What is the relationship-OTO initiations and A.'.A.'.

Q&A and discussion on the Path of Initiation

Moderator: Moderators - Public

What is the relationship-OTO initiations and A.'.A.'.

Postby a seeker » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:27 am

Are the OTO initiations the same for A.'.A.'.? In other words, can OTO be used for A.'.A.'. initiations?
User avatar
a seeker
Forum Neophyte
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:30 pm
Location: Mankato, MN

Postby In Nomine Babalon » Wed Oct 08, 2008 7:53 am

Absolutely not.
In Nomine Babalon
Copper Member
Copper Member
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:19 am

Re: What is the relationship-OTO initiations and A.'.A.'.

Postby Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:28 am

rwidner wrote:Are the OTO initiations the same for A.'.A.'.? In other words, can OTO be used for A.'.A.'. initiations?

The initiations rituals of O.T.O. and A.'.A.'. are quite different. There is no overlap of any kind that I can think of at the moment.

There is no intrinsic relationship. Membership in one doesn't confer membership in the other per se. No degree or grade in one confers any degree or grade in the other.

The O.T.O. rituals are based on (very significant rewrites of) the rituals of Freemasonry - particularly the Craft Degrees, (British) Royal Arch, Rose Croix, Knight Templer, etc. The A.'.A.'. rituals for 1=10 (Neophyte) and 2=9 )Zelator) are based on (very significant rewrites of) the Golden Dawn First Order (0=0, Neophyte) and Second Order (5=6, Zelator Adeptus Minor) rituals.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby In Nomine Babalon » Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:16 am

93

In the lineage i belong to there are only two actual temple initiation ritiuals anyway..OTO has a ritual for every degree.. AA doesn't (at least in my experience)

93, 93/93
INB
In Nomine Babalon
Copper Member
Copper Member
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Jul 23, 2008 5:19 am

Postby Jim Eshelman » Wed Oct 08, 2008 9:38 am

Correct. There is a ceremonial linkage process for Probationer, temple initiations for 1=10 and 2=9, and no further formal initiation documents until the self-initiation instruction at 5=6. (All Middle Pillar, note. The ceremionial component of the others is very brief and almost informal.)
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Wed Oct 08, 2008 8:30 pm

93.

In response to the original question posted:

The O.T.O. (USA), is based on a series of initiations conferred upon the individual, which are as Jim stated, based on the Craft Degrees of Masonry, with the exception of the V.O.T.S.L. In Masonry, we accept a few different "Holy Books" to take an oath upon. With the O.T.O., and the M.'.M.'.M.'. degree's, the book is the Book of the Law.

Every person, who is free and of full age, has the indefeasible right to the M.'.M.'.M.'. Degree's of the O.T.O. (0-III, IV and P.I.)

The A.'.A.'., Initiation rituals are very different, and as Jim mentioned, are based off of the Golden Dawn system...Up to 5=6 I believe.

Both have the Thelemic aspect to them.

I think the main difference is that the O.T.O. (USA) is a secret society, like freemasonry, and is very much 'Outer based' as far as Initiations are concerned. (There is memorization, and recommendation of study for advancement, we congregate, and offer the Gnostic Mass).

The A.'.A.'. is more of an 'Inner' experience. More individualized (In my experience)

Although they are two separate bodies, a lot of the Ritual practice, recommendations for study, memorization and practice are similar.

(Boy, I Hope that all makes sense:-)

A.'.A.'. is more rigorous in study, etc.
O.T.O. is more based on time periods for advancement, dues and fee's.

Both are great Orders. I feel, ultimately it will be up to you to decide which path to take.

(You can do both)...I recommend one or the other at first:-)

(IMHO) A.'.A.'. is the way to go if you are Seriously seeking to learn!

Best wishes.

93 93/93.'.

James
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Thank You

Postby a seeker » Thu Oct 09, 2008 3:25 am

This is such a great forum - responses have been very helpful I was a bit confused on the major differences between OTO and A.'.A.'. The picture is now clearer.
User avatar
a seeker
Forum Neophyte
Forum Neophyte
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Fri Sep 05, 2008 1:30 pm
Location: Mankato, MN

Re: OTO initiations and A.'.A.'.

Postby HeliosMegistos » Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:17 am

rwidner wrote:Are the OTO initiations the same for A.'.A.'.? In other words, can OTO be used for A.'.A.'. initiations?
As most responses indicate, the answer is "No." These are two different "groups" or "orders," although there is a common philosophy shared by them (in many respects).
However, note that this "answer" pertains to the groups or lineages mentioned. But ALL intitiations, OTO, A.'.A.'., Masonry, Amerindian, etc do have one thing in common. They always portray a death and a resurrection of some kind. Even many Xtians use the "born again" slogan.
Helios Megistos
User avatar
HeliosMegistos
1st Warning by Admin
1st Warning by Admin
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:54 am
Location: United States

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:48 pm

93 HeliosMegestos.

Your information is misleading, and by the looks of your website, you are not a True Thelemite. (IMO)!

To the individual that originally started this thread:

Base initiation on your own personal experience.
It is different, and highly significant for each individual:-)

Best wishes.

93 93/93

James
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Postby Jim Eshelman » Thu Oct 09, 2008 7:51 pm

Shachdar8=3 wrote:Your information is misleading, and by the looks of your website, you are not a True Thelemite. (IMO)!

For some reason, the word "plagiarist" kept coming to mind as I looked through it.

Just be sure to mute your sound first.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:19 am

93.

Apologies on my part for choice of words used.

Thanks:-)

93 93/93.'.

James
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Postby Aum418 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 9:20 am

Shachdar8=3 wrote:93 HeliosMegestos.

Your information is misleading, and by the looks of your website, you are not a True Thelemite. (IMO)!


Thats quite audacious...

IAO131
.: Blog: http://iao131.wordpress.com :.

* The Journal of Thelemic Studies: http://www.thelemicstudies.com *
Aum418
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
Ultimate Spark of the Intimate Fire
 
Posts: 597
Joined: Wed May 16, 2007 6:21 pm

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 3:54 pm

93.

Hmmm, Audacious...

Pronunciation
–adjective
1. extremely bold or daring; recklessly brave; fearless: an audacious explorer.
2. extremely original; without restriction to prior ideas; highly inventive: an audacious vision of the city's bright future.
3. recklessly bold in defiance of convention, propriety, law, or the like; insolent; brazen.
4. lively; unrestrained; uninhibited: an audacious interpretation of his or her role.

If this is what you meant, then yes.

93 93/93.'.

James
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Postby h2h » Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:55 pm

A few questions:

Has a comparison and contrast ever been made of the Golden Dawn and A.A. system to see what AC and GCJ included, left out or added to each grade?

If AC attained to 10=1 at Cefalu in 1920, how was he able to set up the full A.A. system in 1907, prior to this attainment? Was he solely relying on the Golden Dawn rituals?

Who set up the Third Order of the Golden Dawn and in what year?
h2h
 

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Fri Oct 10, 2008 5:24 pm

93.

Perhaps this link may be of some assistance in your question.

93 93/93.'.

James

http://www.arcane-archive.org/faqs/aafaq.php
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Postby kuniggety » Fri Oct 10, 2008 7:07 pm

As a note, in One Star in Sight, Crowley plainly outlines MT being the grade required for someone to fully establish an outer vehicle, or school, of the A.'.A.'. In 1907, when Crowley setup the structure of the A.'.A.'., he did it in preparation for when he did attain the grade of MT and joined the Third Order, 2 years later.

It's a little confusing when you directly compare it to the GD which he received his initiations through considering their two grade structures don't exactly match up.
kuniggety
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Wed Jun 13, 2007 10:04 pm

Postby HPK » Fri Oct 10, 2008 8:02 pm

kuniggety wrote:As a note, in One Star in Sight, Crowley plainly outlines MT being the grade required for someone to fully establish an outer vehicle, or school, of the A.'.A.'. In 1907, when Crowley setup the structure of the A.'.A.'., he did it in preparation for when he did attain the grade of MT and joined the Third Order, 2 years later.

It's a little confusing when you directly compare it to the GD which he received his initiations through considering their two grade structures don't exactly match up.


Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law

I was always interested in the role of Cecil Jones in forming of the Astrum Argentum? Also, I can't remember who was the third person? Or just Jones and Crowley formed Astrum Argentum?
What about Transmission of the Etheric Link mentioned in one book by Pat Zalewski?


"If an individua! is expelled or leaves the Order in the Outer Grades, the link will automatically seal itself off, as it cannot be sustained without impetus from the Second Order, no matter how much study is done."

"In the fina! phase at the 7°=4° Grade, a Ritual called Transmission of the Etheric Link is performed (and is usually reserved for those of the Office of Chief or who will succeed to that Office), where the Link is given in its entirety to the Adept so that they are able to carry on."

I hope this is not a problem quoting this, because this is just two sentences?

Crowley attained 7°=4° in 1906. Was Etheric Link was a part of this attainment? In the case that answer is yes, was this same Etheric Link like in the Golden Dawn, or not?

Love is the Law, Love under Will
User avatar
HPK
Silver Member
Silver Member
 
Posts: 34
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 2:04 pm

Postby Jim Eshelman » Fri Oct 10, 2008 10:28 pm

h2h wrote:Has a comparison and contrast ever been made of the Golden Dawn and A.A. system to see what AC and GCJ included, left out or added to each grade?

Sure. Some of us have lived that comparison for a long time. - But remember, the proper comparison of the A.'.A.'. 1=10 through 5=6 isn't to the G.D. grades of the same designation, but to the sub-grades of the G.D.'s 5=6. That is, the 1=10 Neophyte grade has work roughly overlapping the 5=6 Zelator Adeptus Minor Grade (1=10 of 5=6) of the old G.D.

If AC attained to 10=1 at Cefalu in 1920, how was he able to set up the full A.A. system in 1907, prior to this attainment? Was he solely relying on the Golden Dawn rituals?

I don't even understand the question. How has attaining 10=1 anything at all to do with the subject?

To answer the implied question before - yes, the 1=10 initiation ritual of A.'.A.'. is a rewrite of the First Order initiation of the G.D. (its 0=0 or Neophyte ceremony); and the 2=9 initiation ritual of A.'.A.'. is a rewrite of the Second Order initiation of the G.D. (its 5=6 or Zelator Adeptus Minor ceremony).

Who set up the Third Order of the Golden Dawn and in what year?

No such thing. They primarily only worked through 5=6, though Mathers did have (and in a very limited way worked) rituals through 7=4.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby h2h » Sat Oct 11, 2008 11:33 am

Shachdar - thanks for that link.
Jim Eshelman wrote:I don't even understand the question. How has attaining 10=1 anything at all to do with the subject?

Jim - you stated elsewhere that AC attained 8=3 in December 1909, 9=2 in October 1915 and 10=1 in the 1920s. So my question is based on the presumption that one must know about that which he or she speaks - namely how could AC write down the descriptions of these grades if he had not attained to them at the time of establishing the A.'.A.'. system with GCJ in 1907? Were the descriptions based on traditional Kabbalistic sources or was someone else guiding these two men?
Last edited by h2h on Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
h2h
 

Postby frateruranus » Sat Oct 11, 2008 12:00 pm

The third person to help form the A.'.A.'. was Fuller in the role of Grand Neophyte, which is referenced in One Star in Sight though Fuller never went beyond the grade of Probationer he was authorized to admit Probationers to the order and admitted Achad and a few others. When he resigned the Grand Neophyte position wasn't filled, though Achad did take his position in the triumvirate. I held the position in a modern lineage when I was a Probationer.

As to Mathers though, he did have ritual fragments beyond the 7=4. I have been reading discussions of it on Pat Zalewski's Golden Dawn list. The whole thing really shows the pronounced differences between the Golden Dawn and the A.'.A.'. and especially Crowley and Mathers! I can't find the specific posts right now but the ritual of 8=3 reflected back to the 6=5 ritual.
frateruranus
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:31 pm

Postby Steven Cranmer » Sat Oct 11, 2008 5:24 pm

HPK wrote:I was always interested in the role of Cecil Jones in forming of the Astrum Argentum? Also, I can't remember who was the third person? Or just Jones and Crowley formed Astrum Argentum?

This isn't a paid advertisement, but there's a lot of information about this history in a very nice book that's now back on the market. :)

What about Transmission of the Etheric Link mentioned in one book by Pat Zalewski?

Does anyone know if this "Etheric Link" thing was an invention of the Whare Ra period, or if it was originated by Felkin when he started the Stella Matutina, or if it might have even been used by the pre-1900 Golden Dawn? (I doubt the latter...)

In any case, I doubt that Crowley assumed anything like this in his own initiations. I suspect that Crowley would have asserted that this idea of stopping at 7=4 might be the very definition of "Black Brotherhood...."

Steve
User avatar
Steven Cranmer
Stone of Precious Water
Stone of Precious Water
 
Posts: 199
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:36 am
Location: New England

Audaciousness

Postby HeliosMegistos » Sat Oct 11, 2008 7:19 pm

Aum418 wrote:
Shachdar8=3 wrote:93 HeliosMegestos. Your information is misleading, and by the looks of your website, you are not a True Thelemite. (IMO)!

Thats quite audacious...IAO131

Misleading? As in "incorrect?" As in "all initiation rituals do NOT include a (symbolic or real) death and rebirth of some nature?"

"Not a True Thelemite" must indicate that I am not doing my Will. Oh wait! I don't remember claiming that I was a true Thelemite.

You guys can pick away at the website all you want. The last time I looked it contained all the elements of a Thelemic (oh no!) society that was operative before any of you read your first Crowley book. Any plagiarism is not really stealing because the wording of certain documents is completely changed to reflect an "audacious," irreverent, dangerous approach to dictatorships - it even states that openly and up front. Did you destroy your computer after the first reading?

Anyone who is running around flashing an 8=3 username on a (semi)public forum is pretty far out. 8=3! right!

I remain, AlfredENu-Man9=2 (or wuz it 13=0, I can never remember).
User avatar
HeliosMegistos
1st Warning by Admin
1st Warning by Admin
 
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 6:54 am
Location: United States

Postby Jim Eshelman » Sun Oct 12, 2008 12:44 am

h2h wrote:
Jim Eshelman wrote:I don't even understand the question. How has attaining 10=1 anything at all to do with the subject?

Jim - you stated elsewhere that AC attained 8=3 in December 1909, 9=2 in October 1915 and 10=1 in the 1920s. So my question is based on the presumption that one must know about that which he or she speaks - namely how could AC write down the descriptions of these grades if he had not attained to them at the time of establishing the A.'.A.'. system with GCJ in 1907? Were the descriptions based on traditional Kabbalistic sources or was someone else guiding these two men?

He didn't. For example, One Star in Sight (the only real description of 10=1 in his writings) was written later in the 1920s, after he had attained the grade.

And yes, it's also true that they were working under guidance. That was the whole point!

But those first years, they onluy wrote about the work up to 5=6 for the most part.
Love is the law, love under will.
Yours in L.V.X.,
Jim Eshelman
www.jeshelman.com
"Success is thy proof: argue not; convert not; talk not overmuch!" - CCXX 3:42
User avatar
Jim Eshelman
Lost His Marbles
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Sat Jun 04, 2005 1:41 pm
Location: Los Angeles, CA

Postby Shachdar8=3 » Sun Oct 12, 2008 6:43 am

93 Edward E Numan.

What are you...A Minerval or something?

You don't know who I am, or what lineage I come from...Obviously you are not to familiar with grade structures within various different orders.

It doesn't say "Shachdar 8=3 O.T.O., or AA"


93 93/93.'.

(There is a difference between doing YOUR will, and THOU Will!)


James
User avatar
Shachdar8=3
Gold Member
Gold Member
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Sun Jul 13, 2008 10:11 am

Postby h2h » Sun Oct 12, 2008 1:25 pm

Jim Eshelman wrote:And yes, it's also true that they were working under guidance. That was the whole point!

Under whose guidance? Aiwaz?? I don't recall reading anything like this in Confessions. If the guiding entity for setting up the A.'.A.'. system was Aiwaz, how was communication made with him - trance/channeling or automatic writing etc? And are there any documents of this communication in the order's founding papers?
h2h
 

Next

Return to Initiation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron