What is the purpose of the Will? (split from BoL 2.22)

Aeon, thanks for explaining.

I find this all interesting, because in my church we always talk about the Spirit of the Law as opposed to the Letter of the Law. As in, we need to find out directly what God wants us to do, recognize that the commandments are more of a basic guidelines.

So Thelema doesn't see anything wrong with Osirian ethics (thou shalt do this, and having a role model)? Crowley just thought of himself as teaching a more efficient ethical principle?

Curtis Penfold said:

I find this all interesting, because in my church we always talk about the Spirit of the Law as opposed to the Letter of the Law. As in, we need to find out directly what God wants us to do, recognize that the commandments are more of a basic guidelines.

Click to expand...

So it should be obvious how, Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law, is the next step.

Curtis Penfold said:

So Thelema doesn't see anything wrong with Osirian ethics (thou shalt do this, and having a role model)? Crowley just thought of himself as teaching a more efficient ethical principle?

Click to expand...

Outdated would be a better description. A few thousand years ago the Osirian ethic (with emphasis on it's most successful form, Christianity) was the new and improved teaching that would help humanity evolve. But today it has run it's course. Instead of furthering human spiritual potential, it is acting more like a road block.

For example think about the way in which attitudes towards gender equality and alternative sexualities are evolving within society. Even though there is still a long way to go on these issues, increasing numbers of people are finding discrimination in these areas unacceptable.
In comparison to the average person in the street the "role model" of Christianity is an intolerant, misogynistic, homophobic, throw-back. What does it say about the so called "God of love" if a mere human being can show more tolerance and acceptance than he can?

But here's the caveat. Is everyone up to speed? Is everyone reading from the same page? No. There's a lot of late bloomers out there. For many people their current stage of spiritual growth means that they are simply not ready for the next step. For them the Osirian ethic still holds meaning and value.
Or as Crowley would say:

this doctrine is for the weaker brethren, for those who are suffering from the illusion of imperfection; it enables them to make their way to the illimitable Light.

Click to expand...

The Book of the Law is also very clear on this point, and as usual doesn't mince it's words.
The slaves shall serve.

Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

Oh man, this oddly sounds like what our Church teaches. I mean, there are some pretty big differences, but I think Grigori's right when he says Mormonism is closer to Thelema than one would think.

As a matter of interest, with the ethics behind Will, does it have more to do with intent? As in, one can break "the rules" if their intention is real love, a concern to make a person better, or whatever?

Curtis Penfold said:

As a matter of interest, with the ethics behind Will, does it have more to do with intent? As in, one can break "the rules" if their intention is real love, a concern to make a person better, or whatever?

Click to expand...

No, cause it's not your job to make someone else better. That would be stinking compassion sneaking back in again And I don't think its quite right to say there are ethics behind Will, there is just Will.

A good (and extreme) example maybe found in Liber Oz.
http://www.hermetic.com/crowley/libers/lib77.html

I'd say its against Thelemic ethics to kill another person, as that is the ultimate interference in their Will. But if they insist on interfering in yours, then hack away. So its not about intent or ethics, its just about Will.

Came across this quote from Crowley's autobiography today which may be helpful Curtis

The Confessions said:

The main ethical principle is that each human being has its own definite object in life. He has every right to fulfil his purpose, and none to do anything else. It is the business of the community to help each of its members to achieve this aim; in consequence all rules should be made, and all questions of policy decided, by the application of this principle to the circumstances.

Click to expand...

I dont think Crowley meant us to throw the old Osirian concepts out altogether, after all one has to go shopping at times (or deal with the government, relatives etc.) It's good to know where others come from. If that isnt the case, why did Crowley construct 3 intitation rituals based on the old Osirian formula?

Ethics

This converse reminded me of a show I saw about a famous atheist. A religous person admonished him, saying without religion we would all be running around stealing from and killing each other. The atheist replied that he had no such desires at all ... and no religion or belief in god, he did good for its own sake ... for reasons, which, to some of us, are painfully obvious. Then raved at him about how religion had REALLY bought an end to theft and murder - hadn't it!

I also think it is important to look at the TENSE in the main tenet of Thelema; Do what wilt SHALL BE the whole of the Law. That's future tense, isnt it?

Perhaps when Do what thou wilt IS the whole of the Law, ethics will sort itself out?

In the meantime what can I do but contemplate Liber Librae or if you like, the GD version - ( development of the soul, or something like that, I think it's called).

ravenest said:

I also think it is important to look at the TENSE in the main tenet of Thelema; Do what wilt SHALL BE the whole of the Law. That's future tense, isnt it?

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. The word "shall" can imply obligation or the force of law.

The Oxford English Dictionary:

"5. In commands or instructions. a. (a) In the second person, equivalent to an imperative."

Click to expand...

Ummm .... yeah but ... errrm ... I'll PM ya.

Curtis Penfold said:

It's finding that phallus

But there are things you have to forsake, right? I mean, in a way, you have to forsake or at the very least not succumb to your ego. There are a lot of things that work contrary to your True Will.

---------------
By the way, we've discussed my Mormon faith before, and I feel I should add that Joseph Smith did teach that we were all gods. In the Pearl of Great Price (a kind of rewrite of Genesis), the wording for God is Gods.

See, we believe in a pre-existence, that we all lived with God before hand, and that we helped Jehovah and Elohim create the world. In essence, we were Gods.

We don't remember that, but we're trying to. In reality, everything we're learning now we've known before.

We're supposed to follow the Holy Spirit so we can know what God wants of us. Some deep Mormon philosophers (like myself...maybe just myself) would say that, by following the Holy Spirit, we are becoming God.

See: Jesus, Heavenly Father, the Holy Spirit, they're all God! They're all one and the same. In the Pearl of Great Price, God says: This is my work and my glory--to bring to pass the immortality and eternal life of man.

So if our work and our glory becomes the same as God's, we become God. We become one as the Father and Son is one, as two married people are one.

Anyway, I think Thelema and Mormonism are talking about the same thing and just using different imagery.

Comments?

Click to expand...

I'm not a Thelemite, and was 'raised' a Mormon (tiny pun, baptism) and have found my way in esoteric subjects. It is something to think about, that last sentence in your post. It does seem to be all in how you "see" it.
Joseph Smith seems to have been something of a diviner. He used a "seer" or "shew-stone" to locate treasure and possibly to translate the Book of Mormon; very similar to how Dee received the Enochian language.
I don't know what my True Will is, but I trust that the divine spark in me is guiding me on the Path.