Remember that the goal in doing this is to allow oneself to achieve union with Tao. Lao Tzu saw people fighting over money, power, and other transitory goals that only distracted them from their natural place within the universe. The idea isn't to become a dull, grazing beast, but to let go of things that inhibit a relaxed and peaceful life lived in union with Tao.
CCXX I,44 comes to mind:
"For pure will, unassuaged of purpose, delivered from the lust of result, is every way perfect."
"
on another plane entirely, if you're serious about the discipline of the Great Work, the most important thing you can do is restructure your entire life so that everything within it points towards that goal. build your temple, learn your magick, learn your cabala, carry out the charges in liber Al vel Legis, do your yoga, get into the circle two, three times a day, do your pranayama, do your sun and moon adorations, master the astral, do your asana, keep your body in shape, take the breaks you need to take to keep yourself fresh and no more! - make your entire life an expression of your will towards the great work. "
Do you think that this is the path for every thelemite to find his/ her Will? To build a temple and practice Crowley's magick?
"As mentioned about five times above and elsewhere, the Comment is NOT part of the Book of the Law and was added over two decades later. "
@Hypatie said
"Ouch!
Above statements are very serious!
The Comment is a third of the Book itself, and it is the core belief of Thelema that there must be as many readings of the Book as there are readers; for, according to the divine Law of Thelema, every living being in the universe has a Will of their own, which is absolutely single.
That is why, logically, discussions upon the contents of the Book are forbidden, for they may tempt gone-wild egos to try to establish a dogmatic meaning of the Book, which would be a blasphemy against the Law itself - And, however, "class A" material is undiscussable.
That is also why, though I love this forum, and especially Jim's posts, I will now keep away from it, and urge every sincere Thelemite to do the same : for Jim has clearly tilted: how else would he like to become a centre of pestilence?!!!
What a sad evening!"
If the Comment is part of The Book of the Law, aren't you violating it by discussing it?
"How does an organization purporting to be evil operate anyhow? Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't everyone just rebel against the authority of the group until there's nothing left? What could be more honorable in a satanic cult than usurping the authority of the group?"
JoSM doesn't purport to be evil.
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@aum418 said
"
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Wilder said
"
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Wilder said
"Do you view the practice and/or acceptance of ceremonial magick as requisite to Thelema?"
Thelema as a life-philosophy etc.? Heck, no.
However, as a practice of accelerated Thelema-based spiritual development - almost certainly."
Would you place Thelema as a religion in the former or later camp?"
Either the latter or neither."
"
How can you NOT view Thelema as a philosophy for life? How is the doctrine of the Will not hte most practical and down to earth philosophy religion has offered?"
I'm not sure who you were answering. If it was me, then I think I wasn't clearn on my answer.
Wilder's question was whether I would put Thelema as a religion in the "Thelema as life-philosophy" or "Thelema-based spiritual development" part of my answer. I responded that I would put "Thelema as religion" either in neither or these or in both (depending on one's definition of "religion," which is a tired old discussion I didn't want to get into at the moment)."
Sorry, I was kind of ambiguous myself. I was asking if you saw ceremonial magick as requisite to the practice of Thelema as a religion.
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Wilder said
"Do you view the practice and/or acceptance of ceremonial magick as requisite to Thelema?"
Thelema as a life-philosophy etc.? Heck, no.
However, as a practice of accelerated Thelema-based spiritual development - almost certainly."
Would you place Thelema as a religion in the former or later camp?
When reading Lon Milo DuQuette's The Magick of Aleister Crowley, I came across an interesting passage stating that Goetic demons are, in fact, "portions of the human brain." The passage cited The Goetia the Lesser Key of Solomon the King (the Liddell, Mathers, and Crowley version) as its source; while I don't own the book I do happen to be exceedingly crafty (searching for "portions of the human brain" will yield the pages in question).
Suffice to say that this interpretation of Goetia is not one that I have frequently encountered. I'm painfully aware of the fact that I'm plodding through concepts that I have almost no background in and pulling random fragments completely out of their context. Could someone more knowledgeable shed some light on this? For some reason this strikes me as eisegesis; do you think that it was? If not, what grounds would there be to interpret the text as techniques for mental conditioning rather than straight up demon summoning? Or is this another example of initiated occultists throwing out statements not on the grounds of their veracity, but because of the standard "the Oracle tells you what you need to hear" bit?
Do you view the practice and/or acceptance of ceremonial magick as requisite to Thelema? It seems to me that Thelemic ceremonial magick stems more from Crowley than CCXX, but I'm somewhat biased on the subject.
@nashimiron said
"
@YHVH said
"About left-hand-path "thelemites": I think that the Book of the Law is pretty clear about this (personal oppinion):
"I22.
Now, therefore, I am known to ye by my name Nuit, and to him by a secret name which I will give him when at last he knoweth me. Since I am Infinite Space, and the Infinite Stars thereof, do ye also thus. Bind nothing! Let there be no difference made among you between any one thing & any other thing; for thereby there cometh hurt.
"
Isn't this instruction clearly contrary to the objectives of the LHP???"
It's certainly contrary to the situation with Black Brothers but thats not related to left hands or right hands. 
My understanding is that the Black Brothers are those who have turned back at the point of crossing the Abyss, and it makes no difference how you got there, LHP or RHP or you take the high road and I'll take the low road. 
I've seen a lot of debates raging about how you should define the LHP and RHP, most sensible suggestions for those who need such definitions suggest the LHP is all about tantric practices and quaffing down gallons of bodily fluids.
At the end of the day though I think all these definitions are subjective and limiting. If you want to play the guitar properly you need to use both hands!"
LHP/ RHP, as used by most Satanic religions, boils down to something along the following lines:
LHP seeks to empower the ego and leads towards apotheosis.
RHP seeks to break down the ego and leads to Tao/ Samadhi/ ect.
I don't really see how you can "play with both hands" and simultaneously build and break down your ego so as to sever yourself from the universe and become one with it. I don't know what debates you've been looking at, but systems like LaVeyan Satanism are both clearly LHP and clearly devoid of "tantric practices and quaffing down gallons of bodily fluids" - "I am my own God" is enough to fit the definition resoundingly.
The reason black brothers are black brothers, according to Crowley, is that they refuse to let go of their ego - that is, they take the Left Hand Path. Properly crossing the Abyss in Crowley's system means letting go of one's ego, and embracing the Right Hand Path.
As for the actual OP:
First one would have to establish which Satanism we're discussing. Joy of Satan is very different than Church of Satan is very different than Temple of Set is very different than the Order of Nine Angels, and so forth.
Joy of Satan = crazy people. Unless, of course, we actually want to get on the boat with people who preach that the war on Iraq was Bush's attempt to destroy artifacts in Saddam's possession that could disprove Christianity.
Ceremonial magick =/= Thelema. The fact that many Thelemites practice Goetia, as do many followers of JoSM, in no way implies that the two systems are compatible. Technically there may be overlaps, but philosophically they are worlds apart.
I stand by YHVH's point about LHP/ RHP - one of the few common elements amongst Satanic religions is the LHP desire to strengthen the ego.
"Yes, nearly all grades of A.'.A.'. focus on K&C directly or indirectly, and the Adept grades in particular. - Although I still must say that 'joining' A.'.A.'. isn't likely to contribute any more knowledge on the matter since pretty much all of that sort of thing is published. OTOH working the A.'.A.'. system step-by-step is certain to unlock from inside of you what I was talking about earlier. (I'm probably twirling on semantics here.) "
Most of our disagreements seem to be rooted in semantics, not actual beliefs. The A.'.A.'. was probably first in my mind when I wrote the initiatory order comment simply because it is arguably the most famous Thelemic IO.
"FWIW, Temple of Thelema expressly reserves to you absolute freedom of thought, speech, and deed in all matters of belief."
I'll admit that my knowledge of Temple of Thelema is scarce at best (I entered these forums because of a desire to go over ideas with other Thelemites) - perhaps it would fit me. However, constraints of distance still exist, as I will be living quite some distance away from the various temples (I currently have easy access to Aiwass Pronaos, being $12.50 from NYC, but will be leaving for college soon).
"(1) Joining an initiatory Order isn't likely to contribute any more knowledge on this particular item (though there is a great deal to get from working in the presence of genuine adepts)."
I was under the impression that certain grades of the A.'.A.'. focused on K&C.
"(2) That aside, why would you exclude joining an initiatory order?"
The reasons I have for not joining an order are not universal to the concept of initiation - if an order existed that fufilled the criteria that I needed, I would join it immediately. However, as of now I face issues of:*
[:14gpwxmj]Geography: I am yet to find any lodges near where I will be living soon (Boulder, Colorado) and as a college student I lack the time and means to travel freely, easily, and at length.[/
14gpwxmj]
[:14gpwxmj]Practice: The initiatory orders that I have found all have a large focus on occult matters that do not interest me, and I am not particularly keen on devoting time and effort to something that means nothing to me. If I were to join one, most likely I would reach a subject that, while probably pivitol to the order's path, would fail to hold my interest for a number of reasons (disbelief being key amongst them) and I would stagnate as a result of this.[/14gpwxmj]
[:14gpwxmj]Belief: The Thelemic initiatory orders that I have found in my research all have belief structures that are incompatable with my own. [/14gpwxmj]
Wasn't entirely sure which forum to put this in; mysticism seemed to be the best fit. Quite simply put: how does one know when K&C has been achieved? Crowley is on the record as stating:
It is impossible to lay down precise rules by which a man may attain to the knowledge and conversation of His Holy Guardian Angel; for that is the particular secret of each one of us; as secret not to be told or even divined by any other, whatever his grade. It is the Holy of Holies, whereof each man is his own High Priest, and none knoweth the Name of his brother's God, or the Rite that invokes Him.
(Book 4, "One Star in Sight")
But where does the confirmation of this come into play? If it's up to one to figure out how to find his HGA, but there isn't even so much as a consistent answer on what an HGA is, how would one (save by joining an initiatory order) go about obtaining K&C and confirming the results?
Any other opinions on this? Is the study of Qabalah requisite? Occultism in general?
@Jim Eshelman said
"
@Wilder said
"Choice of labels aside, based in Liber L, what was her reasoning for demanding a belief in reincarnation?"
Already answered."
The closest thing to an answer that I can find in your posts:
"I suspect her most concise summary would have been that Liber L.'s doctrine necessitates it to make sense"
As this doesn't really say much of anything, I asked for a more depthful answer. You responded to my Crowley comment, but not the neccessity of believing in reincarnation for Liber L to make sense.
Choice of labels aside, based in Liber L, what was her reasoning for demanding a belief in reincarnation?
Why is it important that Aiwass delivered the message to Crowley? Isn't Liber L the core of Thelema, not how it came to be?
"I suspect her most concise summary would have been that Liber L.'s doctrine necessitates it to make sense, and Crowley's commentary and other writings take it as a baseline."
If I may, could I pry deeper into this, as I am one that your former mentor would label a Thelemic heretic (this has spawned another topic that has been on my mind for some time)? I personally don't take Crowley's words and beliefs to be universaly sacrosanct to Thelema, so I'm more interested in how reincarnation would be neccessary to support Liber L.
What, in your mind, does it take for one to be accurately placed under the category of "Thelemite?" Are their specific beliefs or practices that are requisite? If so, what and why?
"My teacher, Soror Meral, took the position that one can't be a Thelemite without including reincarnation in one's belief system."
Why?