Originally Posted by KSigMason
Sorry galexander, busy day, couldn't get on.
As far as I have read, Crowley did not found it, but is one of the most famous members. Originally, there may have been some associations only through some men being members in both, but once Crowley took charge, the OTO was reformed. And as far as I've seen, there are not too many Masons that are also members.
As far as I understand the Golden Dawn never recruited from within Freemasonry, and from what I've seen, recruiting for a non-Masonic organization is looked down on.
I accept your correction that perhaps it was not Crowley who had founded the O.T.O. but that he was simply a prominent member.
You state categorically that the O.T.O. was not masonic but check the following quotation from Wiki on the order:
In 1917, Reuss wrote a Synopsis of Degrees of O.T.O. in which the third degree was listed as "Craft of Masonry" and listed the initiations involved as "Entered Apprentice, Fellow Craft, Master Mason" and elaborated on this with "Full instruction in Craft Masonry, including the Catechism of the first three degrees, and an explanation of all the various Masonic systems." The same document shows that the fourth degree of O.T.O. is also known as the Holy Royal Arch of Enoch. It was summarized by Reuss as the Degree of "Scotch Masonry," equivalent to "Scotch Mason, Knight of St. Andrew, Royal Arch," and he described it as "Full instruction in the Scottish degrees of Ancient and Accepted Masonry."
What you are basically saying is because the O.T.O. are not recognised by the Grand Lodge they ARE NOT Freemasons by definition even though they themselves would perhaps look at themselves that way.
However I believe you are wrong when you state that the Golden Dawn did not actively recruit from among the ranks of the Freemasons. My source on this one is "Revelations of the Golden Dawn" by G A Gilbert which I read not that long ago.