Talk:Aleister Crowley

i keep looking for this picture but i don't see it. is it on the back wall or on the left side?

I detailed its location a little more accurately in the article; it's above her bookcase, a few feet to the left of her door. - Dharmabum420 13:37, 2 October 2006 (PDT)

best view of the picture

i think the picture can be best seen in the episode "a change in my life" [1] and that makes sense because it's about her religion.

Kathulu/Cthulhu

I'm removing a lot of this stuff as I don't see where it's coming from. Cthulhu is not mentioned in the Bible, and even if there is someone claiming that Leviathan is another name for Cthulhu, Leviathan does not appear in the book of Revelation (no 's'), nor anywhere in the New Testament. --Brucker 12:06, 9 November 2006 (PST)

Whats wrong with this: A text version of The Book of the Law is available on the internet.???--modelmotion 20:00, 21 November 2006 (CST)

Prophet

I think I heard something about Crowley being described as a prophet. It would be nice to have a section about that.--modelmotion 17:26, 30 November 2006 (CST)

Any comment on the prophet question?--modelmotion 01:23, 2 December 2006 (CST)

Book of the Dead

According to this Crowley did infact translate the Book of the Dead and that secion should not have been deleted.--modelmotion 01:06, 1 December 2006 (CST)

No, according to that, Crowley had the Stele of Revealing translated from Egyptian...NOT the Egyptian Book of the Dead. The Egyptian Book of the Dead was not the only work ever translated from Egyptian to English. You really need to actually read the material you are quoting and actually follow up on the quotes. --Tannhaus 01:35, 1 December 2006 (CST)

I found this on an external site and it basically says what I've been saying

I have no problem leaving the book of the dead off the Crowley page for now. I need to read up a little on the subject like you suggest. I do however think the book of the dead is a very interesting topic for discussion.--modelmotion 01:22, 2 December 2006 (CST)

As for the Cake of Light comment in your article, what we have is a direct quote from Wikipedia, if thats wrong perhaps you can get them to change the soucre material and we can change the quote accordingly.--modelmotion 01:29, 2 December 2006 (CST)

But, the simple fact is that Crowley had nothing to do with translating the book of the dead. Crowley did not know Egyptian. When the Stele of Revealing was translated, he had to pay the curator at the Bulaq museum to translate it for him....and that's just a small egyptian tablet.

As far as the cake of light comment, you added the quotes after I made my change it appears. But, while the source material was not wrong on that quote, I just added to the information. --Tannhaus 11:51, 2 December 2006 (CST)

Magick section. In this section I'm really not sure what you're trying to say. How can someone confuse an entity: Cthulu with a practice: magick. It seems like that sentence doesn't fit at all. --Tannhaus 21:19, 2 December 2006 (CST)

Geneology Section

I'm editing out the geneology section. It was part of an April Fool's joke. It has no basis in fact and is not seriously considered by anyone, as evidenced by the blog that the original statement referenced: http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/2006/11/lonelygirl15-crowley-bush-and-more.html

and:

http://www.lashtal.com/nuke/index.php?name=News&file=article&sid=827#comments

It's really apparent that people can say anything about Crowley and someone will believe it, but this is absolutely ridiculous. --Tannhaus 06:07, 4 December 2006 (CST)

Speculation on a Moonchild

I'm not really sure about how speculations are handled here, but does this section really belong here in the Aleister Crowley article? --Tannhaus 15:39, 10 December 2006 (CST)

Now that we've been working on a Theories and Speculation category, a Moonchild article in place of that section would probably be more suitable. However, the section provides no info on the Moonchild or any other reasons why fans speculated that it could have any connection with Bree's ceremony. I'd investigate into that... if there are no other reasons, I'd say the connection is too weak to really merit an article, in which case the section should just be removed. Anyone else know about this? OwenIsCool 16:24, 10 December 2006 (CST)

I agree that this connection is too weak. It was rather far-fetched speculation at the time--there were no clues beyond references to Crowley to suggest anything of the kind. Moreover, since we know the ceremony which did take place was a fake, this entry is simply incorrect. I'll delete it now. --Treefunk 16:39, 10 December 2006 (CST)