The Essence of Thelema
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"So the only purpose in discovering will, to you, is to enjoy life more before you die?"
To paraphrase Crowley, one discovers the True Will because one cannot help but do the True Will, and one therefore ought to figure out how to do it well.
"Also, will in your view of the universe is a misnomer, since it's a side effect of biology, and can be changed fundamentally by random circumstance. Right?"
Wrong.
-
@Frater 639 said
"But, by your definition -- if you mean essential, then, of course, "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law, etc." is the most important idea of Thelema, as you seem to agree with. But by that definition, a Christian, Buddhist, etc. could be a Thelemite."
Not really. I freely concede that a person could call themselves a Christian Thelemite or a Buddhist Thelemite, and I further concede that a person could redefine those words in ways that make them compatible, but the truth is that those things are incompatible.
"In short, I think the True Will idea is important, but it doesn't say much when studying Thelema as a system or a "practice" -- we'll need to look at practices, if it is to be practiced. Which I'm interested in hearing from you which practices you've found to be essential, as you seem to have a good idea what your True Will is..."
So what you really meant by "The Essence of Thelema" is "The Essence of Thelemic Practice"? If that's what you're driving at, your answer is mindfulness. Mindfulness, willingness to listen, discrimination, and self-discipline.
"You still didn't answer the question of "how is it beneficial to you?""
Discovering one's True Nature allows one to live more authentically, resolving the inner tension produced from inauthentic living.
"Since the core doctrine is "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law, etc.," it implies absolutely that the True Will of an individual can include anything that said True Will "wills" to do -- and they can still call themselves a Thelemite, yes?"
Obviously.
"Going further, a collection of Thelemites can have core beliefs that they agree on, all according to their True Will, which may create a religious system around these beliefs."
Sure. [with the minor quibble that True Will doesn't dictate beliefs...True Will only pertains to action]
"Which, in fact, they have -- it is called Thelema."
Well, no. If they were Thelemites who came together to make a religion, "Thelema" clearly had to predate whatever this religion is that they formed. The religion would be, at best, a religion based around the Law of Thelema. See the OTO as an example: Thelema existed long before Crowley wrote the OTO rituals that comprise their "religious practices," so clearly Thelema cannot be identifiable with those rituals or the religious "teachings" (such as they are) within OTO. Thelema might be expressed through those rituals and teachings, but Thelema cannot be identified with them.
"Your opinion regarding any one else's True Will is your right to have -- in fact, I encourage it -- especially if it is in line with your True Will to have it."
True Will doesn't dictate opinions or thoughts or beliefs: True Will is action.
"However, if Thelema as practice includes finding a person's independent True Will, their True Will could necessarily include NOT just stopping at the individual, or is that too much of a leap in your opinion?"
I have no clue what you're trying to ask here. Rephrase with concrete examples if you want an answer.
-
@Los said
"
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"So the only purpose in discovering will, to you, is to enjoy life more before you die?"To paraphrase Crowley, one discovers the True Will because one cannot help but do the True Will, and one therefore ought to figure out how to do it well.
"Also, will in your view of the universe is a misnomer, since it's a side effect of biology, and can be changed fundamentally by random circumstance. Right?"
Wrong."
But why should one do ones true will well?
-
@Los said
"Not really. I freely concede that a person could call themselves a Christian Thelemite or a Buddhist Thelemite, and I further concede that a person could redefine those words in ways that make them compatible, but the truth is that those things are incompatible."
Please let me know what the truth is.
@Los said
"So what you really meant by "The Essence of Thelema" is "The Essence of Thelemic Practice"? If that's what you're driving at, your answer is mindfulness. Mindfulness, willingness to listen, discrimination, and self-discipline."
So then, mindfulness? Wow.
@Los said
"Discovering one's True Nature allows one to live more authentically, resolving the inner tension produced from inauthentic living. "
You still can't even answer the question. Sad. But maybe non-communication is authentic to you.
@Los said
"Sure. [with the minor quibble that True Will doesn't dictate beliefs...True Will only pertains to action]"
Really? So you're absolutely saying nothing...again.
@Los said
"Well, no. If they were Thelemites who came together to make a religion, "Thelema" clearly had to predate whatever this religion is that they formed. The religion would be, at best, a religion based around the Law of Thelema. See the OTO as an example: Thelema existed long before Crowley wrote the OTO rituals that comprise their "religious practices," so clearly Thelema cannot be identifiable with those rituals or the religious "teachings" (such as they are) within OTO. Thelema might be expressed through those rituals and teachings, but Thelema cannot be identified with them.
"I have no idea what this means. Thelema cannot be identified with people that are following their True Will, regardless of the expression? So weird.
@Los said
"True Will doesn't dictate opinions or thoughts or beliefs: True Will is action."
Opinions and thoughts and beliefs are actions. These can all include aspects of the True Will. Please just don't throw things out there before you think them through. It sounds desperate.
@Los said
"I have no clue what you're trying to ask here. Rephrase with concrete examples if you want an answer.
"I don't expect you to understand. A cooperative seems to be beyond your grasp.
You still have yet to answer any of the questions regarding how Thelema is beneficial to you. You mention "practicing" Thelema, but you can't give me one example of that. Why not?
-
@Frater 639 said
" Thanks for sharing. Hope to see more posts..."
And thanks for starting a very-thought provoking thread.
I'm very glad to get drawn back to this board in time for it!LLLL,
MNA -
@Los said
" I freely concede that a person could call themselves a Christian Thelemite or a Buddhist Thelemite, and I further concede that a person could redefine those words in ways that make them compatible, but the truth is that those things are incompatible."
But "those words" can only apply to the labels as you define them, which means that any incompatibility is in your viewpoint, not necessarily anyone else's. For that matter, if you go through any modern denomination of a religion and the source texts/teachings it is based on, there will be incompatibilities....that's the nature of the game. Thelema is already showing that it's not exempt from that tendency.
I feel it's more accurate to say that if you go point by point through the tenets of any given religion and Thelema, there will be points of compatibility AND incompatibility. Crowley's articulation of Thelema drew heavily from his experience and regard for many other religions, as much as the shortcomings as he saw them. The points of incompatibility are very specific and instructive, and the points of compatibility are even more important, as they show the hidden doors. The old question again: Why did Crowley choose to modify the "Cloud Upon the Sanctuary" for "An Account of A.'.A.'.", as part of the design for a vehicle to carry the new Word in the world?
-
@Los said
" I freely concede that a person could call themselves a Christian Thelemite or a Buddhist Thelemite, and I further concede that a person could redefine those words in ways that make them compatible, but the truth is that those things are incompatible."
But "those words" can only apply to the labels as you define them, which means that any incompatibility is in your viewpoint, not necessarily anyone else's. For that matter, if you go through any modern denomination of a religion and the source texts/teachings it is based on, there will be incompatibilities....that's the nature of the game. Thelema is already showing that it's not exempt from that tendency.
I feel it's more accurate to say that if you go point by point through the tenets of any given religion and Thelema, there will be points of compatibility AND incompatibility. Crowley's articulation of Thelema drew heavily from his experience and regard for many other religions, as much as the shortcomings as he saw them. The points of incompatibility are very specific and instructive, and the points of compatibility are even more important, as they show the hidden doors. The old question again: Why did Crowley choose to modify "The Cloud Upon the Sanctuary" for "An Account of A.'.A.'.", as part of the design for a vehicle to carry the new Word in the world?
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"But why should one do ones true will well?"
Oh, sorry, that was a typo on my par. I meant, "One might as well do it well rather than poorly,"
There's no "ought" or "should" at all.
"True Will" is just a term for what a person is naturally inclined to do. A person is always doing this Will, but it's getting obstructed by "restrictions" that the mind throws up. Practicing Thelema is a process of identifying and ameliorating the influence of these restrictions, to allow the True Will to express itself more freely and unfettered, greatly reducing inner resistance and discomfort.
Nothing's going to force anybody to practice Thelema or discover the True Will. If you want to reduce inner tension and discomfort, you can do it.
-
@Frater 639 said
"
@Los said
"Well, no. If they were Thelemites who came together to make a religion, "Thelema" clearly had to predate whatever this religion is that they formed. The religion would be, at best, a religion based around the Law of Thelema. See the OTO as an example: Thelema existed long before Crowley wrote the OTO rituals that comprise their "religious practices," so clearly Thelema cannot be identifiable with those rituals or the religious "teachings" (such as they are) within OTO. Thelema might be expressed through those rituals and teachings, but Thelema cannot be identified with them.
"I have no idea what this means. Thelema cannot be identified with people that are following their True Will, regardless of the expression? So weird."
No, you're misreading me. Here is what you said originally: "Going further, a collection of Thelemites can have core beliefs that they agree on, all according to their True Will, which may create a religious system around these beliefs. Which, in fact, they have -- it is called Thelema."
So, here's a paraphrase of what you just said: "there are some guys who are Thelemites (and in order for them to be Thelemites, there obviously has to be something called "Thelema" for them to be adhering to in some way). They decide that it's their True Will to band together and create a religious system. So they do. That religious system is Thelema!"
There's a logical problem there: if they create Thelema, then Thelema couldn't have been around before that for them to adhere to (and hence they could not be identified as "Thelemites").
If Thelemites create X, then X can't be Thelema itself (otherwise, there couldn't have been Thelemites to make X in the first place).
At best, X could be "something based on Thelema" or "something communicates the basic ideas of Thelema," but it can't actually be Thelema itself.
Far from being "so weird," my response illustrates a basic error in thought that you were making.
"
@Los said
"True Will doesn't dictate opinions or thoughts or beliefs: True Will is action."Opinions and thoughts and beliefs are actions."
You can choose to call them actions, sure, but the concept "True Will" just isn't about the kinds of things we call opinions and thoughts and beliefs. More often than not, opinions, thoughts, and beliefs are the "restrictions" that the mind throws up to obstruct the True Will.
As an elementary example, a person might have the "belief" that he's a great artist, but have that belief contradicted by the evidence time and again. If he paid attention to the evidence (i.e. observed his own being, rather than paying attention to his mind's ideas about himself), he may actually discover he's better suited to juggle numbers, even though the idea of a career in some field like that doesn't fit the romanticized self image of himself that he prefers.
"You still have yet to answer any of the questions regarding how Thelema is beneficial to you."
I already explained the benefits of discovering the True Will. What, are you asking me for personal stories about the specific benefits I've received from discovering my True Will? I'm not inclined to share, especially since this isn't Los Story Hour.
-
@Sr_MNA said
"
@Los said
" I freely concede that a person could call themselves a Christian Thelemite or a Buddhist Thelemite, and I further concede that a person could redefine those words in ways that make them compatible, but the truth is that those things are incompatible."But "those words" can only apply to the labels as you define them, which means that any incompatibility is in your viewpoint, not necessarily anyone else's. For that matter, if you go through any modern denomination of a religion and the source texts/teachings it is based on, there will be incompatibilities....that's the nature of the game. Thelema is already showing that it's not exempt from that tendency."
Well, sure. But I was using the words as they are commonly defined. By their standard definitions, "Christianity" and "Thelema" are nearly opposites. Of course someone could play some not-that-clever re-definition games to make them "compatible," and thus declare, "I'm a Christian Thelemite!" but what in the world would be the point? To utterly confuse everybody by using accepted terms in radically different ways just because?
I don't see anything to be gained from calling oneself a "Christian, Buddhist, Thelemic Hindu," or whatever....
"I feel it's more accurate to say that if you go point by point through the tenets of any given religion and Thelema, there will be points of compatibility AND incompatibility. Crowley's articulation of Thelema drew heavily from his experience and regard for many other religions, as much as the shortcomings as he saw them."
Yes, indeed. But Thelema is distinct from all other religious systems (if it were not, we could not define it and distinguish it).
-
It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously explore the compatible aspects between Thelema and other belief systems.
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously explore the compatible aspects between Thelema and other belief systems."
And when did I say such a thing?
I think if you examine what I actually wrote, you'll see that my point was that these systems are logically incompatible (such that one cannot simultaneously be a Christian and Thelemite, for example), but there are indeed points of similarity that might be interesting to study, for a variety of reasons.
-
Sorry, allow me to rephrase:
It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously be a Hindu and a Thelemite; or a Christian and a Thelemite.
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"Sorry, allow me to rephrase:
It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously be a Hindu and a Thelemite; or a Christian and a Thelemite."
This seems especially evident to me if we move into Los' p.o.v. that there is nothing inherently religious about Thelema. In that case, the whole field of "one's religious life" is per se untouched, and is outside the definition of Thelema.
Of course, being a Hindu or Christian or whatever could, for a particular person, carry other "luggage" (I don't mean that in a pejorative way, so I didn't use "baggage"; I just mean "bundled up stuff that you choose to carry around and keep close to you"). Some of that "luggage" could turn out to be at odds with Thelema in some fashion. But, then, the same is true of being a butcher, a baker, or a candlestick maker (or, for that matter, anything else).
-
@Jim Eshelman said
" Los' p.o.v. that there is nothing inherently religious about Thelema. In that case, the whole field of "one's religious life" is per se untouched, and is outside the definition of Thelema."
That's a good point. Thelema, in and of itself, isn't inherently theistic or atheistic, for example. It's inherently skeptical, though, and I would argue that Thelema is best practiced in the context of beliefs that can withstand skeptical scrutiny.
So that means -- given the fact that there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that any gods exist and given that, therefore, the proper skeptical position is not to accept the claim that any gods exist -- I would argue that Thelema is best practiced in the context of atheism. However, if tomorrow humanity became aware of sufficient evidence for the existence of gods, then in that case, the proper skeptical position would be to accept the claim that gods exist. In that particular situation, Thelema would then be best practiced in the context of theism.
-
@Los said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
" Los' p.o.v. that there is nothing inherently religious about Thelema. In that case, the whole field of "one's religious life" is per se untouched, and is outside the definition of Thelema."That's a good point. Thelema, in and of itself, isn't inherently theistic or atheistic, for example. It's inherently skeptical, though, and I would argue that Thelema is best practiced in the context of beliefs that can withstand skeptical scrutiny.
So that means -- given the fact that there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that any gods exist and given that, therefore, the proper skeptical position is not to accept the claim that any gods exist -- I would argue that Thelema is best practiced in the context of atheism. However, if tomorrow humanity became aware of sufficient evidence for the existence of gods, then in that case, the proper skeptical position would be to accept the claim that gods exist. In that particular situation, Thelema would then be best practiced in the context of theism."
Considering all that (Hard Absolutism), what if the "belief in something" supports results (regardless of the absolute reality of these things believed in)?
-
@Los said
"Thelema, in and of itself, isn't inherently theistic or atheistic, for example. It's inherently skeptical, though"
I don't agree with that at all.
I don't think it's the opposite - inherently UN-skeptical. But the skepticism elements were Crowley interpolations at a time that he was actively distancing himself from The Book of the Law. They form a part of Crowleyanity.
This isn't me taking a stand either for or against them. I'm only disagreeing that they have anything inerently to do with Thelema. I even lean in the direction that balanced skepticism is the best approach (it's my approach, so of course I think it's the best <g>). However, given the diversity of people, I don't lean so far as to think that it applies to everyone. (And it doesn't replace the deeply Thelemic practice of unreasonable enthusiasm outside of any calculation.)
"So that means -- given the fact that there is insufficient evidence to support the notion that any gods exist and given that, therefore, the proper skeptical position is not to accept the claim that any gods exist -- I would argue that Thelema is best practiced in the context of atheism."
Yes, we know
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"Sorry, allow me to rephrase:
It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously be a Hindu and a Thelemite; or a Christian and a Thelemite."
Not any more of a "restriction" than pointing out that a person can't draw a square circle.
Anyway, the idea that it could be someone's True Will to "be a Hindu" (or "be" anything, really) is absurd. True Will is something a person does, as I've been explaining. "I'm a Hindu!" is, at best, a story that a person tells himself (to be clear, so is "I'm a Thelemite!"). These are mental categories and narratives, and getting caught up in them (and stories about "who I am!") is the surest way to get lost in a bunch of distracting narratives.
True Will is what someone does. Might it be someone's True Will to attend a Hindu ritual -- or even perform a Hindu ritual -- because that person enjoys doing it or witnessing it? Sure. But it's not someone's "True Will" to "be" a Hindu -- or to "be" any other abstract concept. To draw an analogy, let's say that Mr. X sees a guy fall and authentically wants to help the guy up. It can be part of Mr. X's True Will to do that specific action in that specific moment, but it can't be Mr. X's True Will to "be an upright and compassionate person who works hard to be kind to my fellow man as a True King should!"
One is an action (performed in a specific context because it's dictated by a person's actual inclinations in the moment). The other is a story that only exists in the mind and is liable to mislead at some point.
-
@Los said
"True Will is what someone does. Might it be someone's True Will to attend a Hindu ritual -- or even perform a Hindu ritual -- because that person enjoys doing it or witnessing it? Sure. But it's not someone's "True Will" to "be" a Hindu -- or to "be" any other abstract concept. To draw an analogy, let's say that Mr. X sees a guy fall and authentically wants to help the guy up. It can be part of Mr. X's True Will to do that specific action in that specific moment, but it can't be Mr. X's True Will to "be an upright and compassionate person who works hard to be kind to my fellow man as a True King should!"
One is an action (performed in a specific context because it's dictated by a person's actual inclinations in the moment). The other is a story that only exists in the mind and is liable to mislead at some point."
So what story are you fooling yourself with to believe you must correct "Thelema?"
-
@Avshalom Binyamin said
"Sorry, allow me to rephrase:
It sounds like a restriction of the mind, with the effect of limiting the expression of true will, to insist that one can't simultaneously be a Hindu and a Thelemite; or a Christian and a Thelemite."
I agree, if and when we argue dogma and whats compatible with another..
Well ok, What's our quest? As human beings i mean.. as in the fulfillment of that which is potential in each of us.. not just some ego trip but transparent to transcendence?