Self and Will in Th...
 
Notifications
Clear all

Self and Will in Thelema  

Page 1 / 13
  RSS

xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
10/07/2020 12:06 am  

Hi, everybody,

I would like to ask a question that has probably come up thousands and thousands of times in this forum, but I still do not have a clear answer. I am not an expert on Thelema, so I hope you will read my question with some benevolence. The question is about the concepts of Will and Self in Thelema.

According to the scheme proposed in Liber AL, the Khabs is our true nature and the Khu is the soul or psycho-physical compound that expresses this essential nature. In this model, the Self is in the Khabs and not in the Khu. Khu is composed of our perceptions of the world, our memory, our mind and our emotions. These are all objects being witnessed by a Self, so they cannot be the Self.

I take for granted that personal teleology is arbitrary, since there is no inherent good or evil in reality. Therefore, the only point of reference to guide us, if any, is our self and its dynamic aspect, the Will.

Since by definition the Self can't be an object of knowledge, the only way we can get to know its nature is by observing how it behaves. The aim is not so much to see what the Self is, but how it behaves. This dynamic aspect is the Will, which is synonymous with the essential preferences of the Self. So with this model we are not trying to offer explanations about the essence of the Self, but a mere description of its dynamic nature (analogous to how I can observe the nature of a ball that tends to roll when I kick it without the need to postulate a metaphysical "substance" that "holds together" its accidents). 

If 1) the Self is not the Khu, and 2) the aim of Thelema is to know your Will and do it, then the kernel of the practice consists in observing how the Self behaves beyond the Khu (knowing your Will) and how to express its nature through the Khu (doing your Will).

Problem: preferences also arise as an object being witnessed by my Self. Therefore, my preferences cannot be my Self. To say that my preferences reveal the behaviour of my Self in this sense is an unjustified assumption and a naïve personification of it.

Any thoughts or suggestions about my question? Does this question make sense to you?


Quote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 2301
10/07/2020 8:32 pm  

I wouldn't say that in Thelema there was any diversion from the traditional '10 parts of the soul' 777 correspondences.   To use the Cabbalistic terms,  The Yechidah, Chiah and Neshema are a Supernal triumvirate that together could be classed as 'Self'.

Self and 'True Will' in Thelema then are, imo basically the same.  'Will' is but one of the components of The Ruach as is e.g. memory.   The Ruach is not Self. 

 

There were a couple of reductive materialists on this forum who used to get totally hung up on definitions of Will and Self and what Khabs and Khu are.   They did some ball-achingly dull posts on the matter.   

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
djedi
(@djedi)
𒇽𒅗𒅗𒈠
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 335
10/07/2020 9:00 pm  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

If 1) the Self is not the Khu, and 2) the aim of Thelema is to know your Will and do it, then the kernel of the practice consists in observing how the Self behaves beyond the Khu (knowing your Will) and how to express its nature through the Khu (doing your Will).

Your error is in trying to use the mind, as an instrument of observation, to observe itself, which it can't do. Just as the scientific method cannot prove itself correct, just as a Turing machine cannot compute a non-recursive function, so can the mind not apprehend its own nature. What you're looking at as your 'Khu' is not your Khu but a model you've cooked up and have been unconsciously operating. I think this to be the case because you describe the 'true self' as a thing with a nature.

The Khu is a veil which must be made clear, not a machine to be controlled. That is to say you have to get around or through your Khu and pierce the Khabs directly, so the light bleeds through everything. Once this is done, your Will knows and does itself. That isn't a perfect way of describing the mechanics of it, but I hope it gets the point across simply.

How to do that in more concrete terms would be either through mystical exercises, which most people would recommend, or by another method most people would not recommend.  


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
10/07/2020 9:25 pm  

@dom

Thank you for your answer. Let's see if my reasoning is congruent from a thelemic point of view.

I'm not talking about the Self above the Abyss. To speak of a Self and of preferences, it is necessary to have arisings and a Self in which these appear. Above the Abyss there are no arisings, and therefore no will with a constrained "direction". To speak of a "witnessing Self" is a kind of "structural necessity" as long as there are arisings.

I understand Yetzirah (7-8-9) to be a reflection of a superior triad (4-5-6) in the Tree. The desires in Netzach are a "reflection" of this superior triad, veiled by the Veil of Paroketh.

My doubt has more to do with the sense of an 'I' that decides things, that has preferences and that has to manifest its will. I understand that on Yetzirah's level, there still exists the illusion of separation and the 'I' is understood as an agent that does things and that decides between different options. This illusion of separation is absolutely necessary to be able to live, do the shopping, pay the bills and go to work, as long as a world with these realities exists. 

Perhaps (and only perhaps) I'm taking the deconstruction of an 'I' with a set of properties (like preferences and agency) too far to speak on the level of Yetzirah, where the True Will is inferred and reflected. It seems to me that maybe this is one of my problems...


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2581
10/07/2020 10:17 pm  

Rather than worry about ontological and philosophical details of the things called the Self(s), is it not better to sit and dissect each little Self, yourself, and experience what each one does in quiet or loud contemplation? Words are meaningless where we are. 


dom liked
ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
10/07/2020 10:19 pm  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

the concepts of Will and Self in Thelema.

Primary definitions: Will is located at Chokmah on the Tree of Life. This is to so-called "True Will," and it needs a lot of work to find it, and then do it.

In Thelemic cosmology, everyone has an Angel or a Genius, and it will guide the poor dunce of a human towards that Will. So EVERYONE'S Will, at a lower level, is to contact that Angel or Genius (it's really a neurocircuit in the brain, the 5th).

In order to contact the Angel, one has to undergo self-discipline, because the mind and emotions and body are usually so screwed up and mis-wired that the Angel cannot be seen. This is called Doing the Work (asana, pranayama, dharana, astral projection, etc).

The Self starts with YOU. Your own sense of "I Am." It is a separate thing from my self, and others to boot.

The first "higher self" is the Angel. You gotta get in union (yoga) with it. But then there's a higher Higher Self up above the Abyss, beyond the Angel who has departed for deva-land. The Higher Self above the Abyss is the "True Self," called Atma by the heathen Hindoos. Atma is a Universal Self and in it there is no difference between your self and my self, and even the folks who haul in the garbage.

Atma is finally seen to be an illusion, and one must deal with none (the Void), but that part is not emphasized in Thelema. The point is, do the work, control the dork vehicle, chat with the Angel (which is not an angelic angel), and after that (which is halfway up the Thelemic Mountain) you can get all needed info direct.

I have merely answered your most basic question. I have not yet read the fine print. I trust this expose suffices to set certain terms (Will, Self) into a clearer focus.

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
10/07/2020 10:30 pm  

@djedi

How to do that in more concrete terms would be either through mystical exercises

What are these mystical exercises and what is their precise purpose?


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
10/07/2020 10:34 pm  

@christibrany

I'm not making ontological claims here, as I clearly said above. I am simply stating what is the scheme that I believe explains Liber AL and contrasting it with my own direct experience. 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
10/07/2020 10:37 pm  

@shiva

The first "higher self" is the Angel. You gotta get in union (yoga) with it.

What would the lower self consist of from which it can be said that the Angel or Higher self is in a superior position? What are the properties of the lower self?


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
10/07/2020 10:58 pm  
Posted by: @djedi

Your error is in trying to use the mind, as an instrument of observation, to observe itself, which it can't do.

This is correct, but everyone does it, so it must be socially and politically acceptable and what else are you going to do?

Oh yeah, there's this thing, probably satanic, where one becomes the higher mind-self-will, and impressions are gained via direct experience. The human mind-brain is linear in its operation, and cannot process direct experience without a label, such as color, name, function, shape ... so it has to be set aside. This "setting aside" just happens to be the true philosopher's stone, which is not composed of sticky fluids.

Posted by: @djedi

you have to get around or through your Khu and pierce the Khabs directly

That's it. Getting "through" means doing the work, which means controlling each aspect of the opacity. Getting "around" is what those zen guys and the Buddhists do, which is why it it said they "skip a step," and certain legal libations will get you "around" the denisty by dragging you "through" it, which is pulling, not pushing, but its a good preview of where to push and pull once you become boringly normal again.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Above the Abyss there are no arisings

There is a constant, endless, eternal arising of new realities from the Universal Self that resides above the Abyss. There is a consciousness of self at all levels and planes, except perhaps the last (final) one, which is supra/pre-Kether.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

and therefore no will with a constrained "direction".

This is a specific definition of the state of Kether, known as 10=1, which it is forbidden to claim. Says so in One Star.

Both Binah and Chokmah have built-in "constraints," as you call them. The Universal Mind is hard at work, delivering input through non-mental channels (Intuition & Wisdom). Some/much/most of this will then register on the human mind, and Adepts will write things about their insights.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I understand Yetzirah (7-8-9) to be a reflection of a superior triad (4-5-6) in the Tree. The desires in Netzach are a "reflection" of this superior triad, veiled by the Veil of Paroketh.

Right. But only the aspirational desires are reflections from above. The 7-8-9 triad is the persona, and the persona has all kinds of pleasure-sex-power desires generated in its own realm. If all the desires down below were pure reflections of above, the path would be a snap. But no, there's this uncorrelated debris clogging up the lower self.

 


ReplyQuote
dom
 dom
(@dom)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 2301
10/07/2020 11:48 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

. This is called Doing the Work (asana, pranayama, dharana, astral projection, etc).

 

I'm outta here.   If he does any work let me know. 

https://www.lashtal.com/wiki/Aleister_Crowley_Timeline


ReplyQuote
Serpent 252
(@serpent252)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 168
11/07/2020 12:20 am  

@xavier-moreno

You see, we all have been diagnosed a certain disease: Mind.

 

"Mind is a disease of semen." (Liber 333, ΚΕΑΛΗ Η)

 

The practices:

Try, for example, the Mahasattipathana. It's mentioned by AC in Eight Lectures on Yoga, Yoga for Yellowbellies, Second Lecture, Point 22. The said practice is best explained in his essay Science and Buddhism, Chapter VIII.

 

Then, as someone mentioned above, you have practices recommended in AL II: 22 (yet another set of 2 & 22): "To worship me..." --- yes, worship...


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
11/07/2020 5:03 am  
Posted by: @dom

I'm outta here.

Dom chooses nirvana.

Posted by: @serpent252

Mind is a disease of semen." (Liber 333

Thank you for continuing to promote The Book of Lies as a major scripture-text that answers all deep questions. For superficial questions, it refers the reader to Liber 418, which is a magical hoot.

 


ReplyQuote
frater-r
(@frater-r)
Member
Joined: 1 year ago
Posts: 52
11/07/2020 5:26 am  

Crowley's philosophy of True Will is paradoxical in  that the aspirant has to reach a fairly advanced level in his spiritual system to have any clue what "True Will" is. In my opinion it begins in earnest when this happens:

“This then is the task of the Adeptus Minor:

To expel from the sephiroth of the nephesch the usurpation of the Evil Sephiroth. To equally balance the action of the sephiroth of the ruach and those of the nephesch.

To prevent the Lower Will and Human Consciousness from falling into and usurping the place of the automatic consciousness. 

To render the King of the Body(and Lower Will) obedient and anxious to execute the commands of the Higher Will; so that he be neither a usurper of the faculties of the Higher Will (because inspired in his Kingdom which is the Man).

Then shall it happen that the Higher Will i.e. the Lower genius, shall descend into the Royal Habitation, so that the Higher Will and the Lower Will shall be as one, and the Higher Genius shall descend into the Kether of the Man, bringing with him the tremendous illumination of his Angelic Nature; and the man shall become what was said of Enoch: “and Chanokh made himself to walk for ever close with the essence of the Elohim, and he existed not apart seeing that the Elohim took possession of his being.”

 

This is also a great mystery which the Adeptus Minor must know:
How the spiritual consciousness can act around and beyond the sphere of sensation.” - A.C., “Temple Of Solomon The King”


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
11/07/2020 8:56 am  
Posted by: @frater-r

In my opinion it begins in earnest when this happens:

“This then is the task of the Adeptus Minor:

I second that opinion.

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
11/07/2020 10:00 pm  
Posted by: @frater-r

Crowley's philosophy of True Will is paradoxical in  that the aspirant has to reach a fairly advanced level in his spiritual system to have any clue what "True Will" is. In my opinion it begins in earnest when this happens:

So, at the beginning, you don't have to have any idea what goal you are trying to achieve? I'm simply asking out of curiosity.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
11/07/2020 10:08 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

 

Right. But only the aspirational desires are reflections from above. The 7-8-9 triad is the persona, and the persona has all kinds of pleasure-sex-power desires generated in its own realm. If all the desires down below were pure reflections of above, the path would be a snap. But no, there's this uncorrelated debris clogging up the lower self.

One question, what if the problem was not Netzach's desires, but Hod's interpretation of them as "good" and "bad" or as something that "I should do" or "I should not do"?


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
11/07/2020 10:26 pm  

@serpent252 T As far as I understood, this "mindfulness" method allows one to disentangle consciousness from one plane to the next. I understand that the objective is to observe a phenomenon from a point "exterior" to it. In this sense, how is it different from neutrally observing the different objects that arise before the Self as I said above?

Could you explain in more detail what you mean when you mention AL II, 22?


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
12/07/2020 1:45 am  
Posted by: @djedi
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

If 1) the Self is not the Khu, and 2) the aim of Thelema is to know your Will and do it, then the kernel of the practice consists in observing how the Self behaves beyond the Khu (knowing your Will) and how to express its nature through the Khu (doing your Will).

Your error is in trying to use the mind, as an instrument of observation, to observe itself, which it can't do. Just as the scientific method cannot prove itself correct, just as a Turing machine cannot compute a non-recursive function, so can the mind not apprehend its own nature. What you're looking at as your 'Khu' is not your Khu but a model you've cooked up and have been unconsciously operating. I think this to be the case because you describe the 'true self' as a thing with a nature.

The Khu is a veil which must be made clear, not a machine to be controlled. That is to say you have to get around or through your Khu and pierce the Khabs directly, so the light bleeds through everything. Once this is done, your Will knows and does itself. That isn't a perfect way of describing the mechanics of it, but I hope it gets the point across simply.

 

I'm sorry I didn't answer you, I inadvertently missed your answer. I think you're making a similar mistake to me if we're to take you seriously. When you speak of the Self as something which "pours" or "bleeds" into the Khu, you are already giving an account of the nature of that Self explaining how it behaves when a series of circumstances occur in the Khu. According to your theory of a Self without nature, this should not be the case.

Whenever there is a manifest world, the entities of this world have a particular nature (i.e. they are structured one way and not another). That's why you can't make a laptop out of smoke or a piece of wood. The self, in its process of manifestation, is no different. This is precisely why in every circumstance you either do or do not do your will, (even though this is done with different degrees of perfection).

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
12/07/2020 2:44 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

So, at the beginning, you don't have to have any idea what goal you are trying to achieve? I'm simply asking out of curiosity.

At the beginning, the goal is to become "fit" to enter Tiphareth. This means doing all the practices as cited in the A.'.A.'. curriculum. Then, once you've done them all, you get to pick and choose which "powers" you will use to get inside tiphareth. Once inside, you (anyone) must contact the Angel. The Angel will tell you what to do, and give you a good (general) idea of your (anyone's) Will.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

what if the problem was not Netzach's desires, but Hod's interpretation of them as "good" and "bad" or as something that "I should do" or "I should not do"?

Netzach-Hod-Yesod are merely three aspects of the persona. They represent one degree (the first in the 3 grades of Thelema). Interpretation, desire, and ego are all intertwined. This is the astral plane - the "burning ground." To enter Tiphareth, one must have control of these phases and this "lower self." CONTROL only means 51%, so even with a "controlled" vehicle, an Adept still has 49% of this sort of philosophical research left to clean up.

Oh. You have to sort this all out, even from the beginning. Others may help with definitions.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

in every circumstance you either do or do not do your will

In every action, you win or lose
in the game of higher consciousness

There are no higher stakes,
There is no other game

- Megatron 7x7, 1st Ray

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
12/07/2020 3:14 am  
Posted by: @shiva

At the beginning, the goal is to become "fit" to enter Tiphareth. This means doing all the practices as cited in the A.'.A.'. curriculum. Then, once you've done them all, you get to pick and choose which "powers" you will use to get inside tiphareth. Once inside, you (anyone) must contact the Angel. The Angel will tell you what to do, and give you a good (general) idea of your (anyone's) Will. 

This may be a very adequate description according to the A.A. scheme. But this description in my opinion moves only on a semantic level. If I were to ask a Jesuit how to discern God's will, he might formally give me an answer almost identical to the one you are giving me. The question is what these words refer to and what their material content is. What does "to become fit" mean and in what sense does that contradict or clarifies what I have written above. 

With regard to what you say about Netzach, obviously Yetzirah is a reflection of the superior triads. As a reflection, whatever is in Yetizirah will always be "imperfect" in terms of the higher planes. That is to say, that whatever the mind says about the Self and the Will is always going to be imperfect. But this is not a problem in itself: we do not need to formulate perfectly what our Will consists of in order to know it and do it. My question is: given that in Netzach there is an imperfect expression of a superior triad, can we say that Netzach's desires, given its successive relationship with Tipheret (6 --> 7), are the most immediate expression of the sixth sephirah?  It is important to note one thing here: there is an abysmal difference between being informed by your desires and being controlled disorderly by them. The one who puts desires in order is Hod, sustained by Yesod's conscience and memory. 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
12/07/2020 3:49 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

in what sense does that contradict or clarifies what I have written above. 

I think the first thing we need to do is figure out where you are coming from. You appeared as a "beginner," and asked for some simple definitions of Self and Will in Thelema. Yet, within a few posts you are citing Sephira and their qualities, and asking questions like Plato, like the one above.

So you certainly are not seeking simple definitions. It looks more like you are looking to engage in some form of philosophical debate. That's cool. But Dom already went to nirvana, and if you want me, you'll have to come to my dojo in New Mexico, which is closed for the planetary plague, so there is Nothing. See The Book of Lies.

Getting Fit means gaining control of ALL your lower faculties. Perfectly Fit is fully controlled (at the moment, at least) and properly Aligned (straight up). I have now given you sufficient information to contact your own personal inner Secret Chief. There will be no fee.

 


ReplyQuote
djedi
(@djedi)
𒇽𒅗𒅗𒈠
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 335
12/07/2020 4:17 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

When you speak of the Self as something which "pours" or "bleeds" into the Khu

I did not, I spoke of the Khabs bleeding into the Khu. The Khabs is not the Self. I can't blame you for misunderstanding this, as that oversight was one of the great failures of the medieval Jewish Cabalists in reinventing Neoplatonism to mesh with the fearful facts of their cult.

The Khabs, as a principle, is one of the two 1s that make up the 2 in the 0=2 equation. The osiric, buddhist destrudo which scatters the Khabs would now have you believe that the 0 of the equation must be what I mean when I say, "true self." That is also an error.

Don't ask me to describe it. This is one of those ineffable things, beyond the poverty of language to capture, because it doesn't have a nature -- and even that is a lie-to-children, because to not have a nature is still to partake of the paradigm of the natural. You've got to know the nature of natures, then do something very special with that knowledge. As @shiva will tell you, the tao you understand is not the tao.

Every kether is a malktuh, but the khu is not in the khabs. 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
12/07/2020 8:07 am  
Posted by: @djedi

Don't ask me to describe it. This is one of those ineffable things, beyond the poverty of language to capture, because it doesn't have a nature

You who am I, beyond all that I am
who has no nature and no name

Who are, when all but you are gone,
the center and secret of the Sun

You're the hidden spring of all things known,
and unknown. Aloof. Alone.

You I invoke; my faint fresh fire
kindling as my intents aspire

You I invoke, abiding one,
the center and secret of the Sun,
and that most holy mystery,
of which the vehicle am I

- Shiva-paraphrased & de-Biblospeaked Anthem from the Gnostic Mass

A ka dua was said by AC to be holiest mantra there is. Well, it probably was to him. But I nominate this Anthem as the real deal, and the fact that Crowley could write it demonstrates he knew where the gold was hidden.

Disclaimer and Oath: If RTC or Frater Bred (or any nitpicker, for that matter) digs up actual "proof" that AC "made this up," "stole it from someone else," or "failed to attain," then I will choose between hara kiri or taking a tranquilizer.

Posted by: @djedi

As Shiva will tell you, the tao you understand is not the tao.

Lwt me tell you: The Tao that has any concept of any color, creed, religion, gender, or anything else you can think of, or understand, or explain, is not the Tao.

A person can become aware of this Tao by exercising "effortless action" (wu-wei), and one can learn to work with it in order to produce extraordinary results, and one can demonstrate it (physically) to even simple people ... But it is something that is done, not explained or understood, and when one can (consciously) do it, then one must learn to "not" do it, and the effect is even more extraordinary.

 


ReplyQuote
Serpent 252
(@serpent252)
Member
Joined: 4 years ago
Posts: 168
13/07/2020 1:40 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

In this sense, how is it different from neutrally observing the different objects that arise before the Self as I said above?

It is not different. "Let there be no difference made among you..., &c.", as you know (AL I: 22).

 

The practice is more like the hammer... In fact, one can be really surprised when he/she/it discovers ones own tendencies (sankhara) & that there is no (& never had been) such a thing/process you've called a "neutral observing."

 

(One stage later, & one discovers there is only a consciousness (vinnanam): there is no (& never had been) such a thing/process you've called the Self.)

 

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Could you explain in more detail what you mean when you mention AL II, 22?

Of course I could, but not right now. I've already talked too much about the first 22.

 

I'd rather like to use this opportunity to say all the best to my brother in arms (regarding II: 22 at least) Lutz, @the_real_simon_iff : I hope you are doing well, & all that, & 93s.

 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
13/07/2020 2:52 am  
Posted by: @serpent252

there is no (& never had been) such a thing/process you've called the Self.)

Eeek!

Now what am "I" going to do?

Everyone knows this, down deep. It gives rise to the notions of primal dread and absurdity in Existentialism. This is why people turn to religion. They don't want to save their souls (about which they know nothing), they want to save their Selfs (which they dread are mortal, and someday they will stop being).

 


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
13/07/2020 7:15 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

But I nominate this Anthem as the real deal

It is quite a nice one.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 5:58 pm  

@djedi

I'm sorry for my delay in responding. I don't know what you mean by "the medieval Jewish Cabalists in reinventing Neoplatonism to mesh with the fearful facts of their cult".

Of course, the Khabs as such is not the True Self. However, we can say that at the heart of the Khabs is the True Self.

The problem is that we live in the illusion of separation. As long as there are arisings, there will be THAT in which these arisings appear. To get to the 0 of the equation, i.e. no-thing, it is not enough to say that things do not consist of substances (which implies part of Buddhist deconstruction) or that they are not independent of THAT which that witness them, since there is still a world. What needs to be annihilated is the world of arisings to reach the zero or no-thing, but without a world there is no THAT to which the world appears, let alone some sense of agency that chooses to do its True Will, so in a practical sense, this level is not too adequate to elucidate my question.

Since in your opinion these realities and the methods of knowing them are indescribable, it seems that you cannot help me any more and all you can do is to remain silent. Thank you for your help anyway.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 6:01 pm  
Posted by: @serpent252
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

In this sense, how is it different from neutrally observing the different objects that arise before the Self as I said above?

It is not different. "Let there be no difference made among you..., &c.", as you know (AL I: 22).

 

The practice is more like the hammer... In fact, one can be really surprised when he/she/it discovers ones own tendencies (sankhara) & that there is no (& never had been) such a thing/process you've called a "neutral observing."

 

(One stage later, & one discovers there is only a consciousness (vinnanam): there is no (& never had been) such a thing/process you've called the Self.)

 

Can you elaborate on this point?


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 6:20 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

I think the first thing we need to do is figure out where you are coming from. You appeared as a "beginner," and asked for some simple definitions of Self and Will in Thelema. Yet, within a few posts you are citing Sephira and their qualities, and asking questions like Plato, like the one above.

So you certainly are not seeking simple definitions. It looks more like you are looking to engage in some form of philosophical debate. That's cool. But Dom already went to nirvana, and if you want me, you'll have to come to my dojo in New Mexico, which is closed for the planetary plague, so there is Nothing. See The Book of Lies.

Getting Fit means gaining control of ALL your lower faculties. Perfectly Fit is fully controlled (at the moment, at least) and properly Aligned (straight up). I have now given you sufficient information to contact your own personal inner Secret Chief. There will be no fee.

 

I don't think I introduced myself as an "beginner". What I said was that I'm not an expert on Crowley's philosophy, which is actually the case.

Where do I come from? I come from Spain, land of pretty sun-kissed women and good wine.

I don't want to get into a philosophical discussion. What I want is to know what the is role of desires, and how they relate to the True WIll and the Self.

The only way I can think of for the conscious mind to know the dynamic dimension of the Self which by definition is non-objective is to infere this dynamism through desires and emotions.

The problem is that desires also appear as an object being seen by a Self and therefore cannot be the Self. 

This makes sense because their place is Netzach, and Netzach belongs to Yetzirah or the world of the conscious mind but at the same time, for some reason, Netzach is directly connected to Tipheret, so its role is at least hypothetically relevant. Besides, there is something even more interesting: I can choose my thoughts, but not my preferences.

Of course, you can deconstruct this sense of agency and say that there is not even an agent who chooses your thoughts, but then for all intents and purposes there is no way to choose or not do your will.


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
14/07/2020 6:24 pm  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Of course, the Khabs as such is not the True Self. However, we can say that at the heart of the Khabs is the True Self.

"I, Hadit, am the complement of Nu, my bride. I am not extended, and Khabs is the name of my House"

Hadit could be described as the "True Self" then.

There might be some confusion in this thread as some might describe it as "Self" and others as "No-Self", they're both talking about the same thing, one with a more active term and the other passive. Neither is exactly accurate but this is as close as language can get (I guess).


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2581
14/07/2020 6:38 pm  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I don't want to get into a philosophical discussion. What I want is to know what the is role of desires, and how they relate to the True WIll and the Self.

As mentioned above somewhere, to find one's True Will, one needs complete control over all one's faculties, consciously and subconsciously.  Banishing the demons if you will.  Part of this control, which would be at 51% or so as mentioned, includes negating ones desires.  That is not to say, removing desire, which is a natural part of life, but I would say, being a master over one's desires, and not allowing them to control ones Self.  Being totally free of attachment, viewing the desire, but not necessarily Needing to act on it, would be the necessary step towards Conversation with the Angel, and finding one's Will.  That's my opinion on the role of desires.  Something to be mastered but not deleted.  


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
14/07/2020 7:16 pm  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I don't know what you mean by "the medieval Jewish Cabalists in reinventing Neoplatonism to mesh with the fearful facts of their cult".

Yes, that is a sentence loaded with obscure terms, strange cultural references, and emotional diversity. You could enroll in a Master's degree program in medieval cultural history ... or just wait a bit for dj to explain his complex assessment, and how it can benefit your life. Maybe mine, too.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Since in your opinion these realities and the methods of knowing them are indescribable, it seems that you cannot help me any more

With such exalted states being "indescribable," which they are, both by definition and practical application ("how to get there"), then nobody will be able to help you - in terms of oral talk-talk. Unless you can find someone who will show you the sights through direct transmission.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

What I want is to know what the is role of desires, and how they relate to the True WIll and the Self.

"Desire" is a component of kama-manas ("desire-mind"). Desire is something one wants. In the Outer Order, the realm of the persona or lower-self, there will probably be a desire to find and do one's Will. This is sort of like using a compass to steer a ship. It certainly moves the ship in the right direction, but does not help it dock in a port.

All desires, and sense of a separate self, are dissolved in attaining to the goal of "nothing." There is no known technique for this attainment. It arises of its own accord.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

The only way I can think of for the conscious mind to know the dynamic dimension of the Self which by definition is non-objective is to infere this dynamism through desires and emotions.

The only way to consciously think and KNOW the (True) Self is to attain union with it (which cannot be done mentally) and let the mind sort out the scraps afterward. Desire, longing,aspiring ... these all (as I said) point in the proper direction, but they cannot bring about the "result," which is only attained in a passive state.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

This makes sense because their place is Netzach

You have announced this correlation three times now. I do not agree with this correspondence. Desire is a component of Yesod-Hod-Netzach. It is not limited to Netzach, which has its own delights and problems. But I will give you the tentative conclusion that Netzach (for a 4=7) is where all the desires congregate, and they must be left behind when one becomes a Dominus Limitless, which is also attained by patient waiting, and not by specific, desire-driven wishes.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Netzach is directly connected to Tipheret

Connected via the Path of death. Prepare to abandon desire in this corridor.

Posted by: @duck

There might be some confusion in this thread

There might be, and is, some confusion, because these concepts resisting hard correlation to know things. These topics (Self, Will) can easily take up fifty-one threads, of forty-nine pages each, of definition and debate or discourse. Yes, "not-Self" would be the correct term from the viewpoint of the aspiring, separated self.

This stuff does not get sorted by the human mind. The mind can put the building blocks in straight lines, but it cannot bring about the final dissolution.

 


ReplyQuote
The HGA of a Duck
(@duck)
Member
Joined: 7 months ago
Posts: 624
14/07/2020 8:38 pm  
Posted by: @christibrany

That is not to say, removing desire, which is a natural part of life, but I would say, being a master over one's desires, and not allowing them to control ones Self

Yes, nothing wrong with desires as such, "But always unto me".

 

Posted by: @shiva

There is no known technique for this attainment. It arises of its own accord.

Yes, thank you! Well said. This should be the disclaimer for just about everything, it would prevent a lot of arguments and fallings-out. Everyone has their own way of doing things which may seem silly to someone else.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 9:13 pm  
Posted by: @duck

"I, Hadit, am the complement of Nu, my bride. I am not extended, and Khabs is the name of my House"

Hadit could be described as the "True Self" then.

There might be some confusion in this thread as some might describe it as "Self" and others as "No-Self", they're both talking about the same thing, one with a more active term and the other passive. Neither is exactly accurate but this is as close as language can get (I guess).

I suppose that the ambiguity here will depend on what you mean by zero or no-thing in the equation 0=2. Using an analogy of language, we can arrive at no-thing either by denying the predicate of a subject, or by denying the subject of a predicate. In both cases, we arrive at a 0, because a subject without a predicate is meaningless, just as a predicate without a subject is meaningless.


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
14/07/2020 9:27 pm  
Posted by: @duck

Everyone has their own way of doing things which may seem silly to someone else.

"But only my way is the proper, true, and unerringly correct way," says the dissenter (who is not me).

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I suppose that the ambiguity here will depend on what you mean by zero or no-thing in the equation 0=2.

Nothing. No concepts. No explanations. No predicates (although predictions are allowed).

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 11:16 pm  
Posted by: @shiva

Nothing. No concepts. No explanations. No predicates (although predictions are allowed).

 

If you start explaining a procedure to someone from the end result, that explanation is of no value or use to the questioner.

Since you like the "Hindu way" so much, if I start with "nothing is really happening" since "Atman is Brahman" with someone interested in the subject, the conversation will not go too far.

I insist that no matter how complex it may be to understand something, if you do not have an idea of the goal you are trying to achieve, then you have no criteria to discern whether you are on the right track or not. I don't need to know how to fly a helicopter to realise that if I see it crashing into a tree something has gone wrong with the pilot's procedure. The same principle applies to knowing and doing your Will. 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 11:22 pm  
Posted by: @shiva
 
"Desire" is a component of kama-manas ("desire-mind"). Desire is something one wants. In the Outer Order, the realm of the persona or lower-self, there will probably be a desire to find and do one's Will. This is sort of like using a compass to steer a ship. It certainly moves the ship in the right direction, but does not help it dock in a port.
 
All desires, and sense of a separate self, are dissolved in attaining to the goal of "nothing." There is no known technique for this attainment. It arises of its own accord.
Without desire, there is no possibility of either a will to do something or an agency knowing this will, so there is no way in that scenario to do or not do your will.

In what sense is desire also present in Hod and Yesod? I would like to understand this scheme that you propose. It is one thing to say that there can be no desires without reason, nor conscience, nor memory, which is absolutely true, and another thing to say that three faculties are one and the same thing.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 11:27 pm  
Posted by: @shiva
 
With such exalted states being "indescribable," which they are, both by definition and practical application ("how to get there"), then nobody will be able to help you - in terms of oral talk-talk. Unless you can find someone who will show you the sights through direct transmission. 

I don't know if it's so appropriate to call them "exalted states," as if to suggest they're a big deal. I don't know if this is what you're implying. Every time we go to sleep we cross the Abyss, and you see, it's not so extraordinary either. What's extraordinary is to sleep knowingly, so to speak.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
14/07/2020 11:33 pm  
Posted by: @christibrany

As mentioned above somewhere, to find one's True Will, one needs complete control over all one's faculties, consciously and subconsciously.  Banishing the demons if you will.  Part of this control, which would be at 51% or so as mentioned, includes negating ones desires.  That is not to say, removing desire, which is a natural part of life, but I would say, being a master over one's desires, and not allowing them to control ones Self.  Being totally free of attachment, viewing the desire, but not necessarily Needing to act on it, would be the necessary step towards Conversation with the Angel, and finding one's Will.  That's my opinion on the role of desires.  Something to be mastered but not deleted.  

I think what you mention can be summed up by saying that there is a difference between being informed by your desires and letting them chaotically control you. 

The question is how it is possible to speak of a will without desires. What do you think about this question? 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/07/2020 12:34 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Since you like the "Hindu way" so much, if I start with "nothing is really happening" since "Atman is Brahman" with someone interested in the subject, the conversation will not go too far.

I am familiar with Raja Yoga, and I know some of the faery tales about the Hindu Gods. But it's not my mainstream ride. I would not use either of the "terms" you have cited. I would give them Book 4, Part I, or Eight Lectures, and tell them to ask any questions after they read it/them.

I would do that after I have smacked you upside the head with the non-dual schtick stick, because you are demonstrating the exact responses that zen students do before the zen master whacks them upside the head and says something about "emptiness." But I am not a xen master, so I won't really do such a primitive thing.

If you want to know where to start, I recommend Book 4, Parts I & II, or their compliment in Blazing Diamond.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I insist that no matter how complex it may be to understand something, if you do not have an idea of the goal you are trying to achieve, then you have no criteria to discern whether you are on the right track or not.

The goal is Nothing. That's simple, but nobody can understand it. So some folks say, the goal is to find and do your Will - then Will needs defining and it gets complex.

I recommend reading all of Crowley's books for this one (Will). Even then, it won't be clear.

Some folks make it easier and say the goal is to contact your Angel, who will guide you toward your Will. Most people can understand this one. It is the immediate goal for every living person (who has not already done so, and that's not many). Jung would say to get in touch with your anima, and others describe this "entity" as The Genius, so we don't need to quibble about the rather silly term "Angel."

There are instructions for doing this simple, but complex, task.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Without desire, there is no possibility of either a will to do something or an agency knowing this will, so there is no way in that scenario to do or not do your will.

Oh, if you want to do your Will, you have to purify the desires. It is an alchemical, magical, initiatory process (purification). Out with the old, in with the new. You are correct. Purified desire is one component of the rocket ship ride to Tiphareth. The lower self gives up ALL OTHER DESIRES in favor of getting a room in The Heliopolis Hotel and Bar. It doesn't even have to be all-encompassing permanent. A temporary alignment of all factors can be temporary. After all, we're all still human, and we can only hold the perfect point for so long.

Later, the permanent thing comes. That one will be all-encompassing permanent. A permanent alignment of all factors can be temporary or permanent. After all, we're all still human, and we can only hold the knot of nothing for so long. So it's temporary. But it's permanent, as long as you can get back into the permanent state from the temporary separate self (the so-called "vehicle").

I think we should make a movie about it.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Every time we go to sleep we cross the Abyss

If you say so.

I would say you are making things up, and that's some kind of sin or bad karma or a misdemeanor somewhere.

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
15/07/2020 12:56 am  

@shiva

I'd like to ask you where Crowley says desires need to be purified. I don't doubt he said it, I just don't remember where he says it. It seems to me that the very idea that something needs to be "purified" is profoundly contrary to the thelemic proposal. If you have taken it from the "new comment", it is worth remembering that what he means by "purification" is really “simplification” 

It seems to me that your interpretation of Crowley is pure crypto-Vedantism. Very interesting, no doubt, but I do not see, beyond the semantic nuances, what is different about your interpretation of Thelema as opposed to Vedanta. And it seems to me that, beyond the fireworks of ceremonial magick, there is a substantial difference between Vedanta, Raja yoga and Thelema (and even Jung), at least on a practical and moral level. 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
15/07/2020 1:01 am  

@shiva By the way, What is "Blazing diamond"? Is that a publication you made? 


ReplyQuote
Jamie J Barter
(@jamiejbarter)
Member
Joined: 5 years ago
Posts: 1553
15/07/2020 1:24 am  
Posted by: @duck

"I, Hadit, am the complement of Nu, my bride. I am not extended, and Khabs is the name of my House"

Hadit could be described as the "True Self" then.

There might be some confusion in this thread as some might describe it as "Self" and others as "No-Self", they're both talking about the same thing, one with a more active term and the other passive. Neither is exactly accurate but this is as close as language can get (I guess).

Although Hadit is impersonal, being unknowable and not having any individual characteristics in itself.

Posted by: @duck

This should be the disclaimer for just about everything, it would prevent a lot of arguments and fallings-out. Everyone has their own way of doing things which may seem silly to someone else.

Blessed are the efforts of the cheese peacemakers, especially His Duckness ones

Posted by: @shiva

Later, the permanent thing comes. That one will be all-encompassing permanent. A permanent alignment of all factors can be temporary or permanent. After all, we're all still human, and we can only hold the knot of nothing for so long. So it's temporary. But it's permanent, as long as you can get back into the permanent state from the temporary separate self (the so-called "vehicle").

Ah, so you're saying that it's permanent, but only for the time being then?

Norma N Joy Conquest


ReplyQuote
djedi
(@djedi)
𒇽𒅗𒅗𒈠
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 335
15/07/2020 1:25 am  

The Impotence of Thought to Perceive Reality

VI

THE CURTAIN

Thy podex like a rose, within
Thy buttocks, sprays of jessamine,

Buds to my kisses; then the wine
Sets this old head of mine aspin,

So that I push thee to thy knees --
A worship, darling, not a sin.

Deep as I plunge, I do not break
Within the velvet of thy skin.

Do what I will, thy self is hid
From me by envy of the Jinn

So, when I think, I cannot pierce
The truth of things; I cannot win

Unto the real; life's wheel is kept
From turning by its axle-pin.

But swing thine hips and smile upon
The hideous world's malicious grin!

Then when we end, the task is light:
Bid El Qahar once more begin!

- Aleister Crowley, The Scented Garden of Abdullah the Satirist of Shiraz

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Every time we go to sleep we cross the Abyss

Oh? 

...

A few friends have remarked to me, recently, how this summer just doesn't feel like those we used to enjoy. Maybe we're stuck in springtime.


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
15/07/2020 1:32 am  
Posted by: @djedi
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

Every time we go to sleep we cross the Abyss

Oh? 

...

What's so surprising? 


ReplyQuote
Shiva
(@shiva)
Not a Rajah
Joined: 13 years ago
Posts: 4944
15/07/2020 1:58 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

I'd like to ask you where Crowley says desires need to be purified

I wasn't quoting Crowley.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

something needs to be "purified" is profoundly contrary to the thelemic proposal.

Fear not to undergo the curses and the ordeals.

The ordeals are listed in AL. At least on of them mentions Fire.

What do you think the "Path" is about ... other than multi-level purification?

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

If you have taken it from the "new comment

If I take it from anywhere, I usually use "quote" marks, and if it's an obscure source, I often add the source. I have not been quoting Crowley.

Otherwise, I just paraphrase the holy scriptures and the gory grimoires, and I really try to write things based on my experience, and will write, "the legends say," if I'm spouting some thing that some body made up. However, i am not perfect, and misunderstandings may apply, the most common being taking a sarcasm of mine seriously.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

it is worth remembering that what he means by "purification" is really “simplification” 

Same thing. I agree.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

It seems to me that your interpretation of Crowley is pure crypto-Vedantism.

Miss. No cigar. No prize. No girl.

I don't even know what Vedantism is, much less its crypto variation. It's a Hindu religion, I know that much.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

there is a substantial difference between Vedanta, Raja yoga and Thelema (and even Jung), at least on a practical and moral level. 

"There is no divergent stream within the Kingdom" you are seeking. (-Boarding Pass 11.8. The Gate of the White Brotherhood).

I do all my practices in English without accents or philosophies. Crowley got "morals" out of the way early in Book 4 and 8 Lectures. What does someone else's system of morals have to do with anyone else. All 6=5s demonstrate some form of immorality (in reference to common habit patterns) because they are finding out the their perception of reality is not reality itself ... and they do weird things that upset people.

Posted by: @xavier-moreno

What is "Blazing diamond"?

https://www.lulu.com/en/us/shop/frater-shiva/blazing-diamond/hardcover/product-1v9k5z7y.html

 


ReplyQuote
xavier-moreno
(@xavier-moreno)
Member
Joined: 4 weeks ago
Posts: 183
15/07/2020 2:44 am  

@shiva 45 bucks? You expect me to spend 45 bucks to be explained how to purify myself with crypto-vendanta? Your brain has to be pretty toasted with all those open chakras. 

I will rephrase my question even more simply to see if it makes sense.

One does not choose one's preferences. A man can do or not do what he wants, but he cannot not want what he wants. The problem is that our mind tells us what we should prefer, instead of being an instrument to observe what we really want.

Why do I think that our preferences are the reflection par excellence in our conscious mind of Tipheret? For two reasons, one phenomenological and the other qabalistic: if I attend to my direct experience, I can distance myself from my body, from my mental images, from my rational faculty. I can even stop identifying with my preferences, but what I cannot do is make my preferences be different. They are what they are, and they appear as they do.

The qabalistic reason is this: Netzach belongs to the individual triad (Yetzirah). It is the only sephira at this level that can be considered as a giver of movement in the individual par excellence. It is the motivating force of our actions and our thoughts. Thought alone cannot motivate anything. As long as there is a choice, there has to be a desire to motivate that choice, and that role is only attributable to Netzach at Yetzirah. What needs to be "purified" is the idea that our preferences are inherently bad, or that we should behave this way or that way. The only way to do this is to re-educate our "lower self" as you call it (I think that's a terrible expression, because that already implies a false value judgment about the Khu) to attend to our true desires and be in service of them.


You liked
ReplyQuote
djedi
(@djedi)
𒇽𒅗𒅗𒈠
Joined: 9 months ago
Posts: 335
15/07/2020 3:21 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

One does not choose one's preferences.

Why?

You choose to think you don't have a choice. Read Liber III, learn how to yoke the ox. Ditch the Wille zum Leben, earn the Wille zur Macht.


ReplyQuote
christibrany
(@christibrany)
Yuggothian
Joined: 11 years ago
Posts: 2581
15/07/2020 3:31 am  
Posted by: @xavier-moreno

One does not choose one's preferences. A man can do or not do what he wants, but he cannot not want what he wants. The problem is that our mind tells us what we should prefer, instead of being an instrument to observe what we really want.

I heartily disagree.

You are making it sound as if we have no free will 

 

 

I think you are sincerely over-thinking, everything.


dom liked
ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 13
Share: