kaos

If such is the case, then I can see now why I’ve led you to confusion on the matter
with my raving on about lies and chicanery. I don’t doubt that Neuburg and Mr C had
their little tussle in the sand. That much seems obvious from the text as given. However,
it does seem that Mr C did not wish to leave the reader of the Equinox version of the
story with the impression that it had been the intention of our two heroes to have
Crowley channel Choronzon from the beginning.
I was led to believe that this was a secret known to few students in the Order, back in
1990, and that the establishment would just as soon keep it that way. Whether they did
not wish to promote this sort of practice in general, or they did not like the doubts it
might cast upon Crowley and his subsequent work, or some other reason entirely, I
cannot say. I do feel confident that this was in Jones’s mind when he volunteered to sit
in the Triangle himself during that evocation of Paimon.
Crowley does mention Makhashanah in another place, as I discovered yesterday
while looking into the Choronzon question. In The Confessions of Aleister Crowley, while
discussing possible proof that might be had that a given vision is genuine, he says:
Let me give one example. The Angel of the twenty-seventh Æthyr said: “The word of
the Aeon is makhashanah.” I immediately discredited him; because I knew that the
word of the Aeon was, on the contrary, abrahadabra. Inquiry by the Holy Cabala then
showed me that the two words had the same numerical value, 418. The apparent blunder
was thus an absolute proof that the Angel was right. Had he told me that the word was
abrahadabra, I should have thought nothing of it, arguing that my imagination might
have put the words in his mouth. [p 617]
It’s not, I fear, quite the kind of mention you had in mind, but there it is. Seems to pass
off the whole thing as inconsequential at best.
I agree that Crowley has altered the spelling of Choronzon so it might be summed
to 333. But why 333? It’s a nice enough number, to be sure, but I’m afraid I don’t quite
follow how the reference in the 28 th (which I think does foreshadow Choronzon in the
10 th ) makes the number 333 somehow more desirable. I looked at Sepher Sephiroth, and
found the following entered under “333”:
Qabalah of the Nine Chambers aiq bkr
Choronzon [vide Dr Dee, & Lib. 418, 10 th Aire] chvrvnzvn (f )
Snow shlg
Surprised to find no mention of “dispersion”, at all. Sepher Sephiroth was originally
begun by Allan Bennett, and subsequently enlarged by Crowley and others before being
130