The Monstrous Ethics of Thelema
-
An examination of the ethical principles of Liber AL III, 18.
(jk)
-
FWIW my own short remarks on this verse are here:
aumha.org/arcane/ccxx3.htm#18 -
The way I am looking at it in this moment:
To show pity for a person is to delude one self, and fall prey to another's illusion.
Instead, show you are 'above it,' kill the illusion which is in turn torture as you unceremoniously tear a veil the person has constructed.
-
@Uni_Verse said
"To show pity for a person is to delude one self, and fall prey to another's illusion."
...not to mention a complete disregard for CCXX I:3
616
-
Pity and compassion are often confused for each other, much like envy and jealousy. In Buddhism compassion is the antidote to anger (which leads to the fiery hell realms) and defined as an attitude toward others that they should not experience unnecessary suffering. Pity, on the other hand, is secretly being glad you are better off than the pitied person.
When the family goes the circus and the little girl stares at the freaks, she feels pity.
Pity is oddly similar to envy (the deadliest of the Seven Deadly Sins according to Aquinas), which wants what others have without acknowledging differences between people and thus secretly competitive, in that both traits fail recognize the principle of difference, individuation and True Will.
-
@Jim Eshelman said
"FWIW my own short remarks on this verse are here:
aumha.org/arcane/ccxx3.htm#18"I do not think you and I are much divergent in our views on this verse, except that you say:
"A fundamentalist reading of this verse would take it as an injunction to “Kill and torture,” and so forth. Although I have no easy explanation for my point of view, I simply renounce this meaning."
Questions:
-
Do you mean by "fundamentalist reading" one is that is necessarily in error?
-
Would you provide a concise, if not easy, explanation for your point of view regarding the meaning of "kill and torture" in Liber AL III, 18?
-
Do you think Crowley's comments about the verse, and other points he made about the violent commandments in Liber AL, should be read literally (as peshat), or only ever metaphorically?
(jk)
-
-
@h2h said
"Pity and compassion are often confused for each other"
"pity" has as its meaning in part to feel compassion for another.
Allow God to explain it in plain terms:
"And I will dash them one against another, even the fathers and the sons together, saith the LORD: I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them."
It seems Aiwass or Crowley recalled Jeremiah 13:14.
And also, note that the God of the Hebrews generally made use of human agents to effect these merciless and terrible destructions. So, he could just as well have been saying "Kill and torture; spare not; be upon them." In fact he often said things like that. And he wasn't being metaphorical.
(jk)
-
@Tarotica said
"
@h2h said
"Pity and compassion are often confused for each other""pity" has as its meaning in part to feel compassion for another.
"Im not aware of any sort of pity that includes compassion.
The only sort of relation is that both pity and compassion often have someone feeling 'bad' for another although pity is often quite demeaning (which is more harsh to say to your enemy: I hate you or I pity you?)
IAO131
-
Possibly a dictionary would help?
American Heritage defines "pity" as:
*Sympathy and sorrow aroused by the misfortune or suffering of another. *It defines "compassion" as:
Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it.There is a definite relationship between the two, and a definite distinction between the two. (And the definition for "pity" much more resembles a distinctive Buddhist definition of "compassion," in contrast to a conventional Western usage of the term.)
I find the most interesting distinction between the two definitions above to be that "pity" is defined as a particular kind of sympathy - literally, "feeling with" - and "compassion" is definied as a particular kind of "awarness." The former is emotional, the latter mental.
-
Some fine interpretations, and each bring us to a level all their own.
For me, I first felt that the Law of Thelema tells us that the whole concept of sin is nothing more than a restriction to our True Will. It is a myth created by those who wish to have power over others.
In this light, the word that is not known is the antithesis to this ancient moral concept of Sin.
If we have no sin, there is no reason to avert our eyes away from the sin of our neighbors, nor pluck the sin from our own eyes.
In the light of True Will, Pure Will, would this word not known be a new kind of expression?
-
The etymological comparison of “pity” and “compassion” indicates the terms are indeed related yet distinct and, if so, what did AC mean when declaring “compassion is the vice of kings” or “damn them who pity”?
Wikipedia, for example, distinguishes between these two terms in a manner that I agree with:
Further Book 4 speaks of “ignorant kindliness”:
In Magick, likewise, the Adept who is sworn to attain to the Knowledge and Conversation of his Holy Guardian Angel may in his grosser days have been expert as a Healer, to find that he is now incapable of any such work. Yet the cause may be no more than that the Wisdom of his Angel depreciates the interference of ignorant kindliness with diseases which may have been sent to the sufferer for a purpose profoundly important to his welfare.
(Book 4, Chapter XVI, Of the Oath, p. 229)
But AC himself clearly had problems with this thought. His notes to this passage state:
I don’t like the tone of this. Better to put it that the True Will of the patient may find these apparent handicaps essentially helpful, and that all interference is dangerous, especially as the full consequences of any action is [sic] unknowable.
-
" But AC himself clearly had problems with this thought. His notes to this passage state:
I don’t like the tone of this. Better to put it that the True Will of the patient may find these apparent handicaps essentially helpful, and that all interference is dangerous, especially as the full consequences of any action is [sic] unknowable."Wo. This stopped me in my tracks this morning. It definitely gives me something to think about!
I'd been thinking that ALL healing was good, period. Thanks for shining more light on this.
Donna
-
@Donna said
"I'd been thinking that ALL healing was good, period. Donna"
"The presence of effects (as in the law of cause-and-effect, or karma) manifests as thoughtforms (symbols or images) in the causal aura, much like sunspots appear on the sun. These images cause a distortion in the initiate's perception of reality and dilute or block portions of the outflow of radiant energy.
"These images are problems. They can cause psychological disorders and medical conditions. Although practitioners can often heal lesser problems, at this (causal) level, no one else can disperse, resolve, or heal these imbedded thoughtforms – The initiate must resolve each problem for himself or herself.
"As counselors or practitioners, we may describe these problems, thus bringing a client to the understanding of what he or she must accomplished, but we cannot "heal" them; it is strictly a matter between the client and his or her soul."
- In Revelation -
@Jim Eshelman said
"Possibly a dictionary would help?
American Heritage defines "pity" as:
*Sympathy and sorrow aroused by the misfortune or suffering of another. *It defines "compassion" as:
Deep awareness of the suffering of another coupled with the wish to relieve it.There is a definite relationship between the two, and a definite distinction between the two. (And the definition for "pity" much more resembles a distinctive Buddhist definition of "compassion," in contrast to a conventional Western usage of the term.)
I find the most interesting distinction between the two definitions above to be that "pity" is defined as a particular kind of sympathy - literally, "feeling with" - and "compassion" is definied as a particular kind of "awarness." The former is emotional, the latter mental."
Mmmm yes. I took pity as the acknowledgement of the misfortunes of others whereas compassion as the sympathy/empathy with them - compassion comes from com-patio or suffering with someone.
IAO131
-
It seems that over the last couple of years since Thelemic groups have developed stable websites and have been successful giving an even handed portrayal of Thelema, it seems that psyop groups have taken this badly and have sought ways to disrupt and present corrupted disengenuous interpretations of Thelema. What motivation/agenda is behind this, i cannot say. It could be religious with bored nutty Evangelicals bored of the Satanism . But it could also be politcal or security/military agendas coming into play. If so thats something else entirely different.
But what i can say is that people like Tarotica and the people he represents ( because he is just one tool of many being used) are going to continue this type of psychological warfare on internet forums and blogs. So the best thing to do is to allow him to continue, and just show how weak and ignorant his interpretation of Thelema is. The best thing to do is to prepare for more Taroticas who will inhabit the internet.
What can i say. Karma is a bitch...
-
@Sphynx said
"
"As counselors or practitioners, we may describe these problems, thus bringing a client to the understanding of what he or she must accomplished, but we cannot "heal" them; it is strictly a matter between the client and his or her soul."
- In Revelation"Thank you, Sphynx, for giving me a deeper look and much more to consider. This goes way beyond my knee-jerk reaction to "do good"; this was a much-needed enlightenment. Thanks.
Donna
-
@zainUK said
"But what i can say is that people like Tarotica and the people he represents ( because he is just one tool of many being used) are going to continue this type of psychological warfare on internet forums and blogs."
-
@Donna said
"Thank you, Sphynx, for giving me a deeper look and much more to consider. This goes way beyond my knee-jerk reaction to "do good"; this was a much-needed enlightenment. Thanks."
Hi Donna,
A useful standard for discerning when to assist or not is what I call "Thelemic morality". Whatever brings us closer to our True Will = good, and whatever distracts, delays or takes us further from our True Will = bad. If an investment banker is suffering ulcers because his True Will is to be a musician, it would only make sense to heal if him if he recognizes this fact and wishes to become better so that he can pursue music.
In any case, healing would probably only occur if it is in alignment with True Will.
-
@h2h said
" If an investment banker is suffering ulcers because his True Will is to be a musician, it would only make sense to heal if him if he recognizes this fact and wishes to become better so that he can pursue music... "
Hey thanks, h2h!
So healing is really an inner process of transformation. The most another can do is perhaps, send light to help that person see the real need and ... help them to puzzle it out if they ask? I guess in the end it is the person in need of change who finds us, and not the other way around.
Wise words. Thank you.
Donna