The Book of Thoth is a legendary book from ptolemaic Egypt 332–30 BCE (the time when Egypt was under Greek/Hellenistic rule). It is supposed to have been written by the Egyptian god Thoth himself, the god of knowledge and writing. It contained two spells, one to communicate with animals, and one to communicate with the gods.
Originally hidden at the bottom of the Nile guarded by serpents, found by an Egyptian prince known as Nepherkaptah, who fought the serpents, but the gods killed his son and wife. He then committed suicide and was buried with the book. Many years later, another lucky adventurer named Setne came along and tried the same, only to meet a beautiful woman who tricked him into killing his children, too late he discovered it was an illusion by the ghost of Nepherkaptah, and the book was returned.
This story has a point, which is the traditional Egyptian idea that the knowledge from the gods is not meant for humans.
The Pharao of course, and the priesthood, stood out from mere mortals, of course. The ptolemaic period ended with Cleopatra (yes that Cleopatra) who was of Greek descent who took it to herself to regard as a reincarnation of the Egyptian female god of Isis.
In the 19th century the famous occultist Aleister Crowley writes the “Book of Thoth : A Short Essay on the Tarot of the Egyptians.
Written only for a few select people of wealth, because it was believed that a working class person would not be able to afford the delicate print and tarot deck, beautifully colored with symbols and magick meaning. Although he did consider cheap ink on cheap paper, but finally decided to go for quality instead of quantity.
I have my views on Aleister, as a “prophet” and a founder of Thelema, which is one thing, but then I like to point to the fact that he had the time, all that time, to experiment and try out things and try to transmit knowledge to as many people as possible, without ruining the original meaning. No wonder why initiation is necessary, and people do have to put in the time and effort even though Mr. Crowley has walked the path before, his views and interpretation require experience to try to follow. Many people believe Crowley manage to teach just that, his worldview, nothing else. Others take his work as a guaranteed path to success, whether they apply the knowledge to their own knowledge or simply copy it.
Regardless of who is to fault of any failiure, I bring my thoughts to the ancient idea, “knowledge from the gods is not meant for humans”.
But I digress. I didn’t want to talk about uncle Al or egyptian mummies.
Luciferians. Are we humans? Are we gods? Or transitioning from one to another? Or both at the same time, but only just realizing our godhood?
First let’s consider the word Luciferian. It’s meaning has many associations, one of which is the bringer of Light. Other associations is of the Fallen Angel, a sort of deity or supernatural angel that was thrown out of paradise.
A great Frater and adept whom I know in the works of magick said: “happyness is not the meaning of life. Religion was created out of suffering. You don’t try to explain happyness – hey-I’m happy! and then go what the hell happened? – no, people who are suffering will start to wonder what the hell is going on”.
Maybe our role in the midst of things is not to bring happyness or salvation, but to serve as another alternative to bring knowledge of good and evil. With this comes huge responsibility. And the potential is to bend every rule, and accomplish any goal, transcending every obstacle, since one of the few things that can penetrate space, time, and matter, is knowledge, ideas and symbols.
One day maybe we control time, matter and energy, but today we still live in carbon-based bodies that need water and nutrients just like a vegetable.
What Crowley meant was probably not to talk to animals.
But it’s nice to know where man is, in relation to the lower animal kingdom (representing nature, all the four elements, existance) and to the higher (representing the divine, life, spirit,and the creator force).
Luciferians are the ones with the potential to bring their own understanding of knowledge, or to use such works as past pasters have used, but not clinging to it, but seeing it for what it is, it’s like a phone number on a napkin can symbolize what it does, but it cannot be equal to having sexual intercourse.