Liber LXXVII....to kill or not to kill!!
-
- Man has a right to kill those who would thwart these rights...
So much for opression and tyranny, it infects mankind like a virus. I cannot judge or oppress another from doing what they will even if it is a course of action I would not take for myself. So many have been oppressed and trampled upon in our world all.in an effort to have a freedom to be without penalty. Does this mean death to the oppressors. Those that make rules and legislate 'rights' often leave many oppressed from the same freedoms others share. Injustice is a bitter pill to swallow in the face of predujice, and that predujice many times.makes.criminals of what is socially acceptable. For what one finds unacceptable another fully welcomes and embraces. Freedom of everyones will is something I value. Death to.the oppresors!!
-
It means exatly what it says (in words of one syllable!). Its implementation is your business.
-
The last verse of Liber OZ is interesting when you consider the logical ramifications of it.
"Man has the right to kill those who would thwart these rights."
What are "these rights"? Well they include "to live in the way that he wills to do" and "to die when and how he will". So, it seems to me that a person trying to carry out this clause of Liber OZ would deserve to be killed.
In fact, the message I get from Liber OZ isn't "we have the right to kill our oppressors"; it's be very careful about interfering with other people's rights. It's that the whole pattern of killing each other belongs to a population who hasn't moved beyond interfering with each other's rights. It's that Adepts don't attempt to thwart each other's wills, and they certainly don't go around killing each other.
-
Yes. Liber OZ doesn't speak of the rights you claim for yourself, so much as the rights you extend to others.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"Yes. Liber OZ doesn't speak of the rights you claim for yourself, so much as the rights you extend to others."
The rights you extend to others are the rights you claim for yourself. Which is basically just the categorical imperative, but stated differently. -
@Iamus said
"The rights you extend to others are the rights you claim for yourself."
That is more often true than when one states the inverse (The rights you claim for yourself are the rights you extend to others).
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"
@Iamus said
"The rights you extend to others are the rights you claim for yourself."That is more often true than when one states the inverse (The rights you claim for yourself are the rights you extend to others)."
Logically speaking they have the same truth conditions
but I get your point. The shift in emphasis is definitely significant. -
@Barrackubus said
"5. Man has a right to kill those who would thwart these rights...
So much for opression and tyranny, it infects mankind like a virus. I cannot judge or oppress another from doing what they will even if it is a course of action I would not take for myself. So many have been oppressed and trampled upon in our world all.in an effort to have a freedom to be without penalty. Does this mean death to the oppressors. Those that make rules and legislate 'rights' often leave many oppressed from the same freedoms others share. Injustice is a bitter pill to swallow in the face of predujice, and that predujice many times.makes.criminals of what is socially acceptable. For what one finds unacceptable another fully welcomes and embraces. Freedom of everyones will is something I value. Death to.the oppresors!!"
93,
Sabazius' observations on Liber Oz are pertinent here.
Most interestingly, at least for me, is the mention of a letter from Crowley where he calls the last line "the safefuard tyrannicide." This implies that he intended this line to refer to tyrants who oppress others and restrict their 'Oz rights', so to speak.
93 93/93
-
93,
Don't fall into the pit of Because; Thou hast NO "right" but to do thy Will.
Do that, and no other shall say nay.
93 93/93
J