Editing Aleister Crowley (section)

===Magick and theology===
Crowley believed in the objective existence of [[ceremonial magic|magic]], which he chose to spell as "Magick", which is an archaic spelling of the word.{{sfnm|1a1=Hutton|1y=1999|1p=174|2a1=Asprem|2y=2013|2p=89|3a1=Doyle White|3y=2016|3p=4}} He provided various different definitions of this term over his career.{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=174}} In his book ''[[Magick (Book 4)|Magick in Theory and Practice]]'', Crowley defined Magick as "the Science and Art of causing change to occur in conformity with Will".{{sfnm|1a1=Hutton|1y=1999|1p=174|2a1=DuQuette|2y=2003|2p=11|3a1=Doyle White|3y=2016|3p=4}} He also told his disciple Karl Germer that "Magick is getting into communication with individuals who exist on a higher plane than ours. Mysticism is the raising of oneself to their level."{{sfn|Churton|2011|p=417}} Crowley saw Magick as a third way between religion and science, giving ''The Equinox'' the subtitle of ''The Method of Science; the Aim of Religion''.{{sfnm|1a1=Asprem|1y=2008|1p=140|2a1=Bogdan|2a2=Starr|2y=2012|2p=4}} Within that journal, he expressed positive sentiments toward science and the [[scientific method]],{{sfn|Asprem|2008|p=150}} and urged magicians to keep detailed records of their magical experiments, having said: "The more scientific the record is, the better."{{sfn|Asprem|2008|pp=151–52}} His understanding of magic was also influenced by the work of the anthropologist James Frazer, in particular the belief that magic was a precursor to science in a [[cultural evolution]]ary framework.{{sfn|Asprem|2008|pp=145, 149}} Unlike Frazer, however, Crowley did not see magic as a survival from the past that required eradication, but rather he believed that magic had to be adapted to suit the new age of science.{{sfn|Asprem|2008|p=150}} In Crowley's alternative schema, old systems of ''magic'' had to decline (per Frazer's framework) so that science and magic could synthesize into ''magick'', which would simultaneously accept the existence of the supernatural and an [[experiment|experimental method]].{{sfn|Josephson Storm|2017|p=170}} Crowley deliberately adopted an exceptionally broad definition of magick that included almost all forms of technology as magick, adopting an [[instrumentalism|instrumentalist]] definition of magic, science, and technology.{{sfn|Josephson Storm|2017|p=172–73}}

{{Quote box|width=25em|align=left|quote=To [Crowley] the greatest aim of the magician was to merge with a higher power connected to the wellsprings of the universe, but he did not trouble himself too much to define that power consistently; sometimes it was God, sometimes the One, sometimes a goddess, and sometimes one's own Holy Guardian Angel or higher self. In the last analysis he was content for the nature of divinity to remain a mystery. As a result, he wrote at times like an atheist, at times like a monotheist, and at others like a polytheist.|source=[[Ronald Hutton]]{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=185}}}}

Sexuality played an important role in Crowley's ideas about magick and his practice of it,{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=173}} and has been described as being central to Thelema.{{sfn|Drury|2012|p=216}} He outlined three forms of sex magick—the autoerotic, homosexual, and heterosexual—and argued that such acts could be used to focus the magician's will onto a specific goal such as financial gain or personal creative success.{{sfn|Drury|2012|p=213}} For Crowley, sex was treated as a [[sacrament]], with the consumption of sexual fluids interpreted as a [[Eucharist]].{{sfn|Djurdjevic|2014|p=44}} This was often manifested as the [[Cake of Light|Cakes of Light]], a biscuit containing either menstrual blood or a mixture of semen and vaginal fluids.{{sfn|Drury|2012|p=210}} The Gnostic Mass is the central religious ceremony within Thelema.{{sfn|Asprem|2013|p=99}}

Crowley's theological beliefs were not clear. The historian [[Ronald Hutton]] noted that some of Crowley's writings could be used to argue that he was an [[atheism|atheist]],{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=174}} while some support the idea that he was a [[polytheism|polytheist]],{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=185}} and others would bolster the idea that he was a [[mysticism|mystical]] [[monotheism|monotheist]].{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=176}} On the basis of the teachings in ''The Book of the Law'', Crowley described a pantheon of three deities taken from the ancient Egyptian pantheon: Nuit, Hadit, and Ra-Hoor-Khuit.{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=178}} In 1928, he wrote that all true deities were derived from this trinity.{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=178}} [[Jason Josephson Storm]] has argued that Crowley built on 19th-century attempts to [[Jesus in comparative mythology|link early Christianity to pre-Christian religions]], such as Frazer's ''Golden Bough'', to synthesize Christian theology and Neopaganism while remaining critical of institutional and traditional Christianity.{{sfn|Josephson Storm|2017|p=165}}

Both during his life and after it, Crowley has been widely described as a [[Satanism|Satanist]], usually by detractors. Crowley stated he did not consider himself a Satanist, nor did he worship [[Satan]], as he did not accept the Christian world view in which Satan was believed to exist.{{sfnm|1a1=Hutton|1y=1999|1p=175|2a1=Dyrendal|2y=2012|2pp=369–70}} He nevertheless used Satanic imagery, for instance by describing himself as "the Beast 666" and referring to the [[Whore of Babylon]] in his work, while in later life he sent "[[Christmas card|Antichristmas cards]]" to his friends.{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=175}} In his writings, Crowley occasionally identified Aiwass as Satan and designated him as "Our Lord God the Devil" at one occasion.{{sfn|van Luijk|2016|p=309}} The scholar of religion Gordan Djurdjevic stated that Crowley "was emphatically not" a Satanist, "if for no other reason than simply because he did not identify himself as such".{{sfn|Djurdjevic|2014|p=58}} Crowley nevertheless expressed strong anti-Christian sentiment,{{sfnm|1a1=Hutton|1y=1999|1p=176|2a1=Hedenborg White|2y=2020|2p=45}} stating that he hated Christianity "as Socialists hate soap",{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=176}} an animosity probably stemming from his experiences among the Plymouth Brethren.{{sfn|Hutton|1999|p=175}} He was nevertheless influenced by the [[King James Version|King James Bible]], especially the [[Book of Revelation]], the impact of which can be seen in his writings.{{sfn|Hedenborg White|2020|p=39}} He was also accused of advocating [[human sacrifice]], largely because of a passage in ''Book 4'' in which he stated that "A male child of perfect innocence and high intelligence is the most satisfactory victim" and added that he had sacrificed about 150 every year. This was a tongue-in-cheek reference to [[ejaculation]], something not realized by his critics.{{sfn|Medway|2001|pp=120–21}}