Morality and Magick
-
In Thelema, moralty is relative, correct. There really isn't an objective right or wrong except as is applies to one particular star at a given moment. Correct.? I also read somewhere(?) that a "Christ" or one who has attained to the K&CofHGA can be of any apparent moralty. I think for an example they gave Jesus and Mohammad as examples, pretty much extreme opposites (one passive, peace, the other by the sword).
Now, my question is, if morality does not matter in attainment, why is there any moral judgement in the use of magick? For example, why can't someone attack a person magically, or do a spell for wealth if moralty does not play a part? I am giving extreme examples to make a point. If morality does not matter in the "real" world, why does it matter in magick? There would be no Black magick if there was not some kind of moral system.
-
(1) It's not that there is no right vs. wrong - it's that right-wrong is complex and that morality is contextual. That is, it depends on the person, the situation, etc. (That's why someone who has attained - or, for that matter, simply someone who is making choices consistent with inner and outer context - may appear immoral to others.)
(2) Morality is very much a part of Thelema, as of magick. It's just different from earlier morality. I think "thou hast no right but to do thy will" is a pretty moralistic statement! (Many more could be found in Liber L.)
(3) A chief characteristic of morality in Thelema, though, might be termed the Principle of Actual Consequences. Rules, mores, moral codes, etc. should be considered in terms of their actual consequences, not some a priori ideal divorced from actual consequences.
(4) One extremely useful rule that holds up completely in my experience is that - regadless of any presumed objective good-evil polarity - if you act in a way that you regard as evil, you will punish yourself for it. You are acting against your own deep formulation of the right course, and therefore are damaging yourself (and will damage yourself further in the aftermath).
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"(1) It's not that there is no right vs. wrong - it's that right-wrong is complex and that morality is contextual. That is, it depends on the person, the situation, etc. (That's why someone who has attained - or, for that matter, simply someone who is making choices consistent with inner and outer context - may appear immoral to others.)"
"In Thelema, moralty is relative, correct. There really isn't an objective right or wrong except as is applies to one particular star at a given moment." Isn't that the same thing as I said?
@Jim Eshelman said
"(2) Morality is very much a part of Thelema, as of magick. It's just different from earlier morality. I think "thou hast no right but to do thy will" is a pretty moralistic statement! (Many more could be found in Liber L.)"
Yes, it is, but for someone who has not reached a level of really knowing their true will, how do they know what actions are moral or not? Is it purely by how one feels as you mentioned below?
@Jim Eshelman said
"(3) A chief characteristic of morality in Thelema, though, might be termed the Principle of Actual Consequences. Rules, mores, moral codes, etc. should be considered in terms of their actual consequences, not some a priori ideal divorced from actual consequences."
ok, this is more useful to me. Thanks, that helps. But again, to clarify, there is no Objective morality because there may be an outcome / consequence that I think is fine while another peropsn may find unacceptable. Again, I guess this goes back to moralty being subjective according to the star (POV) and the moment.
@Jim Eshelman said
"(4) One extremely useful rule that holds up completely in my experience is that - regadless of any presumed objective good-evil polarity - if you act in a way that you regard as evil, you will punish yourself for it. You are acting against your own deep formulation of the right course, and therefore are damaging yourself (and will damage yourself further in the aftermath)."
I can see how this would be the case in at least a psychological sense. Do you think it has deeper implications (karmic, etc.)?
-
@DavidH said
""In Thelema, moralty is relative, correct. There really isn't an objective right or wrong except as is applies to one particular star at a given moment." Isn't that the same thing as I said?"
Yeah, I think it is
I was just bullet-pointing myself to some semblance of completeness."Yes, it is, but for someone who has not reached a level of really knowing their true will, how do they know what actions are moral or not? Is it purely by how one feels as you mentioned below?"
There is something called "conscience" which - once it is stripped of other people's voices, parental nay-saying, etc., becomes a clear voice of guidance. It's basically an in-the-moment truth-sense on choice, action, morality, etc. Listening for and responding to this particular voice is actually one of the best practices for opening oneself to direct guidance from the HGA.
And, until one has this drilled, one has to make the best judgment one can - that's the reason external codes of morality exist, to guide people before they have matured in the faculty to be guided from within. Most of the world's codes have been basically the same on core issues, so what I'd recommend is: Just pick one and follow it.
"But again, to clarify, there is no Objective morality because there may be an outcome / consequence that I think is fine while another peropsn may find unacceptable."
My spiritual understanding of the workings of the universe are that, if in fact you make such a choice based on clear guidance of True Will, you won't be interferring with the True Will of another - they may not like it, but that's a separate issue, you still have to act true to yourself in the matter.
"Again, I guess this goes back to moralty being subjective according to the star (POV) and the moment."
A question for you to ponder and see what conclusions, if any, it leads you to: In the astronomical-mathematical process of calculating the orbit of a planet around the Sun, even though the planet is moving in its own orbit and according to its own nature (position, mass, velocity, etc.), is the exact path of its orbit not objective?
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"(4) One extremely useful rule that holds up completely in my experience is that - regadless of any presumed objective good-evil polarity - if you act in a way that you regard as evil, you will punish yourself for it. You are acting against your own deep formulation of the right course, and therefore are damaging yourself (and will damage yourself further in the aftermath)."I can see how this would be the case in at least a psychological sense. Do you think it has deeper implications (karmic, etc.)?"
Yes. However, I don't draw a distinction between "karmic implications" and the consequences of physical circumstance, psychological implication, etc.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"A question for you to ponder and see what conclusions, if any, it leads you to: In the astronomical-mathematical process of calculating the orbit of a planet around the Sun, even though the planet is moving in its own orbit and according to its own nature (position, mass, velocity, etc.), is the exact path of its orbit not objective? "
Hmmmm....yes....and no.
ok, smoke is coming out of my ears. I'll have to think about this one a couple of days. Logically, from the POV of the scientist that has all the data and "birds eye view" then it appears completly objective, and since it can be recreated with models based on mass, distance, etc. then it is scientifically objective. However, from the POV of another Star....you don't see any of that.Ok, I'll have to meditate on this a few days. Thanks Jim!
-
"In the astronomical-mathematical process of calculating the orbit of a planet around the Sun, even though the planet is moving in its own orbit and according to its own nature (position, mass, velocity, etc.), is the exact path of its orbit not objective? "
Its neither, it is what is. You could argue that the path is objective in the astronomical-mathematical sense after all of the calculations have been performed correctly and prove that a+b will always = c regardless what digits you plug into it, and you could also argue that its subjective because that path is a specific experience of the One Life Force in Assiah; it serves its purpose to be a path for a planet to go 'round the sun. Its objective to the observer and subjective to itself. Which do you choose your perspective to be?
-
"Which do you choose your perspective to be?"
Neither A nor B....but always C.
-
93,
True to life King of Wolves. True to life bro.
93 93/93