Notifications
Clear all

True Will

Page 5 / 5

 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 
"mika" wrote:
"Azidonis" wrote:
It must be said that the term "True Will" is really a contrived term, much like the term Holy Guardian Angel. In that sense, the term does not denote the simple desire one may have to eat a cookie, but rather the desire (so-called) of the HGA.

Why do you assume your HGA does not desire for you to eat a cookie?

You're creating a distinction between "will" and "True Will" based on a personal value judgment (eg, simple desires like eating cookies = will, grand, profound, complex desires = True Will). This value judgment is taking you way off track.

The distinction between "will" and "True Will" or whatever labels you want to use is based on one thing and only one thing: which actions reflect your pure, unfiltered essential nature.

It's not about long term v. short term, "higher calling" v. selfish wants, acts that have significant impacts to yourself and others v. acts that are mundane and quickly forgotten, etc. Living according to your "True Will" means making choices based on your actual nature rather than based on what you think you should be doing or how you should be acting. This includes choosing to have a cookie, and every other choice you make throughout your days. It's not just about the big decisions of "what am I doing with my life" and whatnot, it's about every single conscious act.

It's a question of the degree of relevance to doing true Will (or 'true Nature,' or 'true Arthur,' or whatever the hell we all agree to call it so that we can discuss it) in general which is the measure by which we prioritize our concerns in daily life. How we spend eight hours each day, for example, is usually of a much higher priority than the time it takes to eat a cookie, and so on.


ReplyQuote
mika
 mika
(@mika)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 360
 
"Camlion" wrote:
"mika" wrote:
The distinction between "will" and "True Will" or whatever labels you want to use is based on one thing and only one thing: which actions reflect your pure, unfiltered essential nature.

It's not about long term v. short term, "higher calling" v. selfish wants, acts that have significant impacts to yourself and others v. acts that are mundane and quickly forgotten, etc. Living according to your "True Will" means making choices based on your actual nature rather than based on what you think you should be doing or how you should be acting. This includes choosing to have a cookie, and every other choice you make throughout your days. It's not just about the big decisions of "what am I doing with my life" and whatnot, it's about every single conscious act.

It's a question of the degree of relevance to doing true Will (or 'true Nature,' or 'true Arthur,' or whatever the hell we all agree to call it so that we can discuss it) in general which is the measure by which we prioritize our concerns in daily life. How we spend eight hours each day, for example, is usually of a much higher priority than the time it takes to eat a cookie, and so on.

Once you start categorizing different actions into "higher" or "lower" priority, you are no longer talking about 'true Arthur' (ha). Actions either reflect a person's essential nature, or they don't - will does not "become" True Will through an act of judgment. I'll illustrate what I mean:

You become conscious of a motivation to act. Let's say that action is "eat a cookie". You become conscious of another motivation to act. Let's say that action is "study medicine". Both eating a cookie and studying medicine may or may not be a reflection of your essential nature. Telling yourself "eating a cookie takes 30 seconds and studying medicine takes 10 years, thus the cookie is mere desire and the studies are True Will" is completely off track. As is "the cookie is mundane, studying medicine is a grand life path" or "the cookie is selfish, the studies are meaningful to others" or whatever other value judgment that one might make to distinguish betwen the two actions.

True Will is not determined through an analysis of one's desires. It is discovered (rather, it reveals itself) continually, from moment to moment, when all that analysis, judgment, prioritization, evaluation, etc, is stripped away. Lose all the mental projections and will is what remains.

Regarding the 'amount of time involved' angle: When you're living in the present moment (which is a prerequisite for living according to one's Will), there is no difference between an action that lasts 30 seconds and an action that lasts 30 years. Projecting your mind out into the future takes you away from the present moment (and thus your Will).


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2964
 

93,

"mika" wrote:
"Camlion" wrote:
"mika" wrote:
The distinction between "will" and "True Will" or whatever labels you want to use is based on one thing and only one thing: which actions reflect your pure, unfiltered essential nature.

It's not about long term v. short term, "higher calling" v. selfish wants, acts that have significant impacts to yourself and others v. acts that are mundane and quickly forgotten, etc. Living according to your "True Will" means making choices based on your actual nature rather than based on what you think you should be doing or how you should be acting. This includes choosing to have a cookie, and every other choice you make throughout your days. It's not just about the big decisions of "what am I doing with my life" and whatnot, it's about every single conscious act.

It's a question of the degree of relevance to doing true Will (or 'true Nature,' or 'true Arthur,' or whatever the hell we all agree to call it so that we can discuss it) in general which is the measure by which we prioritize our concerns in daily life. How we spend eight hours each day, for example, is usually of a much higher priority than the time it takes to eat a cookie, and so on.

Once you start categorizing different actions into "higher" or "lower" priority, you are no longer talking about 'true Arthur' (ha). Actions either reflect a person's essential nature, or they don't - will does not "become" True Will through an act of judgment. I'll illustrate what I mean:

You become conscious of a motivation to act. Let's say that action is "eat a cookie". You become conscious of another motivation to act. Let's say that action is "study medicine". Both eating a cookie and studying medicine may or may not be a reflection of your essential nature. Telling yourself "eating a cookie takes 30 seconds and studying medicine takes 10 years, thus the cookie is mere desire and the studies are True Will" is completely off track. As is "the cookie is mundane, studying medicine is a grand life path" or "the cookie is selfish, the studies are meaningful to others" or whatever other value judgment that one might make to distinguish betwen the two actions.

True Will is not determined through an analysis of one's desires. It is discovered (rather, it reveals itself) continually, from moment to moment, when all that analysis, judgment, prioritization, evaluation, etc, is stripped away. Lose all the mental projections and will is what remains.

Regarding the 'amount of time involved' angle: When you're living in the present moment (which is a prerequisite for living according to one's Will), there is no difference between an action that lasts 30 seconds and an action that lasts 30 years. Projecting your mind out into the future takes you away from the present moment (and thus your Will).

In 60 seconds or less, list at least 10 ways in which eating a cookie will ultimately enhance or impede your Great Work.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
mika
 mika
(@mika)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 360
 
"Azidonis" wrote:
In 60 seconds or less, list at least 10 ways in which eating a cookie will ultimately enhance or impede your Great Work.

As I said, "Actions either reflect a person's essential nature, or they don't - will does not "become" True Will through an act of judgment."

Listing ways in which a particular action might enhance or impede one's Great Work is precisely such an act of judgment.

Eating a cookie, or doing anything else for that matter, is going to be a reflection of your will (or not) regardless of what you think about its future benefits or detriments.

But hey, I'll answer your question anyway:

1. Eating a cookie will ultimately enhance my Great Work if it is an action that is a direct manifestation of my essential nature in the present moment.

2. Eating a cookie will ultimately impede my Great Work if it is an action that is not a direct manifestation of my essential nature in the present moment.

Nothing more needs to be said, so, responses 3 through 10 would simply be a rephrasing of the above.


ReplyQuote
Frater_HPK
(@frater_hpk)
Member
Joined: 16 years ago
Posts: 104
 

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

I am just curious what other think about comparing True Will with Atma Ghati (path of the soul - or direction our soul wants that we follow) concept from Yoga/Tantra?

Love is the law, love under will.

B.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  
"Los" wrote:
The phrase "path of least resistance" is associated with Taoism, the central concept of which -- Wu Wei, non-action, acting by not-acting -- Crowley connected with Thelema.

I know what wu wei is, thanks. And I, too, like Crowley, connect it with Thelema - just not with his idea of True Will, which, as it stands, makes no useful sense. All the sophistry in MTP and elsewhere, in his other attempts to flesh out a scientistic "method" regarding it, and all your backflipping over whether or not you actually meant "the path of least resistance" when you said it, doesn't change this simple fact, which I feel has been and remains a tremendous stumbling-block to Thelema (which is an entirely seperate thing from True Will, which is a secondary extrapolation, or rationalisation, of it - a very poor one at that, disappointing really given Crowley's "natural gifts" in this area).

What we're seeing in Noctifer's posts is the kind of thing that's bound to happen when you try to make Thelema into anything you want -- you end up with a mish-mash of useless daydreams in which you claim that the central spiritual model of Thelema is actually the thing that's "useless,"

On the contrary - what we see with Crowley's own exposition of his idea of "True Will", which is not mentioned ONCE - anywhere - in any of the Holy Books of Thelema (which to me provide "the Central Spiritual Model of Thelema", if there could ever be said to be such a thing, though "model" is a poor choice of words and betrays a scientistic pretention which I decry) - is precisely what you describe - he's made it into anything he likes, quite literally, a mish-mash of useless daydreams in which what he'd like to call the central spiritual model of Thelema is, in fact, truly useless (unlike Thelema itself, which rocks!).

all while having virtually no working familiarity with Crowley's ideas and -- apparently -- no ability to read the words of fellow posters and respond to them in a fair manner. I suspect strongly that Noctifer has no practical experience of working with the Thelemic model of self, which is compounding his inability to understand it even when it is explained in simple terms.

Los, I resent your insulting assumptions, and partly because of your habit of inserting them in every post, and partly because nothing you've said comes across to me as having any actual value in this discussion apart from satisfying your ego's compulsion to say something, anything, about True Will, I've decided to go back to my previous more sensible policy of ignoring your posts entirely. I have "working familiarity with Crowley's ideas" (and, probably unlike you, the ideas of other people as well 🙂 )extending two decades into the past, which has led me to say what I'm saying now, and your insistence on ego-tripping in this way, your pretentions, and your inability to engage with ideas as ideas is the worst possible way to go about an argument. But what's new. Adeiu. Next.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

Let us explain this Will thing in terms of behavior.

For example lets look at the salesman.
Ideally and verbally we want sales people to be honest, we don't want to be cheated and our morality claims that people should be honest.
However, the Sales floor is a controlled environment to some extent, it's a lab experiment. The sales, man say makes an exaggeration or hide a fault of an item, the result his that he get's a higher commission. So dishonesty is rewarded with money, this is the positive re-inforcement.

Now the customer has a complaint, the product was not as good as he was promised and calls the complaint department. The complaint secretary deals with the complaint and the salesman never gets the negative feed back.

Now the salesman over time becomes as dishonest as he can get away with and because his internal value system says it's wrong to be dishonest, he feels guilty. He develops anxiety, and so he seeks more money, being conditioned that money relieves anxiety, but to get more money he increases his dishonesty which leads to more anxiety.

Thus the Salesman feels at odds with himself, his conditioned behavior is not conducive to his self image.

There are two means to cure this, either release his behavior as it concerns his inner values and self image or change his external behavior to fit his self image.

Now, neither behavior will change except via an environmental change, an operant condition must initiate the change. When he his behaviors are not in conflict, the daemons of anxiety, self doubt, guilt, etc fade away. He is focused and not acting against himself.

Meditation can help to introspect the nature of the conflict, and ritual magick can work to cerate a dramatic simulation of a controlled environment, in which self designed operant conditioning can change both internal and external behavior.

The TRUE WILL or HGA, is your ideal self, that is without internal conflict, in which your various behaviors are not causing conflicts than produce various symptoms of neurosis, including self destructive or violent behavior, or just depression and apathy. They HGA is balanced out, but also has a dynamic direction, the full focus of all behavior aimed to a single goal, rather than in conflict.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  
"Camlion" wrote:
"Noctifer" wrote:
There. Noctified.

lol I assume that means 'too slippery to be pinned down,' but don't count on that, my friend. I'll get back to you soon. 🙂

If any slipperiness is involved it is entirely a product of Crowley's shabby, self-serving and irresponsible thinking, and weasel language, where the idea/doctrine of "True Will" is concerned.

One reason I don't let him get away with this (apart from the fact that it just sucks as a supposedly coherent doctrine) is because his exposition of the doctrine of True Will is all contained in writings which are intended to be susceptible to rational criticism (class B, C, D). So it's basically fair game for shredding as far as I'm concerned.

Liber ABA, wherein is contained the principal exposition of the doctrine (under the heading of the Theorems of Magick - not "proven laws of Magick", but Theorems) doesn't even have an official AA "class", which says something all by itself!

Yes, it is too slippery to be any use at all (but not too slippery to be pinned down, I think I've stabbed the fucker several times already).

love is the law
n


ReplyQuote
Azidonis
(@azidonis)
Member
Joined: 15 years ago
Posts: 2964
 

93,

Weee!

True Will - on topic.

93 93/93


ReplyQuote
Los
 Los
(@los)
Member
Joined: 12 years ago
Posts: 2195
 
"Noctifer" wrote:
unlike Thelema itself, which rocks!

Rock on, you crazy diamond.

name538:

The TRUE WILL or HGA, is your ideal self, that is without internal conflict, in which your various behaviors are not causing conflicts than produce various symptoms of neurosis, including self destructive or violent behavior, or just depression and apathy.

I’m not so sure about this. To claim that following the true will will not lead to self-destructive or violent behavior seems to me to be another veil the mind casts over one’s actual nature.

This idea about “not self-destructive or violent” could potentially lead to a spurious slippery slope argument: “The true will cannot be something self-destructive; smoking or taking drugs damages the body and can be considered self-destructive; therefore, smoking or taking drugs cannot be one’s true will.”

I do not think that one’s true will must necessarily be something non-self-destructive or non-violent. We might safely presume that in the majority of cases, a person’s natural inclination will not be to do harm to himself or herself, but this is at best a rule of thumb that cannot be taken as some kind of ironclad law (otherwise, it becomes another canon of “right” or “wrong” by which we attempt to judge the true will from the outside).

As Mika’s been saying, true will can only be known by observing it functioning in real time and learning to detect the devious methods of the mind to cast glamours over it: “the will must be something that benefits mankind,” “the will is a special, magical path of destiny,” “the will can’t – just can’t – be anything I deem to be trivial or violent or selfish.” These kinds of thoughts are spiritual poison, and a serious aspirant needs to acquire practical experience in detecting them and the way that they tend to modify perception.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
 

The difference is taking a calculated risk vs having an unconscious self hatred.

It may be your WILL to take a drug because than drug has an effect which helps you to do the great work in some direct or indirect way. However if you are taking drugs out of a secret desire to punish yourself out of guilt, or sense of unworthiness, then that is an indication you are out of joint with you WILL.

Likewise some people go on homicidal rages, because for example in the case of Ed Gein, may feel guilty for having sexual urges and blame those filthy whores of Babylon who seduced him into sin.


ReplyQuote
 Anonymous
Joined: 51 years ago
Posts: 0
Topic starter  
"name538" wrote:
an unconscious self hatred.

ReplyQuote
Page 5 / 5
Share: