"Readers must not, under any circumstances, take this present publication of the Commentaries too seriously." (Introduction)
"Aspirants must be on guard, constantly, because the 'Black Brethren' imitate the Magi, and may be mistaken for them by sloppy thinkers." (Page 13)
"Only venal or naive people hanker for public office." (Page 17)
"...the Aspirant will be approached by all kinds of people who will talk as if inspired, or talk as if they are Masters, and who will attempt to advise or to warn him, or just to make contact with him and be acknowledged as Gods speaking." (Page 35)
All of the above, quoted from The Commentaries of AL by Marcelo Ramos Motta, published by Samuel Weiser, Inc., who gladly gave us permission to quote directly from this book, could, of course, be a reference to Newaeon and myself, but it could also refer to the author of these words. We also requested permission to quote from Mr. Motta's Equinox, Vol. V, No. 2--this one published by his own people at Thelema Publishing Co., not to be confused with the very reputable Thelema Publications--however, even though they were informed that we had a deadline to meet, we have not yet received a word from them. Question: Is the company and/or Motta himself aware of just how foolish this book is and how easy it would be to illustrate the defects of its author? [At the time of this writing, Sr. Motta was still alive. -ED]
As for Commentaries on Liber AL vel Legis, otherwise known as The Book of the Law, the reader is referred to either of the two following publications: The Magical and Philosophical Commentaries on The Book of the Law edited by Symonds and Grant and published by 93 Publishing of Canada, which is often very sloppy in its business practices, and The Law is for All edited by Israel Regardie and published by Llewellyn Publications, also difficult to deal with at times. This second edition is a little less complete than the first, but the first is somewhat less accurate than the second. At any rate, both of these editions of the Commentaries are preferable to Motta's for reasons which will become apparent as you read on.
In the chapter entitled THE O.T.O. MANIFESTO in The Commentaries, Motta wrote: "Let is (sic) be known that Karl Johannes Germer...died on October 25 of 1962, naming as the Follower promised in AL ii 76 Marcelo Ramos Motta..." From here he went on to slander Herr H. J. Metzger, Frater Paragranus IX° O.T.O.. Motta then continued: "Within the period covering the years of 1962-1967 Marcelo Ramos Motta completed the Initiatic Work of the Outer and the Inner Colleges of the A.·.A.·. and, crossing the Abyss, reached in full the Grade of Master of the Temple, of which Mr. Germer had been his herald in 1962 just before his death." Now there is no documentation to back up any of this; Germer himself had no documentation and was hardly a fit leader of the O.T.O. after A.C.'s death (a fact that perhaps he himself was wisely aware of) and if we are to judge Motta by his works...well...read on.
What it comes down to is that we are supposed to take Motta's word for it that he spoke the truth. (By the way, though the source is somewhat questionable, coming from another man who claims the leadership of the O.T.O., it is said that Germer died in screaming agony, which would have made it difficult for him to say anything before he died.)
Motta went on to say: "On reaching the Grade of Master of the Temple, Marcelo Ramos Motta assumed the XI° O.T.O., which is the O.T.O. Grade all Brethren must assume on Crossing the Abyss..." Assuming, of course, that one has truly crossed the Abyss. And funny how Motta has not published an account of his crossing... This Manifesto is signed Parzival XI°...the man has no imagination and no originality. And he did seem to be confusing A.·.A.·. with O.T.O. here.
In the advertisement sheet for his pseudo-Equinox, Vol. V, No. 2, (which is nothing less than blasphemy--good thing sincere Thelemites have a well developed sense of humour) it is claimed that Motta is the Praemonstrator of the A.·.A.·. and Supervisor General of the O.T.O..
But who is this man, really?
Marcelo (Mark) Motta is a Brizilian English teacher (so he is sure to find many errors in this humble aspirant's writing). Samples of his handwriting from 1963 as well as c. 1972-76 E.V. tell us the following:
(1963 E.V.) He is (or was) an ardent, affectionate, amiable sort of fellow; very sensitive and emotional (perhaps too much so for his own good). He is somewhat superficial, fickled and affected. He lacks precision, has too much softness in his character, and has a desire to take the easy, expedient way even if it means that he must be hypocritical and deceptive. Motta is the type of individual who sets traps. This man is much too dangerous and shrewed to do business with (and Donald Weiser might very well agree with this). His feelings predominate his will; he is aggressive and the soul of tenacity. Motta is also prone to despotism. He is inclined to mysticism, but this is marred by the pride, vanity and conceit that is also displayed in his handwriting. He is egotistic, arrogant, and assertive. This subject exaggerates, loves ceremony and desires to be admired. Motta is also selfish and has a love of gain. A graphological analysis shows him to be snobbish and to have a fondness for social formality, display and ceremony. This man has an insatiable thirst for honours and glory. He craves grandeur.
(1972-1976 E.V.) Basically this signature shows that all of this has gone to extremes. It also reveals the person who cannot stop or let go of opinions, habits, worries or even of an unwilling listener. A man who is easily obsessed.
But let us not depend solely upon the analysis of a few scattered and dated samples of his handwriting. Let us read his recently published words very carefully and see what we can see of this man, Motta.
The Commentaries begin with an introduction written by James Wasserman. Motta's Equinox ends with a book review which unnecessarily slips into a slander of Jim's name. True, Jim has made some mistakes--he once accepted Motta for what he claims to be, even after being warned away from Motta by the editor of this newsletter--and by all accounts Jim is prone to repeat his mistakes. [Wasserman joined the Caliphate pseudo-o.t.o. while Grady McMurtry, Caliph Hymenaeus Alpha 777, was still alive. -ED] Still, the slanderous remarks made by Mr. Motta were totally uncalled for, out of place, and petty.
The introduction begins: "Mr. Germer thought most highly of Mr. Motta, and it was his dying wish that he be informed that he was the 'Follower' promised in AL II, 76, a belief which Mr. Motta has since stated was incorrect." But which was not stated in the Manifesto published in this same book. It goes on: "Mr. Motta has edited the Cefalu Comment, deleting approximately one third of the original material, and has added a considerable amount of his own writings." According to Motta: "Mr. Germer and I discussed...the need to edit the Commentaries. ...about a third...is magically worthless." Who is Motta to judge the writings of such a man as Aleister Crowley? It is exactly this kind of thing which distorted the Christian Bible and religion. Should we allow this sort of thing to happen to Thelema? Or should we all follow the example of our brother Keallach, who, while he was on his G.M.R., circa 1975 E.V., was told by Jim that Motta would consider some of his writing for his proposed Equinox series. Our brother, now the editor of this newsletter, was living on the very barest of necessities at the time, with nothing promising ahead of him. He had read The Commentaries and replied that Motta was a burnt-out, fallen star, and that he would rather die a starving, unknown writer than have his name associated with Motta's. Frater Keallach is still with us, and in much better circumstances. Unfortunately, so is Marcelo Ramos Motta...
[Time has corrected the error that Sr. Motta's mother made in giving him birth, and some years after this writing he was found dead. -ED]
Something happened between Weiser and Motta--something which no one will comment upon with any clarity. The result was that Jim was suddenly no longer employed by the publishing company and Thelema Publishing Co. was born to further Motta's ambitions.
"Such writings," said Motta in his Commentaries, "are like mirrors in which each one sees his or her face, and no other. If thou dislikest what is seen, change thyself." In these mirror-like writings the face of Mark Motta has been frozen and when we look into this speculum it is he that we can see and very very clearly. What we see is so pathetic, so horrifying, so amusing, that he cannot be taken seriously by any right thinking person.
Throughout this book Motta went out of his way to prove that most of A.C.'s Commentaries, that is, those which he did not delete, are incorrect and then went on to give us what he claims to be the better and most accurate commentary--and his many words are virtually worthless. His attempts to appear superior to A.C. fall very flat. He does, however, manage to reveal the truth about himself to the careful reader.
In the commentary to AL I.4 he wrote: "There are certain analogies between 'Black Brotherhood' and paranoia, but while paranoia is a mental disorder, 'Black Brotherhood' is of Daäth, and much more dangerous." He should know. While it seems obvious that Motta is not a Black Brother, it is certain that he is a puppet for the brotherhood and the qliphothic forces. It is most probable that he rushed up the Ladder of Initiation and because he was insufficiently prepared, was turned away from the Abyss and thrown back down into the lowest realms of Malkuth, ay, perhaps even into the World of Shells. As for the Black Brothers, he spoke much of them in this book, so much, in fact, that one begins to suspect paranoia. And this suspicion is backed up in his Equinox where he spoke of such things as a Roman Catholic priest launching a magical attack against him, people pretending to be aspirants to spy on him and interfere with his progress along the Path, others interferring with his publishing efforts, and so on.
This man, whom I believe is in his 40's, is far more preoccupied with sex than a young teenager. In his writings he reveals some of his problems with sex, women and his inhabitions. Page 18: "...it is a pity that our mortal mistresses, not understanding Whom we worship [Nuit -ED] in them, so often think that they rule us! Then, when the abuse of their egos finally forces us to seek a new priestess, they accuse us of being cold and unfeeling..." Page 30: "'Sin' is essentially homosexual. His word is Restriction because his nature is twisted." Is not a strict heterosexual somewhat restricted? The reason-blind "rationality" of a homophobe.
In his Equinox, the chapter called LIBER CCXXXI A PERSONAL RESEARCH, Motta haphazardly and ignorantly invoked visions--so he called them--by way of the qliphoth. (Note how both Grant and Motta were compelled to work with Liber CCXXXI.) The careful reader will find that throughout these "visions", inspired by wine, pot, and who knows what else, the main preoccupation is with how to get women and get "fucked". An interesting note here concerning his ignorance of 'Sex Magick' is his entry dated April 18, 1972 E.V. to the effect that, as he believes, when a person loses his taste for sex then that person can safely begin to concentrate upon the Will. Totally absurd. That would take all of the force out of any Working. How ignorant can one man be?
Motta is also a great deal like good old A. E. Waite. When he wants to appear in possession of great secrets that he will bestow upon sincere aspirants (willing to worship him) he writes such things as: "The esoteric meanings had better remain secret." (His commentary to AL II.14.) "This word is communicated directly to any serious Aspirant when needed." (Commentary to AL I.20.) "There are several secret meanings, all of a technical nature, in this passage; it is unnecessary to dwell on them, since they become clear to earnest seekers during training." (AL I.27.)
Commenting on AL I.47: "...the Nazis destroyed all copies of the Book of the Law in Germany, ...and put the Outer Head of the O.T.O. (who, incidentally, was married to a Jewess) in a concentration camp..." This displays the same kind of bigotry as a local black newspaper displayed in the review of a play in which it said "Gremmar...has her life constantly reflected upon because of her relationship with three different men, (one of whom was white)..." Furthermore, page 153: "Christians, Orthodox Jews, Buddhists, Mohammedans, etc. may go on fighting as the petty, insane, unclean, lecherous, treacherous, silly idiots that they are." When A.C. spoke against a certain group of people he did so to point out some grave error in their otherwise splendid ideas, which he would never fail to praise. Motta, out of blind, fanatical bigotry, simply slanders for the sake of making everyone but himself appear inferior. It is the fuel which feeds his superiority complex and megalomania.
Page 222: "Thelemites abhor prostitution..." Motta should speak for himself. If you will excuse the cliche, some of my best friends are prostitutes. A.C. himself was greatly assisted in his magical experiments by prostitutes. There are "good" ones and "bad" ones, as with any other group. A true Thelemite would be the last person on earth to collectively condemn any particular group even though there may be philosophical reasons for disapproving of prostitution in general.
Page 225: "The Thelemic objection to abortion is that a child's Will-to-be-Born is a True Will..." This is not necessarily so, and how can Motta be sure that it is not the Will of the child, and necessary to that child's and it's parents' karma that the child be aborted? As in any other case, the true Thelemite realizes that each and every case must be judged as if it were new and unique, and ultimately it is the woman carrying the child who should decide upon her course of action, to carry the child full term or abort, and no man or woman, no government, has the right to tell that woman what she can and cannot do with her own body.
And his Gematria! Page 37: "HALF = 5 + 1 + 30 + 6 = 62. 4 + 2 = 6, the Sun." Here he transliterates "F" as Vau (V, U, W, or O). Pe (P, Ph) would have been better and would have given it the numeration of 106 or 836. Page 67: "AUM--111" !?!? Motta obviously transliterated "U", normally the Hebrew Vau, as Ayin, "O" or "A'a". Page 121: "BECAUSE = 2 + 5 + 3 + 1 + 6 + 7 + 5 = 29." To prove his point he transliterates "C" as Gimel (G). Kaph (K, Kh) would have been more correct. He uses Zayin (Z) for "S" when Samekh or Shin should have been used. Page 122: "REASON = 200 + 5 + 1 + 7 + 70 + 50 = 333". Nice, I like it, but the "O" could be Vau instead of Ayin, but most important here is that he has again used Zayin for "S". He missed a couple of good ones here. REASON, simply transliterated in this way comes to 322 which is the numeration of KhBSh, Lamb, the symbol of Jesus and Christians, or 386, the numeration of IShVO, Jesus.
On page 136 we find: "HELL = H + L + L = 65, the Number of Adonai." Here he breaks his pattern and drops the vowel, which he would normally transliterate as Heh, so that he can achieve a numeration which suits him.
The point is that here is a man who sets himself up as a teacher and he cannot even master the simplest of things, while he is all too willing to twist the facts to "prove" his ideas. Do you want to accept this man as your teacher? Here is his opinion of others, as stated on page 22 of his Commentaries: "You must expect error and inefficiency at every corner, and the attitude of the Adept towards his--fellows?--must be that of a patient, wary and humourous keeper in an asylum. If he loses his patience, he will kill the inmates; if he stops watching, they will kill him; and if he loses his sense of humor, that is to say, his sense of perspective, he will go insane himself." It should be stated that the true adept sees humanity, roughly, as either asleep (unaware), waking up (becoming aware), or awake (aware; initiated). The adept does not see those less awake than himself as lunatics; that is how a megalomaniac, egotistical person sees his fellow humans. And that is what Mr. Motta is thinking of you as he smiles and shakes your hand.
The worst thing about Mr. Motta is that he is so bloody mediocre.
Mr. Motta, we are not commenting on you in this manner to prove that we are better, or that you are wrong and we are right. We are just doing our Will, and we simply wish that you would be politely quiet and stop misrepresenting your own peculiar ideas, bigotry and hostility as Thelema. Just because you could not create your own movement to glorify yourself (see the October 5, 1974 E.V. entry of LIBER CCXXXI A PERSONAL RESEARCH), it does not give you the right to use A.C.'s.
Again, it is requested that you respond to our petition to quote directly from The Equinox, Vol. V, No. 2...
...for you see, Mr. Motta, this review is not finished.
(TNN.II.4.6-10, 9/24/79 E.V.)
K. J. Germer, Founder
M. R. Motta, Honorary Chairman
August 31, 1979 e.v.
Mr. G.M. Kelly
5910 Alder St.
Pittsburg, PA 15232Dear Mr. Kelly:
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Thank you for your letter of August 5th.
I would like to first inform you that Mr. Motta is deeply offended by your tampering with sacred symbols of which you haven't the slightest knowledge, and he doesn't in any way recognize your rediculous claims of being authorized by your fictitious "Frater M.E.D.".
Secondly, cleverness is not subtlety , Mr. Kelly (or Mr. Martin, or whatever your name is); and Mr. Motta does not give you authorization to quote him under any circumstances. However, since under the "Fair Use" concept on American copyright law you do not need Mr. Motta's consent to quote short passages of his works in reviews, you are obviously just maneuvering toward some sort of contact or recognition.
Lastly, I would like to propose you the following riddle--from Mr. Motta: A beggar who presents himself as himself is at least a beggar; but a beggar who presents himself under a mask is but a thief!
Love is the law, love under will.
Giving Mr. Marcelo Motta and his Thelema Publishing Co. plenty of time to respond either affirmatively or negatively, Brother Kelly wrote to them asking Mr. Motta's opinion of various persons and requesting permission to quote from the pseudo-Equinox, Vol. V, No. 2. While TNN II.4 was at the printer's, the letter which appears above arrived. It was written and mailed on the date that Kelly gave as the deadline so that it would be received after that date...a very impolite and ungentlemanly thing to do.
At the top of the letter some things were covered by correction fluid. To your left, under Germer's name (called the "Founder", which is misleading) was: "R. W. Gernon, President" and "J. H. Cabaniss, Chairman of the Board". To your right, above Motta's name and title was: "D. A. Boone, Treasurer" and "C. C. deMenezes, vice-Chairman". Why these names were removed from the letterhead we will leave for you to conjecture.
What tampering of which sacred symbols is Mr. Cabaniss referring to? He really should be more specific. And how does he know that Kelly hasn't the slightest knowledge of these unspecified symbols? Divine knowledge perhaps? Furthermore, we do not care in the least if these people or any others "recognize" the "rediculous claims of being authorized by your fictitious 'Frater M.E.D.'". I can assure you that I am not "fictitious", though Mr. Cabaniss, Mr. Motta's representative in Tennessee, may not quite understand this humble aspirant. As for the authorization: Mr. Motta is claiming to be authorized by Germer, a dead man who cannot contradict him, and the Order of the O.T.O., which may be just as dead as Mr. Germer, and which is, at least, in a chaotic state,* and the A.·.A.·. (a "sacred symbol" which Mr. Motta certainly seems not to have the slightest knowledge of). He and his followers base their claims upon things which cannot be backed up with documentation for there is no documentation. In other words, despite all reason and common sense, you are to simply take his word for it about everything he says. However, the authorization for Newaeon comes from this humble aspirant alone and his right to authorize anything is given to him by those who make up Newaeon, his own rights, and by the documentation which the Newsletter provides, i.e. certain words and papers presented therein. I am Frater M.E.D.. The Word of my Will is M.·.E.·.D.·.AL. And so on, accept or reject it. No one here is, can, or wishes to claim authorization concerning the O.T.O. nor the A.·.A.·. in the Outer. I do not believe that anyone else can, at this point in time, claim such authority, least of all Mr. Motta and his people. I authorize The Newaeon Newsletter and all that is done through Newaeon Productions--period. So what is there to recognize or not recognize?
We are not subtle and have never claimed to be. (And in this is a subtlety.) We are rather direct and to the point. We would like to thank Mr. Cabaniss for recognizing that we are clever, which is more than we can say of Mr. Cabaniss and the man he represents. As for Kelly's name, which confuses Mr. Cabaniss so much: Was not Eliphas Levi's given name Alphonse-Louis Constant? And Aleister Crowley's Edward Alexander Crowley? It seems to be a rather common thing for a magician or a mystic to change his name in some way and the true aspirant should readily be able to discover some of the reasons for this.
In this letter Mr. Motta (who almost always communicates through one intermediary or another, actual or "fictitious") does not give Newaeon permission to quote from his book. Then, with characteristic stupidity, Mr. Cabaniss proceeds to inform us of the "Fair Use" rights. We would like to thank him for this information, for you see, though we have much material concerning Copyrights, we had nothing concerning "Fair Use". We were not aware of this...until Mr. Cabaniss told us. Thus has Mr. Cabaniss inadvertantly assisted us in writing this review of his commander in chief. I would certainly not want this man to be working for me! Since the reception of this letter Mr. Weiser has written to us and sent Circulars 20 and R21 which say, basically, that brief quotations can be used in reviews without obtaining permission from the author or the publisher of the book being reviewed.
As for Newaeon/Kelly "obviously just maneuvering toward some sort of contact or recognition", this is totally absurd. We do not care to contact Mr. Motta and his people any more than we already have (and that more extensively than he realizes) and we do not care if they or anyone else "recognizes" us. We are just doing our Will and that is all that is important to us.
Finally, the riddle: it makes no sense. For one thing, if a beggar presents himself under a mask he is not a thief but a liar. And, after all, kings and beggars alike present themselves under masks for that is what a personality is and what persona means. For another thing, his riddle is not a riddle at all.
Mr. Donald Weiser wrote a letter to us, "for the record". In it he said, "Our feeling is that if we are willing to publish a work, we should certainly be willing to have people quote from it." The word "gladly" that we used in part one of this review may have been misleading. Further: "We are really sorry that we published this book [The Commentaries of AL -ED], not because we have any adverse feelings about the book but because we have subsequently gained some against Mr. Motta himself. ... Jim [Wasserman] later had a falling out with Motta but this had nothing to do with his employment here and/or the publication of The Commentaries of AL." Though we must realize that Mr. Motta was certainly not a good influence on Jim Wasserman.
Mr. Weiser also informed us of some of Mr. Motta's less than polite and honest business dealings. "Also," he wrote, "for the record, I'd like to point out that I knew Karl Germer when he was here in New York and had a number of conversations with him, many of which concerned Mr. Motta's character and what he stood for, and, as I recall, Mr. Germer did not hold Mr. Motta in very high esteem, to say the least. ... Mr. Germer used Motta (in what regard, I don't exactly know) in order to get some of the Crowley material printed."
In our possession are some letters written by Mr. Motta to various individuals, given to us freely. Please note the following from a letter written by him on the 19th of March, 1965 E.V.: Mrs. Germer "claimed, by the way, that Karl had sent me an O.T.O. charter for the first three grades in 1962--this she claimed in her letter of December of that year of 1963... If she did, I never received it..." So, obviously enough, we cannot expect any documentation from Mr. Motta proving that he has the right to make any claims, whatsoever, concerning the Ordo Templi Orientis.
The (so-called) Equinox, Volume V, Number 2, is a very poor imitation of the true Equinox which was established and published by Aleister Crowley. The poems in it are trite and childish and the book reviews are simply so much wasted space. In the chapter called PRAEMONSTRANCE Mr. Motta took unfair and petty potshots at numerous people with little or no provocation. Now, some of these people we ourselves do not like or "approve of" and some of them we love. Their worthiness is not the point. What is the point is that Mr. Motta, out of childish pettiness, deemed it fit to slander and abuse everyone that did not accept him as the high and mighty being that he pretends to be. There is disagreement between brothers and sisters, that is one thing. However, Mr. Motta displays quite another thing with his purposeless slanders and petty insults. Not only that, but again, the reader has paid for so much wasted space. The author continued this sort of thing, without reason, throughout his book, in reviews and footnotes. Very ungentlemanly of him and done, no doubt, out of immature spite and a certain amount of envy for those that have achieved some amount of respectability and visibility that he himself cannot achieve.
Forget his LIBER LXV COMMENTED printed in this book. SOTHiS (a magazine pretty much devoted to the Typhonian pseudo-o.t.o.) may still have some back copies with their version of it and In The Continuum, put out by Phyllis Seckler (Soror Meral of the Caliphate pseudo-o.t.o.), has an admirable version of this commentary by the Beast.
LIBER CCXXXI: A PERSONAL RESEARCH is one of the most revealing things that Mr. Motta could have written. His foolishness and self-blindness is outlandish. I have pages upon pages of notes taken from this part of his book alone that point to several problems that Mr. Motta has--problems that one who claims as much as he should not have. Frater Keallach was given the money to purchase this book for another and was also given free use of the book before sending it on. The book has since been passed on. May we suggest that you do not waste your money on this book but instead find someone else who has it and borrow the volume--that is, if you want to bother to investigate further the personality and claims of its author.
HIS LACK OF KNOWLEDGE CONCERNING MAGICK: Page 375, 18th of April 1972 entry, "When one loses taste for sex--that's when concentration of the Will can safely begin." Quite absurd for the "taste for sex" should be highly developed so that the power generated is as great as possible.
HIS EXTREME PARANOIA: Page 317, footnote, "The Seer [Mr. Motta -ED] had kept several talismans for some years, directed against people who had 'harmed' him." "Nisei...was one of the many intelligence agents who have got in touch with the Seer through the years, pretending to be Aspirants..." Page 390, "The Seer felt the woman was possessed (she was a Roman Catholic, as practically everybody who lived in that hotel!)..." From a letter written by Mr. Motta, dated 19 March 1965, "...remember that anything that comes to me through the mails is likely to pass through the hands of Roman priests, or false masons, or perhaps even Communists as yet (though the most likely interceptor is the Roman Church)."
HIS OVERWHELMING OBSESSION AND DIFFICULTIES WITH SEX: 3 July 1969 entry, "...I asked [via "visions", haphazardly and dangerously evoked -ED] about such details as getting help in the subject of...girls, etc." 17 July, "A part of my conscious mind kept muttering 'Go get fucked' in Portuguese...It must be a group of cells having to do with Christist ancestors. Or a disciple, maybe? Or enemies." His entries for the 13th of July 1970, the 30th of August, the 21st of March, 1971, the 25th of March, 1974, and so on, and so on, and so on.
Entry dated 5 October 1974: "A movement started by me would not be as good as His [Aleister Crowley -ED]. So, sacrifice for His." Translation: Mr. Motta felt that he could more easily gratify his ego by using A.C.'s "movement", already established, than by creating his own.
Page 390 mentions his so-called Crossing of the Abyss. It is one of the silliest things that one could ever pen. A well-made horror movie would be far more devastating to the ego and psyche.
His entry of the 15th of June 1970 may have been more perceptive than even he yet realizes: "To fall is to do one's will". Perhaps this is true, in a sense, for Motta and others like him. Think about it.
Let us be done with Mr. Motta. We have taken out the garbage, let it now be picked up and whisked away to the dump where it belongs.
Enough has been said of Motta, we think; perhaps too much. If we are all very lucky, and if Mr. Motta is capable of some wisdom, he will remain silent, write and publish no more, and inflict his words upon us no longer. If, on the other hand, Mr. Motta does not know when to quit--well, we have quite enough material at hand to write several more articles on him much better than this present one--and we expect more. After all, Mr. Motta does have the right to speak and write as he will, we do not deny him this, but so too do we have that self-same right--and we will exercise it if we must.
In closing we offer Mr. Motta and his followers our own riddle:
What kind of a man unprovoked insults
Until such treatment of himself results?
What manner of man is a senseless tool?
That's right--you've guessed--a____!
(TNN.II.5.6-10, 11/23/79 E.V.)
*It is our informed and intelligent opinion at Newaeon that the genuine Ordo Templi Orientis died with Aleister Crowley and Karl Germer, and that groups currently claiming to be the O.T.O. are at best nothing more than the maggots feeding off of the animated, rotting corpse of the dead temporal order that has been raised from the ignoble grave to which it's last legitimate members had consigned it. The necromancers raised the putrifying corpse to serve the petty desires of the ego-dominated fools who now claim to be the O.H.O., Caliph or otherwise, and brethren of the Ordo Templi Orientis.
