One of the most common mistakes Thelemites make is to think that the “love” in “love under will” is compassion, and that Thelemites are supposed to somehow moderate or temper their wills by considering how their actions impact other souls.
Those of us in the know have a good laugh, but it’s an understandable mistake.
Crowley represents the love in “love under will” by the Greek word agapē, which actually DOES mean generosity. It’s a gratuity similar to what a parent has for a child. It’s a kind of love, freely given, in which another individuality flourishes.
By contrast, eros or erotic love is the desire to be united with another. Instead of being driven by overabundance or gratuity, it’s driven by a sense of insufficiency which is overcome in a higher wholeness achieved through union. It’s directed toward another, not for the sake of the other, but for the sake of achieving one’s own self-completion.
I’m sure someone can generate an exception, but “love” in Thelema is overwhelmingly erotic, not agapeic.
Crowley had to have intellectually known the difference between eros and agape. The fact that agape adds up to 93 must have been very tempting. It’s also possible he just had no appreciation for actual agape and decided to desecrate the word.