compassion is the vice of kings
-
Thinking more on this subject I realized that the only safe way to practice compassion is to become a "king". Below tiphareth, we cannot grasp the idea of true compassion, we can only strive to act compassionately. If we try to understand the idea standing below tipharet, we run the risk of becoming a caricature of the real thing, but, as I said before, it is always the best thing to do.
-
Has anyone noticed how alike Crowley's thinking was to Frederick Nietzsche? If you have ever read "Beyond Good and Evil" you would see what I'm talking about. I wonder if they just thought alike.
“Only strong personalities can endure history, the weak ones are extinguished by it” ~Nietzsche
You could call Nietzsche something of a naturalist because he believed the exercise of your all of your abilities in whichever way you choose regaredless to conventional morality is the 'natural' use of them. Ergo, he believed in the ability of the strong to dominate the weak, as the exercise of power in such a way was deemed 'natural' by Nietzsche.
He also believed that conventional morality is the creation of the weak protesting at being supressed by the strong, a morality of victimhood. He says that the weak call all of their own attributes to what we call 'good' because they believe that since they are the ones being supressed then all of their other qualities besides being victimized must be good.
Both Nietzsche and Crowley set themselves defiantly against the Christian Church and monotheism; both in some way identified themselves as anti-Christs; both believed they were heralding a time of violent change; both—Nietzsche through Dionysus and Crowley through Pan—sought to reawaken the old nature gods. Both also, in differing ways, experienced the revelation of the mask-wearing, no-self nature of identity, a revelation only now reaching fruition in the post-modern practices of chaos magic.
-
@h3fall3n777 said
"Has anyone noticed how alike Crowley's thinking was to Frederick Nietzsche?"
Not really. I see some definite overlap but mostly see dramatic variances in their points of view. For example, while both men saw through the fallacy of "god" as conceived through conventional religions, Crowley's whole life was committed to linking individuals intimately to the Divine, while Nietzsche denied the idea outright.
"“Only strong personalities can endure history, the weak ones are extinguished by it” ~Nietzsche "
This is a place where Nietzsche overlaps with part of Chapter 2 of Liber Legis, and thus eventually with Crowley's. For that matter, it also resembles the view of Vivekananda in, say, Bhakti Yoga.
As I think through the particular points you made in your post, a slightly different idea comes to me than I've had about this before: I think you're quite right about the similarity of the two men's thinking with respect to the human and social level - but that they then diverge, Crowley having quite different views on the Divine element (a blind-spot in Nietzche, who is sort of the post-boy for why one shouldn't try to cross the Abyss without first having the K&C of the HGA quite solidly established).
-
It's interesting to read Nietszche’s question “What if Truth is a Woman – what then?” in his famous preface to Beyond Good and Evil against the fact he died from syphilis contracted from a prostitute (one of the few times he had sex in his life).
That “Compassion is the vice of kings” passage in Liber Legis indicates a king should not hesitate to stamp down the wretched and weak and, if so, the overall sense would be that compassion is a defect or blemish on royal character.
If so, how to understand the fact that Compassion is the name of the wine in the Chalice from which Babalon drinks?
Let him look upon the cup whose blood is mingled therein, for the wine of the cup is the blood of the saints. Glory unto the Scarlet Woman, Babalon the Mother of Abominations, that rideth upon the Beast, for she hath spilt their blood in every corner of the earth and lo! she hath mingled it in the cup of her whoredom.
With the breath of her kisses hath she fermented it, and it hath become the wine of the Sacrament, the wine of the Sabbath; and in the Holy Assembly hath she poured it out for her worshipers, and they had become drunken thereon, so that face to face they beheld my Father. Thus are they made worthy to become partakers of the Mystery of this holy vessel, for the blood is the life. So sitteth she from age to age, and the righteous are never weary of her kisses, and by her murders and fornications she seduceth the world. Therein is manifested the glory of my Father, who is truth.
(This wine is such that its virtue radiateth through the cup, and I reel under the intoxication of it. And every thought is destroyed by it. It abideth alone, and its name is Compassion. I understand by "Compassion," the sacrament of suffering, partaken by the true worshipers of the Highest. And it is an ecstasy in which there is no trace of pain. Its passivity (=passion) is like the giving-up of the self to the beloved.)
—The Vision and the Voice, 12th Aethyr, Aleister Crowley.
-
-
I don't know if "tried" is the right word, but he has all the earmarks of one who entered into the Abyss without a prior secure link to the Angel. He's kind of the antithesis of a Black Brother - one who surrendered himself to the madness and self-destruction when it really wasn't his time (rather than one who resisted the madness and self-destruction when it was time).
-
93 All,
"Metzareph:Also, keep in mind that you can do things that may appear horrendous, but they are in fact the "compassionate things to do"... like killing the horse with broken legs. You are always at risk of making a huge mistake because you are acting compassionately. You loose perspective, but I'll say that it's better to be compassionate than cruel."
"Metzareph: Thinking more on this subject I realized that the only safe way to practice compassion is to become a "king". Below Tiphareth, we cannot grasp the idea of true compassion; we can only strive to act compassionately. If we try to understand the idea standing below Tiphareth, we run the risk of becoming a caricature of the real thing, but, as I said before, it is always the best thing to do."
Your comments raise an interesting question for me Metzareph and that is (What is good and what is evil?)
Compassion is a virtue in most old Aeon religions that one would associate with goodness. But in practice it often leads to being taken advantage of by lowly evolved people. I looked up Compassion on Wikipedia and this is what I got.Quote Wikipedia: Compassion is a profound human emotion prompted by the pain of others. More vigorous than empathy, the feeling commonly gives rise to an active desire to alleviate another's suffering. It is often, though not inevitably, the key component in what manifests in the social context as altruism. In ethical terms, the various expressions down the ages of the so-called Golden Rule embody by implication the principle of compassion: Do to others as you would have done to you. Ranked a great virtue in numerous philosophies, compassion is considered in all the major religious traditions as among the greatest of virtues.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion#cite_note-0Maybe, the consciousness of one who has attained to Tiphareth would be beyond good and evil.
-
I have always thought of it as such:
A King does not have power, a King has responsibility...
His 'power' derived from a need to carry out his responsibilities.What is the Kings foremost responsibility? To take care of his people.
And by taking care of his people, the King in turn takes care of himself.
So it is a 'vice' as the King keeps 'brining himself down' in order to maintain his 'high' position. -
I'm seeing a little bit of a contradiction here, as far as I understood, Crowley was also influenced by the Tao Te Ching. I know that the "Book of Law" was dictated to him, and therefore free from any personal beliefs that might have swayed it, but there are at least two chapters of the "Tao Te Ching" that deal with rulers and Virtues.
Chapter 59
For governing others and serving heaven
there is nothing better than moderation.
A person who is moderate returns to the path.
Returning to the path brings an abundance of Virtue.
This good store of Virtue cannot be conquered.
Virtue that cannot be conquered knows no limit.
Only a person who has limitless Virtue is fit to lead.
Only the leader who possesses the Mother of the country will long endure.
This is called making the roots go deep by restraining the trunk.
Learn to focus your life and you will see many days.Does anyone see a contradiction here?
-
Liber Tzaddi:
-
Only if ye are sorrowful, or weary, or angry, or discomforted; then ye may know that ye have lost the golden thread, the thread wherewith I guide you to the heart of the groves of Eleusis.
-
My disciples are proud and beautiful; they are strong and swift; they rule their way like mighty conquerors.
**25. The weak, the timid, the imperfect, the cowardly, the poor, the tearful --- these are mine enemies, and I am come to destroy them.
- This also is compassion: an end to the sickness of earth. A rooting-out of the weeds: a watering of the flowers.**
Would this, then, be Thelemic 'compassion'? Is only the Christian and Buddhist notions of compassion attacked in Liber AL? Is compassion really the vice thats 'of service' to Hadit? People seem to jump to conclusions quite quickly...
IAO131
-
-
Hehe, it's so true, only Kings have compassion, and are willing to jump through all sorts of hoops to somehow justify their vice, make it seem good in the end. I am no less liable to this sort of excuse-making (ahem).
But I think compassion is decried in Liber AL, and considered a vice, because it's based on the idea of separation, on the idea that there's someone there, or someone here, to suffer-with. To my mind, chapter i is fundamentally non-dual, and that sets the tone for the book, and the *appearance *of duality in Chapters ii and iii has to be brought in line with it.
But that doesn't mean we have to be all nicey-nice. Naturalness is the key I think.
I think some verses that might be instructive in this connection are AL ii 59-60:
**59. Beware therefore! Love all, lest perchance is a King concealed! Say you so? Fool! If he be a King, thou canst not hurt him.
- Therefore strike hard & low, and to hell with them, master! **
I think it comes down to this: how do you really view your fellow human beings? As kings and queens and stars (albeit occasionally dressed as beggars) or as intrinsically miserable, cowering beggars tossed around by forces greater than themselves?
Do you *really *think that existence is pure joy; that all the sorrows are but as shadows; they pass & are done; but there is that which remains?
The thing that scares me is the thought of someone going all Manson and just getting on some insane trip where they think, "hey, it's ok to kill people or rape babies because in fact by torturing and killing these insects I'm giving them the gift of realising their god-like nature sooner rather than later!"
That is wrong thinking too. Why? Because it *also *relies on the validity of the idea of separation, difference.
One thought I keep coming back to with these kinds of verses in AL though, is this: what person worth their salt would "obey" words in a book anyway? "Obeying" Liber AL (in the sense of the hypothetical crazy Thelemite being obnoxious and rude to all around him, pulling the wings off flies and eventually actually killing and torturing people because he thinks Liber AL says he should) gets the booby prize.
If you are compassionate, be compassionate. To hell with the Book of the Law!
-
@Ankh said
"Maybe, the consciousness of one who has attained to Tiphareth would be beyond good and evil."
No, I thing it is beyond "you" and "me". It is the first step in the "becoming". Tiphareth encompasses the idea of compassion because it is the first point you are actually transcending lower aspects of the psyche and starts to see that we are all part of the body of God.
-
@gurugeorge said
"I think it comes down to this: how do you really view your fellow human beings? As kings and queens and stars (albeit occasionally dressed as beggars) or as intrinsically miserable, cowering beggars tossed around by forces greater than themselves?"
I DO NOT see ALL fellow human beings as kings and queens. I see them as stars. A king and queen in this context represents a level of spiritual attainment of at least 5=6, or in other words, somebody that has attained the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel.
@gurugeorge said
"The thing that scares me is the thought of someone going all Manson and just getting on some insane trip where they think, "hey, it's ok to kill people or rape babies because in fact by torturing and killing these insects I'm giving them the gift of realising their god-like nature sooner rather than later!"
That is wrong thinking too. Why? Because it *also *relies on the validity of the idea of separation, difference."
I may also add that a person like this is not only wrong, but crazy. You can drive yourself insane and have this kind of megalomaniac thoughts when you are operating based on your ego. A very important step in the path is to understand that the ego will not get you very far and that in fact doesn't know where it's going. Going back to my argument that this exercise of compassion can be risky if you haven't understood the mysteries of 5=6.
@gurugeorge said
"If you are compassionate, be compassionate. To hell with the Book of the Law!"
I don't think the Book of the Law is telling you not be compassionate.
-
-
@Metzareph said
"
@gurugeorge said
"I think it comes down to this: how do you really view your fellow human beings? As kings and queens and stars (albeit occasionally dressed as beggars) or as intrinsically miserable, cowering beggars tossed around by forces greater than themselves?"I DO NOT see ALL fellow human beings as kings and queens. I see them as stars. A king and queen in this context represents a level of spiritual attainment of at least 5=6, or in other words, somebody that has attained the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel."
Yeah good point, I got a bit overexcited there
-
@h3fall3n777 said
"Does anyone see a contradiction here?"
I don't, but I'm intrigued. What contradiction do you see?
Love=Law
- C
-
@h3fall3n777 said
"I'm seeing a little bit of a contradiction here, as far as I understood, Crowley was also influenced by the Tao Te Ching. I know that the "Book of Law" was dictated to him, and therefore free from any personal beliefs that might have swayed it, but there are at least two chapters of the "Tao Te Ching" that deal with rulers and Virtues."
I think that The Book of the Law is coloured to some extent by Crowley's views and preoccupations at the time, just as sunlight shining through tinted glass takes on some of its hues. There's some elements of the Book which suggest this.
Best wishes,
Michael.
-
This excerpt from The Vision & the Voice might help clear some things up:
"This wine is such that its virtue radiateth through the cup, and I reel under the intoxication of it. And every thought is destroyed by it. It abideth alone, and its name is Compassion. I understand by "Compassion," the sacrament of suffering, partaken by the true worshippers of the Highest. And it is an ecstasy in which there is no trace of pain. Its passivity ( = passion) is like the giving-up of the self to the beloved." - Liber CDXVIII, The Cry of the 12th Æthyr
The language here (understand, suffering [Dukkha], passivity, etc.) is highly indicative of Binah (as is the Æthyr itself), & Compassion has here been equated with Sangraal. Maybe Compassion doesn't imply compassion at all.
