What else?!

[Aeon418]

Here's something Crowley wrote about the True Will:

I think some of what Crowley wrote in that extract you quoted might have been answered by my previous post. But a bit of context might be helpful too.

At the time Crowley wrote that he was considering how to deal with an increasingly erratic Frater Achad. Some people consider Achad brilliant, and in some respects I agree. But Achad rushed ahead with his work and tried to run before he could walk. He skipped masses of preparatory work and took a running dive into the deep end of the pool. For a time Crowley approved of Achad's daring attitude, but then Achad started pouring forth revelation after revelation and was in danger of becomming completely unhinged.

A famous example is when Achad walked around the streets of Vancouver in a rain coat flashing people. He thought he was dispelling the veils of illusion. The cops weren't convinced.

 

[BodhiSeed]

Thank you MDR and all those who have contributed to this thread, especially Aeon418 - it's the first time I've ever understood the "Do what thou wilt" principle. My knowledge of Thoth and AC is miniscule, so I am really soaking up this information!

 

[Aeon418]

I don't especially like the terms "higher self" or "divine self." Sounds too dualistic, like New Age jargon. Capitalization? O.K., "thou"="you" and "Thou"="You." Heck, I'm holy. Capitalize me if you wish.

I can understand your dislike of these terms, but I don't really object to them either because it's all a matter of perception. And perception changes and widens as you progress and grow.

The terms "higher self" and "divine self" are somewhat misleading because in reality there is only one Self. The trouble is that this is not how it is perceived when your perception begins to open up to it. This "other" and greater aspect of the one Self is so very, very different from your ordinary perception of self that, to all intents and purposes, it is another being. A Holy Guardian Angel.

 

[gregory]

I'm not wild about divine, as it implies something I don't appreciate. But Thou as something Other I find very helpful. OK - that is a "new" use for the word, but still - valid.

 

[Richard]

......The terms "higher self" and "divine self" are somewhat misleading because in reality there is only one Self. The trouble is that this is not how it is perceived when your perception begins to open up to it. This "other" and greater aspect of the one Self is so very, very different from your ordinary perception of self that, to all intents and purposes, it is another being. A Holy Guardian Angel.

Thanks for elucidating. I can accept that.

 

[Richard]

I'm not wild about divine, as it implies something I don't appreciate. But Thou as something Other I find very helpful. OK - that is a "new" use for the word, but still - valid.

I like the term "Other." It has the connotation of something numinous, a mysterium tremendum, which is certainly appropriate with reference to the HGA.

 

[gregory]

I like the term "Other." It has the connotation of something numinous, a mysterium tremendum, which is certainly appropriate with reference to the HGA.

Exactly ! We (seriously) need such a word. and Thou does nicely as its vocative pronoun !

Told you I like words !

 

[Richard]

.......A famous example is when Achad walked around the streets of Vancouver in a rain coat flashing people. He thought he was dispelling the veils of illusion. The cops weren't convinced.

OMG! I can't stop laughing!

 

[Abrac]

I have a couple of things to say. Not to start a flame war but to simply present another point of view. The idea of, do what thou wilt not what you want, has me thinking.

In his new comment on AL 1:40 in the Old and New Commentaries, Crowley said, "From these considerations it should be clear that 'Do what thou wilt' does not mean 'Do what you like.' It is the apotheosis (highest form, Abrac) of Freedom; but it is also the strictest possible bond."

Crowley's thoughts on this closely parallel Christian doctrine. All Crowley has done is substitute the person's "higher self," for God. Instead of "thy will be done," it's "thou will be done." It makes me wonder why Thelemites are so quick to criticize Christianity as "restrictive" when their doctrine so closely mirrors it.

For example, compare these Bible verses with what Crowley said:

Galatians 5:13 -- As for you, my friends, you were called to be free. But do not let this freedom become an excuse for letting your physical desires control you. Instead, let love make you serve one another.

1Peter 2:16 -- Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God."

Crowley -- "It is the apotheosis (highest form, Abrac) of Freedom; but it is also the strictest possible bond."

And then this one:

Jas 1:25 -- "But the one who looks into the perfect law, the law of liberty, and perseveres, being no hearer who forgets, but a doer who acts, he will be blessed in his doing." (emphasis mine)

There's really no justification for the idea that Christianity is restrictive any more than Thelema is restrictive, they only have different conceptions of deity. There may be Christian teachers who have come along over the years and made it restrictive with their dogma, but restriction per se isn't taught in the New Testament.

Crowley's comment "but it is also the strictest possible bond." is a bit of an enigma until you look at it in comparison with Christianity. Thelema teaches that the higher self, or holy guardian angel, is God for that person and therefore the person and God are one. Christianity teaches the same thing only in a somewhat different direction. It teaches that when a person is born again, the old self dies and a new self is born that's in the likeness of Christ, and God & Christ are one (John 10:30 -- I and my Father are one).

Some people have referred to Thelema as "Crowleyanity," and I'm starting to believe this isn't far from the mark at all.

 

[Always Wondering]

There may be Christian teachers who have come along over the years and made it restrictive with their dogma, but restriction per se isn't taught in the New Testament.

1st Corithians 11:3
But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.


As a woman, I find this very restrictive.


AW