Magick Without Tears

54 MAGICK WITHOUT TEARS Demiurge, a creative God behind whom is an eternal formless Greatness-anything to confuse the issue! Sometimes the Universe is supported by an elephant; he, in turn, stands on a tortoise ... by that time it is hoped that the enquirer is too tired and muddled to ask what holds up the tortoise. Sometimes, a great Father and Mother crystallize out of some huge cloudy confusion of "Elements" - and so on. But nobody answers the question; at least, none of these God-inventing mules, with their incurably commonplace minds. H. Serious philosophy has always begun by discarding all these puerilities. It has of necessity been divided into these schools: the Nihilist, the Monist, and the Dualist. I. The last of these is, on the surface, the most plausible; for almost the first thing that we notice on inspecting the Universe is what the Hindu schools call "the Pairs of Opposites. " This, too, is very convenient, because it lends itself so readily to orthodox theology; so we have Ormuzd and Ahriman, the Devas and the Asuras, Osiris and Set, et cetera and da capo, personifications of "Good" and "Evil." The foes may be fairly matched; but more often the tale tells of a revolt in heaven. In this case, "Evil" is temporary; soon, especially with the financial help of the devout , the "devil" will be "cast into the Bottomless Pit" and "the Saints will reign with Christ in glory for ever and ever, Amen!" Often a "redeemer," a "dying God," is needed to secure victory to Omnipotence; and this is usually what little vulgar boys might call a 'touching story '! J. The Monist (or Advaitist) school, is at once subtler and more refined; it seems to approach the ultimate reality (as opposed to the superficial examination of the Dualists) more closely. It seems to me that this doctrine is based upon a sorites of doubtful validity. To tell you the hideously shameful truth, I hate this doctrine so rabidly that I can hardly trust myself to