Book of Law Study Group 1.28

Aeon418

I've never seen a lion worrying about morality before it kills a baby antelope. Or overcome with remorse as it eats it. Have you? ;)
 

Grigori

Aeon418 said:
I've never seen a lion worrying about morality before it kills a baby antelope. Or overcome with remorse as it eats it. Have you? ;)

Surely you're not saying its our developed conception of sin that raises us above the animals Aeon? :p

Its our ability for conscious awareness of the will of divinity that raises us up above the other animals, but its also our conscious awareness of the wants of the ego-self that hold us back. If I'm understanding correctly, your saying that an animal may express divinity (or potentially evolve to such a point) but without consciousness of what it is they're expressing... Is that right?

Is it that the Ego, consciously aware of and directed by divinity, is what we're aiming for? (That doesn't sound righ even as I type it.) Which is different to an animal being unconsciously or perhaps instintively aware of the directions or presence of divinity.

I don't know what I'm trying to say any more and am all in a flap, but would love to hear more thoughts on this from you and others. My comfortable definitions just went out the window and I'm lost at sea :eek:
 

ravenest

Aeon418 said:
A.C. never said he misheard that line.
No he didnt, nor did I, I said it is hard to imagine it was a mishearing - so perhaps we can rule out that possibility, but why is the line written then crossed out and re-written totally differently, considering the verse was supposed to be audibly dictated.

That's what I was getting at.
 

ravenest

I dont know how we could ever tell if an animal is concious of divinity (especially seeings as that concept may be our own creation ;) )

From an Anthropological perspective what makes humans different from OTHER animals is two things;

1) The construction of a tool that a) may not have a pupose or use, i.e. a ritual object and/or b)is constructed with future percieved usages and various applications that might occur in the future, ie. not designed for the one purpose immediatly at hand. And
2) Humans special relationship to the death process and their expression of this in ritual, burial, and preservation.

But both of these COULD be seen as the CREATIVE expression of 'devine' will.
 

Grigori

Thanks Ravenest

ravenest said:
But both of these COULD be seen as the CREATIVE expression of 'devine' will.

Or they could be seen as expressions of an unhappy ego. The desire for possessions and the fear of discontinuity of self. So why try to bypass the ego and contact divinity, if divinity wants the same things as the ego? What's the difference?

(I'm really not trying to be facetious here, just trying to find clarity in my confusion)
 

Aeon418

similia said:
Surely you're not saying its our developed conception of sin that raises us above the animals Aeon? :p
Of course not. ;) But it is human nature for us to reflect on our actions.
similia said:
Its our ability for conscious awareness of the will of divinity that raises us up above the other animals, but its also our conscious awareness of the wants of the ego-self that hold us back. If I'm understanding correctly, your saying that an animal may express divinity (or potentially evolve to such a point) but without consciousness of what it is they're expressing... Is that right?
Animals, by their very nature, are doing their True Will. A lion that behaves like a lion is expressing the divine will in it's own particular way.
The same applies to your dog. Have you ever seen it try to be anything other than a dog? Has it ever had an identity crisis and tried to meow like a cat? It just instinctively does it's Will without question or reflection and acts in a dog-like way.

But if you want something a bit more complicated, creative, and self-aware you need to look at human beings. Our egos make possible the expression of an infinite variety of wills. But the ego is a real double-edged sword. (We're back to the Fall here.) The very same sense of self-awareness that makes the ego into an amazingly versatile tool for exploration and experience gathering is also the same thing that controls it's actions. The ego will go to extreme lengths to protect itself and thus limits it's possibilities for action and experience. And as a natural consequence up pops the whole theme of "suffering". That's where the need for the Great Work comes in. Fate is then transformed into True Will. You can either be dragged through life, with your ego kicking and screaming all the way. Or you can be an active participant in it's unfoldment. Fate or True Will.
Again "Do that thou wilt...", the most sublimely austere ethical precept ever uttered, despite its apparent licence, is seen on analysis to be indeed "...the whole of the Law.", the sole and sufficient warrant for human action, the self-evident Code of Righteousness, the identification of Fate with Freewill, and the end of the Civil War in Man's nature by appointing the Canon of Truth, the conformity of things with themselves, to determine his every act. "Do what thou wilt..." is to bid Stars to shine, Vines to bear grapes, Water to seek its level; man is the only being in Nature that has striven to set himself at odds with himself.
Is it that the Ego, consciously aware of and directed by divinity, is what we're aiming for? (That doesn't sound righ even as I type it.) Which is different to an animal being unconsciously or perhaps instintively aware of the directions or presence of divinity.
You see, you had the answer all along. :D
 

Aeon418

ravenest said:
but why is the line written then crossed out and re-written totally differently, considering the verse was supposed to be audibly dictated.

That's what I was getting at.
Haven't I already answered this?
 

Always Wondering

Simiilia said:
I don't know what I'm trying to say any more and am all in a flap, but would love to hear more thoughts on this from you and others. My comfortable definitions just went out the window and I'm lost at sea.

Sure plants and animals have no egos. That's why I enjoy them so much. :laugh: They have limited intelligence is what I meant. And to me that makes them intresting and effective.

I understand that my animals don't love me, but I love them and I think that is what is important. They bring me joy and comfort because that is what I seek from them. Working, rescue and guide animals bring these things to people who seek this. Unfortunately some people misuse them. If we own or attempt to control one we have ALL of the responsibility. They follow their instincts with no discernment, whether to save a toddler from a pool, or to maul it.
I look at them as gifts from Nuit and as thus some part of Her. It is my belief that they are here to help us understand ourselves and our will if we choose to have a relationship with them. I think relationship is a key word here. Perhaps they are one of those tools Ravenest mentioned.

Just my two cents. Hope you can get something out of them, Similia. :laugh:

AW
 

Grigori

Aeon418 said:
Or you can be an active participant in it's unfoldment. Fate or True Will.

Thanks Aeon, that was very helpful. I think I have been looking at the idea of Ego in a way that is one sided. As if the goal of the great work is the bypassing of the Ego, rather than the harnessing of it to the guidance of divinity.

When thinking about "getting beyond" ego, I've been remembering Crowley's description of himself in "Confessions" when he was initiated into Binah. He describes the removal of his human connections, disinterest in the things that had previously defined his sense of self; family, possesions, career, etc.. I guess I've been thinking of such a state as a stage along the way of reaching the next level of Chokmah and then on onwards, as if you are then stuck in Binah until you reach something higher. Where it would be better to thing of it as an initiation into something different, that is then incorporated back into the whole. So no need to throw the Ego out altogether, just get it to do what you want rather than what it wants.

Always Wondering said:
Hope you can get something out of them, Similia.

Thanks AW, I always do get something out of your posts :) Its been a confusing, but useful exersize for me to compare conceptions of an animal's will, with that of a human. I still maintain that there are many animals far smarter than us, but can see our ego's as a potential gift, as well as a burden, and a point of difference. Which is more balanced I guess :)
 

Yygdrasilian

∴ Prana

Aiwaz said:
28. None, breathed the light, faint & faery, of the stars, and two.
Of one alone none can be said lest there be two, as relation to a point makes its description possible.
So, the ”None” referred to may be Kether - imagined as a Source of Light breathing out ‘spiritual air’: Fool (0=1) the pathway to Chockmah (2).

“None” may also be the single point at the tip of the Tetractys, “and two” the pair (Dyad) directly below - suggesting this None and Two describes the genesis of our 1st supernal triad; as the Force engendered by Chockmah is embraced in the Form of Binah.

In other words- Kether=0 and Chockmah+Binah = 2

Does the Source of Light, then, breathe in philosophic mercury: Magus (the pathway joining Kether-Binah) from the world of Form, thereby returning being into nothingness (1=0)?

“...faint & faery, of the stars...”
The sudden loss of the conscious knowledge (faint) of one’s true essence attends this issuing forth from the Source of being; yet, still being of the spirit realms (faery), every man and woman is “of the stars”, fallen from the heavens - a spirit seeded in Earth, one day to return.