The Purpose and the Goal?
-
thanks for your responses so far, but I just want to highlight that there is seemingly a conflict between the two quotes, one, that the HGA is equivalent to the Higher Self, and two, that it is not. So I am trying to determine which one it is.
Also, if HGA = True Will, and if HGA does NOT = Higher Self, then logically the True Will does NOT = Higher Self.
I am not convinced that the above argument is correct, so I am looking for other opinions.... -
The HGA, IMO, is only the gateway to the Higher Self.
It is only that part of the Higher Self that the lower self can perceive. For all practical purposes the HGA is the Will but it ain't the be all and end all of all that is....
-
@nderabloodredsky said
"thanks for your responses so far, but I just want to highlight that there is seemingly a conflict between the two quotes, one, that the HGA is equivalent to the Higher Self, and two, that it is not. So I am trying to determine which one it is."
Yes. There is both accidental and intentional ambiguity on this matter.
My view is that the question isn't relevant until one gets to the threshold of the event; and, at that point, the question becomes irrelevant. (That's not "fun with words." That's me using every trick I know to say what I mean.)
Honestly, I don't think knowing whether it is a or b is going to help anyone make the link faster. For example, it doesn't affect method. Furthermore, all the terms being debated have a totally different meaning in the face of the actual experience.
"Also, if HGA = True Will, and if HGA does NOT = Higher Self, then logically the True Will does NOT = Higher Self.
I am not convinced that the above argument is correct, so I am looking for other opinions...."HGA does not equal True Will. Furthermore, the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel is not the same experience as the Discovery of the True Will. (In some occassions, they may occur more or less at the same time.)
This is one of the most misleading yet commonplace errors floating around some Thelemic circles.
If it helps (though maybe it's too poetic to communicate conventionally), I settled sometime back on saying that the True Will is the Voice of the HGA speaking to and through us - often long before the K&C, and certainly after it.
-
So now we only have to address the matter of "The Purpose and the Goal".
I think that this Life only has Purpose when the Goal is very, very High (even almost unimaginably so).
-
93,
Purpose is intrinsic. It is the very core of our being. Hadit burns there, at the core of every star.
What obscures purpose is our intellectual attitudes, and the multiple levels of fear we have about being what we actually are. There is a danger with very high goals, in that they make us think about purpose, or admire it, or hope for it. Often, they are there specifically to mask our (apparently) less wonderful desires and drives, and thus function as effective obstructions to our expressing purpose.
"For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect."
93 93/93,
Edward
-
That's what I had to let go of. I finally realized they were all constructs of my 'spirit of the times'.
-
"For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect."
"unassuaged"?
hmmmm....
un-eased of purpose?
un-quenched of purpose?
unrelieved of purpose?maybe... undevoid of purpose is what he meant to say?
I am not real sure what he meant there. That's a tough one.
-
93,
The usual definition of "assuage" is to make something less painful, difficult or severe. So, "unassuaged of purpose" means continuing regardless of distractions, or the call from that part of us that wants to quit.
93 93/93,
Edward
-
I was looking for the meaning of "unassuaged" and came across a few commentaries that helped clear it a bit.
"References in Aleister Crowley's Writings
The term "lust of result" first appears in Crowley's writings in the First Chapter of The Book of the Law:For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect. (AL I:44)
In his Commentaries on the Book of the Law, Crowley typically discusses the concept of "lust of result" along with that of "purpose."From the Old Comment (1913) on AL I:44:
Recommends "non-attachment". Students will understand how in meditation the mind which attaches itself to hope of success is just as bound as if it were to attach itself to some base material idea. It is a bond and the aim is freedom.
I recommend serious study of the word unassuaged which appears not very intelligible. (Magical and Philosophical Commentaries, p. 135)
From the New Comment (1920) on 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. The student is referred to Liber LXV Chap. II, v. 24 [see below], and to the Tao Teh King. This becomes particularly important in high grades. One is not to do Yoga, etc., in order to get Samadhi, like a schoolboy or a shopkeeper; but for its own sake, like an artist.
"Unassuaged" means "its edge taken off by" or "dulled by". The pure student does not think of the result of the examination. (Magical and Philosophical Commentaries, p. 135)EDITOR'S NOTE: The definition of "unassuaged" in the above commentary is incorrect from the viewpoint of Standard English usage. The definition of "assuage (www.thefreedictionary.com/assuage)" is "To make (something burdensome or painful) less intense or severe; To satisfy or appease; To pacify or calm." Unassuaged would therefore be the opposite: to make something already burdensome or painful fully (or perhaps more) intense or severe; to deny satisfaction or appeasement, to disturb or agitate. This editor is unsure whether the divergence of the definition as presented in this commentary from that in common usage was intentional or in error.
Liber Cordis Cincti Serpente vel LXV Chapter II, v. 24, reads as follows:And I laid my head against the Head of the Swan, and laughed, saying: Is there not joy ineffable in this aimless winging? Is there not weariness and impatience for who would attain to some goal?
Crowley's commentary to the above verse reads as follows:
The Adept, bringing this thought closer to Ecstasy, laughs, both for pure joy, and as amused by the incongruous absurdities of "rational" arguments from which he is now forever free, expresses his idea thus: The free exercise of one's faculties is pure joy; if I felt the need of achieving some object thereby, it would imply the pain of desire, the strain of effort, and the fear of failure. (Commentaries on the Holy Books, p. 106)
From the Djeridensis Comment (1923) on AL Chapter I: Will: its possible defects:Purpose takes the edge off pure will; for it implies conscious thought, which should not replace what Nature intends. Work is done best when the mind does not know of it, either to urge or to check its course. The lust of result also spoils work; one must not distract one's forces from their task by thoughts of the profit of success. (Magical and Philosophical Commentaries, p. 313)
From Liber Samekh:Let [the student] beware of the 'lust of result,' of expecting too much, of losing courage if his first success is followed by a series of failures. (Book 4, Appendix IV, Liber Samekh, p. 539) "
-
oh ya forgot, the previous quote was from a search on Thelemapedia: www.thelemapedia.org/index.php/Lust_of_Resul
-
I notice that it is "unassuaged of" not "unassuaged by".
"Unassuaged by" would mean: For pure will, not lessoned/softened/eased by purpose.
"Unassuaged of" would mean: For pure will, not lessoned/eased of purpose.So pure will, with it's full measure of purpose.
Then, the second part contrasts it. "Delivered from the lust of result". Don't mistake the results for the purpose. Keep going.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@nderabloodredsky said
"thanks for your responses so far, but I just want to highlight that there is seemingly a conflict between the two quotes, one, that the HGA is equivalent to the Higher Self, and two, that it is not. So I am trying to determine which one it is."Yes. There is both accidental and intentional ambiguity on this matter.
My view is that the question isn't relevant until one gets to the threshold of the event; and, at that point, the question becomes irrelevant. (That's not "fun with words." That's me using every trick I know to say what I mean.) "
Well, O.K. , but in the above quote, he says Crowley spoke in "no uncertain terms", so I don't see why there is ambiguity on this matter, accidental or otherwise.
"
Honestly, I don't think knowing whether it is a or b is going to help anyone make the link faster. For example, it doesn't affect method. Furthermore, all the terms being debated have a totally different meaning in the face of the actual experience."Also, if HGA = True Will, and if HGA does NOT = Higher Self, then logically the True Will does NOT = Higher Self.
I am not convinced that the above argument is correct, so I am looking for other opinions...."HGA does not equal True Will. Furthermore, the Knowledge & Conversation of the Holy Guardian Angel is not the same experience as the Discovery of the True Will. (In some occassions, they may occur more or less at the same time.)
This is one of the most misleading yet commonplace errors floating around some Thelemic circles."
This helps. Thanks. I do wish you could answer some more of those questions, though.
"
If it helps (though maybe it's too poetic to communicate conventionally), I settled sometime back on saying that the True Will is the Voice of the HGA speaking to and through us - often long before the K&C, and certainly after it."