Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site cbscc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!ihnp4!cbosgd!cbsck!cbscc!pmd
From: pmd@cbscc.UUCP (Paul Dubuc)
Newsgroups: net.religion
Subject: Crowley's sense of humor.
Message-ID: <5429@cbscc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 12-Jun-85 16:21:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbscc.5429
Posted: Wed Jun 12 16:21:16 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 13-Jun-85 03:17:07 EDT
References: <437@cmu-cs-k.ARPA>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories <SCCS>, Columbus
Lines: 45

The following is in reference to one message in the New Age
Digest #4 posted by Tim Maroney.  It had the following header:

>Date: Thu, 10 Jan 85 23:48:33 pst
>From: dual!joshua!josh@Berkeley
>Subject: Stuff, and the NAD

This was part of the introduction to the "Introductory Aleister Crowley
Bibliography":

>More subtle, however, is Crowley's sense of humor. He often sets up logical
>traps for the unwise; he makes statements that are baldfaced lies for the
>purpose of making the reader think (or disposing of the reader who is
>unable to). For example, in his book "Magick" (also titled "Magick in 
>Theory and Practice"), there is a chapter entitled "Of the Bloody 
>Sacrifice: and Matters Cognate". The following lines are interesting:
>
>	"For the highest spiritual working one must accordingly
>	choose a victim which contains the highest and purest
>	force. A male child of perfect innocence and high 
>	intelligence is the most satisfactory and suitable
>	victim."
>
>Yikes, that sounds scary. Then there is the footnote:
>
>	"It appears from the Magickal Records of Frater Perdurabo
>	[Crowley--ed.] that He made this particular sacrifice on
>	the average of about 150 times a year between 1912 e.v. and
>	1928 e.v."
>
>Obviously something is skewed here. No way he sacrificed 150 humans
>a year; Gilles de Rais may have, but that was when nobility could
>get away with anything. I am not going to ruin the joke by explaining 
>it; it is rather more interesting to figure out on your own. Suffice it
>to say that neither quote is really a lie; just some games with words and
>their effects.

OK, I be the fool.  (What else is new?)  Maybe the author or Tim could
"ruin" this joke for me.  I guess I'm lazy (or maybe just unable to think).
How about it?

At your "disposal",
-- 

Paul Dubuc 	cbscc!pmd