http://hermetic.com/legis Here is a link to the text of 'The Book of the Law.' Probably the best one to read is the 'new comment,' which has the text as well as the two primary commentaries with it. Just very briefly to give a sketch of the text. It is divided into 3 chapters, the first being about Nuit, Mother-Goddess, the second Hadit, father-god, the third about the Son, who is dual-natured as the conqueror and the silent-inner child. Now let me, to get the thread started, give a brief sketch of some of the ideas of Thelema. Ideally there will be some interest in the topic, and we can have conversation. First of all, Thelema is a Greek word meaning 'Will,' demonstrating the ultimate aim of Thelema which is to discover what your true Will is, and do that, and only that. As the Book of the Law, holy text of Thelema(represented by 'AL'), says in chapter 1 verse 3, "Every man and every woman is a Star." Well, in order to understand this, let's briefly examine the concept of Nuit, who is the Mother-Goddess of the Thelemic trinity. Nuit is "infinite space, and the infinite stars thereof."(AL 1:22) So, our true nature is as a star in the body of Nuit, who is the Infinite. Now a star's orbit is defined by its Will. The Universe is a Universe of stars, whose pathways are defined by their Will. The universe being coherent, there is perfect harmony when all are in touch with their true Will. All movement besides that of the true Will is erratic, and the source of all disharmony. "Thou hast no right but to do thy Will."(AL 1:42) The law of Thelema also implies freedom. "The word of sin is restriction."(AL 1:41) That is to say, that in following one's true Will, there must be no restrictions whatsoever. Yet we have no right to interfere with another's Will, because the Law is the Law for all. Furthermore, it is postulated that all disharmony results from deviation from Will: thus there does not need to be restrictions on the pursuit of Will, because perfectly following the Will, even to the absolute extreme, cannot by definition conflict with the Will of another. Now Nuit is Space. Hadit is motion. The spark of passionate individuality which define's the individual and his Will is Hadit. Hadit is always the very center, all activity springing forth from that center. "I am not extended...In the sphere I am everywhere the center, as she, the circumference, is nowhere found. Yet she shall be known and I never."(AL 2:2-4) "I am the axle of the wheel...'Come unto me' is a foolish word: for it is I that go."(AL 2:7) This image, and its meaning, is very important to understanding this school of thought in-depth. I'll leave off the OP with a few random illuminating quotes from the Book of the Law, and in further posts I can discuss more and again hopefully we can have conversation. 1:3-4 "Every man and every woman is a Star. Every number is infinite; there is no difference." 1:12-13 "Come forth, o children, under the stars, and take your fill of love! I am above you and in you. My ecstasy is in yours. My joy is to see your joy." 1:22 "Since I am Infinite Space, and the Infinite Stars thereof, do ye also thus. Bind nothing! Let there be no difference made among you between any one thing and any other thing; for thereby cometh hurt." 1:26 "And the sign shall be my ecstasy, the consciousness of the continuity of existence, the omnipresence of my body." 1:27 "O Nuit, continuous one in 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!" 1:29-30 "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." 1:32 "Seek me only! Then the joys of my love will redeem ye from all pain." 1:42-44 "...thou hast no right but to do thy will. Do that, and no other shall say nay. For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect." 2:9 "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass and are done; but there is that which remains."
I went to the link, but found it quite difficult to understand because of the archaic nature of the language used. I think that I get the gist of it though. When reading through it I felt that is was basically the same message that is carried in many of the occult texts that I have read. I often get the sense that I may not be quite ready to explore this in the manner that it is represented here, but that may just be because of the language used. Still I find these kind of texts are of extreme interest to me, not just as concepts, but rather at a level far deeper than that. I feel drawn to them in a way that is quite inexplicable, and I sometimes feel that the best way to learn about these kinds of things for me is through meditation, as well as in the astral planes. Just out of interest, are you familiar with the Seth Material? (Jane Roberts).
Yes, the language used can be difficult. Just as I have been reading it these last few days is the first time that I have really felt I was getting something significant out of it. It really can be difficult to understand. I too have this sort of inexplicable attraction towards these 'occult' teachings. I have consistently studied Crowley and the like for quite some time. I have frequently wondered if I was just wasting my time, memorizing correspondences, trying to understand the meaning of the tree of life, the Hebrew alphabet and the tarot cards. Because, these are all symbols, and so I have wondered at times if it's all just meaningless and arbitrary. But I can't deny that all of these things have become more meaningful for me personally over time, and the study of certain things, including the book of the law, has become easier and more significant seeming. And yes, I'm familiar with the Seth material. I used to be all about something like the Law of Attraction, your mind creates your reality, etc. now, I'm not so sure, about that, or anything really. Occult teachings such as those in Thelema include aspects of that, but it is also part of a larger framework.
I have a very detatched fascination with occultism. This is a very interesting thread, and I hope you keep discussing it, Journey. You definitely seem to have a better handle on it than most. Also... I initially misread the title, and I couldn't get this out of my head, forgive me;
Boats, about your point about respecting or not respecting the will of others. It reminds me of a passage I read by Crowley. He talks about the difference between practitioners of white and black, magick I believe it was. He says that the black magician acts as if his will is the only will, with the complete disregard for anything 'other.' The white magician has consideration for the will and well-being of others in the pursuit of his own will. He says that these two amounts to ultimately being the same, with the ideology of the black magician perhaps being more strictly accurate. This is because ultimately there is nothing in one's experience which could with strict accuracy be called 'other,' and therefore the absolutely perfect pursuit of one's own will, with no regard for other whatsoever, still does result in absolute harmony because one's whole experience is wholly derived from oneself, and it's harmony IS one's true will. This is all somewhat related to the ideas of 'Seth' previously mentioned.
I connect with many of the ideas in that...but when I live/speak of them I'm thrown into the hospital... Go figure! I've come to realize that I cannot speak about such things to the wrong people. I call it Conscious Awareness...doesn't matter what you call it really..just that it is and it lives through us. Esp. these 1:3-4 "Every man and every woman is a Star. Every number is infinite; there is no difference." 1:12-13 "Come forth, o children, under the stars, and take your fill of love! I am above you and in you. My ecstasy is in yours. My joy is to see your joy." 1:26 "And the sign shall be my ecstasy, the consciousness of the continuity of existence, the omnipresence of my body." 1:27 "O Nuit, continuous one in 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!" 2:9 "Remember all ye that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass and are done; but there is that which remains."
This is from the Chinese Catechism thread... http://forum.grasscity.com/philosophy/1309993-chinese-catechism.html.
They who have advanced that everything is alike stay detached from this world like a lotus above muddy water. Who would be drowned in sansar remains like a mouse in the maw of a great cat. So, does death inflict upon you fool a thousand wounds as you hold verily to the cause of your remorse. O lord, how the arrow of your word destroys these iron shackles that bind me to endless turmoil. In fruitless pursuits the mind is lost. O turn away fool, turn away before the chance is lost.
Okay so that may or may not fit in this thread, obviously everyone can freely attempt to understand how it might. Btw boats, let's not take anything to seriously. Additionally, the usage of the word lord refers to the concept of a satguru archetype, which is only personified in this context as the medium of delivery requires it. I think this thelema stuff is all about archetypal conceptual forms, but I could be wrong, I didn't really read it.
Only pretension and oblivion would allow one to believe such a thing -- "detached"? Where is the very root of this lotus based... if not in the muddy waters? One learns of Ishvara's bounty and majesty by growing with the grass and soil, so to speak, and not by looking upon the rest of the land, from a detached position, with a haughty contempt for, o lotus flower. Dostoevsky writes, "One has to grow on the soil where the corn and tress are growing.[...] the whole order, freedom, life, honor, the family, the children, the bonds--in one word, everything of value comes."
Understand what I say through its context boats. I'm talking about the nature of mind. One can dwell in samsara and does. Endless pursuits and endless aversions. The churning of the mind is muddied like the churning of a flooding river. Your mind can have the nature of clarity. The lotus is just a metaphor. There is a root. Surely there is! But to search for it is to drown. Metaphorically drown in the conceptual. Clear, pristine, radiant awareness. This is the nature of what I can only define as nirvana. The state of non conceptual knowledge.
Well, then, let me state that, firstly, you must become more of a resolute "swimmer", and, secondly, that Cartesian philosophy is literally the raft upon which the whole of the Western world's modernity, cultural advancement, and knowledge (both philosophical and scientific), is based. "Descartes is the Atlas on whose powerful shoulders rests the whole firmament of modern philosophy" - Max Muller Not only did Descartes, this indelible genius, elucidate the differentiation between quantitative matter and qualitative mind, thus delineating the bounds of science and philosophy, but his theory of matter is literally the starting point for all modern scientific query. "How much new light was thus thrown on old problems may be best seen by the fact that Descartes admits no difference between organic and inorganic beings, but perceives clearly that, taken simply as external phenomena, the whole material world must be conceived as a thoroughly homogenous substance, obeying mechanical and mathematical laws only, and to be explained in all its modifications by these laws. How much independence of thought was required in order to arrive at this view and to apply it consistently to an explanation of nature, we, who are reaping the fruit of the seed thus sown by Descartes and accustomed to think his thoughts, can hardly realize. We must transport ourselves into his age, with its mystic and theosophic tendencies, when spirits of all kinds, vital and animal, having their seats in different parts of the body, sympathies and antipathies, good and evil demons, influences of the stars, and similar fancies were running a riot, to enable us to bow respectfully before that strong mind which by its own rays of light scattered the phantoms of mysticism, together with the whole rubbish of scholastic formulas, and thus cleared the field for the true scientific method which has since, from century to century, led to new and then unthought of triumphs, and by an uninterrupted and faithful labor collected both the material and the plans for the gigantic structure of exact natural science."
Listen my friend. I don't care much for the hundred western and modern philosophers you're quoting and getting ideas from. I've never heard you speak in terms of your own experience and understanding. You think you can communicate the truth of these subjects easier by finding someone who has said it better than you, but the truth that you express and they express will always differ. Instead of defining aand expressing the truth in knowable terms, you shift your own understanding and conception of reality to fall in line with anothers. Whether it's descartes or your father or your friends. I haven't read all that you wrote because it didn't seem to have anything to do with what I was talking about.
If you say so boats. The idea isn't that your ideas fall in line with those of another, but that your understanding of the concepts that other person is never accurate as they are obscured by your subjectivity. Yet still you interpret them to fall in line with your own ideas. In a sense, inwardly, their ideas are falling in line with yours, but outwardly, your ideas are falling in line with theirs.
Yes, yes, I get it... everyone but Pickled is, philosophically, a victim of bias, prejudice, and self-deception... no one besides Pickled can grasp the truth with a clear discernment. Okay, Pickled, whatever... as I've said before, you are no where as smart as you think you are; and, again, your estimation of my personal position is far from accurate.
Haha what I'm saying applies to everyone. I'm not saying I'm beyond that. I'm saying that just recognizing these things is enough. I don't care about your position. What I care about is all things that defeat right view.