My issues with Thelema - can you help?
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
@UK93 said
"1 - Do Thelemites believe the Gods in Resh etc are actually Gods? Or are they seen as ascended masters / guides etc? When thinking about Nuit and Hadit, again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness? Could they be called whatever we like?"
Firstly:
Thelemites are a rather large group. You shouldn't look for answers in (non-existent) consensus among self-proclaimed Thelemites, rather you should study and meditate on the holy texts and the prophet's teachings. (Blessed be he!) Ultimately, you should draw your own conclusions. It's undesirable with regards as many of these concepts to say "it is so and not so." But for a start, simple answers can be given to pave the way to further understanding.On Resh, the most useful perspective is that it is directed to one's Holy Guardian Angel or whatever you call your Lord. By identifying with many god-forms one can learn to see beyond the outer images and into the Unity which is described in the adoration.
Secondly:
It's not a common idea that the Gods of Resh are Masters etc, no. On the other hand, there's no issue in taking them as actual Gods, or (more or less) whatever. Just keep in mind the One Idea, the Holy Guardian Angel, above all.As for Nuit and Hadit, they are basically the components of existence itself, which comes from the relationship between the two. It's immaterial how you describe them.
As for calling them whatever we like, sure, but with a certain reverence and respect. (Not because they are personal separate gods who might take offense, but because they represent core sacred ideas, our own sacredness.)
"2 - Where does all the talk of Baphomet come from? I hear more reference to Baphomet in Thelema than any other system, and my understanding is that he/she isn't a kind and loving entity. Is this a misconception?"
The main useful source on Baphomet for us is the holy book Liber A'ash.
The many references you may hear about Baphomet in θέλημα may not be because of his actual importance, but because of the ignorance of many people. Baphomet looks like a "dark" and "satanic" figure to the ignorant (most of them wouldn't be able to tell actual dark and satanic if it hit them on their noses), and the prophet and his teachings suffer a similar treatment. Far away be both of them from what those ignorant people claim.
With regards to your question about Baphomet's character, I say kind no, loving yes, and refer you to the mentioned holy book.
"3 - Similar to the above, there seem to be a lot of Thelemites who are into 'Satanism' etc, and this issue isn't one with the concept of Satanism (eg you have to believe in Christianity to be a Satanist) more one with the the fact some people seem to associate their Thelema with evil/dark magic and the like. A minority to be sure, but a larger minority in Thelema than elsewhere I think."
I understand what you're saying about these many self-proclaimed Thelemites, but what is the question here? There are many immature and ignorant people out there.
Note also that "Satanism" can have several distinct meanings. I suggest you just ignore the matter unless you have a strong interest in it.
"4 - Is Crowley really the be all and end all? I believe in not believing anything 'just because' but I do get the feeling a lot of people live or die by what he wrote with no room for movement."
I do not know what you mean by "be and end all." If you mean, vaguely, that Thelemites hold him in high status, that's generally correct. What that status means can vary between people.
I can't speak for anyone else. I live and would die by and for what was revealed to him. There's no greater possibility of movement than this.
"I can understand the 'CHaos Magic' approach to worshipping whatever works for you - how rigid is it in Thelema?"
See my first answer above. I believe that about covers it, but I'll also append a portion of a verse from that most holy of books, Liber Legis:
"The other images group around me to support me: let all be worshipped, for they shall cluster to exalt me. I am the visible object of worship [...]" (III:22)
These are my humble opinions. Feel free to clarify anything.
Love is the law, love under will.
-
93,
"1 - Do Thelemites believe the Gods in Resh etc are actually Gods? Or are they seen as ascended masters / guides etc? When thinking about Nuit and Hadit, again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness? Could they be called whatever we like?"
I would say it depends on the Thelemite. I go through different phases in what I understand these 'beings' to be myself. An arechetype, an imagined form which has personal symbolic meaning and therefore effects you in a certain way. Actual conscious beings, or a myraid of other personal theories. In my opinion in practice it doesn't matter and over time any conclusions you draw at date x will be different upon date y, and then if you are as scattered as I am at times, you may revert back to the conclusions drawn at x!
I think drawing conclusions just complicates matters and makes us think too much at times, worrying about what they are, what label you give them matters less than the ritual's effects for you personally. If you look at Crowley's comments in books about what such beings are he appears to change his mind over time, and in terms of how he speaks to certain students. I think nobody really knows and nobody can speak for another person.
"Where does all the talk of Baphomet come from? I hear more reference to Baphomet in Thelema than any other system, and my understanding is that he/she isn't a kind and loving entity. Is this a misconception? "
I think the following link might help you understand the role of the concept of Baphomet a little more-
hermetic.com/sabazius/creed_egc.htm#baphome
When it comes to any being, I don't like to go off o read another person's experience with that particular 'entity'. I think your own experience is key, and that ascribing any characteristics to it based off other people's experience is like listening to rumors about people you don't know. I think some people also treat Baphomet more as a symbol rather than a deity.
"3 - Similar to the above, there seem to be a lot of Thelemites who are into 'Satanism' etc, and this issue isn't one with the concept of Satanism (eg you have to believe in Christianity to be a Satanist) more one with the the fact some people seem to associate their Thelema with evil/dark magic and the like. A minority to be sure, but a larger minority in Thelema than elsewhere I think."
Contemparay Satanists, like most other people, have borrowed some of Crowley's ideas. In my opinion magick in Thelema is practiced for one reason alone primarily- to discover and carry out your true Will. If you look at Crowley's definitions he defines anything not in line with your true will as 'black magick', not merely causing harm. I think if people are going around cursing, or attempting to do so, they are short of something better to do and aren't really doing what they are supposed to be doing in terms of following the law of Thelema in my opinion. Even if someone is impeding your Will in some way, I would imagine it would be much easier, and much more effective to get rid of them in the same way as anyone else would.
"4 - Is Crowley really the be all and end all? I believe in not believing anything 'just because' but I do get the feeling a lot of people live or die by what he wrote with no room for movement."
You have Thelema, and then you have Crowleyanity. The people you are describing most likely belong to the latter. I forget where I read the article now, but they described Crowley as "The man who wrote everything down" nothing more. The impression I get of Crowley is that he was the sort of guy to say "Look, this is what I did and this worked for me. Go off and try it, record your results." He didn't ask people to believe him, in fact the very first instructions in Liber O are against believing in anything! He wanted people to go off and try, if you look at all his official A.'.A.'. instructions they are for the most part non-dogmatic. They are a set of instructions designed to make someone go off and try it and arrive at their own conclusions.
I disagree with some things Crowley says, I think he would encourage freedom of thought. Those who treat him like the holy prophet and every word must be believed, memorised, and never edited are a little bit 'culty' in my opinion. I am not referencing the 'holy books' as such, but all of his works. People who say "Crowley said this....therefore you are wrong and I am right" have not really experienced much or derived their own conclusions.
I think the sort of Thelemites you are describing are more of a minority, and if I am quite honest, the types I would avoid! Perhaps they have left a sour taste in your mouth and have therefore left more of an impression on you which has led you to believe they are more common than they are.
I admit, my interaction with other magicians, and in particular Thelemites, is little compared to some people, but the ones I have met have always been the sorts of people who would think for themselves, not follow like sheep. I think if you interviewed 5 different Thelemites you would get different thoughts from each on pretty much every topic. They could quote Crowley and speak about Thelema in general terms, but I would imagine their personal thoughts would be more specific to themselves.
93, 93/93.
-
@UK93 said
"When I started learning about Thelema I really liked it. I practiced Resh and LBRP, and enjoyed the start of the journey towards my HGA. 'Is that not enough to practice Thelema?' I hear you ask - and the answer is no I'm afraid."
I'm not sure it's even relevant to "the practice of Thelema." However, you might mean something different by that phrase than I do, so I'll withhold judgment.
After all, the last two things you mentioned pre-exist Thelema - they aren't "Thelema" per se - and the first one is a specific practice of A.'.A.'. and some schools that derive inspiration and teaching from it.
Now, if you'd said you were undertaking the study of Thelemic magick, it's not a bad start.
I'll answer where I can, and try to help you clarify your questions for the rest.
"1 - Do Thelemites believe the Gods in Resh etc are actually Gods?"
(1) Yes. (2) No. (3) Both yes and no. (4) Does the question event matter?
"Or are they seen as ascended masters / guides etc?"
(1) What would the difference be, if any? (2) What would it matter? (3) What would it matter to you?
"When thinking about Nuit and Hadit, again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness? Could they be called whatever we like?"
Same question as above, right? (At this point, to avoid a lot of repetition, I think my best shot is to suggest you read the first three chapters of my book Pearls of Wisdom.)
"2 - Where does all the talk of Baphomet come from?"
This has little or nothing to do with Thelema per se. The primary connection is through O.T.O., which identifies itself as a Templar-themed organization. Baphomet is the name of a gods worshipped by the Templars, and it's only slim connection to Thelema at all is that Aleister Crowley took it has his magical name as a X° of O.T.O.
You might look into the 30° of Freemasonry and collateral writings for further information on this adopted theme of Templar-esque freemasonry such as O.T.O.
"3 - Similar to the above, there seem to be a lot of Thelemites who are into 'Satanism' etc, and this issue isn't one with the concept of Satanism (eg you have to believe in Christianity to be a Satanist) more one with the the fact some people seem to associate their Thelema with evil/dark magic and the like. A minority to be sure, but a larger minority in Thelema than elsewhere I think."
On a person-by-person basis, I have long questioned whether the self-identified Satanists are actually Thelemites. But, if we let them label themselves as they will, then that's all about them, not about Thelema.
It's an issue of true ecumenicalism. In Pearls of Wisdom, the first chapter, I wrote, "...many think that Thelema is Satanic; and that misstatement is not always easy to dislodge because Thelema is not anti-Satanic: It makes space for (and even encourages) any path that leads one to God."
"4 - Is Crowley really the be all and end all? I believe in not believing anything 'just because' but I do get the feeling a lot of people live or die by what he wrote with no room for movement."
Sounds like you've found the answer to your question that works best for you for now.
"I think the main thing for me though is the concept of worshiping a God or Deity."
Personally, I can't see why you would bother coming around if something like that (under some name or form or representation or something else of some kind) wasn't your goal. But that's you and not me. Again, Pearls is probably what you're looking for to answer the questions you have thought to ask and the ones you haven't thought to ask.
-
Thank you for the replies - they are much appreciated. I might not have articulated myself as well as I would have liked, so here goes for my replies:
Jim
@Jim Eshelman said
"I'm not sure it's even relevant to "the practice of Thelema." However, you might mean something different by that phrase than I do, so I'll withhold judgment.
After all, the last two things you mentioned pre-exist Thelema - they aren't "Thelema" per se - and the first one is a specific practice of A.'.A.'. and some schools that derive inspiration and teaching from it.
Now, if you'd said you were undertaking the study of Thelemic magick, it's not a bad start.
I'll answer where I can, and try to help you clarify your questions for the rest."
Yes, I think I meant Thelemic Magick, the more I learn and read the more I understand. I see lots of similarities with other systems - for example Sun Adoration seems to be fairly common. My mistake.
"(1) Yes. (2) No. (3) Both yes and no. (4) Does the question event matter?"
To me, yes it really does matter. I believe in a higher power / God / Being, and for me it doesn't have a name as yet. Perhaps this will come but in the meantime I struggle when people tell me God is called 'x' and looks like 'y'. If they say that it's their interpretation and I'm allowed my own, well, that's altogether different.
"(1) What would the difference be, if any? (2) What would it matter? (3) What would it matter to you?"
I feel that for me worship of an ascended master is different to that of a God. I'm not even sure if they exist. I'm just after clarity here really - it seems like there may not be any.
"Same question as above, right? (At this point, to avoid a lot of repetition, I think my best shot is to suggest you read the first three chapters of my book Pearls of Wisdom.)"
Pretty much the same question but I really intended to ask can 'God' in the context of Thelema mean what I think it means to me personally or is it more rigid such as in Christianity. Repetition. Sorry. I do intend to buy your book (if it was on Kindle I'd buy it now!).
" This has little or nothing to do with Thelema per se. The primary connection is through O.T.O., which identifies itself as a Templar-themed organization. Baphomet is the name of a gods worshipped by the Templars, and it's only slim connection to Thelema at all is that Aleister Crowley took it has his magical name as a X° of O.T.O.
You might look into the 30° of Freemasonry and collateral writings for further information on this adopted theme of Templar-esque freemasonry such as O.T.O."
Interesting, thank you.
"On a person-by-person basis, I have long questioned whether the self-identified Satanists are actually Thelemites. But, if we let them label themselves as they will, then that's all about them, not about Thelema.
It's an issue of true ecumenicalism. In Pearls of Wisdom, the first chapter, I wrote, "...many think that Thelema is Satanic; and that misstatement is not always easy to dislodge because Thelema is not anti-Satanic: It makes space for (and even encourages) any path that leads one to God.""
Just the answer I was hoping for!
"Personally, I can't see why you would bother coming around if something like that (under some name or form or representation or something else of some kind) wasn't your goal. But that's you and not me. Again, Pearls is probably what you're looking for to answer the questions you have thought to ask and the ones you haven't thought to ask."
I think I've answered this above - a Diety isn't the issue, it's being told to believe something dogmatically I have an issue with and I was wondering how Thelema sits with this. I'm confident I have my answer now though
And yes, I seem to have somewhat missed the point of:
'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'I tend to overthink things, just consider it as one of my endearing quirks
-
@Patrick Ossoski said
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
@UK93 said
"1 - Do Thelemites believe the Gods in Resh etc are actually Gods? Or are they seen as ascended masters / guides etc? When thinking about Nuit and Hadit, again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness? Could they be called whatever we like?"
Firstly:
Thelemites are a rather large group. You shouldn't look for answers in (non-existent) consensus among self-proclaimed Thelemites, rather you should study and meditate on the holy texts and the prophet's teachings. (Blessed be he!) Ultimately, you should draw your own conclusions. It's undesirable with regards as many of these concepts to say "it is so and not so." But for a start, simple answers can be given to pave the way to further understanding.On Resh, the most useful perspective is that it is directed to one's Holy Guardian Angel or whatever you call your Lord. By identifying with many god-forms one can learn to see beyond the outer images and into the Unity which is described in the adoration.
Secondly:
It's not a common idea that the Gods of Resh are Masters etc, no. On the other hand, there's no issue in taking them as actual Gods, or (more or less) whatever. Just keep in mind the One Idea, the Holy Guardian Angel, above all.As for Nuit and Hadit, they are basically the components of existence itself, which comes from the relationship between the two. It's immaterial how you describe them.
As for calling them whatever we like, sure, but with a certain reverence and respect. (Not because they are personal separate gods who might take offense, but because they represent core sacred ideas, our own sacredness.)
"2 - Where does all the talk of Baphomet come from? I hear more reference to Baphomet in Thelema than any other system, and my understanding is that he/she isn't a kind and loving entity. Is this a misconception?"
The main useful source on Baphomet for us is the holy book Liber A'ash.
The many references you may hear about Baphomet in θέλημα may not be because of his actual importance, but because of the ignorance of many people. Baphomet looks like a "dark" and "satanic" figure to the ignorant (most of them wouldn't be able to tell actual dark and satanic if it hit them on their noses), and the prophet and his teachings suffer a similar treatment. Far away be both of them from what those ignorant people claim.
With regards to your question about Baphomet's character, I say kind no, loving yes, and refer you to the mentioned holy book.
"3 - Similar to the above, there seem to be a lot of Thelemites who are into 'Satanism' etc, and this issue isn't one with the concept of Satanism (eg you have to believe in Christianity to be a Satanist) more one with the the fact some people seem to associate their Thelema with evil/dark magic and the like. A minority to be sure, but a larger minority in Thelema than elsewhere I think."
I understand what you're saying about these many self-proclaimed Thelemites, but what is the question here? There are many immature and ignorant people out there.
Note also that "Satanism" can have several distinct meanings. I suggest you just ignore the matter unless you have a strong interest in it.
"4 - Is Crowley really the be all and end all? I believe in not believing anything 'just because' but I do get the feeling a lot of people live or die by what he wrote with no room for movement."
I do not know what you mean by "be and end all." If you mean, vaguely, that Thelemites hold him in high status, that's generally correct. What that status means can vary between people.
I can't speak for anyone else. I live and would die by and for what was revealed to him. There's no greater possibility of movement than this.
"I can understand the 'CHaos Magic' approach to worshipping whatever works for you - how rigid is it in Thelema?"
See my first answer above. I believe that about covers it, but I'll also append a portion of a verse from that most holy of books, Liber Legis:
"The other images group around me to support me: let all be worshipped, for they shall cluster to exalt me. I am the visible object of worship [...]" (III:22)
These are my humble opinions. Feel free to clarify anything.
Love is the law, love under will."
Thank you for the very thorough and considered answer - you have given me a lot to think about and I need to go away and look at some of the things you have mentioned.
Your comments on Resh are particularly helpful as are the directions on where to read further about Baphomet.
I think the general consensus seems to be 'ignore the people who think they're Satanists' or 'ignore the people who think Thelemites are Satanists'!
-
@mark0987 said
"93,
"1 - Do Thelemites believe the Gods in Resh etc are actually Gods? Or are they seen as ascended masters / guides etc? When thinking about Nuit and Hadit, again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness? Could they be called whatever we like?"
I would say it depends on the Thelemite. I go through different phases in what I understand these 'beings' to be myself. An arechetype, an imagined form which has personal symbolic meaning and therefore effects you in a certain way. Actual conscious beings, or a myraid of other personal theories. In my opinion in practice it doesn't matter and over time any conclusions you draw at date x will be different upon date y, and then if you are as scattered as I am at times, you may revert back to the conclusions drawn at x!..................
........93, 93/93."
I cut the quote down to save scrolling fingers!
A great reply with some interesting stuff, thank you. The link was very interesting as were your comments about not taking anyone's ideas or experiences too much to heart - like rumors you hear about people, it's an analogy that will stay with me.
Your experiences and thoughts on Crowley and other Thelemites were very insightful for me and have really put my mind at ease. I suppose the take home message from all three replies is to work for myself and not get hung up on what other people think, say or do. Kind of the point of Thelema eh?
-
@UK93 said
"
"(1) Yes. (2) No. (3) Both yes and no. (4) Does the question even matter?"
To me, yes it really does matter. I believe in a higher power / God / Being, and for me it doesn't have a name as yet. Perhaps this will come but in the meantime I struggle when people tell me God is called 'x' and looks like 'y'. If they say that it's their interpretation and I'm allowed my own, well, that's altogether different."
Ultimately, names and images are arbitrary. Names and images are offered by Liber L., and I recommend exploring them - but nobody who has a clue is going to try to tell you that the infinite is expressed in one specific finite way.
"...but I really intended to ask can 'God' in the context of Thelema mean what I think it means to me personally or is it more rigid such as in Christianity. Repetition. Sorry. I do intend to buy your book (if it was on Kindle I'd buy it now!). "
One of the earliest concrete teachings one receives in A.'.A.'. (among other places) is not ever to confuse any god you read about with any god at all except the one known to you personally. (Does that help?)
"I think I've answered this above - a Diety isn't the issue, it's being told to believe something dogmatically I have an issue with and I was wondering how Thelema sits with this. I'm confident I have my answer now though
"Consider that one can work within a system without "buying" the system. That is, one can act as if a thing is true, without resisting it... and this doesn't require believing anything. Setting your mind to look through a particular window is ultimately just another technique, whether what youse out that window is, in any other sense, "true" or "false."
For example, the following (which I'm making up as I type it) would be a valid practice: Consider that the sky is actually green, and you have an optical defect that makes it appear otherwise. Go through your day witnessing the following and record the results in your diary: (1) Engage in conversations about color with other people. If they routinely seeing what you call green and they call it blue, does this affect how you understand them about any other communication? (2) Would you be able to pick ripe apples and tomatoes more effectively, less effectively, or the same if you saw everything bathed in green light? Could you use existing means or would you have to use other means to do this? (3) Does it alter your way of understanding yourself or others if you consider that when you say you "feel blue," you actually are "feeling green"? (4) What other things might you be seeing in a way that is starkly different from how others see it? What thoughts or emotions does reflection on this question cause to rise in you, if any?
-
It's not easy being green!
[attachment=0:1ia3uokd]<!-- ia0 -->11223915_e3c8_625x1000.jpg<!-- ia0 -->[/attachment:1ia3uokd] -
But, on a somewhat serious note...
I notice several times in your posts that you go back to the term "believe" and it seems that most of your concerns stem from how your perception of Thelema (right or wrong) conflict with that belief. While it's not necessarily a tenet of Thelema, one of the most useful things I think Crowley ever wrote was the chapter "Terrier Work" from The Book of Lies. I don't have it in front of me to quote directly, but basically it tells you to doubt everything you think you know, doubt that doubting, doubt some more until you reach absolute bedrock and then doubt that as well. Belief is a great tool in the Work as Jim shows above, but keep an eye out for places where you might be resting comfortably and find ways to challenge them.
-
"...again are they seen as actual Gods or just a way we can perceptualise concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness?"
"...just..."?
What if "perceptualized concepts of infinity and Universal consciousness" are "actual Gods"?
I guess it depends on what happens when you invoke them.
What happens when you invoke them?