Tarot of Ceremonial Magic Study Group - The Magus

Zephyros

The Law isn't for me. Uncle Al must've overlooked me. :D

So... you don't believe in your own freedom and that of others to pursue their life paths?
 

Abrac

I believe in freedom, just not Crowley's brand of so-called freedom. ;)
 

Zephyros

I believe in freedom, just not Crowley's brand of so-called freedom. ;)

Ah, but that's why the Law of Liberty is so absurdly simple, because there is no one definition for what either freedom or Will constitute. That's the whole point, after all, that there is no "brand" of anything. You can be a devout Catholic and still fulfill your Will. You can be a dictator and still be the best Thelemite ever.

Not that I'm trying to be a missionary here, just explaining that Thelema does not advocate emulating Crowley himself.

Aleister Crowley said:
Here then let me make open confession, and say thus: though I pledged myself almost in boyhood to the Great Work, though to my aid came the most puissant forces in the whole Universe to hold me to it, though habit itself now constraineth me in the right direction, yet I have not fulfilled my Will: I turn aside daily from the appointed task. I waver. I falter. I lag.

Let this then be of great comfort to you all, that if I be so imperfect–and for very shame I have not emphasized that imperfection–if I, the chosen one, still fail, then how easy for yourselves to surpass me! Or, should you only equal me, then even so how great attainment should be yours!

Be of good cheer, therefore, since both my failure and my success are arguments of courage for yourselves.
 

Abrac

I agree Thelema promotes the law of freedom, but I don't really buy the premise that anyone who exercises their free will is practicing Thelema, even if unknowingly. [Removed reference. Looked it up and discovered my memory had played tricks on me.] Think about it, if Thelema is simply a codification of of something that people have been doing since the beginning of time and will continue doing forever, it doesn't really usher in anything new at all, except for those believe it does.

Not knocking what anyone else thinks or believes, that's just my opinion.

Edit to add: Also, it doesn't seem logical to me that a dictator could be a "good Thelemite" if that person deprives others the freedom to "pursue their life paths."
 

smw

Again, great post.

Ok one might be a star, but an invisible, dying or even dead one, which is not much use. By studying, meditating and channeling the deities and uniting with them, one must become a bright star shining

Glad you found it helpful. I would like to get it too.


I'm not really sure what you mean here though?
 

foolMoon

Glad you found it helpful. I would like to get it too.


I'm not really sure what you mean here though?


Every men and women is a star, but the star has potential to become a bright one or dying and dead one depending on their spritual fullfillment in life. I am using the astronomical stars in this simile rather than star in other sense. Not sure if they are be relevant, but Astronomy used to be one of my hobbies, and I can relate the Crowley's star and Astronomical stars very well.

As there are billions and billions of stars, there are different people in their sprituality. Crowley wanted us to be brighter star shining above the sky, not the dying ones or dead ones. If one is not spritual or materialist, then he is a dying or dead star forgotten and invisible.

One becomes a brighter star, when one follows the law of Thelema. Do what thou wilt shall be the law.

Again, it is just my understanding, could be wrong. But it makes sense to me at the moment. :)
 

foolMoon

I believe in freedom, just not Crowley's brand of so-called freedom. ;)

Not sure if any human in history has been ever free in strict sense. Of course all humans pursue freedom. But they are under severe ristrictions and limitation and prohibitions which are inborn in biological structure, social codes, duties and morality imposed by nature and the society they live in.

They could say they are free but in very limited sense. I am not sure if Thelemic law is all about living as your freedom as such. If it were the case, I feel it is not really saying much.

Because everyone is trying to pursue their freedom anyway even in the limited manner. Where they find a slightest chance, they will do it anyway, be it Thelemic, Kennedian, Freudian or the 60s hippy freedom. They don't need Thelema to tell them they must live by their freedom.

For one example, every men and women eventually all must get old against their will, and one day sometime in their lives die against their will. So are they truly free? I wouldn't think so.

Thelemic law is, to me it is a religion, the deities, what they are, and do.
 

ravenest

My understanding of Crowley is not denial, but rather potential for the enlightenment of every souls and minds.

Surely Crowley must have said it allegorically, and you must then think about some of the qualities and nature of stars.

As I said previously, some stars are brighter, closer, visible and more influencial to us than others. Some are not, and not even known to us. Some are being born now, and some are dying, and dead.

Every men and women is a star, but stars are all different.

Well, of course, I (or Crowley) never for a moment said 'all people are the same' .

Read what he says about it ..... each with a unique path and orbit ... etc .

Also individual stars have qualities , he would have known about that . Its called astrology.

Your understanding sounds like saying, every men and women is a humanity or whatever, keep emphasising that every living being on earth be it initiates or not, whoever they are excluding no one.

Every man and every woman is a humanity ? :bugeyed: ... heavens no! I hope my English never gets THAT bad !

Then the rest degrades to a level I cant really decipher .

Sure they are. but it doesn't really tell anything meaningful or significant for anything. People would think, eh? So what?

No ... you lost me there, I am not sure what you are saying at all now.

Maybe the two tenses of 'star' and 'will' have been confused ?

Every man and every woman IS a star

Do what thou wilt SHALL BE the whole of the Law.
 

ravenest

I agree Thelema promotes the law of freedom, but I don't really buy the premise that anyone who exercises their free will is practicing Thelema, even if unknowingly. [Removed reference. Looked it up and discovered my memory had played tricks on me.] Think about it, if Thelema is simply a codification of of something that people have been doing since the beginning of time and will continue doing forever, it doesn't really usher in anything new at all, except for those believe it does.

Not knocking what anyone else thinks or believes, that's just my opinion.

Edit to add: Also, it doesn't seem logical to me that a dictator could be a "good Thelemite" if that person deprives others the freedom to "pursue their life paths."

See, here is the problem YET AGAIN for the upteenth time, and I KNOW this has been pointed out to you before;

It isn't anyone who exercises their free will at all !

You misinterpret, add or change what was written, then go on to criticise your own misconceptions about it !

Of course 2 dictators may be in conflict, or a ruler in conflict with his people .... have you not read what AC himself wrote about this ? It is an essential part of understanding the whole thing.

As he put it ... what f 2 boys want the same orange ?
 

Always Wondering

Yes, I get your point of the Book of Law and the underlying principle that every man and every woman is a star implying the deities are present in all of us humanities. However, I still feel that the deities only emanates to those who are the initiates, not to everyone, tom dick and harry on the street.

So every man and woman is a star, if and only if, they are the initiates or at least aware of the Thelemic teachings?

But that is not what Crowley says, or least writes.

The New and Old Commentaries to Liber AL vel Legis
http://hermetic.com/legis/new-comment/

This thesis is fully treated in "The Book of Wisdom or Folly". Its main statement is that each human being is an Element of the Cosmos, self-determined and supreme, co-equal with all other Gods.

Your statement also brings to mind a book review Eshelman wrote for a book called Let Your Life Speak. The author was not at all Thelemic. A wonderful little book, by the way. https://www.amazon.com/Let-Your-Lif...eNumber=1&filterByKeyword=holy+guardian+angel

I wish I had written this book. Since I didn't, I'm thrilled that Parker J. Palmer did. It encompasses every instruction I have ever given a member of our Order on the pathway to meet, embrace, and resolve the mystery of True Will; and in his patient, considered authorship, he does it vastly better than I ever have.

This is a personal, human, moving, insightful, practical work on the discovery of True Will, and living life in conformity with it. While it enumerates principles, most of the book is autobiographical - the author notes that while everyone's journey is unique, instructive insights are commonly found in, rather than veiled by, the details of someone else's trip. Palmer is a Quaker, and a noted education writer. He is also an Adept as sure as any A.'.A.'. 5=6 (though he would likely never own the title), who understands, from experience, what we call the Holy Guardian Angel, even though he calls it something else.

A feeling for this book can, perhaps, be gotten from a series of brief quotations: "Before you tell your life what you intend to do with it, listen for what it intends to do with you. Before you tell your life what truths and values you have decided to live up to, let your life tell you what truths you embody, what values you represent." "True self, when violated, will always resist us, sometimes at great cost, holding our lives in check until we honor its truth." "...self-care is never a selfish act - it is simply good stewardship of the only gift I have, the gift I was put on earth to offer to others." "The attempt to live by the reality of our own nature, which means our limits as well as our potentials, is a profoundly moral regimen." "One dwells with God by being faithful to one's nature. One crosses God by trying to be something one is not. Reality - including one's own - is divine, to be not defied but honored."

He writes of finding "the place where our deep gladness meets the world's deep need." Where Liber Legis tells us that, "There is division hither homeward," Palmer speaks to the process of finding "the courage to live divided [against ourselves] no more."

One chapter explores how limitation and ordeal conspire to discover us to ourselves. He understands projections and how to approach them. He also understands that "the way to God is down" - down into the depths of ourselves - and is found only in embracing all aspects of what is found, without judgment. He explores the mystery of depression and - though speaking of a level way, way below "the Dark Night of the Soul" - insightfully addresses its understanding and resolution by means indistinguishable from those that apply to the sojourning of that most profound abyss. His moral thrust is reflected in a quote from John Middleton Murry: "For a good man to realize that it is better to be whole than to be good is to enter on a strait and narrow path compared to which his previous rectitude was flowery license."

My worst criticism of this hardbound little book is that it could benefit from a better binding, but that is the only weakness in its manufacture. Its contents can transform a life. I give it the highest of recommendations.

93,
AW