Home

Advertisement

Customize
IAO 131
26 July 2009 @ 02:27 pm


God & Worship - First we said there are many Gods but ours is the true God; then we said there is no other God but God; now we say there is no God but Man. If God is Man, the World is a process of Self-Exploration. If God is Man &Worship is celebration of the Highest part of some-thing, then our Worship is love of great Men & Women. Worship is to raise Man to its fullest development (if a pinnacle can ever be found) and celebrate Us in all Our diversity... for there is no other god. [7.26.09]

• Existence is God identifying himself with Man; the Great Work is Man identifying himself with God. [7.26.09]

• God - and Soul, being One in Essence with God - are beyond all quality. God (and Soul) become intelligent, strong, purposeful, capable, cunning, productive, and wise (and their opposites!) only insofar as He becomes Man. Where Man is not, God is barren. [7.26.09]

Savage fiction - How can one 'return to Nature' having come from Her and being constantly immersed in Her? And what is Nature? Tell me your vision of Nature and then we will see what you really mean by returning to It? And what if a quality of Nature is to transform Herself? Are we then ourselves not transformers & creators of new things? Can we judge Nature only by her past forms or by her potential future productions? And what if a quality of Nature is Mystery? Are we then ourselves not mysterious and unfathomable in our own Natures? Instead of 'returning to Nature' let us transform Nature... into the images of our Will. [7.26.09]

• God & Soul are, have always been, and will always be Perfect. The Perfect doesn't require any further fixing; the only logical thing to do in this case is experience the play of Perfection with the natural attitudes of gratitude & enjoyment. [7.26.09]

• Referring to a Universal Will is as useless for finding one's own unique & individual Will as referring to the idea Art is in deciding to create a painting or referring to the idea Music in deciding to create a song. [7.26.09]

• Man's lot is not to live & survive but to develop & conquer; that is, extend one's self beyond oneself. [7.26.09]

• By 'Eternity' I don't mean an endless amount of time but the lack of distinction, in this moment, between events; by 'Infinity' I don't mean an endless amount of space but the lack of distinction, in this place, between objects. Bind nothing! [7.26.09]

The world thru gold-and-rose colored glasses - Most see the world thru a glass darkly (and have lives of quiet desperation); they perceive themselves as an organism surrounded by an environment/world; it is Man vs. World (Profane, 1st Order). If we clean this viewing-glass a little, we see Man is not opposed to the World/Nature but a participant therein; it is Man and World (2nd Order, 5=6), or Lover & Beloved. Clean the viewing-glass until there is not a speck of dust and we realize there are not two things - Man and World - but One. We may call this Man or Nature or God or Soul, but they are all One; this is where Man is World, having become God (3rd Order, Above the Abyss). [7.26.09]
 
 
IAO 131
11 June 2009 @ 01:31 pm


• Today we deem any deviation from normal consciousness to be "pathology;" I envision a future where anyone who has not deviated from normal consciousness is deemed "pathological." [5.18.09]

• The wise don't search for the One True Opinion but, instead, discard all their opinions; likewise, the awakened don't search for the One True Thought but, instead, discard all thoughts. The knowledgeable have conquered knowledge; the thoughtful have conquered thought. [5.18.09]

• The highest virtue is to be unconscious of "virtuousness." [5.19.09]

• Pure will is to not strive but nonetheless conquer. [5.19.09]

• Attainment doesn't automatically make one's actions "humane." How could it when it is the personal and the human which is annihilated in the infinite and impersonal? [5.20.09]'

• I would go further than most and say that Division/Duality/Consciousness occurs (Nuit or 0 becomes 2), not for "chance of union" but rather there simply happens to be a chance of union. Call it "Mystery" or "Miracle" but its simply a fact with no "Because" or "Why" to justify it. There is no answer to the eternal question of, to speak Qabalistically, why 0 became 2 (Why God created the world, why the Tao became ten thousand things, ad infinitum...) we can never rightfully say if it is ignorance, chance of joy/union, to experience, as "play" ("lila"), as a punishment... we can only reflect our attitude toward it. That is, we can see the opportunity of multiplicity (2) as arbitrary, chance of union/love/joy, the cause of all suffering, etc. but these are all projections of our temperament onto a valueless Fact of Life. [5.22.09]

• Living in the city is living in an ocean of contempt (and neuroticism, superficiality, obsession, triviality, etc.) - one can't help but be consumed & enveloped by it all unless one is ice-cold or super-heated... (Rev. 3:15-16) [6.8.09]

Outward expression of inward intentions - A redwood's bark is just like the words of a poet or prophet - they are the husks of crystallized energy, Spirit-made-ink or Energy-made-bark, and yet this static exterior is the only face others see. [6.9.09]
 
 
IAO 131
Naturalistic Occultism
by IAO131



Naturalistic Occultism is an attempt to treat the phenomena of occultism with an eye of naturalism (i.e. not supernatural), science (i.e. based on empirical evidence), and pragmatism (i.e. what works is provisionally 'true'). It is largely a continuation of the ideal of Scientific Illuminism as expressed by Aleister Crowley in his motto "The Method of Science, the Aim of Religion." This book seeks to separate the gold of occultism from the dross of superstition and dogma.


IAO131 creator & editor of the Journal of Thelemic Studies (ThelemicStudies.com) and author of many articles on the subjects of Thelema, Occultism, Philosophy, and Psychology at his blog: http://iao131.livejournal.com.


Available now from Lulu for $9.95
(http://www.lulu.com/content/paperback-book/naturalistic-occultism/6474618)



Table of Contents

Introduction
0. Preface
1. What is Magick?
2. On Subjectivity and Objectivity
3. A Note About Free Will, Determinism, and Pragmatism

Naturalistic Occultism
0. A Naturalistic, Scientific Approach to Magick
1. As Above, So Below – As Within, So Without
2. The Planets, the Zodiac, and other Symbol Schemes
3. Divination: Tarot, I Ching, and Animal Entrails
4. Gematria: Finding Patterns in Numbers
5. Why Magick Seems to Work
6. Psychotherapy and Initiation
7. The Neurology of the Astral Plane, the Astral Body, and Astral Projection
8. Astral Workings & Scrying: The Interpretation of Ambiguous Stimuli
9. Invocation and the Willed Activation of Latent Parts of the Psyche
10. On the Mystic Attainment
11. Conclusion

Appendices
APPENDIX I: “Astral projection” or Out-of-Body Experiences
APPENDIX II: Un-differentiated Consciousness or Mystic Union
APPENDIX III: Recommendations for Further Reading


Preview and order the book now!
 
 
IAO 131
13 May 2009 @ 09:41 am


• I don't refrain from lying because I am "virtuous," but rather because it takes far too much energy. [5.11.09]

• Compassion for the flower is cruelty to the weed and vice versa... but who decides what is a "flower" and what is a "weed"? [5.11.09]

Strength is not invulnerability - it takes great strength to allow oneself to be vulnerable to oneself and others. [5.11.09]

Physical-spiritual law - Evolution stagnates without catastrophe. [5.13.09]

Dinosaur ego - The dinosaur does not evolve to the human without a cataclysm (lightning flash/meteor). [5.13.09]

• The virtues of falsity, hedonism, forgetfulness, argument, promiscuity and selfishness are often forgotten while the vices of truth, austerity, remembrance, acceptance, chastity and selflessness are often ignored. [5.13.09]

Attainment as Understanding, not Sacrifice - It is self-sacrifice for the minister (ego) to acknowledge he works for the King (will) only when the minister mistakenly believes he is the King. The only thing sacrificed is a misunderstanding. [5.13.09]
 
 
IAO 131
29 April 2009 @ 11:27 am


Incorporation, not Castration – Just like an infant doesn’t master speech by having its vocal chords cut out, neither Reason nor Emotion are mastered by completely cutting them out. Not “if it offend thee, cut it off” but rather, “if it offend thee, explore it, acknowledge it, don’t let it dominate you, and subsume it under conscious control.” {3.30.09}

The Equilibrium between Stoicism and Hedonism... or Man as a River – Excessive self-restraint and excessive impulsivity/spontaneity both have pitfalls. We need enough self-restraint to keep ourselves from needless & distracting thoughts, words, and actions, and we need enough spontaneity to remain active (instead of always reactive and self-reflective). The free flow of energy requires a balance between coherence (self-discipline) and flexibility (spontaneity). Observe how a river maintains and does not maintain a particular form… and thereby is a formidable force. {3.31.09}

• To act reasonably is not necessarily to act in accordance with Reason. {3.31.09}

• We are immersed in action. Reason is often after-the-fact or simply puts over-simplified names to the complex interactions of forces at work (e.g. “I am playing the piano.”) Reason does not and can not guide action in the majority of an individual’s circumstances. People act in accordance with their instincts and justify their acts to themselves and others with Reason (or name their instincts with Reason). {3.31.09}

• The harshest critics are always the disciples (e.g. Nietzsche’s attitude to Socrates, Jung’s attitude to Freud, etc.) {4.3.09}

• People dont fear & worship things; they fear & worship the ideals they've built up of things. {4.7.09}

The Mystic Experience – Infinite in Identity, Finite in Appearance; Immediate yet Ineffable; Uniform in its Essence, Diverse in its Expression; Inexhaustible in Name and Image yet inevitably Inconceivable with the Mind; Ultimately unspeakable in the end although endlessly spoken about. {4.13.09}

• The initiator is a skillful frustrator. {4.29.09}

Reading is vanity - We don't read books, we read ourselves into books. We take ambiguities to refer to specificities, abstractions are taken as ego-centric suggestions. We can only understand what is already known inside of us, but authors present ideas to us in new forms (after all, we often have trouble separating the medium from the message). Our favorite authors are therefore those who reveal what is best or most desired in ourselves to ourselves (in the physical-talismanic form of a book)... or those that allow us to indulge in fantasies or extremities vicariously that we would never enact ourselves. {4.29.09}

Ideal - The body athletic; the mind elastic; the emotions energetic; the spirit ecstatic. {4.29.09}
 
 
IAO 131
20 April 2009 @ 09:12 am


part 1: Introduction & Death/Attainment as Non-cataclysmic
part 2 & 3: The True Self contains Good & Evil, Upright & Averse and Embrace of the World
part 4 & 5: Self as Redeemer and No Perfection of the Soul

4) Self as Redeemer

"There is no god but man"
-"Liber OZ"


One common attribute of the Old Aeon systems is their insistence on the baseness, sinfulness, and helplessness of humanity. In this view, mankind is naturally in a state spiritual blindness, deafness, and dumbness; we don't know what is best for ourselves, and we're aimless when left to our own devices. This often translates into the necessity of giving oneself up to a higher power outside of oneself: to the priest class, to the guru, to God, and (most recently) to the State. In the New Aeon, we place no faith on the grace of any god or guru; we assert no need to become Initiate beyond oneself.

As was mentioned in the last section, each person must unite with both the "lower" ("the abyss of depth," "that Blind Creature of the Slime") and "higher" ("the abyss of height," "the glittering Image") Companion - those "Upright" and "Averse" aspects of themselves beyond the current awareness of the ego, which must be released, explored, and assimilated. A very important facet of this "great mystery" is that, "that Companion is Yourself. Ye can have no other Companion" ("Liber Tzaddi," lines 34-35). Although we seek to unite with those abysses beyond our selves (insofar as "self" is here considered as the ego-self), those abysses are parts of Yourself. In terms of psychology, they are the unconscious aspects of the human psyche, which isn't just "below" the ego (i.e. just "lower," "animalistic" drives, the "Qliphothic" in Qabalistic terms; "that Blind Creature of the Slime") but is also "above" (insofar as it contains the "higher," "divine," the "Neschamah" in Qabalistic terms; "the glittering Image"). We realize then that Initiation does not consist in "coming to God" or receiving "the grace of God" insofar as we consider a God separate or "above" ourselves, but rather, in the New Aeon, each person coming to a fuller, truer understanding of the Self is what constitutes Initiation. This is because "Initiation means the Journey Inwards" (Little Essays Toward Truth, "Mastery"), and the Godhead we seek is not something other than our True Selves. As Crowley writes, "Behold! the Kingdom of God is within you, even as the Sun standeth eternal in the heavens, equal at midnight and at noon. He riseth not: he setteth not: it is but the shadow of the earth which concealeth him, or the clouds upon her face" ("De Lege Libellum"). Again, we assert that this Self is always present, even at the beginning of the Great Work of coming to know it, although we normally function in and revert to the state of identifying with our minds and bodies (i.e. our normal ego-conception of the self).

This Work of coming to reveal and identify with the True Self does not require the blessing of priests, the empowerments of gurus, the presence of a "Master," the grace of God, or the funding of the State. Each person must "Lift up thyself!" (Liber AL II:78). In one sense, it is only by the individual's own courage, persistence, and hard work that the Great Work can ever be accomplished. In another sense, Truth - the realization of one's True Self beyond dualities - cannot be communicated.

It is as futile to try to communicate the experience of Unity with All Things as it is describing red to a blind person. We can use metaphors or analogies but they will never actually understand until they have experienced it themselves. As Crowley says, "all real secrets are incommunicable" (Magick in Theory & Practice, chapter 9), and this is because "truth is supra-rational" and so it is therefore "incommunicable in the language of reason" ("Postcards to Probationers"). Therefore, if there is any "faith" it is the confidence conferred by the "consciousness of the continuity of existence" (Liber AL I:26). This perception of Truth can only be partially communicated in poetics, metaphors, symbols, and analogies: it is the direct, individual experience of the True Self which brings real understanding of the Truth as That which is beyond dualities.

One can imagine the perception of Truth as a flower unfolding in the heart of every man and every woman: it is something inherent in the individual which is revealed. Humanity is not sinful, degenerate, empty or untrustworthy but rather each individual is a Star, each a fountain of Godhead, and each inherently Divine. It is the work of the individual to realize this Divinity in themselves, coming to know themselves not as the ego but as the True Self which transcends all opposites: "ye [shall] look upon yourselves, and behold All Things that are in Truth One Thing only" ("De Lege Libellum"). This "consciousness of the continuity of existence" is no supernatural, extraterrestrial, supra-mundane, posthumous fantasy: each person can attain to this awareness here on earth, during this life.

Every man must overcome his own obstacles, expose his own illusions"
-"Liber Causae," line 4



5) No Perfection of the Soul

"The soul is in its own nature, perfect purity, perfect calm, perfect silence... This soul can never be injured, never marred, never defiled"
- "The Soul of the Desert"


This idea is related strongly to the ideas in the last section of the Self as Redeemer. We assert there is no reliance on God, guru, priest, or any external authority, but it is a misnomer to say we "redeem" ourselves for there is nothing to redeem. Crowley writes, "Redemption is a bad word; it implies a debt. For every star possesses boundless wealth; the only proper way to deal with the ignorant is to bring them to the knowledge of their starry heritage" (The Book of Thoth). The "soul" does not need to be redeemed for it is perfect and pure in itself, it only is because of ignorance of our own Divine Birthright that we think ourselves imperfect and transient. This "soul" isn't the personality of the individual - the ego-self which identifies with the mind and body - but rather the Self which is coterminous with All Things.

The True Self never dies as it is beyond all limitation, containing all things and relations within Itself. The body along with the mind surely will expire but it is only through the mysterious mechanisms of this mind and body that the Self, beyond all limits and opposites, may become self-aware and consciously experience the rapture of existence. This Self does not need to be redeemed or perfected: there is no Fall of Man to be rectified (Abrahamic religions) nor a Wheel of Suffering to be liberated from (Dharmic religions). There is even no sense of the soul incarnating to attain to higher and higher "spiritual states" or towards "enlightenment." In the New Aeon, the "starting point" is not a fallen, suffering, and sinful state, but rather we are all Royal and Divine, Divinity-made-manifest, and "existence is pure joy" (Liber AL II:9) if it is seen with eyes that "Bind nothing!" (Liber AL I:22) i.e. eyes that see the unity underlying apparent dualities. As it is said, "Since all things are God, in all things thou seest just so much of God as thy capacity affordeth thee" (The Vision and the Voice, 17th Aethyr). The essential symbol-metaphor is that the Star of Unity is always shining, potentially conscious, but we identify with the ego-self and are therefore mired in duality and limitation (once you identify with the ego, you are immediately not the non-ego or the world and therefore the world becomes Two instead of One). Crowley writes on this imagery in The Law is For All:

"We are not to regard ourselves as base beings, without whose sphere is Light or 'God.' Our minds and bodies are veils of the Light within. The uninitiate is a 'Dark Star,' and the Great Work for him is to make his veils transparent by 'purifying' them. This 'purification' is really 'simplification'; it is not that the veil is dirty, but that the complexity of its folds makes it opaque. The Great Work therefore consists principally in the solution of complexes. Everything in itself is perfect, but when things are muddled, they become 'evil'."


The important point is that "everything in itself is perfect" but our minds inevitably "muddle" the situation which ends with us identifying with the ego instead of the True Self. Because all things are perfect in themselves, we obviously do not need any kind of God or guru to bestow redemption, liberation, or initiation upon us: the aspirant need only clear away the cloud-veils of ignorance around her Star, and the True Self will leap up within her awareness and burn away all division and limitation. As Crowley explains in The Law is For All,

"This 'star' or 'Inmost Light' is the original, individual, eternal essence....we are warned against the idea of a Pleroma, a flame of which we are Sparks, and to which we return when we 'attain'. That would indeed be to make the whole curse of separate existence ridiculous, a senseless and inexcusable folly. It would throw us back on the dilemma of Manichaeism. The idea of incarnations 'perfecting' a thing originally perfect by definition is imbecile. The only sane solution is as given previously, to suppose that the Perfect enjoys experience of (apparent) Imperfection."


In the New Aeon we go even further than one might expect: the "ignorance" of duality is not inherently evil or bad at all either. In short, duality is "ignorance" for one who still identifies with the ego, but once one has dissolved the ego and identified with the True Self one recognizes duality as the necessary means for self-awareness. For the individual mired in duality and identification with the ego, "coition-dissolution" is her formula, but one who has dissolved the ego and identified with the True Self has the formula of "creation-parturition"... and "The All, thus interwoven of These, is Bliss" (The Book of Lies). The body and the mind, with its inherently dualistic conceptions, are a prison of ignorance for the uninitiate and a temple for performing the Sacrament of Life for the initiate. It may take the experience of the dissolution of the ego to overcome the morbid fear of death and accept duality not as the condition of our suffering but as the opportunity for us to rejoice in the uniting of diverse elements (self and world in each experience, along with the Supreme Union of ego and non-ego/subject and object). The world is both "None... and two" (Liber AL I:28)... None, the continuous, is "divided for love's sake, for the chance of union. This is the creation of the world, that the pain of division is as nothing, and the joy of dissolution all" (Liber AL I:29-30). In this conception, duality and the "creation of the world" as we know it (i.e. the normal dualistic world which we commonly inhabit) is actually the condition of "the chance of union." Only if two things are separate can they unite and have the possibility of "the joy of dissolution" wherein the self becomes "all." Crowley explains, "Nuit shews the object of creating the Illusion of Duality. She said: The world exists as two, for only so can there be known the Joy of Love, whereby are Two made One. Aught that is One is alone, and has little pain in making itself two, that it may know itself, and love itself, and rejoice therein" ("Djeridensis Working"). Thereby does one embrace both unity and multiplicity (duality) in a higher Unity.

This perception of "the consciousness of the continuity of existence" (Liber AL I:22) is not something given by a god or a guru but a natural birthright of each individual. It is, as described in the first part, a natural step of Growth towards psychological-spiritual Maturity. And this also leads us to the final point: even this is a step along the Path. It may be the "End" in one sense (the end of the dominance of the ego, for once thing) but it is also the beginning, for "death is life to come" (The Book of Lies). One still has to live one's life. One might say, "Before initiation: work, live, and play; after initiation: work, live, and play," for coming to identify with the True Self doesn't mean the end of one's mind and body along with their normal needs. In fact, the mind and body - the ego-self - are not destroyed permanently but rather they are reborn with renewed energy, the veils of ignorance (of duality as well as the falsity of the doctrines of the Fall of Man and the inherent Suffering of the world) having been torn away. One does not suddenly obtain the earthly power of a king or have the intellectual power of Einstein, but the change is something largely "internal" or psychological, for in initiation, "nothing is changed or can be changed; but all is trulier understood with every step" (Little Essays Toward Truth, "Mastery"). It is this understanding of our True Selves, beyond the veils of mind and body, which we each strive to attain so that we may more effectively and joyfully manifest our wills in the world. The task is then simple yet difficult: each individual must dissolve the ego and their identification with it to identify with the True Self, always shining though we are unaware, which is beyond dualities and all limitation. In the end, "All you have to do is to be yourself, to do your will, and to rejoice" ("The Law of Liberty").


"No star can stray from its self-chosen course: for in the infinite soul of space all ways are endless, all-embracing: perfect."
-The Heart of the Master
 
 
IAO 131
14 April 2009 @ 04:12 pm


part 1: Introduction & Death/Attainment as Non-cataclysmic
part 4 & 5: Self as Redeemer and No Perfection of the Soul

2) The True Self contains Good & Evil, Upright & Averse

"My adepts stand upright; their head above the heavens, their feet below the hells."
- "Liber Tzaddi," line 40


Initiation in the New Aeon is "the Child Growing to Maturity" by the slaying of the ego-self whose "death is life to come" for the True Self. But what is the nature of that True Self? Essentially, the True Self transcends dualities. Specifically, the True Self transcends the moral duality of Good and Evil.

People have a common tendency to imagine their goal as their "Higher Self" which they imagine as Absolute Good, caring, benevolent, etc. In short, many people construct an ideal or an abstraction of their highest ideals and believe that to be the goal. Crowley asserts in Magick Without Tears, "He is not, let me say with emphasis, a mere abstraction from yourself; and that is why I have insisted rather heavily that the term 'Higher Self' implies 'a damnable heresy and a dangerous delusion." The term "Higher Self" is a delusion because the aim of Initiation in the New Aeon is to bring the individual to identify with the "Total Self" or "All-Self," not the "Higher Self" (or "Lower Self"). We must explore and conquer both the "good" and "evil" sides of ourselves: in terms of modern psychology, we cannot neglect our own Shadow. As Crowley advises, "every magician must firmly extend his empire to the depth of hell" (MIT&P, chapter 21). As Nietzsche says, "The great epochs of our life are the occasions when we gain the courage to rebaptize our evil qualities as our best qualities" (Beyond Good & Evil, Aphorism 116).

Much of Thelema's imagery may be seen as "sinister." Examples include the "Beast" and "Babalon" from the Book of Revelations (where they do not appear in a favorable light), the experience of divinity as "evil kisses corrupt[ing] the blood... as an acid eats into steel, as a cancer that utterly corrupts the body" ("Liber LXV" I:13, 16) and "poison" ("Liber LXV" III:39 IV: 24-25 V:52-53, 55-56), "the concealed" within oneself wherein "all things are in thine own Self" (Liber Aleph, "De Libidine Secreta") is called Hell or Satan (who is identified with the Sun in "Liber Samekh"), etc. These could all be considered as attempts to bring the psyche of the individual to acceptance of both the upright and averse aspects of existence. One might even say it is the "darker" side of the self emerging because of its neglect in Old Aeon systems which focus on Good, Virtue, Grace, etc. and exclude their opposites. In the New Aeon we assert that the True Self contains (and thereby transcends) both Good and Evil. "Less than All cannot satisfy Man" (William Blake, "There is No Natural Religion").

This idea of the True Self as containing both Heaven and Hell, Good and Evil, Upright and Averse, is captured succinctly in "Liber Tzaddi," lines 33-42:

"I reveal unto you a great mystery. Ye stand between the abyss of height and the abyss of depth. In either awaits you a Companion; and that Companion is Yourself. Ye can have no other Companion. Many have arisen, being wise. They have said "Seek out the glittering Image in the place ever golden, and unite yourselves with It." Many have arisen, being foolish. They have said, "Stoop down unto the darkly splendid world, and be wedded to that Blind Creature of the Slime." I who am beyond Wisdom and Folly, arise and say unto you: achieve both weddings! Unite yourselves with both! Beware, beware, I say, lest ye seek after the one and lose the other! My adepts stand upright; their head above the heavens, their feet below the hells... Thus shall equilibrium become perfect."


As mentioned in the last section, the True Self transcends the duality of Life and Death. In this section we see that the True Self transcends the duality of Upright and Averse, Good and Evil. The True Self is even "beyond Wisdom and Folly." We must unite both with the Upright, "the glittering Image in the place ever golden," and with the Averse, "that Blind Creature of the Slime." Only thereby may man come to knowledge of his true Self: otherwise the individual will have a lopsided perspective of the self. One must remember that it is only because of its roots deep into the dark ground that a tree is able to produce fruit. As the psychologist Abraham Maslow noted, "Man's higher nature rests upon man's lower nature, needing it as a foundation and collapsing without this foundation" (Toward a Psychology of Being, 1968).

The method of Initiation in the New Aeon is therefore one of Union of Opposites and Equilibrium. The equilibrium is not that of moderation, the Middle Path of Buddha (or the Doctrine of the Mean of Aristotle), where we seek to avoid extremes and remain in the center. The equilibrium of New Aeon Initiation is understood as the balance attained by pushing to both extremes of any duality. "Go thou unto the outermost places and subdue all things" ("Liber LXV" I:45). We don't take the upright ("white light") or averse ("satanic") of the Upright/Averse duality and aim for that alone, we aim for both the heavens and the hells. One might say, symbolically, the Old Aeon is like a pole or a tree, where the vertical section is straight and narrow, avoiding extremes. The New Aeon is then like a large building or a pyramid where the base is expanded horizontally. This symbolically shows that, by pushing towards the extremes (expanding the base horizontally in this metaphor), we enlarge our foundations which thereby allow us to withstand the "winds" of experience better. As it says in The Book of the Law, "Wisdom says: be strong! Then canst thou bear more joy. Be not animal; refine thy rapture! ...But exceed! exceed! Strive ever to more!" (II:70-72). William Blake also enigmatically stated, "The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom."

Again, we can look again to Horus (with the Infinitely Contracted Core of Flame as His Heart and the Infinitely Expansive Space as His Body) as a symbol of That which transcends the dualities of Good and Evil, Upright and Averse. In uniting with both the "glittering Image" and the "Blind Creature of the Slime," we come to know ourselves as the All which contains but transcends both: "For two things are done and a third thing is begun... Horus leaps up thrice armed from the womb of his mother" ("Liber A'ash," line 8). As Horus says in The Vision and the Voice, "I am light, and I am night, and I am that which is beyond them. I am speech, and I am silence, and I am that which is beyond them. I am life, and I am death, and I am that which is beyond them." We might add, "I am good, and I am evil, and I am that which is beyond them." Horus, the Sun, is a symbol of That which contains & transcends dualities, an image of our True Selves, identical in essence yet diverse in expression for each individual; other cognate symbols include the point in the circle (the Solar glyph), the Rose-Cross, semen and menstrual fluid combined (two live, generative fluids combined into a third which "is one substance and not two, not living and not dead, neither liquid nor solid, neither hot nor cold, neither male nor female" -MIT&P, chapter 20), the Heart Girt with the Serpent (see "Liber LXV"), the cross in the circle, the circle squared (Liber AL II:47), the Sun and the Moon conjoined (called "the Mark of the Beast" in "Liber Reguli" and "the secret sigil of the Beast" in the 1st Aethyr of The Vision and the Voice), the Lion and the Eagle, the word ABRAHADABRA, and infinite others. In a certain ritual where the individual comes to identify with Horus ("Liber XLIV: The Mass of the Phoenix"), we proclaim our transcendence of the moral duality: "There is no grace: there is no guilt: / This is the Law: DO WHAT THOU WILT!"

"For Perfection abideth not in the Pinnacles, or in the Foundations, but in the ordered Harmony of one with all."
- "Liber Causae," line 32




3) Embrace of the World

"Enjoy all things of sense and rapture..." - Liber AL vel Legis II:22


We found the True Self which we come to identify with in Initiation is beyond the duality of Life and Death (part 1) as well as the duality of Good and Evil (part 2). Now we unite yet another divide with an embrace of the physical, "mundane" world. Another common dichotomy (at least in the West) that has split the psyche of man is Spirit versus Matter, or Sacred versus Profane.

In the ancient and medieval world, the predominant conception of the universe was of an earth below and the heavens above. People conceived the law of the Heavens as perfect and the Earth as degraded. Isaac Newton was one of the main figures who helped bridge the gap between Heaven and Earth. He said that the same force which makes objects fall on earth is the same force which makes the celestial objects in heaven move in their orbits: gravity. Symbolically and literally, Newton said the heavens and earth do not have separate laws but abide by one law. Also, we now know that the heavens are not above us but surround us on all sides. There is no separation between the "mundane" Earth and the spiritual" Heavens: Earth is literally immersed in the Heavens.

In the New Aeon we assert that "Every man and every woman is a star" (Liber AL I:3). On the physical level, we are all literally made of star-stuff (or "stardust"), as Carl Sagan was fond of noting, but there is a more important meaning here. Nuit - who says of herself, "I am Heaven" (Liber AL I:21) - is a symbol of the Infinite Space in which we are all immersed. Each star - each individual - is the center of self-awareness & expression of Heaven on Earth. Crowley writes, "Know firmly, o my son, that the true Will cannot err; for this is thine appointed course in Heaven, in whose order is Perfection" (Liber Aleph, "De Somniis [delta]"). In an important sense, this asserts that we too are in a perfect course through Heaven just as the celestial stars are. In the New Aeon there is an "unveiling of the company of heaven" (Liber AL I:2): every man and every woman. We are each Gods, Stars going their unique Ways in Heaven. Crowley comments, "[The] Pantheism of AL: The Book of the Law shows forth all things as God" ("Djeridensis Comment") and "The 'company of heaven' is Mankind, and its 'unveiling' is the assertion of the independent godhead of every man and every woman!" (The Law is For All).

From all these considerations its easy to see that in the New Aeon, not only does the True Self transcend the duality of Heaven and Earth/Spiritual and Mundane, but there is essentially no distinction between them at all. The Earth is not a prison, but a Temple where the sacrament of Life may be enacted; the body is not corrupt, but a pulsing and thriving vessel for the expression of Energy; sex is not sinful, but a mysterious conduit of pleasure and power as well as an lmage of the ecstatic nature of all Experience.

In fact, the embrace of the world, and even an ecstatic embrace of the world, naturally comes from cosmological perspective of the New Aeon. "Existence is pure joy" (Liber AL II:9) in the New Aeon (and not pure sorrow as some old hypochondriac and many pessimists since have suggested). We are also told, "the Truth of the universe is delight" (The Vision and the Voice, 17th Aethyr). This is because the Cosmological Picture of the New Aeon is that all Experiences are acts of Love between Infinite Forms ("Nuit") and Infinite Forces ("Hadit").

"Hadit, who is the complement of Nuit ["the infinite in whom all we live and move and have our being"]... is eternal energy, the Infinite Motion of Things, the central core of all being. The manifested Universe comes from the marriage of Nuit and Hadit; without this could no thing be. This eternal, this perpetual marriage-feast is then the nature of things themselves; and therefore everything that is, is a crystallization of divine ecstasy."
-"Liber DCCCXXXVII: The Law of Liberty"


Therefore, in the New Aeon we see every experience as the joyful union between Form and Force, Infinite Space and Infinite Motion. The world itself is an expression of Divinity, and therefore there is no reason to retreat from it in New Aeon Initiation. Just as we must transcend the dualities of Life & Death and Good & Evil, we must transcend the duality of Heaven & Earth, Sacred & Profane. We are told in the 19th Aethyr of The Vision and the Voice, "Worship all things; for all things are alike necessary to the Being of the All." This idea of worshipping all things, and not making a distinction between "spiritual" and "mundane" leads to the Formula of the Scarlet Woman.

"The Formula of the Scarlet Woman" refers to a certain attitude to the world. The Scarlet Woman is traditionally associated with the image of a whore, who symbolically represents "that which allows anything and everything into itself." The opposite image is that of a chaste woman who shuts herself up and does not allow any intimate contact with anything around herself. Crowley writes, "The Enemy is this Shutting up of things. Shutting the Door is preventing the Operation of Change, i.e. of Love... It is this 'shutting up' that is hideous, the image of death. It is the opposite of Going, which is God" (The Law is For All). The whore is an image of Change and the embrace of all things without distinction, and the chaste woman is an image of Stagnation and the separation from all things. The chaste woman is also therefore an image of the ego which refuses to give up its claim to be "King of the Mountain" (the True Self is the rightful "King" and the ego its minister, but the ego insists on claiming this title). Just like a chaste woman will not "let herself go" to have intimate relations with others, the ego will not "let itself go" to dissolve in the non-ego, the rest of the world, so that the individual may become One (beyond dualities). As mentioned in part 1, the work of we mentioned that "the work of each person is the release of identification with the ego and the consequent identification with Horus, That which transcends Life and Death (and all dualities)." We are therefore a "chaste woman" if we refuse to release identification with the ego and insist on a world of division (i.e. a world of ego vs. world or non-ego). This is another example of the "averse" or "sinister" symbolism that is often used in the New Aeon: the symbol of stagnation is a chaste woman (chastity being a "virtue" in the Old Aeons) and the symbol of growth & change is a whore (promiscuousness/sensuality being a "vice"/"sinful" in the Old Aeons). In summary: the Formula of the Scarlet Woman applies to every individual (not just females) and refers to the attitude of accepting all things into oneself, refusing nothing, and growing through their assimilation. Crowley writes, "[this is] a counsel to accept all impressions; it is the formula of the Scarlet woman; but no impression must be allowed to dominate you, only to fructify you; just as the artist, seeing an object, does not worship it, but breeds a masterpiece from it" (The Book of Lies, chapter 4). Therefore, we accept all things but we do not thereby become a passive, lifeless receptacle which is buffeted by external forces; instead we must allow all things "to fructify" us. We all accept all things but we also turn these things towards the accomplishment of our Wills. Here is an illustration of this point: a musical composer does not neglect C# as "profane" or "not worthy" but accepts all notes as worthy and beautiful in themselves, but that does not mean his song will consist of hitting all the keys at once. On the contrary, he selects among the possible notes, arranges them in accordance with his vision, and produces a particular composition. The same idea is true for the Scarlet Woman, for the Formula of the Scarlet Woman is the acceptance of all things no matter if they are "unclean" or "mundane." Crowley insists, "I urge you to beware of the pride of the spirit, of the thought of anything as evil or unclean. Make all things serve you in your Magick [causing Change in conformity with Will] as weapons" ("Djeridensis Comment").

In short, in the New Aeon we do not avoid the things of the world or the world itself in fear of it being "un-spiritual," "profane," or "mundane." On the contrary, each individual is immersed in Heaven itself, as a Star among Stars. In the New Aeon, each individual proclaims, "All things are sacred to me" ("Liber A'ash, line 29), and enacts "the Formula of the Scarlet Woman," refusing nothing and accepting all. Thereby does each individual come to embody the union between (and the fruit of) Heaven and Earth.

“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.”
– Liber AL vel Legis, II:24
 
 
IAO 131
12 April 2009 @ 03:44 pm



part 2 & 3: The True Self contains Good & Evil, Upright & Averse and Embrace of the World
part 4 & 5: Self as Redeemer and No Perfection of the Soul

0) Introduction

"In the name of the Lord of Initiation. Amen."
-"Liber Tzaddi," lines 0 & 44


A New Aeon was proclaimed and begun in April of 1904 with the reception of The Book of the Law, Liber AL vel Legis. A New Aeon implies a new paradigm or a new point-of-view with which to view the world. According to "Liber Causae," "In all systems of religion is to be found a system of Initiation, which may be defined as the process by which a man comes to learn that unknown Crown." If Initiation is common to "all systems of religion," then how is Initiation to be understood in this Aeon of the Crowned & Conquering Child? What are the paradigm-shifts which characterize the point-of-view from this New Aeon?

I intend to outline the basic views of New Aeon Initiation in this essay. There will be as little recourse to esoteric jargon as possible; ideally, an individual who has never encountered Thelema should be able to grasp many of the ideas explained here. It should be noted that the various ideas & formulae which are still valid in this New Aeon, i.e. those ideas that are "superseded" and not "abrogated," will not be mentioned (as nothing has changed in these cases from the Old Aeons).

The basic ideas surrounding New Aeon Initiation are: death/attainment as non-cataclysmic, the True Self contains both good and evil, an embracing of the world, the self as redeemer, and no perfection of the soul. All of these points will be treated in turn, and each will be exemplified by a central quotation from the corpus of Thelema.


1) Death/Attainment as Non-cataclysmic

"...There is that which remains."
-Liber AL vel Legis II:9


The basic idea associated with the last, Old Aeon is an obsession with death. The symbolic proponents of the Old Aeon paradigms - Osiris, Dionysus, Jesus, Adonis, etc. - are all bound by the central motif of a (painful) death. Death is seen as catastrophic and a ritual act must be performed for the dead to be resurrected (or avenged). The cosmological parallel with this initiatory viewpoint is the idea that the Sun dies each night and the priesthood must perform a ritual for the Sun to rise again in the morning. Crowley often writes of the switch from the Old Aeon to the New Aeon view as paralleling the switch from a geocentric to a heliocentric view of our Solar System. Now we know that the Sun does not "die" each night, nor does any priest need to perform any kind of ritual for the Sun to rise in the morning. We know the Sun is constantly shining and it is only the turning of the earth which creates the succession of day and night: the apparent sight of the Sun "dying" and being "reborn" each night has changed to the understanding that the Sun is never born nor dies. Frater Achad, or Charles Stansfeld Jones, encapsulated this idea in his essay "Stepping Out of the Old Aeon Into the New,"

"You know how deeply we have always been impressed with the ideas of Sun-rise and Sun-set, and how our ancient brethren, seeing the Sun disappear at night and rise again in the morning, based all their religious ideas in this one conception of a Dying and Re-arisen God. This is the central idea of the religion of the Old Aeon but we have left it behind us because although it seemed to be based on Nature (and Nature's symbols are always true), yet we have outgrown this idea which is only apparently true in Nature. Since this great Ritual of Sacrifice and Death was conceived and perpetuated, we, through the observation of our men of science, have come to know that it is not the Sun which rises and sets, but the earth on which we live which revolves so that its shadow cuts us off from the sunlight during what we call night. The Sun does not die, as the ancients thought; It is always shining, always radiating Light and Life."


Crowley reiterates this view and explains the spiritual significance in The Heart of the Master where he writes,

"...When the time was ripe, appeared the Brethren of the Formula of Osiris, whose word is I A O; so that men worshipped Man, thinking him subject to Death, and his victory dependent upon Resurrection. Even so conceived they of the Sun as slain and reborn with every day, and every year. Now, this great Formula being fulfilled, and turned into abomination, this Lion came forth to proclaim the Aeon of Horus, the crowned and conquering child, who dieth not, nor is reborn, but goeth radiant ever upon His Way. Even so goeth the Sun: for as it is now known that night is but the shadow of the Earth, so Death is but the shadow of the Body, that veileth his Light from its bearer."


Assimilating this idea of the Sun, in reality, never setting goes a long way to help the aspirant understand the spiritual truth of Thelema that this mirrors. In short, death (both of the ego and of the body) is no longer seen as cataclysmic in the New Aeon. This is because of two connected ideas: Death is complementary with Life, and Death is actually Change ("life to come").

Let's start with the first idea that Death is complementary with Life. "Death is the apex of one curve of the snake Life: behold all opposites as necessary complements, and rejoice" (The Heart of the Master). Life and death are the two complements that constitute existence, and all things are formed from the interplay of Life and Death. All things in the universe, including the mind and body of the aspirant, are subject to Life and Death. One might visualize existence as an undulating serpent, where the crest of a wave is Life and the trough is Death (which is the image Crowley uses above in The Heart of the Master).

This leads into the idea of Death as Change. We often think of Life as constituting change and Death as constituting stagnation: death implies a stop or an end. The New Aeon views Death not as an end but as the possibility for new Life. Just as the Winter brings "death" to plant life, it also gives nutrients to the soil to allow for the inevitable new Spring. (As a note, "Death" refers to the death of the physical body, but more importantly to the "death" or "dissolution" of the ego which can and does occur during an individual's life). Chapter 18, "Dewdrops," of The Book of Lies explains this idea that Death is Change very succinctly:

"Verily, love is death, and death is life to come. / Man returneth not again; the stream floweth not uphill; the old life is no more; there is a new life that is not his. / Yet that life is of his very essence; it is more He than all that he calls He."


The succinct idea that "death is life to come" is expounded here along with the idea that in the life that arises from death, we become "more ourselves." The Life which arises from Death "is more He than all that he calls He." This is because "all that he calls He" is his ego and in the death of the ego, we come to identify with the True Self which contains both Life and Death (and is therefore Eternal and Infinite). This death is not cataclysmic, but even equated with "love." In the Tarot, which symbolically mirrors the intiatory paradigm of its age, traditionally has "Atu XIII" (or the 13th Trump) as "Death." In the New Aeon, we may understand this card not as "Death" but "Transformation" or "Change." In The Heart of the Master, Crowley writes short, poetic stanzas to describe each Tarot card. For "Atu XIII: Death" he writes, "The Universe is Change; every Change is the effect of an Act of Love; all Acts of Love contain Pure Joy. Die daily. Death is the apex of one curve of the snake Life: behold all opposites as necessary complements, and rejoice." This is the fundamental paradigm-shift of the New Aeon: not only is Death actually Change (and "life to come"), but it is a form of Love, and "all Acts of Love contain Pure Joy." There is no trace of cataclysm, sorrow, or suffering in this conception of Death in the New Aeon.

Symbolically, this means Initiation (the myth-drama of each individual's Path) is no longer portrayed as "The Man performing Self-Sacrifice" but as "The Child Growing to Maturity." On this Crowley writes, "What then is the formula of the initiation of Horus? It will no longer be that of the Man, through Death. It will be the natural growth of the Child. His experiences will no more be regarded as catastrophic. Their hieroglyph is the Fool: the innocent and impotent Harpocrates Babe becomes the Horus Adult by obtaining the Wand" ("Liber Samekh"). The idea is one of coming to maturity, specifically of "obtaining the Wand" which represents the creative, generative power: this experience constitutes "spiritual puberty" for the individual, one might say. The process is not a cataclysm that needs rectifying (although puberty often seems cataclysmic!) but a natural process of growth and fulfillment of human potential.

Each person must destroy their ego self and come to identify with the True Self. Every man and woman must "break down the fortress of thine Individual Self, that thy Truth may spring free from the ruins" (The Heart of the Master). This necessarily involves the death or dissolution of the ego ("thine Individual Self") to which many people are strongly attached. This is why death is seen as catastrophic: people view losses as catastrophic and the greatest lost to people is the loss of their ego. In both the Old and New Aeons, the ego must experience death in process of Initiation. The difference is the view of this phenomenon: the Old Aeon views death as a cataclysmic event whereas the New Aeon views it as a necessary step in the progress of Growth. As Crowley explains, "The Ego fears to lose control of the course of the mind... The Ego is justly apprehensive, for this ecstasy will lead to a situation when its annhilation will be decreed... Remember that the Ego is not really the centre and crown of the individual; indeed the whole trouble arises from its false claim to be so" (Commentary to "Liber LXV" I:60). Before the individual personally experiences the dissolution of their own ego, they must assimilate this New Aeon idea that "there is that which remains" after this death. Each person then must come to directly experience and even embody this truth - that is, each individual must come to know this truth through their own experience. "Faith must be slain by certainty," as Crowley wrote (The Book of Thoth). We might even say that each person is psychologically stuck in the Old Aeon paradigm until they have this experience of the death of the ego. Only then can they be "freed of the obsession of the doom of the Ego in Death" (Little Essays Toward Truth, "Mastery"). Only then can the individual identify with "that which remains," which transcends but contains both Life and Death. In the New Aeon, each person "Let[s] the Illusion of the World pass over thee, unheeded, as thou goest from Midnight to the Morning. " (The Heart of the Master). The New Aeon is the Aeon of the Crowned & Conquering Child: Horus, Heru-Ra-Ha, Ra-Hoor-Khuit, and many other names. Horus is a symbol of the True Self which transcends Life and Death just as the Sun is a symbol of that which constantly shines even though day (Life) and night (Death) pass on earth, and just as the Child is a symbol of that which contains but transcends both mother (Life) and father (Death). In the "1st Aethyr" of The Vision and the Voice, Horus himself says of his nature:

"I am light, and I am night, and I am that which is beyond them.
I am speech, and I am silence, and I am that which is beyond them.
I am life, and I am death, and I am that which is beyond them.
I am war, and I am peace, and I am that which is beyond them.
I am weakness, and I am strength, and I am that which is beyond them.
...And it shall be unto them a grace and a sacrament, and ye shall all sit down together at the supernal banquet, and ye shall feast upon the honey of the gods, and be drunk upon the dew of immortality --- FOR I AM HORUS, THE CROWNED AND CONQUERING CHILD, WHOM THOU KNEWEST NOT!"


As mentioned in later sections, in the New Aeon we view each individual as God Him/Herself. Therefore the work of each person is the release of identification with the ego and the consequent identification with Horus, That which transcends Life and Death (and all dualities). This is expressed symbolically by Frater Achad (and Crowley) by the idea of switching one's perspective from Earth (the geocentric viewpoint where we experience day/life and night/death; the perspective of the ego) to the perspective from the Sun (the heliocentric viewpoint where we experience perpetual shining through day and night; the perspective of the True Self).

This paradigmatic change from Old Aeon to New, in the sense of no longer seeing Death as cataclysmic, is captured symbolically in Crowley's changes to old "formulae" to conform with the New Aeon point-of-view. Specifically, the change from IAO to VIAOV and the change from AUM to AUMGN that Crowley speaks about in Magick in Theory & Practice (chapters 5 and 7, respectively) exemplify the paradigm shift from Old Aeon to New Aeon.

On the formula of IAO, Crowley writes, "This formula is the principal and most characteristic formula of Osiris, of the Redemption of Mankind. "I" is Isis, Nature, ruined by "A", Apophis the Destroyer, and restored to life by the Redeemer Osiris" (MIT&P, chapter 5 which should be consulted for a more full examination of VIAOV). The basic idea is that I = Life which is ruined by A = Death/Chaos which must then be redeemed by O. Existence is therefore a process of endless cataclysms which require redemption from this point-of-view. How is this view changed from the point-of-view of New Aeon Initiation? Crowley writes, "THE MASTER THERION, in the Seventeenth year of the Aeon, has reconstructed the Word I A O to satisfy the new conditions of Magick imposed by progress." Now, no one would deny that all things change, that "all things must pass," but from the point-of-view of physics, energy is never created nor destroyed. It is simply transformed into different forms. If we identify with any of these partial phenomena which inevitably must be transformed, we are subject to death. If we "die daily" to our ego-self, to our sense of division or separateness from the world, then we come to identify with the Whole Process. "The many change and pass; the one remains" ("Liber Porta Lucis," line 20). The All contains all opposites within itself, it is the symbol of the Serpent itself whose undulations are Life and Death, and therefore is eternal. This True Self, the All which knows no division, is Horus and "that which remains." It is with these ideas in mind we can understand why, in the New Aeon, IAO has become VIAOV. Basically, IAO has been surrounded by two "V"s (these refer to the Hebrew letter "Vav" or the Greek letter "Digamma" for various reasons which can be investigated in chapter 5 of MIT&P). What does this mean?

Essentially, the "V" represents "that which remains." There may be processes of creation, destruction, and reconstruction (IAO) but there is always "that which remains." The "V" remains unchanged through the various "IAO processes" one might say. Even though the phallus of the father must "die" in ejaculation, it is a necessary step for new Life - the Child - to emerge... And the Semen, the Quintessence, remains unchanged ("that which remains") throughout the entire process. This symbolic process exemplifies the ideas of the New Aeon, especially because the "death" in this case is ecstatic: the death is literally orgasmic. Further, Crowley writes in The Book of Lies, "the snake is the hieroglyphic representation of semen" and so the semen which is "that which remains" is identified with the snake or serpent which, as explained above, represents That which contains the complements of Life and Death (being the crest and trough of His undulations).

There is another interesting idea which this symbolic formula, VIAOV, conceals: One might consider the original "V" as ignorant man, i.e. man as ignorant of his True Self/his identity with All Things, and the final "V" as man conscious of his own Divinity. It is through the process of IAO, or death of the ego, that each individual becomes consciously aware of him or herself as Horus, "that which remains," for since all things are contained in the All-Self, it cannot be created or destroyed. Also, the "V" or the True Self was always there, except the individual was simply ignorant of this fact: "The series of transformations has not affected his identity; but it has explained him to himself" (MIT&P, chapter 5). Crowley explains, "...the 'Stone' or 'Elixir' which results from our labours will be the pure and perfect Individual originally inherent in the substance chosen, and nothing else... the effective element of the Product is of the essence of its own nature, and inherent therein; the Work [then] consists in isolating it from its accretions" (MIT&P, chapter 20). As Crowley writes in "Liber LXV," "Thou wast with me from the beginning."

Moving onto AUM becoming AUMGN, Crowley writes,

"The word AUM is the sacred Hindu mantra which was the supreme hieroglyph of Truth, a compendium of the Sacred Knowledge... Firstly, it represents the complete course of sound... Symbolically, this announces the course of Nature as proceeding from free and formless creation through controlled and formed preservation to the silence of destruction... We see accordingly how AUM is, on either system, the expression of a dogma which implies catastrophe in nature. It is cognate with the formula of the Slain God."
(MIT&P, chapter 7 which should be consulted for a more full examination of AUMGN)


The formula of AUM therefore suffers from the same attitude problem as the formula of IAO: nature is catastrophic. Moving beyond this idea of existence as catastrophic is, as explained above, one facet of New Aeon Initiation. Crowley explains,

"The cardinal revelation of the Great Aeon of Horus is that this formula AUM does not represent the facts of nature. The point of view is based upon misapprehension of the character of existence. It soon became obvious to The Master Therion that AUM was an inadequate and misleading hieroglyph. It stated only part of the truth, and it implied a fundamental falsehood. He consequently determined to modify the word in such a manner as to fit it to represent the Arcana unveiled by the Aeon of which He had attained to be the Logos. The essential task was to emphasize the fact that nature is not catastrophic, but proceeds by means of undulations."


The essential idea appears in the final sentence. As we have gone over above, the New Aeon point-of-view conceives existence as a Serpent whose undulations are Life and Death. The word AUM ends in "M" which symbolizes the fact that, "the formation of the individual from the absolute is closed by his death" (MIT&P, chapter 7). Again the idea is one of Death as a stop or an end instead of "life to come" or one instance of Change. Now, how would "GN" be added to the end of AUM "fix" the word? Crowley writes, "The undulatory formula of putrefaction is represented in the Qabalah by the letter N, which refers to Scorpio." Both of these (the letter N and Scorpio) are traditionally attributed to "Atu XIII: Death" in the Tarot which was spoken of above (when it was suggested it might be more accurately titled "Change" or "Transformation"). Basically, "N" represents the idea that, "Death is life to come;" that is, Death is not an end but one apex of the curve of endless undulations. Crowley continues, "Now it so happens that the root GN signifies both knowledge [gnosis] and generation combined in a single idea, in an absolute form independent of personality." The idea is basically that AUM does not accurately describe the course of nature because existence does not end in cataclysm. Therefore, by adding "GN" to AUM to form "AUMGN," we assert that the process of nature is not cataclysmic. In fact, it does not end at all but instead "proceeds by means of undulations:" Death is not the end but simply one trough of the endless winding of the Serpent of the All-Self.

Essentially, "all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains" (Liber AL vel Legis II:9). It is the work of each individual to dissolve and de-identify with the ego-self and identify with "that which remains," the True Self which transcends all division (especially between Life and Death) in that it contains All. The death of the ego is not cataclysmic because we know the Sun of the True, All-Self which "is more He than all that he calls He" (The Book of Lies, chapter 18) is always shining regardless of our ignorance (our "darkness"). In short, in the New Aeon we give the advice, "If you are "walking in darkness", do not try to make the sun rise by self-sacrifice, but wait in confidence for the dawn, and enjoy the pleasures of the night meanwhile" (The Law is For All).

"With courage conquering fear shall ye approach me: ye shall lay down your heads upon mine altar, expecting the sweep of the sword. But the first kiss of love shall be radiant on your lips; and all my darkness and terror shall turn to light and joy. Only those who fear shall fail."
-"Liber Tzaddi," lines 16-18


* * * * * *


In the next installment: "the True Self contains both good and evil" and "an embracing of the world"...
 
 
IAO 131
02 April 2009 @ 09:32 pm


I think many people have seen the blurry line between religiosity/spirituality and the pathological (i.e. a "mentally disturbed" condition)... Many have even seen connections between epileptic fits and religious ecstasy. There is certainly a practice of spirituality which is healthy, beneficial, etc. and a practice of spirituality which is pathological, detrimental, etc.

Psychologists have attempted to delineate various ways of distinguishing the pathological religious person from the simply religious person. It would certainly be interesting whether Thelema's tenets tend to lead individuals toward these indicators of pathology. I present two here:

This first list is from R.J. Lovinger who believed these "markers of pathology" should be looked for along with a thorough historical understanding of the individual along with the status of their social and work relationships. This means that an individual's ability to function in the various settings of life need to be taken into account instead of making this list (or others like it) into a simple checklist of pathology. Also, this list is obviously geared towards Christianity. With those small caveats here is the first list:
Click to read on... )
 
 
IAO 131
18 February 2009 @ 03:08 pm


A warning - If one practices yoga with eyes closed, the material world becomes "mundane" and the senses become obstacles. This means: the form of one's practices may influence the metaphysic adopted from one's results (and we certainly do not want confounds in our spiritual experiments). {2.18.09}

Yoga deals with identity - The method of Yoga deals fundamentally with identity. The problem: We naturally identify with our bodies and minds. The solution: Attain to the identity of Brahman, of all the infinite in all things, which is not subject to change like the finite body & mind. "Feel your identity with the Supreme Being in meditation. That is the essence of meditation" (Swami Krishnananda). It is the dissolution of attachment to and identification with the personality; it is the dissolution of any kind of attachment to and identification with any kind of limit. Limit means separation; separation means duality... Meditation means identification; identification means union; union means non-duality, limitless, etc. {2.18.09}

The Tower - Magick (and Yoga) means disintegration and corruption; one expands oneself by knocking down & dissolving boundaries. {2.18.09}

Do initiates suffer? - Physical suffering is a necessary and useful reaction to certain harmful stimuli; psychological suffering is an unnecessary and maladaptive reaction to stimuli. The 'uninitiated' stance (and the impetus to become initiate) is that "everything is suffering" because of this maladaptation; the 'initiated' stance is that "everything is pure joy." The senses are embraces on both poles of pleasure and pain ('pure joy' encompasses and embraces pain... a perception attained by 'the initiated')."The embrace of him intense on every centre of pain and pleasure. The sixth interior sense aflame with the inmost self of Him..." (Liber VII); "All that a man bears for God's sake, God makes light and sweet for him. If all was right with you, your sufferings would no longer be suffering, but love and comfort." (Meister Eckhart) {2.18.09}
 
 
IAO 131
17 February 2009 @ 04:26 pm


Schopenhauer & samadhi - There is a definite connection between the metaphysics of Kant's transcendental aesthetic (that Space & Time are necessary backdrops for phenomenal reality, and noumenal reality lies behind the spatio-temporal world) and the idea of samadhi arising from the practice of concentration on any arbitrary object. I believe it was Schopenhauer who realized that, since we distinguish one thing from another thing by the fact that they are distinct in space and time, and since the noumenal is outside space and time, there would be no possible way to distinguish one Ding an sich ("thing-in-itself") from another. Therefore the noumenon can only be one Thing, and for Schopenhauer this was the Will. Schopenhauer realized that if one was to somehow perceive the noumenal reality, the Ding an sich, then one would be perceiving the same, unitary Will, or noumenon (since there can't be a multiplicity of noumena as explained above). This follows roughly the same logic as the Yogi when he practices toward the state of non-duality, samadhi. In Raja Yoga specifically, one concentrates one-pointedly on a certain object of attention - an image, phrase, word, etc. - to a point of such intensity that the perceiver and object of perception appear to merge. Subject unites with object in perception, but a new subject or new object doesn't arise. Instead, they both dissolve into That which contains both. In yoga terms, the yogi unites with the object of concentration and Vishnu arises. It is the same noumenal reality that emerges out of the union of any two things; behind the phenomenal reality of any thing is the same noumenal reality - that which Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, and Thelemites all understand as Will - and so concentration on ANY object is sufficient to bring about the same result, the same noumenon, the same Will underlying all phenomena, the same perception of the continuity of all things. {2.14.09}

• The unsuccessful revolutionary is a traitor; the successful revolutionary is a founding father. {2.17.09}

Spiritual attainment does not correct all the "ills" in the world - A world without corruption & chaos is a fantasy world. Many people look to spiritual attainment to end all sorrows and obtain the good life, but this is only a delusional phantom. Attainment doesn't change the world, it changes the perception of the world. ("Spiritual attainment" is misleading - it is a state of mind just like happiness, dreaming, and psychosis). The world is constantly changing; change implies motion; motion implies friction; friction implies conflict: the only way to escape this world is to falsify it. {2.17.09}

Embodied philosophy - One can most easily tell in a person (if they should suddenly decide to turn to philosophizing) whether they would be inclined to optimism or pessimism by observing whether they carry themselves with their chin up or their shoulders slouched. {2.17.09}

The taste of ego-dissolution is bittersweet - Envy, pity, and enmity all require an ego-concept (a sense of self as separate from the world)... and so do ownership (objects, actions, and even thoughts are no longer "one's own," for who is there to own things in this state?) and moral responsibility (who is it that is responsibility if there aren't separate agents or selves in the world?). The perception of Unity is both wonderful and terrible. {2.17.09}

• For any event, there are infinite potential interpretations on many planes (including especially the etiological & moral) - none inherently more 'true' than another, although some can be more useful towards particular ends in particular circumstances. {2.17.09}
 
 
IAO 131
04 February 2009 @ 10:22 am


When doing some practice or ritual, if one is a Thelemite then one must always ask this question:

How does this help the fulfillment of my Will?

Too many times do Thelemites perform ceremonial rituals and yoga practices for some aim other than the fulfillment of their Wills.

Thelema often speaks of Initiation, the Great Work, Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, Nothing/Naught/None, union of opposites, etc. which represents the attainment of the "consciousness of the continuity of existence" wherein one becomes "chief of all," insofar as one becomes identified with the All. The Universe and the Self are understood as one Thing, a state of non-duality. This unity is called "Nothing" because it is continuous (see Liber AL vel Legis I:22-23, 26-30). This is the First Step or the Next Step. One's Will is the dynamic nature of the Self: if you don't fully know the nature of that Self, then one cannot fully express that nature.

Therefore, attainment of "the consciousness of continuity of existence" must be every aspirant's First Aim. "There is a single main definition of the object of all magical Ritual. It is the uniting of the Microcosm with the Macrocosm. The Supreme and Complete Ritual is therefore the Invocation of the Holy Guardian Angel; or, in the language of Mysticism, Union with God. All other magical Rituals are particular cases of this general principle..." (Magick in Theory and Practice). If one seeks the Will of the True Self, one must attain to that True Self. "The True Self is the meaning of the True Will: know thyself through Thy Way" ("The Heart of the Master"). In this way, all Acts must be done "To me," with the intention of the attainment of Infinity in one's mind.

Once one has attained to 'Naught' (Solve), then one's task is the formulation of that Divinity in motion (Coagula). The True Self has been attained, now it must express itself in the world. "To me" now takes on a new meaning: All Acts must be done as an acknowledgement of that Infinity, as a fulfillment of one of its Possibilities. "To me" means treating all Acts as sacred... as participation in the Joyful Sacrament of Existence. Further, since the Higher (the attainment of unity of perception) has been attained and solidified, the Lower must be consolidated. The mind and body must be fortified and enhanced by all means. The Book of the Law says "Wisdom says: be strong! Then canst thou bear more joy." The mind and body are the means of manifestation of Divinity in the world; they are the means by which the All may become self-aware of itself in the Many. Therefore just as a polished diamond may reflect light more clearly, so must the mind and body be "polished" to reflect the Supernal Light more purely. One must "Contemplate your own Nature," "Explore the Nature and Powers of your own Being," and "Develop in due harmony and proportion every faculty which you posses" ("Duty"). The body must be strong and healthy, and the mind must be elastic and ever-expanding in its limits & knowledge. Not only must one's faculties be strong, but one must always "exceed! exceed!" You must "Go... unto the outermost places and subdue all things" ("Liber LXV") and "Extend the dominion of your consciousness, and its control of all forces alien to it, to the utmost" ("Duty"). This must always be done with the fulfillment of one's Will in mind as the impetus; whether one is attempting to attain to Unity or attempting to fortify the mind and body to fashion a suitable vehicle for Divinity to manifest is up to the individual.

We've seen that all ritual, yoga, or any workings must be towards the end of the fulfillment of the Will. First, "the consciousness of the continuity of existence" must be attained, and secondly one's mind and body must be strengthened, fortified, explored, contemplated, and their dominion extended. The former might be called the Mystic Half of the Path, and the latter might be called the Magick Half of the Path. Either way, both the Higher and the Lower must be attained "For Perfection abideth not in the Pinnacles, or in the Foundations, but in the ordered Harmony of one with all" ("Liber Causae"). If an Act is not made "To me," either as a desire of one's spirit to unite with All Things or as a rapturous love-cry coming from the joy of participation in the World... "if the ritual be not ever unto me: then expect the direful judgments of Ra Hoor Khuit!"

"There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt."
 
 
IAO 131
30 January 2009 @ 09:16 am


Introduction


The politics of Thelema is a mirror. One looks into it to find insight and only finds one's ideals reflected back. One might say that in approaching Thelema with a democratic spirit, one will see a justification of democracy; in approach Thelema with an aristocratic spirit, one will see a justification of aristocracy. What does Thelema really say about politics? It is a complex issue with many facets; to understand what Thelema does say, one has to separate away what Thelema doesn't approve of politically.

Anarchy


Let's first look at anarchy. People claim that if every person is doing their own Will there would be no order and it would be complete chaos. Against this, Crowley explains the nature of Will, "It has naturally been objected by economists that our Law, in declaring every man and every woman to be a star, reduces society to its elements, and makes hierarchy or even democracy impossible. The view is superficial. Each star has a function in its galaxy proper to its own nature. Much mischief has come from our ignorance in insisting, on the contrary, that each citizen is fit for any and every social duty" (The Law is for All, II:58). There is a general idea in Thelema that each star as a particular orbit or course. Thelema implies the freedom to do one's Will but also the severe restriction of only doing one's Will; "It is the apotheosis of Freedom; but it is also the strictest possible bond" ("Liber II: The Message of the Master Therion"), for "Thou hast no right but to do thy will" (Liber AL vel Legis I:42).

Crowley often makes the analogy that a person's relationship to the state is like a muscle's relationship to the body. It must perform the function it is effective at, not attempt to perform a function it is not fit for, and not concern itself with the functioning of the other parts. "For every Individual in the State must be perfect in his own Function, with Contentment, respecting his own Task as necessary and holy, not envious of another's. For so only mayst thou build up a free state, whose directing Will shall be singly directed to the Welfare of all" (Liber Aleph, "De Ordins Rerum"). Therefore Thelema does not justify anarchy as a political system because each star as certain qualities, abilities, proclivities, etc. which make it fit for a certain function; each star must go its particular course, concentrate on its particular functioning, and essentially mind its own business. Just as the different organs perform different functions yet work together to produce a working body, so also does the concentration of each star on following its particular course allow for a functioning State - or even Mankind. As Crowley says, "It is generally understood by all men of education that the general welfare is necessary to the highest development of the particular" ("An Epistle Concerning the Law of Thelema"). Thelema does encourage the autonomy of every individual and the diversity of expressions, yet that does not exclude the possibility of people voluntarily being a part of various organizations (educational, recreational, governmental, etc.).

Democracy


Let's now look at democracy. The equality of all people, the problem of elected officials, and the similarity of all people are all things which Thelema does not accept. Firstly, many people quote "Every man and every woman is a star" as a justification of democracy. Since every man and every woman is a star, we are all equal. Thelema asserts that everyone is equal in their Essence; the quintessence of every Star is Godhead. Thelema does not assert that everyone is equal functionally: different people have different abilities, detriments, and possibilities. As Crowley puts succinctly, "It is useless to pretend that men are equal; facts are against it. And we are not going to stay, dull and contented as oxen, in the ruck of humanity" (The Law is For All, II:25). Although people are not equal in the sense of their abilities, Thelema does assert that every person has a right to live, die, eat, drink, move, think, create, and love as they will - every person has the absolute and equal right to accomplish their Wills. "The Law is for all," after all (Liber AL vel Legis I:34)... Further, Thelema agrees with democracy in treating each individual as sovereign and responsible.

One reason that Crowley understands democracy to be ineffective is that it requires the mass, the mob, to elect representatives. Thelema is against mob-mentality and mob-morality. In Liber AL vel Legis (II:25) it plainly says, "Ye are against the people, O my chosen!" Crowley writes, "The average voter is a moron.  He believes what he reads in newspapers, feeds his imagination and lulls his repressions on the cinema, and hopes to break away from his slavery by football pools, cross-word prizes, or spotting the winner of the 3.30.  He is ignorant as no illiterate peasant is ignorant: he has no power of independent thought.  He is the prey of panic.  But he has the vote. The men in power can only govern by stampeding him into wars, playing on his fears and prejudices until he acquiesces in repressive legislation against his obvious interests, playing on his vanity until he is totally blind to his own misery and serfdom. The alternative method is undisguised dragooning.  In brief, we govern by a mixture of lying and bullying" ("The Scientific Solution of the Problem of Government"). In this way, democracy (ironically) encourages rule by deception and coercion of the mob-mentality. It does not engender political progress.

Democracy can lead to the 'bully' gaining power but it can also lead to the mediocre gaining power. Crowley writes, "The principle of popular election is a fatal folly; its results are visible in every so-called democracy. The elected man is always the mediocrity; he is the safe man, the sound man, the man who displeases the majority less than any other; and therefore never the genius, the man of progress and illumination" ("Liber CXCIV: An Initimation with Reference to the Constitution of the Order"). When the majority is in power - it is mob-rule - and the "efficient eccentrics," who are the real men and women of "progress and illumination" are never elected because the majority will always elect the common denominator. This is also not conducive to political progress.

Coming back to the idea that each person has a particular function for it to fulfill - a star with a certain course to run - Thelema would be against the general leveling of all people to uniformity that is associated with democracy. We tell our kids they can grow up to be anything but again, "Each star has a function in its galaxy proper to its own nature. Much mischief has come from our ignorance in insisting, on the contrary, that each citizen is fit for any and every social duty" (The Law is for All, II:58). Although in theory, there are potentially infinite possible courses of action, each person must understand their own tendencies, drives, and proclivities to find that 'function' which fits them. This large variation of many types of people allows for progress. Crowley writes, "Here also is the voice of true Science, crying aloud that Variation is the Key of Evolution. Thereunto Art cometh the third, perceiving Beauty in the Harmony of the Diverse. Know then, o my Son, that all Laws, all Systems, all Customs, all Ideals and Standards which tend to produce uniformity, are in direct opposition to Nature's Will to change and to develop through Variety, and are accursed. Do thou with all thy Might of Manhood strive against these Forces, for they resist Change, which is Life; and thus they are of Death." (Liber Aleph, "De Lege Motus") Basically, Thelema encourages maximum possible variation for the accomplishment of diverse functions.

Aristocracy


Now we turn to aristocracy - might Thelema align with aristocracy in some way? Many will most likely point to "Let my servants be few & secret: they shall rule the many & the known" (Liber AL vel Legis I:10) to justify the aristocratic tendencies of Thelema. Firstly, Crowley writes, "The theories of Divine Right, aristocratic superiority, the moral order of Nature, are all today exploded bluffs.  Even those of us who believe in supernatural sanctions for our privileges to browbeat and rob the people no longer delude ourselves with the thought that our victims share our superstitions. Even dictators understand this.  Mussolini has tried to induce the ghost of Ancient Rome to strut the stage in the image of Julius Caesar; Hitler has invented a farrago of nonsense about Nordics and Aryans; nobody even pretends to believe either, except through the "will-to-believe."  And the pretence is visibly breaking down everywhere."(The Scientific Solution of the Problem of Government"). In this sense, Thelema certainly doesn't approve of aristocracy founded on various superstitions. Coming back to the idea that Thelema focuses on the fitness of each person for their particular function, its possible that a meritocracy (a system where progress is based on accomplishments) could align closely. In this case, people would theoretically progress in the areas where they showed aptitude for advancement.

Further, the aristocracy may turn into a tyranny. Thelema is certainly against the tyrant who denies others their rights to their own advantage - everyone has the absolute right to accomplish their Wills. Crowley even mentions "the safefuard tyrannicide" (Letter to G. Yorke 9/13/1941) in relation to the line in "Liber OZ" which states "Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights." In short, Thelema recognizes the right of man to fight for his own freedom in the face of tyranny. If anything, Thelema would approve of the Taoist king or the Socratic philosopher-king for their rule is based on their ability to fit each person to their respective functions, yet "it is impossible in practice to assure the good-will of those in power" ("Liber CLXI: Concerning the Law of Thelema"). For this reason, we must guard against tyrants of all types, especially the wolf who appears in sheeps clothing - that is, those who promise benevolence only to gain power over others.

Coming back to aristocracy, one could say that Thelema adopts many facets of the "aristocratic attitude." Crowley writes, "The key of all conduct, generally speaking, is to make every common thing noble, every small thing great" ("Of Eden and the Sacred Oak"). He constantly makes references to Thelemites seeing themselves as Kings and Queens, seeing everyone as royal, noble, and perfect. For example, "Live as the kings and princes, crowned and uncrowned, of this world, have always lived, as masters always live" ("The Law of Liberty"). Every person is the Crowned and Conquering Child, divinity Itself - what could be a more noble attitude? Further, Liber AL vel Legis exhorts the reader to be strong, healthy, beautiful, powerful; the moral, social, and sexual freedom implied by this might be said to be "aristrocratic." Also, "chivalry" or "bushido" is similar to Thelema's attitude in that people can compete, contend, debate, etc. and still maintain respect for each other. Liber AL vel Legis describes this attitude succinctly: "As brothers fight ye!" (Liber AL vel Legis III:59) This again springs out of the "noble attitude" engendered in Thelema.

But what about "the slaves shall serve" (Liber AL vel Legis II:58)? If Thelema views all as free, sovereign, responsible, and noble then why the mention of slaves? It is true that "'There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt:' but it is only the greatest of the race who have the strength and courage to obey it" ("De Lege Libellum"). In short, there are those who are too riddled with fear to accept the Law along with the freedom and responsibility it entails. Crowley writes, "our Law teaches that a star often veils itself from its nature. Thus the vast bulk of humanity is obsessed by an abject fear of freedom; the principal objections hitherto urged against my Law have been those of people who cannot bear to imagine the horrors which would result if they were free to do their own wills. The sense of sin, shame, self-distrust, this is what makes folk cling to Christianity-slavery... Now "the Law is for all"; but such defectives will refuse it" (The Law is For All, II:58). Again he writes, "In my ideal state everyone is respected for what he is. There will always be slaves, and the slave is to be defined as he who acquiesces in being a slave" (Confessions, ch.60). Therefore slaves in Thelema are not physical servants but rather those who have slavish spirits: those who cannot accept the Law of Thelema because of fear of revealing their own natures, fear of the great freedom allowed, and fear of the great responsibility needed to do only one's Will.

Conclusion


In short, "The main ethical principle [of The Book of the Law] is that each human being has his own definite object in life. He has every right to fulfil this purpose, and none to do anything else. It is the business of the community to help each of its members to achieve this aim; in consequence all rules should be made, and all questions of policy decided, by the application of this principle to the circumstances." (Confessions, ch.87) Thelema constantly asserts the need to understand the diverse needs & proclivities of each system so that each part may fulfill its particular function with maximum effectiveness. "Success is your proof" (Liber AL vel Legis III:46). In this sense, it is highly elastic. It adopts several tenets of anarchy, democracy, and aristocracy while admonishing others; it contains their elements but is not limited to them. The individual freedom and autonomy of anarchy are propounded but its lack of structuralization is admonished. The individual sovereignty and equal rights of democracy are propounded but its herd-mentality, uniformity, and tendency to lead rulers to use deception are admonished. The noble spirit and moral freedom of aristocracy are propounded but its claims of inherent superiority (by Divine Right, birth, lineage, etc.) and its tendency towards tyranny are admonished.

Crowley writes, "[The Law of Thelema] admits that each member of the human race is unique, sovereign and responsible only to himself. In this way it is the logical climax of the idea of democracy. Yet at the same time it is the climax of aristocracy by asserting each individual equally to be the centre of the universe." (Confessions, ch.87) Essentially, Thelema is about fitting each part to its particular function in the whole for maximum effectiveness. Thelema may draw upon major political ideas like anarchy, democracy, and aristocracy but it is not limited to them. It seems, Necessity will dictate the politics of Thelema in the end.
 
 
IAO 131
21 January 2009 @ 10:01 am


* part 1: Metaphysics *
* part 2: Epistemology *


Ethics


The proclamation "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" from Liber AL vel Legis (I:40) has especially profound implications in the sphere of morality. There is an immense amount of material on this topic throughout all of Crowley's works.

Since "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt" (Liber AL vel Legis III:60), the only "right" action is that which fulfills that Will and the only "wrong" action is that which thwarts that Will. As Liber AL vel Legis says (I:41), "The Word of Sin is Restriction." Crowley explains that, "[This] is a general statement or definition of Sin or Error. Anything soever that binds the will, hinders it, or diverts it, is Sin" (The Law is For All). Essentially, any form of morality that works in absolutes, saying any quality is a priori "right" or "wrong" (or "evil"). "To us, then, "evil" is a relative term; it is "that which hinders one from fulfilling his true Will"" (The Law is For All).

The attitudes toward oneself and others are necessary outgrowths of "Do what thou wilt." Since "Thou hast no right but to do thy will" (Liber AL vel Legis I:42), the value of self-discipline helps one do one's Will with one-pointedness. As Crowley explains, ""What is true for every School is equally true for every individual. Success in life, on the basis of the Law of Thelema, implies severe self-discipline" (Magick Without Tears, ch.8). Further, since "every man and every woman is a star" (Liber AL vel Legis I:3) and each star has its own unique path, each "star" is must pursue their own Will and avoid interference in the affairs of others. In short, mind your own business. "It is necessary that we stop, once for all, this ignorant meddling with other people's business. Each individual must be left free to follow his own path" (The Law is For All). This consequently means there is total moral freedom, including sexual freedom. "Also, take your fill and will of love as ye will, when, where and with whom ye will!" (Liber AL vel Legis I:51). This is not "individualism run wild" in the sense that there is no possibility of government. The understanding is that each star has its own particular function in the scheme of things and must perform that function with one-pointedness, and this can include one's function in state affairs. "For every Individual in the State must be perfect in his own Function, with Contentment, respecting his own Task as necessary and holy, not envious of another's. For so only mayst thou build up a free state, whose directing Will shall be singly directed to the Welfare of all" (Liber Aleph).

Aside from moving the locus of morality to the individual, making the Will the measure of what is "right" and "wrong," Thelema does emphasize certain moral traits over others and views certain experiences as "good."

One course of action that Thelema encourages is towards the attainment of Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel, Union with God, the dissolution of the ego or any other metaphor used in mysticism. Crowley explains, "A man must think of himself as a LOGOS, as going, not as a fixed idea. "Do what thou wilt" is thus necessarily his formula. He only becomes Himself when he attains the loss of Egoity, of the sense of separateness. He becomes All, PAN, when he becomes Zero [see the "Ontology" section above]" ("The Antecedents of Thelema"). Crowley puts it plainly when he writes, "There are many ethical injunctions of a revolutionary character in the Book, but they are all particular cases of the general precept to realize one's own absolute God-head and to act with the nobility which springs from that knowledge" (Confessions, ch.49). These attainments are understood to be available to anyone and to help one understand the world, oneself, and one's will more completely.

A common moral theme in Thelema is strength over weakness. "Beauty and strength, leaping laughter and delicious languor, force and fire, are of us" (Liber AL vel Legis II:20). "My disciples are proud and beautiful; they are strong and swift; they rule their way like mighty conquerors. The weak, the timid, the imperfect, the cowardly, the poor, the tearful --- these are mine enemies, and I am come to destroy them" (Liber Tzaddi, lines 24-25).

Consequently, Thelema has a different view on "compassion:" "This also is compassion: an end to the sickness of earth. A rooting-out of the weeds: a watering of the flowers" (Liber Tzaddi, line 26). "We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit: let them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is the vice of kings: stamp down the wretched & the weak: this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world" (Liber AL vel Legis II:21). That is, "compassion" is not understood to be the support of the weak but rather the opposite: the "rooting-out of the weeds" or the destruction of the weak and the "watering of the flowers" or the promotion of the strong. This is compassion because it is "an end to the sickness of earth."

A different view of pity is also held in light of Thelema's view that "every man and every woman is a star" (Liber AL vel Legis I:3). Crowley writes, "Pity implies two very grave errors—errors which are utterly incompatible with the views of the universe above briefly indicated. The first error therein is an implicit assumption that something is wrong with the Universe... The second error is still greater since it involves the complex of the Ego. To pity another person implies that you are superior to him, and you fail to recognize his absolute right to exist as he is. You assert yourself superior to him, a concept utterly opposed to the ethics of Thelema—"Every man and every woman is a star" and each being is a Sovereign Soul. A moment's thought therefore will suffice to show how completely absurd any such attitude is, in reference to the underlying metaphysical facts" ("The Method of Thelema"). Also, "The Book of the Law regards pity as despicable... to pity another man is to insult him. He also is a star, "one, individual and eternal". The Book does not condemn fighting --- "If he be a King, thou canst not hurt himw"" (Confessions, ch.49).

This leads into another view which is that Thelema embraces conflict. "Despise also all cowards; professional soldiers who dare not fight, but play; all fools despise! But the keen and the proud, the royal and the lofty; ye are brothers! As brothers fight ye!" (Liber AL vel Legis III:57-59). "Lo, while in The Book of the Law is much of Love, there is no word of Sentimentality. Hate itself is almost like Love! "As brothers fight ye!'' All the manly races of the world understand this. The Love of Liber Legis is always bold, virile, even orgiastic. There is delicacy, but it is the delicacy of strength" ("Liber II").

Thelema also enjoins the individual to rejoice because of life. A general theme of embracing and seeing the joy in all facets of life permeates Thelema. "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains... They shall rejoice, our chosen: who sorroweth is not of us... But ye, o my people, rise up & awake! Let the rituals be rightly performed with joy & beauty! ...a feast for life and a greater feast for death! A feast every day in your hearts in the joy of my rapture! A feast every night unto Nu, and the pleasure of uttermost delight! Aye! feast! rejoice! there is no dread hereafter... Write, & find ecstasy in writing! Work, & be our bed in working! Thrill with the joy of life & death!" (Liber AL vel Legis II:9, 19, 34-35, 41-44, 66); "There is joy in the setting-out; there is joy in the journey; there is joy in the goal" ("Liber Tzaddi", line 22). This view of the world arises out of the metaphysical ideas [see the "Cosmology" section above] that Thelema entertains. In short, "[Nuit] is the infinite in whom all we live and move and have our being. [Hadit] is eternal energy, the Infinite Motion of Things, the central core of all being. The manifested Universe comes from the marriage of Nuit and Hadit; without this could no thing be. This eternal, this perpetual marriage-feast is then the nature of things themselves; and therefore everything that is, is a crystallization of divine ecstasy" ("The Law of Liberty").

In the end one must remember "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt" (Liber AL vel Legis III:60). All of these ideas are subservient to the central law of "Do what thou wilt." This is the beauty of the word Thelema, that it implies such a succinct and sublime answer to the problems of morality while also having complex and intricate implications.
 
 
IAO 131
19 January 2009 @ 10:17 am


* part 1: Metaphysics *
* part 3: Ethics *


Epistemology


There are two stances on reason that are expounded in Liber AL vel Legis. The first stance is that reason must be subservient to Will and the second stance is the importance of direct experience over reason. These ideas about reason all intertwine and support one another.

First, the Will is 'supra-rational' or beyond reason. The section in Liber AL vel Legis that deals with this comes from chapter 2,

"There is great danger in me; for who doth not understand these runes shall make a great miss. He shall fall down into the pit called Because, and there he shall perish with the dogs of Reason. Now a curse upon Because and his kin! May Because be accursed for ever! If Will stops and cries Why, invoking Because, then Will stops & does nought. If Power asks why, then is Power weakness. Also reason is a lie; for there is a factor infinite & unknown; & all their words are skew-wise. Enough of Because! Be he damned for a dog! But ye, o my people, rise up & awake!" (lines 27-34)

Here we have a curse upon "Because," "Reason," and "Why." There is no "Why" or "Because" to Will: it simply GOES, it simply IS. Because we inhabit a world of Infinite Space and since reason can only work with finite ideas and quantities, then reason cannot express the Infinite purely and accurately. It is a "lie" because of this "factor infinite & unknown." Crowley writes, "There is no 'reason' why a Star should continue in its orbit. Let her rip! ...It is ridiculous to ask a dog why it barks. One must fulfil one's true Nature, one must do one's Will. To question this is to destroy confidence, and so to create an inhibition." (The Law is For All, II:30-31) Therefore, reason should attend to its own business (solving problems of rationality) and allow the Will to flow uninhibited; otherwise, "One risks falling form the world of Will (“freed from the lust of result”) to that of Reason" (Djeridensis Working, AL II:30). Crowley writes, "We must not suppose for an instant that the Book of the Law is opposed to reason. On the contrary, its own claim to authority rests upon reason, and nothing else. It disdains the arts of the orator. It makes reason the autocrat of the mind. But that very fact emphasizes that the mind should attend to its own business. It should not transgress its limits. It should be a perfect machine, an apparatus for representing the universe accurately and impartially to its master. The Self, its Will, and its Apprehension, should be utterly beyond it." (The Law is For All, II:27). Also, "When reason usurps the higher functions of the mind, when it presumes26 to dictate to the Will what its desires ought to be, it wrecks the entire structure of the star. The Self should set the Will in motion, that is, the Will should only take its orders from within and above" ("Djeridensis Working", II:31).

Another claim is made in Liber AL vel Legis, I:58, "I give unimaginable joys on earth: certainty, not faith, while in life, upon death; peace unutterable, rest, ecstasy; nor do I demand aught in sacrifice." The Will does not require articles of faith to be accepted but rather asks that the individual rely on their experiences. It is the faith conferred by the direct experience of the "consciousness of the continuity of existence" (Liber AL vel Legis, I:26) that is offered. Rational precepts are not proposed, debated over, accepted, and rejected but rather one attains various Trances and learn from one's experiences. When one attains the "consciousness of the continuity of existence" (Liber AL vel Legis, I:26) and becomes "chief of all" (Liber AL vel Legis, I:23), the unity of this perception is not explainable by the duality of reason. In relation to this experience we find "there could be no reality in any intellectual concept of any kind, that the only reality must lie in direct experience of such a kind that it is beyond the scope of the critical apparatus of our minds. It cannot be subject to the laws of Reason; it cannot be found in the fetters of elementary mathematics; only transfinite and irrational conceptions in that subject can possibly shadow forth the truth in some such paradox as the identity of contradictories." (Eight Lectures on Yoga) Crowley also says, "To have any sensible meaning at all, faith must mean experience... Nothing is any use to us unless it be a certainty unshakeable by criticism of any kind, and there is only one thing in the universe which complies with these conditions: the direct experience of spiritual truth. Here, and here only, do we find a position in which the great religious minds of all times and all climes coincide. It is necessarily above dogma, because dogma consists of a collection of intellectual statements, each of which, and also its contradictory, can easily be disputed and overthrown." (Eight Lectures on Yoga) This perception of the world as continuous and unitary is not offered on faith but can be achieved and recognized as a certainty by those who attain thereto.

One other doctrine relating to reason that appears in Crowley's writings but not explicitly in Liber AL vel Legis is the idea of the circularity of reason. Reason can only manipulate and work with articles of reason; this relates to what was said above because the problems in the sphere of reason should not usurp the power of or dictate actions to the sphere of Will. We have an example of this doctrine of the circularity of reason in "The Antecedents of Thelema" where Crowley writes, "All proofs turn out on examination to be definitions. All definitions are circular. (For a = bc, b = de ... w = xy, and y = za.)" In this sense, reason deals with relations between illusion. This is certainly useful - science is a good example of this - but it doesn't give us any powerful facts of the way things are. In a deeper sense, reason works within the realms of duality while the Will must remain one-pointed and therefore not mired in the relations of reason. Crowley writes further on this idea in the essay "Knowledge" in Little Essays Toward Truth, "All knowledge may be expressed in the form S=P. But if so, the idea P is really implicit in S; thus we have learnt nothing... S=P (unless identical, and therefore senseless) is an affirmation of duality; or, we may say, intellectual perception is a denial of Samadhic truth. It is therefore essentially false in the depths of its nature." Reason is understood as simply the relation of words which point to other words, ad infinitum. Further, as mentioned above, because reason works with relations between ideas (the relation between 'S' and 'P' above), it affirms duality in the world. Two things can only be related in reason if they are distinct and therefore separate.

Again, all of these ideas about reason intertwine to give us a general picture of Thelema's approach to epistemology. Essentially, the Will of the individual is beyond reason, or supra-rational, so one cannot ask "Why" of it or justify it with "Because." The individual must then constantly go forward and experience new and various things, not depending on articles of faith. Reason is a human faculty that allows us to manipulate & find the relations between finite facts and ideas. Because of this it must work within its own sphere (i.e. deal with problems of rationality like mathematics, science, etc.) while leaving the Will to act uninhibited. With this understanding, one can be guarded against reason when it asks "whence camest thou? Whither wilt thou go?" with the response "No whence! No whither! ...Is there not joy ineffable in this aimless winging? Is there not weariness and impatience for who would attain to some goal?" (Liber LXV, II:21-22, 24)
 
 
IAO 131
13 December 2008 @ 01:19 pm



* part 2: Epistemology *

* part 3: Ethics *


Introduction


There is an ongoing and perhaps eternal debate about whether Thelema is a religion, philosophy, or way of life (or all of them or none of them). In my view, Thelema certainly has something to offer the areas of both religion and philosophy. This essay will look at how Thelema approaches the classic divisions of philosophy including metaphysics (including ontology, cosmology, eschatology, and teleology), epistemology, ethics, and more.

Metaphysics


Metaphysics is essentially the study of the nature of the world. It is traditionally split into ontology, cosmology, eschatology, and teleology.

Ontology: None & Two


Ontology is the study of being, existence, or reality. Thelema's ontology is stated simply as "None and Two." The world is understood as 'Nothing' or 'Naught,' which is something completely beyond all description and limit. In Liber AL vel Legis, it is written "Then the priest answered & said unto the Queen of Space, kissing her lovely brows, and the dew of her light bathing his whole body in a sweet-smelling perfume of sweat: O Nuit, continuous one of Heaven, let it be ever thus; that men speak not of Thee as One but as None; and let them speak not of thee at all, since thou art continuous!" (AL I:27). Many mystics have called it "Unity" but even this, some may argue, implies something as "not-One." Crowley writes in "De Lege Libellum," "All Things that are in Truth One Thing only, whose name hath been called No Thing." From this comes the necessity of explaining the appearance of duality. Instead of a "Fall of Man" or an imprisonment of the soul in matter, Thelema explains the appearance of duality in this fashion: "None... and two. For I am divided for love's sake, for the chance of union. This is the creation of the world, that the pain of division is as nothing, and the joy of dissolution all." (Liber AL I:28-30). In this way, the many or divided are in such a position so they may become one and unite. This is given further explanation in Book of Lies ch.3 where it is written, "The Many is as adorable to the One as the One is to the Many. This is the Love of These; creation-parturition is the Bliss of the One; coition-dissolution is the Bliss of the Many. / The All, thus interwoven of These, is Bliss."

...see also "Berashith" by Aleister Crowley, Magick Without Tears ch.5, Book of Lies ch.3, 12, and 46


Cosmology: Nuit, Hadit, Ra-Hoor-Khuit, and Stars


Cosmology deals with what the Universe is essentially. One might argue that there exist several similar but interchangeable cosmologies in Thelema: for example, the Creed of the Gnostic Mass gives a rudimentary cosmology, the "Matter in Motion" idea in the New Comment, and the Qabalistic understanding in chapter 0! of Book of Lies. In the end, the most widespread cosmology, and the one rooted in The Book of the Law, is the idea of Nuit, Hadit, and Ra-Hoor-Khuit. Thelema understands Nuit as Infinite Space which is occupied by various Points-of-View, or Hadit. Each star - every man and every woman - is in the Body of Infinite Space and has Hadit as its core. These together create the Universe as we know it. There are many interpretations of Nuit and Hadit - for example, with Nuit as matter and Hadit as motion and their interplay being the universe but the basic idea remains the same.

...see also Liber AL vel Legis ch.1 & 2, Book of Lies ch.0 & 11, the "Creed" of "The Gnostic Mass"


Eschatology: The destruction of the self & the dawning of the Aeon of Horus


Eschatology deals with the idea of end-times. There is certainly no Last Judgment in the philosophy of Thelema. In a sense, one can view the attainment of the Crossing of the Abyss, the destruction of the personality or ego, as the end-times of the 'self' and the waking to the Self. Another interpretation of eschatology is the "destruction of the world by fire" (which can also be interpreted in the former sense of the destruction of the self), which Crowley gives symbolically in Atu XX: Aeon of the Tarot. In this other interpretation, the world was "destroyed by fire" with the reception of Liber AL vel Legis in 1904. Crowley writes in The Book of Thoth, "The old card was called The Angel: or, The Last Judgment. It represented an Angel or Messenger blowing a trumpet, attached to which was a flag, bearing the symbol of the Aeon of Osiris... The card therefore represented the destruction of the world by Fire. This was accomplished in the year of the vulgar era 1904, when the fiery god Horus took the place of the airy god Osiris in the East as Hierophant."

...see also The Book of Thoth "XX. The Aeon"


Teleology: Will


Teleology deals with the purpose or the understanding of the design of the universe. In Thelema, the teleology is clearly one of "Will." One might contrast the teleology of Thelema with that of Schopenhauer's Will-to-Life and Nietzsche's Will-to-Power, where Thelema understands it as a Will-to-Love. All experiences and events are occurrences of two things uniting into a third. The necessary formula of each star is then "love under will" - to find that Will and do it. Just as each star has its particular orbit in the macrocosm of space, every man and every woman has their particular Way on earth. As Crowley writes in the introduction to Liber AL vel Legis, "Each action or motion is an act of love, the uniting with one or another part of "Nuit"; each such act must be 'under will,' chosen so as to fulfil and not to thwart the true nature of the being concerned."
 
 
IAO 131
11 December 2008 @ 09:15 am


Here are a couple of thought-experiments to ponder the intricacies of what many people take to be simple on the face of things... There is no "right" answer to any of these (although I definitely have my own answers) but are meant to bring some subtle complications to light

1) Addiction:
a) Suppose that someone is addicted to a substance or some behavior. Does this mean that they are a priori NOT doing their Will?
b) If you answer yes: Suppose that this person conquers their addiction and therefore learns more about themselves - they learn about their limitations and the extent of their willpower. Now are they doing their Will?
c) Is the person doing their Will 'better' or 'more completely' because of this ordeal? If yes, then wouldn't this imply that going through addiction is beneficial to the development of Will?

2) The problem of other Wills:
a) Suppose that person A does not enjoy what person B is doing. Does person A have a right to say that person B is not doing their Will?
b) Suppose that person A feels he is being infringed upon by what person B is doing, but person B feels she is doing their Will. Does person A have a right to say that person B is not doing their Will?
c) Suppose person A thinks person B is being irrational. Does person A have a right to say that person B is not doing their Will? Can person B point to the doctrines of Reason, Why, and Because being hindrances to assert her their position?
d) Is there any circumstance where person A can be sure about their right to tell person B that they are not doing their Will?
e) Is there any circumstance where person B can prove to person A that they are doing their Will?

3) Lust of result:
a) Suppose Person A wants circumstance X to come about (for example, getting an A on a test, retrieving groceries, getting a paycheck, wooing some person, etc.). Does this mean this person A suffers from 'lust of result'? If so, should all desires for anything be destroyed?
b) Suppose Person A does not achieve circumstance X. Is Person A's lamentation of this fact 'lust of result'? Conversely: Suppose Person A does achieve circumstance X. Is Person A's celebration of this fact 'lust of result?'

4) Pure will & duality:
a) Suppose Person A has not attained to a Trance of Non-Duality/Unity. Is Person A a priori not doing their Will? Not doing their Will to the full extent? Are there different extents of doing one's Will or is it simply Doing your Will & Not doing your Will?
b) Suppose Person A has attained to a Trance of Non-Duality/Unity but has "come down" from it - back to duality. Is Person A not doing their Will while in duality? Does the Trance of Non-Duality/Unity help this person to do their Will 'better' or 'more completely'?
c) Suppose Person A enjoys a constant Trance of Non-Duality/Unity. Is this person necessarily doing their Will?

5) Killing others:
a) Suppose Person A kills Person B. Was Person A a priori not doing their Will?
b) Suppose Person A kills Person B out of self-defense. Was Person A not doing their Will?
c) Suppose Person A kills Person B because Person B is infringing on their rights (Liber OZ). Was Person A not doing their Will? Was Person B a priori not doing their Will even if they think they are doing their Will?
d) Suppose Person A kills Person B because they BELIEVE Person B is infringing on their rights. Was Person A not doing their Will?
e) Suppose Person A kills Person B in a fit of ecstasy. Was Person A not doing their Will? Can Person A appeal to the ideas of Reason, Because, Why etc. being hindrances in justifying this act?
f) Suppose Person A decides to have an abortion. Was Person A not doing their Will? Suppose Person A knows that they do not have the means to support their baby. Was Person A not doing their Will in having an abortion?

6) A priori Will:
a) Is it possible to say a priori that anyone else is not doing their Will in any circumstance? What circumstances?
 
 
IAO 131


Anyone who has read Liber AL vel Legis, the Book of Law, has surely come upon the Comment which appends this great work. It inspires a cornucopia of reactions from awe to fear to zeal. For the sake of completeness I quote the Comment in full:

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

The study of this Book is forbidden. It is wise to destroy this copy after the first reading.
Whosoever disregards this does so at his own risk and peril. These are most dire.
Those who discuss the contents of this Book are to be shunned by all, as centres of pestilence.
All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself.
There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt.


Some take this Comment as an injunction that only the individual can properly interpret the Book of the Law for him or herself, which I believe is, on its face, quite correct. But what I want to explore are some interesting implications and ideas surrounding this Comment.

Firstly, it hasn't been noted widely that this Comment itself requires interpretation. Many people interpret this Comment itself in various ways. We might take this Comment on its face and interpret it literally. In this case we should shun anyone who discusses the Book of the Law at all as "centres of pestilence," but we should also have destroyed the Book of the Law upon our first reading. This is exactly what many have done, having burned the book, thrown it into the ocean, or many other stories I have heard. Further, people often ignore the very first and very last lines of this Comment which both contain the phrase "Do what thou wilt." Couldn't it possibly be within the scope of one's Will to discuss, study, and interpret this Book? If there really is "no law beyond Do what thou wilt" then the other injunctions can only be mere appendages to this imperative. Therefore, even on a literal interpretation, if we take into account the first & last lines of the Comment, we are therefore still not obligated to either destroy the Book or shun others as centres of pestilence. In a sense, the literal interpretation is self-refuting.

Further, if we accept the Book of the Law's prime injunction of "Do what thou wilt," we might be able to interpret the other lines of the Comment in another light. If the sole authority of each star is his or her own Will, then there are absolutely no other authorities to guide his or her conduct. Therefore, one could view the injunctions to destroy the Book and to shun others as "centres of pestilence" as a sort of test. If one is still susceptible to obeying another's commands without thought of one's own Will - if one, in short, still is not acknowledging one's own Will as the sole authority of one's conduct - then these commands will naturally get rid of the "weeds" insofar as it causes them to destroy the Book and avoid discussion & study of it. Going even further, what true Thelemite is afraid of "risk and peril"? Did the perils of the unconquered mountains deter the Beast from his expeditions? "Is fear in thine heart" (Liber AL II:46) when you hear these seemingly harsh statements of forbidden activity? In the Book of the Law itself we are bidden to "fear not to undergo the curses" (Liber AL III:16), and, going even further, to "Fear not at all; fear neither men nor Fates, nor gods, nor anything. Money fear not, nor laughter of the folk folly, nor any other power in heaven or upon the earth or under the earth" (Liber AL III:17). Again, the Comment may appear in this way as a sort of "test" upon the reader and aspirant: if one is still following other's commands of what is "forbidden" and what to "shun, if one is still afraid of facing consequences & engaging in "perilous" activities... then perhaps this Book and its Word is not for you (at least at that time).

We might also look further into the words used in this Comment. Many people would acknowledge that the words used in Liber AL vel Legis have a symbolic meaning and I see no reason to see why the inspired Comment cannot include such symbolic meanings. The symbols of Thelema can often be off-putting on first glance with its mentions of war, pestilence, pitilessness, etc. Even "poison" is used as a symbol of mysticism in Liber LXV at various times (for example, "Thou hast fastened the fangs of Eternity in my soul, and the Poison of the Infinite hath consumed me utterly." -Liber LXV, III:39). The word "pestilence" itself is used in Liber LXV when it is written, "I too am the Soul of the desert; thou shalt seek me yet again in the wilderness of sand. At thy right hand a great lord and a comely; at thy left hand a woman clad in gossamer and gold and having the stars in her hair. Ye shall journey far into a land of pestilence and evil; ye shall encamp in the river of a foolish city forgotten; there shall ye meet with Me." (Liber LXV IV:61-62)

In short, the Comment itself requires interpretation. If we take the Comment literally or symbolically, neither interpretation (which is what they are) lends itself to an obvious following of the injunctions to destroy the Book, not study it, not discuss it, or shun those who choose to do any of the following (or their opposites). In my opinion, the growth of Thelema and its widespread & diverse community can be sustained not through dogmatic verbotenism nor through extreme secrecy, i.e. the shunning of all people who even hint at commenting on or interpreting or discussing this Book in part or in full. I say, with the Beast, "To hell with this Verbotenism!" (The Law is For All). The best path for growth is in all cases for a variety of opinions to come together and discuss their various points-of-view without taking any of them to be the One True Opinion. The only other advice would be to avoid "folly" insofar as we neglect to "appeal to [The Beast's] writings" on the matter of Liber AL in his own commentaries and writings like Liber Aleph, De Lege Libellum etc. In this way, we may measure our own understandings against others and perhaps learn something ourselves from the views of others.
 
 
IAO 131
01 December 2008 @ 10:10 am


• The structure of the body is the limit of my world - conceptually and factually {11.10.08}

• Mutual participation in an ordeal breeds closeness {11.20.08}

Equilibrium - Its more pleasurable and instructive to rise from a great depth than to maintain a steady balance {11.20.08}

• People agree with each other even when they don't truly agree in fear of that primal punishment: exclusion (excommunication) {11.20.08}

• People are much more vicious to others when they cannot see their face (politicans to constituents, a marksman vs. a foot-soldier, arguments over the internet, CEOs to their employees) {11.20.08}

• Great minds think differently. {12.1.08}

Things change: it shows one's character whether one sees this fact as a mark of the sorrow & suffering of the world or a mark of its joy. {12.1.08}

I have a powerful experience and learn something new: what is the benefit to ascribing this new knowledge to an intelligence external to oneself over understanding the knowledge to have been hidden within oneself but suddenly revealed? {12.1.08}
 
 
IAO 131
The basis of Thelema is the Will (which is "Thelema" itself in Greek). The command "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" (Liber AL I:40) and "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt" (Liber AL I:60) is often distinguished from the often misunderstood and mistranslated statement of "Do what you want." Why is "Do what thou wilt" different from "Do what you want?" and is it similar in some respects? On this point, we may examine the positive and negative aspects of Thelema/Will insofar as positive means affirming and negative means denying.

The negative aspect of "Do what thou wilt"

The negative aspect of "Do what thou wilt" and Thelema/Will in general refers to those tenets and suggestions which we may answer with a "No" or negatively. The foremost idea that Thelema says "No" to is the idea of an absolute, binding morality and any kind of moral pronouncement. In this sense, "Do what thou wilt" is nearly identical to "Do what you want" because both deny that pronouncements of "You should/ought to do this or that" are irrelevant to our concerns. This is explained succinctly by Crowley when he says,

"The formula of this law is: Do what thou wilt. Its moral aspect is simple enough in theory. Do what thou wilt does not mean Do as you please, although it implies this degree of emancipation, that it is no longer possible to say a priori that a given action is "wrong." Each man has the right – and an absolute right – to accomplish his True Will."
-Aleister Crowley, "The Method of Thelema"


Here Crowley asserts that "Do what thou wilt" "implies [the same] degree of emancipation" as "Do as you please" insofar as "it is no longer possible to say a priori that a given action is 'wrong.'" This is the crux of the "negative aspect" of Thelema/Will - that one cannot argue against a certain action as bad, evil, not useful, unholy, etc. Crowley says also,

"There are no "standards of Right." Ethics is balderdash. Each Star must go on its orbit. To hell with 'moral Principle;' there is no such thing; that is a herd-delusion, and makes men cattle."
-Aleister Crowley, "The Law is For All", II:28


Again, "there are no 'standards of Right' or wrong and "each Star must go on its orbit." The fact that there are no objective, external standards firmly allows us to do whatever we Will. But this brings us to the "positive aspect" of Thelema/Will: What is it that we Will? What exactly is our particular "orbit" as a star in the Body of Infinite Space?


The positive aspect of "Do what thou wilt"

Insofar as morality and dogma are burdens upon the free exercise of one's unique and individual Will, they are restrictions, and "the word of Sin is Restriction" (Liber AL I:41). To this we may add the "dogs of Reason" with its questions of "Why" and "Because" for the Will is supra-rational and not to be limited by it. Again, the pressing question once one has discarded the fetters of restriction in their many forms is "What is my Will?" This comes to the aspect of Will which we may say "Yes" to...

The most succinct command in this "positive aspect" is that ancient aphorism and command to "Know Thyself." This is where "Do what thou wilt" splits apart from and is superior to the simple notion of "Do what you want" or "Do as you please." Most people do not even know what they really want - what they really Will - and this requires an intense, continuing process of exploration and introspection. Traditionally, this is done by the methods of Magick and Yoga in Thelema. This allows us to not only control our body and mind but also explore the hidden regions and expand the understanding of ourselves to the uttermost. As Crowley says in the essay "On Thelema," "The value of any being is determined by the quantity and quality of those parts of the universe which it has discovered, and which therefore compose its sphere of experience. It grows by extending this experience, by enlarging, as it were, this sphere." Therefore we must use Magick, Yoga, and whatever methods we Will to explore ourselves and therefore manifest our Wills more fully, freely, purely, and perfectly.

With these considerations of both the negative & positive aspects of Thelema/Will, we may understand the proclamation of the Master Therion when he says,

"From [this], it should be clear that "Do what thou wilt'' does not mean "Do what you like.'' It is the apotheosis of Freedom; but it is also the strictest possible bond. Do what thou wilt--then do nothing else. Let nothing deflect thee from that austere and holy task. Liberty is absolute to do thy will; but seek to do any other thing whatever, and instantly obstacles must arise. Every act that is not in definite course of that one orbit is erratic, an hindrance. Will must not be two, but one."
-Aleister Crowley, Liber II: The Message of the Master Therion
 
 
 
 

Advertisement

Customize