Pure Will and True Will
-
@h3fall3n777 said
"True, but I don't believe in the Buddhist temples that they are feeding the inhabitants, cocaine, hashish, and heroin
"You're right - evidence suggests that the Buddhists were ingesting datura - & there is plenty of evidence to suggest that hashish might have been used as well...
@h3fall3n777 said
"or keeping them in the room while under the effects of said drugs?"
The participants at the Abbey weren't held there beyond their will. They knew full well that upon entering the room that they would be held there for a prescribed amount of time.
616
-
@sethur said
"OK, I think that the terms can be best defined by their opposites. False Will and Diluted Will."
Better, perhaps, False Will and POLluted or "adulterated" Will.
We see frequently people doing the strangest things which (as far as we can pronounce on the question) do not seem to be part of their True Will, at least we can say the acts are "not in their long-term interest", but they're doing it from a sense of "pure will" - "because I wanted to", "just for the Hell of it", "it was the right thing to do", "it seemed like a good idea at the time". There may, indeed, be external conditioning coming into play (what I learned in Sunday School, the amount of alcohol I'd drunk) but the Will is still in a sense "pure will" in that it does not "cry why, invoking because"; it is not consciously weighing up the influences on it; in many cases, it doe not have a particular "lust of result". In those senses, it is "pure" but it is not necessarily in the direction of the True Will.
I'm doubtful about that argument, I must admit; it's difficult for me to see such acts being validly described as "perfect".
More clearly, you can do your True Will from "impure" or "adulterated" motives. Cultivating fitness of my body may be part of my True Will; but I may run this race with "lust of result" - I want to beat a rival, I want to impress someone on the sidelines.
GuruGeorge in his exhaustive list of definitions, mentions a pure (as opposed to "discordant") musical tone. I'm sure most of us have experienced the phenomenon of resonance; the chord (or discord) you sound may be complex, containing a range of pitches (frequencies), but an object in the room "rings" with a pure tone in symnpathy with one particular note of that chord - a note which most human ears might not even identify.
We can compare that resonant frequency to the True Will. It can be furthered by one element among an impure mess of motives.
So "True Will" may not be "Pure"; and "pure will", in the sense of having no consciously conceived motive, may not be True.
As I see it, "True" is a description of a long-term direction or aim; "Pure" describes what you do from moment to moment; the individual decision you make in the next minute.
When thinking of Pure Will, I call to mind Julius Caesar (according to Shakespeare). Asked for some "cause" for refusing to come to the Forum on the Ides of March, he says "the cause is in my will; I will not come" and earlier "cannot is false and that I dare not falser". But the Senators heavy him with "becauses", finally holding out a bribe of a crown to be offered him, and he capitulates.
We can see what his "pure will" was; but which was his True Will - to go to the Forum and be assassinated, or not to go? Not a simple question; Pure Will and True Will are not completely coincident, often not even roughly so.
That's my take on it, anyway. I'm open, of course, to criticism and other views.
OP
-
I think the best way to look at TRUE WILL is to link it up with TAOism.
Tao mean "the way" which is general like Osiris formula the WILL of God would be seen as the TAO. The saying goes "where their is a WILL their is a WAY" The old aeon formula simply starts with THE WAY and say where there is THE WAY their must be "THE WILL" and whose WILL is "the WILL" lets call him God.
anyway, the new Aeon has de-generalized the WILL of GOD, into a Particular WILL specific to the subject (HADIT). and so where their is a WILL their is a WAY, thus the TAO is also de-generalized into particular ways.
Thus ones TRUE WILL is linked to ones particular WAY, or the TAO as manifest in your particular. (The orbit of ones star).
Ok back on target now as an arrow on TARGET flies TRUE, like by WILL must be on target to be TRUE, ie it must be TRUE to its WAY or Tao.
So "don't go out of your way" and you stay "TRUE to your WILL"
if you go out of your way, then your WILL is not TRUE the arrow of your being flies not straight to the target but deviates from its course, its TAO.
-
Yes. That's good. The Tao, the way things really are, untwisted by samsara.
True will. The way the universe really works.
In L.V.X.,
chrys333 -
93,
" The True Will is uncaused, being simply the measure of the motion of the self in respect of any given object." - Comment D
COmment to AL I:44, "This verse is best interpreted by defining 'pure will' as the true expression of the Nature, the proper or inherent motion of the matter, concerned. It is unnatural to aim at any goal."
Connecting true and pure will: "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.'' Take this carefully; it seems to imply a theory that if every man and every woman did his and her will--the true will--there would be no clashing. `" - Liber II
For Chris Hanlon & post above: "This is roughly the plan of the Taoist in his attitude to life. Having ascertained the Path which satisfies the equations of his Nature (as we say, "found his True Will") he continues "without lust of result," acting only when it happens to be necessary to adjust himself to any external stress that affects him, and so proceeds happily" - Magick Without Tears
'The man Crowley had been chosen to enunciate this Law, that is, to exercise the essential function of a Magus. But he had yet to understand it, a task which involved the crossing of the Abyss, already described; and further, to identify his will with the Law, so that his personality might act as the focus of its energy. Before he could be that pure will whose name is that word, he had to be purged by fire of all competing volitions; and this was done by those who had chosen him during this part of his life, which I am about to record...** I continued by setting forth the import and purport of that word. I announced that since "Every man and every woman is a star.", each of us is defined and determined by a set of co-ordinates, has a true will proper and necessary, the dynamic expression of that nature. **The conclusion from these premises is that the sole and whole duty of each of us is, having discovered the purpose for which he or she is fitted, to devote every energy to its accomplishment." - Confessions
It seems he uses them rather interchangeably.
IAO131
-
And Crowley is always the voice of reason, right? OR is it how people read him? To me they are quite separate. Seems like it is saying before he could be pure will he had to discover his True Will to take him to that state (whose name is that word). -
Hi Everybody,
Aum, thanks for the note.
The Abyss - you think people really have crossed the Abyss? No, that's not what I meant.
Who on this list assumes they have or someone else has crossed the Abyss, and how can you tell?
Thanks,
chrys333 -
@Aum418 said
"'The man Crowley had been chosen to enunciate this Law, that is, to exercise the essential function of a Magus. But he had yet to understand it, a task which involved the crossing of the Abyss, already described; and further, to identify his will with the Law, so that his personality might act as the focus of its energy. Before he could be that pure will whose name is that word, he had to be purged by fire of all competing volitions; and this was done by those who had chosen him during this part of his life, which I am about to record...** I continued by setting forth the import and purport of that word. I announced that since "Every man and every woman is a star.", each of us is defined and determined by a set of co-ordinates, has a true will proper and necessary, the dynamic expression of that nature. **The conclusion from these premises is that the sole and whole duty of each of us is, having discovered the purpose for which he or she is fitted, to devote every energy to its accomplishment." - Confessions"
I myself see them as pretty interchangeable too. I usually connotate "pure will" to the very special experiencial gnosis arrived at during pranayama, where one really is in Samadhi upon 0. I associate "true will" with yes lining up with the stream, purpose, or current that you incarnated for. I accept a general "will to the higher" both in physical and spiritual evolution, and that those either not willing themselves to be better or directly going against the tide of truth, will be not operating in accord...with the Dao, "true will" etc.
This is the "pure will" too, but one's "true will" throughout life implies a lot of action and mundane activity, I associate "pure will" to a type of higher meditative or magickal gnosis. That's just me, I'm not sure it's correct.
-
Where does the everyday will or self-discipline stand in this?
Edit: For example, I can imagine someone using the concept of pure will to justify laziness. As in - the pure will is spontaneous and unassuaged of purpose. Therefore making plans and disciplined practice is just my intellect getting in the way.
-
@Nudor said
":rofl: And Crowley is always the voice of reason, right? OR is it how people read him?"
We're talking about Crowley's system of Thelema here and his writings... what are you talking about?
"To me they are quite separate. Seems like it is saying before he could be pure will he had to discover his True Will to take him to that state (whose name is that word)."
So you can have pure will without True Will but not True Will without pure will?
@JNV33 said
"Where does the everyday will or self-discipline stand in this?
Edit: For example, I can imagine someone using the concept of pure will to justify laziness. As in - the pure will is spontaneous and unassuaged of purpose. Therefore making plans and disciplined practice is just my intellect getting in the way."
"Delicious languor" is of us
I think one point is that one wouldn't be 'justifying' anything for pure will is 'unassuaged of purpose'. There is no thought of 'Why' or 'Because' (Liber AL chapter 2), there just IS is the Will.
IAO131
-
@Aum418 said
"I think one point is that one wouldn't be 'justifying' anything for pure will is 'unassuaged of purpose'. There is no thought of 'Why' or 'Because' (Liber AL chapter 2), there just IS is the Will."
I can't tell you how often I've encountered: "Have I paid rent yet? Hey, I'm living in the NOW. Where are you living?" Or - "Late? In the NOW, there is no concept of the past of future. How could I possibly be late?!" From descriptions above and elsewhere, I wonder if the True Will concept is similarly malleable to justify... pretty much anything?
I'm also wondering about the relationship between the mundane everyday will and the transcendent will. Are they quite distinct? Does the exercise of one lead to apprehension of the other? Are they opposed to each other in some respects?
-
@JNV33 said
"
@Aum418 said
"I think one point is that one wouldn't be 'justifying' anything for pure will is 'unassuaged of purpose'. There is no thought of 'Why' or 'Because' (Liber AL chapter 2), there just IS is the Will."I can't tell you how often I've encountered: "Have I paid rent yet? Hey, I'm living in the NOW. Where are you living?" Or - "Late? In the NOW, there is no concept of the past of future. How could I possibly be late?!" From descriptions above and elsewhere, I wonder if the True Will concept is similarly malleable to justify... pretty much anything?
I'm also wondering about the relationship between the mundane everyday will and the transcendent will. Are they quite distinct? Does the exercise of one lead to apprehension of the other? Are they opposed to each other in some respects?"
I'm the last person with enough insight to discuss this, though I'll offer my current and limited opinion anyway.
I believe that I have glimpsed something akin to the "Tao", or True Will. For me it was a sort of spontaneous reaction to my environment where there was no conflict, little intellectualizing - a sort of "flowing with the ebb of life". "Being in the moment", call it what you will.
But there is more to this than one can examine intellectually based merely on past experience of attempting to "be in the moment". There is a sort of perfect "archetypal flowing" of the so-called mature male archetypes in response to one's situation. During the few days of my life when I experienced this I was driving back from work when a car drove past me and soaked me with rain water through my open window. Under normal circumstances I would have been extremely annoyed but in this case I found it wonderfully refreshing. Of course I wasn't carrying any of the normal stress with me at the time because I dealt with every work situation appropriately. Playing with my kids was like becoming a child myself (the fool) from which I naturally evolved towards the magician - transforming their psyches through "play". I don't know perhaps this is not the "Tao" or the "True Will" but this is the closest I have come and the experience was profound.Getting back to your point about using Will as an "excuse" say for laziness. I think if one follows this "instinct" one will eventually become rather bored with life - the psyche will naturally create some discomfort, some irritation or depression that will push one towards becoming let's say for example more "goal driven". This is the natural Alchemy of life - we will evolve regardless. The problem with this attitude however is that it can be rather painful and laborious and that is what spiritual systems are for - an evolutionary shortcut. Does one want many to indulge in many failed relationships to find a fulfilling relationship or does one want to "work on oneself" to achieve a fulfilling relationship now? One could of course also make the excuse that one had the right to kill someone during a fit of anger but there will of course be consequences to such an action. Better to understand what underlying insecurity would drive one to kill and work with this. Of course it's all relative - killing may well be the "perfect" action under certain circumstances.
Anyway, just my 2 cents.
-
Personally, I tend to separate the ideas of "knowing and doing one's True Will" and "the path of finding one's True Will."
Just by the nature of the quest, there are going to be times where "True Will" and the authority to act decisively are going to be invoked. Kind of like, "I rely on the tools and freedoms afforded my by the concept of True Will, until I discover it in full." Before the True Will of an individual is known, you have the freedom to explore all avenues of finding it. A person can seem to justify meaningless acts by the concept, but if the goal is legitimate and the heart intent on learning and discovery by this method, then all of these seemingly senseless justifications go toward the learning process and are in the end fruitful by the law of trial and error. In contrast, if a person is merely excusing themselves to perform foolish acts, then the road is going to be longer and more painful, but it could still be said that the law of cause and effect will eventually lead them to taking the process more seriously, and all, in the end, once again, is fruitful.
Regarding the discovery of the True Will, I can only speak to you from as far as I've come. For me, so far, there is the sense of knowing the function of a personality like mine in the scheme of the evolving Beauty of Life. From that perspective, I have been able to touch the idea that if everyone knew their own place in that Scheme, humanity would function much more organically and efficiently, everyone and everything understanding its proper function and performing it with passionate and fulfilled hearts.
I can only say that I value the process of finding one's True Will enough to allow others to make their own judgments and decisions based on the sacredness of that quest.
When a person knows, they know they know, and all their actions make sense in regard to that specific expression of Greater Purpose, whatever it may be, however nonsensical it may seem to others. I think Crowley was a perfect example of this concept. Everything else is a function of the freedom to find that Purpose.
SO... all that to say, Yes, I think "True Will" can be invoked to excuse some rather silly things on the path to true discovery. I see these as necessary aspects of the journey, for a person will only excuse foolish actions by invoking True Will to the extent that they need to learn from the lawful consequence of those actions.
Maybe you could say that to the extent that a person is willing to pay the consequences of the actions for which they invoked the right of True Will, to that extent they are probably actually attempting to express it.
just thoughts...
-
Possibly one could look at Will in phases. Pure Will would be Will as being. Doing one's True Will, would be that Will in action.
These two could be encapsulted as "Being true to one's Being."
This would have the fundamental injunction to answer to oneself first and foremost, without the the need to resort to invoking "Because it is my will," creating a more self-referenced responsibility and having less recourse or response to external validation.
At the end of the day, how we choose to interpret doing one's Will, the philosophy it instills, the resultant ways in which it would then manifest, are ultimately part of that individual quest.
-
@Chris Hanlon said
"Hi Everybody,
Aum, thanks for the note.
The Abyss - you think people really have crossed the Abyss? No, that's not what I meant.
Who on this list assumes they have or someone else has crossed the Abyss, and how can you tell?
Thanks,
chrys333"93,
I think so, and I dont think you can 'tell.' A King may be yonder beggar.
@JNV33 said
"
@Aum418 said
"I think one point is that one wouldn't be 'justifying' anything for pure will is 'unassuaged of purpose'. There is no thought of 'Why' or 'Because' (Liber AL chapter 2), there just IS is the Will."I can't tell you how often I've encountered: "Have I paid rent yet? Hey, I'm living in the NOW. Where are you living?" Or - "Late? In the NOW, there is no concept of the past of future. How could I possibly be late?!" From descriptions above and elsewhere, I wonder if the True Will concept is similarly malleable to justify... pretty much anything? "
That would be the confusion of planes, I think. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's; if one wants physical freedom of movement, one must obtain the necessary means (paying rent in this case).
"I'm also wondering about the relationship between the mundane everyday will and the transcendent will. Are they quite distinct? Does the exercise of one lead to apprehension of the other? Are they opposed to each other in some respects?"
I think the former is an extension, or small part, of the latter (the Will is both transcendent and immanent).
IAO131
-
@Frater MDC said
"Possibly one could look at Will in phases. Pure Will would be Will as being. Doing one's True Will, would be that Will in action."
Although Crowley writes that Will is fundamentally dynamic in many places ("The Will is the dynamic aspect of the self").
"These two could be encapsulted as "Being true to one's Being."
This would have the fundamental injunction to answer to oneself first and foremost, without the the need to resort to invoking "Because it is my will," creating a more self-referenced responsibility and having less recourse or response to external validation."
Certainly, but does Thelema give that injunction anyways in Liber AL ch2 etc?
"At the end of the day, how we choose to interpret doing one's Will, the philosophy it instills, the resultant ways in which it would then manifest, are ultimately part of that individual quest."
Indeed - although there seem to be definite suggestions in Liber AL and in Crowley's writings...
IAO131
-
"
Although Crowley writes that Will is fundamentally dynamic in many places ("The Will is the dynamic aspect of the self").
"I'm not implying that the nature of our "Being" is static and I'm not implying that it's Not. Though you're right, it could construed that way by some. Discovering that nature is part of it.
"
Certainly, but does Thelema give that injunction anyways in Liber AL ch2 etc?Indeed - although there seem to be definite suggestions in Liber AL and in Crowley's writings...
"I like where you're going with that one
"But exceed! exceed!" - Liber AL ch2
-
The concept of True Will and Pure Will are both more or less hampered by the dualism it takes to believe that there can be an "Un-true" or "Im-Pure" Will. This is a simple and unfortunate byproduct of linguistic conventionality which utilizes duality as a form of representation in a field of non-dual.
If Thelema means "Will", and Ill go out on a limb here - this Will is the vehicle of the HGA as pouring through ones psyche at a conscious and unconscious level of continual reception as an outpouring of the primordial spark. The misapprehension is that, when a person makes an incorrect judgment or misapprehends conditions, or actions, one has manifested or witnessed untrue or impure Will, but that cant be, IMHO because the Will does not partake of duality in an intellectual or moralist sense.
Perceptions pivot not on the singularity of total unity (of which the Will is the unbroken vehicle & messenger) but on the intellectual grounds of object-subject relation in a moral universe where somehow this Will can be manifestly imperfect. As soon as one experiences un-truth and impurity, it is an indication that one is* moving away* from ones natural axis, or Will, which generally rests in the center, not on opposing sides.