| Revision as of 02:24, 15 February 2008 editWill in China (talk | contribs)860 edits note importance to Thelema← Previous edit |
Latest revision as of 16:14, 8 November 2024 edit undoSkyerise (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers141,350 edits Undid revision 1256170632 by 2A02:C7C:F84A:B700:5715:4ADC:F0AD:EDEC (talk) WP:NOTFORUMTag: Undo |
| (122 intermediate revisions by 56 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
|
|
{{talk header}} |
|
{{move|Liber AL vel Legis}} |
|
|
|
{{On this day|date1=2007-04-08|oldid1=121212400|date2=2008-04-08|oldid2=204272723|date3=2009-04-08|oldid3=282433965|date4=2010-04-08|oldid4=354258858|date5=2011-04-08|oldid5=422942314|date6=2013-04-08|oldid6=549105096}} |
|
{{WPRT2|class=start}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Thelema|class=Start|importance=Top}} |
|
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|listas=Book of the Law, The|1= |
|
|
{{WikiProject Books}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Occult|importance=mid}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religion | importance=low | NRM=yes | NRMImp=low}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Religious texts}} |
|
|
{{WikiProject Thelema|importance=Top}} |
|
|
}} |
|
|
{{User:MiszaBot/config |
|
|
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}} |
|
|
|maxarchivesize = 70K |
|
|
|counter = 1 |
|
|
|minthreadsleft = 3 |
|
|
|minthreadstoarchive = 1 |
|
|
|algo = old(180d) |
|
|
|archive = Talk:The Book of the Law/Archive %(counter)d |
|
|
}} |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Interpretation via English Qaballa == |
|
== Links to manuscripts == |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In the 'Interpretation' section are 3 subsections: Via Hermetic Qabalah, Via Prophecy, and Via English Qaballa. The first two are methods that Crowley used to interpret the Book; the last one is a method ''not'' used by Crowley but by English occultists starting in the 1970s. I question why English Qaballa is given this status, when it is merely one of many attempts at 'interpretation' using a version of English gematria and qabalah. The root idea behind these interpretations is the fulfillment of verse 2:55 which states: "Thou shalt obtain the order & value of the English Alphabet; thou shalt find new symbols to attribute them unto." |
|
I was looking a the to which the Manuscript link was recently pointed, and I think the link was the better choice. While the AOTOA site provides somewhat clearer copies of the text pages, the OTO-USA site provides more accurate scans in all their flawed and aged glory, and includes the title page as well, making it more complete. However, since they both have advantages in the eyes of different readers, I will edit the links such that both remain available. --] 20:47, 5 September 2005 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I suggest a change to this subsection, making it about ''Crowley's own attempts'' at fulfilling verse 2:55 using English gematria (via Liber Trigrammaton, as he noted in both his Old and New Comment in The Equinox), with a simple mention of English Qaballa and English Qabalah as attempts made by later researchers, with a redirect to their already existing wikipedia pages. ] (]) 23:58, 12 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
==What else to add?== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:{{ping|Catalyst418}} It's included because there are third-party sources for it, specifically about using it to interpret the Book. You're free to include other systems or "Crowley's own attempts" as long as you can provide third-party sources for them. The article ''already'' has too many quotations and citations to ]. Book reception sections should include all notable views, not just those of its author. This is an article about a book, not about Crowley's interpretation or failure to interpret that book. ] (]) 00:04, 13 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
I think that there could be a section covering the non-AL material that often accompanies its printing. The centennial edition reprints some material Crowley added to earlier printings, which could be interesting to note. –''']''' |
|
|
|
::Yes, I understand that the article is about the book and not about Crowley per se, but given that the first 2 subsections are about his own interpretations, it seems odd that the only other approach mentioned is the English Qaballa, which is only one of many attempts at exegesis via English, (while ignoring what Crowley had to say on the subject). I am not advocating that ''only'' Crowley's views on the book matter, but that later attempts should be contextualized in the light of Crowley's initial efforts in the same direction. In that regard, it would be more neutral to make the subsection about exegesis via English in general, and not about E.Q. specifically. ] (]) 14:06, 13 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
*Also there were changes in the introductory chapters from time to time and place to place. For example, "Democracy dodders" was censored from some editions...On another matter, anyone know where the actual manuscript is these days? --]] 03:44, 19 May 2006 (UTC) |
|
|
|
:::{{ping|Catalyst418}} Yes, but you see, nearly all the other systems listed at ] are self-sourced. There are no secondary sources that confirm their notability. Most of that article should be deleted, almost every section violates our rules against both ] and ]. Also, Misplaced Pages is a collaborative project. I've no interest in expanding on Crowley's efforts myself. But you can, provided you can source the material to a biography or some other secondary source. We call that ]. ] (]) 14:39, 13 September 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
== Latin pronunciation == |
|
==Suggested Additions== |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I notice the Latin pronunciation given is one where the "v" is pronounced "w". British Latin users of Crowley's generation would not have done this, and just pronounced it as an English "v" sound. ] (]) 09:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
Why is there no mention of the connections between The Book of the Law and certain "cult" (or "occult") organizations, like Britain's O.T.O, and modern Wicca? The latter was obviously influenced by Crowley but, in their Rede, distorted "the law" to say essentially "Do what thou wilt as long as you do not harm others". |
|
|
|
:It was added by ]. --] (]) 10:21, 23 October 2023 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
Further, at least some editions of the book, such as one with a red cover published by the O.T.O., include drawings that are loaded with clear and indisputable Satanic symbolism. An inverted pentagram containing a goat's head is just one obvious example. |
|
|
|
|
|
These would seem to bear mentioning. ] 18:25, 8 April 2007 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
==Requested move== |
|
|
] → ] — "The Book of the Law" is a general term used in more than one religion. In Judaism it refers to the Torah; in Mormonism it refers to "The Book of the Law of the Lord". Suggest we move it to its actual distinguishable title —] (]) 19:48, 4 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Survey=== |
|
|
:''Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with'' <code><nowiki>*'''Support'''</nowiki></code> ''or'' <code><nowiki>*'''Oppose'''</nowiki></code>'', then sign your comment with'' <code><nowiki>~~~~</nowiki></code>''. Since ], please explain your reasons, taking into account ].'' |
|
|
|
|
|
*'''support''' since according to the article, the full title is "Liber AL vel Legis, sub figura CCXX, The Book of the Law, as delivered by XCIII=418 to DCLXVI", the change would seem justified. We should then do as dismab. page rather than just a redirect. ''']''' (]) 22:16, 4 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
* '''oppose''': ''Book of the Law'' is the title of this specific book. It is not the specific title of the TaNaK. It is not the specific title of the Mormon work. ''Liber AL vel Legis, sub figura CCXX.'' is an alternate title of this work. ] (]) 01:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**Not true. ''Liber AL vel Legis'' is the ''official'' title of the work. "The Book of the Law" is essentially a nickname. ] (]) 05:31, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Crowley typically gave his work three titles. One in English, one in Latin,Greek,or Hebrew, and one that was simply a number. In this instance the number is 31 (holographic manuscript), 220 (printed version), with ''Liber Al Vel Legis'' being the Latin title and''The Book of the Law''being the English title. As to which title is the most official, that depends upon which list one considers to be "authoritative".] (]) 08:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**Here's the detail, originally named ''Liber L vel Legis'' and name officially changed. Noted on . ] (]) 05:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
**And is the title page of the book. ] (]) 05:43, 6 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Support''' per above. The actual name is ''Liber AL vel Legis''. ] (]) 22:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Oppose'''. ]. Even if "The Book of the Law" is a nickname, wrt this article I think it is a name that most users would understand, so it would be best for it to remain at the current name. – ] (]) 15:09, 9 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
*'''Support''', a book should be listed under its actual title. Since the proposal seems to be that a disambiguation page be put here, the user would easily be able to find the several possible books of the law they might be looking for. ] (]) 00:07, 10 February 2008 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
===Discussion=== |
|
|
:''Any additional comments:'' |
|
In the 'Interpretation' section are 3 subsections: Via Hermetic Qabalah, Via Prophecy, and Via English Qaballa. The first two are methods that Crowley used to interpret the Book; the last one is a method not used by Crowley but by English occultists starting in the 1970s. I question why English Qaballa is given this status, when it is merely one of many attempts at 'interpretation' using a version of English gematria and qabalah. The root idea behind these interpretations is the fulfillment of verse 2:55 which states: "Thou shalt obtain the order & value of the English Alphabet; thou shalt find new symbols to attribute them unto."
.png){kind=small}
