Will
-
@Nudor said
"Is there a "human will" and a "true will?" Or, more clearly, is there a difference between the two? "
There's a human characteristic called will, but it's all psychological stagecraft. That is, it's a joke or a fraud or a mistake.
The so-called "will" of the personality I tend to call "won't power," because it's primary power often seems to be its capacity to interfere with free expression of will.
True Will is a universal force moving through you and finding expression thereby.
Ultimately, after there is some measure of conscious knowledge of True Will - I say "conscious" because "will," to be a meaningful word, surely includes intention - the personality's power of choice boils down to whether it will align itself in conformity with Will, or resist it.
"What is the simplest way to define the difference (if such exists)? "
Will (what we call True Will) is a universal and impersonal force that moves through each living thing and, by the constitution of that thing, finds a distinctive expression.
So-called (personality) will is a mixture of many other traits and conditions that emulates the behavior of True Will and, ultimately, chooses either to be a transparent, unresisting medium for True Will's expression, or an occluded, resistant interference. The former gives the individual an experience of joy - the latter gives the individual an experience of pain.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"I say "conscious" because "will," to be a meaningful word, surely includes intention"
I would think that intention would be a stumbling block to True Will...an imposition of Ruach. It is "pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result" that is "every way perfect".
616
-
@KRVB MMShCh said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"I say "conscious" because "will," to be a meaningful word, surely includes intention"I would think that intention would be a stumbling block to True Will...an imposition of Ruach. It is "pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result" that is "every way perfect"."
For the personality level, this often would be the case, yes.
However, the conscious alignment of choice with True Will is a critical factor - possibly the critical factor - in living a Thelemic life. In this case, intention (which literally means "to lean in") is a contributor.
I was mostly speaking of the semantics of the word "will" in general - but, to follow the thread where you've led it, there is "intention" that isn't Ruach-based. We may need different language for it, though. True Will is essentially Chiah (variations from this would be shadings and nuances in particular contexts), so "leaning in" toward it would be more an "inclination of your being" than intention in the personality sense.
-
It just seems to me that if someone had gotten to the point of actually doing their True Will then there would be no need or room for a conscious effort. I suppose the distinction we might need to make concerning intention as a necessary factor is between simply knowing & actually doing one's True Will - the difference between an Adeptus & a Magister.
616
-
@KRVB MMShCh said
"It just seems to me that if someone had gotten to the point of actually doing their True Will then there would be no need or room for a conscious effort. I suppose the distinction we might need to make concerning intention as a necessary factor is between simply knowing & actually doing one's True Will - the difference between an Adeptus & a Magister.
616"
Its possible for reason to stay on its own plane without affecting action - for example, it would be hard to solve 4566/32 without reason or explain anything without reason. That being said, I tend to think that our incoherent notions of free will get in the way of pure will along with many other misconceptions we have. One might say reason gets in the way when it starts formulating intentions and being the basis of action. I would also say that knowing one's will is coterminous with doing it - if you formulate your knowledge of your will in a sentence, in rational terms, you fall into the pit of Because because the Will is supra-rational
“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:28
“We now come to a challenge which is in some ways even more daring than any yet made. Before, the moral sense of men was outraged. He now turns to attack the Reason itself. He looks on reason as a soulless machine. Its proper function is to express the Will in terms of conscious thought, the will being the need of the inmost self to express itself by causing some Event.” - “Djeridensis Working,” II:28-31
Jung says, “Rationalistic opinions come unexpectedly close to neurotic symptoms. Like these, they consist of distorted thinking, which takes the place of psychologically correct thinking. The latter kind of thinking always retains its connection with the heart, with the depths of the psyche, the tap-root.” (“The Soul and Death” from Collected Works of C.G. Jung volume 8: The Struture and Dynamics of the Psyche, par. 808)
as well as: "The intellect does indeed do harm to the soul when it dares to possess itself of the heritage of the spirit. It is in no way fitted to do this, for spirit is something higher than intellect since it embraces the latter and includes the feelings as well.” - “Psychological Commentary on The Secret of the Golden Flower” par.7
While commenting on one of Jung’s works, Stephan Hoeller writes, "Thinking, the function of reason, has many commendable uses and cannot be eliminated, but it also builds barriers between the personality and its unconscious matrix. In order to reach the necessary transformative self-knowledge, one needs to keep the thinking function subservient to the inspiration proceeding from the Self."
IAO131
-
Nice post. I agree. I am startled that I agree with you.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
@Aum418 said
"One might say reason gets in the way when it starts formulating intentions and being the basis of action."
That was exactly my point.
@Aum418 said
"I would also say that knowing one's will is coterminous with doing it"
If that were true then the 7=4 wouldn't run the risk of becoming a Black Brother by refusing the Abyss. Birth from the Abyss places one in the Sephirah most compatible with one's True Will...it is at that point that the initiate has begun the process of being/becoming that Will that they only glimpsed as an Adept(& subsequently being stripped of one's HGA for the sake of Individuation). The Adeptus knows his/her True Will - but are they still doing it once the Abyss as been refused? Doesn't this necessitate a distinction between knowing & doing one's True Will?
616
-
@KRVB MMShCh said
"
@Aum418 said
"I would also say that knowing one's will is coterminous with doing it"If that were true then the 7=4 wouldn't run the risk of becoming a Black Brother by refusing the Abyss."
I don't see the bridge in your logic here. Where did the Abyss enter the subject?
"Birth from the Abyss places one in the Sephirah most compatible with one's True Will...it is at that point that the initiate has begun the process of being/becoming that Will that they only glimpsed as an Adept"
I think you've over-structuralized all of this. I disagree that the process of being/becoming the Will only begins upon crossing the Abyss - it begins long before that, possibly even before Adepthood. Certainly the 5=6 has far more than begun this, and the 6=5 is quite deep into that process. The key thing (in this regard) that happens on crossing the Abyss is that the personality gets out of the way.
"The Adeptus knows his/her True Will"
...as to many non-Adepts.
"but are they still doing it once the Abyss as been refused?"
Possibly. One could even argue that some incarnations might be designed to climax in that particular way for some work that is to be undertaken. (There are things that one just can't go back and do from the same place after surrendering fully to the Abyss - but they may still need to be done. Consider, for example, the life work of Manly Palmer Hall.)
"Doesn't this necessitate a distinction between knowing & doing one's True Will?"
These are definitely two different stages - at least, during the learning cycle.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@KRVB MMShCh said
"
@Aum418 said
"I would also say that knowing one's will is coterminous with doing it"If that were true then the 7=4 wouldn't run the risk of becoming a Black Brother by refusing the Abyss."
I don't see the bridge in your logic here. Where did the Abyss enter the subject?"
I was simply using the that phenomenon as a springboard for my point of a Black Brother being one who has reached the point of Adepthood(thus knows his/her True Will) but is not doing it.
@Jim said
"I disagree that the process of being/becoming the Will only begins upon crossing the Abyss"
Given. The process of becoming the True Will begins before 8=3, but it would seem that actually being that Will cannot commence until one has been stripped of their HGA, i.e. is Self-actualized.
@Jim said
"
@616 said
"The Adeptus knows his/her True Will"...as to many non-Adepts."
I would think that knowing one's True Will was the constitution of an Adept.
616
-
@Chris Hanlon said
"Nice post. I agree. I am startled that I agree with you.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333"Me too. Whoa. That is crazy-talk.
@KRVB MMShCh said
"I was simply using the that phenomenon as a springboard for my point of a Black Brother being one who has reached the point of Adepthood(thus knows his/her True Will) but is not doing it."
I would argue that (a) Will is dynamic so its hard to simply 'know' it (Crowley says its the dynamic aspect of the Self as Chiah is the dynamic aspect of Kether) and (b) therefore knowing it without doing it is hard to separate.
"
@Jim said
"I disagree that the process of being/becoming the Will only begins upon crossing the Abyss"Given. The process of becoming the True Will begins before 8=3, but it would seem that actually being that Will cannot commence until one has been stripped of their HGA, i.e. is Self-actualized."
Crowley says Becoming is higher than Being - that Being implies a static idea and Becoming is dynamic - in the Law is for All. In Reguli he implies that Being, Non Being, and Becoming are all necessary but Becoming is the balance between the former two. Further Im not sure being 'stripped' of their HGA is a great metaphor - I think identifying with Him is better (therefore the concept of HGA as 'higher' or 'separate' is stripped)
IAO131
-
@KRVB MMShCh said
"
@Jim said
"I disagree that the process of being/becoming the Will only begins upon crossing the Abyss"Given. The process of becoming the True Will begins before 8=3, but it would seem that actually being that Will cannot commence until one has been stripped of their HGA, i.e. is Self-actualized."
That logic sounds truly abyssmal
"
@Jim said
"
@616 said
"The Adeptus knows his/her True Will"...as to many non-Adepts."
I would think that knowing one's True Will was the constitution of an Adept."
The defiinition of an Adept in the sense that A.'.A.'. uses the term is that one has attained to the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardianb Angel. This shouldn't be confused with the step of knowing one's True Will. (Some people attain each concurrently. Many have the latter many years and grades before the K&C.)
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@KRVB MMShCh said
"
@Jim said
"I disagree that the process of being/becoming the Will only begins upon crossing the Abyss"Given. The process of becoming the True Will begins before 8=3, but it would seem that actually being that Will cannot commence until one has been stripped of their HGA, i.e. is Self-actualized."
That logic sounds truly abyssmal
"
@Jim said
"
@616 said
"The Adeptus knows his/her True Will"...as to many non-Adepts."
I would think that knowing one's True Will was the constitution of an Adept."
The defiinition of an Adept in the sense that A.'.A.'. uses the term is that one has attained to the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardianb Angel. This shouldn't be confused with the step of knowing one's True Will. (Some people attain each concurrently. Many have the latter many years and grades before the K&C.)"
The OHO of the OTO, Bill Breeze or Hymenaeus Beta, gives this explanation of Thelema & the HGA in his Editor's Introduction to the Goetia (if this isnt a commentary on Liber AL and such, I dont know what is):
"Jewish and Christian theologians adopted this divide-and-conquer approach to human consciousness and separateds pirits into ever more elaborate angelic and demonic hierarchies. Ever since, it has taken the infrequent prophet/initiate - a Plato, Iamblichus, Blake or Crowley - to remind us of our divine birthright. Crowley went further, declaring that the evolutionary goal of the new age inaugurated by his reception of The Book of the Law was nothing less than the conscious attainment by each individual of the Knowledge and Conversation of their daimon or Holy Guardian Angel. This is, he declared, the Next Step in human evolution. The Book of the Law's dictum "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law" admits more than might be apparent at first reading. Crowley made each individual's realization of their Holy Guardian Angel or daimon central to the religious, magical and social system of Thelema - itself a Greek word meaning 'will.' He taught that each individual possessed a true will which was identified with the daimon or Guardian Angel; to know the one is to know the other. Crowley placed the emphasis on true will rather than free will, as he sought to reconcile individual volition with fate, destiny, and that inborn spark that makes us uniquely who we are - our innate genius. Self-realization of this is, according to Crowley, the true purpose of Magick, to which all of its various branches are subordinate. Indeed he taught that: "the Single Supreme Ritual is the attainment of the Knowledge and Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel. It is the raising of the complete man in a vertical straight line. Any deviation from this line tends to become black magic. Any other operation is black magic." (Liber ABA: Part III, ch.21)"
Why do you disagree with this, Jim?
IAO131
-
LOL, do you really mean to ask Why? I think maybe you mean to ask How (in what fashion) I differ.
The spiritual thresholds of "discovering the True Will" and "attaining to the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel" are distinctive. I base this on experience - my own, and watching others - and on understanding them.
The two are definitely related. My own preferred phrasing is to call the True Will "the voice of the Holy Guardian Angel." That voice vibrates through us through is more deeply as intimacy with the Angel deepens. It also can be heard and comprehended and rendered into assimilable terms at an earlier stage than the K&C - often long before.
It would be a mistake to think they are not related to the point of seeming to be different points in continuity. Equally, it would be a mistake to smush them together and lose their distinctions.
The experience called "Discovering the True Will" is a psychological and spiritual synthesis wherein one "gets" and is able to articulate in simple, coherent language the central kernal of who one is and what one's essential life-expression is. As Crowley phrased it in Duty, "Find the formula of this purpose, or "True Will", in an expression as simple as possible." This step gives one the key to one's life and purpsoe, and access to the great practical technique of Thelema, the living of life in conscious alignment with one's True Will.
This technique may, in fact, be a significant contributor to the attainment of the K&C. (But each person finds his or her own unique path to That.) I remain gleeful that the K&C resists singular definition but (just to stir commotion, and for today only) I might define it as a profoundly intimate union of what one customarily experiences as (and calls) oneself with the Infinite expressed as "other" such that Neshamah settles into a permanet link with Nephesh. (Boy, I must be in a trouble-making mood
.)I'm not sure if that answers your question, but it's my best shot between walking in the door and heading for dinner.
-
Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.
Jim, you said:
@Jim Eshelman said
" As Crowley phrased it in Duty, "Find the formula of this purpose, or "True Will", in an expression as simple as possible." This step gives one the key to one's life and purpose, and access to the great practical technique of Thelema, the living of life in conscious alignment with one's True Will."
So in defining my True Will, would you say that one way could be to look back at my life and find the underlying drive(s) that I have gravitated back to, which resulted in joy and/or a sense of fulfillment? Could it be that I have been over-intellectualizing the process and instead should take a look at where I fit best rather than where I [think] I should fit? Is it more about instinct than conscious thought?
Love is the law, love under will.
Donna
-
@Donna said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
" As Crowley phrased it in Duty, "Find the formula of this purpose, or "True Will", in an expression as simple as possible." This step gives one the key to one's life and purpose, and access to the great practical technique of Thelema, the living of life in conscious alignment with one's True Will."So in defining my True Will, would you say that one way could be to look back at my life and find the underlying drive(s) that I have gravitated back to, which resulted in joy and/or a sense of fulfillment? Could it be that I have been over-intellectualizing the process and instead should take a look at where I fit best rather than where I [think] I should fit? Is it more about instinct than conscious thought?"
Yes, those are among the more useful tactics. The same exact approach doesn't work for everyone, and it isn't (at the end) an intellectual calculation (though such calculations are invaluable in collating raw material and beginning to see patterns). You've got a good picture of it there.
BTW, not only positive peak moments, but also horrors and embarrassments. Embarrassments are times we were involuntarily disclosed - to ourselves as much as to others! - that the psyche recoils from and hides (sometimes under other feelings). To come back and examine those times we were "caught naked" is often very revealing.
Donna, I think you'd very much enjoy and benefit from this amazing book - I wish I'd written it (I think my review of it is still on the Amazon page):
Let Your Life Speak: Listening for the Voice of Vocation
by Parker J. Palmer
www.amazon.com/Let-Your-Life-Speak-Listening/dp/0787947350/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1226256047&sr=1-1PS - I found the direct link to my review:
www.amazon.com/review/R2V0PARPNG2O6/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm -
@Jim Eshelman said
"BTW, not only positive peak moments, but also horrors and embarrassments. Embarrassments are times we were involuntarily disclosed - to ourselves as much as to others! - that the psyche recoils from and hides (sometimes under other feelings). To come back and examine those times we were "caught naked" is often very revealing."
Heh. Lots of those to choose from
so this should keep me busy. Good call.Thanks for the recommendation of this book -- it's ordered and on the way. These days I seem to be seeing more of the bold strokes rather than just the details. The book sounds like it will add more to the mix. Thanks.
Donna
-
93 Jim,
"Donna, I think you'd very much enjoy and benefit from this amazing book - I wish I'd written it (I think my review of it is still on the Amazon page):
Let Your Life Speak: Listening for the Voice of Vocation
by Parker J. Palmer "That's a fantastic book, Jim. I bought it some time ago and only just recently noticed your review. It has certainly helped me develop some insight into my own path.
93 93/93
-Andy
-
Since the Book of the Law only mentions Will, Ill Will, and Pure Will where did Crowley get the term True Will?
I, for one, would see Ill Will just as important as Pure Will, if it where not premeditated, but actually a direct experience. I am not judging ill will here, in this sense, such as righteous anger, etc.
Does Nietzche's Will to Power fit in here anywhere?
Is Pure Will more like a verb, instead of a noun?
Just some of my ponderings over the years.
Can a plant or animal have True Will?
I do feel True Will to be something of a primal energy, more archetypal.