Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
Essays
From his essays in GettingIt.com and the Fortean Times. I was under the
assumption that they would be somewhat dated. But as I reread the
articles, it became clear that admirers who are unaware of them might in
fact find them enjoyable. I’ve left the links in but not sure of they still work
(via 10 Zen Monkeys, boing boing)
Coming Again
The orgasmic release of the Apocalypse myth
by Robert Anton Wilson Published November 15, 1999 in Whoa!
Back in the early 1980s, Vicki Weaver, a pious Christian lady, persuaded her
husband Randy that the Bible proved that the final battle between Christ
and Antichrist would take place in 1987, beginning with an attempted
slaughter of the Christians by ZOG -- the Zionist Occupied Government in
Washington, D.C. The two of them (and their children) logically moved to a
high hill in Idaho -- Ruby Ridge -- where they planned to stage their own last
fight for the Lord.
Alas, 1987 passed, Vicki had to recalculate, and things were a bit fuzzy
there for a while. But then the '90s came 'round, Randy sold a sawed-off
shotgun to a government informer, and the Feds arrived to arrest him.
Randy and Vicki thought they were facing the ZOG, the Feds thought they
were dealing with lunatics, and the results were so bloody all around that
Ruby Ridge remains controversial to this day.
On the other hand, I have survived Doomsday so many times that it has
begun to bore me. In the last three months alone, I have -- we all have --
lived right on through three dates that leading eschatologists have
authoritatively named as the Day of Reckoning (11 August, 11 September,
and 7 November.).
I wonder why so many people have such a lascivious longing for the
Apocalypse? It seems a far more popular fantasy game than Dungeons &
Dragons, and, of course, it has all the thrills and chills of a slasher movie.
But there may be more here, just as there is to horror and catastrophe
movies if you think about them. Neo-Freudians, and especially Reichians,
suggest that our form of civilization stifles and constricts us so much that at
times we all long to experience some orgasmic but catastrophic "explosion,"
like King Kong breaking his chains and wrecking New York, or even more like
the masochist in bondage, according to Dr. Reich. This sudden release from
the bondage-and-discipline of our jobs and our taxes -- actually called the
Rapture by Fundamentalists -- seems ghoulishly attractive to Christians,
New Agers, and others who believe in a "spirit" that will survive the general
wreckage. In that case, the end of the world seems no worse than a visit to
the dentist: You know you'll feel better afterwards. This sort of desire for
Total Escape/Total Annihilation has always had its bards and visionaries.
Verily, I say unto you, there will be some of them that stand here which
shall not taste of death until they have seen the Kingdom of God come with
power. -- Mark 9:1
And there shall be signs in the sun and in the moon and in the stars... This
generation shall not pass until all be fulfilled. -- Luke 21: 25,32
And then shall appear the sign of the Son of Man in heaven ... This
generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled. -- Matt 24:
30,34
Of course, when all the marks standing there and their whole generation did
pass without the Apocalypse coming, these prophecies required
reinterpretation. The second most common talent among Doomsayers --
after their unparalleled ability to predict dates on which the world
perversely does not end -- is their capacity to recalculate. But, then,
theology is logic with deuces and one-eyed jacks wild.
Those with the Right Ideas are the ones who believe in the Prophet, of
course. Thus there seems an element of sadism mixed in with the
masochism of the Millennialist mentality: We will suffer only a little, these
folks say, but the rest of you motherfuckers are really going to get the
works. Well, Freud himself pronounced that sadism and masochism always
contain a bit of one another.
This is only a very, very small selection of failed end-times prophecy; if you
are curious, you can find longer lists of Doomsdays here and here.
So far, the batting average of all Doomsayers has stayed firm at 0.000. That,
of course, will not stop this ever-popular guessing game. We survived the
alleged three meteors of November 7, but we still have Y2K ahead of us;
and if we survive that, well, the Weekly World News recently reported the
Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse to be in the vicinity of Santa Fe, heading
east.
As long as people enjoy scaring themselves and scaring one another, horror
movies will remain popular, and so will Doomsday. Pick a date -- any date --
and you may become the leader of a new cult. You may even get as rich as
Rajneesh or the Pope.
In my own (hazardous) attempt to translate Bell's math into the verbal forms
in which we discuss what physics "means," Bell seems to prove that any two
"particles" once in contact will continue to act as if connected no matter
how far apart they move in "space" or "time" (or in space-time). You can see
why New Agers like this: It sounds like it supports the old magick idea that if
you get a hold of a hair from your enemy, anything you do to that hair will
affect him.
The most daring criticism of Bell comes from Dr. N. David Berman of
Columbia, who believes he has refined the possible interpretations of Bell
down to two: 1. non-locality ("total rapport") and 2. solipsism. We will
explain non-locality below, but Dr. Berman finds it so absurd that he prefers
solipsism. ("Is The Moon There When Nobody Looks?" Physics Today, April
1985. Berman says it isn't.)
Among those who accept Bell's Theorem, Dr. David Bohm of the University of
London offers three interpretations of what it means: "It may mean that
everything in the universe is in a kind of total rapport, so that whatever
happens is related to everything else (non-locality); or it may mean that
there is some kind of information that can travel faster than the speed of
light; or it may mean that our concepts of space and time have to be
modified in some way that we don't understand"(London Times, February 20,
1983).
Bohm's first model, "total rapport," also called non-locality, brings us very
close -- very, very close -- to Oriental monism: "All is One," as in Vedanta,
Buddhism, and Taoism. It also brings us within hailing distance of Jungian
synchronicity, an idea that seems "occult" or worse to most scientists -- even
if Wolfgang Pauli, a quantum heavyweight and Nobel laureate, once
endorsed it. You can see why New Agers like this; it is argued with unction
and plausibility in Fritjof Capra's The Tao of Physics. It means particles are
correlated because everything is correlated.
Dr. John Archibald Wheeler and Dr. Jack Sarfatti have offered even more
radical offshoots of this notion. Dr. Wheeler has proposed that every atomic
or sub-atomic experiment we perform changes every particle in the universe
everywhichway in time, all the way back to the Big Bang. The universe is in
constant creation, as in Sufism, but atomic physicists are its creators.
Dr. Bohm's third alternative, modification of our ideas of space and time,
could lead us anywhere... including back to the Kantian notion that space
and time do not exist, but are only human projections, like persistent
optical illusions. (Some think Relativity already demonstrates that.) The
particles are correlated because they never moved in space or time,
because space and time are just "in our heads."
And there are other alternatives. David Harrison suggests that we may have
to abandon Aristotelian logic, i.e., give up classifying things into only the
two categories of "true and real" and "untrue and unreal." In between, in
Aristotle's excluded middle, we may have the "maybe" proposed by von
Neumann in 1933, the probabilistic logics (percentages/gambles) suggested
by Korzybski, the four-valued logic of Rapoport (true, false, indeterminate
and meaningless) or some system we haven't found yet.
Others would rather give up "objectivity" -- the basic pre-Bell axiom that we
can describe an external world apart from our experiments or meddlings.
Some say this rejection of objectivity was always meant by the Copenhagen
Interpretation (invented by Neils Bohr long before Bell appeared, c. 1926 in
fact.) Generally, the Copenhagen view is stated as: We can only describe
observer-observed interactions; we can never know anything about any
hypothetical "observed" without an observer. Sounds like Zen to some, but
others fear this is opening the door to Dr. Berman's solipsism and the moon
that is only there when we look at it...
Bell's Theorem "means a whole new ball game," physicist Saul Paul Sirag told
the present author once. Unfortunately, as we have seen, nobody feels too
sure about the rules of the new game.
All we can say for sure is that "reality" ain't what it used to be.
In Doubt We Trust
Cults, religions, and BS in general
by Robert Anton Wilson Published November 29, 1999 in Whoa!
Can we actually "know" the universe? My God, it's hard enough finding your
way around in Chinatown.
-- Woody Allen
Last week, I happened to see two TV shows about "cults" -- "Scientology" and
"Heaven's Gate" on A&E's Investigative Reports -- and they got me thinking.
Each show had at least one galoot remarking that the line between "cult"
and "religion" seems fuzzy at best, but each show also had a majority of
folks who were quite sure they could distinguish a "cult" from a "religion" by
the institution's degree of "mind control" or "brainwashing." I think both
groups were confused.
There are two clear-cut and empirical lines between a "cult" and a
"religion": [a] membership (voters) and [b] bank account, [b] being a
function of [a]. If a group has enough members to influence elections, it will
also have a large bank account, and these two factors will guarantee that
the politicians, the cops and the corporate media will treat it with respect,
as a "religion." With few members and little money, the same group could be
called a "cult" and treated accordingly, even to the extent of toasting,
roasting and charbroiling, as in Waco.
This line remains obvious and visible to all observers. The only problems
arise when people try to draw a less "materialistic," more metaphysical
distinction between one gang of True Believers and another. Materialistic
questions can be answered, e.g., "Does that matchbox have any matches
left in it?" Metaphysical questions about "mind control" or any other
immeasurable "entity" or "essence" cannot be answered, and the best that
can be said is that arguing about them has provided a certain amount of
intellectual entertainment, or combat, for a few thousand years. At least
for those who enjoy that kind of pastime. Sort of like chess, you know.
But BS has an even more total incompatibility with what I loosely called
"common sense." Except when we get dragged into a metaphysical, or
ideological, argument, we all know damn well how fallible we are. We know
that our sense impressions can mislead us, for instance. If we see somebody
who looks like Joe across the street, we are aware that it may be Joe or it
may be some ginkus who looks a lot like Joe. We examine him empirically
lest we classify him too quickly as Joe or not-Joe. We have learned that
slow, tentative judgements are safer than rapid certitudes.
After all, the Earth looks flat. Worse yet, if ten witnesses at an accident are
questioned, ten slightly different stories always emerge -- and sometimes
the differences are huge, not slight.
The same experiment works with hearing, and other senses, as well as with
vision and memory. Try it with a half-dozen friends. Let somebody with a
watch say "Go!" and then all of you be silent and listen for one full minute --
60 surprisingly long seconds. You will all hear some sounds nobody else hears
and miss some sounds everybody else caught.
But if our perceptions are somewhat uncertain, then all of our ideas, which
are deductions or inferences from perception, must also remain somewhat
uncertain.
The late, great Dr. Timothy Leary used to put this in terms of a baseball
metaphor: the best batters all had a lifetime batting average below .333.
That means they missed more than two out of three times they swung. Now,
maybe you are vain enough to think you are more than twice as good at
philosophy as Ted Williams was at baseball, but even then you'd only have an
average around .600. To assume an average of 1.000 is to assert that you are
more than three times as smart with words as Babe Ruth was with baseballs
-- rather a conceited view, nu? -- and yet that's what every Belief System
(BS) claims.
If the world seems to be full of stupid, crazy and half-asleep people, that is
because it is still dominated by Belief Systems. Whether this BS operates
under the label of religion or cult or Political Correctness, it shuts off all
brain functions except memorization and represents the suicide of
intelligence.
Did you know that Bill Gates is the Antichrist? Well, you've probably
suspected it, but some people have set out to prove it, using the time-
honored methods of Theological Numerology -- which transcends ordinary
logic because it's played with deuces, eights and one-eyed jacks wild,
making for a livelier game.
For instance, one Web site proves Bill's diabolism by converting Bill Gates III
into the ASCII code used in computer science. Why not just "Bill Gates" since
he seldom uses the III? Why not William Gates III? Well, you get the wrong
results that way, see? That's the advantage of using wild cards.
In ASCII, Bill Gates III converts to the following: B=66, I=73, L=76, L=76,
G=71, A=65, T=84, E=69, S=83, I=1, I=1, I=1. Add the numbers and the total
is 666! Horrors!
If you're not convinced, try Bill's Microsoft Operating System, MS-DOS 6.21.
Converted into ASCII code, the result is: 77 + 83 + 45 + 68 + 79 + 83 + 32 + 54
+ 46 + 50 + 49 = 666, again.
In fact, Bill seems to be the target of more Web sites identifying him as the
Antichrist than any other candidate. One even gives you the lyrics to a song
"Bill Gates Is the Antichrist," which makes an ideal sing-along for pot parties
and other gatherings of the digerati elite.
Bill still has rivals, though. In the Holy Writ -- where the word "Antichrist"
only appears five times -- it has both singular and plural forms. I John 2:18
denounces many "Antichrists" who were already living then (nearly 2000
years ago...) and I John 2:22 defines the singular "Antichrist" collectively as
"he who denies the Father and the Son," while I John 4:2-3 describes the
"Antichrists" as those who deny Jesus, without mentioning the Father.
Meanwhile, The Catholic Encyclopedia says "Antichrist" does not refer to one
specific person or event. "Antichrists" in all these contexts simply means
heretics; the reification of Antichrist(s) into one monstrous individual,
identified with the Dragon and the Beast in Revelations, was a later, post-
Biblical creation.
Incidentally, in the film Who's That Girl?, Madonna, when asked if she is the
Antichrist, evades a direct answer. Nothing says Anti can't be an Auntie....
Leaning toward the pluralist view, some fundies have identified the
Antichrist with freemasonry, computers per se, the Susan B. Anthony dollar
and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Texx Marr, a leading demonologist, claims
Anti-or-Auntie lives at Lucent Technologies at 666 Fifth Avenue in New York.
I kid you not: None of this is satire. All of the above persons, groups,
cartoons, coins etc. have been accused either on Web sites, or in Robert
Fuller's scholarly study of this obsession, Naming the Antichrist (Oxford,
1995).
As J.R. "Bob" Dobbs observed, "You know how dumb the average guy is? Well,
mathematically, by definition, half of them are even dumber than that."
According to a 1992 poll by Time, 53 percent of our citizens expect both
Christ and Anti to fight their final bout sometime in the year 2000. It sounds
like a hell of a show; I wish I knew where to buy tickets.
The Anti and/or Auntie and/or plurals now has his/her/their own Web site,
Antichrist and Associates. They brag a lot about their control over the mass
media and preach love and kindness. Now that sounds sinister, doesn't it?
Oh, by the way, do you know the meaning of 2 x 4 x 666? That's the lumber
of the Beast.
Although few people remember this, Bugs Bunny was the first UFO
"abductee" in a 1952 cartoon called "Hasty Hare."
The next case did not occur until nine years later, in 1961, when Betty and
Barney Hill famously encountered the "greys" from Zeta Reticuli, who
molested them sexually and otherwise, and were also wearing Nazi
uniforms. At least, Barney Hill remembered the malign midgets as garbed in
Nazi regalia; Betty, for some reason, never did recall that poignantly
puzzling detail.
I've met Dr. Mack, and he seems like a sane and sensible man. He frankly
admits that he's not quite sure what kind of "reality" these experiences
occur in, except that it sure ain't consensus reality. It's something more like
the non-ordinary reality of Carlos Castaneda's Don Juan books, or of the
mystics of all traditions -- or of Leary and his merry band of acid astronauts.
I find that startling. Imagine what would happen if "many millions" of U.S.
citizens said they had been sexually assaulted by aliens from Mexico or Iraq,
instead of aliens from Outer Space. Obviously, there would be no scientific
taboo against investigating such cases, and Congress might even have
declared war on the invaders by now. If the subjects claimed, as most of Dr.
Mack's subjects do, that they now love their kidnappers and have received
important ecological warnings from them, as well as learning from their
extraterrestrial sermons about how wicked and wretched our society is, this
would be considered evidence that they had been "brainwashed" as well as
raped (think Stockholm Syndrome). The differences in scientific and
political reactions to atrocities by human aliens and nonhuman aliens seem
even more confusing than the rest of this mystery.
Dr. Mack, on the other hand, isn't sure about the literalness of alien
abductions. In his second book, Passport to the Cosmos (Crown) he no
longer calls his subjects "abductees," but "experiencers," although he
remains convinced that they experienced something and that the
experience is real in some sense.
Can we believe both Dr. Mack and Dr. Hammond at the same time, and
accept that while extraterrestrials or even weirder nonhumans have been
raping people and teaching ecology, another conspiracy is simultaneously
torturing and reeducating children to make them Slaves of Satan? Or might
we more economically assume that a lot of people have had a lot of non-
ordinary experiences -- psychedelic trips without drugs -- and we all tend to
interpret these according to our own hopes and fears?
Consider the model offered by Dr. Jacques Vallee, who has been
investigating UFOs for more than 30 years. Dr. Vallee has suggested as one
possible explanation a vast experiment in mind control and behavior
modification by some Intelligence Agency (he doesn't try to guess which
one). Could both Dr. Mack's cases and Dr. Hammond's cases represent
persons who fell victim to this and retain only shattered and distorted
memories of their ordeal? Considering what has already leaked about the
CIA's MK-ULTRA research, this hypothesis does not seem altogether
extravagant.
Bill Cooper, the guy who says the greys were behind the JFK hit, has also
considered a variation on Vallee's theory. He himself, Cooper says, may have
been deceived by his superiors in Naval Intelligence. But in that case, he
points out, the government (I no longer feel safe in calling it "our
government") must be using the "grey mythology" as a cover-up to hide
something else -- something even worse than selling us out to rapists from
Reticuli.
Frankly, I cannot accept either the blind faith of the True Believers or the
dogmatic denials of the Establishment. Like Dr. Mack, I think the whole topic
needs less sensationalism and more open-minded research.
After all, the next person engulfed by this non-ordinary reality might be you
or me.
In 1997, a jury awarded $2.4 million in damages to one Nadine Cool, who
had sued her former therapist, Dr. Kenneth Olson, for malpractice. He had
convinced her, under hypnosis, that when she was a child her father had
forced her to participate in Satanic rituals of human sacrifice. He also
convinced her that she possessed no fewer than 126 alternate personalities,
including angels, demons and even a duck. She had believed it all --
including the duck -- until she confronted her father with these hideous
memories and he dropped dead of a heart attack.
Many secular humanists hold that these B-movie scenarios are not
"recovered" by hypnosis but created by it -- but such infidels are often so
sunk in skepticism that they even deny the Virgin Birth and the Face on
Mars. Besides, Recovered Memory Therapy has a Politically Correct
pedigree: It was popularized by two outstanding Feminist philosophers,
Ellen Bass and Laura Davis, in their book The Courage to Heal (Harper &
Row, 1988). And Satanic rituals were authenticated by Ms. Magazine.
Doubting that Satanism exists in every nook and cranny of our republic, at
this point, might easily get you convicted of Political Incorrectness. Even
doubting the talking duck might get you in trouble at U.C. Santa Cruz.
According to sociologist Jeffrey Victor in his book Satanic Panic (Open Court,
Chicago, 1993) there were over 60 mob panics created by Satanic
revelations in the years1982-92. And as my grampa used to say, "There's no
smoke without fire." Right?
The FBI's Behavioral Science Unit, which deals with serial killers, has even
been drawn into the fray, and announced that they have never found any
evidence to support the panic. This must mean, of course, that the FBI is
part of the cover-up.
Why not? According to leading Recovered Memory expert Dr. Cory Hammond
of the University of Utah, the CIA and NASA are both part of the
international Satanic cabal, which originated in Nazi Germany. How could
the FBI possibly be left out of such a juicy conspiracy?
Dr. Fernandez was wearing a tie with a picture of Daffy Duck on it when he
was convicted, according to an Associated Press report earlier this month.
Maybe Daffy was also the talking duck in the Nadine Cool case? Or, worse
yet, is it possible that Daffy Duck is the Devil? Keep an eye on your local
media for further Feminist or Fundamentalist revelations.
They charged Mr. Claus, represented in court by a stuffed dummy, with all
sorts of high crimes and misdemeanors. They charged him with paganism.
They charged him with perjury for claiming to be Saint Nicholas. They even
charged him with encouraging child abuse by appearing in whiskey ads.
Worse yet, they found him guilty on all counts, for basically being a jolly old
elf -- i.e., a pagan god trying to steal Christmas from Christ.
It wasn't the first time Mr. Claus got the boot from a Christian congregation.
Pope John XXIII threw the suspiciously merry old clown out of the Roman
Catholic church back in the late 1960s. The Jehovah's Witnesses have always
denounced Santa for his unsavory pagan past. (They also recognized
Christmas trees as phallic symbols long before Freud.) Many fundamentalists
believe that all pagan gods are basically one false god -- the same demon in
different disguises -- and they think the disguise is thin in the case of this
particular elf. It only takes a minor letter switch, they point out, to reveal
Santa Claus as SATAN Claus.
I sort of think the fundies have it right for once. Santa not only has an
unsavory pagan ancestry but a rather criminal family history all around. Let
me Illuminize you...
As Weston La Barre pointed out a long time ago in his classic Ghost Dance:
The Origins of Religion, you can find remnants of a primordial bear-god
from the bottom of South America up over North America and over the North
Pole and down across most of Europe and Asia. This deity appears in cave
paintings from southern France carbon-dated at 30,000 BC. You can find him
and her (for this god is bisexual) disguised in Artemis and Arduina and King
Arthur, all unmasked via canny detective work by folklorists -- and
etymologists, who first spotted the bear-god when they identified the Indo-
European root ard, meaning bear. You can track the bear-god in dwindling
forms in a hundred fairy tales from all over Europe and Asia. And you can
find the rituals of this still-living god among the indigenous tribes of both
American continents.
And Santa, like Peter Pan and the Green Man of the spring festivals, and the
Court Jester -- and (in an odd way) Chaplin's beloved Little Tramp -- all have
traits of the god that walks like a man and acts nasty sometimes and
clownish sometimes and who was ritually killed and eaten by most of our
ancestors in the Stone Age, who then became one with their god and thus
also became (if the ritual worked) as brave as their god. See Sir James
Frazer's The Golden Bough for the gory details.
And I swear the same god-bear tromps and shambles through every page of
Joyce's masterpiece of psycho-archeology, Finnegans Wake. If you don't
believe me, consult Adaline Glasheen's Third Census of 'Finnegans Wake.'
Yes, indeedy.
In some rustic parts of Europe and probably in Kansas, Santa retains traces
of his carnivorous past. Children are told that if they are "good" all year,
Santa will reward them, but if they are "bad" he will EAT THEM ALL UP. Yeah,
the Boogie Man or Bogie or Pookah or Puck are all of somewhat ursine
ancestry, although other animal-gods got mixed in sometimes.
As Crazy Old Uncle Ezra wrote in Canto 113, "The gods have not returned.
They have never left us."
Jung might state the case thusly: Gods, as archetypes of the genetic human
under-soul (or "collective unconscious"), cannot be killed or banished; they
always return with a new mask but the same symbolic meaning. Related
example: Young ladies in ancient Greece were often seduced or raped by
satyrs; in the Arab lands, we note a similar outbreak of randy djinn; it India,
it was devas. In the Christian Dark Ages, it began happening to young men,
too, especially to monks. They called the lascivious critter an incubus. Now
it's happening all around us, and the molesters come from Outer Space. The
sex-demon, like the Great Mother and the Shadow and our ursine hero, and
the three brothers hunting the dragon (Recognize them in Jaws? Spot them
doing their Three Stooges gig?) -- these archetypal forces always come back
under new names. Sir Walter Scott called them "the crew that never rests."
Prof. Hans Seisel of the University of Chicago passed the following along to
Arthur Koestler, who published it in The Challenge of Chance. Seisel’s
grandparents had a 23 in their address, his mother had 23 both as a street
number and apartment number, Seisel himself once had 23 as both his home
address and his law office address, etc. While visiting Monte Carlo, Seisel’s
mother read a novel, Die Liebe der Jeannie Ney, in which the heroine wins a
great deal by betting on 23 at roulette. Mother tried betting on 23 and it
came up on the second try.
Adolf Hitler was initiated into the Vril Society (which many consider a front
for the Illuminati) in 1923. The Morgan Bank (which is regarded as the
financial backer of the Illuminati by the John Birch Society) is at 23 Wall
Street in Manhattan. When Illuminatus! was turned into a play, it premiered
in Liverpool on 23 November (which is also Harpo Marx’s birthday). Ken
Campbell, producer of Illuminatus!, later found, on page 223 of Jung’s
Memories, Dreams, Reflections, a weird dream about Liverpool, which
Campbell says describes the street intersection of the theatre where
Illuminatus! opened (Jung, of course, was the first psychologist to study
weird coincidences of this sort and to name them synchronicities). Campbell
also claims that Hitler lived briefly in Liverpool when he was 23 years old,
but I haven’t found the reference for that.
I now have almost as many weird 23s in my files as Fort once had records of
rains of fish, and people are always sending me new ones.
Bonnie and Clyde, the most popular bank-robbers of the 1930s, lived out
most American underground myths quite consciously, and were shot to death
by the Texas Rangers on 23 May, 1934. Their initials, B and C, have the
Cabalistic values of 2–3.
Dr John Lilly refers to “the crew that never rests” as Cosmic Coincidence
Control Center and warns that they pay special attention to those who pay
attention to them. I conclude this account with the most mind-boggling 23s
to have intersected my own life.
On 23 July 1973, I had the impression that I was being contacted by some
sort of advanced intellect from the system of the double star Sirius. I have
had odd psychic experiences of that sort for many years, and I always record
them carefully, but refuse to take any of them literally, until or unless
supporting evidence of an objective nature turns up. This particular
experience, however, was especially staggering, both intellectually and
emotionally, so I spent the rest of the day at the nearest large library
researching Sirius. I found, among other things, that 23 July is very closely
associated with that star.
On 23 July, ancient Egyptian priests began a series of rituals to Sirius,
continuing until 8 September. Since Sirius is known as the “Dog Star”, being
in the constellation Canis Major, the period 23 July – 8 September became
known as “the dog days”.
My psychic “Contact” experience continued, off and on, for nearly two
years, until October 1974, after which I forcibly terminated it by sheer
stubborn willpower (I was getting tired of wondering whether I was specially
selected for a Great Mission of interstellar import, or was just going crazy).
After two years of philosophic mulling on the subject (late 1974 – early
1976), I finally decided to tune in one more time to the Sirius–Earth
transmissions, and try to produce something objective. On 23 July 1976,
using a battery of yogic and shamanic techniques, I opened myself to
another blast of Cosmic Wisdom and told the Transmitters that I wanted
something objective this time around.
The same week as that issue of Time, i.e. still one week after my 23rd
experiment, Rolling Stone published a full-page advertisement for a German
Rock group called Ramses. One of the group was named Winifred, which is
the name of one of the four German Rock musicians in Illuminatus!, and the
advertisement included a large pyramid with an eye atop it, the symbol of
the Illuminati.
The actor who played Padre Pederastia in the National Theatre production
of Illuminatus! informed me that he once met Crowley on a train. “Mere
coincidence”, if you prefer. But the second night of the National Theatre
run, the actors cajoled me into doing a walk-on as an extra in the Black
Mass scene. And, dear brothers and sisters, that is how I found myself, stark
naked, on the stage of the National Theatre, bawling Crowley’s slogan “Do
what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”, under the patronage of Her
Majesty the Queen.
If you look up Crowley’s Confessions, you’ll find that he began the study of
magick in 1898, at the age of 23.