High school teacher...
 
Notifications
Clear all

High school teacher's questions about Crowley

Page 1 / 2

 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

Howdy,

I work at a state funded school. Amusingly I got to teach religion this year.
πŸ™‚ 😈

And in the book we are using there are a couple of pages on satanism, two of them devoted to Crowley.

It claims that Crowley during a dream 1896 got the message that he could rule the world with magic.

from the secret chiefs he later got appointed as world teacher.

One secret chief - Aiwass - dictated the book of the law 1904 in egypt. According to this law there is no law beyond do what you will. Will is a cosmic force which is nearly magical.

During large parts of his life Crowley experimented with expanding his consciousness and changing the sex drive with drugs.

The view on weak is very clear in the book of the law:
"We have nothing with the outcasts and those who are inferior. Let them die in their misery. They have no feelings. Compassion is the plight of kings: trample the condemned and weak - this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world."

Crowleys supporters use the internet to recruit new followers. The message supplied is not so much about satan as about recreating oneself with magic. They do not wish to call themselves satanists, but prefer the term magicians. Follow your own way and use your free will. With will you will go far is the message.

----

I find this is pretty cool for a schoolbook. I would love comments about how accurate YOU find what I have paraphrased above. ESPECIALLY about the view of weak people as described by the book of the law - is this how YOU view weak people?

(Of course similar quotes from the bible are NOT used in the book - instead the christian religion is just about love.)

----

Even if I have some ideas about this myself as a result of having studied crowleys books myself, as a teacher I would REALLY APPRECIATE your input.

Thnaks

Luxluxlux


Quote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

93

"noxlux" wrote:
I would love comments about how accurate YOU find what I have paraphrased above. ESPECIALLY about the view of weak people as described by the book of the law - is this how YOU view weak people?

In most instances, speaking for myself, I find this inspirational quote from aL is referring to the admonishment of the weak parts of oneself.

93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"noxlux" wrote:
I would love comments about how accurate YOU find what I have paraphrased above. ESPECIALLY about the view of weak people as described by the book of the law

93,

Well, for one thing the quotation from The Book of the Law is incorrect...

Love=Law

- Shangren


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I agree with Mal on this point. That the section dealing with the weak, etc; is meant as as a pointer
to a weeding out of undesirable elements of The Psyche.
Liber Al is, as it states, written with four levels of meaning.


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 461
 
"noxlux" wrote:
Howdy,

I work at a state funded school. Amusingly I got to teach religion this year.
πŸ™‚ 😈

And in the book we are using there are a couple of pages on satanism, two of them devoted to Crowley.

Cool.

It claims that Crowley during a dream 1896 got the message that he could rule the world with magic.

Im not really aware of this but it could be true - its more likely that Crowley experienced the 'Trance of Sorrow' (disillusionment with all possible earthly accomplishments) which led him to seek out Secret Knowledge and secret socities.

from the secret chiefs he later got appointed as world teacher.

He does claim this essentially - he claims to be both the World Teacher and the Logos itself.

One secret chief - Aiwass - dictated the book of the law 1904 in egypt. According to this law there is no law beyond do what you will. Will is a cosmic force which is nearly magical.

Yes, although its "There is no law beyond Do what thou wilt." 'Will' might be called a 'cosmic force' although it has the implication of the individual's path/motion. Why one would call it 'nearly magical' Im not sure - it really depends on your definition of 'magical.' Some identify it with the law of the universe itself, the life-force, etc. which are entirely naturalistic ideas.

During large parts of his life Crowley experimented with expanding his consciousness and changing the sex drive with drugs.

True.

The view on weak is very clear in the book of the law:
"We have nothing with the outcasts and those who are inferior. Let them die in their misery. They have no feelings. Compassion is the plight of kings: trample the condemned and weak - this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world."

This is a misquotation from Liber AL II:21 which is: "21. We have nothing with the outcast and the unfit: let them die in their misery. For they feel not. Compassion is the vice of kings: stamp down the wretched & the weak: this is the law of the strong: this is our law and the joy of the world. Think not, o king, upon that lie: That Thou Must Die: verily thou shalt not die, but live. Now let it be understood: If the body of the King dissolve, he shall remain in pure ecstasy for ever. Nuit! Hadit! Ra-Hoor-Khuit! The Sun, Strength & Sight, Light; these are for the servants of the Star & the Snake."

Many people will and ahve said that this applies to stamping down the internal weak parts of one's own psyche. This is certainly true but I honestly do not think this is the end of it. (Draconuit: If there are 4 interpretations of every line, what about the other 3 interpretations? πŸ˜› ) The real question comes down to this: THERE IS NO LAW BEYOND DO WHAT THOU WILT. Most people would claim that stamping down people they see as weak is not part of their Will - that being said, its not outlawed in any sense. Thelema is unique in that it challenges many of our preconceptions, especially about morality.

Crowleys supporters use the internet to recruit new followers. The message supplied is not so much about satan as about recreating oneself with magic. They do not wish to call themselves satanists, but prefer the term magicians. Follow your own way and use your free will. With will you will go far is the message.

Crowley's supporters dont really recruit with the internet, its usually done in person, at least with the OTO. They call themselves 'Thelemites' which is a term from Liber AL itself. 'Following your own way' is essentially the message - whether hte Will is free or not is another question πŸ˜›

I find this is pretty cool for a schoolbook. I would love comments about how accurate YOU find what I have paraphrased above. ESPECIALLY about the view of weak people as described by the book of the law - is this how YOU view weak people?

It matters how you define weak really. Physically weak people arent really a strain on me - people like Steven Hawking, Helen Keller, and Beethoven are/were all physically disabled in some way yet all assets to civilization. Intellectual weakness is a real problem - the ability to take criticism without getting angry is a sign of intellectual strength, for example.

(Of course similar quotes from the bible are NOT used in the book - instead the christian religion is just about love.)

Thats what they keep telling me...

IAO131


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 856
 
"noxlux" wrote:
Howdy,

I find this is pretty cool for a schoolbook. I would love comments about how accurate YOU find what I have paraphrased above. ESPECIALLY about the view of weak people as described by the book of the law - is this how YOU view weak people?

(Of course similar quotes from the bible are NOT used in the book - instead the christian religion is just about love.)

----

Even if I have some ideas about this myself as a result of having studied crowleys books myself, as a teacher I would REALLY APPRECIATE your input.

Thnaks

Luxluxlux

Howdy!

(Where are you at that *you* say "howdy?")

Pretty cool for a school book, yes-- it certainly wouldn't get selected in the State of Texas.

Well, I'm suprised that we got any copy at all, but as it's been pointed out, there's plenty wrong with the copy we got. The "quotes" are mere paraphrases, and are wrong. Thelema is misrepresented as a philosophy of pure licenciousness, and not of disciplined indulgence. It's about the parameters-- my right to do my Will ends where your property and your safety begins. I have no right to endanger your safety, or to destroy or abscond with that which is yours as the the result of the the fruits of your labors or other means (such as inheritance, or gifting, or sales).

However, I'll disagree with the previous apologists who try to imply that the verse from Chapter II, verse 21 is somehow about weeding out undesirable parts of one's own psyche. I take it pretty much at face value, and refuse to help those who will not help themselves, or are incapable of taking control of their own lives-- tough love, the therapists call it. I won't have a hand in enabling their dysfunction, addiction, or self-induced slavery.

Certainly Stephen Hawkins and Helen Keller *took* control of their own lives, and hardly fall into this category. The courage and fortitude it takes for any person with a handicap to function however minimally in this society is to be admired and encouraged. Theirs is an uphill battle.

But I do agree with IAO131 when he says "Thelema is unique in that it challenges many of our preconceptions, especially about morality." I am personally still trying to get a grip on the concept that "exposure of innocence is a lie," for example.

YMMV, as they say.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Walterfive" wrote:
However, I'll disagree with the previous apologists who try to imply that the verse from Chapter II, verse 21 is somehow about weeding out undesirable parts of one's own psyche. I take it pretty much at face value, and refuse to help those who will not help themselves, or are incapable of taking control of their own lives-- tough love, the therapists call it. I won't have a hand in enabling their dysfunction, addiction, or self-induced slavery.

Walterfive is quite correct, as I see it. Freedom is only one half the Thelemic equation, the other half being independence. Those that will not accept independence, be it from gods or governments or what-have-you, have voluntarily enslaved themselves.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

If Aiwass by II21 wanted to tell us to trample on the weaker part of ourself he sure picked a overcomplicated and confusing way of saying it! Also I would never trample on a part of myself, be it labelled strong or weak. Seriously with this attitude to what you consider weaker part of yourself you should be weary of not just shutting your eyes to them and thinking you are rid of them. I personally read the paragraph as a comment and critique on buddhism, which Crowley was devoted to when he recieved the book. Enlightenment and Work breeds (atleast in my experience, and according to the buddhists) enourmous amounts of compassion, and just therefore it is the vice of kings (the enligtened)and not everyman. It's a warning, taken to far compassion becomes a hinderance to the will, the buddhisattvas are fools who give up their enlightenment in their compassion of the world. No one is really suffering nevertheless. Personally I've thankfully remembered the paragraph on several occasions in my life where my compassion for somone otherwise would have lead me astray.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I was attempting to be politically correct.
My physical brother went to Oxford, and works in Londons golden mile: He's bought a Β£4 million =
$8 million, and pays 44 per cent tax. I retired aged 36, and get whatever I need for my work.
I got given a crimson car with space for my dogs and a '93' numberplate recently.
Young boys do literally dance for me in the marketplace, where I gather my incense and copious morphine prescription.
Most incarnate forms seem to have pig-meat for brains, Angels peering through them as telescopes.
The local Voodouns are those most in attunement with me-Thelema.
The slaves serve well, in this world and others, to be honest. One does rather enjoy the English
politically correct clowns mask, however. It serves me well.
The four levels of meaning, IAO131; to preach my dogmatic viewpoint, silver, gold, dew, sparks:
seem to relate to the four worlds.
Thats all you're getting.
888


ReplyQuote
ianrons
(@ianrons)
Member
Joined: 17 years ago
Posts: 1126
 

noxlux,

I find it rather disturbing that you think it "pretty cool" to characterise Crowley as a Satanist, which of course he wasn't; especially if you work with children and are yourself a follower of Crowley.

Can you please give the title and author of this book so we can judge for ourselves, rather than reply to your paraphrasing?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

OOPS! Terribly sorry; poor phrasing.
I meant: My brothers Β£4million house; that he and other materialists pay my, really rather decent
pension, that I spend all all of my time studying and practising Higher Magick, in a jolly decent,
to my mind, section of London; Such is as is.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

That confused matters:- NOXLUX is not referring to Draconuits 2 parter.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Neither is ianrons!


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

The Priest comments 'Those who discuss the contents of this Book are to be shunned by all, as centers of pestilence.
All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself."

A servant obeys....

I spoke hastily with my earlier post on this thread. I should have been more thorough.

"IAO131" wrote:
stamping down people they see as weak is not part of their Will - that being said, its not outlawed in any sense

Are you sure about that? A person who sees an adversary as weak implies they are superior.

Every man and every woman is a star.

By seeing an adversary as weak, not only do you disrespect their abilities and underestimate them, you set yourself up to become their prey.

"Walterfive" wrote:
refuse to help those who will not help themselves, or are incapable of taking control of their own lives

Isn't what you are saying here accomplished by admonishing those parts of yourself that would incite you to help those you suggest?

"Boris" wrote:
Also I would never trample on a part of myself, be it labelled strong or weak.

then you say...

"Boris" wrote:
Personally I've thankfully remembered the paragraph on several occasions in my life where my compassion for somone otherwise would have lead me astray.

Boris, aren't you saying here, you "trampled on a part of" yourself? Namely your compassion.

Also Boris, if you were specifically referring to my post in your reply, I suggest, in a friendly way, you acquire yourself a dictionary. Admonishment is not trampling.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"mal" wrote:
Boris, aren't you saying here, you "trampled on a part of" yourself? Namely your compassion.

I wouldn't say so no, but you are welcome to do so yourself. Nor would I consider my compassion a week or wretched part of myself. The phrase in the book is "stamp down the wretched & the weak".


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

My Suggestions, to Noxlux,
I think you may enjoy, taking a read through the book, "The Law Is For All".
The questions you ask, (or have been asked) should be cleared up from Crowley himself, in that book, (which is a commentary on Liber AL).
Also, I may refer you to Liber 2 which can be found as a .pdf file, many places on the interenet these days. It deals with some concerns which had made their way back to Crowley, upon the meaning of, Will.
I hope this will help you with the class on religion and the presentation and discussions, of the class. having not read the textbook myself, it seems that the focus is somewhat off from acomplishing the Great Work. Also I note that the HGA matter, is missing from the paraphrase you present. I would think that any reliable asessment on Thelema would certainly include that material.
Many false impressions and outright fabrications are floating around, 'out there" about what Thelema is and is not. I have seen all sorts of this material originating from many fundamental sources. Most of this amounts to unresearched statements which are passed around from one so called source to another. These vague and unknown sources are a huge problem. I may note that christian writings are not the only ones doing this, I have seen this same method coming from fundamantal muslims too.
The selections dealing with the weak, are the same way that nature operates, or possibly what may be called the weeding of the gene pool. To preserve the unfit one is actually allowing (or encouraging) the weker genes to remain and multiply. This in the end will breed in poor health and all sorts of other less than desireable traits into the human race. The result is more suffering, weak and unfit people. I think this is the situation which is being warned against. As a man of science, I cannot find a reliable argument against this. Of course I do not advocate killing people, but there is a merit in the concept.
I congratulate you in your presentation of various religions to the student community, and your seemingly fair representation, desires in presenting material.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Boris" wrote:
I wouldn't say so no

This reads as if you are not really sure. Could you please elaborate upon what you mean?

"Boris" wrote:
Nor would I consider my compassion a week or wretched part of myself.

Nor would I.

"Boris" wrote:
The phrase in the book is "stamp down the wretched & the weak".

I've often thought this was phrased as a indicator of a whole lot of attitude.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"mal" wrote:
This reads as if you are not really sure. Could you please elaborate upon what you mean?

I am detemined, I was just adopting your language (aren't you saying here..") and giving you the right to interpret the book as you please and in your own therms. I wouldn't use that language to describe the process, you may. It is none of my business and rude of me to tell you how to interpret the book. Also I think I've said what I have to say on the subject.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

OK, you are determined .........about what now?

"Boris" wrote:
I wouldn't use that language to describe the process, you may. It is none of my business and rude of me to tell you how to interpret the book.

Indeed one may use any language they like to describe the process, there is no need for you reiterate that concept. I suspect, this statement of yours was meant as a blind to disguise your ignorance of your own processes.

"Boris" wrote:
Also I think I've said what I have to say on the subject

Of the veracity of this statement of yours, at the present time, I have little doubt.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

I felt a bit concerned about ths thread, and needed to at least raise some points.

Noxlux, how old are the children you are supposed to be "teaching" here exactly?

How would you be able to explain aspects of Crowley's practice to children without bringing questions of integrity to yourself or causing concern for the school and the childrens parents?

And has a final note why do you think its your responsibility to "teach" Thelema has a "religion" when clearly even that label isnt set in stone?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"mal" wrote:
I suspect, this statement of yours was meant as a blind to disguise your ignorance of your own processes.

Either that or its lazyness, you deside. Your aguement suggest, to me, that by invoking Geburah one tramples on Chesed and shuns it as something weak. That's an idea that don't hold any relevance in my mind, it may to you or you may or may not see is a st such. I don't see the fruit in the discussion and suspect our disagreement to be merely a trifle of language. Also please don't consider yourself in postion to comment on my work and understanding without reading my journal, that's rude if anything is.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"hawthornrussell" wrote:
I felt a bit concerned about ths thread, and needed to at least raise some points.

Noxlux, how old are the children you are supposed to be "teaching" here exactly?

How would you be able to explain aspects of Crowley's practice to children without bringing questions of integrity to yourself or causing concern for the school and the childrens parents?

And has a final note why do you think its your responsibility to "teach" Thelema has a "religion" when clearly even that label isnt set in stone?

Further to these clarifications, I've been a bit concerned about this thread, as well. It would seem to me not so important to teach about Crowley as an object of either history or religion, at all. Wouldn't it be far more productive to assist each child to know and do their true Will? How do you approach this aspect of your responsibility as a teacher of children, noxlux?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"hawthornrussell" wrote:
And has a final note why do you think its your responsibility to "teach" Thelema has a "religion" when clearly even that label isnt set in stone?

There's a holy book, a prophet and a system of magick and mysticism attached to it. I really don't see how anyone in the field of history or science of religion would have any doubts or expect any reactions labeling it as such.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"Boris" wrote:
"mal" wrote:
Also please don't consider yourself in postion to comment on my work and understanding without reading my journal, that's rude if anything is.

You are posting on a public forum. People may comment on what you say. No one cares if you think this is rude.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"mal" wrote:
You are posting on a public forum. People may comment on what you say. No one cares if you think this is rude.

You may, I am pointing out that by doing such you are with water over your head and am asking you not to. And hey, some might care πŸ™‚


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

make it rain.


ReplyQuote
the_real_simon_iff
(@the_real_simon_iff)
Member
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 1908
 
"noxlux" wrote:
Follow your own way and use your free will. With will you will go far is the message.

93, Noxlux!

I don't envy you.

I would find it appropriate to start your lessons with asking why following your own will would be seen as "satanic" in a Christian society which demands to follow someone else's will, i.e. God's will. If you manage to teach your pupils to think for themselves, you will probably achieve more than simply trying to defend Thelema or even explain it. They should take nothing at face value, and the cryptic parts of Liber AL are still as unexplained as the cryptic parts of the Bible. I guess you will not manage to whitewash Crowley, organized Christianity is totally incompatible with Thelemic thoughts. Crowley's personality is too complex to access during an hour a week, but I guess one can agree that he was an explorer. He wanted to know and experience for himself, not to believe anything blindly. He acknowledged the influences of psychology, biochemics, society, history etc. on our reality tunnels and showed ways of how we can redesign these tunnels. He certainly found that others had being doing this for centuries and millenia and were equally regarded as heretics and satanists. This is natural in a Christian society. Our "civilized" western world is so intertwined with Christian concepts and moralities, that most people are afraid that overthrowing them will lead to anarchy, immorality and the reign of Satan. From a Christian perspective that's correct, but seen from outside it will be a liberation for humanity. I also would recommend to point out the dangers to embrace certain elements of Liber AL blindly and without guarding, because I am sure there are real dangers, especially for children and teenagers.

Well, as I said, I don't envy you and I hope you can correct your text book at least a little. Why not start with other quotes from the book?

Love=Law
Lutz


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 461
 
"mal" wrote:
"IAO131" wrote:
stamping down people they see as weak is not part of their Will - that being said, its not outlawed in any sense

Are you sure about that? A person who sees an adversary as weak implies they are superior.

Every man and every woman is a star.

By seeing an adversary as weak, not only do you disrespect their abilities and underestimate them, you set yourself up to become their prey.

I disagree. Every person is a star but all men are not created equal in their physical and mental abilities - that is clear to me. Further, this only applies if you base 'superiority' on strength and weakness. One can easily say, 'yes this child is certainly weaker and less knowledgeable than I but I am not superior in any kind of objective or absolute sense.' One can say 'weeds are not superior to flowers in any kind of absolute sense but I wish to have a garden of flowers and therefore I must root out these wretched weeds mercilessly.'

IAO131


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
"noxlux" wrote:
Follow your own way and use your free will. With will you will go far is the message.

93, Noxlux!

I don't envy you.

I would find it appropriate to start your lessons with asking why following your own will would be seen as "satanic" in a Christian society which demands to follow someone else's will, i.e. God's will. If you manage to teach your pupils to think for themselves, you will probably achieve more than simply trying to defend Thelema or even explain it. They should take nothing at face value, and the cryptic parts of Liber AL are still as unexplained as the cryptic parts of the Bible. I guess you will not manage to whitewash Crowley, organized Christianity is totally incompatible with Thelemic thoughts. Crowley's personality is too complex to access during an hour a week, but I guess one can agree that he was an explorer. He wanted to know and experience for himself, not to believe anything blindly. He acknowledged the influences of psychology, biochemics, society, history etc. on our reality tunnels and showed ways of how we can redesign these tunnels. He certainly found that others had being doing this for centuries and millenia and were equally regarded as heretics and satanists. This is natural in a Christian society. Our "civilized" western world is so intertwined with Christian concepts and moralities, that most people are afraid that overthrowing them will lead to anarchy, immorality and the reign of Satan. From a Christian perspective that's correct, but seen from outside it will be a liberation for humanity. I also would recommend to point out the dangers to embrace certain elements of Liber AL blindly and without guarding, because I am sure there are real dangers, especially for children and teenagers.

Well, as I said, I don't envy you and I hope you can correct your text book at least a little. Why not start with other quotes from the book?

Love=Law
Lutz

In extremely delicate circumstances such as this school scenario, the discrete omission of Crowley's name from the message of Thelema is often most appropriate - and is certainly just as effective without the distraction of negative connotation.


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 461
 
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
I would find it appropriate to start your lessons with asking why following your own will would be seen as "satanic" in a Christian society which demands to follow someone else's will, i.e. God's will.

Im not sure starting your teachings with a reaction to something else (X-tianity in this case) would be very effective or profitable. Secondly, one can maintain the notion of 'God's will' without telling someone they are following 'someone else's will.' The difference is that Thelema might not impose on you what God's will is and tells you to figure out your own unique expression of it whereas other religions dictate what God's will is quite rigidly. In our case eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil is the beginning of initiation & liberation, not the Fall of man from disobedience.

IAO131


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"IAO131" wrote:
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
I would find it appropriate to start your lessons with asking why following your own will would be seen as "satanic" in a Christian society which demands to follow someone else's will, i.e. God's will.

Im not sure starting your teachings with a reaction to something else (X-tianity in this case) would be very effective or profitable. Secondly, one can maintain the notion of 'God's will' without telling someone they are following 'someone else's will.' The difference is that Thelema might not impose on you what God's will is and tells you to figure out your own unique expression of it whereas other religions dictate what God's will is quite rigidly. In our case eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil is the beginning of initiation & liberation, not the Fall of man from disobedience.

IAO131

Disagree here. From my experience, personalizing the idea of true Will is essential; emphasizing, at least initially, that it is internal authority rather than external in origin. From that point, the harmony of that internal Will with the Universe is the next logical step.


ReplyQuote
Walterfive
(@walterfive)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 856
 
"hawthornrussell" wrote:
Noxlux, how old are the children you are supposed to be "teaching" here exactly?

As Noxlux identified themself as a "High School Teacher" I think the answer to this question is readily appearant. We would obviously be discussing teenagers aged 14 (as younger Freshmen) to 19 (as older Seniors). Hardly "children."


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 461
 
"Camlion" wrote:
"IAO131" wrote:
"the_real_simon_iff" wrote:
I would find it appropriate to start your lessons with asking why following your own will would be seen as "satanic" in a Christian society which demands to follow someone else's will, i.e. God's will.

Im not sure starting your teachings with a reaction to something else (X-tianity in this case) would be very effective or profitable. Secondly, one can maintain the notion of 'God's will' without telling someone they are following 'someone else's will.' The difference is that Thelema might not impose on you what God's will is and tells you to figure out your own unique expression of it whereas other religions dictate what God's will is quite rigidly. In our case eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil is the beginning of initiation & liberation, not the Fall of man from disobedience.

IAO131

Disagree here. From my experience, personalizing the idea of true Will is essential; emphasizing, at least initially, that it is internal authority rather than external in origin. From that point, the harmony of that internal Will with the Universe is the next logical step.

I see your point - I guess another real difference is that Thelema teaches that God is not something/someone outside of you but the core of your being and that each star is the One God. "The evident interpretation of this is to take the word to be "Do what thou wilt," which is a secret word, because its meaning for every man is his own inmost secret. And it is the most profound blasphemy possible against all 'gods of men,' because it makes every man his own God. We may then take it that this Solar-Phallic Ra Ha is Each Man Himself."

I would also argue that if one finds that Will, one is already in harmony with the Universe and if one finds harmony with the Universe one has found that Will. "Thou must (1) Find out what is thy Will. (2) Do that Will with a) one-pointedness, (b) detachment, (c) peace. Then, and then only, art thou in harmony with the Movement of Things, thy will part of, and therefore equal to, the Will of God. And since the will is but the dynamic aspect of the self, and since two different selves could not possess identical wills; then, if thy will be God's will, Thou art That."

IAO131


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Exactly so. πŸ™‚


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"IAO131" wrote:
Every person is a star but all men are not created equal in their physical and mental abilities - that is clear to me.

Clearly you are correct, when assessing people strictly on the material plane. However, what you are assessing when you look at a people, the way you are here, are the tools they have, not thier spiritual quality.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  

Big thanks for interesting responses in this thread!

Some comments:

"shangren" wrote:
Well, for one thing the quotation from The Book of the Law is incorrect...

damn, I definitely should had been explicit about what I did - I translated the translation from swedish and back into english ... I think my translation is a better translation of the swedish translation than crowleys original text. hence.

@IAO131 Thanks for your very enlightening reply.

"IAO131" wrote:
Many people will and ahve said that this applies to stamping down the internal weak parts of one's own psyche. This is certainly true but I honestly do not think this is the end of it. (Draconuit: If there are 4 interpretations of every line, what about the other 3 interpretations? πŸ˜› )

This is very interesting as this way of reasoning, these ways of reasoning certainly carry paralells in other worldviews.

"IAO131" wrote:
The real question comes down to this: THERE IS NO LAW BEYOND DO WHAT THOU WILT. Most people would claim that stamping down people they see as weak is not part of their Will - that being said, its not outlawed in any sense. Thelema is unique in that it challenges many of our preconceptions, especially about morality.

Here is a question. I have sometimes thought that "do what thou wilt" is poetically prophetically both descriptive and prescriptive as in this is what a darwinian world IS, and this is what one "ought" to do.

"Walterfive" wrote:
(Where are you at that *you* say "howdy?")

Sweden. saying "Howdy" is just a habit I picked up in california. πŸ™‚

"Walterfive" wrote:
Thelema is misrepresented as a philosophy of pure licenciousness

More or less!

"Walterfive" wrote:
disciplined indulgence.

I do not quite understand this.

"Walterfive" wrote:
It's about the parameters-- my right to do my Will ends where your property and your safety begins. I have no right to endanger your safety, or to destroy or abscond with that which is yours as the the result of the the fruits of your labors or other means (such as inheritance, or gifting, or sales).

Is this what uncle al states?
Is this a commonly held view amongst thelemites?

"Boris" wrote:
I personally read the paragraph as a comment and critique on buddhism, which Crowley was devoted to when he recieved the book. Enlightenment and Work breeds (atleast in my experience, and according to the buddhists) enourmous amounts of compassion, and just therefore it is the vice of kings (the enligtened)and not everyman. It's a warning, taken to far compassion becomes a hinderance to the will, the buddhisattvas are fools who give up their enlightenment in their compassion of the world. No one is really suffering nevertheless. Personally I've thankfully remembered the paragraph on several occasions in my life where my compassion for somone otherwise would have lead me astray.

THis to me is a very interesting interpretation. To me the question becomes if it is idiosyncratic to Boris - or if it is common?

"ianrons" wrote:
I find it rather disturbing that you think it "pretty cool" to characterise Crowley as a Satanist, which of course he wasn't; especially if you work with children and are yourself a follower of Crowley.

What I find pretty cool is that a book intended for religion class contains a section about satanism, and even a couple of pages about Crowley.

As to the chracterisation just before the pages about Crowley (which i missed previously) stating that "Not even the man who by some is considered to be the father of modern satanism, Aleister Crowley, worshipped Satan." It does modify it's claim by putting it in the mouth of "some" ... and the text never explicitly states that Crowley is a satanist. Placing the text about him in the chapter about satanism rather than the new age chapter is concieveably about creating a historical context for lavey rather than claiming Crowley was a satanist.

It is what it is. How accurate can one expect a more or less mainstream portrayal of Crowley to be.

Also I would not characterise myself as a "follower" of Crowley though I have certainly been influenced by his work. I am not a thelemite though I have deep respect for this current, (and who knows I may turn out to become one). I think I only stated that I have read some of Crowleys books.

The book:

BΓΆrge Ring
Religion och sΓ₯nt
Religionskunskap kurs A
Almqvist & Wiksell 2000

"mal" wrote:
The Priest comments 'Those who discuss the contents of this Book are to be shunned by all, as centers of pestilence.
All questions of the Law are to be decided only by appeal to my writings, each for himself."

A servant obeys....

Ok, here is a big difference of perspective. As a teacher of religion I am more interested in what people think than in the "true" meaning of any text.

(As a private person I may often find the other perspective more rewarding.

"mal" wrote:
Every man and every woman is a star.

Question: is this often taken to imply that when people have found their true wills their paths will not cross?

"AM" wrote:
My Suggestions, to Noxlux,
I think you may enjoy, taking a read through the book, "The Law Is For All".
The questions you ask, (or have been asked) should be cleared up from Crowley himself, in that book, (which is a commentary on Liber AL).
Also, I may refer you to Liber 2 which can be found as a .pdf file, many places on the interenet these days. It deals with some concerns which had made their way back to Crowley, upon the meaning of, Will.

I most probably will get back to doing the research you suggest.

"AM" wrote:
having not read the textbook myself, it seems that the focus is somewhat off from acomplishing the Great Work. Also I note that the HGA matter, is missing from the paraphrase you present. I would think that any reliable asessment on Thelema would certainly include that material.

This is my understanding. While I am a bit hazy on the concept of the Great Work (it has been a couple of years since I was deeply immersed in Crowleys writings) my understanding is basically that the concept of "do what thou wilt" refers to ones "true will" which is dependant on the knowledge and conversation with ones hga. Is this correct?

"AM" wrote:
Many false impressions and outright fabrications are floating around, 'out there" about what Thelema is and is not. I have seen all sorts of this material originating from many fundamental sources. Most of this amounts to unresearched statements which are passed around from one so called source to another. These vague and unknown sources are a huge problem. I may note that christian writings are not the only ones doing this, I have seen this same method coming from fundamantal muslims too.

Thank u for putting it clearly.

"AM" wrote:
I congratulate you in your presentation of various religions to the student community, and your seemingly fair representation, desires in presenting material.

Thank you. It is a tricky business and I work earnestly to accomplish exactly that.

"hawthornrussell" wrote:
I felt a bit concerned about ths thread, and needed to at least raise some points.

Thank you for doing so.

"hawthornrussell" wrote:
Noxlux, how old are the children you are supposed to be "teaching" here exactly?

This particular group is 16-20 year olds.

Sorry, I think I have understood that I misapplied the word children. English is my third language.

"hawthornrussell" wrote:
How would you be able to explain aspects of Crowley's practice to children without bringing questions of integrity to yourself or causing concern for the school and the childrens parents?

This is a truly tricky question and to be perfectly honest with you I think there are several aspects of Crowley's practice I am simply not willing to discuss while I am acting as a teacher.

Did that answer your question/concern?

"hawthornrussell" wrote:
And has a final note why do you think its your responsibility to "teach" Thelema has a "religion" when clearly even that label isnt set in stone?

Whereas the term religion is very problematic I think it is a VERY good idea to talk about Crowley and many other relatively minor (speaking of numbers) movements. At the present point in time alternative religious groups are exploding in their growth. When it comes to the occultly interested well, it is a good example. This of course has much to do with the internet ... and also some other cultural factors.

Another reason Crowley is an interesting topic is that he gets slightly misrepresented in the schoolbook.

"Camlion" wrote:
It would seem to me not so important to teach about Crowley as an object of either history or religion, at all. Wouldn't it be far more productive to assist each child to know and do their true Will? How do you approach this aspect of your responsibility as a teacher of children, noxlux?

Yes it would. I am not sure how to reply ...

a) It is not my responsibity
b) I shun it
c) Since I teach kids belonging to different faiths I cannot demand that they should try on other belief systems for size
d) In my attempts to teach I urge my students to consider what it would be like to belong to different "faiths"
e) I mention the existence of knowing and doing ones true will
f) I will make a photocopy of the relevant sections from the new translation of the abramelin book ... no ... i won't ...

---

Ok, big thanks for really interesting reading. And thanks also to those whom I have not explicitly answered above. Your input is appreciated.

Noxlux


ReplyQuote
IAO131
(@iao131)
Member
Joined: 14 years ago
Posts: 461
 

93,

@IAO131 Thanks for your very enlightening reply.

"IAO131" wrote:
Many people will and ahve said that this applies to stamping down the internal weak parts of one's own psyche. This is certainly true but I honestly do not think this is the end of it. (Draconuit: If there are 4 interpretations of every line, what about the other 3 interpretations? πŸ˜› )

This is very interesting as this way of reasoning, these ways of reasoning certainly carry paralells in other worldviews.

Indeed. Thelema is unique among many religions in that it embraces the spiritual without forgetting the physical. It embraces the world and its many facets with joy, including (especially) all of the conflict in the world.

"IAO131" wrote:
The real question comes down to this: THERE IS NO LAW BEYOND DO WHAT THOU WILT. Most people would claim that stamping down people they see as weak is not part of their Will - that being said, its not outlawed in any sense. Thelema is unique in that it challenges many of our preconceptions, especially about morality.

Here is a question. I have sometimes thought that "do what thou wilt" is poetically prophetically both descriptive and prescriptive as in this is what a darwinian world IS, and this is what one "ought" to do.

Indeed - one can view the Law of Thelema as simply revealing the way things really work and clearing away the brush of illusion. In that sense, conforming oneself to this Law is simply abiding by a more clear understanding of the Universe.

IAO131


ReplyQuote
lashtal
(@lashtal)
Owner and Editor Admin
Joined: 18 years ago
Posts: 5332
 
"IAO131" wrote:
Thelema is unique among many religions in that it embraces the spiritual without forgetting the physical. It embraces the world and its many facets with joy, including (especially) all of the conflict in the world.

Very nicely - and accurately - expressed.

Owner and Editor
LAShTAL


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Greetings noxlux.

You asked the question:"is this often taken to imply that when people have found their true wills their paths will not cross?" I understand that English is not your first language, even so your question is not very clear. Their paths will not cross?......I assume that you don't mean that, in other words, people following thier true will won't MEET or SEE others doing the same. If that were so I don't think this forum would exist do you? πŸ˜‰

That particular quote from the good book implies that those people who are doing their True Will won't come into CONFLICT with others who are doing their will. I hope that clarifies it a bit for 'ya.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"N.O.X" wrote:
That particular quote from the good book implies that those people who are doing their True Will won't come into CONFLICT with others who are doing their will. I hope that clarifies it a bit for 'ya.

Does it? Even stars collide, you know? Noxlux: My take on the ethical questions: By accepting the law of thelema you also accept it for everybody else. That is a statement of simple logic, it is not "Do what I wilt" we declare to be "the whole of the law". If you deny anybody their right to do their will you also lose the right to do your own (hence Crowley were pro imprisonment of criminals etc). If two boys want the same orange (stars colliding) the principle of "as brothers fight ye" rules.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

By the way, your paraphrase of the textbook seems very similiar to what I remember from my own at "high school" in one of your neighboring countries, it made me do a project on him, and seven or so years later here I am, so its never so bad it aint worth for nothing πŸ™‚


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Regarding AL.II.21, Marcelo Motta's comment from the Commentaries of AL addresses this issue well. I should also state that Thelema does not proselytize, recruit, or any such thing, if anything we test, probate and instruct those who have already found their Way. The education of children is concisely noted within AC's Duty, and Motta's Calling the Children of the Sun.


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 2195
 

93

Keep in mind that in the 12th Aethyr of The Vision and the Voice, Crowley notes that the wine in the cup of Bablon -- made of the blood (the surrendered selfhood/individuality) of the saints -- is called "compassion." Crowley goes on to say that,

"I understand by 'Compassion,' the sacrament of suffering, partaken by the true worshipers of the Highest. And it is an ecstasy in which there is no trace of pain. Its passivity (=passion) is like the giving-up of the self to the beloved.)"

My point here is not to advocate a definitive interpretation of "compassion" in Thelema, but rather to point out that terms like "compassion" and "vice" have different definitions in different contexts. We might say that there are kinds of compassion endorsed by Thelema and other kinds of compassion condemned.

Thelema actively encourages its adherents to think for themselves about these issues. There is no dogma, but rather a living tradition that has its roots in serious thought and reflection on the holy books.

93/93


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  
"666TSAEB" wrote:
Thelema does not proselytize, recruit, or any such thing, if anything we test, probate and instruct those who have already found their Way.

We? Which we specifically?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"noxlux" wrote:
"666TSAEB" wrote:
Thelema does not proselytize, recruit, or any such thing, if anything we test, probate and instruct those who have already found their Way.

We? Which we specifically?

Let's just say Thelemic Outer Orders in adherence to Liber AL, in this context.


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 486
 
"666TSAEB" wrote:
Let's just say Thelemic Outer Orders in adherence to Liber AL, in this context.

I think you are overstating your point slightly. While it is true that the Outer Order of the A.'.A.'. does center it's mission around testing the fit and weeding out the unfit (cf. the praemonstrance of the Equinox), the Order does in fact demand adherence to promulgation and establishment of the Law as declared in One Star in Sight and defined in the Order's main promulgationary tract, Liber CCC, where recruitment is very much at the forefront of Crowley's mind.

I should also like to note that several degrees in the O.T.O. one does as indicated among other places in Liber CXCIV take oaths to recruit new members and that recruiting new members and declaring the Law of Thelema to new potential Thelemites by preaching are one of the duties set down in Liber CI. In fact a historical overview of Crowley's life shows that this was increasingly at the forefront of his mind.

A more correct assertion would have been that 666TSAEB does not recruit or proselytize etc., because clearly Crowley disagreed with you since Crowley's main legacies as far as his outer Orders went (and even one of the two others as well) required this as an activity and his volumnious correspondence shows an incredible concern for just this kind of work.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"666TSAEB" wrote:
"noxlux" wrote:
"666TSAEB" wrote:
Thelema does not proselytize, recruit, or any such thing, if anything we test, probate and instruct those who have already found their Way.

We? Which we specifically?

Let's just say Thelemic Outer Orders in adherence to Liber AL, in this context.

I'm curious, 666TSAEB, as to how you reached this conclusion?


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Not to open up a can of worms, but one source has it:

"Do your True Will, and nothing else. Thelemites are NOT, repeat NOT, to preach or convert."

I was hoping to get away from constant quoting, but it seems to be inevitable. The above from:

The Commentaries of AL, Chapter III, verse 11 and the source of that comment would no doubt

be derived from AL.III.42.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"666TSAEB" wrote:
" ... Not to preach or convert."

"Recruit(ing)" is not preaching or converting.

"666TSAEB" wrote:
I was hoping to get away from constant quoting....

You don't need to provide a steady stream of quotes. That's just intellectual stuff anyway. It seems others feel that Thelemic outer orders are indeed ready to engage in recruitment. While preaching or converting would be stupid, if one simply follows directions and hands a potential aspirant a copy of Liber AL, and then lets them ask for more - What else can you want?


ReplyQuote
Patriarch156
(@patriarch156)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 486
 
"666TSAEB" wrote:
Not to open up a can of worms, but one source has it:

I think you would open up no can of worms if you were able to accurately represent Crowley's views and consequently that of his occult Orders. Take the following for example:

"Do your True Will, and nothing else. Thelemites are NOT, repeat NOT, to preach or convert."

That source is not Crowley at all but Motta who I think we all can agree had very novel ideas concerning how to run things.

I was hoping to get away from constant quoting, but it seems to be inevitable.

What else could you hope for when you make unsubstantiated assertions concerning the adherents of Thelemites as organized in the outer Orders? That we should just accept your "inititiated insight" into the matter, or as you seem to have done, that of Motta, even when it flies in the face of what Crowley wrote on the subject and the oaths and obligations he cultivated within his outer Orders?

The above from: The Commentaries of AL, Chapter III, verse 11 and the source of that comment would no doubt be derived from AL.III.42.

Yes it is from A commentary of AL, but not that of Crowley, it is as I have already indicated Motta's commentary. Crowley on the other hand as I have shown asked us to preach openly both in his official instructions and as indicated in a letter to Jones dated 4. october 1915:

"I have got my A.'.A.'. grade [...] and that too, exactly at the time prophesied. [...] I must do my duty (vide Liber I) and that is to preach my Law.

Therefore this is the Word of Baphomet to all the members of the O.T.O. [THELEMA] [...] One must take some very simple, very deep word which cuts at the heart of things. [...]

I say [THELEMA]. Go on, therefore, preaching this and nothing else in season and out of season. You won’t have to wait long for results.”

I suggest you instead of "hoping to avoid quotations" instead work on substantiating your claims in line with the guidelines of LASHTAL.COM:

Submissions should not contain false or misleading information.


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2