Marcelo Motta

279 Pages·2011·3.73 MB·English

by  Paul Joseph Rovelli

THE
YI JING
Of Fu Xi, King Wen and the
Duke of Zhou

Commented by
Aleister Crowley

Paraphrased

From the James Legge translation

As found in the
“Chinese Equinox”
with additional notes by
Marcelo Motta

Edited and appended with
Crowley‟s Tarot attributions
and added notes from the
Book of Thoth, 777
and other sources including
the writings of
C.F. Russell
by
Paul Joseph Rovelli

Also including two lessons
on the Yi Jing
drawn from lecture notes
prepared by
The Master Therion
A.‟.A.‟. Publication in Class B
Imprimatur N. Frater A.‟.A.‟.
All comments in Class C
EDITORIAL NOTE
By Marcelo Motta
Our acquaintance with the Yi Jing dates from first finding it mentioned in Book Four
Part III, the section on Divination, where A.C. expresses a clear preference for it over
other systems as being more flexible, therefore more complete. We bought the Richard
Wilhelm translation, with its shallow Jung introduction, but never liked it much.
Eventually, on a visit to Mr. Germer, he showed us his James Legge edition, to which he
had lovingly attached typewritten reproductions of A.C.‟s commentaries to the
Hexagrams. We requested his permission to copy the commentaries. Presently we
obtained the Legge edition and found that, although not as flamboyant as Wilhelm‟s, it
somehow spoke more clearly to us. We carefully glued A.C.‟s notes to it, in faithful copy
of our Instructor‟s device. To this day we have the book, whence we have transcribed the
notes for the benefit of our readers.
Mr. Germer always cast the Yi before making what he considered an important decision.
He told us that Crowley, from the time when he started using the Yi, always cast a
Hexagram for the day, and continued doing so for the rest of his life. He showed us the
tortoise shell plaque Crowley had used, which had been willed to him, and which he used
as well. Upon his death he desired that they be given to us by his widow, but we were far
away in Brasil at the time, and eventually, upon Mrs. Germer‟s death, the plaques were
appropriated by Grady McMurtry with the slick help of James Wasserman, a Samuel
Weiser editor whom we had been foolish enough to name our representative for the
purposes of securing what remained of the Thelemic Library. But this is another story.
For many years we imitated A.C., and cast a Hexagram for the day first thing in the
morning. That we not longer do so is not because we have lost confidence in the Yi as an
oracle; occasionally, when we think the situation warrants such a grave measure, we
consult the Book of Changes yet. We do not claim to always follow its advice; but we do
claim that its advice is always sober, sensible, and sound.
Although A.C. mentioned several times that he was preparing a translation of the Yi,
there is no record of a complete work of this kind similar to his Dao De Jing translation,
reproduced in this number of the Equinox1. Besides the mnemonic stanzas and the
commentaries now correctly published for the first time, however, he left a profusion of
cross-references linking the Yi to the Qabalah, Alchemy and the Book of Thoth, which
were reproduced by Mr. Germer in 777 Revised, now pirated by Samuel Weiser along
with other Crowleyana.

1 PJR Note: The original material taken for this document, comes from Motta‟s “Chinese Equinox”, being
Vol. V, No. 3.
Since a full Crowley translation has not yet been found, and may never be found, we
decided to paraphrase Legge‟s, which is a superb scholarly work, but has no great
relation—nor could it have—with Thelemic nomenclature and thought. We have
appended some notes of our own, as well as excerpts from the Chinese commentaries to
the book which seemed to us of modern interest and still useful to Thelemites. To this we
have added A.C.‟s notes and the entire body of cross-references published in 777
Revised.
The Introduction that follows is our own, and we have done all in our power to
differentiate the A.C. material included in the text itself from whatever has been done by
us.2
Editor‟s note: The accusations against Weiser‟s Publishing seem unfounded even for the
time in which this was written. They were and are publishers and published in a time
when there was no attempt to account for Crowley‟s copyrights and they were thought to
be non-existent. For a more detailed accounting of the events involving James
Wasserman and Grady McMurtry, Cf. Oriflamme, Vol. VI, Nos. 3-5 by Marcelo Motta;
Equinox, Vol. III, No. 10 by cO.T.O.; O.T.O. Rituals and Sex Magick by I-H-O
Publishing.
In Motta‟s Oriflamme, there‟s a long diatribe on the battle for copyrights in which Motta
alleges some egregious actions by the hands of those that would eventually form the
Caliphate O.T.O. The rants are particularly striking as being a bit immature and
resultantly hostile; even paranoid. Yet, note that Motta was under the most intense
political scrutiny by his totalitarian government in Brasil as he was a relatively public
figure that wrote television programs being produced in the media there. There was some
valid justification for his paranoia.
What is really striking is the use of the pronoun „we‟ in place of „I‟ in his editorial to the
Yi Jing in his production of the Equinox, Vol. V, No. 3 (a.k.a. “The Chinese Equinox”).
This seems to show the megalomania that would ruin Motta in the end, despite his
enormously wonderful contribution to Thelemic philosophy. He adopted an Eastern
approach to the traditional student/teacher relationship in the A.‟.A.‟., which I believe is
impracticable and must lead to abuse. In the East, the Chela lives with the Master, at the
Master‟s expense, working menial chores for the estate of the Master in order to show
proper resolve. This situation can last several, even many years. The Master clothes,
houses and feeds the Chela during and after this probationary period.

2 PJR Note: By this time in the history of the O.T.O., the prevailing word of mouth complaint by
Wasserman in his „betrayal‟ of Motta is that in Motta‟s first number of this volume of the Equinox, he both
dared to comment on Thelemic holy books, which forms the basis of a sophistic taboo created by the
Caliphate, and one supposedly couldn‟t tell the difference between Motta‟s comments and Crowley‟s. This
would amount to a general idea that Motta was committing some sort of heresy. The intelligent reader can
plainly see the difference between Motta‟s and Crowley‟s commentaries in that edition, but the prevailing
debate that still hails to this day is whether or not anyone besides Crowley should comment on Thelemic
holy books. All of this of course, would amount to a propaganda campaign by the emergent Caliphate for
lawsuits that are about to ensue.
The West is a whole different mindset as well as locale; quite the opposite of the East on
both counts. Here, one does not make a vocation out of being a spiritual master. The
mutual interdependence between Master and Chela is not viable. Indeed, the student of
the A.‟.A.‟. spends relatively little time in the physical presence of the teacher as both
have to earn a living in a capitalist economy. Demanding autocracy by the Master and
from the Student fits the very definition of cultic behavior by our cultural standards. This
could be in part, what led Jim Wasserman to be convinced to betray his teacher.
One important flaw in Motta‟s account is that he hailed himself as Wasserman‟s Master.
Jim Wasserman was a Probationer at the time. And in the A.‟.A.‟. system, one does not
become a „Disciple‟ until the Grade of Zelator. Officially, Jim was not even a member of
Our Order. More to the point, Jim failed to properly carry out the trust placed in him by
Motta as Motta‟s legal representative; having been given „Power of Attorney‟ to
represent him in the evolving situation with Grady McMurtry and the California
organization that was attempting to re-establish the Ordo Templi Orientis, in
contradiction to the known wishes of Karl Germer as head of the A.‟.A.‟.; and later,
Marcelo Motta as perhaps the arguable successor to Germer. It was Motta‟s mistake to
place so much trust in someone so very far outside the pale of Our Order. If Motta had
no one of sufficient grade to rely on, he should have taken care of things himself. Cf.
Hexagram 7—Shi.
As well, in their loyalty to Motta, it seems that several of Motta‟s students have adopted
the same cultic and abusive principles that are a part of Motta‟s legacy. And there‟s even
those who practice the same level of paranoia in the guise of some magickal
impeccability. To me, this seems less than erudite and on the whole, quite dysfunctional,
especially due to the fact that it does not serve to promote the Philosophy of Thelema in
virtuous nor credible terms. Indeed, all the in-fighting that has plagued the Thelemic
community from the original court battles between Motta and the Caliphate to the
infighting amongst Motta‟s descendants; and from the general enmity and belligerence
that belies even the new orders and lines that have sprung up.
The net result is that we are making fools out of ourselves! And we are proving to the
rest of the spiritual community that the net result of the practices of Thelemic theurgy is
to demure the individual into an ignoble state of imbecility. The yellow press and our
enemies that produce it are getting all the ammunition they need to use against us from
our own words and deeds. When will we begin to realize that we are each of us, a unique
variance of that wonderfully diverse philosophical system called Thelema? How can we
rule over the many and the known if we cannot even rule over ourselves?
"Behold! these be grave mysteries; for there are also of my friends who be hermits.
Now think not to find them in the forest or on the mountain; but in beds of purple,
caressed by magnificent beasts of women with large limbs, and fire and light in their
eyes, and masses of flaming hair about them; there shall ye find them. Ye shall see
them at rule, at victorious armies, at all the joy; and there shall be in them a joy a
million times greater than this. Beware lest any force another, King against King!
Love one another with burning hearts; on the low men trample in the fierce lust of
your pride, in the day of your wrath."
AL II.24
As a final thought on all of this, we have to ask the question; if Motta had gone so far
afoul in the balance and equilibrium required to hold onto his level of initiation, why
would his work have any relevance or even importance in Thelemic doctrine? The
answer is quite simple; despite his personal foibles, his scholarship remains articulate and
erudite. The reader has but to examine for him or herself, (Cf. Hexagram 7—Shi!) the
teachings of a man well schooled in this philosophical system.
PREFACE
By Paul Joseph Rovelli
When I had decided to make a study of the Yi Jing (this spelling is much closer to the
actual Chinese pronunciation; rather than the more common „I-Ching‟), I decided I would
type up Crowley‟s and Motta‟s comments to the book as found in Motta‟s “Chinese
Equinox”. But while doing so, I realized that Crowley‟s comments in Motta‟s work were
not the same comments as found in the Book of Thoth. So I decided to append the work
to include those comments, along with the insertion of the depictions of the Qabalistic
Holy Tarot, which Crowley realized exactly corresponded with the Hexagram structure.
At first, Crowley provides a contrast in his marvelous tome on the Tarot with the
following statement:
“One may begin to suspect that the Tarot is not a mere straightforward representation of
the Universe in the impersonal way of the system of the Yi King.”
But he would later go on to draw the comparisons as follows:
“This identity between the two systems was masked, until quite recently [The present
author discovered this fact during his study-still incomplete-of the Yi King], by the fact
that the Chinese continued with their doubling-up
system, and so turned their eight trigrams into
sixty-four hexagrams, while the scholars of
Western Asia joined together their ten numbers on
the Tree of Life by twenty-two Paths.
The Chinese have thus sixty-four principal
symbols as against the thirty-two of the Tree; but
the Qabalists have a concatenation of symbols
which is capable of very subtle interpretation and
handling. It is also better fitted to describe the
internal relations of its Elements. Moreover, each
can be multiplied or subdivided at will, as
convenience may require.”
This work is the only place where all of Crowley‟s commentaries as well as Motta‟s
commentaries to the Yi Jing can be found in one place. And this is a third in a series
where I‟ve done this. The first two are the commentaries to Liber AL vel Legis and the
commentaries to Liber Cordis Cincte Serpente.
I feel it is important to consider all the contributors to the Thelemic Gnosis. Besides
Motta and Crowley, Charles Stansfield Jones, C.F. Russell, Dion Fortune and Kenneth
Grant have proven themselves to be marvelous expounders on a living and viable system
of Attainment. And there are other lesser voices as well, carving out their niche in the
present generation of Thelemic journeymen. It is imperative that the serious student
recognize these voices and examine their works with both an open mind and a critical
eye.
This philosophical system, though connected with the antient lineage of the Great White
Brotherhood, is of its own right, a very young discipline. And while there are mistakes
that have been made and that have yet to be made, there‟s a wondrous quality in the act
of discovering what could be. And we need yet to pour all our creative blood into the
Cup of Babalon, withholding not a drop. Such sincere dedication to the holy practice of
Scientific Illuminism is the necessary pre-requisite for the growth of Thelema and the
nurturing of the light that it carries at this inaugural period of history also known as the
Aeon of Horus.
INTRODUCTION
By Marcelo Motta
The trigrams which, combined, compose the Yi hexagrams were allegedly conceived by
Fu Xi, nearly five thousand years ago. No one knows for sure who first combined them
into hexagrams; but all Chinese sources agree that the present order of the Yi, as well as
the names of the hexagrams, are due to “King” Wen.
Approximately three thousand years ago there ruled in China the dynasty of the Shangs.
At the time it was in a state of complete moral disorder. The reigning monarch, Zhou
Xin, was a tyrant. One of his brothers wrote:
“The House of Yin (Shang) no longer has power over the nation. The great deeds of our
founder established the dynasty, but we have lost that Heritage through our abuses. The
people, rich and poor, deliver themselves to theft, corruption and treason. The public
administrators and the army officers rival with each other in disrespecting the laws.
Criminals go about freely, and we can never be sure they will be brought to account for
their felonies. Humble people revolt and commit senseless acts. Our dynasty is sinking:
its condition is that of a person wadding a wide river, finding no bottom, and far from the
margins.”
This miserable state of the nation was in great part due to the tyranny of the reigning
monarch. When Wen‟s younger son finally rose against Zhou Xin, he denounced the
king in this ”Solemn Proclamation” to all the provinces:
“Zhou Xin, the king of Shang, despises virtue and delivers himself to laxity and
disrespect for the laws. He has cut himself from Heaven,3 and created enmity between
himself and the people. He has crippled innocent persons on a whim; he ordered a just
man‟s heart torn out of the living chest. He has wielded his power but to kill and
torture…”
The accusations were true: two examples are registered in the annals. During a winter,
Zhou Xin saw a group of peasants wading a stream, and ordered their legs cut off at the
height of the shin, so that he could “see the marrow that bore so much cold so well”. The
“just man” of the proclamation was a relative of his, called Bi Gan, who dared to scold
him for his outrages. Zhou Xin had Bi Gan‟s heart torn out of the living chest, so he
could “examine closely the heart of a sage”.
While Zhou Xin indulged himself thus, the western part of his kingdom prospered under
the Duke of Zhou. Te Zhou family had already been admired and respected through
several generations for their ability and virtue. The reigning Duke—later known as
“King” Wen—had, willy-nilly, become a sort of viceroy. The governors of neighboring

3 That is, from the Supernals. The state of a “Black Brother”, so-called; but the serious student must not
think that a “Black Brother” is always so obvious as this.
provinces, noticing the prosperity of Wen‟s duchy, willingly consulted him about
administrative problems. The duke was respected in war and peace, and apparently
behaved with remarkable self-control and wisdom. Both the feudal lords and the people
themselves began to insist with him that he should rise against Zhou Xin and take the
throne of China; but Wen continually refused, saying that his dynasty had sworn fealty to
the Shang dynasty, and that he would keep this oath, as he kept all others.4
Inevitably, Zhou Xin had him arrested. The Duke delivered himself into the hands of the
king‟s soldiers, in spite of the protests of the people of his duchy and the neighboring
rulers, and was thrown into the royal dungeons. Without knowing whether he would be
put to torments and executed or eventually released, during his confinement he quietly
dedicated himself to writing commentaries upon the Yi hexagrams.5
Zhou Xin hesitated to have Wen killed; he knew such a deed might provoke a definitive
revolution in the kingdom. On the other hand, to let such a popular duke go free was a
political liability. Finally, the tyrant summoned to his presence Wen‟s elder son and heir,
whose name was Den, and told him: “Your father upholds his fealty oath to my family.
If you, who are due to succeed him in his title, swear on the souls of your ancestors that
you will never rise against me, I shall have him released.” Den swore, and Zhou Xin had
Wen released, sure that those two foolish Zhou lords would keep their word, and thus his
position would be safe.
He did not count on the abnegation of the Zhous. Perhaps from being ill-treated during
his confinement, Wen died soon after his release; but Den, instead of assuming the throne
of the duchy, abdicated in favor of his younger brother, Wu, who had taken no personal
oath of loyalty to Zhou Xin. Wu prepared himself carefully, consulting the commentaries
to the Yi hexagrams provided by his dead father, and hearkening the advice of his elder
brother.
An analysis of Wen‟s commentaries leads us to conclude that the Duke foresaw the
situation of the kingdom would become so intolerable that one of his descendants would
eventually be forced to take arms against the Shang dynasty. He wanted to avoid a
hurried or unnecessary undertaking of such seriousness. His commentaries repeatedly
warn the querent against untimely initiatives, too much optimism, unbalanced
enthusiasm, dishonesty or laxity.
Deprived, by his own will, of the duchy, Den dedicated himself to enlarging the scope of
his father‟s work, and analysed the hexagrams line by line. Reading his notes, we are
forced to opine that he was a worthy son of such a father. (The history of China declares
him a patriot, a hero, a legislator and a philosopher.) His advice is a corroboration and
amplification of Wen‟s: prudence, economy, psychic balance, sincerity, character,
steadfastness.

4 Cf. Liber 650, v. 4.
5 Compare with Mr. Karl Johannes Germer, who reached success in the Adept Minor work while in solitary
confinement in a Nazi concentration camp.