imposed on us by the English language.]

[sovaghoul]

"Aleister Crowley was an English occultist born on October 12, 1875. He was best known as a ceremonial magician, painter, novelist, and mountaineer who also founded the modern religion of Thelema. Crowley identified himself as a prophet entrusted with leading humanity into the Æon of Horus, a time of self-realization and spiritual awakening in the first half of the 20th century. Today, he is still a widely prominent figure in Western esotericism, and his influence has been studied and reviewed by many scholars, as well as widely documented."

Source

Crowley has been a very strong influence to Tobias as well, especially this era.

The song Call Me Little Sunshine is also a direct Crowley reference:

"The title of the song is a reference to the British occultist, Aleister Crowley. When Crowley was in court in the 1930s, pursuing a libel case, he was asked by the judge to explain why he called himself "The Beast 666." He replied that the number 666 simply means "sunlight." "You can call me Little Sunshine," he told the judge."

Source

[alephskoteinos]

"Christians who practice magic aren't Christians" is in itself an interesting argument, not just because one has to ask "well what else would they be?" but because I have to wonder what they have to say about members of other religions who "break the rules".

And yeah, I have asked in the past "why would Christians practice magic if magic was considered sinful by Christianity?". That's what makes the reality of lived Christianity a contradiction. That's kind of what makes Christianity a mess. But Christians did sometimes practice magic, we have a lot of evidence for that fact, and in fact probably the majority of pre-modern organised systems of occultism were in some way based on Christianity. We don't have to like that, and indeed I'd argue that this fact itself colours the real struggle that underwrites the modern occult revival: to break away from the hegemony of Christianity in all areas, including occultism. In this sense, Thelema, Satanism, modern witchcraft, and various newly emerging non-Christian occult movements and reconstructions all should be understood as almost inherently revolutionary. But it is what it is, and as usual the people who understand this the least are Christians.

[hadit93]

Frustrations with Modern Thelema.

A couple of days ago I proclaimed that Thelema as a spiritual movement was dead, inert, and dull as dishwater. This was perhaps a harsh critique, but it cannot be denied that the majority of Thelemic circles have become stagnant, simply parroting Crowley instead of thinking for themselves. I do not believe Thelema as a current is dead. Thelema as a magical paradigm is very much so alive, vibrant, and filled with life. The issue is: Few people are willing to truly engage with it. Thelema is for all, but at some point upon engaging with it sheep will have to become wolves, the sleeping will have to become the awake; people will have to think for themselves.

My irritations with Thelemites have been going on for some time, you get into a discussion and if you say something they don’t like, they have a Crowley quote to back their ideas up and believe this is enough to shut your opinion down. Half of the time there is another Crowley quote that contradicts theirs because he often changed his mind, as we are all apt to do over the course of our lives. Not every word he penned was golden, some of it certainly was brilliant, other things were less…..sublime. 

Furthermore, we know a lot more about historical practices now, we know a lot more about the Golden Dawn practices, and yoga. Crowley certainly synthesised numerous currents into his magical system that was born out of and permeates the Thelemic current, but there were resources which were simply not available at the time. To ignore these advances in occultism is ridiculous. To follow any system unquestionably and without trying to find the best fit for the individual is ridiculous. Crowley died nearly 80 years ago, the world was a very different place, the magical world was a very different place, and I believe Thelema was written down by Crowley for us as Thelemites to develop. My question is: Where is that development today? There are a few notable people making innovations; however, the majority are still practicing magic blind to all that has come before and after Crowley.

Then we have the magick is simply psychological exercises designed to calm you down camp. Performing banishing rituals instead of smoking a cigarette. I don’t understand when Thelema began to have the magic and spirit stripped out of it, but it needs to stop. I am sick to my teeth of seeing Crowley quoted that spirits are part of the brain. I don’t care what he said at that time. He was young, inexperienced, and going through a stage of atheism. It is apparent from his life, his diaries, and his later thoughts that Crowley believed in the spiritual world, in discarnate entities, and in magic. His life would have perhaps ended in much more luxury and comfort if he didn’t believe in the spiritual. 

To all the Thelemites who ridicule me, asking “You actually believe in spirits?” Yes, yes I do. I do not proclaim to understand what they are, or even how they function. But my experiences dictate to me that there is something ‘other’ going on when magic is performed with external entities. Too many weird things have happened in a magical circle for me to simply put it down to a psychological projection. In fact, treating these things as a psychological protection can be dangerous at times in my opinion. Furthermore, if you are practicing magic as a form of therapy, just get therapy! You will save time and money. 

Again, I have plenty of experience, and it is my experience that I use as guidance in my own path. I have read almost everything Crowley has written: the good, the bad, and the ugly. I have engaged with Thelema for over a decade, I have been involved in AA, I have studied with other Thelemites, and I have practiced all that time. I have also practiced other traditions, found common ground, and related it back to Thelemic philosophy. I do not need Crowley’s words to back up my opinions any more, and his words will also not undo my opinions either. Especially when his words are misunderstood by the masses, who fail to comprehend his meaning and equally fail to understand his sarcasm. 

So what am I going to do to tackle this problem? To stop the stagnation of this spiritual movement? I cannot moan about it and then proceed to do nothing. I am going to start writing again, I will start sharing my ideas and my practices again. I stopped because the hate I was getting was simply not worth it. I don’t live a dramatic life, I would rather not argue with strangers on the internet. I have much better things to do with my time. So I shall respond to the hate with the most powerful magic of all: silence. 

[apoloadonisandnarcissus]

I haven’t talk about this until now because I’m actively ignoring these “interpretations” about “Nosferatu” (2024), but when these are the most popular here (and everywhere, apparently), and the most “liked” and “reblogged” post is how “people not comprehending this film correctly” followed by the most incorrect statement of all time, Von Franz is also compelling me to speak in the name of angels and demons with his Abraxas stone ring (if you don’t know what a “Abraxas stone ring” is, you shouldn’t even be attempting to interpret and analyze this film to begin with).

First: it’s mindblowing to me how folks are trying to interpret this story while systematically ignoring (either by choice or ignorance, I don’t even know at this point) all the inspirations and themes in it; yes, this story is based on “Dracula” by Bram Stoker, and “Nosferatu: A Symphony of Horror” (1922), but Robert Eggers also shared he was inspired by “Wuthering Heights” by Emily Brontë, and cinematic inspirations: “Svengali” (1931), “La Belle et la Bête” (Beauty and the Beast) (1946), “Great Expectations” (1946), “The Queen of Spades” (1949), “The Innocents” (1961), “Andriesh” (1954), “Vechir na Ivana Kupala” (“The Eve of Ivan Kupalo”) (1968) and “Leptirica” (“The She-Butterfly”) (1973).

Second, more than “Gothic horror” (Female Gothic genre, to be more specific), this film is Folk Horror because that’s Robert Eggers brand. This is a story is based on Romanian folklore: strigoi, Şolomonari and Zalmoxis worship. Orlok is a strigoi doing strigoi stuff, he’s also a Pagan who worshipped Zalmoxis to conquer the secret of immortality, and like all Pagans, he was demonized as a “devil worshipper” by Christianity.

Third, attempting to interpret what’s happening on-screen without any knowledge of the Victorian era, it’s incorrect. Robert Eggers has no interest in doing “modern takes” in his work; he transports his audience to the time period where his films take place. This means, the dialogue, behavior and beliefs of his characters will reflect the historical time in question. If you are interpreting all of this with modern day bias, you are incorrect in your interpretations, simple as that. If you don’t understand the meaning of the words, browse a Old English dictionary (I have no problem admitting I did this, actually).

Last but not least: attempting to interpret this film without knowing the alchemist and occult meaning behind this story is also incorrect. Are you familiar with Aleister Crowley occult system Thelema? Because it was already a part of the OG 1922 “Nosferatu”, Eggers just took a different route to arrive at the same message (the birth of New Age of Aquarius), because he wanted the divine feminine goddess. Do you know who Paracelsus is? He’s the reason why Ellen is called a “sylph”. Who Babalon and her Beast are? That’s Ellen and Orlok in this story. Eggers went full “all hail Babalon” in this film, because Ellen is the hero of the story, but not in the way everyone thinks. Christians know Babalon by another name: “the whore of Babylon” from the “Book of Revelations”.

After you understand all of these themes and inspirations, it’s when you start “problematizing” this story, and taking your own conclusions of it, or making parallels with other stories, not before.

[156shadesofscarlet]

Description of the lecture by Alkistis:

The re-emergence of the figure of the Harlot of Revelation as the goddess Babalon in Aleister Crowley’s visions of the Enochian Aethyrs is arguably the first appearance of the heretical erotic divine feminine in the modern era. Crowley placed Her at the heart of his (sex) magick. Though radical in its time, his is a closed system and fundamentally misunderstands the sexual dynamic and human sexuality. In pursuing the ‘mystery of mysteries,’ that of Babalon, I have developed a personal magical and spiritual praxis rooted in the carnal body, independent of the solar-phallic doctrine of Thelema. In conjunction with my somatic practice, I’ve made extensive investigations into the Babylon of Revelation as the archetype and source of Crowley’s Babalon, tracing John’s Harlot to her origin in Inana-Ishtar and the corpus of poetic, mythic and stellar lore associated with her. I propose that this corpus can be understood as a prehistory of Babalon, that the stellar theophanies of the hierodule Inana-Ishtar are celestial bodies of the holy whore Babalon.

I speak about incorporating astral magic with the body-techniques that underlie my artistic and magical practice, deepening our felt connection to the heavens, our sensitivity to its rhythms. Such an approach, in its affective, creative and visionary potentials, can allow us to move beyond the impasse of an exhausted, unspirited culture and enflesh our visions of the future.

This lecture was one of the keynotes for the Astro Magia 23 conference.

[talonabraxas]

“Oh, how superior is the Eye of Horus to the Mouth of Isis!” — Aleister Crowley Aeon of Horus Talon Abraxas

The modern Aeon of Horus, with our times of self-realization as well as a growing interest in all things spiritual, is considered to be dominated by the Principle of the Child. The Word of its Law is Thelema (will) which is complimented by Agape (love), and its formula is Abrahadabra. Individuality and finding the "True Will" are the dominant aspects; its formula is that of growth, in consciousness and love, toward self-realization.

Of the Aeon of Horus, Crowley writes:

the crowned and conquering child, who dieth not, nor is reborn, but goeth radiant ever upon His Way. Even so goeth the Sun: for as it is now known that night is but the shadow of the Earth, so Death is but the shadow of the Body, that veileth his Light from its bearer. (Heart of the Master)

And also:

The Aeon of Horus is here: and its first flower may well be this: that, freed of the obsession of the doom of the Ego in Death, and of the limitation of the Mind by Reason, the best men again set out with eager eyes upon the Path of the Wise, the mountain track of the goat, and then the untrodden Ridge, that leads to the ice-gleaming pinnacles of Mastery! (Little Essays Towards Truth, "Mastery")

[maeviuslynn]

I felt like I needed to make this video. It's an exploration of what the "Scarlet Woman" means in Thelema. It gets into what it is by definition, how Crowley viewed it, and issues with modern interpretations. I also get into an exploration of what the "Book of the Law" says about the Scarlet Woman and what it means for Thelemite women today.

[coinandcandle]

Occult Topics to Look Into

This is less of a witchy post and more of an occultist post. While they do tend to mingle, most of these topics should not be viewed as things to incorporate into your practice.

These are meant to be read and researched with a discerning eye and a solid ability to understand context and nuance so keep that in mind.

General Topics

Alchemy (history of + modern) Sacred-text's Alchemy index

Victorian Spiritualism & Occultism

Theosophy (Sacred-text's Theosophy Index)

Thelema (Sacred-text's Thelema Index)

Hermes Trismegistus

Philosophy (history of + modern)

Books/Texts

Jakob Böhme's The Signature of All Things

Agrippa's Philosophy of Occult Magic

Francis Barrett's The Magus

Manly P. Hall's Secret Teachings of All Ages

People

Austin Osman Spare

Éliphas Lévi

Paracelsus

Roger Bacon

John Dee

HP Blavatsky

Henry Cornelius Agrippa