Why should Thelema practitioners learn and do divination?
-
Hello there
I'm curious; at some point the...'syllabus' of the A.A. or any other Thelemic organizations would require the...'practitioner' (for a lack of a better word) to learn at least one form of divination and practice it.
For example, I remember reading somewhere (I believe it was from a book written by AC?) that the practitioner is required to learn either tarot, geomancy or astrology after a certain level~
Can anyone shed some light on this?
+==---Laxus---<>
-
*Divination is so important a branch of Magick as almost to demand a separate treatise.
Genius is composed of two sides; the active and the passive. The power to execute the Will is but blind force unless the Will be enlightened. At every stage of a Magical Operation it is necessary to know what one is doing, and to be sure that one is acting wisely. Acute sensitiveness is always associated with genius; the power to perceive the universe accurately, to analyse, coordinate, and judge impressions is the foundation of all great Work. An army is but a blundering brute unless its intelligence department works as it should.
The Magician obtains the transcendental knowledge necessary to an intelligent course of conduct directly in consciousness by clairvoyance and clairaudience; but communication with superior intelligences demands elaborate preparation, even after years of successful performance.
It is therefore useful to possess an art by which one can obtain at a moment's notice any information that may be necessary. This art is divination. The answers to one's questions in divination are not conveyed directly but through the medium of a suitable series of symbols. These symbols must be interpreted by the diviner in terms of his problem. It is not practicable to construct a lexicon in which the solution of every difficulty is given in so many words. It would be unwieldy; besides, nature does not happen to work on those lines...*
--- Book 4, Part III, Chap. XVIII (iv) - excerpt
-
In the A.'.A.'., one must begin studying divination as a 1=10 and pass examination on it in 4=7.\
There are several reasons. For example:
-
Divination is useful.
-
All initiates of A.'.A.'. must learn all main categories of methods because no one knows in advance which ones they will need for their distinctive Great Work. (And, in any case, they need to be able to teach those who come behind them.)
-
In particular, divination gives access to the contents of subconsciousness and, once it is better perfected, to Neshamah. (This puts the "divine" in "divination.") This is directly applicable.
For example, prior to the Knowledge & Conversation of the HGA, many people find that their Angel is able to pass wisdom and insight to them through divination techniques.
Now, I have a question for you: The tone of your post seems to communicate that you are against the idea or, at least, that you think it should be different. Where do these ideas come from?
-
-
Hi
So these are the reasons (as I understand it):
-
Divination has practical value (in both the material world and the spiritual world).
-
Divination hones our perception which allows us to gather more information about our situation.
-
Divination allows access to the contents of the subsconsciousness and later, to Neshamah ("soul?" is it also related to accessing the Akashic Records?).
-
Access to these information allows one to perform the Great Work more efficaciously.
@Jim:
I could not figure out what place divination has in Thelema...I think that training the mind and body and performing magickal rituals would be more directly effective.
Regarding the use of astrology, which branch of astrology? I suspect mainly horary? Although I think studying natal charts can give some insights as to what one's True Will is...
@Frater 639:
Based on the text, why is divination preferred over the clairs? Theoretically, a clair should be able to attain information at about the same speed once she has become reasonably skilled at it.
One could even argue that in more 'mundane' matters, clairs would be faster than say, drawing a geomantic chart (unless you use a computer program.)
Probably the only reasons to use it over the clairs are to maintain more objectivity and consistency.
-+==---Laxus---<>
-
-
@Laxus said
"Based on the text, why is divination preferred over the clairs? "
I didn't get that from the text at all. Why do you feel that the text leans toward divination over clairaudience and clairvoyance?
"Probably the only reasons to use it over the clairs are to maintain more objectivity and consistency."
The two aren't mutually exclusive and are very related. Could you clarify the question?
When using different forms of divination, how do you find yourself to be receiving information? In what case would you say a geomantic divination would be more accurate and objective than (say) a "voice" or "vision" and why?
-
"The Magician obtains the transcendental knowledge necessary to an intelligent course of conduct directly in consciousness by clairvoyance and clairaudience; but communication with superior intelligences demands elaborate preparation, even after years of successful performance."
This part. OK, I'll admit that I misread it.
But it is also possible to solely use the clairs without using a divinatory tool. To require the use of divination as a medium implies to me that the clairs aren't sufficient.
Insights come to me 'intuitively' or 'claircognizantly'. Clairvoyance and clairaudience are the faculties which I have to consciously develop, not something that I can use normally, which I why I think that clairvoyance/clairaudience itself is something which has to be studied, just like a divinatory system.
Edit:
My comment on objectivity and consistency only applies to situations in which the clairs are not well developed yet.
Clairs are like our sensory faculties; they have to be developed in order to function well. We can call them our psychic faculties.
Divination is objective because the symbols appear outside us. We are able to use our sensory faculties to determine what symbols have appeared, and record it as is. Clairs are subjective because the symbols appear within the person (i.e. subject). Note that I'm not saying objective=good, subjective=bad.
However, when our psychic faculties are not well developed, we are not always able to distinguish our clairs' information and our imagination. So the symbols that appear may be distorted by our imagination. As such, it is harder to be consistent with our readings if we are using our clairs.
Readings with divination tends to be more consistent for two reasons; one, it relies more on our sensory faculties, which are often more developed (since we need them to survive in the material world). Two, the symbols have fixed significations that directs the reader's intuition to then manipulate it.
Edit 2:
@Jim:
If I appear cranky or cynical in my expression, I apologize. Things have not been going well for me, which often stunts my communication skills and makes me come across as confrontational.
I think my question is:
"For thelemic purposes, what is purpose of the practice of divination?"
Perhaps you have already given your answer in your first post.
-
@Laxus said
"Divination is objective because the symbols appear outside us."
But requires our subjectivity to interface with the divination.
@Laxus said"However, when our psychic faculties are not well developed, we are not always able to distinguish our clairs' information and our imagination. "
Well, there may be confusion here between psychic faculties and intuition, judging by the sentence.
@Laxus said
"Readings with divination tends to be more consistent for two reasons; one, it relies more on our sensory faculties, which are often more developed (since we need them to survive in the material world). Two, the symbols have fixed significations that directs the reader's intuition to then manipulate it."
I'm not going to tease this apart too much, other than to say that divination and what you call "clairs" can both be considered subjective and objective, depending on what POV you happen to fancy at the time. As training progresses, one isn't concerned so much with classifying the phenomena as "inside" or "outside". Not to say that you shouldn't remain very skeptical of all of the phenomena...
Much of these intellectual difficulties are solved with practice and not with intellectualizing the practices. Mercurial spirits (like Tarot) or Earth elementals (like geomantic Intelligences) can be equally as misleading, as well as the "clairs", relative to the level of training of the practitioner. Symbols can be muddled all over the place. Suffice it to say, this is part of the reason why the system of the A.'.A.'. starts to deal with the "proving of the spirits" very early on. Jim's answer was very thorough as to why it is stressed in the training regimen.
-
@Frater 639:
"But requires our subjectivity to interface with the divination."
Yes, but there are two separate processes involved here. First, we perceive something. Then, we interpret what that something means.
A clairvoyant perceives something appearing in his mind's eye. A non-clairvoyant tarot reader 'feels the cards' before selecting them to be spread.
Although arguably both uses psychic faculties at first, the 'plane' on which the object is perceived is different. The object perceived by the clairvoyant stays in his/her mind's eye, and is therefore subjective because it can only be 'seen' by him (unless he telepathically communicates it to others).
The object perceived by the tarot reader are the cards, which are objects resting on the material plane (I believe it's called Assiah). It's there for all to see with their sensory sight.
Note that I am not assigning a value judgment on the words "objective" and "subjective"; I am simply describing the nature of the object of our perception.
Also, I am looking at it from the POV of someone who has been relying more on his sensory perception, and therefore it would be easier for him to accept the judgment if he is given some sensory stimuli.
So that's why I claimed that it's a reason to use divination over our natural psychic faculties. But only those who depend more on sensory perception would find it beneficial. To the strong intuitive/psychic, their psychic faculties would be as reliable as a system of divination.
"Well, there may be confusion here between psychic faculties and intuition, judging by the sentence."
Can you elaborate?
"...and what you call "clairs" can both be considered subjective and objective..."
No it cannot, unless you mean that the object that the clairs see actually exist somewhere on the material plane. This I would agree with. But then the object might not be within your proximity, unlike the tarot cards which will be right in front of you.
Of course, I realize that this is arbitrary if only the meaning is significant, and the stimuli themselves are not.
"Mercurial spirits (like Tarot) or Earth elementals (like geomantic Intelligences) can be equally as misleading, as well as the "clairs", relative to the level of training of the practitioner. Symbols can be muddled all over the place."
I agree, but the object of perception itself are of different natures depending on which method you use.
"Suffice it to say, this is part of the reason why the system of the A.'.A.'. starts to deal with the "proving of the spirits" very early on."
That's good; hopefully I'll be able to migrate somewhere where a centre is available.
Thanks for the responses!
-
@Laxus said
"Yes, but there are two separate processes involved here. First, we perceive something. Then, we interpret what that something means.
A clairvoyant perceives something appearing in his mind's eye. A non-clairvoyant tarot reader 'feels the cards' before selecting them to be spread.
Although arguably both uses psychic faculties at first, the 'plane' on which the object is perceived is different. The object perceived by the clairvoyant stays in his/her mind's eye, and is therefore subjective because it can only be 'seen' by him (unless he telepathically communicates it to others).
The object perceived by the tarot reader are the cards, which are objects resting on the material plane (I believe it's called Assiah). It's there for all to see with their sensory sight.
Note that I am not assigning a value judgment on the words "objective" and "subjective"; I am simply describing the nature of the object of our perception.
Also, I am looking at it from the POV of someone who has been relying more on his sensory perception, and therefore it would be easier for him to accept the judgment if he is given some sensory stimuli.
So that's why I claimed that it's a reason to use divination over our natural psychic faculties. But only those who depend more on sensory perception would find it beneficial. To the strong intuitive/psychic, their psychic faculties would be as reliable as a system of divination."
Thank you for your summation on ontology and how you believe it applies to divination and the "clairs".
See your quote starting with 'Of course...' below.
@Laxus said"Well, there may be confusion here between psychic faculties and intuition, judging by the sentence."
Can you elaborate?"
Sure I can. Do I choose to? No.
@Laxus said
"No it cannot, unless you mean that the object that the clairs see actually exist somewhere on the material plane. This I would agree with. But then the object might not be within your proximity, unlike the tarot cards which will be right in front of you."
I'm not debating that the Tarot cards are not on the table. Subjective and objective are classifications that can apply to more than just the material plane.
@Laxus said
"Of course, I realize that this is arbitrary if only the meaning is significant, and the stimuli themselves are not."
Yes!
@Laxus said
"I agree, but the object of perception itself are of different natures depending on which method you use."
See your second to last quote above.
@Laxus said
"That's good; hopefully I'll be able to migrate somewhere where a centre is available."
For the A.'.A.'. proper, there is not a "centre" in the mundane sense of the word. Much of the training is done by the Aspirant and assessed through correspondence.